6 Collaborative music making continues to be a powerful

means of facilitating group knowledge construction and

emancipatory learning in communities.

Music for Community Education and

Emancipatory Learning
Kevin Olson

The history of adult education is embedded with community movements

that were committed to acquisition of new knowledge, development of new
skills, and empowerment of individuals and communities (Heaney, 1996).
Leaders in many of these movements recognized the potential of using
music to promote community solidarity, identity, and transformation. The
potential of community building through music certainly caught the atten-
tion of several pioneers in the field of adult education (see, for example, Lin-
demann, 1926; Dewey, 1934; Horton, Kohl, and Kohl, 1990), and music
making was an important component of such legendary adult education
movements as the Chautauqua assemblies, workers’ movements, the civil
rights and feminist movements, and the Highlander Folk School, among
others (Denisoff and Peterson, 1972; Denisoff, 1983; Glen, 1996; Simpson
and Solomon, 1999). More common but less recognized is the adult educa-
tion that occurs through the medium of music in a variety of formal and
informal community settings across the world, in arenas as diverse as com-
munity choirs and bands, senior center and Elderhostel programs, ethnic
celebrations and festivals, informal coffeehouse performances, private music
instruction, garage bands, and religious ensembles, to name just a few. This
chapter explores the distinguishing characteristics of community music; its
rich historical traditions; and its potential to evoke personal transformation,
collective consciousness, and social change. It further examines the chal-
lenges and rewards that community music makers face in creating an envi-
ronment where emancipatory learning can take place.
In each context just mentioned, music can function as a medium
through which adults evaluate and critique their life experiences and

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR ADULT AND CONTINUING EDUCATION, no. 107, Fall 2005 © Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 55
56 ARTISTIC WAYS OF KNOWING

consciously determine new ways to view the world, a process explored in

depth in Mezirow’s theory on transformative learning (1991, 1978, 2000).
Although the transformative process, according to Mezirow, must be self-
initiated and often comes as a result of a disrupting dilemma in the individ-
ual’s life, adult educators can facilitate transformative learning by creating
an environment energized with discourse, in which participants feel trust,
safety, and support (Mezirow, 2000; Brookfield, 1987). Many of the arenas
of community music discussed later in this chapter exhibit these qualities
and are an ideal opportunity for this type of learning.
Mezirow’s theory has come under critique, specifically in its emphasis
on rational approaches to the transformative learning process. New perspec-
tives of transformative learning as an intuitive, creative, and emotional
process are beginning to appear in adult education literature (Dirkx, 2001;
Imel, 1998; Greene, 1995). Central to this new focus on intuition and emo-
tion as a driving force in transformation is Boyd and Meyers’ work in depth
psychology, which draws on the “realm of interior experience, one con-
stituent being the rational expressed through insights, judgments, and deci-
sions, the other being the extrarational expressed through symbols, images,
and feelings” (R. Boyd and Meyers, 1988, p. 275, cited in Imel, 1998, p. 1).
Certainly, Boyd would recognize the music and other arts as a possible cat-
alyst for external expression of these interior experiences.
Transformative learning does not necessarily imply external action, but
emancipatory learning centers on freeing individuals from personal, insti-
tutional, or environmental forces that limit their options or control their
lives (Apps, 1985; Imel, 1999). As with transformative learning, a major
component of emancipatory learning centers on self-reflection and evalua-
tion. However, the praxis of emancipatory learning carries with it the sub-
sequent responsibility of recognizing one’s connections with her or his
community and then fulfilling requisite social responsibilities toward that
community. Music has frequently aided in community efforts to promote
emancipatory learning, and many programs continue to incorporate music
for the purposes of critical reflection and collective action. In her disserta-
tion, Gwendolyn Kaltoft (1990) found that musical interaction facilitated
group trust, critical reflection, individuality of voice, individual and group
identity, and dialogue at the Highlander Research and Education Center, the
On-the-Line Music Collective, and the Augusta Heritage Center. Michael
Rowland (1999) and Bernice Johnson Reagon (2001) noted similar learn-
ing processes occurring collectively in African American religious music.
Music, in these and other environments, creates a space for a community to
create identity, solidarity, and empowerment, providing a groundwork for
imagining solutions to individual and group dilemmas.

