Model design and path for cultivating music literacy of future university teachers

Introduction

The issue of how to develop music literacy in the future university teacher has taken on a new urgency as higher education has been displaced by competence-based, interdisciplinary, and responsive to aesthetics teaching. The current literature demonstrates that definitions of music literacy that focus solely on notation and technical reproduction have become inadequate in regard to modern classroom realities [5, p. 3-6]. A more inclusive explanation of music literacy, particularly one relating to lived music, has been furthered in popular music education studies [4, p. 470-491].

This is particularly a problem in the training of teachers of university level, as they are not only supposed to perform or describe musical material, but also to teach adults, to design intellectually sound courses, to critically use digital tools, and to create a pedagogical environment where an aesthetic experience facilitates reflection, creativity and dialogue. Research about preservice music teachers shows that effective preparation requires professional learning communities [8, p. 54-65]. Teacher development research further indicates that the identity formation is the key to the process of becoming a teacher after being a student musician [7].

Other recent research on music teacher education has also proposed that change in the curriculum is necessary to prepare music teachers in the future, not a small methodological modification [2, p. 208-216]. Simultaneously, technological fluency is entering the modern portfolio of a successful music teacher, especially in the setting when AI-enabled design and hybrid learning are on the rise [3]. It is on this backdrop that the current article will seek to develop a model and establish viable directions through which the music literacy of future teachers in universities can be developed.

Methods

The research employs a conceptual synthesis that is project based. Such an approach allows integrating the results of peer-reviewed sources of music literacy, music teacher education, professional identity, collaborative learning, and digital pedagogy to develop a practically applicable model. The article synthesizes theoretical and research-based perspectives to create an empirical design framework applicable to the context of higher education, instead of testing one intervention.

The process of analysis entailed three phases. The literature on the topic was reviewed to help define how music literacy is now conceptualized and the abilities related to the training of future music teachers. Repeat developmental conditions were then compartmentalized into larger pedagogical dimensions. Based on this, the following dimensions were grouped into a model that had implementation path and assessment logic.

Results

The proposed model treats music literacy as a multidimensional construct with five interrelated components. Perceptive-analytical literacy includes developed listening, recognition of musical structure, stylistic differentiation, and the ability to explain how rhythm, melody, harmony, texture, and form function in actual musical works. Such an expanded understanding of literacy is consistent with recent attempts to rethink the relationship between musical experience, analysis, and curriculum design [5, p. 3-6].

Music literacy in this model also includes symbolic-theoretical literacy, interpretive-performing literacy, pedagogical-communicative literacy, and digital-creative literacy. Symbolic-theoretical literacy involves the confident reading and use of notation, terminology, harmonic and formal analysis, and the translation of musical ideas across sound, symbol, and concept. Theory is not treated as an isolated block of knowledge; its value emerges when it is connected to sounding music, interpretive decision-making, and pedagogical explanation.

Interpretive-performing literacy emphasizes that future university teachers need to embody music as well as describe it. It includes expressive performance, stylistically appropriate interpretation, improvisation where relevant, and the capacity to demonstrate musical ideas in ways that make learning visible to students. This view aligns with arguments that music literacy should be grounded in meaningful musical participation rather than restricted to symbolic decoding alone [4, p. 470-491].

Pedagogical-communicative literacy marks the point at which musical competence becomes educational competence. It involves the ability to select repertoire, structure explanation, ask productive questions, design learning tasks, scaffold student understanding, and connect musical material with learners’ developmental and cultural backgrounds. Evidence from music teacher education shows that weak self-efficacy can limit pedagogical confidence even when content knowledge is present [1, p. 271-286]. Research on early identity development likewise suggests that professional judgement becomes stronger when teaching experience is integrated into training rather than delayed [7].

Digital-creative literacy reflects the realities of contemporary higher education, where future music teachers increasingly work with notation software, digital audio workstations, online platforms, multimedia presentations, AI-assisted design tools, and hybrid teaching environments. Within the model, digital literacy is not understood as a merely technical skill. It also includes the judgement required to select tools that deepen musical understanding rather than fragment attention. This emphasis is supported by recent intervention research on generative AI and TPACK development in preservice music teachers [3].

These components are held together by a set of design principles centred on integration, aesthetic meaningfulness, reflexivity, and gradual professionalization. Hearing, analysis, performance, and teaching are therefore treated as mutually reinforcing dimensions of learning. Technical work remains connected to artistic perception and value, while future teachers are encouraged to examine how they understand music, how they teach it, and how students respond.

The model is translated into practice through several interconnected implementation paths. Curriculum integration requires solfeggio, theory, history, conducting, performance, and pedagogy modules to be linked through common repertoire clusters and shared tasks. A single musical work, for example, may become the basis for analytical commentary, interpretive performance, historical contextualization, and teaching simulation. This reduces fragmentation and helps students experience music literacy as a coherent professional competence.

Reflective teaching practice should begin early in the programme through microteaching, peer teaching, and guided university classroom observation. After each practice episode, students need structured reflection on what musical idea was taught, how it was communicated, what learners understood, and what should be redesigned. In this way, implicit musicianship is gradually transformed into explicit pedagogical judgement.

Collaborative professional learning is equally important. Recent studies indicate that communities of practice support preservice music teachers both emotionally and intellectually [8, p. 54-65]. Future university teachers benefit from ensemble-based planning, co-analysis of lessons, joint repertoire design, and peer feedback protocols. Collaboration reduces isolation and strengthens the professional language required to justify methodological choices in higher education.

Digital pedagogical design forms another implementation path. Students should complete tasks that require them to create annotated scores, multimedia lecture fragments, listening guides, short instructional videos, or AI-supported lesson prototypes. Every digital product, however, needs to be evaluated against musical and pedagogical criteria such as accuracy, interpretive quality, clarity, and educational purpose. Technology is thereby aligned with literacy rather than treated as a substitute for it [3].

Assessment within the model is staged and multidimensional. It extends beyond a single final examination to include listening journals, score-based commentary, performance demonstrations, teaching episodes, digital projects, and reflective portfolios. Such an approach captures development across the different dimensions of music literacy and provides evidence not only of what future teachers know, but also of how they mobilize knowledge in teaching situations.

Discussion

According to the model, developing music literacy among the future university teachers would entail a change in the additive curriculum logic to the integrative professional design. The danger of training music literacy as notation training or as a matter of theoretical correctness is that teachers when they graduate will be the graduates who are capable of reading musical texts but not of making them come alive as an educational experience. It has been clearly observed that wider curricular change is necessary in recent debates surrounding music teacher education [2, p. 208-216].

In comparison, the proposed framework connects the aesthetic susceptibility, concept, pedagogical mediation, and the digital judgment. This stance aligns with the new scholarship demanding a wider view of literacy in music education [5, p. 3-6]. On the practical level, the model has the potential to inform curriculum change, course development and assessment change in universities that train music teachers. The primary strength of it is the ability to explain that music literacy is not an isolated skill but a developmental structure. The significance of motivation and career intention in teacher development also indicates that the institutional support and professional orientation must be retained in the curriculum design [6, p. 1-22].