GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY
Graduate Council NEW Certificate, Concentration, Tack or Degree Program
Coordination/Approval Form
(Please complete this form and attach any related materials. Forward it as an email attachment to the Secretary of
the Graduate Council. A printed copy of the form with signatures should be brought to the Graduate Council Meeting.
If no coordination with other units is requires, simply indicate “None” on the form.
Title of Program/Certificate,etc: Doctoral Program in Music — Doctor of Musical Arts (D.M.A.)
Three program area specializations are included: Performance, Conducting, and Composition.
This is #2 of two proposed degrees. The other is a Ph.D. in Music Education.
Level (Masters/Ph.D.): Doctoral (D.M.A.)
Please Indicate:
X
Program
______ Certificate
_______ Concentration
_____ Track
Description of certificate, concentration or degree program:
Please attach a description of the new certificate or concentration. Attach Course Inventory Forms for
each new or modified course included in the program. For new degree programs, please attach the SCHEV
Program Proposal submission.
Please list the contact person for this new certificate, concentration, track or program for incoming
students:
Dr. Lisa Billingham, Director of Graduate Studies, Department of Music
Approval from other units: — Please list those units outside of your own who may be affected by this new
program. Each of these units must approve this change prior to its being submitted to the Graduate
Council for approval.
Unit:
Head of Unit’s Signature:
Date:
Unit:
Head of Unit’s Signature:
Date:
Unit:
Head of Unit’s Signature:
Date:
Unit:
Head of Unit’s Signature:
Date:
Submitted by: ____________________________________________
Email: ____________
Graduate Council approval: __________________________________ Date: _____________
Graduate Council representative: ______________________________ Date: _____________
Provost Office representative: _______________________________ Date: _____________
1
STATE COUNCIL OF HIGHER EDUCATION FOR VIRGINIA
PROGRAM PROPOSAL COVER SHEET
1.
Institution
George Mason University
2. Program action (Check one):
Spin-off proposal
_____
New program proposal
XXX .
3. Title of proposed program — Doctor of Musical Arts
Program Areas: Performance, Composition, Conducting
4. CIP code
50.0999
5. Degree designations — Doctor of Musical Arts (DMA)
[This is #2 of 2 proposed doctoral degrees in music.]
6. Term and year of initiation
Fall 2008
7. Term and year of first graduates — Fall 2011
8. For community colleges: date
approved by local board
9. Date approved by Board of Visitors
10. For community colleges:
date approved by State Board
for Community Colleges
11. If collaborative or joint program, identify collaborating institution(s) and attach letter(s) of
intent/support from corresponding chief academic officers(s)
12. Location of program within institution (complete for every level, as appropriate). If any
organizational unit(s) will be new, identify unit(s) and attach a revised organizational chart
and a letter requesting an organizational change (see Organizational Changes--hotlink).
George Mason University; College of Visual and Performing Arts; Department of Music
Campus (or off-campus site)
Fairfax
Distance Delivery (web-based, satellite, etc.)
13. Name, title, telephone number, and e-mail address of person(s) other than the institution’s
chief academic officer who may be contacted by or may be expected to contact Council
staff regarding this program proposal.
Dr. James Gardner, Chair, Department of Music
(703) 993-3574 JGviolin@gmu.edu
Dr. Victoria N. Salmon, Director of Graduate Studies, CVPA
(703) 993-4541 vsalmon@gmu.edu
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART A — DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CURRICULUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
FACULTY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ASSESSMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
BENCHMARKS OF SUCCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING PROGRAM? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
COLLABORATIVE OR STANDALONE PROGRAM? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
3
4
8
9
11
11
13
PART B — JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROPOSED PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
RESPONSE TO CURRENT NEEDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
SPIN-OFF PROPOSAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EMPLOYMENT DEMAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
STUDENT DEMAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
DUPLICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
SUMMARY OF PROJECTED ENROLLMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14
18
18
19
19
22
PART C — PROJECTED RESOURCE NEEDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
PART D — CERTIFICATION STATEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A — EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDIX B — BRIEF FACULTY BIOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDIX C — JOB ANNOUNCEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDIX D — SURVEY INSTRUMENT & RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDIX E — ASSUMPTIONS USED IN DEVELOPING RESOURCE PROJECTIONS . . . .
APPENDIX F — SYLLABI OF NEW COURSES NECESSARY FOR THIS PROPOSAL . . . . . .
APPENDIX G — HIGHER EDUCATION DATA SERVICES (HEADS): CONTEXTS . . . . .
APPENDIX H — DIRECT INQUIRY DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A–1
B–1
C–1
D–1
E–1
F–1
G–1
H–1
2
PART A — DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROGRAM
OVERVIEW — George Mason University seeks approval to offer the Doctor of Musical Arts
degree (D.M.A.). The University has offered master’s-level degrees in music since Fall 1982.
The Department of Music, with over 60 faculty members, is recognized nationally for the
positive quality of its faculty, students, and graduates. This proposal is a direct response to the
needs of the Northern Virginia and the Washington metropolitan regions, the research and
creative profiles of the faculty, and the cost structures necessary to deliver the instruction.
This proposal for a Doctor of Musical Arts (D.M.A. — with three areas of program
specialization — Performance, Conducting, and Composition) is one of two projected doctoral
degrees in music. The other is a proposal for a Ph.D. in Music Education (see other material).
Some aspects of the four degree plans overlap even as there are important distinctions. The
United States Network for Education Information of the Department of Education describes both
degrees as research degrees common in the field of music. The Reston-based National
Association of Schools of Music (NASM), the accrediting agency for the discipline, encourages
a measure of standardization regarding degrees in music. Doctoral programs in music education,
especially when characterized by quantitative study, are usually offered as Ph.D. in Music
Education degrees. Doctoral programs in Performance, Conducting, and Composition are most
typically found within D.M.A. degrees.
This overall doctoral initiative in music does not create the six or eight majors that one might
find at a large public research university (even though Mason is a large public research
university). These four programs (Performance, Conducting, Composition, and Music
Education) are integrated in important ways and they support the viability of one another. These
four (Performance, Conducting, Composition, and Music Education) are the most widelysubscribed doctoral majors in music, accounting for 82.1% of doctoral enrollment nationally.
(See excerpts from the 2005–2006 Higher Education Arts Data Services Report in Appendix G.)
These programs will make an important impact on Virginia and beyond.
In addition to a graduate music student headcount of over 50, the university also offers
significant post-graduate continuing education opportunities to over 100 music professionals
each year. Many people (current students, alumni, and professionals participating in postmaster’s-level continuing education) have expressed strong interest in doctoral study in music at
Mason. The academic and curricular foundation for doctoral studies in music is positive.
Adding a doctoral program in music will continue natural growth toward a leadership school of
music for the region. A consequence of the current strong graduate courses in music is that a
doctoral program will require a minimal number of new courses, new faculty, and other new
resources. Syllabi for new courses are included in Appendix F. See Part C of this proposal for
more detail of necessary resources for this proposal.
The National Association of Schools of Music (NASM) articulates important learning
outcomes (knowledge and skills) for doctoral graduates. As a full member of the association, the
university is committed to achieving these outcomes. This proposed D.M.A. adheres to the
professional and academic requirements of NASM.
