Developing Agency Through Music and Movement for Special Needs Students
This ethnographic study investigates how students with special needs develop agency during a classroom music teaching experiment at a special school. The experiment ran from August 2015 to March 2016, drawing on Émile Jaques-Dalcroze's principles of music and movement as tools for building competencies, skills, and understanding in both music and everyday life.
The lessons featured quick-reaction exercises, follow-along activities, singing combined with movement, body percussion, dance, movement improvisation, and relaxation. Data came from video recordings of the lessons and interviews with students, teachers, and teaching assistants. Researchers analyzed this material using qualitative analysis software and thematic analysis. The findings from this practitioner-research ethnography revealed that music-and-movement activities support the growth of student agency by encouraging four key areas: students' own decision-making, interaction with others, expression of emotions and initiative, and being recognized by others as active, capable musicians. The study urges educators to promote music and movement as a means of fostering individual agency and active participation both inside and outside the classroom.
Introduction
In Finland, basic education aims to support individuals' "growth into humanity and into ethically responsible membership of society" (Basic Education Act 628/1998). The latest Finnish National Core Curriculum for Basic Education (2014) emphasizes involving students in decision-making. Yet curriculum statements alone do not guarantee full participation for all students during or after basic education. Educational and vocational choices can be limited by impaired social, mental, or physical abilities. Research by Davis and Watson (2000) showed that disabled pupils are often denied agency in educational settings because others fail to recognize their capacity to make choices.
In line with calls for equal opportunities and self-determination in an inclusive society, Taylor (2004) advocates for a "politics of recognition" to identify discrimination. He notes that "our identity is partly shaped by recognition or its absence, often by the misrecognition of others." In special school settings, agency emerges from a complex interplay of individual growth, social interaction, and the recognition (or lack thereof) from the surrounding community. This study defines agency as the capacity for individual action and decision-making in changing contexts, where one adapts actions accordingly. This capacity is embodied. Rather than adhering to Cartesian dualism that separates body and mind, this research aligns with the embodied mind paradigm, which sees mind-body unity as fundamental to cognition, consciousness, and learning.
Building on the work of Campbell, Meynell, and Sherwin (2009), the study identifies four aspects of embodied agency: subjectivity, intersubjectivity, emotions, and autonomy. Subjectivity is not merely psychological but also embodied—we perceive, experience, act, and engage with the world through our bodies. Mackenzie's concept of "bodily perspective" describes the interplay between body and subjectivity, showing how our practical aims structure our engagement with the world. Merleau-Ponty's "I can" rather than "I think" highlights how impairment can disturb this bodily engagement. Since each body is unique, it shapes our decision-making and daily existence.
Agency is also constituted through intersubjectivity, meaning it develops "in and through one's lived bodily engagement with the world and others" (Mackenzie, 2009, p. 119). This capacity responds to and is shaped by our bodily realities, personal history, relationships, and social and cultural imagination. Disability can reveal our deep interconnectedness, yet disabled individuals are sometimes treated as isolated rather than relational beings.
Emotions prepare us for action (Damasio, 1994). They represent our attempts to make judgments about the world, helping direct our actions and personal development. As Lotan and Ells (2010, p. 114) write, "it is through our interactions with others in a supportive and encouraging environment that we learn the skills and gain the confidence necessary for autonomy." Autonomy is therefore both embodied and socially constituted, and can be compromised by abusive relationships as well as oppressive social and political environments (Mackenzie, 2008, p. 519).
In short, agency appears through future-oriented action and social-emotional engagement with others. Many studies indicate that students with special needs struggle to form meaningful relationships, putting them at higher risk of dropping out of school, leisure activities, work, and society. Having few school friends harms overall well-being and motivation, with an extremely high risk of social exclusion in adulthood. Research also shows that music participation offers opportunities for social bonding, self-determination, and transition to community life. Musical synchrony can foster social cohesion and affiliation. This raises the question: How can music and movement enhance the development of agency for students with special needs?
Music education scholars have debated agency for some time. However, research on how students with special needs can develop their agency through music education remains almost nonexistent. The agency of special needs students is often unrecognized, forgotten, or even denied in music classrooms.
This paper presents an empirical study of agency development in special needs students during a classroom music teaching experiment at a special school. The Dalcroze approach exemplifies music teaching that emphasizes interactive student participation through body movement and experiential learning. Previous studies suggest that Dalcroze-based music-and-movement teaching promotes social interaction, communication, awareness of personal identity, and agency. Therapeutic aspects of Dalcroze activities also provide opportunities to advance emotional understanding and nurture social relationships. The article aims to discover how music-and-movement activities support agency development in music education.
