Abstract
Although resources exist to help instrumental music teachers assist learners in inclusive settings, students’ voices may be absent from those resources. As such, music teachers may struggle to honor the needs and experiences of students with physical differences. Students with physical differences may be steered away from instrumental music or toward an instrument that may not be the student’s preference. The purpose of this study was to understand the stories of students with physical differences and their teacher to examine how participation in instrumental music was enabled in this setting. Data were generated through examining artifacts and completing interviews with the instrumental music teacher, students, and students’ parents. Interview data were analyzed using process/action coding. Main themes that emerged were (a) previous experiences and prior knowledge, (b) recognizing strengths and challenges, (c) perseverance toward desires in the face of uncertainty, (d) help and support from others, and (e) materials. Implications for future research and possible applications to music teaching and music teacher education are discussed.
Keywords
It makes me sit there and wonder, “Has anybody gone through my programs who should have had an opportunity to try with me, and I didn’t reach out to them, you know, and give a try?”
Introduction
Children with exceptionalities can face challenges playing instruments in schools that can be mitigated or exacerbated by music teachers. In a study conducted by Jellison and Flowers (1999), children with disabilities not only expressed interest in playing musical instruments but also reported playing traditional band or orchestral instruments less frequently than peers without disabilities. Some preservice music therapists and music educators perceived adapting instruments for children with disabilities as a challenge and also expressed concern that students with disabilities would not be accepted by peers or capable of participating (Cassidy & Colwell, 2012). Similarly, inservice music teachers indicated not feeling competent in their ability to adapt instruction for students with special needs (McCord & Watts, 2010). McCord and Watts also revealed inservice teachers had very limited information about assistive technology that, when used, “may increase success of students with disabilities in music classes and ensembles” (p. 83).
An instrument’s design may imply a fixed and present set of physical features or functioning necessary for a student to find success. Some teachers may consider students’ physical features (e.g., height, arm length, or finger length) when determining what instrument that student may play. Also, instrumental textbooks and resources often define and outline correct holding position(s) and fingerings. Teachers may be unaware of alternate ways to play standard instruments and may be uncomfortable encouraging students to play in ways that do not conform to these expectations. Furthermore, students who deviate from these expectations may not be encouraged to play said instruments.
Consequently, children whose physical features do not conform to certain ideals, standards, or preconceived notions (termed here, physical differences 1 ) can face challenges to participating in school instrumental ensembles. High school band directors in Nebraska reported their greatest concerns for including students with physical disabilities involved the availability of instruments to accommodate students’ needs, knowledge of options to include students, and the cost of obtaining such instruments (Nabb & Balcetis, 2010). Among these respondents, “61% . . . indicated that within their career, they experienced firsthand a time when a student’s physical disability limited that student’s participation in instrumental music” (pp. 314–315).
Teachers may be unprepared to offer appropriate accommodations due to a lack of intentional, informative professional development and preparation. Music teachers may teach for years without receiving training or staff development to teach students with special needs (McCord & Watts, 2010). Working with individuals with special needs in music settings can help preservice music teachers feel more confident, prepared, and/or comfortable (Hourigan, 2007; VanWeelden & Whipple, 2005). Furthermore, professional development can be beneficial for inservice music teachers’ perceptions of competence to include learners with special needs (Hammel & Gerrity, 2012). Yet teaching music to exceptional learners is not always purposefully integrated within music teacher preparation programs and a course on this topic may not be required or offered (Salvador, 2010). Given that teachers can be a source of salvation or stagnation for their students, ensuring teachers have the information necessary to assist all their learners is warranted.
