Cultural Responsiveness as Best Practice for Teaching Mariachi

Cultural Responsiveness as Best Practice: Implications for Teaching Mariachi
José R. Torres-Ramos
University of North Texas

Author Note

José R. Torres-Ramos, College of Music, University of North Texas.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to José R. Torres-Ramos, College of Music, University of North Texas, Denton TX 76203. Email: jose.torres@unt.edu

Abstract

: In recent years, mariachi ensembles have gained widespread prominence within music programs in secondary and post secondary educational institutions throughout the US. Positioning mariachi ensembles within music education reflects a larger socio-cultural shift in US demographic. Yet virtually no research from the field of music education has been produced to support the “rapidly expanding universe of educators responsible for teaching classes in mariachi to students ranging from university students [sic] to middle school beginning musicians” (Sheehy, 2006, p. xiii). Ethnomusicologist Steven Loza believes, “It is essential that we understand people in a more complete, cultural way through music, the arts … philosophical beliefs … practices … In my view, experiencing people’s musical expressions may be one of the most direct avenues to intercultural understanding” (Campbell, 1995 p. 46). Scholars have cited mariachi as a curricular example of multicultural music in the classroom (Abril, 2009; Campbell, 1995; O’Hagin, 2006). Substantial literature supports a culturally responsive approach to teaching multicultural music (Abril, 2009; Campbell, 1991, 1995; O’Hagin, 2006). The purpose of this paper is to analyze cultural responsiveness through a review of literature, as a best teaching practice, and its implications for mariachi classroom instruction. The analysis will begin by presenting the theoretical discourse on music and culture, followed by relevant research on the relationship between identity, music, and culture. This synthesis will then be posited within the politics music education contrasted against the backdrop of the mariachi tradition in order to provide implications for classroom instruction.

Introduction

“Since the 1960s mariachi music has become a legitimate area of study within the educational system” Rodríguez (2006, p. 158). In recent years, mariachi ensembles have gained widespread prominence within music programs in both secondary and post secondary educational institutions throughout the United States. Positioning mariachi ensembles within music education reflects a larger socio-cultural shift in US demographic. “Except for Mexico, ‘there are now more Latino origin people in the U.S. than there are people in Spain, Argentina, Colombia, or any other Spanish-speaking country…[In fact, our nation is experiencing] the greatest demographic transformation in the last 100 years of its history’” (Sánchez & MachadoCasas, 2009, p. 5). Music educators are seeking ways to “respond to Hispanic students’ cultures and attract them to the elective music programme” (Abril, 2009, p. 77). Yet little if any research from the field of music education has been produced to support the “rapidly expanding universe of educators responsible for teaching classes in mariachi to students ranging from university students [sic] to middle school beginning musicians” (Sheehy, 2006, p. xiii). Ethnomusicologist Steven Loza (a former band director) argues, “It is essential that we understand people in a more complete, cultural way through music, the arts … philosophical beliefs … practices … In my view, experiencing people’s musical expressions may be one of the most direct avenues to intercultural understanding” (Campbell, 1995 p. 46). Many scholars have cited mariachi as a curricular example of multicultural (world) music in the classroom (Abril, 2009; Campbell, 1995; Clark, 2005; O’Hagin, 2006; Rodríguez, 2006; Sheehy, 2006;). Substantial literature supports culturally responsiveness as an appropriate approach to teaching multicultural (world) music (Abril, 2009; Campbell, 1991, 1995; O’Hagin, 2006; Rodríguez, 2006; Sheehy, 2006;). This paper will analyze cultural responsiveness through a review of literature, as a best teaching practice, and its implications for mariachi classroom instruction. The analysis will begin by

presenting the theoretical discourse on music and culture, followed by relevant research on the relationship between identity, music, and culture. This synthesis will then be posited within the politics of music education contrasted against the backdrop of the mariachi tradition in order to provide implications for classroom instruction.