Methodology
To investigate agency development in students with special needs, researchers organized a teaching experiment during the 2015–16 school year. This practitioner research took place at a lower secondary special education school in northern Finland. Participants included thirteen students (eight boys and five girls, though one student left school at the start of the year and one declined participation), aged fifteen to sixteen, from two different classes. The group was diverse, with many students exhibiting various neuropsychiatric symptoms. Two classroom teachers and their teaching assistants also participated.
Research ethics followed standard procedures. Information letters were given to students, parents, and all participating staff. Signed informed consent was obtained from everyone. The first author explained the experiment's content and procedures both weeks before it began and again during the project. Despite this, ensuring that the students fully understood their consent remained challenging. Researchers also recognized that music-and-movement activities could trigger strong emotions—rage, joy, embarrassment, sadness—which would require extremely careful handling.
Weekly forty-five-minute lessons, designed and taught by the first author, included body percussion, quick reaction exercises, follow-along activities, drama-like movement expression, dancing, relaxation, music listening with free bodily expression, and movements connected to musical concepts like phrase length. The period was not rigidly pre-planned; instead, it evolved based on student responses, their development, and teacher reflections. Lessons took place in a large classroom with space for movement. Each followed a similar structure: opening in a circle with warm-up, then exercises tied to a musical topic (such as metrics, harmony, or tempo), ending with relaxation. The main goals were to help students trust their own ideas, collaborate, and discover their bodies as expressive instruments for agency.
The twenty-one lessons (August 2015 to March 2016) were videotaped with one camera to analyze interaction and document agency development. Since subjectivity, intersubjectivity, emotions, and autonomy are not always directly observable, researchers studied them indirectly through action and interaction. Interviews with students were analyzed using thematic analysis. However, during data collection it became clear that students struggled to articulate the development of their agency in depth. Therefore, video data and observations from teachers and assistants took on central importance. Classroom teachers and teaching assistants were interviewed about their observations and conceptions of student development. Together, these reflections roughly twelve hours total, plus the teacher-researcher's research diary, enhanced the picture drawn mainly from the video data (approximately sixteen hours total).
After familiarizing themselves with the video recordings, researchers performed initial coding of one student's actions and interactions using qualitative analysis software (NVivo). The data-driven codes—inspired by but distinct from those in Rainio's (2010) study—included bodily passivity, bodily activity, rambling, touching, bodily interaction, responsiveness, and initiatives as indicators of that student's agency. These codes focused on the student's interaction with others, participation, initiatives, and responses to others' initiatives during musical activities.
For an analysis of all students' agency development, researchers revised the coding as follows: 1) students' passivity (passive sitting, turning back, following the lesson at the side); 2) activity (moving according to teacher instructions or randomly); 3) intersubjectivity (moving and participating through interaction with others); 4) interaction with objects (touching walls, communicating with and through instruments, music, and other objects); 5) responsiveness (participating by responding to others' initiatives through movement, nodding, or answering questions); and 6) initiatives (supporting, developing, contributing to, or resisting suggestions and actions of others). These codes were partly overlapping, as it was sometimes difficult to interpret student actions.
The coding revealed that most students' activity, intersubjectivity, and responsiveness increased toward the end of the school year. The participants' actions were captured on video, but the meanings they constructed were not visible. Thus, the video coding was used to conceptualize what was essential for understanding how agency is manifested and possibly developed in music-and-movement activities.
Findings
During analysis, researchers noticed that students had spontaneously formed subgroups: the "loners," a pair of girls, and a group of three boys. These subgroups were evident in students' acting and decision-making throughout the experiment. To understand agency development, it was crucial to observe how student initiatives were further developed by others and to what degree they influenced the flow of musical exercises. The following presents agency development based on this grouping.
< FIGURE 1>
From individual obstacles to collective action
Throughout the teaching experiment, six of the students remained more or less on their own. Alex displayed behavioral challenges, continuously taking initiative and demanding space, yet he got along well with everyone. Beth, who had difficulties in social relationships, had been excluded in her own class due to aggressive behavior. Other students avoided her based on past experiences. Cathy also had challenging behavior and was often rejected by her peers. While all three were active learners, they struggled to tolerate disappointments. This often led them to interrupt and disrupt the flow of musical activities. Their activity and interactivity often became counterproductive when they encountered obstacles. Additionally, they tended to comment negatively on exercises and the actions of others, which hindered their acceptance by the group. According to reflections from teachers and assistants, Beth and Cathy "did not really know how to be a friend, and caused all sorts of hassle just because not many want to be her friend, 'cause it's got to go on her terms" (Pauline, 22.9.2015). They required adult support to participate. Alex was friendly but often considered himself superior, causing group confusion initially. These three students primarily displayed aggressive activity and responsiveness or, in Alex's case, hyperactivity and self-centered motivation. All were socially isolated from others.
