next »

[hardbop12]

I come to this board because I am a confused 22-year-old (I guess that's redundant) who is trying to become a music educator.  I have undergrad degrees in Music (performance) and Political Science.  While in undergrad, I cultivated an interest in theory and history/musicology, and would love to study and ultimately teach in either area, as well as performance in my instrument.  I've struggled to find consistent information about becoming a music teacher at the community college level (or university/state level).  In the spirit of being somewhat efficient, a listing of my primary questions is as follows:

1) I've been told by some current full-time community college professors that an MA in the area of music you want to teach is a minimum requirement, but a doctorate is really necessary to be competitive for a full-time teaching position.  I've been told by other community college teachers that an MA is suitable with teaching experience, good communication skills, and developed education skills.  Which is more true?  Due to my family and financial situation, I don't really want to have to invest the money and time into a doctorate unless I absolutely have to.  I have advanced knowledge in music theory and history for someone who has just completed their undergrad, I love teaching and I do it well, and my communication skills are polished and better than most (I worked in PR for 3 years).  However, the last thing I want to do is earn an MA, realize I can't get a full-time position, and then not be qualified to do much else (not even teach high school without a credential).  So this doctorate question is crucial for me.

2)  I've been told by some community college teachers that one of the biggest needs is teachers who can teach music theory.  I'd love to teach musicology, music history, appreciation, varying music culture classes, and theory.  I'm considering either an MA in musicology or theory.  Since I'd love either, is one better to get me a full-time job at the community college level?

3) If I did get an MA in Musicology, would I be able to get a full-time position at the University level?  Or would that require a doctorate to be competitive?

Thanks so much for your time and consideration.  I've seen the affable nature of this forum and I hold all of your responses in high esteem.

[voxprincipalis]

1) I've been told by some current full-time community college professors that an MA in the area of music you want to teach is a minimum requirement, but a doctorate is really necessary to be competitive for a full-time teaching position.  I've been told by other community college teachers that an MA is suitable with teaching experience, good communication skills, and developed education skills.  Which is more true? 

It all depends, and it's impossible to predict. The various factors are these:

1. Is the school in a geographically desirable area, one which will attract many, many applicants? If so, then those who have PhDs, DMAs, or DMs will probably stand a better chance. Even CCs like to be able to brag about the percentage of their faculty holding terminal degrees, and if there are a ton of applicants for the position, then setting aside the non-terminal-degree holders is an easy way to make a first cut. But not all CC's do this, and you can't really know ahead of time what will happen. The job market is such that there are plenty of PhDs/DMAs/DMs/etc. who don't have jobs, so you are definitely in competition with those folks.

2. What are the teaching needs of the school, and how well do you match them? (more on that below)

3. Have you already been adjuncting at the school you have in mind, and/or do you have any other personal connections there that will speak well of you?

4. How well are you able to talk about the community college mission and its population?

5. What kind of teaching experience do you have?

2)  I've been told by some community college teachers that one of the biggest needs is teachers who can teach music theory.  I'd love to teach musicology, music history, appreciation, varying music culture classes, and theory.  I'm considering either an MA in musicology or theory.  Since I'd love either, is one better to get me a full-time job at the community college level?

In general it is unusual to find a CC that offers more than two semesters' worth of theory, and even then the first class will probably be a fundamentals class. (My first teaching gig was at a CC and I had to start my Theory I class with how to read music.) So you will not likely ever use any advanced music theory in your teaching. Musicology is more useful for your future plans, because it will also provide you with opportunities to integrate music history with other disciplines, which is attractive. CCs also like courses like "history of rock & roll" and such, because there is a strong popular appeal. You really need to be a generalist to be a successful CC music prof, and almost everything you teach will be intro-level for non-musicians.

In the course of my CC job, I taught the following:
-- music appreciation
-- music history (two semesters: medieval through Beethoven, Schubert to the present)
-- US music
-- world music
-- music theory
-- interdisciplinary arts/humanities
-- various honors seminars on music, culture, and aesthetics, both Western and non-Western
-- direct the choir (and in spite of my moniker, I am no singer)

I think there were 135 other applicants for my job.