Need for the Study
Music educators must understand how to meet the needs of all their learners, including students with physical differences. Previous authors’ suggestions and experiences could help music teachers accommodate children with visual impairments (e.g., Best, 1958; Coates, 2012), who are Deaf or hard of hearing (Hash, 2003), and develop inclusion strategies (e.g., Mixon, 2005; Zdzinski, 2001). Furthermore, available literature can assist music teachers understand legal issues (Crockett, 2017), individualized education plans (McCord & Fitzgerald, 2006), and available materials such as adaptive instruments and technology (e.g., Chadwick & Clark, 1980; Clark & Chadwick, 1980; Darrow, 2011; McCord & Fitzgerald, 2006). Recently published books devoted to accommodating students in music education are also valuable resources for instrumental music teachers (e.g., Adamek & Darrow, 2018; Hammel & Hourigan, 2017; Jellison, 2015; Sobol, 2017).
After examining existing qualitative research in music education related to students with exceptionalities, Hourigan (2014) concluded that future investigations should focus on the teaching strategies of successful inservice music teachers and also include the voices and perspectives of students with special needs. The present study focuses on such successful strategies and the voices of students, which we hope will help inservice teachers and researchers. Additional qualitative research has provided valuable insights that could also assist music teachers in including children with exceptionalities in instrumental music (e.g., Hourigan, 2007; Lapka, 2005; Meier, 2009; Moss, 2009).
Purpose
On reviewing the existing literature, we concur with Hourigan (2014) that more research examining the personal experiences of students with exceptionalities is needed. The purpose of this study was to understand the stories of students with physical differences and their teacher to reveal how participation in instrumental music was enabled in this setting. The following questions guided this study: (a) How was instrumental music made accessible? (b) What practices influenced the students’ musical journeys? and (c) What dispositions and beliefs helped to facilitate students’ musical journeys? Including the voices of these students and their teacher allowed for a more thorough understanding of their specific circumstances and perspectives and will hopefully help support teachers in assisting these learners in their spaces.
Method
Design
In this study, we examined the personal experiences of three students and their teacher. The examination was based in a qualitative descriptive (Sandelowski, 2000) design. “Qualitative description is especially amenable to obtaining straight and largely unadorned . . . answers to questions of special relevance to practitioners” (p. 337). Similar to this type of inquiry, we had “no pre-selection of variables to study, no manipulation of variables, and no a priori commitment to any one theoretical view” (p. 337). That is, as there are limited previous data about the personal experiences of students like our participants, we adopted an exploratory stance.
Interview Protocols and Procedure
Interview protocols were developed by the researchers to ensure similar information was discussed with all participants; interview protocols for the teacher differed from protocols for the students although participants’ responses informed and shaped protocols for subsequent interviews. The interviews were conducted in a semistructured manner; participants answered questions from the protocols and additional questions were asked based on responses.
Data were collected primarily during three interviews. Photographs were taken during interviews and researchers also reviewed archival materials, specifically news and social media postings that together helped to shape the interview protocols and provided more depth to the participant responses. Interviews were audiorecorded and researchers also took written notes during interviews. Data collection took place over 3 months; interviews typically lasted approximately 30 to 60 minutes.
Participants
Following institutional review board approval and obtaining appropriate consent, a male instrumental music teacher and three male students with physical differences whom the teacher had instructed in elementary instrumental music were enlisted as participants for the study. Parents accompanied their children to the interviews and participated as much as they wished, varying from considerable participation to minimal. We did not originally plan to include the parent voices but after the first round of interviews we found their contributions to be vital. As such, the parents were then consented separately following institutional review board protocols. All participants lived in a rural midsized town with a large research university. Pseudonyms are used in this report; and, of note, student participants selected their own pseudonyms.
Rob (Music Teacher)
When Rob participated, he had been teaching instrumental music for 30 years, 24 of which had occurred in his current district. At the time of the interview, he was teaching fourth- and fifth-grade instrumental music in two elementary schools. When he first began teaching in the late 1980s, he did not think about accommodating students with physical differences. He asserted the attitude at that time in music education was “if you didn’t fit into paradigms that they had set up, then you failed. Or didn’t participate” (Rob, Interview 1). Now, he believes, “My student body is made whole, it’s complete, when I include all of [the students]” (Rob, Interview 2) and providing differentiated instruction for every learner is the very essence of being an instrumental music teacher. He claimed each time he finds a solution for a student, finding the next solution becomes easier because he accrues “educational wealth” as he teaches (Rob, Interview 3).