By the end of the teaching experiment, however, all three learned to calm themselves through music-and-movement exercises. This allowed them to concentrate on peer interaction and make constructive initiatives. The video data shows, for example, how Alex toward the end of the experiment was able to engage in musical exercises he had initially rejected. He also supported others' ideas, responded to them, and waited his turn. In Mackenzie's terms, his engagement in musical exercises became structured by collectively constructive practical aims.
Similarly, Beth learned to calm herself and gradually shift focus from subjective to collective actions. Midway through the school year, she expressed her creativity and skills through bodily movement—bouncing a ball or playing the djembe in steady pulse, modeling for other students. By the end, she performed musical exercises in pairs several times, suggesting growth in interaction. She also began taking initiative when asked to pair with peers. Her teaching assistant described her development: "music is what brings her that success and those experiences of succeeding… that way, she got to really show her good sides and the abilities she has" (Tina, 5.4.2016). Music-and-movement activities had supported these students in moving from individual obstacles toward collective engagement. < FIGURE 2>
Beth’s expressive attempts to appraise the situation helped direct her actions toward positive peer interaction (see e.g., Burrow, 2009; Maclaren, 2009).
Similarly, Cathy, who delighted in dancing, clearly enjoyed recognition from others, especially through the dance movements she created before them. Early in the school year, she demonstrated several deconstructive actions toward musical activities. For example, she laughed at others’ movements and disrupted shared exercises. Occasionally, she refused to participate in the lesson. Yet her approach to others shifted from impulsive and self-absorbed to more sensitive and interactive. Her teacher described her behavior at the close of the teaching experiment: “Cathy was more restrained and calmer” (Pauline, 12.4.2016). She became capable of making initiatives toward peers, redirecting her focus from herself to others. For Cathy, independent decision-making and her sense of agency—the feeling of “I can” (Merleau-Ponty, 1962, p. 159)—in musical activities played a crucial role in participation.
Well, yeah, I sort of like to move to music and so, but then if, like, you should be doing something the teacher tells you to, then it always goes to like me not taking part, but then, if I got to decide by myself what to do, then it was like different so that you’re totally in it. (Cathy, 31.3.2016)
By contrast, David, Ellen, and Noah were more introverted. At the start of the school year, they were shy, withdrawn, and often passive during lessons. Ellen was a wary student who seemed to dread new situations, typically refusing to attempt an exercise or leaving the classroom. Rose, the teaching assistant, speculated that Ellen might seek attention through her behavior: “that way she got the attention that the girls here compete for” (Rose, 12.4.2016). Noah, who had already received an autism spectrum diagnosis, largely lived in his own world, facing considerable communication and interaction difficulties.
At first, these three students displayed passivity in novel situations. This was evident, for instance, in video data where Ellen and Noah literally walked away from new learning contexts and sat passively on the sidelines. The following excerpt illustrates such a situation, which ends with Ellen returning and participating again:
We are doing an exercise in which we walk around the room to the beat of music, throwing a soft toy to each other. Ellen participates fully, and she knows from whom to catch the toy and to whom to throw it while moving. Suddenly I shout: “Hi, dj, stop the music! And please come here all!” At the same time, Ellen walks away from the room. Others don’t see that. I start to give new instructions to change the direction of toy throwing. When it is Ellen’s turn, we notice that she has disappeared. “Ellen!”, Pauline shouts and goes to look for her. The exercise is interrupted, and we are waiting for Ellen. After a while, Ellen comes back and decides to stay out of the exercise. After watching others doing the exercise for a minute, she walks to Pauline and says her ankle and neck are hurting. However, she is soon participating in the exercise again. (Videotape transcription of music-and-movement lesson, 5.11.2015)
During the teaching experiment, these three students needed and received constant adult support in their actions. They struggled, in a sense, to commit to the exercises. Yet Noah’s and David’s agency in particular developed through musical activities. Noah transformed from a passive outsider into a participant and even a leader, as he learned to communicate through non-verbal, embodied ways in music. His agency manifested in his embodied capacity to act in and through music with others. This shift in agency development was also observed outside the classroom: he began to take initiatives and interact with others.
