Abstract
This paper studies conceptions of woodwind students regarding learning and teaching music, within the framework of implicit theories. It analyzes whether there are differences related to participants’ instruction level, and whether it is possible to identify profiles according to their conceptions. Sixty-eight students from three different levels at 14 Spanish conservatories took part voluntarily in this study. A multiple-choice questionnaire was used, which comprised 16 dilemmas on different situations typical of learning and teaching music. Three answers were presented for each dilemma, corresponding to the three implicit theories identified in recent years: direct, interpretative, and constructive. For each dilemma, participants were requested to choose the option they most agreed with and the one they least agreed with. Data were analyzed using chi-square tests of independence, multiple correspondence analysis, and ascending hierarchical classification. From the results obtained we can state that as students’ age and level of instruction increase, so does the level of sophistication of their conceptions. Three conceptual profiles were identified: direct, direct-interpretative, and constructive, which are consistent with prior results on conceptions of teaching and learning in other domains. Implications for education are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baccalá, N., & Montoro, V. (2008). Introducción al Análisis Multivariado. Cuaderno Universitario 51. Bariloche: Universidad Nacional del Comahue.
Bautista, A. (2009). Concepciones de profesores y alumnos de piano sobre la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de partituras musicales (Doctoral thesis, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain).
Bautista, A., & Pérez Echeverría, M. P. (2008). ¿Qué consideran los profesores de instrumento que deben enseñar en sus clases? Cultura y Educación, 20(1), 17–34. doi:10.1174/113564008783781477.
Bautista, A., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Pozo, J. I., & Brizuela, B. M. (2009). Piano students’ conceptions of musical scores as external representations: a cross-sectional study. Journal of Research in Music Education, 57(3), 181–202. doi:10.1177/0022429409343072.
Bautista, A., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., & Pozo, J. I. (2010). Music performance teachers’ conceptions about learning and instruction: a descriptive study of Spanish piano teachers. Psychology of Music, 38(1), 85–106. doi:10.1177/0305735609336059.
Bautista, A., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Pozo, J. I., & Brizuela, B. M. (2012). Piano students’ conceptions of learning, teaching, assessment, and evaluation. Estudios de Psicología, 33(1), 79–104.
Benzécri, J. P. (1977). Histoire et préhistoire de l’analyse des données. Partie V: L’analyse des correspondances. Les cahiers de l’analyse des données, 2(1), 9–40. http://archive.numdam.org/ARCHIVE/CAD/CAD_1977__2_1/CAD_1977__2_1_9_0/CAD_1977__2_1_9_0.pdf
Burwell, K. (2005). A degree of independence: teachers’ approaches to instrumental tuition in a university college. British Journal of Music Education, 22(3), 199–215. doi:10.1017/S0265051705006601.
Crivisqui, E. (1993). Análisis Factorial de Correspondencias. Asunción: Editorial de la Universidad Católica de Asunción.
Fine, J. (1996). Iniciación a los análisis de datos multidimensionales a partir de ejemplos. Montevideo: Editorial Universidad de la República.
Gaunt, H. (2008). One-to-one tuition in a conservatoire: the perceptions of instrumental and vocal teachers. Psychology of Music, 36(2), 215–245. doi:10.1177/0305735607080827.
Hallam, S. (2001a). The development of expertise in young musicians: strategy use, knowledge acquisition and individual diversity. Music Education Research, 3(1), 7–23. doi:10.1080/14613800020029914.
Hallam, S. (2001b). The development of metacognition in musicians: implications for education. British Journal of Music Education, 18(1), 27–39. doi:10.1017/S0265051701000122.
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88–140. doi:10.3102/00346543067001088.
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (Eds.). (2002). Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hultberg, C. (2002). Approaches to music notation: the printed score as a mediator of meaning in Western tonal tradition. Music Education Research, 4(2), 185–197. doi:10.1080/1461380022000011902.
Jørgensen, H., & Hallam, S. (2009). Practising. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 265–273). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ley Orgánica de Educación (L.O.E.) (2006). Organic Law in Education. Madrid: Boletín Oficial del Estado.
Marín, C., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., & Hallam, S. (2012). Using the musical score to perform: a study with Spanish flute students. British Journal of Music Education, 29, 193–212.
Martín, E., & Cervi, J. (2006). Modelos de formación docente para el cambio de concepciones en los profesores. In J. I. Pozo, N. Scheuer, M. P. Pérez Echeverría, M. Mateos, E. Martín, & M. de la Cruz (Eds.), Nuevas formas de pensar la enseñanza y el aprendizaje. Las concepciones de profesores y alumnos. Barcelona: Graó.
