Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 1

Research Rationale & Paper

Rationale

The purpose of this paper is to explore how group improvisation and collaborative
composition activites in the music classroom may facilitate what Woodford (2005) and
Lederach (2005) call “moral imagination” (p. 86) and what Nodding (2010) expresses as
“moral interdependence [and] caring relations” (pp. 3, 6). Because group improvisation
and collaborative composition lends itself to generative, dynamic, and dialectical
processes, it is an appropriate setting in which to entertain empathy, compassion, respect,
and care. It is also a welcoming approach to exploring so-called moral education. Far too
often and for far too long, educators have been burdened with the task of teaching
morality in didactic, abusive, and culturally insensitive ways. Evolving the 21st-century
music classroom into a cooperative learning space where diversity, inclusion, and the
voices of other, serve as rich reservoirs of experiences to be drawn upon, reflected on,
valued, and shared is our responsibility as educator-citizens of change. It is in these
spaces that the educative possibilities for modeling moral imagination are ripe.

Introduction

In her recent “anti-bullying” address to the United Nations General Assembly,

United States First Lady Melania Trump said, “Our choices on how we raise and educate

our children will in fact provide the blueprint for the next generation…[so] we must teach

each child the values of empathy and communication that are at the core of kindness,

mindfulness, integrity, and leadership which can only be taught by example” (San Diego

Union Tribune). 1 While on the surface these words may sound promising -- endorsing

education’s formative role in developing compassionate citizenry, embracing the

collective we (i.e. parents, advocates, community) in the struggle towards equity,

inclusion, and equality, and espousing principles core to humanitarian ideals -- I find it

necessary to trouble the waters.

Entangled in Mrs. Trump’s plea are notions of “moral truths,” “moral clarity,”

and “moral conscience.” In fact, the word moral was employed six times in her seven-

minute spiel, leaving one to wrestle with the questions: What is moral truth, clarity, and

conscience? Whose moral truth, clarity, and conscience should be instilled? Whose
 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 2

children shall be subject to these? How shall these moralities be disseminated, and to

what end?

Problematic also is Mrs. Trump’s appeal to educators to educate the “leaders of

tomorrow.” She states, “Show me your civic lessons of today, and I will show you your

civic leaders of tomorrow. Show me your history lessons of today, and I will show you

your political leaders of tomorrow. Show me the loving bonds between your families

today, and I will show you the patriotism and moral clarity of your nation tomorrow.”

Are Mrs. Trump’s “civic and history lessons” fodder for critical debate about current

political, social, and educational policies that cripple, terrorize, and dismember large

portions of black and brown peoples in cities across the globe? Do these lessons

investigate, critique, or interrogate the vast “opportunity deserts…isolated places for

disposable people” (Glaude, p. 23) trapped in “the oppressive lethargy of choicelessness”

(Adichie, p. 34)? Or, are these lessons shrouded in a “thick fog of unreality” (Glaude, p.

3), emitting toxic acrid fumes, glorifying and civilizing savagery and free market

meritocracies, monumentalizing the despotic terrorists who have been dubbed founders

and leaders of the free world? Is not the ability to critically engage with others and

regularly reflect on how our attitudes and actions impact one another desired traits for

tomorrow’s leaders opposed to blind and static patriotism?

Mrs. Trump continues: “If we do not advocate a love of country to our

children…why would [they] grow up to fight for their country’s founding principles and

moral truths?” Are the founding principles of American democracy that strategically

butchered Native Americans, legally defined African-Americans as three-fifths a person,

 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 3

and demoted women to second-class citizens, the moral truths Mrs. Trump wants

educators to espouse and children to ingest and defend with their lives?

Though, Mrs. Trump’s rhetoric positions education and educators as key players

in developing children’s sense of morality, she does not articulate how this should be

accomplished. However, the underlying assumption is that prescriptive “moral truths”

should be administered. Typically, prescriptive measures do not create or sustain the

kinds of dialogue necessary to enact peaceful relations. They are didactic and anchored in

someone else’s belief of how one should or should not act. This makes it difficult, if not

impossible to lead children to their own understanding of empathy, care, and compassion.

Thus, the job of teaching morals is a slippery slope and familiar road educators have tread

before.

