The Contemporary Music Project Forums

Chappell White

For the past decade, the Contemporary Music Project has been a stimulus and a focal point in both thought and action concerning new developments in the teaching of music. CMP's roots are in the Ford Foundation's Young Composers Project, established in 1959 under the guidance of Norman Dello Joio. What was learned from the experiences of thirty-one young composers who were placed in public school systems led the Music Educators National Conference to propose, in 1962, an expansion of the program. With the acceptance of this proposal by the Ford Foundation, the Contemporary Music Project came into being under the administration of the MENC.

In April, 1965, a CMP-sponsored seminar at Northwestern University articulated the concept of Comprehensive Musicianship. The exploration of the implications of this concept and the formulation of practical plans for its implementation dominated the work of CMP for the next years (even to the extent of appropriating its initials). But even so broad an area as Comprehensive Musicianship did not set the limits of CMP's interest and influence. Other related activities continued, and in the first half of 1973 CMP widened its range still further with two ambitious forums, the first on the Graduate Education of College Music Teachers, the second on the Education of the Performing Musician. "It could rightly be said," wrote CMP Director Robert J. Werner, "that all of the Contemporary Music Project's programs and activities over the past several years have inevitably led to the topics being considered by these forums. CMP felt that a search for means of effecting the development of values and a considered reappraisal of the profession must begin with the professional education of musicians."

As events developed, the forums marked the end of CMP's major activities. In June, 1973, its funds exhausted, the Contemporary Music Project closed its national office in Washington.

The world of music will miss its work, but there is a paradoxical sense of fitness in the way that work has ended. What seemed at first to be the foundation of a new program turned out to be the last project, but its influence is left as a potential stimulus. And in the final analysis, the stimulation of thought about contemporary music and music in contemporary life has been the basic work of CMP. The last two forums of CMP have raised questions that the next generation of musicians must answer.

Throughout the existence of CMP, the pages of Symposium, as well as the meetings of the College Music Society, have been open to reporting, discussing and evaluating its activities. In the following reports, it has not been possible to present the individual papers that were delivered nor to list the numerous participants.1 It is hoped, however, that these summaries, the questions posed and the answers postulated, may serve as a catalyst to produce still further discussion.


The Graduate Education of College Music Teachers

An Invitational Forum Sponsored by CMP and Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, January 22-24, 1973

In plenary sessions, the participants were addressed by Himie Voxman (University of Iowa) on "Current Status of Graduate Programs and the Need for More Versatility in Graduate Students," by Robert Glidden (NASM) on "Implications of the NASM Basic Musicianship Statement for the Education of College Music Teachers," by Claude Mathis (Northwestern University) on "Reorientation and Utilization of Faculty," and by Robert Trotter (University of Oregon) and Eugene Bonelli (Southern Methodist University) on "The Administrator's Role in the Reorientation and Utilization of Faculty."

For discussion, all participants were assigned to one of four groups, each with its own chairman and graduate student reporter. The participants felt that the topics that emerged and their related questions could become the basis for consideration by college faculty who wish to engage in discussions devoted to a reevaluation of their own graduate music programs.

The following material presents under four main topics (1) questions and position statements that summarize the discussions and (2) recommendations that emanated from the four discussion groups.




Do graduate students today need to be educated as specialists or generalists? Most individuals have the need to excel and assume they can do so only through a narrow specialization. But is it an either-or situation? Cannot a specialist be educated with a broad point of view? How important is it for an individual to view his specialty from a broader perspective? What is the relevance of other areas within a discipline to one's own specialty? Is a breadth of competence and interest necessary in order to accept change? How important is synthesis? Is it important to make relationships explicit so that students can synthesize the various components of their professional studies?


Expertise that is accompanied by breadth, versatility, flexibility, and openness is an important characteristic for all graduate students; thus the recent NASM Statement on Basic Musicianship was felt by the Forum participants to be appropriate to all graduate as well as undergraduate study. Ideological separations among the various segments of a music department or school should be minimized, with pedagogy an acknowledged part of all disciplines.