Theoretical Framing of Music and Culture

Most research studies on music of diverse cultures use the categories of “multicultural”, “world”, “non-European”, “cross-cultural”, “other” and “alternative” in order to describe styles, traditions, and teaching approaches outside mainstream Western oriented music education (Abril, 2009; Biernoff & Blom, 2002; Brittin, 1996; Chinn, 1997; Colley, 2009; Fung, 1994; Herbert, 2001; Morrison, Demorest, Campbell, Bartolome, & Roberts, 2013; O’Hagin, 2006; Shehan, 1985; Thomson, 2002). For purposes of this review of literature, all of these labels should be considered synonymous with music of diverse cultures. Green (1999) stated that, “A fundamental aspect of the sociology of music is a commitment to look at both the social organisation [sic] of music practice and the social construction of musical meaning. Otherwise … [it] will miss some of the most important and interesting characteristics of the very thing it purports to study” (p. 161). Music is a significant domain among all cultures of the world (Nettl, 1999) and thereby central to social organization. A culturally responsive approach to music instruction develops “curriculum that serves as valid and respectful representations of specific cultural groups” (Abril, 2009 p. 78). Research on the relationship between music and culture included both philosophical and qualitative discourse on race, ethnicity, gender and identity as well as empirical observations of student attitudes, perceptions and skills acquisition. Identifying shareable traits in music across cultures has its root in the 19th-century when it was fashionable to postulate the existence of universal traits of music across cultures to understand diverse

expressions of music from the monolithic, homogeneous perspective of Western European art music (Campbell, 1997). Much music education research examined music of diverse cultures in reference to Western European art music through the binary curricular positions of cultural pluralism and particularism (Yudkin, 1993). Many research studies in some cases contain overlap using one position to justify the other.

Cultural particularism approaches the study of culturally diverse music through its differences from Western music using labels such as “alternative”, “other”, “Non-Western” etc. to describe diverse cultural music in education (Abril, 2009; Brittin, 1996; Colley, 2009; Morrison et al. 2002; Shehan, 1985). Colley (2009) documented the implementation district-wide of “alternative music ensembles”, including mariachi, among K-12 music programs in Washington, Kentucky, Massachusetts and Nevada. These case studies serve as templates for training teachers to respond locally and idiosyncratically to the communities in which they work, using their individual talent, as musicians, to design and create diversified ensemble programs of high musical quality. She concluded that the “overarching goal as a profession should be to … offer [programs that are] representative of our country’s varied and rich musical heritage” (p. 57). Thompson (2002) utilized critical discourse analysis ${ }^{1}$ in order to observe the number of occurrences in which the word “other” was used by music teachers in interviews on their opinions of world music. The analysis found a binary opposition between Western and World music as an “us and them” (p.17) attitude, “with the word ‘different’ to refer to world music … [occurring] 25 times in a 30-minute interview” (p. 17). In studies of music preference, Brittin (1996) used the “music of ‘other’ cultures” (p. 328) as the title, while Shehan (1985), used “Non-Western music genres” (p. 149). Morrison et al. (2002) used the labels "own music

^[1]

culture" versus “another’s music culture” (p.363) in a study implementing cross-cultural music instruction to measure memorization of culturally unfamiliar music. Abril (2006) examined concepts of “self” and “other” (p. 77) through a case study of one teacher’s cultural responsiveness and multicultural curriculum through the establishment of a mariachi ensemble.

Cultural pluralism approaches the study of culturally diverse music through its commonalities to Western music (Yudkin, 1993). Many researchers utilized a pluralist approach to illustrate the intersection of globalization and cultural negotiation within music preference, curricular approach, and performance (Biernoff and Blom, 2002; Drummond, 2010; Fung, 1994; Herbert, 2001). Fung (1994) measured the relationship between preference of World music and attitudes on multiculturalism citing “cultural pluralism of the American Society” as a theoretical impetus. Biernoff and Blom (2002) conducted interviews with teachers and students of Turkish and Afro-Caribbean ensemble respectively to illustrate methods for negotiating boundaryoriented diversity within cross-cultural curricular methods. Herbert (2001) spent two years as a participant observer with the Tokyo Kosei Wind Ensemble in order to illustrate intercultural music transmission. Among his conclusions were that, “Musicians pursuing shared aesthetic ideals, and engulfed in the world of performance, may acknowledge each other primarily as fellow artists and only secondarily as cultural ‘others’” (Herbert, 2001 p. 221). Drummond (2010) argued for a reclassification of Western European art music as “North-west Asian Court Music” (p. 117) in an effort to contextualize its shared stylistic taxonomy among other world music.