Martín, E., Pozo, J. I., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Mateos, M., & Martín, A. (2011). ¿Cómo representan los profesores el aprendizaje y la enseñanza? De las concepciones a los perfiles docentes. In C. Monereo & J. I. Pozo (Eds.), La identidad en psicología de la educación. Necesidad, utilidad y límites. Madrid: Narcea.
McPherson, G. E. (2005). From child to musician: skill development during the beginning stages of learning an instrument. Psychology of Music, 33(1), 5–35. doi:10.1177/0305735605048012.
Olafson, L., & Schraw, G. (2006). Teachers’ beliefs and practices within and across domains. International Journal of Educational Research, 45, 71–84. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2006.08.005.
Olafson, L., & Schraw, G. (2010). Consistency and development of teachers’ epistemological and ontological world views. Learning Environments Research, 13(3), 243–266. doi:10.1007/s10984-010-9078-3.
Olson, D. R., & Bruner, J. S. (1996). Folk psychology and folk pedagogy. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The handbook of education and human development (pp. 9–27). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Pecharromán, I., & Pozo, J. I. (2008). Epistemologías intuitivas de los adultos: influencia de la edad, el nivel de instrucción y el dominio de conocimiento. Estudios de Psicología, 29(3), 245–272.
Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Mateos, M., Pozo, J. I., & Scheuer, N. (2001). En busca del constructivismo perdido: concepciones implícitas sobre el aprendizaje. Estudios de Psicología, 22(2), 155–173. doi:10.1174/021093901609479.
Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Mateos, M., Scheuer, N., & Martín, E. (2006). Enfoques en el estudio de las concepciones sobre el aprendizaje y la enseñanza. In J. I. Pozo, N. Scheuer, M. P. Pérez Echeverría, M. Mateos, E. Martín, & M. de la Cruz (Eds.), Nuevas formas de pensar la enseñanza y el aprendizaje. Las concepciones de profesores y alumnos. Barcelona: Graó.
Pozo, J. I. (2006). La nueva cultura del aprendizaje en la sociedad del conocimiento. In J. I. Pozo, N. Scheuer, M. P. Pérez Echeverría, M. Mateos, E. Martín, & M. de la Cruz (Eds.), Nuevas formas de pensar la enseñanza y el aprendizaje. Las concepciones de profesores y alumnos. Barcelona: Graó.
Pozo, J. I., Scheuer, N., Pozo, J. I., & Scheuer, N. (1999). Las concepciones sobre el aprendizaje como teorías implícitas. In J. I. Pozo, C. Monereo, J. I. Pozo, & C. Monereo (Eds.), El aprendizaje estratégico. Enseñar a aprender desde el currículo. Madrid: Aula XXI/Santillana.
Pozo, J. I., Scheuer, N., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Mateos, M., Martín, E., & de la Cruz, M. (Eds.). (2006). Nuevas formas de pensar la enseñanza y el aprendizaje. Las concepciones de profesores y alumnos. Barcelona: Graó.
Reid, A. (2001). Variation in the ways that instrumental and vocal students experience learning music. Music Education Research, 3(1), 25–40. doi:10.1080/14613800020029932.
Rodrigo, M. J., Rodríguez, A., & Marrero, J. (Eds.). (1993). Las teorías implícitas. Una aproximación al conocimiento cotidiano. Madrid: Visor.
Scheuer, N., de la Cruz, M., Pozo, J. I., & Neira, S. (2006). Children’s autobiographies of learning to write. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 709–725. doi:10.1348/000709905X67601.
Scheuer, N., de la Cruz, M., Pozo, J. I., Echenique, M., & Márquez, M. S. (2009). Kindergarten and primary school children’s implicit theories of learning to write. Research Papers in Education, 24(3), 265–285. doi:10.1080/02671520902928903.
Scheuer, N., de la Cruz, M., & Iparraguirre, M. S. (2010). El aprendizaje de distintos dominios notacionales según niños de preescolar y primer grado. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Niñez y Juventud, 8(2), 1083–1097.
Strauss, S., & Shilony, T. (1994). Teachers’ models of children’s minds and learning. In L. A. Hirschfeld & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: domain specificity in cognition and culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tikva, J. B. (2010). Socratic teaching is not teaching, but direct transmission is: notes from 13 to 15-year olds’ conceptions of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 656–664.
