Share your Fieldwork

The primary aim of Outreach Ethnomusicology is to share fieldwork research. Below is a list of items that are included for view by members of the community. 

Some of these articles are official documents of research which have been submitted to university departments, so they are set "not viewable" by the public, only registered members of outreach can view them. But, we welcome all sorts of articles within the interests of ethnomusicology, so please get in touch if you have something that might interest us.

If you would like to include some of your work, please let us know, and/or submit some of your research to our mailbox. Our contact address is info [at] o-em [dot] org. When we receive documents, we usually will have a full read through, and then reply with suggestions on how to edit and publish. How much exposure or access you want for your work will depend on your own needs, and we will publish or unpublish anything upon request. 

Thank you,
Patrick

 

 

Music and Smiles: Development of Social Interactions in Children with Autism through Participation in a Community Music Group

After reading Michael Bakan’s research, I decided to use a qualitative ethnographic style of data collection in order to reflect the children’s unique experiences with their community music sessions. Child-centered ethnography provided a manageable way to collect rich qualitative data. This style of data collection also allowed for a Participatory Inquiry Process (PIP) to take place as the community music group sessions progressed, because as children were observed in the music group and interviewed about their experiences, I was able to change and adapt the group sessions to fit their needs and desires. Community, School, Study Sample (Subjects) 
 This research was conducted at an elementary school, located in a suburb of a large metropolitan city in California. According to the most recent census data, the community consisted of nearly 76,000 people (Census, 2010). The suburb is a generally middle class community, with a median income of $74,000 and approximately 10% of individuals living in poverty (Census, 2010).

The population is comprised of 50% Caucasians, 31.2% Asians, 11% Latinos, and 6.4% African Americans (Census, 2010.) The population of the elementary school somewhat reflects the population of the larger community. According to the most recent School Accountability Report Card (SARC) data, the students who attend the elementary school are 43% Caucasian, 19% Asian, 15% Latino, and 2% African American, with 14% percent of students identifying as two or more races (California Department of Education, 2015). 17% of the students are considered economically disadvantaged. English learners make up 19% of the school (California Department of Education, 2015).

My pilot action research project did not target the entire elementary student body. Instead, I had five small groups of students with three to four students in each group, totaling seventeen participants. Fourteen children were 1st grade students who were in general education classrooms. I also had three 4th grade participants who were in the moderate/severe autism classroom. Of my action research participants, 64% were Caucasian, 24% were Asian, and 12% were Hispanic. Ten of the participants were girls and seven were boys. Participatory Inquiry Process
 The Participatory Inquiry Process (PIP) is a way of thinking about change in schools in which individuals question what is going well and what could be improved, then set about to create positive change, and through their participation in the creation of change, alter and improve their own methods working in schools (Lewis & Winkelman, In press.)

Thus, the participatory inquiry process is an exciting dynamic way of creating hopeful and positive change in schools.

Phase One: Initiating Conversations and Identifying Challenges When I first began asking about research projects that might benefit my school, the principal and the school psychologist, had several ideas and many areas of need at the school emerged. I actually was able to engage with the staff in more than one area of research at the school, a process that helped me come to feel more integrated into the fabric of the school. However, due to a variety of time constraints, none of those projects were appropriate for this action research project.

The principal suggested that I conduct a project that involved the population with autism. She explained that as the population with autism has grown, the need for programs and interventions for children with autism has also grown. She estimated that a decade ago, there were three or four children with autism in the entire school and now there are three or four children with autism in every grade. The principal explained that she is interested in developing more intervention options for this population and gave me an amount of free reign to design the project myself. The school psychologist suggested that there was a need for social programs for children with autism at the kindergarten level. She explained that there were five inclusion children with autism diagnosis in kindergarten and that it could be positive to help encourage inclusive play between those children and their peers. Both the principal and the school psychologist were on-board with my idea of creating an inclusive community music group at the school.