3
CURRICULUM — This proposal for a Doctor of Musical Arts degree calls for 60 credits beyond
the master’s degree in music. This is typical and standard for doctoral degree programs in music.
This proposal for a Doctor of Musical Arts degree has three program areas: Performance,
Conducting, and Composition. Each shares important required course work, and each is distinct
at certain points.
Admission to the Doctor of Musical Arts — All D.M.A. coursework requires significant
prerequisite and entrance requirements. Application deadlines are as published by the university.
Applicants must have an earned master’s degree in music from an accredited college or
university for admission consideration. Students in Performance and Conducting must schedule
a formal audition. Composition students must present a portfolio of recent compositions and
recordings of performances of their recent work. In addition, the following materials must be
submitted:








Completed application form
A non-refundable application fee
The application for Virginia In-State Tuition Rates, if applicants are Virginia
residents
The appropriate international paperwork, as required by the University
Official transcripts from each undergraduate and graduate program attended
GPA of 3.50 in graduate music courses in the proposed area of specialization
(Performance, Conducting, or Composition)
Three letters of recommendation from faculty members, or those who can evaluate
the applicant’s academic potential
A sample of academic writing about music, such as a graduate-level paper from a
Musicology or Music History course taken during M.M. studies
During the first semester of study, the Director of Graduate Studies of the Department of
Music will select the Faculty Committee for the student. Normally the committee will have five
faculty members: two from the student’s area of specialization (Performance, Conducting, or
Composition), one from music theory, one from music history, and one at-large. The student’s
Major Professor will serve as chair of the committee. The Director of Graduate Studies of the
Department of Music may be part of the committee; if not, he or she will serve ex-officio.
The Committee will evaluate the progress of the student each year. Continuation in the
program is subject to the endorsement of this group. Performance and composition recitals and
projects moving toward the dissertation are also subject to approval of this group.
Financial assistance may be available to a D.M.A. student. Support for students may be in
the form of teaching assistantships, graduate research assistantships, and/or externally-funded
scholarships.
4
Course Work — This proposed D.M.A. degree builds on the largest master’s-level degree
program in music among the public universities of the Commonwealth. The requirements for
this degree program include three categories of courses: foundation studies in music (18 credits),
studies in the concentration (Performance, Conducting, or Composition —29 credits), and the
proposal/dissertation (13 credits). Rigorous coursework reflects expectations for the potential
intellectual contributions Mason students will offer to the field. Courses will be offered on a
rotational basis, allowing the doctoral student to complete the classes in a timely manner. A
complete listing of the requirements is also presented in the Executive Summary in Appendix A.
Program of Study: D.M.A. — Performance, Conducting, or Composition
Foundation Studies in Music
18 Credits
Courses in Music History/Literature
9
Courses in Music Theory
6
Advanced History or Theory
3
Course Number
MUSI 830 plus 630, 640, and/or 730
MUSI 810 plus 610 or 710 or 712
MUSI 610, 611, 613, 614, 630, 640,
710, 712, or 730
Program Area Studies: Performance, Conducting, or Composition (29 credits)
Performance
29 Credits
Doctoral Private Music Instruction
15
Courses in Ensemble Performance
4
Chamber Music or Accompanying
2
Course in Pedagogy
3
Recitals
2
Advisor Approved Electives
3
Course Number
MUSI 82x
MUSI 880
MUSI 885 and/or 720
MUSI 770
MUSI 890
600, 700, and/or 800-level MUSI
Conducting
29 Credits
Doctoral Private Music Instruction
15
Courses in Ensemble Performance
4
Course in Pedagogy
3
Recitals
2
Advisor Approved Electives
5
Course Number
MUSI 829
MUSI 880
MUSI 770
MUSI 890
600, 700, and/or 800-level MUSI
Composition
29 Credits
Doctoral Private Music Instruction
15
New Music Ensemble
4
Doctoral Major Ensemble
1
Additional Doctoral Seminar in Analysis 3
Music Theory Pedagogy
3
Recitals
2
Advisor Approved Elective
1
Course Number
MUSI 828
MUSI 885
MUSI 880
MUSI 810
MUSI 770
MUSI 890
600, 700, and/or 800-level MUSI
Dissertation Studies
Dissertation Proposal
Dissertation
13 Credits Course Number
1 MUSI 998
12 MUSI 999
5
NASM expectations for learning outcomes are in two dimensions: breadth of
knowledge/skills in music and depth in the area of specialization (Performance, Conducting, or
Composition). All graduates of doctoral programs in music are expected to have strong
knowledge and skills in common areas of study (music theory and music history/literature) as
well as advanced knowledge and skill in their major area (Performance, Conducting, or
Composition). These expectations have given rise to the specific course requirements for this
proposed doctoral program. The specific courses in the degree plans proposed at Mason are
designed to equip the students toward successful accomplishments in the profession and thereby
make important positive contributions to society.
NASM standards include the following general areas of knowledge and skills for all doctoral
students in music: a knowledge of the techniques of music theory sufficient to perform advanced
musical analysis, a knowledge of representative literature and composers of each major period of
music history, and a knowledge of general bibliographical resources in music (National
Association of Schools of Music 2003–2004 Handbook, page 110). These areas of general
knowledge are foundational to the specialized knowledge and skills that lead to the dissertation
project.
The required coursework is built on important prerequisite and entrance requirements. These
are designed to ensure that the doctoral student is ready to function within the advanced theory
and history courses. This includes abilities to communicate in written and oral formats, to
absorb and understand material in at least one language other than English, and to master
contemporary research materials and techniques. Thus, the anticipated outcomes in foundational
areas of advanced knowledge in music theory and in music history are matched by the nature of
the required courses in the degree plan. Over one-fourth of the required coursework of the
proposed degree plan focuses on foundational points of knowledge/skill. The doctoral student
can take additional courses in performance, music theory, and/or music history by appropriate
selections of electives.
In a similar way, NASM-articulated expectations for learning outcomes related to the
program area specialization (Performance, Conducting, or Composition) are matched by the
nature of the curricular structure. These expectations center on depth of knowledge and skills in
the practice and scholarship of Performance, Conducing, or Composition. The required courses
focus on these expectations. The urban location of George Mason University is an important
advantage for students with a strong commitment to the performing aspects of music — a vital
part of the professional world of each of the three DMA program area specializations:
Performance, Conducting, and Composition. There is potential for a natural integration of
academic, artistic, and professional activities in this region.