Education/MusED: Ethics, morality, and the moral imagination

Tasking education and educators with the responsibility of moralizing society’s

youth is nothing new. Inspired by his belief that the welfare of a country depends on the

moral cultivation of its people, and that such virtues can be learned, Confucius’s dutiful

disciples crystallized his discourses in the Analects (479 BC). The philosophy conveyed

throughout this text served as a guide to produce ethical leaders who were virtuous,

righteous, loyal, filial, and showed consummate integrity in all things. The Greek

gymnasium served as an institutional center where philosophers and sophists could

debate and informally instruct young athletes in morals and ethics. Plato’s Socratic

dialogue, the Republic (380 BC), sought to redirect young souls’ gaze to intellectual,

ethical, and moral virtues. 2 Both approaches, however, were prescriptive in their

approaches. Morals, ethics, and virtues were something decided for individuals to follow.
 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 4

In more recent history, constructivist and progressive approaches to the

development of morals were considered. Educator-philosopher John Dewey contributed

his opinions on traditional morality and ethics instruction, furnishing The Moral

Principles in Education (1909). In it he argues for naturalistic and intuitive metaethics of

value judgments based on “observation, reflection, imagination, judgment, and affective

responses to what we observe and think [whose] essential function is to guide conduct”

(pp. 1, 4). Extending this line of reasoning into the field of music and music education,

Woodford (2012) harmonizes constructivist education philosophy with democratic

pedagogical principles suggesting “music education should be reconceived as a study in

social intelligence” wherein educators inculcate moral imagination” (p. 86). Noddings

(2010) echoes this sentiment, emphasizing the teachers’ role in modeling “caring and

moral interdependence” (p. 4). She says, “caring relations…provide the best foundation

for moral education [as] teachers show students how to care, engage them in dialogue

about moral life, supervise their practice in caring, and confirm them in developing their

best selves” (p. 6). It is empathetic engagement with students that educes moral

development, making it an act of reciprocity, or what Higgins (2012) refers to as an “act

of hospitality” (p. 144). Constructivist and democratic approaches to moral training are

dialectical and facilitate the space for young people to practice being humane.

Woodford’s “moral imagination” envisions music education as a space for “self-

examination, reflection, and mutual growth – which can motivate conversation” (p. 18)

and cultivate the “personal skills, dispositions, virtues, and attributes needed to mindfully

engage in public criticism of musical values” (p. 86). What is moral imagination, and

how can we cultivate it in our music classroom communities?

 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 5

Lederach (2005) elucidates Woodford’s notion of moral imagination by posing a

question he calls “simple and endlessly complex” (p. 5) – How do we transcend the

cycles of violence that bewitch our human community while still living in them? This, I

believe, is at the heart of humanity’s desire to pursue ‘moral clarity,’ or a moral compass

to guide our ability to live together peacefully on our planet. “The moral imagination,”

according to Lederach, “requires the capacity to imagine ourselves in a web of

relationships that includes our enemies; the ability to sustain a paradoxical curiosity that

embraces complexity without reliance on dualistic polarity; the fundamental belief in and

pursuit of the creative act; and the acceptance of inherent risk of stepping into the

mystery of the unknown that lies beyond the far too familiar landscape of violence” (p.

5). These four facets mirror the creative process, and can be witnessed in group

improvisation and collaborative composition. Drawing from my observations and

experiences facilitating such activities, I will illustrate ways young people construct

meaning from their musical experience, and in doing so, employ aspects of moral

imagination.

Web of relationships

Central to group improvisation and collaborative composition is one’s capacity to

listen and respond to multiple motives that emerge. These motives, or voices, are often

dissonant, particularly at the beginning of the musical journey. It may seem that this

dissonance is out of place or does not belong. However, as participants collaborate to

make musical meaning, they find ways to integrate this dissonance. They discover that

tension is an important element in a composition because it serves to thwart expectation,

heighten anticipation, and excite release. Suspensions, minor seconds, quartertones, and
 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 6

tri-tones are not enemies to consonance, but necessary complements. The complex web

of relationships entertained throughout the creative process is captivating, frustrating, and

fulfilling: participants realize how to weave seemingly clashing tones into a sensuous

tapestry of sound. How participants arrive is a practice in moral imagination. Sitting

around, what I call the Sound Table, I have observed adolescents vociferously engage in

musical debates about which notes belong where, what instruments sound better, and who

should play louder or softer, and why. Because group improvisation and collaborative

composition is about realizing intention and creating musical meaning as a community,

contrasting voices must be entertained. Participants practice active listening and when

disagreements (i.e. tensions) occur, they employ the art of negotiation. The Sound Table

is a “deterritorialized space” (Higgins, p. 150) that encourages convergent and divergent

thinking – both of which are necessary for composition and improvisation (Hickey, p. 8)

and for real world citizenry. As participants imagine themselves in this complex web of

sound relationships, they are confronted with their own moral responsibility to listen and

learn from one another and ultimately to respect and embrace difference.

