Making Sense of Music Theories of Learning for Babies and Early Years

Welcome!

I have to say that over decades and with 7 years of classroom teaching, I’ve learned that no single early-years music approach fits every child or group.

When we understand what each method offers — and where it doesn’t reach — we can combine them to create a more holistic learning journey. This is the challenge that educators face both in formal and informal spaces.

Why Sticking with One Music Method Just Isn't Enough

🎶 Every Child’s Musical Journey Is Unique

No single music learning or theory approach meets every child’s needs. Even qualified practitioners who have spent years training and observing how children engage with music agree that they cannot confine their practice to one single philosophy.

“A child’s response to music reveals who they are long before they can tell us in words.” – Maria Moreira‑Edwards

Each early years music framework—Orff, Kodály, Suzuki, Dalcroze, and Edwin Gordon—offers something precious but incomplete. Some light up rhythm and movement; others awaken melody, pattern, or mindful listening. Experienced educators know that children, especially in their early developmental years, need all of these languages of sound to form a balanced musical brain.

Blending and adapting elements from each method around the child’s stage of growth—rather than around the theory—creates a far richer and more inclusive pathway into music.

This is particularly vital for sensitive children or those with additional needs (SEN), whose emotional and sensory worlds often respond to tone, vibration, and pacing before words themselves.

I once worked with a little boy, Sam, who was hypersensitive to loud sounds and avoided busy group play. Instead of structured exercises, we began each session with a “heartbeat rhythm”—soft tapping on a drum while humming his name.

Gradually, he started to echo the pulse with gentle fingertip taps, then added a smile, then a word. That tiny rhythm became a bridge to communication. Music met him where words couldn’t.

So whether you’re a parent, childminder, or early years practitioner, build a toolkit that suits your child, not the textbook. Perhaps that means voice play and sound mimicry one week, movement with ribbons or scarves the next, or rhythm patterns on cereal boxes and pots at home.

What matters is that music becomes a language of belonging—a space where every child can regulate, express, and connect at their own tempo.

“The richest musical journey is not about choosing the perfect method, but about meeting each child in perfect time.”

Is it a music book, voice play, movement, patterns, and creativity with cereal boxes, or movement to a song with ribbons? Or could it be a more atistic journey with music art, writing, drawing a song, or creating a musical hat for when you go to the park?

Well it depends on the set up and the child. The child will absob the focus of the session through various mediums and resources. So make sure you have a range of them.

I have created this comparison grid for you to get a better idea of where each one of these music educators fit and what their focus is. In this grid you will notice how some only really kick in after your child starts to walk 2 years + except for E.Gordon (MLT) who has worked on his methodology for newborns all the way to 8 years of age and beyond.

Early Years Music Approaches Comparison Grid

Approach	Main Focus	Key Benefits (Early Years)	Typical Age Focus	Helpful But Incomplete Because…	Official Site
Dalcroze Eurhythmics 1900's	Body movement, rhythm in space, listening through motion	Coordination, timing, embodied music, theatre and stage	3–10 years	Needs added pitch/repertoire work	dalcrozeusa.org
Orff Schulwerk 1920 to 1940	Rhythm, speech, movement, improvisation, instruments	Playful creativity, ensemble skills, confidence, links to nature	3–8 years	Under-emphasises pitch training alone	orff.org
Kodály Method 1940 to 1950	Singing, solfa, hand signs, folk songs, ear training	Pitch accuracy, musical literacy via voice, stricter literacy of music	3–10 years	Can feel too formal without movement	kodaly.org
Suzuki Method 1940 onwards	Ear learning, repetition, parent involvement, instruments	Deep focus, technique, focus on reading and writting music, decoding	3–10 years	Instrument-heavy; misses free improvisation	suzukiassociation.org
Edwin Gordon MLT	Audiation, tonal/rhythm patterns, developmental stages	Musical thinking foundation, improv readiness	Birth–8 years	Abstract without playful translation	giml.org

Each shines but lacks fullness solo or in isolation.

Blending them tailors music to your child’s unique spark and interests. This is what most alternative and informal educators, who taught in schools on in formal settings are doing. They are creating their own version or variation if you like of their "mini curriculum" for their specific community.

Edwin Gordon: How Children “Think” Music

Of all the main early years music educators E.Gordon is by far the most comprehensive in research and music readiness because he has managed to map music development from birth till 8 years of age, by clearly defined ages which he explores in practice. (see aptitude grid)

His early music childhood work is unmatched and should be embraced by anyone who delivers baby, infant and early music sessions today. He has written many books- which are always out of print- about his methodology, apprach and resources.

Edwin Gordon’s Music Learning Theory shows that musical understanding develops in stages, just like language. Audiation — the ability to hear and understand music in the mind — grows through natural progression from soaking in sounds to creating musical ideas.

Gordon mapped how musical intelligence develops thhrough audiation, being able to listen to music first as a language— an invaluable scientific contribution — but Orff, Kodály, and Dalcroze showed how to live it. The difference lies not in substance, but in translation: Gordon offered a theory of understanding -MLT- which was invisible until several months or years passed; the others offered an experience which was visible and immediate but some may argue as being superficial.

