Chapter in a book. Discusses the concept of idiocultural music education.
DOCUMENT
“In-Between” is the title of this conference. If I am right, it focuses on the role of the artist as a middle-man, or middle-woman, between art and learner. It focuses, maybe, on the way artists are capable to transfer knowledge, skills, attitudes, insights, emotions of an artistic nature. And it focuses, maybe, on the way experiences from the domain of the arts may be transferred through the mechanism inherent in the domain of education; two domains which sometimes seem to have a rather problematic relation because the arts are seen as a domain of beauty, of expressivity, of individuality, of freedom, of creativity, whereas education is seen as the domain of standardization, of group work, of compliance to rules, and of mastering the existing.
DOCUMENT
Invited keynote presented at International Conference for Research in Music Education, Bath, UK, 24/4/2017
DOCUMENT
Article (Dutch) in Kunstzone, 14/4 (2015), pp. 52-53, on idiocultural music education.
DOCUMENT
Evert Bisschop Boele explicitly refers to different conceptualizations of culture by describing earlier concepts of culture in education in the Netherlands to explain the proposed logical shift to “idiocultural” music education. Idiocultural music education, according to him, encompasses the fact that each person is highly individual as well as highly social simultaneously, thus, idiocultural music education should take this into account and perceive individuals and social beings with complex and dynamic cultural backgrounds that deserve respect and should be the origin for the individual’s further musical development. Bisschop Boele’s description of earlier concepts of culture connects each concept prior to idioculture, e.g., monocultural, bicultural, multicultural, in five stages with a societal development throughout the last 70 years in the Netherlands. Two different theoretical lenses are applied to theoretically underpin these different conceptualizations of culture.
LINK
Article on the basis of the keynote given at the 28th EAS conference, March 2021.
DOCUMENT
Short article in Dutch on the concept of 'excellence' in music education
DOCUMENT
The EAS conference theme “Craftsmanship & Artistry” confers the image that general music education in 21st western century society moves from a work-based (cf. Small 1998: 2) towards a performance-based definition of music. An example is the work of the MayDay-Group, which formulates many of its seven ideals for general music education in terms of music making (Regelski e.a. 2009: xxxii).This centrality of musicianship is not straightforward. Music is not one but a set of activities (Clarke 2005: 204), and for many music is meaningful in daily life without performance being central. Based on my own research of a varied selection of individuals narrating the importance of music in their lives, this article argues that craftsmanship and artistry are only two of many more ways of describing what music essentially “is”.We must take Cavicchi’s (2009) thesis on the bifurcation of everyday and institutionalized musicality and the resulting “irrelevance of music education” seriously. Musicianship can’t be positioned a-priori at the core of music education; its core must be located on the basis of research into what music means in the actual lives of actual people. This leads towards a more learner-centered approach to general music education in which each learner’s idio-syncratic “musicker-ship” is the starting point.
DOCUMENT
Verslag van een onderzoek waarin de lespraktijk van muziekdocent Johan 't Hart werd onderzocht. Centraal staat de vraag: is die praktijk te karakteriseren als een vorm van 'idiocultureel muziekonderwijs'?
DOCUMENT
In de zoektocht naar relevant muziekonderwijs vanuit het theoretisch concept idiocultureel muziekonderwijs, van Evert Bisschop Boele, is de eigenzinnige lespraktijk van muziekdocent Johan ’t Hart drie maanden intensief gevolgd om tot een gedetailleerde beschrijving van zijn manier van werken te komen. De onderzoeksvraag die centraal stond is: ‘In welke mate schept Johan ’t Hart in zijn muzieklessen een leersituatie (leerwereld) die te karakteriseren is als idiocultureel muziekonderwijs?’ Het theoretisch kader voor deze studie is idiocultureel muziekonderwijs (Bisschop Boele 2015). Op de achtergrond speelt een aantal andere concepten een rol, bijvoorbeeld biografisch leren (Alheit & Dausien, 2000) en subjectivering (Biesta 2010). De talentendriehoek (Veenker et al., 2017) wordt gebruikt om de manier waarop leerling, docent en taak invloed op elkaar hebben te duiden. Op basis van dit theoretisch kader is een zevental vuistregels voor de vormgeving van idiocultureel muziekonderwijs geformuleerd. Vervolgens zijn data verzameld over de praktijk van ’t Hart. De data gebruikt in deze casestudy zijn lesobservaties, interviews met zowel leerlingen als Johan ’t Hart, documenten en literatuurstudie. Op basis van een kwalitatieve analyse is bekeken in hoeverre de vuistregels terug te herkennen zijn in ’t Hart’s lespraktijk. De conclusie is dat veel van de vuistregels te herkennen zijn – en dat de (idiosyncratische) manier waarop ’t Hart de vuistregels in de praktijk laat zien vooral ook leidt tot nieuwe discussie en reflectie.
DOCUMENT
