National Anthem Project: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
reorganized and eliminated redundancies |
||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
Some have opposed the National Anthem Project, and their concerns have been documented in several publications and conference presentations including some feedback indicating there were some who were dissatisfied with the choice of "The Star-Spangled Banner" as the focus for the campaign. Some requested the focus of the campaign shift to changing the national anthem. This was argued for reasons such as its perceived difficulty to sing due to range, or its militaristic lyrics, and the melody which some felt was uninteresting. The response to these concerns was that the song itself is not the focus of the [[campaign]], but rather that Americans are not learning to sing the national anthem because of dwindling school music programs. |
Some have opposed the National Anthem Project, and their concerns have been documented in several publications and conference presentations including some feedback indicating there were some who were dissatisfied with the choice of "The Star-Spangled Banner" as the focus for the campaign. Some requested the focus of the campaign shift to changing the national anthem. This was argued for reasons such as its perceived difficulty to sing due to range, or its militaristic lyrics, and the melody which some felt was uninteresting. The response to these concerns was that the song itself is not the focus of the [[campaign]], but rather that Americans are not learning to sing the national anthem because of dwindling school music programs. |
||
Collectively, criticism includes the following: |
|||
In addition, some have expressed concerns regarding the project's implications, including whether American public school music teachers should lead students during wartime in activities involving "The [[Star-Spangled Banner]]" and its lyrics (e.g. "conquer we must, when our cause it is just"). Some perceive that the project's emphasis on this single song offers limited musical benefits to music students and may run counter to key concepts in the education field. Other concerns about the continued presence of corporate sponsors in education have been heard. Despite heavy publicity in local and national venues for the importance of music education, some continue to question the value of this project in terms of measurable benefits for public school music. |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
Collectively, the concerns of Project opponents include the following ten points: |
|||
*(1) The Project may increase singing of the “[[Star Spangled Banner]]”, but is unlikely to lead to improvements in music education. Like the “[[Mozart Effect]],” use of the National Anthem Project for music advocacy brings greater attention to the work of music educators and music organization leaders, but it also denigrates music education by promoting the educational use of music as a tool for non-musical objectives (math achievement in one case, history and culture in the other). |
*(1) The Project may increase singing of the “[[Star Spangled Banner]]”, but is unlikely to lead to improvements in music education. Like the “[[Mozart Effect]],” use of the National Anthem Project for music advocacy brings greater attention to the work of music educators and music organization leaders, but it also denigrates music education by promoting the educational use of music as a tool for non-musical objectives (math achievement in one case, history and culture in the other). |
||
*(2) The National Anthem Project advocates a narrowing of the curriculum by placing unprecedented emphasis on the [[patriotic]] music genre, and one song in particular. To the contrary, leading music education scholars advocate for a broadening of the music curriculum. |
*(2) The National Anthem Project advocates a narrowing of the curriculum by placing unprecedented emphasis on the [[patriotic]] music genre, and one song in particular. To the contrary, leading music education scholars advocate for a broadening of the music curriculum. |
||
| Line 41: | Line 37: | ||
*(9) With its emphasis on patriotic music, the spirit of the National Anthem Project appears to run counter to trends in some areas of the education field, such as [[peace studies]], [[multiculturalism]], and [[international education]] (see UNESCO's 2006 statement on arts education below). |
*(9) With its emphasis on patriotic music, the spirit of the National Anthem Project appears to run counter to trends in some areas of the education field, such as [[peace studies]], [[multiculturalism]], and [[international education]] (see UNESCO's 2006 statement on arts education below). |
||
*(10) Supporters of the National Anthem Project claim that the reason few Americans can remember all the words to the anthem is that music programs have been cut from public schools, and that therefore music programs must be retained so American heritage is preserved. They neglect to mention the following points: (a) lyrics to the Star Spangled Banner are notoriously awkward and difficult to remember, including historical terms that most children fail to comprehend, (b) many American school music programs emphasize instrumental music for which song lyrics are irrelevant, (c) for decades, many American students have learned the anthem in “civics”, “social studies”, or “home room” courses, rather than from school music programs, and (d) the inability to remember all the words of the Star Spangled Banner is not a reliable indication of inadequate music instruction since many musicians – and music teachers – also do not know all the words to this song. |
