A multi-context approach was needed in order to meet the research aims and examine the different settings of home, school and the wider environment. Three frameworks for study were drawn from the music education literature and
55 Hargreaves (2003) proposed a model to explore music education in and out of schools. Figure 1.1 shows the model, which outlined the various educational provisions for music within England. This model included the musical settings of ‘in school’ and ‘outside school’ which relates to aims 3 and 4 and extracurricular participation which is relevant to the first three aims. The model also included the National Curriculum which not all schools were required to follow, and which would relate to the first two aims.
Whilst this model is useful for examining the wider context of music education, and would provide a framework for examining some of the research aims, it does not consider the relationship between the three elements of home, school and the child which form the basis of the final research aim.
Figure 1.1 A ‘globe’ model of opportunities in music education (Hargreaves, 2003, page 158).
56 The second model which was considered was that of Creech and Hallam (2003) shown in Figure 1.2. Unlike Figure 1.1, this model did explore the interaction of pupils, parents and teachers using the systems approach and model developed by Tubbs (1984, cited in Creech and Hallam, 2003, p40). This theory “provides a framework for understanding how the many variables of human behaviour and communication work together.” and allowed the interactions of the various parties to be studied. Creech and Hallam’s model included pupils, parents and teachers, but focused on instrumental teachers rather than class teachers and neglected the role of peers within the interactions and the wider contexts of home and school. This model also failed to address the focus on school culture and the role music played in the lives of children.
57
Figure 1.2 The interaction of human variables within a musical context, Creech and Hallam (2003), page 40.
Lamont (2002) referred to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of child development as a way of examining the contextual influences of a child’s developing identity. This child-centred model of development, in which the child affects the settings in which he or she spends time as well as being affected by them, and was a useful framework for considering the roles of actors within a child’s musical culture. One of the additional features of this model was that it placed emphasis on the number
58 and quality of the connections between the settings in which a child spent time (e.g. was there communication between home and school?). Bronfenbrenner (1979) explained the importance of considering the many interpersonal
relationships surrounding children and placed equal importance on what he termed N + 2 systems (groups larger than a two-person ‘dyad’).
“Several findings indicate that the capacity of a dyad to serve as an effective context for human development is crucially dependent on the presence and participation of third parties, such as spouses, relatives, friends, and neighbours. If such third parties are absent, or if they play a disruptive rather than a supportive role, the developmental process, considered as a system, breaks down.” (page 5).
Bronfenbrenner described his model in terms of a Russian doll, where concentric circles contained different settings which affected the child on a daily basis.
Figure 1.3 Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of human development (Lamont, 2000, page 42).
The microsystem related to “a pattern of activities, roles and interpersonal
59 the playground. Examples of ‘roles’ included mother, baby, teacher and friend. The mesosystem described “the interrelation of two or more settings” (p25), in which the person actively participated, such as school and home. The exosystem referred to one or more settings that did not involve active participation, but
affected or were affected by what happened in the setting, for example the parent’s workplace, an older sibling’s class, and the Local Education Authority. Finally, the macrosystem included “consistencies in culture or subculture as well as any belief systems or ideologies” (page 26). An example of this would be different systems of education in different countries.
This framework provided opportunities to explore the links and influences between the child, the home and the school, as well as the wider aspects such as school type and culture which were not present in the other models. Bronfenbrenner’s ecology shaped the model which I developed in order to explore the research aims and is shown in Figure 1.4. At the centre of the model were the microsystems - home, school and the wider community environments. Incorporated were
components drawn from the Expectancy-Value Theory (Eccles, 1983), which were also often present in the literature regarding instrumental learning (Eccles,
Wigfield, Harold and Blumenfield, 1993; Sichivitsa, 2005; McPherson, 2000-2001) as seen in sections 1.9 and 1.11 and in McPherson’s (2009) model outlined in section 1.11.1. These influenced the child, and other adults and children
encountered at home, at school and in the wider community. These three settings also interacted in the mesosystem. The exosystem contained the Local Education Authority and the LEA music service which related to the concepts of school
culture and diversity. Finally, the macrosystem consisted of the British school system, social conditions (including socio-economic status) and economic patterns
60 (such as the current economic climate), all of which may influence musical
participation.
Figure 1.4 Proposed model to examine the interactions in music education
This model will be used as the framework with which to study school culture, pupils’ attitudes towards and participation in school music and the wider influences of the home and school. It will be used to identify the levels that need to be
accounted for within the research but will also allow consideration of the
importance of relationships between settings. The attitudes, values and beliefs and aspirations of pupils, parents and teachers are important in establishing views on the culture of a school. They contribute to the wider, generic, unique and
61 perceived cultures outlined by Prosser (1999) in section 1.4.3. The framework will influence the methodology used in the research and inform the materials
developed to collect data by ensuring that these four cultures are examined through the micro-, meso-, exo- and macro—systems.