36

Creativity in Music Education

To read and write about a philosophy of music 
education is nothing new, but to encourage the 
music teacher to think about it is a fairly new 
innovation in music education
Recently I was given the task of discussing the 
philosophy of music education at four consecutive 
sessions organised for music teachers in Natal.
Before I began my lecture I asked the teachers to 
answer in one sentence the question: Why am I 
teaching music? The majority of answers read as 
follows: I love music and want to pass on that 
love to others. This outlook could be dangerous 
because we put first and foremost our particular 
interests, our likes and dislikes, even our pre­
judices and this is of little interest or value to 
children. Very few made any mention of creati­
vity.
Over the past 15-20 years the following events 
occurred in England and the U.S.A. which have 
influenced the thoughts of music educators 
throughout the world.
1959 — The Young Composer’s Project was estab­
lished. As a result of this project it was discovered 
that very little is known about contemporary 
music in the schools; music seminars and work­
shops in contemporary music in education were 
set up and the outgrowth of this was:
1963 —  The Contemporary Music Project for 
Creativity in Music Education. One of the stu­
dies which proved highly successful in this project 
was the students’ study of contemporary music as 
well as their creative experiences in improvisation 
and composition. This not only helped them de­
velop an understanding of how music works, but 
also made them eager to develop the skills they 
needed in order to perform their compositions.
1964 — The Yale Report was issued. It recom­
mended a wholesale renewal of the repertory of 
school music, both for performing and listening.
Among other ideas — they advised that there 
should be courses in musics of the world’s peoples.
I point this out because it is so relevant to South 
African music education.
1965 — The Manhattenville Music Curriculum 
Program was established. This project approached 
music instruction by ways of composition, impro­
visation, the use of contemporary materials, and 
contemporary sounds. Unfortunately, the total 
programme is such a departure from the tradi­
tional methods of skill development that it has not 
gained wide support.
1967 — The Tanglewood Symposium took place.
This is one of the most exciting meetings I know 
of in the history of music education. In attendance 
were not only music educators but musicologists, 
composers, philosophers, and psychologists. I wish 
I had time to refer to you some of the papers 
which resulted from this conference, but I have 
time only to pass on to you their declaration which 
was: “We believe that education must have as 
major goals the art of living, the building of per­

E OEHRLE

sonal identity, and nurturing creativity. Since the 
study of music can contribute much to these ends, 
we now call for music to be placed in the core of 
the school curriculum” .
1967 — At that same time in England the Plow- 
den Report was issued stating that “ the child is 
the agent of his own learning” . There is little 
place for the type of scheme which sets down 
exactly what ground should be covered and what 
skills should be acquired by each class in the 
school. The report also stated that they found the 
planning of music as a creative subject lagging 
behind work in language and the visual arts and 
crafts.
1973 — The Teacher Education Commission Re­
port was published which said that a new type of 
teacher education in music is needed in order to 
provide music educators who are competent, 
flexible, creative, curious . . . They must develop 
a comprehensive musicanship that, coupled with 
an open-mindedness towards the use of any sounds 
combined in a musical context, will enable them 
to address themselves to any music they encoun­
ter. In this report the musical qualities and com­
petencies for classroom teachers included:

1. Skills in making sounds and playing and con­
ducting.

2. Skills in organising sounds — for example a 
teacher should be able to guide a child as 
they invent rhythmic themes on simple in­
struments.

3. Utilise simple procedures in composing music.
4. Skills in hearing sounds.
5. Skills in creating a climate in which creative 

experience and musical exploration are pos­
sible.

While doing some research of materials which 
are being used in music education today, I came 
across two types of books which are presently 
in use. The first is the traditional and the second 
is the more progressive or open-ended book.
Let’s take a look at the philosophies of the writers 
of these books: Those I have chosen to look at I 
have chosen because I know they are used by 
teachers in the Natal area, and because they were 
either published or revised within the last 15 
years. I shall discuss first a traditional approach, 
then a more progressive approach.
The Class Music Teacher — Charles Proctor 
(1965).
1. He says that all music is essentially vocal. He 

supports this by reminding us that conductors 
often tell their players to make the instru­
ment ‘sing’ in order to give maximum effect 
to the music.