Phase Two: Engaged Inquiry
 While the typical opportunities to form social relationships and connections exist at the school, (recess, free playtime, lunch time, et cetera) sometimes children with autism do not take advantage of these natural opportunities to create social connections. There are not many intervention options available to children who have difficulty making friends. Children with autism who have Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) may receive social skills training through speech therapy or sometimes through the social skills groups run by the school psychologist and school psychologist intern. These groups generally are intended to explicitly teach the social skills that children may need to make friends and while they may be enjoyable groups for some children, they are not explicitly friendship groups. That is, children are supposed to learn social skills in these groups and then go onto the playground and use their new skills to make friends.

Through my own observations and in talking with others who facilitate these social skills groups, children often make progress in learning about social skills and are able to successfully practice their skills in the counseling or speech setting. However, many children have trouble generalizing their new skills to other settings and thus may often have difficulty in forming strong and lasting friendships at school. I wanted to see more opportunities at this school for children with autism to make friends and socialize with their peers outside of whole-school recess and social skills instruction groups. Small, interest-based clubs and “lunch bunch” social groups are some examples of potentially enjoyable activities that could promote healthy connectedness for this population. Small groups may feel safer and less overwhelming for some children and provided activities may take the pressure off of socialization, allowing children to interact at their own pace. Other staff at the school have also noticed the need for children to sometimes have small, facilitated, play and social groups. As the school psychologist pre-intern, I am often asked to create these groups and am inundated with requests for children to be in them.

A community music group fit both within the needs of the school and within my established role. As it had been suggested that there was a need for social group programs at the kindergarten level, I decided to reach out to those teachers to see if they believed that some of the children in their classes could enjoy community music groups and benefit from them. I sent permission forms home with the children that were recommended for the group and I telephoned all of their parents to discuss the group in more detail. None of the permission forms were returned and parents reported that they were confused about why their children were asked to be in the group. It was apparent that while administration and teachers saw a potential area of need for social group programs at the kindergarten level, the parents of these students did not see the same need. I approached teachers from other grades to inquire about whether they felt their students would benefit and enjoy community music groups. Most of the teachers at the upper grade levels informed me that they did not want their children missing too much class time. However, the first grade teachers were interested in the project and the teacher in the moderate/severe autism class also expressed interest. This time around, I sent out permission forms to entire classrooms rather than only to specific students who were recommended by their teachers and I had a much larger number of permission slips returned.

Phase Three: Collaborative Actions
 During the community music sessions, children were encouraged to improvise with instruments, sing, write songs, and direct the music. Available instruments included harps (generously donated by the Multicultural Music Fellowship), an ukulele, a mountain dulcimer, hand drums, and shakers. These instruments were chosen because they are considered to be “high yield, low input” instruments (i.e. even though they all require considerable skill to play well, they can still be played enjoyably by individuals who have little or no musical training.) Children were free to participate as much or as little as they liked. Each group began and ended with a ritual of the whole group listening to each child play on an instrument of their choice.

During the bulk of the sessions, children were allowed to freely improvise, sing, dance, or listen. I played along with the children and followed their musical leads. Improvisation games, such as call and response with instruments and playing different emotions on the instruments were sometimes introduced. I also taught some children simple tunes at their request. A special note should be made about the use of the harp for these groups, because harp playing featured prominently in all of the music sessions and playing the harps was considered a highlight for many of the children who participated. The harp has a long history of being used as a healing instrument and is often played in hospitals and retirement centers. Additionally, with the resurgence of availability of small harps, harps are also being used more and more in community music groups with children. The bright, colorful harps (we had them in yellow, green, blue, and lavender) were particularly attractive to the children; most of the children had never seen a harp, let alone been invited to play one. Beyond their novelty value and pretty visual appearance, the harp is also very pleasing to play immediately (children almost always start by playing glissandos, which sound so thrilling on the harp). The musical attractiveness of the harp for a beginning student means that children can feel musically successful on the harp almost immediately. Additionally, because I play the harp, I was able to use the harp to back the children as they played music, providing musical foundation and support for their exploration.

I was able to form five small community music groups, four of which were first grade groups and one group was comprised of fourth grade students from the moderate/severe autism class. Initially, I had wanted to create mixed groups of children with autism and neurotypical children, but due to scheduling conflicts, this was not feasible and the groups were unfortunately kept separate. Each group met for a half hour during school hours and on school grounds. One group was able to meet only one time, three groups met for four sessions, and a fifth group met for eight sessions. I used an anthropological/ethnomusicological framework for collecting data.