Permission to use Noah’s diagnosis was granted, as it helps clarify the challenges he faced in interaction, participation, and agency overall. Noah’s development is examined and analyzed in closer detail in Sutela, Juntunen & Ojala (2019).
Noah immediately noticed that “hey, here’s a sledge and a child on it, and a rope, and this needs someone to pull it” – and joined the play. And afterwards, people in the teachers’ lounge were astonished that one day someone came over to say that “Come, look, Noah’s there pulling that child.” […] Noah’s participation has increased by 500%. At least. What happened with Noah was that first his gaze changed, to the kind that he sought attention, and every now and then peeked from there. And then he came out into the open, [showing] that “I am here”. And then his participation in the intermission activities. It’s really amazing. (Sarah, 5.4.2016)
David actively began to pursue participation in everything, despite many learning and motor skill challenges. He was cooperative and responsive but lacked initiative in decision-making. For David, the turning point in agency development occurred on October 29th, when the teacher-researcher encountered internet connection problems while preparing the lesson and with the music she was using. David volunteered to help her with his own phone. From then on, he became responsible for playing music in class. The following excerpt captures the situation:
We are gathering together to start the lesson. David comes to me and hugs me, saying: “Wasn’t it good that I could help you?” “Yeah, thank you – I was totally lost”, I answer. “You don’t understand anything about information technology, do you?”, he continues. “No, I don’t”, I laugh. (Videotape transcription of music-and-movement lesson, 29.10.2015)
From this event onward, he changed from a passive, rarely responsive student into an active DJ who wanted to choose music for some exercises. He discovered his own way of taking responsibility in lessons, and through interconnectedness with the teacher-researcher gained the confidence needed for individual acts (Lotan & Ells, 2010, p. 114). Regarding Ellen’s agency, however, no notable development occurred during the school year. She continued to disappear during new turns in the lesson and only participated occasionally. Nevertheless, she took positive steps toward the teacher-researcher and peers by the end of the teaching experiment. It appears she would have benefited from a longer period of music-and-movement teaching.
Among these six students, the challenge was adjusting their own decision-making to that of others. At the start of the school year, many expressed their agency—or lack thereof—by turning or walking away, refusing to participate, resisting, or negatively affecting interaction in musical exercises by interrupting the flow or making disruptive initiatives within musical activities. Some of these manifestations of agency restricted their potential for interaction and further action in class. The teachers and teaching assistants performed musical exercises with these “loners” in pairs, encouraging them to try new things and helping each student reach their highest participation level. This support allowed them to practice bodily skills—and through them, social skills—safely, thereby helping them “gain the confidence necessary for autonomy” (Lotan & Ells, 2010, p. 114). This was evident, for example, in their improved ability to eventually perform musical activities alone or as a student-student pair.
The exercises activated their self-regulation and invited them to act and interact with others. As Sarah (the 9th-grade teacher) reflected on their increased participation during lessons, the students no longer feared one another as much.
In my opinion, toleration within that group has grown, at least in some ways, very delicately. That they, just like [with] that trust, that they are not so afraid of one another. And that their joint experience also has unified them in a way. So there has been, between the two groups, […] clearly some fearfulness towards some students, but we’ve got rid of it a little. (Sarah, interview, 5.4.2016)
Creation of one’s own world in the music-and-movement lessons
Gaby and Holly were already close friends before the teaching experiment. They were kind girls who followed instructions exactly, never questioned or resisted teachers’ directions, and caused no trouble. They were always paired, sitting next to each other and holding hands. In a sense, they carved out a private space with no room for others. Compared to other students, the girls remained nearly invisible to the participating adults, to the point that the teacher and teaching assistants barely mentioned them in interviews.
Video data revealed that the girls’ movements in musical exercises were mainly small and limited, turning inward or toward each other (Figure 3). In a way, Gaby and Holly were present but passive in the lessons—they obeyed instructions yet remained isolated from other participants and their initiatives. Their agency was, in a sense, restricted and shaped by their relationship with each other.