Summary of Knowledge, Skills, and Experiences Graduates Will Have
Appropriate Depth of Insight into the Style of Music from Major Eras
Appropriate Breadth of Knowledge of Specific Repertoire from Major Eras
6
Appropriate Knowledge of Principal Developments in Musical Performance, Musical
Leadership, or Musical Composition
Demonstrated Ability/Skill in Musical Analysis: Standard & Pedagogical Repertoire
Demonstrated Ability to Communicate Verbally and in Writing about Musical Style
Demonstrated Ability to Communicate Verbally and in Writing about the Program Area
Specialization (Performance, Conducting, or Composition)
Demonstrated Ability/Skill to Perform Musically in Ensembles and/or Solo at a level
consistent with the Program Area Specialization
Conducting Area Specialization: Demonstrated Ability to Effectively Conduct and Lead a
Variety of Musical Groups
Composition Area Specialization: Demonstrated Ability to Compose Effective Music for
a Variety of Groups
Accomplishment of a Dissertation that makes an original contribution to the field of
Performance, Conducting, or Composition
Advancement to Candidacy — The final steps for completion of the D.M.A. include the research
proposal (MUSI 998) and the dissertation (MUSI 999). The student who has successfully
completed all course work, a signed program of study that reflects any changes from the original
course of study, and candidacy examinations may submit a request to the Director of Graduate
Studies of the Department of Music to convene the Dissertation Committee. This group will be
the student’s Faculty Committee as described above plus a faculty member from beyond the
Department of Music. The Director of Graduate Studies of the Department of Music will
assemble the Dissertation Committee in consultation with relevant members of the faculty. The
members of the Dissertation Committee will have terminal degrees and/or extensive professional
experience in fields related to the student’s research. Once the committee is appointed, the
student works directly with the committee for guidance and direction for the research and
proposal. The committee members consult and meet with the student on a regular basis to:
* Advise in topic selection including appropriateness and overall academic value;
* Determine if the selected research procedures are appropriate and effective, especially
relative to the document;
* Guide the student in the proposal writing process; and
* Ensure that appropriate performance and musicianship standards are in full evidence for
each step of the process.
A student is permitted to register for Dissertation (MUSI 999) after advancing to candidacy
and successfully defending the proposal for the project. The dissertation chair (professor of
record) and committee will
* Provide guidance and evaluation during the research and writing stages and in
preparation of the musical material for public performance;
* Meet with the student during the dissertation registration semesters;
* Read and review the document drafts in a timely manner;
7
* Offer substantive and clear recommendations regarding musical artistry;
* Make qualitative judgments about the candidate's musical work;
* Approve the performance for public presentation; and
* Approve the final draft of the document prior to the defense.
The dissertation is the culmination of a student's doctoral program of study and must make an
original contribution to knowledge and practice in Performance, Conducting, or Composition.
To this end, dissertations demonstrate rigorous processes relative to musical creativity,
leadership, and public presentation. Holders of the doctorate are expected to contribute to the
discipline through independent scholarship and artistry. The dissertation provides students with
first-hand experience in making such a musical contribution, including a written summary of that
inquiry, noting how the findings make an original contribution to the field.
FACULTY — Over sixty persons are on the music faculty at George Mason University. This
includes nationally and internationally prominent educators, scholars, performers, composers,
and conductors. Brief biographies are included in Appendix B.
The music faculty includes individuals who are full-time tenured, and tenure-track; term; and
adjunct to the department. Ten of the sixteen full-time faculty members have an earned
doctorate, with an eleventh graduating with a D.M.A. from the University of North Texas in
December 2007. (Note that in some components of the academic music world, the Master of
Music is the terminal degree, especially among persons who have been in the profession for a
number of decades.) The full-time faculty includes individuals with important prominence in the
profession, with impact nationally and internationally. Full-time term faculty members (on nontenure-track appointments) also provide significant leadership. Faculty who are successfully
immersed in the profession provide important value to doctoral students. Research during
doctoral study should be ground-breaking and insightful, but it also needs to be actual and
effective. The balance of full-time faculty among research-intensive tenure-track individuals and
profession-intensive non-tenure-track individuals is an important value.
Part-time faculty members are vital components of the instructional resources for this
proposed program. Their instructional impact is particularly important in applied music as well
as in specialized professional and research courses. Fifty-four persons are regular part-time
faculty members in music. It is anticipated that 30 of this group will be teaching and guiding
doctoral students (see Appendix B). Fifteen of the 54 hold a doctoral degree. George Mason
University is fortunate in being located in the metropolitan region of the nation’s capital. This
creates significant opportunities for students to study with some of the best musicians of the
region and the nation. This is especially significant in areas of musical performance. The parttime music faculty also includes individuals who are fully engaged in other aspects of the
profession and who teach at Mason as adjuncts. These persons have important links to the
Library of Congress, the Smithsonian, the Department of Education, the National Association of
Music Educators, and similar entities. They are thought leaders of the profession — at the
national and the international level.
8
ASSESSMENT — Both the progress of individual students and the overall effectiveness of the
program are subject to assessment. Student assessment relates to the progress of individual
students and their achievement of the skills and knowledge goals of the curriculum.
Programmatic assessment relates to the overall effectiveness and quality of this proposed
doctoral program.
Student Assessment — The skills and knowledge expected of graduates of the program are listed
above in the Curriculum section. Required course work is designed to address achieving those
general goals. Normal course grading processes thereby interface with the accomplishment of
the skills and knowledge goals central to the purposes of the degree.
Regular internal assessment of individual students in the program is also present in a more
comprehensive manner via yearly certification of appropriate progress toward completion. This
assessment is made by the student’s faculty committee and is based on the student’s overall
academic, professional, and artistic progress in meeting the goals of the degree program. This
includes attention to both the foundational areas of advanced research and knowledge and to the
development of the specialized knowledge and skills that will culminate in the dissertation.
In addition to student assessment methodologies within courses (with traditional activities
such as examinations and research papers), assessment of the D.M.A. student’s progress will
include significant attention to juried performances (Performance and Conducting students) and
juried portfolio reviews (Composition students). Evaluating the student’s achievement in
meeting the goals of the curriculum is at the heart of the annual certification of appropriate
progress toward completion. This is the key internal assessment process for students during the
pre-candidacy phase of the D.M.A. degree program.
Course Evaluations — Course evaluations are conducted in every course, each term, providing
students’ perspectives on course effectiveness. Evaluation results are published online by the
university.
Program Assessment: Internal — The College of Visual and Performing Arts (CVPA) has a
regular process of program review that correlates with University and external evaluations. The
purpose of the program review is to evaluate the quality of the program, to stimulate program
development, and to assess the role of the program in fulfilling institutional mission. The
program review may result in strategic decisions about the program, may identify areas of
potential improvement, may make resource recommendations, may articulate considerations for
expansion or consolidation, and may consider other aspects of programmatic quality.
The review includes consideration of policies and practices relative to:
 Student recruitment, admissions, advising, and retention;
9









Enrollment projections including consideration of the context of the SCHEV 5-year
benchmark and other on-going enrollment targets;
Faculty profile, specializations, and creative/research activity;
Course descriptions and implementation;
Curriculum changes and development;
Support staff and personnel;
Facilities;
Interface with and effectiveness of the Library and other institutional resources;
Internal and external funding; and
Description of strengths and weaknesses with attention to points of action for the
future.
Program Assessment: External — External assessment is provided through continuing
accreditation by the National Association of Schools of Music (NASM). The university’s
commitment to the accreditation process includes annual submission of data that is reviewed by a
group of scholars and leaders from the profession. In addition, there is an intense periodic
process of Self Study and evaluation by external visitors. The Self Study process takes place
every ten years, with the next point occurring during the 2012–2013 academic year. That will be
the fifth year of these proposed doctoral programs. The NASM process will include a visit from
an evaluation team during the Spring 2013 or Fall 2013 semester. The visitors are persons from
leading institutions who have received special training and who are experienced in this kind of
activity. The institution’s Self Study, the Visitor’s Report, and our Institutional Response are
presented to Commission on Accreditation of the National Association. The Commission makes
decisions about re-accreditation. The primary focus of its deliberation is an overall assessment
of the vitality of each degree program in music offered by the university.