John Blacking, in a series of unpublished addresses to teachers throughout the United Kingdom, urged for a study of music that explored "the uniquely ‘transcendental’ or transformative properties of music, including its aesthetic, emotional, and spiritual qualities, that

thus justify its imperative as a curricular subject" (as cited in Campbell, 2000 p. 344). He also argued for “the critical need for music teachers to direct their efforts toward musical-artistic rather than nonmusical (social or political, including multicultural) ends” (p. 344). This appears to suggest music should not be culturally defined in school instruction. This position sharply contrasts the current trend for multicultural music study.

Scholars more recently have begun to explore the primordial universal characteristics of music in in effort to move beyond the politics of territory and locality that have been central to multicultural music education (Butler, Lind, & McCoy, 2007; Davis, 2005; Erlmann, 1999; Matsunobu, 2011). This position espouses the view that musicology is historically a mode of knowledge about Western musical models and therefore can only define its epistemology in contrast to the “other” (Davis, 2005). Erlmann (1999) sought an understanding beyond culture stating that, “music organizes social interaction in ways that that are no longer determined by the primacy of locally situated practice and collectively maintained memory” (p. 6). Davis (2005) argued for the removal of music education as an instrument for cultural affirmation asserting that if Erlmann is correct, “there can be … no historicized music education” (p. 59). Matsunobu (2011) in a study of shakuhachi ${ }^{2}$ music contrasted Herbert’s assimilative view of culture, illustrating “the universal aspects of human experience identified in Japanese music … the feeling of being part of nature and the revitalization of humans’ organic sensitivities …” (p. 273). This approach transcended the cultural boundaries of music study, showing “the cultural, served as a hindrance to accessing the underlying spirituality of Japanese music” (Matsunobu, 2011 p. 273). The study reinforced later findings that instrumental music is stronger curricular choice for introducing world music. This was unintentional as the study’s stated conclusion

^[1]

affirmed that participants “sensed” instrumental music through a spiritual aesthetic rather than cultural. For purposes of this review, research studies have been characterized using the aforementioned theoretical frameworks, however many of these studies blur the lines between pluralism, particularism, and universalism in some instances using one approach to justify another. This imbrication highlights the complexities of studying relationships between identity, music, and culture, particularly from the vantage of music education.

Relationship Between Identity, Music, and Culture

Research on relationships between identity, music, and culture are woven within studies designed to strengthen curricular understandings of cross-cultural music education. Research has also drawn a distinction between teaching diverse cultural music and teaching music to culturally diverse populations (Teicher, 1997). Experimental research on identity and music found a significant effect of cultural background vis-à-vis language usage and instruction, on perceptions of attitude, listening preference, and omnivorism ${ }^{3}$ (Abril & Flowers, 2007; Brittin, 2014; Fung, 1994; Teicher, 1997). Race is a significant factor effecting listening preference as well as formations of cultural trust between student/teacher relationships (Chinn, 1997; McCrary, 1993). The importance of music as cultural symbol of ethnic/nationalist identity and a way to reach culturally diverse students is emphasized in many qualitative research studies (Abril, 2009; Biernoff and Blom, 2002; Clark, 2005; O’Hagin & Harnish, 2006).