*(10) Supporters of the National Anthem Project claim that the reason few Americans can remember all the words to the anthem is that music programs have been cut from public schools, and that therefore music programs must be retained so American heritage is preserved. They neglect to mention the following points: (a) lyrics to the Star Spangled Banner are notoriously awkward and difficult to remember, including historical terms that most children fail to comprehend, (b) many American school music programs emphasize instrumental music for which song lyrics are irrelevant, (c) for decades, many American students have learned the anthem in “civics”, “social studies”, or “home room” courses, rather than from school music programs, and (d) the inability to remember all the words of the Star Spangled Banner is not a reliable indication of inadequate music instruction since many musicians – and music teachers – also do not know all the words to this song. |
||
| ⚫ | Public criticisms include David Hebert’s (2006): “The notion that patriotism would serve as an objective for music education is antithetical to contemporary music education philosophies. Rather, music classes exist for the development of musical skills and understandings” (p. 25). In one of the first scholarly responses, Amy Beegle (2004) documented musical [[propaganda]] in American schools during [[World War II]], and suggested that music educators should “reflect upon the experiences of past generations” (p.67). Later, Jere Humphreys remarked that “the National Anthem Project sends questionable messages during this time of controversy during a foreign war and the reduction of civil liberties at home and abroad” and warned against the “messages and images this campaign engenders” (Humphreys, 2006, p. 183). More recently, Carlos Abril (2007) cautioned that most of the Project's efforts “propel absolutist views in which declared truths take a front seat to divergent understandings and discoveries” (p. 81). Estelle Jorgensen (2007) also wrote that “selecting The Star-Spangled Banner as the focus of a national campaign to teach the nation to sing can be read as too narrow an objective in that it forwards the limited claims of [[nationalism]] to the exclusion of building international and local affiliations and identities. Rather, music teachers need to resist the claims of excessive nationalism in order to ensure that these other interests are also served.” (p. 153). |
||
==External links== |
==External links== |
||
Revision as of 17:52, 24 October 2008
The National Anthem Project was launched in 2005 as a major initiative of the Bush administration. Mrs. Laura Bush served as honorary chairperson.
The Purpose
The purpose of the National Anthem Project was to promote music education and the national anthem.
Project Background
According to the Project, nearly two out of three Americans are unable to recall all of the words to The Star-Spangled Banner and three in four Americans indicate that school is where they learned the anthem. A survey showed only 39 percent of Americans could complete the third line of The Star Spangled Banner correctly.
According to the Project, music programs have experienced extensive funding cuts over the past several years. Further, while local school boards struggle to close ongoing budget gaps and meet new federal requirements, music continues to be cut in districts across the country.[1]
Project Activities
The National Anthem Project toured the United States in 2006, making "Road Show" stops in every state and Washington, D.C. The Road Shows featured music performances by student ensembles, an interactive education center, and music education advocacy materials. Visitors were encouraged to try singing "The Star-Spangled Banner" to test themselves on its lyrics. At each stop, one singer was designated a winner and given $1000 to donate to the local school music program of his or her choice.
Having concluded its Road Show, the National Anthem Project focused on the planned Grand Finale in Washington, DC, June 14-16, 2007, which featured a performance of The Star Spangled Banner on the National Mall. On June 14, 2007 more than 1,200 participants gathered at FedEx Field, home of the Washington Redskins near Washington, D.C., to celebrate the Project in a singalong led by country star Taylor Swift.
That same day more than 5,000 students joined together on the National Mall at the Washington Monument with "The President's Own" U.S. Marine Band for an afternoon concert. On June 15, school ensembles from around the country performed throughout Washington, D.C. at eight monuments including the Lincoln Memorial, Capitol Reflecting Pool, World War II Memorial, and Jefferson Memorial.
The Grand Finale’s third day of celebrations was hosted by Drum Corps International at the Navy/Marine Corps Stadium in Annapolis, Maryland. These festivities included a special singing of the national anthem, and later competition of drum corps from around the country. The National Anthem Project Grand Finale events garnered more than 220 news stories, reaching 26 million people.
The Project continued its three-year tradition of celebrating National Anthem Project Day on each September 14th. The day aims to promote the importance of music education and the Project by encouraging teachers, students, parents, and community members and leaders to participate in joint celebrations. Events include singalongs and public statements of support for music education by local school administrators and elected officials. Media coverage of National Anthem Project Day and public statements of support from state and national elected officials are available online on the Project Web site.
Opposition to the National Anthem Project
Some have opposed the National Anthem Project, and their concerns have been documented in several publications and conference presentations including some feedback indicating there were some who were dissatisfied with the choice of "The Star-Spangled Banner" as the focus for the campaign. Some requested the focus of the campaign shift to changing the national anthem. This was argued for reasons such as its perceived difficulty to sing due to range, or its militaristic lyrics, and the melody which some felt was uninteresting. The response to these concerns was that the song itself is not the focus of the campaign, but rather that Americans are not learning to sing the national anthem because of dwindling school music programs.
