By Hanna Stephens
The David Douglas school district in Portland, Oregon, boasts an award-winning music program that has brought the community together in immeasurable ways. However, what is most remarkable is that 73% of its students “qualify for free or reduced-price lunch, a federal measure of poverty” (Mongeau, 2019). Students from this district often work to help cover the costs of the music program, but the benefits for students who participate are extraordinary—from becoming straight-A students to finding a second family with their bandmates (Mongeau, 2019). However, statistics from the Oxford Handbook of Social Justice in Music Education and the Journal of Community Psychology indicate that students of low socioeconomic status are “significantly underrepresented” and “disproportionately not enrolled in music programs compared to their higher-income peers” (Abril & Kelly-McHale, 2018, p. 157; Whitson et al., 2020, p. 428). Only 90% of low-income districts offer music programs, compared to 96% of wealthier districts (Mongeau, 2019). Despite the trend in developed countries of decreased access to music programs for low-income students, these students are the ones who benefit most from them in terms of their academic, mental, and social development. Therefore, communities in developed nations should fight to sustain or enable engagement in music programs for youth of lower socioeconomic status.
The Academic Benefits of Music Programs
The academic benefits from music programs are astounding. Moreover, notable improvements are distinctly profound in students of lower socioeconomic status. According to the Journal of Community Psychology, studies have found a positive association between music participation and academic achievement (Whitson et al., 2020). Furthermore, the authors note that music programs play a “vital role in augmenting the academic achievement for youth residing in low-income communities” (p. 427). One study conducted by the Music Haven afterschool program, which provided free music education and performance opportunities to disadvantaged youth in New Haven, Connecticut, found an increasing benefit over time in areas such as grades and likelihood to earn a college degree, which was noted as the “dosage effect” (Whitson et al., 2020, p. 434). The longer that students of lower income backgrounds were involved in the music program, the higher their likelihood of attending and graduating college, and the better their grades were. This does not merely indicate a correlation between students who play instruments and get good grades, but a causal relationship between the two. Throughout the study, it was noted that community support was integral in sustaining the youths’ academic and musical success.
Additionally, longitudinal studies have also shown that music engagement predicts overall academic achievement. One research report published by the National Endowment for the Arts completed a meta-analysis of four longitudinal studies on the impact of such programs on at-risk youth, three of which were sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education (Catterall et al., 2012, p. 8). The data ranged from 1988 to 2008 and found that involvement in music and arts programs correlated with higher test scores, GPAs, graduation rates, and college enrollment. These correlations were strongest with students of low-income backgrounds. Ultimately, the authors concluded that students involved in arts programs experienced more benefits than those without arts experiences, and low socioeconomic-status students benefited more than higher socioeconomic-status students (p. 24).
The Mental Benefits of Music Programs
Music programs not only enhance academic performance, but they also improve the mind itself. The mental benefits of engagement in music programs range from cognition and neural development to mental wellness. For instance, a study in the Journal of Neuroscience examined the impact of free community music programs for 44 disadvantaged children. Researchers found that two years of music training resulted in “a stronger neurophysiological distinction of stop consonants, a neural mechanism linked to reading and language skills,” whereas the control group “[did] not show any year-to-year changes” (Kraus et al., 2014). It was also noted that such training “can effect structural and functional neural changes” through engaging the networks in the brain “whose integration drives neuroplasticity” (Kraus et al., 2014). Hence, community music programs have indisputable neurophysiological benefits specifically for at-risk children through cognitive development.
In addition to neurological development, music programs also increase the mental health and well-being of students. The previously mentioned study of the Music Haven community program interviewed parents before, during, and after their child’s involvement in the program. The parents overwhelmingly reported “an increase in the youth’s confidence and self-esteem. . . with [those] who had lower family incomes reporting greater empowerment for their children than those with higher family incomes” (Whitson et al., 2020, pp. 427–8, 432). Self-concept is a vital element of mental wellness, which can often be strained in at-risk environments. Furthermore, Abril and Kelly-McHale explored how culturally aware teachers improve the health and emotional well-being of low-income students by simply caring for them. Caring teachers, such as one unnamed Texas band director who made taquitos for his low-income students who often went without meals, help foster positivity, growth, and success (Abril & Kelly-McHale, 2018, pp. 166–7). Therefore, music programs facilitate healthy cognitive and mental development for disadvantaged youth.
The Social Benefits of Music Programs
Interlinked with mental wellness is the sense of belonging which comes from a social support network. There are a wide range of social benefits for developing youth who engage in music programs. In addition to culturally inclusive programs and caring teachers creating “more positive attitude[s] toward band and school,” band programs have been described by students as facilitating bonding to the point of creating a second “family” (Abril & Kelly-McHale, 2018, p. 166-7; Mongeau, 2019). These social benefits have particular potential for low socioeconomic status students who often come from marginalized populations. Refugees and immigrants under age 18 constitute the Sierra Leone youth group in Australia (Oxford Handbook); they formed to learn English and express themselves through music. The group performed traditional Sierra Leonian drumming and dancing for the community, as well as choral renditions in collaboration with the Sydney-Conservatorium of Music. In surveying the youth after the performance, the researchers found increased senses of “social inclusion, self-esteem, confidence and social acceptance” (Marsh, 2018, p. 173-186). Not only can music performance groups promote a sense of belonging for marginalized populations—the same longitudinal studies also noted particularly significant increases in involvement with student government and service clubs in low-income music students compared to higher income counterparts (Catterall et al., 2012). Furthermore, the Music Haven study found that free community music programs increased social competence for the youth involved (Whitson et al., 2020). The social advantages of music programs are clear, especially in disadvantaged communities, but these cases all had the same factor contributing to their success: a supportive community willing to bear the costs.