Crispy
We spoke with both Crispy and his mother during all three interviews. At the time, Crispy was a sixth-grade trumpet player with an enthusiastic and outgoing personality. He had one sibling, an older brother, and he dreamed of a career in the tech industry. Crispy had muscle weakness in his upper body and some visual limitations. His mother, a physical therapist, stated, “He has a lot of knowledge if we all just ask him what works best. He’s living it” (Crispy’s mother, Interview 1).
Crispy had a lifelong history of making music. He played piano and drums at home, sang in community groups, and learned saxophone and trombone informally at school, the latter typically when his trumpet was being repaired. For band, trumpet was Crispy’s first and only choice. He would not have played in band on any other instrument and enjoyed being loud. His trumpet was adapted for him in two ways. First, the body of the trumpet was supported using the bottom portion of a metal music stand. Second, with the assistance of the high school robotics lab and a local university, solenoids (electrical switches, like on the face of a smart phone) were added beside the valve stems that when touched created an electromechanical response that pulled the valves down. This creative adaptation was a continual work in progress. While he insisted he is not a patient person, he had waited many times for the next version of the trumpet. At the time of the interviews, he was awaiting trumpet “6.0” (Crispy, Interview 3).
FN2187
FN2187 was in fifth grade at the time of the interviews to which his father accompanied him. His personality in the interviews was thoughtful and somewhat reserved. He was the oldest child in his family and his father was completing his doctorate; the family relocated for his father’s new job the summer after the interviews. FN2187 had the use of two undersized digits on his right hand. When asked to describe how he refers to his right hand, FN2187 responded, “Uh . . . I call it my hand, really” and went on to say, “I don’t like it as a disability, or something like that” (Interview 1).
FN2187 had musical people in his family and first began playing piano at home, taught by his father (Interview 1). He became interested in the cello due in part to watching videos of The Piano Guys. An adept player for his age, he played a half-size cello with a specially designed “apparatus” (Interview 2) that attached to his right hand to assist him in holding the bow. The apparatus was developed by the nearby university’s biomechanics lab along with a string education specialist. While FN2187 was very interested in cello, without the apparatus, he may have selected another instrument: “at first I wanted to do, um, horn or some brass instrument. And . . . um, I was looking at trumpet; that would be pretty easy for me to do right away” (Interview 1). During his final interview, FN2187 stated he felt “lucky” to have Rob as his teacher (Interview 3).
Steve
At the time of the interviews, Steve was in fifth grade and his father also attended the interviews. With a sunny, bubbly personality, Steve was the second of five children in the family and had a piano in his house. Steve had limited use of the right side of his body and did not describe his physical state as being disabled: “I think of it like, just as like. . . . Well, like, not like a disability . . . I just think of it like . . . (short pause) Like I—I can use it, but not like, fully” (Interview 1).
Steve’s parents valued playing instruments, and Steve was excited by the prospect of performing as a part of the band. As a trumpet player, Steve used the bottom part of a metal music stand to support the weight of the instrument. This allowed the trumpet to sit at a playable height and be stable enough to blow into while Steve depressed keys with his left hand. Although the trumpet was Steve’s first choice, he may have chosen another instrument had the music stand not been provided. He was thankful for the assistance that his teacher gave him and felt “bummed” and “depressed” (Interview 3) at the thought that all students may not have had the same opportunities to participate in instrumental music as he did.
Data Analysis and Respondent Validation
Interviews were transcribed by a paid undergraduate assistant and the researchers using close (verbatim) transcription. We began coding independently using process coding (Saldaña, 2013, p. 96). Process coding helps to understand processes where the “process is ongoing action/interaction/emotion taken in response to situations, or problems, often with the purpose of reaching a goal or handling a problem” (Corbin & Strauss, 2008, pp. 96–97).
