Gina Rico The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project 2/17/2012
By Gina Rico
E-231 Methods and Materials For General Music
2/17/2012
1

Gina Rico The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project 2/17/2012
The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project (MMCP) was established in the 1960s during a time of immense educational reform in the United States. Shortly after Russia launched their spacecraft “Sputnik” in October 1957, there was an upheaval in the U.S. Many pointed to our educational system as being flawed and ineffective to explain our gap in technology with
Russia. As a result, educational reform was moved to the forefront of the nation’s consciousness and became a critical concern (Moon, 72). To address this, the United States federal government passed a piece of legislation entitled “The National Defense Education Act” (NDEA), which allowed for the federal government to contribute more funds than ever, to public education
(Moon, 72).
In 1962, President John F. Kennedy created the Cultural Affairs under the umbrella of the
Office of Education. This would later become known as the Arts and Humanities Program
(AHP). The creation of AHP marked the first time the U.S. government officially recognized arts education. This branch conducted research on what was being taught in American public schools, and studied opportunities for reform. Appointed “special consultant on the arts” by
President Kennedy, researcher August Heckscher commenced a 14-month study on how the government prioritized the arts, and in 1963 published a report entitled The Arts and the
National Government , which stated that arts were given a particularly low priority in our government in terms of funding, research and teacher training programs. This gave impetus to a greater recognition of the importance of the arts by the federal government (Moon, 73).
Following this, the AHP began working to bring educational reform into fruition. They established over 30 new teacher training programs and seminars (Moon, 74). During this reformation of education, many curriculum research projects were established in various fields of study, including science, mathematics and music. Among the programs developed for music
2

Gina Rico The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project 2/17/2012 was the Contemporary Music Program, and the Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project.
Thanks to the AHP, MMCP was able to receive the largest grant in the field of music education from the government, and funding allocated as a result of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 made it possible for it to exist at all (Moon 83). The development of
MMCP was mostly due to events at the Yale Seminar on Music Education of 1963, and a survey by educator Ronald B. Thomas entitled “Study of New Concepts, Procedures, and
Achievements in Music Learning as Development in Selected Music Programs” of 1965 (Moon,
74).
Ronald B. Thomas was a music educator from the Nanuet, NY school district who later joined the faculty of Manhattanville College in 1966 (Moon, 81). He had many progressive and unconventional views on music education, and went on to become director of MMCP. Among his many philosophies, Thomas subscribed to ideas surrounding a spiral curriculum system and trusting the intuitive abilities of children to learn and understand concepts often reserved for older students. This philosophy can be compared to the theories of psychologist Jerome Bruner.
In MMCP Synthesis, Thomas includes the statement “Have you ever considered that…Bruner could have written “The Process of Education” just about music” (Thomas, iii). Besides this direct reference, Bruner’s influence on Thomas’ philosophy can be inferred from the structure of MMCP, which emphasizes a spiral curriculum which allows students to revisit fundamental materials over and over again in order to form a solid grasp of concepts (Moon 76).
Thomas’ theories on learning can be associated with the concepts of constructivist theory, which is attributed in part to the theories of experiential learning by philosopher Jean Piaget.
Constructivist theory is sometimes considered radical, and calls for the learner to gain
3

Gina Rico The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project 2/17/2012 knowledge through discovery and advocates the concept of the non-existence of knowledge beyond what the learner is able to discover for him or herself (Hein).
In the MMCP synthesis, a comprehensive explanation of the objectives, philosophies and general approach used in MMCP curriculum, Thomas opens with a series of probing questions which aim to have the reader rethink traditional views on music education. It reads, in part:
“Have you ever considered…that if all of the works and theory from 1780 to 1880 were suddenly lost to the world, music would still exist. That the purpose of education is to open minds and to provide the substance and enthusiasm for continued personal discovery and growth. That notation is only a coding device…it’s a system for translating musical ideas for future recall, not…acquiring or developing musical sensitivity or sensibility… That a composition is merely a statement of someone’s musical thoughts, and everyone has musical thoughts…that the gulf between the educational system and the living creative art of music has grown so huge that a really knowledgeable student…may be intimidated to reject the art.” (MMCP synthesis iii).
The curriculum developed by MMCP was based on a set of principles, objectives, description of appropriate environment, and a spiral of cycles of instruction. Spiral curriculum is defined in the synthesis as “a way of organizing knowledge without fragmenting it. It is a plan which allows the learner to deal with concepts of music without isolating them from a n aural context which gives them meaning…focus is on the unity and interaction of musical factors”
(MMCP synthesis, 31). Thomas goes on to describe how the curriculum begins with broad understanding of subjects, and spirals upwards into more focused and precise understanding of concepts (Thomas, synth 17).
4

