I thought this module was a bit behind the times with suggesting that the inclusion of popular music in contemporary music study is somehow novel or revolutionary. Now, it might be that Australia has more conservative or traditional pedagogy methods. Or, it might be a bigger issue in elementary and secondary levels. But a lot of these music topics are rather commonplace in U.S. colleges and universities.
Undergraduate jazz studies programs, speciality colleges such as Berklee, certification courses such as the one presented in the Liveschool video, history of rock/rap/country courses, music production courses, appreciation courses that devote equal time to popular and art musics…all of these things have been around for years
It seemed like the message is, that students are bored by art music, and therefore quit studying music, and if we teach them music via repertoire of the Billboard Hot 100, we'll have overflowing numbers of students studying music through high school.
Just because a student enjoys something in a passive, consumerist mode, doesn't mean that he or she wants to actively create it as well. And can we possibly anticipate the personal preferences of every single student? For example, in the in the Xavier video, we have a DJ who was actually bored by the inclusion of pop music (i.e. The Doors) in his high school education!
Fortunately, the module ended on a strong note with the delightful Richard Gill postulating what I think is probably the best approach: music study needs to be a mix of approaches (singing/instrumental), techniques (performance/composition/improv), styles (art/folk/pop), and, I might add, cultures and traditions (Western and non-Western). This is most likely the best way to reach and engage a wide audience of learners.