7/28/2019 Constants and Changes in Russian Music Edu

1/6

Title:ConstantsandChangesinRussianMusicEducation

Author(s):LaurenceLepherd

Source:Lepherd,L.(1993,Fall).ConstantsandchangesinRussian

musiceducation.TheQuarterly,4(3),pp.59-63.(ReprintedwithpermissioninVisionsofResearchinMusicEducation,16(4),

Autumn,2010).Retrievedfromhttp://www-usr.rider.edu/~vrme/

It is with pleasure that we inaugurate the reprint of the entire seven volumes of The

Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning. The journal began in 1990 as The

Quarterly. In1992,withvolume3,thenamechangedto TheQuarterlyJournalofMusic

TeachingandLearningandcontinueduntil1997.Thejournalcontainedarticlesonissues

thatweretimelywhentheyappearedandarenowimportantfortheirhistoricalrelevance.

For many authors, it was their first major publication. Visions of Research in Music

Educationwillpublishfacsimilesofeachissueasitoriginallyappeared.Eacharticlewillbe

aseparatepdffile.JasonD.Vodickahasacceptedmyinvitationtoserveasguesteditorfor

the reprint project and will compose a new editorial to introduce each volume. Chad

Keilmanistheproductionmanager.IexpressdeepestthankstoRichardColwellforgranting

VRMEpermissiontore-publishTheQuarterlyinonlineformat.Hehasgraciouslyprepared

anintroductiontothereprintseries.

7/28/2019 Constants and Changes in Russian Music Edu

2/6

ConstantsAndChanges InRussianMusicEducation

By LaurenceLepherdUniversity ofSouthern Queensland

One of the most important constantsof Russian music education is thehigh standard of cultural excellence,evident for centuries intradi-tional folk music, and in artmusic sincebefore thebegin-ning of the century. It isimportant to recognise theseaccomplishments when ex-amning the current state ofmusiceducation inthatcoun-try. Notwithstanding thecriti-cismsthatmght beleveled atthe more recent repressivecommunist policies, much ofthe music of ShostakovichandKabalevsky, asexamples,were created during that pe-riod. Rostropovich flourishedduring this time, and highstandards ofmusic have con-tinued tobeachieved inrela-tive international isolation.The question that will neverbeanswered iswhether, withmore liberal policies, the ar-tistic standards would havebeen higher. Despite theacknowledged difficulties of the last 80 years,the love and high standards of Russian music,both in its folk and European forms, havecontinued.These are the constants. Aswill be dis-cussed, the changes that have occurred sincethe Russian republics' declaration of indepen-dence in 1990have had both positive andnegative aspects for music education.

ContextThe 15republics that formed the Soviet

Union asserted their independence during1990. Russia itself consistsof 16republics with acen-tral government inMoscowand has a considerable eth-nic mx throughout. Eachethnic group has itsownfolklore which exists along-side European art tradi-tions. The principalchange in context has beenthe abandonment of com-munist ideals and greaterfreedom of expression.This was heralded before1990in the term glasnost,or openness; the term isnolonger used because thesociety isnow "open."The other term prevalent

before 1990was peres-troika, or restructuring.This was loosely applied tothe fabric of society andbroadly encouraged theconcepts of democracy and

the shift of educational and societal emphasisto the development of the individual. Thisterm also isno longer used. In one sense,restructuring took place, although some callit disintegration. Others saw it as success-ful-democracy now exists, in that there isgreater opportunity for "democratisation" and"humanisation," the latter term referring tothe development of the whole, individualpersonality. Some saw perestroika as aslo-gan-one of the many that have emergedand disappeared at various times in recenthistory. Others have been grateful that a

[DJecisionmakingoccurs '-Vithin

the frarne-cvork oftraditions of

key institutions'-Vhichhavebeenoperating for

decades and areproud of theirachievements ...Radical changesinpolicy arenot,therefore, readilyentertained.