Collectively, criticism includes the following:
- (1) The Project may increase singing of the “Star Spangled Banner”, but is unlikely to lead to improvements in music education. Like the “Mozart Effect,” use of the National Anthem Project for music advocacy brings greater attention to the work of music educators and music organization leaders, but it also denigrates music education by promoting the educational use of music as a tool for non-musical objectives (math achievement in one case, history and culture in the other).
- (2) The National Anthem Project advocates a narrowing of the curriculum by placing unprecedented emphasis on the patriotic music genre, and one song in particular. To the contrary, leading music education scholars advocate for a broadening of the music curriculum.
- (3) The National Anthem Project encourages American music teachers to focus on content and coverage rather than musical skills and understandings in their curriculum, an approach that is contrary to contemporary theories of instructional design.
- (4) The Star Spangled Banner has long been contested as an appropriate national anthem for the United States. Its melody is borrowed directly from an old drinking song “To Anacreon in Heaven”, and it features militaristic lyrics, with phrases such as “bombs bursting in air”, “conquer we must, when our cause it is just, let this be our motto: “In God is our Trust.””, etc. Rather than promoting this song, the largest arts educators organization could advocate for a song that is both lyrically and musically appropriate relative to other national anthems in the world (such as “America the Beautiful”).
- (5) Despite recent statements made on behalf of the National Anthem Project, its objectives have much more to do with patriotism than music. Chaired by First Lady Laura Bush, and including the Department of Defense as a Supporting Organization, The National Anthem Project was launched during a highly controversial war.
- (6) Philosophers, from ancient times to the present, have suggested that uncritical nationalistic patriotism is rarely a virtue, and contemporary thinkers consider it to be an attitude that should not be deliberately instilled among students in a democracy if the purpose of education is to foster independent and creative thinkers.
- (7) The National Anthem Project facilitates the promotion of a corporate agenda in public schools, complete with company logos that clearly qualify as advertising. This kind of practice has been strongly criticized in numerous publications.
- (8) Since the National Anthem Project may not directly result in either a higher quality of music teaching or improved working conditions and job opportunities for American music teachers, its connection to stated objectives of music education organizations, strengthening music education, may be tangential.
- (9) With its emphasis on patriotic music, the spirit of the National Anthem Project appears to run counter to trends in some areas of the education field, such as peace studies, multiculturalism, and international education (see UNESCO's 2006 statement on arts education below).
- (10) Supporters of the National Anthem Project claim that the reason few Americans can remember all the words to the anthem is that music programs have been cut from public schools, and that therefore music programs must be retained so American heritage is preserved. They neglect to mention the following points: (a) lyrics to the Star Spangled Banner are notoriously awkward and difficult to remember, including historical terms that most children fail to comprehend, (b) many American school music programs emphasize instrumental music for which song lyrics are irrelevant, (c) for decades, many American students have learned the anthem in “civics”, “social studies”, or “home room” courses, rather than from school music programs, and (d) the inability to remember all the words of the Star Spangled Banner is not a reliable indication of inadequate music instruction since many musicians – and music teachers – also do not know all the words to this song.
Public criticisms include David Hebert’s (2006): “The notion that patriotism would serve as an objective for music education is antithetical to contemporary music education philosophies. Rather, music classes exist for the development of musical skills and understandings” (p. 25). In one of the first scholarly responses, Amy Beegle (2004) documented musical propaganda in American schools during World War II, and suggested that music educators should “reflect upon the experiences of past generations” (p.67). Later, Jere Humphreys remarked that “the National Anthem Project sends questionable messages during this time of controversy during a foreign war and the reduction of civil liberties at home and abroad” and warned against the “messages and images this campaign engenders” (Humphreys, 2006, p. 183). More recently, Carlos Abril (2007) cautioned that most of the Project's efforts “propel absolutist views in which declared truths take a front seat to divergent understandings and discoveries” (p. 81). Estelle Jorgensen (2007) also wrote that “selecting The Star-Spangled Banner as the focus of a national campaign to teach the nation to sing can be read as too narrow an objective in that it forwards the limited claims of nationalism to the exclusion of building international and local affiliations and identities. Rather, music teachers need to resist the claims of excessive nationalism in order to ensure that these other interests are also served.” (p. 153).