Remember that if you go the CC route, the vast majority of students you have will not want to become professional musicians or even to go on for further musical training. They are taking your courses because they are interesting elective options, or (sad but true) because they are perceived as easy A's. You should really be aware of that before you commit to pursuing a CC job. This is not to say it's a bad job -- there were lots of things about my CC gig that I liked a lot. But it's often a shock for those of us who came out of traditional music programs to realize that the things that we love most about music are just not interesting to most of the students in the class.

3) If I did get an MA in Musicology, would I be able to get a full-time position at the University level?  Or would that require a doctorate to be competitive?

PhD, unquestionably. And depending on the school and the nature of the position, you may also be competing against people with DMAs. More info on that if you want it.

Good luck!

VP

[hardbop12]

Thanks much for that thoughtful and generous response.  So, I've learned from your feedback, and have some follow-up questions.  Why are these CC positions so popular?  I mean, 135 applicants?  Wow.  Is there any way to set myself apart from the pack in CCs without a PhD?  I understand that a PhD takes 3 years after the MA in any music field; is that true?  I really can't afford to be in school that long.  That notwithstanding, I don't want to be an adjunct CC teacher for years after my MA.  And on the Musicology track, I've seen that some schools require fluent knowledge of another language such as German or Italian?  Is that the standard?  Because I don't have either of those languages under my belt, and it sure seems late to start.  If the music history, theory, and appreciation classes at the CC level are generally basic and not exceeding a two semester progression, why the need for a PhD?  Wouldn't that level of advanced study be a little overkill?  Shouldn't teaching skills and knowledge of education principles play a bigger role at that point?  It seems to me that someone with an MA and a proven passion and ability to teach music and reach students would be more likely effective at the CC level than someone with just a doctorate.  Thanks again for the courteous help.  I don't want to be one of these guys who gets a higher education in music naive as to what it's worth and what is likely to happen after commencement.  Thus, any help anyone can offer means the world to me.

[voxprincipalis]

Well, I am one of those DMA folks, so I can't give you specifics about the length of PhD programs. In general, yes, you are in it for the long haul. 3 years seems actually kind of short to me, but I could be blowing smoke. My degree took longer than that, and yes, I am counting from *after* the Master's (in my case, an MM rather than an MA).

Why are these CC positions so popular?  I mean, 135 applicants?

Looked at the market lately? :)  The disadvantage to it being a generalist kind of position is that, well, lots of people think they can be generalists.

And, just for comparison, positions in English and other humanities fields at 4-year schools routinely draw upwards of 200 or 300 applicants, all of whom either already have PhDs or are about to finish them. I don't know what the competition in those fields is like at the CC level, but I would imagine it's comparable. There's a vast number of people out there who want to teach at the college level, and not nearly enough positions to accommodate them all.

And on the Musicology track, I've seen that some schools require fluent knowledge of another language such as German or Italian?  Is that the standard?  Because I don't have either of those languages under my belt, and it sure seems late to start. 

Well, I'm not a musicologist, but it does seem standard for the field. I wasn't even able to get out of my MM program without a fairly rigorous language exam that involved translating an article (on a research topic in music) from X Language into English.

If the music history, theory, and appreciation classes at the CC level are generally basic and not exceeding a two semester progression, why the need for a PhD?  Wouldn't that level of advanced study be a little overkill?  Shouldn't teaching skills and knowledge of education principles play a bigger role at that point?  It seems to me that someone with an MA and a proven passion and ability to teach music and reach students would be more likely effective at the CC level than someone with just a doctorate.

You will want to watch the use of that word "just". :)

Don't forget that people with PhDs (or other terminal degrees) may already have a lot of teaching experience under their belt that comes with their doctoral program. So it wouldn't be wise to assume that PhD's don't have "a proven passion and ability to teach". You are right that a terminal degree does not replace teaching skill -- but it sure is a nice bonus. Terminal degrees aren't required for most job ads, but they do *tend to* make you more competitive among all those other applicants. If Candidate A has proven teaching experience, a great attitude, an understanding of and commitment to the community college mission, experience as a generalist, etc., etc., and Candidate B has all that *plus* a terminal degree, who do you think the CC is going to hire?

VP

[newbie]

Why are these CC positions so popular?  I mean, 135 applicants?  Wow.