2. The greatest music of the church has always 
been its vocal music.

3. The meat and fibre of national music can be 
said to be found in its folk songs.

On page 14 he says “ There is no need to go into 
the question in great detail, but we must insist



CREATIVITY IN MUSIC EDUCATION 37

that the essentials of music are in the vocal mani­
festations rather than in instrumental; that the 
vocal aspect is more natural and more real than 
any other” .
He then goes on to discuss the cultured person of 
Elizabethan times and says they could be expect­
ed to take their part in song and instrumental 
music as a matter of course. He adds that the 
cultured persons of today are the least articulate 
and it is left to the teenagers and the teddy boys 
and girls to express themselves . . . ‘‘But when 
we see and hear the material in which they ex­
press themselves . . . largely of decadent taste 
and limited poetic aspiration, we have only our­
selves to blame” .
Again, “ It is of some significance that the great 
composers —  Bach, Mozart, etc., have written 
largely though not exclusively for the voice” . The 
remainder of the book is a discussion of ways the 
voice must be used to express emotion.
In contrast to Proctor’s ideas, let us look at the 
Manhattenville Music Curriculum Program 1965 
—  a curriculum which was established for prim­
ary and high school students. I want only to point 
out the three fundamental characteristics which 
they said transcend the differences of specific 
styles, sound and sources or other idiomatic fac­
tors and give a meaning and coherence to the total 
art of music.

1. Music is an agent for the projection and clari­
fication of thought. It is a medium of ex­
pression . . . which serves a need that is not 
met by other communication processes. 
Through a distinctly unique and foreful lan­
guage of sound, music conveys ideas and feel­
ings in a way that is not matched by words or 
pictures. In this sense music becomes a way 
of knowing and experiencing. Thoughts are 
expressed, transmitted, received and clarified 
on an extremely personal and intimate level. 
This effects both the mind and the emotions. 
But it is through the indefinable ability of 
music to address the spirit of man that its 
greatest value as a communication process 
lies . . . Knowing has assumed a proportion 
that goes beyond just rational consideration.

2. The second characteristic of music is found in 
its continuing nature . . . which means that 
music is always sensitive to and interpreting 
the present. It is neither a static medium nor 
a completed monument of the past.

3. The third characteristic of music is suggested 
by the first two, but relates music more ex­
plicitly to the intrinsic need of man. Music is 
a vehicle for man in his constant search for 
individual creative fulfillment . . .

These three are the most basic characteristics of 
music and they must be the most immediate re­
sponsibility of the study underlying every class­
room experience. Without this depth of perspec­
tive the learning of data, skills, and techniques has 
limited purpose and the full potential value of 
music to man is obscured. (Page 75.)

Children must become involved in the total 
process —  that is composing, performing, 
conducting, listening and evaluating, and this 
participation in these activities must always

be in the spirit of a musician, not an imi­
tator.

The Oxford School Music Books —  1967
They feel that song teaching is not enough but 
that it is of utmost importance that children 
should learn to play an instrument, preferably the 
recorder, violin or pitched percussion instrument. 
Also important is music for listening and music 
for movement.
Concerning the question “ Why teach music?” they 
w rite: “ Music . . . has no other purpose than to 
give pleasure. It is not ‘useful’ and it is not even 
good training for the intellect. Young children are 
prepared to enjoy music in a number of ways . . . 
All these ways of enjoying music are ends in them­
selves and should not be regarded as a means to 
some vague unspecified greater end” .
In contrast to the Oxford Philosophy, John 
Paynter from York University says the first duty 
of both the music specialist and class teacher is 
the education of the whole person. He goes on to 
concern himself with the question of what contri­
bution music can make besides giving immense 
pleasure to the performer and to the listener alike,
He says it is as a creative art that music is begin­
ning to play an increasingly important role in edu­
cation. The materials of music are as available for 
creative exploration as the materials of the other 
arts; however, this seems to be an area of activity 
where music has not kept pace with other school 
subjects. Why?
Teachers of drama, English and art have found 
the change of emphasis from children being in­
structed, to children being placed in situations 
where they can learn themselves, very stimulating.
Music on the other hand has tended to go its own 
way and been unaffected by recent moves in edu­
cation.
Too often we are encouraged to regard music as 
a leisure activity. This may have lead us to em­
phasize the re»creative rather than creative acti­
vities in school music and although creative 
activities in school music and although creative 
work in drama, etc., has been readily accepted the 
same is not true for music.
What is creative music? First of all, it is a way of 
saying things which are personal to the individual. 
It also implies freedom to explore chosen 
materials. The role of the teacher is to help the 
student develop his own critical powers and per­
ception. The processes of composition in any art 
are selection and rejection, evaluating and con­
firming the material at each stage. It is essen­
tially an experimental situational Sound and 
Silence.
The Teaching of Music in Primary Schools — 
Ulrich (no publishing dates; however written 
after 1952).
He says that Standard I marks the beginning of 
formal introduction of music in all its aspects. 
. . .  Teachers should endeavour to awaken not only 
a keener appreciation for the art, but also a desire 
for the rudimentary knowledge of the subject. 
From now on we are to read and write music. And 
this is in fact the sole object of our work in Stan­
dard I.