＜FIGURE 3＞
Toward the end of the teaching experiment, the girls showed small signs of reaching out to others. For instance, in an exercise where students paired up according to what they heard in music, Gaby extended her hand toward Noah, who was shy and still unable to initiate choosing a partner. Similarly, Gaby did not turn away from Cathy, who wanted to speak with her at the start of one lesson. The next excerpt describes the incident:
We are about to start the lesson. Isaac is improvising with the piano and I am gathering my things to get started with teaching. Some students are walking around, some are sitting and waiting. Cathy and Gaby are walking and talking to each other, while Holly is undressing her outdoor clothes. Gaby turns toward Cathy, talks and listens to her, until Holly comes to pick Gaby up. They hold each other by the hand and Cathy walks away from them. (Videotape transcription of music-and-movement lesson, 18.2.2016)
This was the first time Gaby demonstrated any activity toward Cathy during the experiment. Gaby and Holly were so tightly bound that no room existed for others. Holly, especially, depended on Gaby in her actions. Yet in an exercise where everyone showed a movement pattern for others to follow, Holly was decisive and demonstrated willingness to be first:
We are in a circle, and after the first round of movements, I say: “Hey, let’s take one more round where those who want to show a new movement, do it!”. I turn away and go to pick up Noah, who is standing behind Isaac and at the same time Holly walks and shows her movements, raising hands high and whirling around. Others follow her and she laughs when watching them. (Videotape transcription of music-and-movement lesson, 11.2.2016)
Overall, the accumulated data provided little evidence of agency development in these two. Gaby and Holly inhabited their own world within lessons, which isolated them from others. They broke out of it when asked but always “bounced back” and retreated to their safe space. They were comfortable and secure within their own realm. Beyond this, their limited movements, gestures, and restrictive postures expressed “a femininity of compliance” (Burrow, 2009, p. 126), thereby reducing their chances for action and self-expression. Their constrained, restrained bodily movements may indicate that they were, in fact, undermining their own agency compared to the physically larger students who demanded more space. Gaby’s and Holly’s self-motivated initiatives and interactivity with the group started to emerge only at the very end of the teaching experiment. However, they would have needed more time and scaffolding to further adapt their actions to those of others in the group.
From collective resistance to individual decision-making
Similar to the girl duo, three boys—Isaac, Jim, and Kenny—did everything together during lessons. They came from the same class, always sat next to each other, and performed all exercises as a unit unless directed otherwise. When the teacher-researcher gave instructions to the class, they turned to each other for mutual confirmation of how to react and respond. Isaac was an exception: he occasionally mustered the courage to resist the group’s joint decisions.
At the start of the school year, they expressed their agency through collective resistance—for example, by performing musical exercises together but apart from the others, collectively resisting the teacher-researcher’s instructions, interrupting or slowing the exercise flow (for instance, by bouncing the ball too hard for others to catch). Their interaction focused mainly on their own clique, not on others in the group. Like Gaby and Holly, they were poised and took initiative within their own sphere but not much beyond it.
When they showed strong resistance or passivity toward instructions, they were permitted to improvise the exercise by themselves. Jim, in particular, exhibited active resistance to many exercises, trying to lure Isaac and Kenny to join him by turning his back, lying on the floor, or whispering to them. As the tallest of the three, Jim claimed space with his large, masculine movements. The trio cited early mornings and tiredness as reasons for refusing some musical activities: “Well, hmm, sometimes [I] felt a little tired and kinda often just didn’t have the energy to do [the exercises] then. I did listen to what was said, though” (Jim, 31.3.2016).
They determined their own level of participation, often led by Jim. Their classroom teacher interpreted the students’ resistance as a process of asserting independence or fearing failure:
Some of them showed some contradiction in that they also wanted to bring forward their need to become independent and grow up… what might be behind this questioning might basically be some kind of inability to function for some reason. Then [there could be] some incapacity, fear of failing and low self-esteem. (Sarah, 5.4.2016)
Gradually, Kenny began to resist the trio’s collective decision-making: “Kenny clearly would like to do the exercises, but because the other boys don’t participate, he just stands there for a moment, arms crossed, and doesn’t know what to do” (Research diary 1.10.2015). Slowly, his bodily posture shifted, and he opened up—both physically and socially—toward others, as if waiting for an invitation to join musical activities. He began demonstrating his agency through an embodied and social capacity to act and interact. Over time, he grew more active, stronger in himself, and started making individual decisions, often opposing those made by Jim. These changes in Kenny’s agency affected Isaac and Jim as well: “Jim and Isaac try to cop out every now and then, but Kenny is actively with us and clearly gets Isaac and Jim to stay with us as well” (Research diary, 29.10.2015).
As the teaching experiment progressed, Kenny participated more actively in musical exercises and interacted with other students. He also started moving in more open ways, whereas his bodily stance and movements had been very limited at the beginning.