Laurence Lepberd isAssociate Professor andAssociate Dean in the Faculty of Arts, the Uni-versity of Southern Queensland, Australia.Volume IV, Number 3 59

7/28/2019 Constants and Changes in Russian Music Edu

3/6

There appears to be common agreement that all children shouldreceiveamusical education, but thedebate centres around 'whetherthe emphasis should be on developing loveand appreciation forrnusic, or onmore musical development inthe formof skillsandknowledge of theory. It ispossible that asareaction totheformallycontrolled, central fixingofaimsandobjectives, now there isalmostanoverreaction resulting inpolarised positions.more specific form of perestroika that mayhave had adverse affects on music did noteventuate. They argue that the techniquesand pedagogy of musical training have beenconstants over decades-there was no needto restructure them.Greater freedom has also meant increased

emphasis on international exchange pro-grams, for previously music educators feltisolated. The advent of glasnost translatedinto ahunger among Soviet artists for inter-national exchange-both to demonstratewith pride their own artistic achievements,and to become more aware of current inter-national trends. This potential isnow beingrealised with agreater loosening and facilityfor exchange, because there are fewer politi-cal barriers. Moreover, increasing freedom ofreligious worship continues to encourage aresurgence in choral music. The constants ofmusical traditions will continue and be stimu-lated by change, but there are some problems.

Aims of EducationThe central goal of Russian education,once stated as the desire to educate citizensfor a socialist and communist society, has be-come aloosely ascribed commtment to thedevelopment of individuals who will contrib-ute to society. The emphasis has shifted tothe individual, as distinct from the group.Two observations can be made about the

effect of this change on music education. Inthe development of musicians of the highestcalibre, many Russian music educators be-lieve that they have been emphasizing "hu-manization" for decades, despite officiallyexpressed governmental aims. Specialisationin high quality music instruction, perfor-mance, and composition has always nurturedindividual creativity and expression. On theother hand, concerning the education for the

children who are not considered to be highlytalented and who are enrolled in thegeneral schools, there is no consensus aboutthe goals of music education. Since there isnow greater freedom to develop educationalgoals in amore open society, the Ministry ofEducation indicates that all subject areasshould develop sets of goals, objectives, andcurricula. In music, there isno such set asyet, nor is there a formal mechanism in placefor its development.Debate about music education is carried on

through various semnars and publications.There appears to be common agreement thatall children should receive amusical educa-tion, but the debate centres around whetherthe emphasis should be on developing loveand appreciation for music, or on more musi-cal development in the form of skills andknowledge of theory. It is possible that as areaction to the formally controlled, centralfixing of aims and objectives, now there isalmost an overreaction resulting in polarisedpositions. More critical Russian colleaguesrefer to astate of chaos, although Rust (1992)draws attention to the existence in the Rus-sian Ministry of Education of abroad educa-tional framework that has "aclear set of con-ceptual goals and orientations" (p. 1). Thecommon element that music education col-leagues are enjoying is the freedom to ex-press their views and develop their interests.One of the most positive aspects of theserecent changes is a resurgence of traditionalRussian music. Fewer restrictions on sometraditional forms of Russian ethnic expressionhave enabled folk music to again become animportant part of the unstated aims of musiceducation. Teachers are using their newfreedoms to begin to promote more vigor-ously Russian traditional music, with the aim

60 TheQuarterlyjournal ofMusic Teaching and Learning

7/28/2019 Constants and Changes in Russian Music Edu

4/6

of reinforcing the great cultural traditions.The support of organisations such as theRussian House of Folk Artin providing sem-nars, workshops, and resources for teachersin special music and general schools (as wellas for amateur musicians) is doing much toassist this resurgence.Administration and FinanceWith the disintegration of the Soviet

Union, a layer of the top communist hierar-chy affecting the admnistration of music hasbeen abolished. With this abolition and withfreedom of expression has come the greaterability of individual organisational units tocontrol their own direction. Previously, thecentral government dictated policy and fi-nancial management. Now, in the musiccolleges, special schools, and conservatorieseach individual institution can determne itsown policies, curricula, and financial man-agement while remaining accountable to thestate. Such management is the responsibilityof each institution's governing council thatincludes staff and student representatives.This decision making, however, occurs withinthe framework of traditions of key institutionswhich have been operating for decades andare proud of their achievements-the con-stant'>of their alt. Radical changes inpolicyare not, therefore, readily entertained.It is in the financial sphere that one now

finds the greatest change in Russian musiceducation, and change that is the most nega-tive. Economc difficulties existing before1991have been exacerbated, resulting inless government funding for music educa-tion. While the more established institu-tions, designated as components of the Rus-sian national heritage, have been somewhatprotected from financial cutbacks, other fac-tors such as inflation severely affect all ofmusic education. Consequently, these insti-tutions have increased their fund-raising ef-forts by focusing on such sources as alumni,direct grants, foundations established to re-ceive gifts from sources such as graduatesresiding and performng outside Russia,sponsorships by businesses such as the Rus-sian airline Aeroflot and car manufacturers,and increasing the enrollment of interna-tional students, particularly those fromEu-rope and EastAsia. The lack of tax incen-VolumeIv, Number 3