Graduate programs should strive to develop a balance between depth in an area of specialization on the one hand and a breadth of competence on the other. To gain perspective of the music of their own culture, graduate students should be exposed to an expanded repertory that is representative of many musical styles and cultural values (including music outside Western culture).

Additional means for developing breadth in graduate students include providing opportunities for (1) intra- and interdisciplinary interaction among faculty and students, (2) teaching assignments and responsibilities that cross institutionalized, traditional boundaries, and (3) team teaching. A new system of rewards might acknowledge the contributions of those who are more generalists than specialists. Above all, to achieve breadth of competence as well as perspective, active communication is needed between faculty, administration, and students and among the various segments of the faculty.




The education of future college music teachers must begin not so much with graduate students as with present graduate school faculty and curricula. Thus, this discussion was concerned more with present college faculty as they influence future teachers.

Teaching must be recognized as a probable vocation for all graduate students, hence a commitment to the development of skills of communication is a needed component of graduate studies, particularly in the preparation of future college teachers. How can we place teaching in perspective to the total discipline, i.e., what is its relation to research, performance, composition, etc.? How does the authoritarian teaching found in many performance activities ("do as I do") affect teaching in other areas of the music curriculum?


The best way to learn to teach is to teachunder the supervision of master teachers. Problems of teaching are best presented for all graduate students in the context of direct teaching experiences with progressively deepening responsibilities: (1) through observation of model teachers working with music majors and general college students, (2) micro-teaching responsibilities under direct supervision, and (3) internship programs. Supervised teaching at the graduate level (1) should involve a variety of specialized concerns such as applied music study and music programs in community colleges, (2) can be initiated in special courses and seminars, and (3) can be implemented in graduate and undergraduate on-campus classes and through cooperative arrangements with community colleges and private music schools for off-campus teaching experiences. Most crucial, however, is improvement in the guidance and supervision of teaching assistants who have full or partial responsibility for undergraduate classes.

All graduate students should gain some understanding of present attitudes and trends related to the learning process and should develop competencies in establishing objectives and, in light of current thought and needs, effective teaching procedures, even if this requires study outside the field of music. In addition, they should develop efficient means for both evaluation of student achievement and self-evaluation. Perhaps a graduate student could prepare, teach, and evaluate a course in his major field as part of his degree requirements.

One recommendation to improve the quality of teaching and to develop awareness of roles both as musicians and as teachers is to relate teaching techniques more explicitly to the students' music study, acknowledging that they in fact do absorb teaching qualities from the many different professors.

Policies should be established to recognize and reward good teaching, in addition to scholarship and publication. Grants might be awarded to individual faculty members to improve teaching, as an alternative or supplement to conducting research. Funds could be made available to faculty members for (1) equipment or materials to use directly in their teaching, (2) attending workshops, seminars, or retreats devoted to the improvement of teaching, or (3) organizing on-campus meetings that involve outside consultants. And, finally, resources among neighboring institutions could be pooled to set up programs for the improvement of teaching.

The teaching assignments of graduate school faculty members should be redefined and periodically rotated in order to maintain a vital teaching-learning process. Other means to accomplish this might include faculty exchange, team teaching, the visiting of classes by other faculty members, and intradisciplinary teaching assignments.




The evaluation of a graduate program should begin with the construction of a statement of beliefs based on an assessment of the place of both music and higher education in American society; it should define values in light of this statement, and define criteria for granting degrees. Institutional resources and their effects on enrollment should be described, with consideration given to a possible limitation to the size of graduate enrollments to match the job market.

Graduate programs should be flexible in order to accommodate changing needs, competencies, and desires of students. Stress should be placed on competencies, and when they are achieved, students should be released to develop their abilities in areas in which they are less proficient. Barriers to specialty changes between degree programs (e.g., performance [B.M.] to theory [M.M.]) should be removed. Excessive compartmentalization of interest (faculty and students) should be counteracted. Efforts must be exerted to expand the interests and competencies of faculty to meet changing needs.


