In this study, completed as part of my doctoral studies at New York University, I examined the status of MIDI as part of the curricula of higher education institutions offering degree programs in music. My purpose was to provide an assessment of current practice and to make recommendations for the integration of MIDI into music programs.

A preliminary (pilot) questionnaire was developed and sent to a select group of music teachers and administrators. This questionnaire was revised and further developed, then a final version was sent to a larger group of subjects.

Data from the responses to the questionnaire were analyzed in order to determine and describe the current status of MIDI instruction in institutions of higher education and to frame specific recommendations for the revision and development of MIDI instruction in the curricula of music programs.

The descriptive method, utilizing survey research, was used for this study. This method involves asking the same set of questions to a large number of individuals. Responses are then tabulated and reported, usually in the form of frequencies and percentages. The mailed questionnaire was used as the primary means of data collection.

Publications such as MIX magazine’s directory of recording schools and programs, the Audio Engineering Society’s Directory of Educational Programs, and a mailing list obtained from the College Music Society were used to provide a list of teachers and administrators who were asked to respond to the survey. The population included faculty and administrators in several areas of teaching specialization: Music Theory, Composition, Music Technology, Music Education, Performance, and others (music therapy, musicology, etc.).

The direct (cold) mail survey method was used. This method involves mailing questionnaires to individuals who have not agreed in advance to participate in the survey. This method has the disadvantage of a lower response rate, but this problem is generally compensated by a much larger number of subjects.

The final questionnaire, accompanied by a cover letter explaining the purpose of the study, was sent to 584 administrators and faculty members Once all responses were received, several steps were taken to prepare the data for analysis:

Responses were entered into the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), a statistical analysis and data management system. Using this software, this researcher was able to generate complete tabulated reports, charts and plots of distribution and trends, descriptive statistics, reference analysis of any question against any or all responses, and advanced statistical analyses.

Using the information obtained from the responses to the questionnaire, I provided:

The total number of useful responses was 180 (30.8% of all mailed questionnaires). Most respondents have doctorates (71.9%) and listed their job title as instructors (59.2%). Music theory and composition were the areas with the largest number of respondents (67 and 60 respectively), while music technology, education and performance had a smaller number of respondents (see Table 1); responses in all other areas totaled 16. A large percentage (59.6%) of the respondents work at institutions that have at least 1 recording studio). An even larger number (92.6%) responded that they work at institutions that have Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI) or MIDI workstations.

Table 1. Teaching Specialization (N =180)

Most respondents are familiar with music technology (68.9%), Computer Assisted Instruction (85%), or MIDI (88.3%). When asked whether or not they agreed that music technology enhances music education, most respondents agreed. On a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), the mean value was 4.37. Most respondents also agreed (but not as strongly) that music technology is essential to music education and to music composition.

When asked about their attitude towards MIDI, most respondents also seemed to agree about the importance of MIDI in music education, recording, and composition. Some respondents disagreed when asked whether or not MIDI has changed the way educators teach music or the way composers compose music. Most respondents disagreed with the statements that MIDI is slow or obsolete.

A large number (81.1%) of those who responded to section 4 of the questionnaire (Relevance of MIDI in the curriculum) said that MIDI is being offered as part of the music programs; however, a much smaller number (41.6%) responded that MIDI is required for majors within their area of teaching specialization. When asked about the type of software used, sequencing and notation programs were selected more often (89.9% and 89.2 respectively).

Most respondents (90%) believe that MIDI enhances the learning process in their area of teaching specialization; immediate feedback and keeping with current technology were more often mentioned as the reasons. Basic MIDI theory, sequencing, and editor/librarian/notation were the topics most frequently mentioned as covered in the required MIDI courses (all three received above 85% positive response). Four other topics (Synchronization/SMPTE, digital audio, General MIDI and Internet access) received positive responses ranging between 50% and 65%, and MIDI programming received only 39.2% of responses.

Predictably, there were significant differences in the way music technology respondents answered the question about whether or not MIDI courses are required for majors in their area. More than 60% responded "yes", while a significantly smaller number of respondents in other areas responded that MIDI courses are required for majors in their area (see Table 2).

Table 2. Are MIDI Courses Required for Majors in Your Area?

With the exception of the music technology respondents, respondents in all other areas of teaching specialization (music theory, music education, music composition, and performance) rated the MIDI topics quite similarly: basic MIDI theory, sequencing, and editing/librarian/notation were consistently rated above the "useful" rating (a rating of 2 or more), and all other topics (MIDI Time Code, MIDI Machine Control, Synchronization, Programming, etc.) were rated somewhat lower. Music technology respondents, on the other hand, rated all topics except one above the 2 rating (MIDI programming got a rating of 1.95).

Concerning the different "activities" when teaching MIDI, responses were similar for all areas of specialization, the teaching of background MIDI theory was considered "important" with an average rating of 3.62. Hands-on labs were considered "very important" with an average rating of 4.72, while internships were considered "somewhat important" with an average rating of 3.18. The ratings are on a five degree scale ranging from 1 = Not Important to 5 = Very Important.

My main purpose in conducting this study was to report on the current status of MIDI in the curricula of higher education institutions offering music degrees. Based on the findings of the survey, it would appear that: (1) most music teachers are familiar with music technology, Computer Assisted Instruction, or MIDI, (2) most higher education institutions that offer music degrees offer courses featuring music technology and/or MIDI, (3) few programs, however (with the exception of music technology programs), actually require MIDI courses as part of their curriculum, (4) most music teachers believe that MIDI enhances the learning process in their area of teaching specialization, and (5) most music teachers agree that basic MIDI theory, sequencing, and notation (and, to a lesser degree, digital audio and Internet access) would be useful when integrated into their programs.

The second purpose of this project was to provide recommendations for the integration of MIDI into music programs. An entire chapter of the study focused on the number and content of MIDI courses and other issues (like hardware and software). One of the recommendations was the development and implementation of an introductory course on MIDI designed for non-music-technology (music education, composition, performance, etc.) majors. This course would emphasize lecture/demonstration-type classes and practical hands-on experience. The outline would include: basic computer skills, introduction to MIDI, basic MIDI systems, sequencing, notation, editors/librarians, and (if time allows) tape machine synchronization and digital hard disk recording.

It is my hope that this study will encourage others to examine ways to integrate these technologies into music programs. As mentioned in the study, I believe music technology and MIDI are here to stay. It is up to us as educators to explore, learn, and take advantage of them, to make us better teachers and to make our students ready for the challenges that they will face as musicians in the next century.