ChoralNet

The professional networking site for the global online choral community.

You are here: Home / Others / Is ACDA the right name for us?

Is ACDA the right name for us?

by Leave a Comment


In case you haven’t heard, MENC (Music Educators National Conference” changed it’s name to NAME (National Association for Music Education) on September 1, 2011.
 
Here is part of the announcement:
One of the world’s oldest and largest arts education organizations enters a new chapter in its distinguished history today when it officially assumes the name National Association for Music Education. This organization of music educators and music education advocates was founded in 1907 as Music Supervisors National Conference, and later became Music Educators National Conference, with the familiar acronym “MENC.” In 1998, the association became known as MENC: The National Association for Music Education. September 2011 marks the completion of the name transition to National Association for Music Education. “Our new name says exactly what we are and what we do: an organization for music education for everyone in our nation, an association that supports music teachers and the profession of music education,” said Michael A. Butera, executive director.
It makes me think – does ACDA have the right name these days?

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. My older brother, now a professor of medicine at USC, butr formerly a professional rock drummer, loves to rile me by referring to us as AC/DC. Of course I do my best not to take the bait.

  2. Their new website is at http://www.nafme.org , and they’re using “NAfME” there pretty consistently, so that’s their new official “initialism” (rather than “acronymn,” which is actually a word formed out of initials, such as “scuba” and “laser”). Although their name change process started in 1998, when they became “MENC: The National Association for Music Education,” the “NAME” problem doesn’t appear to have occurred to them until early this year, when MENC first registered the “nafme.org” domain name. If “NAfME” was part of the plan all along, they surely would have registered that domain before 19-Apr-2011.
     
    Speaking of name problems, I work for a regional headquarters of the United Methodist Church, long known as an “Annual Conference,” but that has become a confusing label for something that isn’t only “annual,” so the the UMC is now clarifying the term by inserting “(regional)” in their news pieces mentioning a regional entity, as opposed to an annual event. As part of the Communications Department, I regularly remove “annual” from announcements and print pieces where it could be confusing.
     
    As for ACDA, I’m strongly in the “it ain’t broke, so it doesn’t need fixing” camp. “America” is obviously shorthand for the “United States of America” in this case, and look at all the local chapters with “ACDA” (or at least “CDA”) in their names, which wasn’t quite the case with MENC. For example, I grew up in California, which has the CMEA, and now live in Arizona, which has the “AMEA.” So MENC could change its name without causing a ripple effect into the state chapters, which is not true of ACDA. So, a very short answer to Philip’s original question would be “Yes, ACDA has the right name.”

  3. So it looks even sillier – NAfME – looks like a typo!  (I’m sure it looks better on letterhead, but honestly, when was the last letter of this sort you received that you paid any attention to?)  John, as usual, you’re right on – and you make my point better than I did that change does NOT mean better – but that it can even be hiding something (not unlike Voldemort in Harry Potter’s world being referred to as “he-who-must-not-be-named” for fear that the sheer power of stating his name out loud would bring him forth).  ACDA can get its knickers all in a twist about the name thing – but my (and I think John’s and others’) question is:  Does it work now?  If so, what value in “fixing” it?  As an intellectual exercise there may be some worth in looking at it periodically, but so often these become exercises in intellectual self-flagellation!

  4. In MENC’s recent email to members they emphasized the “f” so the new acronym is actually “NAFME” rather than “NAME” (Apparently that “name” had already been claimed by another group. Over the last few years they were using both MENC and NAME in a lot of their publications, but the “official” change last week includes a lower case Italized “f” looking much like the typical font one would find for a “forte” designation, while the other latters remain in uppercase.

  5. Philip et al.:  I would strongly suggest looking at the wisdom of business and marketing experts.  A name, whatever it is, creates a “brand.”  And that brand accrues objective, subjective, and sometimes unearned value–a fancy way of saying “reputation.”  So in the long run it doesn’t really matter whether the name (or acronym) spells out EXACTLY what the mission is (especially since that may very well change over the years), the important thing is the reputation that goes along with it.
     
    The school I teach at–which happens to be the state’s land-grant university–is a perfect example.  Through about the 1960s it was known as the “Virginia Polytechnic Institute” or VPI.  As academic standards were raised and higher-powered professors came on board, they didn’t like that designations on their papers and biogrophies, so they pushed through a name change to “Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.”  (Try spelling THAT out with your marching band!)  But in the ’90s–and just recently officially confirmed and now gospel– we are now “Virginia Tech” (thanks to the Athletics side of the university).  Changing the name changed NOTHING in the mission and work of the university; it was pure administrative BS!
     