Torrado, J. A., & Pozo, J. I. (2006). Del dicho al hecho: de las concepciones sobre el aprendizaje a la práctica de la enseñanza de la música. In J. I. Pozo, N. Scheuer, M. P. Pérez Echeverría, M. Mateos, E. Martín, & M. de la Cruz (Eds.), Nuevas formas de pensar la enseñanza y el aprendizaje. Las concepciones de profesores y alumnos. Barcelona: Graó.
Torrado, J. A., & Pozo, J. I. (2008). Metas y estrategias para una práctica constructiva en la enseñanza instrumental. Cultura y Educación, 20(1), 35–48. doi:10.1174/113564008783781468.
Ward, J. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58, 236–244. http://www.jstor.org/pss/2282967
Wellman, H. (1990). The child’s theory of mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Young, V., Burwell, K., & Pickup, D. (2003). Areas of study and teaching strategies in instrumental teaching: a case study research project. Music Education Research, 5(2), 139–155. doi:10.1080/1461380032000085522.
Zhukov, K. (2007). Student learning styles in advanced instrumental music lessons. Music Education Research, 9(1), 111–127. doi:10.1080/14613800601127585.
Acknowledgements
We wish to thank all the students who took part in this study, and their teachers and conservatories, for the facilities given to collect the data. We wish also to thank the members of the ‘Music Teaching and Learning’ research group at the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid for their ideas and comments throughout the elaboration of this work.
This study has been developed within the research project ‘Learning of external representational systems and representational change in different domains of knowledge’ (EDU2010-21995-C02-01), whose main researcher is Juan Ignacio Pozo. The project is funded by the Spanish Ministry for Science and Innovation. This study was also supported by the projects PIP 1029 from CONICET and B-139 from Universidad Nacional del Comahue.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Cristina Marín. Departamento de Psicología Básica, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain. Address: Aula PIF, Módulo 2. Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. C/Iván Pavlov, 6. E- 28049, Madrid. Spain. E-mail: cristina.marin@uam.es. Web Site: www.uam.es
Current themes of research:
Learning of notational systems. Music students’ conceptions of learning. Learning strategies in music.
Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:
Marín, C., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., & Hallam, S. (in press). Using the musical score to perform: a study with Spanish flute students. British Journal of Music Education.
Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Postigo, Y., & Marín, C. (2009). Aprender con imágenes e información gráfica. In J. I. Pozo, & M. P. Pérez Echeverría (Eds.), Psicología del aprendizaje universitario: la formación en competencias (pp. 134–148). Madrid: Morata.
Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Postigo, Y., & Marín, C. (2010). Las habilidades gráficas de los estudiantes universitarios: cómo comprenden las gráficas los estudiantes de psicología? Cultura y Educación, 22(2), 215–229.
Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Postigo, Y., & Marín, C. (in press). Students’ handling of graphs in university. In B. M. Brizuela, & B. E. Gravel (Eds.), ‘Show me what you know’. Exploring representations across STEM disciplines (pp. 493–497). New York: Teachers College Press.
Postigo, Y., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., & Marín Oller, C. (2010). ¿Cómo usan y comprenden los gráficos los estudiantes universitarios? Revista IRICE, 21, 81–94.
Nora Scheuer. CONICET, Centro Científico Tecnológico Comahue, Argentina; Universidad Nacional del Comahue, Centro Regional Universitario Bariloche, Argentina. Address: Centro Regional Universitario Bariloche. Quintral 1250. (8400) Bariloche. Argentina. E-mail: nora.scheuer@gmail.com. Web Site: http://www.uncoma.edu.ar
Current themes of research:
Learning of notational systems. Children’s conceptions of learning.
Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:
Scheuer, N., de la Cruz, M., Pedrazzini, A. M., Iparraguirre, M. S. y Pozo, J. I. (2012). Children’s gendered ways of talking about learning to write. Journal of Writing Research., 3(3), 181–216.
Scheuer, N., de la Cruz, M., Pozo, J. I., Echenique, M. y Márquez, M. S. (2009). Kindergarten and primary school children’s implicit theories of learning to write. Research Papers in Education, 24 (3), 265–285.
Scheuer, N., de la Cruz, M., Pozo, J. I., Huarte, M. F. y Sola, G. (2006). The mind is not a black box: children’s ideas about the writing process. Learning and Instruction, 16 (1), 72–85.
Scheuer, N., de la Cruz, M., Pozo, J. I. y Neira, S. (2006). Children’s autobiographies of learning to write. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 709–725.