Both researchers reviewed all the data generated during the study. To most accurately preserve each participant’s perspective as closely as possible, each researcher led the interviews for two of the participants and then coded those data. Coding occurred two times with several months between coding. Throughout the coding process, the researchers regularly discussed codes and potential emerging themes among the data. After identifying emerging themes for each participant, the researchers negotiated final themes over several meetings. The final interview demonstrated data saturation among the participants. As such, the third interview, along with the confirmations among the students and teacher, provided adequate engagement with the data.
Participants’ parents and the music teacher were sent transcriptions following the interviews, and they provided edits that were applied. The teacher and the parents were sent a copy of the manuscript before it was submitted for publication and asked to determine if the representations, interpretations, and conclusions accurately and respectfully reflected their reality. All suggested edits were applied to the manuscript.
Findings
“[Playing trumpet] made me more courageous. Just because, like, . . . we have to be loud, so that made me try out for solos in choir and that sort of thing.” (Crispy, Interview 2) “I’ve gotten a larger passion for music.” (FN2187, Interview 2)
Five interrelated themes emerged from the analysis: (a) previous experiences and prior knowledge, (b) recognizing strengths and challenges, (c) perseverance toward desires in the face of uncertainty, (d) help and support from others, and (e) materials. As described in the earlier section, these themes were collaboratively determined between the researchers. We sought to focus on the experiences of the teacher, students, and parents throughout their time together in elementary instrumental classes.
Previous Experiences and Prior Knowledge
“Every single day that I interact with students, I’m just, you know, I’m accumulating more . . . educational wealth” (Rob, Interview 3)
The collective experience of the participants, others in the community, and the teacher played an important role in bringing the students and their instruments together. Rob was armed with an interest in “mechanical advantage” (Rob, Interview 2), an idea inspired by a former private student with arthritis, and knowledge of the robotics lab at the high school; together these all influenced his work with Crispy. His prior work assisting students led him to give Steve the trumpet stand and prepared him to assist FN2187.
As regards the student participants, all had musical instruments and experiences in their homes, and musical individuals in their families (as described above in participants’ stories) prior to beginning instrumental music in school; all valued music study. In addition, all had their physicalities since infancy. Therefore, they had used their bodies to function in the world throughout their lives and had developed strategies for doing day-to-day tasks. Crispy’s mom indicated that Crispy himself was the best source for accommodation ideas because “He’s living it” (Crispy’s mother, Interview 1). Furthermore, Steve indicated that knowing the journey of another student with a physical difference playing trumpet helped him figure out a more comfortable way to hold the trumpet by using the stand.
Finally, FN2187’s father mentioned his own lack of knowledge on certain information that could have been beneficial for his child. However, the expertise of the individuals in the biomechanics lab was effectful, “We could have figured it out faster, I think, if we had gone to the—if we had—put a greater call for help in the beginning” (Interview 1). Furthermore, FN2187’s father noted that he believed it was the experience of the experts at the biomechanics lab that made all the difference in their case, making the apparatus possible.
Recognizing Strengths and Challenges
“I thought it’d be easier to solve than it actually was.” (FN2187’s father, Interview 3)
Recognizing strengths and challenges over time emerged as important to successful musical experiences. Accurately and actively assessing students’ capabilities, needs, and available resources seemed to help participants remain positive and invested in the process. In general, disappointment or frustration appeared to emerge most frequently when finding a solution was more difficult than it first appeared, or when the process was slow.
Rob stated, “Every child has their way of learning, and it might not be a common one, or one that you’ve learned yet; they may need to teach you how they need to learn” (Interview 3). On the whole, all participants seemed able to evaluate their capabilities, identify areas that were likely to pose challenges, and provide assistance. For example, reading notation was not a challenge for FN2187 and he had full use of his left hand. Furthermore, as time went on, FN2187 was provided additional music to play that helped keep his interest. Hence, recognizing the strengths of the learners as well as areas that would pose challenges, allowed participants to focus their energies to develop solutions and strategies that would most effectively suit their needs.
