This study examined mainstreaming in music via a survey of a sample of Arizona music educators. Among the respondents (n = 107), the vast majority are or have been responsible for teaching students with disabilities, although most have received little or no training in special education. Emotionally/behaviorally disordered students are perceived as the most difficult to mainstream, and physically handicapped and speech-impaired students the least difficult. Among disabled students, "learning disabled" was the category most frequently encountered. In most schools, mainstreaming is the only music placement option, and regular music faculty members are the sole providers of music instruction for special learners. Musical ability is rarely the primary reason for mainstreaming students, few respondents have access to special education consultants or adequate time to individualize programs, and most respondents rarely or never participate in placement decisions. The respondents' goals for special learners in music center on student participation and classroom management, with little demarcation between musical and nonmusical goals or objectives. We concluded that effective mainstreaming in music, The Education for Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (Public Law 94-142) mandates the least restrictive educational environments for all students. For many students with disabilities, this law implies mainstreaming, "a term used to describe the process of integrating exceptional children into the regular classroom" (Darrow, 1990). P.L. 94-142 is almost two decades old, yet there is a paucity of research literature on music education for students with disabilities. Research does suggest that many music educators are involved in mainstreaming. Just over 10 years ago, some 63% of music educators responding to a nationwide survey reported involvement with disabled students (Gilbert & Asmus, 1981). Elementary teachers were more involved than secondary teachers. A survey of Iowa and Kansas

The teaching of multicultural music, and to a lesser extent popular music, has been the stated goal of music education policy makers for many decades. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to estimate the amount and percentage of time music education majors in a university teacher education program spent on 13 styles of music in history, theory and performance courses during a four-year program, both in and out of class. Subjects were the entire population of undergraduate pre-service music teachers from one large university music school in the southwestern United States ( N = 80). Estimates were provided by the course instructors. Subjects spent widely disparate amounts of time on musics of the western art (92.83%), western non-art (6.94%), and non-western (.23%) traditions, with little time (.54%) devoted to popular music. The discussion centers on solutions sometimes proffered for musically unbalanced music teacher education programs, implications relative to accreditation and national music standards in the USA, and changes implemented by the institution under study.

It is an honor and privilege to serve the profession as the nint_h chair of the Editorial Committee (editor) ofthejourn~l of~earch m Music Education (]RME), and I look forward to the snmulatmg and challenging work ahead. I would like to extend thanks on behalf ' ;>f the research community to my immediate predecessor, Corneha Yarbrough, and to .all those esteemed editors before he~, who. de~ot-d extraordinary time and energy' in the interest of disseminating ~utstanding and innovative research in music education. Thanks als?to the members of the Editorial Committee, whos~ ~owledge, dedication and integrity ensure the quality of the _Pubhcation, and ~hose detailed reviews· help improve the manuscnpts that appear In. the JRME and provide valuable feedback to the authors ?f submitted manuscripts not accepted for publication. We owe our sincere appreciation to the members who have rece!J.tly completed 6-year terms. of service: Patricia Flowers, Donald Hamann, Jere Humphreys, JaniceKillian, Clifford Madsen, and Gary McPherso":.. As I assume this position, I want to take ~us opporturucy to state emphatically that the JRME Editorial Committee has been an? continues to be willing to consider original research co~ducted ~n any mode of inquiry, with p;::trticipants of any demographiCS, that IS c~:m sistent with our mission of enhanc;:ing knowledge about the _te;::tc~ung and learning of music. Editorial Committee membe~ are hig~ly_ qualified and well-eqUipped to review rese~ch repre~enting the Wide range of research methodologies and topics extant m the field. On the rare occasion when there is not expertise on the Committee to review a particular submission, the editor is fre~ t? cal~ upon ad hoc reviewers as necessary. The evaluation of submissions lS based up~:m the quality of the research prOcesses and pro~edures, the success_ With which this is communicated in the manuscnpt, and the p~ten~al of the manuscript to make an excellent and important contnbu~on to the research literature. These have been, are currently,_ and wtll c~:m tinue to be the criteria used as the basis for manuscnpt evaluation and publication decisions..

It is an honor and privilege to serve the profession as the nint_h chair of the Editorial Committee (editor) ofthejourn~l of~earch m Music Education (]RME), and I look forward to the snmulatmg and challenging work ahead. I would like to extend thanks on behalf ' ;>f the research community to my immediate predecessor, Corneha Yarbrough, and to .all those esteemed editors before he~, who. de~ot-d extraordinary time and energy' in the interest of disseminating ~utstanding and innovative research in music education. Thanks als?to the members of the Editorial Committee, whos~ ~owledge, dedication and integrity ensure the quality of the _Pubhcation, and ~hose detailed reviews· help improve the manuscnpts that appear In. the JRME and provide valuable feedback to the authors ?f submitted manuscripts not accepted for publication. We owe our sincere appreciation to the members who have rece!J.tly completed 6-year terms. of service: Patricia Flowers, Donald Hamann, Jere Humphreys, JaniceKillian, Clifford Madsen, and Gary McPherso":.. As I assume this position, I want to take ~us opporturucy to state emphatically that the JRME Editorial Committee has been an? continues to be willing to consider original research co~ducted ~n any mode of inquiry, with p;::trticipants of any demographiCS, that IS c~:m sistent with our mission of enhanc;:ing knowledge about the _te;::tc~ung and learning of music. Editorial Committee membe~ are hig~ly_ qualified and well-eqUipped to review rese~ch repre~enting the Wide range of research methodologies and topics extant m the field. On the rare occasion when there is not expertise on the Committee to review a particular submission, the editor is fre~ t? cal~ upon ad hoc reviewers as necessary. The evaluation of submissions lS based up~:m the quality of the research prOcesses and pro~edures, the success_ With which this is communicated in the manuscnpt, and the p~ten~al of the manuscript to make an excellent and important contnbu~on to the research literature. These have been, are currently,_ and wtll c~:m tinue to be the criteria used as the basis for manuscnpt evaluation and publication decisions..

No abstract