The MayDay Group invites scholars, music makers, educators, and innovators from around the globe to submit proposals to this year’s colloquium centered on the following action ideal:

Theory and Philosophy

We actively engage with and generate theory and philosophy to understand the relationship(s) between musical actions and their contextual meanings and values.

We account for the fullest range of meanings and modes of thinking inherent in individual and collective musical actions. This requires asking new questions and developing robust toolkits for understanding and theorizing how we position and are positioned as part of larger groups and practices operating within multiple layers of social, cultural, spiritual, geographical, historical, and political contexts. In so doing, we work to avoid the trappings of narrative frameworks that may oppress or misrepresent the contexts in which we seek greater theoretical and philosophical understandings. We embrace pluralism in knowledge construction (e.g., Indigenous, queer, feminist) which promotes interpretations of musical actions from multiple worldviews and creates more equitable representation.

What are the problematics of using Western theories and philosophies to understand the relationship between non-Western musical actions and their contextual meanings and values?

What are the possibilities and limitations of embracing pluralism in knowledge construction in music education through multicultural, intercultural, cross-cultural, transcultural, and syncretic lenses?

How do we avoid theoretical and philosophical extractivism when interpreting musical actions from worldviews that are not our own to create more equitable representation?

What are new questions and toolkits for understanding and theorizing the positionality of music educators and education inherent in pluralist contexts?

Is there a particular non-Western philosophical lens that might transcend the issues we are dealing with in music education? How might it inform what we do in music education?

Utilitarian, Aesthetic, and praxialist music education philosophies have shaped and guided music education practices in many countries. What might be the next historical turn in music education philosophy?

COLLOQUIUM FORMAT

Presentations—better understood at MayDay Colloquia as provocations—are designed to stimulate discussion and debate. Therefore, each presenter will be allocated 45 minutes, to include no more than 25 minutes for the presentation and no fewer than 20 minutes for discussion. Proposals that go outside the conventional scope of a provocation are encouraged. Musical engagements will also be considered. Projectors, speakers, and screens will be available, but it is completely acceptable to use no supporting technology. Presenters must register and are expected to attend the colloquium. Extenuating circumstances to in-person presentations will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Please contact the colloquium coordinator if accommodations are needed due to political or health-related issues.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION PROCESS:

Please submit both: a proposal of no more than 800 words (references not included in word count) and an abstract of no more than 100 words as email attachments. Incomplete submissions will not be considered. State your name, institutional affiliation, email address, and other contact information in the body of the email only. There should be no identifiers on proposals or abstracts. Submit by January 7, 2024 to: MayDayGroup35@gmail.com

Proposals will be reviewed anonymously by committee and evaluated according to the following criteria: clarity of ideas, contribution to/interest for the profession, relevance and contribution to theory, and connection to the action ideal.

Notification will occur by email no later than January 27, 2024. Registration will open April 1, 2024. If accepted, the primary presenter and any co-presenters must register for the conference no later than May 1, 2024, or forfeit their acceptance.

Registration information will be posted on the MDG 35 Colloquium website here. Accepted abstracts will be posted to the Colloquium website by May 1, 2024 and cannot be changed after that date.

QUESTIONS?

Please contact us at: MayDayGroup35@gmail.com

We are delighted to announce publication of two new articles for TOPICS (Themes, Opinions, Practice, Innovation, Curriculum, & Strategies)

The Musical Work of Serious Leisure: Piping with the 78th Fraser Highlanders

Kari K. Veblen & Janice L. Waldron

ABSTRACT: Using the concept of serious leisure as a lens, this study investigated musical engagement in a competitive Grade One Canadian Scottish Pipe Band, the 78th Fraser Highlanders, based in Burlington, Ontario. The 78th Fraser Highlanders are respected in the global piping community for their innovative arrangements and unique repertoire selection. Data was collected over a three-year period in this hybrid ethnographic case study situated in both online and offline contexts. Findings indicate correspondences with other research in the field of serious leisure studies. Themes that emerged from interviews and observation were: 1) centrality of music making, 2) social connectedness, 3) competition/fun, 4) identity and heritage, 5) group dynamics and unique band identity, 6) teaching and learning, and 7) uses of online platforms and social media (link).