In conjunction with the department’s periodic NASM Self Study, external visitors will
engage the following methods of assessment:
 Direct observation of classes, rehearsals, and applied music lessons;
 Interview students; faculty; and administrators at the department, college, and
university level;
 Listen to students perform;
 Interview and/or observe student teachers (undergraduate);
 Listen to large and small ensembles in rehearsal and/or performance;
 Inspect facilities and equipment (instruments, audio facilities, practice rooms, etc.);
 Examine libraries (books, periodicals, scores, recordings, information technologies,
ensemble music, etc.);
 Examine items such as final projects, theses, dissertations, performance tapes, and
compositions submitted in fulfillment of requirements for each degree or program
offered;
 Evaluate web sites and recruiting material applicable to the music unit;
 Examine and evaluate student transcripts; and
 Inspect academic advising records of students’ performance examinations and
repertoire.
10
Summary of Assessment Processes
Individual Student Assessment:
Required Courses — accomplishing required knowledge and skills
Annual Certification — verifying appropriate progress toward completion
Programmatic Assessment:
CVPA Program Review process
Annual submission of data to NASM
Correlation of GMU data with activities at other NASM institutions
Periodic Self Study and Visitors process, culminating in judgment by the Commission
(NASM) regarding continuing accreditation
BENCHMARKS OF SUCCESS — Benchmarks for doctoral study include performance standards
within the discipline, enrollment goals, and professional placement of graduates. If the program
does not meet articulated standards, adjustments will be made. Success may be measured by the
ways the program affects academic goals, career goals, and future job mobility. While studying
in the Doctor of Musical Arts program, successful students and faculty will develop their talents
and abilities in music performance, conducting, or composition; and construct and create
knowledge that serves a variety of music constituencies.
Performance standards within the profession are fundamental to achieving other benchmarks
of success (enrollment goals and placement of graduates). Standards within the degree programs
are articulated within accreditation norms. The assessment process of the National Association
of Schools of Music (NASM) as described above will be the means embraced to evaluate this
benchmark.
At the doctoral level one should expect full professional engagement of graduates. One
strong dimension of a doctoral program in music at Mason is the outstanding professional and
scholarly climate of the region. There is an assumption that many students will be part-time
during part of their doctoral work. It is anticipated that they will already have professional
appointments and are seeking doctoral study because accomplishing doctoral study is significant
for their continuing professional vitality and advancement.
Faculty, administrators, students, and alumni will participate in periodic evaluation of the
success of the program in meeting these benchmarks. These are the persons who contribute to
the various processes of assessment as described above. A continuing process of evaluation and
responsive adjustment is anticipated to keep the program in a posture of dynamic success. This
is vital for any strong doctoral program to remain innovative and competitive.
EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING PROGRAM — This proposal for a D.M.A. is not a direct
expansion of an existing doctoral program in music. However, it is a natural expansion of other
11
graduate programs at Mason. The most significant launching point for doctoral programs is the
vitality of master’s-level programs. In this regard Mason is well-prepared. The current Master
of Music (M.M.) program is the largest among public universities in Virginia, and the summer
professional continuing education program is one of the largest and most highly respected in the
nation for the training of music educators and teachers.
Though the present proposals (this D.M.A. and the Ph.D. in Music Education documents) are
not direct expansions of an existing doctoral program in music there are important existing
programs in the university that have informed and shaped these proposals. In particular, two
current doctoral programs have been formative to this process. These two programs are the
Ph.D. in Education (College of Education and Human Development — CEHD) and the Doctor
of Arts in Community College Education (College of Humanities and Social Sciences — CHSS).
The Ph.D. in Education (CEHD) occasionally enrolls musicians who can include up to 18
approved credits in music toward the overall degree requirements. Over the years this has
included some important students in the Curriculum and Instruction program and also in the
Educational Psychology program. Some of these students sought a “music” doctoral degree; and
when it was not present at Mason, they began this Ph.D. program. This program is a positive
academic and professional experience for them, but a more focused program in music is needed
to fulfill the goals of many music educators. Ph.D. in Education programs typically prepare
individuals for a variety of leadership positions in the education field. Leadership in Music
Education typically requires a more focused degree. Doctoral degrees in Music Education
include more musical content than can be accommodated by the structure of a strong Ph.D. in
Education program. Accreditation standards articulate the need for particular skills and
knowledge in music that cannot normally be gained without the scope of musical courses present
in the proposal for a Ph.D. in Music Education (see other material). Some music educators will
continue to be drawn to the important values present in existing Ph.D. programs in areas such as
Curriculum/Instruction and in Educational Psychology. But even more prospective students are
currently not being served because their professional appetites await the more focused and
developed program of a doctorate in Music Education.
In comparison with the Ph.D. in Education, a larger group of “music” students is currently in
the existing Doctor of Arts in Community College Education program. This degree has the
potential of more course work in music than the 18 credits currently available on the Ph.D. in
Education program. However, it is not a “music” degree and does not create all of the strengths
in the discipline necessary for strong advancement in the profession. It does have important
value for a group of students, but even more students await the opportunity for specifically
“music” doctoral programs.
This proposal for a new Doctor of Musical Arts degree is built on the direct experiences with
these two existing programs. The hunger of students for doctoral studies in music is a strong
indicator of the need for this proposal. Our academic experience with courses and research
activities for students in the existing programs is demonstrating an appropriate capacity for
expansion into the focused degree programs in music presented in these doctoral proposals. Few
programs and institutions that might contemplate adding doctoral studies in a given discipline
have had this kind of pre-proposal process.
12
Please note that this proposal will not result in eliminating those healthy and important
programs but could result in some shifts in patterns of enrollment in coming years. However,
please also note that the “music” numbers within the Ph.D. in Education (1 to 2 per year) and the
Doctor of Arts (4 to 6) are a small percentage of the vitality of those programs. It is quite
possible that the presence of healthy doctoral programs in music may even spur additional
enrollment in those programs as prospective doctoral music students would have the benefit of a
strong diversity of doctoral options available to match their particular professional and artistic
aspirations.
COLLABORATION OR STAND-ALONE PROGRAM — This program is within George Mason
University. It is not a collaborative program with another institution. However, students in the
D.M.A. program may (under certain circumstances) take courses within the Consortium of
Universities of the Washington Metropolitan Area. Members of the Consortium whose
academic programs may be relevant to this proposed degree include: The Catholic University of
America; Howard University; and the University of Maryland, College Park. In order to
participate in this connection with other institutions, graduate students must be in good standing
and any specific course taken through the Consortium must (1) be approved by the department
chair and dean, (2) be relevant to the program of study, (3) not be offered at Mason, and (4) the
visited institution must have space available. Other restrictions may apply. No more than 6
credits may be taken in the Consortium.