As indicated previously, the NASM Statement on Basic Musicianship is appropriate as a guideline for all graduate study. Thus it was recommended that a course of study be instituted for all graduate students, a study based on principles of a more comprehensive musicianship as suggested by this NASM Statement. This required core, which could be structured in a variety of ways, would continue to develop attitudes, knowledge, and competencies through experiences in the following:

  1. Study of the basic repertory of Western art music and a wide variety of other styles, including music outside Western culture.
  2. Performance.
  3. Composition and improvisation.
  4. Analysis and critical evaluation as related to performance, composition, and listening.
  5. Communication/teaching.

A program such as this requires executive commitment and administrative support, and it might necessitate new units or departments which put together people of different specialties and persuasions. As in undergraduate studies, the pursuit of specialization continues simultaneously with efforts to develop breadth in perspective and expertise.

Finally, the need for student involvement in educational planning was stressed. College faculty were encouraged to listen to graduate students, to seek their input in matters related to curriculum, admissions, examinations, and teacher preparation.




Disparities between what we teach and what we test should be avoided. Is evaluation more than testing alone? What new means are needed for successful evaluation procedures?

Admissions policies and procedures need to be reevaluated and new indices found for measuring a student's potential for success. We need to learn more about a student before he is admitted to an institution.


Reexamine testing programs, particularly for admission to specialized programs in graduate schools, with special emphasis on remedial courses. A consistent and embracing policy is needed to control standards of testing, curriculum, and instruction. Prognostic and diagnostic testing of competencies should be conducted both periodically and terminally. Evaluation should be defined for the various musical roles:

  1. Performance
  2. Creative skills
  3. Analytical-critical-historical studies
  4. Pedagogical studies



School of Music, Northwestern University

The Forum on the Graduate Education of College Music Teachers emphasized the need for forging a statement of philosophy and mission preliminary to the development of graduate curricula by all institutions. Only as its philosophy can be articulated and its resources assessed in relation to its goals for graduate education can an institution develop effective graduate programs. Thus an obligatory first step should be the development of a philosophy in keeping with the character of the institution and the profession.

The participants of the Forum were unanimous in their affirmation of the Basic Musicianship Statement by NASM and affirmed their support of that statement for all graduate programs. If the implications of that statement are to be realized at the undergraduate level, teachers educated in our graduate schools of music must experience curricula consistent with its intent. Specifically, the Forum recommended that graduate programs in music should require, in addition to a field of specialization, (1) a demonstrated understanding of the musical processes within a wide variety of music; (2) familiarity with a basic repertoire of Western Art music through performance, including performance practice, and analysis; (3) fluency in making evaluative judgments about music and conceptualizing about it as an aesthetic experience. Special emphasis was placed on the need for a demonstrated competence in the teaching of music as a significant aspect of every graduate program in music.

The discussions leading to these statements are indicative of the reasoning. Forum participants felt that there is a need to recognize the importance of excellence in teaching, particularly among students in the graduate schools. It is ironic that many college faculty do not exhibit pride in teaching as a profession even though evidence indicates that large numbers of musicians do teach, either full- or part-time; thus, teaching must be an important part of musicians' education.

In too many instances over-compartmentalization of faculty in the graduate schools leads to similar divisions among students. Professional segregation and over-compartmentalization are not just the result of individual preferences; they are also a product of schools which permiteven cultivatea too narrow view of the discipline. Graduate faculties as a whole take pride in their narrow fields of specialization and therefore are highly resistant to change. This is in part due to a lack of rotation of teaching assignments within specialties and among various specialties. Barriers to student changes in specialization within graduate study are often enforced by highly specialized faculty. The problem requires a fundamental review of graduate admission procedures. The result of continuous highly specialized teaching assignments frequently leads to authoritarian teaching and almost exclusive reliance on the traditional lecture method. Particular mention of the teaching of performance study as highly authoritarian recurred constantly in the discussions. A need for the continuation of performance during work on advanced scholarly degrees was strongly recommended. The Forum pointed out that ineffective evaluative techniques at the graduate level of study and among graduate faculty contributes to status quo programs which perpetuate themselves through graduates to other institutions.

Any reform of graduate curricula requires a high degree of administrative commitment to bring about new structures within music schools that allow for cross-disciplinary teaching by faculty and interdisciplinary programs for their students. The Forum participants underscored the necessity for establishing specific objectives for graduate programs and the development of evaluative criteria to measure their success as they relate to the total musicianly function as performer, scholar, composer and teacher.