 A Lexicon for a Praxical Turn in Music Education

Thomas A. Regelski

ABSTRACT: For over 60 years, my research and in-school observations concerning action learning and music as social praxis have warranted the following terms, ideas, suggestions, and cautions. This lexicon briefly outlines the leading themes of my published articles and books. It represents a significant turning away from traditions and taken-for-granted assumptions; and toward the important implications for teachers in a praxical turn for music education. It is my hope that students and teachers will jointly examine these precepts (and their brief qualifications), and engage with pro and con essays, discussions, and experiments with the praxical suggestions described. Thoughtful consideration, I hope, will lead music educators from defending school music through advocacy to, instead, producing the substantially notable results characteristic of praxis that will mitigate the profession’s legitimation crisis. I believe that by stressing the main points of my praxical approach, these conclusions will promote change in teaching praxis (link).

The late British philosopher, music critic, and political theorist Mark Fisher (1968–2017) coined the term capitalist realism to describe the ideological frame that undergirds our current social, cultural, economic, and political life-worlds. He summarized the concept with the phrase, “it’s easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.”^[1] As he explained, “That slogan captures precisely what I mean by ‘capitalist realism’: the widespread sense that not only is capitalism the only viable political and economic system, but also that it is now impossible even to imagine a coherent alternative to it.”^[2] Fisher further described the ideological nature of this concept thus:

Capitalist realism as I understand it cannot be confined to art or the quasi-propagandistic way in which advertising functions. It is more like a pervasive atmosphere, conditioning not only the production of culture but also the regulation of work and education, and acting as kind of an invisible barrier constraining thought and action.^[3]

After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, philosopher Francis Fukuyama famously claimed in 1989 that we had reached “the end of history”—that, with the defeat of “actually existing socialism” by capitalism, we had reached the “the end-point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.”^[4] The future development of political and economic systems was therefore, in his view, foreclosed. For Fisher, capitalism is “realistic” in that it serves as the unnoticed background within which we act. It seems to be the natural state of the world to those who have lived their lives in capitalistic societies. In this way, capitalist realism is ideological, in that it structures the parameters of reality while going largely unquestioned.

Similarly, American political theorist Wendy Brown sees our current predicament as one in which the market tenets of neoliberal capitalism have spread—without significant resistance or debate—from the economy proper to all areas of social, cultural, and political existence. Invoking Frankfurt School philosopher Herbert Marcuse, she describes this situation as the “closing of the political universe—the erasure of intelligible, legitimate alternatives to economic rationality.”^[5] Not only has neoliberal capitalism constructed a new economic and material reality, its advance marks “a new production of subjectivity.”^[6] Within this frame, all aspects of life, even those previously outside the economic sphere, are subjected to the model of the market as human beings are configured “exhaustively as market actors, always, only, and everywhere as homo oeconomicus,”^[7] even when direct profit-making is not enacted.

The capitalist base of society serves as the “pervasive atmosphere” within which music education exists in many nations. For example, in many contexts, teachers have developed a sense that organizing music education around competition is the only viable system, and it has thus become impossible for them to imagine alternatives to the competitive structures that undergird so many music programs, converting the use value of musical learning into the exchange value of competitive scores.^[8] In these school music contexts, structuring music learning as competition “seamlessly occupies the horizons of the thinkable”^[9] as an a priori, taken-for-granted substructure of music education.[10] In addition to this competitive structure, capitalist realism’s effects (market logic, business ontology, entrepreneurial ethos, instrumental aims, economic centering and marginalization, hierarchical structures, precarity and scarcity, etc.) appear in music education in myriad ways.

