Notes from the first meeting of the CMS MIHE Committee

January 16, 2008 in CMS

The first meeting of the College Music Society Music In Higher Education Committee took place on Friday, November 16, 2007, at 7:30 a.m. in the Grand America Hotel in Salt Lake City, Utah

 

http://cmsmihe.wordpress.com

 

Committee Members:

Laurence Kaptain, Shenandoah Conservatory, Chair

Sara Adams, Madisonville Community College

Nancy Cochran, Southern Methodist University

Miranda Crispin, Vincennes University

David Myers, Georgia State University

Robert Peavler, Indiana University Pennsylvania (Absent)

James Shrader, Valdosta State University

Jeffrey Stannard, Lawrence Conservatory

Betty Anne Younker, University of Michigan

 

 

The Committee Mission was reaffirmed:

The mission of the College Music Society’s (CMS) Committee on Music in Higher Education is to; (1) provide liaison between music associations with higher education associations, (2) convey the essential need for a communications plan that demonstrates the success of music programs in higher education, (3) articulate the changing roles of music units, and (4) advocate for maintaining the artistic and educational integrity of music programs.

 

 

Committee goals identified at meeting:

Create an action plan for two areas of focus using SMART goals:

Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Realistic, Relevant, Results-Oriented, Timely, Time-bound

Meet 2-3 times between November 2007 and August 2008.

 

Continue discussion online through the committee blog. (http://cmsmihe.wordpress.com) and a special interactive networkling site being established on ning.com.

 

Topics of discussion at this meeting

 

1.    The need for refined assessment, communication, and evaluation in order to demonstrate value of music units.

 

2.    The need to design guidelines to maintain integrity of our units while showing our value.

 

3.    The difficulty of large research schools in attaining necessary budget and attention for music units.

 

4.    Arts programs are not always successful in conveying their value/worth in a way that is palatable to administration.

 

5.    Music areas struggle to defend the necessity of music courses in general education.

 

6.    The difficulty of presenting measurable, visible outcomes.

 

7.    Music units are self-conscious about their role in academy and not always able to translate what they do to researchers and administration.

 

8.    The struggle of making work transparent in a way that demonstrated worth/value to higher education and making programs as visible as possible.

 

9.    The effect of the business model on academia as it becomes widespread in assessment and accreditation standards.

 

10. The need to be proactive in demonstrating how we (music units) are similar to other programs and balancing this with talking in a direct way with how we are unique.

 

11. Using the very public face of music units as leverage. (Example that many donors enjoy attending concerts, not watching chemistry experiments.)

 

 

12. Learning to use the necessary jargon and to educate peers, assessment bodies, etc… without changing what we do.

 

13. The need to value this process in our own review/evaluation of faculty so that faculty and students are encouraged to embed accessible assessment and evaluation in our curricula.

 

14. Teaching the processes of review, evaluation, and community involvement by example and embedding them into our programs.

 

15. Three (intrinsically linked) assessment areas; (1) Student/Teaching Assessment, (2) Faculty Assessment (as in for promotion/tenure), and (3) Program Assessment (subsumes areas 1 and 2).

 

16. The concern that peer evaluation is on the books but not being practiced.

 

17. Using Peter Selden’s work on portfolios as a reference. Online chat with Selden?

 

18. Teaching/facilitating student’s self-reflection. (Students often making decisions in search of teacher approval.)

 

19. Blogs are on the rise for online discussion and courses (rather than Blackboard).

 

20. Using www.ning.com for courses. Private blog/social networking site that allows students to see each other’s work. The observation was made that student writing improves when their peers see their work.

 

21. Valdosta Symphony Orchestra website uses a blog to solicit reviews from concert attendees. Roughly 1,000 unique visitors to site to date. Used to track data and connect with community. (http://valdostasymphonyorchestra.blogspot.com/)

 

22. Using the Cultural Belief Model and Brand Identity (attach or paste diagrams below) to inform others of the committee’s purpose.

 

23. The question of community engagement with regard to the CMS MIHE Committee and our music units need examination in the context of higher education.

 

24. Committee members will gather successful models that can be used in crafting our presentation of programs to administration and catalogue them on the CMS MIHE blog.

 

25. The committee determines its own mission and responsibility to the CMS.

 

26. Changing societal needs are dictating new directions in music units and community outreach.

 

27. Students are entering music schools with a very entrepreneurial interest in music. They are often less focused on large ensemble participation and are looking for alternative experiences. Student too often seeks study in music education music education but do not necessarily look at teaching as a career.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Laurence Kaptain, Shenandoah Conservatory, Chair