E.Gordon lecturing and engaging with parents.

Edwin Gordon in the early 1970's playing with children, with parents and while teaching

This is a a really useful grid for you to consider the best approach for each stage of your child's growth from a less known but critically important pioneer in EY music learning and teaching E. Gordon. For a more detailed guide please visit the Music Learning Theory website or MLT👇🏼

E. Gordon Stages of Music Audiation and Aptitude Grid

Stage (Home-Friendly Name)	What’s Happening Musically	Typical Age Focus	What You Can Do at Home
Music Soaking & Babble	Baby absorbs sound, reacts with coos, wiggles; holds brief “music moments” in memory.	Birth–2 years	Sing daily lullabies, hum during routines; vary tempo and style.
Imitation & Playful Echo	Child copies song fragments, chants; experiments with pitch and beat.	2–4 years	Echo-clap games, call-and-response; celebrate every try.
Organising Sound	Child feels “home notes” and steady beat; prefers familiar songs.	3–5 years	Step/tap the beat; contrast fast/slow, high/low songs.
Intentional Musical Thinking	Child predicts song patterns, invents ideas internally.	4–6 years	Pause songs for them to continue; simple improv games.
Recalling & Creating	Child remembers patterns across contexts; improvises freely.	5+ years	Ask for “their version”; home concert turn-taking.

I believe that you as an educator should be encouraged to blend the approach that best suits your level of understanding, your child likes and dislikes and above all their enjoyment of the artform.

Why Edwin Gordon’s Music Learning Theory Didn’t Become Mainstream

Although Edwin Gordon’s Music Learning Theory (MLT) profoundly advanced our understanding of how children truly think and internalize music, it never achieved the same mainstream appeal as Orff, Kodály, or Dalcroze.

While those systems evolved into structured, accessible pedagogies with ready-to-use materials, Gordon’s model remained more research-driven — complex, conceptual, and less emotionally intuitive for parents or early educators.

His focus on audiation and cognitive sequence required theoretical training that few non-musicians possessed. In contrast, methods like Orff and Kodály emphasized joyful group play, rhythm, movement, and singing — all elements that felt natural, visible, and instantly gratifying to families and teachers alike.

Barriers to Mainstream Adoption: Gordon vs. Other Methods

Key Area	Gordon's MLT	Orff / Kodály/ Dalcroze	Impact on Parents
Accessibility of Language	Heavy academic jargon: "audiation," "syntax," "discrimination learning"	Simple, intuitive terms: "sing," "play," "move," "dance"	Parents felt intimidated vs. empowered
Entry Point Complexity	Required understanding of developmental sequences and theoretical frameworks	Immediate activities: grab an instrument, sing a song, move to music	High barrier to entry vs. instant engagement
Material Availability	Limited published resources, many out of print, mostly academic texts	Abundant songbooks, instruments, videos, apps, curriculum packages	Difficult to find vs. readily available
Teacher Training Requirements	Extensive certification needed to properly implement MLT	Basic workshops sufficient for home use	Inaccessible to parents vs. weekend workshop friendly
Cultural Integration	Remained in university programs and specialist early childhood centers	Integrated into mainstream schools, community centers, children's programs	Unknown to parents vs. familiar from childhood
Marketing & Branding	Academic conferences and journals	Colorful instruments, fun class names, social media presence	No parent-facing identity vs. family-friendly brands
Emotional Appeal	Focus on cognitive development and music aptitude testing	Focus on joy, creativity, and parent-child bonding	Felt like "work" vs. felt like "play"
Implementation Clarity	Abstract principles requiring translation into activities	Concrete activities with step-by-step instructions	"What do I actually DO?" vs. "Here's exactly what to do"
Community Support	Small network of certified practitioners	Large communities, playgroups, online forums	Isolated learning vs. social support
Cost of Entry	Expensive training and limited resources	Affordable instruments, free songs, YouTube tutorials	High investment vs. low/no cost start

Gordon’s work was visionary, but it demanded interpretation rather than imitation, making it more respected in academia and music research than practiced in daily musical life. The tragedy is that Gordon's work provides the most scientifically robust framework for musical development from birth—exactly when parents are most eager to support their child's growth—yet its academic packaging made it the least accessible to families who needed it most.

Remember that no theory replaces the joy of live, responsive play that you can provide— but frameworks like Gordon’s help educators and parents map how learning unfolds.

💡 Key Takeaway

Blend methods. Watch how your child responds to rhythm, movement, sound, and story. Then adapt. Keep what works and revisit what doesn't later.

The best method is the one that keeps music alive for your child.

For tips and training including real practical ideas for activities please visit our YouTube channel. I am adding more conetent so that you can keep learning, to build your confidence in making sure you have Music in the Home.

Sing you later,

Maria

Connect with me on LINKEDIN and ask me a question.

#MusicAtHome #EarlyYearsMusic #ChildBrainDevelopment #EdwinGordon #MusicEducation #ParentingTips #Audiation #Orff #Kodaly #SuzukiMethod #Dalcroze #MariaMoonMusic #earlyyearsmusicblendedapproach