tives to sponsors, however, inhibits contribu-tions. One of the difficulties associated withfinancial stringency is the deterioration ofbuildings and musical instruments. Thus far,staffing levels seem unaffected.Formerly fully funded by the state or dis-

trict councils, special music schools now re-ceive virtually no government funding. Thisisacritical problem. With littlemusic educa-tion available in the general schools, the spe-cial interest schools have played avital rolein providing music instruction for young mu-sicians, the most talented of whom apply toconservatory schools and colleges. Parentsmust now pay the cost of tuition at the dis-trict special interest schools. As inflationerodes the parents' ability to subsist, declin-ing enrollments threaten the future of thespecial music schools.Coupled with these factors is also the

problem of inflation in relation to the cost ofinstruments. Some institutions are rentinginstruments to students. Because fewer par-ents can now afford to purchase pianos,however, doubt is cast on the future devel-opment of piano instruction.Structure and OrganisationThe organisational structure of the school

system has not seen major changes (see Fig-ure 1). Children still begin school at the ageof 6 and progress through the generalschool, where there is littlemusic. They canchoose to have parallel music instruction indistrict special music schools (where they ob-tain music instruction for about 4-8hours perweek) or, if sufficiently talented, they can beadmtted to conservatory music schools.Very successful music students ultimatelyprogress to the uchilisches (colleges) andthence to conservatories. Admssion require-ments are stringent, and examnations are amajor factor inmaintaining enrollment status.One significant change concerns the kindof students admtted to some of the more ad-

vanced institutions. Previously, as these Rus-sian institutions were Soviet funded, adesig-nated number of places was reserved for tal-ented musicians from other Soviet Republics.Simlarly, some places were reserved for par-ticular kinds of Soviet citizens, such as thechildren of farmers. Consequently, in afewinstances themore talented students were

61

7/28/2019 Constants and Changes in Russian Music Edu

5/6

Teacher education for general schools increasingly reflects thediverse nature of the curriculurn. Three principles of teachereducation arearticulated: First,music teachers must bemusicians.Second, theyrnustbeinterested inpedagogy, Third, theyrnusthavealoveforchildren.not able to gain entry into the conservatories.The basis for admssion has now changed

so that only the most talented students areaccepted. Music students native to theformer republics are still accepted, generallyat no cost to those republics. Also in termsof admssion, the institutions are not influ-enced by the temptation to accept fee-payingstudents unless these students are also ex-ceptionally talented. Fees charged for inter-national students arevery low, particularlyby some American, British, and Australianstandards. Russian colleagues are adamantthat they are more interested in maintainingthe highest musical standards than in obtain-ing the highest funding.Russian music educators draw attention tothe unique and constant nature of student

progress within music education. Talentedchildren are identified at an early age andreceive a broad education in general schools.At the same time, district music schools pro-vide these children specialised music educa-tion through the primary and secondary levels.Then these students may enter college or aconservatory. No other subject inRussianeducation enjoys this specialised education.CurriculumThere have been major changes in the gen-

eral curriculum that all music students tookbefore 1991. At the specialised institutions,students formerly studied some sciences, hadmandatory classes inMarxism and Leninism,and some mlitary instruction. Asthese insti-tutions began to determne their own cur-ricula, science and political studies wereabandoned and replaced by agreater em-phasis on the humanities, including worldand Russian history, philosophy, and litera-ture. Military instruction has been replacedby physical education. The reduction in sci-ence and communism studies has often re-sulted in an increase in music studies, includ-ing additional music history, harmony,62

solfege, and ensemble studies. There havebeen some changes to the development oftraditional folk music. The curricula of spe-cial schools isnow more diverse, and morefolk-music students are becomng involved inresearch and categorisation of folk musics.The diversity of goals for music education

in general schools is now being encouraged.Before 1991, Kabalevsky's system was all butcompulsory in the general schools. Oftendescribed as promoting the love and appre-ciation of music, the system was developedby Kabalevsky to try to fill the gap inmusiclearning that existed for students who did notattend the district special interest schools.The Kabalevsky system has been criticised asbeing too passive and emphasising apprecia-tion rather than promoting music making,although this may have been a reflection ofthe implementation rather than Kabalevsky'sconcept. Documentation associated with thesystem (Kabalevsky, 1988, p. 51, and RSFSR,1988) demonstrates clearly that singing is avital element. The current status is that thesystem isbeing adapted and developed butis receiving far less support.Initially, the system received impetus byvirtue of Kabalevsky's authority as amusicianand composer, President of the Soviet Unionof Composers, and member of the SupremeSoviet and the Academy of Pedagogical Sci-ences. With his death and the lack of insis-tence on the maintenance of his systemthrough more liberal curriculum principles,and the lack of any individual colleaguestrongly carrying on hiswork, the system isbeing less strictly promoted. The journal heinitiated, Music in Schools (now known asArtat School), continues to assist in the develop-ment of music education, and not the Kab-alevsky systemonly. The aims associated withtraditional music are also translated into thecurriculum, together with elements of the ap-proaches developed by Orff and Kodaly.