Language is a significant factor when teaching to culturally diverse populations, and used as a variable for measuring listening preference. Foreign language usage explained a considerable amount of variance for world music preference (Fung, 1994). Fung (1994) examined world music preference among university non-music majors, concluding that

^[1]

instrumental music was preferable to vocal when introducing world music curriculum. Abril and Flowers (2007) observed listening preference among middle school students who commented which of three versions of the same song (instrumental and by lyric language, English/Spanish) they most identified with. Utilizing qualitative and quantitative approaches, the study reported differences between monolingual and bilingual students with significant positive correlations between identity and preference (Abril & Flowers, 2007). Bilingual students preferred and identified most closely with the Spanish version while monolingual students preferred and most closely identified with the instrumental version. These findings support Fung’s (2007) suggestion of instrumental music as a preferred curricular approach to world music but only when teaching monolingual students, suggesting that language ability among students is an important consideration for planning curricular approaches. Brittin (2014) broadened the scope of language usage measuring student preference and musical omnivorism (see also Graham, 2009) for 10 instrumental and vocal selections from various styles performed in English, Spanish, or an Asian language. Participants estimated their identification with Spanish, Hispanic, Latino and/or Asian culture; number of languages spoken; and number of musical styles adult family members listened to at home (Brittin, 2014). Significant small correlations were reported between degree of identification with specified cultures and preference for popular songs representing those cultures respectively, and between preference for those songs and the number of languages spoken. Musical omnivorism was not conclusively examined with participant’s responses to English or non-English versions of songs showing significant, small correlations between the number of musical styles adults at home were estimated to like and overall preference. Abril (2007) and Brittin (2014) both reported high ranges of opinion by Hispanic populations on music performed in the Spanish language. This is significant for mariachi teachers who may not speak

Spanish or understand the significance of language to music preference among students and parents.

Teicher (1997) examined preservice elementary music teacher’s attitudes on their teaching preparation after having prepared multicultural lessons as part of the methods class. The assumption being that teachers would feel more prepared if given the opportunity to develop multicultural lessons. The study reported significant difference between treatment conditions and attitudes of willingness to teach multicultural music, indicating that the experience of developing and implementing multicultural music lessons, can positively affect preservice teachers’ attitudes toward future multicultural music teaching (Teicher, 1997). However, the study found no difference in attitudes, of preparedness for multicultural music teaching, nor of willingness to teach in culturally diverse environments (Teicher, 1997). This study supported assertions by Abril (2009) and Colley (2009) that student cultural background is given little attention in music education. Music methods courses should include several opportunities for pre-service teachers to become familiar with multicultural music content and strategies through hands-on experiential practice teaching (Teicher, 1997).

Researchers found race to be a significant factor when examining the relationship between cultural identity and music. Chinn (1997) measured vocal self-identifications of style and singing range in order to gauge the level of cultural trust among African American female vocalists. The study was grounded in the notion that “vocal models, attitude toward oneself, and attitude toward one’s own voice, may derive from cultural values and traditions” (Chinn, 1997 p. 637). The method involved a separation of participant volunteers into two groups based on levels of high and low mistrust of American culture, as assessed through the Cultural Mistrust Inventory (CMI) (see also Terrell & Terrell, 1981). Participants assessed their vocal self-

identification through listening preferences for music of varying vocal styles. The study reported statistically significant differences between the two groups on each vocal characteristic with the high-mistrust group demonstrating more characteristics associated with the African-American culture than did the low-mistrust group (Chinn, 1997). McCrary (1993) reported statistically significant differences among black listeners when examining the effect of race on listening preferences. Participants first indicated how much they liked or disliked taped music examples. Then on a subsequent second rating scale, the listeners selected a point closest to the racial identifier that they believed described the performer’s race. A second measurement examined the participants’ attitudes toward social encounters with blacks and whites. Black participants gave stronger preference ratings when they identified the performer’s race as black. White listeners’ preference ratings, however, were virtually equal for the black and white performers. On the social-encounter measurement, both black and white respondents provided more positive responses to statements of encounters with members of their own race than with the other racial group (McCrary, 1993). Both of these studies stress the importance of race awareness when teaching culturally diverse populations. However, these studies also reflect a strong postulation of Western aesthetic in music teaching, for example Chinn (1997) stressed the importance of ethnicity as a variable affecting the teaching of “proper singing behavior to adolescents for aesthetic purposes” (p. 636). The underlying philosophical approach of these studies reaffirms a position contested by scholars challenging the Western centricity of music education (Erlmann, 1999; Davis, 2005; Drummond, 2010; Colley, 2009).

