Routledge International Handbook of Music Psychology in Education and the Community 2020051421, 2020051422, 9780367271800, 9780367769819, 9780429295362

Citation preview

i

R O U T L E D G E I N T E R NAT I O NA L HA N D B O O K O F M U S I C P S YC H O L O G Y I N E D U C AT I O N AND THE COMMUNIT Y

This handbook provides an evidence-​based account of psychological perspectives on issues in music education and music in the community through the life course, exploring our understanding of music learning and participation across contexts. The contributors draw on multidisciplinary research from different cultures and contexts in order to set out the implications of music psychology for music education and music in the community. Highlighting the intersecting issues across education and community contexts, the book proposes new theories as well as offering important refinements to existing conceptual models. Split into six parts, it considers the role of music in society as well as for groups and individuals, and explores topics such as processing and responding to music; pedagogical and musical practices that support or pose challenges to the emotional, cognitive, social or physical wellbeing of learners and participants in a range of contexts; and ‘music in identity’ or ‘identity in music’. With the final part on future directions and the implications for professional practice in music education and music in the community, the book concludes by exploring how the two sectors might work more closely together within a post-​COVID-​19 world. Based on cutting-​edge research from an international team, this is essential reading for anyone interested in music psychology, education and community, and it will be particularly helpful for undergraduate and graduate students in music psychology, music education and community music. Andrea Creech is Professor of Music Pedagogy at the Schulich School of Music, McGill University, Canada. Following an international music performance career, Andrea was awarded a PhD in Psychology in Education from the Institute of Education, University of London, UK, where she subsequently was appointed Reader in Education. Andrea’s research has covered a wide range of issues in formal and informal music education contexts, including interpersonal dynamics, informal learning, inclusion, lifelong learning and music for positive youth development. Donald A. Hodges, formerly Distinguished Professor of Music at the University of North Carolina Greensboro, USA, is the author of Music in the Human Experience (2020, 2011) and A Concise Survey of Music Philosophy (2017). His research efforts have included a series of brain imaging studies of pianists, conductors and singers using PET and fMRI.

ii

Susan Hallam is Emerita Professor of Education and Music Psychology at the UCL Institute of Education, UK. She was awarded an MBE in 2015 for her services to music education, a lifelong achievement award in 2020 for music and drama education, and subsequently lifelong honorary membership of the British Psychological Society, the International Society for Music Education, MusicMark and the Society for Education, Music and Psychology Research (Sempre). Her research is based in psychology and education with particular emphases on music, learning and disaffection.

iii

ROUTLEDGE I N T E R NAT I O NA L HA N D B O O K O F M U S I C P S YC H O L O G Y I N E D U C AT I O N A N D T H E COMMUNIT Y

Edited by Andrea Creech, Donald A. Hodges and Susan Hallam

iv

First published 2021 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2021 selection and editorial matter, Andrea Creech, Donald A. Hodges and Susan Hallam; individual chapters, the contributors The right of Andrea Creech, Donald A. Hodges and Susan Hallam to be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-​in-​Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-​in-​Publication Data Names: Creech, Andrea, editor. | Hodges, Donald A., editor. | Hallam, Susan, editor. Title: Routledge international handbook of music psychology in education and the community / edited by Andrea Creech, Donald A. Hodges, and Susan Hallam. Description: [1.] | New York: Routledge, 2021. | Series: Routledge international handbooks | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2020051421 (print) | LCCN 2020051422 (ebook) | ISBN 9780367271800 (hardback) | ISBN 9780367769819 (paperback) | ISBN 9780429295362 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Music–Psychological aspects. | Music–Social aspects. | Music–Instruction and study–Psychological aspects. Classification: LCC ML3830 .R808 2021 (print) | LCC ML3830 (ebook) | DDC 781.1/1–dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020051421 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020051422 ISBN: 978-0-367-27180-0 (hbk) ISBN: 978-0-367-76981-9 (pbk) ISBN: 978-0-429-29536-2 (ebk) Typeset in Bembo by Newgen Publishing UK

v

CONTENTS

List of figures  List of tables  List of boxes  List of contributors  Acknowledgements 

ix x xi xii xv

PART I

Introduction and context 

1 3

Introduction  Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges 1 The social functions of music: Communication, Wellbeing, Art, Ritual, Identity and Social networks (C-​WARIS)  Raymond MacDonald

5

2 Ruminations on music psychology research  Donald A. Hodges

21

3 The wider cognitive benefits of engagement with music  Sylwia Holmes

38

4 The wider personal and social benefits of engagement with music  Albi Odendaal and Donald A. Hodges

52

5 The health benefits of engaging with music  Gunter Kreutz and Urs Nater

68

v

vi

Contents PART II

Processing and responding to music 

81

Introduction  Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

83

6 Musical processing across the life course  Wilfried Gruhn

86

7 Responses to music  Robert Fulford, Alinka Greasley and Karen Burland

101

8 Listening to, evaluating and appraising music  Alexandra Lamont

116

9 Musical preferences  Alexandra Lamont and David Hargreaves

131

PART III

Acquiring specific music skills 

147

Introduction149 Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech 10 Conceptions of musical ability and the expertise paradigm  Jane W. Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur

153

11 Transformational models of music learning  Maria Varvarigou and Andrea Creech

169

12 Learning to play an instrument  Katie Zhukov

185

13 Through singing to music across the life course  Annabel J. Cohen

201

14 Acquiring skills in music technology  Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides

217

15 Community music learning and creativity  Beatriz Ilari, Susan Helfter and Peter Webster

236

16 Motivation and developing a musical identity  Maria Spychiger

254

17 The role of music performance through the life course  Ioulia Papageorgi

269

18 Health issues for those participating in musical activities  Bronwen Ackermann

286

vi

vii

Contents PART IV

Pedagogy in education and community music 

301

Introduction303 Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech 19 Music pedagogy for large group teaching: The conductor-​educator  Wendy K. Matthews

306

20 Working with and in small groups  Elaine King

320

21 Musical engagement in one-​to-​one contexts  Helena Gaunt, Guadalupe López-​Íñiguez and Andrea Creech

335

22 Additional needs and disability in musical learning: Issues and pedagogical considerations  David Baker 23 Holding multiple musical identities: The portfolio musician  Jennifer Rowley, Anna Reid and Dawn Bennett 24 The role of formative and summative assessment in musical learning and participation  Mathieu Boucher and Andrea Creech PART V

Support for musical learning 

351 367

381

397

Introduction399 Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech 25 The role of the family in supporting musical learning  Stephen F. Zdzinski

401

26 The role of peers in supporting learning in music  Siw Graabræk Nielsen and Guro Gravem Johansen

418

27 The role of technology in mediating collaborative learning in music  Aaron Liu-​Rosenbaum and Andrea Creech

433

PART VI

Future directions 

449

Introduction451 Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

vii

viii

Contents

28 Implications for research and practice 1  Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

454

29 Implications for research and practice 2  Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

473

Index 

488

viii

ix

FIGURES

1.1 1.2 1.3 10.1 10.2 15.1 16.1 22.1 23.1 25.1 25.2 25.3 28.1 28.2 28.3 28.4 28.5 28.6

C-​WARIS: The social functions of music  6 Three mechanisms for meaning in musical communication  8 Reciprocal deterministic explanation of musical engagement  15 The differentiated model of musical giftedness and talent  155 Stages for musical development  163 Intersections between creativity and community music with a focus on individual, groups, creative process and product and possible outcomes  249 Sectors of musical activity related to societal opportunities and to varieties of musical motivation and development in musically active individuals  260 Left to right: Graphic representation of the LRA matrix and a conductor’s gesture, an LRA and the haptic vest  360 Student self-​assessment by gender, scaled to a 10-​point Likert-​style scale  374 Hoover-​Dempsey and Sandler’s (1997) model of parental involvement  403 Zdzinski and Russell’s (2014) SEM model of the influence of parental involvement/​home music environment, parenting style and psychosocial maturity on musical success and academic success  406 Colon-​Leon’s (2018) SEM model predicting school-​based parental involvement for special learners in music  412 Four phases of music psychology research  455 Personal protective equipment for singers  462 Oboist wearing a mask  464 Horn bell cover  465 The Boise Baroque Orchestra, conducted by Robert Franz  467 Karlin Coolidge, principal flutist of the Boise Baroque Orchestra  468

ix

x

TABLES

14.1 Highly rated music technology skills for (a) undergraduate musicians, (b) students of music education and (c) intending audio engineers  22.1 The religious, medical and social models of disability compared  22.2 Disability, music teaching and learning  29.1 Key messages, reflective questions and pedagogical applications 

x

219 355 356 484

xi

BOXES

11.1 Content, incentive and interaction dimensions of Musical Futures in two schools  11.2 Music for Life Project: Transformative learning experiences  16.1 Vignette 1  16.2 Vignette 2  16.3 Vignette 3  24.1 Definitions of formal, informal and non-​formal contexts of learning  24.2 Definitions for summative and formative assessments  24.3 Assessment in a Musical Futures secondary school classroom  24.4 Formative assessment in community music contexts  24.5 Using video feedback to foster self-​regulation skills among college-​level guitarists 

xi

176 179 255 261 263 382 383 387 389 390

xii

CONTRIBUTORS

Bronwen Ackermann, Associate Professor, Biomedical Science, School of Medical Sciences, Sydney Medical School, Australia. David Baker, Associate Professor UCL Institute of Education, UK. Dawn Bennett, Assistant Provost and Director of the Transformation CoLab with Bond University in Australia. Mathieu Boucher, Coordinator, École préparatoire Anna-​Marie-​Globenski Université Laval, Canada. Karen Burland, Professor of Applied Music Psychology, School of Music, University of Leeds, UK. Annabel J. Cohen, Professor of Psychology, University of Prince Edward Island, Canada. Andrea Creech, Professor of Music Pedagogy, Schulich School of Music, McGill University, Canada. Jane W.  Davidson, Professor of Creative and Performing Arts (Music), The University of Melbourne, Australia. Robert Fulford,Visiting Research Fellow, School of Music, University of Leeds, UK. Helena Gaunt, Principal, Royal Welsh College of Music & Drama, UK. Alinka Greasley, Associate Professor of Music Psychology, School of Music, University of Leeds, UK. Wilfried Gruhn, Professor Emeritus, Musikhochschule (University of Music) Freiburg, Germany. xii

xiii

List of contributors

Susan Hallam, Emerita Professor, UCL Institute of Education, UK. David Hargreaves, Emeritus Professor of Music Psychology, The University of Roehampton, UK. Susan Helfter, Associate Professor of Practice, Thornton School of Music, University of Southern California, USA. Evangelos Himonides, Professor of Technology, Education, and Music, UCL Institute of Education, UK. Donald A. Hodges, Professor Emeritus, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, USA. Sylwia Holmes, Associate Professor, The University of Warwick, UK. Beatriz Ilari, Associate Professor of Music Education, Chair of the Department of Music Teaching and Learning, University of Southern California. Guro Gravem Johansen, Associate Professor of Music Education, Norwegian Academy of Music, Norway. Elaine King, Reader in Music, School of the Arts, University of Hull, UK. Gunter Kreutz, Professor, Department of Music, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Germany. Alexandra Lamont, Professor of Music Psychology, Keele University, UK. Aaron Liu-​Rosenbaum, Associate Professor of Music Technology; Director, Digital Audio Production certificate programme; Coordinator, Flexarts bachelor’s programme; Faculty of Music, Université Laval, Canada. Guadalupe López-​Íñiguez, Adjunct Professor of Music Education, Sibelius Academy, University of the Arts Helsinki, Finland. Stephanie MacArthur, Instrumental Music Teacher and Sessional Tutor in Music Education, Conservatorium of Music, The University of Melbourne, Australia. Raymond MacDonald, Chair of Music Psychology and Improvisation, Music,The University of Edinburgh, UK. Wendy K. Matthews, Associate Professor, Kent State University, USA. Urs Nater, Professor of Clinical Psychology, Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Universität Wien, Austria. Siw Graabræk Nielsen, Professor of Music Education, Co-​Leader of CERM (Centre for Educational Research in Music), Norwegian Academy of Music, Norway. xiii

xiv

List of contributors

Albi Odendaal, Associate Professor, School of Music, MASARA (Musical Arts in South Africa:  Resources and Applications), North West University, South Africa; Postdoctoral Researcher, Sibelius Academy, University of the Arts Helsinki, Finland. Ioulia Papageorgi, Associate Professor, Department of Social Sciences, Associate Dean, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Nicosia, Cyprus. Ross Purves, Associate Professor of Music Education, Department of Culture, Communication and Media, UCL Institute of Education, UK, USA. Anna Reid, Head of School and Dean, Sydney Conservatorium of Music, The University of Sydney, Australia. Jennifer Rowley, Associate Professor, Sydney Conservatorium of Music, The University of Sydney, Australia. Maria Spychiger, Professor of Music Education,Venia Legendi for Psychology of Music and Music Pedagogy, University of Music and Performing Arts, Germany. Maria Varvarigou, Lecturer in Music Education, Mary Immaculate College, University of Limerick, Ireland. Peter Webster, Scholar-​in-​Residence, Thornton School of Music, University of Southern California, USA. Stephen F. Zdzinski, Professor of Music Education, Graduate Program Director, Speaker of the Frost School of Music Council, Frost School of Music, University of Miami, USA. Katie Zhukov, Research Professional, Monash University, Australia.

xiv

xv

newgenprepdf

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to take this opportunity to thank Eleanor Taylor at Routledge for her initial enthusiasm for this project and for her ongoing support. Thank you too to her team, including Alex Howard and Lucy Kennedy, for their support and help in guiding us through the process to completion. We would also like to acknowledge the unwavering patience and meticulous work of our Editorial Assistant, Angelina Lynne. Very particularly, we would like to thank each one of the authors for their contributions to this volume. When accepting to contribute, no one of us could have known that this project would coincide with the global COVID-​19 pandemic. Each one of the chapters has been completed under extraordinary conditions when authors were meeting a whole range of unprecedented personal and professional demands. We are truly grateful for their dedication to producing a collection of such quality, breadth and scope. Finally, Andrea and Don would like to thank Susan for being the driving force behind this project. She had the original idea and worked tirelessly to bring it into its present conception. We are grateful to her, as she has been an inspiration to us and to so many.

xv

xvi

1

PART I

Introduction and context

2

3

INTRODUCTION Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

Part I of this volume, comprising Chapters 1–​5, provides a broad context. Here, authors explore perspectives from music psychology concerned with the function of music in society, the wider benefits associated with musical engagement at group and individual levels, and approaches to research. Part  I begins by exploring two overarching questions:  What is the function of music, and what is music psychology? With regard to the former question, Raymond MacDonald (Chapter 1) highlights the overarching communicative role of music in society. As he explains, communication through music can be enhanced or constrained by structural features of the music itself as well as by multiple facets of the social contexts within which musicking takes place. Furthermore, our communicative intention and response may be shaped by culturally specific associations. MacDonald argues that these three mechanisms (structure, social/​cultural factors, association) are interdependent and intersect in specific ways within five domains, each associated with a distinct function of music in society:  Wellbeing, Art, Ritual, Identity and Social networks. This chapter synthesises music psychology evidence concerned with how we use music in each one of these domains and discusses the implications that cut across music education and community music. Chapter  2 follows with Donald Hodges’ discussion of the intentions, principles, approaches and implications associated with music psychology research. Major themes of this chapter are interdisciplinarity and collaboration, the principal idea (in accordance with the ethos of the volume overall) being that ‘silos’ are not helpful in pushing the boundaries of our theoretical and practical knowledge; rather, there is great potential in truly collaborative exploration that would reflect the interdisciplinary nature of music psychology (e.g., neuroscientific and sociocultural perspectives in collaboration; making explicit the philosophical foundations of psychological perspectives) and, in so doing, bring together theory, research and practice. Together, these first two chapters set the scene for subsequent chapters that explore the intersections of music psychology with musical practices in education and community contexts. Chapters 3, 4 and 5 collectively highlight the ways in which music listening, learning and participation can contribute to a range of positive –​or sometimes negative –​social, emotional, cognitive and physical health outcomes. Each of these chapters demonstrates the potential for lifelong impact of musical engagement, whether the context is conceptualised as education or community music. That said, it is clear that contexts differ with regard to intention, practices, 3

4

Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

resources and more; accordingly, the chapters in this part demonstrate some of the ways that context may have an influence on outcomes. In a similar vein, these chapters also highlight the complexities involved in research that aims to establish any kind of cause and effect; notwithstanding increasing evidence and innovative approaches to investigation, as noted in Chapter 5, the relationships of listening, singing and playing music with health and wellbeing remain meaningful areas for investigation. The wider cognitive benefits of engagement with music are discussed in Chapter 3. Here, Sylwia Holmes unpacks issues concerned with (a) musicians as compared with ‘non-​musicians’ and (b) listening as compared with active music-​making, in relation to cognition. Critical issues concerning the possible causality of this association are highlighted and discussed. Holmes reviews recent empirical studies from a range of national and cultural contexts, critically evaluating arguments on the possibility that musical engagement can be associated with cognitive gains in the areas of executive functioning; auditory skills, reading, and literacy; spatial-​ temporal reasoning; and mathematics.Taking a life course approach, Holmes considers evidence concerned with school-​age children, disadvantaged young people, adults and older people. The idea of ‘wider benefits’ of music education and music in the community is further explored in Chapter 4. Here, Albi Odendaal and Donald Hodges consider music psychology research focused on the social and personal benefits of musicking across the lifespan and in various cultures. These authors bring a critical perspective to the idea that affordances of music are always positive, reminding us that there is no evidence that supports a direct relationship between specific benefits and musical engagement; furthermore, they highlight some of the harmful, as well as helpful, uses and outcomes of musical engagement. Like Holmes in Chapter 3, the authors of Chapter 4 structure their discussion around different phases of the life course, ranging from early years, through schools, higher education and adult lifelong learning contexts. Overall, while Odendaal and Hodges do certainly conclude that musicking offers the possibility of personal and social benefits, they highlight the complexity of researching such benefits, which (as MacDonald suggests in Chapter 1) are influenced by multiple factors apart from the structural features of the music itself. Finally, Chapter 5 draws on the existing literature concerned with the implications for health that can be related to music-​making and listening to music across the life course. Gunter Kreutz and Urs Nater frame their chapter with models from the fields of health and positive psychology, focusing on the health benefits of singing and playing instruments in non-​clinical educational or community contexts. The overarching message of this chapter concurs with Chapters 3 and 4, namely that robust research frameworks are needed to further investigate both contributing factors and underlying processes that can explain the wider, extramusical (sometimes unexpected) effects of music learning and participation. Such research has important implications for policy concerned with education and social systems.

4

5

1 THE SOCIAL FUNCTIONS OF MUSIC Communication, Wellbeing, Art, Ritual, Identity and Social networks (C-​WARIS) Raymond MacDonald

We are the same. There is no difference anywhere in the world. People are people. They laugh, cry, feel, and love, and music seems to be the common denomination that brings us all together. Music cuts through all boundaries and goes right to the soul. (Willie Nelson, quoted in Nelson & McMurtry, 2003, p. 119) We are all musical and music is universal; these are not glib assertions, but well-​evidenced conclusions drawn by researchers from across the academic spectrum. Music is universally accessible and universally available. Everyone can communicate using music and everyone can be moved by experiencing music, regardless of environmental or health factors (MacDonald et al., 2012). These observations lead us to ask a very basic question: What are the functions of music? While the quote above from Willie Nelson may seem just another glib generalisation, there are several points of interest for us in terms of the aims of this chapter. Willie Nelson signals music’s universal presence and its distinction as a unique and separate channel of communication, quite separate from other channels (e.g., language, visual communication). In saying music “goes right to the soul”, he draws on the observation that music can invoke powerful emotions and deep memories; it can help bring people together and unite us in a collective activity. These are not anodyne blandishments, but suggest that underlying music’s power to communicate are significant social, psychological and musical processes that combine in unique and important ways to help give music its meaning. If music is universal, what type of role does it have in society? Music is woven into the fabric of our lives, inextricably linked to a host of social and psychological functions that help define what it means to be human (MacDonald & Wilson, 2020). This chapter focuses on the functions of music in society. These include medical and health functions, everyday functions such as mood maintenance, the artistic and aesthetic role of music, and its spiritual and ceremonial functions.

5

6

Raymond MacDonald

Figure 1.1  C-​WARIS: The social functions of music

C-​WARIS In this chapter, I propose five broad categories and one overarching caveat that summarise the social function of music. These are represented by the acronym C-​WARIS (Figure 1.1).

Communication The one overarching caveat is that the primary social function of music is communication –​ C. Its communicative prowess is utilised across the following domains: W –​ Wellbeing; A –​ Art; R –​ Ritual; I –​Identity; and S –​Social networks. Music’s communicative functions and its effects have been an interest for writers for millennia (Patel, 2008; Rousseau, 1998). Pythagoras, along with other Greek philosophers, believed that music had specific relationships with Greek Gods and medicinal effects related to its acoustic properties (Horden, 2000). These ideas focused on psychoacoustic features and how particular instruments, songs, intervals or note clusters could produce specific effects for listeners. This approach draws clear causal links between structural features of music and particular psychological affects, and it remains influential within contemporary research and popular culture. Cook (1959) presents a detailed analysis of how listeners may perceive emotion in classical music with reference to various structural features while Juslin (2019) offers a comprehensive overview of musical communication and emotion with particular emphasis on structural aspects. In addition to the importance of structural aspects, researchers have also highlighted the role of social and cultural factors when discussing music’s communicative properties (Blacking, 1973; Clayton, 2016; Farnsworth, 1969; Groarke & Hogan, 2019; Hargreaves & North, 1997; Koelsch, 2013; MacDonald et al., 2017; Merriam, 1964; Turino, 2008). These authors show that the importance of music is partly due to the ways in which it can be flexibly utilised in countless social contexts. Huron (2006) presents evidence to account for tonality’s expressive qualities. This includes leading tones creating a feeling of yearning, final chords generating a feeling of closure, Picardy thirds lending an element of surprise, and so on. Merriam (1964), in the landmark text The Anthropology of Music, outlines ten functions of music in society, covering such aspects as emotions, aesthetics, notation, embodiment and ceremonies. Farnsworth (1969) also emphasises the important social function of music while integrating structural aspects. This argument is further developed by Blacking (1973), who moves the debate beyond the acoustic and structural by stating that “universals of music must not be sought in immanent structures such as melodic or rhythmic components, but in the behaviours associated with sound phenomena” (p.  34). In pointing towards behaviours related to musical engagement, 6

7

The social functions of music

Blacking (1973) emphasises the social and psychological importance of musical engagement. David Hargreaves and Adrian North published two texts which also investigated the importance of music within society. The first, The Social Psychology of Music (Hargreaves & North, 1997), explores the social situations in which music is created, performed and heard.This theme is developed in The Social and Applied Psychology of Music (North & Hargreaves, 2008), which focused on educational, technological and creative issues for those engaged with music. Koelsch (2013) presents an overview of social functions of music, linking key psychological and cognitive processes with neurological and social processes.This paper highlights a number of neurological and cognitive aspects underpinning the social function of music. In a paper with Steinbeis, he also shows how particular parts of the brain, related to social engagement, are stimulated when listening to music (Steinbeis & Koelsch, 2008). These publications have contributed to our understanding of how music functions in society by proposing a nuanced interplay between social contexts and the acoustic properties of music. Thus, a substantial body of literature demonstrates how both structural aspects and social contexts are important to consider when discussing the function of music. Our engagement with music, while also functioning as a social and pleasurable channel of communication, is characterised by flexibly incorporating cultural, acoustic and neurological components. There is considerable debate as to the relationship between structural features and social context when attempting to understand how music communicates (McDermott et al., 2016). Cross (2005) refers to this interaction of structure and social factors as music’s “floating intentionality” (p. 36). A very simple, almost clichéd, and easy to understand way to highlight this argument is through the assertion that music in a minor key conveys sad emotions, while music in a major key conveys happy emotions. In this example, music conveys sadness as a result of the acoustic properties (rhythm, harmony, melody).Thus, one possible social function of music is to communicate emotions via musical structural and acoustic properties (Juslin & Sloboda, 2010). It is, however, difficult to convey specific subtle and/​or complex emotions through this type of mechanism. It is not possible to signify the complex emotion of ‘joyful schadenfreude’ using only melody or rhythm, or indeed via any purely musical means. What is clear is that music conveys meaning as a result of culturally contextualised listening. Repeated listening and pairing of social events, or social rituals, with particular types of music, can create learned meanings. Music in minor tonalities used in opera, film, theatre and ceremonies may create a learned response to particular types of music. Therefore, learning and enculturation also facilitates emotional responses to music (Jentschke, 2016; North et al., 1997). The third mechanism is associative. Here, a piece of music achieves particular meaning because it is heard at important moments or is repeatedly playing during particular periods (e.g., a summer holiday). Music playing in a café when a declaration of eternal love is made may become seared into the consciousness of young lovers. Resultantly, if AC/​DC’s Highway to Hell is playing at that moment, it could subsequently evoke happy romantic feelings for the couple regardless of the structural or cultural associations of this music. The associative mechanism overrides structural or cultural features, and for this couple, Highway to Hell evokes romantic feelings of love, commitment and loyalty, even if musically the song says otherwise. This effect was pithily termed the “Darling, they are playing our tune” effect by John B. Davies (1978) in one of the first books to explore the psychology of music. A key feature here is that the structural, cultural and associative mechanisms are not mutually exclusive. They can all function together to different degrees, and this contributes to music’s unique communicative power, distinctiveness and social functions. For example, you may have had a particularly bad week and are feeling low on a Friday night. Perhaps you are listening to Mozart’s Requiem and have it playing loudly through your apartment. Mozart’s Requiem has 7

8

Raymond MacDonald

Figure 1.2  Three mechanisms for meaning in musical communication

structural features that make it sad –​lots of minor intervals combined with slow underlying rhythm. It also has cultural associations that make it sad –​funerals, death, and so on. There is no doubt it is a sad piece of music. However, for the sake of argument, let’s say as well as feeling sad, you have bought a big pizza, a bottle of wine and a lottery ticket. When you check the internet for the winning numbers while eating pizza, drinking your wine and listening to your structurally and culturally derived sad music, you discover that you have won 134 million euros in the Intergalactic lottery, and in that moment the sad music now takes on a whole new meaning as it instantly becomes reconditioned as happy music. Therefore, for the rest of your life, whenever you hear Mozart’s Requiem, you will instantly be transported back to the moment you won 134 million euros and this piece of music now becomes happy music for you. Figure 1.2 displays these processes. While the basic structural, cultural and associative processes of musical communication may function cross-​culturally, the assumption that similar music may mean the same cross-​ culturally is problematic since music is utilised in different ways, with different social rituals, scales and instruments globally (Campbell, 1997; Jacoby & McDermott, 2017).This flexibility of meaning also signals that music is a separate and distinct communication channel. It shares certain features with other channels of communication like natural language (it has a syntax and it has phonemes); however, semantically, music is more ambiguous, more fluid in its meaning, and that is what gives it much of its power as a distinct channel of communication par excellence. This ambiguity of meaning has been termed a “floating intentionality”, signalling the complex relationship between structural, cultural and associative aspects (Cross, 2005). The nature of musical communication means that while specific semantic ideas such as “would you like to visit the art gallery at 3 p.m.?” cannot be communicated, deep and profound abstract ideas, thoughts and emotions can be.

Music and Wellbeing –​ W One particularly important social function of music is how it is used for maintaining and enhancing wellbeing. For example, every time we select a piece of music for listening, we make a number of important psychological assessments about how we are feeling, if we want to enhance or change that mood and what music will help us reach these psychological goals. Issues such as whether there is anybody else who will listen to this music –​and, if so, do I care what they think –​influence our choice of music. Importantly, in these situations we choose music to enhance or modify our mood. Thus, in many respects, we can consider this type of musical engagement a sort of informal self-​medicated therapy with a specific aim of enhancing wellbeing. This is one of the primary functions of music –​to enhance how we feel –​and modern technological advances mean we can now have instant access to an infinite array of music (Brancatisano & Thompson, 2019). Crucially, we can select music to serve particular social and psychological functions with ease, meaning we are very sophisticated and highly

8

9

The social functions of music

nuanced consumers of music.This function of music, for mood maintenance, enhancement and change, can operate in many ways; for example, the selection of music for listening via personal listening devices. In these instances, music is used to meet very particular psychological needs via a number of sophisticated but very efficient music psychological processess. How do I feel right now? How will I feel in 5 minutes? How do I want to feel in 10 minutes? What music will help me to achieve these goals? Do I want to change the mood I am in? Do I want to enhance this mood? Am I wanting to rid myself of this ‘blue’ feeling or do I want to explore it further? Do I want to cheer myself up? We are expert in selecting music to meet these particular psychological goals, and even if we are not consciously aware of these processes, we engage in them continually. Similar processes are at play when we select music to listen to with others. What sort of mood do I want to create in the kitchen? Am I dancing around the kitchen with a friend while cooking? Am I selecting music for a romantic dinner for two or a family meal? Do I want to impress my friends with my sophisticated taste? Are we having a frivolous post-​ dinner chat? This type of social and psychological analysis is fundamental to selecting music and matching particular music for particular social and cultural needs. We are all very good at this type of music psychology work; in other words, we are all very good music psychologists. Music listening is always about more than just music.Thus, in many ways, one of the primary functions of music is to provide a means of enhancing situations. These could be internal situations –​that is, our mood –​or social situations such as having friends around for drinks. This type of music use is explicitly related to music listening. When we are listening to music, we are engaged in a host of psychological, social and musical functions. Throughout history, music has played an important social role in healing and medical practices (Horden, 2000). Both listening to and participating in music have been implicated in health practices since antiquity. The modern profession of music therapy has over 100 years of research investigating the processes and outcomes of music interventions that have applied specific uses of music to enhance health and wellbeing. Music therapy involves trained therapists working explicitly in healthcare contexts to use music to achieve non-​musical goals; that is, psychological, social, or cultural goals. An important point here is that therapists have produced evidence to outline numerous possible ways in which musical engagement can provide social and psychological benefits. Although music therapists can work in explicitly clinical contexts, the basic foundations of music therapy are drawn from observations that underpin music’s use in society. For example, music’s meaning is ambiguous, and this ambiguity that is inherent in music means that it can have subjective and profound effects that can be life enhancing (Cross, 2005; Hargreaves et al., 2005). Community music –​while not included explicitly in clinical applications of music, but usually focused on increasing access to creative activities for people who may have been denied access to music activities –​also uses health objectives as secondary goals for involvement in music (Bartleet & Higgins, 2018). For example, weekly drum circles or choir activities organised by community musicians can have profound positive effects on participants and also point towards the social function of music. These activities utilise music’s inherently social, accessible, universal and ambiguous aspects. The modern profession of music therapy is predicated on a particularly deep and comprehensive understanding of the relationship between music and health and wellbeing (Belgrave & Kim, 2020). This includes drawing the distinction between music listening and active musical participation. Music therapy is defined by a focus on clinical relationships with an emphasis on a therapeutic alliance between client and therapist. However, recent advances emphasise that music therapy functions in many community settings as well. Also, community music interventions often have health and welling as objectives. While the primary function of community music

9

10

Raymond MacDonald

may be to enhance access to musical activities for individuals who may have had limited access to music, a stated secondary goal for community music may include enhanced wellbeing (Bartleet & Higgins, 2018).The recent explosion of interest around community choirs is a good example. In these instances, the aim may well be to bring people together to explore creativity via singing, possibly with an emphasis on people who may have no previous experience or lack confidence. However, while the aim is firmly upon participation and music engagement, a stated secondary aim may be to enhance communication skills or confidence. A key issue here is that music listening and music performance are used worldwide to help enhance health and wellbeing, both in terms of music therapy and community music settings and also in less formal contexts. Therefore, the links between musical engagement and wellbeing are clear, explicit and universal. One important point for consideration when discussing the social functions of music is that music in and of itself is neither good nor bad. The urge to proselytise about the benefits of music, the evidence-​based perspective notwithstanding, can often lead to the assumption that all musical engagement is good; but of course, given the power of music, we must consider situations where music listening can in fact be detrimental socially and psychologically. For example, an individual with mental health problems may use a particular piece (or pieces) of music to accompany excessive and automatic negative thinking (Miranda et al., 2012). Here, music may provide a social context that perpetuates or even intensifies depressive symptoms. Many musicians suffer psychological and mental health problems as a result of pressures to maintain musical careers, and these need to be recognised. It is possible that preventative strategies such as music education during training can alleviate these potentialities. Music has also been used in social contexts to invoke negative emotions, through playing opera or devices that emit a high-​pitched tone, in attempts to stop teenagers from loitering in particular public spaces. Music has also been used in conflict situations as a form of torture. In 1989, when the US Army in Panama was trying to remove General Noriega from his sanctuary in the Vatican’s diplomatic mission, loud rock music was played from large speakers (Windsor, 2019).

Music and Art –​ A In attempting to explore music’s role within society, we often neglect one primary reason for music’s existence: music is fun. When Stephen Pinker (2007) claimed music was nothing more than “auditory cheesecake”, a simple hedonistic pleasure, he provoked a furore of responses from commentators quick to claim, with evidence, that music was much more than that. We enjoy music and it brings us pleasure and joy in so many ways. This primary function is one reason why it is universal and why it reaches far into many aspects of our life and has a multitude of other functions and implications. We should not forget that it is, at its heart, a deeply enjoyable activity, and here we can concur with Pinker even if he failed to grasp the wider significance of musical engagement. The fun inherent in musical engagement (both listening and performing) has, throughout history, partly motivated music’s aesthetic social function as a pleasurable art form and cultural activity. This observation leads us to ask: what is music? When trying to delineate the functions of music, it is worth attempting to outline what type of phenomenon can have universal and abundant significance. Sound can be viewed as a primary component of music, and categories such as rhythm, melody, pitch and timbre are often utilised to further aid definition (Wallin et al., 2000). However, as this ­chapter –​indeed this book –​quite emphatically demonstrates, one of the key functions of music is to engender collective social engagement. Indeed, music is defined by its social context. Stop reading; listen to the sounds that surround you for 3 seconds. 10

11

The social functions of music

Let’s say we record the sounds and call the new composition “the impossible beauty of spontaneous environmental sounds”. This is not just a pretentious art experiment, but a demonstration of how music is defined by its social context. The claim that music must have conventional rhythmic or melodic qualities, as numerous textbook and dictionary definitions of music state, misses the way in which music is socially constructed. It is impossible to define music by structural means. John Cage’s seminal composition 4’33”, which consists of 4 minutes and 33 seconds of silence (apart from ambient sounds like wind or outside noises), demonstrates that music need not have any conventional melody or rhythm (Gann, 2011). The piece has become iconic, posing an interesting existential quandary.The key point here is that silence can be music in terms of how it is placed within a social context. Thus, all music is by definition social, and uniting us in a collective endeavour (e.g., listening to the nature of silence) is one of the primary functions of music. Music brings us together –​to listen together, to play together and to exist together (DeNora, 2000; Mazzola et al., 2020). Musical engagement not only facilitates but also necessitates a type of collectivity that is quite unique. While the precise nature of music can be viewed as a social construction, it is quite clear that music exists as a pleasurable art form in a universal and accessible manner.

Music and Ritual –​ R Music has been an integral part of religious ceremonies, ancient healing practices, rituals and rites of passage for millennia (Dissanayake, 2006). Marriages, funerals, birthdays, state ceremonies and institutional events all involve music (Durkheim, 1968; Koen, 2011). Moreover, one of the most widespread roles music has within society is that within religious and spiritual ceremonies (Clayton, 2016). This includes rituals that involve altered states of consciousness, such as trance and possession (Becker, 2004; Friedson, 1996; Racy, 2003; Roseman, 1991; Rouget, 1985). Ethnomusicology has made considerable contributions to understanding the way music functions in blending and merging with social practices, and sometimes dance and other art forms, to form important social ritual (Nettl, 1983; Pettan & Titon, 2016). In one example, within native North American traditions, improvised music is incorporated into religious social rituals involving altered states of consciousness (Nettl & Russell, 2008). Music and dance are of vital importance to the indigenous people of Australia. Aboriginal culture utilises music and dance in such a way that they are woven into everyday life and are also part of key ceremonies and rituals called corroborees (Bradley & Mackinlay, 2007). “Songlines” depict journeys across vast swathes of Australia and tell stories of the creation and “Dreamtime” (Richards, 2017). Sometimes one particular member of a group, the “Songman”, has responsibility for creating songs to describe current events and also for singing traditional songs passed down through generations (Bradley & Mackinlay, 2007). In his groundbreaking How Musical is Man?, John Blacking (1973) elegantly shows how everybody within the Venda community in Africa is musical and how music and dance play an integral part of daily life. Whether within Christian churches or Hindu temples, Sufi celebrations or countless other spiritual gatherings, music as a social practice provides a soundtrack and a relationship with spirituality, ceremony and rites of passage.This is one of music’s key roles within society (MacDonald & Wilson, 2020). There are two ways in which music can function within these ceremonies. One is as a backdrop, a kind of soundtrack to provide ‘appropriate’ musical accompaniment to the ceremony. However, a second is to function as an extra channel of communication, facilitating and enhancing the spiritual relationship that participants feel with the spiritual deities. In these contexts, the music is not just a soundtrack but a fundamental part of the relationship each person feels with their god, deity or spiritual guide. 11

12

Raymond MacDonald

Music and Identity –​ I Another important social function of music is the development, maintenance and negotiation of identity through musical engagement. Music is a key marker of our identity and a psychological resource utilised in shaping our constantly evolving sense of who we are (MacDonald et al., 2017). Identity is an issue of fundamental concern for modern society in terms of how we all navigate our lives (Colmas, 2019; Giddens, 2001). Socio-​economic situations notwithstanding, contemporary life necessitates many more decisions about how we want to live. In previous times, the path our lives took would have been mapped out by our gender, our locality, our family history and our educational background, but now decisions about sexuality, career, cultural tastes or where we live are much more open to choice and discussion, and music has a part to play in negotiating these fundamental identity issues. A number of ethnomusicology studies demonstrate the role of that music within identity processes cross-​culturally (Koskoff, 1989; Moisala & Diamond, 2000; Stokes, 1994; Sugarman, 1997). Music is an important psychological resource in how we signal to the world who we are (MacDonald et al., 2002; Stokes, 1994). We all have a musical identity. Everyone has musical preferences which can merge with friendship groups, places we socialise, clothes we wear, websites we visit and how we choose to spend our time (Kumar & Akash, 2020). Thus, our musical tastes play an important social role in helping to shape how we see ourselves and how we project ourselves to the world. These types of identity processes can be conceptualised as “music in identities”; that is, how we use music as a psychological and social resource to help shape personality (MacDonald et al., 2002). For example, there is evidence to suggest that music is one of the most important recreational activities that young people engage with (Zillmann & Gan, 1997). Musical tastes and preferences are important makers of identity for young people during adolescence as they develop distinctive personalities and actively seek ways to establish a sense of self that is unique and distinctive from others around them, such as parents and teachers (Tarrant et al., 2002). While this is particularly important for young people, it remains important throughout our lives as we use our musical tastes to shape our identities (Greenberg & Rentfrow, 2017). Another key aspect of how music helps shapes our identity, and thus plays an important social role, relates to what way we see ourselves as musical. These types of identity processes can be considered “identities in music” (MacDonald et al., 2002). We all have a sense of our musical skills, whether that is as a professional musician (“I am a drummer in a jazz band”) or as someone less experienced (“I play guitar with my family”). Indeed, even assertions like “I am tone-​deaf ” or “I am not musical” construct and project a type of musical identity and are markers of personality. Importantly, our sense of identity in music may not be linked to our technical skills in music, but rather may be related to important social influences and the experiences we have. On the one hand, Trevarthen (2002) shows how the earliest communication between a newborn baby and their carer is musical.These cooing and babbling interactions are rhythmic and melodic musical improvisations forming a crucial part of the earliest and most important bonding relationship in life –​between baby and parents. This also provides further evidence for the assertion that we are all musical, since we all used music to bond with our parents. The patterns of interaction laid down in the early weeks and months of life influence identities across the life span and has an important musical element. Therefore, one of the most important social functions of music is to aid the bonding process between babies and their parents. On the other hand, people can also view themselves as non-​musical, using phrases such “tone-​ deaf ” or saying “I’m not from not from a musical family”. Indeed, it has been reported that up 12

13

The social functions of music

to 15% of the population will self-​report as tone-​deaf at any one time (Wise & Sloboda, 2008). However, true tone-​deafness, in terms of not being able to recognise the difference between tones, is exceptionally rare. The ability to take turns in a conversation relies on the ability to discriminate between tones, so in this sense virtually no one is tone-​deaf. This highlights the socially constructed nature of identities in music. Indeed, based on an early negative experience of music, many people claim not to be musical. Often, people will claim to be tone-​deaf or not have a musical gene and recount an early negative experience of music as evidence for this claim. Often, they will say that they wanted to play an instrument at school or to join the choir, but in order gain access to the choir or instrumental lessons they were required to sit a test. The typical story continues: “I did not perform well at this test. I failed and the teacher suggested I join the football team or the netball team instead.” The reason for recounting this story is that people can take this early experience of music, this early failure, and internalise it as evidence for being non-​musical. This belief can last decades and often leads people to not engage with music when really they would like to. However, being able to play a musical instrument is like other skills, such as driving a car, and involves advanced motor coordination. If you want to learn to drive a car, you need to know where to put your hands and your feet, how to hold the steering wheel and control the various levers and buttons on the dashboard. In the same way, learning to play to a musical instrument involves knowing where to place your hands on the fretboard of a guitar or on the keyboard of a piano. While many people will claim not to have a music gene or come from a musical family, it sounds frankly ridiculous to claim that you don’t come from a family of drivers or you don’t have the driving gene; yet similar basic skills are required for both tasks. Let’s take another example: how does a baby learn to walk? Baby starts to crawl, receives lots of encouragement from family, lots of positive reinforcement, manages to stand for the first time, more clapping and cheering, perhaps baby fails over, but still more clapping and cheering and positive reinforcement. Then finally with lots and lots of encouragement and help and positive reinforcement, baby takes first steps and starts to walk and is well on their way. Let us say we use the musical example from above here so that when baby falls over, parents say: “Oh well you don’t have the walking gene.You are not from a family of walkers. Perhaps you should just not bother trying and sit over here.” This sounds ridiculous, but in many ways it is what happens in musical terms. Thus, our musical identities –​as professional musicians, amateurs or even as non-​musical –​serve an important social function in marking who we are and how we relate to the world around us.

Music and Social networks –​ S Music plays an important role in friendship groups, both for young people and throughout the life span, influencing with whom and where people socialise (DeNora, 2000; Schäfer & Eerola, 2020). For young people in particular, fashion, socialising, internet activity and friendship groups influence, and are influenced by, music tastes and choices. Music exists as a means of extending and facilitating social bonds and a means of being together and communicating without necessarily using language. For example, an audience sharing a concert constitutes group communication even if members of the audience do not to talk to each other in order to feel part of a group experiencing an event. Also, conversations before and after a concert regarding what will be performed and how the music was received and even issues relating where to meet and what to wear all form part of the way in which music helps shape and maintain our social networks. These types of discourse are crucial aspects of the musical communication process, and how we talk about music influences how we hear music. Music facilitates a type of social 13

14

Raymond MacDonald

communication, functioning as a distinctive channel of communication that draws people into shared experiences in ways in which words, spoken language, cannot. Music can also play a particularly important role within migrant and diasporic communities, helping to maintain and develop group identities (Clayton, 2016; Shelemay, 1998; Slobin, 1993, 2003; Turino, 1993). Other forms of group experiences can facilitate this; however, music is a universally accessible communicative medium that is both emotional and ambiguous in how it functions and can, therefore, facilitate this type of social bonding well. A second way in which music can function to facilitate social networks is via active music-​ making (Finnegan, 2002). Here the functions of music may be quite different from music listening. Performing music in a group, whether in a basement room of a student house or at the front of a church or standing on a street corner, facilitates a deindividuation, a merging of the self within a group and a collectivity that no other activity can inculcate in quite the same way. This is primarily because music is a unique and distinctive channel of communication. One important factor to bear in mind here is that it does not matter at what level the music is performed. Similar psychological process operate whether the musicians are collectively performing as part of the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra, a rock band in a garage or a nursery group improvising together. Music provides a site of social cohesion, a place to unite and be together, to develop a collective identity that can be transformative and create a unique social, collective space where we can forge new identities, new connections, and develop individually and socially. The unique type of communicative process at play when we engage in musical activities may be one reason why music has an important social function (Nattiez, 1990). For example, music engagement affords simultaneous communication between many people at once (Pothulaki et al., 2012). If six people attempt to converse with each other at the same time, with everybody speaking at once, comprehension is impossible. However, when six people play music together, be that improvised or notated, it is possible for sophisticated and profound communication to take place between all six individuals simultaneously. This type of distributed creativity and distributed identity are crucial aspects of the social functions of music. As we perform music together, identity and creative processes are distributed across the group, and these distributed processes are motivating factors for individuals to engage in music activities. Thus, group communication via performance activities involving distributed creativity can create social and psychological bonds within a music group (MacGlone & MacDonald, 2017).

Theoretical considerations Are there any overarching theoretical ideas that might bind these observations together? Theoretical approaches would need to be flexible enough to encapsulate the many diverse situations we have explored in this chapter but also sufficiently robust to offer a convincing analysis. Albert Bandura’s (1986) concept of reciprocal determinism offers one such possibility. In this approach, Bandura proposed that within any given situation, environmental, behavioural and personal variables all interact reciprocally to influence and help explain unfolding events. For example, in our ethnomusicological examples, music functions within a social situation to influence people’s behaviour. This behaviour resultantly influences the ongoing social situation. A key point here is that the behaviours, social situations and indeed personality factors all reciprocally influence each other. This situation may then influence an individual’s self-​esteem or view of themselves as musical or otherwise and, therefore, could influence the sort of situations in which they might find themselves in the future. Thus music, social situations and identity variables all reciprocally influence each other. Figure 1.3 presents a fictional weekly community choir. The choir takes place in the upstairs room of a local pub on a Wednesday night and this 14

15

The social functions of music

Figure 1.3  Reciprocal deterministic explanation of musical engagement

constitutes the ‘situation’. The choir is organised in such a way that members come to together and sing classic pop songs under the direction of a designated leader. These features represent the types of ‘behaviours’ taking place within the situation. The third aspect of the reciprocal deterministic framework is ‘personality’ components of the participants. For example, an individual who lacks confidence in music but has always wanted to try singing may attend for a few weeks, taking full part and contributing to all the activities.They may experience enhanced confidence in singing (self-​efficacy), which may generalise to enhanced confidence socially at the choir and in other situations. Thus, the situation, behaviour and personality factors are all reciprocally influencing each other. Social identity theory and self-​ categorisation theory contribute to another conceptual framework which helps explain the ways in which music has important social functions (Turner & Reynolds, 2010). In this context, music helps create and maintain social bonds and groups. The liking for a particular musician, group or genre, or participation in a type of musical activity, can be a defining aspect of friendship groups. Young people who share a liking for contemporary hip-​hop may wear a similar style of clothing, socialise in the same places, attend concerts together and develop a language and social norms that are related to their music preferences. In this way an ‘in-​group’ is formed, defined by a liking for a particular style of music. Of course, the converse can also be true in that out-​g roups are created in relation to the in-​g roup. The out-​group may constitute people who do not like a particular type of music (the type preferred by the in-​group) or like alternative styles of music. These types of social and psychological processes also function across the life span. So, a liking for classical music and its resultant behaviour expectations and norms can be a defining aspect of friendship groups for adults, and the same with jazz or folk or any type of music or indeed music in general. In this way, music is functioning socially to help form and maintain bonds between people and help friendship groups establish a way of being together. Music helps establish and maintain social bonds. Indeed, it has been suggested that this aspect of music has evolutionary significance. If music helps establish and maintain groups or communities and living in social groups offers better chance of survival in comparison to solitary living, then music could have played an important evolutionary role (Mithen, 2005). From within a social identity and reciprocal determinism framework, early humans may have used music to help establish and maintain groups, and in doing so, music may have helped to ensure the survival of the species.

Conclusion At time of writing, March 2020, the world is gripped by an unprecedented pandemic: the coronavirus COVID-​19. The full extent of the global tragedy unfolding is only being guessed at 15

16

Raymond MacDonald

right now, but we are undoubtedly in the midst of a monumental crisis. In an attempt to curb the spread of the virus, people are required to social distance and, where necessary, to stay home and self-​isolate. One of the ways in which people are able to come together communally while still self-​isolating is via engagement with music. Italians living in Sienna stand on their balconies in the evening and sing “Bella Ciao” (Goodbye Beautiful) or “Canto Della Verbena” (And While Siena Sleeps) (Kearney, 2020) in a communal act, a joining together while isolated that creates community and solidarity during desperately difficult times. A virtual choir has been created by UK celebrity choirmaster Gareth Malone for the BBC as a means of bringing people together; although participants cannot be physically together they can join together in song, creating a community, a sense of togetherness during exceptionally challenging times defined by the need for isolation. All over the world, people are using music to unite while physically alone in their homes. Music can help assuage feelings of isolation, since it is a unique and social form of collective communication. In Scotland, a Glaswegian DJ plays songs from his balcony in a performance that allows an in-​the-​moment communal and visceral listening experience that inculcates a sense of togetherness (Lennon, 2020). In an attempt to maintain contact between players, the Glasgow Improvisers Orchestra, a large improvisation ensemble with a flexible membership of approximately 25 individuals, began experimenting using Zoom software as a means to improvise together.The sessions include an international group of over 30 musicians, all of whom are living under conditions of social distancing (MacDonald & Birrell, in press). Around the world there are examples of how music is bringing people together, uniting them in a collective endeavour. My mother, Nadia, is 75, lives by herself and is in what is termed a ‘high-​r isk’ group and therefore has to be extra careful. She is currently facing a long period of staying indoors with no visitors. Although having never sung seriously, she now engages in online singing classes twice a week with the internet facilitating interaction, communal activity and musical learning. One could argue that any activity may offer these opportunities. However, as this chapter has attempted to show, music is universal, accessible, creative, communicative, collaborative, emotional and fun. These features make music unique and are fundamental to its social function. It also means that music can be employed to facilitate contact between people, to help connectedness between people through the sharing of ideas, to aid mutual creative engagement and to provide a reason to be in contact with others –​so vital during times of enforced isolation. Across the world we are seeing examples of how people can come together through music –​singing from their balconies, joining together over the internet using music’s quintessential social qualities to facilitate a togetherness, a sense of collectivity, a camaraderie, a we-​are-​all-​in-​this-​together feeling that other activities do not. Music is universal, music is accessible, and music is sociable. The overarching theme of this chapter is that music’s primary social function is to communicate and it is inextricably linked with social practices helping to define what it means to be human. This chapter presents an overview of the social power of music and some of the psychological and social processes underlying how music functions. Music may be “auditory cheesecake”, but it is more, much more, than that (as delicious as cheesecake is). A  primary theme of the chapter is that music is a separate and distinctive channel of communication, both universally present and universally accessible. A key reason for its presence is that music conveys meaning via a sophisticated mix of acoustic, cultural and personal associative mechanisms. This enables music to have both personal and culturally defined meanings concurrently. Music exists to form a unique and distinct channel of communication –​universal, accessible, ambiguous. This universal communality is utilised across five domains.

16

17

The social functions of music

I propose a five-​level model for how music communicates: C-​WARIS. The first category is Wellbeing; music is used to enhance wellbeing both informally and in clinical contexts. The second is Art; this signifies music’s use as a pleasurable and engaging art form. Ritual is the third category; this highlights music’s use in social rituals such as weddings, funerals and birthdays. The fourth is Identity; this signals music’s function as a resource in shaping who we are, as both musicians and listeners. The fifth is Social networking; this highlights music’s role in creating and maintaining social bonds such as friendship groups. Music is used to help form, shape and maintain our social networks, friendship groups, family dynamics and workplace relationships. The chapter then moves on to discuss theoretical issues that could be utilised to help explain how music functions socially. The first is Albert Bandura’s notions of reciprocal determinism and how it is possible for personality factors, social factors and situational factors all to influence each other on an ongoing basis. The second is social identity theory or social categorisation theory, and here I show how music plays an import role setting up in-​g roups and out-​g roups. Music is inextricably linked to our social lives. It is woven into the fabric of society via rituals, wellbeing and joyful and expressive moments. It helps cement the bonds of friendship that can last a lifetime, but most of all it is a form of communication, a deep and profound form of communication that unites us and brings us together socially and psychologically. Yet it is not magical. We may feel that our connection to music is beyond words, beyond explanation, and any attempt to emphatically and definitively explain how and why music works is doomed to failure; yet there are processes that can be explained, even if some aspects will remain mysterious, elusive and even cosmic. Future research will continue to explore the inextricable link music has to our lives and its social functions. Brain scanning advances now mean we are beginning to understand what is happening in our brains when two or more musicians play together. These advances will further enhance how we understand music to function within society. Music listening technology will also develop to allow as yet unimaginable sensitivity in how we consume and listen and to music. Research advances will facilitate new understandings of music’s centrality within society. What is undeniable is that music will continue to be a universally accessible presence within our lives. It will continue to influence how we see ourselves, how we engage and perform ceremonies –​some the most important rites of passage of our lives. It will enhance our wellbeing as we select music to listen to daily and as we perform music. It will help shape how we see our lives and how we relate to the world around us as we choose what concert to go to, what we wear when we go, and who we accompany. But most important, music will help us communicate with others, to express and mirror our and thoughts and feelings, to bring us together and facilitate communal living and share our lives and help define what it means to be human.

Reflective questions 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

What is my musical identity? What songs remind me of important moments in my life, and why? In what ways are we all musical? What are the functions of music in my life? In what ways are my musical tastes shared with friends and family? Why might music listening be considered self-​medication?

17

18

Raymond MacDonald

Suggestions for further reading MacDonald, R., & Wilson, G. (2020). The art of becoming:  How group improvisation works. Oxford University Press. MacDonald, R. A. R., Hargreaves, D. J., & Miell, D. (Eds.). (2017). Handbook of musical identities. Oxford University Press. MacDonald, R. A.  R., Kreutz, G., & Mitchell, L. A. (Eds.). (2012). Music, health and wellbeing. Oxford University Press.

References Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Prentice Hall. Bartleet, B. L., & Higgins, L. (Eds.). (2018). The Oxford handbook of community music. Oxford University Press. Becker, J. (2004). Deep listeners: Music, emotion and trancing. Indiana University Press. Belgrave, M., & Kim, S. A. (2020). Music therapy in a multicultural context: A handbook for music therapy students and professionals. Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Blacking, J. (1973). How musical is man? University of Washington Press. Bradley, J., & Mackinlay, E. (2007) Singing the land, singing the family: Song place and spirituality amongst the Yanyuwa. In F. Richards (Ed.), The soundscapes of Australia: Music, place and spirituality (pp. 75–​95). Routledge. Brancatisano, O., & Thompson, W. F. (2019). Seven capacities of music that underpin its therapeutic value in dementia care. In A. Baird, S. Garrido, & J.Tamplin (Eds.), Music and dementia: From cognition to therapy (pp. 41–​67). Oxford University Press. Campbell, P. S. (1997). Music, the universal language: Fact or fallacy? International Journal of Music Education, 29(1),  32–​39. Clayton, M. (2016). The social and personal functions of music in cross-​cultural perspective. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 47–​59). Oxford University Press. Colmas, F. (2019). Identity: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press. Cook, D. (1959). The language of music. Oxford University Press. Cross, I. (2005). Music and meaning, ambiguity and evolution. In D. Miell, R. A.  R. MacDonald, & D. J. Hargreaves (Eds.), Musical communication (pp. 27–​43). Oxford University Press. Davies, J. B. (1978). The psychology of music. Stanford University Press. DeNora, T. (2000). Music in everyday life. Cambridge University Press. Dissanayake, E. (2006). Ritual and ritualization:  Musical means of conveying and shaping emotion in humans and other animals. In S. Brown & U.Volgsten (Eds.), Music and manipulation: On the social uses and social control of music (pp. 31–​56). Berghahn. Durkheim, E. (1968). The elementary forms of the religious life. George Allen and Unwin. Farnsworth, P. R. (1969). The social psychology of music (2nd ed.). Iowa State University Press. Finnegan, R. (2002). Communicating: The multiple modes of human interconnection. Routledge. Friedson, S. M. (1996). Dancing prophets: Musical experience in Tumbuka healing. University of Chicago Press. Gann, K. (2011). No such thing as silence.Yale University Press. Giddens, A. (2001). Modernity and self-​identity. Polity. Groarke, J. M., & Hogan, M. J. (2019). Listening to self-​chosen music regulates induced negative affect for both younger and older adults. PLoS ONE, 14(6), Article e0218017. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal. pone.0218017 Greenberg, D. M., & Rentfrow, P. J. (2017). The social psychological underpinnings of musical identities: A study on how personality stereotypes are formed from musical cues. In R. MacDonald, D. J. Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), Handbook of musical identities (pp. 304–​321). Oxford University Press. Hargreaves, D., MacDonald, R., & Miell, D. (2005). How do people communicate using music? In D. Miell, R. A. R. MacDonald, & D. J. Hargreaves (Eds.), Musical Communication (pp. 1–​25). Oxford University Press. Hargreaves, D. J., & North, A. C. (Eds.). (1997). The social psychology of music. Oxford University Press. Horden, P. (2000). Music as medicine: The history of music therapy since antiquity. Ashgate. Huron, D. (2006). Sweet anticipation: Music and the psychology of expectation. The MIT Press. Jacoby, N., & McDermott, J. H. (2017). Integer ratio priors on musical rhythm revealed cross-​culturally by iterated reproduction. Current Biology, 27(3), 359–​370.

18

19

The social functions of music Jentschke, S. (2016).The relationship between music and language. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M.Thaut (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 343–​355). Oxford University Press. Juslin, P. N. (2019). Musical emotions explained: Unlocking the secrets of musical affect. Oxford University Press. Juslin, P., & Sloboda, J. (2010). Handbook of music and emotion. Oxford University Press. Kearney, C. (2020, 14 March). Italians sing patriotic songs from their balconies during coronavirus lockdown. The Guardian. www.theguardian.com/​world/​2020/​mar/​14/​italians-​sing-​patriotic-​songs-​ from-​their-​balconies-​during-​coronavirus-​lockdown Koelsch, S. (2013). From social contact to social cohesion: The 7 Cs. Music and Medicine, 5(4), 204–​209. Koen, B. D. (2011). The Oxford handbook of medical ethnomusicology. Oxford University Press. Koskoff, E. (Ed.). (1989). Women and music in cross-​cultural perspective. University of Illinois Press. Kumar, A. A., & Akash, U. (2020). Influence of demographic factors on music listening preferences. Workplace International Management Review, 16(1), 98–​109. Lennon, H. (2020, 20 March). Glasgow legend George Bowie blasts GBX anthems during impromptu DJ set from his balcony. GlasgowLive. www.glasgowlive.co.uk/​news/​glasgow-​news/​glasgow-​legend-​ george- ​ b owie- ​ blasts-​ 1 7953095?fbclid=IwAR3Lil3Q1dIGU-​ og4R_​ Y vOqdC6nkPSk9An0m8x OA1gEENHBmlC8C6CsPwC0 MacDonald, R. A.  R., & Birrell, R. (in press). Flattening the curve:  Glasgow Improvisers Orchestra’s use of virtual improvising to maintain community during COVID-​19 pandemic. Critical Studies in Improvisation. MacDonald, R. A. R., Hargreaves, D. J., & Miell, D. (Eds.). (2017). Handbook of musical identities. Oxford University Press. MacDonald, R. A.  R., Kreutz, G., & Mitchell, L. A. (Eds.). (2012). Music, health and wellbeing. Oxford University Press. MacDonald, R. A. R., Hargreaves, D. J., & Miell, D. (Eds.). (2002). Musical identities. Oxford University Press. MacDonald, R. A.  R., & Wilson, G. (2020). The Art of becoming:  How group improvisation works. Oxford University Press. MacGlone, U. M., & MacDonald, R. A. R. (2017). Learning to improvise, improvising to learn: A qualitative study of learning processes in improvising musicians. In E. F. Clarke & M. Doffman (Eds.), Distributed creativity: Collaboration and improvisation in contemporary music (pp. 278–​294). Oxford University Press. Mazzola, G., Noer, J., Pang, Y., Yao, S., Afrisando, J., Rochester, R., & Neace, W. (2020). The future of music: Towards a computational musical theory of everything. Switzerland AG. McDermott, J. H., Schult, A. F., Undurraga, E. A., & Godoy, R. A. (2016). Indifference to dissonance in native Amazonians reveals cultural variation in music perception. Nature, 535, 547. Merriam, A. (1964). The anthropology of music. Northwestern University Press. Miranda, D., Gaudreau, P., Debrosse, R., Morizot, J., & Kirmayer, L. J. (2012). Music listening and mental health: Variations on internalizing psychopathology. In R. MacDonald, G. Kreutz, & L. Mitchell (Eds.), Music, health, and wellbeing (pp. 513–​529). Oxford University Press. Mithen, S. (2005). The singing Neanderthals: The origins of music, language, mind and body. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. Moisala, P., & Diamond, B. (Eds.). (2000). Music and gender. University of Illinois Press. Nattiez, J.-​ J. (1990). Music and discourse:  Toward a semiology of music. (C. Abbate, Trans.). Princeton University Press. Nelson, W., & McMurtry, L. (2003). The facts of life: And other dirty jokes. Random House Digital. Nettl, B. (1983). The study of ethnomusicology: Twenty-​nine issues and concepts. University of Illinois Press. Nettl, B., & Russell, M. (Eds.). (2008). In the course of performance: Studies in the world of musical improvisation. University of Chicago Press. North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2008). The social and applied psychology of music. Oxford University Press. North, A. C., Hargreaves, D. J., & McKendrick, J. (1997).The influence of in-​store music on wine selections. Nature, 390, 132. Patel, A. D. (2008). Music, language and the brain. Oxford University Press. Pettan, S., & Titon, J. T. (2016). The Oxford handbook of applied ethnomusicology. Oxford University Press. Pinker, S. (2007). The language instinct. Harper Perennial Modern Classics. Pothulaki, M., MacDonald, R. A. R., & Flowers, P. (2012). An interpretative phenomenological analysis of an improvisational music therapy program for cancer patients. Journal of Music Therapy, 49(1),  45–​67. Racy, A. J. (2003). Making music in the Arab world: The culture and artistry of Tarab. Cambridge University Press. Richards, F. (2017). The soundscapes of Australia: Music, place and spirituality. Routledge.

19

20

Raymond MacDonald Roseman, M. (1991). Healing sounds from the Malaysian rainforest: Temiar music and medicine. University of California Press. Rouget, G. (1985). Music and trance:  A theory of the relations between music and possession. University of Chicago Press. Rousseau, J.-​J. (1998). Essay on the origin of languages and writings related to music (J.T. Scott,Trans.). University Press of New England. Schäfer, K., & Eerola, T. (2020). How listening to music and engagement with other media provide a sense of belonging: An exploratory study of social surrogacy. Psychology of Music, 48(2), 232–​251. Shelemay, K.  K. (1998). Let jasmine rain down:  Song and remembrance among Syrian Jews. University of Chicago Press. Slobin, M. (1993). Subcultural sounds: Micromusics of the West. Wesleyan University Press. Slobin, M. (2003).The destiny of “diaspora” in ethnomusicology. In M. Clayton,T. Herbert, & R. Middleton (Eds.), The cultural study of music: A critical introduction (pp. 284–​296). Routledge. Steinbeis, N., & Koelsch, S. (2008). Understanding the intentions behind manmade products elicits neural activity in areas dedicated to mental state attribution. Cerebral Cortex, 19(3), 619–​623. Stokes, M. (1994). Ethnicity, identity and music: The musical construction of place. Berg Publishers. Sugarman, J. C. (1997). Engendering song: Singing and subjectivity at Prespa Albanian weddings. University of Chicago Press. Tarrant, M., North, A., & Hargreaves, D. (2002). Youth identity and music. In R. A.  R. MacDonald, D. J., Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), Musical identities (pp. 134–​150). Oxford University Press. Trevarthen, C. (2002). Origins of musical identity: Evidence from infancy for musical social awareness. In R. A. R. MacDonald, D. J. Hargreaves, & D. E. Miell (Eds.), Musical identities (pp. 21–​38). Oxford University Press. Turino, T. (1993). Moving away from silence: Music of the Peruvian Altiplano and the experience of urban migration. University of Chicago Press. Turino, T. (2008). Music as social life: The politics of participation. Chicago University Press. Turner, J. C., & Reynolds, K. J. (2010). The story of social identity. In T. Postmes & N. R. Branscombe (Eds.), Rediscovering social identity (pp. 13–​32). Psychological Press. Wallin, N. L., Merker, B., & Brown, S. (Eds.). (2000). The origins of music. The MIT Press. Windsor, L. W. (2019). Music in detention and interrogation: The musical ecology of fear. In M. Grimshaw-​ Aagaard, M. Walther-​Hansen, & M. Knakkergaard (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of sound and imagination (Vol. 2, pp. 281–​300). Oxford University Press. Wise, K. J., & Sloboda, J.A. (2008). Establishing an empirical profile of self-​defined “tone deafness”: Perception, singing performance and self-​assessment. Musicae Scientiae, 12(1),  3–​26. Zillmann, D., & Gan, S. (1997). Musical taste in adolescence. In D. J. Hargreaves & A. C. North (Eds.), The social psychology of music (pp. 161–​188). Oxford University Press.