Still, even the best of intentions does not always yield effective solutions and it was important for participants to recognize when they could find a solution and when they needed to seek additional assistance. For example, Rob felt agency to take action to include students as evidenced in his statement: “I can’t think of anything—that would make me . . . make me not want to try” (Rob, Interview 2). He believed in his abilities to help students and figure things out. Still, there were times he had to accept his limitations and recognize when something was “over [his] head” (Rob, Interview 2) and seek additional assistance.
Participants were able to effectively use the resources at their disposal, needs that became apparent over time. In addition to repurposing existing materials (e.g., wire music stands), social media and the local network served as important tools to connect people to find solutions. The resources present at the local research university benefited the students, particularly when initial attempts at assistance failed.
Perseverance Toward Desires in the Face of Uncertainty
“Anything is possible except skiing through a revolving door.” (Crispy, Interview 1)
Rob’s ultimate desire was to help kids succeed in music and the students and their families worked diligently to ensure their participation as well. Rob’s care for students’ opinions was evidenced in his willingness to help students learn any instrument of their choosing. Rob and the students’ parents honoring the students’ choices allowed students to play what they wanted, which seemed to help students invest in the process and work hard.
All students and families faced challenges but they chose to persevere. Both the students and Rob invested their time, even when they were uncertain how, or if, solutions may work or could be found. Students were shown instruments individually and given a choice in what they wanted to play, even when it did not seem playing that instrument would be easy to achieve. Rob spent additional time with the students in problem solving: developing and locating assistive devices and posting to social media to find additional advice/services.
All the students described struggles they faced ranging from various iterations of apparatuses, broken models/materials, or the time it took to locate or develop the necessary materials. The students were determined to persevere. In fact, frustrations to the point of quitting did not emerge as a theme. When asked about frustrations, students indicated little noteworthy frustration and that it was not enough to make them want to quit music altogether. Hence, all students had to practice patience and perseverance as they sought a solution that they were not sure would be found. Both Crispy and FN2187 spent time outside of school meeting with professionals to construct special assistive devices receiving several iterations each. Rob would teach Crispy other instruments while they waited for the next version of his trumpet. Steve received his stand from Rob rather quickly but had to push through initial frustrations until that solution was found.
Also, it should be noted that this perseverance in the face of uncertainty seemed to have played a role in the lives of some participants since childhood. For example, Steve’s family was not sure how physical therapy would benefit him but chose to move forward with physical therapy to see what would happen. Crispy’s life was also characterized by a great deal of experimentation, which may have contributed to his positive outlook on possibilities.
Help and Support From Others
“[Rob] told me . . . he’d help me through any instrument I wanted.” (FN2187, Interview 1)
Here, help and support from others refers to assistance given to participants to support their success. Examples of such relationships include, but are not necessarily limited to, students helping the music teacher, the music teacher helping the students, the parents helping and supporting the students and the music teacher, students helping students, community members and other professionals supporting the music teacher and students, and students supporting community professionals. Although challenges were faced by participants, all students were given many choices and felt they had the power to act on their choices, which also speaks to the power of personal agency and perceived ability to choose and affect one’s fate.
Rob (Music Teacher)
During the second interview Rob stated, “Can I as his teacher find a way, or can I find the right people who can find a way, to—remove that barrier so this child can do everything else . . . like anyone else” (Rob, Interview 2). Rob supported his students primarily by investing additional time, listening, and connecting them with additional support and community resources. Rob provided lessons to instrument groups and spent additional time with student participants, such as showing them instruments individually, experimenting with materials (e.g., using duct tape), or offering suggestions (e.g., music stand, or holding position). While Rob offered students individual assistance, none reported feeling singled out in a negative way. Rob’s care for the students’ opinions/preferences was evidenced by his willingness to help students with any instrument they wanted, making suggestions rather than mandates, working with them to find solutions, and individualizing his practices to suit their needs (e.g., providing additional music or teaching additional instruments). Finally, Rob ensured students were supported by and/or supporting others by encouraging informal peer mentoring in music classes and connecting students with community resources. Community resources were primarily enlisted after Rob was unable to find a solution.