Many researchers celebrate cultural symbolism and diversity, actively seeking opportunities to observe cultural practices and utilize interactive approaches towards teaching (Biernoff and Blom, 2002; Campbell, 1995; O’Hagin & Harnish, 2006). O’Hagin and Harnish

(2006) completed a descriptive study of Latino music traditions in Toledo, Ohio. Utilizing ethnographic data, they reported that musicians were regenerating Mexican-American traditions, particularly among folk conjunto ensembles, developing strategies to innovate the sound in order to meet the changing aesthetics of an emerging pan-Latino identity (O’Hagin & Harnish, 2006). The study emphasized the importance of culturally sensitive class curricula, advocating for teacher/student lessons that engaged “directly in fieldwork projects to better grasp the meaning of music in peoples’ lives” (O’Hagin & Harnish, 2006 p. 56). Positioning mariachi ensembles within music curriculum highlights the need for cultural responsiveness in teacher preparation programs (Abril, 2009; Clark, 2005). Clark (2005) affirmed mariachi’s symbolism of Mexican culture in the US, citing language as a contributing factor. “The growing Hispanic population and the use of Spanish as the second most popular language in the United States seem to ensure that mariachi music will continue to become more important throughout the country …” (Clark, 2005 p. 235). She concludes that the establishment of mariachi programs in secondary schools indicates that ethnic music occupies an increasingly significant role in music education. Abril (2009) used a case study of one teacher’s use of mariachi as way to reach to Latino students. The study draws attention to the intersection of cultural politics of authenticity, ownership and transnationalism in the music classroom. One of the central issues is the resistance of student acceptance of a “white” teacher who did not speak Spanish, teaching a Mexican music tradition symbolic of ethnic and cultural identity. This study illuminates the notions of cultural mistrust among students (Chinn, 1997), importance of language in music preference (Abril, 2007; Brittin, 2014), and overall awareness of cultural expressions as symbols of identity (Clark, 2005; O’Hagin & Harnish, 2006).

Diversity and sharing of teaching and learning approaches can be universally meaningful

when teaching cross-cultural music. Biernoff and Blom (2002) interviewed students and indigenous teachers of two non-Western music groups active within a music department, in order to observe musical, cultural and educational expectations, experiences and outcomes within the ensembles, and their responses to issues of national identity, appropriation and ‘cultural rights.’ The study reported that the enthusiasm of all participants for blending traditional and “other musics”, allows for a re-contextualization creating a musical interstice within which traditional cultural values are not offended, musical development and difference continue to occur. This approach to music learning frames “a new ground … created, not of binaries or fixed hierarchies, but one where new ‘sites of meaning’, be they educational, musical or cultural, continually emerge in a fluid interplay of peoples” (Biernoff & Blom, 2002 p. 29). Whether centralized in locality or framed among universal characteristics, music learning in education has been strongly influenced by Western ideology.

Politics of Music Education

Thompson (2002) discovered evidence in the music education profession that Western Art Music forms “a hidden and implicit construct, which functions to naturalize its position of power vis-à-vis other world musics” (p. 17). Drummond (2002) framed this as a “binary opposition between ‘own music’ and ‘others’ music [which] is not a deliberate choice, but the result of deep conditioning, and to alter it … may require a Herculean effort” (p. 118). “The training of music educators tends to encourage them to operate within the dominant paradigm rather than to challenge it” (p. 119). Colley (2009) characterized a “band, orchestra, and chorus trilogy” (p. 57) that focuses “music programs in schools on traditional large ensembles … is no longer-on aesthetic, educational, cultural, or artistic grounds-defensible” (p. 57). She urged the music education community to expand its definition of music ensembles in teacher education

