Musical Futures
30% of secondary teachers surveyed as part of this review reported that Musical Futures has had a significant, positive impact on music learning in their schools.
Musical Futures has been the subject of a number of surveys and research enquiries over the last 10 years, including a major longitudinal study carried out by the Institute of Education[46. Hallam, S. et al. (2011) ‘Musical Futures: A case study investigation’, report from Institute of Education University of London for the Paul Hamlyn Foundation]. The MF team themselves have consistently engaged in active dialogue with teachers, both to refine the programme and to evaluate the impact of MF on pupils, schools and teachers. For this review, specific MF questions were included in the online survey, and all interviewees were asked to comment on their knowledge and experience of MF.
The online survey showed that 73% of secondary teachers were aware of MF, with 34% using it regularly, and 30% of those total respondants reporting that the programme has made a significant and positive impact on the quality of music learning in their schools. This finding chimes with the anecdotal feedback from MF Champion Teachers and other review contributors, and supports the 2011 Institute of Education finding that:
“Musical Futures has the potential to enhance pupil motivation in relation to music and enhance the quality of teaching and learning.”
Musical Futures Champion Teachers are clear that MF has impacted on the status of music in their schools, as well as providing a model for shared learning (between teachers), collaborative working and reflective practice. They value the online ‘buzz’ and national presence of MF, and believe that is has helped them to position MF in their schools, with pupils’ outcomes improving and the status of music as a subject thus being raised.
MF is also recognised as having pioneered links between community musicians – and their democratic, learner-centred strategies – and schools. Ten years ago, community musicians and teachers saw their work as quite distinct, and the notion of synthesising practices in the way that MF has was radical and innovative. It has had a significant impact on practitioners and perceptions.
“…there is every good reason why Musical Futures has become a flagship of PHF work. It really appealed to – and was understood by – community musicians….I think before MF there were far fewer strong connections between community musicians and schools. Musical Futures came along and we could see affinity of practice – music making being the core of classroom experience.”
MF values and principles are precisely aligned with the over-riding need for teacher-led innovation to improve the quality and reach of schools-based music that this review highlights. Specifically, MF can make a valuable contribution to addressing the key challenges described earlier in the review in respect of teacher CPD, curriculum and pedagogy and retention/progression.
MF is arguably one of the largest single providers of CPD for teachers in the UK. Since 2006 MF has delivered 300 CPD days to approximately 3,200 delegates across the UK with the majority of those attending training stating they intend to use MF in their classroom practice, and the MF rubric TAKEUSE- INNOVATE-SHARE speaks directly to the issue of teacher CPD and dissemination of best practice. There is strong evidence that MF contributes1. to enhanced professional satisfaction and teaching confidence in those who use it regularly, and the peer-to peer, hands-on nature of the training builds professional networks and relationships that extend beyond the training days themselves through the dynamic social media platform that is becoming a hallmark of the MF training approach. The MF strategy for engaging teachers in peer learning and professional networks has much to offer the wider sector as a model for development.
MF’s dialogic, learner-centred approach and characteristic focuses on young people’s own musical interests to offer a distinctive model of inclusive pedagogy. The mix of aural learning, composition, improvisation and performance is clearly effective as a strategy for motivating and engaging learners, and could be applied more widely; there is a tendency for MF to be understood as synonymous with pop and rock music, but that need not – and should not – be the case.
Musical Futures has played a significant role in demonstrating effective learner-led strategies, but it’s important to not to assume that Musical Futures is the right choice for all students.
“A lot of the assumptions around Musical Futures are wrong – that it’s just about letting people get on with rock and pop…. many people just don’t do the homework to go and find out what it really is….Musical Future has helped a lot in terms of teaching music musically – it now needs to evolve with the times….the language may need to be different than it was four or five years ago. There is a danger of teachers regarding it as an ‘initiative’ – how do you embed that in your practice? It isn’t good when schools say ‘we’re a Musical Futures school’ – that limits pupil choice and pupil voice.”
MF has demonstrated new and novel ways of integrating technology into the classroom, most recently through the Find Your Voice initiative, and there is much scope for, and interest in, extending these ideas further. MF can also provide a bridge between schoolbased experience and private musical passions, supporting progression and retention in music. There is mounting evidence that where students have participated consistently in Musical Futures in Years 8 and 9, take up of Music GCSE and results at KS4 in music are significantly higher than the national average2.
Furthermore, there was a widely held view amongst review contributors with experience of MF that where implemented with expertise and care, Musical Futures has had particular benefit for young people otherwise not well-engaged in music, nor learning more generally. It provides an excellent platform for inclusion. There are examples of schools where it is had a profound impact on whole-school music culture.
There were also questions and reservations about MF from some sources. However, a number of the challenges teachers report in using MF – difficulty of managing several small groups simultaneously, lack of resources, discomfort with facilitative role – are challenges for any unconfident music teacher who tries to make meaningful music with students, so are unlikely to be restricted to MF. There is general agreement that – like all pedagogies – when badly implemented, the outcomes for pupils are not strong. It is sometimes seen as a pop/rock module, rather than a pedagogical strategy – some schools ‘do’ MF for six weeks, and then move on to ‘do’ something else. Therefore, it is important for the MF team to continue to take a proactive, rigorous approach to training and quality guidance, so that bad MF practice doesn’t take root.
There are many interesting areas of further investigation for MF – development of the teacher CPD programme and online networking, and the wider sharing/ application of those principles; detailed exploration of what happens when MF principles are implemented through a wider variety of musics; extension of the Find Your Voice / technology work; exploring application of MF principles to other Key Stages, and more.
An independent Musical Futures would have an invaluable role to play in helping address the key issues that need to be resolved to advance music education.