Defining Community Music

Given the range of music-making activities mentioned earlier that could be cat-
egorized as “community music,” it is difficult to apply specific characteristics
 MUSIC FOR COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND EMANCIPATORY LEARNING 57

and learning processes that apply to every situation. My own experience as a

music educator inspired a recent study (Olson, 2003) in which I explored how
music enhanced social learning, community building, and cross-cultural empa-
thy among adults. The study was framed around the shared experiences of
eight musicians involved in cultural education programs. This diverse group
of educators used music in a variety of contexts, with wide-ranging objectives:
some were involved with preserving cultural traditions within their commu-
nity, others were more interested in sharing cultural traditions with audiences
outside their community, and still others were interested in using music as a
tool to create a democratic learning environment in a variety of disciplines.
Through a series of interviews and observations, I found four themes to be the
fundamental philosophies of this group.
Exploring Musical Ways of Knowing. First, participants agreed that
music is more than a teaching “tool”; it is a way of knowing and under-
standing the self and one’s relationship to the world. Music, to them, has the
potential for “teaching” adults in four ways: fostering self-identity, physical
or emotional therapy, awakening consciousness and spiritual connections
that cannot be achieved otherwise, and forging connections to past experi-
ences and cultural heritage. One participant explained how music created
space for new knowledge this way: “People getting in touch with their inner
self [sic], so they are able to see through the day-to-day monotony, what it
means to live without really seeing the world. They appreciate it, because
those beats, those dance movements will never be replicated again—those
circumstances will never come back again. If I say, ‘Well, I should have done
that,’ it doesn’t matter. That performance is over.”
Preserving Cultural Continuity Within Communities. Each par-
ticipant in this study stressed the importance of community membership
in her or his educational philosophy, although each defined the focused
community using differing criteria for community construction. They
recognized that music could assist in building group identity built on
shared heritage and commitments, empowering individuals through
active participation. Participants sought to create an arena of respect and
tolerance, and many were focused on ensuring that cultural symbols such
as music continue to survive against the onslaught of mainstream popu-
lar culture.
Building Cross-Cultural Empathy Through Music. Several partici-
pants in this study seemed most excited about the potential music has to
create awareness, empathy, and interaction among individuals of disparate
cultural, social, and religious backgrounds. Each saw music as a “window”
into the life experience of others, which encouraged recognition, interac-
tion, and eventually empathy among diverse groups of people. Several
essential attributes to this process were identified: authenticity, contextual
understanding, relativist interpretation, sensitivity, and respect. One partic-
ipant involved in a multicultural musical ensemble explained how the
process built bridges across social divides: “The love of music and love of
sharing music and artistic expression brought us together. When a group
58 ARTISTIC WAYS OF KNOWING