Welcome to academia.

There are way too many people graduating with DMAs to fill the number of open spots in typical tenure-track universities each year, so sometimes the people who wanted a job at a 4-year university apply for a CC because their other options are limited. Voxprincipalis gives you a good gist of what other issues come into play.

I have a few good friends who were in music, and one of them managed to land a t-t job. It's not easy. Good luck!

[hardbop12]

That all makes good sense.  The only question I would still have from the last post is:  how does the years of advanced study one might do in a PhD or DMA program prove more valuable at the CC level than using that time to maximize teaching experiences?  Especially considering that the CC level music courses are generally basic and don't go terribly deep into subject matter.  It seems that in the case of CCs, teachers are teaching subject matter that doesn't even touch the level of content they conquer in MA or MM programs, and so experience teaching more surface level music subject matter would be the premium.  Is the value of the PhDs and DMAs to CCs just that they can boast about the amount of DMAs and PhDs they have on faculty?

So I guess my take on that scenario of Candidate A & B you posed is as follows:

Candidate A finished his MA in 2003, started a PhD and finished it in 2007, has one additional year of teaching experience, and is applying for X job at CC in 2008.

Candidate B finished his MA in 2003, and then taught various relevant courses at different community colleges for 5 years, and is applying for X job at CC in 2008.

I take Candidate B.  Even though he doesn't have a PhD, his MA took him well beyond the knowledge level he'll ever need for teaching at the CC level, plus he is the more polished educator with far more significant applicable CC level teaching experience.  Though A got some teaching experience during his PhD program, the bulk of his time and commitment were likely focused on his PhD candidacy-related work, and he probably did an assistantship teaching students at the University level.  So Candidate A has less teaching experience, while Candidate B has more experience, and specifically relevant CC experience.  Taking A suggests to me that perception is more important that good teaching-based decisions.  Is that how it is?  I don't know if I want to be a part of that game.

What exactly is a DMA and what does it entail?  If there are so few positions, why do all these people commit to such long programs (big buck + years) with the intention of teaching at the college level, if their chances are in fact so low?  For performance people, I guess it makes some sense in terms of building the resume and further perfecting their instrument.  But what does a PhD in Theory or Musicology (etc.) do if they can't get good work in a place that makes sense for their family?  Do lots of people commit their blood, sweat, tears, and so much money and time to these 5+ year programs on hope?  I understand the idea of having an unrelenting passion for something; I love music and want it to be fully involved in my life until I die.  However, it seems that when considering family responsibilities and obligations, it doesn't seem smart (and certainly not practical) to commit so much with so little promise of stability and payback in return.  If you don't get a full-time gig and you're starting a family, what do you do, take various adjunct positions, moving your kids around from city to city while they're developing and craving stability.  That seems plain irresponsible.  I know I'm young, and lot of these bridges are a little further away for me, but it seems like it's only smart to try to understand all of this before committing to longterm programs.  I'm getting married soon and so informing myself on all these issues couldn't be more important to me.  I so much appreciate the help you've been so far.  If you have any ideas about the questions I just mentioned, I'd love to hear anything you have to say.  Thanks again.  You guys are more well-informed than anyone I've talked to.

[voxprincipalis]

Is the value of the PhDs and DMAs to CCs just that they can boast about the amount of DMAs and PhDs they have on faculty?

Well, yes and no. First, don't underestimate the value of terminal degrees to institutions that often bill themselves as "just as good as a four-year school in terms of quality, but cheaper, closer to your house, and with more night and weekend classes." Having a lot of PhDs on faculty helps them sell this idea.

Also, who knows? If you have a PhD, you might do research! If you have a DMA, you might be a good enough performer to have a performing career! Both of those bring value to the school. (This is, presumably, *in addition to* your stellar teaching, not in place of it.) I published and did conference presentations while I was at a CC and they loved it.

So I guess my take on that scenario of Candidate A & B you posed is as follows:

Candidate A finished his MA in 2003, started a PhD and finished it in 2007, has one additional year of teaching experience, and is applying for X job at CC in 2008.

Candidate B finished his MA in 2003, and then taught various relevant courses at different community colleges for 5 years, and is applying for X job at CC in 2008.