13
PART B — JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROPOSED PROGRAM
RESPONSE TO CURRENT NEEDS — This proposal is a direct response to requests from
prospective students and reflects national trends in graduate programs in music. The National
Association of Schools of Music, Higher Education Arts Data Services (HEADS), offers clear,
public analysis of enrollments for degree granting and non-degree granting institutions in the
Arts. An overall evaluation of the profession is evident in the enrollment projections in Part B
below. This includes an evaluation of the appetite for music doctoral programs among
individuals who are in the profession, an evaluation of existing parallel programs (including their
capacity to meet the needs for doctoral study in music), and a consideration of the professional
placement of graduates after completion of the degree (that is, the capacity of the market to
absorb graduates in meaningful ways). In a sense the profession is a pipeline that needs to have
appropriate capacity at each phase of its existence. The scope of this proposal is designed to
match this understanding of the profession in the national context of HEADS data.
This proposal incorporates enrollment goals for both the doctoral program and the overall
music program. All dimensions of enrollment — undergraduate and graduate — work together.
Doctoral programs require a depth of academic and artistic activity (a community of scholarship
and creativity). Critical markers of appropriate programmatic depth include: (1) the overall
number of music major students; (2) musical activity among non-music majors, especially at the
undergraduate level; (3) number of music major students at the master’s level; (4) total number
of music students at the doctoral level [in both this proposed D.M.A. and the proposed Ph.D.],
and (5) the quantity and quality of musical performances on campus given by professionals,
faculty, and students. Each of these markers is important in creating an appropriate community
of scholarship and creativity foundational to an effective doctoral program.
This doctoral proposal is part of an overall plan for the department that projects a music
program with a strong commitment to (1) non-majors at the undergraduate level, (2) music
majors at the undergraduate level, (3) a vigorous master’s level program, and (4) advanced study
as present in both doctoral proposals in music (this Ph.D. and the D.M.A.). The headcount for
undergraduate and graduate music majors is envisioned becoming 1.5% to 2.0% of the overall
university headcount, approximately 450–500 music majors. (Fall 2006 numbers are
approximately 330 music majors out of an overall headcount of about 30,000 — or 1.1% of the
institutional total.) This projection of overall music students reflects an assessment of the
appetite of the Commonwealth, the needs of this region, and the national/international context of
the George Mason University. Distributing academic programs to the three levels
(undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral) creates appropriate critical mass for each component of
activity. Specific enrollment targets for the doctoral program are presented in Part B below and
in Appendix E. Meeting articulated enrollment goals is very important to the functional viability
of the entire music program.
The Higher Education Data Services (HEADS) provide a variety of data related to
enrollment productivity. Selected data from the 2005–2006 reports are included in Appendix G.
One enrollment benchmark suggested in the HEADS data is the percentage of overall music
major enrollments (headcount) who are doctoral students. Nationally, this is 5.4% of all music
14
major students, or 24 doctoral students for a program with 450 music majors. The enrollment
projections for both of the proposed doctoral degrees in music (this proposed D.M.A. and the
proposed Ph.D. in Music Education) are combined in Appendix E. That data suggests that
Mason will reach this benchmark percentage by approximately the seventh year of operation.
The Music department anticipates this positive productivity due to the urban nature of the
doctoral constituency in this region. Interested applicants from the Washington, D.C. area will
not need to relocate, and this program anticipates that a significant portion of the students will be
part-time during part of their coursework study.
The HEADS data was also used to inform projections for numbers of graduates and other
aspects of programmatic development such as needed full-time faculty and FTE faculty. That
data affirms the “normalcy” of these overall proposals: there are 40 NASM-accredited public
institutions in America with music major enrollment of 400 and above, and 70% of them have
doctoral degree programs in music. This is an important benchmark for the Commonwealth.
Virginia is currently deficient. This proposed program at Mason is the best and most costefficient way for the Commonwealth to meet this national measure of cultural and scholarly
infrastructure.
State and Regional Needs — The reality of strong demand for doctoral study is consistent with
the character of this region. Northern Virginia has one of the highest concentrations of persons
with doctoral and professional degrees among regions of the nation. This might lead one to think
that since so many persons (proportionally speaking) already have advanced degrees, no more
are needed. But the reality is that individuals in this community expect to lead and expect to
have the educational background to give them leadership knowledge and skills. And a
characteristic of this region is its mobility. Individuals enrich the area with their service for a
period of time and often depart to other parts of the country and the world. (This pattern is
probably typical of other regions as well.) Virginia residents need significant access to the
highest levels of academic and professional training in order to successfully compete in this
region, and, more importantly, to be able to make the kinds of contributions to society that will
result in a better future for all.
In the area of music, advanced study at the doctoral level is increasingly expected. It is not
uncommon for individuals in professional orchestras to have doctoral degrees. Indeed: advanced
academic work was fundamental in equipping them to win the audition that got them the job.
Other aspects of the music profession also show a move toward doctoral credentials as common
or even as a norm. Higher education continues to move toward the doctorate as the standard
entry-qualification for music faculty members. Even at the elementary and secondary levels,
music educators who are leaders in the profession often have the doctoral degree, especially
teachers who are themselves in younger age brackets. Again, doctoral study was a vital vehicle
for these individuals to obtain the knowledge and skills that empowered their leadership roles.
Training leaders is a primary goal of a doctoral program and many individuals in this region are
leaders or aspire to be leaders. Thus it is logical that a significant demand for doctoral study in
music exists at Mason.
15
It is possible to demonstrate need for this proposed program with articulations of logical
analyses (as above) and with positive survey results (see Appendix D). But perhaps the best
demonstrations of need are unsolicited inquiries. Mason regularly receives inquiries about
doctoral study in music — phone calls, e-mails, and contacts with individuals who walk into the
office. These vary from casual queries to persons who are ready to register today, write a check
for tuition, and start the program. For many years Mason has had a parade of persons even in the
latter description. As this proposal was initiated, the department began keeping more careful
track of individuals in order to assess prospective enrollment. The enrollment projections given
below are based, in part, on this kind of information. These numbers are relatively firm, perhaps
more substantial than demonstrations of logic or survey data from groups such as current
students, alumni, or members of the profession.
In the three months from August through October 2006 over three dozen individuals
expressed strong interest in beginning doctoral studies in music at Mason. (See Appendix H.)
As delightful as that “firm” number sounds, for purposes of planning it seems prudent to be more
conservative.
Appendix E includes enrollment projections for this proposed D.M.A. as well as the Ph.D. in
Music Education. As can be noted in Appendix E, a total of ten individuals are anticipated
enrolling in both doctoral music programs in the first year — beginning in Fall 2008. Note that
these projections are split between individuals interested in the proposed D.M.A. (as presented in
this document — see Summary of Projected Enrollment below) and the proposed Ph.D. in Music
Education (as presented in other material). For planning purposes, the total numbers are split
two-thirds and one-third between this proposed D.M.A. and the proposed Ph.D. This
proportionality reflects an evaluation of the inquiries.
Prospective Students — It can be helpful to understand the nature of the pool of prospective
students for doctoral study in music at Mason. In this region there are four initial groups of
prospective students. A fifth additional aspect of the need for the program is a consequence of
the international reach of the region and its institutions. Prospective students in the proposed
D.M.A. program areas are anticipated from each of these groups, especially those described in
items 1, 2, and 5 below.