Balancing Costs and Benefits
Consequently, considering both the invaluable benefits of such programs and the costs they incur, are these programs worth creating or sustaining? Some may note that low SES students in higher SES communities comprise cultural minorities; thus, music programs based on the majority culture may be irrelevant and unhelpful (Abril & Kelly-McHale, 2018). Additionally, the financial costs of hiring music educators, obtaining instruments, procuring private lesson teachers for each instrument, providing uniforms, and conducting instrument maintenance can quickly add up. In other words, as one flute player from the David Douglas high school band said, “music is not cheap” (Mongeau, 2019).
The costs may seem overwhelming when considering that something as simple as playing in Westernized programs with European repertoire, rather than culturally representative music, may result in the program being “unhelpful.” However, in each of the previously cited studies, the benefits were found regardless of the type of music played or pedagogical practices of the teachers. Although outcome quality varies, social inclusion through group activity, academic benefits through time management skills, and cognitive development through neuroplasticity occur in music programs regardless of the type of music or program—whether a community program such as Music Haven, a project such as the Sierra Leone Youth Group, or a high school marching band such as David Douglas’s. A debate continues as to which programs are most effective, but the consensus is that having some program is better than not having a program at all. Benefits are simply maximized by higher quality programs which have culturally aware/inclusive repertoire and teachers. Hypothetically, they would not be completely eliminated due to a director having their marching band play an American pop-culture song at a football game rather than a Chinese folk song—albeit the latter would represent a healthy immersive experience for the Chinese-American band members.
Once communities understand the universal benefits of music programs for students with low income, they brainstorm various innovative methods to help cover the financial costs. For instance, the David Douglas School District recognized the importance of early incorporation of music in education and was able to hire full-time music teachers for all their elementary schools by instituting a “local arts tax—$35 from every adult in Portland city limits living above the poverty line” (Mongeau, 2019). Federal and state grants, non-profit work, and caring community members all pave the way to make life better for disadvantaged youth through music. Therefore, creating a brighter future for low-income students is actually much less costly than many people assume—which makes it all the more worth pursuing.
Logically and ethically, if the academic, mental, and social benefits are most pronounced in low SES youth, and those are the individuals who would also need said benefits the most, we should fight to give every disadvantaged youth—whether in a rich or poor community—the opportunity to take advantage of music programs through community support and initiatives. Otherwise, we do an injustice to society and to the principle of music itself. Music is a universal language able to convey emotions and tell stories across languages and cultures. It unifies us and is therefore the ideal tool to heal and bridge the gap between the privileged and disadvantaged. From a global perspective, music programs have even more potential for less developed countries. Celine Ferland is currently a band director and flute instructor in Washington state; she lived in Ethiopia for seven years, during which time she started a flute school to release girls from poverty-induced prostitution. By learning the art of flute playing and then becoming teachers at the school, the girls not only find a safe, productive hobby to earn money for in performance, but some also receive paid positions as teachers which become their source of livelihood. The girls also develop friendships with the other teachers and students, creating a deeper sense of community and experiencing all the social benefits of a music program (C. Ferland, personal communication, April 15, 2021). The world of music surpasses all boundaries of culture, language, income-level, race, and ethnicity. Thus, it is our responsibility as ethical members of society to provide access to this world to youth who have never known it. In doing so, we ensure them a brighter future, eventually changing the world—but we must start with our own neighborhoods.
References
Abril, C. R., & Kelly-McHale, J. (2018). The space between worlds: Music education and Latino
children. In C. Benedict, P. K. Schmidt, G. Spruce, & P. Woodford (Eds.), The Oxford
handbook of social justice in music education. Oxford University Press.
Catterall, J. S., Dumais, S. A., & Hampden‐Thompson, G. (2012). The arts and achievement in at‐
risk youth: Findings from four longitudinal studies. National Endowment for the Arts.
Kraus, N., Slater, J., Thompson, E. C., Hornickel, J., Strait, D. L., Nicol, T., & White-Schwoch, T.
(2014). Music enrichment programs improve the neural encoding of speech in at-risk
children. Journal of Neuroscience, 34, 11913–11918.
https://www.jneurosci.org/content/34/36/11913
Marsh, K. (2018). Music, social justice, and social inclusion: The role of collaborative music
activities in supporting young refugees and newly arrived immigrants in Australia. In C.
Benedict, P. K. Schmidt, G. Spruce, & P. Woodford (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social
justice in music education. Oxford University Press.
Mongeau, L. (2019). Low-income districts find ways to help students make music. The Hechinger
Report. https://hechingerreport.org/low-income-districts-find-ways-to-help-students-make-
Whitson, M. L., Robinson, S., Valkenburg, K. V., & Jackson, M. (2020). The benefits of an
afterschool music program for low-income, urban youth: The Music Haven evaluation
project. Journal of Community Psychology, 48(2), 426–436.