    When a bank changes its name, I distrust it because I can’t help feeling that it has something to hide.  (And WAY too many times in the past that turned out to be absolutely true!!)  I grew up with MENC and it will always be MENC to me; the new acronym is flat-out stupid!  I absolutely HATE that SPEBS has changed their name to something else I’ll never be able to remember; it feels like a real betrayal.  Just don’t forget that when businesses are bought and sold, the NAME is one of the things that is bought because it has enormous value and is worth money in the bank to the new owner.  (Unless the reputation has been degraded by absolutely horrible practices, like “Blackwater” for example.)
     
    Changing an established name is a symptom of micro-management, which seems NEVER to be a good thing, and too often goeth before a fall.
     
    All the best,
    John

  6. The name American Choral Directors Association ain’t broke.  Don’t fix it.  ACDA looks and sounds great!
                     t
     
     

  7.  
    Or, Dr. Sharp, as well with Gertrude Stein’s version of the Shakespeare:
     
    “A rose is a rose is a rose.”
     
    I must admit to having chaffed under the “directors” part for a long time, but I like being a “conductor” in the broader sense, nonetheless with a choral speciality.  But is “American Association of Choral Musicians” any better?  I doubt it… 
     
    ACDA is ACDA is ACDA …
     
     

  8. As Phlilip knows, I have raised the question of ACDA's name, primarily for rhetorical discussion, on several occasions. I applaud MENC's move, first of all because it takes a lot of courage and money to make such a change, but more importantly, their acronym now reflects their real name. But, even with that said, any name with "national" in it only has meaning within the country that it functions. When ACDA was formed in 1959, it modeled itself after the American Bandmasters Associaition, but it grew out of the Music Teachers National Association. Our framers had the choice at that time between "American" and "National", and no-doubt, had that debate. In Major League Baseball, the "American League" includes U.S. teams, but they also have Toronto, while the "National League" has only U.S. teams. Similary, ACDA has members throughout the Americas, but then, we have members throughout the world. We don't, however, have chapters throughout the Americas or throughout the world, and perhaps it is time to grow into our name with such a constitutional adjustment. But, on the other hand, ACDA formed the International Federation for Choral Music in 1982 "to strengthen cooperation between national and international organizations and individuals in all aspects of choral music." Therefore, we have been very gentle about moving our system of governance beyond our borders. With that said, we have been in serious discussion about embracing our neighbors in Cuba, Middle America, and South America. Canada, our neighbor in North America, has a thriving choral organization (which, by the way, has a lovely name–the Association of Canadian Choral Communities), so our discussions about Canada have focused on collaboration, never integration.
     
    As to any discussion about "choral directors" versus something like "choral conductors" or "choral artists", or "choral leaders", some will make a fine distinction, but for a person like me that spends 24/7 thinking about our mission, at the end of the day, I remain unconvinced that a change would have any significant meaning to the profession.
     
    As to any discussion about the word "Association", oy veh.
     
    I do like the British choral association's acronym, however; it is clever–ABCD (Association of British Choral Directors).
    So with the British cleverness in mind, I defer to Shakespeare:
     
          What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
          Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
          Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
          What's in a name? that which we call a rose
          By any other name would smell as sweet…..

  9. You mean like does the organization need to have its name spell a real word instead of just having it not be a real word?  I think not.  I don’t know what changing MENC to NAME accomplishes either to tell you the truth.

  10. You  know, I’ve never questioned it before, and I think “NAME” is a RIDICULOUS acronym… but now that I think about it… AMERICAN Choral Director’s Association sort of brings with it the idea that members of the association are American? I understand it an association for this country, so “National” might work, but “American” sounds more like race than location. Just a thought. What I really think we should do is come up with a great acronym for AWESOME and use that…
    Jay

  11. Okay, a thought from a non-ACDA person:  Be careful when you approach this issue.  I used to belong to the National Association of Church Musicians, which changed its name from Choral Conductors’ Guild.  The reason it did so was it felt that first, the new title was more accurate – which it was by intention – and that it would energize recruiting.  Well, it fell flat on its face because, as a very small and frankly very regional organization (10 chapters – nine in California, and only one east of the Rockies – here in the DC area) there were internal problems that made such a change laughable, not the least was a total failure to make any sort of a real appeal to church musicians of all stripes.  I understand what could encourage ACDA to rethink its mission to a new title to reflect that – but be fully prepared to make the necessary transition and commit the resources to making that title a reality.  MENC/NAME was very clever, and because their mission is quite specific, the transitional title to the new title makes some sense, though I personally find the new acronym laughable (“My association’s name is NAME” – “Whaaa???”).  Look at your mission, and decide if your mission needs updating to meet a new reality, and thus perhaps a new title.  If it doesn’t, don’t change it; people handle change poorly in general terms; and even if you decide as an organization that it needs to be updated, be fully prepared to support that change.

Leave a Reply

© 2024 American Choral Directors Association. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy