The early years music education sector is a group with a diverse background in experience, intention, qualification, funding, delivery and evidence. While the mixed nature of this sector has kept the group from uniting, it also serves as an opportunity to powerfully unify a small but growing community that could potentially impact the rest of the early years sector through professionalisation, as well as attaining the full recognised status as members of the music education community. This paper is in two parts, presenting the diversity and then a potential way forward.

1.1 Mixed Experience

Music, like language, can be acquired without formal instruction, which has led to a mixed workforce of sessions delivered by trained musicians, teachers, dancers, actors, sports people, health care workers, and interested parents. This has led to an unclear mix of child development and musical skill and is the unfortunate basis for the group’s inability to unite under a single common purpose. Each time the topic arises, regardless of the instigating group, the “minimum” levels of membership are contested, with little lee-way or open opportunity for broad sector inclusion.

1.2 Mixed Intention

The variety of experience is reflected in the marketing strategies that are used and tend to be based on three main concepts: music education approaches (e.g. Dalcroze, Orff, Kodály, Suzuki, Gordon, el Sistema); general educational approaches (e.g. Montessori, Steiner, Reggio Emilia, national Early Learning Goals); and skill specifications (e.g. sports levels, dance grades, music grades). The early years sector picks and chooses their rationale in a pragmatic approach designed to appeal to the interests and priorities of local areas. Often this includes a primary skill with a musical add-on, and examples of this include crafts, pottery painting, language courses, massage, yoga/relaxation, swimming, parent fitness, trampolining and messy play. Success is dependent on the group meeting the needs of local interest, often viewed (and even funded) as parent-support or alternative childcare.

1.3 Mixed Qualification

The diversity of experience is also reflected in the qualification of the workforce, where different sectors offer access to pre-grade qualifications, e.g. dance, drama, gymnastics and other sports, but few in music (e.g. Colourstrings, Suzuki), and no early years/preschool options through any of the music exam boards. Within the sectors that do qualify their workforce, applicants are qualified by an appropriate exam board that maintains membership that recognises sector expertise (e.g. dance, sport), safeguarding, early childhood development training and on-going professional development. At one point there was talk of a generic Sector Skills Council award for the early childhood provision community however it was highly criticised for over-emphasising generic management skill development while underplaying the skills needed to progress in the individual sectors.

1.4 Mixed Funding

Funding is a great contention within the sector, with different groups following different models, led by local demand. While some sector providers offer a drop-in service, the non-negotiable room rental costs often make this model unsustainable in the long-term, so providers insist on monthly or termly arrangements. Unfortunately with this population group, between the newness of parenting, frequent illnesses and/or doctor/midwife appointments, the most regular parents tend to be second or third time parents who already have an established routine. The advent of Sure Starts opened opportunities for independent music providers to deliver guaranteed sessions for a guaranteed regular payment. While there were incidents of high quality sessions in high demand, there were also sessions with low to zero attendance, prompting the question of whether payment should be contingent on attendance numbers or areas of deprivation. Occasional Music Education Hubs specifically employ educators to teach early years sessions, but more often than not, use already-employed staff.

1.5 Mixed Delivery

Delivery of the sessions varies greatly, too, from a capella sessions to professionally-recorded sound tracks, to live instrumental sessions. Some provide an abundance of play toys or child-sized instruments, while others focus purely on the voice. Some provide free-play throughout, while others provide structured sessions towards developing specific musical or educational skills. Some have a family focus; others have an age-specific focus. Some have a community focus, while others have a nursery or child day care focus. While none of these are bad in and of themselves, they are the small points that competing groups and individuals use to try to define their Unique Selling Point (USP), often damaging other groups’ reputations.

1.6 Mixed Evidence

As a phenomenon, the industry experienced increased interest particularly in the early 21^st century after academic and educational professionals claimed that they had conclusive evidence that students experienced enhanced educational benefit as a result of musical training at an early age. While many studies show different kinds of benefits of music education, some have made much stronger, controversial claims which have not been repeatable at all, for example, the claim that listening to classical music from birth improves academic ability, attracting the interest of over-achieving parents and politicians focussed on re-election. Over time, while some of these claims have been justified, others are too small or use a method that cannot be repeated – usually because of a lack of funding.