20

21

2 RUMINATIONS ON MUSIC PSYCHOLOGY RESEARCH Donald A. Hodges

When I  was given the assignment to write this chapter, I  had nearly a year to complete it. I delayed, dithered and procrastinated. A main reason was a number of other projects already in the pipeline that had to be completed first. Another major contributing factor was an inability to find a focus.What to say about music psychology research? When in doubt, go back to basics. So, I drew on 50+ years of experience with the discipline –​I was introduced to music psychology as an undergraduate in 1965 and published my first article in 1975 and my first book on music psychology in 1980. What transpired is a series of ruminations on music psychology research vis-​à-​vis education and the community. Because this entire volume provides specific examples of how music psychology has contributed to our understanding of music in education and the community, the focus of this chapter is on thoughts concerning music psychology writ large as it applies to these domains. What follows are brief discussions, not with the intention of full coverage but rather of highlighting particular concerns to stimulate thinking and perhaps even some action. Here are the ten ruminations under consideration: R1. What is music psychology, and who conducts music psychology research? R2. Interactions between philosophy and music psychology R3. The triumvirate of theory, research and practice R4. Basic and applied research R5. Quantitative and qualitative research R6. Formal and informal music experiences R7. Global perspectives R8. Toward a cultural music psychology R9. Replications R10. A music psychology research collaboratory Even though each topic is treated separately, there are, of course, many interconnections. Space does not permit thorough treatment, and you may feel that the discussions end abruptly. This may not be a bad thing, especially if it encourages you to think, discuss and write about these issues as a way of extending the conversation.

21

22

Donald A. Hodges

R1.  What is music psychology, and who conducts music psychology research? Just as there is no standard, universally agreed-​on definition of music, the name ‘music psychology’ (also ‘psychology of music’, ‘music cognition’, or ‘systematic musicology’) is somewhat fuzzy. However, continuing the legacy of Seashore, a leading figure in 20th-​century music psychology who believed that a thorough understanding of musical experiences involves physics, physiology, psychology, anthropology, philosophy and metaphysics (Seashore, 1938), most contemporary sources emphasise the eclectic nature of the field. A perusal of the homepages of four of the leading music psychology journals (Psychology of Music, Music Perception, Musicæ Scientiæ, and Science & Music) provides ample support for this broad view. Consider, for example, that Music Perception “draws from a range of disciplines and interdisciplinary teams, including psychology, music, cognitive neuroscience, music theory, acoustics, linguistics, philosophy, anthropology, cognitive science, computer science, speech science, corpus studies, and data science” (https://​mp.ucpress.edu/​content/​about). Besides the expertise coming from many specialists, most who would call themselves a ‘music psychologist’ have had varied and eclectic training. This broad perspective is echoed in several recent music psychology books (e.g., Hallam, 2019; Hodges, 2020; Margulis, 2019; Tan et  al., 2018; Thompson, 2015). Finally, 68 contributing authors, representing 11 countries and a wide variety of disciplines, wrote 54 chapters in The Oxford Handbook of Music Psychology, second edition (Hallam et al., 2016a). These chapters are divided into 11 sections, including: the origins and functions of music; music perception; responses to music; music and the brain; musical development; learning musical skills; musical performance; composition and improvisation; the role of music in our everyday lives; music therapy; and a concluding section on conceptual frameworks, research methods and future directions. Such a broad scope of research (what) necessarily requires the expertise of acousticians, geneticists, neuroscientists, psychologists, anthropologists, biologists, sociologists, ethnomusicologists, music educators, music therapists and a host of other disciplines (who). In addition to the specific music psychology journals already mentioned, pertinent research is found in research journals in music education, music therapy, music theory, musicology and ethnomusicology. Beyond music journals, one may find relevant research in such disparate journals as American Journal of Human Genetics, European Journal of Neuroscience, Japanese Psychological Research, and many, many more. In an informal investigation of the 679 papers published between 1973 and 2014 in Music Psychology, Ockelford (2016) arrived at the following percentages of papers covering various topics: • 35% (241 papers)  –​cognitive psychology (e.g., musical abilities, perception, cognition, etc.); • 14% (98 papers) –​aesthetics or affective response to music; • 14% (92 papers) –​music performing; • 13% (88 papers) –​music education; • 8% (52 papers) –​wider educational or developmental contexts; • 3% (21 papers) –​music therapy or special education; • 2% (12 papers) –​ethnomusicology; • 2% (11 papers) –​epistemology or methodology; • 1% (8 papers) –​music theory focus; • 8% (55 papers) –​not readily categorisable. 22

23

Ruminations on music psychology research

Perhaps the distribution of topics reflects to some extent the relative percentages of music psychologists who are trained in each area. These figures and the preceding discussion should not suggest that there are no differences or distinctions to be made between and among the various disciplines involved. Ockelford (2016) recognises that each discipline operates out of its own epistemological stance and that sometimes tensions arise from differing viewpoints. Thus, there have been disagreements between music psychology and music education researchers or between music psychologists and music theorists, for example. There are tensions in each case, but benefit too for those who are prepared to explore with an open mind. Ultimately, however, music psychology cannot extend beyond the boundaries of its epistemological box, always granted that the sides are flexible and subject to change: indeed, such movement is likely to come about through the influence of adjacent disciplines. (Ockelford, 2016, p. 890) There is no need to create a clean demarcation between music research that does and does not qualify as music psychology research. In fact, some fuzziness allows for an ever-​expanding notion of how we understand human musical behaviour. However, it is important that we continue to think about what music psychology is and who conducts music psychology research so that we do not lose the core of “empirical, theoretical and critical [research] directed at increasing the understanding of how music is perceived, represented and generated” (Musicæ Scientiæ, https://​journals.sagepub.com/​home/​msx).

R2.  Interactions between philosophy and music psychology Recently, nine scientists penned an opinion piece on “[w]‌hy science needs philosophy” to explain why they believe that philosophy has an important role to play in science. Philosophy’s contribution can take at least four forms: the clarification of scientific concepts, the critical assessment of scientific assumptions or methods, the formulation of new concepts and theories, and the fostering of dialogue between different sciences, as well as between science and society. (Laplane et al., 2019, p. 3948) Their goal was to “encourage a renaissance in the integration of science and philosophy” (p. 3951). Similarly, Thagard (2009) argues that philosophy is essential to cognitive science. Not everyone agrees. Some philosophers argue that they have nothing to offer the arts, while others argue that music psychology may be overtaking philosophy. At one extreme is a Wittgensteinian insistence that nothing we can learn from the scientific study of cognition could shed any light on what is interesting or valuable in art qua art –​ even assuming that the study was conducted on correct principles and according to a sound method. At the other extreme, consistent with the eliminativist theory of mind, is the view that a scientific approach to art, creativity, and appreciation will sweep aside the exhausted superstitions of the connoisseur, the philosopher, and the historian. (Currie, 2003, p. 708) 23

24

Donald A. Hodges

Supporting the latter idea, Huron (2016) states that “[o]‌nly time will tell whether we are witnessing the passing of the aesthetics baton from philosophy to empirical science” (p. 242). Rather than choose sides, for a moment let us agree with Laplane and Thagard and assume that music philosophers and music psychologists ought to work more closely together for their mutual benefit (Hodges, 2013). We have much to learn from each other. A music psychologist’s philosophical orientation can alter the outcome of experiments. Campbell and Heller (1980) explain how experiments conducted from a Cartesian or Humean view can arrive at different results. A Cartesian view –​after French philosopher René Descartes (1596–​1650) –​holds that there is one correct Truth and that this Truth is external to human perception. A Humean view –​after Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711–​1776) –​is that there are many truths, based on each person’s perceptions and individual construction of reality. For example, when is a given note in musical performance ‘out of tune’? If a tuner is used as the arbiter (Cartesian approach), the answer is clear and objective. If a musician’s choices (Humean approach) are the determiner (e.g., raising the leading tone or ‘bending’ pitches in certain musical styles), the answer is conditional and subjective. Indeed, Madsen and Geringer (1976) demonstrate that listeners actually prefer the trumpet tone quality found in passages where the solo was sharp relative to the accompaniment. Though music psychologists rarely declare their philosophical position openly (Hiller, 2016), two eminent researchers did just that. In his landmark book, Emotion and Meaning in Music, Leonard Meyer (1956) takes the time to discuss his belief in the philosophical positions of formalism and absolute expressionism, which he feels could coexist. In eliminating referentialism, he takes the position that the meaning of music is found in the music itself. Alf Gabrielsson (2016) takes the opposite position. He holds that the meaning of music is found in referential meanings; that is, in what listeners feel the music refers to outside itself. His book, Strong Experiences with Music (Gabrielsson, 2011), is a massive extension of this philosophical orientation. So much more could be written on this subject, but let us simply conclude with the notion that music psychology in general and research specifically geared toward the interests of education and community music ought to pay more attention to philosophical underpinnings. As Meyer and Gabrielsson demonstrate, it is not that we need to reach consensus but that we need to be clearer in those principles that guide our research.

R3. The triumvirate of theory, research and practice Relationships among theory, research and practice have been recognised generally (e.g., Mahrer, 1978) and in music psychology (e.g., Eagle, 1996) and music (e.g., Martin et al., 2016) specifically. The gist of the symbiotic relationship is succinctly captured by Mahrer: “Good theory advances good research and good practice and, in turn, is itself moved ahead by advances in our knowledge (research) and in what we can do (practice)” (1978, p. 4). Research should ideally be grounded in theory and informed by practice. What we do when we practice our craft as educators, therapists and community musicians should be a realisation of a given theory and, to the extent possible, based on evidence. Unfortunately, there is frequently a gap between the three components. For example, music therapy developed as a practice-​based discipline, and Baker and Young (2016) note the “long history of disconnect between research and practice” (p. 33). Even more disheartening is the suggestion that “the divide between research and practice may be growing” (p. 33). Likewise, “research [in music therapy] has typically been empirical, quantitative, and outcome-​focused more than emphasizing theoretical development” (Gold, 2012, p.  1). “The vast majority of studies lack an explicitly-​stated theoretical orientation” (Amir et al., 2016, p. 39). 24

25

Ruminations on music psychology research

The situation in music education is not much different. A perceived gap between research and practice led to the establishment of the journal UPDATE: Applications of Research in Music Education as a means of making research more accessible to practitioners (https://​nafme.org/​ nafme-​research/​update-​applications-​of-​research-​in-​music-​education/​). Regarding theory in music education research, Hanley and Montgomery (2002) state that “[i]‌f practitioners have been reluctant to use research, they have not been any more eager to engage in theory building. … Whatever the reason, the quality of much research has suffered from a lack of solid theory building” (p. 114). Hanley and Montgomery also quote from an unpublished manuscript by Roger Rideout (On Leadership in American Music Education):  “Music education is facing a profound disparity between theory and practice forced on us by the emergence of a postmodern society” (Hanley & Montgomery, 2002, p. 117). Most damning is a statement by Westbury (2002): I will take as my starting point and as my given that neither the basic or applied research of education nor the theory building of the field has had or is having any discernible systematic effects on music teaching in either schools or studios. (p. 144) After this bleak assessment, are things changing very much? Well, yes and no. Consider this statement from Reimer (2012): “Scholarly, research-​based efforts in our profession have clearly fostered impressive growth in further theory, both in breadth and in depth. Their influence on school programs and practices, however, can fairly be regarded as inconsequential” (p. 679). Is the situation regarding theory–​research–​practice any different in music psychology?

R4. Basic and applied research Basic research refers to seeking knowledge for its own sake or for the purpose of knowing and understanding more about a given phenomenon. For example, efforts to understand the physiological processes involved in the male vocal apparatus during the period of vocal change would be classified as basic research. Applied research is aimed toward a direct application. For example, one might wish to compare two approaches to dealing with the cambiata voice, one that restricts vocalisation during the vocal change and one that emphasises full-​range vocalisation. One conception of these two forms of research is that basic research provides a foundation from which applied research can be launched. Medical historian Lewis Thomas (1979) writes that during its earliest years, medicine involved a great deal of guesswork. Primarily this was due to a lack of knowledge about basic physiological processes of disease. Once the scientific method began to be used in a systematic way near the end of the 19th century, rapid progress was made toward unravelling many mysteries of the body. Thomas explains that the rapid progress made from the 1930s on was based on an accumulation of knowledge gained from basic research. “But it needs emphasizing that it took about fifty years of concentrated effort in basic research to reach this level” (1979, p. 162). “It was basic science of a very high order, storing up a great mass of interesting knowledge for its own sake, creating, so to speak, a bank of information, ready for drawing on when the time for intelligent use arrived” (1979, p. 164). The sequence of basic research preceding applied research is not always the case. Narayanamurti and Odumosu (2016) deplore the dichotomy of basic versus applied research and instead argue for a discovery–​invention cycle in which the two approaches reinforce and support each other. Consider, for example, three studies we might place in a basic-​applied-​basic sequence. In 2001, researchers used fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) to detect brain activation in 25

26

Donald A. Hodges

neonates in response to auditory stimulation (Anderson et al., 2001). Later, preterm infants in a neonatal intensive care unit randomly received live music, recorded music or no music therapy (Arnon et al., 2006). Although there were no differential effects on physiological parameters (e.g., heart and respiratory rates, oxygen saturation and behavioural assessments) during the 30-​ minute sessions, live music sessions significantly reduced heart rate and improved behavioural scores, leading researchers to conclude that live music is more beneficial than recorded music or no music. Once again, using fMRI, researchers determined that there was more right auditory cortex activation than left among 1-​to 3-​day-​old newborns as they heard excerpts of Western tonal music and altered versions of the same excerpts (Perani et al., 2010).These results demonstrate that some of the neural architecture involved in music processing is active at birth and that these regions are sensitive to changes in tonality and consonance/​dissonance. In other words: (a) the brains of neonates respond to sound (basic research); (b) live music is more effective than recorded music or no music in calming preterm infants (applied); and (c) the neural architecture for processing music functions at birth (basic). This point taken, one might consider that for much of its early history, music psychology research was largely dedicated to investigations of basic perceptual processes underlying musical experiences, and because of this, applied research may now be conducted more frequently. In making this assertion, I am keenly aware that this is only a rough generalisation. There has, of course, always been a mixture of both basic and applied studies throughout the history of music psychology. However, perhaps it is time for more applications to be made from this research.

R5.  Quantitative and qualitative research One traditional means of organising the literature has been into quantitative and qualitative research. Often, these two types of research are polarised, as in quantitative versus qualitative. However, it may be much more useful to think of quantitative and qualitative research as different tools in a toolbox. Sometimes you need a saw and sometimes you need a hammer. Ercikan and Roth describe the situation this way (2006): Instead of dichotomizing research into qualitative and quantitative, we need integrative approaches that provide the appropriate forms of knowledge needed by decision makers located differently in society and dealing with different units of analysis (individual, group, community, etc.). In this approach, we need researchers to make choices regarding data sources, data construction, and analysis methods that best fit their research questions and to consider using multiple approaches and modes of inquiry. (p. 23) Quantitative research, sometimes referred to as being objective or empirical, is characterised primarily by the use of the scientific method, data analysis and descriptive and experimental methodologies. It is undergirded by the epistemological position of post-​ positivism, which assumes there is an objective truth but that researcher bias may influence observations made (Cohen, 2016). Qualitative research is frequently referred to as subjective or interpretivist, because researcher interpretations are so central. Qualitative research stems from phenomenological, hermeneutic, constructivist and social constructivist epistemologies (Wheeler, 2016). Let us briefly consider two examples, again dealing with boys’ changing voices. Willisa and Kenny (2008) conducted a longitudinal study in which they collected data for one year from 26

27

Ruminations on music psychology research

boys whose average age at the outset was 12 years and 11 months. Purposes of the study were to identify phonational gaps in ascending and descending glides and to determine relationships between phonational gaps, weight gain and fundamental speaking frequency. A ten-​point visual analogue scale was also used for participants to respond to a question about how they thought their voice was functioning. The authors conclude that “[i]‌n this study, these phonational gaps were associated with certain weight ranges and rapid weight gain, with changes to boys’ speaking voices, and with loss of ability to use the mid-​and falsetto vocal range” (p. 451). In a related qualitative study, Kennedy (2004) utilised interviews and observations of students in a boy choir school and their directors. His report highlights the uniqueness of each boy’s experience in going through a vocal change. For example, one boy said that his teacher “made my voice change a very good experience. I didn’t feel bad about losing my treble voice at all” (p. 272). Another boy was frustrated when his voice started to change. Once his voice began to mature into an emerging tenor voice, his director commented, “[b]‌ut he is so happy that he has this voice, and he knows he sounds wonderful” (p. 271). As these examples illustrate, it should not be a matter of either/​or but both/​and. That is, quantitative and qualitative research methodologies each have their strengths and limitations, and each make contributions the other cannot. Music psychology is better served when quantitative and qualitative methods, along with mixed-​methods approaches, are used in the most efficacious manner.

R6.  Formal and informal music experiences For obvious and necessary reasons, a great deal of music psychology research takes place in laboratories and other formal settings. In addition, that which is being studied frequently involves skills or behaviours acquired in a formal way. For example, an investigation of cortical areas activated during actual and imagined violin performances involving highly trained violinists was conducted in a university laboratory (Kristeva et al., 2003). There are, of course, examples of research conducted in informal settings involving behaviours not necessarily acquired through formal learning processes. One research team used experience sampling methods (i.e., participants responded to randomly generated phone calls ten times per day) to explore aesthetic chills in everyday music listening (Nusbaum et  al., 2014). Only 19% of these participants were enrolled in a formal music degree programme. Thus, the scope of music psychology research encompasses both formal and informal learning styles and settings. Music in education and the community is experienced both formally and informally. The intent of this discussion is to highlight the need for increased awareness of the numerous musical experiences that happen in informal settings and that are not acquired through formal learning experiences. Several teenagers making music together in a family basement, a mother singing lullabies to her child, or children accompanying games like jump rope with sing-​song chants are familiar examples. Folkestad (2006) suggests that formal –​informal should not be regarded as a dichotomy, but rather as the two poles of a continuum, and that in most learning situations, both these aspects of learning are in various degrees present and interacting in the learning process. (p. 143) Although it is possible to discuss formal/​informal learning separately from formal/​informal settings, in reality the two often go together. For example, how do teenagers working on their 27

28

Donald A. Hodges

own learn to perform music? A common misconception involves groups of teenagers learning rock songs in the family garage by repeated listening. However, [s]‌uch practices as DJing/​turntablism; assembling of various bits and pieces to remixes; remixing entire songs to mash-​ups in home studios; collective songwriting online; producing of one’s own music videos to YouTube; exchanging and comparing videos of live performances of Guitar Hero and Rock Band game songs –​all of these indicate a musical culture that differs substantially from conventional “garage band” practices. (Väkevä, 2010, 63) It is understandable that the bulk of music psychology research concerns formal music learning which takes place in formalised settings. However, we must take on the enormous challenge of investigating informal music experiences if we are to continue to mature as a discipline. See the following recent commentaries on formal/​informal music teaching and learning: Carroll (2020), Hess (2020), Kastner (2020) and Ng (2020).

R7.  Global perspectives The bulk of music psychology research is done in the United Kingdom, mainland Europe, North America and Australia (Folkestad, 2005). This circumstance has led to the notion that most often research participants are from WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialised, rich and democratic) countries (Henrich et al., 2010). This parochial approach prohibits us from having a more complete understanding of how humans learn, perform and enjoy music all around the world. As Stevens and Byron (2016) state, “[t]‌o date, research on music-​processing in non-​ WEIRD populations is scattered and inconclusive” (p. 21). Paradoxically, there is both improvement and apprehension about the lack of progress. That the situation may be improving can be seen in the inclusion of excellent review chapters on global perspectives in the second edition of The Oxford Handbook of Music Psychology (e.g., Cross, 2016; Stevens & Byron, 2016; Cross & Tolbert, 2016; and Clayton, 2016). The geographically imbalanced nature of music psychology research is shown in a bibliometric analysis of Psychology of Music, Music Perception, and Musicae Scientiae from 1973 to 2017 (Anglada-​Tort & Sanfilippo, 2019). Out of 49 countries represented (based on the country of the corresponding author), 28 had at least five publications.The most productive countries were the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, Germany, Finland, France and the Netherlands. A cursory review of recent issues in several journals provides more support for an improving as well as a disheartening view of geographical distribution. Articles published in the November 2019 issue (37:4) of the International Journal of Research in Music Education pertain to Israel, Nepal, Spain, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates and Venezuela, with two additional articles coming from the United States, two from Australia and one from Finland. The most recent issue of Psychology of Music (48:1, January 2020) has ten articles, three of which pertain to Hong Kong, Serbia and Turkey. In the December 2019 issue of Music Perception (37:2), two of five articles pertain to China and Israel, and in Musicæ Scientiæ’s December 2019 issue (23:4), two of eight articles concern Africa and Brazil. One of 21 articles published in Music and Science in January–​ December 2019 (2) deal with Thai music. However, in a sobering rebuttal, Anglada-​Tort and Sanfilippo (2019) report that of 2,089 articles published in Psychology of Music, Music Perception, and Musicæ Scientiæ between 1973 and 2017, only 113 (5%) are from non-​WEIRD countries. Some would contend –​with no criticism of individual studies necessarily implied –​that a Westernised view of music prevails even in some of these reports. For example, in Zhang et al. 28

29

Ruminations on music psychology research

(2019), participants were native Chinese speakers but musical stimuli were European opera melodies on violin, on flute or by voice. This leads to the major concern that we are racing a countdown clock of extinction. Increasingly, it may be more difficult to identify indigenous peoples who have not been exposed to Western music. Recalling R1, it may be time to bring anthropologists and ethnomusicologists into a more active consideration of the purview of music psychology (see R8). R10 may provide one, admittedly visionary, possibility. As closer working relationships between music psychologists and anthropologists/​ethnomusicologists are pursued, one important issue (among many) to be ironed out is the fact that “ethnomusicological research indicates that music is better conceived of as a mode of interaction than as the object of auditory perception” (Cross & Tolbert, 2016, p. 43).

R8.  Toward a cultural music psychology Bothered by what they perceive as an inadequacy in current music psychology research concerning cultural aspects, Allesch and Krakauer (2006) argue for a “cultural turn” in the psychology of music. Following developments within psychology, research over recent decades in the psychology of music has concentrated on neuro-​cognition while cultural aspects have been underestimated –​as they continue to be in psychology in general. (p. 41) Cultural psychology is the recognition that no psychological process is immune from cultural influences. Music psychology research that fails to consider cultural influences provides an impoverished account. A similar movement is echoed in the neuroscience of music. Cultural neuroscience is the investigation between culture and brain (Chiao et  al., 2016; Han et  al., 2013). Pertinent to this volume, cultural neuroscience recognises that biological and cultural aspects of music are inextricably intertwined and that no musical experience is strictly biological or cultural (Hodges, 2019). Several decades ago, one of the pioneers in cognitive psychology, Jerome Bruner (1990), recognised the critical role that culture plays in psychology: “It is man’s participation in culture and the realisation of his mental powers through culture that make it impossible to construct a human psychology on the basis of the individual alone” (p. 12). Bruner also quotes Geertz (1973), who said, “there is no such thing as a human nature independent of culture” (p. 49). This situation also holds true for music psychology.We need to be increasingly aware that music cognition, music perception and music production can only be fully understood within the framework of a cultural perspective (Stevens & Bryon, 2016). Believing that the role culture plays in musical experiences has been critically understudied in music psychology, Boer and Fischer (2012) conducted a series of cross-​cultural studies involving participants from Brazil, Germany, Hong Kong, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore and the United States. Of 21 analyses, 16 revealed similar cultural patterns among the different groups; however, some cultural differences did appear. The non-​Anglophone Western sample mentioned a greater number of memory and emotion functions for the individual use of music, diversion was mentioned more frequently by Anglophone Western and South American samples as a social function, while emotions were identified more frequently by South Americans as a cultural function. (p. 194) 29

30

Donald A. Hodges

In a follow-​up study of listeners in Germany, Kenya, Mexico, New Zealand, the Philippines and Turkey, findings indicate that musical functions are “systematically influenced by listeners’ culture and gender” (Boer et al., 2012, p. 368). In particular, music listeners from collectivistic societies used music to convey cultural identity more than those in individualistic societies. Miranda et al. (2015) provide a thorough review of literature on a cultural–​developmental psychology of music in adolescence. In the final chapter of The Oxford Handbook of Music Psychology, second edition, the editors recognise the important role of culture in musical experiences. In calling for more cultural music psychology research, they state that “this would elaborate our knowledge of the impact of different cultural and familial traditions on perception, learning, cognition, and responses to music” (Hallam et al., 2016b, p. 911).

R9. Replications In the hard sciences, such as chemistry or physics, repeating experiments provides confirmation or contradiction of results. This cannot be done as precisely in the social and behavioural sciences, but replication –​reproducing experimental conditions as closely as possible –​can serve the same or a similar function. Chemicals and formulas can be duplicated, but human behaviour cannot. Replication attempts to confirm or contradict results from previously published experiments by using participant groups that match the original cohorts as closely as possible and by adhering to the original methods and procedures. In an examination of the complete publication history of the top 100 psychology journals (341,211 articles), researchers found an overall replication rate of only 1.07% (Makel et al., 2012). More closely related to this volume, Frieler, Müllensiefen and colleagues (2013) lobby for increased usage of replication in music psychology research as a means of increasing quality control. Although there are currently too few replication studies, the following are some recent examples: • “Personality, self-​ estimated intelligence, and uses of music:  A Spanish replication and extension using structural equation modeling” (Chamorro-​Premuzic, Gomà-​i-​ Freixanet et al., 2009); • “The big five personality traits and uses of music:  A replication in Malaysia using structural equation modeling” (Chamorro-​Premuzic, Swami et al., 2009); • “A survey of burnout among college music majors: A replication” (Bernhard, 2010); • “Absolute memory for pitch: A comparative replication of Levitin’s 1994 study in six European labs” (Frieler, Fischinger et al., 2013); • “Is there a peak in popular music preference at a certain song-​specific age? A replication of Holbrook & Schindler’s 1989 study” (Hemming, 2013); • “Rhythmic engagement with music in early childhood: A replication and extension” (Ilari, 2015). Unfortunately, replications may not be the best way to achieve quality control. According to Diener and Biswas-​Diener (2020): “the science of psychology is facing a crisis. It turns out that many studies in psychology –​including many highly cited studies –​do not replicate.” In a large-​scale study, the Open Science Collaboration (2015) conducted replications of 100 prominent papers published in three psychology journals. While 97% of the original articles had statistically significant effects, only 36% of the replications reported the same level of effects. One difficulty is that “all replications differ in innumerable ways from original studies. They 30

31

Ruminations on music psychology research

are conducted in different facilities, in different weather, with different experimenters, with different computers and displays, in different languages, at different points in history, and so on” (Anderson et al., 2016). Even when replication studies fail to confirm previous results, they still have value: “When results differ, it offers an opportunity for hypothesis generation and then testing to determine why. When results do not differ, it offers some evidence that the finding is generalizable” (Anderson et  al., 2016). Zwaan and colleagues (2018) reviewed six major concerns about replication and provided detailed responses, concluding that “there are no substantive and methodological arguments against direct replication” (p. 13). The fact that this article is followed by 36 responses in Open Peer Commentary along with the authors’ extensive response to these comments is some indication of the importance of this topic.

R10.  A music psychology research collaboratory The previous nine ruminations present problematic but, given enough commitment, doable challenges. Perhaps it is time for a big, hairy audacious goal (BHAG). As described by Collins and Porras (1994), BHAGs are visionary goals that are risky but carry the potential for monumental leaps beyond the status quo. A BHAG with relevance for this volume would be to launch a music psychology collaboratory focusing on music education and music in the community. ‘Research collaboratory’ is a relatively new term, having entered the scientific lexicon in the past 25 years. Wulf (1993) provides this description: As I wrote in 1989, the collaboratory is “a center without walls, in which the nation’s researchers can perform their research without regard to physical location –​interacting with colleagues, accessing instrumentation, sharing data and computational resources, [and] accessing information in digital libraries” [Wulf, 1989 BIB-​086, p.  vii]. The physical infrastructure of the collaboratory is the worldwide collection of networked computers augmented by instrumentation interfaced to the network (such as that at Sondre Stromfiord in Greenland).The essence of the collaboratory, however, is not this physical infrastructure. Rather, it is the software that enables scholars to use remote libraries, collaborate with remote colleagues, interact with remote instruments, analyze data and test models –​all with nearly the facility they now enjoy locally. (p. 854) An online search on this term reveals dozens of such entities, including the Human Brain Project, “a multi-​national European brain research initiative to advance neuroscience and medicine and to create brain-​inspired information technology” (Amunts et al., 2016, p. 574). As can be surmised, research collaboratories are nationally or internationally distributed organisations that link researchers together via emerging audio and video communication technologies. However, a collaboratory is more than an elaborate collection of information and communications technologies; it is a new networked organizational form that also includes social processes; collaboration techniques; formal and informal communication; and agreement on norms, principles, values, and rules. (Cogburn, 2003, p. 86) Let us imagine for a moment that we have actually established the Music Psychology Collaboratory for Research in Music Education and Music in the Community (MPCRMEMC). 31

32

Donald A. Hodges

Setting aside all the daunting reasons why this BHAG would be exceedingly difficult to implement, think of the research that could emanate from such an entity. Further imagine the potential outcomes if such an organisation involved collaborations among music psychologists, music educators, music therapists, community musicians and a host of experts in psychology, philosophy, education, neuroscience, ethnomusicology or whatever disciplines were required for cutting-​edge, paradigm-​shifting research. Of course, there are numerous issues to resolve in creating, funding and sustaining such an entity, but the possibilities should be well worth the effort of pursuing them. Although it will take time, effort and the resolution of several thorny issues, the result may well be an outpouring of more high-​quality, complex and sophisticated research that has a stronger influence on what practitioners do in the classroom and the community. Although Peter Webster was speaking to music educators in his 2014 Senior Researcher of the Year address, his words are pertinent to this BHAG discussion. While acknowledging the difficulties, Webster affirmed the need for collaborative efforts: My last [suggestion] is about our ability to team together to tackle the big problems we face. … [W]‌hat I am talking about here is more advanced work –​focused research studies that are executed in tandem. I realize the issues of time, money, and personal ego that may play out here, but I have to believe that we can overcome these hurdles to move to a better day. (Webster, 2014, p. 212)

Implications for future research As a way of extending this last, fantastical rumination and bringing a close to this chapter, let us imagine that R10 has transpired. MPCRMEMC has been established and has adopted the first nine ruminations as formative concepts. 1. To carry out the mandate of the collaboratory, it will be necessary to incorporate the work of a wide variety of research specialties. We affirm the value of contributions from all pertinent fields. While some may argue that the inter-​disciplinary nature of psychology is a weakness leading to a lack of focus there have been clear benefits to the quantity and quality of research generated when compared with the other visual and performing arts. From this perspective interdisciplinarity is a cause for celebration. (Hallam et al., 2016b, p. 913) 2. Recognising that we have much to learn from each other, we resolve to work more closely with philosophers. One aim is to develop stronger philosophical foundations for our research. Recalling Meyer’s and Gabrielsson’s clarity in declaring a philosophical stance, “[i]‌deally, all music psychologists would be as explicit in situating their work within a philosophical framework” (Hodges, 2020, p. 22) 3. We resolve to pay greater attention to relationships among theory, research and practice. As Eagle (1996) states:  “Theory without practice and research to verify it is impotent. Practice without research based on theory to guide it is blind. Research without theory and resultant practice is inapplicable” (p. 12).

32

33

Ruminations on music psychology research

4. We agree to be more intentional in applying music psychology research to music education and music in the community. Music education and music therapy often consider the psychology of music to be a foundational field of study for their disciplines, and music psychology has indeed contributed important knowledge to those fields. However, it is probably fair to say that the majority of research efforts in music psychology have not been in applied or translational research for educational, developmental, or therapeutic purposes. This applied or translational focus may become one of the many new future directions in the psychology of music. (Thaut, 2016, p. 902) 5. We recognise that quantitative and qualitive research methodologies are simply different ‘tools’, each suited for its own purposes. It is as simple as saying that “the techniques and methodology used to search for an answer to a question should be appropriate to the question posed” (Heller & O’Connor, 2002, p. 1089). 6. We agree to direct more attention toward informal music experiences. In the frontismatter to Lucy Green’s How Popular Musicians Learn (2002), an intriguing question is posed: Popular musicians acquire some or all of their skills and knowledge informally, outside school or university, and with little help from trained instrumental teachers. How do they go about this process? Despite the fact that popular music has recently entered formal music education, we have as yet a limited understanding of the learning practices adopted by its musicians.

Similar questions might be asked of a broad range of music learners throughout the community. Music psychologists have the potential to contribute much toward finding answers. 7. We recognise that a full and complete understanding of human musical experiences requires vastly increased research emanating from non-​WEIRD countries. According to Cross (2016), “there is a pressing need to extend the scope of research on music cognition into non-​Western musical domains” (p. 13). 8. Although significant progress is being made in music psychology, “the problem of reconciling ‘cultural’ and ‘biological’ approaches to music, and indeed to the nature of mind itself, remains” (Cross & Morely, 2009, p. 61). We recognise the strong role of culture in musical processes and will encourage greater awareness of and sensitivity to this influence. 9. We resolve to encourage replications.We could also facilitate replications by providing open access to data, sharing research instruments and fostering open dialogue and critiques of individual studies (e.g., Howe et al., 1998; Juslin, 2013). Another thing that would improve both the quality of articles and the chances for demonstrating the same results in a replication is more details in methods sections. Bemoaning the lack of specificity, Chambers (2019) comments that “methods sections have thus faded from their original purpose of providing the recipe for replication” (p. 62). As long as we are dreaming about this BHAG, what would be the result of establishing a music psychology collaboratory and following these guiding principles? Someday, I hope we will all be privileged to find out!

33

34

Donald A. Hodges

Reflective questions 1. If you were named Czar of Music Psychology Research, what changes would you institute regarding research in music education and the community? 2. Suppose you were appointed a member of the committee charged with bringing the MPCRMEMC into existence. What would be some of your first steps? What aspects of a MPCRMEMC might be accomplished within a year or two and in the 5–​10-​year range, and what aspects might take much longer? 3. What might be done to foster stronger working relationships among music psychologists and practitioners in music education and music in the community?

Suggestions for further reading Allesch, C. G., & Krakauer, P. M. (2006). Understanding our experience of music: What kind of psychology do we need? Musicae Scientiae, 10(1 Suppl.), 41–​63. Anglada-​Tort, M., & Sanfilippo, K. R. M. (2019).Visualizing music psychology: A bibliometric analysis of psychology of music, music perception, and musicae scientiae from 1973 to 2017. Music & Science, 2. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​2059204318811786 Folkestad, G. (2005). Here, there and everywhere: Music education research in a globalised world. Music Education Research, 7(3), 279–​287. Laplane, L., Mantovani, P., Adolphs, R., Chang, H., Mantovani, A., McFall-​Ngai, M., Rovelli, C., Sober, E., & Pradeu, T. (2019). Opinion: Why science needs philosophy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(10), 3948–​3952.

References Allesch, C. G., & Krakauer, P. M. (2006). Understanding our experience of music: What kind of psychology do we need? Musicae Scientiae, 10(1 Suppl.), 41–​63. Amir, D., LaGasse, B., & Crowe, B. (2016). The relationship between research and theory. In B. Wheeler & K. Murphy (Eds.), Music therapy research (3rd ed.; pp. 37–​46). Barcelona. Amunts, K., Ebell, C., Muller, J., Telefont, M., Knoll, A., & Lippert, T. (2016). The human brain project: Creating a European research infrastructure to decode the human brain. Neuron, 92(3), 574–​581. Anderson, A. W., Marois, R., Colson, E. R., Peterson, B. S., Duncan, C. C., Ehrenkranz, R. A., Schneider, K. C., Gore, J. C., & Ment, L. R. (2001). Neonatal auditory activation detected by functional magnetic resonance imaging. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 19(1),  1–​5. Anderson, C., Bahník, S., Barnett-​ Cowan, M., Bosco, F., Chandler, J., Chariter, C., Cheung, F., Christopherson, C. D., Cordes, A., Cremata, E. J., Della Penna, N., Estel, V., Fedor, A., Fitneva, S. A., Frank, M. C., Grange, J. A., Hartshorne, J. K., Hasselman, F., Henninger, F., … Suni, K. (2016). Response to comment on “Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science”. Science, 351(6277), Article 1037-​c. DOI: 10.1126/​science.aad9163 Anglada-​Tort, M., & Sanfilippo, K. R. M. (2019).Visualizing music psychology: A bibliometric analysis of psychology of music, music perception, and musicae scientiae from 1973 to 2017. Music & Science, 2. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​2059204318811786 Arnon, S., Shapsa, A., Forman, L., Regev, R., Bauer, S., Litmanovitz, I., & Dolfin, T. (2006). Live music is beneficial to preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit environment. Birth, 33(2), 131–​136. Baker, F., & Young, L. (2016). The relationship between theory and practice. In B. Wheeler & K. Murphy (Eds.), Music therapy research, (3rd ed., pp. 26–​36). Barcelona. Bernhard, C. (2010). A survey of burnout among college music majors: A replication. Music Performance Research, 3(2),  31–​41. Boer, D., & Fischer, R. (2012). Towards a holistic model of functions of music listening across cultures: A culturally decentred qualitative approach. Psychology of Music, 40(2), 179–​200.

34

35

Ruminations on music psychology research Boer, D., Fischer, R., Gürkan, H., Abubakar, A., Njenga, J., & Zenger, M. (2012).Young people’s topography of musical functions: Personal, social and cultural experiences with music across genders and six societies. International Journal of Psychology, 47(5), 355–​369. Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Harvard University Press. Campbell,W., & Heller, J. (1980). An orientation for considering models of musical behavior. In D. Hodges (Ed.), Handbook of music psychology (pp. 29–​36). National Association for Music Therapy. Carroll, C. L. (2020). Seeing the invisible: Theorising connections between informal and formal musical knowledge. Research Studies in Music Education, 42(1),  37–​55. Chambers, C. (2019). The seven deadly sins of psychology. Princeton University Press. Chamorro-​Premuzic,T., Gomà-​i-​Freixanet, M., Furnham, A., & Muro, A. (2009). Personality, self-​estimated intelligence, and uses of music: A Spanish replication and extension using structural equation modeling. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(3), 149–​155. Chamorro-​Premuzic, T., Swami, V., Furnham, A., & Maakip, I. (2009). The big five personality traits and uses of music: A replication in Malaysia using structural equation modeling. Journal of Individual Differences, 30(1),  20–​27. Chiao, J., Li, S., Seligman, R., & Turner, R. (Eds.). (2016). The Oxford handbook of cultural neuroscience. Oxford University Press. Clayton, M. (2016). The social and personal functions of music in cross-​cultural perspective. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology, (2nd ed.; pp. 47–​59). Oxford University Press. Cohen, N. (2016). Principles of objectivist research. In B. Wheeler & K. Murphy (Eds.), Music therapy research, (3rd ed.; pp. 118–​130). Barcelona. Collins, J. and Porras, J. I. (1994) Built to last: Successful habits of visionary companies. Harper Collins Publishing. Cogburn, D. (2003). HCI in the so-​called developing world:  What’s in it for everyone. Interactions, 10(2),  80–​87. Cross, I. (2016).The nature of music and its evolution. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M.Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology, (2nd ed.; pp. 3–​17). Oxford University Press. Cross, I., & Morley, I. (2009).The evolution of music: Theories, definitions and the nature of the evidence. In S. Malloch & C. Trevarthen (Eds.), Communicative musicality (pp. 61–​81). Oxford University Press. Cross, I., & Tolbert, E. (2016). Music and meaning. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology, (2nd ed.; pp. 33–​46). Oxford University Press. Currie, G. (2003). Aesthetics and cognitive science. In J. Levinson (Ed.), The Oxford handbook on aesthetics (pp. 706–​721). Oxford University Press. Diener, E., & Biswas-​ Diener, R. (2020). The replication crisis in psychology. Noba textbook series: Psychology. DEF publishers. http://​noba.to/​q4cvydeh Eagle, C. T., Jr. (1996). An introductory perspective on music psychology. In D. Hodges (Ed.), Handbook of music psychology, (2nd ed.; pp. 1–​28). IMR Press. Ercikan, K., & Roth, W. M. (2006). What good is polarizing research into qualitative and quantitative? Educational Researcher, 35(5),  14–​23. Folkestad, G. (2005). Here, there and everywhere: Music education research in a globalised world. Music Education Research, 7(3), 279–​287. Folkestad, G. (2006). Formal and informal learning situations or practices vs formal and informal ways of learning. British Journal of Music Education, 23(2), 135–​145. Frieler, K., Fischinger, T., Schlemmer, K., Lothwesen, K., Jakubowski, K., & Müllensiefen, D. (2013). Absolute memory for pitch: A comparative replication of Levitin’s 1994 study in six European labs. Musicae Scientiae, 17(3), 334–​349. Frieler, K., Müllensiefen, D., Fischinger, T., Schlemmer, K., Jakubowski, K., & Lothwesen, K. (2013). Replication in music psychology. Musicae Scientiae, 17(3), 265–​276. Gabrielsson, A. (2011). Strong experiences with music. Oxford University Press. Gabrielsson, A. (2016). The relationship between musical structure and perceived expression. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 215–​232). Oxford University Press. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books. Gold, C. (2012). The importance of being aware of what we don’t know. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, 21(1),  1–​2. Green, L. (2002). How popular musicians learn: A way ahead for music education. Ashgate.

35

36

Donald A. Hodges Hallam, S. (2019). The psychology of music. Routledge. Hallam, S., Cross, I., & Thaut, M. (2016a). The Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. Hallam, S., Cross, I., & Thaut, M. (2016b). Where now? In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 905–​913). Oxford University Press. Han, S., Northoff, G., Vogeley, K., Wexler, B., Kitayama, S., & Varnum, M. (2013). A cultural neuroscience approach to the biosocial nature of the human brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 335–​359. Hanley, B., & Montgomery, J. (2002). Contemporary curriculum practices and their theoretical bases. In R. Colwell & C. Richardson (Eds.), The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning (pp. 113–​143). Oxford University Press. Heller, J., & O’Connor, E. (2002). Maintaining quality in research and reporting. In R. Colwell & C. Richardson (Eds.), The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning (pp. 1089–​1107). Oxford University Press. Hemming, J. (2013). Is there a peak in popular music preference at a certain song-​specific age? A replication of Holbrook & Schindler’s 1989 study. Musicae Scientiae, 17(3), 293–​304. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Most people are not WEIRD. Nature, 466, 29. https://​ doi.org/​10.1038/​466029a Hess, J. (2020). Finding the “both/​and”: Balancing informal and formal music learning. International Journal of Music Education, 38(3), 441–​455. Hiller, J. (2016). Epistemological foundations of objectivist and interpretivist research. In B. Wheeler & K. Murphy (Eds.), Music therapy research, (3rd ed.; pp. 99–​117). Barcelona. Hodges, D. (2013). Music listeners, philosophers, and researchers. Physics of Life Reviews, 10(3), 275–​276. Hodges, D. (2019). Music through the lens of cultural neuroscience. In M. Thaut & D. Hodges (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music and the brain (pp. 19–​41). Oxford University Press. Hodges, D. (2020). Music in the human experience: An introduction to music psychology. Routledge. Howe, M., Davidson, J., & Sloboda, J. (1998). Innate talents: Reality or myth? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21(3), 399–​407. Huron, D. (2016). Aesthetics. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 233–​245). Oxford University Press. Ilari, B. (2015). Rhythmic engagement with music in early childhood: A replication and extension. Journal of Research in Music Education, 62(4), 332–​343. Juslin, P. N. (2013). From everyday emotions to aesthetic emotions: Towards a unified theory of musical emotions. Physics of Life Reviews, 10(3), 235–​266. Kastner, J. D. (2020). Healing bruises: Identity tensions in a beginning teacher’s use of formal and informal music learning. Research Studies in Music Education, 42(1),  3–​18. Kennedy, M. C. (2004). “It’s a metamorphosis”:  Guiding the voice change at the American Boychoir School. Journal of Research in Music Education, 52(3), 264–​280. Kristeva, R., Chakarov,V., Schulte-​Mönting, J., & Spreer, J. (2003). Activation of cortical areas in music execution and imagining: A high-​resolution EEG study. Neuroimage, 20(3), 1872–​1883. Laplane, L., Mantovani, P., Adolphs, R., Chang, H., Mantovani, A., McFall-​Ngai, M., Rovelli, C., Sober, E., & Pradeu, T. (2019). Opinion: Why science needs philosophy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(10), 3948–​3952. Madsen, C., & Geringer, J. (1976). Preferences for trumpet tone quality versus intonation. Council for Research in Music Education, 46,  13–​22. Mahrer, A. R. (1978). Experiencing: A humanistic theory of psychology and psychiatry. Brunner/​Mazel. Makel, M., Plucker, J., & Hegarty, B. (2012). Replications in psychology research:  How often do they occur? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 537–​542. Margulis, E. (2019). The psychology of music: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press. Martin, A. J., Collie, R. J., & Evans, P. (2016). Motivation and engagement in music:  Theory, research, practice, and future directions. In J. Fleming, R. Gibson, & M. Anderson (Eds.), The arts, motivation and engagement: How the arts makes a difference (pp. 169–​185). Routledge. Meyer, L. (1956). Emotion and meaning in music. The University of Chicago Press. Miranda, D., Blais-​Rochette, C.,Vaugon, K., Osman, M., & Arias-​Valenzuela, M. (2015).Towards a cultural-​ developmental psychology of music in adolescence. Psychology of Music, 43(2), 197–​218. Narayanamurti,V., & Odumosu, T. (2016). Cycles of invention and discovery. Harvard University Press. Ng, H. H. (2020). Towards a synthesis of formal, non-​formal and informal pedagogies in popular music learning. Research Studies in Music Education, 42(1),  56–​76.

36

37

Ruminations on music psychology research Nusbaum, E. C., Silvia, P. J., Beaty, R. E., Burgin, C. J., Hodges, D. A., & Kwapil, T. R. (2014). Listening between the notes: Aesthetic chills in everyday music listening. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(1), 104–​109. Ockelford, A. (2016). Beyond music psychology. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M.Thaut, (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology, (2nd ed.; pp. 877–​892). Oxford University Press. Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251). https://​doi.org/​10.1126/​science.aac4716 Perani, D., Saccuman, M. C., Scifo, P., Spada, D., Andreolli, G., Rovelli, R., Baldoli, C., & Koelsch, S. (2010). Functional specializations for music processing in the human newborn brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(10), 4758–​4763. Reimer, B. (2012). All theoried up and nowhere to go. In G. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 2; pp. 678–​681). Oxford University Press. Seashore, C. (1938). Psychology of music. McGraw-​Hill. Stevens, C., & Byron, T. (2016). Universals in music processing: Entrainment, acquiring expectations, and learning. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 19–​31). Oxford University Press. Tan, S.-​L., Pfordresher, P., & Harré, R. (2018). Psychology of music:  From sound to significance (2nd ed.). Routledge. Thagard, P. (2009). Why cognitive science needs philosophy and vice versa. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(2), 237–​254. Thaut, M. (2016). History and research. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 893–​904). Oxford University Press. Thomas, L. (1979). The Medusa and the snail: More notes of a biology watcher.Viking  Press. Thompson, W. (2015). Music, thought, and feeling:  Understanding the psychology of music (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. Väkevä, L. (2010). Garage band or GarageBand®? Remixing musical futures. British Journal of Music Education, 27(1),  59–​70. Webster, P. (2014). 2014 Senior Researcher Award acceptance address: Cautious optimism for the future of research in music teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Music Education, 62(3), 203–​214. Westbury, I. (2002). Theory, research, and the improvement of music education. In R. Colwell & C. Richardson (Eds.), The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning (pp. 144–​161). Oxford University Press. Wheeler, B. (2016). Principles of interpretivist research. In B. Wheeler & K. Murphy (Eds.), Music therapy research (3rd ed.; pp. 131–​141). Barcelona. Willisa, E. C., & Kenny, D.T. (2008). Relationship between weight, speaking fundamental frequency, and the appearance of phonational gaps in the adolescent male changing voice. Journal of Voice, 22(4), 451–​471. Wulf,W. (1989).The national collaboratory: A white paper. Appendix A in Towards a national collaboratory, an unpublished report of a National Science Foundation invitational workshop held at Rockefeller University, New York, March 17–​18. www.nap.edu/​catalog/​2109/​national-​collaboratories-​applying-​ information-​technology-​for-​scientific-​research Wulf, W. (1993). The collaboratory opportunity. Science, 261(5123), 854–​855. Zhang, W., Liu, F., Zhou, L., Wang, W., Jiang, H., & Jiang, C. (2019). The effects of timbre on neural responses to musical emotion. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 37(2), 134–​146. Zwaan, R. A., Etz, A., Lucas, R. E., & Donnellan, M. B. (2018). Making replication mainstream. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 41, Article E120. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​S0140525X17001972

37

38

3 THE WIDER COGNITIVE BENEFITS OF ENGAGEMENT WITH MUSIC Sylwia Holmes

Over the last 25 years, our knowledge of the association between music and cognition has changed greatly and continues to progress towards a more robust understanding of the processes behind this relationship and its possible causalities. From the enormous influence of the now discredited ‘Mozart effect’ (Cabanac et al., 2013; Cooper, 2019; Schellenberg & Hallam, 2005) to applying sophisticated brain imagery, academics worldwide have undertaken great efforts to establish how music interacts with, and perhaps shapes, cognitive capacity (Bugos, 2019; Hallam, 2015; Jaschke et  al., 2018). Ensuing excitement over the idea that music makes us smarter led to widely available, and sometimes freely distributed, Baby Mozart CD collections, school lessons starting with classical music to sharpen students’ intellectual abilities, and many other expressions of misunderstanding over what music can and cannot do. Whilst encouraging more people of all ages to engage with music is certainly extremely worthwhile, caution is necessary when attributing vaguely defined cognitive benefits to any musical activity over any period of time. This chapter aims to elucidate these deeply embedded misinterpretations and reclaim rigorous scientific evidence to empower advocacy for inclusive, purposeful and progressive formal and non-​formal music-​making for people of all ages. The following issues are considered: • •

• •

listening to music and cognitive performance; active participation in music and cognition –​musicians and non-​musicians; intellectual development; executive functioning; auditory skills, reading, and literacy; spatial-​ temporal reasoning and mathematics; disadvantaged students; adults and older people; and implications for music education and music in the community and further directions in research.

Listening to music and cognitive performance Studies of the relationship between listening to music and intellectual skills have been undertaken since the 1950s, predominantly focusing on background music (Hall, 1952). Such research has demonstrated improved performance on a number of measurements, but it did not 38

39

The wider cognitive benefits

robustly indicate the nature of this enhancement and has not provided conclusive evidence for improvements in cognitive performance. To examine the underlying processes, further studies investigated how exposing participants to different types of music affected their performance on cognitive tasks, introducing active control groups who listened to comparison genres of music or spoken text, rather than sitting in silence. The Schubert effect, found by Nantais and Schellenberg (1999), was followed by effects of Bach (Ivanov & Geake, 2003), Blur (Schellenberg & Hallam, 2005) and children’s songs (Schellenberg et al., 2007). Evidence from these studies indicates that participants’ preferred music is most effective in enhancing test results, leading to the hypothesis that it is the change in emotion that facilitates greater achievement. Schellenberg and colleagues (2007) additionally measured levels of mood and arousal changes and observed no differences on any of the IQ subtests when only mood was changed, but not arousal. When both mood and arousal changed, there was a reliable enhancement on one of two subtests  –​Symbol Search. This result was greater when participants listened to music by Mozart (uplifting) versus Albinioni (reflective). No differences were observed for Letter–​Number Sequencing or working memory. Involving Japanese children in this study added much needed cultural variability, and groups of children who listened to or sang songs familiar to them drew more creative, expressive and technically proficient pictures when compared to the groups who listened to Mozart or Albinioni. There were no differences according to whether the children listened to or sang songs. In the meta-​analysis undertaken by Kämpfe and colleagues (2011), the overall effect of listening to background music was established as null, but further examination led authors to the conclusion that this finding was most likely caused by the averaging-​out of specific effects, such as improved arousal positively influencing achievement in sports or detrimental effects on reading or memory. An explanation for this adverse impact of background music was offered by Hallam and MacDonald (2008), who proposed that listening to some types of music might reduce the cognitive processing capacity available for other material. The relationship between the variety of music and the change of mood or the level of arousal was further explored by Bottiroli and colleagues (2014). They measured how different types of music affect performance in cognitive tasks by using contrasting conditions: no music; white noise; music with positive emotion and high arousal levels (Mozart); and music with negative mood and lower arousal (Mahler). It was evident that when participants completed the processing speed task, their performance was improved when listening to Mozart. However, when participants were faced with free recall and phonemic fluency tasks, it was Mahler’s music which constituted the most beneficial conditions. Both of these types of music were advantageous over white noise or silence in both types of tasks. These findings do not support the previously formulated idea of increased arousal improving performance, but suggest that the influence of music is not homogeneous and depends on the type of task. In addition, individual preferences, context and familiarity might also play a role in the relationship between music and cognition, as evidenced by the enhancement in scores in spatial reasoning in 10-​and 11-​year-​olds after listening to Blur versus Mozart, talking or silence in a study by Schellenberg and Hallam (2005). The issue of the subjective aspects of music perception was considered more closely by Hallam and MacDonald (2008). The ways in which individuals benefit (or not) from music varies, and even fluctuates within the same listener, because individuals respond differently to the same music depending on the features of the music itself, the individual’s cultural context and additional experience-​driven associative aspects. Individual preferences and ways of responding to music determine whether music influences mood, level of arousal and the capacity to perform better because of these physiological effects. Moreover, as 39

40

Sylwia Holmes

Schellenberg et al. (2007) point out, some cognitive tests might be more susceptible to changes in arousal and mood, and this may skew the findings. Considering these limitations to investigating the relationship between listening to music and cognitive benefits, further research needs to establish how the following factors influence the findings: • •

• • •

type of cognitive activity and how was it measured –​detailed description of testing would allow closer comparisons between studies; type of music used in the study, including its predominant elements (pitch, duration, timbre, form) as they might all play a role in the association between music and cognition; duration of the intervention, including whether music is listened to before or during testing; the role of individual preferences and cultural contexts; and moderating factors, such as changes in mood and arousal, social interactions, etc.

Active participation in music and cognition Musicians and non-​musicians Taking into account the passive nature of listening to music, further research exploration turned to active participation in music and its influence on a range of cognitive skills. Technological advancement facilitated the approach to this phenomenon from three perspectives: anatomic changes to the brain after playing music; modifications in neural activity; and behavioural changes measured on a range of tests. This allowed a shift from exploratory to theory-​and hypothesis-​driven studies (Schellenberg & Peretz, 2008). Studies exploring differences between formally trained young and adult musicians and people who did not actively engage with music showed morphological differences in the brain (Schlaug et al., 1995), and neuroimaging techniques advanced this by studying distinctive differences in functional patterns of activation (Zuk & Gaab, 2018). Children who learned music for 15 months had structural changes in temporal, frontal and parieto-​occipital areas of the brain, and these were correlated with better performance in auditory and motor tasks (Hyde et al., 2009). Putkinen and colleagues (Putkinen, Tervaniemi, Saarikivi, Ojala & Huotilainen, 2014; Putkinen, Tervaniemi, Saarikivi, de Vent & Huotilainen, 2014) found that prior to music training there were no differences in auditory processing between children, while the longer the lessons continued, the greater neural discrimination was observed. Children and adults who received formal music training scored higher on tests of verbal fluency and working memory (Brandler & Rammsayer, 2003; Loui and Guetta, 2019). In a study by Gaab and Schlaug (2003), musicians and non-​musicians were paired in terms of performance scores and measures of brain asymmetry. To complete a pitch memory task, musicians used more short-​term auditory storage centres and completed this task more effectively than non-​musicians. Similarly, Zhao and colleagues (2017) found that musicians used significantly fewer neural resources than non-​musicians in completing a rhythm-​related task. Such changes to functional connectivity can be achieved with relatively short training, as reported by Wu and colleagues (2017), who also observed that these alterations were activity specific and that it was not clear how prolonged they were after the training was withdrawn. Even though this evidence is compelling, the methodologies used do not yet  allow for drawing definitive conclusions around the causality of these changes. It may be that some 40

41

The wider cognitive benefits

pre-​existing functional or structural differences predetermine interest in music and undertaking training. Other confounding factors such as socio-​economic status, parental education or the environment might also underpin these differences. It is important to resolve these limitations through undertaking further studies to establish causal, rather than correlational, relationships. We must also note that by recognising only formal music education, these studies exclude a whole range of non-​formal music-​making that may be just as beneficial.

Intellectual development The possibility that music might enhance cognitive skills and intellectual development, and in this way contribute to academic attainment, has received much attention and led to a variety of studies aspiring to explain and evidence such connections. While many such studies employ robust methodologies and advanced technologies, the fact that they measure different cognitive outcomes makes it very difficult to compare their findings and make categorical suggestions as to whether, and how, they could be utilised to support learning. Current research incorporates a range of cultural backgrounds. Music interventions in the United States involving vocal activity and improvisation on pitched and non-​pitched instruments appeared to enhance inhibition (a core component of executive functioning that is associated with self-​control) after a 6-​week intervention (90 minutes weekly) as compared to children who undertook Lego training (Bugos & DeMarie, 2017). Kaviani and colleagues (2014) found increased IQ and greater progression in verbal reasoning and short-​term memory in Iranian children after 3 months of Orff music lessons (12 75-​minute music lessons) compared to controls matched for age, gender and mother’s level of education. German secondary students participated in an extended music curriculum with three weekly instrumental lessons for 2 years, one group lesson and up to 4 hours of practical training in choir or orchestra. When compared with controls who had one music lesson, significant differences were found in visual and auditory memory, even when controlling for intelligence, socio-​economic status and musical aptitude (Degé et  al., 2011). Greater improvements in verbal but not visual memory were recorded in children after a year of at least 1 hour per week of classical instruction on Western instruments in Hong Kong (Ho et  al., 2003). Rauscher and Zupan (2000) report improved spatial-​temporal skills in children who undertook two 20-​minute group keyboard lessons per week over 4 months. Also, research by Holmes and Hallam (2017) evidenced enhanced spatial-​ temporal skills after 2 years of group music (predominantly rhythmic) instruction delivered for 20 minutes per week. Training via a technology-​based programme with a series of progressive exercises alongside a composing software delivered over 4 months (2 hours per week) in Israel and the United States led to improvement in memory and qualitative measures of self-​ regulation and cognitive flexibility (Portowitz et al., 2014). However, two studies conducted in Australia with music classes delivered over two terms did not find significant differences between music and drama groups in an intelligence test (Rickard et al., 2012). This music programme was delivered over 1 hour per week in groups of 20 and included playing, composing, improvising and performing in groups. Similarly, two studies with American children who took part in a total of 4.5 hours of music classes over 6 weeks did not show differences from children who did visual arts with regard to receptive vocabulary, spatial reasoning or numerical discrimination (Mehr et al., 2013). It is possible that the short duration and low intensity of training played a role in these findings. Two recent meta-​analyses attempted to establish whether the available data support the idea of the association between music and cognitive skills. Sala and Gobet (2017) examined 38 studies involving music training, control groups and a measurement of cognitive skill not related 41

42

Sylwia Holmes

to music, concluding that music moderately facilitates development of intelligence and memory but reporting no significant effect for literacy and mathematics.They propose that the rigour of the research plays an important role, as the better the design of a study, the less significant were the results, and they note that further studies should aim for random allocation and active control groups within their methodologies. To avoid confusion between cognitive ability and academic achievement, Cooper (2019) focused on only the first of these concepts. Similarly, there was a small effect on cognitive growth, inversely related to setting (smaller effect in labs) and to active versus passive control groups (smaller impact with active controls). The limiting factor pointed out by the author was that even though most of the included research had adopted similar approaches, they did not test the same cognitive functions and the measurements differed from study to study. The focus in the remainder of this section is, therefore, on specific areas of cognition: executive functioning; auditory skills, reading and literacy; and spatial reasoning and mathematics.

Executive functioning In the attempt to narrow down the very broadly understood definition of cognitive skills, several studies have focused specifically on the impact of music on executive functions. These mental processes enable us to optimise cognitive performance through more efficient concentration, planning, filtering and prioritising of information, switching between tasks and adapting to changes (Diamond, 2013). Three core components of executive functioning facilitate our self-​control and attention (inhibition and interference control), working memory, and creativity (cognitive flexibility). Previous research has demonstrated the association of music with the development of executive functions. In a recent study in China, Shen and colleagues (2019) tested children’s three executive functioning components prior to and after formal musical training and compared those to a control group. Twelve weeks of participation in the programme led to greater enhancement of all three abilities for the randomly assigned music group. Additionally, when measured again after another 12 weeks, this development was sustained. The development of inhibition was observed in a study of Finnish children (Putkinen et al., 2013) who, after undertaking music activities at home, showed greater attention to given tasks, while their brains responded less strongly to auditory distractors compared to their peers. Researchers in Germany (Frischen et  al., 2019) set out to establish whether the type of musical intervention played a role in the development of executive functions, while controlling for parental education, family income, personality and IQ. A comparison of pre-​and post-​test results between children randomly assigned to rhythm-​based or pitched-​based music training or sports training evidenced that the rhythm programme facilitated the development of inhibition, while the other two interventions did not. Additionally, the descriptive data revealed enhancement in visuospatial working memory and cognitive flexibility tests. This finding points to rhythmic instruction being particularly conducive to the enhancement of executive functions, including possibilities to use fluctuating rhythms to improve attention and strengthen goal-​ directed behaviour (Loui & Guetta, 2019). This may be particularly important within the context of non-​formal music-​making, as a large number of community programmes are focused around rhythmic activities (e.g., drumming circles or samba bands) and, as such, might foster different kinds of cognitive benefits. A longitudinal study from the Netherlands (Jaschke et al., 2018) examined cognitive skills in children randomly allocated to music, visual art and passive control groups. The music group significantly outperformed others in planning, inhibition and verbal intelligence, and a possible 42

43

The wider cognitive benefits

transfer from executive functions to academic attainment was found in these pupils. Similar findings were linked by Zuk and colleagues (2014) to greater neural connectivity between brain hemispheres through the strengthening of the corpus callosum as well as with enhanced inhibition and planning, related to changes in prefrontal cortex, observed in people who practice music for a prolonged period of time. Cabanac et al. (2013) suggest that because performing music requires processing a multitude of information concurrently, learning to manage such cognitive dissonance while playing music allows an individual to become more effective in resolving similar cognitive overloads in situations outside of music. This evidence demonstrates that music can promote the development of executive functions, and brain plasticity allows for this to continue throughout childhood and adolescence and into adulthood. Even though more studies are needed to establish how the influence of music translates into attainment outcomes, formal and informal music programmes can promote analytical thinking, planning and prioritising, attention, problem-​solving and other executive functions associated with academic success (Serpell & Esposito, 2016) and with meeting the requirements of the future global labour market (Tervaniemi et al., 2018).

Auditory skills, reading and literacy A number of studies have explored the possible association between participation in music, auditory skills and language, and how this may translate into reading and literacy skills (Benz et al., 2016; Bugaj & Brenner, 2011; Degé & Schwarzer, 2011; Hallam, 2015; Kraus & Chandrasekaran, 2010; Moreno et  al., 2009; Moreno et  al., 2011). Research has revealed that music training induces functional and structural changes in the auditory system (Hyde et  al., 2009), and musicians’ auditory skills such as verbal memory or auditory attention are enhanced compared to those of non-​musicians (Kraus & Chandrasekaran, 2010). Moreover, the intensity of this enhancement correlates with when the training started and how long it lasted. Increased verbal intelligence was found in children who took part in a 4-​week music programme (Moreno et al., 2011). Developed through musical training, pitch perception and production were linked to better phonemic awareness (Loui et al., 2011). The temporal character of music develops a response to evolving musical structures, including sequencing, ordering and prioritising as well as predicting, all of which are required in language processing (Loui & Guetta, 2019). Slevc and colleagues (2009) propose that the shared processing between music and language is the building of syntactic structures from incoming elements, and this may lead to faster reaction time and better reading comprehension. Furthermore, enhanced auditory skills and stronger neural reaction to pitch patterns translated into better phonemic awareness, vocabulary and reading (Rauscher & Hinton, 2011; Tallal & Gaab, 2006). These improvements were related to the length of the training (Corrigal & Trainor, 2011), while findings by Nan et al. (2018) suggest that learning piano in childhood might support reading more effectively than reading interventions. A  study by Swaminathan and colleagues (2017) found that the relationship between music training and reading in adults was facilitated by general (cognitive) rather than auditory skills. Another line of research investigates the temporality of music and proposes that processing timing cues might transfer into better segmenting of sounds of speech and quicker recognition of distinct units of sound in language and, in this way, contributes to better reading (Kraus & Chandrasekaran, 2010; Overy, 2003;Tallal & Gaab, 2006). In a study by Long (2014), taking part in a rhythm-​based music intervention with elements of physical coordination developed children’s reading fluency, measured by comprehension, rate and accuracy. Research by Swaminathan and Schellenberg (2019) supports these findings by evidencing the association between rhythm 43

44

Sylwia Holmes

aptitude and speech perception, while Chandrasekaran and Kraus (2010) linked poor reading ability with deficiencies in processing essential sound elements. Even short rhythm instruction brought positive effects in dyslexic children (Habibi et al., 2014), and 7 months of training led to an increase in phonological awareness and reading (Flaugnacco et  al., 2015). Additionally, because music training can improve auditory processing (Putkinen, Tervaniemi, Saarikivi, Ojala & Huotilainen, 2014; Putkinen, Tervaniemi, Saarikivi, de Vent & Huotilainen, 2014), it may be particularly beneficial to children with impaired perception in background noise.