I take Candidate B.  Even though he doesn't have a PhD, his MA took him well beyond the knowledge level he'll ever need for teaching at the CC level, plus he is the more polished educator with far more significant applicable CC level teaching experience.  Though A got some teaching experience during his PhD program, the bulk of his time and commitment were likely focused on his PhD candidacy-related work, and he probably did an assistantship teaching students at the University level.  So Candidate A has less teaching experience, while Candidate B has more experience, and specifically relevant CC experience.  Taking A suggests to me that perception is more important that good teaching-based decisions.  Is that how it is?  I don't know if I want to be a part of that game.

Well, that's why I said in my first reply that it was impossible to predict. You just don't know what exact combination of degree, area of expertise, teaching experience, etc. that each candidate brings to the table. Sure, candidate B may well get hired in such a scenario. Or not. Really, you just can't know. Also, believe it or not, some schools will look at Candidate B and say, "Wow, he's been adjuncting for five years -- what's wrong with him that he hasn't gotten a tenure-track job by now? We'd better pass him over." I'm not saying that's right, mind you, but it does happen. There's no general rule. Certainly in other fields, freshly minted PhDs are considered to be more desirable than people who have been out awhile but who don't have full-time jobs yet.

What exactly is a DMA and what does it entail? 

The DMA is a Doctor of Musical Arts degree and it's for those of us who are both performers and academics (though some programs emphasize one of those aspects more than the other). It is an intensive performance program that also has many academic hoops that are similar to some features of PhD programs. I had to take comps, do two sets of orals, write a substantial paper (not as big as a dissertation, but then I also had to do a bunch of recitals and other performance things)... etc. Now in addition to a performance career and studio teaching I also teach classroom topics and do research; I have a book coming out late this year or early next.

If there are so few positions, why do all these people commit to such long programs (big buck + years) with the intention of teaching at the college level, if their chances are in fact so low?

;) They're musicians. Do the other options (doing the orchestra audition circuit, becoming a conductor, living as a freelancer, becoming a professional opera singer, supporting oneself by composing) really have any better of a track record?

For performance people, I guess it makes some sense in terms of building the resume and further perfecting their instrument.  But what does a PhD in Theory or Musicology (etc.) do if they can't get good work in a place that makes sense for their family?  Do lots of people commit their blood, sweat, tears, and so much money and time to these 5+ year programs on hope?

Yes.

  I understand the idea of having an unrelenting passion for something; I love music and want it to be fully involved in my life until I die.  However, it seems that when considering family responsibilities and obligations, it doesn't seem smart (and certainly not practical) to commit so much with so little promise of stability and payback in return. 

This may well be true.

If you don't get a full-time gig and you're starting a family, what do you do, take various adjunct positions, moving your kids around from city to city while they're developing and craving stability. 

Yes, many people do this. But you may also be confusing "adjunct" (part-time) with "visiting" (usually full-time but temporary) positions. An adjunct professor teaching music history for a community college will only earn about $2500-$3500 per course. The rates vary depending on where you are, but it's not a living. Some colleges also have caps on how many courses you can cover -- so you might be limited to two courses a semester. That's $7000 a semester. Adjuncting is a hard way to earn a living -- in order to fully support yourself as an adjunct you'd have to be in an area where you could teach at several different schools and be willing to drive around a LOT. It's an exhausting way to earn a living -- but lots of us do it.

Also, your spouse would need to be "portable" -- meaning he/she would have to have the kind of job that could be found in many cities.

VP

[margarete]

I'm a grad student in musicology, working on a PhD.  I think everything voxprincipalis has said is right on target but I might be able to add a few things from a musicology standpoint.

PhD take 3 years?  That would be nice, but in my program most take 5 or 6, MA or no MA.  This varies a lot, and combined MA/PhD programs usually take about 2 years for the MA and 3-? for the PhD.  If you don't do both degrees at the same institution, the majority of the top musicology PhD programs aren't going to let you out of a lot of requirements because you already have an MA (about half of the incoming students in my program already have MAs or MMs, sometimes not in music, and we all have the same requirements).  So in most cases 3 years is extremely optimistic.  Writing a PhD dissertation takes time, and if that degree of research doesn't appeal to you, the DMA track might suit you better.