Capitalism is the pre-given, taken-for-granted base upon which the global hegemonic economic system’s social superstructures—including music education systems— are built. The effect of this system reaches people in nominally non-capitalist nations. Given these dynamics, this special issue of ACT invites manuscripts that examine and critique capitalist realism as it relates to the theory and practice of music education. While we seek manuscripts that employ Fisher’s concept of capitalist realism as a frame, a direct, explicit engagement with Fisher’s work is not required (although it is certainly welcome). [11] Authors are also strongly encouraged to engage with scholarship previously published in ACT that addresses issues of capitalism and socioeconomic status.[12]

Possible themes may include but are not limited to:

• How can music education (and/or the arts in general) contribute to a critique and/or amelioration of capitalism’s effects? Given Fisher’s background as a music critic (aka the music blogger k-punk), how does music, in particular, factor into this theoretical matrix?

• What possible alternatives can we offer to capitalist realism? What are the conditions of possibility for conceiving of such alternatives? How could or should music education appear differently under such alternative scenarios?

• How does an intentional (re)focus on a critique of capitalist ideology within music education scholarship and praxis—with its centering of the class struggle—inform, augment, intersect, or potentially conflict with scholarly critiques centered on other oppressive social structures (e.g., racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism)?

• How can a return to the critical dimension (combating post-political ideology) offer space for envisioning alternative modes of music teaching and learning without succumbing to naïve utopianism? How can we combat “the commodification of political engagement and the reduction of politics to the performative signaling of political affiliation and support which forestalls an ‘actual’ political agency towards palpable material change?”[13]

• Given Fisher’s focus on post-Fordist finance capitalism as it manifests in the Global North (in the U.K. and U.S. in particular), how might the critique of capitalist infused music education practices appear different in other settings?

• What are the potential deficiencies within the capitalist realism concept of ideology critique as it relates to music teaching and learning?

• How have the technological, social, cultural, and economic changes that have occurred since 2009 (the publication year of Capitalist Realism) weakened or strengthened Fisher’s position, and what are the implications for music education?

• How can the explicit capitalist intervention in music education (e.g., corporate sponsorship of music education as a market-building strategy, public-private partnerships, outsourcing public education to private interests, the interpellation of music teachers and students as “entrepreneurs,” school choice, vouchers, charter schools) be critiqued and challenged, and what alternative models could be considered?

• How can an analysis of the capitalist commodification of music, which leverages desire by producing phantasmal objects for consumption, problematize the use of “popular” music in education?

• Can a renewed emphasis on economic class dynamics in music classrooms inform a re-conceptualized framework for music education philosophy, advocacy, and praxis?

• Do current (or historical) philosophies or approaches to music education knowingly or unwittingly support capitalist exploitation?

Submission Deadline: Please submit your manuscript as a Word document via e-mail no later than January 1, 2024 to Dr. Sean Powell at sean.powell@unt.edu, copied to the ACT Editor Dr. Lauren Kapalka Richerme at lkricher@indiana.edu.

Submission Guidelines

Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education is devoted to the critical study and analysis of issues related to the field of music education. ACT welcomes submissions from diverse perspectives (e.g. education, music, philosophy, sociology, history, psychology, curriculum studies), dealing with critical, analytical, practical, theoretical, or policy development concerns, as well as submissions that seek to apply, challenge, or extend the MayDay Group’s Action Ideals.

Article Length: ACT imposes no set restrictions on length. However, authors may be asked to shorten submissions where reviewers or the editor determine that an essay’s length is not warranted by its content.

Formatting: Please format submissions using the most recent edition of the Chicago Manual of Style’s “author-date system” with the following three adaptations: 1) omit quotations marks around titles in reference lists, 2) follow APA conventions for capitalization in reference lists, and 3) use closed ellipses (necessary for html formatting). Endnotes are permitted. Audio and video materials are encouraged. Also, ACT encourages the use of “they” (and any derivation) as a singular, gender-neutral pronoun. Consult a recent issue of ACT or contact the editors for more information if required.

Abstract and Keywords: Submissions must be accompanied by a brief abstract (ca. 100–150 words) and a short list of keywords.

About the Author: Include a 100–150-word biography for each author.

Languages: Following ACT’s special issue guidelines on the Decolonization of Music Education, and with the purpose of actively diversifying knowledge creation strategies, this special issue also welcomes manuscripts that were originally published in a language other than English and in a venue not commonly accessible by all. Submitters are required to provide the English translation of their submissions.