Scheuer, N., Sinclair, A., Merlo de Rivas, S. y Tièche Christinat, Ch. (2000). Cuando ciento setenta y uno se escribe 10071: niños de 5 a 8 años produciendo numerales. Infancia y aprendizaje, 90, 31–50.
María-Puy Pérez-Echeverría. Departamento de Psicología Básica, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain. Address: Vicedecanato Grado y Calidad. Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. C/Iván Pavlov, 6. E- 28049, Madrid. Spain. E-mail: mdelpuy.perez@uam.es. Web Site: www.uam.es
Current themes of research:
Learning strategies. Learning of notational systems. Conceptions of teaching and learning.
Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:
Andersen, C., Scheuer, N., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., & Teubal, E. (Eds.). (2009). Representational systems and practices as learning tools in different fields of knowledge. Rotterdam: Sense.
Bautista, A., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., & Pozo, J. I. (2010). Music performance teachers’ conceptions about learning and instruction: a descriptive study of Spanish piano teachers. Psychology of Music, 38, 85–106.
Bautista, A., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Pozo, J. I., & Brizuela, B. M. (2012). Piano students’ conceptions of learning, teaching, assessment, and evaluation. Estudios de psicología, 33(1), 79–104.
Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Martí, E, & Pozo, J. I. (2010). Los sistemas externos de representación como herramientas de la mente. Cultura y Educación, 22(2), 133–147.
Pozo, J. I., Scheuer, N., Pérez Echeverría, M. P., Mateos, M., Martín, E., & De la Cruz, M. (Eds.). (2006). Nuevas formas de pensar la enseñanza y el aprendizaje. Las concepciones de profesores y alumnos. Barcelona: Graó.
Appendix 1: questionnaire
Appendix 1: questionnaire
Note: the questionnaire presented below is an adapted version for woodwind instrumentalists from the original Spanish version for pianists which can be found in Bautista (2009). For a translated version into the English from that questionnaire, see Bautista et al. (2012).
In order to simplify its presentation, items are presented in the same order as described in Table 3. Response choices are always presented following this order: Direct (Dir), Interpretative (Int), Constructive (Con).
Instructions
In the following pages, you are going to find a set of situations dealing with instrumental learning and teaching. After each situation, three response choices are presented. These choices reflect opinions frequently held by conservatory students and teachers.
-
First, you must choose the response choice with which you are most in agreement. You may only pick one option.
-
Second, you must choose the response choice with which you are least in agreement. You may only pick one option.
Please answer all the items even if you do not entirely agree or disagree with the response choices provided.
Learning
LE1: Three students (at the same level as you) have different opinions about how to start learning new musical pieces. What do you think?
Dir. The best is to start from the beginning always, progressing in the reading of the score as both musical text and technical aspects become mastered. This is the most methodical and systematic way of working.
Int. The best is to start working on the most difficult sections at the technical and interpretative levels, because these sections will require being practised the most. This is the most effective way to end up mastering the musical pieces.
Con. The best is to start analyzing the pieces at the expressive, aesthetic, and stylistic levels, as well as reading information about their composers. This is the most effective way to develop a personal understanding of the pieces.
LE2: Michael, a student at the same level as you, has studied for months the same repertory of pieces. However, he is still not able to play most of the pieces properly because of their technical difficulties. What do you think?
Most likely, Michael…
Dir. … is not practicing enough time. I would recommend him to practise more, because solving certain technical difficulties requires being very perseverant.
Int. … is practicing in the wrong way. I would recommend him to address his technical difficulties carefully following the directions provided by his teacher.
Con. … is practicing without having clearly defined musical objectives. I would recommend him to practise thinking in music first, and then in technique.
LE3: Paul, a student at your same level, plays a piece in which the following indication appears: Presto (♪ = 180). However, he performs the piece using much slower tempo (around ♪ = 90). What do you think?
Dir. He’s playing the piece using an excessively slow tempo and hence incorrectly, as he’s not following the indication given by the composer. If the student is not able to reach the technical level required by this piece, he’d better leave the piece for now.
Int. He’s playing the piece using an excessively slow tempo and hence incorrectly, as he’s not even tried to reach the tempo that the composer indicated. If the student wants to play this piece, he should effort to increase the tempo as much as his technical possibilities allow him.
Con. He’s playing the piece without following the indication given by the composer, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that his performance is ‘incorrect’. If the student decides to play the piece that way, he should be able to justify the interpretative and expressive reasons for doing so.