But you can do things other than just research in that time.  Several musicologists in my program (both students and professors) have quite active, sometimes very high-level professional performing careers.  If you have the performance skills, I think it's more possible to be a musicologist to do some performance than a performer and teacher to do some musicology, if that's worth anything.

I hope that helps!

Edited for convoluted grammar.

[gekko]

Let me take the other side in this and just say to not even consider what you're about to do.

First off, I'm a former music student and ended up with a composition MFA, declining to attend a couple doctoral programs for reasons that should be relevant to you as well.

-You will never be able to choose your location even if you get a job.

-You probably won't get a job to begin with.

-Even if you do get a job (unlikely) it will pay in the high 30s - low 50s range depending on the institution. (CCs are pretty standardized with no negotiation except for time. You can find an online payscale if you want to be underimpressed...)

-Very few programs offer funding and when they do it is much lower than other academic fields. (To get a fellowship of 14k in music is a "big deal" while it's nothing in the scienses.)

If you can withstand financially the years of education with lo/no payout at the end and are willing to live in an arbitrary location over which you have no control, AND your family is ok with all of that as well, go for it. Chances are this is not the case and you're better off looking into more lucrative career options. 

[hardbop12]

For all of those who have posted, thank you so much.  These responses are helping me work through some tough decisions.  I would be interested to hear your responses to gekko's most recent response.

So, all in all, I'd love to here all of your advice/outlooks for my situation.  I have undergrad degrees in music and political science (with a business minor) from a good school.  I love music and love teaching, although I do also have other interests.  I am going to be married soon.  I would love to go for an MA in music theory, composition, or musicology if it makes sense for me.  However, I know this: I don't plan on going for a PhD or DMA.  With my obligations to my to-be wife, existing family, and considering my financial situation/obligations, I just can't commit to that many years of expensive education while not earning a good income.  That can't work for me.  I can make an MA or MM program work.  So how bad does this impact my chances of getting a TT Community College position?  Would I really have no control over where I worked?  That's a problem for me.  I know it's unpredictable, but all likelihoods considered, would I be able to find a TT position after a few months, a few years, 5 or more years, or maybe never?  I'm a good musician and I think an even better teacher.  I have developed good group communications skills and I'm very much a people-person.  If I made the most of each teaching experience I got, how long would I realistically have to take adjunct and visiting professor type positions before I'd have enough experience (keeping in mind with an MA, but no PhD) to be very competitive for TT community college positions?  Even if the outlook is grim for me, please be as honest as possible.  I am young.  I would love to teach music at the community college level.  However, if my plans and life situation are not conducive to me becoming a TT community college music teacher, I don't want to make a commitment to an MA program and then realize that I was setting myself up to be jobless and unhappy for longer than I can deal with.  I guess I'm just looking for likelihoods.

[voxprincipalis]

Everything that gekko says is true, although gekko has had bad experiences in academia that tend to color the tone of his/her posts. In our field, you have to be willing to go where the jobs are. (This is less true of other fields that are high-demand, low-supply; those candidates have a better shot at choosing their preferred geography.) That's true of university jobs as well as CC's. This is certainly not an ideal situation, and some people end up in long-distance marriages because of it. They want/need the teaching gig, but spouse cannot or will not move. So they spend a lot of time apart during the academic year.

Look up all the CCs in your geographic area. Then see how many full-time music faculty there are. If there are 10 CCs in your area, I'm betting there won't be more than 12 jobs total (and very likely there won't even be that many). Once people get tenure, they tend to stay in jobs for a long time, so the amount of turnover will likely be very small. How many of those positions will open up in the next couple of years? Maybe 2 or 3. How much competition will there be for those jobs? A lot, esp. if you are in a geographically desirable area (read: city).

Only you know how much you want this kind of job, and so only you know what you're willing to endure to get it. Right now I don't hear you saying, "College teaching is the only possible gig for me, and I'm willing to do whatever I need to do to get a job!" The people against whom you will be competing will be saying that, and will have been willing to make all those sacrifices. Think about whether you really want to play poker with these folks.

