Fixes looks at solutions to social problems and why they work.

On Friday, I wrote about an organization called Little Kids Rock, which has helped to revitalize and broaden music education in more than a thousand schools by encouraging children to learn to play popular music, form bands and compose their own songs. The column sparked a little bit of a culture war: some readers were aggrieved by the idea that children should learn popular music in schools, others suggested that classical composers would love rock ‘n roll. Some feared that teaching pop would “dumb down” music education, others felt it was vital to make music education more relevant to children. I’d like to clarify some misconceptions and explain why I think the program is a valuable addition, rather than a threat to the classical tradition.

An appreciation of music can’t be imposed; it needs to be elicited.

Little Kids Rock has had remarkable success getting students excited about music class by putting instruments (mostly guitars) into their hands on day one, showing them simple techniques to get started playing quickly, and allowing them to play music that they love to listen to. What’s most instructive about the program is how its pedagogical approach helps students enjoy early success and makes them eager to learn more — and this could be easily adapted to many musical genres that have historically spread through informal channels — everything from Irish ballads to bluegrass to Brazilian samba. The teachers and school administrators I spoke with said that when children discover that they can make music with their friends — and this can begin within weeks — it generates tremendous excitement and causes children to focus, experiment, practice and challenge themselves in ways that often surprise and thrill adults.

Brian Gellerstein

It’s important to note that the vast majority of the program’s teachers — and its biggest supporters — are themselves classically trained music instructors, who also frequently teach orchestra, chorus or jazz or marching bands. A few of them wrote in to share their experiences with Little Kids Rock. MamfeMan (20) wrote that the program had “shaped the culture of my school, the mind-set of these students, and has been — without a doubt — the most inspirational part of my life.” Another teacher, who is based in Philadelphia and teaches fifth graders, (56) added that when “students who want to learn a certain song … go ahead and learn the chords, and practice till they ‘get it’’’ the belief in learning-through-practice carries over to other areas of school.

Little Kids Rock’s founder, Dave Wish, a former elementary school teacher and self-taught musician, designed his approach to mirror the way children acquire language. Nobody starts to speak by studying the alphabet; children begin by imitating sounds to communicate their wants (“mama!” or “ball!”). Parents don’t correct the grammar of their toddlers; they respond with delight and lots of encouragement. With no anxiety about making mistakes, children babble freely and continuously. They get immediate and positive feedback and they absorb language like sponges.

By contrast, with music, children are often asked to learn to read and write notation, and to grasp things like time signature and note values at the very same time they’re struggling to learn the fingering of an instrument. It’s a lot to take in. “When you teach music through reading, the learner becomes a code breaker and the teacher can become a code enforcer,” notes Wish. That’s a different relationship than a performer and, say, a band leader. And the code the children are struggling to break may yield a song they don’t even like. Approaching music education this way can take years to produce a satisfying payoff for the child. And, indeed, many children lose patience; they quit music lessons, then as adults regret the decision. Only the most dedicated, disciplined or talented stick with it (or the ones with parents who make them).

Howard Dratch

A number of readers wrote in to share their own cautionary experiences. Indierhythm, from Palo Alto, Calif. (14), wrote: “I had piano lessons at a young age and a really lame music program in elementary school and was completely turned off from music when I was a kid.” Contrarian, from the Southeast (6), added: “With the best of intentions, we absolutely ruined [our son’s] love of music by sending him to piano lessons.” And John Sieger, from Milwaukee (37.), who teaches guitar to kids and adults, added: “No one needs to learn ‘Little Brown Jug’ or ‘Aura Lee.’ The minute you show someone how to play something they like, they start having fun. Music without fun is punishment. Do I like Taylor Swift? Not much. But the 15-year-old girl I showed those fairly unimaginative songs to can now play ‘Michelle’ by the Beatles. Is ‘Michelle’ classical music? To me it is.”

A number of readers would strongly disagree. Many were upset by the idea that schools should teach anything but serious music — like classical music or jazz. (It’s worth remembering that people raged against the introduction of school jazz bands 40 years ago, too.) Diekunstder, from Menlo Park, Calif. (25), commented: “[T]here is no classical music industry shoving its values down the public’s throat, rather, it is popular music which pervades every corner of contemporary ‘culture.’” And Fed Up (44), worried: “Is this the death knell for classical music and opera? Methinks so. Sad!”