Spatial-​temporal reasoning and mathematics A body of research has provided evidence for the relationship between music and spatial-​ temporal reasoning (Graziano et  al., 1999; Hallam, 2015; Hetland, 2000; Holmes & Hallam, 2017; Rauscher & Hinton, 2011; Rauscher & Zupan, 2000). Spatial skills are used on many levels of mathematical thinking, and their level strongly predicts achievement in mathematics (Booth & Siegler, 2008; Geist et al., 2012). These abilities are engaged not only in geometry, but also in the number sense, comparing and calculating quantities and effectively using strategies to solve problems. The more developed the spatial skills, the wider and more appropriate the choice of strategies and the more efficient and less erroneous the mathematical operations (Holmes, 2017). Rhythm-​based instruction is most conducive for the improvement of these skills, followed by piano training, while singing has led to smaller changes (Rauscher et al., 1997; Rauscher & Hinton, 2006). Enhanced spatial-​temporal skills have been found in musicians, who outperformed people not actively engaged with music in mental rotation tasks (Slumming et al., 2007). Pietsch & Jansen (2012) compared students of music, sports and education and demonstrated better performance on mental rotation tasks among the first two groups. Miksza (2010) extended this research by controlling for individual and school factors. Students who belonged to school music ensembles had higher scores in standardised mathematics tests; however, the factors controlled for included socio-​economic status but not performance in mathematics prior to music training. In none of these studies was it clear whether the differences identified were caused by music training or whether they were present prior to involvement in music. Holmes and Hallam (2017) set out to assess the possible causality between music, spatial-​temporal reasoning and attainment in mathematics via a longitudinal study in which randomly assigned children took part in predominantly rhythmic instruction. Significantly greater progression in spatial-​temporal skills was recorded in children from the intervention groups, and for the youngest of these groups, there was also significant difference in overall results in mathematics. Moreover, this research showed correlations between music and only some, rather than all, mathematical skills related to spatial reasoning, while changes in mathematical skills reliant on memory were much smaller. This finding suggests that the development of spatial skills may be a moderator between rhythmic instruction and attainment in mathematics.

Disadvantaged students The positive wider benefits of music might be of particular importance to provision for pupils from socio-​economically disadvantaged backgrounds, whose access to formal music education is often limited. Supporting the learning of such pupils and the development of cognitive, emotional and social skills through participation in music has been the focus of several studies. Studies by Rauscher and colleagues (Rauscher, 2009; Rauscher & Hinton, 2011; Raucher & Zupan, 2000; Rauscher et al., 1997) suggest that active music-​making can be beneficial to at-​r isk 44

45

The wider cognitive benefits

children’s spatial-​temporal reasoning and, through this, improves attainment in mathematics. The authors propose that the rhythmic element of instruction might promote enhancement of spatial skills as well as reading, while improved auditory skills can support language development. After entering El Sistema (a structured extracurricular orchestral programme), pupils from a low-​income neighbourhood showed greater improvement in spatial reasoning, verbal and mathematical skills than comparison groups (Osborne et al., 2016). The underpinnings of such accelerated progression in disadvantaged pupils are not yet clear, and these enhancements might be mediated by the development of cognitive abilities. It is also possible that these programmes raise participants’ motivation, self-​efficacy and perseverance, while encountering positive role models contributes to building greater aspirations.

Adults and older people A continuously growing body of research provides evidence that the structural, neural and behavioural benefits of music can occur throughout life and can be used to support further learning as well as for prevention and rehabilitation. Considering the growing needs of ageing societies, such interventions can enhance physical and mental conditions in an easy-​ to-​implement and pleasurable way. Psychological perspectives suggest that there is no age limit for learning or practising music (Hallam, 2015; Thaut & Hodges, 2019), while in adults involved in musical activity, neural decline was observed to be slower (Tervaniemi, 2017). Also music can foster cognitive abilities in adults; for example, piano lessons for 6 months enhanced levels of concentration, attention and planning in older adults (60–​85 years old) compared to a control group (Bugos et al., 2007). Similar results were found after singing in a choir, group music-​making or playing percussion instruments (Bugos, 2019; Hallam, 2015). The influence of music on memory is particularly well established, and this applies to both listening to music and participating in musical activities (Hallam & Creech, 2016;Varvarigou et al., 2012). Ludke et  al. (2014) found that enhancements of short-​term memory related to music might also support linguistic functions. In this intervention study, adult participants learned foreign phrases by speaking, rhythmic speaking or singing, and singing was most conductive for recalling in the foreign language. This finding evidenced that enhancement in processing pitch structures benefits verbal learning and memory. Music instruction can also enhance motor skills, which might interact with the improvement of some cognitive abilities, such as visual scanning or working memory. Participants randomly allocated to piano, percussion or music listening groups undertook 16 weeks of training with 3 hours of practice per week (Bugos, 2019). The groups were matched for age, education, intelligence or music aptitude. In both piano and percussion groups, improvements in processing speed, visual scanning and working memory were recorded. In terms of motor skills, all three music conditions led to improved rhythmic accuracy and hand synchronisation. Improvements in other executive functions, such as attention, inhibition, planning and monitoring, and meeting new challenges, have also been reported in relation to musical activity (Hallam, 2015; Koshimori & Thaut, 2019;Varvarigou et al., 2012). Such capacity for improvement could serve as stimulation for learning and as a tool in therapy. As decline in executive functioning and motor coordination is most likely a result of the degradation of the neuromuscular system progressing with age, challenging and strengthening neural pathways and motor skills through learning or playing a musical instrument may slow down this decline or even, in some cases, reverse it (Tervaniemi, 2017). Although older adults draw on their cognitive resources more heavily for motor control, they can still learn new motor skills and, in doing so, encourage cerebellar activity, which might then enhance executive and other cognitive functions (Bugos, 2019). 45

46

Sylwia Holmes

The highly motivating and social character of musical interventions available across the whole lifespan adds even further to this enrichment. Hallam and Creech (2016) propose that to be effective, activities for adults and older participants need to be welcoming and inclusive and take place in accessible settings. Their content should consider participants’ prior experience, be structured to enable progression, help to develop participants’ confidence and motivate them (e.g., by including time for socialising or introducing cooperation with ‘buddies’). Further investigation of the neural mechanisms is needed to find robust evidence for the causal effect of such interventions and to inform uses of music in adult education and rehabilitation. The available evidence can, however, already vouch for the wide benefits of learning music in adulthood.

Implications for music education and music in the community and further directions for research One of many challenges faced by those researching the relationship between music and cognition is the direction of this relationship and the issue of causality. Research confirms that children who take up music often have higher academic attainment before learning music (Hillie et al., 2011; Schellenberg & Mankarious, 2012). Corrigall and colleagues (2013) set out to examine this association and established that, having controlled for IQ and conscientiousness, the relationship between duration of music training and average grade in school was not significant. The authors point out that rather than causing cognitive enhancement, participation in music might strongly influence changes in personality and, in this way, interact with better achievement in school. This was followed by Swaminathan and colleagues (2017) who established that partaking in music training was associated with intelligence, socio-​economic status and attitude. The authors did not disregard the idea that some kinds of music training might enhance some cognitive abilities for some individuals, but the relationship between musical aptitude and intelligence led them to conclude that high-​functioning children are more predisposed to take up music lessons. Methodologies with random assignment to different activities can reduce baseline differences and enable more rigorous evidence of causation, while employing multiple regression analyses would take into account many possible confounding factors and establish which of these might determine outcomes. The variety of interventions used in studies makes it difficult to compare findings and come to overarching conclusions. Some authors have observed changes in participants after only 1 month, yet there is evidence that the longer the programme, the greater the impact (Corrigall et al., 2013; Degé et al., 2011; Hetland, 2000). Schellenberg (2006) found that the influence of music was particularly effective in children who learned music over long periods of time, even controlling for intelligence (Schellenberg, 2019) or family background (Corrigall et al., 2013). Moreover, in some studies, the effects were largest after 2 to 3 years (Holochwost et al., 2017) or only observed after 2 or more years of learning music (Holmes & Hallam, 2017; Schneider & Klotz, 2000). Undertaking these studies longitudinally is necessary to understand the impact of music and its sustainability. The nature of music interventions has also been raised as an important factor. For example, Johnson and Memmott (2006) examined the relationship between academic achievement and participation in music activities across nearly 5,000 participants, concluding that the higher the quality of the programme, the stronger the relationship. Time and intensity of programme have also been pointed out by Habibi et al. (2014), as has the format of the activity –​individual versus group collaboration. Playing with others is associated not only with changes in social

46

47

The wider cognitive benefits

behaviour and group cohesion, but also with greater development of auditory skills and executive functioning, because of the need to overcome and organise more auditory information as well as improve attention and concentration. This is particularly important considering the growing number of community programmes, and as findings currently only describe formal education, there is an urgent need to extend this type of research to a whole range of non-​ formal and informal learning. The role of individual preferences and context and the considerable diversity in how different people interact with music need to be considered, and this is in stark contrast to the ‘volume-​knob effect’ perception of the impact of musical interventions. Additionally, to even consider the possibility of transfer between music and cognitive skills, research needs to ensure that learning in music has actually happened. Commonly, studies assume that participation in the programme develops musical skills, but do not measure this. Such an approach discounts the fact that individuals learn differently and that if one’s musical ability has not improved, it would be unreasonable to expect enhancement in intellectual skills. Studies should therefore factor in musical aptitude, the progression of musical skills and how the level of this development influences the strength of the possible transfer. Further studies should also include teenage participants, as this group is under-​reported in the overall body of research (Cooper, 2019), and continue to expand to different cultural contexts. In the past, music interventions were often developed and delivered entirely for the purposes of research, using models not sustainable within the broadly understood music education. This was necessary to establish what mechanisms underpin the relationship between music and cognition, but it is also important to consider the nature of real-​life applications of these findings and their input to making formal and non-​formal music-​making in educational and community settings more equitable and improving its quality. Studies based on musical programmes embedded in the curricula and replicable across schools and non-​formal contexts will not only increase our knowledge of the processes underpinning the wider benefits of music, but will also improve music education itself; for example, by establishing clear learning outcomes or competencies (Holmes & Hallam, 2017; Jaschke et  al., 2018) or by training teachers and community leaders (Holmes & Hallam, 2017). Such approaches can also help to eliminate methodological limitations, such as self-​selection of participants and attrition, and enable a longitudinal perspective when investigating issues of innateness. Assuring appropriately rigorous methodologies with active, rather than passive, control groups would provide robust research findings as well as a platform for sustainable and progressive development of musical abilities and wider skills. While research related to the wider benefits of music attracts a considerable amount of attention, it is pressing to differentiate the findings from their implications (Linnavalli et al., 2018) and to be explicit about the level on which changes were measured –​consistency at a neural level does not always translate to behavioural changes, while enhancement of cognitive skills does not always translate into academic achievement. Caution in drawing recommendations for practitioners is indispensable to avoid exaggerating, simplifying or distorting the findings (Schellenberg & Peretz, 2008). At this stage, it is not safe to conclude that cognitive benefits of music can be generalised across individuals and pedagogies, and further research is needed to find evidence for the causality of this relationship and its moderating factors.What we do know without a doubt is that making music supports the development of a wide range of skills and creativity in a pleasurable and social context, and it has an unparalleled capacity to be prolonged and progressed over the lifespan, to reach across cultures and to generate a sense of belonging and achievement.

47

48

Sylwia Holmes

Reflective questions • •

Should wider benefits of music be the leading argument in advocating for greater access to music? How might the growing presence of non-​formal and informal community-​based music-​making and the widespread access to music technology augment the possibilities of fostering cognitive outcomes similar to those reported in relation to formal musical training?

Suggestions for further reading Hallam, S. (2015). The power of music. International Music Education Research Centre. Rauscher, F. H. (2009). The impact of music instruction on other skills. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 244–​252). Oxford University Press.

References Benz, S., Esellaro, R., Ehommel, B., & Colzato. L. S. (2016). Music makes the world go round: The impact of musical training on non-​musical cognitive functions –​a review. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article  2023. Booth, J. L., & Siegler, R. S. (2008). Numerical magnitude representations influence arithmetic learning. Child Development, 79(4), 1016–​1031. Bottiroli, S., Rosi, A., Russo, R.,Vecchi,T., & Cavallini, E. (2014).The cognitive effects of listening to background music on older adults: Processing speed improves with upbeat music, while memory seems to benefit from both upbeat and downbeat music. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 6(284),  1–​7. Brandler, S., & Rammsayer, T. H. (2003). Differences in mental abilities between musicians and non-​ musicians. Psychology of Music, 31(2), 123–​38. Bugaj, K., & Brenner, B. (2011). The effects of music instruction on cognitive development and reading skills: An overview. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 189, 89–​104. Bugos, J. A. (2019). The effects of bimanual coordination in music interventions on executive functions in aging adults. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 13(68),  1–​13. Bugos, J. A., & DeMarie, D. (2017). The effects of a short-​term music program on preschool children’s executive functions. Psychology of Music, 45(6), 855–​867. Bugos, J. A., Perlstein,W. M., McCrae, C. S., Brophy,T. S., & Bedenbaugh, P. H. (2007). Individualized piano instruction enhances executive functioning and working memory in older adults. Aging and Mental Health, 11(4), 464–​471. Cabanac, A., Perlovsky, L., Bonniot-​Cabanac, M.-​C., & Cabanac, M. (2013). Music and academic performance. Behavioural Brain Research, 256, 257–​260. Chandrasekaran, B., & Kraus, N. (2010). Music, noise-​exclusion, and learning. Music Perception, 27(4), 297–​306. Cooper, P. K. (2019). It’s all in your head: A meta-​analysis on the effects of music training on cognitive measures in schoolchildren. International Journal of Music Education, Advance online publication. https://​ doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761419881495 Corrigall, K. A., & Trainor, L. J. (2011). Associations between length of music training and reading skills in children. Music Perception, 29(2), 147–​155. Corrigall, K. A., Schellenberg, E. G., & Misura, N. M. (2013). Music training, cognition, and personality. Frontiers in Psychology, 4. www.frontiersin.org/​article/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2013.00222 Degé, F., & Schwarzer, G. (2011).The effect of a music program on phonological awareness in preschoolers. Frontiers in Psychology, 2. Article 124. Degé, F., Wehrum, S., Stark, R., & Schwarzer, G. (2011). The influence of two-​years school music training in secondary school on visual and auditory memory. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 8(5), 608–​623. Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–​168.

48

49

The wider cognitive benefits Flaugnacco, E., Lopez, L., Terribili, C., Montico, M., Zoia, S., & Schön, D. (2015). Music training increases phonological awareness and reading skills in developmental dyslexia: A randomized control trial. PLoS One, 10, Article e0138715. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.pone.0138715 Frischen, U., Schwarzer, G., & Degé, F. (2019). Comparing the effects of rhythm-​based music training and pitch-​based music training on executive functions in preschoolers. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 13(41),  1–​10. Gaab, N., & Schlaug, G. (2003). Musicians differ from nonmusicians in brain activation despite performance matching. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 999(1), 385–​388. Geist, K., Geist, E. A., & Kuznik, K. (2012). The patterns of music: Young children learning mathematics through beat, rhythm, and melody. Young Children, 67(1),  74–​79. Graziano, A. B., Peterson, M., & Shaw, G. L. (1999). Enhanced learning of proportional math through music training and spatial-​temporal training. Neurological Research, 21(2), 139–​152. Habibi, A., Ilari, B., Crimi, K., Metke, M., Kaplan, J. T., Joshi, A. A., Leahy, R. M., Shattuck, D. W., Choi, S., Haldar, J. P., Ficek, B., Damasio, A., & Damasio, H. (2014). An equal start: Absence of group differences in cognitive, social and neural measures prior to music or sports training in children. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, Article 690. doi: 10.3389/​fnhum.2014.00690 Hall, J. (1952). The effect of background music on the reading comprehension of 278 eighth and ninth grade students. Journal of Educational Research, 45(6), 451–​458. Hallam, S. (2015). The power of music:  A research synthesis of the impact of actively making music on intellectual, social and personal development of children and young people. International Music Education Research Centre. Hallam, S., & Creech, A. (2016). Can active music making promote health and well-​being in older citizens? Findings of the music for life project. London Journal of Primary Care, 8(2),  21–​25. Hallam, S., & MacDonald, R. (2008). The effects of music in community and educational settings. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, M. Thaut, & R. MacDonald (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 471–​480). Oxford University Press. Hetland, L. (2000). Learning to make music enhances spatial reasoning. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34(3–​ 4), 179–​238. Hillie, K., Gust, K., Bitz, U., & Kammer, T. (2011). Associations between music education, intelligence, and spelling ability in elementary school. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 7,  1–​6. Ho, Y., Cheung, M., & Chan, A. (2003). Music training improves verbal but not visual memory: Cross-​ sectional and longitudinal explorations in children. Neuropsychology, 17(3), 439–​450. Holmes, S. (2017). The impact of participation in music on learning mathematics [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University College London. Holmes, S., & Hallam, S. (2017). The impact of participation in music on learning mathematics. London Review of Education, 15(3), 425–​438. Holochwost, S. J., Propper, C. B., Wolf, D. P., Willoughby, M. T., Fisher, K. R., Kolacz, J.,Volpe,V.V., & Jaffee, S. R. (2017). Music education, academic achievement, and executive functions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(2), 147–​166. Hyde, K. L., Lerch, J., Norton, A., Forgeard, M., Winner, E., Evans, A. C., & Schlaug, G. (2009). Musical training shapes structural brain development. The Journal of Neuroscience, 29(10), 3019–​3025. Ivanov, V. K., & Geake, J. G. (2003). The Mozart effect and primary school children. Psychology of Music, 31(4), 405–​413. Jaschke, A. C., Honing, H., & Scherder, E. J. A. (2018). Longitudinal analysis of music education on executive functions in primary school children. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 12, Article 103. https://​doi.org/​ 10.3389/​fnins.2018.00103 Johnson, C. M., & Memmott, J. E. (2006). Examination of relationships between participation in school music programs of differing quality and standardized test results. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(4), 293–​307. Kämpfe, J., Sedlmeier, P., & Renkewitz, F. (2011). The impact of background music on adult listeners: A meta-​analysis. Psychology of Music, 39(4), 424–​448. Kaviani, H., Mirbaha, H., Pournaseh, M., & Sagan, O. (2014). Can music lessons increase the performance of preschool children in IQ tests? Cognitive Processing, 15(1),  77–​84. Koshimori,Y., & Thaut, M. H. (2019). New perspectives on music in rehabilitation of executive and attention functions. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 13, Article 1245. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fnins.2019.01245 Kraus, N., & Chandrasekaran, B. (2010). Music training for the development of auditory skills. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(8), 599–​605.

49

50

Sylwia Holmes Linnavalli, T., Putkinen, V., Lipsanen, V., Huotilainen, M., & Tervaniemi, M. (2018). Music playschool enhances children’s linguistic skills. Scientific Reports, 8 Article 8767. https://​doi.org/​10.1038/​ s41598-​018-​27126-​5 Long, M. (2014). “I can read further and there’s more meaning while I read”: An exploratory study investigating the impact of a rhythm-​based music intervention on children’s reading. Research Studies in Music Education, 36(1), 107–​124. Loui, P., & Guetta, R. (2019). Music and attention, executive function, and creativity. In M. H. Thaut & D. A. Hodges (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music and neuroscience (pp. 263–​284). Oxford University Press. Loui, P., Kroog, K., Zuk, J., Winner, E., & Schlaug, G. (2011). Relating pitch awareness to phonemic awareness in children: Implications for tone-​deafness and dyslexia. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, Article 111. doi: 10.3389/​fpsyg.2011.00111 Ludke, K. M., Ferreira, F., & Overy, K. (2014). Singing can facilitate foreign language learning. Memory & Cognition, 42,  41–​45. Mehr, S. A., Brady, A. M., Katz, R. C., & Spelke, E. S. (2013). Two randomized trials provide no consistent evidence for nonmusical cognitive benefits of brief preschool music enrichment. PLoS One, 8(12), Article e82007. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.pone.0082007 Miksza, P. (2010). Investigating relationships between participation in high school music ensembles and extra-​musical outcomes: An analysis of the education longitudinal study of 2002 using bio-​ecological development model. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 186,  7–​25. Moreno, S., Bialystok, E., Barac, R., Schellenberg, E. G., Cepeda, N. J., & Chau, T. (2011). Short-​term music training enhances verbal intelligence and executive function. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1425–​1433. Moreno, S., Marques, C., Santos, A., Santos, M., Castro, S. L., & Besson, M. (2009). Musical training influences linguistic abilities in 8-​year-​old children: More evidence for brain plasticity. Cerebral Cortex, 19(3), 712–​723. Nan,Y., Liu, L., Geiser, E., Shu, H., Gong, C. C., Dong, Q., Gabrieli, J. D. E., & Desimone, R. (2018). Piano training enhances the neural processing of pitch and improves speech perception in Mandarin-​speaking children. PNAS, 115(28), Article e6630-​39. https://​doi.org/​10.1073/​pnas.1808412115 Nantais, K. M., & Schellenberg, E. G. (1999). The Mozart effect: An artifact of preference. Psychological Science, 10(4), 370–​373. Osborne, M. S., McPherson, G. E., Faulkner, R., Davidson, J.W., & Barrett, M. S. (2016). Exploring the academic and psychosocial impact of El Sistema-​inspired music programs within two low socio-​economic schools. Music Education Research, 18(2), 156–​175. Overy, K. (2003). From timing deficits to musical intervention. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 999, 497–​505. Pietsch, S., & Jansen, P. (2012). Different mental rotation performance in students of music, sport and education. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(1), 159–​163. Portowitz, A., Peppler, K., & Downton, M. (2014). In harmony:  A technology-​based music education model to enhance musical understanding and general learning skills. International Journal of Music Education, 32(2), 242–​260. Putkinen, V., Saarikivi, K., & Tervaniemi, M. (2013). Do informal musical activities shape auditory skill development in preschool-​age children? Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 572. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​ fpsyg.2013.00572 Putkinen,V.,Tervaniemi, M., Saarikivi, K., de Vent, N., & Huotilainen, M. (2014). Investigating the effects of musical training on functional brain development with a novel Melodic MMN paradigm. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 110,  8–​15. Putkinen, V., Tervaniemi, M., Saarikivi, K., Ojala, P., & Huotilainen, M. (2014). Enhanced development of auditory change detection in musically trained school-​aged children: A longitudinal event-​related potential study. Developmental Science, 17(2), 282–​297. Rauscher, F. H. (2009). The impact of music instruction on other skills. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 244–​252). Oxford University Press. Rauscher, F. H., & Hinton, S. C. (2006). The Mozart effect:  Music listening in not music instruction. Educational Psychologist, 41(4), 233–​238. Rauscher, F. H., & Hinton, S. C. (2011). Music instruction and its diverse extra-​musical benefits. Music Perception, 29(2), 215–​226.Rauscher, F. H., Shaw, G. L., Levine, L. J., Wright, E. I., Dennis, W. R., & Newcomb, R. L. (1997). Music training causes long-​term enhancement of preschool children’s spatial-​ temporal reasoning. Neurological Research, 19(1),  2–​8.

50

51

The wider cognitive benefits Rauscher, F. H., & Zupan, M. A. (2000). Classroom keyboard instruction improves kindergarten children’s spatial-​temporal performance: A field experiment. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(2), 215–​228. Rickard, N., Bambrick, C., & Gill, A. (2012). Absence of widespread psychosocial and cognitive effects of school-​based music instruction in 10–​13 year-​old-​students. International Journal of Music Education, 30(1),  57–​78. Sala, G., & Gobet, F. (2017). When the music’s over. Does music skill transfer to children’s and young adolescents cognitive and academic skills? A meta-​analysis. Educational Research Review, 20,  55–​67. Schellenberg, E.  G. (2006). Long-​term positive associations between music lessons and IQ. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 457–​468. Schellenberg, E.  G. (2019). Correlation  =  causation? Music training, psychology, and neuroscience. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1037/​aca0000263 Schellenberg, E. G., & Hallam, S. (2005). Music listening and cognitive abilities in 10-​and 11-​year-​ olds: The Blur effect. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1060(1), 202–​209. Schellenberg, E. G., & Mankarious, M. (2012). Music training and emotion comprehension in childhood. Emotion, 12(5), 887–​891. Schellenberg, E. G., Nakata, T., Hunter, P. G., & Tamoto, S. (2007). Exposure to music and cognitive performance: Tests of children and adults. Psychology of Music, 35(1),  5–​19. Schellenberg, E. G., & Peretz, I. (2008). Music, language and cognition:  Unresolved issues. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(2),  45–​46. Schlaug, G., Jancke, L., Huang,Y., & Steinmetz, H. (1995). In vivo evidence of structural brain asymmetry in musicians. Science, 267(5198), 699–​701. Schneider, T. W., & Klotz, J. (2000). The impact of music education and athletic participation on academic achievement. ERIC Document Reproduction Service, Article eD448186. Serpell, Z. N., & Esposito, A. G. (2016). Development of executive functions: Implications for educational policy and practice. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2), 203–​210. Shen,Y.,Yishan, L., Liu, S., Fang, L., & Liu, G. (2019). Sustained effect of music training on the enhancement of executive function in preschool children. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(1910),  1–​14. Slevc, L. R., Rosenberg, J. C., & Patel, A. D. (2009). Making psycholinguistics musical: Self-​paced reading time evidence for shared processing of linguistic and musical syntax. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(2), 374–​381. Sluming, V., Brooks, J., Howard, M., Downes, J. J., & Roberts, N. (2007). Broca’s area supports enhanced visuospatial cognition in orchestral musicians. The Journal of Neuroscience, 27(14), 3799–​3806. Swaminathan, S., & Schellenberg, E. G. (2019). Music training and cognitive abilities: Associations, causes, and consequences. In M. H. Thaut & D. A. Hodges (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music and the brain (pp. 645–​670). Oxford University Press. Swaminathan, S., Schellenberg, E. G., & Khalil, S. (2017). Revisiting the association between music lessons and intelligence: Training effects or music aptitude? Intelligence, 62, 119–​124. Tallal, P., & Gaab, N. (2006). Dynamic auditory processing, musical experience and language development. Trends in Cognitive Science, 29(7), 382–​390. Tervaniemi, M. (2017). Music in learning and re-​learning: The life-​span approach. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind and Brain, 27(3), 223–​226. Tervaniemi, M., Tao, S., & Huotilainen, M. (2018). Promises of music in education? Frontiers in Education, 3(74),  1–​6. Thaut, M. H., & Hodges, D. A. (2019). The Oxford handbook of music and the brain. Oxford University Press. Varvarigou, M., Hallam, S., Creech, A., & McQueen, H. (2012). Benefits experienced by older people who participated in group music-​making activities. Journal of Applied Arts and Health, 3(2), 183–​198. Wu, C. C., Hamm, J. P., Lim,V. K., & Kirka, I. J. (2017). Musical training increases functional connectivity, but does not enhance mu suppression. Neuropsychologia, 104, 223–​233. Zhao,T. C., Lamb, H.T. G., Sohi, H., & Kuhla, P. C. (2017). Neural processing of musical meter in musicians and non-​musicians. Neuropsychologia, 106, 289–​297. Zuk, J., Benjamin, C., Kenyon, A., & Gaab, N. (2014). Behavioural and neural correlates of executive functioning in musicians and non-​musicians. PLoS ONE, 10, 137–​145. Zuk, J., & Gaab, N. (2018). Evaluating predisposition and training in shaping the musician’s brain: The need for a developmental perspective. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1423(1),  40–​50.

51

52

4 THE WIDER PERSONAL AND SOCIAL BENEFITS OF ENGAGEMENT WITH MUSIC Albi Odendaal and Donald A. Hodges

This chapter considers recent research on the social and personal benefits of musical engagement across the lifespan and in various cultures. We largely ignore the literature on cognitive, health and therapeutic benefits, despite considerable overlaps with the aim of this chapter, since these are more thoroughly dealt with in other chapters in this volume. It is well established that music presents affordances for “meaning and lifeworld making” (DeNora, 2011, p. 40), and several review articles and books have addressed specific benefits, age groups or populations (e.g., Creech et al., 2013; Croom, 2015; Hallam, 2015; Henderson et al., 2017). It is important to bear in mind that no direct relationship has been established between music engagement and any specific benefit. When one considers that music has routinely been used in torture (Chornik, 2013; Naliwajek-​Mazurek, 2013; Papaeti, 2013), in support of racism (Corte & Edwards, 2008) and political ideologies of various kinds (Keller, 2007; Randall, 2004), it quickly becomes evident that the sonic patterns of music cannot be an unqualified force for good outside of an intentional and contextual usage. McFerran (2019), for example, shows that young people can flexibly move between associating a specific song with the flush of first love, the pain of break-​up and triumph over the disaster. She suggests that music engagement may be understood as ranging from harmful to helpful and that helping young people to understand the intentions with which they are using music will have benefits for their wellbeing. Music allows such flexibility because it exhibits what Cross (2009) calls “floating intentionality”. Various participants may interpret a musical event in widely divergent ways, and thus the various aspects of the context within which music is experienced is of cardinal importance when it comes to understanding the benefits of music. Social music-​making can have “ambiguous and conflictual consequences” (Boeskov, 2018, p. 108; see also Baker, 2014) and should be understood as contributing to and drawing from social narratives that stretch far beyond the immediate music event. In the remainder of this chapter, we consider research that has investigated personal or social benefits in four broad age ranges: infants and children; adolescents and young adults; adults; and older adults. The demarcation of these age ranges is not clearly defined, but serves as a way of structuring the chapter rather than as a way to present sharp differences between age groups. Each section is structured according to the kinds of research that is typical for that age group. 52

53

The wider personal and social benefits

Infants and children The discussion in this section roughly corresponds to a chronological arc from foetal stages to age 12. In infancy, research on musical engagement has typically explored the parent–​child relationship. Although a foetus is able to hear and respond to both internal and external sounds by a gestational age (GA) of 20–​27 weeks (Joseph, 2000), Parncutt (2016) cautions that many of the anecdotal reports of foetal responses to music are difficult to substantiate scientifically. Nevertheless, there are some relevant findings. For example, heart rates of foetuses at a GA of 28–​32 weeks demonstrated attention to a piano recording, while foetuses at 33 weeks GA and older produced cortical responses indicating changes in processing complex sounds along with body movement responses (Kisilevsky et  al., 2004). Bearing Parncutt’s reservations in mind, there are some indicators of the positive benefits of musical exposure to premature infants, such as a reduction in stress behaviours and shorter stays in neonatal intensive care units (Chou et al., 2003; Loewy et al., 2013). Mothers all over the world sing lullabies to their babies and have done so for millennia (Trehub, Becker & Moreley, 2015). Comparing cohorts of mother–​infant pairs where lullabies were sung with non-​singing cohorts, researchers found that postnatal bonding was significantly greater in the singing cohort (Persico et al., 2017). In addition, infants in the singing group had reduced incidents of crying, colic and nightly awakening. Rhythmic movement may also offer these benefits. Having reviewed a number of studies, Cirelli et al. (2018) conclude that rhythmic movement and socially relevant melodies has a positive effect on prosocial behaviours of infants. For example, 14-​month-​old infants who were bounced in time with music (reflecting interpersonal synchrony) showed increased prosocial behaviours compared to those who were bounced asynchronously (Cirelli et al., 2014). A number of studies have provided evidence that music enhances prosocial behaviours among infants and children. Affect regulation, including self-​regulation, is a primary goal of infant-​directed singing and contributes to prosocial behaviour. For example, 6-​to 9-​month-​ old infants remained soothed and contented for longer periods while listening to recordings of play songs than to recordings of infant-​directed or adult-​directed speech (Trehub, Ghazban & Corbeil, 2015). In a confirming study, infants at 7–​10 months were more comforted when listening to singing than to speech (Corbeil et  al., 2016). The influence of music on sociability was demonstrated when songs presented to 5-​and 11-​month-​old infants were imbued with social meanings (Mehr et al., 2016; Mehr & Spelke, 2018). Gerry et al. (2012) found that 6-​month-​old children randomly assigned to 6 months of active music participation improved their social behaviour when compared with infants assigned to passive musical experiences. Likewise, prosocial and emotional self-​regulation behaviours improved among preschool children (ages 3–​8) who engaged in a variety of musical activities and interventions (Kirschner & Tomasello, 2010; Saarikallio, 2009; Williams & Berthelsen, 2019). These findings extend to economically disadvantaged children (3–​5) who attended a fully arts-​integrated (daily music, dance and visual arts classes) Head Start school (Brown et al., 2018) and to children (6–​11) involved in dance activities (Soares & Lucena, 2013). Several experiments have demonstrated that musical activities foster social play between children living with and without disabilities (e.g., Gunsberg, 1988; Humpal, 1991). In addition, a number of studies provide supporting evidence for the use of music in the development of social skills for children with autism (Finnigan & Starr, 2010; LaGasse, 2014) and moderate intellectual disability (Duffy & Fuller, 2000). Among school-​age children, mixed results have been obtained in studies designed to investigate the influence of musical experience on social behaviours. Researchers compared third and fourth grade students who participated in 10 months of enhanced group music lessons with a 53

54

Albi Odendaal and Donald A. Hodges

control group of children who were matched for socio-​economic status but did not attend such classes (Schellenberg et al., 2015). Overall, students in the music group had larger increases in sympathy and prosocial behaviour, but this effect was limited to those who scored below the median in prosocial skills at the outset. It is possible that those with elevated social skills had little or no room for improvement. In another year-​long study, 10-​year-​olds were randomly assigned to music group interaction (musical games with empathy-​promoting musical components), games (similar games but without music) or control (no special activity) groups (Rabinowitch et al., 2013). In two of three measures of empathy, students in the music group had increased scores, but control groups did not. When comparing 6-​year-​olds who were randomly assigned to receive either keyboard or voice lessons with students receiving drama lessons or no lessons, children in the drama group showed significant improvements in adaptive social behaviour not evident in the music groups; although music lessons positively impacted IQ (Schellenberg, 2005). Similarly, in a group of 6-​to 11-​year-​olds, music lessons correlated positively with intelligence and academic ability but not with social adjustment (Schellenberg, 2006). This may be because a large portion of the sample was taking individual music lessons that presumably lacked the intentional social interaction typical of group music activities. When new El Sistema participants in Venezuela were tested on 26 variables in a randomised control trial, only self-​ control and behavioural difficulties showed notable improvement, despite instruction occurring in group format. Variables measured included self-​regulatory skills, self-​regulatory behaviours, prosocial skills and cognitive skills (Alemán et al., 2017). It may be that differences in sample size account for differences in the findings reported above, with the larger sample size of the El Sistema study showing a smaller effect size for the same variables. Group singing among primary school children with diverse ethnic and socio-​economic backgrounds led to more cooperative behaviours than among students engaged in group art or competitive games (Good & Russo, 2016). Economically and socially disadvantaged children, including immigrants and refugees, demonstrated an improvement in self-​esteem, self-​regulated behaviours and social responsibility after participating in an El Sistema-​inspired instrumental programme in Australia, but only at one of the two sites of research (Osborne et  al., 2016). Marsh (2017) found that musical activities contributed to the wellbeing of refugee and immigrant children, such as Iraqi, South Sudanese and Sierra Leonean refugee children and young people in Australia, Punjabi children in the United Kingdom and newly arrived Central and South American immigrants in the United States. In a large study, researchers evaluated data from 6,087 participants (95% of whom were aged 7+ to 10+), finding that the higher the singing development rating (e.g., singing in tune with correct pitches and rhythms, etc.), the greater the sense of self and of being socially included (Welch et al., 2014). These results were irrespective of singer age, sex and ethnicity. Speculations on the reason for these relationships centred on the group nature of singing in a choir along with the fact that acting in synchrony may have increased cooperative behaviours and social attachment among choir members. Singing may increase the production of oxytocin, a neurohormone influencing social bonding. However, Rickard et al. (2012) found no convincing evidence that school music classes were beneficial on psychosocial measures for 10-​to 13-​year-​olds enrolled in schools with high socio-​economic status.They speculate that music classes might be more effective in promoting prosocial behaviours among children from lower socio-​economic levels. However, it may also be that music classes on their own are not sufficient to change social behaviours; instruction with an intention to foster social cooperation may be necessary (for related discussions, see Foster & Jenkins, 2017; Hogan et al., 2018; Winsler et al.,  2019). Although positive benefits for infants and children have been recorded as a result of their engagement in music, and these benefits accrue in both structured and more informal settings, 54

55

The wider personal and social benefits

the findings are equivocal, with some studies reporting small (or no) effects for musical engagement. This discrepancy may be a result of differing research designs, but may also be a demonstration of the ways that the affordances of music lead to differing effects depending on the context in which the music is used as well as the intentionality with which the music is used and received.

Adolescents and young adults Laiho (2004) suggests that music “appears to have its strongest relevance in adolescence” (p. 48). This claim can be supported by evidence of the reminiscence bump for music in older adults (Zimprich, 2018), the phenomenon that the music individuals listened to in youth and early adulthood is remembered more strongly than music from other time periods in an older adult’s life. McFerran et al. (2019) consider the impact of music on emotions, identity and connectedness in their recent collected work, and this section follows a similar outline. Adolescents engage in a continuous exploration of possible identities, eventually committing and developing a more stable sense of their place within their social networks (Evans & McPherson, 2017). In this process, music can stand as a proxy for “social standing, status, and lifestyle stances”, demarcating a particular identity for others to see, and at the same time music can influence adolescents’ sense of self and belonging (DeNora, 2017, p. 49). Australian adolescents who were diagnosed with cancer used music in several ways, one of which was to support the changes in identity that living with cancer brought on them (O’Callaghan et al., 2012). Musical styles as markers of positive identity have been discussed in many contexts, from Kenyan pop (Wanjala & Kebaya, 2016) to Mayan hip-​hop (Bell, 2017), from heavy metal (Hines & McFerran, 2014) to Welsh choral singing (Johnstone, 2015). In South Africa, participation in a newly formed concert band at a school where none existed before improved optimism among band members, although no notable effect was seen in positive and negative affect or self-​esteem. Band members also improved aspects of their general regulation (Roy et al., 2015). However, music can also be a formative force in developing racism and white supremacy in adolescents (Corte & Edwards, 2008). Music participation may, furthermore, negatively influence the participant’s sense of wellbeing and, thereby, also negatively affect their identity formation process (Evans et al., 2013). Evans and McPherson (2017) argue that the phenomenon of dropout from musical studies is related to this musical identity formation process; a student may decide that this pursuit does not align with their developing sense of self. Such a perspective reframes dropout as a positive identity choice. Musical engagement affords benefits in affect regulation, both through influencing the mood one experiences (Rickson et  al., 2018; Saarikallio, 2007) and, possibly, through longitudinal improvement of affect regulation abilities (Groarke & Hogan, 2016). Baltazar and Saarikallio (2017) identify three dimensions involved in affect self-​regulation, which they have termed “cognition” (cognitive work versus entertainment); “feelings” (affective work versus distraction); and “body” (revival versus focus on situation).While the features of the music (such as sound, style and valence) play a role in affect regulation, the experience of each individual, based on their relationship with the music (including the familiarity of the music, memories associated with it and the meaning of the lyrics), is equally important. In a Yazidi refugee camp in Greece, young refugees used music as self-​expression and as a vehicle for understanding the expressions of others (Millar & Warwick, 2019), and in England, at-​r isk youths gained emotional awareness through the process of discussing, writing and recording rap music related to domestic abuse (Clennon & Boehm, 2014). Music can positively influence experienced mood, whether through private listening in the Netherlands (ter Bogt et al., 2017), through 55

56

Albi Odendaal and Donald A. Hodges

attendance at a festival in Australia (Packer & Ballantyne, 2011) or group singing at a school in New Zealand after an earthquake (Rickson et al., 2018). However, music has been found to be “double-​edged” with regard to managing emotions, both helping adolescents in youth justice facilities with cathartic moments and “stirring up difficult memories and feelings” (Daykin et al., 2017, p. 955). Music is especially suited to developing intergroup solidarity, especially among those who make music together. For example, singing in a choir developed a strong sense of team for the adolescents involved (Parker, 2014). The sense of being in a team resulted in participants feeling “acknowledged and accomplished”, building a sense of pride, developing a stronger sense of self-​efficacy and also developing the “desire to give back” (p. 27). Similarly, adolescent women experienced choir as a place where they can open themselves up and use their voices, thereby boosting confidence, a sense of group solidarity and vision (Parker, 2018). Such group solidarity and meaningful participation, together with meaningful teaching practices and engaging musical practices, may allow adolescent male participants to withstand taunting due to vocal change (Freer, 2015). Group solidarity also has a negative counterpart, which is the exclusion or devaluing of those who are perceived to be outside of the group. However, it seems that musical appreciation may moderate this effect, at least to the extent that musical preference overlaps (Bakagiannis & Tarrant, 2006). In juvenile detention centres in the United States, participating in an ensemble programme has been shown to reduce antisocial and externalising behaviours among detainees, although the observed change was significant in only one of the two detention centres in the study (Wolf & Holochwost, 2016). Adolescents’ engagement with music may support identity formation, emotional regulation and intergroup connection, but such support may not necessarily be regarded as positive to the wider society, nor may it be helpful to the individual, and adolescents may need guidance in how they use music (McFerran, 2019).

Adults Throughout adulthood, musical engagement continues to play a role in identity formation and maintenance, affect regulation and building and maintaining intergroup solidarity (Boal-​ Palheiros, 2017; Goodrich, 2019; Leipold & Loepthien, 2015; Taylor, 2011). Adults engage in music for a variety of reasons, and they bring a variety of values to the ways they engage with music (Lamont, 2011; Roulston et al., 2015). Although this is also true for younger age groups, adults typically have greater freedom in deciding if, when and how to engage with music. Gates (1991) distinguished between types of musical engagement and used the labels of dabblers, recreationists, hobbyists, amateurs, apprentices and professionals to distinguish between these types. These types should not be understood as fixed or necessarily easy to distinguish (see Cottrell, 2004, for a discussion). Nonetheless, differences in kind and level of motivation have been observed when amateur musicians are compared to professional musicians (Appelgren et  al., 2019; Juniu et  al., 1996). Professional musicians scored higher than amateurs in self-​ regulation and appreciation of beauty and excellence but lower than amateurs on judgement, perspective, teamwork, fairness and leadership (Güsewell & Ruch, 2015). The variety of motivations and typical character traits of people who engage with music are important to consider in the light of the relationship between motivation and psychological wellbeing (Evans, 2015). Croom (2012, 2015) has comprehensively reviewed literature on the contributions of music engagement, drawing on Seligman’s (2012) PERMA (positive emotions, engagement, relationships, meaning and achievement) model. We briefly touch on each of these areas as they relate to adult engagement with music. 56

57

The wider personal and social benefits

Gabrielsson (2011) reports that in his large study on strong experiences with music, the most often mentioned positive emotions resulting from musical engagement are “happiness and joy[;]‌ then come enjoyment, pleasure, delight, and beauty” (p. 122).Van Goethem and Sloboda (2011) also found that people most often used music to regulate affect toward becoming more positive and to lessen negative effects; however, some did aim to become nostalgic and melancholic as well. Valence (relating to songs with positive mood) was found to be one of three important dimensions of music preference, along with arousal and depth (Fricke et al., 2019). It seems important that music be largely self-​selected to elicit such positive emotions, and the incidence of music used as torture (e.g., Naliwajek-​Mazurek, 2013) points to the effect of removing agency in musical engagement. Playing music involves a high degree of concentration and engagement, and brain imaging studies have demonstrated that musicians in flow deactivate frontal areas associated with self-​ monitoring and conscious motor control (Limb & Braun, 2008; Parsons et  al., 2005). Flow experiences are often characterised as highly rewarding. Bernard (2009) also made strong connections between flow experiences and transcendence based on content analyses of autobiographical accounts of music-​making experiences. In addition to music performance, flow also can occur during music listening (Diaz, 2013). On the other hand, the pressures that orchestral musicians face lead to high levels of anxiety and depression, and 22% show symptoms of post-​ traumatic stress disorder (Kenny et al., 2014), which may inhibit experiences of engagement. Relational music engagement involves what Koelsch (2013) calls the “7 Cs” –​social contact, social cognition, co-​pathy (the social function of empathy), communication, coordination of actions and cooperation with others –​leading to increased social cohesion. Two mechanisms have been identified: self–​other merging as a consequence of interpersonal synchrony and the release of endorphins during exertive rhythmic activities (Tarr et al., 2014). A number of studies have found that choral singing increases oxytocin production and reception (e.g., Fancourt et  al., 2014; Keeler et  al., 2015). Oxytocin is associated with social bonding and cohesion. However, not all contexts of music-​making fosters positive relationality, and competition and discouragement is common in professional settings (Pecen et al., 2018). Maslow (1968) found that music was one of the two most common ways for people to have a peak experience, defined as intensely ‘meaningful’ moments in life when one feels at his or her very best, strong, whole and in control. Schäfer et al. (2014) investigated intense musical experiences (IMEs), finding that: (1) IMEs are characterized by altered states of consciousness, which leads to the experience of harmony and self-​realization; (2) IMEs leave people with a strong motivation to attain the same harmony in their daily lives; (3) people develop manifold resources during an IME; (4)  IMEs cause long-​term changes to occur in people’s personal values, their perception of the meaning of life, social relationships, engagement, activities, and personal development. (p. 525) People who participate in arts are characterised by “intense engagement”, “dedication” and “enjoyment” (Wali et  al., 2001, p.  215). However, musical engagement can also be boring (Fakhr Tabatabaie et al., 2014) and frustrating (Hallam, 2011, p. 803), making such moments less meaningful. A sense of accomplishment was an almost universally agreed-​on reason for adults to study piano (Jutras, 2006). A  sense of accomplishment may take various forms, depending on the initial motivation for being involved in music. For example, one of Roulston et  al.’s (2015) 57

58

Albi Odendaal and Donald A. Hodges

participants wanted to improve their breathing through learning to play the saxophone and felt accomplishment as a result of seeing some improvement. Accomplishment was an important motivator for homeless people in a choir in Portugal (Boal-​Palheiros, 2017). However, not all musical engagement leads to a sense of accomplishment, and some orchestral musicians report boredom and frustration with their work-​related music-​making (Parasuraman & Purohit, 2000). Important in the studies in this section is the issue of choice to engage in music-​making or listening. When people listen to their favourite music, the default mode network (DMN) of the brain is strongly activated (Wilkins et al., 2014). The DMN has been implicated in autobiographical memory processing, empathy and other aspects of personal consciousness and awareness. In this way, music engagement supports fostering wellbeing, even for professional musicians, who score higher in all five aspects of the PERMA model than the general population (Ascenso et al., 2017, 2018). For professional musicians, wellbeing should not be understood as only the absence of ill-​being; rather, professional musicians generally find meaning in what they do for a living, despite many of the negative aspects that have been highlighted throughout this section. Wellbeing can thus be understood as a balancing of positive and negative aspects of music-​making for these musicians.

Older adults Although issues such as loneliness, loss of physical and mental health and loss of agency are often associated with advancing age, and music engagement is effective in alleviating aspects of these problems (Creech et al., 2013), care is needed not to medicalise the musical engagement of people in this age group. Music is best seen as care, not as a cure (Shih & Luo, 2008). Furthermore, music is not only therapeutic, but also an expression of empowerment and agency (Laes, 2015). Older adults (especially those suffering from dementia) are often infantilised and depersonalised, and maintaining a perspective on the whole person is important in musical interactions with this group (Elliott & Gardner, 2018). In this perspective, artists who work with older adults in various settings develop agency through encouraging individual expression and ownership, encouraging competence through skill development and through minimising negative self-​belief, and cultivating relatedness through social interaction between participants and between the artist and the participants (Swindells et al., 2016). Musical engagement often involves some kind of focused movement, especially when playing instruments or singing. This focused movement aids older adults with many aspects of physical maintenance, including posture, muscle tone and coordination (Fung & Lehmberg, 2016). When compared to matched controls who attended lectures rather than music instruction, music instruction has been shown to increase general physical activity levels as well as stimulating spiritual growth (Perkins & Williamon, 2014). Aside from the movement involved in making music, walking while purposefully attending to the beat of the music that is matched to normal gait improves the stability of the gait of older adults (Maclean et al., 2014). Music also provided an aid for older adults suffering from Alzheimer’s disease to memorise movement sequences, but only gave moderate support when compared to those without the disease (Moussard et al., 2014). Older adults who participate in music-​making activities report that such activities affect their personal development. Making music provides opportunities for self-​improvement in music and in cognitive skills, improves physical health, boosts psychological health, provides spiritual fulfilment and offers avenues for enjoyment and expression (Fung & Lehmberg, 2016). For instance, Spanish choristers demonstrated higher personal wellbeing than their non-​chorister counterparts (Pérez-​Aldeguer & Leganés, 2014). However, higher socio-​economic status1 and 58

59

The wider personal and social benefits

level of education correlates with higher physical, psychological and overall quality of life in this cohort, and choristers often have higher socio-​economic status and education levels than their peers (Johnson et al., 2017). Fung & Lehmberg (2016), for example, report only a small difference in quality of life between participants in musical events in a large American retirement community and those who did not participate.This small difference may be the result of similar socio-​economic status across the participants of their study. However, when controlling for a number of socio-​demographic variables (including socio-​economic status), older adults who sang in choirs in a Finnish city still reported a higher physical quality of life and satisfaction with health than matched peers who engaged in other hobbies to a similar extent. Overall, however, psychological quality of life was not significantly different between the groups (Johnson et al., 2017). Choral singing promotes wellbeing through six mechanisms:  “positive affect, focused concentration, controlled deep breathing, social support, cognitive stimulation and regular commitment” (Clift & Hancox, 2010, p.  90). When comparing people who participated in a choir with those who continued with their normal activities over a 2-​year period, Cohen et al. (2007) found that choral singing significantly aided physical and mental health as well as helping to maintain levels of involvement in other activities. However, while intense short-​term musical instruction had the expected effect of improving musical self-​efficacy, it had no effect on stress, measured through cortisol, or general self-​efficacy (Bugos et al., 2016). Despite this, playing the piano offered older adults in South Africa ways of coping with suffering, in addition to providing tools for maintaining wellbeing according to Seligman’s PERMA model (Fourie, 2018). In Canada, even the less active option of attending chamber music concerts reduced pain, improved mood and increased energy for older adults (Clements-​Cortés, 2017). Making music also provides opportunities for making new friends and socialisation, creates a sense of camaraderie, bolsters a sense of participation in culture and places the participants before an appreciative audience (Fung & Lehmberg, 2016). In Spain, people enrolled in musical activities primarily to make social contact (Solé et al., 2010). In the United States, members of New Horizons Band projects enjoy the social interaction and opportunity to make music together (Glen, 2018). There are, however, differences in how the social benefits accrue to, or are discussed by, choir singers in Norway and Japan, and it is important to be aware of such differences in communication style when conducting musical interventions (Kimura & Nishimoto, 2017). Music can support the social relationships of people who are suffering from dementia, in addition to reducing agitation, facilitating the formation of new memories and strengthening recall of older memories and positively influencing abstract thinking (Elliott & Gardner, 2018). The maintenance of an engaged lifestyle is an essential part of wellbeing for older adults (Adams et al., 2011), with social, physical and leisure activities contributing most to subjective wellbeing in this population. Music can touch each of these domains, and interventions that have been successful in showing a link between music and subjective wellbeing have typically included these domains. Physical ability is a major enabler of musical engagement for most older adults (Fung & Lehmberg, 2016), and it is worrying that in this population, individuals may reach the point where they are no longer able to engage in such activities.

Implications for research and practice in music education and music in the community In this chapter, we have considered a range of evidence that contributes to the discussion on personal and social benefits of musical engagement. We have pointed out that the affordances 59

60

Albi Odendaal and Donald A. Hodges

of music for these kinds of benefits are linked to context and intentionality, both in presentation and in reception of music. It is notable that many researchers cited above want their projects to affect the person or the group in some way and are thus deeply invested in the process. Projects are often designed to improve wellbeing, and the planning and delivery of projects impacts on their effectiveness; thus the “benefits of arts participation may lie as much in the interactions between leader and participants as arts practice per se” (Swindells et  al., 2016, p. 348). The impact of intentionality in the affordances of music as well as the impact of relationships on these affordances are important aspects to bear in mind when designing and evaluating programmes, as well as being an interesting area for future research. Another contextual factor which may also influence the relationship between music and any personal and social benefits is socio-​economic status. Higher socio-​economic status is associated with higher levels of wellbeing (Kaplan et  al., 2008). Furthermore, people with higher socio-​economic status engage in more leisure activities more frequently (Baldwin & O’Flaherty, 2018; Johnson et  al., 2017), one of which is music. If samples are not carefully chosen (e.g., in cases where participants self-​select the activity), socio-​economic status may be a hidden moderating variable in the association between music and wellbeing. It is important to consider and investigate the relationships between music, socio-​economic status and wellbeing. We have tried throughout the chapter to point to the negative effects that may arise from musical engagement in order to counter the idea that all musical engagement always results in benefits –​a perspective one can sometimes find in advocacy texts (Odendaal et al., 2019). It is important for studies on personal and social benefits to consider difficulties and counter narratives and not report only on positives. It is also important to consider the interactions between participants and the ways that organisations structure the research situation as well as the ways that society makes certain empirical criteria available for evaluating the benefits that arise from musical engagement (see Nassehi, 2005, for a fuller discussion). Research is needed at the social and societal level, as is research that takes accrued wellbeing into account. Accrued wellbeing reflects “an individual’s capacity to manage over time, the range of inputs, both constructive and undesirable that can, in isolation, affect a person’s emotional, physical and cognitive state in response to a given context” (Gillett-​Swan & Sargeant, 2015, p. 143). Music certainly affords the opportunity for personal and social benefits, but the ways in which these benefits accrue to the individual or group is complex and influenced by many factors outside of the sonic properties of the music itself.

Reflective questions 1. Using Cross’s concept of “floating intentionality”, how do intent (on the part of teachers/​leaders, musicians or recipients such as audience members) and the relationships between the participants of the event shape the outcomes of various musical experiences? 2. Although it is reasonable to foster positive outcomes of musical experiences, do you think it is important for music educators and community music leaders to be more aware of potential deleterious effects? Should they become more active in trying to ameliorate the negative effects of music (e.g., when it is used as a means of torture or to express racism, misogyny, etc.)?

60

61

The wider personal and social benefits

Note 1 The APA defines socio-​economic status as consisting of educational achievement, occupational prestige and income levels of participants or their families. www.apa.org/​topics/​socioeconomic-​status/​ (accessed 20 November 2019).

Suggestions for further reading Infants and children Foster, E. M., & Jenkins, J. V. M. (2017). Does participation in music and performing arts influence child development? American Educational Research Journal, 54(3), 399–​443.

Adolescents and young adults Hallam, S. (2015). The power of music: A research synthesis of the impact of actively making music on the intellectual, social and personal development of children and young people. International Music Education Research Centre.

Adults Croom, A. M. (2015). Music practice and participation for psychological well-​being: A review of how music influences positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment. Musicae Scientiae, 19(1),  44–​64.

Older Adults Creech, A., Hallam, S., McQueen, H., & Varvarigou, M. (2013). The power of music in the lives of older adults. Research Studies in Music Education, 35(1), 87–​102.

References Adams, K. B., Leibbrandt, S., & Moon, H. (2011). A critical review of the literature on social and leisure activity and wellbeing in later life. Ageing & Society, 31(4), 683–​712. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​ S0144686X10001091 Alemán, X., Duryea, S., Guerra, N. G., McEwan, P. J., Muñoz, R., Stampini, M., & Williamson, A. A. (2017). The effects of musical training on child development: A randomized trial of El Sistema in Venezuela. Prevention Science: The Official Journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 18(7), 865–​878. https://​doi. org/​10.1007/​s11121-​016-​0727-​3 Appelgren, A., Osika, W., Theorell, T., Madison, G., & Bojner Horwitz, E. (2019). Tuning in on motivation:  Differences between non-​musicians, amateurs, and professional musicians. Psychology of Music, 47(6), 864–​873. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735619861435 Ascenso, S., Perkins, R., & Williamon, A. (2018). Resounding meaning: A PERMA wellbeing profile of classical musicians. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2018.01895 Ascenso, S., Williamon, A., & Perkins, R. (2017). Understanding the wellbeing of professional musicians through the lens of positive psychology. Psychology of Music, 45(1),  65–​81. Bakagiannis, S., & Tarrant, M. (2006). Can music bring people together? Effects of shared musical preference on intergroup bias in adolescence. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 47(2), 129–​136. https://​doi. org/​10.1111/​j.1467-​9450.2006.00500.x Baker, G. (2014). El Sistema: Orchestrating Venezuela’s Youth. Oxford University Press.

61

62

Albi Odendaal and Donald A. Hodges Baldwin, E., & O’Flaherty, M. (2018). Enriching the rich? A  review of extracurricular activities, socioeconomic status and adolescent achievement. Life Course Centre Working Paper Series 2018–​17. Institute for Social Science Research, The University of Queensland. Baltazar, M., & Saarikallio, S. (2017). Strategies and mechanisms in musical affect self-​regulation: A new model. Musicae Scientiae. Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864917715061 Bell, E. R. (2017). “This isn’t underground; this is highlands”: Mayan-​language hip hop, cultural resilience, and youth education in Guatemala. Journal of Folklore Research, 54(3), 167–​197. http://​dx.doi.org. nwulib.nwu.ac.za/​10.2979/​jfolkrese.54.3.02 Bernard, L. (2009). Music making, transcendence, flow and music education. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 10(14),  1–​21. Boal-​Palheiros, G. (2017). Singing against loneliness: Songs of a homeless choir in Porto. Music and Arts in Action, 6(1),  63–​79. Boeskov, K. (2018). Moving beyond orthodoxy: Reconsidering notions of music and social transformation. Action, Criticism & Theory for Music Education, 17(2), 92–​117. https://​doi.org/​10.22176/​act17.1.92 Brown, E. D., Garnett, M. L.,Velazquez-​Martin, B. M., & Mellor,T. J. (2018).The art of Head Start: Intensive arts integration associated with advantage in school readiness for economically disadvantaged children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 45, 204–​214. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.ecresq.2017.12.002 Bugos, J. A., Kochar, S., & Maxfield, N. (2016). Intense piano training on self-​efficacy and physiological stress in aging. Psychology of Music, 44(4), 611–​624. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735615577250 Chornik, K. (2013). Songs of torture: Music in Chilean torture chambers during the Pinochet regime. World of Music, 2(1),  51–​65. Chou, L.-​L., Wang, R.-​H., Chen, S.-​J., & Pai, L. (2003). Effects of music therapy on oxygen saturation in premature infants receiving endotracheal suctioning. The Journal of Nursing Research, 11(3), 209–​216. Cirelli, L. K., Einarson, K. M., & Trainor, L. J. (2014). Interpersonal synchrony increases prosocial behavior in infants. Developmental Science, 17(6), 1003–​1011. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​desc.12193 Cirelli, L. K., Trehub, S. E., & Trainor, L. J. (2018). Rhythm and melody as social signals for infants. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1423(1), 66–​72. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​nyas.13580 Clements-​Cortés, A. (2017). Artful wellness: Attending chamber music concert reduces pain and increases mood and energy for older adults. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 52, 41–​49. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​ j.aip.2016.10.001 Clennon, O., & Boehm, C. (2014).Young Musicians for Heritage Project: Can a music-​based heritage project have a positive effect on well-​being? Music Education Research, 16(3), 307–​329. Clift, S., & Hancox, G. (2010). The significance of choral singing for sustaining psychological wellbeing:  Findings from a survey of choristers in England, Australia and Germany. Music Performance Research, 3(1),  79–​96. Cohen, G. D., Perlstein, S., Chapline, J., Kelly, J., Firth, K. M., & Simmens, S. (2007). The impact of professionally conducted cultural programs on the physical health, mental health, and social functioning of older adults –​2-​year results. Journal of Aging, Humanities, and the Arts, 1(1–​2), 5–​22. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1080/​19325610701410791 Corbeil, M., Trehub, S. E., & Peretz, I. (2016). Singing delays the onset of infant distress. Infancy, 21(3), 373–​391. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​infa.12114 Corte, U., & Edwards, B. (2008).White power music and the mobilization of racist social movements. Music and Arts in Action, 1(1), 4–​20. Cottrell, S. (2004). Professional music-​making in London: Ethnography and experience. Ashgate. Creech, A., Hallam, S., McQueen, H., & Varvarigou, M. (2013). The power of music in the lives of older adults. Research Studies in Music Education, 35(1), 87–​102. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1321103X13478862 Croom, A.  M. (2012). Music, neuroscience, and the psychology of well-​being:  A précis. Frontiers in Psychology, 2. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2011.00393 Croom, A. M. (2015). Music practice and participation for psychological well-​being: A review of how music influences positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment. Musicae Scientiae, 19(1), 44–​64. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864914561709 Cross, I. (2009). The evolutionary nature of musical meaning. Musicae Scientiae, 13(2 Suppl.), 179–​200. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864909013002091 Daykin, N., de Viggiani, N., Moriarty,Y., & Pilkington, P. (2017). Music-​making for health and wellbeing in youth justice settings: Mediated affordances and the impact of context and social relations. Sociology of Health & Illness, 39(6), 941–​958. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​1467–​9566.12549 DeNora, T. (2011). Music in everyday life. Cambridge University Press.