38 OEHRLE

Further on one reads, when dealing with Stan­
dard III, “ Here is the beginning of music proper.
Here we stai’t with the real nomenclature and the 
use of authentic technical names.”
When he discusses music appreciation with Stan­
dard V he says “ I feel that no one can fail to ap­
preciate ‘The Hebrides Overture’ by Mendelssohn 
once the background story has been told. Similarly 
I fail to be convinced that a composition such as 
Beethoven’s Pathetique Pianoforte Sonata, if 
analysed properly, will leave anyone unmoved . . .
My last word on this matter —  join the thousands 
of others who have discovered joy at the hands 
of the great masters such as Bach, etc.”
The book by Percy Buck, Psychology for Musi­
cians, (10th imp in 1967) will support Ulrich’s 
last statement because he says that the highest 
aim that he can put before musicians as music 
teachers is that you should further the cause of 
good music.
My question: “ What is good music?”
In contrast to Ulrich’s philosophy, Murray 
Schafer —  a composer who is working in music 
education— says the music education is an expres­
sive subject rather than a knowledge-gaining sub­
ject. Could not music be taught as a subject which 
simultaneously releases creative energy and trains 
the mind in the perception and analysis of its own 
creation ?
“To perform, to interpret music is to engage in a 
reconstruction of the past, which may certainly 
be a desirable and useful experience. But should 
we not spend some of our energies in teaching to 
make things happen. The only way we can turn 
the past tense subject of music into a present tense 
activity is by creating.”
. . . . “ To me music is nothing but a collection of 
the most fascinating and beautiful sounds made 
by men with good ears and affectionately remem­
bered by humanity.”
We hear the word creative being used over and 
over and we see it on the jacket of many books 
which are not truly creative. The scientific study 
of creativity is a very recent development. Psy­
chology began to take an interest in creativity or 
creativeness about 1950. One indication of this 
rising interest may be found in the numbers of 
articles appearing under the heading “ creativity” 
in Psychological Abstracts. In allfi 240 articles 
are listed between 1927 - 1957. Of these the first 
20 percent appeared during the first 13 years and 
the most recent 20 percent in only the last two 
years.
The word creative needs to be looked at. Firtly to 
define it is very difficult. David Asubel (1968) 
wrote that creativity

“ is one of the vaguest, most ambigious and 
most confused terms in psychology and edu­
cation.” He feels that it is important that the 
criterion of originality be reserved for defin­
ition of creativity. Other writers are less res­
trictive and suggest that creative potential is 
present in almost everyone.

Trevor Wishart —  an English composer —  goes 
one step further and not only says that creativity 
is present in everyone, but that Western society 
has established an artistic elite who wants to re­

tain their privileged position and therefore they 
do not wish to recognize the creativity present in 
all peoples.
At the ISME convention in 1976 they said that the 
creative process in music education defines cre­
ativity as the discovery of relationships which are 
new to the individual and the development of such 
relationships into some form that is individually 
satisfying.
From the Journal of Creative Behaviour—William 
Ward says that we should give up using the word 
“ creativity” in the name of any instrument used 
in research with young children . . . rather call 
the instrument a measure of playfulness, of open­
ness to experience, of educational fluency or what­
ever else it looks like.
For our purpose it is not vital to come to terms 
with one definition of the word creativity. It is, 
however, important for us to consider it in rela­
tion to music education and to realize that finally 
psychology is beginning to study creativity in a 
scientific way and that programmes are being 
organized such as “ Project for Creativity in Music 
Education” in the USA.
A disturbing finding in Benjamin Fine’s book 
Stretching Their Minds says : Studies have shown 
that our schools have rewarded children for being 
neat, clean, polite, co-operative, honest and punc­
tual; for conforming to cultural norms. We do 
not reward creativity and frequently do not allow 
it in our schools.
There are creative techniques of education which 
will encourage at least eight different abilities 
which, according to Dr Torrance — the foremost 
researcher in the field of creativity — are invol­
ved in creative thinking:

1. Sensitivity to problems — the ability to 
see defects, needs, deficiencies.

2. Fluency of ideas —  the ability to think 
of different ideas, new concepts, new com­
binations of data.

3. Flexibility in handling data — the ability 
to use varied approaches, strategies and 
kinds of solutions.

4. Originality of interpretation — the ability 
to get away from the beaten track.

5. The ability to redefine —  the ability to re­
construct a scientific theorem; to see uses 
and applications other than the intended 
ones.