The participants were explicit in their belief that meaningful reform in graduate education for the college music teacher can only be brought about through a systematic revitalization of existing graduate faculties to encourage an awareness of the profession's needs for genuinely prepared college teachers. Only as existing attitudes among graduate faculty change can significant progress in the quality of the education of future college music teachers be assured.

The Education of the Performing Musician

An Invitational Forum Sponsored by CMP and Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, April 9-10, 1973

The first session of the Forum was addressed by Lucien Wulsin, President of the Baldwin Piano Company, who posed basic questions for the Forum participants to deal with: (1) Who is a performing musician? (2) What can he expect to be? (3) What techniques or skills can we expect him to have? (4) What repertory can we expect him to have? In the discussion that followed, it became evident that a kind of consumerismthe healthy interrelationship of performer and audiencewould inform all the discussions that were to take place during the two days.


Panel: The Increasing Demand for Versatility

The four members of this panel were able to interpret the performer's need for versatility from quite disparate backgrounds. To Bethany Beardslee, who for years has sung from the ramparts of avant-garde music, versatility meant the flexibility needed as a performer which she had to teach herself. Her own preparation had been deficient in twentieth-century technique and repertoire and she feared that today's students were being left with the same handicaps to overcome. Without a solid grounding in the "twentieth-century classics," she felt, we could be opening an unbridgeable gap in the ability of performers to perform music of their own time.

To Richard Clark of Affiliate Artists versatility meant the ability to relate to an audience as a person as well as an artist. Any music can be performed before a Rotary Club if done with conviction and skill by artists who have developed a "performing personality." Young performers, he suggested, must be trained "to convey their art to the public."

To Stephen Sell, manager of the itinerant St. Paul Chamber Orchestra, versatility meant the ability to perform different kinds of music in different size ensembles before different types of people in the most different kinds of setting. There is a potential for performance in every place people gather, and the performer of the future must be trained to seize that opportunity. When players in the St. Paul Chamber Orchestra are auditioned, they are heard in solo performances of music from the standard and contemporary repertory. They are also asked to sit in with a chamber group and to give a lecture on one of a variety of subjects, the latter test certainly not one encountered in the auditions of most symphony orchestras. About a third of the musicians in the St. Paul Chamber Orchestra have neither a conservatory nor a university background.

To concert manager Sheldon Soffer, versatility meant answering the demands of the communities and institutions that are looking for more than a walk-on recital from today's concert artists. They are asked to perform eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth century repertoire with equal authority, and often they are asked to stay around for classes and lectures to discuss their approach to their art. Even though the larger names are sold as specialists, they must be prepared to function well in many styles of performance.

Questions to the panelists indicated a concern on the part of some delegates that solid programs of preparation would be sacrificed in an effort to make all performers Renaissance Men, "without giving them a Renaissance," as a student reporter pointed out. Would the versatility embodied in comprehensive musicianship lower standards of instrumental performance by dissipating the talent within each individual, or would it allow a flowering of creative energy through cross-pollination? Pianist Claude Frank tried to mediate by suggesting the performers must allow themselves to become emotionally specialized while adding breadth to their whole musical background, so that the catholicity of a student's musical education both develops from and relates to his central interest.


Panel: Professional Internships in the Arts

If tomorrow's performers will need a different kind of training in order to operate creatively and successfully in the real-world music market, one way they could get this experience is through pre-professional internships in the field.

William Porter, dean of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology School of Architecture, who was invited to talk about his school's internship program, admitted that the idea runs counter to the concept of the university as an institution that can economize on experience. The anomaly of field work in a university setting, he said, was somewhat reduced by insisting that the field work be carried on concurrently with classwork and not as a substitute for it.

The advantages of internships, at least for MIT architecture students, had proved to be three-fold: Skills were being acquired that the university simply could not teach. Professional entry was facilitated by the students' association with established firms. And through the program, the university was able to let the students become involved in beneficial social change.

