Phase I: Goals
To discover:
  what IG singing programs exist and in
what form;
  initiating factors that influence the
likelihood of a program starting;
  sustaining factors that influence
whether or not a program continues;
  the perceived benefits or outcomes ;
  lessons that were learned about
existing programs;
  the climate of IG programming;
  opportunities for future programs.

 Phase I: Literature Review 
 Limited published studies related to IG music programs
 Most studies involve instrumental rather than vocal music
 Most literature is descriptive and anecdotal rather than
analytical or containing systematic research
 Little theory development or data can be generalized or
transferred
 Much of the literature is dated (over ten years old at least)
 No discussion of curriculum

 Phase I: Methodology
 List of170 organizations 56 serving seniors,
68 serving children; 46 serving adults,
seniors, and/or children.
 A total of 134 of 170 agencies (78.8%)
were successfully contacted for telephone
survey
 36 organizations identified as having IG
activities/programming
 7 out of 36 were successfully contacted and
interviewed.

 Phase I: Findings
100.00%

Children sing for seniors
Children & seniors sing together
No systematic planning

80.00%

Incoming groups organize events
Only plans for special events

60.00%

Word of mouth
Calling and advertising

40.00%

Existent connections
Valuing participants' opinions

20.00%

Seeing children
Staffing & volunteer support

0.00%

Plan for occasional events

Forms

Program Initiators Sustainers Future Challenges Benefits Program
structures
plans
evaluation

Plan for more people & support
Interest in IG singing programs
Seniors' low participation
Cost for transportation
Cost for music

 Phase II: Goals
To identify:
The constituents of IG
singing curricula that could
produce wellbeing through
opportunities for learning
and relationship building
and provide expansive
communication and identity
options for participants

 Phase II: Theoretical Framework
• 

Multimodal Social Semiotic Theory

  Singing within a common communicational trajectory (e.g., Kress & Jewitt, 2003)
  Affordances of modes (e.g., singing) and participants’ facility with them
  How interest and identity are instantiated in (song as) text (e.g., Kress, 1997;
Albers, 2007)
  Semiotic chains which focus on singing can produce (e.g., Kress, 1997; Pahl,
1999; Stein, 2008)

• 

New Literacy Studies

  Understanding of singing as a social literacy practice and song as text
  Consideration of how Discourse operates within text-making (e.g., Gee, 1996)
  Multimodal Pedagogies (e.g., Stein, 2008)

• 

Singing in Young Children and Older Adults

  Understanding singing as a means of health and well-being (deHaan, 2008; Clift &
Hancox, 2001)
  Gaining confidence in development of singing (Richards, 1999)

 Phase II: Premises for Program
Curriculum

•  Emergent curriculum (invent new solutions that fit situations (Schwab,
1971)
  Affordances: Builds on participants’ funds of knowledge (Moll, 1992) and
interests (Hedges, Cullen & Jordan, 2011)
  Ethical Corollaries (Kumar & Mitchell, 2004; Heydon & Wang, 2006)

•  What is known about successful IG curriculum
IG programming vs activities (e.g., Friedman, 1997; Jarrott, 2007)
Beneficial/meaningful to all participants
On-going
Serving the community
Including a curricular component (i.e., opportunities for some form of planned
learning)
  Class structures that focus on communication learning opportunities,
relationship building, and expanded identity options (Heydon, 2007; Heydon, in
press-a; Heydon, in press-b).
  Promotion of equal group status (Jarrott, 2007)
 
 
 
 
 

 Phase II: Method
  Participatory research and curriculum
development (Evans, McDonald & Nyce,
1999)
  Methods are emergent, but adhere to six
step protocol: initiation, planning,
curriculum development, implementation,
evaluation, and expansion
  Case study method using ethnographic
tools (Dyson & Genishi, 2005)
  Adult interview protocol field tested by
O’Neill
  Child interview developed from Pelletier
(2010) and adapted by Heydon (2010)
  Data analysis according to Dyson &
Genishi (2005) and Handsfield (2006)

 Phase II: Preliminary Findings
• 

Emergent selection of song: fulfilling ethical
corollaries; building on participants’ interests and
funds of knowledge

• 

Sharing of songs: positioning participants as
knowledgeable and able to pass this knowledge on
to each other (particularly salient for adults)

• 

Singing together & sharing songs: creating
opportunities for relationship and community
building; creating opportunities for meaningful
communication, learning, and practice in
communicational trajectory

• 

Song within a semiotic chain: drawing attention
to the affordances and features of this and other
modes and each mode helped to improve facility
with other modes

 Phase II: Questions for Future

• 

How to support adults in particular who had limited experience with and
interest in singing?

• 

How to sustain relationship and community building beyond program?

• 

How to make it easier to have emphasis on art and song in one
session?