6. The ability to analyze, to synthesize and 
to organize.

Do we encourage these abilities in education, or is 
what George Prince writes in the Journal of Cre­
ative Behaviour true?

“ The vast majority of us human beings are 
born with very powerful engines of thought. 
The precise nature of the thinking operation 
has not been widely understood. Without 
meaning to, we cause children to repress in 
themselves certain important thinking opera­
tions —  such as those above.”

Before I list for you a few findings which have 
resulted from studies regarding creativity over 
these last few years, I want us to think a little 
about the world we are going to be sending our



CREATIVITY IN MUSIC EDUCATION 39

children into. It is important to consider this be­
cause one of the ideals which education should aim 
towards is to help a person get the most out of 
living while giving as much of himself or herself 
to help his or her neighbour as much as possible.
In order to do this we must be aware of the world 
around us — the world of today and tomorrow.
We should be far more aware in education of the 
future sense — instead we are too aware of edu­
cation as it has been in the past —  particularly 
music education, as you may have noticed in the 
philosophies of the traditional music books.
We should have institutions which study the fut­
ure as we already have many which preserve the 
past. We should search for our objectives and 
methods in the future as well as in the past. Alvin 
Toffler in his book Future Shock suggests that 
all schools create a ‘Council of the Future’ —  a 
team of men and women devoted to probing the 
future in the interest of the present.
To give you some idea of the acceleration of ac­
cumulated knowledge consider the following:

1. Of the 92 basic elements of Earth such as 
phosphorus, uranium, etc, only 12 were 
discovered up to 1670. By 1932 discovery 
of the 92 atomic elements was completed. 
From 1932-1970 we have been discovering 
super atomic elements.

2. Using the metaphor of a clock face we 
easily see t h e  K N O W L E D G E  
EXPLOSION. Imagine a clock face with 
60 minutes on it. Le the clock stand for 
the time men have had access to writing 
systems. Our clock would represent 3 000 
years with each minute representing 50 
years. Thus there were no significant 
changes until nine minutes ago with the 
printing press in Western culture. About 
three minutes ago, the telegraph, photo­
graph and locomotive arrived. One minute 
ago the talking picture came. Television 
appeared in the last 10 seconds, and com­
puters in the last five, with communica­
tion satellites in the last second. (From 
Teaching as a Subversive Activity, Post­
man & Weingartner). It would be possible 
to place almost any area of life on our 
clock face and get the same answer.
Change isn’t new, but the degree of change 
is. As Alfred North Whitehead pointed out 
in The Adventure of Ideas, our sociological 
theories, our political philosophy, our prac­
tical maxims of business, our political 
economy, and our doctrines of education 
are derived from an unbroken tradition of 
great thinkers and of practical examples 
from the age of Plato . . .  to the end of the 
last century. The whole of this tradition 
is warped by the vicious assumption that 
each generation will substantially live 
amid the conditions governing the lives of 
its fathers, and will transmit these con­
ditions to mould with equal force the lives 
of its children. We are living in the first 
period of human history for which this 
assumption is false.

What kind of person with what characteristics 
and skills will best cope with this world? I believe

a person who has had the opportunity to develop 
the techniques involved in creative thinking has 
the better chance, and music is a means of devel­
oping these techniques.
Dr Torrance said in 1962 that “ as our research 
evidence continued to accumulate, it became clear 
that creative thinking is important in mental 
health, educational achievement, vocational suc­
cess and many other important areas of life. As 
we studied creative behaviour among both child­
ren and adults, it became increasingly clear that 
perhaps nothing could contribute more to the 
general welfare of our nation and to the satisfac­
tion and mental growth of its people than a 
general development of creative behaviour. There 
is little doubt but that the prolonged and severe 
stifling of creative thinking cuts at the very roots 
of satisfaction in living.”
Having said this, let us look at three pieces of 
scientific research in connection with creativity:

1. Educational and Environmental Influences 
on Creativity— Hadden and Lytton (1968) 
They administered a battery of tests of di­
vergent thinking to two pairs of contrast­
ing primary schools. Two were selected 
as representing traditional schools with 
emphasis upon convergent thinking and 
authorative learning, and two further 
schools represented the informal school, 
where the emphasis was on self-initiated 
learning and creative activities. 211 child­
ren were used and their social economic 
background and verbal reasoning quotients 
were controlled.
Result: The emphasis laid on self-initiated 
learning is the more important school fac­
tor in the development of creative talent, 
supported by a relaxed atmosphere in 
which children are free to pursue their 
own path of learning and discovery.