Gina Rico The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project 2/17/2012
The principals of the MMCP curriculum are identified as “Discovery”, “Concepts”,
“Skills”, “Today”, and “Totality”. The first concept, “Discovery”, deals with the importance of students receiving “first-hand experience” in their learning (Thomas, 16). Thomas stresses the importance of making a distinction between observation and discovery. He writes, “True discovery of music usually demands involvement in creative activity.” (Thomas,15). Discovery learning versus observation always involves the student actively working with the medium, in this instance the creation of music, and not simply observing examples and recognizing characteristics and drawing conclusions from given information. The emphasis lies heavily on the student discovering the meaning for themselves, instead of being told about its existence.
The next main principal, “Concepts”, delves deeper into the actual body of knowledge the student should be able to gain from the program. He writes, “Music is fundamentally ideas in an aural form…[students] need…sensitivity, thought, judgment, and aural logic.” (Thomas 16).
A pillar of MMCP’s philosophy is that concepts must be presented in context of their true meaning, not as obtuse pieces of information. For example, the concept of written music and musical theory should not be separated from its aural counterpart. Thomas identifies two main types of concepts: inherent musical concepts and idiomatic musical concepts. He defines inherent musical concepts as “[concepts that] pertain primarily to the basic characteristics of the materials of music…natural tendencies which override the limitations of one style, period or culture,” (Thomas, 17). This refers to the natural understanding of music which is “intrinsically” in every person. The other side of this, idiomatic concepts, are concepts which are based on conceived notions about music. He gives the example of traditional harmony, such as IV V I cadences as being idiomatic concepts- which are still valid, but should be considered separate from inherent concepts, especially in their application to a wide variety of music (Thomas 17).
5

Gina Rico The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project 2/17/2012
The next principal, skills, is closely related to concepts. Thomas considers skills, the actual ability to play an instrument, control one’s voice or compose for the production of aesthetically pleasing music; the means to make the other musical “tools” (concepts) the student has viable (Thomas, 18). The need for sensitivity by the student is crucial to the correct application of their skills to effectively express their musical ideas. Thomas divides skills into three categories: aural, dexterous and translative. Aural skills refers to the students ability to aurally identify various aspects of music such as pitch, timbre, dynamics, and the development of their musical memory. He refers to this knowledge as “a personal resource in the drive towards understanding,” meaning that it is not the end all be all of musicianship, but allows for students to be able to creatively and accurately interpret and create music themselves (Thomas, 18).
Dexterous skills refer to physical skills required to sing, play an instrument or conduct. This is, as he describes, the most heavily emphasized aspect of music education in most programs.
Translative skills refer to skills of notation and recording of musical ideas. According to Thomas,
“it is a storage and retrieval system, not a way of acquiring musical sensitivity or sensibility,”
(Thomas, 19).
An important point in understanding Thomas’ interpretation of concepts and skills, are two ideas. He believes that conceptual understanding of musical ideas will develop much faster than skills of dexterity or translation and therefore must come first, and that skill developments do not necessarily lead to better conceptual understanding. He emphasizes that a thorough understanding of concepts should be the primary objective of a music curriculum in order for students to be intrinsically involved in learning.
In terms of the kinds of music to be taught, Thomas believes the music of today has the most relevance, and is the best place to be begin instruction. He recognizes that music is a living,
6

Gina Rico The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project 2/17/2012 breathing art form which both a current set of ideas, and a sum of its history. He believes that using contemporary music removes the distance that sometimes develops between students and music of the past which is no longer socially relevant. As he writes in his article Rethinking the
Curriculum
, Thomas notes, “the Classical and Romantic periods reflect the upper-class European culture during a hundred-year period, one hundred years ago,”(Thomas, Rethinking The
Curriculum, 69). The music of the past, though relevant to the development of current music, is not always relevant to students and can sometimes push them away from pursuing the study of music when it is the only version offered to them in the classroom (Thomas, MMCP Synthesis,
20).
On totality, Thomas believes that comprehensive musical understanding requires the student understand the relationship of different elements of music to create one cohesive effect.
“Pitch is relative to timbre, rhythm to dynamics, harmony to duration, timbre to tempo, dynamics to spacing, melody to structural balance,”(Thomas, 20). This underlines the main idea of all principles of MMCP, as holistic understanding of music is the ultimate goal of the program.
The objectives of the MMCP curriculum break down into 4 main ideas: Cognitive objectives, Attitudinal objectives, Skill objectives, and Aesthetic objectives. All 4 function under the main principals of the curriculum and serve to instruct students in all areas of music in order to form a comprehensive understanding.
Cognitive objectives of the curriculum are primarily the use of spiral curriculum to solidify learning of concepts over time, and the teaching of all concepts in the context of music rather than separate entities. Part of the spiral curriculum theory, is that the gradual broadening of understanding will cause the student’s perception of music to change over time, like building
7