Some readers were also annoyed by my assertion that schools should not “force” classical music on children. This was not intended to disparage the classics, or music teachers, but to make the point that an appreciation of music can’t be imposed; it needs to be elicited. Tom Chapman (9) disagreed with the idea that we should accommodate children’s tastes. “The solution to give kids access to music they would want to listen to is, in an education sense, quite ridiculous,” he wrote. “Most popular music that students listen to is redundant and simplistic.”

The comments revealed a number of misunderstandings. First, Little Kids Rock does not seek to replace traditional music education, but to supplement it — to add a fifth stream, “contemporary band” — and it is helping schools in low-income communities create or expand music programs at a time of severe cutbacks in music and other arts programs.

The assumption that music education should prepare children for a musical career sets music apart from other subjects in school.

Second, while it is valuable to give children exposures to music that they are unlikely to hear outside school, requiring them to study a particular genre of music in a particular way can backfire as many readers noted. Hal Horvath, from Austin (55), observed: “One needn’t pit, as some comments do, classical against popular music … Let kids start on the kind of music they enjoy, at that time in their lives. I did, and now I listen to almost every form… The only possible error, repeated often, is to force a style of music onto a child for which they have no pleasure.” Many musicians and educators (like Benjamin Zander — watch his fun Ted talk here) apply considerable creativity to help people cultivate an appreciation of classical music. When a child quits piano because he hates to practice scales, no one benefits.

On the other hand, when someone gains basic proficiency on an instrument, it opens up musical doors very quickly. I taught myself to play guitar in my twenties and I found that it caused me to watch musicians’ fingers with more wonder and to listen more carefully to the way music is constructed. Little Kids Rock teachers say that when children have basic comfort with one instrument, they are more confident and eager to try out others. As a teacher named Scott, from Los Angeles (59), noted: “I love classical music, play classical guitar, and teach it to my students (over 100 a year), yet still see the immense value in rock music, improvisation, and composition … Rock music turned me onto classical music, not the other way around.”

But the debate over which musical genre to teach, and how to teach it, gets to a more profound question: What is music education for? A number of readers suggested that the goal is to produce professional musicians. As Tom Chapman (9) noted: “Any professional musician will tell you that to get where they are (jazz, classical, or pop), they had to work hard, very hard. A classroom music setting in band, orchestra, or choir, reveals the work required to succeed.”

Related More From Fixes Read previous contributions to this series.

The assumption that music education should prepare children for a musical career sets music apart from other subjects in school. We don’t teach kids math so they will become mathematicians. We teach kids math so they will be able to use math in whatever they need it for. We teach math and reading as life skills, not professional skills. If we think of music as a professional skill, then it’s fortuitous that many kids quit young. That’s part of the winnowing process, which helps us identify the ones who have the talent to attend Julliard. But if we think of the ability to play music as a skill that can enrich anyone’s life, then what we see now is more like a hemorrhage of musical potential.

As in all fields of education, there is no one approach that works best. “We serve our students best when we try to reach them in as many ways as possible to ensure that we get through to them,” says Wish. “Music is so much a part of what makes us human. It is our goal that every child grow up with the ability to express themselves musically. Creating a hierarchy of musical genres is counter-productive to this goal.” Wish noted that during the September 11th memorial, citizens took solace from many different forms of music — from The Beatles to Mahler’s “Resurrection.” He added: “All were comforted, nourished and consoled by the music that spoke to them personally.”

Most students aren’t going to become professional musicians. For the majority, Wish says, the goal should be to “captivate their interest, provide them with the skills to become active music-makers, and capitalize on the joyful, engrossing, community-building qualities that music can bring to students in school.”

Join Fixes on Facebook and follow updates on twitter.com/nytimesfixes.

David Bornstein is the author of “How to Change the World,” which has been published in 20 languages, and “The Price of a Dream: The Story of the Grameen Bank,” and is co-author of “Social Entrepreneurship: What Everyone Needs to Know.” He is the founder of dowser.org, a media site that reports on social innovation.