Following Kenny, Isaac—who had been strong in individual decision-making from the outset (when he chose to be)—also grew more autonomous and took leadership in lessons. For instance, he accompanied one relaxation exercise on the piano and led a chain dance. Moreover, he began developing the musical exercises further by inventing movements and gestures, and improvising “stories” within drama exercises, thus being interactive outside their trio and exhibiting autonomous agency.
We are performing and exercising in pairs to develop kinesthetic awareness. In the exercise, one participant acts as a marionette, while the other one moves the marionette by pulling the imaginary strings attached to the joints. It is Isaac’s and Kenny’s turn to perform their marionette to the others. Kenny starts to pull imaginary strings attached to Isaac. However, Isaac takes control over Kenny and “comes alive”. He starts to move around the “stage” and Kenny runs after him. Everyone is laughing as Isaac performs his marionette coming alive. (Videotape transcription of music-and-movement lesson, 18.2.2016)
Isaac also actively demonstrated his newly developed skills through singing and dancing. His agency was reflected in autonomous and constructive acting within musical exercises. Finally, toward the end of the experiment, Jim began to show some initiative. For example, he led the chain dance (Figure 4) and contributed to drama exercises. Still, he remained mainly guarded, and his attitude toward musical exercises was often negative even at the conclusion. He chose to express his agency through negative attitudes and resistance.
Discussion
For those who participated actively, the teaching experiment provided a platform to practice individual decision-making, interaction, and expression of knowledge and musicianship. Based on interviews and the research diary, music-and-movement exercises—with their turn-taking, listening to music and responding with movement, improvisation, and interactive nature—created a safe space for agency development. For others, the time frame was insufficient but promising, referring to forms of incipit agency (Metcalfe & Terrace, 2013).
In sum, students perceived, acted, and experienced the music and others in lessons through their bodies, highlighting the embodied nature of their subjectivity. Their decision-making and interaction were structured by practical aims when engaging in musical exercises with others. Active participation in musical exercises in pairs and in groups supported participants’ activity in relation to others—that is, their intersubjectivity. As Lotan and Ells (2010, p. 114) note, “as opposed to freedom from others, a relationship with others is a precondition for autonomy” (emphasis added). For many students, moving to the music they heard, singing, and playing face to face with teachers and teaching assistants was not only a step toward more independent actions but also a step toward learning interaction with peers. These positive interactions and emotional support from others promoted their engagement in musical activities (see also Juntunen, 2015). These shared acts of trust within musical activities diminished the “asymmetrical power” relationships in the classroom.
The students’ activity within lessons was shaped by the bodily cues—emotions, voices, and gestures—of those around them (Hoehl, 2013; Metcalfe & Terrace, 2013). Their emotional expressions frequently appeared to act as a catalyst for their participation throughout the teaching experiment. For instance, a student in a bad mood might refuse to engage, walk away, or turn their back.
Conversely, joy manifested in the opposite manner: drawing near to others, fully participating, and using broader movements. As a result, students adjusted their own actions in response to those around them; emotional cues and displays influenced their choices during musical interaction. In this way, students negotiated their own subjectivity with that of their peers. When the world felt unfamiliar to them, or when their bodily expressions went unanswered, their intentional actions turned inward, directed toward themselves, objects, or individuals within their immediate reach. They might have been receptive to the world yet unable to take initiatives or influence the action’s flow. When the environment felt safe and encouraging, they acted outward, contributing to and initiating actions, thereby displaying and strengthening their individual agency.
The analysis reveals that the growth of agency is either enabled or hindered across three interconnected dimensions: (1) the individual level, where we perceive our self and its capacities; (2) the social level, where our agency is shaped—for better or worse—through interaction with others; and (3) the societal level, where policies determine whether we are regarded as capable agents. The individual and social levels engage in constant dialogue, through which agency is either supported or undermined, depending on whether the exchange is constructive or deconstructive. Put plainly: if students receive no support for their initiatives in the music classroom, it becomes hard for them to view themselves as able musicians. Beyond the school system’s inherent qualities, the development of agency is furthered by equal entry to learning opportunities and adequate support—guided by societal structures—and, according to this study, specifically through taking part in music-and-movement education.
Drawing from these results, we argue that music and movement ought to be more broadly recognized as a meaningful pathway to learn music and develop agency, at least among students with special needs. We urge educators to view music and movement as a tool through which equitable learning practices can help learners “grow into active citizens by developing knowledge and skills for operating in a democratic, egalitarian society” (Ministry of Culture and Education, 2014, p. 18). Activities based on music and movement—such as body percussion, leading and following, quick-response games, and moving along with music—can help individuals build bodily skills, confidence, communication, self-awareness, and independence. We therefore recommend such activities for special education, as they enable students with varying needs to practice agency and achieve empowerment, equipping them for active participation in society.