62

63

The wider personal and social benefits DeNora, T. (2017). Music-​ecology and everyday action: Creating, changing and contesting identities. In R. A. R. MacDonald, D. J. Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of musical identities (pp. 46–​62). Oxford University Press. Diaz, F. M. (2013). Mindfulness, attention, and flow during music listening: An empirical investigation. Psychology of Music, 41(1), 42–​58. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735611415144 Duffy, B., & Fuller, R. (2000). Role of music therapy in social skills development in children with moderate intellectual disability. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 13(2), 77–​89. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1046/​j.1468-​3148.2000.00011.x Elliott, M., & Gardner, P. (2018). The role of music in the lives of older adults with dementia ageing in place: A scoping review. Dementia: The International Journal of Social Research and Practice, 17(2), 199–​213. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1471301216639424 Evans, P. (2015). Self-​determination theory:  An approach to motivation in music education. Musicae Scientiae, 19(1), 65–​83. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864914568044 Evans, P., & McPherson, G. E. (2017). Processes of musical identity consolidation during adolescence. In R. A. R. MacDonald, D. J. Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of musical identities (pp. 213–​231). Oxford University Press. Evans, P., McPherson, G. E., & Davidson, J. W. (2013). The role of psychological needs in ceasing music and music learning activities. Psychology of Music, 41(5), 600–​619. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735612441736 Fakhr Tabatabaie, A., Azadehfar, M. R., Mirian, N., Noroozian, M., Yoonessi, A., Saebipour, M. R., & Yoonessi, A. (2014). Neural correlates of boredom in music perception. Basic and Clinical Neuroscience, 5(4), 259–​266. Fancourt, D., Ockelford, A., & Belai, A. (2014). The psychoneuroimmunological effects of music: A systematic review and a new model. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 36, 15–​26. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​ j.bbi.2013.10.014 Finnigan, E., & Starr, E. (2010). Increasing social responsiveness in a child with autism: A comparison of music and non-​music interventions. Autism, 14(4), 321–​348. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1362361309357747 Foster, E. M., & Jenkins, J. V.  M. (2017). Does participation in music and performing arts influence child development? American Educational Research Journal, 54(3), 399–​443. https://​doi.org/​10.3102/​ 0002831217701830 Fourie, C. (2018). Exploring the lived piano-​playing experiences of older adults [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. North-​West University. Freer, P.  K. (2015). Perspectives of European boys about their voice change and school choral singing:  Developing the possible selves of adolescent male singers. British Journal of Music Education, 32(1), 87–​106. http://​dx.doi.org.nwulib.nwu.ac.za/​10.1017/​S026505171400031X Fricke, K. R., Greenberg, D. M., Rentfrow, P. J., & Herzberg, P. Y. (2019). Measuring musical preferences from listening behavior: Data from one million people and 200,000 songs. Psychology of Music, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735619868280 Fung, C. V., & Lehmberg, L. J. (2016). Music for life: Music participation and quality of life of senior citizens. Oxford University Press. Gabrielsson,A. (2011). Strong experiences with music: Music is much more than just music. Oxford University  Press. Gates, J. T. (1991). Music participation: Theory, research, and policy. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 109,  1–​35. Gerry, D., Unrau, A., & Trainor, L. J. (2012). Active music classes in infancy enhance musical, communicative and social development. Developmental Science, 15(3), 398–​407. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​ j.1467-​7687.2012.01142.x Gillett-​Swan, J. K., & Sargeant, J. (2015).Wellbeing as a process of accrual: Beyond subjectivity and beyond the moment. Social Indicators Research, 121(1), 135–​148. https://​doi.org/​10.1007/​s11205-​014-​0634-​6 Glen, N. L. (2018). Music in a new key: The sociocultural impact of the New Horizons Band programme and its relationship to Baltes’ Selective Optimization with Compensation Model. International Journal of Community Music, 11(2), 199–​212. https://​doi.org/​10.1386/​ijcm.11.2.199_​1 Good, A., & Russo, F. A. (2016). Singing promotes cooperation in a diverse group of children. Social Psychology, 47(6), 340–​344. https://​doi.org/​10.1027/​1864–​9335/​a000282 Goodrich, A. (2019). Spending their leisure time: Adult amateur musicians in a community band. Music Education Research, 21(2), 174–​184. http://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613808.2018.1563057 Groarke, J. M., & Hogan, M. J. (2016). Enhancing wellbeing: An emerging model of the adaptive functions of music listening. Psychology of Music, 44(4), 769–​791. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735615591844

63

64

Albi Odendaal and Donald A. Hodges Gunsberg, A. (1988). Improvised musical play: A strategy for fostering social play between developmentally delayed and nondelayed preschool children. Journal of Music Therapy, 25(4), 178–​191. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1093/​jmt/​25.4.178 Güsewell, A., & Ruch, W. (2015). Character strengths profiles of musicians and non-​musicians. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 4(6), 1–​17. https://​doi.org/​10.18533/​journal.v4i6.734 Hallam, S. (2011). Music education: The role of affect. In P. N. Juslin & J. Sloboda (Eds.), Handbook of music and emotion: Theory, research, applications (pp. 791–​818). Oxford University Press. Hallam, S. (2015). The power of music: A research synthesis of the impact of actively making music on the intellectual, social and personal development of children and young people. International Music Education Research Centre. Henderson, S., Cain, M., Istvandity, L., & Lakhani, A. (2017). The role of music participation in positive health and wellbeing outcomes for migrant populations: A systematic review. Psychology of Music, 45(4), 459–​478. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735616665910 Hines, M., & McFerran, K. S. (2014). Metal made me who I am: Seven adult men reflect on their engagement with metal music during adolescence. International Journal of Community Music, 7(2), 205–​222. Hogan, J., Cordes, S., Holochwost, S., Ryu, E., Diamond, A., & Winner, E. (2018). Is more time in general music class associated with stronger extra-​musical outcomes in kindergarten? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 45, 238–​248. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.ecresq.2017.12.004 Humpal, M. (1991). The effects of an integrated early childhood music program on social interaction among children with handicaps and their typical peers. Journal of Music Therapy, 28(3), 161–​177. https://​ doi.org/​10.1093/​jmt/​28.3.161 Johnson, J. K., Louhivuori, J., & Siljander, E. (2017). Comparison of well-​being of older adult choir singers and the general population in Finland: A case-​control study. Musicae Scientiae, 21(2), 178–​194. https://​ doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864916644486 Johnstone, J. (2015).Welshness and choral singing: Cognitive and sociohistorical aspects of cultural identity in North Wales. MUSICultures, 42(1), 89–​120. Joseph, R. (2000). Fetal brain behavior and cognitive development. Developmental Review, 20(1), 81–​98. https://​doi.org/​10.1006/​drev.1999.0486 Juniu, S., Tedrick, T., & Boyd, R. (1996). Leisure or work? Amateur and professional musicians’ perception of rehearsal and performance. Journal of Leisure Research, 28(1), 44–​56. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​ 00222216.1996.11949760 Jutras, P. J. (2006).The benefits of adult piano study as self-​reported by selected adult piano students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(2), 97–​110. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​002242940605400202 Kaplan, G. A., Shema, S. J., & Leite, M. C. A. (2008). Socioeconomic determinants of psychological well-​ being: The role of income, income change, and income sources over 29 years. Annals of Epidemiology, 18(7), 531–​537. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.annepidem.2008.03.006 Keeler, J. R., Roth, E. A., Neuser, B. L., Spitsbergen, J. M., Waters, D. J. M., & Vianney, J.-​M. (2015). The neurochemistry and social flow of singing: Bonding and oxytocin. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fnhum.2015.00518 Keller, M.  S. (2007). Why is music so ideological, and why do totalitarian states take it so seriously? A personal view from history and the social sciences. Journal of Musicological Research, 26(2–​3), 91–​122. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​01411890701361086 Kenny, D., Driscoll, T., & Ackermann, B. (2014). Psychological well-​ being in professional orchestral musicians in Australia: A descriptive population study. Psychology of Music, 42(2), 210–​232. https://​doi. org/​10.1177/​0305735612463950 Kimura, H., & Nishimoto, Y. (2017). Choirs in two countries: A study of community music therapy for the older adults in Norway and Japan. Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy, 17(1). https://​doi.org/​ 10.15845/​voices.v17i1.860 Kirschner, S., & Tomasello, M. (2010). Joint music making promotes prosocial behavior in 4-​year-​old children. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(5), 354–​364. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.evolhumbehav.2010.04.004 Kisilevsky, S., Hains, S. M. J., Jacquet, A.Y., Granier-​Deferre, C., & Lecanuet, J. P. (2004). Maturation of fetal responses to music. Developmental Science, 7(5), 550–​559. Koelsch, S. (2013). From social contact to social cohesion: The 7 Cs. Music and Medicine, 5(4), 204–​209. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1943862113508588 Laes, T. (2015). Empowering later adulthood music education. A  case study of a rock band for third age learners. International Journal of Music Education Research, 33(1), 51–​65. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0255761413515815

64

65

The wider personal and social benefits LaGasse, A. B. (2014). Effects of a music therapy group intervention on enhancing social skills in children with autism. Journal of Music Therapy, 51(3), 250–​275. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​jmt/​thu012 Laiho, S. (2004).The psychological functions of music in adolescence. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, 13(1), 47–​63. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​08098130409478097 Lamont, A. (2011). The beat goes on:  Music education, identity and lifelong learning. Music Education Research, 13(4), 369–​388. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613808.2011.638505 Leipold, B., & Loepthien, T. (2015). Music reception and emotional regulation in adolescence and adulthood. Musicae Scientiae, 19(1), 111–​128. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864915570354 Limb, C. J., & Braun, A. R. (2008). Neural substrates of spontaneous musical performance: An fMRI study of jazz improvisation. PLoS ONE, 3(2), Article e1679. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.pone.0001679 Loewy, J., Stewart, K., Dassler, A.-​M., Telsey, A., & Homel, P. (2013). The effects of music therapy on vital signs, feeding, and sleep in premature infants. Pediatrics, 131(5), 902–​918. https://​doi.org/​10.1542/​ peds.2012-​1367 Maclean, L. M., Brown, L. J. E., & Astell, A. J. (2014). The effect of rhythmic musical training on healthy older adults’ gait and cognitive function. The Gerontologist, 54(4), 624–​633. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​ geront/​gnt050 Marsh, K. (2017). Creating bridges:  Music, play and well-​ being in the lives of refugee and immigrant children and young people. Music Education Research, 19(1), 60–​73. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​ 14613808.2016.1189525 Maslow, A. H. (1968). Music education and peak experience. Music Educators Journal, 54(6), 72–​171. https://​ doi.org/​10.2307/​3391274 McFerran, K. (2019). Crystallizing the relationship between adolescents, music, and emotions. In K. McFerran, P. Derrington, & S. Saarikallio (Eds.), Handbook of music, adolescents, and wellbeing (pp. 3–​14). Oxford University Press. McFerran, K. Derrington, P., & Saarikallio, S. (Eds.). (2019). Handbook of music, adolescents, and wellbeing. Oxford University Press. Mehr, S. A., Song, L. A., & Spelke, E. S. (2016). For 5-​month-​old infants, melodies are social. Psychological Science, 27(4), 486–​501. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0956797615626691 Mehr, S. A., & Spelke, E. S. (2018). Shared musical knowledge in 11-​month-​old infants. Developmental Science, 21(2). https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​desc.12542 Millar, O., & Warwick, I. (2019). Music and refugees’ wellbeing in contexts of protracted displacement. Health Education Journal, 78(1), 67–​80. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0017896918785991 Moussard, A., Bigand, E., Belleville, S., & Peretz, I. (2014). Music as a mnemonic to learn gesture sequences in normal aging and Alzheimer’s disease. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​ fnhum.2014.00294 Naliwajek-​Mazurek, K. (2013). Music and torture in Nazi sites of persecution and genocide in occupied Poland 1939–​1945. World of Music, 2(1),  31–​50. Nassehi,A. (2005). Organizations as decision machines: Niklas Luhmann’s theory of organized social systems. The Sociological Review, 53(1 Suppl.), 178–​191. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​j.1467-​954X.2005.00549.x O’Callaghan, C., Barry, P., & Thompson, K. (2012). Music’s relevance for adolescents and young adults with cancer: A constructivist research approach. Supportive Care in Cancer, 20(4), 687–​697. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1007/​s00520-​011-​1104-​1 Odendaal, A., Levänen, S., & Westerlund, H. (2019). Lost in translation? Neuroscientific research, advocacy, and the claimed transfer benefits of musical practice. Music Education Research, 21(1), 4–​19. https://​doi. org/​10.1080/​14613808.2018.1484438 Osborne, M. S., McPherson, G. E., Faulkner, R., Davidson, J.W., & Barrett, M. S. (2016). Exploring the academic and psychosocial impact of El Sistema-​inspired music programs within two low socio-​economic schools. Music Education Research, 18(2), 156–​175. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613808.2015.1056130 Packer, J., & Ballantyne, J. (2011). The impact of music festival attendance on young people’s psychological and social well-​being. Psychology of Music, 39(2), 164–​181. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735610372611 Papaeti, A. (2013). Music, torture and testimony: Reopening the case of the Greek Military Junta (1967–​ 74). World of Music, 2(1),  67–​89. Parasuraman, S., & Purohit,Y. S. (2000). Distress and boredom among orchestra musicians: The two faces of stress. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(1), 74–​83. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​1076-​8998.5.1.74 Parker, E. C. (2014).The process of social identity development in adolescent high school choral singers: A grounded theory. Journal of Research in Music Education, 62(1), 18–​32. http://​dx.doi.org.nwulib.nwu. ac.za/​10.1177/​0022429413520009

65

66

Albi Odendaal and Donald A. Hodges Parker, E. C. (2018). A grounded theory of adolescent high school women’s choir singers’ process of social identity development. Journal of Research in Music Education, 65(4), 439–​460. http://​dx.doi.org.nwulib. nwu.ac.za/​10.1177/​0022429417743478 Parncutt, R. (2016). Prenatal development. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of musical development (2nd ed.; pp. 3–​30). Oxford University Press. Parsons, L. M., Sergent, J., Hodges, D. A., & Fox, P. T. (2005). The brain basis of piano performance. Neuropsychologia, 43(2), 199–​215. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.neuropsychologia.2004.11.007 Pecen, E., Collins, D. J., & MacNamara, Á. (2018). “It’s your problem. Deal with it”:  Performers’ experiences of psychological challenges in music. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​ fpsyg.2017.02374 Pérez-​Aldeguer, S., & Leganés, E.-​N. (2014). Differences in psychological well-​being between choristers and non-​choristers in older adults. International Journal of Community Music, 7(3), 397–​407. https://​doi. org/​10.1386/​ijcm.7.3.397_​1 Perkins, R., & Williamon, A. (2014). Learning to make music in older adulthood:  A mixed-​methods exploration of impacts on wellbeing. Psychology of Music, 42(4), 550–​567. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735613483668 Persico, G., Antolini, L.,Vergani, P., Costantini, W., Nardi, M. T., & Bellotti, L. (2017). Maternal singing of lullabies during pregnancy and after birth: Effects on mother–​infant bonding and on newborns’ behaviour. Concurrent cohort study. Women and Birth, 30(4), Article e214-​e220. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​ j.wombi.2017.01.007 Rabinowitch, T.-​C., Cross, I., & Burnard, P. (2013). Long-​term musical group interaction has a positive influence on empathy in children. Psychology of Music, 41(4), 484–​498. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735612440609 Randall, A. J. (Ed.). (2004). Music, power, and politics. Routledge. Rickard, N. S., Bambrick, C. J., & Gill, A. (2012). Absence of widespread psychosocial and cognitive effects of school-​based music instruction in 10–​13-​year-​old students. International Journal of Music Education, 30(1), 57–​78. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761411431399 Rickson, D., Reynolds, D., & Legg, R. (2018). Learners’ perceptions of daily singing in a school community severely affected by earthquakes: Links to subjective well-​being. Journal of Applied Arts & Health, 9(3), 367–​384. https://​doi.org/​10.1386/​jaah.9.3.367_​1 Roulston, K., Jutras, P., & Kim, S. J. (2015). Adult perspectives of learning musical instruments. International Journal of Music Education, 33(3), 325–​335. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761415584291 Roy, M. M., Devroop, K., & Getz, L. (2015). Improvement in South African students’ outlook due to music involvement. Music Education Research, 17(4), 465–​479. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613808.2014.910183 Saarikallio, S. (2007). Music as mood regulation in adolescence. Jyväskylä Studies in Humanities No. 67. University of Jyväskylä. Saarikallio, S. (2009, August 12–​16). Emotional self-​regulation through music in 3-​8-​year-​old children [Paper presentation]. 7th Triennial Conference of European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music, Jyväskylä, Finland. https://​jyx.jyu.fi/​handle/​123456789/​20913 Schäfer, T., Smukalla, M., & Oelker, S.-​A. (2014). How music changes our lives: A qualitative study of the long-​term effects of intense musical experiences. Psychology of Music, 42(4), 525–​544. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0305735613482024 Schellenberg, E.  G. (2005). Music lessons enhance IQ. Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice, 4(2), 10–​13. Schellenberg, E.  G. (2006). Long-​term positive associations between music lessons and IQ. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 457–​468. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​0022-​0663.98.2.457 Schellenberg, E. G., Corrigall, K. A., Dys, S. P., & Malti, T. (2015). Group music training and children’s prosocial skills. PLoS ONE, 10(10), Article e0141449. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.pone.0141449 Seligman, M. E. P. (2012). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-​being. Atria Books. Shih, Y.-​N., & Luo, T.-​H. (2008). Applications of Kagayashiki music care in health care. Journal of Taiwan Occupational Therapy Research and Practice, 4(1),  27–​33. Soares, D. S. V., & Lucena, S. F. V. B. (2013). The contribution of dancing in the socio-​emotional development of children at extracurricular activities in a Portuguese primary school. Journal of Music and Dance, 3(1), 6–​11. https://​doi.org/​10.5897/​JMD11.005 Solé, C., Mercadal-​Brotons, M., Gallego, S., & Riera, M. (2010). Contributions of music to aging adults’ quality of life. Journal of Music Therapy, 47(3), 264–​281.

66

67

The wider personal and social benefits Swindells, R., Lawthorn, R., Parkinson, C., Clennon, O., Kagan, C., & De Bézenac, C. (2016). “I’m not a therapist you know … I’m an artist”: Facilitating well-​being and basic psychological needs satisfaction through community arts participation. Journal of Applied Arts and Health, 7(3), 347–​367. Tarr, B., Launay, J., & Dunbar, R. I.  M. (2014). Music and social bonding:  “Self-​other” merging and neurohormonal mechanisms. Auditory Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, Article 1096. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​ fpsyg.2014.01096 Taylor, A. (2011). Continuity, change and mature musical identity construction: Using “Rivers of Musical Experience” to trace the musical lives of six mature-​age keyboard players. British Journal of Music Education, 28(2), 195–​212. http://​dx.doi.org.nwulib.nwu.ac.za/​10.1017/​S0265051711000076 ter Bogt, T. F. M.,Vieno, A., Doornwaard, S. M., Pastore, M., & van den Eijnden, R. J. J. M. (2017). “You’re not alone”: Music as a source of consolation among adolescents and young adults. Psychology of Music, 45(2), 155–​171. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735616650029 Trehub, S. E., Becker, J., & Morley, I. (2015). Cross-​cultural perspectives on music and musicality. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 370, Article 20140096. https://​doi. org/​10.1098/​rstb.2014.0096 Trehub, S. E., Ghazban, N., & Corbeil, M. (2015). Musical affect regulation in infancy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1337(1), 186–​192. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​nyas.12622 van Goethem, A., & Sloboda, J. (2011).The functions of music for affect regulation. Musicae Scientiae, 15(2), 208–​228. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864911401174 Wali, A., Marcheschi, E., Severson, R., & Longoni, M. (2001). More than a hobby: Adult participation in the informal arts. Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 31(3), 212–​230. Wanjala, H., & Kebaya, C. (2016). Popular music and identity formation among Kenyan youth. Muziki, 13(2), 20–​35. http://​dx.doi.org.nwulib.nwu.ac.za/​10.1080/​18125980.2016.1249159 Welch, G. F., Himonides, E., Saunders, J., Papageorgi, I., & Sarazin, M. (2014). Singing and social inclusion. Frontiers in Psychology, 5. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2014.00803 Wilkins, R. W., Hodges, D. A., Laurienti, P. J., Steen, M., & Burdette, J. H. (2014). Network science and the effects of music preference on functional brain connectivity: From Beethoven to Eminem. Scientific Reports, 4, Article 6130. https://​doi.org/​10.1038/​srep06130 Williams, K. E., & Berthelsen, D. (2019). Implementation of a rhythm and movement intervention to support self-​regulation skills of preschool-​aged children in disadvantaged communities. Psychology of Music, 47(6), 800–​820. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735619861433 Winsler, A., Gara, T.V., Alegrado, A., Castro, S., & Tavassolie, T. (2019). Selection into, and academic benefits from, arts-​related courses in middle school among low-​income, ethnically diverse youth. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​aca0000222 Wolf, D. P., & Holochwost, S. J. (2016). Music and juvenile justice: A dynamic systems perspective. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10(2), 171–​183. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​aca0000059 Zimprich, D. (2018). Individual differences in the reminiscence bump of very long-​term memory for popular songs in old age: A non-​linear mixed model approach. Psychology of Music, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735618812199

67

68

5 THE HEALTH BENEFITS OF ENGAGING WITH MUSIC Gunter Kreutz and Urs Nater

Music is ubiquitous. Human cultures without music are unknown, as are the precise prehistoric conditions that led to the emergence of music (Mithen, 2005). Consequently, questions arise as to why music is important to people, be it a form of aesthetic embellishment of everyday life (Pinker, 1997) or fulfilling a certain array of functions such as entertainment, social communication or serving ritualistic practices (North et al., 2004). Music therapy, which is practised mainly in clinical but also in communal contexts, can be seen as a form of adjuvant medical psychotherapy tailored to the needs of people with physical or mental health problems (Edwards, 2015). However, recent research suggests that music activities can be beneficial to health and wellbeing in everyday life (DeNora, 2016; MacDonald et al., 2012) and with respect to educational settings in particular (Burnard & Dragovic, 2015). This chapter was written during the onset and first stages of the worldwide coronavirus crisis (see Chapters 1 and 28 for details). Specifically, choral singing and also playing music in larger ensembles were believed to enhance infectious activities leading to increased rates of spreading the SARS-​CoV-​2 virus. However, here we address mainly the potential benefits of singing and playing musical instruments at amateur levels, while acknowledging that other activities such as listening to music, dancing, composing or perhaps even imagining music can be highly beneficial too. Indeed, auditory processing and physical movement are apparently core components of any model which proposes that engaging with singing and playing instruments might entail high levels of motivation and reward. However, exposure to music per se does not necessarily imply benefits. Indeed, most researchers agree that liking, preference, familiarity and underlying motivational processes are necessary prerequisites for music in any form having benefits (Kreutz, 2015; Wuttke-​Linnemann et al.,  2019). Note that although amateur ensembles including choirs or instrumental ensembles also perform in public, they generally, of course, do not represent high art or world-​class performance levels. Instead, they often perform in social and educational settings to reach audiences that would otherwise be less exposed to live concert performances. Perhaps more important, motivation of performing music at this level can also be different, with a greater emphasis on individual and social wellbeing benefits. Indeed, for example, the likelihood of performance-​ related health problems in professional orchestra musicians increases with older age (Gembris et al., 2018), whereas amateur music playing appears generally less associated with health risks.

68

69

The health benefits

To the contrary, playing music or singing across the lifespan could be beneficial for wellbeing and health (Gembris, 2012).

Demographics of amateur singing and instrumental ensembles The German Music Council (Deutscher Musikrat) counted nearly 1.7 million musicians who practise and perform in amateur instrumental ensembles (Deutsches Musikinformationszentrum, 2018b). In addition, it found 2.1  million singers who were members of registered choral societies (Deutsches Musikinformationszentrum, 2018a). This means that at least 3% of the German population are musically active through practising and performing for presumably recreational purposes. However, despite the widespread engagement in music activities that is associated with the administration of public and private music schools providing opportunity for learning to play music across the lifespan, there is a paucity of research that addresses the health implications of music in public health in general and in educational settings in particular (e.g., Hallam, 2010).

Models of engaging with music and wellbeing Singing and playing music are generally conceived of as rewarding activities. Therefore, models from the fields of health and positive psychology are often evoked as theoretic frameworks and as guidance to develop research questions and hypotheses. For example, the so-​called salutogenetic approach by the Israeli physician Aaron Antonovsky (1997) has been linked with effects of everyday music practices on wellbeing (Batt-​Rawden, 2010; Ruud, 2005). In brief, according to this model, health and illness are the end points of a continuum. The activities we choose should enable us to stay at the healthier end of the continuum. Antonovsky reasoned that such health-​promoting activities should be perceived by those who are engaged in them as intelligible, manageable and meaningful. In other words, it is not the intrinsic properties of an activity, but rather the psychological processes and attributions that should be seen as the most important factors in suggesting any activity is health promoting. A related model that is believed to contribute significantly to the psychology of health and wellbeing has been proposed by Martin Seligman (2011, 2018). Seligman suggested that five independent components comprise an essential part of those factors that determine an individual’s level of life satisfaction, or happiness. They include positive emotions, engagement, relationships, meaning and accomplishment (abbreviated as PERMA). This can be seen as both as extending and broadening Antonovsky’s salutogenetic approach. Clearly, positive emotions are necessary but not sufficient to sustain elevated levels of wellbeing. Engagement refers to activities that are perceived as important and fulfilling. Relationships are a consequence of humans being social beings who are dependent on the support of others, particularly at the beginning and also during the end of life. The final components, meaning and accomplishment are similarly self-​evident as we need to make sense of our experiences and actions, which are undertaken for accomplishments of some kind. The seeming simplicity of the constructs notwithstanding, there is extensive debate on the nature and the assessment of any of these components. Seligman (2018) suggests that his model still might be extended or components modified as the scientific understanding of the psychological processes associated with wellbeing advance. In a theoretic contribution, Croom (2015) attempted to link musical activities with each of the PERMA components (see Kreutz & Bonshor, in press, for details). Croom’s analysis

69

70

Gunter Kreutz and Urs Nater

is important in several respects. First, he offered no differentiation in terms of the nature of musical activities, implying that both performing or listening could have similar or different profiles with respect to affecting the PERMA components. Second, although empirical support for each of the components can be discerned in the literature, the sources are heterogeneous and not all of them are equally well linked to wellbeing. Indeed, there is abundant work related to how and why music listening (Blood & Zatorre, 2001) or group singing (Kreutz, 2014) may induce highly pleasurable experiences. However, the other PERMA components appear less straightforward in contributing to music-​induced wellbeing. For example, relationships can have different meanings and functions in the context of singing. In particular, solo singing has been shown to be more prone to higher stress levels compared to group singing (Schladt et al., 2017). Third, support in favour of music-​induced wellbeing as predicted by the PERMA model comes from groups of participants with heterogeneous health status. This can be seen as a first indication that musical activities, or conditions that still allow some degree of engagement with music within and beyond therapeutic contexts, can be beneficial for individuals with poor health. Kreutz (2015) reasons that if musical activities were considered under the prerequisites of the salutogenetic approach, they would be seen as enabling individuals to reconcile the self in terms of re-​evaluating his or her living conditions. Specifically, musical activities might enhance positive affect, reduce stress and enhance levels of self-​efficacy and self-​regulation, which are psychological constructs that have been linked to better health (Bandura, 1997). Note that musical activities and experiences are understood in holistic terms. Consequently, health and wellbeing effects result from complex interactions in which individual differences and cultural and contextual variables play important roles in moderating potential wellbeing effects. In other words, musical activities per se are not attributed unique and irreplaceable roles in enhancing individual wellbeing. However, it is assumed that musical activities are likely to achieve such effects and that they are most often free of significant health risks or side effects. Perhaps most important, they are associated with high levels of compliance, desirability and perceived health effects. In sum, they need to be considered in a wider context of culture and arts participation for public health (Fancourt & Finn, 2019) in general and as agents for the enhancement of individual health-​related quality of life in particular.

Human stress and immune responses The beneficial effects of musical activities on health-​related outcomes are most likely following a in direct pathway. Of course, certain characteristics of music, such as tempo, loudness or the bodily activity of playing an instrument or singing might affect health-​related processes in a direct manner, but current evidence suggests that the potentially beneficial effects of music might be mediated to an extent by stress reduction, which in turn affects health (according to the biopsychological mediation model; see Wuttke-​Linnemann et al., 2019). The stress system is an important part of human physiology, with intricate interrelationships between various subsystems. Chief among those is the hypothalamic–​pituitary–​adrenal axis, with its end product cortisol, as well as the autonomic nervous system, which may be reflected by various indices, such as catecholamines and electrodermal activity. Both systems are closely related, and both achieve a substantial impact on the immune system, thus affecting health-​related outcomes. As stress is one of the key factors that might undermine both mental and physical health (McEwen, 1998), its reduction via non-​invasive means is essential. There is a vast amount of research showing that musical activities directly impact the biological stress system, with positive effects on cortisol concentrations being the most frequently observed finding (Fancourt, Williamon 70

71

The health benefits

et al., 2016; Finn & Fancourt, 2018; Kreutz et al., 2012; Thoma et al., 2011). Music activities also affect the autonomic nervous system, as autonomic biomarkers are particularly sensitive to characteristics of the music (e.g., rhythm, tempo, valence, arousal), thus leading to autonomic arousal. This effect is most likely mediated at the level of the brainstem, as brainstem nuclei are responsible for early analysis of acoustic features of music (Koelsch, 2014). Music activities have also been shown to be associated with changes in a variety of immune markers (e.g., natural killer cells, cytokines and immunoglobulins), suggesting that music has the potential to enhance the body’s immune response via its effect on both the hypothalamic–​pituitary–​adrenal axis and the autonomic nervous system (Chanda & Levitin, 2013).The precise physiological mechanisms underlying the health-​beneficial effects of music still remain to be elucidated. However, the biopsychological mediation model is supported by a growing body of empirical evidence and provides a valid theoretical framework for future research.

Psychobiological effects of singing and playing instruments Singing Since singing is so good a thing, I wish all men could sing. (William Byrd, 1920[1588]) Studies from the beginning of the millennium on wellbeing and health benefits of choral singing have been important motivations for subsequent systematic investigations. To begin with, Bailey and Davidson (2002) interviewed members of a choir of homeless men. They found that regular choral singing provided opportunity for flow, social reward and initiating reflections on life situations. Clift and Hancox (2001) initiated the most extensive research programme on singing and health in the United Kingdom, and perhaps worldwide. They conducted open-​ended interviews on the perceived health benefits of singing in a university choir, followed by a quantitative investigation to assess the validity and reliability of a newly developed scale of singing-​related wellbeing. Self-​reports overall confirmed a range of psychophysiological benefits, including improvement of mood, reduced stress and better relaxation. Participants also felt that they benefitted in terms of respiration, posture and immune functions. Follow-​up studies using mixed-​methods approaches and including choirs from different nationalities overall confirmed and extended the initial evidence while also finding positive associations between prolonged participation in choral singing and quality of life (Clift, Hancox et  al., 2010). The original research was further supplemented by systematic reviews of different subdomains of singing and health (Clift, Nicol et al., 2010; Williams et al., 2018). Despite this progress in the field, there remain uncertainties about the effectiveness of singing as a health-​promoting activity and the extent to which some of the claims that have been proposed in terms of its wellbeing benefits can be sustained given the available evidence (Clift, 2012). Beck and colleagues (2000) were among the first to address psychobiological effects of choral singing during rehearsal and performance sessions. Those authors’ study protocol included a range of psychological measures and two biomarkers, namely salivary cortisol and immunoglobulin A (s-​IgA). Cortisol was found to significantly decrease during rehearsal and significantly increase during performance. One interpretation of this finding is that the former situation was associated with less social stress as compared to the latter. Moreover, there were increases in s-​ IgA across conditions, with psychological measures of emotional reward predicting higher levels in a regression analysis. Beck and colleagues (2006) extended these findings that solo singers 71

72

Gunter Kreutz and Urs Nater

could also benefit from enhanced immunocompetence in the presence of feelings of wellbeing and reduced concern with artistic identity (Beck et al., 2006). These authors also found that higher stress levels were associated with lower levels of s-​IgA. Stone et al. (2018) provided initial evidence of an association between group singing and increases of endocannabinoids in healthy amateurs.These findings tend to confirm observations of heightened pain tolerance, a proxy for the release of endorphins, in response to synchronised group activities, including singing (Tarr et al., 2014). The observation of lower cortisol levels in response to group singing and higher levels in response to solo singing was recently confirmed in a study which also observed changes in concentrations of salivary oxytocin (Schladt et  al., 2017). Oxytocin is a hormone that is traditionally associated with breastfeeding and mother–​infant bonding, but it has also been investigated intensively in the wider context of sexual and social behaviour (Campbell, 2010). However, contrary to the finding by Kreutz (2014) that 30 minutes of group singing led to increases in concentrations of oxytocin, Schladt et al. (2017) observed decreases in group singing and higher levels in solo singing within a time window of about 20 minutes. Over the years, several reviews have identified potential benefits, but also some significant research gaps (Clift, Nicol et al., 2010; Daykin et al., 2018). Perhaps the most robust finding across studies targeting different populations has been a general increase of subjective wellbeing in response to group singing (Daykin et al., 2018).These authors also note that studies involving groups of people with low wellbeing scores are rare and that the majority of studies include healthy females. This general trend notwithstanding, there has been initial evidence showing that singing can reduce depression and anxiety in individuals with mental health (Coulton et al., 2015) or lung problems (Skingley et al., 2014). In sum, despite substantial progress over the last decades, the long-​term effects on wellbeing or health-​related quality of life of group singing at amateur levels is by and large unknown. There are a number of promising areas of current and future work that have the potential of affecting health policies; for example, in the domains of lung health (Lewis et al., 2016) and brain health (Gold et al., 2019; Osman et al., 2016). Recently, auditory health has been advocated as a novel field of inquiry with wider implications for the rehabilitation of older adults who are affected by hearing loss (Dubinsky et al., 2019; Russo, 2006).The extent to which regular group singing could enhance immune function, as it is often claimed, can be seen as one of the more robust findings (Fancourt,Williamon et al., 2016). However, even in that case there has been no study yet to show that group singing is associated with lower risk of infection.

Playing instruments Playing music in ensembles as amateur instrumentalists is often perceived as rewarding and thus a significant component of social leisure activities (Juniu et  al., 1996). Although professional musicians have also reported high levels of life satisfaction and happiness (Ascenso et al., 2018), amateur musicians seem to show relatively greater appreciation of social benefits across educational (Hallam, 2010; Iadeluca & Sangiorgio, 2009), therapeutic (Ansdell & DeNora, 2016; Fancourt, Perkins et al., 2016) and leisure (Hallam et al., 2017) contexts. Therefore, it has been proposed that a lifelong learning perspective appears appropriate to investigate the long-​term costs and benefits of active music participation in terms of mental, physical and social wellbeing and health (Creech et al., 2014). Williamson and Bonshor (2019) observed in their cross-​sectional interview study that amateur brass players found therapeutic value in regular engagement in rehearsals and occasional concerts. Individual psychophysical benefits included improved posture, muscle tone, core 72

73

The health benefits

strength, general fitness, stamina, manual dexterity, flexibility and cardiovascular function. Perhaps not surprisingly with respect to the nature of the activity, many participants characterised brass playing as exercising respiration. However, individual benefits were obviously interdependent with the social context and bonding between ensemble members that provided a familial atmosphere that is rarely overshadowed by conflict. Finally, interviewees considered their musical activity as a positive cognitive stimulation. Learning to play new pieces or retrieving rehearsed music from memory were believed to contribute to mental sanity.These findings corroborate and extend earlier work on non-​musical effects on quality of life in amateur musicians (Coffman, 2002). In sum, perceived health benefits are reminiscent of the findings reported above by Clift and Hancox (2001) with respect to singing. Does playing music in amateur ensembles cause wellbeing and health effects? To answer this question, it has been argued that non-​musical aspects, such as motivations to engage in meaningful activities that give rise to flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990), could be crucial (Appelgren et  al., 2019). Therefore, the same methodological issues as noted for choral singing apply to playing instruments, namely to disentangle the psychophysiological effects of the activity from the social context and other moderating factors. Rohwer and Coffman (2006) investigated high and low music participation by constructing groups of amateur band players (n = 269) and non-​players (n = 211) to compare measures of quality of life and spirituality for each group. Additionally, they asked band members about perceived health improvements in response to playing music. With regard to the first research question, enhanced quality of life was noted for band players, whereas enhanced spirituality was noted for non-​players. In addition, 69% of the band players reported no changes in their perceived health status. However, mental health and lung capacity/​breathing improvements since the beginning of engaging in the band programme were reported by a substantial proportion of players (Rohwer & Coffman, 2006). Clearly, the issue of causality is mainly of academic relevance, whereas practitioners will rely on a wealth of experiences and observations to ascribe health and wellbeing effects from engaging with music. In addition, there have been recommendations to propose music listening as a strategy for healthy ageing on the basis of studies showing that frequent music listeners were more often engaged in cognitive, physical, social and spiritual activities and reported fewer severe health problems as compared to peers who were less engaged with listening (Kaufmann et al., 2018).

Educational settings Burnard and Dragovic (2015) interviewed students and teachers who participated in a collaborative music learning programme. They observed psychological benefits in response to the activity at individual and social levels. In relation to the former, key advantages were self-​discovery and embodiment. In brief, extended musical learning provided opportunity to explore creative abilities and build connections between evolving bodily skills and music learning. At the same time, participating in a music group was associated with enhanced feelings of togetherness. In a related study involving groups of primary school children, Rabinowitch et al. (2013) compared the effects of musical games with do-​nothing controls on empathy scores of psychometric tests which were applied pre and post sessions. Indeed, musical game children outperformed controls, but they also showed lower baseline scores as compared to controls. Empathy levels in both groups were similar at the end of the intervention. It is not clear to what extent these findings could be explained by a combination of retest and experimenter effects. 73

74

Gunter Kreutz and Urs Nater

Hallam and colleagues (2017) addressed making music as a lifelong leisure activity from a psychological perspective. They reviewed studies on amateur ensemble practices including instrumental performance and singing and concluded that beneficial effects seemed to arise from both individual and social experiences. Specifically, interviewees of different age groups from the Music For Life Project (Creech et al., 2014) often reported similar improvements of emotional aspects such as self-​regulation, feelings of social reward, mood enhancement and pride.

Older adulthood The specific benefits and challenges of music-​making in later life have attracted a range of research efforts. Specifically, playing music or learning to play music instruments in later life can be seen as a significant cognitive stimulation that benefits a wide range of processes such as attention, memory and motivation. For example, Bugos (2019) submitted a cohort of healthy older adults (aged 60–​80 years; n = 135) to one of three age-​matched groups: (1) a 16-​week piano training programme or (2) a percussion training programme (each with a 3-​hour practice requirement) or (3)  a do-​nothing-​but-​listen-​to-​music control group to assess potential changes in a range of cognitive and psychomotor functions. The author found significant improvements of motor functions in both music performance groups, but improvements were dependent on training levels (Bugos, 2019). These findings corroborated and extended earlier findings which specifically suggested piano training as an intervention to improve motor coordination and synchronisation in older adults between 60 and 85  years of age (Bugos et al., 2007). Playing music at an older age may also come with some challenges. For example, Rohwer (2008) addressed the health concerns among 83 adult band musicians (age range: 47 to 91 years) who attended a summer senior band camp. The author observed that visual and hearing problems dominated performance-​related health concerns, followed by musculoskeletal issues and other physical ailments (Rohwer, 2008). Rohwer (2012) extended her findings in a similar group by showing that psychological factors such as positive relationships with the conductor or a pleasant and humorous atmosphere during rehearsals were of great importance in enabling beneficial experiences of ensemble playing.

Brain health Brain health is arguably the most important concern with respect to public health, in general, and to individual healthy ageing, in particular (Altenmüller & Schlaug, 2012). For example, the consequences of lifelong leisure activities on brain health have been studied from the perspectives of sports (Bherer et al., 2013; Hillman et al., 2008). However, in one seminal study, which aimed at highlighting the roles of lifelong leisure activities on the onset of dementia in older adults, Verghese and colleagues (2003) observed that instead of physical exercise, dancing and playing musical instruments influenced a delayed onset of symptoms of dementia in a cohort of older adults in the United States. Although these findings appeared to generalise across other cognitive activities in later studies (Verghese et al., 2006), they sparked a discussion on how lifelong music learning might influence cognitive reserve (Gooding et al., 2014) and cognitive ageing (Hanna-​Pladdy & MacKay, 2011). Following a longitudinal study by Cohen and colleagues (2007), who observed positive physical and mental health effects through cultural participation in healthy older adults, Hanna-​Pladdy and MacKay (2011) asked the crucial question of whether creative engagement contributes to preserve brain function and reduce 74

75

The health benefits

the risk of dementia. Indeed, Schneider and colleagues (2019) confirmed potential cognitive benefits from playing music in healthy older adults in a scoping review in which 11 out of 666 studies were identified to meet the inclusion criteria. Consequently, they demand high-​quality research to understand the underlying mechanisms (Schneider et al., 2019). Therefore, a consensus can be assumed in ascribing significant correlations between learning to play musical instruments and cognitive brain functions. However, such associations neither reveal the direction of causality nor explain the contribution of individual (e.g., genetic) or contextual (e.g., socio-​economic and/​or cultural environment) factors. Some authors argue that persons with healthier or higher functioning brains are more likely to engage in complex creative abilities such as playing music, or that genetic and/​or personality traits are significant influences (Butkovic et al., 2015; Corrigall & Schellenberg, 2015). In sum, the effects on brain health of playing music in ensembles provide a promising area for future research. Despite the challenges that may arise from assessing the influences of individual differences and contextual factors, there is overall consensus that, particularly in amateurs, the enjoyment of participation may by far outweigh psychophysical and mental stress in response to rehearsing and performing music.

Conclusions This brief overview advocates for amateur singing and playing music across the lifespan as a multifaceted topic of interdisciplinary research across the humanities, social and health sciences. There is considerable potential in such leisure activities to enhance quality of life and as effective strategies of health prevention. However, irrespective of mainly correlational findings, there is insufficient evidence to suggest singing or playing music per se cause health and wellbeing benefits. Moreover, it may be that any such effects are not specific to music (Lonsdale & Day, 2020).To conclude, singing and playing music remain meaningful areas of investigation into the health and quality of life implications of leisure activities. It appears desirable that policymakers pay greater attention to music as a potential public health strategy.

Reflective questions 1. Does music affect wellbeing, health and/​or quality of life? 2. Do health policies reflect the importance of leisure activities in general and music in particular to improve health promotion and public health? 3. What is the value of showing specific effects of music engagement on health and wellbeing?

Suggestions for further reading Coulton, S., Clift, S., Skingley, A., & Rodriguez, J. (2015). Effectiveness and cost-​effectiveness of community singing on mental health-​related quality of life of older people: Randomised controlled trial. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 207(3), 250–​255. https://​doi.org/​10.1192/​bjp.bp.113.129908 Hallam, S., Creech, A., & Varvarigou, M. (2017). Well-​being and music leisure activities through the lifespan. In R. Mantie & G. D. Smith (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music making and leisure (pp. 31–​60). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780190244705.013.30 MacDonald, R., Kreutz, G., & Mitchell, L. (Eds.). (2012). Music, health, and wellbeing. Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​acprof:oso/​9780199586974.001.0001

75

76

Gunter Kreutz and Urs Nater

References Altenmüller, E., & Schlaug, G. (2012). Music, brain, and health: Exploring biological foundations of music’s health effects. In R. A. R. MacDonald, G. Kreutz, & L. A. Mitchell (Eds.), Music, health, and wellbeing (pp. 13–​24). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​acprof:oso/​9780199586974.003.0002 Ansdell, G., & DeNora, T. (2016). Musical pathways in recovery. Routledge. https://​doi.org/​10.4324/​ 9781315596976 Antonovsky, A. (1997). Salutogenese. Zur Entmystifizierung der Gesundheit. Dgvt. Appelgren, A., Osika, W., Theorell, T., Madison, G., & Bojner Horwitz, E. (2019). Tuning in on motivation:  Differences between non-​musicians, amateurs, and professional musicians. Psychology of Music, 47(6), 864–​873. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735619861435 Ascenso, S., Perkins, R., & Williamon, A. (2018). Resounding meaning: A PERMA wellbeing profile of classical musicians. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2018.01895 Bailey, B. A., & Davidson, J. W. (2002). Adaptive characteristics of group singing:  Perceptions from members of a choir for homeless men. Musicae Scientiae, 6(2), 221–​256. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 102986490200600206 Bandura, A. (1997). Self-​efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman and Company. Batt-​Rawden, K. (2010). The role of music in a salutogenic approach to health. International Journal of Mental Health Promotion, 12(2), 11–​18. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14623730.2010.9721809 Beck, R. J., Cesario, T. C.,Yousefi, A., & Enamoto, H. (2000). Choral singing, performance perception, and immune system changes in salivary immunoglobulin a and cortisol. Music Perception, 18(1), 87–​106. http://​ search.ebscohost.com/​login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2000-​00722-​004&site=ehost-​live Beck, R. J., Gottfried, T. L., Hall, D. J., Cisler, C. A., & Bozeman, K. W. (2006). Supporting the health of college solo singers:  The relationship of positive emotions and stress to changes in salivary IgA and cortisol during singing. Journal for Learning through the Arts, 2(1). http://​escholarship.org/​uc/​item/​ 003791w4 Bherer, L., Erickson, K. I., & Liu-​Ambrose, T. (2013). A review of the effects of physical activity and exercise on cognitive and brain functions in older adults. Journal of Aging Research, 2013, Article ID 657508. https://​doi.org/​10.1155/​2013/​657508 Blood, A. J., & Zatorre, R. J. (2001). Intensely pleasurable responses to music correlate with activity in brain regions implicated in reward and emotion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(20), 11818–​11823. https://​doi.org/​10.1073/​pnas.191355898 Bugos, J. A. (2019). The effects of bimanual coordination in music interventions on executive functions in aging adults. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 13. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fnint.2019.00068 Bugos, J. A., Perlstein,W. M., McCrae, C. S., Brophy,T. S., & Bedenbaugh, P. H. (2007). Individualized piano instruction enhances executive functioning and working memory in older adults. Aging & Mental Health, 11(4), 464–​471. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​13607860601086504 Burnard, P., & Dragovic, T. (2015). Collaborative creativity in instrumental group music learning as a site for enhancing pupil wellbeing. Cambridge Journal of Education, 45(3), 371–​392. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1080/​0305764X.2014.934204 Butkovic, A., Ullén, F., & Mosing, M. A. (2015). Personality related traits as predictors of music practice: Underlying environmental and genetic influences. Personality and Individual Differences, 74, 133–​ 138. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.paid.2014.10.006 Byrd, W. (1920). Psalms, sonnets, and songs of sadness and piety, to five parts: Two madrigals. Stainer and Bell. (Original work published 1588) Campbell, A. (2010). Oxytocin and human social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(3), 281–​295. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1088868310363594 Chanda, M. L., & Levitin, D. J. (2013). The neurochemistry of music. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(4), 179–​193. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.tics.2013.02.007 Clift, S. (2012). Singing, wellbeing and health. In R. MacDonald, G. Kreutz, & L. A. Mitchell (Eds.), Music, health, and wellbeing (pp. 113–​124). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​acprof Clift, S., & Hancox, G. (2001). The perceived benefits of singing: Findings from preliminary surveys of a university college choral society. The Journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 121(4), 248–​ 256. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​146642400112100409 Clift, S., Hancox, G., Morrison, I., Hess, B., Kreutz, G., & Stewart, D. (2010). Choral singing and psychological wellbeing: Quantitative and qualitative findings from English choirs in a cross-​national survey. Journal of Applied Arts and Health, 1(2), 19–​34. https://​doi.org/​10.1386/​jaah.1.1.19/​1

76

77

The health benefits Clift, S., Nicol, J., Raisbeck, M., Whitmore, C., & Morrison, I. (2010). Group singing, wellbeing and health: A systematic mapping of research evidence. UNESCO Observatory, 2(1). Coffman, D. (2002). Music and quality of life in older adults. Psychomusicology: A Journal of Research in Music Cognition, 18(1–​2),  76–​88. Cohen, G. D., Perlstein, S., Chapline, J., Kelly, J., Firth, K. M., & Simmens, S. (2007). The impact of professionally conducted cultural programs on the physical health, mental health, and social functioning of older adults –​2-​year results. Journal of Aging, Humanities, and the Arts, 1(1–​2), 5–​22. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1080/​19325610701410791 Corrigall, K. A., & Schellenberg, E. G. (2015). Predicting who takes music lessons:  Parent and child characteristics. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 282. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2015.00282 Coulton, S., Clift, S., Skingley, A., & Rodriguez, J. (2015). Effectiveness and cost-​effectiveness of community singing on mental health-​related quality of life of older people: Randomised controlled trial. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 207(3), 250–​255. https://​doi.org/​10.1192/​bjp.bp.113.129908 Creech, A., Hallam, S.,Varvarigou, M., & McQueen, H. (2014). Active ageing with music: Supporting wellbeing in the third and fourth Ages. Institute of Education Press. Croom, A. M. (2015). Music practice and participation for psychological well-​being: A review of how music influences positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment. Musicae Scientiae, 19(1), 44–​64. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864914561709 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. HarperCollins. Daykin, N., Mansfield, L., Meads, C., Julier, G.,Tomlinson, A., Payne, A., Duffy, L. G., Lane, J., D’Innocenzo, G., Burnett, A., Kay, T., Dolan, P., Testoni, S., & Victor, C. (2018). What works for wellbeing? A systematic review of wellbeing outcomes for music and singing in adults. Perspectives in Public Health, 138(1), 39–​46. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1757913917740391 DeNora, T. (2016). Music asylums:  Wellbeing through music in everyday life. Routledge. https://​doi.org/​ 10.4324/​9781315596730 Deutsches Musikinformationszentrum. (2018a). Chöre und Mitglieder in den Chorverbänden des Amateurmusizierens. http://​miz.org/​downloads/​statistik/​41/​41_​Choere_​Mitglieder.pdf Deutsches Musikinformationszentrum.(2018b).Orchester,Ensembles und Mitglieder in den Instrumentalverbänden des Amateurmusizierens. http://​miz.org/​downloads/​statistik/​96/​96-​Orchester-​Ensembles-​Mitglieder_​ 2018.pdf Dubinsky, E., Wood, E. A., Nespoli, G., & Russo, F. A. (2019). Short-​term choir singing supports speech-​ in-​noise perception and neural pitch strength in older adults with age-​related hearing loss. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 13. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fnins.2019.01153 Edwards, J. (Ed.). (2015). The Oxford handbook of music therapy (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press. https://​doi. org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199639755.001.0001 Fancourt, D., & Finn, S. (2019). What is the evidence on the role of the arts in improving health and well-​being? A scoping review. Copenhagen. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​17533015.2012 Fancourt, D., Perkins, R., Ascenso, S., Carvalho, L. A., Steptoe, A., & Williamon, A. (2016). Effects of group drumming interventions on anxiety, depression, social resilience and inflammatory immune response among mental health service users. PLOS ONE, 11(3), Article e0151136. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​ journal.pone.0151136 Fancourt, D., Williamon, A., Carvalho, L. A., Steptoe, A., Dow, R., & Lewis, I. (2016). Singing modulates mood, stress, cortisol, cytokine and neuropeptide activity in cancer patients and carers. Ecancermedicalscience, 10. https://​doi.org/​10.3332/​ecancer.2016.631 Finn, S., & Fancourt, D. (2018). The biological impact of listening to music in clinical and nonclinical settings:  A systematic review. Progress in Brain Research, 237, 173–​200. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​ bs.pbr.2018.03.007 Gembris, H. (2012). Music-​making as a lifelong development and resource for health. In R. A.  R. MacDonald, G. Kreutz, & L. Mitchell (Eds.), Music, health, and wellbeing (pp. 367–​382). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​acprof:oso/​9780199586974.003.0025 Gembris, H., Heye, A., & Seifert, A. (2018). Health problems of orchestral musicians from a life-​span perspective. Music & Science, 1. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​2059204317739801 Gold, C., Eickholt, J., Assmus, J., Stige, B., Wake, J. D., Baker, F. A., … Geretsegger, M. (2019). Music interventions for dementia and depression in elderly care (MIDDEL):  Protocol and statistical analysis plan for a multinational cluster-​randomised trial. BMJ Open, 9(3), Article e023436. doi: 10.1136/​ bmjopen-​2018-​023436

77

78

Gunter Kreutz and Urs Nater Gooding, L. F., Abner, E. L., Jicha, G. A., Kryscio, R. J., & Schmitt, F. A. (2014). Musical training and late-​life cognition. American Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease & Other Dementias, 29(4), 333–​343. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​1533317513517048 Hallam, S. (2010). The power of music: Its impact on the intellectual, social and personal development of children and young people. International Journal of Music Education, 28(3), 269–​289. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0255761410370658 Hallam, S., Creech, A., & Varvarigou, M. (2017). Well-​being and music leisure activities through the lifespan. In R. Mantie & G. D. Smith (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music making and leisure (pp. 31–​60). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780190244705.013.30 Hanna-​Pladdy, B., & MacKay, A. (2011). The relation between instrumental musical activity and cognitive aging. Neuropsychology, 25(3), 378–​386. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​a0021895 Hillman, C. H., Erickson, K. I., & Kramer, A. F. (2008). Be smart, exercise your heart: Exercise effects on brain and cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(1), 58–​65. https://​doi.org/​10.1038/​nrn2298 Iadeluca,V., & Sangiorgio,A. (2009). Bambini al centro: Music as a means to promote wellbeing. International Journal of Community Music, 1(3), 311–​318. https://​doi.org/​10.1386/​ijcm.1.3.311_​1 Juniu, S., Tedrick, T., & Boyd, R. (1996). Leisure or work? Amateur and professional musicians’ perception of rehearsal and performance. Journal of Leisure Research, 28(1),  44–​56. Kaufmann, C. N., Montross-​Thomas, L. P., & Griser, S. (2018). Increased engagement with life: Differences in the cognitive, physical, social, and spiritual activities of older adult music listeners. The Gerontologist, 58(2), 270–​277. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​geront/​gnw192 Koelsch, S. (2014). Brain correlates of music-​evoked emotions. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(3), 170–​180. https://​doi.org/​10.1038/​nrn3666 Kreutz, G. (2014). Does singing facilitate social bonding? Music and Medicine, 6(2),  51–​60. Kreutz, G. (2015). The value of music for public health. In S. Clift & P. Camic (Eds.), Oxford textbook of creative arts, health, and well-​being: International perspectives on practice, policy, and research (pp. 211–​217). Oxford University Press. Kreutz, G., & Bonshor, M. (in press). Ensembles for wellbeing. In R. Timmers, H. Gaunt, & F. Bailes (Eds.), Together in music: Participation, coordination, and creativity in ensembles. Oxford University Press. Kreutz, G., Quiroga, C., & Bongard, S. (2012). Psychoneuroendocrine research on music and health: An overview. In R. A. R. MacDonald, G. Kreutz, & L. Mitchell (Eds.), Music, health, and wellbeing (pp. 457–​ 476). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​acprof:oso/​9780199586974.003.0030 Lewis, A., Cave, P., Stern, M., Welch, L., Taylor, K., Russell, J., Doyle, A.-​M., Russell, A.-​M., McKee, H., Clift, S., Bott, J., & Hopkinson, N. S. (2016). Singing for lung health –​a systematic review of the literature and consensus statement. NPJ Primary Care Respiratory Medicine, 26, Article 16080. https://​doi. org/​10.1038/​npjpcrm.2016.80 Lonsdale, A. J., & Day, E. R. (2020). Are the psychological benefits of choral singing unique to choirs? A comparison of six activity groups. Psychology of Music, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0305735620940019 MacDonald, R., Kreutz, G., & Mitchell, L. (Eds.). (2012). Music, health, and wellbeing. Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​acprof:oso/​9780199586974.001.0001 McEwen, B. S. (1998). Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators. New England Journal of Medicine, 338(3), 171–​179. https://​doi.org/​10.1056/​NEJM199801153380307 Mithen, S. (2005). The singing neanderthals: The origins of music, language, mind and body. Phoenix. North, A. C., Hargreaves, D. J., & Hargreaves, J. J. (2004). Uses of music in everyday life. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22(1), 41–​77. https://​doi.org/​10.1525/​mp.2004.22.1.41 Osman, S. E., Tischler,V., & Schneider, J. (2016). “Singing for the brain”: A qualitative study exploring the health and well-​being benefits of singing for people with dementia and their carers. Dementia, 15(6), 1326–​1339. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1471301214556291 Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. Norton. Rabinowitch, T.-​C., Cross, I., & Burnard, P. (2013). Long-​term musical group interaction has a positive influence on empathy in children. Psychology of Music, 41(4), 484–​498. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735612440609 Rohwer, D. (2008). Health and wellness issues for adult band musicians. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 23(2),  54–​58. Rohwer, D. (2012). Going to the source:  Pedagogical ideas from adult band members. Journal of Band Research, 48(1),  45–​57.

78

79

The health benefits Rohwer, D., & Coffman, D. (2006). Relationships between wind band membership, activity level, spirituality, and quality of life in older adults. Research Perspectives in Music Education, 10(1),  21–​27. Russo, F. A. (2006). Perceptual considerations in designing hearing aids for music. Hearing Review. www.hearingreview.com/​ p ractice-​ building/​ p ractice- ​ m anagement/ ​ p erceptual- ​ c onsiderations​in-​designing-​and-​fitting-​hearing-​aids-​for-​music Ruud, E. (2005). Music: A salutogenetic way to health promotion. In G. Tellnes (Ed.), Urbanization and health. New challenges to health promotion and prevention. Academic Press. Schladt, T. M., Nordmann, G. C., Emilius, R., Kudielka, B. M., de Jong, T. R., & Neumann, I. D. (2017). Choir versus solo singing: Effects on mood, and salivary oxytocin and cortisol concentrations. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fnhum.2017.00430 Schneider, C. E., Hunter, E. G., & Bardach, S. H. (2019). Potential cognitive benefits from playing music among cognitively intact older adults: A scoping review. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 38(12), 1763–​ 1783. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0733464817751198 Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish. Free Press. Seligman, M. E. P. (2018). PERMA and the building blocks of well-​being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 13(4), 333–​335. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​17439760.2018.1437466 Skingley, A., Page, S., Clift, S., Morrison, I., Coulton, S., Treadwell, P., Vella-​Burrows, T., Salisbury, I., & Shipton, M. (2014). “Singing for breathing”: Participants’ perceptions of a group singing programme for people with COPD. Arts & Health: An International Journal of Research, Policy and Practice, 6(1), 59–​74. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​17533015.2013.840853 Stone, N. L., Millar, S. A., Herrod, P. J. J., Barrett, D. A., Ortori, C. A., Mellon, V. A., & O’Sullivan, S. E. (2018). An analysis of endocannabinoid concentrations and mood following singing and exercise in healthy volunteers. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 12. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fnbeh.2018.00269 Tarr, B., Launay, J., & Dunbar, R. I.  M. (2014). Music and social bonding:  “Self-​other” merging and neurohormonal mechanisms. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2014.01096 Thoma, M. V., Scholz, U., Ehlert, U., Nater, U. M., Costa, A., & Villalba, E. (2011). The psychoneuroendocrinology of music effects on health. Horizons in Neuroscience Research, 6(6), 189–​202. Verghese, J., LeValley, A., Derby, C., Kuslansky, G., Katz, M. J., Hall, C. B., Buschke, H., & Lipton, R. B. (2006). Leisure activities and the risk of amnestic mild cognitive impairment in the elderly. Neurology, 66(6), 821–​827. https://​doi.org/​10.1212/​01.wnl.0000202520.68987.48 Verghese, J., Lipton, R. B., Katz, M. J., Hall, C. B., Derby, C. A., Kuslansky, G., Ambrose, A. F., Sliwinski, M., & Buschke, H. (2003). Leisure activities and the risk of dementia in the elderly. The New England Journal of Medicine, 348, 2508–​2516. https://​doi.org/​10.1056/​NEJMoa022252 Williams, E., Dingle, G. A., & Clift, S. (2018). A systematic review of mental health and wellbeing outcomes of group singing for adults with a mental health condition. European Journal of Public Health, 28(6), 1035–​1042. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​eurpub/​cky115 Williamson, V. J., & Bonshor, M. (2019). Wellbeing in brass bands: The benefits and challenges of group music making. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2019.01176 Wuttke-​Linnemann, A., Feneberg, A., & Nater, U. M. (2019). Music and health. In M. Gellman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine. Springer. https://​doi.org/​doi.org/​10.1007/​978-​1-​4614-​6439-​6_​ 101901-​1

79

80

81

PART II

Processing and responding to music

82

83

INTRODUCTION Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

Part II addresses some fundamental questions that have intrigued music psychologists and music educators alike, concerning how humans process, listen, appraise and respond to music.This part considers critical implications for music education and community music of research focused around those questions. Collectively, the authors in this part highlight the lifelong and seemingly universal phenomenon of human ‘musicality’, whereby we respond emotionally, cognitively, physically and physiologically to music (Savage et  al., 2015), yet  also demonstrate the multifaceted influences that can shape these responses. Wilfried Gruhn (Chapter  6) draws on developmental psychology and neuroscientific perspectives in his discussion of the development of music processing in the musical mind at various points across the lifespan. Gruhn introduces us to the general dimensions of musical processing, structuring his discussion around developmental ages from prenatal stages and early childhood to the ages of schooling, adolescence and adulthood and to the maturation of cognitive abilities and their neural conditions. Gruhn draws our attention to the extraordinary musical sensitivity and open-​earedness that can be observed among infants and the ways in which as we mature, so too our musical cognition becomes embodied, embedded, enacted and/​or extended (Rowlands, 2010). In this vein, Gruhn explores the relative contributions to embodied music perception and cognition brought to bear by informal or non-​formal musical experience and formal music education as well as by cultural and social background. The chapter concludes with some reflections on the constraints of cognitive processing and its application to music education, in view of the enormous emotional power which accompanies any musical experience. A key message focuses on the idea of embodied cognition, with the implications for those who facilitate music learning and participation being that listeners can perceive and respond to musical phenomena in profound ways when their engagement is holistic, involving the mind and the body. The complex and multidimensional nature of responses to music is reinforced further by Robert Fulford, Alinka Greasley and Karen Burland (Chapter 7). Here the authors take a social-​ psychological perspective, drawing on cross-​cultural studies and research situated in both community and formal educational settings to argue that emotional responses to music can function as an indication of musical engagement; that these responses are integrally linked with cognitive, social and health benefits; and that shared musical responses can strengthen community

83

84

Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

bonds. The authors note the methodological limitations in studying emotional responses to music among very young children, but also highlight some evidence to support the view that particular emotional states can be induced by particular types of music (e.g., Cirelli & Trehub, 2020), noting that children may identify emotional cues in familiar music (Laukka et al., 2013). The authors go on to discuss the importance of musical response in adolescence, when social aspects of personal development are linked to musical engagement and when music is used increasingly for emotional regulation. Critical questions concerned with the functions of such emotional responses are addressed, distinguishing between uses of music that support positive emotional regulation and uses of music that foster rumination on negative memories, escape or problem avoidance. In this vein, the authors highlight the role of educators and community music leaders in guiding young people towards personal agency in their proactive use of music and the role of music in self-​regulation of positive mental health. Finally, the chapter turns to younger and older adults, demonstrating that while our responses to music may vary at different points in the life course, these responses, at any age, may include the physical desire to move to music; social affinity or bonding; a sense of ‘thrills’ or ‘chills’; and affirmations of social identity and reinforcement of memories. Alexandra Lamont (Chapter  8) focuses on the different experiences  –​and subsequent implications for cognition, learning and emotion  –​associated with listening versus hearing music. Lamont frames her discussion with the categories of unintentional listening (hearing) to background music; more intentional listening to music as an accompaniment to other activities; the more rare phenomenon of focused listening for its own sake; and finally listening while engaged in music-​making, involving highly engaged attention and activity (Boal-​Palheiros & Hargreaves, 2004). The discussion highlights an interplay between a host of social and intrapersonal factors, the aesthetic characteristics of the music itself and the capacity of music to trigger multisensory responses that may influence listening experience and responses to music. Therefore, while Lamont advocates that the role of a music educator or facilitator of music in the community can be to guide listeners towards a highly involved and focused music listening experience, she also explains the complexity of such an objective. Lamont furthermore cites some evidence that too great a focus on mindful listening could lead to an unintentional consequence of inhibiting creative and intuitive responses to music (Diaz, 2011). Overall, this chapter raises many critical questions about how we listen to and respond to music and how our listening experiences may be guided or enhanced within education or community contexts. The chapter concludes with a reminder that notwithstanding the role of educators in creating the conditions for music listening, the focus of music listening and, in turn, its personal meaning is ultimately controlled by the listener. Finally, Alexandra Lamont and David Hargreaves (Chapter 9) discuss the development and maintenance of musical preferences across the lifespan. Again, a holistic perspective frames this discussion, highlighting the intersection of the listener, the music itself and the context in shaping musical preferences across different phases of the life course. At the level of the music itself, and focusing on the aesthetics of music that may be associated with preferences, Lamont and Hargreaves highlight research supporting the view that preferred music may correspond to moderate levels of ‘arousal potential’ that is in turn affected by familiarity, novelty and complexity (Berlyne, 1971). Here, the authors link to a consideration of the listener, synthesising research concerned with individual differences in musical preference that may be associated with age, personality, cognitive style, gender, ethnic background and social class.Turning to context, Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model is used to illustrate the multiple contexts that may shape musical preferences, though the authors also remind us of the individuals (with all their attendant differences) and the specific musics and musical practices that are nested within 84

85

Introduction

the model. A key message in this chapter is that musical preferences are highly idiosyncratic and subject to change across the life course, while also being shaped by global and local musical cultures. Overall, Part II encompasses social psychological as well as neuroscientific perspectives in exploring the role of music education and community music in facilitating and harnessing the power of music perception and emotional responses to music among those who are engaged in playing, singing, listening or creating. Key messages that may have relevance within formal music education as well as community music concepts focus around promoting opportunities for holistic, embodied musical cognition, guiding music learners towards exercising personal agency in their proactive movement to music; social bonding through music; and discovering how the thrills, chills and joy associated with responses to particular musics can reinforce memories and identity.

References Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and psychobiology. Appleton-​Century-​Crofts. Boal-​Palheiros, G. M., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2004). Children’s modes of listening to music at home and at school. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 161/​162,  39–​46. Cirelli, L. K., & Trehub, S. E. (2020). Familiar songs reduce infant distress. Developmental Psychology, 56(5), 861–​868. Diaz, F. M. (2011). Mindfulness, attention, and flow during music listening: An empirical investigation. Psychology of Music, 41(1),  42–​58. Laukka, P., Eerola, T., Thingujam, N. S., Yamasaki, T., & Beller, G. (2013). Universal and culture-​specific factors in the recognition and performance of musical affect expressions. Emotion, 13(3), 434–​449. Rowlands, M. (2010). The new science of the mind. From extended mind to embodied phenomenology. The MIT Press. Savage, P. E., Brown, S., Sakai, E., & Currie, T. E. (2015). Statistical universals reveal the structures and functions of human music. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(29), 8987–​8992.