2. Barker, Lunn (1970) in her study of 
streaming in the primary school also ex­
amined whether the schools and teachers 
favouring a more informal progressive ap­
proach to curriculum and method would do 
more to foster divergent thinking than 
those prefering to adhere to more formal 
methods associated with the achievement 
of accepted standards of academic attain­
ment.
The value of her findings identify the 
most important features in the develop­
ment of creativity: it would seem it is not 
the degree of permissiveness, but rather 
the attitude of the teacher, the emphasis 
on self-initiated learning, the freedom of 
access to school libraries, relatively less 
use of class teaching, and a relaxed, 
friendly atmosphere.

3. Creativity and Intelligence: Getzels and 
Jackson’s study Highly Intelligent and 
Highly Creative Adolescents —  Explora­
tion in Cognitive Giftedness.
Two groups were used. One high in intel­
ligence but not concomitantly high in cre­
ativity ; the other high in creativity but 
not concomitantly high in intelligence. 
Both creativity and intelligence tests were 
used. The high Creativity Group —  the



40 OEHRLE

subjects were in the top 20 percent of the 
creative measures when compared to 
students of same age and sex, but below 
top 20 percent in IQ.
The high intelligence group was the oppo­
site. A few of the findings were: 
that the children with high IQs were rated 
by the teacher as more desirable, better 
understood, more ambitious and hard 
working. Further to this problem the two 
most common criteria applied to a prospec­
tive college student are:
i) Scholastic aptitude measures of IQ. 
(ii) School recommendations based upon 

teachers’ evaluations of the student.
You can see the problem this poses for the cre­
ative child. From these few studies we see that 
creativity is often not rewarded and that certain 
environmental conditions need to exist in order 
to encourage creativity. Torrance found that cre- 
activity needs to be energized and guided almost 
from birth. If it is stifled early, it will only be­
come inmitative if it survives at all. The vigorous 
creative imagination which survives early stif­
ling and opposition may even become dangerous 
to society and civilization.
Torrance defines the ways for rewarding creative 
behaviour as :

1. Being respectful of unusual questions.
2. Being respectful of imaginative or unusual 

ideas.
3. Showing your pupils that their ideas have 

value.
4. Occasionally having pupils do something 

‘for practice.’
5. Linking in evaluation with cause and con­

sequences.
It was found in a report that as a group the teach­
ers who could not accept the principles which were 
advocated, placed a high value on the following 
concepts:

a. Time (but not timelessness).
b. Orderliness (but not logical thinking).
c. Respect for authority.
d. The child’s responsibility to the group 

but not the teacher’s responsibility to the 
child).

e. The preservation of the self-image.
f. The importance of information (but not 

importance of information-getting skills).
The writings of Maslow have influenced me a 
great deal in formulating my philosophy of edu­
cation. He says that every individual has both de­
fensive and growth motivational forces within 
him. One set clings to safety and defensiveness out 
of fear, tending to regress, hanging on to the past 
. . . afraid to take chances, afraid of freedom. I 
say that our present educational system encour­
ages this particular side of a person’s growth. The 
other set of forces impels him forward towards 
wholeness of self and uniqueness of self, toward 
full functioning of all his capacities. The process 
of growth is a never ending choice between these 
two forces.

Maslow elaborates a few concepts which are 
compatible with traditional research in creativity 
and creative teaching:

1. A teacher should be open to experience . . . 
Because of a positive self-concept, the self- 
actualized creative teacher suspends j udge- 
ments and habitual interpretations in 
order to be freely tolerant of ambiguities 
and new experiences as they arise.

2. A teacher should view the student in all 
his potentialities . . . He is capable of per­
ceiving not only what they are, but more 
important, what they can become.

3. The teacher should become affectively as 
well as cognitively involved in the teach­

ing process . . .  The dichotomy between 
superior-inferior must be removed and in­
teraction established whereby goals, pro­
cesses and evaluation of learning can be 
student-teacher orientated, not teacher- 
dominated.