(1) Every metropolitan area has important cultural resources in its professional musical
ensembles. In Northern Virginia this includes the National Symphony Orchestra,
Washington National Opera, Fairfax Symphony, and the Virginia Opera (partially
resident in Fairfax). Individuals in these groups are potential students in doctoral
programs in music, and employment in these entities is a possible destination for
graduates of the program. Academic study at the doctoral level can empower individuals
to climb the professional ladder within institutions such as these.
(2) Northern Virginia is distinct from other metropolitan areas in that as the nation’s
capital it is home to the leadership military musical institutions. These include the
Marine Band (the President’s Own — the nation’s oldest professional ensemble), the
Navy Band, the Air Force Band, and the Army Band (Pershing’s Own). These musicians
16
are among the very best in the country and the world. With over 400 individuals in the
most elite of these groups, this region has the largest concentration of outstanding
woodwind, brass, and percussion professionals in the world.
[As noted in the brief biographies in Appendix B, these professional ensembles —
military and independent — are also an important source of some of the excellent parttime persons on the music faculty. The artistic vitality of the region is significant.]
Individuals in these ensembles are selected via stringent auditions and come from
some of the leading undergraduate and graduate programs in the country, including
George Mason University. Their careers can follow a variety of trajectories. Some stay
with the groups for decades, then retire and begin a second career in higher education.
Others are in the groups for a period of time, then migrate into the professional
symphonic world where salaries can be higher — but certain stresses are higher as well.
Others are in the ensembles for a period of time, then leave to teach in elementary music
education, secondary music education, or in higher education. There is a strong pattern
of placement from the military ensembles into teaching positions. But advanced degrees
are often a key to that success. Thus having access to doctoral studies in music is
important for these individuals.
Currently doctoral programs in music are available in this region at The Catholic
University of America (a private institution in the District of Columbia) and at the
University of Maryland. Relatively close institutions with important doctoral programs
include the Peabody Conservatory of the Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore and
Shenandoah Conservatory in Winchester. Virginia residents in this region do not have
access to a public institution with doctoral music programs. Given the level of military
salaries, the private institutions, even with their vigorous scholarship programs, are often
financially out of reach for this group of potential students. This places these Virginians
at a professional disadvantage.
(3) This region is a leading area for Music Education. The public schools of Northern
Virginia include some of the nation’s largest and most highly-recognized music
programs. Music Teachers in Northern Virginia are a significant part of prospective
students for this doctoral initiative. Many of the individuals who have expressed specific
interest in a doctoral program in music at Mason are in currently teaching in this region.
Doctoral study is important for any individual in public education who aspires to
significant leadership. The advanced training and research present in a doctoral program
can equip these persons to continue the trajectory of their careers to include national
leadership. Thought-leaders of the profession are often found in districts like those in
Northern Virginia. The missing link in that national (and international) impact is access
of those individuals to advanced research-based study in music. This proposed program
can equip those Virginians to more closely achieve their potential.
(4) The first three groups of persons expressing current need for this proposed doctoral
program in music are, in a sense, already in the profession. They need this kind of
program to be more effective and to advance the quality of the profession in Virginia.
17
The fourth category of persons is more general: those individuals aspiring to positions in
performing institutions and in teaching institutions. Doctoral study is a necessary part of
their career. They are often already resident in Northern Virginia. Their family ties
and/or spousal employment keep them here. Without a doctoral program in a public
university in Northern Virginia (i.e., George Mason University) these individuals will
have difficulty advancing in their chosen profession. Again, this group of persons is part
of the group of individuals who have been routinely seeking doctoral study in music at
Mason. They are ready to advance. This proposal seeks to empower them.
(5) As mentioned above, these first four groups of persons form a strong expression of
current need for this proposed program. In addition to the prospective pool of students
they represent, the international reach of the region should be noted. Many individuals
from throughout the world are attracted to the prospect of living in the nation’s Capital
Region. This is an opportunity for Virginia to attract outstanding performers, conductors,
composers, scholars, and educators to Mason for doctoral study — and to have their
presence in our region contribute to the vitality of the Commonwealth. The international
reach of academic programs at Mason is an important part of their contribution to global
culture and development.
SPIN-OFF PROPOSAL — This is not a spin-off proposal, though it is built on existing programs
of important strength. See previous comments above in Section A: Expansion of An Existing
Program.
EMPLOYMENT DEMAND — Virtually, all of the music jobs in higher education in American
universities specify the Doctorate as required or preferred. It is the terminal degree in the
profession. And especially as institutions hire younger faculty members — having a doctorate is
a vital part of an applicant’s background. See Appendix C: Job Announcements.
Higher Education is facing a challenge in hiring faculty members to replace persons who are
expected to retire in coming years. (For example, see an article in the Chronicle of Higher
Education: chronicle.com/weekly/v46/i28/28a01801.htm.) Education in general is one of the
brightest spots for prospective employment. (See various data points in Bureau of Labor
Statistics published materials and web site.) It should be noted that general comments about
prospective employment of new professors to replace retiring baby boomers and comments about
positive job prospects for education do not get to the level of detail one might want. Data does
not exist about “Music Professors” and “Music Teachers” even though it does exist for the more
general aspects of the professions. Music is a vital part of our national economy, but it is not
tracked in detail.
For example, the Virginia Employment Commission projects a “positive” prospect for
employment demand in arts education: see http://velma.virtuallmi.com/ then navigate to “Labor
Market Analysis,” “Occupational Employment by Industry,” “Virginia Statewide,” “Occupation
18
by Group: Education and Training Occupations,” then (finally) “Art, Music, and Drama
Teachers — Postsecondary.” However, this data point blends a wide variety of anticipated needs
into one chart. Specific data related to music is not precisely available.
Perhaps the best articulation of need is the record of job announcements for candidates with a
D.M.A. in the three areas of program specialization as proposed in these documents. As noted
above, Appendix C presents a sample of job announcements specific to this degree. A major
source for this data is the College Music Society — the principle clearing-house for positions in
higher education in music. The significant number of openings, especially targeted at persons
such as individuals currently in the military ensembles, may be surprising. A solid doctoral
program in music is vital to these persons and to the professional health of our region.
STUDENT DEMAND — See comments above in the section “Response to Current Needs.”
DUPLICATION — This doctoral proposal in Music from Mason is distinct from existing and
emerging programs in Virginia and in the region in important ways. The following music related
doctoral programs exist in Virginia and the Washington metropolitan area:






The Catholic University of America (private institution, Washington, D.C. relatively
small music doctoral student enrollment) — does not offer a Ph.D. in Music
Education; does offer the Ph.D. in Musicology and in Music Theory; does offer
the D.M.A. in Performance, in Composition, in Pedagogy, and in Sacred Music.
University of Maryland (public institution for Maryland residents) — offers the Ph.D.
in Music Education, Musicology, Ethnomusicology, and Music Theory; offers the
D.M.A. in Performance, in Conducting, and in Composition.