Still, teachers must be mindful of challenges before introducing music and movement in a special school context. Students may feel insecure, and gaining their trust can require considerable time. Moreover, a group of diverse learners makes music instruction susceptible to behavioral difficulties, calling for flexible pedagogical frameworks and long-term support for these working styles. Nonetheless, how exercises are structured within lessons matters greatly. Many students have faced bullying; thus, musical activities should be planned with careful regard for their personal space and development, emphasizing the necessity of a safe environment. Given that students may need support with learning, communication, and motor skills, the teacher must design lessons so that everyone can participate. Likewise, when implementing processes rooted in imagination, some students may struggle to differentiate between the imagined and reality. Therefore, exercises should be paired with reflection, and different experiences and sensations handled with respect and care.
While multi-disciplinary research has increasingly addressed the issues of students with special needs and their active participation (see Laes, 2017), more studies are still needed on how music education can foster each individual’s agency within society. By recognizing the equal worth of all learners in music classrooms, we affirm their value as integral members of society.
Declaration of interest statement: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References:
Abril, C. R. (2011). Music, movement, and learning. In R. Colwell & P. R. Webster (Eds.), The MENC handbook of research in music learning, Volume 2: Applications (pp. 92–129). New York: Oxford University Press.
Adamek, M., & Darrow, A.-A. (2012). The intersections of arts education and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches. Music participation as a means to facilitate self-determination and transition to community life for students with disabilities. Washington, DC: The Kennedy Center.
Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 385–405.
Basic Education Act 628/1998. Amendments up to 1136/2010. (2010). Government of Finland.
Burrow, S. (2009). Bodily limits to autonomy: Emotion, attitude, and self-defense. In S. Campbell, L. Meynell & S. Sherwin (Eds.), Embodiment and agency (pp. 126–144). University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Campbell, S., Meynell, L., & Sherwin, S. (2009). Embodiment and agency. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Cooper, V., & Ellis, C. (2011). Ethnographic practitioner research. In S. Callan & M. Reed (Eds.), Work-based research in the early years: Positioning yourself as a researcher (pp. 47–61). London: Sage.
Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason and the human brain. New York: HarperCollins.
Davidson, J. W. (2009). Movement and collaboration in musical performance. In S. Hallam, I. Cross & M. Thaut (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 364–376). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Davis, J., & Watson, N. (2000). Disabled children's rights in everyday life: Problematising notions of competency and promoting self-empowerment. The International Journal of Children's Rights, 8(3), 211–228.
DeNora, T. (2002). Music in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ells, C. (2001). Lessons about autonomy from the experience of disability. Social Theory and Practice, 27(4), 599–615.
Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity. (2012). Responsible conduct of research and procedures for handling allegations of misconduct in Finland. Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity.
Goldman, R., Pea, R., Barron, B., & Denny, S. J. (2006). (Eds.) Video research in the learning sciences. New York: Routledge.
Habron-James, B. (2013). Mémoire de Diplôme: The application of Dalcroze Eurhythmics to the teaching of children with special educational needs. Unpublished Diplome Superieur thesis, Institut Jaques-Dalcroze, Geneva.
Hammel, A. M., & Houringan, R. (2011). Teaching music to students with special needs: A label-free approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hoehl, S. (2013). Early sensitivity to emotion cues: Precursors of social referencing? In J. Metcalfe & H. S. Terrace (Eds.), Agency and joint attention. (pp. 196–205) New York: Oxford University Press.
Hove, M. J., & Risen, J. L. (2009). It’s all in the timing: Interpersonal synchrony increases affiliation. Social Cognition, 27, 949–961.
Juntunen, M.-L., & Hyvönen, L. (2004). Embodiment in musical knowing: How body movement facilitates learning with Dalcroze Eurythmics. British Journal of Music Education, 21(2), 199–214.
Juntunen, M.-L. (2015). Pedagoginen kokeilu integroida Ipadin käyttö, luova tuottaminen ja keholliset työtavat peruskoulun seitsemännen luokan musiikinopetuksessa: Tapaustutkimus toimijuuden näkökulmasta [Pedagogical experiment on the use of iPads with creative production and bodily approaches in 7th grade music instruction: A case study from the perspective of agency]. Finnish Journal of Music Education, 18(1), 56–76.