programs, making special note of the recommendation for “expansion and not alteration or replacement,” (p. 57) even though the very word alternative might suggest it (Colley, 2009). Abril (2009) concurred this position by supporting a “rethinking of the school-based ensembles at the secondary level” (p. 88). He traced teacher identity to
…Tertiary institutions where divergent ways of being musical are not typically embraced
… As gatekeepers to the profession, these institutions generally reserve admittance to students whose training in Western art music qualifies them to continue such pursuits. Logically, preservice teachers know that musical study will focus on classical music, despite the fact that they might have other musical interests and/or expertise that could serve them in the future. …When students become teachers, they are likely to continue to adopt such values, suppressing, instead of capitalizing, on the richness of their musical selves, as well as those of the students with whom they will work (p. 88).

Mariachi ensembles, positioned within formal music instruction, create a protagonist to the politics of teaching music. Although the impetus for mariachi in schools was to fulfill a desire to preserve Mexicanidad, many teachers lack a cultural and musical understanding of the tradition (Rodríguez, 2006) correlating to the broader disparity of cultural awareness in music education.

Conclusion and Implications for Teaching Mariachi

As a cultural symbol of nationalist pride, mariachi music ensembles “serve as a model for music educators in other regions to encourage and promote the use of traditional music in the music curriculum” (Clark, 2005 p. 235). Teachers can benefit from cultural immersion and interactive field research, especially to gain an understanding of the effects of language, particularly Spanish, in musical expression. One aspect not referenced in the literature, is the

notion of cultural aesthetic through instrumentation. The vihuela ${ }^{4}$ and guitarrón ${ }^{5}$ are foundational to mariachi instrumental aesthetic. Although there are a number of method books for vihuela and guitarrón published independently and through mainstream publishers, they fail to demonstrate an understanding of the pedagogical differences between mestizo hybrid instruments and classical European counterparts. The aesthetic performance roles these instruments play interactively within the ensemble, is also ignored. The approach of these methods is instead completely devoid of cultural performance context. The same can be said of mariachi method books for violin, trumpet, guitar and harp despite their long-standing crosscultural stylistic references to a number of musical traditions in Latin America. Understanding performance practice and instrumental pedagogy for music of diverse cultures is an important under-researched consideration when teaching mariachi. Beyond regional locality, mariachi music provides the opportunity to teach and learn music from a global perspective (Campbell, 1995). Gaining an understanding of the philosophical approaches to music and culture, as well as the theoretical underpinnings, is vital for preservice teachers. Mariachi is taught to both Latino and non-Latino students including white, black, and Asian ethnicities. Understanding the difference between teaching diverse music and teaching to diverse populations will help formulate a culturally responsive curriculum. Curriculum will contain elements of particularism and pluralism depending on the context of student populations. Ultimately it should also illustrate the concept of music as a “universal cultural expression” (Nettle, 2005).

^[1]

References:

Abril, C. R. & Flowers, P. J. (2007). Attention, preference, and identity in music listening by middle school students of different linguistic backgrounds. Journal of Research in Music Education 55: 204 - 219.

Abril, C. R. (2009). Responding to culture in the instrumental music programme: A teacher’s journey. Music Education Research 11, 77-91.

Biernoff, L. & Blom, D. (2002). Non-Western ensembles: Crossing boundaries and creating interstices in cross-cultural educational contexts. Research Studies in Music Education 19: $22-31$.

Brittin, R. V. (1996). Listeners’ preference for music of other cultures: Comparing response modes. Journal of Research in Music Education 44: 328 - 340.

Brittin, R. V. (2014). Young listeners’ music style preferences: Patterns related to cultural identification and language use. Journal of Research in Music Education 61: 415 - 430. Butler, A., Lind, V. R., & McCoy, C. L. (2007). Equity and access in music education: Conceptualizing culture as barriers to and supports for music learning. Music Education Research 9: 241 - 253.