Paradoxical curiosity

The dominant tonic relationship is fundamental to western music. The familiar

sound sets up landmarks in a composition, allowing listeners to trace theme, exposition,

development, and so forth. While this harmonic function relies on dualistic polarity, it is

the interplay between multiple chordal progressions, polyrhythmic patterns, and

syncopated surprises that make a composition alluring as harmonic and rhythmic

alliances are shaped. Participants in group improvisation and collaborative composition

sessions are challenged to explore multiple ways of playing with time and sound. It is this
 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 7

paradoxical curiosity that drives rhythmic and motivic development. Inverted themes,

retrogrades, contrapuntal lines, and other variations make a seemingly dualistic

relationship pluralistic. As participants wrestle with “what sounds right,” they find that

subjectivity is at play as each member in the group hears music differently. Grappling

with the notion that there is no right or wrong musical idea redirects participant’s

attention towards solution-oriented approaches based on conundrums. Solving musical

puzzles together allows participants opportunity to engage their moral imagination as

they make “music outside the lines” (Hickey, 2012) and in so doing, see the “what if”

rather than the “as is” (Dolan, “Feet” 515). This is most noticeable when participant’s

share from their Sound Journals – a weekly diary of collected sounds from their

environment. What may at first seem “just a noise” (e.g. rattling keys, dogs barking,

sirens, water dripping, etc.) when reimagined as musical material opens participant’s

minds to innovative ways of hearing and employing familiar sounds. Familiarity may

breed comfort, and comfort can often stiffen into complacency – a seeing (and hearing)

the world in black and white. Group improvisation and collaborative composition can

disrupt dualistic thinking because the rules of engagement necessitate diversity and

require dynamic interdependence.

Pursuit of the creative act

Creating is a necessary human activity. In the creative act we participate in the

process of becoming. Group improvisation and collaborative composition is a

strategically sound and practical place to realize moral imagination because it promotes

dialectical play, reflection, critique, and intrigue. Participants are immersed in designing

and arranging sound structures, birthing something newly imagined by a specific group
 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 8

of people, in a specific time and place, and with a specific intention. As with every birth,

there is pain, joy, effort, elation, tension and release. In addition, group improvisation and

collaborative composition mirror a core tenet of cultural democracy in that members are

coming from diverse musical, social, and intellectual backgrounds. Drawing from each

other’s strengths, participants are crossing borders as they actively experiment and

engage in the “circulation of opinions, ideas, and artistic expression” (Balkin, 2016, p.

1055). As Graves (2004) reminds us, democracy itself is an experiment, and the “ongoing

process of cross-fertilization is part of what keeps cultures and communities dynamic and

healthy” (p. 15). Wading these waters is not always easy as currents may be rough,

murky, and messy. Often the direction of where a composition “is going” is unclear.

However, once participants have crossed to the other side, their perspectives necessarily

shift. Their journey through unknown and strange terrains of sound, rhythm, melody, and

harmony bands them together. These border crossings are an essential and enlightening

elemental force in group improvisation and collaborative composition activities.

Stepping into the mystery

Participants in group improvisation and collaborative composition activities stand

at the precipice of the unknown. Fear is often triggered as risks are taken. In this

environment, facilitators who model moral imagination and show genuine care and

empathy can help diminish participants’ apprehensions. As Higgins and Campbell note,

“facilitation is concerned with encouraging open dialogue among different individuals

with differing perspectives… Facilitators offer routes toward suggested destinations and

are ready to assist if the group journey becomes lost or confused, but they are always

open to the possibility of the unexpected that results from individuals and their
 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 9

interactivity with the group” (Higgins & Campbell, 2012, p. 7). Valuing and validating

participants’ choices in the creative act takes the pressure off and demonstrates that every

voice matters. A continuous feedback loop between participants and facilitator creates an

environment where musical ideas can be taken in and tried. Which themes stay, which

ones get integrated into other sections, how one motif or rhythm plays well here but not

there, or sounds better when crossed with another – these are all elements the composer is

faced with. These creative decisions are amplified in group improvisation and

collaborative composition sessions, making this form of musicking a dynamic and

dialectical process wherein the moral imagination is lit. Group improvisation and

collaborative composition ignites imagination, advances agency, and promotes the ability

for participants to find, validate, and value their unique contribution to the greater whole.

