A critical look at the Dictionary of Music Education

A dictionary exists as a reference volume, consulted when the need arises, not read sequentially like a novel or a news column. This is the spirit in which the Dictionary of Music Education is assessed here.

The work opens with a catalogue of “Acronyms and Abbreviations,” yet the list contains no acronyms, only abbreviations. Thereafter appear abbreviations for organizations, followed by a chronology called “Precursors to the Discipline of Music Education.” This chronology does not actually record true precursors; instead it assembles a miscellaneous collection only tenuously connected to music education. As an illustration, the entry for “1921 – The Republic of Ireland is established” appears, with no clear relevance to the field.

Both the misuse of terms (“acronyms,” “precursors”) and the haphazard nature of the chronology reveal a lack of precision, cohesion, and purpose that runs through the entire dictionary. The root cause may lie in how the author conceptualizes her topic. In her preface, Collins writes: “Music education represents two subject fields… One must always be aware of the pervasive aspect of music when defining music education. (For example, without music, it would be education, and without education, it would just be music.)”

This music/education divide appears in the entries themselves. Individual items either address music topics or education issues; only occasionally do they deal directly with music education. Some entries verge on the superfluous: “child-care centre,” “education week,” and “emergency teacher” seem out of place. A reader encountering these terms would hardly turn to a music-education dictionary to find their meaning.

Other entries relate to neither music nor education. “Champlain, Samuel de” is sandwiched between “chamber ensembles” and “changing voice,” yet the brief bibliography offers no connection between the explorer and music teaching. Equally baffling is the entry on “elastics.” Collins identifies it as an Australian game, but states that its origins trace back to Jump Rope, a children’s pastime from ancient China. In her foreword, Carolynn Lindeman proposes that “this dictionary goes beyond just defining important words in music education. It focuses on persons, terms, events, and organizations that have affected and shaped the teaching and learning of music through the years.” Far too many entries fail to meet this goal; they only introduce distraction.

The selection often seems whimsical and arbitrary. Why are some individuals considered key figures in music education while others are omitted? The same inconsistency affects citations of specific songs and instruments. A notable bias favors prominent Americans connected to music education.

Several entries suggest that Collins’s research is thin. Her note on “Charter Schools” ends with the claim that they “have not been shown to be more effective than regular schools.” This is an editorial comment, not a dictionary definition, and it is also inaccurate. Recent evidence, especially from Chicago and New York City, indicates the opposite. Collins’s sweeping remark misses the varying effectiveness of charter schools across widely different demographic zones.

The “Mozart Effect” entry is lifted word-for-word from Wikipedia without acknowledgment. Worse, it neglects the controversy around the term and the common misconception among parents and educators about the link between music and cognitive growth.

The definition for “Inuit Peoples” is not simply wrong — it encourages a stereotype. Collins incorrectly identifies them as “A member of the Eskimo peoples…” In reality, “Inuit” has long replaced “Eskimo,” a term many Inuk people consider offensive. According to the entry, Moravian church missionaries taught music to the Inuit: “They had great capacity to learn music. In 1824 they were able to accompany voices instrumentally. The Inuit were taught not only to sing and play instruments, but also to read music notation. It was observed that by 1899 they were able to sight-read simple melodies.” The Moravian teachers were steeped in European classical traditions. Apart from dismissing the Inuit’s own rich musical heritage, the entry implies that Western music teaching functioned as a tool of colonization.

The book’s references center on the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada — an outlook that feels both constrained and constrictive. Contemporary music education pedagogy emphasizes multicultural and intercultural dimensions, but this dictionary neglects that entirely, even in its list of international organizations.

Ultimately, this dictionary fails as a helpful resource because its overall aim remains muddled. That confusion of purpose connects directly to Collins’s uncertainty about her intended audience: is the book aimed at musicians, at music teachers, or at educators in general? In attempting to serve all these groups, it may well succeed in satisfying none.