External links
- NPR-Citizen Student: Teaching Patriotism in Time of War
- Martha Nussbaum - Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism
- Simon Keller - Patriotism as Bad Faith
- Emma Goldman - Patriotism: A Menace to Liberty
Related Publications
BOOKS:
- Boutwell, Clinton E. (1997). Shell Game: Corporate America's Agenda for Schools. Phi Delta Kappa.
- Brown, Steven (2006). Music and Manipulation: On the Social Uses and Social Control of Music. Berghahn Books.
- Franklin, M.I. (2005). Resounding International Relations: On Music, Culture, and Politics. Palgrave Macmillan.
- Heller, Dana (2005). The Selling of 9/11: How a National Tragedy Became a Commodity. Palgrave Macmillan.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Jorgensen, Estelle R. (2003). Transforming Music Education. Indiana University Press.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Koza, Julia (2003). Stepping Across: Four Interdisciplinary Studies of Education and Cultural Politics. Peter Lang.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Russell, Bertrand (1984). Education & The Social Order. Unwin Paperbacks.
- Saltmann, Kenneth J. (2000). Collateral Damage: Corporatizing Public Schools - A Threat To Democracy. Rowman & Littlefield.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Woodford, Paul G. (2005). Democracy and Music Education: Liberalism, Ethics, and the Politics of Practice. Indiana University Press.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help)
ARTICLES:
- Abril, Carlos (2007). Functions of a National Anthem in Society and Education: A Sociocultural Perspective. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 172, p. 69-87.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Allsup, Randall (2004). Imagining Possibilities in a Global World: Music, Learning, and Rapid Change. Music Education Research, 6(2).
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Apple, Michael (2002). Patriotism, Pedagogy, and Freedom: On the Educational Meanings of September 11th. Teachers College Record, 104(8).
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Ayers, William (2006, November). Toward a Fuller Humanity (Patriotism and Education Revisited). Phi Delta Kappan, 88(3), p. 237.
{{cite book}}: Check date values in:|year=(help); Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help)CS1 maint: year (link) - Beegle, Amy (2004). American Music Education 1941-1946: Meeting Needs and Making Adjustments During World War II. Journal of Historical Research in Music Education, 26.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Beegle, Amy (2005). Patriotism and Music Education in the United States of America. Proceedings of the Fifth Asia-Pacific Symposium for Music Education Research.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Beegle, Amy & Campbell, Patricia Shehan (2002). Teaching Music to Children in Times of Crisis. Orff Echo, 34.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - Brubaker, R. (2004). In the Name of the Nation: Reflections on Nationalism and Patriotism. Citizenship Studies, 8(2).
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Brueggemann, W. (2003). Patriotism for Citizens of the Penultimate Superpower. Dialog, 42(4).
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Gee, Constance (2002). The “Use” and “Abuse” of Arts Advocacy and its Consequences for Music Education. New Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and Learning (R. Colwell & C. Richardson, Eds.), Oxford University Press.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters:|1=and|2=(help) - Hebert, David G. (2006). Rethinking Patriotism: National Anthems in Music Education. Asia-Pacific Journal for Arts Education, 4(1).
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Kertz-Welzel, Alexandra (2005). The Pied Piper of Hamlin: Adorno on Music Education. Research Studies in Music Education, 25.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Jorgenen, Estelle R. (2007, Fall). Songs to Teach a Nation. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 15.
{{cite book}}: Check date values in:|year=(help); Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help)CS1 maint: year (link) - Meizel, Katherine (2006, December). A Singing Citizenry: Popular Music and Civil Religion in America. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 45(4), p. 497.
{{cite book}}: Check date values in:|year=(help); Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help)CS1 maint: year (link) - O’Brien, Tom (2002, January). The Importance of Being Earnest. Arts Education Policy Review, 103(3), p.35.
{{cite book}}: Check date values in:|year=(help); Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help)CS1 maint: year (link) - Quiong, L. (2004). What Does It Mean to Be an American?: Patriotism, Nationalism, and American Identity After 9/11. Political Psychology, 25(5).
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help) - Stinespring, John A. (2001, March). Preventing Art Education from Becoming “a Handmaiden to the Social Studies”. Arts Education Policy Review, 102(4), p.11.
{{cite book}}: Check date values in:|year=(help); Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help)CS1 maint: year (link) - UNESCO (2006, March 6). 2006 Joint Declaration of the UNESCO World Arts Conference (pdf). United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Retrieved 2008-08-14.
{{cite book}}: Check date values in:|year=(help)CS1 maint: year (link)