85

86

6 MUSICAL PROCESSING ACROSS THE LIFE COURSE Wilfried Gruhn

Introduction This chapter deals with the development of processing music in the musical mind throughout the lifespan. After an introduction to the general dimensions of musical processing, we follow the developmental ages from prenatal stages and early childhood (section 2) to the ages of schooling (section 3), adolescence and adulthood and to the maturation of cognitive abilities and their neural conditions (section 4), finally shedding some light on the opportunities of music-​making in the third and fourth ages (section 5). The chapter concludes with some reflections on the constraints of cognitive processing and its application to music education in view of the enormous emotional power which accompanies any musical experience. The development of musical processing has attracted many researchers from various fields and dimensions of interest, who have produced new insights and extended the knowledge of how humans process musical sound in their brains, how the mind and the body are involved in this process and how practitioners and listeners alike respond to music cognitively, emotionally and socially. This chapter provides readers with a survey of topical research from developmental psychology and neuroscience. Especially new insights from brain research have drawn the attention of a broad audience of musicians, educators and scientists as well as the interested public, attracted by the new possibilities of brain research related to music and music education (Gruhn & Rauscher, 2008; Koelsch, 2012; Peretz & Zatorre, 2003). Music psychology has also expanded and covers various dimensions of the developmental growth of musical processing (Hargreaves & Lamont, 2017). Although a great deal of our knowledge about cognitive processing is grounded in the results of neuroscience, it also plays on findings coming from behavioural studies and qualitative descriptions. Along with behavioural and empirical findings, we aim to present a condensed review of the research on the development of music processing throughout the lifespan. By this, the chapter mainly intends to uncover the structural conditions for playing, listening and recognising sound to be something which transcends mere sensory stimulation. Therefore, although the general line of the review follows the chronological development over the life course, it comprehensively demonstrates tonal and temporal processing in music and language and considers general aspects, such as neuroplasticity, performance and practice, auditory imagery and memory,

86

87

Musical processing across the life course

absolute pitch and sight-​reading, and introduces perception as action. Therefore, it equally centres on the physiological, psychological, neurobiological, social and cultural dimensions of human behaviour that contribute to the musical mind and foster understanding of the growth of individuals’ musical thinking and music performance.

Prenatal development and early childhood Prenatal research on human development has become a new research focus because foetal development establishes the basis for further development and behaviour in childhood in terms of perceptive, cognitive, behavioural and psychological dimensions, all of which have prenatal origins. This applies to auditory abilities, the vestibular sense of balance and the proprioceptive sense of body orientation and movement (Parncutt, 2009). The foetal auditory system starts to process sound around 20 weeks of gestation (Parncutt, 2006). The auditory system is one of the first senses that is fully developed and functioning before birth. Unlike the visual environment of the foetus, the auditory environment is rather rich and diverse; it consists of internal sounds (heartbeat, blood flow, breathing, digestive noise, body movement and even the mother’s voice) and external sounds (voices, environmental noise, music). Initially, the frequency range to which the cochlea responds is rather small, ranging from 200 to 1000 Hertz (Parncutt, 2006). More important, the external sound is muffled and attenuated when it passes through the mother’s body and the amniotic fluid.Therefore, internal sounds appear to be louder and clearer than external sounds. The mother’s voice, especially, is perceived through bone conduction and, therefore, plays a prominent role in foetal auditory environment. The attenuation affects the prominence of vowels compared to consonants, and the fundamental frequency contour is more salient than spectral information. It has been observed that the foetus responds to audible stimuli (music) by a change of heart rate and body movement. Heart beat acceleration evoked by sound perception begins at about 20 weeks (Lecanuet, 1996) and occurs regularly at about 26 weeks (Abrams, 1995). Motor responses to loud and rhythmically stimulating sounds become consistent at 28–​32 weeks (Kisilevsky et al., 2004). The cochlear and vestibular systems are connected and develop in parallel.Through maternal communication, the foetus has access to the mental and emotional state of the mother via the perceived sound and movement and via biochemical information (hormone concentration in the blood). By this, the foetus connects the maternal emotional state with patterns of sound and movement, which is important for postnatal development of emotional behaviour and supports the bonding of the child and the mother. Finally, there is a general interest in foetal learning. However, this primarily refers to habituation and memory (Hepper, 1991). It is obvious that a newborn can recognise their mother’s voice but not their father’s, even if the latter was equally present (DeCasper & Prescott, 1984; Lee & Kisilevsky, 2014). Similarly, newborns exhibit a different behaviour to music they have heard repeatedly before birth compared to unfamiliar music.This is primarily due to the habituation hypothesis, which explains the behaviour better than prenatal learning, and it supports the function of memory for musical tunes after prenatal exposure. Infants exhibit a natural and vital interest in musical features (for a review, see Trehub, 2006, 2009).They show a high sensitivity to rhythmic pulsation and melodic pitches.This is especially true for premature neonates who keep bonding with their mother through body contact and maternal vocalisation. In recent times, music has been used more and more in special care units as a treatment for preterm infants, because exposure to music can induce changes in the functional brain architecture and cause an increase of those networks that are normally found to be decreased in premature neonates (Lordier, Loukas et al., 2019; Lordier, Meskaldji et al., 2019). 87

88

Wilfried Gruhn

During the first months of life, infants are astonishingly proficient in processing pitch and time (metric) relations (Hannon & Johnson, 2004; Trehub et  al., 1999). They develop a pronounced sensitivity to expressive maternal singing. From the very beginning, they clearly prefer infant-​directed singing (motherese) to other types of singing or normal speech (Trainor, 1996). Furthermore, there is evidence that infants prefer consonant to dissonant sequences (Trainor & Heinmiller, 1998; Trainor et  al., 2002). Infants are already skilful listeners with a remarkable ability to differentiate between small sound changes. In the early stages, they are sensitive to changes even in tonalities and metric systems of non-​Western cultures (Hannon & Trehub, 2005; Trehub et al., 1999); however, by 12 months, this openness to all kinds of tonal and metric organisations gradually disappears as a result of cultural conditioning (Hannon & Trehub, 2005). This indicates a general openness of the mind for different tonal and metric systems which will consolidate with exposure and experience. Early childhood is characterised by an impressive development of aural skills and the ability to differentiate aural information. However, we must consider that infants and children experience and process music in a quite different way. Whereas adults measure time and space while counting units of distance from one to the next, children rely on the present and relate what they hear to what they have just heard before. But, in doing so, they do not measure; instead they experience time and space by the continuous flow of movement and the felt weight of their body. This is in essence what Rudolf Laban has elaborated in his Choreutics (Laban, 1991). Accordingly, flow and weight are the two main modalities of infants’ musical experience. The cognitive processing of musical sound and mental development have been investigated by Edwin Gordon’s music learning theory based on his concept of “audiation”, which aims at the constitution of genuinely musical thinking (Gordon, 1990). This endeavour calls for an integration of corporeal experience (movement) into perception and cognition. Whatever infants do, they get their body involved. The communicative interaction between the mother or the environment and the infant underpins the communicative function of body movements. Gestural narrative patterns of voice and body build the foundation of communicative musicality (Malloch & Trevarthen, 2009, 2018), which links musical thinking and expressiveness with body movement (Llinás, 2001). Gibson’s (1986) ecological perception theory has introduced a new view on cognition as an interactive exploration of the environment by responding to the affordance of what is to be perceived and recognised. In this regard, the body plays an essential role in the development of perception and cognition. Therefore, perception and cognition in infancy and childhood must be seen as embodied and enacted processes (Hurley, 2013; MacRitchie et al., 2013; Rowlands, 2010; van der Schyff et al., 2018). It has been argued that formal musical training enhances infants’ music skills, if not their general cognitive development; however, research in early childhood confirms that informal musical exposure has the best effect on the development of musical competencies (Trainor & Corrigall, 2010). A major area of musical development comprises singing and vocal development, and there is a large body of research on this (for a review, see Welch, 2016; Brodsky & Gruhn, 2021). Vocal babblings antecede singing and speaking. Here, one has to differentiate between vocal learning, which is based on imitation generated by the vocal organs and is shared by a few mammals (humans, bats, cetaceans, seals, elephants) and birds (songbirds, parrots, hummingbirds), and auditory learning, which is grounded in memories of sounds heard without the ability to imitate them. First indications of vocal learning appear in baby cries that mirror the prosodic shape of the sound envelope of the mother tongue (Mampe et al., 2009; Prochnow et al., 2019). The cultural rootedness and emotional expression of a mother’s vocal interactions with her infant are extremely important for its further development. 88

89

Musical processing across the life course

First approaches to singing are characterised by glides and instable pitches. Research has shown how young children primarily focus on pitch chroma instead of matching the precise pitch height (Stadler Elmer & Elmer, 2000). (See the sections on “Models of cognitive representation and neural processing” and “Absolute pitch” for further discussion of pitch chroma and pitch height.) Therefore, for infants’ early musical guidance, it is important to develop and consolidate their singing voice in contrast to the speaking voice, which has a much smaller vocal range (Gudmundsdottir, 2018; Rutkowski, 1997, 2015). However, early vocal development exhibits large individual differences according to infants’ musical aptitude and environmental stimulation.Therefore, it is quite problematic to indicate concrete dates and ages when children start using their singing voice; rather, one needs to distinguish the chronological age from the musical age (Gordon, 1990). In general, infants perform diverse vocal activities and different types of melodic development (Stadler Elmer, 2015) as precursors of their language acquisition.

The formation of the musical mind: Emerging cognitive abilities during schooling The years from starting school up to adolescence are characterised by the growth of cognitive abilities. It is the time when the prefrontal cortex, where cognitive functions are mainly located, matures. As early childhood is characterised by an exuberant growth of synapses (Bruer, 1999; Eliot, 1999), it now becomes more relevant to strengthen those connections that are used most and to prune others that are no longer needed. Pruning becomes as important as synaptogenesis for the functional stabilisation of neural networks. This process is favoured by environmental stimulation (enriched environment). The experience-​dependent plasticity of the brain opens a sensitive window to adapt to new demands and supports the cognitive development. As Piaget (1996) has shown, many cognitive functions are established by observation, exploration, reflection and interaction with the environment. This dimension has become extremely prominent in recent cognitive psychology. A  new science of the mind (Rowlands, 2010) accentuates the role of the interaction between the growing mind and its entanglement with external conditions. The philosopher Mark Rowlands rejects a Cartesian view of cognition that determines mental states and cognitive processes solely by neural mechanisms in the brain. On the contrary, he claims that external relations of the brain can become essential parts of the mind. Therefore mental states and cognitive processes are variously “embodied”, “embedded”, “enacted” and/​or “extended” (the “4E conception of the mind”).This focuses on a salient interaction of mental development with environmental conditions. The years of schooling aim at cognitive development in the processing of information and sensorial input. The blow-​up of cognitive transfer effects has stimulated music education as a means to foster domain-​general cognitive, social and personal competencies (Hallam, 2010). However, the Mozart effect has been discussed rather controversially (Gruhn, 2005). In general, one can state that musical activities exhibit a moderate positive near transfer effect (i.e., learning in a similar context of the same or related domain) on the development of music-​related skills, but weak effects on far transfer (effects in a different domain), such as on general intelligence or social behaviour. With regard to the development of genuine musical abilities, Edwin Gordon (2012) built his cognitive learning theory on the concept of audiation, which can be understood as the neural establishment of mental representations (Gruhn, 2018). Audiation describes a mental state which contains representations of musical phenomena (tonal and rhythmic). While listening to music, one audiates by activating a respective representation of what was previously heard and learned. This theoretical construct of music processing, however, doesn’t represent a mere Cartesian 89

90

Wilfried Gruhn

understanding of the mind, because listeners –​amateurs and professionals alike –​respond to their bodily experience of the sound and the environmental and corporeal conditions of the cultural field in which they are rooted. Through exposure and musical practice, students gain the abstract rules and structures of the grammar of their preferred familiar music because the brain functions as a rule-​generating system. However, currently it is difficult to describe how one adopts the system of hierarchical orders as a model of cognition and predictions in public schooling, since there is no longer just one binding musical grammar in favour of various multicultural impacts. Therefore, one cannot pinpoint generally when or even if a student develops a sense of tonality or of the flow of metric pulsation. During schooling, students grow into a musical culture of their own through active participation and personal involvement and embodiment. The way they perceive and process musical sound depends on their cultural and social background. In the following section, we see how the mature brain processes music.

Music processing in the mature brain Models of cognitive representation and neural processing Since the earliest brain map was produced by Korbinian Brodman in 1909, we have learned a lot more about the ‘what’ and ‘where’ of neural activities while processing music. New brain imaging technologies, including high-​resolution nanoscopies, have provided us with an extended knowledge about the location of brain areas and their functions. The Human Brain Project (a European Commission research project) pursues a detailed map of all neural connections (connectome). However, there are unsolved questions regarding the benefits of this knowledge for educational purposes. Single neurons and cell assemblies are specialised in processing particular parameters of sound (pitch, duration, rhythmic time structure, direction of movement, etc.), and those modules must collaborate to generate an integrated impression of a musical sound (Fodor, 1983), described as parallel distributed processing (Rumelhart & McClelland, 1986).Therefore, the most important accomplishment of the musical mind is to integrate the particular parameters of sound events into a holistic impression of music which is based on a synchronous oscillation of the firing patterns of neurons involved in sound perception. What we perceive as a musical tone consists of the pitch height (frequency) and pitch chroma (pitch class profile, independent of its height), which are the two dimensions of a tone; these are processed differently, but appear as one musical unit (tone). Krumhansl and collaborators have developed psychological models of the cognitive representation of pitch, on key relatedness and the representation of chord functions (Krumhansl, 1979; Krumhansl et al., 1982; Krumhansl & Kessler, 1982). These models may help to explain how participants of the same cultural environment cognitively represent pitch relations, but it has little relevance to music teaching and learning. However, what is important is to focus on the two dimensions of pitch qualities and their integration into perception, which might focus more on the one or the other and therefore influence the quality of perception.

Neuroplasticity Brain architecture is determined by genetic factors regarding its general structure, but in detail it develops individually according to environmental and educational impacts and individual use. The brain is not firmly wired; its individual structure is rather plastic and moulds its internal 90

91

Musical processing across the life course

structure in a dynamic process according to environmental demands and personal use. Thus, Elbert et  al. (1995) have demonstrated that the cortical representation of the fingers of the left hand of violinists is increased compared with non-​musicians. Previous studies have also reported structural brain changes in auditory, sensorimotor and visuospatial areas. Intensive musical training results in greater grey matter volumes in different brain areas, which cannot be ascribed only to brain maturation (Groussard et  al., 2014). Because of their training of dependent structural and functional brain modifications, musicians have been used as a model of brain plasticity (Altenmüller & Furuya, 2016; Schlaug, 2015). Deliberate multisensory practice over a long period of time and strong commitment to this activity causes extended networks of multimodal sensorial integration regions. The cross-​modal plasticity probably explains some near and far transfer effects associated with long-​term musical training (Schlaug, 2009).

Music and language Another important aspect of musical perception is time and the perceptional structuring of time flow. Music shares this aspect with language and, therefore, also shares neural resources (Patel, 2008). Recently, neurolinguists have started to refer to a dual-​stream model of information processing, with partly identical neural pathways (Hickok & Poeppel, 2007; Saur et al., 2008) in which the dorsal (upper) stream is involved in signals to phonological representation and the ventral (lower) stream refers to the auditory processing of signals for semantic comprehension. In line with linguistic experiments, it has been demonstrated by magnetoencephalography studies that the brain exhibits electrophysiological event-​related potential signals independent of special musical training when unexpected irregular syntactic combinations are performed. The left anterior negativity is elicited by morphosyntactic violations (Koelsch, 2012). In music, an early right anterior negativity constitutes the neural correlate of music-​syntactic processing; for example, in a regular or irregular chord progression (Koelsch, 2012). Beyond that, it is more difficult to address musical semantics. In general, an N400 signal (a negative deflection peaking around 400 milliseconds after a post-​stimulus onset) indicates the processing of intra-​musical meanings (Koelsch, 2012). However, a neurophysiological reaction to structural hierarchies premises a certain degree of familiarity with the particular musical culture and separates this kind of “semantics” from formal “syntactic” regularities.

Performance and practice To play a musical instrument demands a great deal of auditory-​motor interaction. It calls for precise motor coordination with permanent simultaneous auditory control to enact fine motor reflexes. Ongoing feedback loops determine the timing of movements, the sequencing of motor patterns and the spatial organisation of finger positions (Zatorre et al., 2007). To position the fingers precisely in time and place them in the right position on the key- or fingerboard involves several cortical and subcortical regions as well as the cerebellum and the basal ganglia. For the production of motor sequences, premotor and prefrontal cortices are activated. In the spatial organisation of finger movements, sensory-​motor and premotor areas are involved (Zatorre et al., 2007). However, it needs a lot of repeated practising to automatise fast motor patterns and motor coordination so that these programs can be stored in subcortical regions. In general, musical performance and practice are built on a strong but complex auditory-​motor interaction. A dominant aspect of music processing is pitch, which is represented mentally lateral to the primary cortex (Heschl’s gyrus). Pitch sequences that unfold over time engage neurons in 91

92

Wilfried Gruhn

anterior (front) and posterior (back) pathways.Therefore, different parameters of a melody (contour, interval size, durations, metric structures) might be processed in different streams (Zatorre et al., 2007). It is an interesting feature that musicians who listen to music they have studied co-​ activate auditory and motor areas, once again underlining the strong auditory-​motor interaction in musicians (Bangert & Altenmüller, 2003; Zatorre et al., 2007). Furthermore, the neural interaction of auditory and motor activities is crucial for mental rehearsal where sound and motor patterns are practised mentally. An important ability for musicians is pitch discrimination. The discrimination sensitivity depends on physiological (genetic) and training-​dependent factors. In early music aptitude tests, discrimination of fine pitch changes functioned as an indicator of music aptitude. Psychoacoustic and functional MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) studies have shown that musicians outperform non-​musicians by a lower pitch discrimination threshold which is correlated with neural activity in the right auditory cortex (Bianchi et al., 2017). Besides pitch discrimination, time structure (rhythm) plays an important role in musical performance. Here, the insula and the cerebellum are relevant to the development and representation of motor programs. In ensemble music, a precise synchronisation of all parts is essential.This ability is clearly linked with anticipation and prediction of the next beat. Neurophysiological studies have demonstrated that auditory temporal predictions during sensorimotor synchronisation reflect an extremely complex task and, therefore, recruit a distributed network of cortico-​ cerebellar brain areas (Pecenka et al., 2013). Instrumental practice is often seen as training of repetitive motor patterns. However, recent findings from sport science show that it is not the repetition of the intended optimal motor patterns that results in an efficient behaviour, but exploring the diversity of different motor sequences adequate to the individual physiology to establish the most appropriate result. “Differential learning” demonstrates increased learning rates compared to repetitive learning. EEG (electroencephalography) measurements exhibit an increased involvement of parieto-​ occipital regions that facilitates early consolidation in motor learning (Henz & Schöllhorn, 2016). These results from motor learning in several sport disciplines have also been applied to instrumental practice, establishing a new systematics of motor learning in instrumental pedagogy (Widmaier, 2016).

Auditory imagery, audiation and memory Auditory imagery is a form of a mental representation of an imagined, physically not present sound. Here, the same neural channels are activated as in real music. Therefore, it shares some traits with Gordon’s (2012) concept of audiation. Through audiation, one activates a mental representation of a musical entity (an interval, a motif, a rhythmic cell, etc.) which has already been established and is a prerequisite to giving an internal or genuine musical meaning to what has been heard before or is just imagined. Unlike audiation, which is completely independent of physical sound, auditory imagery comes close to memory, as it can result from a sort of recall of what has already been heard. Thus, auditory imagery is purely a mental process and can be described as thinking in sound. This ability is a solid indicator of musical aptitude and, thus, a core issue in music learning, whereas auditory imagery is sometimes mixed with procedural memory and uses the same neural activations as in real music. Memory is a storage of musical information due to former sensorial experience, which can be retrieved and actualised. Memory capacity changes with age. However, it is striking how long and stable memory for some tunes and pieces can persist throughout the lifespan, and as a consequence, it is implemented in rehabilitation treatments.

92

93

Musical processing across the life course

Absolute pitch Absolute pitch is the rare ability to identify or produce a given pitch without a reference tone. This ability is often associated with a higher level of musicianship (Levitin, 2008). However, it has been shown that even children are able to recall familiar songs on the precise pitch level that they had used or heard many times before.This type of a latent absolute pitch also indicates a relevant portion of pitch memory, which is involved in the recall of pitch independent of its octave invariant chroma, or physical spectrum (Jakubowski et  al., 2017). Therefore, two subprocesses of absolute pitch recognition can be differentiated: perceptual structures of processing pitch chroma and cognitive associations with a verbal label (Elmer et al., 2015; Kim & Knösche, 2017). During auditory perception, the human brain analyses time and frequency simultaneously. There is also psychophysical evidence that a musical tone is characterised by two distinct dimensions: pitch height represents a linear dimension caused by the increase of frequencies (e.g., by transposition by an octave), whereas pitch chroma is based on a cyclic octave-​independent dimension of recurring tone qualities, so-​called Tonigkeit (Révész, 1926; Wellek, 1963). Both have distinct representations in the human auditory cortex (Warren et al., 2003) and are crucial for absolute pitch recognition. Whilst chroma determines the harmonic and melodic aspects of music, it is robust in timbre and dynamics. Although it is not yet well understood how the two pitch properties interact in absolute pitch, it seems clear that chroma is highly relevant to pitch recognition ability (Korpell, 1965), which is why auditory perception and identification tasks focus on pitch class rather than octave position. There are two different dimensions of sound perception that account for clearly distinguishable modes of pitch perception, depending on which aspect of the sound the perception is primarily focused: on tone as a whole with independent recognition of timbre and fundamental pitch; or on its spectral components. Thus, Schneider and Wengenroth (2009) differentiate between two types of listeners according to their aural orientation: holistic (or fundamental) and spectral listeners. It has been demonstrated that both modes are reflected by structural and functional asymmetries in Heschl’s gyrus (Schneider, Sluming, Roberts, Bleeck & Rupp, 2005). Furthermore, has been shown that pitch labelling accuracy in absolute pitch possessors might be influenced by the pitch perception preference (Gruhn et al., 2018), indicated by the individual pitch as measured by the Pitch Perception Preference Test (Schneider & Bleeck, 2005; Schneider, Sluming, Roberts, Scherg et al., 2005). Absolute pitch can, therefore, be understood as a highly complex ability with strong associations with the type of pitch preference. This has implications for the teaching of listening skills and ear training methods.

Sight-​reading Music reading and playing from notation is an important faculty of music performance. It is based on the mental connection of a sign or symbol with sound. The notation uses symbols, instead of letter names or fingerings, to represent sound. Reading means to take all musical information from the notation and transfer it into a meaningful and expressive musical performance. Researchers have investigated how well professional musicians were able to connect visual symbols with audiated sound while silently reading scores of well-​known themes embedded into a figuratively embellished notation (Brodsky et al., 2003; Brodsky et al., 2008). Only 80% of the participants achieved correct recognition scores for the themes. Notational audiation as a core ability is essential, namely in situations with little or no preparation, which is indicated as prima vista and is common in ensemble situations and 93

94

Wilfried Gruhn

accompaniment (Lehmann & Kopiez, 2009). To study the mechanics of prima vista, sight-​ reading is necessary to consider the eye movements that are relevant to gathering information from sight. The eye does not fixate on an object (the notation) steadily, but in rapid movements (saccades) four to five times per second, followed by short fixation rests.The musical mind takes information from the notation via these saccadic movements and generates a consistent picture of the score. Eye movement patterns, necessary to perform a notated melody or to read a polyphonic score, can only develop through experience and training. Because it is not possible to fixate on every note in a piano score, one after the other, the eyes need to jump back and forth several times and construct a connected line of single events. For this, the eye–​hand span –​ that is, the individual distance between the actual point of performance and the farthest point of fixation –​is crucial for the ability to sight-​read. Research has shown that subjects perform more accurately with a preview of two to four beats (Lehmann & Kopiez, 2009). The acquisition of expertise in piano sight-​reading is supported by technical piano skills, size of repertoire and accumulated accompanying experience. Additionally, psychomotor effects (tapping speed, trill) and general cognitive abilities (reaction time, mental speed, working memory) have been investigated. Best predictors for an overall sight-​reading score are the trill speed between third and fourth finger, the duration of sight-​reading experience and auditory imagery (audiation) abilities (Kopiez & Lee, 2008). Since one cannot sight-​read beyond the established level of performance experience, sight-​reading must be seen as mainly a matter of training and experience (Lehmann & Kopiez, 2009).

Perception and action In recent times, perception and cognition have been viewed in the context of evolutionary biology, where it is evident that cognitive processes such as thinking and audiating have evolved from bodily movements. As Rodolfo Llinás has demonstrated, “the evolutionary development of a nervous system [is] an exclusive property of actively moving creatures” (2001, p. 17). And these “external properties … have begun to be internalized in the brain” (p. 61).Therefore, “the ability to think … arises from the internalization of movement” (p. 62).This has been confirmed recently by the neurobiologist Daniel Wolpert (2011), who underlines the primary function of the brain to produce adaptable and complex movements. Consequently, the perception of music is strongly associated with corporeal activities. Even the perception itself can be seen as, and is based on, bodily actions (Gruhn, 2020). This becomes obvious when musicians play their instrument.The sound is evoked by feeling the fingering.While listening to music, one activates the motor areas of finger movements and, vice versa, in moving the fingers, one senses the music corporally. If perception (audiation) must be taken as an act of internal musical thinking, it has evolved from movement. Therefore, the learning of music should strongly interact with body movements. Perception and the cognition in the musical mind are inseparably connected with action and result in processes of embodied cognition (Shapiro, 2011).

Demands and opportunities in the third and fourth ages In Western cultures, since life expectancy has expanded significantly and humans are growing older in good health condition, music geragogy has moved into the focus of music educators, neuroscientists and gerontologists. There is a growing cohort of seniors with special needs beyond 60 or 65 years of age who show a pronounced interest in musical activities. And since our understanding of ageing has moved away from a deficit-​oriented picture towards a vital model of lifelong learning, it offers more challenging options for active operations beyond 94

95

Musical processing across the life course

former professional experience. Therefore, it has become common to differentiate between the younger elderly (third age; over 60) and the older elderly (fourth age; over 80) (Hartogh, 2018). From neuroscience we know that the brain holds its plasticity to a certain extent and is, therefore, quite capable of gaining new information and developing extended networks. Although fluid intelligence decreases with age, it is compensated for by stability, or even increase, in crystallised intelligence, where accumulated experience and knowledge is stored. Therefore, many efforts are undertaken to counteract the age-​dependent decline of mental capacities through musical activities. Here, music is expected to inhibit mental decline and support social and cognitive dimensions of positive ageing (Altenmüller, 2015; Cuddy et al., 2020; Kenny et al., 2018). The salutogenic effects of singing and music-​making are often claimed to justify musical activities in therapeutic situations. However, in music geragogy, musical activities must be seen as an opportunity to open varied possibilities for active engagement. Among the elderly, many musical abilities can be maintained or re-​activated; but on the other hand, there are also distinct physical and mental restrictions, such as reduced mobility, fluency and speed of movement, loss of motor coordination, technical limitations, listening and sight disabilities and reduced cognitive speed and reaction time. These deficits can be partly compensated for by experience, high commitment and strong persistence. In education programmes and activities in community music, these advantages and disadvantages have to be balanced. Pitch discrimination ability and rhythmic stability and precision are maintained even in higher age groups. Sight and hearing impairments may influence sight-​reading accuracy and reaction time, but experience-​and training-​driven sight-​reading skills in general (prima vista play) do not get lost. Musical performance no longer focuses on technical brilliance; rather, it stresses aspects of musical presentation and expression of musically meaningful phrasing and articulation which rise with musical experience. An ongoing question concerns whether it is possible to learn a new instrument. Even elderly people can achieve some instrumental faculties that enable them to play in an ensemble or alone, just for individual satisfaction (Bugos et al., 2004; Cabeza et al., 2002). This has been demonstrated even for people with mental diseases (Beatty et al., 1994; Cowles et al., 2003; Fornazzari et al., 2006). Skills that have been developed at an early age and continuously practised over the lifespan keep their functionality. Although the technical aspect will not necessarily improve, the artistic performance can benefit from ageing, as internationally esteemed soloists like Vladimir Horowitz or Menahem Pressler have shown. They might be outperformed by younger pianists in terms of power, energy and technical virtuosity, but their artistic expertise and depth of musical interpretation will gain from their experience. However in everyday situations, the personal satisfaction and social interaction of people who engage in music enthusiastically contribute to positive ageing effects.

Conclusion The brain is a dynamic system. Therefore, the mental processing of sensory input also corresponds to a dynamic structure.The old model whereby neurons grow, mature and die off should be replaced by a conception of neurons that are implemented in a system of dynamic adaptations according to individual environmental and personal demands with floating periods of activation. Therefore, lifelong changes in neuronal connectivity, an ongoing cerebral activity, and variable synaptic density according to individual application facilitate learning at all ages. Active engagement and deliberate practice keep the particular brain areas busy and enable musical processing and support learning. However, despite all neuroscientific power and sophisticated 95

96

Wilfried Gruhn

technology, we do not know why a certain piece music moves some to tears while others are left cold. The huge amount of brain studies cannot disenchant the myth of music and its power on humans, but it can help us better understand the mechanisms of musical processing in the mind. In this regard, the newly emphasised focus of cognitive psychology on embodied cognition and the involvement of movement in the learning process indicates new ways of teaching and learning. If thinking is internalised movement, the body and its motor activities become prominent modes and models in education. Especially in early childhood education, it is necessary to enable children to develop mental representations of the musical phenomena they are exposed to. And this process is best supported by the involvement of the entire body. The understanding of different modes of musical thinking in children and adults should affect the teaching of pitch and time (rhythm) through weight and flow. A better knowledge of the mental processes of music perception and cognition, then, will promote the embodied cognition of musical parameters which do not completely correspond to notated music. Therefore, in Western societies, children must learn how the Western conventions of musical notation are represented in notational symbols. Otherwise they will never understand the phenomenal correspondence of sound and sign. Besides the evolutionary roots of embodiment (Llinás, 2001), which supports the integration of movement into the learning process, two different types of listening (holistic versus spectral sound representation) should be considered to address the individual needs of students regarding their sound representation. However, a detailed knowledge of the psychological and physiological processing of music as well as the most sophisticated neuromusical research cannot immediately lead to explicit methodical and didactical applications, but we can and should base didactic decisions on relevant empirical facts. With regard to this, further research could include more intervention studies that investigate the effect of neuroscientifically recommended methods on the quality of learning. There is also a desideratum of comparative studies of the learning in different cultures, traditions and social practices that reflect the activated mechanisms of music perception, cognition and practice.

Reflective questions 1. Is there an educational need or possibility to apply results from cognitive psychology and/​or neuroscience to music pedagogy? 2. To what extent does neuromusical research account for music pedagogy? 3. Is there a particular domain in music pedagogy that is strongly based on the knowledge coming from neuromusical research? 4. According to individual teaching experiences, are there didactic aspects that are strongly related to the reported findings? 5. How and in which domain is educational and neuropsychological research related to the actual challenges for music pedagogy?

Suggestions for further reading Arbib, M. A. (Ed.). (2013). Language, music, and the brain. The MIT Press. Gruhn, W., & Rauscher, F. H. (Eds.). (2008). Neurosciences in music pedagogy. Nova Science Publishing. Hargreaves, D., & Lamont, A. (2017). The psychology of musical development. Cambridge University Press. Kölsch, S. (2012). Brain and music. Wiley-​Blackwell.

96

97

Musical processing across the life course Llinás, R. (2001). I of the vortex: From neurons to self. The MIT Press. McPherson, G. (Ed.). (in press). The Oxford handbook of music performance (Vol. 2). Oxford University Press. Peretz, I., & Zatorre, R. (Eds.). (2003). The cognitive neuroscience of music. Oxford University Press. Stevens, C. J. (2012). Music perception and cognition: A review of recent cross-​cultural research. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4(4), 653–​667.

References Abrams, R. M. (1995). Some aspects of the foetal sound environment. In I. Deliège & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Perception and cognition of music (pp. 83–​101). Psychology Press. Altenmüller, E. (2015). Wie lernen Senioren? Mechanismen der Hirnplastizität beim Musikunterricht im Erwachsenenalter. In H. Gembris (Ed.), Musikalische Begabung und Alter(n) (pp. 103–​123). LIT. Altenmüller, E., & Furuya, S. (2016). Brain plasticity and the concept of metaplasticity in skilled musicians. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, 957, 197–​208. Bangert, M., & Altenmüller, E. (2003). Mapping perception to action in piano practice: A longitudinal DC-​EEG-​study. BMC Neuroscience, 4,  26–​36. Beatty, W. W., Winn, P., Adams, R. L., Allen, E. W., Wilson, D. A., & Prince, J. R. (1994). Preserved cognitive skills in dementia of Alzheimer type. Archives of Neurology, 51(10), 1040–​1046. Bianchi, F., Hjortkjaer, J., Santurette, S., Zatorre, R. J., Siebner, H. R., & Dau, T. (2017). Subcortical and cortical correlates of pitch discrimination:  Evidence for two levels of neuroplasticity in musicians. Neurolmage, 163, 398–​412. Brodsky, W., Henik, A., Rubinstein, B.-​S., & Zorman, M. (2003). Auditory imagery from musical notation in expert musicians. Perception & Psychophysics, 65(4), 602–​612. Brodsky, W., Kessler, Y., Rubinstein, B.-​S., Ginsborg, J., & Henik, A. (2008). The mental representation of music notation:  Notational audiation. Journal of Experimental Psychology:  Human Perception and Performance, 34(2), 427–​445. Brodsky, W., & Gruhn, W. (Eds.). (2021). Music in the lives of young children. An annotated anthology of research papers from ECDC. Routledge. www.routledge.com/9780367547189. Bruer, J. T. (1999). The myth of the first three years. A new understanding of brain development and lifelong learning. The Free Press. Bugos, J. A., Perlstein, W. M., Brophy, T. S., & Bedenbaugh, P. (2004). The effects of individualized piano instruction on executive memory functions in older adults. Proceedings of the ICMPC, 8,  60–​85. Cabeza, R., Anderson, N. D., Locantore, J. K., & McIntosh, A. R. (2002). Aging gracefully: Compensatory brain activity in high-​performing older adults. Neurolmage, 17(3), 1394–​1402. Cowles, A., Beatty, W. W., Nixon, S. J., Lutz, L. J., Paulk, J., & Paulk, K. (2003). Musical skill in dementia: A violinist presumed to have Alzheimer’s disease learns to play a new song. Neurocase, 9, 493–​503. Cuddy, L. L., Belleville, S., & Moussard, A. (Eds.). (2020). Music and the aging brain. Academic Press. DeCasper, A. J., & Prescott, P. A. (1984). Human newborns’ perception of male voices: Preference, discrimination, and reinforcing value. Developmental Psychobiology, 17(5), 481–​491. Elbert,T., Pantev, C.,Wienbruch, C., Rockstroh, B., & Traub, E. (1995). Increased cortical representation of fingers of the left hand in string players. Science, 270(5234), 305–​307. Eliot, L. (1999). What’s going on in there? How the brain and mind develop in the first five years of life. Bantam Books. Elmer, S., Rogenmoser, L., Kuhnis, J., & Jäncke, L. (2015). Bridging the gap between perceptual and cognitive perspectives on absolute pitch. Journal of Neuroscience, 35(1), 366–​371. Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. MIT Press. Fornazzari, L., Castle, T., Nadkarni, S., Ambrose, M., Miranda, D., & Apanasiewicz, N. (2006). Preservation of episodic musical memory in a pianist with Alzheimer disease. Neurology, 66(4), 610–​611. Gibson, J. J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Erlbaum. Gordon, E. E. (1990). A music learning theory for newborn and young children. GIA Publishing. Gordon, E. E. (2012). Learning sequences in music.A contemporary music learning theory (8th ed.). GIA Publishing. Groussard, M.,Viader, F., Landeau, B., Desgranges, B., Eustache, F., & Platel, H. (2014).The effects of musical practice on structural plasticity: The dynamics of grey matter changes. Brain and Cognition, 90, 174–​180. Gruhn, W. (2005). Mozart-​Effekt. In G. Gruber & J. Brügge (Eds.), Das Mozart Lexikon (pp. 474–​479). Laaber. Gruhn, W. (2018). Audiation. Grundlage und Bedingung musikalischen Lernens. In W. Gruhn & P. Röbke (Eds.), Musiklernen. Bedingungen –​Handlungsfelder –​Positionen (pp. 94–​109). Helbling.

97

98

Wilfried Gruhn Gruhn, W. (2020). Hoeren, Handle, Bewegen. Eine europhysiologische Theorie der musikalischen Wahrnehmung und ihre pädagogische Bedeutung. https://www.academia.edu/44231453. Gruhn, W., & Rauscher, F. H. (Eds.). (2008). Neurosciences in music pedagogy. Nova Science Publishing. Gruhn, W., Ristmägi, R., Schneider, P., D’Souza, A., & Kiilu, K. (2018). How stable is pitch labeling accuracy in absolute pitch possessors? Empirical Musicology Review, 13(3–​4), 110–​123. Gudmundsdottir, H. R. (2018). Revisiting singing proficiency in three-​year-​olds. Psychology Of Music, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735618798031 Hallam, S. (2010). The power of music: Its impact on the intellectual, social and personal development of children and young people. International Journal for Music Education, 28(3), 269–​289. Hannon, E. E., & Johnson, S. P. (2004). Infants use meter to categorize rhythms and melodies: Implications for musical structure learning. Cognitive Psychology, 50(4), 354–​377. Hannon, E. E., & Trehub, S. E. (2005).Tuning in to musical rhythms: Infants learn more readily than adults. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 102(35), 12639–​12643. Hargreaves, D. J., & Lamont, A. (2017). The psychology of musical development. Cambridge University Press. Hartogh, T. (2018). Musikalisches Lernen im dritten und vierten Lebensalter. In W. Gruhn & P. Röbke (Eds.), Musiklernen (pp. 292–​312). Helbling. Henz, D., & Schöllhorn, W. (2016). Differential training facilitates early consolidation in motor learning. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 10, Article 199. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fnbeh.2016.00199 Hepper, P. G. (1991). An examination of fetal learning before and after birth. Irish Journal of Psychology, 12(2), 95–​107. Hickok, G., & Poeppel, D. (2007).The cortical organization of speech processing. Nature Review Neuroscience, 8, 393–​402. Hurley, S. (2013). Wahrnehmen und Handeln. In J. Fingerhut, R. Hufendiek, & M. Wild (Eds.), Philosophie der Verkörperung. Grundlagentexte zu einer aktuellen Debatte (pp. 379–​412). Suhrkamp. Jakubowski, K., Müllensiefen, D., & Stewart, L. (2017). A developmental study of latent absolute pitch memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(3), 434–​443. Kenny, D. T., Driscoll, T., & Ackermann, B. J. (2018). Effects of aging on musical performance in professional orchestral musicians. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 33(1),  39–​46. Kim, S. G., & Knösche,T. R. (2017). On the perceptual subprocess of absolute pitch. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 11, Article 557. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fnins.2017.00557 Kisilevsky, B. S., Hains, S. M., Jaquet, A.-​Y., Granier-​Deferre, C., & Lecanuet, J.-​P. (2004). Maturation of fetal responses to music. Developmental Science, 7(5), 550–​559. Koelsch, S. (2012). Brain and music. Wiley-​Blackwell. Kopiez, R., & Lee, J. I. (2008). Towards a general model of skills involved in sight reading music. Music Education Research, 10(1),  41–​62. Korpell, H. S. (1965). On the mechanism of tonal chroma in absolute pitch. American Journal of Psychology, 78(2), 298–​300. Krumhansl, C. L. (1979). The psychological representation of musical pitch in a tonal context. Cognitive Psychology, 11(3), 346–​374. Krumhansl, C. L., Bharucha, J., & Catstellano, M. (1982). Key distance effects on perceived harmonic structure in music. Perception and Psychophysics, 32(2), 96–​108. Krumhansl, C. L., & Kessler, E. (1982). Tracing the dynamic changes in perceived tonal organization in a spatial representation of musical keys. Psychological Review, 89(4), 334–​368. Laban, R. (1991). Choreutics. Noetzel. Lecanuet, J.-​P. (1996). Prenatal auditory experience. In I. Deliège & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Musical beginnings (pp. 3–​34). Oxford University Press. Lee, G.Y., & Kisilevsky, B. S. (2014). Fetuses respond to father’s voice but prefer mother’s voice after birth. Developmental Psychology, 56(1),  1–​11. Lehmann, A. C., & Kopiez, R. (2009). Sight-​reading. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 344–​351). Oxford University Press. Levitin, D. J. (2008). Absolute pitch: Both a curse and a blessing. In M. Clockars & M. Peltomaa (Eds.), Music meets medicine: Proceedings of the Signe and Ane Gyllenberg Foundation (pp. 124–​132). Signe and Ane Gyllenberg Foundation. Llinás, R. R. (2001). I of the vortex: From neurons to self. MIT Press. Lordier, L., Loukas, S., Grouiller, F., Vollenweider, A., Vasung, L., Meskaldji, D. E., Lejeune, F., Pittet, M. P., Borradori-​Tolsa, C., Lazeyras, F., Grandjean, D.,Van de Ville, D., & Hüppi, P. S. (2019). Music processing in preterm and full-​term newborns:  A psychophysiological interaction (PPI) approach in neonatal fMRI. Neuroimage, 185, 857–​864. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.neuroimage.2018.03.078

98

99

Musical processing across the life course Lordier, L., Meskaldji, D. E., Grouiller, F., Pittet, M. P., Vollenweider, A., Vasung, L., Borradori-​Tolsa, C., Lazeyras, F., Grandjean, D.,Van de Ville, D., & Hüppi, P. S. (2019). Music in premature infants enhances high-​level cognitive brain networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 116(24), 12103–​ 12108. https://​doi.org/​10.1073/​pnas.1817536116 MacRitchie, J., Buck, B., & Baily, N. J. (2013). Inferring musical structure through bodily gestures. Musicae Scientiae, 17(1), 86–​108. Malloch, S., & Trevarthen, C. (Eds.). (2009). Communicative musicality: Exploring the basis of human companionship. Oxford University Press. Malloch, S., & Trevarthen, C. (2018).The human nature of music. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://​doi.org/​ 10.3389/​fpsyg.2018.01680 Mampe, B., Friederici, A. D., Christophe, A., & Wermke, K. (2009). Newborns’ cry melody is shaped by their native language. Current Biology, 19(23), 1994–​1997. Parncutt, R. (2006). Prenatal development. In G. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician (pp. 1–​31). Oxford University Press. Parncutt, R. (2009). Prenatal development and the phylogeny and ontogeny of music. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 219–​228). Oxford University Press. Patel, A. D. (2008). Music, language, and the brain. Oxford University Press. Pecenka, N., Engel,A., & Keller, P. (2013). Neural correlates of auditory temporal predictions during sensorimotor synchronization. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, Article 380. doi: 10.3389/​fnhum.2013.00380 Peretz, I., & Zatorre, R. (Eds.). (2003). The cognitive neuroscience of music. Oxford University Press. Piaget, J. (1996). Das Erwachen der Intelligenz beim Kinde. Klett-​Cotta. Prochnow, A., Erlandsson, S., Hesse,V., & Wermke, K. (2019). Does a “musical” mother tongue influence cry melodies? A comparative study of Swedish and German newborns. Musicae Scientiae, 23(2), 143–​156. Révész, G. (1926). Zur Geschichte der Zweikomponententheorie der Tonhöhe. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 99, 325–​356. Rowlands, M. (2010). The new science of the mind. From extended mind to embodied phenomenology. MIT Press. Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. MIT Press. Rutkowski, J. (1997). The nature of children’s singing voices:  Characteristics and assessment. In B. A. Roberts (Ed.), The phenomenon of singing (pp. 201–​209). Memorial University Press. Rutkowski, J. (2015). The relationship between children’s use of singing voice and singing accuracy. Music Perception, 32(3), 283–​292. Saur, D., Kreher, B.W., Schnell, S., Kümmerer, D., Kellmeyer, P.,Vry, M. S., Umarova, R., Musso, M., Glauche, V., Abel, S., Huber, W., Rijntjes, M., Hennig, J., & Weiller, C. (2008). Ventral and dorsal pathways for language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 105(46), 18035–​18040. Schlaug, G. (2009). Music, musicians, and brain plasticity. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut, (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 197–​207). Oxford University Press. Schlaug, G. (2015). Musicians and music making as a model for the study of brain plasticity. Progress in Brain Research, 217,  37–​55. Schneider, P., & Bleeck, S. (2005). Test zur Grundton-​und Obertonerkennung [Pitch Perception Preference Test]. Schneider, P., Sluming, V., Roberts, N., Bleeck, S., & Rupp, A. (2005). Structural, functional, and perceptual differences in Heschl’s gyrus and musical instrument preference. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1060, 387–​394. Schneider, P., Sluming, V., Roberts, N., Scherg, M., Goebel, R., Specht, H. J., Dosch, H. G., Bleeck, S., Stippich, C., & Rupp, A. (2005). Structural and functional asymmetry of lateral Heschl’s gyrus reflects pitch perception preference. Nature Neuroscience, 8(9), 1241–​1247. Schneider, P., & Wengenroth, M. (2009). The neural basis of individual holistic and spectral sound perception. Contemporary Music Review, 28(3), 315–​328. Shapiro, L. (2011). Embodied cognition. Routledge. Stadler Elmer, S. (2015). Kind und Musik. Das Entwicklungspotential erkennen und verstehen. Springer. Stadler Elmer, S., & Elmer, F.-​J. (2000). A new method for analysing and representing singing. Psychology of Music, 28(1),  23–​42. Trainor, L. J. (1996). Infant preferences for infant-​directed versus noninfant-​directed playsongs and lullabies. Infant Behavior and Development, 19(1),  83–​92. Trainor, L. J., & Corrigall, K. A. (2010). Music acquisition and effects of musical experience. In M. Riess Jones, R. R. Fay, & A. N. Popper (Eds.), Music Perception (pp. 89–​127). Springer.

99

100

Wilfried Gruhn Trainor, L. J., & Heinmiller, B. M. (1998). The development of evaluative responses to music: Infants prefer to listen to consonance over dissonance. Infant Behavior and Development, 21(1),  77–​88. Trainor, L. J., Tsang, C. D., & Cheung, V. H. W. (2002). Preference for sensory consonance in 2-​and 4-​ month-​old infants. Music Perception, 20(2), 187–​194. Trehub, S.  E. (2006). Infants as musical connoisseurs. In G. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician (pp. 33–​49). Oxford University Press. Trehub, S. E. (2009). Music lessons from infants. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M.Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 229–​234). Oxford University Press. Trehub, S. E., Schellenberg, E. G., & Kamenetsky, S. B. (1999). Infants’ and adults’ perception of scale structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25(4), 965–​975. van der Schyff, D., Schiavio, A., Walton, A., Velardo, V., & Chemero, A. (2018). Musical creativity and the embodied mind:  Exploring the possibilities of 4E cognition and dynamic systems theory. Music & Science, 1, 1–​18. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​2059204318792319 Warren, J. D., Uppenkamp, S., Patterson, R. D., & Griffith, T. D. (2003). Separating pitch chroma and pitch height in the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 100(17), 10038–​10042. Welch, G. F. (2016). Singing and vocal development. In G. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician (2nd ed.; pp. 441–​461). Oxford University Press. Wellek, A. (1963). Musikpsychologie und Musikästhetik. Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft. Widmaier, M. (2016). Zur Systemdynamik des Übens: Differenzielles Lernen am Klavier (Üben und Musizieren: Texte zur Instrumentalpädagogik). Schott. Wolpert, D. M. (2011, July). The real reason for brains [Video]. TED conferences. www.ted.com/​talks/​ daniel_​wolpert_​the_​real_​reason_​for_​brains Zatorre, R., Chen, J. L., & Penhune,V. B. (2007).When the brain plays music: Auditory-​motor interactions in music perception and production. Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 8, 547–​558.

100

101

7 RESPONSES TO MUSIC Robert Fulford, Alinka Greasley and Karen Burland

People respond to music in many ways  –​intellectually, emotionally and physically. These responses vary between individuals but also on many different levels within individuals. Along with Chapter 9 (Musical preferences), this chapter represents a turn towards the individual in that responses to music are typically positioned as internal and personal and as a direct consequence of musical stimuli which are external. However, this chapter highlights that responses to music are in fact culturally constructed and that social factors influence the ways in which responses are invoked, experienced and utilised at all stages in the lifespan. This has implications for how responses to music are curated in education and community contexts and requires a lens on the degree to which responses are the result of innate factors or individual differences versus being enculturated or affected by social context. For example, from a psychophysiological standpoint, how do responses to music occur? From a social-​psychological perspective, how are responses mediated by social factors, or how do they vary across different cultures? How do neutral or negative responses affect musical engagement? The chapter draws on recent studies of music responses and adopts a lifespan approach, focusing on cross-​cultural studies and those situated in education or community music settings. In common with other chapters, musical engagement is positioned as a desired outcome. It is proposed that emotional responses to music in particular represent perhaps our most authentic measure of engagement in music, reflecting the full diversity of human experience both positive and negative. The chapter summarises where evidence supporting the translation of our empirical understanding of responses to music for teachers and practitioners appears to be lacking. It is suggested that a renewed focus on responses to music will help drive meaningful engagement with music, supporting the relationship between individuals and their communities, an important effort in light of continued and increasing political and economic constraint on musical activities in education and society.

Theoretical perspectives While responses to music can be broadly classified as physical, physiological, emotional, cognitive and psychological, in reality they are often some or all these things in different ways, and this complexity is reflected in existing theories that relate to our responses to music. Physical responses are typically explained using theories of beat perception, sensorimotor synchronisation 101

102

Robert Fulford et al.

and entrainment (Repp & Su, 2013), that link externally perceived rhythms with motor activity in the brain and body. Entrainment also forms part of our emotional responses to music. Other physiological responses include heart rate, blood pressure, respiration rates and muscular tension (Hodges, 2016). A prevalent, multilevel theory of the formation of emotional responses to music is the BRECVEMA framework (Juslin, 2013). The theory encompasses physiological origins and extends into psychological domains to explain how emotional responses are: induced (brain stem reflex, rhythmic entrainment); moderated by learned associations (evaluative conditioning, contagion); influenced by personal experience (visual imagery, episodic memory); perceived as surprise or ‘chills’ (musical expectancy); and finally evaluated (aesthetic judgement). A distinction is made in the literature between conscious perceptions of emotion in music, as intended by the music or the composer, which are influenced by musical expertise and invoked emotional responses or affect (Imbir & Gołąb, 2017). Trehub et  al. (2010) adopt the standpoint that both the expressive intentions of performers or composers and affective responses in the listener cannot be reduced to discrete emotional messages with corresponding labels. This perspective is relevant for infants and children who have not yet acquired the language and enculturation to fully articulate their emotional responses. In education contexts, affect responses have received less empirical attention than conscious inferences about recognised or intended emotions (Hallam, 2011). In this chapter, we therefore define and limit our focus to emotional responses as subjective, affective responses, as these are more likely to underpin engagement in education and community settings for majorities of people (being independent of musical expertise), and we examine how social, cultural and contextual factors affect these responses. Psychological or intellectual responses include how we develop liking or disliking for music and the ways in which we use music to regulate our emotions in daily life. Early theorising by LeBlanc (1980) incorporated cognitive processes and sensory attending with personal and cultural environment factors that collectively contribute to the formation of musical preferences and associated behaviours. More recently, in their “reciprocal feedback model” of responses to music, Hargreaves et al. (2012) propose that the music, listener and situations and contexts simultaneously influence each other to produce physiological (e.g., arousal, engagement), cognitive (e.g., attention, expectation) and affective (e.g., emotion/​mood, like/​dislike) responses. While musical preferences (see Chapter 9) are inherently linked with responses, the following sections focus specifically on current understanding about how responses to music are shaped by social and cultural factors in education and community settings across the lifespan.

Early years Before the development of language, observable responses to music in babies or infants are predominantly physical and physiological (Trehub, 2016). Researchers have been keen to explore these early years, as they shed light on the nature of responses to music that are innate or unenculturated. Babies in  utero have not only been shown to respond to the presence of auditory stimuli with increases in heart rate, but also in later gestational stages they show differentiated responses (see Parncutt, 2016, for a review of prenatal musical responses). For example, in a study using Brahms’ “Lullaby”, the heart rate of full-​term foetuses increased and was sustained with a faster tempo, but was unaffected by the lullaby played at normal tempo, suggesting differential sensory attending and physiological response (Kisilevsky et al., 2004). Early musical exposure in infancy (0–​18 months) is crucial in supporting musical abilities and is also likely to foster culture-​specific preferences, as evidenced by looking, movement and vocalisation responses (Arrasmith, 2019). Western infants can retain flexibility in their ability to 102

103

Responses to music

detect metrical distinctions in Western and non-​Western music until the age of about 5 years (Cirelli et al., 2018), but musical exposure is likely to increase the speed of enculturation (Gerry et al., 2010). By only 12 months, infants’ responses to music begin to reflect their native culture, just as their auditory perception skills become aligned to their native language (Kuhl et al., 2006). Western infants of the same age are able to learn from training and exposure to successfully detect metric disruptions in non-​Western rhythms, but this ability was not evident in adults (Hannon & Trehub, 2005), confirming the circumscription effects of enculturation from 12 months. Beat perception, and associated responses to rhythm and tempi, is a fundamental musical ability which develops in utero and is shaped by musical exposure in the first year after birth (Joseph, 2000), during which time it supports psychological representations of metre. Seven-​ month-​old infants trained to bounce in either duple or triple time will subsequently listen longer to music accented in the trained metre (Phillips-​Silver & Trainor, 2005). Babies’ rocking or bouncing to music is a powerful, pleasurable response and is a precursor to the way we move to music that remains with us throughout our lives. Infants move directly in response to musical tempi, and do so more than they would in response to speech sounds, because of the regular ‘beat’ in music (Ilari, 2015). Such spontaneous, dance-​like movements in children are often playful and form an important part of children’s social learning (Ilari, 2016). Caregivers therefore have a key role to play as music educators, providing exposure to as wide a variety of musical rhythms, styles and cultures as possible (Arrasmith, 2019). As children get older, their conscious ability to synchronise or entrain to a regular beat develops, and this too is affected by cultural factors. Researchers have shown that Brazilian children aged 3–​4 years are better than German children at synchronising to the beat of an adult drumming partner, even when they could not see their partner (Kirschner & Ilari, 2014). The researchers suggest that this is likely because the Brazilian children had significantly more active and social musical experience in the form of exposure to live music, drumming groups and musical instruments at home and in their daily lives. Beyond movement, there is very little research focusing on emotion induction in infants and children; instead, much has considered emotion or affect perception. There are methodological challenges to researching affect identification in children, as they may not have yet developed sufficient working memory or emotional vocabulary to perform well in an experiment or describe what they are feeling (Baron-​Cohen et al., 2010). Even the most basic emotions (e.g., happiness, sadness or fear) are not reliably perceived in children until between the ages of 4 and 6, and this is based first on tempo, then the major-​happy/​minor-​sad association using modal information (Dalla Bella et al., 2001; Franco et al., 2017). Considering these factors, it is surprising that researchers ask children ‘is this music happy or sad?’ rather than ‘does this music make you feel happy or sad?’ Evidence for emotions induced by music in children can be inferred from their behavioural outcomes. For example, infants only 8–​10 months old are more soothed by familiar music than unfamiliar music, smiling more and showing reduced distress (Cirelli & Trehub, 2020). There is evidence that older children use the lyrics in music to make inferences about the emotional content of music (Morton & Trehub, 2007) and that enculturation renders the identification of emotional cues in familiar music easier than unfamiliar music for children (Laukka et al., 2013). Like adults, children have a bias to more easily and more often identify music as conveying happiness (Trehub et al., 2010). Nonetheless, it is generally accepted that the mirroring of vocalisations and physical responses in childhood are associated, if not wholly driven by, emotional responses (Diekmann & Davidson, 2018). It is likely that the inherent methodological limitations have contributed to the lack of empirical evidence linking emotional responses with associated behavioural responses in childhood. 103

104

Robert Fulford et al.

Adolescence Adolescence is a critical period in the development of responses to music and musical identities (Lamont & Hargreaves, 2019; McFerran et al., 2019). A large cross-​sectional study involving over a quarter of a million participants revealed that music is more important in early adolescence than at any other time in life (Bonneville-​Roussy et  al., 2013). In this study, the majority reported that they were either passionate about music or felt that music was at least as important as other hobbies and interests. Other research estimates that adolescents listen for around 3 hours per day, becoming ‘expert’ listeners accumulating more than 10,000 hours of music listening during adolescence (Miranda, 2013). Lamont and Hargreaves (2019) argue that aesthetic appreciation for music develops in early adolescence and stabilises during late adolescence, and that there is evidence for a “critical period” around 16–​17 years wherein music listened to is likely to shape future preferences and listening behaviours. There is limited research focusing on physical responses to music during adolescence. Bosacki and O’Neill (2015) asked 13-​to 14-​year-​olds (n  =  66) to self-​report on their engagement with popular music activities and found that while the most frequent activities were listening (98%) and playing an instrument (67%), other frequent responses were dancing (61%) and tapping along to music (38%). Activities were almost exclusively linked with positive emotional experiences, particularly dancing, for which solely positive emotions were reported.The authors note that adolescents’ self-​reports prioritised emotional responses over physical responses, and they suggest that educators should be aware of this in the school contexts. Nonetheless, music therapy interventions have demonstrated that physical responses such as drumming and vocalisation were effective tools for working through negative emotional states with adolescents referred for challenging behaviours (e.g., aggression, violence) (McFerran et al., 2019). There is evidence that during this period, emotional and intellectual responses to music become increasingly self-​referential in relation to identity exploration and self-​concept, but are also important for social connectedness with peers. Indeed, it is the social aspects of personal development that appear to increase the salience of music during the adolescent years. For example, in a study of over 1,000 young adults, over two-​thirds were found to use music for consolation (to create a sense of comfort and understanding), adolescents (13–​18 years) more so than young adults (19–​30  years) (ter  Bogt et  al., 2017). The researchers found it was not only the musical sound and textures that supported the use of music for consolation, but also a sense of personal identification with sung lyrics. Research shows that song lyrics influence musical preferences in children (Bosacki et al., 2006) and adults (Greasley et al., 2013), but there is little empirical evidence on how responses to lyrics contribute to the salience of music for adolescents. Young peoples’ emotional responses to music are also linked to wellbeing. Research has explored how adolescents use music for emotional regulation in relation to mental health issues (McFerran et al., 2019). A recent focus has been to explore ‘healthy’ uses of music that support positive outcomes, such as mood enhancement, reappraisal or distraction, versus ‘unhealthy’ uses, including rumination on negative memories, escape or problem avoidance. Saarikallio et al. (2015) found that unhealthy patterns of music use among adolescents were associated with increased psychological distress and reduced psychological wellbeing. In another study (age range 16–​74 years; n = 697) focusing on social listening practices, Garrido et al. (2017) found a link between negative group listening (e.g., rumination, listening to sad songs with friends) and higher ‘unhealthy’ scores on the Healthy Uses of Music Scale, and higher depression scores, and this was particularly the case for younger adults. Scholars and practitioners have advocated the importance of positioning young people as active agents, not passive recipients, in their use 104

105

Responses to music

of music, and they argue that educating young people on what constitutes maladaptive and adaptive uses of music is key to developing their capacity for using music as a resource for health (Dingle et al., 2019; McFerran et al., 2019; Miranda, 2013). Studies in adolescence highlight how psychosocial and emotional responses to music are intertwined and how the social factors become increasingly relevant in later adolescence. Herbert and Dibben (2018) asked individuals aged between 10 and 18 to provide free responses to musical pieces of different styles. Reported affect and mental imagery were similar across 75% and 90% of extracts, respectively, underlining the strength of shared enculturation regardless of age or musical training. The youngest group, of 10–​12 years, wrote longer, immersive descriptions, often in the present tense and referring to themselves, while older teenagers more often used bullet points but gave more evaluative responses that evidenced their musical training. This supports prior evidence that musical training is positively associated with greater nuance and diversity (granularity) of emotional responses in high school students (Kantor-​Martynuska & Horabik, 2015). Even geographical aspects of social development influence responses in adolescence. Finnäs (2006) collected qualitative descriptions of aesthetic experiences (including with dance, music, nature) from 5-​to 16-​year-​olds (n = 776) and found that strong experiences with music were more common for boys living in urban areas and for live music experiences. Finnäs argues that education therefore has a significant role to play in providing opportunities for practical music-​making activities supporting strong emotional responses for adolescents.

Adulthood In adulthood, musical responses are shaped by personal preferences and complex sociocultural influences and, as such, are as multifaceted and varied as musical engagement itself. Yet the desire to move to music persists, driven as it is in childhood by beats and rhythm. Recent research has explored experiences of ‘groove’, defined as the desire to move to a musical rhythm and often reported to be associated with positive emotions (Witek et al., 2015). An online study using extracts of varying rhythmic and harmonic complexity revealed that desire to move and reported pleasure were highest for medium rhythmic complexity (rather than low or high complexity) and that pleasing harmonies enhance entrainment, heightening the sense of groove (Matthews et al., 2019). Structural features of the music have also been shown to facilitate group physical movements. Using electronic dance music in a simulated nightclub setting, researchers captured the strong synchronisation of dancers’ vertical movements after the ‘drop’, typically occurring after a breakdown and build-​up in the track (Solberg & Jensenius, 2019). Outside of the lab, researchers used the accelerometers in modern smartphones to show that physical synchronisation is highest in popular songs, evidencing that familiarity plays a key role (Ellamil et al., 2016). In choirs, synchronisation of respiration and heart rate variability has been shown to be higher in unison than multipart singing, and the organising role of the conductor was positioned as causal to these effects (Müller & Lindenberger, 2011). The power of music to induce physical responses extends beyond dance into self-​directed movement and exercise. Fast music has been shown to significantly increase anaerobic power, agility and explosive power in male athletes, with a stronger effect than familiar or light music, suggesting that the strong, fast beat is associated with increased exertion (Arazi et al., 2017). A meta-​analysis by Clark et al. (2016) helped clarify this relationship by synthesising data from 23 studies on music listening and exercise. The resulting ‘meta-​theory’ proposed that the power of music to support exercise results from two key factors: first, physiological arousal, in particular rhythmic entrainment that promotes motor coordination and control; and, second, positive subjective experience which describes the effects of harmonic, melodic and sung lyrics on mood, 105

106

Robert Fulford et al.

affect and emotion and, in turn, increases physiological arousal.Together, these factors distract us from the discomfort or pain of exercise and support behavioural outcomes of increased participation and adherence. The theory highlights the complex relationship between beat perception and physical responses in the body, but also acknowledges the fact that individual differences in age, gender, familiarity, and sociocultural associations play a role. ‘Chills’ (sometimes referred to as ‘thrills’ or ‘frisson’) are typically positioned as an emotional response, but one that often coincides with (psycho)physiological responses such as ‘goosebumps’, tingling or ‘shudder’ sensations (Bannister, 2020; Harrison & Loui, 2014). Early research focused on what musical structures may cause chills; for example, sudden or unexpected crescendos, melodic appoggiaturas, chords in descending cycles of fifths, sequences (Sloboda, 1991). More recently, chills have been linked to the dopaminergic reward system associated with the anticipation of pleasure, as music can both fulfil and violate psychological expectations (Gebauer & Kringelbach, 2012). Nonetheless, there remains no clear stimulus–​ response pattern between individuals, and chills are not a singular response, suggesting that personality or autobiographical factors play a role. For example, they have been shown to co-​ vary with the ‘openness to experience’ personality trait (Colver & El-​Alayli, 2016). Chills have a different psychophysiological response pattern to tears, which are calming and cathartic, and therefore may serve a different function (Mori & Iwanaga, 2017). One social hypothesis is that we experience chills in response to acoustic cues that resemble separation or distress in isolation and so they serve to motivate social contact with others (Panksepp & Bernatzky, 2002). Bannister (2020) surveyed adults about their experience of chills and showed the human voice was a salient musical factor, providing further evidence that experiencing chills is linked with social and empathetic processes for the listener. Immediate social contexts can have dramatic effects on our psychological and emotional responses to music. The concept of ‘emotional contagion’ has been used to describe the way in which emotions arising from music are shared or transmitted between individuals. It has been shown that social contexts create stronger emotional reactions in Pentecostal ecstatics (Becker, 2011) and that strong emotional and physiological responses such as trance states can arise from a personal need for social bonding (Bicknell, 2007; Harrison & Loui, 2014). Moreover, music-​ festival-​goers often experience peak emotional experiences that are reported to have long-​ lasting effects on wellbeing (Packer & Ballantyne, 2010). While music may act as a catalyst for trance states caused by social factors, individual differences in propensity or personality factors may also play a role (Will, 2017). The concept of emotional contagion presents problems for music in applied community or education settings, especially regarding the ethical implications of ‘operationalising’ emotions in this way (Diekmann & Davidson, 2018). Hitler and the Nazis used the music of Wagner during their rallies for the ecstatic social bonding effect it created, and some social musical interventions (e.g., El Sistema) have been viewed as problematic for creating power differentials among participants (Diekmann & Davidson, 2018). Just as in childhood where social learning affects physical responses to music, psychological responses in adulthood are also influenced by enculturated associations and stereotypes. A recent cross-​cultural study demonstrated that emotions associated with particular musical genres were associated with wider stereotypes about the culture of that music (e.g., that Bolero–​Cuban shared emotions include “romantic” and “sad” or that Western Classical–​Western is “calm” or “relaxing”) (Susino & Schubert, 2019). Participants reported 20 emotions in total, with no one emotion common to all genres, underlining the diversity of potential responses to cross-​cultural genres when using a free-​response format. Where participants were less familiar with a genre, there was increased stereotyping of the perceptions about the associated culture, and the valence of emotional responses was less positive, likely due to more detailed knowledge of in-​g roup 106

107

Responses to music

genres as a result of culture or fandom. The authors suggest by linking emotional responses with subconscious, learned associations, the findings supplement the “evaluative conditioning” mechanism within the BRECVEMA framework (Susino & Schubert, 2019, p.354; Juslin, 2013). However, a recent study of discrete ethnic groups (Israeli Arabs and Jews) found relatively little difference in categorical judgements of induced affect responses (Ornoy, 2020), highlighting that experimental designs may inhibit the identification of cultural differences. Emotional responses to music in adulthood have also been linked to positive mental health and wellbeing. A field study utilising a live classical music performance to explore the impact of a cognitive-​behavioural approach to emotional responses highlighted that while both negative and positive valence emotions can be affected simultaneously, music more readily induces mood-​congruent positive affect (Şoflău & David, 2018). A recent study involving a 12-​week community choir intervention for individuals who had experienced bereavement found that those who chose to participate in the choir recorded higher levels of self-​efficacy and self-​esteem than non-​participants (Fancourt et al., 2019). While social factors were not operationalised, the authors posited this may be due to the benefits of empathetic social support fostering increased emotional resilience (Fancourt et al., 2019). Yet motivations for joining a choir are not always social. A survey of individuals in auditioned choirs in the United States found that aesthetic motivations (relating to art, beauty and taste) were most salient, while social and educational motivations were ranked the least important (Redman & Bugos, 2019). Revealingly, participants describing themselves as “talented amateurs” more frequently indicated that their motivations were emotional, while semi-​professionals and professionals most often cited aesthetic motivations, highlighting the importance of sampling in community studies. In adulthood, stimulus–​response relationships are unlikely to account for the complexity of intellectual and psychological responses to music, especially regarding the use of negative valence music. A recent study with psychiatric patients revealed that maladaptive uses of music can include non-​reflective ‘venting’ of negative emotions, but that music therapy helped individuals more consciously regulate their emotions and explore more positive aspects of self-​image (Gebhardt et al., 2018).These findings suggest that while adults may constructively seek out sad music for comfort and solace (Van den Tol & Edwards, 2013), negative valence music can also be used maladaptively, depending on personality and mental health factors. The nuanced use of music in adulthood extends to social and behavioural responses. Groarke and Hogan (2015) explored age-​related differences in the functions of music listening for wellbeing. They found that adults in their early 20s reported using music to enhance motivation and negotiate busy social lives (e.g., social bonding or avoiding social interaction), while adults in their 60s were more likely to report using music to create positive affect and regulate feelings of social isolation. Moreover, younger adults more frequently reported engaging in maladaptive uses of music, such as reliving painful memories (e.g., listening to ‘break-​up’ songs), whereas older adults were more likely to reminiscence to evoke positive emotions (Groarke & Hogan, 2015).This supports more recent research in which older adults experienced more vivid music-​evoked autobiographical memories and reported more positive emotions overall (Jakubowski & Ghosh, 2019). Krumhansl and Zupnik (2013) evidenced that music and songs listened to between the ages of 10 and 30 are associated with strong autobiographical memories and emotional responses later in life, underlining the power of early musical exposure via the family and other social influences. The fact that responses to music are both individually and socially constructed affects how they are expressed behaviourally in community settings, being shaped by nuanced perceptions of social desirability and acceptability (Lamont & Hargreaves, 2019). For example, while most people responded positively to Pharrell Williams and Miley Cyrus’ performance of ‘Happy’ at the One 107

108

Robert Fulford et al.