By collecting data through ethnographic interviews, observations, and participation in the music group with the children, I hoped to understand the children’s musical and social experiences in the group. I conducted post interviews with the children in order to understand how they felt about their musical experiences in the group and how they felt about playing music and interacting with their peers in the group. I videotaped the first and last sessions to look for qualitative change in the children’s interactions with each other. Additionally, I used a modified session rating scale (SRS) form to track the children’s feelings about their musical and social experiences (My Outcomes Tools, n.d.). On the SRS form, children were asked to answer the following three questions by coloring in a happy, medium, or sad face: “How was this session for you?” “How was it to be with your friends/peers in here?” and “How was it to make music in here?” Children were also allowed to verbally elaborate on their responses if they wanted to. Asking the children for their feedback on a daily basis, both served to convey to them that their experiences and opinions of the musical activities are valuable and also allowed me to adjust the musical sessions if necessary (Duncan, B.L et al, 2004).

Because very little practical information is available on how to facilitate a community music group, I contacted Michael Bakan (whose work I referenced in my literature review) and he was gracious enough to allow me to interview him over the phone. He suggested having a paraprofessional present during sessions with children with autism, using “high yield, low input” instruments, and limiting the availability of instruments with extremely high pitches (Bakan, M., 2016, personal communication). We also discussed how I could apply my listening and musical skills in such as way that I could enhance and honor the children’s music without taking over musically (the musical equivalent of “tracking” in play therapy) (Bakan, M. 2016, personal communication). He suggested that I follow children’s rhythms and melodies, softly echo their playing, or keep steady beats while they explored their instruments (Bakan, M. 2016; personal communication). Finally, he explained that participation should never be forced and that children may gain enjoyment from simply listening to their peers (Bakan, M. 2016; personal communication).

Gaining this information allowed me to implement community music group services in a more effective way, which reflect the current best practices of the small community music field. I hypothesized that participation in a community music group would foster social connectivity among the participating students. Research from the medical model of music therapy suggests that while social connections through music are often created in the musical environment, these skills and connections are not often generalized to other settings (Thompson, McFerran & Gold, 2013.)

Community music practitioners often take the viewpoint that while lasting change outside of the musical environment would be ideal, they also acknowledge that the joy and connections created in the musical environment should be considered valuable in and of themselves. Operating from a community music model, I was hoping to see connectivity occurring during the sessions, but would not expecting huge impacts outside of the sessions. Phase Four: Community Assessment and Reflection Each of the five groups made music very differently; they developed different music goals, had different music synergy, had different musical tastes, and had different challenges along the way. Three of the groups showed a similar musical and social trajectory- they were excited about the music groups but each individual had their own ideas for group musical goals. Some children wanted to play songs individually, some were interested in learning “real” tunes, some were interested in writing songs with lyrics, and some wanted to play percussion instruments loud and furiously, while others plugged their ears. I let the children navigate how they wanted to handle these individual goals and differences in musical taste. One of the groups preferred to have each child play separately and have a sharing circle at the end of the session in which each individual showed off what they had accomplished during the session. Another group would assign one child to be the director; the director controlled the volume of each member of the group and indicated when each group member should play.

[1] The third group worked together to assign different parts to each group member (one child played a drum; another child played a harp et cetera).
[2] The musical synergy ebbed and flowed throughout the sessions for each of these groups as each of these groups sought to find ways of making music together; sometimes they felt they were successful in coming together and other times children indicated that their group individual musical goals had not been achieved.

Minor conflict arose in all three of these groups, the most common conflict was around volume levels, with some children enjoying playing louder than others found comfortable. The children navigated this common conflict in different ways; one group appointed a volume director and another group decided to ban the loud instruments. One group had two participants who actively disliked each other. They were able to play together during the first three sessions without their bringing their outside conflict into the group, but by the fourth and final session, their interpersonal conflict was more apparent. They were able to agree to put aside the conflict by agreeing to listen to each other but not play together. During later interviews, both of these children brought up the conflict, but each stated that they did not mind playing music with the other.