Peabody Conservatory of the Johns Hopkins University (private institution in
Baltimore) — offers the D.M.A. in Performance, in Conducting, and in
Composition.
Shenandoah University (private institution VA, 29 headcount in Fall 2004 SHEV
report) — offers the D.M.A. with program area specializations in Music
Education and in Performance. See additional comments below.
University of Virginia (small Ph.D. program with program area specializations in
Music Criticism and in Composition/Technology. See comments below.
James Madison University (SCHEV action in Fall 2006 for a Fall 2007 initiation) —
approved for D.M.A. with program area specializations in
Performance/Pedagogy, in Conducting, and in Music Education. See comments
below.
Of public universities in the Commonwealth, only the University of Virginia has an existing
doctoral program in music. That program is focused and is small in proportion to the scope of
current needs. The UVA program is a Ph.D. in Music with two program areas: Music Criticism
and Composition/Music-Technology. No graduates from that program are reported on the
19
SCHEV web-site. The site reports a headcount of nine in Fall 2004, the most recent reported
data point.
In Fall 2006 James Madison University was authorized to begin three D.M.A. degree
programs: Music Education, Performance, and Conducting. These programs could be perceived
as a more direct overlap with this proposal from George Mason University. However, even with
this emerging program at Madison and the existing program at UVA, the Commonwealth is far
below national norms in programs for doctoral study in music. (See below.) Also, the relative
geographic isolation of both of those institutions creates a limit in terms of attracting students to
those programs.
In addition, it should be noted that Madison’s D.M.A.—Music Education has important roots
in the practice of music education rather than the research focus anticipated in the Ph.D. in Music
Education as proposed by Mason. Research focus is an important match for the institutional
profile of Mason. Also proximity to large population centers is a vital part of the capacity of
faculty and students to accomplish original research in music education. Mason is a stronger
place to propose this kind of research-intensive program.
Among private institutions in Virginia, only Shenandoah University has a doctoral program
in music. They offer degree programs in Music Education and in Performance. Again, the size
of the program (Fall 2004 SCHEV-reported a headcount of 29) and relative geographic isolation
limits the ability of this existing program to respond to the full scope of current need.
National data from the Reston-based Higher Education Data Services (HEADS) report that
there were 5323 doctoral music students in NASM-accredited universities in Fall 2005. (See
charts and summaries in Appendix G.) This is .001796% of the 2005 national population as
estimated by the Census Bureau. If Virginia were to be only “average” in that commitment to
doctoral music study, there would be 136 doctoral music students in the state. Of course many
students cross state borders for advanced study. But Virginia, as a state with important national
leadership in many areas, should have as many (or more) students coming to our institutions as
we have students departing the Commonwealth for more substantial opportunities. These
doctoral proposals by Mason are an important step in adding capacity to the state’s public
universities in order to stem the “brain drain” of artistic leadership — people who do not now
have the opportunity to study music at the doctoral level in Virginia.
Both of the public institutions with existing and approved doctoral programs in music (UVA
and JMU) continue to offer important contributions to the cultural vitality of the Commonwealth.
But the scope of need and the opportunities present in Northern Virginia call for a program at
Mason — especially given the population density of the region, existing professional musical
institutions, and the international impact of activities in the national capital region. Individuals at
the professional level who need doctoral study are not often able to relocate to relatively remote
locations in order to pursue advanced study. There are significant advantages to their being able
to stay in vibrant touch with the profession while accomplishing the advanced research and study
present in doctoral degree work.
20
In addition, the vitality of the master’s program in music at Mason is well beyond other
public institutions in Virginia. The size and scope of the M.M. and of continuing education
programs in music at Mason creates the strongest foundation for a doctoral program in music in
the Commonwealth.
A doctoral program in music is a vital step in building the kind of great university that
continues to lead the Northern Virginia area, and Music is an active part of the lives of our
constituents. Virginia and the Mid-Atlantic region are among the most culturally vigorous in the
country. The immediate community has many professionals who are ready to participate in the
kind of advanced training represented by a doctoral program in music. Moreover, cultural
activities in this region have a significant impact throughout the Commonwealth, and this impact
continues vigorously to the international level. This is a current need. George Mason University
is uniquely positioned to meet this important need.
As faculty and administration wrestled with the notion of a doctoral program, the excitement
of the prospect of advanced music research and performance has been tempered by an
understanding of fiscal and physical limits. In that context this proposal presents the kind of
doctoral program that will best serve this region — yet a program that begins with current
resources in the context of increasing institutional and community commitments to music.
This year, 2007, the Commonwealth celebrated the 500th anniversary of the founding of
Jamestown. Contrasts have been drawn with previous large-scale commemorations, especially
the 450th in 1957. In just fifty years economic and cultural conditions have changed dramatically
in Virginia. In key measurements of economic vitality and educational accomplishment we have
progressed from near the bottom of the states to near the top. Probably no state has made a more
dramatic relative shift. Yet in the context of that change, infrastructure in vital areas such as
enrollment in advanced degrees in the arts still has significant catching up to do. Virginia is
becoming a place for leadership in other disciplines and professions. Regarding doctoral study
in music, the Commonwealth is poised to take a positive place in leadership for the region and
nation. Building scholarly, artistic, and cultural infrastructure is vital to equipping Virginia.
This proposal for a doctoral program in Music at Mason is an important step toward that positive
future.
21
STATE COUNCIL OF HIGHER EDUCATION FOR VIRGINIA
SUMMARY OF PROJECTED ENROLLMENTS IN PROPOSED PROGRAM
Instructions:
• Enter the appropriate dates at the top of each column
• Provide fall headcount enrollment (HDCT) and annual full-time equivalent student
(FTE) enrollment. Round the FTE to the nearest whole number.
Note: Target Year refers to the year the institution anticipates the program will have achieved
full enrollment. The Council will review for possible closure any program that has not met
SCHEV’s productivity standards within five years of the date of first program graduates.
Programs that do not anticipate meeting SCHEV productivity standards should not be proposed.
Projected enrollment:
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Target Year
2008–2009
2009–2010
2010–2011
2011–2012
2012–2013
HDCT FTES HDCT FTES HDCT FTES HDCT FTES HDCT FTES GRAD
7
5
10
7
11
8
13
9
14
10
4
Definitions
HDCT — fall headcount enrollment
FTES — annual full-time equated student enrollment
GRAD — annual number of graduates of the proposed program
22
PART C — PROJECTED RESOURCE NEEDS
George Mason University is well-positioned to propose doctoral study in music. As
mentioned above, the cultural vitality and expectations of the region are very strong. Mason is
itself a major part of the rich artistic quality of the region. The performing arts series hosted at
the university is at the cultural heart of Northern Virginia. Thousands of persons attend campus
concerts by professionals, faculty, and students each month. This personal involvement in the
Arts at Mason is accompanied by important financial contributions to music. These
contributions are having a profoundly transformational impact on the academic programs. This
includes new spaces, new links with the community, and new artistic accomplishments.
A key example of this vital partnership between the public and private sector is the recent
accomplishment of transforming the institution into an “All-Steinway” school. A major
purchase of vital equipment (excellent pianos) is being accomplished via strategic links between
contributors in the private sector and resources in the public sector. This kind of partnership sets
the stage for important future accomplishments.
