To Örebro University

Kollegialitet spelar en central och samtidigt mångtydig roll inom högre utbildning. Kollegiala processer kan avse såväl samarbete och gemensamt ansvar som formella strukturer för beslut om utbildning och forskning. Den här artikeln syftar till att belysa hur kollegiala processer konstrueras i en specifik organisatorisk kontext och att diskutera konstruktionernas implikationer. Artikeln bygger på en enkätundersökning genomförd vid ett svenskt lärosäte som omfattar både kvantitativa svar och kvalitativa utsagor. Resultatet visar att kollegiala processer konstrueras på tre delvis konkurrerande sätt: som motor, som mylla och som myt. Som motor framträder de som drivande i kvalitets- och utvecklingsarbete och kopplas till inflytande, förankring och beslut. Som mylla framträder de som en relationell och normerande infrastruktur för kunskapsdelning, men också som beroende av informella och delvis ojämlika praktiker. Som myt framträder kollegiala processer som symboliska eller urholkade former, där kollegialitet åberopas utan tydlig koppling till mandat eller faktisk påverkan. Artikeln synliggör därmed hur kollegiala processer inom samma organisatoriska kontext konstrueras på sätt som tillskriver dem olika funktioner och värden, med skilda implikationer för hur kollegialt inflytande kan göras gällande.

Collegiality plays a central and multifaceted role in higher education. Collegial processes encompass both collaboration and shared responsibility, as well as formal structures for decision-making in education and research. This article aims to examine how collegial processes are constructed in a specific organizational context and to discuss the implications of these constructions. The study is based on a survey conducted at a Swedish higher education institution, combining quantitative responses with qualitative statements. The findings show that collegial processes are constructed in three partly competing ways: as a motor, as soil, and as myth. As a motor, they emerge as central to quality enhancement and development work and are associated with influence, collective endorsement and decision-making. As soil, they appear as a relational and normative infrastructure for knowledge sharing, while also depending on informal and partly unequal practices. As myth, they take the form of symbolic or hollowed-out practices, in which collegiality is invoked without a clear connection to mandate or actual influence. The article thereby shows how collegial processes within the same organizational context are constructed in ways that attribute different functions and values to them, with different implications for how collegial influence can be asserted.

Like broader society, the ways people engage with and interact around music are profoundly influenced by power relations. Inequities related to social categories such as class, gender, age, race, and ethnicity permeate all aspects of music—be it education, creation, or consumption. Furthermore, norms and expectations tied to specific places, genres, educational settings, and professional domains often create barriers to participation and freedom to act. While there is a substantial body of scholarship on social inequities in music education, much of it focuses on marginalized individuals, overlooking the structural dynamics of power. This essay argues for a critical approach attentive to how power relations are constituted through the positioning of different social groups within structural contexts. Emphasizing social class, we argue that research must investigate how power, norms, and cultural values are maintained and reinforced by elites, the privileged, as well as marginalized groups. In an era where social inequity is increasingly reinforced, understanding the structural underpinnings shaping music practices—including music education—is crucial. 

The research program Music, Power and Inequities (MPI) brings together scholars with a shared interest in power in musical practices and institutions at Örebro University. MPI was established on the recognition that music’s celebrated potential for cohesion is paralleled by musical practices and institutions that sustain exclusion and inequity.

There is, for instance, a long-established belief that music fosters cooperation and moral standards. The European Commission (2022) argues that music “has the power to bring positive changes in society”, yet research shows that unequal relations and forms of exclusion persist across musical contexts. Music spaces, from conservatories to recording studios, have been sites of sexual harassment and abuse, as demonstrated by the #metoo campaign (Bull et al. 2023); professional opportunities are shaped by prejudice (Ålander & Volgsten 2021); and music-making and consumption are divided by class, gender, and ethnicity (Angelo et al. 2019; Bull & Scharff 2021; Moberg 2019). In addition, music has been used by anti-democratic movements, to promote racist, xenophobic agendas (de Boise 2024).

In this paper, we present findings from a scoping review of contemporary research on power in musical practices and institutions, conducted within MPI. Through an examination of peer-reviewed articles addressing inequ(al)ities related to various aspects of music, we show that research on music and power places strong emphasis on gender, race, and social justice. While the concepts of power and inequality are frequently invoked, they are rarely defined. We outline three central lines of critique: (1) power is often addressed implicitly, without attention to the relational dynamics through which it operates; (2) inequality and inequity are commonly framed as issues of representation or attitudes, rather than as outcomes of unequal distribution of resources; and (3) barriers to analysing power are reinforced by epistemic inequalities within academic research itself. Together, these findings point to the need for more explicit, structural, and relational analyses of power in music research.