like this is performing music of different cultures and presenting it to audi-

ences of different cultures, there is a circle of life being formed where we
feel each other culturally, give to each other emotionally, learn from one
another by sharing familial backgrounds and experiences. If we tried to
make a musical family tree, putting on it the names of those that were
touched in some kind of way by music, it would be a never-ending task, but
a wonderful one.”
Promoting Collective Consciousness and Social Action Through
Music. Participants stressed music’s potential to inspire personal and social
transformation by way of music, through recognizing individual and com-
munity commitments and connecting marginalized and oppressed individ-
uals. Music created space that fostered engaged pedagogy, where hegemonic
structures of power and positionality could be challenged and new solutions
to individual and social dilemmas and injustices could be imagined. This
space is described by country singer Rosanne Cash this way: “The essence
of art is, if it works, it should reveal people to themselves. It shouldn’t just
tap into a vein that’s already there and reflect back at them what they are. It
should reveal something that’s hidden to themselves. When that’s working,
it has power, power to heal and change” (J. Boyd, 1992, p. 131).
Despite the variety of arenas I have described, I observed that there are
important attributes present in most community music environments that
distinguish them from music making in formal or academic settings. Veblen
and Olsson (2002) state that a fundamental quality of community music
making is a flexibility of process and structure. I observed this flexibility
manifested in membership that was often voluntary and accessible to any-
one; the roles of members were fluid in these groups, as participants often
moved freely from observer to active performer to leader within each arena.
In contrast to the required training expected in professional ensembles and
those in higher education, music proficiency was not a prerequisite for com-
munity music making in these contexts.
Community music makers recognize that each member brings a fresh
perspective to the collective community, and the varied levels of expertise (or
lack thereof) add richness to the process. This fluidity and accessibility gives
members in a community music program a strong sense of identity, owner-
ship, and responsibility for the welfare and direction of the entire group.
Quite often, community music makers consider the music-making
process a means to an end. The goal of many community music programs
is to recognize (and facilitate resolution of) the needs of the marginalized
and disenfranchised members of a particular community, in an environment
where emancipatory learning can take place. Community music that occurs
in a youth detention center, prison, hospital, or senior center in particular
often places the focus on personal and social progress over musical mastery.
Cultural education, cross-cultural interaction, or intergenerational educa-
tion can also be an end result of the community music-making endeavor.
Powwows, cultural festivals, and folk music schools are just a few examples
 MUSIC FOR COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND EMANCIPATORY LEARNING 59

of arenas in which individuals can connect with their own cultural heritage
or develop appreciation for and fluency in traditions of other communities.
Facilitating the survival of cultural traditions or bringing to light the tradi-
tions of historically disenfranchised communities is a rallying cry for many
community music programs.
Another difference between community music making and perfor-
mance in a more formal musical setting is the emphasis on personal expres-
sion over technical mastery. Where most classical musicians have been
trained to accept that there is one “correct” way to properly recreate each
musical work, many community music makers delight in the flexible, cre-
ative process of improvisation and collaborative composition. Community
music makers disregard a distinction between “high culture” and “low cul-
ture,” finding value in folk and popular music—traditionally regarded in
academia as inferior and unworthy of study. Eduard Lindemann challenged
adult educators to champion the cause of folk art and cautioned against giv-
ing prescriptions by which all art was judged. By blurring the lines of high
and low culture, adult educators could “aid greatly in the much-needed pro-
cedure of transforming a growing artistic snobbery into an indigenous folk-
expression. . . . In short, adult education may justly be expected to do
something toward democratizing art” (quoted in Brookfield, 1984, p. 520).

Historical Traditions of Community Music

Anthropologists have long wondered why music making is present in all
known societies, given that it is not apparently necessary for a community’s
physical survival. Music has historically brought people together to wor-
ship, work, protest, dance, love, and relax. Some cultures have used music
as protection against sickness, natural disaster, and other phenomena that
cannot be explained by the community (Nettl, 1956).
Music has historically connected individuals in persecuted social and
religious groups, giving strength and hope where it could be found nowhere
else. Most music making in these communities has been social and inclu-
sive in nature, and many of the conditions typical of community music
already mentioned here were present in these circumstances. In the past
century, several movements helped to preserve the rich tradition of commu-
nity music making against an onslaught of contemporary pressures, notably
a disconnection between the everyday experience and aesthetic experience
of individuals, the rise of music in mass media, and a growing divide
between classical and popular music traditions. In this technological age,
community musicians are faced with a large number of individuals who
experience music only as passive listeners and fail to see the relevance of
the arts in their lives beyond mere entertainment and escape from reality.
Although community music making has existed for ages, centers ded-
icated to the philosophy of community music making are a relatively new
phenomenon. The first centers in North America recognized as “community
60 ARTISTIC WAYS OF KNOWING