Gina Rico The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project 2/17/2012 blocks that eventually create a solid structure that is comprehensive and fully functional. This musical growth over time is critical to Thomas’ approach and allows for the most thorough musical learning to occur.
Attitudinal objectives refer the the student’s attitude towards music and themselves.
Thomas explains “fostering of positive attitudes is crucial if personal concern and involvement are to be motivated intrinsically,” (Thomas, 8). The student’s relationship to the art of music is to be built by instilling confidence in their ability to be creative and be part of creative processes, as well as fostering openness to new ideas and concepts. Intuitive thinking is highly valued, and empowering the student to be an independent and confident individual is a major part of allowing for musical success (Thomas, 8). Importantly, Thomas notes that “attitudes are not taught,” but rather are a result of having a powerful, meaningful experience with music.
Skill objectives include the understanding of musical language, and the acquisition of skills which specifically enhance all of the objectives being taught. According to Thomas, skills in performance, notation and aural abilities are “irrelevant experience” outside the context of the objectives themselves: Aural, dexterity and translative. Skills should not be taught in and of themselves as separate entities; again, going back to the concept of the spiral curriculum and a certain “oneness” of all musical concepts and developing holistic musical understanding.
Thomas gives the example that a student performing physical tasks, such as fingering scales on an instrument, does not demonstrate their actual understanding of the concept of scales. This means that the student performing the task of fingering scales on an instrument is a combination of understanding the dexterity involved in the task, the aural skill of hearing and understanding what a scale is, and the translative skill of reading or in some way notating a scale (Thomas, 9).
8

Gina Rico The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project 2/17/2012
The final objective outlined is the Aesthetic objective. Thomas explains, “The ultimate acheivementin musicality implies knowledge, attitudes and skills, but it goes beyond these objectives. It includes the awakening of an aesthetic sense, the ability to comprehend beauty and to find meaning on a plane beyond analysis of mechanics, techniques, or even concepts,”
(Thomas, 9). The aesthetic objective is the most nebulous of all the objectives, but also the most important as it epitomizes the whole point of the MMCP’s curriculum. There is no complete or accurate way to assess a student’s achievement in this area specifically, but it is meant to be taught through the other objectives, and occur naturally as a result of comprehension of concepts, skills and attitudinal objectives.
The overall goals of MMCP’s curriculum are to engage students musically in such a way that they become empowered to take ownership of their own learning. It encourages intrinsic involvement of students in the lessons taught in class, and empowers the student by providing them with opportunities to explore and discover music and sound. This idea is in opposition to the standard approach of a teacher lecturing a class, or simply giving students information without meaningful context- which is what makes the learning valuable to the student and encourages them to explore further and ultimately learn more.
9

Gina Rico The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project 2/17/2012
1. Thomas, Ronald B (1970). MMCP Synthesis; a structure for music education Bardonia, N.Y.,
Media Materials, inc.
2. Moon, Kyung-Suk. "The Commencement of the Manhattanville Music Curriculum Program:
1957-1966." Journal of Historical Research in Music Education XXVII.2 (2006). Web. 17 Feb.
2012. <http://www.jstor.org/pss/25597922>.
3. Thomas, Ronald B. "Manhattanville Music Curriculum Program Final Report." (1970): n. page. Print. <http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED045865.pdf>.
2. Walker, Robert. Innovation in the Music Classroom: II The Manhattanville Music Curriculum
Project. Psychology of Music, Vol. 12, No. 1, 25-33 (1984)
3. Thomas, Ronald B. "Rethinking The Curriculum." Music Educators Journal . 56.6 (1970): 68-
70. Print.
4. Thomas, Ronald B. "Innovative Music Education Programs." Music Educators Journal . 53.9
(1967): 50-52. Print.
10

Gina Rico The Manhattanville Music Curriculum Project 2/17/2012
5. Scott, Seifried. "Exploring the outcomes of rock and popular music instruction in high school guitar class: a case study." International Journal of Music Education . 24.2 (2006): 168-176.
Web. 17 Feb. 2012. <http://ijm.sagepub.com/content/24/2/168
6. Biasini, Americole, Ronald B. Thomas, and Pogonowski Lenore. MMCP Interaction . 2nd ed.
Bardonia, NY: Media Materials, Inc., 1979. 41-99. Print.
7. Thomas, Ronald B. "Learning Through Composing." Music Educators Journal . 50.4 (1964):
106-108. Print
8. Hein, George E.. "Constructivist Learning Theory." Institute for Inquiry . The Museum and the
Needs of People, 22 October 1991. Web. 15 Feb 2012.
<http://www.exploratorium.edu/IFI/resources/constructivistlearning.html>.
11