Currently, most schools which provide courses in music therapy (i.e. universities, junior colleges, and vocational institutes) each have their own set of ideologies and objectives when it comes to designing their curriculum. These schools that aspiring music therapists attend in the hopes of obtaining their qualifications will have their form and content of education checked by an association or council, and if it meets the standards set by them, they will be accredited. Furthermore, the basis of each school’s curriculum is in the curriculum guidelines that individual associations or councils have set up. I have chosen to focus on the Japanese Music Therapy Association (JMTA), which is one of the associations that accredits music therapy schools. I will analyze the basis of obtaining a recognized qualification in music therapy through the curriculum and lecture contents of the JMTA. From this, it is hoped that the current condition of the music therapy education system will be made clear and potential improvements in the current system will be identified and explored.
In addition, I will focus this time largely on ‘Music Discipline and Welfare, Education Discipline’, as stipulated in JMTA’s Curriculum Guideline 11. The analysis revealed the following: (a) the points established in the Curriculum Guideline 11, which lists basic guidelines in writing a curriculum for a music therapy course, is tenuous. (b) There is a discrepancy between what is mentioned in the Guidelines and the curriculum of various schools. (c) It is difficult to learn the necessary skills required of a music therapist in the education system of these schools.