music schools” were the Hull House Music School in Chicago and the Third
Street Music School Settlement in New York, both started in the late nine-
teenth century and modeled after settlement houses in Europe (Veblen and
Olsson, 2002). These schools differed from existing music conservatories in
that their focus was not on instruction of classical music performance but
on cultural development, with the immigrant community and its children
as a target audience. Lessons were made available to all, even if they could
not afford tuition. Some of the ideals present in community music schools
are found in a passage from a manual produced by the National Guild of
Community Music Schools in 1957: “The Community Music School
believes that music can be used a tool to aid in one’s social development by
serving as a beautiful and significant unifying factor in family life. By bring-
ing together people from different ethnic, economic and intellectual groups
to share a common experience, music can promote an understanding and
appreciation for the spiritual values of all people, as it is practiced in these
schools” (Egan, 1989, p. 91).
Following the success of the Hull House Music School, community
music schools began to appear in other urban areas, such as Boston, New
York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore; many continue running under these same
philosophies today. The Web site of the National Guild of Community
Schools of the Arts ([Link] lists more than three
hundred current institutions, serving more than half a million students.
In the early twentieth century, the Music Supervisors National Confer-
ence (now known as the Music Educators National Conference) noted a
growing disinterest in American folk songs and work songs and began to
actively promote community singing. The organization published several edi-
tions of folk songbooks, and “community sings” were organized nationwide.
When World War I broke out, these community sings were an opportunity
for communities to connect with their shared national heritage, and many
traditional songs were sung at large war-band rallies. The community singing
tradition also extended into the military, where more than thirty thousand
personnel were trained to be song leaders for the troops (Mark, 1992).
After the war, community singing continued in movie theaters, and in
factories, where workers would sing at noon and during rest periods. Even
the Depression in the 1930s didn’t stop community music making from tak-
ing place. In 1934, Peter Dykema (cited in Mark, 1992) wrote about hundreds
of glee clubs from New York through Chicago that had performed at recent
state “sings” and national conventions; he also reported vibrant activity in
women’s choruses, adult music appreciation classes, and national agencies
committed to training community leaders in developing new music programs.
Music played a major role in boosting morale during World War II for
troops abroad and on the home front. After the war, a variety of organiza-
tions committed to promoting music making in communities. For example,
the Adult Education Association held sessions on community music at their
1955 meeting and subsequently formed a committee exploring the relation-
ship between music and adult education (Kaplan, 1992).
 MUSIC FOR COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND EMANCIPATORY LEARNING 61

Music in the 1960s fostered a large physical arena where members of

social movements could define their space and identify with others of com-
mon beliefs. In movements promoting equality of race or gender, commu-
nity singing again became a connective thread. Sanger (1996) writes,
“Freedom songs became an important part of the . . . activists’ attempts to
construct a new sense of self. The songs offered a compelling means by
which activists could communicate among themselves and disseminate a
positive self-definition, and provide answers to questions about black iden-
tity and black relationships with one another and whites” (p. 8).
In these instances, community music was a vehicle through which a
social movement could gain momentum through connecting masses with a
common identity and a collective identification of injustice.
During the last part of the twentieth century, community choruses,
bands, and symphonies flourished, thanks to an ever-increasing body of com-
munity members who have a musical background through school music pro-
grams. Local governments have recognized the benefits of these community
ensembles. One notable example of this is the recent Iowa Band Law, which
provided funds from state tax revenues to support local community bands
(Mark, 1992). The growth of ethnic communities has spurred local leaders
to recognize a growing need for a renewed connection to their heritage, espe-
cially among the younger members of the community. Mathews (2000) has
researched the recent flourishing of contemporary Native American pow-
wows, noting trends toward a younger community demographic.
Community music leaders are currently facing the challenge of inspir-
ing active music making in a society where enjoying the arts is an increas-
ingly passive process. There is a growing hegemonic assumption that arts are
on a pedestal, to be enjoyed and performed only by the privileged elite with
extensive music training. With the dominance of contemporary popular
music on the radio and television, historical music traditions (both folk and
classical) are becoming more remote from the everyday life of individuals.
Attali (1985) identifies music as more than an object of study: a way of per-
ceiving the world. Rarely, however, does it seem that people today associate
their everyday experience with aesthetic experience; it is uncommon to hear
an individual using music as a framework for personal reflection or critical
analysis. Given this disassociation, it is no wonder that there is a growing call
from government leaders to pull spending from music education programs
in academia and in communities. It is important for political leaders to rec-
ognize that active music making in a community can effectively combat the
increasing mechanization, isolation, and lack of creativity that has been a by-
product of the technological advances in the past century.