4. Teachers in South Africa should influence 
creative learning. The development of end- 
potential must serve as a foundation for 
all creative teaching. Uniform plans for 
all students are not educationally sound. 
The educational process must involve a 
learning environment conducive to full 
development of end-potential, not collec­
tive potential. Teachers must involve not 
only flexibility in planning and carrying 
out plans, but must also utilize original 
thinking to d e v e l o p  appropriate 
experience.

5. The focus of evaluation should be internal 
in the student. Creative teaching implies 
that the student’s perception of his suc­
cess or failure is under his control, not the 
teacher’s.

6. Psychological freedom should exist in the 
teaching process. The teacher and student 
must be free to think, to feel, to be and 
to become.

Before I give you my one line answer to “ Why 
I am teaching music?” I would like to submit three 
questions to you for your consideration.

a) A recent thesis titled “A Study of Values 
in Music Education from 1950-1970” by 
W Jones stated that out of the 19 values 
which music educators thought to be im­
portant the most important were crea­
tivity and aesthetics. What we are as 
music educators doing to foster these 
values ?

b) UNESCO said that liberating the energies 
of the people, unleashing their creative 
powers heads the list of future prospects 
for the development of education. Art 
education has, for years, been giving child­
ren the opportunities to unleash their 
creative powers. Are we doing the same 
in music education?

c) Is a music educator a creator himself or 
a preserver of the past, or even a destroy­
er of the initial love of music? David P 
McAllester in an article “ The Substance of



CREATIVITY IN MUSIC EDUCATION 41

Things Hoped For” says that the music 
educator has come to take the role of pre­
server of a certain section of his music.
A corollary observation is that in most of 
the other cultures of the world, if they are 
outside the influences of Western Europe, 
there are no music educators as such. And 
yet, music thrives. I, myself, fear for the 
Africans’ music when they begin to train 
music educators, because up to now the 
Africans all create music and movement.
Our dilemma here underscores the fact 
that, like it or not, our society has assigned 
to music education a role of built-in con­
servatism. Except in the sciences, where

the new is unquestionably considered to be 
the good, the school is generally regarded 
as the preserver of our great traditions 
of the past. Very rarely is there room for 
a predisposition for new ideas in music. 
How do we meet these difficulties or do 
we even recognize the problem?

Now for my answer to the question “ Why am I 
teaching music?” I hope that through the langu­
age of music, which is sound, to enable people to 
explore and discover sounds in an atmosphere 
which is conducive to openness and free enquiry 
which will, in turn, enable the learner to grow 
in the knowledge of what he or she is and thinks 
and feels.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books for use in class :

Chacksfield, Binus and Robins. 1975. Music and 
Language with Young Children. Basil 
Blackwell.

Dennis, B. 1970. Experimental Music in Class. 
London, OUP.

Holmes and McDonald. Children Make Music.
Massialas and Zevin. 1967. Creative Encounters in 

the Classroom. New York. Wiky and Sons 
Inc.

Nye and Nye. 1977. Music in the Elementary 
School. Prentice Hall, 4th ed.

Orff, Carl. Schulwerk No 1— English version by 
Margaret Murray, Schott and Co., London.

Raebeck and Wheeler. 1964. New approaches to 
Music in the Elementary School. Wm C 
Brown.

Schafer, R Murray. 1976. Creative Music Educa­
tion. Schirmer.

Self, G. 1967. New Sounds in Class. Universal.

Books about education :

Lowenfeld, Victor and W Lambert Brittain. 1975. 
Creativity and Mental Growth. 6th edition, 
Macmillan.

Reimer, B. 1970. Philosophy of Music Education. 
Prentice Hall.

Rogers, C. 1966. Freedom to Learn. Columbus 
Ohio, Charles E Merrill.

Silberman. 1970. Crisis in the Classroom. Random 
House.

Postman and Weingartner. Teaching as a Subver­
sive Activity. New York, Delacarte Press.

Journals:

Music Educators Journal. Official magazine of 
MENC-monthly, Reston, VA 22091, USA.

The Australian Journal of Music Education. Uni­
versity of W Australia, Nedlands, Australian 
Society for Music Education.

The World of Music. Quarterly journal of the 
International Institute for Comparative 
Music Studies and Documentation, Mainz, 
(UNESCO).

Psychology of Music. University of Manchester, 
Manchester, England.