Campbell, P. S. (1991). Lessons from the world: a cross-cultural guide to music teaching and learning. New York, NY: Schirmer.

Campbell, P. S. (1995). Steven Loza on Latino music. Music Educators Journal 82(2), 45-52. Campbell, P. S. (2000). How musical we are: John Blacking on music, education, and cultural understanding. Journal of Research in Music Education 48: 336 - 359.

Clark, S. (2005). Mariachi music as a symbol of Mexican culture in the Unites States.
International Journal of Music Education 23: 227-237.

Chinn, B. J. (1997). Vocal self-identification, singing style, and singing range in relationship to a measure of cultural mistrust in African-American adolescent females. Journal of Research in Music Education 45: 636 - 649.

Colley, B. (2009). Educating teachers to transform the trilogy. Journal of Music Teacher Education 19 (1) 56-67.

Davis, R. A. (2005). Music education and cultural identity. Educational Philosophy and Theory 37(1): 48-62

Drummond, J. (2010). Re-thinking Western art music: A perspective shift for music educators. International Journal of Music Education 28: 117 - 126.

Erlmann, V. (1999). Music, modernity and the global imagination: South Africa and the West. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Fung, C. V. (1994). Undergraduate non-music majors’ world music preference and multicultural attitudes. Journal of Research in Music Education 42: 45 - 57.

Graham, R. (2009). The function of music education in the growth of cultural openness in the USA. Music Education Research 11, 283-302.

Green, L. (1999). Research in the sociology of music education: Some introductory concepts. Music Education Research 1: 159 - 169.

Herbert, D. G. (2001). The Tokyo Kosei Wind Orchestra: A case study of intercultural music transmission. Journal of Research in Music Education 49: 212 - 226.

Machado-Casas, M. & Sánchez, P. “At the Intersection of Transnationalism, Latina/o Immigrants, and Education,” The High School Journal 92, No. 4 (April-May 2009): 3-15.

Matsunobu, K. (2011). Spirituality as a universal experience of music: A case study of North

Americans’ approaches to Japanese music. Journal of Research in Music Education 59: $273-289$.

McCrary, J. (1993). Effects of listeners’ and performers’ race on music preferences. Journal of Research in Music Education 41: 200 - 211.

Morrison, S. J., Demorest, S.M., Campbell, P.S., Bartolome, S.J. & Roberts, J. C. (2013). Effect of intensive instruction on elementary students’ memory for culturally unfamiliar music. Journal of Research in Music Education 60: 363 - 374.

Nettl, B. (2005). An ethnomusicological perspective. International Journal of Music Education 23: $131-133$.

O’Hagin, I. B. & Harnish, D. (2006). Music as a cultural identity: a case study of Latino musicians negotiating tradition and innovation in northwest Ohio. International Journal of Music Education 24: 56-70.

Peterson, R. (1992). Understanding audience segmentation: from elite and mass to omnivore and univore. Poetics 21: 243-58.

Rodríguez, R. C. (2006). Cultural production, legitimation, and the politics of aesthetics: Mariachi transmission, practice, and performance in the United States. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from Proquest Dissertations and Theses databases. (UMI No. 3219648)

Sheehy, D. E. (2006). Mariachi music in America: Experiencing music, expressing culture. New York: Oxford University Press.

Shehan, P. (1985). Transfer of preference from taught to untaught pieces of non-western music genres. Journal of Research in Music Education 33, 149 - 158.

Teicher, J. M. (1997). Effect of Multicultural music experience on preservice elementary

teachers’ attitudes. Journal of Research in Music Education 45: 415 - 427.
Terrell, F., & Terrell, S. (1981). An inventory to measure cultural mistrust among Blacks.
Western Journal of Black Studies 5(3): 180-185.
Thompson, K. (2002). A critical discourse analysis of world music as the `other’ in education.
Research Studies in Music Education 19: 14-21.
Yudkin, J. (1993). Choosing pluralism or particularism. Music Educators Journal 79: 46 - 48.