Peer Review Process: ACT submissions are subject to a rigorous process of anonymized peer review. Final publication decisions rest with the editors (in consideration of reviewer recommendations).

Notes

[1] Mark Fisher, Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? (Winchester, UK: Zer0 Books, 2009), 2.

^[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid., 16.

[4] Francis Fukuyama, “The End of History?” The National Interest, no. 16 (1989): 3–18. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24027184.

[5] Wendy Brown, Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution (New York: Zone Books, 2015), 68.

[6] Rachel Greenwald Smith, Affect and American Literature in the Age of Neoliberalism (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 5.

[7] Brown, Undoing the Demos, 31.

[8] Joseph Michael Abramo, “The Phantasmagoria of Competition in School Ensembles,” Philosophy of Music Education Review 25, no. 2 (2017): 165.

[9] Fisher, Capitalist Realism, 8.

[10] Sean Robert Powell, The Ideology of Competition in School Music (New York: Oxford University Press, 2023), 29.

[11] For an example of the use of the concept of capitalist realism as an analytical frame in music education scholarship, see Chapter 2, “It’s Easier to Imagine the End of Music Education Than then End of Competition,” in Powell, The Ideology of Competition in School Music.

[12] For example, see (among many others) articles appearing in the special issue of ACT on neoliberalism and music education (volume 20, issue 3).

[13] Schutzbach, There is an Alternative, 47.

The widespread use of ChatGPT, DALL·E, and Stable Diffusion has sparked worldwide discussions about how artificial intelligence (AI) can alter humans’ learning, working, thinking, and lives in general. To date, most literature on AI and music teaching and learning has been produced by researchers outside of the music education profession. For example, the 1993 World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education hosted a day of workshops in which computer science researchers proposed various interdisciplinary theories and approaches focused on music education (Smith et al. 1994). More recent research related to music education by computer scientists has examined the effectiveness of AI applications in teaching students how to sing or play an instrument (Cui 2022; Delgado et al. 2018; Ince et al. 2021; Li and Wang 2023), assisting with music teaching (Han et al. 2023), facilitating composing and musicking (Cook 1994; Dahlstedt 2021; Eldridge 2022; Franklin 2006; Moruzzi 2018; Schöen and Tompits 2022; Tsuchiya and Kitahara, 2019), promoting improvisation (Addessi and Pachet 2005), assisting with music sight reading (Pierce et al. 2021), and supporting dyslexic learners in music learning contexts (Ventura 2019).

This body of research exemplifies the interests AI researchers have in music education, but what interests do music education researchers have in AI? We forward that it is imperative that music education researchers grapple with the implications of AI in/for/against/as/around music education.

The aim of this special issue is to critically examine intersections of AI and music education. We invite authors to consider the role(s) of AI in music education from diverse theoretical, critical, and philosophical perspectives. We offer the following prompts:

1.   How is artificial intelligence experienced in music education by teachers and learners in schools and/or community contexts? How should artificial intelligence be experienced in music education by teachers and learners?

2.   How can artificial intelligence mediate the ways in which teachers and learners engage in music making?

3.   How can artificial intelligence influence* music educators’ pedagogical philosophies?

*ChatGPT recommends the following terms in place of “influence” for this prompt: enhance, augment, transform, challenge, inform, disrupt, facilitate, integrate, inspire, question, shape, customize, analyze, simulate, and revolutionize.

4.   How can artificial intelligence intersect with music education as it relates to teachers’ and learners’ identities, including but not limited to disability, sexuality, gender, race, ethnicity, class, religion, and culture?

5.   How can AI shift, if at all, understandings of musical ability, aptitude, expertise, intelligence, talent, and other related constructs? What are the implications for music education?

6.   What potential ethical issues could arise from the integration of artificial intelligence in music education, broadly conceived? How should music educators adapt their practices and policies to address issues including but not limited to agency, authorship, creativity, equity, intellectual property, and labor?

7.   In what ways can artificial intelligence interact with the practices and/or processes of accompanying, arranging, collaborating, composing, improvising, producing, songwriting, and other ways of musicking?