Applications for Adult Educators and Music

Educators
Despite the challenges mentioned earlier, community music continues to
thrive, with ensembles, festivals, classes, and other programs catering to
62 ARTISTIC WAYS OF KNOWING

individuals from all walks of life. If amateur musicians look hard enough,
they will see that there is usually a program close by that welcomes them
with open arms, and if not then many will begin grassroots efforts to build
a program. The struggle for many of these programs, however, is that they
still fly under the radar of most music scholarship and dialogue.
Combining the resources and expertise of community and professional
musicians can be mutually beneficial to both parties. I can think of several
examples of a successful academic-community relationship at Elmhurst Col-
lege, where I teach. The membership in our concert band is more than one
hundred strong, and nearly half are members of the community, represent-
ing a variety of backgrounds and age groups (two members are over the age
of ninety!). There is a combined college and community Choral Union and
students are invited to the Elmhurst Symphony Orchestra, a community
organization that is more than forty years old. We have a vibrant commu-
nity preparatory program, teaching private and group musical instruction
to children and adults of the community.
Although relationships of this kind certainly aren’t unique to this
school and admittedly have emerged out of necessity for a small, private lib-
eral arts college, it does show how successful community efforts can be
when combined with academic and professional resources. There is also still
more work to be done. Music educators should look to see if any resources
offered effectively in the community are redundant with the music programs
in secondary and higher education. Are there additional opportunities to
explore where community resources could enhance education in schools,
and vice versa?
Like music educators, adult educators should become more aware of
musical resources in their community and begin collaboration with com-
munity musicians and community music programs. Given the philosophies
of community music leaders, the focus of this collaboration should be on
collective music making, not the traditional guest-lecture-by-an-expert
approach. The inclusive philosophies of community music should alleviate
any fears about an educator’s lack of musical expertise. Adult educators
should look for opportunities to address cultural issues through music,
allowing space for individuals to share their cultural traditions, as well
developing stronger connections to the community through music making.
There is also a need for adult educators to explore how adults can tie life
experience to aesthetic experience, creating affective connections that can-
not be expressed in other ways.
In his book Art as Experience, John Dewey (1934) wrote that the com-
municative arena of music could go beyond functioning as merely a vehicle
for entertainment and aid in identifying connective elements within the
community: “Works of art that are not remote from common life, that are
widely enjoyed in a community, are signs of a collective life. But they are
also marvelous aids in the creation of such a life. The remaking of the mate-
rial of experience in the act of expression is not an isolated event confined
 MUSIC FOR COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND EMANCIPATORY LEARNING 63

to the artist and to a person here and there who happens to enjoy the work.
In the degree in which art exercises its office, it is also a remaking of the
experience of the community in the direction of greater order and commu-
nity” (p. 81).
As adult educators look for new ways to encourage critical reflection,
community identity, cross-cultural empathy, and social awareness and
empowerment, joining forces with community music makers holds great
promise in facilitating transformative and emancipatory learning in adults.
Once educators begin to think of music not as a curricular tool or gim-
mick but as a way of knowing, its true potential can be explored. Music’s
ability to bring people in touch with their emotions offers individuals the
opportunity to affectively analyze and critique life experiences and begin to
imagine ways to enact change. Music creates space for a community to cre-
ate solidarity through cultural interaction and recognition of heritage. An
empowered community can then begin to share its voices with others in
musical dialogue, offering an opportunity for intercultural understanding
and interaction. Music, in this sense, is adult education: an arena in which
individuals and groups are actively engaged in transformation and empathy.