In the process of the internship, the students were able to acquire process skills and situational skills to complement the knowledge dispensed in their courses. But there were still some problems to be worked out. Internships involved the university in obligations to the professionals in the field that helped train their students. Whether the students themselves, through their assistance, were able to repay these obligations was a source of some concern. Another concern was whether the university, through its students, should be providing lower quality service to a community simply because it can afford no better. From an educational standpoint, is it wise to allow students on internships to assume leadership roles that don't reflect their present ability or what they would achieve within established firms? And does the immediate situational response engendered by internships encourage students to adopt a short-term, non-permanent approach to problems of the profession?

A second address by Howard Stein, dean of faculty and students of the Yale School of Drama, discussed the advantage of designing a professional arts program around a visionary idea of what the profession should be doing. This is what Robert Brustein had done with the Yale Drama School when he took over as dean. Each year the preparation of three productions of legitimate theater serves as the basis of Yale's whole drama program. The plays are chosen with a point of view, and the students are trained narrowly. "We don't serve the whole country with our drama," Stein said, "but with the people we produce."

In recommending that music schools develop a point of view of their own, Stein warned that without a visionary approach the technicians would take over. The importance of undissipated inspirational leadership was paramount, for "as much has to be caught as taught."



The Forum participants were divided into four discussion groups. Their charge was to develop the ideas presented in the three plenary sessions and to formulate position statements and, especially, recommendations for further action by university music schools and conservatories.

Discussion Group A

The members of Discussion Group A touched on issues ranging from the global to the picayune. They arrived at the opinion that the current repertory considered to have "culturally redeeming value" is but a small segment of the world of music and one that is limited geographically, temporally, and sociologically. Our ethnocentric approach, it was felt, relegates the music of other cultures to the level of exotic curiosities. At the same time, we downgrade music of our own culture, such as jazz, blues, and country music. We further limit our repertory by emphasizing the classics and neglecting contemporary music. Rather than directing itself to all people, the "official" music of our culture is intended for an educated elite, and this results in the "musical mandarinism" Lucien Wulsin decried in the Forum's opening session.

The group agreed that so limited a repertory is not only inadequate, but also inappropriate. If the performing musician is to be an exponent of his culture, as he has been in the past, he must have a broader repertory reflecting the variety of today's musical life. Both performers and audiences are indoctrinated with a hierarchy of values. This hierarchy, the group agreed, should be turned on its axis to become a spectrum of values in order to foster a more vital tradition and a truly comprehensive culture.

Such a re-orientation involves the audience as much as the performer. It was stressed that educational institutions should be concerned not just with the training of performers, but with the creation of a music-loving audience. They should seek to provide maximum exposure and non-biased presentation of all types of music. Those in teaching and administrative roles must go beyond personal aesthetic boundaries, or their instruction becomes indoctrination rather than education.

The group predicated its discussion upon the needs of the average performer. The "superstar" often finds it difficult to fit into a conventional program because of extraordinary self-motivation or personal goals the school cannot anticipate. Despite our implicit belief in the musical leadership of an elite, our commitment is to mass education. In pedagogy as well as in repertory, we must substitute a spectrum for a hierarchy.

There is too little cultivation of basic musical skills and too little preparation for actual survival in the musical world. There should be a more thorough training in fundamental music mechanics such as sight-singing, ear-training, improvisation, and tuning.

In addition, there should be some training in cable television, the recording industry, and the like. Guidance concerning the media is essential in this technological age, and so also is instruction in commercial techniques. Today's performer simply cannot afford to be naive in these matters if he is to survive.

The group agreed upon the desirability of internships as a way for the student to get a taste of the real world and learn the practical side of his profession: how to draw up contracts and how to work with fellow performers; the practical necessities of concert arrangements, programming, and copying music; the details of showmanship, such as stage poise, dress, and the creation of an image; and all the other onerous, yet necessary aspects of professional life. Most important, a student's close work with professionals in the field, it was felt, would help sharpen his musical skills as well as expose him to the exigencies of the professional life.

Summarizing the above ideas, Group A produced the following two statements:

I. We believe that excellence can be found in all musical repertories and activities, and that exposure to these is essential to the education of a musician.