Beyond or in addition to these prompts, potential contributors to this special issue may also benefit from engaging with Goodlad’s (2023) framing of the “three core dilemmas for critical AI studies” and considering them within the context of music education:

(1) Reductive and Controversial Meanings of ‘Intelligence’;

(2) Problematic Benchmarks and Tests for Supposedly Scientific Terms Such as ‘AGI’ [Artificial General Intelligence]; and

(3) Bias, Errors, and Concentration of Power.

Finally, for potential contributors who find that none of the aforementioned prompts satiate their interest in AI and music education, we welcome you to generate your own prompts with or without the assistance of AI.

Submission Deadline

Please submit your manuscript as a Word document via e-mail, no later than May, 1 2024 to adam patrick bell at adam.bell@uwo.ca, copied to the ACT Editor Lauren Kapalka Richerme at lkricher@indiana.edu.

Submission Guidelines

Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education is devoted to the critical study and analysis of issues related to the field of music education. ACT welcomes submissions from diverse perspectives (e.g. education, music, philosophy, sociology, history, psychology, curriculum studies), dealing with critical, analytical, practical, theoretical, or policy development concerns, as well as submissions that seek to apply, challenge, or extend the MayDay Group’s Action Ideals.

Article Length

ACT imposes no set restrictions on length. However, authors may be asked to shorten submissions where reviewers or the editor determine that an essay’s length is not warranted by its content.

Formatting

Please format submissions using the most recent edition of the Chicago Manual of Style’s “author-date system” with the following three adaptations: 1) omit quotations marks around titles in reference lists, 2) follow APA conventions for capitalization in reference lists, and 3) use closed ellipses (necessary for html formatting). Endnotes are permitted. Audio and video materials are encouraged. Also, ACT encourages the use of “they” (and any derivation) as a singular, gender-neutral pronoun. Consult a recent issue of ACT or contact the editors for more information if required.

Abstract and Keywords

Submissions must be accompanied by a brief abstract (ca. 100–150 words) and a short list of keywords.

About the Author

Include a 100–150-word biography for each author.

Languages

Following ACT’s special issue guidelines on the Decolonization of Music Education, and with the purpose of actively diversifying knowledge creation strategies, this special issue also welcomes manuscripts that were originally published in a language other than English and in a venue not commonly accessible by all. Submitters are required to provide the English translation of their submissions.

Peer Review Process

ACT submissions are subject to a rigorous process of anonymized peer review. Final publication decisions rest with the editors (in consideration of reviewer recommendations).

References

Addessi, Anna Rita, and Francois Pachet. 2005. Young children confronting the Continuator, an interactive reflective musical system. Musicae Scientiae 10 (1): 13–39.

Cook, J. 1994. Agent feflection in an intelligent learning-environment architecture for musical composition. In Music Education: An Artificial Intelligence Approach, edited by M. Smith, A. Smaill, and G. A. Wiggins, 3–23, Springer-Verlag.

Cui, Kangxu. 2022. Artificial intelligence and creativity: Piano teaching with augmented reality applications. Interactive Learning Environments: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2059520

Dahlstedt, Palle. 2021. Musicking with algorithms: Thoughts on artificial intelligence, creativity, and agency. In Handbook of Artificial Intelligence for Music: Foundations, Advanced Approaches, and Developments for Creativity, edited by Eduardo Reck Miranda, 873–914. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72116-9_31

Delgado, Miguel, Waldo Fajardo, and Miguel Molina-Solana. 2018. A software tool for categorizing violin student renditions by comparison. In Advances in Artificial Intelligence, CAEPIA 2018, edited by F. Herrera, S. Damas, R. Montes, S. Alonso, O. Cordon, A. Gonzalez, and A. Troncoso, 11160: 330–340. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00374-6_31

Eldridge, Alice Cecelia. 2022. Computer musicking as onto-epistemic playground. Journal of Creative Music Systems 1 (1): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.5920/jcms.1038