This paper examines the public debate on teacher education in Sweden over the past two decades and its impact on current reforms. Drawing on policy documents, media discussions, and scholarly perspectives, we show how teacher education has become the most frequently reformed part of higher education, shaped largely by political agendas and external voices rather than research-based knowledge. The debate often blames pedagogy for perceived failures, favors cognitive science and psychology over educational research, and downplays critical thinking and reflection. We conclude by highlighting concerns about this development, while pointing to how alternative paths for music teacher education may emerge through questioning and challenging neoliberal logics.

Despite extensive research on inequalities in music, it remains unclear how power is conceptualized and analyzed within musical practices and institutions. The purpose of this study is to explore contemporary academic research on power in musical practices and institutions. Through a scoping literature review of peer-reviewed articles published between 2013 and 2023, the study examines how inequalities in music are framed and explored. Our findings reveal a strong emphasis on gender, race, and social justice, with music education emerging as the most studied context. Despite frequent references to power, the concept is often left undefined, and research primarily highlights marginalized groups’ experiences rather than the mechanisms through which power operates, limiting its ability to address structural inequities. We suggest that future research further engage with how power operates, is maintained, and contested in musical institutions and practices, with particular attention to dominant groups, material power, and institutional mechanisms shaping inequalities.

Musiklivet genomsyras av maktrelationer. Ojämlika villkor sätter gränser för människors deltagande och handlingsutrymme i allt från musikutbildning, musik­skapande och konsumtion av musik. 

I antologin görs nedslag i olika delar av musiklivet. Tio forskare och lärare från Sverige, Norge och Storbritannien bidrar med kritiska perspektiv på rela­tioner mellan musik och makt. Varje kapitel avslutas med ett antal frågor som ger vägledning för fortsatta diskussioner. 

Boken är skriven för studenter inom högre musikutbildning. Den riktar sig till blivande musiklärare, musiker, kompositörer eller musikproducenter, såväl som till dig som läser musikvetenskap eller musikpedagogik. Texterna utgör även relevant läsning för lärare inom högre musikutbildning. Antologin är angelägen läsning också för andra som arbetar inom kulturlivet och är intresserade av maktfrågor. 

Music spaces, from conservatories to recording studios, have proven themselves unequal and exclusionary. To investigate how power relations condition present-day musical life, the research environment in musicology at Örebro university has been awarded funding for the three-year research program Music, Power, and Inequity (MPI).

The aim of this paper is two-fold. To contextualize our studies, we will initially give a brief presentation of the research program MPI. With the specific aim of discussing power relations in music society, we will secondly introduce two studies in their initial phase. Both studies investigate inequalities and hierarchies affecting the underprivileged in musical life, focusing on issues with regards to the music elite and freelance musicians' working lives.

The studies' methodologies build on a mixed-method approach. They map socio-economic characteristics of (i) freelance musicians, and (ii) people in power within central music organizations, conduct interviews focusing on musicians' life stories from a feminist intersectional perspective, and perform critical discourse analysis and multimodal analyses of home pages and official social media accounts.

Together, the projects contribute a crucial critical analysis of the constitution of the elite in musical life, clarifying the consequences of social distinctions as well as discussing what is required in terms of risk, support, and various forms of social, cultural, and economic background to lead a sustainable working life in music.

Questioning the frameworks we live by requires analyzing and critiquing arguments – both our own and those of others – and a willingness to take action.

In this chapter, we highlight the significance of Bildung, critical thinking, and knowledge in shaping individuals as citizens of society. Our starting point is that Bildung is related to societal development and potential for change, making critical Bildung normative rather than value-neutral.

By examining the public debate on teacher education in the Swedish daily press over the past two decades, we explore the participating actors, the expressed opinions, and their implications. Our findings reveal the pervasive influence of neoliberal ideology, which contrasts solutions for a so-called crisis in teacher education with the “fluffy school of the 1990s.” We critically discuss the regulatory measures aimed at detailing teacher education content and equipping future teachers with practical tools and methodologies grounded in cognitive science, with the expectation that these measures will enable future teachers to handle ‘everything’ and ‘everyone’. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the consequences of these perspectives in relation to critical Bildung and power relations.

While writing is undeniably an essential part of higher education, in music education, musical performance skills form the core of assessing students' results. However, higher music education is experiencing growing demands on research activities parallel to heightened requirements on music performance students' abilities to formulate themselves around their main field of study. This paper turns to theses as discursive acts embedded in higher music education. The present study investigates how master theses construct educational ideals by analysing written components of successfully completed theses within music performance programmes in Sweden. The paper shows that the theses treat a variety of subjects which are justified from five different perspectives: Improve, Succeed, Share, Acclaim or to Discover. Two diametrically opposed kinds of purpose statements are revealed; they appear as either impersonal and distanced or intimate and personal. Influences of traditional academic writing manifest themselves while conservatory ideals around craft, individualism and hierarchies are reproduced. It is argued that the self-exploratory approach - which is a characteristic feature on an overall level - excludes collective knowledge building as well as social perspectives on art and music.