LE4: Mary, a student at your same level, plays a piece very differently than the most prestigious pianists. What would you suggest to her?
Dir. I would suggest to listen to the CD with the interpretation of the pianist most specialized in that composer, so that she can imitate that interpretation as much as possible. In this way, the quality of her performance will be guaranteed.
Int. I would suggest to listen to several CD’s with well-known interpretations, so that she can imitate the ideas she likes the most. In this way, her interpretation will be stylistically correct and, at the same time, a little personal.
Con. I don’t think that suggesting her something is necessary at all. Once the most famous and conventional interpretations are known, students need to innovate and express their musical ideas and feelings in their own way.
LE5: There are different ways to memorize musical pieces. Which one do you think is the best?
Dir. Playing the pieces from beginning to end at least once a day, as if we were in the final recital, and then many times practicing those sections in which we’ve made mistakes. Our memory is more efficient when the music is rehearsed repeatedly.
Int. Practicing the pieces using different study techniques, such as playing with different speeds, with different rhythms, section by section, etc. Our memory is more efficient when music is rehearsed step by step, and using different procedures.
Con. Analyzing the different sections of the pieces at the melodic, harmonic, formal, and structural levels, even before we start reading and practicing the score itself. Our memory is more efficient when music is learnt in a comprehensive and meaningful way.
LE6: Teacher Mr. Smith usually advises his students to practise together at least once a week, so that when one plays the other one listens, teaches, corrects, gives advice, etc., and vice versa. What do you think about that?
Dir. I think it’s inappropriate because it is a waste of time. To learn how to play music good, one needs to be alone and very focused, and practise a lot of time according to the teacher’s instructions.
Int. I think it’s appropriate only if the student who teaches and corrects has a higher level than the other student. Otherwise, the former won’t be able to teach anything useful to the latter.
Con. I think it’s very appropriate even if the two students have different levels, because the act of listening to the other and trying to teach him/her something will make both students learn.
Teaching
TE1: As you know, certain scores do not suggest the articulations to the interpreter. In your opinion, when students at your same level start to learn a score like that, what is the best thing that teachers can do?
Dir. Suggest the most appropriate articulations from the start, especially those of the most difficult sections, so that the students save time and read and memorize the piece faster. Playing the pieces correctly is the most important thing.
Int. Let the students choose their own articulations, and then correct when there are mistakes by suggesting the most correct alternative. Learning is important, but if we want to play really well, we need to be guided by the experts.
Con. Let the students choose their own articulations, and use their mistakes to make them think about how to improve. Although this approach takes more time and students might not play the pieces ‘perfect’, students will learn much more.
TE2: From one lesson to the next one, Mary—a student at the same level as you—improves very much certain sections of the piece she is practicing. However, the way that she plays other sections is still pretty bad. What do you think?
Her teacher should start focusing on…
Dir. … those sections she doesn’t play well yet. The teacher should recommend Mary to practise specific exercises so that she can overcome these difficulties, and practically demonstrate how to do the exercises.
Int. … those sections she doesn’t play well yet. The teacher should explain Mary the reasons for her difficulties, and give her specific recommendations to overcome them as soon as possible.
Con. … those sections in which she has improved. The teacher should make Mary reflect about the reasons for her improvements, and later on compare with the difficulties that she is experiencing in the other sections.
TE3: During her weekly lesson, Susan plays very well a technically difficult section of a piece. In her previous lessons, though, she was not able to play that section at all. In your opinion, what Susan’s teacher should do in this situation?
Dir. He should simply congratulate Susan on her progresses and provide her with further challenging learning opportunities. Other than that, it wouldn’t be necessary to do anything else because the student has learnt and improved her technical skills.
Int. He should ask her to play the section more times and in different ways to make sure Susan didn’t play that section well by sheer chance. If she does it well again, the teacher should congratulate her and suggest her new challenges. Otherwise, he should explain her how to improve her difficulties.
Con. He should ask her to explain how she practised that difficult section during the week so that Susan becomes aware of the reasons for her improvement. Then, the teacher should ask her about the aspects that need to be further improved, and how she’d practise those aspects.
TE4: During his individual lesson, Jim (a student at the same level as you) is not able to play a certain section of a piece because it’s technically very difficult. In your opinion, what should his teacher do to help him improve? The teacher should…
Dir. … play the section (slowly, dividing it into smaller parts) so that Jim can observe how he has to play it, and then suggest him specific exercises to practise at home.