Juntunen, M.-L. (2016). The Dalcroze approach: Experiencing and knowing music through the embodied exploration. In C. R. Abril & B. Gault (Eds.), Approaches to teaching general music: Methods, issues, and viewpoints (pp. 141–167). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Karlsen, S. (2011). Using musical agency as a lens: Researching music education from the angle of experience. Research Studies in Music Education, 33(2), 107–121.
Karlsen, S., & Westerlund, H. (2010). Immigrant students’ development of musical agency: Exploring democracy in music education. British Journal of Music Education, 27(3), 225–239.
Keller P. E., Novembre, G., & Hove, M. J. (2014). Rhythm in joint action: Psychological and neurophysiological mechanisms for real-time interpersonal coordination. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369: 20130394.
Koster, M., Timmerman, M. E., Nakken, H., Pijl, S. J., & van Houten, J. E. (2009). Evaluating social participation of pupils with special needs in regular primary schools. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 25(4), 213–222.
Laes, T. (2015). Empowering later adulthood music education: A case study of a rock band for third-age learners. International Journal of Music Education Research 33(1), 51–65.
Laes, T. (2017). The (im)possibility of inclusion: Reimagining the potentials of democratic inclusion in and through activist music education. Studia Musica 72. Helsinki: Sibelius-Akatemia.
Lakkala, S., Miettunen, H., Takala, M., Kyrö-Ämmälä, O., Sarivaara, E., Kielinen, M. (2019). Steps towards and challenges of inclusive education in Northern Finland. In M.C. Beaton, D.B. Hirshberg, G. R. Maxwell & J. Spratt (Eds.), Including the north – A comparative study of the policies on inclusion and equity in the Circumpolar North (pp. 125–142).
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Leder, D. (1990). The absent body. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lotan, G., & Ells, C. (2010). Adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities and participation in decision making: Ethical considerations for professional–client practice. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 48, 112–125.
Mackenzie, C. (2009). Personal identity, narrative integration, and embodiment. In S. Campbell, L. Meynell & S. Sherwin (Eds.), Embodiment and agency (pp. 100–125). University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Maclaren, K. (2009). Emotional metamorphoses: The role of others in becoming a subject. In S. Campbell, L. Meynell & S. Sherwin (Eds.), Embodiment and agency (pp. 25–45). University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Maes, P.-J. (2016). Sensorimotor grounding of musical embodiment and the role of prediction: A review. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–10.
Matyja, J. R., & Schiavio, A. (2013). Enactive music cognition: Background and research themes. Constructivist Foundations 8(3): 351–357.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. London: Routledge.
Metcalfe, J., & Terrace, H. S. (Eds.). (2013). Agency and joint attention. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ministry of Education and Culture. (2014). Teacher education in Finland: Leaflet 1.
National Board of Education. (2014). National Core Curriculum for Basic Education. Helsinki.
Nepi, L. D., Facondini, R., Nucci, F., & Peru, A. (2013). Evidence from full-inclusion model: The social position and sense of belonging of students with special educational needs and their peers in Italian primary school. European Journal of Special Needs Education 28(3), 319–332.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Perdue, N. H., Manzeske, D. P., & Estell, D. B. (2009). Early predictors of school engagement: Exploring the role of peer relationships. Psychology in the Schools 46(10), 1084–1097.
Rainio, A. P. (2010). Lionhearts of the playworld: An ethnographic case study of the development of agency in play pedagogy. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
Robertson, C. E., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2017). Sensory perception in autism. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18, 671–684.
Sheets-Johnstone, M. (2009). The corporeal turn: An interdisciplinary reader. Exeter: Imprint Academic.
Taylor, C. (1994). The politics of recognition. In A. Gutmann (ed.) Multiculturalism: Examining the politics of recognition (pp. 25–73). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Terzi, L. (2007). Capability and educational equality: The just distribution of resources to students with disabilities and special educational needs. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 41(4), 757–773.
UN (United Nations). (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. New York: The United Nations.
Unesco. (2003). Overcoming exclusion through inclusive approaches in education: A challenge and a vision. Conceptual paper.
Van der Merwe, L. (2015). The first experiences of music students with Dalcroze-inspired activities: A phenomenological study. Psychology of Music, 43(3), 390–406.
Wehmeyer, M. L., & Palmer, S. B. (2003). Adult outcomes for students with cognitive disabilities three-years after high school: The impact of self-determination. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38(2), 131–144.