II. We recommend that schools use the best available resources for apprenticeship experiences to the following ends:

a. for observing and interacting with the professional world,
b. for further developing professional skills,
c. and as a vehicle for professional entry.

Discussion Group B

Discussion Group B focused on two key issues: (1) the expansion of the abilities of the performing musician, and (2) the need for musicians to see alternative careers in music and for musical institutions to expose their students to these alternatives.

Conceding that there would always be room for a number of highly specialized concert artists, the group seemed unanimous in the view that music schools can no longer limit themselves to turning out performers in the traditional sense. Instead, they must seek to increase the range of things the performing musician can do by: (1) enlarging his repertory (particularly in contemporary music), (2) instilling in him a willingness to relate to repertories other than his own, (3) equipping him with technical skills that will enable him to cope with diverse styles and repertories, and (4) attuning him to society's needs, encouraging his involvement with the community, and gearing him to accept performance platforms other than the concert stage.

A few members stressed the importance of verbal communications as a means by which the performer can stimulate audience involvement. Others pointed to such intangible, non-musical factors as "personality," "professional pride," "spirit of friendship and cooperation with fellow musicians," which, although unteachable, are a vital asset to the performing artist.

There was grave concern over the way in which musicians have "painted themselves into a corner" by their reluctance to explore all aspects of their profession. It was generally agreed that music schools are doing students an injustice both by admitting too many who are under-qualified and by denying those admitted adequate exposure to alternative outlets for their talent. Schools must aim for a better distribution of talent by informing students of the realities ahead and by offering those who are not going to make the grade as performers some genuinely satisfying alternatives. At least two ways in which schools might do this were suggested: by expanding their present limited contact with the commercial musical world, and by raising pre-college music education from the level of a "back-up-career" for the second- or third-rate performer (which is how the group felt it was viewed) to that of a challenging alternative for the really talented musician.

Exactly how broad a curriculum should be in order to meet current needs of performers was not decided. Some favored the individually tailored curriculum ideal, while recognizing its economic implications. Others held to the view that a school must be able to do a few things very well, and that no school should attempt to be all things to all people. There was an evident reluctance in some quarters to admit the popular commercial repertories within the walls of the conservatory or music school. Some felt it was impossible to devise a curriculum that included jazz, rock, country and western, jingle writing, and the like. Others adopted the view that they were simply unteachable while one or two showed a clear disdain for repertories beyond the pale of Western art music. All, however, seemed to support the notion of a somewhat broader curriculum and a more flexible approach, provided this did not entail a lowering of standards.

The recommendations the group drafted and submitted at the final plenary session are the following:

I. That a more realistic appraisal of the professional potential of the music student be implemented, and that there be a greater reassessment of the commercial alternatives open to the professional musician.

II. That each institution examine that which it does best and concentrate on those areas; that each institution have an open mind to all music; that it recognize and identify those musical disciplines it cannot teach, and that it encourage and assist students by means of symposium-workshops and/or lecture performances to explore those areas.

III. That those institutions which offer a degree in music education be more selective regarding the performance and teaching potential of students admitted to that program. That the curriculum of the music education major be pared down, and that a greater number of accomplished musicians who love to teach be encouraged to seek careers in music education.

Discussion Group C

There was general agreement among members of the group that today's performing musician exists in and must adapt to a society undergoing considerable and rapid change.

Vastly increased accessibility and decentralization brought about by television, radio, and the burgeoning recording industry have made more people aware of a greater variety of experiences. Audience expectations have been significantly altered both by the products disseminated and by the manner of their presentation in the various media. Although the precise nature of the impact was difficult to define, the group noted a number of possible effects, including a greater need for a variety of stimuli, increased visual orientation, a smaller average span of attention, a tendency towards informality, and satisfaction with uncomplicated, readily enjoyable products. Traditional European art music, while obviously still widely accepted, is not the repertory most salable in the United States today, and the professional performer trained exclusively in this tradition faces growing competition.