When we begin to hear and listen closely to our environment, we broaden our

understanding of the forces at play in our society. As we allow music to reach us and

teach us “across the senses” (Kerschner, 2016) we unravel the mystery of the unknown

and are more apt to take risks.

Conclusion

I argue that the didactic “teaching” of morals, as espoused by Mrs. Trump, is a

hand-me-down tactic, and is itself an immoral act, as the morals being peddled are worn

and ragged, tethered with patriarchal tendencies that promote assimilation and blind

conformity. Believing morals, ethics, virtues, and values to be static immovable truths,

many zealots of moral teaching practice prescriptive methods, leaving little room for

individual and collective experience and expression. Squeezed out of most moral-driven
 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 10

standardized curricula are the creative and imaginative potentialities present in a

classroom community.

Modeling moral imagination through creative, constructive, and compassionate

conversation has a greater impact than does didactic practice, and significantly reduces

feelings of alienation, anger, and other deleterious forces currently hurting humanity. As

Damasio & Damasio (2006) assert, “It is simply not possible to mandate children and

adolescents to behave morally” (p. 12). It didn’t work for Mrs. Reagan’s “Just Say No”

anti-drug campaign, and it won’t work for Mrs. Trump’s “leaders of tomorrow.” Moral

behavior sits in the social-emotional processes of our being, and is “acquired gradually in

the setting of examples, accompanied by reflection and exercise over certain problems,

over their possible solutions and over their consequences” (p. 12). Group improvisation

and collaborative composition lends itself to this kind of dynamic and dialectical

processes, and thus is an appropriate setting in which to entertain empathy, compassion,

respect, and care.

One’s capacity to engage with and mold the materials of music (e.g., sound,

rhythm, melody, dynamics, etc.), individually and collectively, correlates to her capacity

to listen, learn, experience, and contribute her unique perspective with the greater

community in mind. As such, the implications for music education are bright, for “we are

positioned to address the broader educative goal of democratic inquiry and critique"

(Benedict, 2010, p. 12) and we have at our disposal the fundamentals of moral

imagination – the right to be musical, and the freedom to exercise that right in pursuing a

just, kind, and caring world.

 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 11

Works Cited

Adichie, Chimamanda Ngozi. Americanah. New York: Anchor, 2014.

Balkin, J. (2016). Cultural democracy and the first amendment. Northwestern University

Law Review, 110 (5).

Benedict, C. Defining Ourselves as Other: Envisioning Transformative

Possibilities in (Ed. Carol Frierson-Campbell) Teaching Music in the Urban

Classroom – A Guide to Survival, Success, and Reform. Vol. 1 (3-13). Oxford

University Press, 2007.

Damasio A. & Damasio H. (2006). “Brain, Art and Education” – paper presented at the

UNESCO Conference on Arts and Education

Dewey, J. Moral Principles in Education. Houghton Mifflin Company, 1909.

Glaude, E. S. Democracy in black – How race still enslaves the American soul. New

York: Broadway Books, 2016, 2017.

Graves, James B. Cultural Democracy – The Arts, Community & the Pubic Purpose.

University of Illinois Press, 2005.

Hickey, M. Music outside the lines – Ideas for composing in K-12 classrooms.

Oxford University Press, 2012.

Higgins, L. (2012). Community music in theory and practice. Oxford University Press

Higgins, L. & Campbell, P.S. Free to be musical – Group improvisation in music.

MENC: The National Association for Music Education, 2010.

Kerchner, J. Music across the senses: Listening, learning, and making

meaning. Oxford University Press, 2014.

 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 12

Lederach, J.P. The Moral Imagination – The Art and Soul of Building Peace. Oxford

University Press, 2005.

Noddings, N. (2005). ‘Caring in education’, the encyclopedia of informal education,

www.infed.org/biblio/noddings_caring_in_education.htm.

Woodford, P. Democracy and music education: Liberalism, ethics, and the politics of

practice. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2005.

1 http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/the-conversation/sd-melania-

2 Plato, Republic, 518 b-d

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.016
8%3Abook%3D7%3Apage%3D518
 Modeling Moral Imagination in MusED thru GICC 13