Love Manchester concert after the Manchester Arena bombing of 2017, others felt it was insensitive (Diekmann & Davidson, 2018). In prisons, sound and noise provide crucial information and cues about the social environment (Rice, 2016), often in the absence of visual information, and music may be used socially to exert control. For example, the use of personal audio technology can prompt hostile responses, being viewed as antisocial or antagonistic and carrying the intent to disconnect from others, and loud music can represent an attempt by groups to exert dominance over particular spaces (Hemsworth, 2016). Hemsworth points out that the use of music to support positive rehabilitation in prisons in Canada is declining. A more recent qualitative study of prisoners highlighted the ability of music to ease emotional pain and create emotional connection between inmates, but also to create aggravation and even incite physical violence (Edri & Bensimon, 2019). In hospitals, music forms part of a wider soundscape that can be positive or negative in valence and is mediated by the complex social context. For example, while responses from staff may be positive, patients may respond negatively (see Iyendo, 2016, for a systematic review, including positive clinical effects of music on stress, blood pressure and trauma).

Older adults Research about responses to music in older age have included studies spanning a range of physical, emotional and psychological responses, including health and wellbeing benefits. Kaufmann et al. (2018) used a US public health data set to show that listening to music for more than 28 hours per week was positively associated with other cognitive, physical and social activities in older adults, including playing games, visiting friends, cultural events and life tasks such as shopping and cooking. The process by which these benefits are conferred remains unclear, however; and in such cross-​sectional studies, it is not possible to claim music listening causes these benefits. Nonetheless, tangible benefits of engagement with music in older adults have been documented. A quasi-​experiment involving a community band of non-​musicians aged 60 and over evidenced physical benefits for breathing and endurance, psychological benefits for wellbeing, purpose and identity and social benefits of feeling reconnected with friends (Barbeau & Cossette, 2019). Physical and psychological responses to music vary as a function of age. Older adults prefer softer forms of music (e.g., classical, folk) and dislike loud and distorted music (e.g., rock, punk) (Bonneville-​Roussy et al., 2013). Older adults also prefer slower tempo music and find it harder to entrain to faster rhythms (McAuley et al., 2006). Less is known about effects of age on physical entrainment to musical rhythmic stimuli in older age outside of the lab. Clark et al. (2016) propose that the ability of music to stimulate physiological arousal and positive affect in the context of exercise could benefit people with long-​term sedentary behaviours (and having high risk of cardiovascular disease). It has also been shown that music acts as a memory booster for learning song lyrics in older adults (Ratovohery et al., 2018). Music not only helps people connect with themselves, by affirming their own identities via autobiographical memories, but also with others, helping reduce feelings of loneliness (Hays & Minichiello, 2005). A study of older orchestral players confirmed the sense of belonging and social engagement provided by group music-​making (MacRitchie & Garrido, 2019), though levels of emotional engagement were found to increase with age for amateur musicians but decrease for professional ‘performing’ musicians. The role of music in reaffirming life experiences, memory and identity in older adults has been highlighted in a recent wave of research on music engagement in people with dementia. These studies typically adopt a biopsychosocial model that acknowledges both changeable and intractable factors in the dementia process (Spector & Orrell, 2010). Using focus groups and 108

109

Responses to music

interviews, McDermott et al. (2014) showed that music can connect individuals with the ‘here and now’, their personal autobiography, memories and identity, but can also build and sustain relationships fostering connectivity. As one relative commented, “social interaction is so important … [there is] so little left for them, but they still respond to music” (p. 713).The study confirmed that preferences for certain songs or types of music remain stable throughout the dementia process, highlighting the importance of understanding musical histories in care home settings. Again, music may not always invoke positive responses. People with depression may be more inclined to view the world negatively, and for these individuals, music can induce negative affect such as sadness due to music triggering negative thoughts or memories (Garrido et al., 2018). In elderly care contexts, this highlights the importance not only of personal preference but also of taking all aspects of mental health into account.

Summary The above review of recent literature highlights the diversity of responses to music as well as the methodological challenges in researching them, in particular those which are emotional. It also reveals trends in how responses are linked with changing styles of engagement across the lifespan: •

•

•

•

There are common physiological responses to music across all cultures. The physical desire to move to music is a human universal. Likewise, the innate mirroring and vocalisation responses of infants support universal social learning, communication and empathy processes. Enculturation factors including: the physical geography of our upbringing; range of musical genres; involvement with live, social music-​making; and exposure to formal (typically Western classical) musical training, affect how our responses are shaped from infanthood and throughout childhood and adolescence. Our ‘in moment’ responses to music can be significantly altered by specific social situations and contexts (e.g., community music groups or hospitals or prisons) which further shape the way our responses are expressed in our behaviour. Our familiarity with certain musics and underlying preferences intersect the formation and development of responses to music, and these shift over the lifespan as we revisit different music over time (DeNora, 2019; Greasley & Lamont, 2013).

Implications for music practitioners Music teachers, community music leaders and therapists (music practitioners) are uniquely placed in their responsibility to curate musical experiences, and therefore responses, in society. On the basis of the evidence above, some practical implications can be inferred: • Beyond physical and vocalisation responses, encouraging infants and children to engage with a wide variety of musical genres will socialise a familiarity with diverse cultures that will last a lifetime. • In adolescence, educators should balance technical skills development with opportunities for personal reflection to explore emotional responses and identities. There is no ‘correct’ emotional response to music. Positive, social and physical responses should not be sidelined in adolescence or young adulthood particularly for those engaging in formal musical training or careers. 109

110

Robert Fulford et al.

•

•

Practitioners can re-​engage adults with uses of music supporting health (e.g., dance, exercise), mindful of the strength of social desirability effects in group settings. Curating positive social and emotional responses is particularly important for trained musicians. In older age, health transfer effects should not be prioritised above meaningful emotional engagement which reaffirms memories of the past and social connections in the present. Understanding preferences and wider mental health is crucial for positive responses.

Conclusions and future steps There are ongoing methodological issues around researching responses to music. The majority of research is white, educated, industrialised, rich and democratic (or WEIRD) with a bias towards the use of Western classical materials and musically trained participants. This limits the degree to which findings translate across cultures. For example, controlled emotion perception tasks likely favour trained musicians, calling into question claims that musicians experience more diverse emotions in music than non-​musicians. Given more ecological methods, non-​musicians and those of different cultures would be better able to express diversity of emotional responses. Eerola and Vuoskoski (2013) state that “researchers should try to move beyond the outdated view that classical music would be emotionally and aesthetically superior to other types of music” (p. 325). More than ever, community and education practitioners must not create hierarchies of musics that exclude those who do who neither access nor relate to them. Controlled experiments are unlikely to elicit the full potential of human emotional responses, as stronger responses are observed in social settings, underlining the need for ecological validity. Music psychology has typically operationalised culture by examining effects of age or musical training on responses, but future research should incorporate broader aspects of enculturation, perhaps moving towards qualitative approaches to better operationalise them. Regarding genre, it is likely that the majority of contemporary music listened to globally every day contains lyrics (Imbir & Gołąb, 2017), yet we know little about how sung lyrics affect emotional and intellectual responses.The same authors point out that the wider field of ‘affect sciences’ in psychology rarely cites research on responses to music. Music psychology should draw from other areas of psychology and indeed other humanities to avoid operating in silos and to increase impact in education and community settings. For example, theories of intergroup relations, stereotyping and prejudice can help us understand attitudinal and behavioural responses to music (Reyna et al., 2009; Susino & Schubert, 2019). Research on responses raises questions around the goals of music education in adolescence, especially in relation to identity development (Miranda, 2013). Hallam (2011) suggests that positive affect experiences in music education will enhance motivation and attainment in the classroom (p. 808) and foster emotional intelligence. Western education promotes intellectual responses to music based on historical genres, traditions and composers, but could this sacrifice a deeper emotional relationship with music for the majority? Longitudinal research is lacking, but studies of musical responses suggest that balancing the formation of technical skills in adolescence with emotional responses will help foster culturally inclusive engagement in the classroom and that social music-​making will create positive-​valence memories and support psychologically healthier engagement into old age. For those with high levels of musical training or where music is an adult occupation or vocation, learned responses may negatively impact engagement later in life, particularly if positive, social or community aspects of music-making are neglected. Research linking emotional responses with long-​term engagement and social inclusion would provide evidence for the ongoing inclusion of music in school curricula, especially in current political climates. A  small study with children in the United Kingdom and 110

111

Responses to music

Finland revealed a promising association between group music performance and a new measure of social inclusion (Rinta et al., 2011), yet our understanding of the processes underlying these associations remains weak. Longitudinal research with a focus on responses is needed to help evidence the processes by which associations between music and these outcomes occur. Welch et al. (2020) state that “it is perhaps the level of emotional engagement in the activity that drives its degree of health and wellbeing efficacy as much as the activity’s overt musical features” (p.  3). Positioning emotional responses as the intrinsic outcome and goal of music engagement in education and community settings will likely create the optimal environment to encourage extrinsic cognitive, social and health benefits. Research into responses illuminates process-​oriented effects of music rather than outcome effects, helping us explain ‘how’ and ‘why’ musical engagement is of value in society. It also avoids the assumption that music is always good, positive or beneficial. Understanding neutral or negative responses may help explain why adolescents choose not to continue with formal musical education or why community music is not always transformative for everyone involved (Henley, 2018). The variety and uniqueness of responses to music should be celebrated as they reflect the infinite variability of human bodies and minds, and therefore our humanity. A renewed focus on responses will promote engagement in music education and other community settings, increase personal salience, expressivity and creativity and, at the same time. strengthen ties between individuals and their communities.

Reflective questions 1. How have your responses to music changed over the course of your lifetime? Has this affected the way you engage with music? 2. Think about the last time you responded negatively to music. Why was this? What does it reveal about you? 3. Do you use music to benefit your health? If so, in what ways? And how might we encourage others to do so? 4. What value might longitudinal research offer our understanding of responses to music? What are the opportunities and challenges of this kind of research?

Suggestions for further reading Hallam, S. (2011). Music education: The role of affect. In P. N. Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Handbook of music and emotion: Theory, research, applications (pp. 791–​818). Oxford University Press. Juslin, P. (2013). From everyday emotions to aesthetic emotions:  Towards a unified theory of musical emotions. Physics of Life Reviews, 10(3), 235–​266. Miranda, D. (2013). The role of music in adolescent development: Much more than the same old song. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 18(1),  5–​22. Susino, M., & Schubert, E. (2019). Cultural stereotyping of emotional responses to music genre. Psychology of Music, 47(3), 342–​357.

References Arazi, H., Ghanbari, E., Zarabi, L., & Rafati, F. (2017).The effect of fast, light and favorite music on physiological function and physical performance of the male athlete students. Central European Journal of Sport Sciences and Medicine, 17(1),  33–​40. Arrasmith, K. (2019) Infant music development and music experiences:  A literature review. National Association for Music Education, 38(3),  9–​17.

111

112

Robert Fulford et al. Bannister, S. (2020). A survey into the experience of musically induced chills: Emotions, situations and music. Psychology of Music, 48(2), 297–​314. Barbeau, A.-​K., & Cossette, I. (2019). The effects of participating in a community concert band on senior citizens’ quality of life, mental and physical health. International Journal of Community Music, 12(2), 269–​288. Baron-​Cohen, S., Golan, O., Wheelwright, S., Granader, Y., & Hill, J. (2010). Emotion word comprehension from 4 to 16 years old: A developmental survey. Frontiers in Evolutionary Neuroscience, 2, Article 109. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fnevo.2010.00109 Becker, J. (2011). Rhythmic entrainment and evolution. In J. Berger & G. Turow (Eds.), Music, science and the rhythmic brain. Cultural and clinical implications (pp. 49–​72). Routledge. Bicknell, J. (2007). Explaining strong emotional responses to music:  Sociality and intimacy. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 14(12),  5–​23. Bonneville-​Roussy, A., Rentfrow, P. J. J., Xu, M. K., & Potter, J. (2013). Music through the ages: Trends in musical attitudes and preferences from adolescence through middle adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(4), 703–​717. Bosacki, S. L., Francis-​Murray, N., Pollon, D. E., & Elliott, A. (2006). “Sounds good to me”:  Canadian children’s perceptions of popular music. Music Education Research, 8(3), 369–​385. Bosacki, S. L., & O’Neill, S. A. (2015). Early adolescents’ emotional perceptions and engagement with popular music activities in everyday life. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 20(2), 228–​244. Cirelli, L. K., & Trehub, S. E. (2020). Familiar songs reduce infant distress. Developmental Psychology, 56(5), 861–​868. Cirelli, L. K., Trehub, S. E., & Trainor, L. J. (2018). Rhythm and melody as social signals for infants. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1423,  66–​72. Clark, I. N., Baker, F. A., & Taylor, N. F. (2016). The modulating effects of music listening on health-​related exercise and physical activity in adults: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, 25(1), 76–​104. Colver, M. C., & El-​Alayli, A. (2016). Getting aesthetic chills from music:  The connection between openness to experience and frisson. Psychology of Music, 44(3), 413–​427. Dalla Bella, S., Peretz, I., Rousseau, L., & Gosselin, N. (2001). A developmental study of the affective value of tempo and mode in music. Cognition, 80(3), B1–​B10. DeNora, T. (2019). “Forever piping songs forever new”: The musical teenager and musical inner teenager across the lifecourse. In K. McFerran, P. Derrington, & S. Saarikallio (Eds.), Handbook of music, adolescents, and wellbeing (pp. 119–​126). Oxford University Press. Dieckmann, S., & Davidson, J. W. (2018). Emotions. Music & Arts in Action, Special Edition –​Keywords for Music in Peacebuilding, 6(2),  29–​44. Dingle, G., Sharman, L., & Larwood, J. (2019).Young people’s uses of music for emotional immersion. In K. McFerran, P. Derrington, & S. Saarikallio (Eds.), Handbook of music, adolescents, and wellbeing (pp. 25–​37). Oxford University Press. Edri, O., & Bensimon, M. (2019).The role of music among prisoners and prison staff: A qualitative research study. European Journal of Criminology, 16(6), 633–​651. Eerola,T., & Vuoskoski, J. (2013). A review of music and emotion studies: Approaches, emotion models, and stimuli. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 30(3), 307–​340. Ellamil, M., Berson, J.,Wong, J., Buckley, L., & Margulies, D. S. (2016). One in the dance: Musical correlates of group synchrony in a real-​world club environment. PLoS ONE, 11(10), Article e0164783. https://​ doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.pone.0164783 Fancourt, D., Finn, S., Warran, K., & Wiseman, T. (2019). Group singing in bereavement: Effects on mental health, self-​efficacy, self-​esteem and well-​being. BMJ:  Supportive & Palliative Care. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1136/​bmjspcare-​2018-​001642 Finnäs, L. (2006). Ninth-​grade pupils’ significant experiences in aesthetic areas: The role of music and of different basic modes of confronting music. British Journal of Music Education, 23(3), 315–​331. Franco, F., Chew, M., & Swaine, J. S. (2017). Preschoolers’ attribution of affect to music: A comparison between vocal and instrumental performance. Psychology of Music, 45(1), 131–​149. Garrido, S., Eerola, T., & McFerran, K. (2017). Group rumination:  Social interactions around music in people with depression. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 490. doi: 10.3389/​fpsyg.2017.00490 Garrido, S., Stevens, C. J., Chang, E., Dunne, L., & Perz, J. (2018). Music and dementia: Individual differences in response to personalized playlists. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 64(3), 933–​941.

112

113

Responses to music Gebauer, L., & Kringelbach, M. L. (2012). Ever-​changing cycles of musical pleasure: The role of dopamine and anticipation. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind and Brain, 22(2), 152–​167. Gebhardt, S., Dammann, I., Loescher, K.,Wehmeier, P. M.,Vedder, H., & Von Georgi, R. (2018).The effects of music therapy on the interaction of the self and emotions:  An interim analysis. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 41,  61–​66. Gerry, D.W., Faux, A. L., & Trainor, L. J. (2010). Effects of Kindermusik training on infants’ rhythmic enculturation. Developmental Science, 13(3), 545–​551. Greasley, A. E., & Lamont, A. (2013). Keeping it fresh:  How listeners regulate their own exposure to familiar music. In E. King & H. Prior (Eds.), Music and familiarity: Listening, musicology and performance (pp.13–​31). Ashgate. Greasley, A. E., Lamont, A., & Sloboda, J. A. (2013). Exploring musical preferences: An in-​depth study of adults’ liking for music in their personal collections. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 10(4), 402–​427. Groarke, J. M., & Hogan, M. J. (2015). Enhancing wellbeing: An emerging model of the adaptive functions of music listening. Psychology of Music, 44(4), 769–​791. Hallam, S. (2011). Music education: The role of affect. In P. N. Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Handbook of music and emotion: Theory, research, applications (pp. 791–​818). Oxford University Press. Hannon, E. E., & Trehub, S. E. (2005).Tuning in to musical rhythms: Infants learn more readily than adults. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(35) 12639–​12643. Hargreaves, D. J., Hargreaves, J. J., & North, A. C. (2012). Imagination and creativity in music listening. In D. Hargreaves, D. Miell, & R. A. R. MacDonald (Eds.), Musical imaginations: Multidisciplinary perspectives on creativity, performance and perception (pp. 156–​172). Oxford University Press. Harrison, L., & Loui, P. (2014). Thrills, chills, frissons, and skin orgasms: Toward an integrative model of transcendent psychophysiological experiences in music. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 790. https://​ doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2014.00790 Hays, T., & Minichiello, V. (2005). The meaning of music in the lives of older people: A qualitative study. Psychology of Music, 33(4), 437–​451. Hemsworth, K. (2016). “Feeling the range”: Emotional geographies of sound in prisons. Emotion, Space and Society, 20,  90–​97. Henley, J. (2018, 19–​20 May). A challenge to assumptions of the transformative power of music [Paper presentation]. 3rd SIMM-​posium on the Social Impact of Making Music, Porto, Portugal. Herbert, R., & Dibben, N. (2018). Making sense of music:  Meanings 10-​to 18-​year-​olds attach to experimenter-​selected musical materials. Psychology of Music, 46(3), 375–​391. Hodges, D. A. (2016). Bodily responses to music. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 183–​196). Oxford University Press. Ilari, B. (2015). Rhythmic engagement with music in early childhood: A replication with extension. Journal of Research in Music Education, 62(4), 332–​343. Ilari, B. (2016). Music in the early years: Pathways into the social world. Research Studies in Music Education, 38(1),  23–​39. Imbir, K., & Gołąb, M. (2017). Affective reactions to music: Norms for 120 excerpts of modern and classical music. Psychology of Music, 45(3), 432–​449. Iyendo,T. (2016). Exploring the effect of sound and music on health in hospital settings: A narrative review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 63, 82–​100. Jakubowski, K., & Ghosh, A. (2019). Music-​evoked autobiographical memories in everyday life. Psychology of Music, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735619888803 Joseph, R. (2000). Neuropsychiatry, neuropsychology, clinical neuroscience. Academic Press. Juslin, P. (2013). From everyday emotions to aesthetic emotions:  Towards a unified theory of musical emotions. Physics of Life Reviews, 10(3), 235–​266. Kantor-​Martynuska, J., & Horabik, J. (2015). Granularity of emotional responses to music: The effect of musical expertise. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(3), 235–​247. Kaufmann, C., Montross-​Thomas, L. P., & Griser, S. (2018). Increased engagement with life: Differences in the cognitive, physical, social, and spiritual activities of older adult music listeners. The Gerontologist, 58(2), 270–​277. Kirschner, S., & Ilari, B. (2014). Joint drumming in Brazilian and German preschool children: Cultural differences in rhythmic entrainment, but no prosocial effects. Journal of Cross-​Cultural Psychology, 45(1), 137–​166. Kisilevsky, B. S., Hains, S. M. J., Jacquet, A.-​Y., Granier-​Deferre, C., & Lecanuet, J. P. (2004). Maturation of fetal responses to music, Developmental Science, 7(5), 550–​559.

113

114

Robert Fulford et al. Krumhansl, C., & Zupnick, J. (2013). Cascading reminiscence bumps in popular music. Psychological Science, 24(10), 2057–​2068. Kuhl, P. K., Stevens, E., Hayashi, A., Deguchi, T., Kiritani, S., & Iverson, P. (2006). Infants show a facilitation effect for native language phonetic perception between 6 and 12 months. Developmental Science, 9(2),  13–​21. Lamont, A., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2019). Musical preference and social identity in adolescence. In K. McFerran, P. Derrington, & S. Saarikallio (Eds.), Handbook of music, adolescents, and wellbeing (pp. 109–​ 118). Oxford University Press. Laukka, P., Eerola, T., Thingujam, N. S., Yamasaki, T., & Beller, G. (2013). Universal and culture-​specific factors in the recognition and performance of musical affect expressions. Emotion, 13(3), 434–​449. LeBlanc, A. (1980). Outline of a proposed model of sources of variation in musical taste. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 61,  29–​34. MacRitchie, J., & Garrido, S. (2019). Ageing and the orchestra: Self-​efficacy and engagement in community music-​making. Psychology of Music, 47(6), 902–​916. Matthews, T. E., Witek, M. A. G., Heggli, O. A., Penhune,V. B., & Vuust, P. (2019). The sensation of groove is affected by the interaction of rhythmic and harmonic complexity. PloS One, 14(1), Article e0204539. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.pone.0204539 McAuley, E., Konopack, J. F., Motl, R. W., Morris, K. S., Doerksen, S. E., & Rosengren, K. R. (2006). Physical activity and quality of life in older adults: Influence of health status and self-​efficacy. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 31, Article 99. https://​doi.org/​10.1207/​s15324796abm3101_​14 McDermott, O., Orrell, M., & Ridder, H. (2014).The importance of music for people with dementia: The perspectives of people with dementia, family carers, staff and music therapists. Aging & Mental Health, 18(6), 706–​716. McFerran, K., Derrington, P., & Saarikallio, S. (Eds.). (2019). Handbook of music, adolescents, and wellbeing. Oxford University Press. Miranda, D. (2013). The role of music in adolescent development: Much more than the same old song. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 18(1),  5–​22. Mori, K., & Iwanaga, M. (2017). Two types of peak emotional responses to music: The psychophysiology of chills and tears. Scientific Reports, 7, Article 46063. https://​doi.org/​10.1038/​srep46063 Morton, J. B., & Trehub, S. E. (2007). Children’s judgements of emotion in song. Psychology of Music, 35(4), 629–​639. Müller V., & Lindenberger, U. (2011) Cardiac and respiratory patterns synchronize between persons during choir singing. PLoS ONE, 6(9), Article e24893. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.pone.0024893 Ornoy, E. (2020). Affective responses to European art music by Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews: A cross-​ethnic study. Musicae Scientiae, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864920918629 Packer, J., & Ballantyne, J. (2010). The impact of music festival attendance on young people’s psychological and social well-​being. Psychology of Music, 39(2), 164–​181. Panksepp, J., & Bernatzky, G. (2002). Emotional sounds and the brain: The neuro-​affective foundations of musical appreciation. Behavioural Processes, 60(2), 133–​155. Parncutt, R. (2016). Prenatal development and the phylogeny and ontology of musical behaviour. In S.  Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 371–​386). Oxford University Press. Phillips-​Silver, J., & Trainor, L. J. (2005). Feeling the beat: Movement influences infant rhythm perception. Science, 308(5727), Article 1430. https://​doi.org/​10.1126/​science.1110922 Ratovohery, S., Baudouin, A., Gachet, A., Palisson, J., & Narme, P. (2018). Is music a memory booster in normal aging? The influence of emotion. Memory, 26(10), 1344–​1354. Redman, D., & Bugos, J. (2019). Motivational factors in adult, auditioned community choirs: The power of aesthetic experiences. Psychology of Music, 47(5), 694–​705. Repp, B. H., & Su,Y.-​H. (2013). Sensorimotor synchronisation: A review of recent research (2006–​2012). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(3), 403–​452. Reyna, C., Brandt, M., & Viki, G.T. (2009). Blame it on hip-​hop: Anti-​rap attitudes as a proxy for prejudice. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12(3), 361–​380. Rice, T. (2016). Sounds inside: Prisons, prisoners and acoustical agency. Sound Studies, 2(1),  6–​20. Rinta, T., Purves, R., Welch, G., Stadler Elmer, S., & Bissig, R. (2011). Connections between children’s feelings of social inclusion and their musical backgrounds. Journal of Social Inclusion, 2(2),  34–​57. Saarikallio, S., Gold, C., & McFerran, K. (2015). Development and validation of the Healthy-​Unhealthy Music Scale. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 20(4), 210–​217.

114

115

Responses to music Sloboda, J. A. (1991). Music structure and emotional response: Some empirical findings. Psychology of Music, 19(2), 110–​120. Şoflău, R., & David, D. (2018).The impact of music-​based rational-​emotive and cognitive-​behavioral education on positive and negative emotions: A preliminary investigation in ecological conditions. Journal of Rational-​Emotive & Cognitive-​Behavior Therapy, 36(1),  89–​97. Solberg, R. T., & Jensenius, A. R. (2019). Group behaviour and interpersonal synchronization to electronic dance music. Musicae Scientiae, 23(1), 111–​134. Spector, A., & Orrell, M. (2010). Using a biopsychosocial model of dementia as a tool to guide clinical practice. International Psychogeriatrics, 22(6), 957–​965. Susino, M., & Schubert, E. (2019). Cultural stereotyping of emotional responses to music genre. Psychology of Music, 47(3), 342–​357. ter Bogt, T. F. M.,Vieno, A., Doornwaard, S. M., Pastore, M., & van den Eijnden, R. J. J. M. (2017). “You’re not alone”: Music as a source of consolation among adolescents and young adults. Psychology of Music, 45(2), 155–​171. Trehub, S. E. (2016). Infant musicality. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 387–​398). Oxford University Press. Trehub, S. E., Hannon, H. E., & Schachner, A. (2010). Perspectives on music and affect in the early years. In P. N. Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Handbook of music and emotion:  Theory, research and applications (pp. 645–​668). Oxford University Press. Van den Tol, A. J. M., & Edwards, J. (2013). Exploring a rationale for choosing to listen to sad music when feeling sad. Psychology of Music, 41(4), 440–​465. Welch, G. F., Biasutti, M., MacRitchie, J., McPherson, G. E., & Himonides, E. (2020). Editorial: The impact of music on human development and well-​being. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 1246. https://​doi. org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2020.01246 Will, U. (2017). Cultural factors in responses to rhythmic stimuli. In J. R. Evans & R. P. Turner (Eds.), Rhythmic stimulation procedures in neuromodulation (pp. 279–​306). Academic Press. Witek, M. A. G., Clarke, E. F., Wallentin, M., Kringelbach, M. L., & Vuust, P. (2015). Syncopation, body-​ movement and pleasure in groove music. PLoS ONE, 10(9), Article e0139409. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1371/​journal.pone.0139409

115

116

8 LISTENING TO, EVALUATING AND APPRAISING MUSIC Alexandra Lamont

Music is first and foremost an auditory experience. However, people do not all listen to music in the same way, and as Boschi et al. put it, “it is unclear whether music at all is actually heard in the way the arbiters of musical behaviour would approve” (2013, p. 7).We can start by drawing a distinction between hearing and listening. Hearing has more to do with the relatively automatic processes by which we perceive sound, while listening often includes a more conscious, deliberate and attentive aspect. The perceptual mechanisms that underlie hearing are clearly essential precursors of listening, but greater emphasis is placed on the importance of listening, often in an active way, as a more rewarding and engaging response in a range of fields from counselling to business and industry (Comer & Drollinger, 2013; Rautalinko, 2012). In music, this distinction is mirrored by a number of researchers and theorists. In his influential work on flow, Csikszentmihalyi (1992) considers how music listening might influence wellbeing, starting from a distinction between behaviour and experience: “it is not the hearing that improves life, it is the listening” (p. 109, original emphasis). This distinction is furthered in Cook’s (1990) delineation between musical and musicological listening. Cook argues that both trained and untrained listeners can listen musically, but a trained listener can also engage in a more analytic manner to hear relationships between musical themes or connections between keys that may not be noticed at a conscious or unconscious level by a listener without training. Csikszentmihalyi (1992) developed his ideas to propose different types of engagement with music. The first is sensory. Responses to music at this level, he suggests, tend to induce pleasant physical reactions evoked by sound combinations of pitch or rhythm which may be innate. The next is analogic, where the listener evokes narratives of feelings and images based on sound patterns. Finally, akin to musicological listening, Csikszentmihalyi proposes the analytic mode of music listening, where attention is given to the structural features of music. Listening skills at this [analytic] level involve the ability to recognize the order underlying the work, and the means by which the harmony was achieved. They include the ability to evaluate critically the performance and the acoustics; to compare the piece with earlier and later pieces of the same composer, or with the work of other composers writing at the same time; and to compare the orchestra, conductor, or band with their own earlier and later performances, or with the interpretations of others. Analytic listeners often compare various versions of the same blues song, or sit 116

117

Listening to, evaluating and appraising

down to listen with an agenda that might typically be: “Let’s see how von Karajan’s 1975 recording of the second movement of the Seventh Symphony differs from his 1963 recording,” or “I wonder if the brass section of the Chicago Symphony is really better than the Berlin brasses?” Having set such goals, [listening] becomes an active experience that provides constant feedback (e.g., “von Karajan has slowed down”, “the Berlin brasses are sharper but less mellow”). As one develops analytic listening skills, the opportunities to enjoy music increase geometrically. (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992, p. 111) This deep form of engaged listening brings reward both aesthetically and in relation to non-​ musical outcomes such as wellbeing. Both strong and peak experiences of music tend to arise when engagement and focus are high (Gabrielsson, 2011; Gabrielsson et  al., 2016). These also tend to form lasting memories which can shape the development of identity (Lamont, 2011, 2012), contribute to self-​care and emotional benefits (Gabrielsson & Lindström, 1995; Saarikallio, 2011) and predict future patterns of engagement with music (Sloboda, 1991). Despite its benefits, focused listening is relatively rare. Studies with adults using experience sampling methodology, where participants are randomly signalled and asked about their immediate music listening, suggest that music listening as a primary activity represents a very small percentage of everyday listening. For instance, Sloboda et al. (2001) found only 6 of their 156 music episodes were exclusively listening to music, compared with a range of non-​musical activities such as personal maintenance, travel, passive and active leisure and work. This rarity could, however, be a product of the data collection methods. Experience sampling operates on broad categories and is unable to differentiate the attention that is being given to the music and another activity. For instance, if someone is driving (a fairly automatic process) while also listening to music (which could be high in volume and engaging in lyrical content), this would be simply categorised as ‘driving’. Nonetheless, in everyday life, experiences where people are only listening to music are relatively uncommon. In a useful typology, Boal-​Palheiros and Hargreaves (2004) draw on research with children and adults to propose four different modes of music listening. Firstly, listening to background music is unintentional and passive, with listeners giving little or low levels of attention to the music. Listening to music as accompaniment to non-​musical activities is more intentional but still passive, with low to moderate levels of attention. Listening as a main activity is mentally active but physically passive, with high intention and attention. Finally, listening and performing musical activities has high levels of activity, intention and attention. I use these modes as a way of structuring research on listening in different contexts from both listener and performer perspectives.

Hearing, listening, appraising and evaluating the listening experience Background music Technological advances mean music has become increasingly ubiquitous in contemporary society (Boschi et  al., 2013). Despite the lack of conscious intention and attention, background music can influence children and adults simply through being ‘heard’. The effects of background music have been extensively researched, with remarkable benefits found in non-​ musical domains such as concentration, cognitive abilities and creative thinking, both for adults (Proverbio et  al., 2019) and children (Savan, 1999). For instance, Ivanov and Geake (2003) found 10-​to 12-​year-​old children who listened to Mozart or Bach scored higher on a test of 117

118

Alexandra Lamont

spatial-​temporal reasoning than those doing the same test with background noise. Similarly, 10-​to 11-​year-​old children performed better on an arithmetic task while listening to calming background music (Walt Disney film music and children’s music) compared to silence (Hallam et al., 2002), and 13-​to 14-​year-​olds performed better on reading comprehension tasks while listening to either Western or Indian classical music than in silence (Mohan & Thomas, 2020). A related strand of research has explored the after-​effects of listening to music on other activities. The best-​known example is the ‘Mozart effect’ research by Rauscher et al. (1993), where exposure to 10 minutes of a Mozart piano sonata led to short-​term enhancements in spatial-​ temporal reasoning. Initial explanations for these positive effects on cognitive skills suggested that simply hearing particular sound patterns, such as the complex spatial-​temporal patterning of Mozart, directly activated certain brain areas that could then be used for non-​musical tasks (Rauscher & Shaw, 1998; Rideout & Laubach, 1996). However, after two decades of follow-​up research, the most plausible current explanation is that the emotional effects of music listening mediate the resulting cognitive effects, known as the ‘arousal and mood’ hypothesis (Thompson et  al., 2001). This is supported by the relatively few studies with children. For 10-​and 11-​year-​old children, listening to Blur (contemporary and liked pop music) led to higher spatial-​temporal reasoning scores than listening to Mozart (Schellenberg & Hallam, 2005); similarly, 5-​year-​olds who had listened to familiar children’s playsongs drew more creative pictures than those who had listened to Mozart or Albinoni (Schellenberg et al., 2007). The definition of background music as wholly unintentional and passive by Boal-​Palheiros and Hargreaves (2004) could be challenged. As non-​chosen non-​intentional music can have demonstrable effects on the listener, this suggests that unconscious processing of sound is still competing for cognitive resources (Salamé & Baddeley, 1989). For instance, Cassidy and MacDonald (2007) found high arousal music had negative consequences on adults’ cognitive performance, particularly for introverts, and Echaide et al. (2019) found similar negative effects on long-​term memory. With children, Hallam et al. (2002) found disruptive effects on 11-​to 12-​year-​old children’s performance on a memory task of music perceived as arousing, aggressive and unpleasant (John Coltrane’s “The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost”). Some of these discrepancies are most likely responsible for the diversity in positive, negative and null findings in relation to the effects of background music (de la Mora Velasco & Hirumi, 2020; Kämpfe et al., 2010; Schwartz et al., 2017). Nonetheless, hearing can turn to listening depending on the qualities of the music, with high arousal music able to attract attention even when it was not chosen and may not be beneficial to the situation.

Self-​chosen music while doing other activities Considering more intentional self-​chosen music while doing other activities, most research has focused on adults. As noted above, music accompanies many everyday activities, and considerable attention can be given to the music. Supporting evidence converges from different perspectives. On the one hand, self-​chosen music can attract attention away from the ‘other’ activity; for instance, music listening while driving is associated with higher levels of relaxation, concentration and arousal (Dibben & Williamson, 2007), but can also take concentration away from the activity of driving itself, leading to more dangerous driving and increased risk of accidents (Brodsky et al., 2018). On the other hand, listening to music in mundane contexts such as washing the dishes or commuting can sometimes result in highly intense emotions and the formation of strong musical memories (Heye & Lamont, 2010; Lamont, 2011). With children, more attention has been devoted to understanding music-​making than listening in early years settings and at home (e.g., Barrett, 2009). However, it is clear that young 118

119

Listening to, evaluating and appraising

children are listening to a lot of music: in an experience sampling study with children, 3½-​ year-​olds experienced music over 80% of the time (Lamont, 2008) compared to 37%–​53% of the time for adults (Juslin et  al., 2008; Sloboda et  al., 2001). For young children, music most frequently accompanied ‘entertainment’ consisting of watching television or videos (30%). General music play was also frequent (17%), and similar to adults, music also accompanied other non-​musical activities such as eating, travelling and preparing for bed. Unlike other experience sampling studies, this data allowed inferences to be drawn about the focus of the activity. Fifty per cent of the episodes were music-​focused (including television watching, music play and the single occurrence of just listening) in this data, while 43% were activity focused. The children chose the music far more often in music-​focused settings, including television programmes and videos as well as active music choices of both pop and children’s music through television and radio channels and requests for recordings. Boal-​Palheiros and Hargreaves (2004) identified different non-​musical activities that music listening accompanied for their 9-​to10-​year-​olds and 13-​to 14-​year-​olds in Britain and Portugal. At home, music listening accompanied activities such as doing homework, reading or watching TV and represented 40% of the music listening behaviour. Not much research has explored this directly, but evidence from other studies shows that music is typically used to accompany a range of routines such as study, relaxation, waking up and going to sleep (Cheong-​ Clinch & McFerran, 2016). At school, music rarely accompanied other activities, with only 4% of episodes of music listening while doing group work or tests or in language or arts lessons. This form of music listening appears not to be very prevalent in contrast to more focused music listening and music listening while performing and composing, and it has not been uncovered by other research studies.

Just listening The third mode Boal-​Palheiros and Hargreaves (2004) propose, listening as a main activity, opens up the potential for both analogic and analytic modes of engagement (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992). In their sample, the prevalence of these activities varied by context: at home, 15% of children reported just listening, often alone, while at school, 33% reported just listening, mainly in relation to set tasks in school music lessons (Boal-​Palheiros & Hargreaves, 2004). The first question to ask is how we can measure this kind of behaviour. One measure is listening times.With technological advances enabling far greater access to music in recent years, it is harder to draw absolute comparisons, but music listening is clearly more prevalent for young children than for adults (Lamont, 2008); listening to music is the most popular indoor activity among 13-​to 14-​year-​olds (North et al., 2000); and listening times are higher in adolescence compared with childhood (Roberts et al., 2009) and later in adulthood (Bonneville-​Roussy et al., 2013). The second question is what exactly is involved in just listening? Csikszentmihalyi (1992) highlights the sense of intent, purpose and dedication, and DeNora (2001) emphasises how people can emotionally prepare and anticipate deep and meaningful intentional musical experiences. Boal-​Palheiros and Hargreaves (2004) found fairly simple descriptions of these listening situations from their young participants. At home, the activity itself was central, with an element of concentration on the music; for example, “I just lay down on my bed”, or “I like to concentrate on it. I like to know what kind of instruments they are using” (Boal-​Palheiros & Hargreaves, 2004, p. 43). At school, just listening occurred in music lessons when teachers requested a focus on the music through directed questioning such as “try out the beat” or “guess what instruments are playing” (p. 44). This was clearly not initiated by the children: “At 119

120

Alexandra Lamont

home we listen to music because we feel like it. At school we listen because it is a school activity” (Boal-​Palheiros & Hargreaves, 2001, p.  116). This is echoed in data from Griffin’s (2009) interviews with 7-​and 8-​year-​old girls who talked about the importance of being free to listen to their own music choices outside school. The third question concerns what it is that is being listened to in these focused situations. Juslin’s (2013) theory of emotional mechanisms in music begins from the brain stem reflex, which he proposes as an evolutionary adaptation to sudden or loud sound. Several studies suggest that melody seems to dominate over harmony, timbre and rhythm, particularly for less experienced listeners (e.g., Madsen, 1997;Williams, 2008). Changes in focus can result in changes of effect:  Williams et  al. (2011) found that trained adults listening to Mozart who reported focusing attention on the harmony felt increased levels of tension, while those who reported focusing on the melody felt less tension. Listeners’ attention can be maintained by introducing new instrumental timbres or variations in tonality (Janata et al., 2018). Thus, different musical features can attract attention and sustain interest in focused listening. The final point is the nature of the experience. A clear distinction has been made between general and musical or aesthetic emotions. Considering how this connects to listening, the goals of the listening experience become important. Arguably if the purpose of the listening is to accompany something else, then certain general and potentially more immediately accessible features of the music such as tempo or loudness levels might dominate; if the focus is on the music itself, subtleties of musical structure, form, and so forth might receive more attention. Focused music listening is most often referred to in relation to emotional outcomes such as mood regulation (Saarikallio & Erkkilä, 2007), and listening can provide valuable solace for children and young people experiencing difficult times. For instance, Cheong-​Clinch and McFerran (2016) found that focused solitary bedroom listening was used by adolescents with mental illness as a way of creating their own space and being transported to another place.These more instrumental outcomes may differ from more abstract aesthetic responses, although the aesthetic response clearly relates to the interaction between music and listener (Morrison, 2009). Focused aesthetic listening is rarely mentioned outside the context of higher music education, but may also be a driving force particularly for people who have high levels of engagement with music. Another important and related contextual factor has to do with the medium of presentation, and in particular the distinction between live and recorded music. Many studies of live events find that listeners highlight the enhanced nature of such events. For instance, Radbourne et al. (2014) found that concert audiences spoke about the ‘liveness’ being responsible for the quality of the listening experience: “I think when you are actually here in person you are more focussed and probably more attentive and more involved … than [when you are] listening to it at home” (p. 65). Their participants also noted the importance of experiencing the event through multiple senses, echoed in the strong intense memories of music reported by young adults at concerts and music festivals (Lamont, 2011) and by concertgoers (O’Sullivan, 2009). The presence of others can lead to heightened responses through emotional contagion (Garrido & Macritchie, 2020), which can be further enhanced through supporting activities such as pre-​concert talks. Less positively, the rituals around attending live events, particularly classical concerts, sometimes put listeners off (O’Sullivan, 2009), and a great deal of outreach work from professional arts organisations has focused on increasing accessibility and demystifying the experience of a live event for children and young people.These can provide valuable opportunities for building connections in the community as well as developing future audiences (Reese & Derrick, 2019), although research is urgently needed on children’s actual experiences of such events and their perceptions of live events in general. 120

121

Listening to, evaluating and appraising

A slightly different approach to focused listening comes from research looking at explicit evaluations from lay listeners. In contemporary digital culture, the wide availability of music from different times and places allows for a great deal of evaluation and judgement, from giving a ‘thumbs up’ on YouTube videos to detailed critiques on blogs. In certain contexts, such as live classical events, less experienced listeners sometimes feel out of their depth. For instance, in Dobson’s (2010) audience research, Emma noted: I suppose with me with classical concerts the big thing is … I find it impossible to tell really how good they are, because I’ve got nothing to measure it against. And so there have been one or two occasions where people go mad, they go absolutely berserk, and you’re like “well that was good, but is this good enough to go berserk to?” I don’t know, I have no way of judging it, and you feel self-​conscious if you’re not going berserk, in case that makes you look like you’re rude and you haven’t appreciated it fully. (p. 117) In other musical genres and contexts and where listeners feel more confident, evaluations are more readily forthcoming. Larrouy-​Maestri et al. (2015) found lay listeners could judge sung melodies from other performers with high levels of objectivity and reliability, basing judgements on pitch rather than contour and applying stricter pitch accuracy criteria than expert judges. Evaluation skills can also be improved by guided listening. Ekholm (1997) provided university music students with a short guided listening course based around 12 musical criteria, such as “dynamic range”, “legato line” and “color/​warmth”; students who undertook the course could make more consistent judgements than those who had not. Directing attention to features of the music seemed to improve evaluation, although it could be argued that this is simply a function of practice on the particular evaluation criteria. The choice of music also seems to be important. In the research on background music summarised above, the music is typically chosen by the researcher, while in everyday settings such as children doing their homework or just listening, the music would be chosen by the child or young person. In many other fields of music research, this element of choice is vitally important (Krause et al., 2014). Self-​chosen music has far greater therapeutic benefits, and this fits with the arousal and mood hypothesis since music that is chosen is presumably also liked, resulting in positive mood enhancements which then result in other non-​musical benefits. The wealth of research on preference (see Chapter 9) provides implicit evaluations, as listeners make decisions about what they like and what they want to listen to, but evaluation can also take a more explicit form in terms of judging musical quality (see Chapter 24), which is of particular relevance in educational settings.

Listening, appraising and evaluating the performing experience Csikszentmihalyi (1992) proposes that “even greater rewards are open to those who learn to make music” (p.  111), and the ability to make and create music clearly embodies greater potential for deep levels of engagement and emotional reward (Lamont, 2012). Boal-​Palheiros and Hargreaves (2004) describe listening in connection with a range of musical activities in their British and Portuguese children and adolescents. At home, 43% of performing activities included singing, dancing and playing: “We dress up like a pop band, and sing along to it. We pretend we’ve got a microphone.” At school, the 57% of reported musical activities included performance skills such as singing, playing, dancing and composing (“play instruments to the beat”) as well as rhythmic training and analysis and history of music in music lessons. 121

122

Alexandra Lamont

Performing can be seen as the fundamental starting point for listening (e.g., Elliott, 1995), and good listening while performing seems to be vital, from the very basics of getting one’s instrument in tune through to successful performance of complex group musical works. Yet performing represents a particularly demanding situation for encouraging listening. Morrison explains this challenge well: [I]‌n the early stages of students’ musical-​performance development, Elliott’s “artistic listening”—​or any form of fully engaged, creative listening—​may not be an option for them while performing, focused as they so often are on simply getting through the music mistake free. (2009, p. 78, original emphasis) In relation to adult and more expert performers, Gabrielsson and Lindström Wik (2003) found musical performances that reflected loss of self-​awareness, indicative of flow: for example, “sometimes it is as if it isn’t me who is playing. The fingers move by themselves” (p. 176). How aware is the performer of their own performance, and how able are they to listen and evaluate it? Much research on listening while performing has focused on self-​evaluation of technical skills that do not refer explicitly to listening (see Chapter 24). Performers spend a great deal of time practising, and here active listening can be more prominent. Van Zijl and Sloboda (2011) studied this from the perspective of emotions experienced. Initially, emotions were focused on the practice itself, but musical emotions also emerged in the early stages. Feeling emotions became transformed into knowing emotions, with a decline in expression felt by the performer; and finally at the performance a little felt emotion was reintroduced. It is plausible that the same process is experienced in relation to listening, with initial listening focused on technical issues such as intonation, then moving towards greater focus on gestures and shapes until physical and technical mastery can take over and the need to actively listen is reduced. Much research has looked at performing as an individual skill, but it is important to remember that many performance contexts involve others and that listening to those others is vital for success. Research has not tackled this question directly, however, so there is a need for further studies looking at nuanced listening in ensemble situations, both in rehearsal and performance.

Factors influencing listening skills Throughout this chapter, clear differences in engagement have been illustrated between listeners with more or less musical experience. Cook (1990) argues that the trained listener has greater analytic capacity, and this is echoed in much music psychology research based around a binary distinction between ‘musician’ and ‘non-​musician’. Initially this was typically defined by years of formal music instruction, but more complex and subtle measures of expertise have been developed such as the Goldsmiths Musical Sophistication Index (Müllensiefen et al., 2014) or the Music Use and Background Questionnaire (Chin et al., 2018). The extent to which music training influences the way people listen is hotly contested, however, with some arguing that much of the observed differences in experimental settings can be explained by explicit task complexity. For instance, Smith et  al. (1994) demonstrated how untrained participants who were unable to recognise musical intervals when labelling them abstractly were far better able to perform the task when the intervals were associated with familiar folk-​tune labels. Research with children has produced conflicting findings on the subtle effects of years of training compared with age on factors such as the perception of tonality (e.g., Fancourt et  al., 2013), and the type of training could also be important (Rauscher & Hinton, 2011). 122

123

Listening to, evaluating and appraising

For instance, Ilari et al. (2016) showed how a year of an El Sistema-​inspired programme with a strong emphasis on performance and group singing supported 6-​to 7-​year-​old children’s development of pitch skills (with no effects seen for rhythm skills). Broadly speaking, children’s listening skills increase in analytic features the older they get; for instance, Herbert and Dibben (2018) found that 10-​to 12-​year-​olds were more likely to refer to emotional experiences, while participants aged 15 showed an increase in analytic listening to novel music, which was also influenced by musical training. This suggests, following Cook (1990), that trained listeners should be better able to engage with the complexity of music. Csikszentmihalyi’s approach, despite his references to classical music, does not imply that a formally trained listener is in any way superior to an enthusiastic amateur or that music cannot give this kind of pleasure to all. Yet in addition to training, a range of additional concepts have sprung up over the past decade concerning other potentially important differences in listener behaviour, including engagement, absorption, cognitive style and personality. In relation to engagement, ter Bogt et al. (2011) identified three different groups in adolescents and young adults. Their high-​involved listeners rated music as very important, used music most frequently for mood enhancement and liked a broad range of genres, while medium-​involved and low-​involved listeners felt music had less importance and listened to less music (see also Greasley & Lamont, 2011). The related concept of absorption has also been studied as a potential moderator of emotional responses to music (Sandstrom & Russo, 2013); it relates to general absorption, musical involvement and empathy but not, in Sandstrom and Russo’s data at least, musical training.Their Absorption In Music Scale includes items such as “when I listen to music I can get so caught up in it that I don’t notice anything” or “I can imagine a song/​piece of music so vividly that it holds my attention as if I were hearing it ‘live’ ”. Herbert (2011) argues that absorption differs from task-​based focused listening since it has less pragmatic aims. Her qualitative enquiry with adults found absorption happened rarely with live events but frequently with more everyday music listening. Absorption was connected with feeling focused, balanced or pleasantly dreamy and was generally emotionally positive; it also occurred with rather mundane repetitive activities such as exercise or DIY. Although other activities were listed, Herbert’s participants reported their central focus as being on the music. Cognitive styles and psychological traits may also influence listening. Empathising and systemising as cognitive styles have also been studied in music using survey methods (e.g., Kreutz et al., 2008). In Kreutz and colleagues’ inventory, music empathising was tested with items such as “When I listen to good instrumental music, it feels in a way like someone is telling me a story” or “I could easily choose examples from music collection of songs that make me feel relaxed, uplifted, sad, etc.” Music systemising items include statements such as “I am easily bored by songs with clearly defined structure—​a verse and chorus, etc.” or “I think that people who do understand the rules of music composition gain most out of it” (Kreutz et al., p.72).The two cognitive styles were clearly demarcated according to sex: females were more likely to be positive music empathisers and males were more likely to be positive music systemisers. Higher levels of music training were also related to greater systemising, but not empathising. Finally, personality may also play a role in the way people listen to music. Personality has been connected with music preference (Chapter 9) and also to engagement. The chill response to music provides a good example. Musical chills are not experienced by everyone (Grewe et al., 2007). Nusbaum and Silvia (2011) found chills were more likely to be experienced by people high in openness to experience and that this was mediated by experience and engagement with music in everyday life. Mas-​Herrero et  al. (2013) found that people who scored higher on the aesthetics and feeling facets of openness to experience also experienced greater 123

124

Alexandra Lamont

reward-​seeking tendencies in music. Nusbaum et al. (2015) found that undergraduate students with physical anhedonia (a core construct in depression, but also evident in the general population) experienced reduced pleasure from music listening, and they listened to less music; they were also less likely to have chosen the music, to be listening to music with special meaning or to be listening attentively. This work highlights how certain mental conditions can negatively affect enjoyment of an activity that is generally considered to be universally pleasant. All these concepts are relatively new, and recent evidence with adults suggests they may be interrelated. Dahary et  al. (2020) found links between general and musical empathising and systemising traits, and between musical sophistication (measured using the Goldsmiths Musical Sophistication Index), music training and musical empathising and systemising. Hernandez-​Ruiz et al. (2020) have linked the concept of absorption to focused listening, also finding that this is related to, but independent from, music training. Margulis (2017) found that adults with higher levels of absorption in music and those low in extraversion and conscientiousness experienced more narrative engagement in a listening situation. Research with children and young people will need to incorporate these concepts into future studies to explore how they develop and what influences what, but the suggestion that the way a listener approaches a listening situation will determine what the listener gains from it seems worthy of further exploration.

How to enhance engagement As a simple result of exposure to music, children develop impressive perceptual and representational skills (Hargreaves & Lamont, 2017). Nonetheless, music education can clearly enhance children’s capacity to learn to listen in a focused way. Listening is identified in the English National Curriculum for Music as a fundamental musical element, based largely on a tradition of research tracing back to Swanwick (1998) that includes it as an activity in its own right which can be both taught and assessed. In the United States, Madsen and Geringer (2000/​2001) make the strong argument that focused, meaningful listening leads to greater discrimination and evaluative capacities and should be fundamental in education. In this final section, I consider learning opportunities that might lead to enhanced focused listening, both in and out of school. Simple guided activities can rapidly alter children’s understandings of music. Fung and Gromko (2001) explored the effects of brief classroom experiences on 7-​to 12-​year-​old children’s drawings of unfamiliar music. The ‘active’ group moved while listening to the music, while the ‘passive’ group listened quietly; afterwards both were asked to draw how the music went. Drawings were subsequently scored for evidence of musical parameters, such as pitch, rhythm and grouping. The passive group showed less evidence of rhythm/​beat and grouping/​ phrasing in their drawings, suggesting that the movement allowed in the active group helped to emphasise those musical features. The active group also preferred the music more afterwards. Over longer periods, similarly, the active listening–​performing nexus promoted by Musical Futures (Green, 2008) provides opportunities for children and young people to learn more about music by attempting to recreate it through aural copying in performance. Explicitly directing attention towards a more mindful approach to listening can also be beneficial in both the short and long terms. Margulis et al. (2015) gave children programme notes before a live performance, finding that this raised their level of attention and comprehension of the performance (although it did not affect their enjoyment). Anderson (2015) gave 9-​to 10-​year-​old pupils a 10-​week programme of music that involved listening to a range of classical pieces. One group was simply told to listen carefully to several repetitions of the music in the context of a traditional music education class, while another group was given more explicit mindful listening instructions to focus their attention on more subtle aspects of the music and 124

125

Listening to, evaluating and appraising

evoked narratives. All children were prompted to create a personal story around the music, and they completed listening questionnaires and listening sensitivity tests. Mindful listening led to enhanced sensitivity after the intervention, reflecting the kind of focused listening that Madsen and Geringer (amongst others) promote. Specifically directing attention may not always have positive effects, however. A  similar mindful listening programme with adult listeners had no effect on the quality of emotional response (Diaz, 2015). Diaz suggests that while mindful listening can be very successful with young children or unfamiliar music, too much guidance could prevent creativity in response or even compete for attention with more intuitive listening. His recommendations are for more open and less scripted types of goal-​directed listening. Given the typically negative attitude that many children and young people have towards music listening in school contexts and the importance of choice and intention, these points are worth remembering. Familiarity with music can play a role in engaging attention. Margulis (2017) found her adult participants were six times as likely to imagine a story to accompany a piece of music if they were familiar with the musical style it was drawn from, and also to enjoy the music substantially more. Green (2008) draws on this in Musical Futures by starting with a pedagogy to approach familiar music (popular music) and then bridging this to an unfamiliar kind of music (classical music) to provoke deeper engagement. Dobson (2010) found that when novice concert audiences heard a talk that linked the (unfamiliar) music to be heard to styles they did know, this aided understanding and contributed to their enjoyment of the concert. Making links to the familiar can thus increase accessibility. Maintaining focus over extended listening times is not always easy. In Madsen and Madsen’s (2002) listening study with simple melodies, nearly half their adult participants gave comments such as “went brain-​dead after several melodies”, and Margulis (2017) also reported instances where participants’ attention wandered. I just wasn’t very interested in the type of music playing. I just thought of it as a bunch of instruments playing at once. While the music was playing I  was thinking about different things such as school and what I have to accomplish today. (p. 242) In a study explicitly measuring distraction, Abril and Flowers (2007) played 12-​to 13-​year-​ olds instrumental or English or Spanish lyrical versions of a song. They asked their participants to listen attentively but to tap a touchpad every time they felt distracted. Instrumental music produced far fewer distractions than versions with lyrics. Abril and Flowers also asked participants to report on what the distractions were. Some related to the music or the lyrics, but most were non-​music-​related and included thoughts about the immediate context of the testing room, other people, looming problems such as homework or anticipating or reflecting on personal events such as “when are we going to lunch?” These comments are similar to those found by Thompson (2007) in audience members’ perceptions of a live classical concert, where non-​musical factors such as the quality of the seating and the temperature of the hall featured alongside more musical features. In trying to enhance focused and engaged listening, practicalities clearly matter, and addressing the fact that human beings bring a wealth of memories, hopes and fears for the future and a range of complex emotions to any listening situation is also vital. The more cognitive approaches to topics such as background music often fail to acknowledge that the listener does not arrive as a blank slate ready to absorb and respond to a musical stimulus, and these data provide important reminders of that. This resonates with Frith’s (2012, cited in Radbourne et al., 2014) comments 125

126

Alexandra Lamont

about listeners’ memories of gigs being bound up with elements of place and people and mundane details such as travel or the layout of the venue. Abril and Flowers (2007) also found a slight preference for the versions of their songs that matched participants’ native language, suggesting that attention can be enhanced by music where people feel a connection or sense of identity.This relates clearly to the wealth of research on preferences and their influences (Chapter  9) and to the concept of familiarity, discussed in this section. Social connections to the music help in establishing a motivation to engage and to remain engaged, again supported by research on autobiographical memories of music (Rathbone et al., 2017).The critical literacy approach championed by Beach and Bolden (2018) provides important reminders of successful strategies that can help develop deeper engagement and which resonate here:  choosing music purposefully, using open-​ended questions, empowering the student voice and connecting music to life in order to unpack complex issues.

Concluding remarks Creating conditions for focused listening should be an important goal both for educators and for community musicians seeking to engage their audience and provide meaningful, memorable experiences. The evidence reviewed here suggests that this is far from straightforward. Listeners bring their past listening experience (training, culture, style and piece) and their attitudes to the listening situation (engagement, absorption, systemising/​empathising) as well as general features such as their mood, personality and other competing priorities. They make rapid judgements of liking despite potentially requiring extended periods of time for deep engagement, and their attention often wanders. However, music itself provides an excellent stimulus for attracting attention and maintaining engagement: it can engage through repetition and alteration to provide a balance of familiarity and novelty using a range of musical elements such as loudness, instrumentation, pitch and rhythm. The multisensory nature of music is also helpful:  music triggers not only auditory but also motoric pathways in the brain; live music provides a visual component which enhances the experience; and music is able to connect us to others through personal relationships and sense of identity. Vocal music also provides an additional layer of explicit lyrical content which can further engage listeners. The role of the educator or the musician should be to provide the appropriate guidance to the listener to unlock the rich potential of music in different ways, while remembering that not everyone will like everything and that the goals of listening may vary. At times, the listener may want to be able to identify the instruments playing at a particular moment or focus attention on the precise timing of a rubato, but at other times, emotional goals might dominate and the listener might seek to be immersed in the wall of sound or follow the emotional roller coaster of the symphony or pop song. Strategies that encourage focused listening seem to be both important and necessary in today’s fast-​paced world, but precisely what the focus is should, ultimately, be up to the listener if the experience is to be truly engaging.

Reflective questions 1. Has music ever caught you completely by surprise? Try to identify features of the situation that might be responsible for unexpected effects. 2. What goals might you want to set for a listening experience, and how would you know if they had been met?

126

127

Listening to, evaluating and appraising

Suggestions for further reading Beach, P., & Bolden, B. (2018). Music education meets critical literacy: A framework for guiding music listening. Music Educators Journal, 105(2),  43–​50. Boal-​Palheiros, G. M., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2004). Children’s modes of listening to music at home and at school. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 161/​162,  39–​46. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1992). Flow: The classic work on how to achieve happiness. Rider. Griffin, S. M. (2009). Listening to children’s music perspectives: In-​and out-​of-​school thoughts. Research Studies in Music Education, 31(2), 161–​177. Madsen, C. K., & Geringer, J. M. (2000/​2001). A focus of attention model for meaningful listening. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 147, 103–​108.

References Abril, C. R., & Flowers, P. J. (2007). Attention, preference, and identity in music listening by middle school students of different linguistic backgrounds. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55(3), 204–​219. Anderson, W. T. (2015). Mindful music listening instruction increases listening sensitivity and enjoyment. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 34(3),  48–​55. Barrett, M. S. (2009). Sounding lives in and through music: A narrative inquiry of the “everyday” musical engagement of a young child. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 7(2), 115–​134. Beach, P., & Bolden, B. (2018). Music education meets critical literacy: A framework for guiding music listening. Music Educators Journal, 105(2),  43–​50. Boal-​Palheiros, G. M., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2001). Listening to music at home and at school. British Journal of Music Education, 18(2), 103–​118. Boal-​Palheiros, G. M., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2004). Children’s modes of listening to music at home and at school. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 161/​162,  39–​46. Bonneville-​Roussy, A., Rentfrow, P. J., Xu, M. K., & Potter, J. (2013). Music through the ages: Trends in musical engagement and preference from adolescence through middle adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(4), 703–​717. Boschi, E., Kassabian, A., & Quiñones, M. G. (2013). A day in the life of a ubiquitous musics listener. In M. G. Quiñones, A. Kassabian, & E. Boschi (Eds.), Ubiquitous musics: The everyday sounds that we don’t always notice (pp. 1–​12). Ashgate. Brodsky, W., Olivieri, D., & Chekaluk, E. (2018). Music genre induced driver aggression: A case of media delinquency and risk-​promoting popular culture. Music & Science, 1(1), 1–​17. Cassidy, G., & MacDonald, R. A. R. (2007). The effect of background music and background noise on the task performance of introverts and extraverts. Psychology of Music, 35(3), 517–​537. Cheong-​Clinch, C., & McFerran, K. S. (2016). Musical diaries:  Examining the daily preferred music listening of Australian young people with mental illness. Journal of Applied Youth Studies, 1(2),  77–​94. Chin, T.-​C., Coutinho, E., Scherer, K. R., & Rickard, N. S. (2018). MUSEBAQ: A modular tool for music research to assess musicianship, musical capacity, music preferences, and motivations for music use. Music Perception, 35(3), 376–​399. Comer, L. B., & Drollinger, T. (2013). Active empathic listening and selling success: A conceptual framework. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 19(1),  15–​29. Cook, N. (1990). Music, imagination, and culture. Oxford University Press. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1992). Flow: The classic work on how to achieve happiness. Rider. Dahary, H., Fernandes, T. P., & Quintin, E.-​M. (2020). The relationship between musical training and musical empathizing and systemizing traits. Musicae Scientiae, 24(1), 113–​129. de la Mora Velasco, E., & Hirumi, A. (2020). The effects of background music on learning: A systematic review of literature to guide future research and practice. Education Technology Research and Development, 68, 2817–​2837. https://​doi.org/​10.1007/​s11423-​020-​09783-​4 DeNora, T. (2001). Aesthetic agency and musical practice:  New directions in the sociology of music. In P. N. Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Music and emotion:  Theory and research (pp. 161–​180). Oxford University Press. Diaz, F. M. (2015). Listening and musical engagement: An exploration of the effects of different listening strategies on attention, emotion, and peak affective experiences. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 33(2), 27–​33.