On the pre-session survey, all of these children indicated that they feel included with their peers at school, indicating an already strong sense of connectedness for all of these children. On a post survey and during interviews after the group sessions had ended, ten out of eleven children from these three groups indicated that they greatly enjoyed the music sessions, while the eleventh child said that she enjoyed the sessions sometimes but not all of the time. Common responses to favorite things about the sessions were “getting to play harps,” and “getting to play the thunder machine.” All of the children stated that they enjoyed being musicians. One child stated that it was enjoyable to get to play whatever she wanted to play and not have to follow rules like in her other music classes. Another child stated that she felt being a musician was inspiring. Another girl sang her answers to all of the interview questions and composed some on the spot lyrics about how much she liked being a singer and a musician. There was variation in how group members felt about playing music with their peers- some of the children indicated that they really enjoyed playing with their peers, while others showed less enjoyment of this aspect of the group sessions. One child stated that while he enjoyed the group, he was frustrated that his peers did not have the same interest in playing “real” tunes and stated that the noise level preferences of the other children were annoying to him. On the post session survey, all of the children reported that they continue to feel included with their peers at school.

A fourth group, comprised of three first grade students- two girls and one boy, had a somewhat different musical trajectory than the other first grade groups. The children in this group showed an interest in playing together from the beginning of the sessions. In early sessions, they attempted to copy each other’s noise levels. In later sessions, they developed high musical synergy and worked together to create intricate rhythms and songs. Interestingly, as they began to work together musically, their other social interactions began to decline. They would come quietly into the room, pick up their instruments and begin playing, often without much discussion of what or how they wanted to play together. They frequently sat with their backs turned away from each other, but still successfully listened to each other and played together.[3] On a pre-session survey, two out of three of these children reported feeling included with their peers at school, the third child reported that she only sometimes feels included with her peers.

During post surveys and interviews, all three children in this group indicated high levels of enjoyment of the group and playing with their peers. All three of these children indicated that they wanted to continue playing music in some form and would not mind continuing to play with each other. The girl who had indicated that she only felt included with her peers at school “sometimes,” stated that this was still the case after the sessions were over. She stated that she felt very included with the other children during the musical sessions and had liked playing with them. The other two children reported that they continued to feel high levels of inclusion with their peers at school. Due to difficulties with scheduling and the requirement for a paraprofessional (who was often unavailable), the group of children from the moderate/severe autism classroom were only able to meet one time. This group who comprised of three boys who were all in the fourth grade. We met on a warm breezy, day and we played music outside under a tree. One boy sat quietly and listening to his peers play music. Another child played the drum when it was placed in front of him but did not reach out for any of the other instruments. The third boy enthusiastically tried all of the instruments, before settling on the harp and strumming it for the rest of the session. He and I sat together playing harps and he occasionally reached over to my harp to strum it for a second before returning to play his own again. A paraprofessional who also helped facilitate this group session stated that he believed the children responded well to the free-flowing and non-restrictive nature of community music participation. He stated that when compared to other times of the day, the children appeared happy, calm, and content while playing and listening to the music. When asked how they felt about the session, all three children indicated enjoyment of the music session.

Limitations

I think the most obvious limitation to this project was that I was unable to create a situation in which the children with autism were able to join the groups comprised of neurotypical children. Additionally, the group with children with autism only met a single time due to scheduling constraints. Therefore, the nature of this project changed drastically from my initial ideas to it’s actual implementation and the data that I obtained never did truly answer my hypothesis question. However, I still found the project valuable because I was able to learn how this group of neurotypical children navigated the community music experience and was able to briefly observe how children with autism might respond to being part of a community music group. Recommendations I think if I were to recreate this project (and I do want to!), I might consider hosting the sessions during after school hours so that children who were interested could participate during a time which was specifically set aside for community music. Additionally, in another setting, I would like to offer community music experiences continuously so that community music could become part of the fabric of the culture of the school and not just be a one-time experience opportunity.