As other claims have been re-tested, they have been shown to require multiple caveats ranging from being short-term benefits of college/university students to being evident primarily in families with higher socio-economic status. Many providers hear of research and use these claims in their advertising, which has somewhat damaged the public reputation of the industry. The current interest in brain scans is following a similar pathway by taking small studies and making large potential claims, but only time will tell whether as-yet unproven theories will be shown to be valid. One additional point on evidence is that while it is generally accepted that most areas of knowledge require a raison d’etre or purpose, the arts historically use the “art for art’s sake” argument, claiming that art needs no explanation or justification. This argument damages an already-fragile sector by, at the very least, mystifying the sector, and the most encouraging elitist notions, thereby adding to the argument that music may be eliminated from general education, to be sought out by those able to afford and appreciate it. This concept goes against the ethos of early years music educators creating opportunities for music to be accessible to all.

2. Workforce development

It appears that previously, the workforce comprised of trained musicians with an interest in early childhood, most likely at the onset of parenthood. As the industry developed organically, individuals began to franchise their delivery “formulae” and recruited by inviting parents with a musical interest to promote and deliver branded sessions with no required musical qualification. At some point, the more enthusiastic franchisors left to start their own independent sessions, offering bespoke, demand-led groups than franchises were able to offer. Various support networks have emerged through independent alliances, the most arguably successful being the Early Years Music Facebook group, with a current membership of 1,600. With no skill or qualification prerequisite, individuals throughout the sector have joined from all over the country, only needing the common basis of practice at some point being their defining characteristic. This wide variance and informal nature has sadly resulted in different models and opinions being fairly publicly criticised and resulted in a number of individuals withholding comment and even leaving. This model needs to be extended and formalised in order adequately support individuals in taking this industry forward. Comments from this group have been collated to form the following points:

2.1 Provision

• Early years music providers want national provision of early childhood music sessions for every child, regardless of means
• Early years music providers want access to research showing the significant social physical, academic, creative and emotional benefits to children and parents in attending these sessions
• Early years music provision could be housed within local music hubs, pathway communities are easily established, leading to the outcomes that so many American studies conclude, from reduced antisocial behaviour through to achievements outside of the classroom or sports field, currently the main forms of recognised achievement in England
• Early years music provision should be free to access from pre-birth, as a growing number of studies show the power of music to transcend spoken or body language, and accessible until children start primary school
• Every nursery and preschool should include a creative specialist with a deeper knowledge of one or more creative skills (music, dance, drama, art)

2.2 Funding

• Early years music providers rate of pay should be enhanced to reflect the two specialisms that they embrace: music specialist and child development specialist
  • Like their colleagues who teach older children, they put in many more hours than they are paid for, covering costs from home-made instrumental apparatus to tea and biscuits which encourages parents to socialise
  • Similar to GPs, their lack of deep specialism is compensated by the breadth of skills they deliver at every session
• The self-employment model of delivery can be centralised, even regionally, as the current model restricts many early years specialists from affording CPD, representing their community in groups like MEC/MU/YM/SS, and working together to develop best practice
  • Centralising compensation addresses the current problem that many individual providers face in directly accessing grant funding from providers

2.3 Representation

Early years music providers need co-ordinated representation in multiple areas including:

• National government – to raise national awareness of music
• Local government – to manage day-to-day tasks, e.g. venues, materials, continuity
• Music exam boards – to develop early years provision and support qualification delivery
• Tertiary specialists – to actively identify pathway opportunities into music development
• Professional – to build sustained financial and educational relationships between successful performers (classical and contemporary) and students

2.4 Professionalisation

• Early years music educators need a protected title and membership register (as do their colleagues teaching older children)
• Represented by a sector-voted board
• Research database to collate related sector-specific findings
• Sector-specific publication accessible to early years providers and available to all music education colleagues
• Sabbatical opportunities to engage in later level provision (prim/sec/tert/prof)

2.5 Teacher training

• Early years music courses for colleges/universities need funding to trial nationally
• Research techniques should be included and encouraged in training courses
• Responsible to the sector-voted board
• Early years training courses need to develop a music elective
• Music education courses need to develop an early years elective