In the first Chapter of Democracy and Music Education, Woodford can be found quoting and referencing the ideas of James Mursell, a music education activist and author. In the discussion of Mursell's ideas, the term "Participatory democracy" comes up as a positive program for music classrooms. Mursell conceived music teachers as leaders whose job it was to help students deliberate, choose and act cooperatively. Also, the ideal music program was a "cooperating venture involving all people (student, Parents, community etc.) who needed to coordinate their pursuit of common social, musical and educational goals." My question is, isn't this idea of common goals more like "Participatory socialism" than democracy?

Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines democracy as "government by the people : ruled by the majority. A government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections." Is Mursell saying that students and parents should get together and "vote" on what is being taught? That the majority will rule over the minorities? Isn't that silencing, or hegemony? Where as Socialism is defined as "a system based on a belief that social ownership of the means of production can be achieved by voluntary and peaceful surrender of their holdings by propertied groups" In music education terms, that when administrators and curriculum standards yield to the people of society, and the community will "own" or guide decisions in pursuit of common goals.

So I ask, Are the ideas and ideals of Educational "Democracy" that we are reading about and being taught as "good teaching" really democracy or are they socialist ideas? And, do you think that Educational philosophers are only labeling it as such because of the negative connotations that socialism carries with it?

In chapter one the idea of "teachers as moral and intellectual" leaders is brought up, saying that they should lead and "direct by indirection". It goes on to say that teachers are to "establish the right conditions for inspiring, incalculating and guiding the development of socialized intelligence" I have a hard time with this, because you come up with the idea that obviously, you are a role model for your students. However, it seems like an aweful big shoes to fill; not only are we expected to serve as educational leaders but moral and ethical leaders as well. I just wanted to know how you possibly felt about the idea, what happens if you make the smallest mistake? Your students remeber everything, even if you change something in normal routine in the slightest form, and they talk about everything as well. It just seems very overwhelming to me to think that your life is on display, so how do you find the balance between a personal relationship with your students and revealing too much information? Obviously there are things you should never bring up, but you never know what could possibly cause problems.