Community and School Members
Community resources proved invaluable for Crispy and FN2187 whose assistive devices were provided pro bono. Rob recognized the value of his location, stating, “I’ve got an outstanding school district that had a high school program that could do something advanced and technical, and then a university that can do something on the cutting-edge professional level” (Interview 2). FN2187’s father recalled that after Rob shared FN2187’s needs online, a paraprofessional at the school learned of the situation; her husband worked at the biomechanics lab at the local university. An undergraduate class took on the task under the biomechanical engineer’s direction, meeting with FN2187 for fittings and creating several iterations of his apparatus. In the case of Crispy’s family, benefits were due to Rob’s tenure in the community. Rob knew former students who worked in the high school robotics lab as well as the robotics lab teacher and brought the idea of solenoids, which he had imagined earlier when working with an adult student with arthritis, to the robotics space as a potential real-life learning opportunity.
Families
Because assistive devices were provided to families at no cost, families primarily invested their time to ensure students had access to the instruments and to the assistive devices, and supported Rob and their students’ decisions. All families valued musical study and supported their child’s decision to play an instrument. Parents were also willing to allow Rob to share their students’ stories—and potentially sensitive information—with others. Feeling his family lacked a strong local network, FN2187’s father said, “I appreciate [Rob] reaching out to a broader group” (Interview 2).
Students
Student participants supported their own journeys by investing time, advocating for themselves, voicing concerns and suggestions, being willing to try new things, and exercising patience. As Rob invested additional time with the students, student participants invested extra time—in addition to practicing their instruments—meeting with Rob, experimenting on their own, and/or meeting with others with expertise. Like their parents, they supported Rob’s decision to share their stories with others and were active and open during the process of finding solutions with these new individuals. The development of FN2187’s device even provided further support to the biomechanics lab by creating some press for them. It is also worth noting the indirect ways students assisted one another. In particular, Steve noted the impact of watching another trumpet player with exceptionalities in his district, stating “So, like, he had the stand that I use now . . . so that like, showed me like how I would do it” (Interview 1).
Materials
“I think I would have like, switched like, maybe to like the French horn where it kind of like sits . . . or just like the tuba even.” (Steve, Interview 1)
In general, the assistive devices provided to the students seemed to have the greatest influence on the students’ participation in instrumental music. Crispy was provided technology that depressed his valves and also enlarged music to aid his vision, Steve was provided a stand, and FN2187 used an apparatus to hold his bow. Additionally, Rob also provided extra music for FN2187, who indicated the additional music kept him interested. The availability of the materials was made possible by participants’ previous experiences, ability to recognize strengths and challenges, perseverance, and support from others. Although FN2187 and Steve may have played instruments that presented fewer initial challenges, Crispy indicated if he were not able to play the trumpet, he would not have played anything at all in band.
Limitations
There were limitations to this study. For example, the teacher and student participants were all male and hearing the perspectives of students of other genders may have provided different insights. Furthermore, because we sought to represent the participants’ perspectives, we did not observe student participants in their ensembles or with the music teacher participant as observation would have inserted our view of their experiences even more. Therefore, all results and conclusions should be considered with appropriate, thoughtful caution.
Discussion
Inclusion seems most successful when the teacher engages willingly and feels positively about including students with unique needs (see Lapka, 2005). In Rob’s case, his disposition changed in tandem with (a) his shift to valuing student learning over performance and (b) his thinking about the value of music. At the beginning of his career, he believed music was “supplemental . . . the little rose petals on the icing on the cake” (Interview 1) but at the time of the interviews he believed music was an important subject for every student. He credited these changes to professional development from graduate classes and inservices, staying informed about research, as well as his accumulated experiences. Armed with his current disposition, teaching every child was axiomatic.
