Secondary Musical Languages: Modeling Multicultural Music Curricula after Foreign Language Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Music conservatories and university music departments around the world have recently begun to introduce additional musics outside the Western art music traditions into their required curricula, including non-Western traditions and Western vernacular traditions. While preprofessional training in Western art music remains the primary objective, these institutions are modifying curricula in order to expose their students to a broader scope of musics and cultivate an awareness of global musical diversity. However, many newly developed programs and course models that integrate additional musics fail to illustrate these “other” musics as complete artistic entities in and of themselves. To propose a more comprehensive approach to diversifying conservatory curricula, this paper analogizes discrete musical traditions to foreign spoken languages and draws on the established models of foreign language studies in the language departments of higher education. The three proposed course models derived from foreign language study can be applied in great extent to “musical languages”: a linguistic anthropology model, a living language model, and a musical immersion model. This paper outlines the general parameters of each model and discusses the learning opportunities and challenges specific to each, as well as possible adjustments to accommodate the resources and needs of a given institution. The purpose of this paper is to offer a variety of methods by which to approach non-Western and Western vernacular musical traditions as independent equals of Western art music, even within institutions where Western art music is the primary focus.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 teacher head, 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".