127

128

Alexandra Lamont Dibben, N., & Williamson, V. J. (2007). An exploratory survey of in-​vehicle music listening. Psychology of Music, 35(4), 571–​589. Dobson, M. C. (2010). New audiences for classical music: The experiences of non-​attenders at live orchestral concerts. Journal of New Music Research, 39(2), 111–​124. Echaide, C., del Río, D., & Pacios, J. (2019). The differential effect of background music on memory for verbal and visuospatial information. The Journal of General Psychology, 146(4), 443–​458. Ekholm, E. (1997). The effect of guided listening on evaluation of solo vocal performance. Contributions to Music Education, 24(2),  53–​72. Elliott, D. J. (1995). Music matters: A new philosophy of music education. Oxford University Press. Fancourt, A., Dick, F., & Stewart, L. (2013). Pitch-​change detection and pitch-​direction discrimination in children. Psychomusicology, 23(2),  73–​81. Fung, C. V., & Gromko, J. E. (2001). Effects of active versus passive listening on the quality of children’s invented notations and preferences for two pieces from an unfamiliar culture. Psychology of Music, 29(2), 128–​138. Gabrielsson, A. (2011). Strong experiences with music: Music is much more than just music. Oxford University Press. Gabrielsson, A., & Lindström, S. (1995). Can strong experiences of music have therapeutic implications? In R. Steinberg (Ed.), Music and the mind machine (pp. 195–​202). Springer-​Verlag. Gabrielsson, A., & Lindström Wik, S. (2003). Strong experiences related to music: A descriptive system. Musicae Scientiae, 7(2), 157–​217. Gabrielsson, A., Whaley, J., & Sloboda, J. A. (2016). Peak experiences in music. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 745–​758). Oxford University Press. Garrido, S., & Macritchie, J. (2020).Audience engagement with community music performances: Emotional contagion in audiences of a “pro-​am” orchestra in suburban Sydney. Musicae Scientiae, 24(2), 155–​167. Greasley, A. E., & Lamont, A. (2011). Exploring engagement with music in everyday life using experience sampling methodology, Musicae Scientiae, 15(1),  45–​71. Green, L. (2008). Music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom pedagogy. Ashgate. Grewe, O., Nagel, F., Kopiez, R., & Altenmüller, E. (2007). Listening to music as a re-​creative process: Physiological, psychological and psychoacoustical correlates of chills and strong emotions. Music Perception, 24(3), 297–​314. Griffin, S. M. (2009). Listening to children’s music perspectives: In-​and out-​of-​school thoughts. Research Studies in Music Education, 31(2), 161–​177. Hallam, S., Price, J., & Katsarou, G. (2002). The effects of background music on primary school pupils’ task performance. Educational Studies, 28(2), 111–​122. Hargreaves, D. J., & Lamont, A. (2017). The psychology of musical development. Cambridge University Press. Herbert, R. (2011). Musical and non-​musical involvement in daily life: The case of absorption. Musicae Scientiae, 16(1),  41–​66. Herbert, R., & Dibben, N. (2018). Making sense of music:  Meanings 10-​to 18-​year-​olds attach to experimenter-​selected musical materials. Psychology of Music, 46(3), 375–​391. Hernandez-​Ruiz, E., Dvorak, A. L., & Weingarten, K. (2020). Music stimuli in mindfulness meditation: Comparison of musician and non-​musician responses. Psychology of Music, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735620901338 Heye, A., & Lamont, A. (2010). Mobile listening situations in everyday life: The use of MP3 players while travelling. Musicae Scientiae, 14(1), 95–​120. Ilari, B. S., Keller, P., Damasio, H., & Habibi, A. (2016). The development of musical skills of underprivileged children over the course of 1 year: A study in the context of an El Sistema-​inspired program. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2016.00062 Ivanov, V. K., & Geake, J. G. (2003). The Mozart effect and primary school children. Psychology of Music, 31(4), 405–​413. Janata, P., Peterson, J., Ngan, C., Keum, B., Whiteside, H., & Ran, S. (2018). Psychological and musical factors underlying engagement with unfamiliar music. Music Perception, 36(2), 175–​200. Juslin, P. N. (2013). From everyday emotions to aesthetic emotions: Toward a unified theory of musical emotions. Physics of Life Reviews, 10(3), 235–​266. Juslin, P. N., Liljeström, S., Västfjäll, D., Barradas, G., & Silva, A. (2008). An experience sampling study of emotional reactions to music: Listener, music, and situation. Emotion, 8(5), 668–​683. Kämpfe, J., Sedlmeier, P., & Renkewitz, R. (2010). The impact of background music on adult listeners: A meta-​analysis. Psychology of Music, 39(4), 424–​448.

128

129

Listening to, evaluating and appraising Krause, A. E., North, A. C., & Hewitt, L.Y. (2014). Music selection behaviors in everyday listening. Electronic Media, 58(2), 306–​323. Kreutz, G., Schubert, E., & Mitchell, L. A. (2008). Cognitive styles of music listening. Music Perception, 26(1),  57–​73. Lamont, A. (2008).Young children’s musical worlds: Musical engagement in 3.5-​year-​olds. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 6(3), 247–​261. Lamont, A. (2011). University students’ strong experiences of music: Pleasure, engagement and meaning. Musicae Scientiae, 15(2), 229–​249. Lamont, A. (2012). Emotion, engagement and meaning in strong experiences of music performance. Psychology of Music, 40(5), 574–​594. Larrouy-​Maestri, P., Magis, D., Grabenhorst, M., & Morsomme, D. (2015). Layman versus professional musician: Who makes the better judge? PLoS ONE, 10(8), Article e0135394. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​ journal.pone.0135394 Madsen, C.  K. (1997). Focus of attention and aesthetic response. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45(1),  80–​89. Madsen, C. K., & Geringer, J. M. (2000/​2001). A focus of attention model for meaningful listening. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 147, 103–​108. Madsen, C. K., & Madsen, K. (2002). Perception and cognition in music: Musically trained and untrained adults compared to sixth-​grade and eighth-​grade children. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50(2), 111–​130. Margulis, E.  H. (2017). An exploratory study of narrative experiences of music. Music Perception, 35(2), 235–​248. Margulis, E. H., Kisida, B., & Greene, J. P. (2015). A knowing ear: The effect of explicit information on children’s experience of a musical performance. Psychology of Music, 43(4), 596–​605. Mas-​Herrero, E., Marco-​Pallares, J., Lorenzo-​Seva, U., Zatorre, R. J., & Rodriguez-​Fornells, A. (2013). Individual differences in music reward experiences. Music Perception, 31(2), 118–​138. Mohan, A., & Thomas, E. (2020). Effect of background music and the cultural preference to music on adolescents’ task performance. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 25(1), 562–​573. Morrison, C. D. (2009). Music listening as music making. The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 43(1),  77–​91. Müllensiefen, D., Gingras, B., Musil, J., & Stewart, L. (2014). Measuring the facets of musicality:  The Goldsmiths Musical Sophistication Index (Gold-​MSI). Personality and Individual Differences, 60, S35. North, A. C., Hargreaves, D. J., & O’Neill, S. A. (2000). The importance of music to adolescents. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 255–​272. Nusbaum, E., & Silvia, P. (2011). Shivers and timbres: Personality and the experience of chills from music. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(2), 199–​204. Nusbaum, E., Silvia, P. J., Beaty, R. E., Burgin, C. J., & Kwapil,T. R. (2015).Turn that racket down! Physical anhedonia and diminished pleasure from music. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 33(2), 228–​243. O’Sullivan, T. (2009) All together now:  A symphony orchestra audience as a consuming community. Consumption, Markets and Culture, 12(3), 209–​223. Proverbio, A., De Benedetto, F., Ferrari, M. V., & Ferrarini, G. (2019). When listening to rain sounds boosts arithmetic ability. PLoS ONE, 13(2), Article e0192296. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal. pone.0192296 Radbourne, J., Johanson, K., & Glow, H. (2014). The value of “being there”: How the live experience measures quality for the audience. In K. Burland & S. Pitts (Eds.), Coughing and clapping: Investigating audience experience (pp. 55–​67). Ashgate. Rathbone, C. J., O’Connor, A. R., & Moulin, C. J. A. (2017). The tracks of my years: Personal significance contributes to the reminiscence bump. Memory and Cognition, 45(1), 137–​150. Rauscher, F., & Hinton, S. (2011). Music instruction and its diverse extra-​musical benefits. Music Perception, 29(2), 215–​226. Rauscher, F. H., & Shaw, G. L. (1998). Key components of the Mozart effect. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86(3), 835–​841. Rauscher, F. H., Shaw, G. L., & Ky, K. N. (1993). Music and spatial task performance. Nature, 365, Article 611. https://​doi.org/​10.1038/​365611a0 Rautalinko, E. (2012). Reflective listening and open-​ended questions in counselling: Preferences moderated by social skills and cognitive ability. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 13(1),  24–​31. Reese, J., & Derrick, C. L. (2019). Children’s concerts: Experiences of university music students and faculty. International Journal of Music in Early Childhood, 14(1), 111–​126.

129

130

Alexandra Lamont Rideout, B. E., & Laubach, C. M. (1996). EEG correlates of enhanced spatial performance following exposure to music. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 82(2), 427–​432. Roberts, D. F., Henriksen, L., & Foehr, U. G. (2009). Adolescence, adolescents, and media. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (3rd ed.,Vol. 2; pp. 314–​344). Wiley. Saarikallio, S. (2011). Music as emotional self-​regulation throughout adulthood. Psychology of Music, 39(3), 307–​327. Saarikallio, S., & Erkkilä, J. (2007). The role of music in adolescents’ mood regulation. Psychology of Music, 35(1), 88–​109. Salamé, P., & Baddeley, A. (1989). Effects of background music on phonological short-​term memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 41(1), 107–​122. Sandstrom, G. M., & Russo, F. A. (2013). Absorption in music: A scale to identify individuals with strong emotional responses to music. Psychology of Music, 41(2), 216–​228. Savan, A. (1999). The effect of background music on learning. Psychology of Music, 27(2), 138–​146. Schellenberg, E. G., & Hallam, S. (2005). Music listening and cognitive abilities in 10-​and 11-​year-​ olds: The Blur Effect. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1060, 202–​209. Schellenberg, E. G., Nakata, T., Hunter, P. G., & Tamoto, S. (2007). Exposure to music and cognitive performance: Tests of children and adults. Psychology of Music, 35(1),  5–​19. Schwartz, R.W., Ayres, K. M., & Douglas, K. H. (2017). Effects of music on task performance, engagement, and behavior: A literature review. Psychology of Music, 45(5), 611–​627. Sloboda, J. A. (1991). Music structure and emotional response: Some empirical findings. Psychology of Music, 19(2), 110–​120. Sloboda, J. A., O’Neill, S. A., & Ivaldi, A. (2001). Functions of music in everyday life: An exploratory study using the experience sampling method. Musicae Scientiae, 5(1),  9–​32. Smith, J. D., Nelson, D. G., Grohskopf, L. A., & Appleton, T. (1994). What child is this? What interval was that? Familiar tunes and music perception in novice listeners. Cognition, 52(1),  23–​54. Swanwick, K. (1998). Music, mind, and education. Routledge. ter Bogt,T. F. M., Mulder, J., Raaijmakers, Q. A. W., & Gabhainn, S. N. (2011). Moved by music: A typology of music listeners. Psychology of Music, 39(2), 147–​163. Thompson, S. (2007). Determinants of listeners’ enjoyment of a performance. Psychology of Music, 35(1),  20–​36. Thompson, W. F., Schellenberg, E. G., & Husain, G. (2001). Arousal, mood, and the Mozart effect. Psychological Science, 12(3), 248–​251. Van Zijl, A., & Sloboda, J. A. (2011). Performers’ experienced emotions in the construction of expressive musical performance: An exploratory investigation. Psychology of Music, 39(2), 196–​219. Williams, L. R. (2008). Effect of music complexity on nonmusicians’ focus of attention to melody or harmony. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 26(2),  27–​32. Williams, L. R., Fredrickson, W. E., & Atkinson, S. (2011). Focus of attention to melody or harmony and perception of music tension: An exploratory study. International Journal of Music Education, 29(1),  72–​81.

130

131

9 MUSICAL PREFERENCES Alexandra Lamont and David Hargreaves

This chapter considers the development and maintenance of musical preferences across the lifespan. We consider the three main determinants of preferences and their potential changes over the lifespan, namely those based on the listener, the nature of the music and the situation or context in which listening takes place. First, we set out some definitions of our terms, distinguishing between preference and taste and clarifying the definition of musical styles and genres.We next take a broad look at patterns of musical preference across the lifespan as a whole, looking more specifically at infancy, childhood, adolescence and adulthood. One conceptualisation of these changes is in terms of the concept of ‘open-​earedness’, and we use this to discuss how tolerance for different musical styles changes across the lifespan and how prejudices against certain types of music develop at different ages. Lastly, we provide a detailed consideration of the contexts, from culture through to the home, that shape music preference and engagement. To conclude, we consider the implications of these considerations for teachers and community musicians, including the ways in which they might select repertoire for their pupils.

Definitions To fully understand any kind of musical experience, we need to identify features that come from the music (e.g., structure, style, complexity, familiarity), the person (e.g., age, gender, cultural group, musical training) and the listening situation (Hargreaves, 2012; Hargreaves et al., 2016). First, considering the nature of music preferences, in most academic usage, ‘preference’ refers to listeners’ liking for specific pieces of music as compared with others at particular points in time, whereas ‘taste’ refers to the overall pattern of their preferences over longer periods of time (Hargreaves & Lamont, 2017). Experimental aesthetics deals with aspects of musical structure which are held to determine musical preferences (Hargreaves & North, 2010), suggesting that we like music best that corresponds to moderate levels of “arousal potential” (Berlyne, 1971), affected by familiarity, novelty and complexity. Different music is differently liked: self-​evidently, ‘popular’ music is consumed and experienced more by listeners in different musical traditions than ‘classical’ or ‘art’ music. However, even something as seemingly abstract as arousal potential varies between listeners and changes over time. There are many individual difference features that we need to take into account when thinking about the listener. The most important is age, which reflects the fact that listeners 131

132

Alexandra Lamont and David Hargreaves

change across the lifespan and that their engagement with music also changes; this forms the largest part of the research reviewed here. Other important individual difference factors include personality, cognitive style, gender, ethnic background and social class (see Greasley & Lamont, 2016). Most research in this area has explored individual differences separately; we review these below, together with a recent attempt by Bonneville-​Roussy and colleagues to develop a more integrated model that includes age, personality and what they term “psychological internal dispositions”, which include conformity, self-​monitoring and uniqueness seeking (Bonneville-​ Roussy et al., 2017). Finally, to come to a deeper understanding of context, we draw on a popular theoretical model first proposed by Bronfenbrenner (1979) which identifies the levels at which situations and contexts can influence development. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory begins from the individual and identifies microsystems, such as family, school and peer groups, within which the individual operates. At the microsystem level, the individual is directly involved in the context, and each of these contexts has its own rules and systems. At the next level of mesosystem, the microsystems interact with one another. Moving to broader levels, the exosystem reflects contexts in which the individual is not involved but which impact them directly, while the broadest level of macrosystem exerts an indirect and abstract cultural influence. The whole system also changes over time (Bronfenbrenner, 1986). This model provides a useful way of identifying what is important in understanding music preferences and potentially in shaping them. The chapter considers new research on how contexts interact with listening behaviour and how they might influence the development of preference over time. To illustrate this more clearly with a musical example, let’s consider a 13-​year-​old pupil from a school in London. The pupil is a boy called Mohamed, and his teacher, Miss Smith, wants to know how to build on Mohamed’s current situation to develop his horizons. To do this, she needs to be aware of the language and terminology Mohamed might use to talk about the music he likes with his friends, the styles of music popular with children of his age and the specifics of music that he has experienced from the range of musical contexts open to him. These might include more direct influences like his family and friends at school and his past experiences in the classroom (which may or may not overlap), more distant influences such as the music prescribed in the national curriculum and, at a broader level, the music of the cultures Mohamed grew up in. Having identified these three separate key concepts for understanding preference and engagement with music, it quickly becomes apparent that each cannot operate in a vacuum, and the labelling of the tripartite model as “reciprocal feedback” clearly highlights this (Hargreaves, 2012). Both theory and research has sometimes foregrounded one of these concepts; for instance, experimental aesthetics emphasises the musical stimulus, while developmental research prioritises age-​over-​time as the key listener variable. Context has, to date, been the poor relation in research terms, but drawing on an older sociological tradition, new research is beginning to address this. We begin with the largest body of research on how responses to and evaluations of music change across the lifespan, which requires an interaction between the music and the listener.

Music and listener over time: Age-​related patterns of development The interaction between musical and temporal features can clearly be seen in the well-​ established experimental aesthetics approach of Berlyne (1971), which hinges on the psychobiological concept of arousal. Berlyne’s inverted U-​shaped model proposes that levels of liking are low for stimuli of very low and very high arousal potential and at their highest for stimuli 132

133

Musical preferences

of intermediate arousal potential. Arousal potential is determined by what Berlyne calls the “collative” properties of the stimuli, in particular familiarity, novelty and complexity. Research into music preference finds broad levels of support for this (Chmiel & Schubert, 2017); and a recent study by Chmiel and Schubert (2019) extended familiarity to cover the concept of unusualness as a predictor of musical preference. In a study of 94 participants who were exposed to each of five varied musical stimuli ten times over a 3-​week period, they found that their results were consistent within Berlyne’s inverted U-​shaped model and that unusualness was a good indicator of musical preference. Bonneville-​Roussy and Eerola’s (2018) findings suggest that unpretentious music, which includes popular music, was rated as “comparatively moderate” (p. 408) on all the musical features, which again supports Berlyne’s notion of optimal moderate arousal as being responsible for preference. Studies show that people with different arousal levels may prefer different styles of music: specifically, low resting arousal can lead to preferences for loud and fast music (McNamara & Ballard, 1999). Schäfer and Sedlmeier (2011) have shown more immediate effects of arousal on preference: when their participants were put in a state of higher arousal, they preferred a novel piece more, providing the music was not too complex. Similarly, complexity can be measured objectively in terms of patterns of musical structure but is more intuitively understood subjectively with reference to the listener (North & Hargreaves, 2008). As familiarity increases through repetition, the listener becomes better able to predict the temporal structure, and the specific piece becomes less complex to that listener. It is thus impossible to understand preference or taste simply by looking at the musical stimulus itself, since the listener plays a central role. Furthermore, most of the experimental aesthetics research uses specific pieces of music but draws generalisations from listeners’ responses to these to apply to genres and styles. This issue remains contested throughout the literature but is essential to disentangle in order to be clear. We first cover the larger body of work on taste before moving to relationships with specific pieces of music.

Genres and styles of music over time Early childhood Preference is an essential component of research on responses to music in, and immediately prior to, infancy. Ingenious studies in utero show that the foetus is first responsive to sound at around 20–​25 weeks gestational age (Chelli & Chanoufi, 2008) and by 33 weeks, foetuses show relatively consistent heart rate and movement changes in response to a musical stimulus (Kisilevsky et  al., 2004). Memory for repeated musical patterns also develops early and can be studied in the womb by measuring changes in heart rate (Krueger et  al., 2004). Studies of transnatal memory  –​memory shown after birth for experiences before birth  –​provide the most fundamental explanation for why preferences develop across the lifespan: exposure. Newborns prefer to listen to their mother’s voice to that of a stranger (Kisilevsky et al., 2003). This works for music too, and long-​lasting musical memories can be formed before birth (Partanen et al., 2013). This suggests that fine-​grained discrimination is possible from a very early age. Studies have shown that musical features such as consonance and scale structure can clearly be detected by infants as young as 4 months (Zentner & Kagan, 1998), and newer work has specified that these preferences are strongly influenced by familiarity through prior exposure rather than resulting from any innate predispositions (Gerry et al., 2012; Plantinga & Trehub, 2014). Infants and young children are also sensitive to musical features related to pitch and tonal organisation 133

134

Alexandra Lamont and David Hargreaves

(Corrigall & Trainor, 2014; Jentschke et al., 2014) and to rhythm (Bergeson & Trehub, 2006). Ilari and Polka (2006) provide further evidence for this fine-​g rained discrimination. They gave 8-​month-​old infants versions of Ravel’s “Prélude” and “Forlane” from Le tombeau de Couperin, played either on the piano or by a full orchestra. Both segments shared a similar metre and tonal centre but included different musical patterns. In the piano version, infants did not show any preference for the two pieces, which supports the idea that the musical similarities of tonality and metre dominate. However, in the orchestral version, infants responded differently, preferring the “Prélude”. Ilari and Polka argue that very young children do not need to only hear ‘simple’ children’s music, and their findings support the idea that rich materials can lead to richer responses in listeners of any age. However, further work with older children suggests that the voice can be an early preference bias in auditory stimuli. Ilari and Sundara (2009) found 5-​, 8-​and 11-​month-​olds preferred to listen to an unaccompanied vocal melody than to a variation of it with an instrumental and percussive accompaniment. How might these discrimination skills play out in the formation of early music preferences? Early work by Gardner (1973) showed 6-​year-​old children were able to detect whether pairs of extracts came from the same or different pieces of music drawn from different periods of classical music from 1680 through to 1960 (Baroque, Classical, Romantic or Modern). Castell (1982) repeated Gardner’s approach including jazz and rock alongside classical music. The task was embedded in a real-​life story where groups of 8-​to 9-​year-​olds and 10-​to 11-​year-​olds were asked to imagine finding a room full of musicians and musical instruments to which they returned at different points in time, and to indicate whether or not the musicians were playing the same piece at those points. Castell found that children were more accurate in judging popular pairs than classical ones, and somewhat surprisingly, the 8-​to 9-​year-​olds performed significantly better than the 10-​to 11-​year-​olds. She speculates that “by the age of 11 children have formed very definite likes and dislikes in the field of current pop music, and cease to distinguish very much between pieces and styles for outside their chosen favourites” (p. 25). More recent research comparing classical and popular styles supports this greater accuracy in matching heard examples of popular styles in younger children (Marshall & Hargreaves, 2007; Marshall & Shibazaki, 2011). Marshall and Hargreaves (2007) carried out a study with preschoolers in which the style discrimination task was embedded in a cassette tape matching game: children were asked to find one tape to listen to and then to match this with another tape.This study used the same four classical styles as Gardner, along with four popular styles.The results showed that matching of popular musical styles was more accurate than that of classical styles. This was extended by Marshall and Shibazaki (2011), who asked 3-​and 4-​year-​olds to match pieces of music from five different styles (grunge/​rock, jazz, blues, classical and baroque) to their “ideal/​preferred” listeners, making a choice from five different types of people (teachers, old people, business people, sportspeople and bikers). They found that preschoolers were able to match the musical excerpts at above-​chance level, but were better able to make judgements with popular styles. Furthermore, the study revealed some established associations between type of person and style of music. A naturalistic study of young children’s exposure to music (Lamont, 2008) revealed that most music heard by 3½-​year-​olds is either music aimed at children or popular music, so familiarity is likely to play a role in all these findings.

Adolescence In adolescence, listening becomes even more prevalent. Music listening is widely reported to be one of the most popular activities among young people (Davis, 2016; North et al., 2000) and is reported at around 25 hours a week for 18-​year-​olds, more than double the amount for 134

135

Musical preferences

60-​year-​olds (Bonneville-​Roussy et al., 2013). Passion for music is also reportedly higher in adolescence (Bonneville-​Roussy et al., 2013). Music preferences at this broad level are a way for adolescents to explore various identities; Frith’s (1981) suggestion that music serves as a “badge of identity” at this point in development clearly encapsulates the notion that these identities can then be communicated to other people. In terms of genre, pop music in its many incarnations (including hip-​hop, rap, DJ-​based music, dance/​house, R&B, indie and chart pop) is the style preferred most by young adults (North & Hargreaves, 2007). Pop music preferences in adolescence are strongly related to clothing styles, leisure interests, patterns of friendship and many other aspects of adolescents’ values and attitudes (Lamont & Hargreaves, 2019). A challenge to understanding preference for music is the plethora of genres and styles: music itself has diversified and cross-​fertilised, and access to music is now no longer restricted to the music being currently released. To counter this, researchers have moved away from the older approach of using simple genre labels to measure preference, and most researchers break pop music down into different substyles, such as rock, elite, urban and dance (Delsing et al., 2008). Many researchers are now using the MUSIC model which emerged from rigorous research by Rentfrow and colleagues (Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003; Rentfrow et al., 2011). In its current form, this model divides music into five different types that cross genre labels: mellow (smooth and relaxing styles); unpretentious (singer-​songwriter and country music); sophisticated (classical, operatic, world and jazz); intense (loud, forceful and energetic music); and contemporary (rhythmic and percussive music such as rap and funk). A similar approach has been developed by Bonneville-​Roussy and colleagues in the Music Preferences in Adulthood Model (Bonneville-​ Roussy et al., 2017), which also comprises five styles (unpretentious, intense, jazzy, classical and contemporary). Both models were derived by playing clips of music to listeners and attempting to extract the musical features that listeners feel belong together. Having established style categories that seem to make sense for listeners, age-​related changes in preference for these styles can then be studied. Once musical affiliations have been made in adolescence, they seem to be fairly robust in the short to medium term. In a longitudinal study, Delsing et al. (2008) found that adolescents’ music preference dimensions remained stable over a 3-​year period. They tested preference in two subsamples aged 12 and 16, finding the older group was more consistent across the time period, though both showed a consistency in their preferences for the four musical style factors (rock, elite, urban, pop/​dance –​although they do not report on the degree to which these styles were preferred, they suggest that the older adolescents had greater preference for more ‘adventurous’ music). Similarly, Mulder et al. (2010) found high levels of consistency in preference for different styles in adolescents and young adults over a 21-​month period. Looking over larger age spans, there appears to be more variation. Bonneville-​Roussy et  al. (2013) explored age trends from adolescence to middle adulthood. Preferences for contemporary and intense music peaked in adolescence and declined with age, preferences for sophisticated and unpretentious music were lowest in adolescence and increased with age, and preference for mellow music remained relatively stable (Bonneville-​ Roussy et al., 2017).

Adulthood Music remains important in later life, and although listening may be less prevalent (Bonneville-​ Roussy et al., 2013), memories of and through music can be important in dealing with social isolation and conditions such as dementia (Baird et al., 2018; Hays & Minichiello, 2005; Laukka, 2007). Often older adults find themselves transported to earlier stages in life; data from across the lifespan serve to reinforce the idea that adolescence and early adulthood are critical periods 135

136

Alexandra Lamont and David Hargreaves

for music taste (we return to this below in relation to specific pieces of music). However, adults also seem to experience a shift in the kind of music they like to listen to, with increases found in preference for unpretentious and sophisticated music and decreases in preference for intense and contemporary music found from a range of studies (Bonneville-​Roussy et al., 2013; North & Hargreaves, 2007). As well as age, this may be influenced by other people: Bonneville-​Roussy and Rust (2018) found peers were more influential in relation to intense music while family members were more influential in relation to classical and unpretentious music.

Preference and specific pieces of music A rather different tradition of research has explored people’s relationships with specific pieces of music; this can also shed light on age-​related developmental change. In particular, the critical period of adolescence to early adulthood has been highlighted by a range of studies with older adults, finding that recognition of music which was popular at the time is particularly high (Janata et al., 2007; Krumhansl, 2017). This fits a pattern of results in autobiographical memory research suggesting that memories across the lifespan exhibit a ‘reminiscence bump’, which falls somewhere between the age of 13 and 30, and more memories are recalled from this bump than before or after it. Theoretically, events in adolescence may lead to more lasting memories because they are novel or transitional, relate to identity formation or originate when the brain is at a point of optimal functioning (Koppel & Rubin, 2016). In music, the precise age when this bump occurs varies: Hemming (2013) suggested age 17; Holbrook and Schindler (1989) age 23½; Platz et al. (2015) found more music-​evoked autobiographical memories between the ages of 15 and 24; and Zimprich and Wolf (2016) found a peak in recognition of specific pieces of music around 29. In line with the importance of social influence on music preference, a ‘cascading’ reminiscence bump has also been identified by Krumhansl & Zupnick (2013). In their study, 20-​year-​old participants recognised and liked songs that were at the top of the charts both when they themselves were in adolescence and early adulthood and when their parents and (to a lesser extent) grandparents were at the same ages, in comparison to music that was at the top of the charts in the intervening years. Krumhansl and Zupnick make a strong argument that the reminiscence bumps for these particular pieces are caused by transmission through generations, although they acknowledge that the ‘grandparent’ bump might be more to do with the quality of the music at that particular period in time. This picks up earlier work on the concept of eminence in music, looking at types of music that seem to endure across generations. North and Hargreaves (1995) found that some popular artists, notably Elvis Presley and The Beatles, were consistently rated as eminent by all age groups over the last 30 years or so, supporting the idea of eminence in preferences for pop music. Asking participants to freely recall their own memories of music from earlier in life, the importance of adolescence is again underscored by Schubert (2016); his 20-​to 22-​year-​olds recalled far more early memories of music from the age of 13 to 14, while Janssen et al. (2007) found people first encountered their favourite records (and books and films) at an average age of 17 to 18 years. One challenge with this work is the diversity of music that is mentioned. None of the individual pieces listed by Schubert’s (2016) 88 participants overlapped.This supports evidence that music listening habits are remarkably diverse even among individuals of the same age and from the same home environments (Lamont & Webb, 2010), meaning that we may need to take a still more fine-​grained approach when exploring children’s and young people’s engagement with specific pieces of music. 136

137

Musical preferences

Other individual differences Berlyne’s (1971) concept of arousal potential already introduced the idea that individuals can vary along psychological dimensions such as personality, and clear links have been found between personality variables and music preferences using the genres approach. Since most of this work relates to adults and has no clear developmental implications, we cover it briefly (for a more detailed overview, see Greasley and Lamont, 2016). At a broad level, relatively clear correlations can be established between facets of personality and preferences for different types of music (Dunn et al., 2012; Rentfrow et al., 2011; Swami et al., 2013). For instance, adolescents who like rock music are also low in conscientiousness and high on openness to experience, and those who prefer urban or pop/​dance music are high in extraversion and agreeableness (Delsing et al., 2008). From most of this work, it appears that results are more conclusive for extraversion and openness to experience than other personality traits (Greasley & Lamont, 2016). More sophisticated research has been able to predict preference from personality. For instance, Vella and Mills (2017) found openness to experience predicted preferences for reflective and complex music and extraversion was positively related to preferences for energetic-​rhythmic music. Using the MUSIC model, Rentfrow and Gosling (2003) established links between personality and preferences on their dimensions, such as preference for cheerful music with vocals being positively related to extraversion and preference for complex music being positively related to openness to experience. More recently, Greenberg and colleagues (2016) found that preferences for musical attributes reflected their ratings of their own personality traits; this overrode any other individual differences or demographic variables. Research has also highlighted gender differences. Women score higher on music-​empathiser than music-​systemiser scales (Kreutz et al., 2008) and are more likely to emphasise mood and emotion-​related functions as influential in shaping their preferences (Chamorro-​Premuzic et al., 2012). Explicit comparisons have shown that women have a greater preference than men for pop, country and religious styles (Bonneville-​Roussy et al., 2013) and are also more likely to prefer opera, chart pop, R&B and musicals, whereas men are more likely to prefer rock, blues, jazz, reggae and heavy metal (Colley, 2008; North & Hargreaves, 2007; Swami et al., 2013).

Open-​earedness Hargreaves (1982) introduced the concept of open-​earedness to explain the results of a study of young people’s willingness to listen to and their liking for a wide variety of different styles of music at different ages from childhood to adolescence, and we discuss this here to provide a useful summary of the age-​and personality-​related literature on the development of music preference. Based on findings from children aged 7–​8, 9–​10 and 14–​15, Hargreaves found the younger children were more ready to listen to and possibly enjoy unconventional or unusual (e.g., avant garde, aleatory or electronic) musical forms. This was further developed by LeBlanc (1991) to a model of age-​related change in open-​earedness: after an initial phase of open-​earedness, a decline is seen in adolescence, followed by a further partial rebound in early adulthood and a further decline in old age. A substantial body of implicit and explicit research on this concept broadly supports these generalisations (Hargreaves et al., 2016). Tolerance and liking for a range of musical styles seems to decrease across childhood (Busch et  al., 2016), while strongly expressed preferences for a narrow range of pop styles coincides with adolescence. The rebound of open-​earedness in early 137

138

Alexandra Lamont and David Hargreaves

adulthood is associated with young adults’ desire to acquire music, either from recordings or downloads (Greasley et al., 2013). After this, there seems to be a general decline in liking for popular music styles across the remainder of the lifespan and a corresponding general increase in classical styles (Bonneville-​Roussy et al., 2017). Open-​earedness may result from preferences (Hargreaves & Bonneville-​Roussy, 2018) or from a spirit of openness, curiosity or tolerance (Louven, 2016). In addition, open-​earedness may relate to the concept of omnivorousness of musical taste, which is positively related to musical training and sophistication (Elvers et  al., 2015) and could be more likely in listeners with either flexible associative network systems, as proposed by Schubert et al. (2014), or those who are more open to experience, relating to personality (Bonneville-​Roussy et  al., 2013). The dip in open-​earedness that LeBlanc found in mid-​childhood and early adolescence, and its rebound in early adulthood, run parallel to research findings on the development of openness to experience over the same age range (Soto et al., 2011).This suggests that there may be a strong association between the psychological trait of openness to experience and open-​earedness in music.

Context Cultural background could, in some ways, be considered a listener characteristic, but we address it here as, unlike other listener characteristics, it has been more studied from a developmental perspective. As noted at the outset, situations and contexts have hitherto received far less research attention, but the growing recognition of the importance of the social and contextual elements that surround human behaviour is now encouraging many researchers to address this issue. In this final evidence section, we address context at a range of levels. Drawing on Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological systems theory, we start from the widest cultural level and move through to the more specific subcultures, social groups and individual settings of music listening with relevance to music preference. At the broadest level, music is frequently celebrated as an example of a cultural universal. Merriam (1997) argues that ethnomusicologists consider music to be one of the most stable elements of culture, suggesting that “music is one of the most important elements through which a child maintains a stable cultural identity, even when cultural traditions and associated life-​styles have all but disappeared” (p. 439). Based on analysis of the features of song worldwide, Mehr et al. (2019) found that music appears in every society observed, and that musical behaviours vary more within societies than across them when considering the global dimensions of formality, arousal and religiosity. In keeping with these common purposes, it seems that all mothers sing to their newborn infants, intuitively using an infant-​directed register to which their infants respond positively (Trainor et al., 1997). Music provides a structure for caregiving around the world in different social and cultural niches, and forms the building blocks of social interaction through a process of communicative musicality (Trevarthen, 2012). This seems likely to provide a strong foundation for music preference. Early enculturation provides infants and young children a basis for later perceptual and cognitive development through music within a given musical culture, so at this point in development, cultural specificity is introduced. As reviewed in more detail elsewhere (Hargreaves & Lamont, 2017), enculturation occurs rapidly over the first year of life. Infants aged up to about 6 months are able to detect structural features of music (scale tones, intervals and rhythms) from many musical cultures and also ‘artificial’ invented patterns, while by 12 months their discrimination skills improve but, at the same time, become limited to the organising principles of the music they hear around them (e.g., Hannon & Trehub, 2005a, 2005b; Trehub et al., 1999). Further cultural development continues beyond this point, and belonging to a musical culture is 138

139

Musical preferences

vital for identity development (Ilari, 2017; Zapata et al., 2017). The preferences for the musical structures of one’s own culture stem from these early experiences. Music education influences children’s musical development at both an exosystem (policy) level and a microsystem (how policy is implemented in school) level, and it also interacts with other contexts at the mesosystem level. Hargreaves et al. (2003) identified a globe model of the music education opportunities open to children and young people, distinguishing between formal and informal contexts and between statutory and elective provision. One critical point concerns whether music is provided at all in formal schooling. In many parts of South America and Africa, for example, music is an integral part of everyday life; it is a natural part of work, play, rituals, ceremonies, religious occasions and family occasions. In countries in which the provision of school music is relatively scarce, informal music-​making assumes prominence: but in the United Kingdom and other European countries, there is a clear distinction between music inside and outside school, particularly at the secondary school level. Beyond the principle of whether music is included in education (see Lamont, 2017), the details are also important. Music education research has attempted to identify how curriculum, pedagogy and evaluation as decided by policy can influence the experiences children have; the notion that children should be exposed to classical music through education and the provision of a canon of repertoire through initiatives such as the National Songbook and schemes of work for music teachers certainly influences how much is understood about different styles of music (Lamont & Maton, 2010). Different cultural contexts bring their own challenges in terms of what is valued at school; for instance, a recent study by Carver (2017) highlights the challenges of tackling indigenous African music in a South African music curriculum which also contains elements of Western art music, and the clash between the two traditions can create disjunctures in the educational experience. The music that is valued by others has a clear impact on what is valued by children and young people, either negatively or positively; for instance, adolescents seem particularly resistant to classical music of any kind (Kopiez & Lehmann, 2008), and these negative connotations may stem from the way in which this is introduced to them in formal education. At the microsystem level, school can be a very important context in which children and young people learn directly about what counts and how to succeed in music (Lamont & Maton, 2008), and at the mesosystem level, children’s beliefs and attitudes towards music are shaped by their teachers as well as their parents (Lamont et al., 2003). The specific microsystem can be highly influential. In one of the first studies of musical identity in school-​age children, Lamont (2002) found that in a primary school context where very few children were taking extracurricular music lessons, the majority of the children were confident to describe themselves as musicians. However, in a different context where around a third of children were taking extracurricular lessons, the musical identities of those not having lessons were negatively affected. These children were far less likely to describe themselves as musicians, seeing the ‘special’ activity of those around them as ‘counting’ more than the classroom activities they were all engaged in. This question of preference for music in general is likely to relate also to preference for types of music, and as we saw earlier, omnivorousness or greater open-​earedness is likely amongst those who have had more musical opportunities. School contexts stretch beyond the classroom and the music studio, and playground routines have been intensively studied by several researchers. Children have their own musical cultures, often consisting of invented songs and musical utterances, that are developed spontaneously and contrast with those on offer from adults and older children (Campbell, 2011; Marsh, 2011). School friendship groups also provide an important context for preferences to be expressed. Adolescents believed that pupils at their own school, representing an in-​g roup, were more 139

140

Alexandra Lamont and David Hargreaves

likely to prefer what they themselves valued as musical styles than pupils at a different school, representing an out-​group (Tarrant et al., 2001). This confirmed North and Hargreaves’ (1999) finding that adolescents had a more positive view of peers who were described as fans of prestigious rather than non-​prestigious musical styles, suggesting that musical preference might be used as a measure of group discrimination. The home provides another important context for music-​making. Many caregiving activities, such as changing nappies or bedtime routines, involve musical exchanges which provide building blocks for specific song-​singing and shared musical cultures within families (Addessi, 2009; Sole, 2017). Children listen to music with parents, siblings and other family members, and shared listening experiences can shape preferences (Krumhansl, 2017). Ter Bogt et al. (2011) found similarities in the types of music liked by pairs of children and parents, particularly in relation to pop and highbrow music, although Morgan et al. (2015) found some evidence of conflict between parents and their children in terms of musical taste. Children and young people seem to experience music in a wider variety of contexts than adults (Lamont, 2008; Bonneville-​Roussy et  al., 2013), and much more research is needed on how these contexts interact as well as on a greater diversity of contexts than currently exists. We need to know more about the microsystems of children and young people’s musical activities, and innovative research methods such as observation and ethnography may provide valuable insights. An interesting observational study by Custodero et  al. (2016) of children’s music-​making on the New York subway revealed how very young children entertained themselves through musical utterances and movements sparked by environmental noises, such as the train itself, and friendship groups of children singing invented songs to one another. Their conclusions that music is brought by children to a range of situations such as the subway as a ‘security blanket’, to bring familiarity into less familiar spaces, often through singing, show how music is a dynamic force that can bridge contexts.

Concluding remarks Our review has shown that music preferences are shaped by a range of people and influenced by a very broad range of settings from global musical cultures through to friendship groups in playgrounds; that they are dynamic and subject to change throughout the lifespan; that there are phases at which new experiences might be better received and others where the more familiar might be more welcome; and that music preference is highly idiosyncratic and personal.This leads us to the final section of this chapter on the role educators and community musicians can have in broadening opportunities and experiences, and also the importance of recognising, celebrating and accommodating different musical cultures and microsystems in practice. There are clearly points in development where preference is more flexible and educators and community musicians attempting to engage children and young people will have an easier time of it. Primary school attitudes towards music of all kinds are generally positive (Lamont et al., 2003), and the evidence we have reviewed strongly suggests that all kinds of music will be well received at this point due to open-​earedness and openness to experience both being high. However, other points can be more challenging. Returning to our opening example, Miss Smith is being challenged by expanding her 13-​year-​old pupil Mohamed’s musical horizons within the context of a whole-​class music setting. Mohamed is in the middle of the adolescent closed-​eared period, so alongside high levels of enthusiasm for music he prefers, his willingness to embrace something new is likely to

140

141

Musical preferences

be relatively low. Green’s (2008) Musical Futures paradigm, popular in the United Kingdom among secondary school music teachers, capitalises on this by suggesting that Mohamed and his friends might bring in music of their own choice and work out how to play this themselves, using materials available to them at school and with peer and teacher support. However, Miss Smith may not have experience of the particular musical tradition Mohamed knows well, and in the later stages of the pedagogy, transferring techniques to a very different tradition like Western classical music might be quite a stretch (Carver, 2017; Lamont & Maton, 2010). On safer territory, Miss Smith might assume that Mohamed and his class share a typical preference for chart pop music and, thus, introduce something at the top of the charts as a way of explaining an element of musical structure or engaging her class. However, as highlighted earlier, not all young people will share the same specific music preferences, and the sophisticated nuances of mainstream music and music from various subcultures may also be lost on Miss Smith. She may engage the majority of her class but lose the young people whose identity is centred on rap, grime, tropical house or other subcultures and who reject pop music with the same strength of feeling as classical music. Encouragingly, however, with the proliferation of digital media and access to a vastly expanded range of music, openness to experience may be sustainable throughout adolescence. Music is also something that people like to talk about with others at all ages. Music’s ability to bridge contexts also provides the potential for musical preference and taste to be expanded with appropriate information gathering and for preferred music to provide a bridge to new styles as well as an opening to find out more about that music. Recognising the influences on preference is vital for understanding the diversity of jumping-​off points in encouraging children and young people to continue to engage with a broad range of music, and the fluidity and continued development of musical preference over the lifespan suggests that education has a vital role to play in continuing to expand musical horizons.

Reflective questions 1. What is the earliest memory you have of music, and who or what is associated with it? How does that relate to the ideas presented here on lifespan development of musical preferences? 2. Imagine trying to get to know a completely new kind of music, and consider how you could make this easier for yourself.Would these ways be suitable for children and young people? 3. What assumptions might you make about someone who likes heavy metal? Having read this chapter, would these be justified?

Suggestions for further reading Greasley, A. E., & Lamont, A. (2016). Musical preferences. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 263–​281). Oxford University Press. Hargreaves, D. J., & Bonneville-​Roussy, A. (2018). What is “open-​earedness”, and how can it be measured? Musicae Scientiae, 22(2), 161–​174. Zapata Restrepo, G. P., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2017). Musical identities, resilience and wellbeing: The effects of music on displaced children in Colombia. In D. J. Hargreaves, R. A. R. MacDonald, & D. E. Miell (Eds.), Handbook of musical identities (pp. 736–​750). Oxford University Press.

141

142

Alexandra Lamont and David Hargreaves

References Addessi, A. R. (2009). The musical dimension of daily routines with under-​four children during diaper change, bedtime and free play. Early Child Development and Care, 179(6), 747–​768. Baird, A., Brancatisano, O., Gelding, R., & Thompson, W. F. (2018). Characterization of music and photograph evoked autobiographical memories in people with Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 66(2), 693–​706. Bergeson, T. R., & Trehub, S. E. (2006). Infants’ perception of rhythmic patterns. Music Perception, 23(4), 345–​360. Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and psychobiology. Appleton-​Century-​Crofts. Bonneville-​Roussy, A., & Eerola, T. (2018). Age trends in musical preferences in adulthood: 3. Perceived musical attributes as intrinsic determinants of preferences. Musicae Scientiae, 22(3), 394–​414. Bonneville-​Roussy, A., Rentfrow, P. J., Xu, M. K., & Potter, J. (2013). Music through the ages: Trends in musical engagement and preference from adolescence through middle adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(4), 703–​717. Bonneville-​Roussy, A., & Rust, J. (2018). Age trends in musical preferences in adulthood: 2. Sources of social influences as determinants of preferences. Musicae Scientiae, 22(2), 175–​195. Bonneville-​Roussy, A., Stillwell, D., Kosinski, M., & Rust, J. (2017). Age trends in musical preferences in adulthood: 1. Conceptualization and empirical investigation. Musicae Scientiae, 21(4), 369–​389. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986) Ecology of the family as a context for human development:  Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22(6), 723–​742. Busch, V., Bunte, N., & Schurig, M. (2016). Open-​earedness, musical concepts, and gender identity. In O. Krämer & I. Malmberg (Eds.), European perspectives on music education VI: Open ears –​open minds, listening and understanding music (pp. 151–​165). Helbling. Campbell, P.  S. (2011). Musical enculturation:  Sociocultural influences and meanings of children’s experiences in and through music. In M. Barrett (Ed.), A cultural psychology of music education (pp. 61–​ 81). Oxford University Press. Carver, M. (2017). Knowledge transfer: Indigenous African music in the South African music curriculum. African Music, 10(3), 119–​141. Castell, K.  C. (1982). Children’s sensitivity to stylistic differences in “classical” and “popular” music. Psychology of Music, Special Issue,  22–​25. Chamorro-​Premuzic, T., Swami,V., & Cermakova, B. (2012). Individual differences in music consumption are predicted by uses of music and age rather than emotional intelligence, neuroticism, extraversion or openness. Psychology of Music, 40(3), 285–​300. Chelli, D., & Chanoufi, B. (2008). Audition foetale: Mythe ou realité? Journal de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Biologie de la Reproduction, 37(6), 554–​558. Chmiel, A., & Schubert, E. (2017). Back to the inverted-​U for music preference: A review of the literature. Psychology of Music, 45(6), 886–​909. Chmiel, A., & Schubert, E. (2019). Unusualness as a predictor of music preference. Musicae Scientiae, 23(4), 426–​441. Colley, A. (2008).Young people’s musical taste: Relationship with gender and gender-​related traits. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(8), 2039–​2055. Corrigall, K.A., & Trainor, L. J. (2014). Enculturation to musical pitch structure in young children: Evidence from behavioural and electrophysiological methods. Developmental Science, 17(1), 142–​158. Custodero, L. A., Calì, C., & Diaz-​Donoso, A. (2016). Music as transitional object and practice: Children’s spontaneous musical behaviors in the subway. Research Studies in Music Education, 38(1), 55–​74. Davis, S. (2016). Children, popular music, and identity. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of musical development (2nd ed.; pp. 265–​283). Oxford University Press. Delsing, M. J. M. H., ter Bogt, T. F. M., Engels, R. C. M. E., & Meeus, W. H. J. (2008). Adolescents’ music preferences and personality characteristics. European Journal of Personality, 22(2), 109–​130. Dunn, P. G., de Ruyter, B., & Bouwhuis, D. G. (2012). Toward a better understanding of the relation between music preference, listening behaviour, and personality. Psychology of Music, 40(4), 411–​428. Elvers, P., Omigie, D., Fuhrmann, W., & Fischinger, T. (2015). Exploring the musical taste of expert listeners: Musicology students reveal tendency toward omnivorous taste. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 1252. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2015.01252 Frith, S. (1981). Sound effects: Youth, leisure, and the politics of rock’n’roll. Pantheon.

142

143

Musical preferences Gardner, H. (1973). Children’s sensitivity to musical styles. Merrill-​Palmer Quarterly, 19(1),  67–​77. Gerry, D. W., Unrau, A., & Trainor, L. J. (2012). Active music classes in infancy enhance musical, communicative and social development. Developmental Science, 15(3), 398–​407. Greasley, A. E., & Lamont, A. (2016). Musical preferences. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 263–​281). Oxford University Press. Greasley, A. E., Lamont, A., & Sloboda, J. A. (2013). Exploring musical preferences:  An in-​ depth study of adults’ liking for music in their personal collections. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 10(4), 402–​427. Green, L. (2008). Music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom pedagogy. Ashgate. Greenberg, D. M., Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D. J., Monteiro, B. L., Levitin, D. J., & Rentfrow, P. J. (2016). The song is you:  Preferences for musical attribute dimensions reflect personality. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(6), 597–​605. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1948550616641473 Hannon, E. E., & Trehub, S. E. (2005a). Metrical categories in infancy and adulthood. Psychological Science, 16(1), 48–​55. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​j.0956-​7976.2005.00779.x Hannon, E. E., & Trehub, S. E. (2005b). Tuning in to musical rhythms: Infants learn more readily than adults. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(35), 12639–​12643. https://​doi.org/​10.1073/​ pnas.0504254102 Hargreaves, D. J. (1982). The development of aesthetic reactions to music. Psychology of Music, Special Issue,  51–​54. Hargreaves, D. J. (2012). Musical imagination: Perception and production, beauty and creativity. Psychology of Music, 40(5), 539–​557. Hargreaves, D. J., & Bonneville-​Roussy, A. (2018). What is “open-​earedness”, and how can it be measured? Musicae Scientiae, 22(2), 161–​174. Hargreaves, D. J., & Lamont, A. (2017). The psychology of musical development. Cambridge University Press. Hargreaves, D. J., Marshall, N., & North, A. C. (2003). Music education in the 21st century: A psychological perspective. British Journal of Music Education, 20(2), 147–​163. Hargreaves, D. J., & North, A. C. (2010). Experimental aesthetics and liking for music. In P. N. Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), The handbook of music and emotion: Theory, research, applications (pp. 515–​546). Oxford University Press. Hargreaves, D. J., North, A. C., & Tarrant, M. (2016). How and why do musical preferences change during childhood and adolescence? In G. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of musical development (pp. 303–​322). Oxford University Press. Hays, T., & Minichiello, V. (2005). The meaning of music in the lives of older people: A qualitative study. Psychology of Music, 33(4), 437–​451. Hemming, J. (2013). Is there a peak in popular music preference at a certain song-​specific age? A replication of Holbrook & Schindler’s 1989 study. Musicae Scientiae, 17(3), 293–​304. Holbrook, M. B., & Schindler, R. M. (1989). Some exploratory findings on the development of musical tastes. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(6), 119–​124. Ilari, B. (2017). Children’s ethnic identity, cultural diversity, and music education. In R. A. R. MacDonald, D. J. Hargreaves, & D. E. Miell (Eds.), Handbook of musical identities (pp. 527–​542). Oxford University Press. Ilari, B., & Polka, I. (2006). Music cognition in early infancy: Infants’ preferences and long-​term memory for Ravel. International Journal of Music Education, 24(1),  7–​20. Ilari, B., & Sundara, M. (2009). Music listening preferences in early life: Infants’ responses to accompanied versus unaccompanied listening. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56(4), 357–​369. Janata, P.,Tomic, S.T., & Rakowski, S. K. (2007). Characterisation of music-​evoked autobiographical memories. Memory, 15(8), 845–​860. Janssen, S. M. J., Chessa, A. G., & Murre, J. M. J. (2007). Temporal distribution of favourite books, movies, and records: Differential encoding and re-​sampling. Memory, 15(7), 755–​767. Jentschke, S., Friederici, A. D., & Koelsch, S. (2014). Neural correlates of music-​syntactic processing in two-​ year old children. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 200–​208. Kisilevsky, B. S., Hains, S. M., Jacquet, A.-​Y., Granier-​Deferre, C., & Lecanuet, J. P. (2004). Maturation of fetal responses to music. Developmental Science, 7(5), 550–​559. Kisilevsky, B. S., Hains, S. M., Lee, K., Xie, X., Huang, H.,Ye, H. H., Ke, Z., & Wang, Z. (2003). Effects of experience on fetal voice recognition. Psychological Science, 14(3), 220–​224. Kopiez, R., & Lehmann, M. (2008). The “open-​earedness” hypothesis and the development of age-​related reactions to music in elementary school children. British Journal of Music Education, 25(2), 121–​138.

143

144

Alexandra Lamont and David Hargreaves Koppel, J., & Rubin, D. C. (2016). Recent advances in understanding the reminiscence bump: The importance of cues in guiding recall from autobiographical memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(2), 135–​149. Kreutz, G., Schubert, E., & Mitchell, L. A. (2008). Cognitive styles of music listening. Music Perception, 26(1),  57–​73. Krueger, C., Holditch-​Davis, D., Quint, S., & DeCasper, A. J. (2004). Recurring auditory experience in the 28-​to 34-​week old fetus. Infant Behavior & Development, 27(4), 537–​543. Krumhansl, C. L. (2017). Listening niches across a century of popular music. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2017.00431 Krumhansl, C. L., & Zupnick, J. A. (2013). Cascading reminiscence bumps in popular music. Psychological Science, 24(10), 2057–​2068. Lamont, A. (2002). Musical identities and the school environment. In R. A. R. MacDonald, D. J. Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), Musical identities (pp. 41–​59). Oxford University Press. Lamont, A. (2008).Young children’s musical worlds: Musical engagement in three-​year-​olds. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 6(3), 247–​261. Lamont, A. (2017). Musical identity, interest, and involvement. In R. A. R. MacDonald, D. J. Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), Handbook of musical identities (pp. 176–​196). Oxford University Press. Lamont, A., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2019). Musical preference and social identity in adolescence. In K. S. McFerran, P. Derrington, & S. Saarikallio (Eds.), Music and adolescents: An Oxford university press handbook (pp. 109–​118). Oxford University Press. Lamont, A., Hargreaves, D. J., Marshall, N. A., & Tarrant, M. (2003). Young people’s music in and out of school. British Journal of Music Education, 20(3), 229–​241. Lamont, A., & Maton, K. (2008). Choosing music: Exploratory studies into the low uptake of music GCSE. British Journal of Music Education, 25(3), 267–​282. Lamont, A., & Maton, K. (2010). Unpopular music: Beliefs and behaviours towards music in education. In R. Wright (Ed.), Sociology and music education (pp. 63–​80). Ashgate. Lamont, A., & Webb, R. (2010). Short-​and long-​term musical preferences: What makes a favourite piece of music? Psychology of Music, 38(2), 222–​241. Laukka, P. (2007). Uses of music and psychological well-​being among the elderly. Journal of Happiness Studies, 8(2), 215–​241. LeBlanc, A. (1991, 7–​9 March). Effect of maturation/​aging on music listening preference: A review of the literature [Paper presentation].The Ninth National Symposium on Research in Music Behavior, Cannon Beach, Oregon, United States. Louven, C. (2016). Hargreaves’ “open-​earedness”: A critical discussion and new approach on the concept of musical tolerance and curiosity. Musicae Scientiae, 20(2), 235–​247. Marsh, K. (2011). Meaning-​making through musical play: Cultural psychology of the playground. In M. Barrett (Ed.), A cultural psychology of music education (pp. 41–​60). Oxford University Press. Marshall, N., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2007). Musical style discrimination in the early years. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 5(1),  35–​49. Marshall, N., & Shibazaki, K. (2011). Two studies of musical style sensitivity with children in early years. Music Education Research, 13(2), 227–​240. McNamara, L., & Ballard, M. E. (1999). Resting arousal, sensation seeking, and music preference. Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs, 125 (3), 229–​250. Mehr, S. A., Singh, M., Knox, D., Ketter, D. M., Pickens-​Jones, D., Atwood, S., Lucas, C., Jacoby, N., Egner, A. A., Hopkins, E. J., Howard, R. M., Hartshorne, J. K., Jennings, M. V., Simson, J., Bainbridge, C. M., Pinker, S., O’Donnell,T. J., Krasnow, M. M., & Glowacki, L. (2019). Universality and diversity in human song. Science, 366(6468), Article eaax0868. Doi: 10.1126/​science.aax0868 Merriam, A. P. (1997). The anthropology of music. Northwestern University Press. Morgan, J. P., MacDonald, R. A. R., & Pitts, S. (2015). “Caught between a scream and a hug”: Women’s perspectives on music listening and interaction with teenagers in the family unit. Psychology of Music, 43(5), 611–​626. Mulder, J., ter Bogt, T. F.  M., Raaijmakers, Q. A.  W., Nic Gabhainn, S., & Sikkema, P. (2010). From death metal to R&B? Consistency of music preferences among Dutch adolescents and young adults. Psychology of Music, 38(1),  67–​83. North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (1995). Eminence in pop music. Popular Music and Society, 19(4),  41–​66. North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (1999). Music and adolescent identity. Music Education Research, 1(1), 75–​92.

144

145

Musical preferences North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2007). Lifestyle correlates of musical preference: 1. Relationships, living arrangements, beliefs, and crime. Psychology of Music, 35(1),  58–​87. North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2008). The social and applied psychology of music. Oxford University Press. North, A. C., Hargreaves, D. J., & O’Neill, S. A. (2000). The importance of music to adolescents. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(2), 255–​272. Partanen, E., Kujala, T., Tervaniemi, M., & Houtilainen, M. (2013). Prenatal music exposure induces long-​ term neural effects. PLoS ONE, 8(10), Article e78946. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.pone.0078946 Plantinga, J., & Trehub, S. E. (2014). Revisiting the innate preference for consonance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(1),  40–​49. Platz, F., Kopiez, R., Hasselhorn, J., & Wolf, A. (2015). The impact of song-​specific age and affective qualities of popular songs on music-​evoked autobiographical memories (MEAMs). Musicae Scientiae, 19(4), 327–​349. Rentfrow, P. J., Goldberg, L. R., & Levitin, D. J. (2011). The structure of musical preferences: A five-​factor model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(6), 1139–​1157. Rentfrow, P. J., & Gosling, S. D. (2003). The do re mi’s of everyday life:  The structure and personality correlates of music preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1236–​1256. Schäfer, T., & Sedlmeier, P. (2011). Does the body move the soul? The impact of arousal on music preference. Music Perception, 29(1),  37–​50. Schubert, E. (2016). Does recall of a past music event invoke a reminiscence bump in young adults? Memory, 24(7), 1007–​1014. Schubert, E., North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2014). A dynamically minimalist cognitive explanation of musical preference:  Is familiarity everything? Frontiers in Psychology, 5, https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​ fpsyg.2014.00038. Sole, M. (2017). Crib song: Insights into developmental functions of toddlers’ private spontaneous singing. Psychology of Music, 45(2), 172–​192. Soto, C. J., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2011). Age differences in personality traits from 10 to 65:  Big five domains and facets in a large cross-​sectional sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(2), 330–​348. Swami,V., Malpass, F., Havard, D., Benford, K., Costescu,A., Sofitiki,A., & Taylor, D. (2013). Metalheads: The influence of personality and individual differences on preference for heavy metal. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(4), 377–​383. Tarrant, M., North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2001). Social categorization, self-​esteem, and the estimated musical preferences of male adolescents. Journal of Social Psychology, 141(5), 565–​581. ter Bogt, T. F. M., Diesling, M. J. W. H., van Zalk, M., & Christenson, P. G. (2011). Intergenerational continuity of taste: Parental and adolescent music preferences. Social Forces, 90(1), 297–​319. Trainor, L. J., Clark, E. D., Huntley, A., & Adams, B. A. (1997). The acoustic basis of preferences for infant-​ directed singing. Infant Behavior and Development, 20(3), 383–​396. Trehub, S. E., Schellenberg, E. G., & Kamenetsky, S. B. (1999). Infants’ and adults’ perception of scale structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25(4), 965–​975. Trevarthen, C. (2012) Communicative musicality:  The human impulse to create and share music. In D. J. Hargreaves, D. E. Miell, & R. MacDonald (Eds.), Musical imaginations (pp. 259–​284). Oxford University Press. Vella, E. J., & Mills, G. (2017). Personality, uses of music, and music preference: The influence of openness to experience and extraversion. Psychology of Music, 45(3), 338–​354. Zapata Restrepo, G. P., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2017). Musical identities, resilience and wellbeing: The effects of music on displaced children in Colombia. In D. J. Hargreaves, R. A. R. MacDonald, & D. E. Miell (Eds.), Handbook of musical identities (pp. 736–​750). Oxford University Press. Zentner, M. R., & Kagan, J. (1998). Infants’ perception of consonance and dissonance in music. Infant Behavior & Development, 21(3), 483–​492. Zimprich, D., & Wolf, T. (2016). The distribution of memories for popular songs in old age: An individual differences approach. Psychology of Music, 44(4), 640–​657.

145

146

147

PART III

Acquiring specific music skills

148

149

INTRODUCTION Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

A central issue in music education and community music is the acquisition of musical skills, the core topic undertaken by the nine chapters in Part III. Authors discuss conceptions of musical ability, transformational models of music learning, playing instruments and singing, music technology skills, creativity, motivation and identity, the social, emotional and cognitive benefits of music learning and performance-​related health problems (PRHPs). Across all chapters, we see the lines formerly separating music education from community music beginning to blur. Increasingly, it is not only possible but more accurate to discuss the acquisition of musical skills across the life course. In Chapter 10, Jane W. Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur note that conceptions of musical ability rely on sociocultural perspectives and the acquisition of music-​specific skills. Thus, for one person, musical ability might manifest in learning enough chords on a ukulele to join in a folk singing group, while for another it might be a rigorous regimen of daily practice in preparation for a professional symphony orchestra audition. In some cultures, everyone is considered musical, as people of all ages join in community singing, playing and dancing. However, in Western cultures, an expertise model of musical ability often prevails.Those who want to pursue a professional career as a musician often need to amass an inordinate amount of practice time to develop the requisite skills. Yet there are biological (e.g., genetic) and social (e.g., parental and teacher influences) components as well. Special musicians (e.g., prodigies, musical savants, etc.) may follow a different course. Regardless of ability level or age, being a successful musician may depend on aspects of self-​determination theory, including competence (being proficient at the desired level of activity), relatedness (fitting in with peers or social groups) and autonomy (engaging in music through personal choice and agency). Maria Varvarigou and Andrea Creech consider transformational models of music learning in Chapter 11. They highlight the multidimensional nature of musical learning with its potential to foster profound change at social, emotional, cognitive or physical levels. Transformational learning is that which changes the learner in meaningful ways. For example, learning the correct way to spell Rachmaninoff would not normally result in long-​lasting profound changes for the individual. However, improving musical skills sufficient to move from the second concert band to the top wind ensemble might have deep-​seated consequences for one’s self-​perceptions, including influences on motivation to continue working, feelings of self-​identity and self-​worth,

149

150

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

feelings of acceptance by peers and mentors, and so on. Transformative learning in music can occur at any stage throughout the life course and at any level of musical development. It can also occur in formal, informal and non-​formal settings. Musical engagements are not axiomatically transformative, and teachers and learners need to engage in reflective dialogue, among other strategies, to facilitate the type of life-​changing learning that is possible. Playing an instrument or singing are at the core of musical experiences, and issues related to learning how to do so are covered in Chapters 12 and 13. Katie Zhukov (Chapter 12) and Annabel J. Cohen (Chapter 13) discuss aspects that are common to both and also distinctive. These two authors discuss benefits of playing and singing, and Cohen includes a comparison of the two. Both authors discuss reasons for discontinuing singing or playing, learning in formal and informal settings and individual and group learning. Zhukov discusses issues related to choosing an instrument, reading notation, playing by ear, acquisition of technical skills, sight-​ reading and practising individually and in ensembles.Where Zhukov stresses technical aspects of acquiring performance skills on an instrument, Cohen emphasises accessibility for everyone to sing throughout the lifespan. She also discusses evolutionary history, physiological mechanisms of singing and vocal development from childhood through older age. In the 21st century, and perhaps even more so during the pandemic, music technology skills are becoming increasingly important. In Chapter 14, Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides deal with issues surrounding the pursuit of a professional musical career in this fast-​moving field. One difficulty they face is identifying critical skills, since these can change rapidly with new developments, not only in hardware and software (i.e., ‘hard skills’) but also in the so-​called ‘soft skills’ relating to personal and social qualities. They also note distinctions between specific skills and transferable or generic skills (i.e., those that have relevance for multiple occupational domains). Formerly, music technology skills were codified in lists of competencies or learning outcomes, such as entering and editing music using notation software or recording and mixing a performance with digital audio software. Currently, there is a greater emphasis on acquiring music technology skills in holistic learning experiences, such as working in collaborative interdisciplinary teams. Online or distance learning, critically highlighted during the COVID-​19 pandemic, involves cooperation between administrators, institutional technology support, instructors and learners (for younger students, this includes parents). Finally, the authors discuss the role of developing music technology ‘skills’ in a world of metacognition and metalearning wherein musicians are redefining their roles in unique and entrepreneurial ways. Creating and leading a laptop ensemble, whether in person or online, is just one example. Because the literature on creativity is prevalent in music education, Beatriz Ilari, Susan Helfter and Peter Webster focus their discussion primarily on creativity in community music (Chapter 15). They identify three waves of research on creativity in the modern era. The first wave began with a lecture by J. P. Guilford to the American Psychological Association in 1950. For the next 20 years, the emphasis was on the creative personality. From the 1970s to the 1980s, research focused on cognitive processes involved in creativity.The last 30 years (the 1990s to the present) has seen a shift toward interdisciplinary sociocultural influences. This latter period is reflected in musical creativity in community contexts, which emphasises process or engagement more than product, and this is, in turn, connected to the social nature of community music. Ilari, Helfter and Webster draw our attention to Hill’s (2018) cross-​cultural model of musical creativity, that included six processes: • • •

generativity –​composing, improvising, arranging and performing; agency –​making personal choices; interaction –​collaborating with musicians, audiences and others; 150

151

Introduction

• • •

nonconformity – creating something novel; recycling – reusing, remixing and building on the work of others; flow – immersion in a creative experience with total absorption.