Participants’ parents’ perspectives and support were crucial to the success of these students. It was clear to the researchers that all parents who participated in the interviews were very proud of their children and their children’s accomplishments musically and otherwise. The parents’ roles included varying supports. The students reported musical experiences in the home from a young age, parents served as resources for Rob to identify student strengths and discover appropriate adaptations, and parents gave permission for social media posts that led to solutions. Therefore, this research echoes the work of Sichivitsa (2004) who found parental support of and interest in music contributed to children’s motivation to continue musical study, as well as similar work by Hourigan (2007) and Lapka (2005).
Prior experiences affected the behavior of everyone involved in the process. Interactive experience has been well-documented to be effective in preparing preservice and inservice teachers to work with learners with special needs (e.g., Hourigan, 2007, 2009; Jones, 2015; Smith & Wilson, 1999). Rob’s confidence in meeting students’ needs increased the more students he helped. Scott et al. (2007) described similar realizations by inservice teachers. Furthermore, Steve’s experience of seeing another student use a stand to support a trumpet encouraged him to use a stand as well. Additionally, the community members applied their experience in their own media to these unique challenges. Of note, neither the parents, students, nor Rob reported consulting P–12 school personnel with experience in educational adaptations (e.g., occupational therapists) in the process of helping the students with their instruments. It should also be noted that previous experience likely influences one’s ability to recognize the strengths and challenges in a given situation. Hence, because the ability to accurately determine strengths and challenges may be limited, persevering when things seem uncertain can be an important factor.
Nabb and Balcetis (2010) reported that teachers were concerned with the cost of instruments to meet the needs of students with physical limitations. This concern may also be shared by parents, indicated by FN2187’s father who worried about how they might obtain and afford a new apparatus as FN2187 grew. In the present study, all students played standard instruments using assistive devices that were provided at no cost and so were obviously more affordable than premade adapted instruments.
The positive attitudes of all involved seemed invaluable. Rob adopted an open, positive attitude that allowed him to view the whole child rather than focusing solely on a perceived deficit. He supported students’ agency in decision making and approached endeavors with a “we’re going to be learning together” (Rob, Interview 2) attitude. Furthermore, all student participants found Rob funny and enjoyable to work with. The students’ care for Rob perhaps influenced their desire to pursue and persist in instrumental music.
In her investigation, Sichivitsa (2004) stated “the value that students placed on music was a single, strong, direct predictor of their musical intentions” (p. 35). For our participants, it is possible the value the student placed on learning a specific instrument was connected to the students’ motivation to persist with that instrument. Crispy was clear that he was only interested in trumpet; Steve and FN2187 took a less exclusive stand. Perhaps FN2187 and Steve had an interest in participating in instrumental music for other reasons beyond the instrument itself.
Last, this study shed further light on the notion of just how disabling the standard design of musical instruments can be for students with varying needs, a sentiment echoed by Bell (2014). In his discussion of the limitations posed by the guitar for a student with Down syndrome, Bell noted that the thickness of the guitar neck seemed to hinder the student’s ability to successfully fret while strumming. We believe scholars should continue to highlight the ways in which standard, often taken-for-granted practices can exclude otherwise interested and capable individuals.
Implications for Music Teaching and Learning
Teachers and researchers should not assume the findings of this study could be transferred to other situations. However, teachers may consider using information gleaned from these participants to inform decisions in similar situations. Below, we offer suggestions for music teachers based on our emergent themes that we hope contribute to existing resources and support teachers and students’ learning.
Build Knowledge and Gather Experiences
Teachers should endeavor to learn as much as they can about assisting students with physical differences. Most important, teachers should listen to the voices of learners and their families and seek to understand students’ points of view about their capabilities, preferences, desires, strategies that have worked in the past, and challenges. One means of gaining experience in this area can be working with aging populations—for example, New Horizons ensembles—as this population can typically articulate the challenges they have acquired and solutions they have found in their daily lives.
Supporting all learners is a journey. Rather than using a deficit model to guide instructional decisions, teachers should focus on students’ capabilities in partnership with the students and their families as much as possible. By embracing the journey, teachers focus on capitalizing on strengths to overcome potential barriers. Furthermore, teachers should consider resources that exist in the community that could be a source of support. By recognizing strengths and challenges initially and as they change over time, all parties may be better able to successfully overcome obstacles to allow music to (continue to) be accessible for all.