TheQuarterlyJournal ofMusic Teachingand Learning

7/28/2019 Constants and Changes in Russian Music Edu

6/6

One advantage of the broadening of thecurriculum is the greater likelihood of thecurriculum being implemented. With a less-than-wholehearted commtment to the imple-mentation of the Kabalevsky system in thefirst place, and lack of adequate teacher edu-cation to support his system, outstanding re-sultson awide scalewere unlikely. Cementgrowth in the study of traditional folk music inschools, led by enthusiastic and commttedteachers and given appropriate regional varia-tions, ismore likely to succeed. Our Russiancolleagues are likely to develop adiverse gen-eral school curriculum over the next few years.Teacher EducationThere is little change in teacher educationfor music students wishing to teach in the

specialised music schools and colleges. For-mal pedagogy associated with individual in-strumental teaching and folk music in specialschools mostly takes place in the RussianAcademy (Gnesin's Institute) where the mu-sic training also includes psychology andteaching principles. Graduates are generallyappointed to district special interest schools.How long this will continue remains to beevaluated. Because students of these schoolsmust now pay fees, enrollment may soon falldrastically, and these teaching positions willno longer be available.Teacher education for general schools in-

creasingly reflects the diverse nature of thecurriculum. Three principles of teacher edu-cation are articulated: First, music teachersmust be musicians. Second, they must beinterested in pedagogy, Third, they musthave a love for children. Pedagogicalcourses include elements of Kodaly, Orff,and Kabalevsky, in an endeavour to train stu-dents in awide variety of methodologiesfromwhich they can select the most effectiveapproaches. The freedom associated withthe aims and curriculum content is reflectedin teacher education.ConclusionHigh standards of European-centred music

have remained constant throughout all as-pects of specialised Russian music education.The constant of unique folk music now re-ceives greater emphasis. Changing degreesof freedom should continue to enhance mu-sic teaching and learning, but the severe eco-Volume IV; Number 3

nomc problems may reduce the number ofstudents inmusic and subsequently the stan-dards. In general education there are fewconstants. Changes are taking place in aims,objectives, curricula and teacher education.It is important that Russian music educatorsdevelop some consensus regarding the goalsand objective of music education, lest morepurposeful and definitive educational inter-ests crowd out music education in the gen-eral education schools.SourcesMost of the information contained in this articlewas obtained through discussion with key personnelin music education. Among the many colleagueswho have contributed observations the author would

like to sincerely thank those listed below. Specificcomments cannot be attributed to them individually,and they mayor may not agree with all the viewsexpressed by the author or their colleagues.Vladimr Sukhanov, Deputy Rector for Foreign

Relations, Moscow ConservatoryLarisa Artinova, Director, and Alexandre Lagutin,

Vice-Principal, Moscow Conservatory MusicalCollege

Anatoly Ryabov, Deputy Director, Moscow Con-servatory Music SchoolSergey Kolobcov, Rector, Russian Academy of Mu-

sic (Gnesin's Music Institute)Mikhail Vorogeev, Director, and Avia

Kabakchieva, Deputy Director, Gnesin' sSchool and College

Oleg Galakhov, Deputy Chair, Russian ComposersUnion

Gennady Pozhidayev, Editor-in-Chief, Art atSchool

The Russian House of Folk ArtThe author would also like to thank Professor VadimP. Dyem, the Deputy Minister of Culture for Russia,for sponsoring and facilitating his recent visit. Thework of translator Yana Yakhnina is also appreci-ated. ReferencesKabalevsky, D. (1988) The basic principles andmethods of the music curriculum for the gen-

eral school. Soviet Education, 30, pp. 1, 29-58.RSFSR Ministry of Education. (988) The musiccurriculum from grade one of the fourth yearof elementary school. Soviet Education, 30,pp. 1, 94-101.Rust, V. D. (1992) ionequilibrium theory: Impli-cations for educational systems undergoingradical change in eastern Europe. Compara-tive and International Education Society Con-ference Proceedings, March, pp. 1-2.~

63