While not denying the importance for success of certain qualities apparently independent of academic trainingnative talent, charisma, or a sense of purposethe group agreed that educational institutions could do more to help the student performer prepare himself to meet the challenges of today's society, and various measures were recommended. First, these institutions must educate the whole musician, providing a broader education beyond technical excellence on a given instrument. Second, there should be greater emphasis on communication with the public; the student should perform more often, and be able to talk intelligently about all facets of music. Such contact may be accomplished through semiprofessional concerts not only within the institutional environment, but also outside it, before the public at large. Increased concert experience would also benefit the musician by promoting greater confidence, by helping to define his role as a performer, and by reconciling ideals with reality at an early stage in his career. The concert experience remains unique in today's world, for the particularly human bond that can arise between musician and audience in a live situation is noticeably lacking in the estranged and often superhumanly perfect performances presently obtainable from the electronic media. Third, student performers should be made more aware of the business of art, including money and marketing matters. The student should be actively exposed to the spectrum of ways of earning a living as a performing musician in today's society. These alternatives ought to be provided as early as possible so that the performer will not be locked into a narrow or ill-suited career involuntarily or through ignorant choice. Furthermore, these options should be kept available as "escape hatches" for as long as is feasible. Teachers should evaluate the student honestly and on a continuing basis to help him determine where his true talents lie and how best to take advantage of them. Such guidance ought to be supplemented when possible by direct contact with working professionals in the performer's areas of interest through extended workshops or long-term residencies.

The recommendations of Group C follow:

I. The sense of the group is that the education of the performing musician needs to be responsive to the continuing changes occurring in the society. Among the urgent needs in musical education is greatly increased cross-communication between students preparing performing careers and every sector of the professional field. Field work is important for the performing student, but it is also important and sometimes probably more efficient to bring resource professionals into the academic process.

II. The group also endorses the objectives of CMP, and believes that if these objectives were pursued and realized, many of the major problems that have come under discussion in the past two days would be satisfactorily resolved.

Discussion Group D

The group dealt specifically with what it regarded as the central problem in the education of the performer: the demands made on the performer in the course of his professional life. To define those demands, the committee focused on the two most common areas of employmentthe world of classical orchestral performance and the commercial complex of television, film, and recording.

Present educational opportunities were found wanting in both areas. It was argued that the failure of today's orchestra to find a large, adventurous audience is due partly to a lack of sympathy between the performer and the public. Such sympathy comes about less easily in the formality of the concert hall than in the more personal context of a chamber concert in the community or in the visit to a school of a personable and exciting soloist. The conservatory or large university music department is the logical place for initial experience in outward-directed performance, as well as for good training in solo and small and large ensembles. This training, it was suggested, would make performing musicians more secure about playing in exposed ensembles as part of their full-year service contracts, which in most cases now severely limit the ways performers can be assigned to smaller ensembles.

Many performers emerging from conservatories and universities, it was felt, are ill prepared for commercial work. Their familiarity with the business practices was evaluated as insufficient, and a lack of pre-professional experience with things such as playing before a microphone or playing with a click track was noted, as was the lack of training in the kind of improvising the performer might be expected to do on a commercial job. The blame for these inadequacies was laid on the prejudices of the academic community against certain kinds of music and on a past failure to reconcile those prejudices with the exigencies of the kind of employment some students may choose to seek. It was argued that the general populace would have its music and its performing musicians with or without the conservatory, and that the institutions of higher education could serve the needs of our society only if they were willing to prepare their students to enter and transform that broader world.

In light of this discussion and evaluation, Group D made the following general recommendation:

We believe that the question of the performer's diversity or specialization is academic, since the duty of the educational institution is to analyze the real-life challenge the professional performing musician encounters and to provide the educational experience necessary to meet that challenge. It is also incumbent upon the educational institution to undertake continuing analyses of the professional performer's environment and to modify the educational program accordingly. The basic goal is the development of musicianly people whose abilities may be manifested in performance.

It was the last line of this recommendation that received the most discussion. All agreed that music and musicality came first, that teaching an instrument must be equally the teaching of music and the evocation of intrinsically musical responses.

The committee further specified four ways to augment the present training program of the performer.

(1) We feel the educational program should embrace opportunities for performing in the community and the public media outside the walls of the institution.