Strive Toward Student-Centered Goals Even When the Outcome Seems Uncertain
A music teacher who adopts a philosophy that recognizes the value of music for all learners may be more likely to remain open to new experiences and outside support. Simply put, persevering toward desires in the face of uncertainty, calls for the teacher to continue working toward what the student wants even when stakeholders are unsure of the outcome. To do this, teachers must invest time to understand the student (e.g., desires, preferences, and abilities), develop solutions with the student, and continue to monitor progress. While some instruments may appear to be initially easier, helping the student play an instrument of their choosing can provide many benefits. Children with physical differences may be used to figuring it out as they go; accustomed to both successes and setbacks along the journey. The teacher should adopt this same attitude and join learners in this vulnerable space of discovery.
Collaborate
Collaboration can happen in many ways and can benefit the teacher and the student. The most important place to begin collaborative efforts appears to be directly with the students and families to understand interests, strengths, and previous experiences. Students with physical differences may be used to working with others and sharing their stories and may even be more comfortable than the teacher in this regard. Collaborating with community members and support personnel can inspire ideas to help stakeholders uncover solutions. Watching performances or viewing online videos of individuals with physical differences can provide additional resources and inspiration. Resharing videos posted by students’ parents online could serve to assist other students and teachers, while also soliciting additional outside assistance. Of course, acquiring permission from families is warranted prior to sharing or reaching out for assistance.
Ensure Appropriate Materials Are Provided
The importance of assistive devices for the students in the current investigation cannot be overstated. The assistive devices allowed these learners to play the instruments of their choosing and may have instilled a greater desire to persevere during the process. Using strategies listed above, teachers can become familiar with available assistive technology, as well as current technology such as 3D printers and other tools that could assist learners with physical differences in playing instruments. 2 It may be necessary for students to be temporarily without their instruments and/or assistive devices. Therefore, teachers could consider alternatives for participation such as encouraging the student to play a secondary instrument, arrange or compose music, or mentor others. As the cost of some materials may be prohibitive to families, music teachers can also try to ensure materials are included in a student’s individualized education program if possible. We suggest collaborating with special education and related service professionals (e.g., occupational therapists) toward this end.
Implications for Future Research
This investigation depicts a need for future research examining the personal experiences of students with physical differences in music settings. Future researchers could endeavor to share the experiences of individuals of varied genders, who attend low-income schools, and/or from ethnically and racially diverse backgrounds. Further examining the musical journeys of older students (e.g., high school or college) and professionals with physical challenges could also be informative. Interviewing the student participants in the current investigation nearer to high school graduation could serve that function and provide an examination of their musical journeys over time. Finally, researchers can continue to examine the roles of internal and external factors on exceptional students’ enrollment and persistence in instrumental music.
Conclusions
Every child deserves the chance to explore and develop their musical interests by playing instruments in school. Therefore, teachers should act as facilitators to help students achieve personal goals. The implications listed above can be considered suggestions for teachers who have a current student or provide preparation so teachers will be prepared to teach future students. These actions, among others, can help ensure students have the necessary access, materials, and experiences they need to succeed.
While meeting the needs of learners with physical differences in instrumental music may seem daunting, we believe effectively adapting instruction to meet the needs of one’s learners mirrors the process of good teaching. Teachers must be comfortable sitting in ambiguity, open to listening to students and families, persistent when the outcome seems uncertain, and humble in seeking assistance. To do so, teachers need to devote the time and attention necessary to know students as individuals, be willing to meet them where they are, and to make the journey together. As such, teachers must provide students choices and listen to their voices to ensure their needs and desires are properly honored.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the work of undergraduate research assistant Julia Grossmann who provided valuable work and support to this project.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article: Research efforts were supported in part by the President’s Fund for Undergraduate Research Grant at The Pennsylvania State University. Funds supported an undergraduate research assistant, acknowledged above.