Int. … explain Jim what his difficulties are and give him instructions to overcome them, making sure that he correctly understands how he needs to practise.
Con. … ask Jim different questions to make him reflect and think about the reasons for his struggles, as well as about what to do to overcome them.
TE5: Three instrument teachers argue about the best way to assign students their weekly practice. Which one do you agree the most and the least with? What the teacher should do is…
Dir. … choose the most suitable practice for the students, showing them how they have to complete it, and demonstrate the technical or interpretative outcomes they have to achieve.
Int. … choose the most suitable practice for the students, explaining and justifying why it needs to be completed, and provide students with instructions about how to practise their assignments.
Con. … involve the students in the assignment of their own practice in order to make them think and reflect about why, what for, and how they are going to complete the practice that they’ve decided by themselves.
TE6: According to teacher Mr. Johnson, encouraging students to self-evaluate and self-criticize their own performance during the lessons is a good teaching strategy. What do you think about that?
Dir. I don’t think that’s a good teaching strategy because that’s a waste of time. Obviously, teachers have more expertise than students, so the best is for teachers to tell us what we do right and wrong as soon as possible.
Int. I think that could be a good teaching strategy as the first approach, given that it fosters students’ active engagement. However, that strategy should always be followed up by the teachers’ evaluation on what is right and wrong.
Con. I think that’s a very good teaching strategy. It fosters the students’ reflection about our own learning process and helps us develop our personal criteria, which, in terms of our learning, are as important as teachers’ criteria.
TE7: Three students at your same level have different opinions about who are the best instrument teachers. Who do you agree the most and the least with? The best instrument teachers are…
Dir. … generally the best performers, because their experience as musicians enables them to show the students in a practical way how to practise and how to play; these teachers are the best models to be imitated.
Int. … not necessarily the best performers, because aside from playing the instrument well, teachers need to be able to provide students with clear explanations about what to do in each situation, as well as effectively correct students’ mistakes.
Con. … those who have received more education as teachers, because their pedagogical knowledge and skills enable them to teach students in comprehensive and reflective ways.
Evaluation
VA1: Within the context of instrument instruction, ‘Evaluation’ should mainly pursue…
Dir. … that teachers examine students’ musical skills and give us grades to describe how we play at the end of each term or each course.
Int. … that teachers give grades to students to describe our achievements and detect which aspects we need to correct in the next lessons or course.
Con. … that students, based on the dialogue with the teachers, reflect on our own learning process and realize our personal strength and weaknesses.
VA2: Lilian, a student at your same level, has practised very little over the current year. Although she is a ‘brilliant’ instrumentalist, she admits that this course has been really lazy. Her teacher has been unhappy with her performance because Lilian has improved practically nothing. However, during the last weeks of the course, Lilian practises a lot, up to the point that she wonderfully plays all the pieces in the final recital, much better than the other students. In your opinion, what aspects should the teacher have into consideration when deciding Lilian’s final grade?
Dir. The teacher should consider that Lilian has played the pieces wonderfully in the final recital, and also that her performance has been much better than the other students.
Int. The teacher should mainly consider that Lilian has played very well in the recital, although the fact that her improvement throughout the year has been scarce should be considered a little bit too.
Con. The teacher should mainly consider that Lilian’s improvement throughout the year has been scarce, and the fact that she has played very well should be considered little because she could have improved much more.
VA3: In the final exam, David—a student as the same level as you—plays all the pieces very well, much better than the other students. When the members of the examination panel discuss what grade he should receive, however, David’s teacher brings the idea that he is still unable to learn new pieces by himself. Moreover, the teacher has tried really hard to teach David how to be more self-sufficient but he hasn’t achieved any improvement at all in that regard. Do you think that these facts should negatively influence in David’s final grade?
Dir. No, I don’t. The important thing is that he’s played the pieces very well, even better than the other students. The fact that David is not self-sufficient is not important because teachers are there to teach whatever students need.
Int. No, I don’t. The important thing is that he has played the pieces very well, but in the next year he should pay more attention to the teacher and make more efforts to improve his self-sufficiency.
Con. Yes, I do. The capacity of being self-sufficient is absolutely essential for learning. In consequence, this fact should be taken into consideration when deciding the grade David deserves.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Marín, C., Scheuer, N. & Pérez-Echeverría, MP. Formal music education not only enhances musical skills, but also conceptions of teaching and learning: a study with woodwind students. Eur J Psychol Educ 28, 781–805 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0140-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0140-7