VP

[choirguy]

Might I suggest, hardbop, that you consider a position in a public school for a few years to both hone your teaching skills and accumulate some coins in the bank (public schools tend to pay better than community colleges/universities).  Many school systems are crying for music teachers at all levels.  With your degree, you should be able to do a lateral entry position and have your certification in a year or so.  Spending a few years in the secondary classroom might answer a lot of the questions you are voicing here.  The years of experience will also put your community college application in the pile of "applicants with teaching experience."  Many (but not all) of the students you will encounter in community colleges will act/seem/work like high school students.  Having some experience with actual high school students will make you more effective in helping students go to the next level.

My two cents.

[schoolmarm]

And to get a teaching license will require you to go through the music ed program and student teach, if you are to do it right.  That license will allow you to get a job in nearly every area of the US.  And your level of teaching may be higher than at many CCs. 

In my rural area, several of my MA students/graduates hold CC positions.  They all have teaching licenses in addition to their masters degree.  Only one out of the 7 has a full-time job at the CC.  He teaches voice, choir, music theater, theory and music appreciation and administrates the program.  I had an administrator call me a month ago looking to fill, for sick leave, a position that taught music appreciation, music theory, history of rock, music technology, flute, clarinet, and piano class in addition to two other areas that I can't remember, but it was an odd combination. 

A masters degree in music doesn't REALLY help you get additional jobs.  It deepens your knowledge in a couple of areas.  It also prepares people for doctoral study.

I am in a PhD field.  You have 3 years of course work (if you are not deficient in anything) and then several years of exams and researching/writing the dissertation.  My dissertation and exams took 5 years after I finished coursework.  Yes, there are language requirements.  I had to take translations courses in both French and German and I am not in musicology.  Typically these translation courses cram 4 years of undergrad language courses into 2 semesters.  You don't have to speak, but you have to read and translate.  This is not to be taken lightly.  My current research requires me to read German in various technical fields in and outside of music (those words used in broadcasting and in production/copyright contracts are R E A L L Y long in German).

Do not get a doctorate unless you are funded.  In fact, I wouldn't apply for a masters if I weren't funded.  I DID do mine unfunded in a summers only program, as I was teaching school full time.  If you can't get funding for your graduate work, consider it an indication as to how you would fare in the job market.  With funding will come a TA or RA and teaching and/or research experience.  Without the teaching experience (or a public school teaching license) you are dead in the water in the job market.

Why would a CC hire a PhD/DMA over someone with a MA?  Well, the doctorate has about 70-90 more credits of courses, and a terminal degree.  That terminal degree is very valuable when the institution goes up for accreditation.  The advanced degree also give a depth to thinking and experience.  My R1 faculty has three people with MFAs and these three people just do not "get" the graduate program or some other issues in research/creative activity that they should.  They are lucky that they have been here for a while and are tenured.  They wouldn't make the hiring pool today, as the market is much, much different.

All the best to you in your endeavors.  If you need a portable job with benefits, you should certainly get a teaching license.  You may want to consider an MAT program where you get a masters and a teaching license together.  I am not a big fan of MAT programs as they tend to water down both the licensing procedures AND the master degree, but this may work for you.

[gekko]

I'd second the opinion that if you don't want to do it, don't. There's nothing wrong with doing something else. I for one am really happy with an unrelated position allowing me to choose my location and afford other creature comforts. I'm finding myself getting more work done than before as well. I have a fried that graduated from my MFA program about 15 years before I did and is one of the best performers I've EVER played with. I remember being at a session sitting in with him and he let me call out whatever I wanted (trane tunes, bop stuff, etc.) which he nailed right off the bat. He has also earned a composition Ph.D. and is now in his late 40s/early 50s after several years of being an adjunct at a number of institutions. He's applied to well over 200 full time positions and got an in person interview ONE time, in a rural area. (Several phone interviews along the way that ended there.) What baffles me is that anyone would even accept some of these jobs, let alone go through such nonsense to get one. If you want to be involved in MUSIC, not teaching the 13th grade, you're much better off in my opinion going to a major city where a lot of it is happening, not spending valuable time and money in a degree program that will not ultimately meet your goal. If you DO decide to take that step though, do it all the way. You're wasting your time if you dip your toe in the water with so many other people willing to jump in.