Franklin, Judy A. 2006. Recurrent neural networks for music computation. INFORMS Journal on Computing 18, no. 3: 321–38. https://doi.org/10.1287/ijoc.1050.0131

Goodlad, Lauren M. E. 2023. Editor’s introduction: Humanities in the loop. Critical AI 1 (1–2). https://doi.org/10.1215/2834703X-10734016

Han, Xiao, Fuyang Chen, Ijaz Ullah, and Mohammad Faisal. 2023. An evaluation of AI-based college music teaching using AHP and MOORA. Soft Computing. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-023-08717-5

Ince, Gökhan, Rabia Yorganci, Ahmet Ozkul, Taha Berkay Duman, and Hatice Köse. 2021. An audiovisual interface-based drumming system for multimodal human–robot interaction. Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces 15 (4): 413–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12193-020-00352-w

Li, Ping-ping, and Bin Wang. 2023. Artificial intelligence in music education. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2209984

Moruzzi, Caterina. 2018. Creative AI: Music composition programs as an extension of the composer’s mind. In Philosophy and Theory of Artificial Intelligence 2017, edited by Vincent C. Müller, 69–72, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96448-5_8

Pierce, Charlotte, Tim Hendtlass, Anthony Bartel, and Clinton J. Woodward. 2021. Evolving musical sight reading exercises using expert models. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 3. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frai.2020.497530

Schön, Felix, and Hans Tompits. 2022. PAUL: An algorithmic composer for classical piano music supporting multiple complexity levels. In Progress in Artificial Intelligence, edited by Goreti Marreiros, Bruno Martins, Ana Paiva, Bernardete Ribeiro, and Alberto Sardinha, 415–26. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16474-3_34

Smith, Matt, Alan Smaill, and Geraint A. Wiggins, eds. 1994. Music education: An artificial intelligence approach. Springer-Verlag.

Tsuchiya, Yuichi, and Tetsuro Kitahara. 2019. A non-notewise melody editing method for supporting musically untrained people’s music composition. Journal of Creative Music Systems 3 (1): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.5920/jcms.624

Ventura, Michele Della. 2019. Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence in music education to enhance the dyslexic student’s skills. In Learning Technology for Education Challenges, edited by Lorna Uden, Dario Liberona, Galo Sanchez, and Sara Rodríguez-González, 14–22. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20798-4_2

EAS DOCTORAL STUDENT FORUM

The popular EAS Doctoral Student Forum, led by Dr. Eva-Maria Tralle and Dr. Andreas-Lehmann-Wermser, returns next year in conjunction with the 31st EAS Conference in Dublin.

Aims of the Doctoral Student Forum:

• for doctoral students to experience a rich and supportive environment for mutual discourse
• to give students, at any stage of their study, an opportunity to present, share, and discuss their work in a supportive environment with both fellow doctoral students and the experienced advisors to the forum
• to give students opportunities to discuss methodological and theoretical issues related to research in music education
• for students in the early stages of their studies to gain feedback on their ideas and plans
• to enable students to join the EAS network which can provide valuable sources of support, knowledge and professional contacts.

Deadline for Applications: 15 January 2024

Find out more about the DSF and application process here

Joint Conference — Music(s) in Context

 Canadian University Music Society, Canadian Network for Musicians’ Health and Wellness, Eckhardt-Gramatté National Music Competition

Brandon University — Brandon, Manitoba

May 12^th – 15^th, 2024

Call for Papers, Sessions, and Round Tables

Deadline: January 15, 2024

This year, the Canadian University Music Society (MusCan) will hold its annual conference in conjunction with the Eckhardt-Gramatté National Music Competition and the Canadian Network for Musicians’ Health and Wellness, hosted by the School of Music at Brandon University. The competition portion will be held from May 10th to May 12th, 2024, and the conference portion from May 12^th to 15^th, 2024. Brandon University is located in Treaty 2 territory, home to Anishinaabe, Dakota, Cree, Oji-Cree, and Dene peoples, as well as the homeland of the Red River Métis. Treaty 2 was signed in 1871 by the Crown and six Anishinaabe representatives at Manitoba House.

