ABSTRACT
The Schools Council Inquiry 1 (1968) reported that many secondary pupils found school music to be not only one of the most ‘useless’ but also one of the most ‘boring’ curriculum subjects, (Plummeridge 1991: 136). Until this point, few had openly questioned the validity of a curriculum based on the imparting of inert facts about music, usually delivered through the music appreciation lesson, and with little or no active musical experience. But following this damning judgement, there ensued what amounted to a revolution in classroom Music teaching, in which music educators re-evaluated views about the nature of music and what might constitute musical learning. The aim was to develop the basis for a curriculum that would lead to children knowing music, rather than knowing about music. What emerged was the general acceptance that performing, composing, and listening were the essentially musical activities that would enable this. These came to form the basis for the National Criteria for the GCSE examination (DES 1985), introducing composing for the first time in an examination at this level, and, ultimately, the National Curriculum. Shepherd and Vulliamy (1994) give an intriguing account of the debates and politicking that surrounded the birth of the first National Curriculum for Music. They describe how ‘composing’ was chosen instead of ‘composition’ to emphasize the active approach that was envisaged, and how a new word, ‘appraising’, was introduced to highlight the fact that listening/appraising was an active process and not a continuation of the old appreciation lessons.