The commencement of doctoral studies in music will continue this positive trajectory.
Doctoral students will enrich the accomplishments of research in music and in the artistic quality
of the performing ensembles. Doctoral students will also be a vital part of the teaching resources
of the university. These individuals are natural leaders in teaching a variety of undergraduate
courses for non-majors and for majors. Many aspects of a doctoral program in music will help
leverage existing resources into more effective patterns of expenditure. Of course, however,
doctoral study in music will require additional resources and shifts in some current patterns of
expenditure within the department and beyond.
All meaningful instruction requires resources. George Mason University already has an
important academic program in music (as well as in the other arts). This quality program is
being built without all of the resources that one might normally expect. We are fortunate in
having access to the resources of a region of extraordinarily high professionalism. The Capital
Region of Northern Virginia has one of the highest doctoral and professional degrees per capita
in the country. This results in a terrific pool of potential adjunct faculty, thus a significant cost
savings to the institution and the Commonwealth. (This regional profile is also creating the
student demand for the program, as discussed above.) However, many institutional leaders have
also articulated that some aspects of current expenditure patterns are not necessarily sustainable.
In particular, the ratio of full-time faculty to numbers of majors is unique among institutions
accredited by the National Association of Schools of Music. (See Appendix G for charts and
data that place the Mason music program in national contexts of productivity and effectiveness.)
This creates great productivity figures (numbers of music major students per full-time faculty,
for example), yet probably does not suggest our best future. There is a need to adjust the balance
between numbers of full-time and part-time faculty.
Creating a more appropriate number of full-time positions in music suggests a significant
opportunity. With this need already present in the existing programs, and already being
addressed in important increments by recent institutional decisions, it is clear that with just a bit
more energy (money) a critical mass of faculty members can be assembled that will be able to
23
implement and sustain a solid doctoral program. (The ability of doctoral students to take on
some of the teaching tasks currently given to adjuncts is also part of this calculation.) Thus there
are faculty costs related to a doctoral program. The institution is engaged in an adjustment mode
relative to numbers of full-time faculty; adding a doctoral program will probably require a slight
amount of additional commitment to that overall trajectory, but a doctoral program will also
create some savings via the doctoral students’ teaching capacity. And the doctoral program is a
significant response to needs of the Commonwealth and the region.
This same kind of calculation is at work in dimensions of cost beyond the numbers of fulltime faculty positions. In long-range planning exercises the department has projected growth to
450–500 majors. That growth creates new FTE students (via SCH productivity). Enrollment
growth is a natural occasion for potential additions to the faculty. In addition, new numbers of
music major students creates additional teaching load. Overall, the most recent long-range plan
articulated a need for ten additional faculty positions, only three of which are particular to the
doctoral proposals (this proposal for a D.M.A. and the proposed Ph.D. in Music Education).
Again, note that most of the “new” positions are already needed due to the existing academic
programs. In addition, it is quite probable that some of the “new” positions could be formed by
converting existing teaching assignments of adjunct faculty. Combining these part-time
assignments and the funding associated with them can mitigate the overall cost of a “new” fulltime position, though shifting from part-time to full-time is clearly a net cost to the institution.
Three additional staff positions are requested; only one of which is particular to a doctoral
program.
In the same manner, an institution needs certain spaces for a music program of note; having
some of those students at the doctoral level does not increase the aggregate amount of needed
space. It does perhaps add a compelling argument in favor of making the commitment for the
space, but the costliness of necessary music spaces is driven by the undergraduate student
population, including the presence of effective activities for non-majors.
The principal areas of cost are: full-time faculty positions; full-time staff positions;
scholarships/assistantships; library faculty/staff; library acquisitions; and facilities. For planning
purposes each new course necessary for the overall doctoral proposals (this D.M.A. and the
Ph.D. in Music Education) was listed, with enrollment and frequency of course offering corollary
with faculty loads. This generated an articulation of needed faculty FTE. Potential doctoral
teaching assistants were also factored in as an impact on the departmental adjunct FTE and costs.
Similar projections were engaged for other components of programmatic cost: space, staff, and
library assets. This background material is summarized in Appendix E.
Note that a primary dynamic of providing these resources is the natural processes of
enrollment growth, both in terms of doctoral FTE students and overall SCH productivity.
It should be noted that even with robust additions imagined and envisioned (those occasioned
by this doctoral proposal and those independent of this proposed development) the institution
will still be extraordinarily productive and efficient. There is no other institution in the
Commonwealth that can deliver a solid and exciting doctoral program in music with as little
overall cost to the taxpayers and contributors.
24
PROJECTED RESOURCE NEEDS FOR PROPOSED PROGRAM
Part A: Answer the following questions about general budget information.





Has or will the institution submit an addendum budget request
to cover one-time costs?
Yes_____ No_____
Has or will the institution submit an addendum budget request
to cover operating costs?
Yes_____ No_____
Will there be any operating budget requests for this program
that would exceed normal operating budget guidelines (for
example, unusual faculty mix, faculty salaries, or resources)?
Yes_____ No_____
Will each type of space for the proposed program be within
projected guidelines?
Yes_____ No_____
Will a capital outlay request in support of this program be
forthcoming?
Yes_____ No_____
Part B: Fill in the number of FTE positions needed for the program.
Program initiation year
2008 - 2009
Full-time faculty
On-going and
reallocated
1.5
Added
(New)
Total expected by
target enrollment year
2012 - 2013
On-going and
reallocated
2.5
Added
(New)
2
Part-time faculty
Graduate Assistants
1
Classified Positions
TOTAL
1.5
1
.5
3.5
3.5
25
Part C: Estimated $$ resources to initiate and operate the program.
Program initiation year
2008 - 2009
Full-time faculty
$45,000
Total expected by
target enrollment year
2012 - 2013
$215,000
Part-time faculty
Graduate assistants
$30,000
Classified positions
$67,500
Fringe benefits
$13,500
$87,045
Total personnel costs
$58,500
$399,545
Targeted financial aid
$40,000
$80,000
Equipment
Library
$8,000
$20,000
Telecommunication costs
$60,000
$4,000
Other resource needs (specify)
TOTAL
$118,500
$551,545
26
Part D: Certification Statement(s)
The institution will require additional state funding to initiate and sustain this program.
_____ Yes
_______________________________________________
Signature of Chief Academic Officer
_____ No
_______________________________________________
Signature of Chief Academic Officer
If “no,” please complete Items 1, 2, and 3 below.
1. Estimated $$ and funding source to initiate and operate the program.
Funding Source
Reallocation within the
department or school (Note below
Program initiation year
2008 - 2009
Target enrollment year
2012 - 2013
the impact this will have within the
school or department.)
Reallocation within the
institution (Note below the impact
this will have within the school or
department.)
Other funding sources
(Please specify and note if these are
currently available or anticipated.)
2. Statement of Impact/Other Funding Sources.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
3. Secondary Certification.
If resources are reallocated from another unit to support this proposal, the institution will not
subsequently request additional state funding to restore those resources for their original purpose.
_____ Agree
_______________________________________________
Signature of Chief Academic Officer
_____ Disagree _______________________________________________
Signature of Chief Academic Officer
27