The conference theme “Music(s) in Context” explores the many ways in which music and music-making relate to multiple aspects of our lives. The conference theme invites us to reflect, through disciplinary or interdisciplinary lenses, on the reciprocal influences between music and location, wellness, community, but also on the personal experiences of composing, playing, or listening to music, and much more.

This year’s conference will be a connected event; paper sessions will be available to presenters and attendees in both in-person and virtual space, while other conference features will be available only to in-person attendees.

Proposals from all areas of academic inquiry, including musicology, music theory, ethnomusicology, composition, music education, electro-acoustic music, popular music studies, music recording and production, performance, and disciplines related to musicians’ health and wellness are welcome in English or French, from members and non-members. The deadline for all proposals and submissions is January 15, 2024.

Proposals on any topic are welcome, but we particularly encourage proposals that relate to this year’s theme, “Music(s) in Context” or that continue to build on the themes of Indigenization, decolonization, equity, and diversity within all areas of music study. With its Calls for Lecture-Recitals, Mini-Concerts, Scores, Papers, Sessions, and Round Tables, the Canadian University Music Society aims to bring together scholars from a wide range of perspectives for a vibrant discussion.

Papers: Papers should not exceed 20 minutes, including illustrations, and will be followed by a 10-minute period for questions and discussion. Those wishing to propose a paper must submit by the deadline: 1) an abstract of 250 words maximum for consideration by the Program Committee; 2) an abridged abstract (150 words); and 3) a biography (100 words). Abstracts must describe the subject of the paper proposal, its relationship to previous scholarship, the methodology, and the conclusions. Graduate students whose papers are chosen for presentation in any session of the MusCan conference may be eligible to compete for the George Proctor Prize; eligible students who wish to compete will be required to submit copies of their complete papers by April 29, 2024 (George Proctor Prize for student presenters: see separate call on our website).

Sessions: Those wishing to propose a session comprising three or four papers should submit: 1) a description and rationale for the session as a whole (maximum 250 words); 2) a 150-word abridged abstract; 3) the names and a 100-word biography for each proposed participant; 4) a proposed chairperson; and, 5) for each paper, an abstract that conforms to the session abstract described above (maximum of four abstracts).

Round Tables: Round tables are organized by an individual or group of individuals around a specific topic, with the participation of invited speakers/discussants. Round table sessions may be scheduled for a maximum of 90 minutes. Those wishing to organize a round table should submit an abstract of 500 words maximum, describing the topic and the method of presentation, the participants and the precise nature of each of their contributions. Proposals for Round Tables must also include an abridged abstract of no more than 150 words, and short biographies of no more than 100-words for each invited speaker/discussant. Please note that Round Tables are the only proposals that will not be read blind, as the program committee must assess the contributions of those involved in order to consider the session within the overall program.

Conference registration and membership in MusCan: All presenters and speakers must be current members of MusCan before their submissions can be accepted for inclusion into the program. They must also register for the MusCan 2024 conference as either an in-person or an online presenter. Annual dues for MusCan membership in 2024 are $95 for regular members, and $50 for part-time faculty, students, independent scholars, and retired persons. Membership may be purchased, for the current and next calendar year, online at www.muscan.org.

Submission: To submit a proposal, complete the online submission form by Monday, January 15, 2024. The submission portal can be found on our new website; it will be open to accept submissions beginning on November 30th, 2023. The author’s name, affiliation, title of the abstract, email address, and phone number should appear in the online form but not on the abstract or in any file names, as proposals will be read blind. All file submissions should be in .DOCX or .PDF format.

Submission of a proposal denotes willingness and ability to attend the MusCan conference in person or virtually. You will be asked to indicate whether you plan to present in-person or virtually at the time of submission and will have an opportunity to confirm your participation style by April 1, 2024.

Results: The results of the program committee’s deliberations will be announced no later than March 15, 2024.

For further information, visit the conference website or e-mail questions to: pastpresident@muscan.org or godinj@brandonu.ca



Programme Committee Co-Chairs: Caroline Ehman and Jon-Tomas Godin

Local Arrangements Committee Chair: Gretta Sayers and Nora Wilson