Alike and Different: Canadian and American Music Therapists' Lives and Work/Semblables et Différents : La Vie et le Travail De Musicothérapeutes Canadiens et Américains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A recent survey (Curtis, 2013) examined the experiences of and American music therapists, comparing men and women with each other as well as comparing the respondents with their 1990 counterparts (Curtis, 1990). In terms of the respondents' work and personal lives, results indicated instances of notable differences on the one hand and remarkable similarities on the other hand. Since 1990 the music therapy professions in Canada and the United States have evolved dramatically. As well, there is a widespread understanding among Canadians that while we may have much in common with our neighbours to the south, there are incontestable differences that make for two distinct cultures. Questions arise: How does this play out in terms of present-day and American music therapy, and what are the implications of these distinctions?There has been some exploratory literature concerning the nature of the music therapy profession, but this was limited in scope (Kirkland, 2002, 2007). In discussing the issue, Kirkland (2007) commented that there is a national identity that is distinctly Canadian (para. 22), provided that an identity is understood as one that embraces diversity in terms of its educational and clinical practice approaches. This might be in part supported by several factors: the nature of Canada, given its immense geography and small population; Canada's diversity of culture, which typically embraces a garden-salad style as opposed to the traditional American melting pot; and a lack of music therapy education, necessitating training abroad until relatively recently1 (Citizenship & Immigration Canada, 2012; Malinder, 2012; Palmer, 1976; Study Mode, 2002). These unique features of the landscape (geographic, political, cultural, and educational) may work in combination to create a greater heterogeneity of the music therapy profession and practice. Sutton (2007) underscored this diversity in his description of music therapy in northern Canada, informed by a unique history, climate, geography, and people. This diversity in Canada was further detailed in Kirkland's (2007) examination of music therapy history, education, and practice across some of the other provinces. Curtis's description of the changing landscape of music therapy in Quebec (2011, para. 1) further attests to this diversity in its identification of a distinct Quebecois music therapy context.While this anecdotal literature makes reference to a distinct and diverse music therapy identity, little research exists concerning the experience itself or the experience in comparison to that of American music therapists. The present survey report helps to address this research gap. It entails analysis of data gathered from an earlier survey of music therapists (Curtis, 2013) designed to provide a comparative analysis of women and men music therapists' experiences as compared to each other as well as to survey results from 1990 (Curtis, 1990). This report on the 2013 survey focuses on comparing the experiences of and American music therapists-on the commonalities and differences in their situations, their practices, their approaches, and their personal, work, and family concerns. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of relevant survey data are used to examine the question: In what ways are and American music therapists alike and different?MethodParticipantsThe survey was distributed to all professional members of the American Music Therapy Association (AMTA) and the Association for Music Therapy (CAMT) living in the United States or Canada. A total of 2,040 (1,733 AMTA and 307 CAMT) survey requests were sent, with 150 returned because of non-functioning email accounts, for a total of 1,890 contacts made. The return rate was 36%, with 682 individuals responding. This is a conservative return rate as some respondents may have been members of both the AMTA and CAMT. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.041 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".