References
Apps, J. Improving Practice in Adult Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985.
Attali, J. Noise: The Political Economy of Music. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press, 1985.
Boyd, J. Musicians in Tune: Seventy-Five Contemporary Musicians Discuss the Creative
Process. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1992.
Boyd, R., and Meyers, J. “Transformative Education.” International Journal of Lifelong
Education, 1988, 7, 261–284.
Brookfield, S. “The Meaning of Adult Education: The Contemporary Relevance of
Eduard Lindemann.” Teachers College Record, 1984, 85, 513–524.
Brookfield, S. Developing Critical Thinkers: Challenging Adults to Explore Alternative Ways
of Thinking and Acting. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1987.
Denisoff, R. Sing a Song of Social Significance. Bowling Green, Ohio: Bowling Green Uni-
versity Press, 1983.
Denisoff, R., and Peterson, R. The Sounds of Social Change: Studies in Popular Culture.
New York: Rand McNally, 1972.
Dewey, J. Art as Experience. New York: Wideview/Pedigree Books, 1934.
Dirkx, J. “The Power of Feelings, Emotion, Imagination, and the Construction of Mean-
ing in Adult Learning.” In S. Merriam (ed.), The New Update on Adult Learning The-
ory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, no. 89. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 2001.
Dykema, P. “Music in Community Life.” In M. Mark (ed.), The Music Educator and Com-
munity Music. Reston, Va.: Music Educators National Conference, 1992.
Egan, R. Music and the Arts in the Community: The Community Music School in America.
Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1989.
Glen, J. Highlander: No Ordinary School, 1932–1962. Knoxville: University of Tennessee
Press, 1996.
Greene, M. Releasing the Imagination: Essays on Education, the Arts, and Social Change.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995.
Heaney, T. “Adult Education for Social Change: From Center Stage to the Wings and
64 ARTISTIC WAYS OF KNOWING

Back Again.” Information Series no. 365. Columbus, Ohio: ERIC Clearinghouse on
Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, Center on Education and Training for
Employment, College of Education, Ohio State University, 1996.
Horton, M., Kohl, J., and Kohl, H. The Long Haul: An Autobiography. Garden City, N.Y.:
Doubleday, 1990.
Imel, S. “Transformative Learning in Adulthood.” Columbus, Ohio: ERIC Clearinghouse
on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, series no. 200, 1998.
Imel, S. “How Emancipatory Is Adult Learning?” Columbus, Ohio: ERIC Clearinghouse
on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, Myths and Realities, series no. 6, 1999.
Kaltoft, G. “Music and Emancipatory Learning in Three Community Education Pro-
grams.” Dissertation Abstracts International, 51(07), 2239A (University Microfilms
no. AAT95–34003), Columbia University, 1990.
Kaplan, M. “Community Music in an Earlier Time.” In M. Mark (ed.), The Music Educa-
tor and Community Music. Reston, Va.: Music Educators National Conference, 1992.
Lindemann, E. The Meaning of Adult Education. New York: New Republic, 1926.
Mark, M. (ed.). The Music Educator and Community Music. Reston, Va.: Music Educa-
tors National Conference, 1992.
Mathews, L. “The Native American Powwow: A Contemporary Authentication of a Cul-
tural Artifact.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New Mexico, 2000.
Mezirow, J. “Perspective Transformation.” Adult Education, 1978, 28, 100–110.
Mezirow, J. Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1991.
Mezirow, J. (ed.). Learning as Transformation: Critical Perspectives on a Theory in
Progress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000.
Nettl, B. Music in Primitive Cultures. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1956.
Olson, K. “Bridge over Troubled Water: Exploring Music’s Role in Building Communi-
ties of Adult Learners.” Doctoral dissertation, National-Louis University, 2003.
Reagon, B. J. If You Go, Don’t Hinder Me: The African-American Sacred Song in Tradition.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2001.
Rowland, M. “Missing the Beat: Adult Learning Through Religious Music in an African-
American Church.” Paper presented at the Adult Education Research Conference, De
Kalb, Ill., May 1999.
Sanger, K. When the Spirit Says Sing! The Role of Freedom Songs in the Civil Rights Move-
ment. New York: Garland, 1996.
Simpson, J., and Solomon, P. Chautauqua: An American Utopia. New York: Abrams, 1999.
Veblen, K., and Olsson, B. “Community Music: Toward an International Overview.” In
R. Colwell and C. Richardson (eds.), The New Handbook of Research on Music Teach-
ing and Learning. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Kevin Olson is assistant professor of music at Elmhurst College.