To implement this proposal it was suggested that the solo recital might be played for a local Rotary Club or church group, rather than for the usual audience of fellow students. Visits to schools were also encouraged, with the hope that public relations work can offset the resistance that music teachers typically offer such projects.

(2) Experiences with facets of the music profession which extend beyond the conventional forms and repertoires should be provided, such as practical application of devices, techniques, and materials in the popular, folk, and commercial areasincluding television, film, and recording.

(3) Practical information and experience regarding the business of professional music should be provided, concerning such things as management, promotion, royalties, fund-raising, unions, and legislation.

Both of these proposals address themselves to the development of professional "savvy" and the broadening of the performer's experience. It was suggested that learning to play one kind of music well can only help the performer play other kinds wellthat is, help to make him a good musicianand that these options ought to be available to him.

(4) The education of the performing musician should embrace opportunities for learning and experiences which go beyond the traditional curriculum. These may take the form of alternate situation models, such as internships with symphony orchestras, or chamber groups, commercial productions, television, films, etc.; and visiting specialists, consultant's seminars, and the use of other professional resources invited to the institution.

This proposal urges the establishment of alternate learning situations. As examples, the committee universally hailed the master class as a form of instruction. The Denver Symphony was cited as one of many orchestras that allow students to sit-in and double with the players during a residency program. Although professional studio experience was not a likely possibility for the student, it was thought that its simulation was desirable.

Finally, the committee undertook to elucidate the philosophy by which it made its recommendations and to list them as general goals.

We feel that the implications of these recommendations are: open-mindedness, flexibility, adaptability to change, avoidance of snobbism, the development of attitudes that can discern quality while avoiding prejudices often associated with some musical categories, and the making of the musical experience a humanizing one.



Yale School of Music

The Forum at Yale took a hard look at the ways in which performing musicians are presently being educatedand the delegates were critical of what they saw.

It was especially significant, I think, that the Yale Forum brought together so many members of the music profession whose breadth of expertise within the profession (representatives from artists management, radio, television, press, foundations, orchestrasin addition to university faculty members) made possible such a lively exchange of ideas.

Principal among their concerns was an examination of the demands placed upon the professional performing musicianby the profession, and the ways in which American institutions of higher (musical) education do, or do not, prepare their students to meet the realities of this demanding profession.

Beginning with Lucien Wulsin's thoughtful and challenging keynote address, members of the Forum were asked to consider the performing musician in terms of:

his identity
his expectations within the profession
the skills and techniques he will need to flourish
the repertoire which he will be expected to know.

In accepting Mr. Wulsin's suggestions that professionals need to solidly frame their performance careers on the basic tenets of comprehensive musicianship, as refined by the actual need of the profession itself, Forum members were especially concerned that the institutions charged with the responsibility for the education of the performing musician reexamine both their educational programs and their educational philosophy to ascertain if:

(1) the education of the performer takes into account the needs and requirements of the audience of the future, and stresses the dimensions of both specialization and versatility.

(2) curricular programs and the musical ambiance of the institution seek to provide maximum exposure (and hopefully non-biased presentation) to all types of music.

(3) the curriculum rigorously insists upon the student's acquisition of basic musical skillsand encourages the integration of these skills throughout the total educational program.

(4) opportunities are being created for close association with practicing professionals in the fieldthrough apprenticeship/internship programs.

(5) a realistic appraisal of the professional potential of the music student is made, and if there is also a continuing reassessment of the commercial alternatives available to the performing musician.

(6) it is always the quality of the educational program that is of paramount importance, rather than the numbers of students enrolled in any particular program.

(7) students are informed of the realities ahead and whether those who are not qualified as professional performers are offered some genuinely satisfactory alternatives within the music profession.

In sum then, the members of the Yale Forum were very much concerned that the "Education of the Performing Musician" be solidly grounded within the framework of a rigorous comprehensive musicianship program which is broad and deepand which is constantly in touch with the real demands of the profession itself.

The tendency to drift toward "musical mandarinism" evident in many institutionalized music programs must be stopped. The language of our musical programs must be greatly broadened and the tide reversed.

1Full reports of the proceedings of the two forums are published by the National Association of Schools of Music in Monographs on Music in Higher Education, No. 1.