Framed by this model, the authors discuss case studies involving babies, children, adolescents, young adults, adults and seniors from Brazil, Canada, Finland, Hong Kong, Italy, South Africa and the United States in a variety of community settings (e.g., prison populations, military veterans), providing numerous exemplars of creativity in community music. Motivation is, of course, a critical component in the acquisition of musical skills. Maria Spychiger covers this topic, along with self-identity, in Chapter 16. A number of issues – such as risk assessment, task difficulty, subjective task value, desire to achieve, self-efficacy and social affiliation – influence motivation, and these are addressed in expectancy-value theories, theories of self and needs satisfaction theories. Through several vignettes, Spychiger illustrates how motivation triggers the ways in which musicians move toward musical possible selves and map their potential musical trajectories. Identity in music is intertwined with motivation. A person who feels inadequate or incompetent as a musician may become discouraged and less motivated to continue the hard work necessary to improve. Contrarily, an accomplished musician may be strongly motivated to maintain or improve a high degree of expertise. In Chapter 17, Ioulia Papageorgi surveys a broad range of evidence to understand how the study of music affects individuals throughout the life course. From childhood to older age, from amateur to professional, from formal to informal settings, music is associated with many social, emotional and cognitive benefits. Neuroscientific research has identified many structural and functional changes that result from musical engagements. Whether these changes result in cognitive enhancements has been of considerable interest. A general consensus is emerging that music training may bring about small changes in general intelligence, fluid intelligence, verbal intelligence and executive functioning. Verbal and auditory memory, along with spatial reasoning are also affected. The purported translation of effects to academic skills is more controversial. For example, whether music instruction transfers benefits to mathematical skills is less certain than for language skills. With mathematics, results are highly variable and often rely on correlation, not causation. Evidence supporting a transfer of benefits to language and literacy skills is more consistent with positive effects found in auditory processing of speech sounds, such as prosodic elements. Although there are strong associations between musical studies and academic achievement, investigations of causality are limited and report mixed results. Finally, music studies may have positive influences on motivation, socio-emotional development, mental health and wellbeing and prosocial behaviour across the life course. Although the general trend of research findings indicates positive benefits of music instruction, much more work is yet to done to disentangle non-musical influences (e.g., parental support and quality of home life) from musical studies per se. Bronwen Ackerman reviews health issues for those participating in musical activities (Chapter 18). Providing a counterpoint to Chapter 5 in Part I, where the health benefits of music participation were discussed, Ackerman highlights that musicians of all types and ages may experience PRHPs due to musical participation. However, more frequent and severe injuries are likely to occur in young adults seriously pursuing a career or in professional musicians. Although poor technique or faulty practice habits can contribute, the most likely cause of most PRHPs is overuse or overload. PRHPs can include musculoskeletal problems (e.g., carpal tunnel syndrome), vocal problems (e.g., polyps, nodules), neurological health issues (e.g., focal dystonia), psychological health issues (e.g., performance anxiety, depression), hearing health issues (e.g., noise-induced hearing loss, tinnitus) and general health issues (e.g., high blood 151

152

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

pressure, anxiety). One of the most important aspects of this chapter is the call for increased awareness of PRHPs and collaborative efforts among musicians, music educators and heathcare professionals, which are critical for prevention and treatment. Collectively, the authors of Part III present an amazing amount of research and commentary on the acquisition of musical skills. In the diversity of contexts and settings, we see not only the blurring of lines between music education and community music skills, but also the prolific contributory role of music psychology. The question is no longer “Can music psychology research contribute to music education and community music?” but “How can we move into a more advanced phase of cooperation between music psychologists and practitioners?”, especially concerning applications of research to practice.

Reference Hill, J. (2018). Becoming creative. Oxford University Press.

152

153

10 CONCEPTIONS OF MUSICAL ABILITY AND THE EXPERTISE PARADIGM Jane W. Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur

This chapter focuses on how musical ability has been conceived in different contexts and realised across different parts of the life course, primarily in Western societies. In teasing out the factors that contribute to musical ability in Western culture, the text highlights the “expertise model” which demonstrates that skills are amassed over many years and are dependent on significant quantities of practice to acquire and maintain them. This practice is entwined with material resources, such as musical instruments, and intersects with the cultural context including the values bestowed on the music, the availability of skilful teachers and other key social supports, such as family members and mentors. These influences combine with other factors such as intrapersonal traits and cognitive and physical skills to impact the individual’s motivation and volition. This chapter also reveals that as well as the social and individual aims and intentions of the participant that are strongly associated with cultural context and individual life stage, musical skills often differ according to the requirements of the musical tasks. Cohorts like musical prodigies and those with amusia (musical deficits) are examined as examples at the extremes of musical ability. Additional cases are used to outline the myriad ways in which some learners progress to high-​level competency, while others sustain a deep engagement through listening and responding to music rather than through playing. The chapter reveals the complex and multifaceted construct that is musical ability and demonstrates how biological, genetic as well as cognitive and social dimensions influence ability development and so musical engagement across the life course.

Defining musical ability Without doubt, in Western musical cultures, ability is a term that has been much debated (see McPherson, 2016, for example). Thus, from the outset, there is a need to differentiate between key terms including ability, aptitude, capacity and achievement. For Radocy and Boyle (1997), “ability” is applied in the broadest sense, with “aptitude being the part of ability resulting from a combination of genetic endowments and environmental experiences with music other than formal music education” (Radocy & Boyle, 1997, p. 335). “Capacity” combines the results of genetic endowment and maturation while “achievement” refers to specific accomplishments gained through training  –​which may be formal or informal or even generated through self-​exploration. And these might all be manifest in quite different ways. For some, musical 153

154

Jane W. Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur

achievement might be strumming a few chords or having a keen passion for music through listening; yet for others, it might be associated with exceptional outcomes, such as being able to memorise and play a sonata by Beethoven with great technical fluency and artistic expression. In other words, conceptions and realisations of musical ability do depend on social and cultural perspectives and the mastery of music-​specific skills. Indeed, an individual also needs structures to scaffold their musical development (Kupers et al., 2014). Finding tools that suitably identify musical capacities and aptitudes and then being able to apply methods that encourage musical engagement have presented considerable challenges. Outside of the Western cultural context, various studies have demonstrated that where daily life revolves around engaging in musical practices, high-​level musical achievements are often well represented across the life course (see Nettl & Bohlman, 1991). John Messenger’s seminal research from the 1950s to 1990s with the Anang Ibibo people of West Africa (Nigeria) investigated sophisticated musical achievements across the community. Messenger found that all members engaged with their culturally attuned musical practices through singing, playing and dancing to music. In fact, across their studies, the researchers could not find anyone who was, in their view, “un-​musical” (Messenger & Messenger, 1992). Results of enquiries such as those by Messenger indicate that people have the innate capacities to be musical. Fulfilling musical potentials enables people to realise social practices that shape their wellbeing (Emberly & Davidson, 2011). For example, events such as marriages and deaths offer rites and rituals where music is central to social sharing, and these collective experiences may offer unique forms of thought and action that enhance connectivity between community members (Krueger, 2014). In cultural environments different to those offered to the Anang Ibibo, people have been known to claim low capacity for music; for example, tone-​deafness or being unrhythmical are often cited in countries like Australia and England and viewed as significant barriers to learning and/​or enjoyment (Sloboda et al., 2005). In these contexts, research interest has been to understand this apparent deficit, and as we see in subsequent sections of this chapter, biological evidence supports some of these claims but not to the extent that an entire culture group cannot develop their musical aptitudes into achievements. Indeed, for many people who demonstrate a low aptitude for music, they are simply not sufficiently engaged with music-​making experiences in their everyday lives to acquire the skills necessary to improve their pitch, rhythm and musical memories (Davidson, 2011). The contrasting results described in the two paragraphs above can also in part be attributed to the research emanating from different disciplines; for example, anthropological participant observation on the one hand and laboratory-​based scientifically controlled studies on the other. Of course, in the context of the current volume, these tend to be Western-​centric approaches looking at alternative cultures, which can lead to ‘othering’ and treating those data as extraordinary (e.g., Messenger’s view of the Anang Ibibo). Additionally, culturally and methodologically focused discourses do, to some degree at least, endorse the specific and culturally framed questions that different disciplinary approaches are predicated on. Thus, it is always important in assessing research and its implications to appraise the ways in which the cultural practice of the research itself shapes belief and behaviour and its measurement. Indeed, these sociocultural influences include the ways in which definitions are drawn, how research questions are posed and assessments undertaken (He & van de Vijver, 2012). Taking all of the cautions above into account, it is nonetheless useful to consider the existing literature, being mindful of the context in which it was generated. Françoys Gagné, a Canadian educational psychologist very much focused on Western educational systems and measurements, applied the term “gifts” to domains of ability and “talent” to the field of performance (2009, 154

155

Musical ability and the expertise paradigm

Figure 10.1  The differentiated model of musical giftedness and talent Source: Adapted from Françoys Gagné (2009) and previously published in McPherson & Williamon (2016, p. 342)

2013).Thus, to possess a gift is to have genetic endowment while talent is a term used to capture the superior skills and performance of someone who has been through a skills-​focused training in a specific domain. In summary, Gagné categorises five components that lead to abilities being fulfilled: gifts (G), talents (T) and a talent development process (D) as well as intrapersonal (I) and environmental (E) catalysts. In Gagné’s view, those who progress incrementally are able to successfully convert gifts into talents. Gagné’s model has been applied to Western music learning by McPherson et al. (2012) (see Figure 10.1).1 In appraising how musical aptitudes (that combination of genetic endowments and environmental experiences prior to musical education) might be translated through education into formal achievement, it is necessary to understand the constituent subcomponents of aptitudes and how these might be assessed.

Measuring musical ability As mentioned above, musical ability comprises many subcomponents, and many attempts have been made to measure it. As Radocy and Boyle (1997) wisely note, where a high level of musical competency is already apparent, this is easily measured by assessing achievements and shortcomings. It is much more difficult to reliably assess potential prior to the acquisition of musical skills. Finding ways to measure latent capacity apart from learned skills is very challenging. For various social and political reasons between the First and Second World Wars, all 155

156

Jane W. Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur

sorts of measures of intellectual and physical abilities became popular in the United States and the United Kingdom (Leahey, 2017). Relating to music, one of the most historically significant is Seashore’s Measures of Musical Talents (appearing initially in 1919 and then heavily revised with other authors in Seashore et  al., 1919/​1930). It is a testimony to Seashore’s belief that musical capacity can be appraised through basic psychoacoustical discrimination. Central to the approach is that auditory ability is hardwired. These tests depended on comparing sinusoidal tones with a second tone, the latter being assessed as higher or lower, stronger or weaker, longer or shorter than the first tone. These tones were far from music-​sounding stimuli, and critics of these tests show that these stimuli were susceptible to the quality of the replay equipment and the acoustics in which they were heard. Seashore’s test lost favour in the 1970s as some adopted the view that aptitude combines acoustical processing and encultured information; thus, a more ecological approach took precedence, but even then, the resulting measures were limited. Herbert Wing, a music educator, developed the Wing Musical Aptitude Test (1962) and tests of musical ability and appreciation (1968), which are dependent on prior musical experience. The confusion apparent in Wing’s tests is that the conception of aptitude highly favours those from a music-​r ich culture, especially when those tested are asked to discriminate between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ music, the ‘correct’ result requiring a considerable understanding of how melody, harmony and timing function in Western classical music. Wing’s tests were superseded by Gordon’s Musical Aptitude Profile (1965/​1988) and Bentley’s Measures of Musical Abilities (1966a) and his publication Musical ability in children and its measurement (1966b), all aiming to access underlying mechanisms and general environmental exposure to music.Yet, all were highly problematic as they did not discriminate an individual’s genetic endowment and general environmental knowledge from their specific musical training. The current authors were subjected to these tests as young children and struggled not only to comprehend basic instructions and cope with listening over recording equipment, but also to muster the concentration required to sit through the lengthy pre-​recorded batteries of tests when only 7–​8 years old. One author was denied access to instrumental music lessons in school as she had not attained a high enough mark on the Bentley test –​a result that is rather ironic given that she later went on to become a professional classical musician. Had her parents not invested in music lessons outside of school, she would have never been given the opportunity to develop her musical education or interests. The validity of these various tests of musical ability has been proven to be shaky at best, yet their popularity historically was steeped in the belief that it was possible to identify and measure aptitude, which in all cases failed to recognise the difficulty in teasing apart genetic endowment, previous learning and the strong advantage of cultural milieu. While researchers continue to strive for measures of musical potential, one area of research which has been confident in its findings is that based on the expertise model of musical ability. Over the past 20 years, this has been one of the most influential paradigms, emphasising the role of practice in ability development.

Expertise model of musical ability A milestone research paper by Ericsson and colleagues (1993) showed that to attain professional levels of performance, it had taken Western classical violinists over 10,000 hours of accumulated deliberate practice; that is, practice in musical tasks with well-​defined goals having ample opportunities for repetition and gradual refinement, thus feeding the motivation to improve. A subsequent large-​scale investigation by Sloboda and colleagues (Sloboda et  al., 1996; Davidson et  al., 1997) into the musical development of students showed that Western school children who were on the 10,000-​hour trajectory progressed much more quickly than their peers who 156

157

Musical ability and the expertise paradigm

did comparatively little practice. Indeed, those who did not practice regularly typically gave up playing after one year or less of formal study. This particular finding has been highly reported in the scientific literature and popular press, with the latter translating the implication of the findings to be that ‘practice makes perfect’. Indeed, when Sloboda and colleagues investigated music examination achievements, these were correlated with quantities of practice, and thus a startling result was revealed: all the cohorts (high-​achieving musicians as well as those who had given up) progressed through their examination grades at a rate that was proportional to the amount of practice they had done. For instance, a child in the high-​achieving musician group might attain Grade 1 in one year with average practice of 30 minutes a day. A child in the ‘given up playing’ cohort might also achieve Grade 1, but after six years of playing; the total number of minutes of accumulated practice would be identical to that of the participant in the high-​achieving  group. The results of amassed quantities of practice only tell a partial story. In a follow-​up study of students who had been in Sloboda et al.’s original research, those who did the most hours of practice in their childhood did not show stronger evidence of being able to sustain a musical career nor indeed of continuing to play into their mid-​20s (see Burland & Davidson, 2004). Added to this, reference back to the Anang Ibibo reveals that when music-​making is an embedded cultural practice, much assimilation and accommodation of knowledge occurs whether or not long hours of deliberate skills-​focused practice are involved (Emberly & Davidson, 2011). Indeed, these elements entwine in complex ways. Looking into the world of the Western musical prodigy, some useful insights can be found.

Musical prodigies Musical prodigies have been distinguished in the Western cultural tradition as possessing elite-​level, mature musical skills in childhood (see Solomon, 2012). A  recent volume edited by McPherson (2016) highlights how a range of factors relating to an individual’s routines, practices, achievements, inner dispositions, motivations and opportunities contribute to the development of prodigious musical ability and how very different lives can align in order to bring that individual unity of musical direction or purpose. Here are two highly contrasting examples. One of the most discussed musicians in the literature in the past 50  years is jazz musician Louis Armstrong. The special appeal of Armstrong as a prodigy is that at first glance, he received no formal training, yet by his teenage years he was playing at an elite level and by early adulthood he revolutionised trumpet performance and the jazz idiom. From very early childhood, Armstrong was obsessive in his focus on music and invested many hours of engagement (Davidson & Faulkner, 2013). Being steeped in the jazz culture of New Orleans, Armstrong sang on street corners, calling for a junk cart by playing a toy horn. When he was a child living in the Waifs’ Home for Boys, Armstrong was taken on by the institution’s music instructor, who helped guide Armstrong’s already significant but implicit understanding of music. By early adolescence, Armstrong became a member of the Kid Ory Band, where the bandmaster taught him the fundamentals of jazz. Through a remarkable and singular focus on engagement with music, the trumpet in particular, plus a chain of key mentors and opportunities, Armstrong was able to hone his skills further. Key events in Armstrong’s complex early life reveal how personal motivations and specific environmental alignments aided Armstrong to acquire high-​level skills. However, Armstrong was also highly motivated to spend extended periods of time exploring how musical structures functioned and how they could be adapted and extended through creative engagement and 157

158

Jane W. Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur

invention. In doing so, Armstrong contributed significantly to the development of jazz.While the factors explored were unique to Armstrong and his own circumstances, the example shows how personal motivation and social factors combine with practice to become critical determinants in musical endeavours. Practice alone, without these other elements that were clearly personally satisfying to Armstrong, may not have led to the same unique and positive outcomes. A totally contrasting example of a musical prodigy is Derek Paravicini, a blind and autistic man with severe learning difficulties, who also acquired remarkable musical expertise in childhood. Paravicini belongs to a tiny sector of society living with savant syndrome, which is manifest in those with significant mental disabilities who also possess one or more abilities that are far in excess of the average. Paravicini’s principal musical guide since early childhood onwards has been Adam Ockelford, a music educator and performer who has specialised in educational needs and the development of exceptional abilities in learning, memory and creativity (see Ockelford, 2008, 2016). In work with Paravicini and others, Ockelford found that musical savant syndrome is characterised by an exceptionally early obsessive preoccupation with music (not dissimilar to the experience of Armstrong or other neurotypical prodigies). Further to this, Ockelford notes that when Paravicini came to him as a 4-​year-​old boy, he had already been listening to music in a highly focused manner and engaging with a toy keyboard for 2 years. Ockelford’s insight and pedagogical prowess resulted in daily musical tuition that painstakingly improved Paravicini’s playing technique. There is no doubt that Paravicini’s musical ability is staggering, as he now merges different musical styles and can play incredibly virtuosic jazz passages. While Paravicini cannot undertake many simple tasks, he is able to converse fluently through music in many different musical styles and displays an experience of great joy in these activities. In studying musical savants, Ockelford (2016) highlights the significance of their exceptional early cognitive environment  –​their blindness, autism and/​or severe learning difficulties. He notes that neurotypical humans deal with three strata of listening: “musical listening” which focuses on pitches, timings and loudness of musical stimuli; “everyday listening” which involves taking in noises around us, such as a door slamming; and “linguistic listening”, or focusing on the comprehension and understanding of speech sounds. In studying Paravicini and others, Ockelford has found that visual impairment or blindness heightens everyday sound processing, and this impacts cognitive development (Ockelford & Matawa, 2009).

Biological bases of musical ability Over the past decade, there has been an intensive interest in both brain science and genetics and their roles in the development of musical ability. Neurobiological evidence has revealed that interhemispheric connections between brain regions form the structural core of general intelligence. Specifically, it has been found that these connections build into subgroups that contribute to processing speed, working memory and perceptual organisation (see Hodges & Gruhn, 2012). It has been argued that these subgroups may “snowball as we go through life creating environments that are correlated with our genetic propensities” (Plomin, 2004, p. 344).While there is no structural neural core to any specific aptitude, the literature does show that brain size, processing speed and processing efficiency underlie mental abilities. Growth of new neurons and grey matter as the result of synapse growth mean that more grey matter is associated with higher-​capacity thinking (Hodges & Gruhn, 2012). Professional pianists have been shown to possess greater volume of grey matter than amateur pianists (Gaser & Shlaug, 2003). Faster decision-​making and shorter reaction times are affected by neural transmission speed –​the consequence of myelinisation of the axons of the 158

159

Musical ability and the expertise paradigm

brain. Musicians have faster reaction times in eye-​tracking experiments than non-​musicians, indicating a relationship between musical engagement and mental speed (Gruhn et al., 2006). What we do not know from these specific studies is how biologically advantaged the musicians were before music training took place (Hodges, 2016). However, we do know that students who received only 5 months of musical training in harmonic discrimination did decrease in their overall cortical activation, suggesting a mental processing efficiency developed through musical training (see Altenmüller et al., 2000). More recent developments in genetic analyses have facilitated neurobiological investigations in understanding the heritability of musical ability (Järvelä, 2018; Tan et al., 2014). Research involving 108 twin pairs revealed that associations between singing ability, instrumental expertise and years of music training were significantly mediated by shared additive genetic influences (Tan, 2016). The findings provide evidence for the role of genes in influencing singing ability and formal music training, as well as a partially shared genetic basis for singing ability and music training. Referring back to the role of practice in the skills model of expertise, Mosing and colleagues (2014) found that how much and how well one practices is between 40% and 71% heritable. This led to the conclusion that musical ability is an example of multifactorial gene-​ environment interaction (Mosing et al., 2017; Ullen et al., 2016). Further to this, research into musical deficits, such as tone-​deafness and beat deafness, that characterise congenital amusia, indicate that these conditions can indeed be inherited. In seminal research, Peretz (2020) has been able to trace families in which at least half of the siblings have amusia. And in a neuroimaging study of amusics (see Peretz & Vuvan, 2017), grey matter proliferation was found in the right auditory cortex and inferior frontal cortex of the brain. As Peretz notes, a deficiency in the capacity to sing or recognise accurate pitches does not mean that amusics cannot like music; some do. But some amusics do not want to learn anything about the music, finding it to be nothing more than a cacophony of random sounds, like pots and pans falling to the floor (Peretz, 2020, p. 62). It could also be that amusia has resulted in them being teased or singled out in the past, so it could be easier for them to cope with their inability to process musical information by claiming no interest or understanding of music rather than engaging with music and risking potential shame or embarrassment. These results together suggest that while biological dispositions may influence learning behaviours, they do not identify what specifically enables learners to sustain casual engagement, nor do they account for people who show no interest or ability in music in early life, but then take to music in their final years.

Musical abilities in the everyday lives of everyday people McPherson et al. (2012) undertook a longitudinal study of 157 young people, traced from first lessons on, over a 14-​year period. While musical achievements emerged in the group, only one attained professional status by 21  years of age. That young man, like Armstrong and indeed Paravicini, shared many biographical features that could be equated with talent development and possessed intrapersonal factors that seem to align with Gagné’s definition of someone with gifts for music. The other learners who had either continued or given up musical engagement did not possess the same focus in developing their musical skills. Of those who continued to play, many reached a skill plateau and did not move beyond it. Indeed, one student managed to master a single favourite piano piece during childhood and then stopped having lessons. This achievement was sufficient to keep him playing and he would return to the keyboard to play his limited repertoire time and again, describing his keyboard playing as a personally enjoyable and satisfying pursuit. 159

160

Jane W. Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur

The diversity of findings within McPherson et al.’s longitudinal study were framed in terms of self-​determination theory. This theory asserts that in order for learning to be motivating and sustaining, three main psychological needs have to be met: “competence” –​effective in engagement; “relatedness” –​integrating and affiliating with a social group; and “autonomy” –​ participating of one’s own free will and being self-​governed in the engagement (see Deci & Ryan, 2002). McPherson et al.’s (2012) study was thus able to offer a detailed insight into how and why young people up to 21 years of age ended up with often radically different outcomes from their musical engagements. Just how the three basic psychological needs can be sustained over time can be further understood in recent work in older music learners. Musical activities with older people have shown that with persistence and practice, skills can be acquired and refined even in later adulthood (Li & Southcott, 2015; MacRitchie et al., 2019; White-​Schwoch et al., 2013). Krampe (1997), who had been a co-​researcher on the original study that claimed 10,000 hours practice is needed to acquire expertise, reports that when older pianists invest time in deliberate practising, there is no evidence of age-​related decline in expertise. In later work, however, he did investigate training, expertise and age to discover expertise-​related differences in underlying processes. In the study, training and expertise were tested in young (20–​35) and older (60–​70) professional musicians and non-​musicians through a series of movement/​tapping and coordination tests in addition to behavioural measurements. Neural evaluations were made in pre-​and post-​training via fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) sessions. Results showed improvements due to training in non-​musicians, whereas professional musicians showed little or no impact of task or training. Age effects were found and discussed in relation to changes in the brain resulting from age-​related decline on functional brain plasticity (Lavrysen et al., 2009). Added to the more traditional practice-​ based studies, there is a burgeoning literature revealing that even modest levels of musical skill acquisition can satisfy competency needs and bring adult learners benefits that are much richer than those initially assumed from the expertise perspective of instrumental mastery (Creech et  al., 2013a, 2013b; Davidson, 2011). These benefits include strong affective experiences with music that seem to lead to a more positive self-​concept, improved general attitudes, but also greater self-​recognition, satisfaction and comfort (see Forssen, 2007; Southcott, 2009). In other words, it addressed autonomy needs. Further to this, relatedness needs were satisfied through participation in music groups, with much socialising and competency gained through learning and developing skills. Together, for this older population, the satisfaction of psychological needs through musical engagement contributed to recovery from depression, maintenance of personal wellbeing (Fullagar, 2008) and increased happiness (Fowler & Christakis, 2009). Of course, community music education programmes have long been shown to bring benefits aside from the development of technical production skills (Kalthoft, 1990). Additional benefits have included improvement in:  concentration and more orderly thought processes (Bailey & Davidson, 2002, 2003, 2005); spatial-​temporal reasoning (Rauscher & LeMieux, 2003); emotional expression including anxiety and anger to regulate and calm mood (Ansdell, 1995), feelings of empathy and emotional transference (Lee et al., 2016; Pavlicevic & Ansdell, 2004); better physical health and wellbeing (Cohen et  al., 2006; Hays, 2005). Work is now also showing how musical activity can decrease the risk of ageing-​related conditions such as dementia (Brancatisano & Thompson, 2020; Cacioppo et al., 2000; Sixsmith & Gibson, 2007). Older people’s experience of music demonstrates that it is not necessary to achieve high-​ level musical expertise to sustain engagement and reap many of the psychosocial benefits music provides. It may seem like something of a sidestep from a chapter exploring musical ability to discuss wellbeing benefits of musical engagement, but it does point to the fact that music’s status 160

161

Musical ability and the expertise paradigm

as a human technology is strongly related to human need. Musical ability is within almost every human and finding ways to express it seems to offer benefits far in excess of the historical tests of musical ability and research that regards only the talented few as having musical credentials. Indeed, musical ability as defined in terms of being able to learn difficult music and playing with great skill and fluency is only one form of musical expression. Recall the young student who has a repertoire of only one piece; his is a limited capacity, but nonetheless shows a form of engagement that brings him great affective satisfaction. Further to this, there is a specialist field of interest in lifelong learning and human development which reveals that the reasons for adult engagement with new learning, or indeed intermittent reconnection with experiences from childhood, are strongly connected to self-​determination (Schindler et al., 2006; Schuller, & Watson, 2009; Smith, 2003). This point leads us to consider how Westerners regard those who struggle or fail to acquire musical expertise. It is also pertinent to remind the reader that there are cultural contexts where no one is regarded as being un-​musical, less still a musical failure.

Musical failures In Western contexts, people often report how at a sensitive point in their lives, such as in primary school, they were refused a musical opportunity and this deeply affected them, preventing them from pursuing music.This refusal was often based on lack of skill in pitching a note or repeating a rhythm. But is someone really a musical failure if they play with inaccurate intonation or rhythm or poor tone? Perhaps they have not unlocked the correct approach to understanding and processing the musical information. Also, what if they love and are deeply satisfied by their engagement in the musical process; and, of course, who is a worthy judge? As noted above, the failure of one of the current authors in such a test disheartened her, but she nonetheless was able to pursue lessons. What internal processes enabled her to persist in the face of failure? Failure in music education has been measured through investigation of student dropout (Corenblum & Marshall, 1998; Costa-​Giomi et al., 2005; Hallam, 1998). The studies show that when students have a restricted view of what musical ability is and perceive their own failure to achieve this, they are at risk of potential dropout. Family impact, including students’ belief in the presence of musically heritable characteristics, can further influence their sense of failure (Austin & Vispoel, 1998). In this context, musical ability is regarded as an inherited gift rather than a set of skills developed over time through practice and sustained engagement.This limited view can inhibit progress and be demotivating and problematic for students. However, when examining student dropout where there is social isolation or no support and/​or a lack of competence, ceasing music education may be the most sensible and best outcome for some students’ wellbeing (Evans et al., 2013). The role of the teacher to encourage students to broaden their view of musical ability is key (Austin & Vispoel, 1998). One way to encourage is to promote an enjoyment in the activity and process of skill development, not necessarily the rate of progress or outcomes. A sense of relatedness to the emotional expressive factors of music can also be a valuable pedagogical focus. Indeed, most people who learn or engage in music-​making in school and in the community will not achieve exceptional expertise, but most will maintain a level of competency that satisfies their own desire, and this needs support in order to promote engagement throughout the life course. Teachers in these contexts are known for their skills in facilitating group process. There are cases where people do achieve high levels of musical expertise yet still give up playing; they might not be regarded as musical failures, but rather people who select to put their focus elsewhere, sometimes for quite unusual reasons. One of the current authors 161

162

Jane W. Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur

stopped practising and performing music at a professional standard in order to invest seriously in athletics in her 40s. Others often choose to focus on a different yet totally demanding and absorbing career like medicine or farming. In the sections that follow, the idea of a threshold for immersion, engagement, sustainment and progression is explored.

Sustaining musical ability Skill development and sustaining musical engagement over time in the context of self-​ determination theory was introduced above in reference to McPherson et al.’s (2012) 14-​year study of student learners. The study revealed that students were most likely to terminate lessons and give up playing altogether, even after years of study, if the psychological needs of competency, autonomy and relatedness were not seen to be fulfilled. Here is one indicative quote supporting the findings: I quit the trombone in Year 8 because the music we were playing was not challenging and crap, along with the fact that I wasn’t noticed for my skill, didn’t have many friends doing it, and the instrument wasn’t used in the music I listened to at my leisure. (McPherson et al., 2012, p. 88) Here, multiple reasons for giving up are offered: the trombonist’s capacity to play was not valued within the music group; also, music was not relevant to his life and socially limiting. Reading the student’s words re-​enforces the negative impact the music learning had on him, so there is little wonder he gave up. For students in the research by McPherson and colleagues who continued with their musical engagement, their learning environment looked very different. These students received tuition from teachers who they regarded as supportive, and as a result the students reported feeling more self-​determined in their learning. This appeared to offer greater enjoyment in learning, fostering a positive and socially connected outcome (McPherson et  al., 2012). These results were also reflected in a study which traced 20 students from high school successes in music on to tertiary education and beyond (Burland & Davidson, 2004). The theories explored and the particular examples given above reveal that musical ability can flourish in conditions that satisfy psychological needs by building self-​confidence, autonomy and relatedness.Work from sports psychology can also help us to understand how and why some people are more likely to ‘stay there’ and sustain their musical skills and passions at whatever age they start or whatever level they are satisfied to work at. Consider Figure 10.2, which is adapted by McPherson et al. (2012) from Abbott and Collins’ (2004) work. It shows how learners need to transition from sampling to specialisation through the development of a musician identity. This transition may not be that strong, which might permit the sorts of intermittent sampling experienced in some of the cases described in the previous section; that is, individuals who were content to express themselves musically at a very low level of musical competency. Clearly, as music becomes a specialised interest in the learner’s life, a strong identification with music leads to further and deeper investment. However, to add to the complexity of research findings and their implications, McPherson et  al. (2012) also discovered learners who had given up often only after a year or so of childhood lessons, but strongly engaged with playing music in adolescence and young adulthood. Their goal was not instrumental mastery, but to play sufficiently well for their own personal needs. Take Bryan, for example, who had been a very resistant 9-​year-​old clarinettist and gave up, lamenting that he did not like the culture of learning, as it was hard to get any 162

163

GETTING THERE

Maintains best performance focus Develops an effective system for dealing with increasing demand (e.g., performance stress, public performances)

Macro transition:

Maintenance stage

Consistent level of musical performance

Parents make lifestyle changes to support learning High-quality experiences and training Collaborative (student−teacher) decision-making

Macro transition:

Musical prioritisation

Technical and musical development Family support Recognition of talent and achievement Increasing musicspecific experience Involved with similarly minded peers Forming identity as a musician

Investment stage

Musical expertise at professional level

Specialisation stage

Macro transition:

Participation opportunities Positive family support and encouragement Caring music teacher Emphasis on fun leading to skill development

Macro transition:

Sampling stage

Musical identity formation

Musical ability and the expertise paradigm

STAYING THERE

Figure 10.2  Stages for musical development Source: Adapted from Abbott & Collins (2004) and previously published in Davidson & McPherson (2017, p. 24)

sense of progress or achievement even after practising, and that he had to attend band with mainly girls, which was not enjoyable. By mid-​teenage, Bryan started to socialise with a group of males keen to form a band, and he began work on cover versions of well-​known popular songs. He picked up the guitar and grappled with chords, getting to know repertoire through the internet. His experience of the overall male collective, leadership and some success –​the band quickly got gigs in a local club –​re-​engaged Bryan musically (McPherson et al., 2012, pp. 130–​134). For those who do fulfil their musical talents, ‘staying there’ involves them in maintenance work to keep a consistent focus on performance and its preparation and to manage the demands of the lifestyle (the methods of coping or competencies alluded to earlier.) One mechanism to sustain and develop the increasing demands of the musically talented might be to apply flexibility in new and emergent circumstances. This in itself may not be that different to the much older musician who has to cope with and adjust to increasing arthritis in their fingers. For someone who has been used to the rigour and routine of long hours of practice, such flexible approaches to sustaining themselves across their career might not be so easy. Indeed, there is evidence from the lives and achievements of some child prodigies, such as singers Bejun Metha and Judy Garland and composer Erich Korngold, that maintenance is often very difficult to achieve.

Musical abilities appraised This chapter has interrogated conceptions of musical ability, drawing on examples largely from Western paradigms, though the roles of cultural context and belief have been discussed. Case studies have revealed how these constructs have been defined and studied, embracing musical experiences from those of young children through to those learning in late life. It has demonstrated that the expertise model  –​based on a linear relationship between quantity of practice and achievement –​has some salience, but it is oversimplified when the subtleties of individual profiles are considered. Indeed, explorations of both biographical and biological studies have offered insights into understanding how and why musical interests emerge and are developed in specific ways for individuals. The influences of genetic make-​ up, an individual’s characteristics and the circumstances in which they develop are revealed 163

164

Jane W. Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur

to shape both personal and broader social alignments which impact directly on how music is experienced and learned. Key studies and robust theoretical models from education, music and sports psychology research, reveal that individuals must satisfy three fundamental psychological needs in order to shape their motivation for persistence and progression. Indeed, the chapter shows that music learning pivots around the degree to which an individual’s psychological needs are fulfilled at any stage of life, whether young or old. Furthermore, satisfaction and high-​level achievement are not necessarily correlated, with some individuals expressing minimal competency but finding satisfaction in aspects of the experience related not to fluency but, rather, the pleasure of engagement.

Finding the key to stimulating musical abilities This final section of the chapter discusses one route that may –​above all others –​support self-​ determined progress, thus aiding the learner as they sample and then possibly specialise and sustain their musical skills development. The route builds on the observations that musicians who are the most autonomous and engaged in their formative experiences are those who have experimented with the materials of music in a safe environment, engaging in trial and error (Sloboda & Davidson, 1996). This was certainly the case in the biographies of Louis Armstrong and Derek Paravicini. The older learners discussed in this chapter were not so motivated to engage in high levels of practice for technical skills development, but enjoyed writing lyrics, learning choreology sequences and adding creative inputs to their work (Davidson, 2011). Thus, some expressive experience through the learning process seems to be of great benefit in developing musical engagement.These types of experiences seem to focus attention and stimulate emotional response. The learner can source these opportunities themselves, but a good teacher can facilitate such processes though simple questions, such as: “What happens if … we slow down, get louder or use a different pitch or harmony?” (McPherson et al., 2012, p. 211). Of course, whether the individual’s personal engagement with the activity is stimulated by a teacher, a peer or through their own self-​discoveries, a transaction needs to occur through which a sufficient competency can lead to an autonomous expressive response. Having fun is reported as key to ongoing engagement, and a principal component of that enjoyment –​beyond competency for its own sake –​is found in the competency that unlocks music’s expressive, communicative and affective powers (McPherson et al., 2012). This chapter reveals that musical ability should not be associated only with the high-​level technical skills of a prodigy, but should be related more to the expressive and communicative components of musical experiences that assist the promotion of self-​determined musical behaviour that also reveal music’s capacity to regulate personal and social emotional experience. Based on their study of music in the lives of learners traced over a 14-​year period, McPherson et al. (2012) argue that it is the expressive potentials of music that make it personally meaningful, whatever the level of achievement and area of musical experience; for example, the teenage pianist who did not wish to progress further in technical skill and older choristers who are satisfied to learn a non-​demanding repertoire. If we want people to develop their musical abilities, an understanding of the impact of a meaningful musical event should be developed within a framework that allows them to acquire the skills to play instruments or listen critically to music. Moreover, as high-​level music performance also depends on expressive and communicative skills (performing with heart, sensitivity, communication), it must not favour a model of technical skill development at the expense of affective experience. 164

165

Musical ability and the expertise paradigm

Reflective questions 1. To what degree can the expertise model account for musical ability? 2. What factors contribute to life course engagement with music? 3. How best might we formulate a conception of musical ability that embraces life course engagement with music?

Note 1 The figures that appear in this chapter have been presented by the first author in other contexts, including McPherson et al. (2012). They are used with permission granted by Oxford University Press.

Suggestions for further reading Creech, A., Hallam, S.,Varvarigou, M., & McQueen, H. (2014). Active ageing with music: Supporting wellbeing in the third and fourth ages. Institute of Education Press. Hodges, D., & Gruhn, W. (2012). Implications of neurosciences and brain research for music teaching and learning. In G. E. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music education (pp. 205–​223). Oxford University Press. McPherson, G. E., Davidson, J. W., & Faulkner, R. (2012). Music in our lives: Rethinking musical ability, development and identity. Oxford University Press.

References Abbott, A., & Collins, D. (2004). Eliminating the dichotomy between theory and practice in talent identification and development: Considering the role of psychology. Journal of Sports Science, 22(5), 395–​408. Altenmüller, E., Gruhn, W., Parlitz, D., & Liebert, G. (2000). The impact of music education on brain networks: Evidence from EEG-​studies. International Journal of Music Education, 35(1),  47–​53. Ansdell, G. (1995). Music for life. Jessica Kingsley. Austin, J. R., & Vispoel, W. P. (1998). How American adolescents interpret success and failure in classroom music:  Relationships among attributional beliefs, self-​concept and achievement. Psychology of Music, 26(1), 26–​45. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735698261004 Bailey, B., & Davidson, J. W. (2002). Group singing as adaptive behavior: Perceptions from members of a choir of homeless men. Musicae Scientiae, 6(2), 221–​256. Bailey, B., & Davidson, J. W. (2003). Amateur group singing as a therapeutic agent. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, 12(1),  18–​32. Bailey, B., & Davidson, J.W. (2005). Effects of group singing and performance for marginalized and middle-​ class singers. Psychology of Music, 33(3), 269–​303. Bentley, A. (1966a). Measures of musical abilities. October House. Bentley, A. (1966b). Musical ability in children and its measurement. George G. Harrap & Co Ltd. Brancatisano, O., & Thompson,W. F. (2020). Seven capacities of music that underpin its therapeutic value in dementia care. In A. Baird, A. S. Garrido, & J.Tamplin (Eds.). Music and dementia: From cognition to therapy (pp. 41–​64). Oxford University Press. Burland, K., & Davidson, J. W. (2004). Tracing a musical life transition. In J. W. Davidson (Ed.), The music practitioner: Research for the music performer, teacher and listener (pp. 225–​250). Ashgate Publishing. Cacioppo, J. T., Berntson, G. G., Sheridan, J. F., & McClintock, M. K. (2000). Multilevel integrative analyses of human behavior: Social neuroscience and the complementing nature of social and biological approaches. Psychological Bulletin, 126(6), 829–​843. Cohen, G. D., Perlstein, S., Chapline, J., Kelly, J., Firth, K. M., & Simmens, S. (2006). The impact of professionally conducted cultural programs on the physical health, mental health, and social functioning of older adults. The Gerontologist, 46(6), 726–​734.

165

166

Jane W. Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur Corenblum, B., & Marshall, E. (1998). The band played on: Predicting students’ intentions to continue studying music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46(1), 128–​140. Costa-​Giomi, E., Flowers, P. J., & Sasaki, W. (2005). Piano lessons of beginning students who persist or drop out: Teacher behavior, student behavior, and lesson progress. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53(3), 234–​247. Creech, A., Hallam, S., McQueen, H., & Varvarigou, M. (2013b). The power of music in the lives of older adults. Research Studies in Music Education, 35(1),  83–​98. Creech, A., Hallam, S.,Varvarigou, M., McQueen, H., & Gaunt, H. (2013a). Active music making: A route to enhanced subjective well-​being among older people. Perspectives on Public Health, 133(1),  36–​43. Davidson, J. W. (2011). Musical participation: Expectations, experiences and outcomes. In J. W. Davidson & I. Deliège (Eds.), Music and the mind (pp. 65–​87). Oxford University Press. Davidson, J. W., & Faulkner, R. (2013). Music in our lives: Syzygistic influences for achievement in music. In S. B. Kaufmann (Ed.), Beyond “talent or practice?” The multiple determinants of greatness (pp. 367–​389). Oxford University Press. Davidson, J. W., Howe, M. J.  A., & Sloboda, J. A. (1997). Environmental factors in the development of musical performance skill in the first twenty years of life. In D. H. A. Hargreaves & A. J. North (Eds.), The social psychology of music (pp. 188–​203). Oxford University Press. Davidson, J. W., & McPherson, G. (2017). Learning to perform: From “gifts” and “talents” to skills and creative engagement. In J. Rink, H. Gaunt, & A. Williamon (Eds.), Musicians in the making: Pathways to creative performance (pp. 7–​27). Oxford University Press. Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of self-​determination research. University of Rochester Press. Emberly, A., & Davidson, J. W. (2011). From the kraal to the classroom: Shifting musical arts practice from the community to the school with special reference to learning tshigombela in Limpopo, South Africa. International Journal of Music Education, 29(3), 265–​282. Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R., & Tesch-​Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–​406. Evans, P., McPherson, G. E., & Davidson, J.W. (2013).The role of psychological needs in ceasing music and music learning activities. Psychology of Music, 41(5), 598–​617. Forssen, A. S. K. (2007). Experiences of elderly Swedish women. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 35(3), 228–​234. Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N.A. (2009). Dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network: Longitudinal analysis of the Framingham heart study social network. British Medical Journal, 338(7685),  23–​31. Fullagar, S. (2008). Leisure practices as counter-​depressants:  Emotion-​work and emotion-​play within women’s recovery from depression. Leisure Sciences, 30(1),  35–​52. Gagné, F. (2009). Building gifts into talents:  Detailed overview of the DMGT 2.0. In B. MacFarlane & T.  Staumburgh (Eds.), Leading change in gifted education:  The festschrift of Dr.  Joyce VanTassel-​Baska (pp. 61–​80). Prufrock Press. Gagné, F. (2013). The DMGT: Changes within, beneath, and beyond. Talent Development and Excellence, 5(1),  5–​19. Gaser, C., & Shlaug, G. (2003). Brain structures differ between musicians and non-​musicians. Journal of Neuroscience, 23(27), 9240–​9245. https://​doi.org/​10.1523/​JNEUROSCI.23-​27-​09240.2003 Gordon, E. (1988). Musical aptitude profile. Houghton Mifflin. (Original work published 1965) Gruhn, W., Litt, F., Scherer, A., Schumacher, T., Weiss, E., & Gebhardt, C. (2006). Suppresing reflective behaviour:  Saccadic eye movements in musicians and non-​ musicians. Musicae Scientiae, 10(1),  19–​32. Hallam, S. (1998). The predictors of achievement and dropout in instrumental tuition. Psychology of Music, 6(2), 116–​132. Hays, T. (2005). Well-​being in later life through music. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 24(1),  28–​32. He, J., & van de Vijver, F. (2012). Bias and equivalence in cross-​cultural research. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(2). https://​doi.org/​10.9707/​2307-​0919.1111 Hodges, D. (2016). The child musician’s brain. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of musical development (2nd ed.; pp. 52–​66). Oxford University Press. Hodges, D., & Gruhn, W. (2012). Implications of neurosciences and brain research for music teaching and learning. In G. E. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music education (pp. 205–​223). Oxford University Press. Järvelä, I. (2018). Genomics studies on musical aptitude, music perception, and practice. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1423(1), 82–​91. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​nyas.13620

166

167

Musical ability and the expertise paradigm Kalthoft, G. (1990). Music and emancipatory learning in three community education programs. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51(7), 2239A. (UMI No. AAT90-​33861). Krampe, R. (1997). Age-​related changes in practice activities and their relation to musical performance skills. In H. Jorgensen & A. C. Lehmann (Eds.), Does practice make perfect? Current theory and research on instrumental music practice (pp. 165–​178). Norges Musikkhogschole. Krueger, J. (2014). Musical manipulations and the emotionally extended mind. Empirical Musicology Review, 9(3–​4), 208–​212. Kupers, E., van Dijk, M., & van Geert, P. (2014).Within-​teacher differences in one-​to-​one teacher–​student interactions in instrumental music lessons. Learning and Individual Differences, 37, 283–​289. https://​doi. org/​10.1016/​j.lindif.2014.11.012 Lavrysen, A., Krampe, R., Wenderoth, N., & Swinnen, S. (2009, 15–​17 July). Training, expertise and age effects of movement timing and rhythm production: fMRI results [Paper Presentation]. Rhythm, Production, and Perception Workshop 12th Biannual Meeting, Lille, France. Leahey, T. H. (2017). A history of psychology. Routledge. Lee, J., Davidson, J. W., & Krause, A. E. (2016). Older people’s motivations for participating in community singing in Australia. International Journal of Community Music, 9(2), 191–​206. https://​doi.org/​10.1386/​ ijcm.9.2.191_​1 Li, S., & Southcott, J. (2015).The meaning of learning piano keyboard in the lives of older Chinese people. International Journal of Lifelong Learning, 34(3),  1–​18. MacRitchie, J., Breaden, M., Milne, A. J., & McIntyre, S. (2019). Cognitive, motor and social factors of music instrument training programs for older adults’ improved wellbeing. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2868. McPherson, G. E. (2016). Musical prodigies: Interpretations from psychology, education, musicology and ethnomusicology. Oxford University Press. McPherson, G. E., Davidson, J. W., & Faulkner, R. (2012). Music in our lives: Rethinking musical ability, development and identity. Oxford University Press. McPherson, G. E., & Williamon, A. (2016). Building gifts into musical talents. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of musical development (2nd ed.; pp. 340–​360). Oxford University Press. Messenger, J. C., & Messenger, B. (1992). Sexuality in folklore in a Nigerian society. Central Issues in Anthropology, 3(1),  29–​50. Mosing, M. A., Madison, G., Pedersen, N. L., Kuja-​Halkola, R., & Ullén, F. (2014). Practice does not make perfect: No causal effect of music practice on music ability. Psychological Science, 25(9), 1795–​1803. Mosing, M. A., Peretz, I., & Ullén, F. (2017). Genetic influences on music expertise. In D. Z. Hambrick, G. Campitelli, & B. N. MacNamara (Eds.), The science of expertise (pp. 272–​282). Routledge. Nettl, B., & Bohlman, P.V. (Eds.). (1991). Comparative musicology and anthropology of music: Essays on the history of ethnomusicology. University of Chicago Press. Ockelford, A. (2008). In the key of genius: The extraordinary life of Derek Paravincini. Arrow. Ockelford, A. (2016). Prodigious musical talent in blind children with autism and learning difficulties: Identifying and educating potential musical savantism. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.)., Musical prodigies:  Interpretations from psychology, education, musicology and ethnomusicology (pp. 471–​ 495). Oxford University Press. Ockelford, A., & Matawa, C. (2009). Exploring the musical interests and abilities of blind and partially-​ sighted children and retinopathy of prematurity. British Journal of Visual Impairment, 27(3), 252–​262. Pavlicevic, M., & Ansdell, G. (2004). Community music therapy. Jessica Kingsley. Peretz, I. (2020). How music sculpts our brain. Odile Jacob. Peretz, I., & Vuvan, D. T. (2017). Prevalence of congenital amusia. European Journal of Human Genetics, 25(5), 625–​630. https://​doi.org/​10.1038/​ejhg.2017.15 Plomin, R. (2004). Genetics and Developmental Psychology. Merrill-​Palmer Quarterly, 50(3), 50th Anniversary Issue: The maturing of the human developmental sciences: Appraising past, present, and prospective agendas, 341–​352. Radocy, R., & Boyle, D. (1997). Psychological foundations of musical behavior (4th ed.). Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Ltd. Rauscher, F. H., & LeMieux, M. T. (2003). Piano, rhythm, and singing instruction improve different aspects of spatial-​temporal reasoning in Head Start children [Poster presentation]. Cognitive Neuroscience Society Annual Meeting, New York, United States. Schindler, I., Staudinger, U., & Nesselroade, J. (2006). Development and structural dynamics of personal life investment in old age. Psychology and Ageing, 21(4), 737–​753.

167

168

Jane W. Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur Schuller, T., & Watson, D. (2009). Learning through life: Inquiry into the future for lifelong learning. NIACE. Seashore, C. E., Lewis, D., & Saetveit, J. (1930). Measures of musical talents. Psychological Corp. (Original work published 1919) Sixsmith, A., & Gibson, G. (2007). Music and the well-​being of people with dementia. Ageing & Society, 27(1), 127–​145. Sloboda, J. A., & Davidson, J. W. (1996). The young performing musician. In I. Deliège & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), The origins and development of musical competence (pp. 127–​145). Oxford University Press. Sloboda, J. A., Davidson, J. W., Howe, M. J. A., & Moore, D. M. (1996). The role of practice in the development of expert musical performance. British Journal of Psychology, 87(2), 287–​309. Sloboda, J. A., Wise, K., & Peretz, I. (2005). Quantifying tone deafness in the general population. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1060(1), 255–​261. https://​pdfs.semanticscholar.org/​3cdf/​4bf319485a faf2d4baa31afbeb6a2a3adf2c.pdf Smith, J. (2003). The gain-​loss dynamic in lifespan development: Implications for change in self and personality during old and very old age. In U. M. Staudinger & U. Lindenberger (Eds.), Understanding human development: Dialogues with lifespan psychology (pp. 215–​241). Kluwer. Solomon, A. (2012). Far from the tree. Scribner. Southcott, J.  E. (2009). “And as I  go, I  love to sing”:  The happy wanderers, music and positive aging. International Journal of Community Music, 2(2–​3), 143–​156. Tan, Y.  T. (2016). The genetic basis of singing ability:  A twin study [Doctoral Dissertation]. University of Melbourne, Minerva Access. http://​hdl.handle.net/​11343/​191324 Tan, Y. T., McPherson, G. E., Peretz, I., Berkovic, S. F., & Wilson, S. J. (2014). The genetic basis of music ability. Frontiers in Psychology, 5. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2014.00658 Ullen, F., Hambrick, D. Z., & Mosing, M. A. (2016). Rethinking expertise:  A multifactorial gene–​ environment interaction model of expert performance. Psychological Bulletin, 142(4), 427–​446. White-​Schwoch, T., Woodruff Carr, K., Anderson, S., Strait, D. L., & Kraus, L. (2013). Older adults benefit from music training early in life: Biological evidence for long-​term training-​driven plasticity. Journal of Neuroscience, 33(45), 17667–​17674. https://​doi.org/​10.1523/​JNEUROSCI.2560-​13.2013 Wing, H. (1962). Musical aptitude test. Journal of Research in Music Education, 10(1),  39–​46. Wing, H. (1968). Tests of musical ability and appreciation (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

168

169

11 TRANSFORMATIONAL MODELS OF MUSIC LEARNING Maria Varvarigou and Andrea Creech

Several established theories and models have been applied to music learning and development (see Hallam, 2006; Hargreaves & Lamont, 2017 for psychological perspectives; Peretz & Zatorre, 2005 for a neuroscientific perspective; and Smilde et al., 2014 for a lifelong learning perspective). In this chapter, we highlight the multidimensional nature of musical learning with its potential to foster profound change at social, emotional, cognitive or physical levels (Elliot & Silverman, 2015). Music learning, we suggest, requires a holistic theoretical framework that takes account of contextualised experiential, practical, conceptual and imaginal dimensions of learning (Heron, 1999) and captures the interplay between intrapersonal processes and interpersonal dynamics (Illeris, 2014). We focus on the concept of learning as change, considering the ways in which transformational music learning in diverse contexts can be supported. Elliot and Silverman (2015, p. 229) describe musical understanding as an intricate network of “practical, situated, experiential, intuitive, and embodied” knowledge, developed through embodied, enactive, and interactive musical learning. Learning processes and outcomes, from this perspective, are progressive, but not linear. Learners, whether it is within formal music education or community music contexts, develop their musical understandings through engaging with musical ideas and actions in increasing depth and breadth. As highlighted by Elliot and Silverman (2015), multifaceted learning in music or learning through music can be experienced within many diverse contexts, ranging from formal music education in schools or conservatoires to non-​formal, structured extracurricular contexts to informal self-​directed learning. A focus on the situated and contextualised nature of learning may be traced to sociocultural models of learning, originating in the work of Vygotsky (1966, cited in Shotter, 1989) in the first half of the 20th century. Central ideas in Vygotskian theory were that learning is inherently social and occurs in interaction with others and that learning is mediated by culturally specific uses of tools including language as well as material resources. In this vein, the way we learn can be seen to be shaped by, and situated within, specific cultural and interpersonal contexts.This is not to suggest that there are predictable relationships between context and how or what we learn. Rather, the way we learn is mediated by orientations to learning and teaching and the ways in which these orientations are articulated between learners and their teachers or facilitators. As Smilde (2018, p. 686) states, “it is evident that it is important for community musicians to have a deep understanding of the social context in which they are engaged, and that this is a requirement for the emergence of the transformative power of 169

170

Maria Varvarigou and Andrea Creech

music”. Furthermore, “transformative learning” can be shaped by specific situations and interpersonal factors, but what is learned is experienced, processed and interpreted in a multitude of different ways by individual learners (Illeris, 2014). Therefore, a significant challenge in any discussion of theoretical models for musical learning is the issue of context and its relationship with individual as well as collective processes in learning. Very broadly, learning can be conceptualised as an accumulation of knowledge or alternatively learning as change, or transformation. These two perspectives may be traced in part to Piaget’s distinction between assimilation (accumulating new knowledge) and accommodation (changing one’s existing knowledge in such a way as to incorporate the new knowledge) (Illeris, 2014). It has been argued that an understanding of learning as the accumulation of knowledge can also be mapped to the ‘banking model’ of education (Freire, 1970) and behaviourism, whereby learning is contingent on the acquisition and reinforcement of tightly sequenced and hierarchical steps (Shepard, 2000). Conversely, the notion of learning as transformation has roots in cognitive and sociocultural theories, whereby learning involves connecting new knowledge with prior understandings, transferring knowledge from one context to another and experiencing profound changes in meaning perspectives or frames of reference (Illeris, 2014; Mezirow, 1978a). Naturally, the two processes (accumulation of knowledge and changes in meaning perspectives) are not mutually exclusive; ‘learning as change’ will certainly involve encountering and acquiring new knowledge. In this chapter, though, we focus on the idea that learning necessitates some kind of change or transformation in the learner and that in music (whether this is in music education or music in the community), transformative learning is framed by a holistic model involving practical, conceptual, imaginal and experiential processes (Heron, 1999).Therefore, we explore the idea of a multifaceted and holistic model for learning in music that is underpinned by the notion of transformation.

Transformative learning We frame our discussion with the model proposed by Illeris (2014, p.  40), whereby transformative learning is understood as being far-​reaching, deep, expansive and significant, and includes “all learning that implies change in the identity of the learner.” Illeris builds on transformative learning theory, first introduced by Mezirow (1978a, 1978b) in the context of adult learning and emerging from his research with women returning to education. Inspired by ideas concerned with the communicative and emancipatory potential of learning, Mezirow’s theory focused initially on cognitive changes; for example, with regards to meaning perceptions. Since then, the theory has been developed, and in 2009 Mezirow and Taylor identified key elements of transformative learning that include individual experience, reflection, dialogue, a holistic orientation (accounting for cognitive, social and emotional influences), awareness of context, and authentic, trusting teacher–​student and peer relationships. From this perspective, transformative learning is “a process grounded in respect and trust, with an appreciation for the ambiguous and unknown, and a recognition that engaging with the contradictions and tensions of life can lead to greater personal and social understanding” (Illeris, 2014, p.  10). Transformative learning, according to Mezirow and Taylor (2009), involves using imagination, reflection and exploration of differences in order to go beyond one’s limits and transform habitual understandings and behaviour. Illeris (2014) proposes three underpinning dimensions of learning, namely the “incentive” dimension (motivation, volition, feelings, emotions), the “content” dimension (including knowledge, skills, insights, strategies, methods, and so on) and the “interaction” dimension (that 170

171

Transformational models of music learning

can take place as perception, transmission, experience, imitation, activity and participation). Accordingly, the internal cognitive and emotional processes of acquisition and elaboration of new knowledge, always founded on connections with prior knowledge, is seen to occur in the space between content and incentive. In other words, learners’ engagement with new material, their reflections, exploration of their limits, and so on, can be conceptualised as an embodied (involving mind and body) and emergent property of the interplay between content and incentive (feelings, emotions and motivation concerning the content). This process intersects with an external process of interaction between the learner and the social, cultural and material environment (Illeris, 2004, 2006). Transformational learning, underpinned by these three dimensions of content, incentive and interaction, differs from learning that is “aimed at increasing our fund of knowledge, at increasing our repertoire of skills, at extending already established cognitive structures  … [bringing] new contents into the existing form of our way of knowing” (Kegan, 2009, p. 42). Rather, transformative learning is characterised by simultaneous restructuring of a whole cluster of schemes and patterns in all of the three learning dimensions.  … Transformative learning is thus both profound and extensive, it demands a lot of mental energy and when accomplished it can often be experienced physically, typically as a feeling of relief or relaxation. (Illeris, 2009, p. 14) Transformative learning may thus be said to underpin changes in one’s identity (Illeris, 2009). Therefore, it is no surprise that it also spawns resistance in the mind and body of the learners. Illeris (2009) identified identity defence alongside ambivalence and mental resistance as barriers to learning. Mezirow (1978b, p.  105) explains that questioning our assumptions could threaten our sense of self, as we “defend our social roles with the armour of our strongest emotions”. Illeris (2009) adds that young people in particular respond to learning initiatives with questions such as “What does this mean to me? or What can I use this for?” (p.  18), attending most to those learning experiences that would nourish the “present demands of their identity process” (p. 18). In other words, learners might resist transformational learning when it challenges strongly held values, beliefs and understandings shaped by their social context.

Facets of transformative learning While transformative learning may be evidenced by outcomes in the form of change in frames of reference (Mezirow & Taylor, 2009) or identity (Illeris, 2014), our focus in this section is on transformative learning as a journey (O’Neill, 2012).We turn our attention here to the processes and orientations that may contribute to transformative learning. Fundamental facets of transformational learning are embodied practical experience, critical reflection and ‘pushing the boundaries’ of our thinking and social interaction. The interrelated nature of these processes is represented in the “experiential learning” cycle of “manifold learning” proposed by Heron (1999, pp.  3, 299). Experiential learning, according to Heron (also termed “affective” learning in Heron, 2009, p. 130), forms the basis from which imaginal, conceptual and practical learning emerge. While experiential (affective) learning focuses on emotion and what can be learnt in the moment of encounter, practical learning focuses on skills and how they are acquired and physically carried out, referred to by Heron (2009, p. 131) as “action”. Imaginal learning is concerned with metaphorical and evocative visualisations of new 171

172

Maria Varvarigou and Andrea Creech

ideas (imagery), while conceptual learning, or discrimination, underpins criticality and cognitive understandings. Thus, at each stage of manifold learning there exists the potential for change; for example in relation to procedural knowledge, conceptual understanding or creative thinking. However, holistic, transformative change may occur when the full cycle is complete, comprising embodied experience, practical know-​how, creative imagination and critical reflection. Heron proposes that his model, which privileges self-​direction and the idea of whole personhood, may be applied to any context where learning is through experience, action and practice, including gaining technical skills in a domain. Furthermore, Heron’s model recognises that the learning cycle of emotion, imagery, discrimination and action occurs both at an individual level, where the aim is the satisfaction of individual needs, and at a collective level, where the aim is effective participation in “wider and more inclusive fields of endeavour” (2009, p. 142).

Transformative learning in music The concept of transformation learning aligns naturally with aims that characterise many 21st-​century music education and community music contexts, where arguments have been made in favour of the idea of music for social justice (Benedict et al., 2015), music learning as a vehicle for personal empowerment and flourishing (Ansdell, 2014) and the lifelong wider transformative benefits of music (Qi & Veblen, 2016; Smilde, 2018; Smilde et  al., 2014). In community music, for example, a transformational agenda has been noted (Mullen & Deane, 2018). Similarly, in formal contexts, the idea of transformative learning has underpinned shifts in thinking about what it means to be a music learner and the ways in which learning in music can be framed and nurtured (Abrahams & Abrahams, 2015; O’Neill, 2012; Schmidt, 2005). Broadly, within the music education and community music literature, the idea of transformative learning has been discussed in terms of pedagogies that foster reflection, criticality and changes in musical identity or musical frames of reference (e.g., Carey & Grant, 2016; Creech et al., 2014); transformational outcomes associated with music learning and participation (e.g., Qi & Veblen, 2016); and transformative musical engagement, referring to a paradigm shift in understandings of learning across diverse contexts for music learning and participation (e.g., O’Neill, 2012). While these perspectives differ somewhat, a shared interest can be found with regards to the processes that bring about profound change in world views, values, beliefs and understandings. In this vein, there is some consensus that transformative learning and participation in music is necessarily learner centred (Carey & Grant, 2016; O’Neill, 2012). In accordance with the principles of transformative learning as proposed by Illeris (2014), interaction and collaboration in music learning are manifest in a “process of reflection, dialogue, inquiry, and action” (O’Neill, 2015, p.  615). This interactive and reflective process intersects with the interrelated dimensions of incentive and content. In this sense, the transformative potential of collaboration and critical reflection in music learning may be contingent on motivation (incentive) that emerges in tandem with engagement in personally meaningful, authentic, embodied musical experience (content). In accordance with the increasing focus on the potential for learning to be transformative, music educators have turned their attention towards emancipatory narratives associated with Freire (1970). Accordingly, a critical pedagogy for music education has been discussed and applied, delineating “practices believing that real learning is to take place only if students and teachers alike are changed in and by the process of education” (Schmidt, 2005, p.  2). Again, the social and interactive nature of transformative learning is emphasised here; according to Schmidt (2005, p. 3), “real learning” requires investment from both teachers and students and is 172

173

Transformational models of music learning

“discovered through dialogue and experienced in and with the world, [becoming] an impacting and changing force”. Just as transformational learning arises from disturbances, dilemmas and opposition to existing knowledge, critical pedagogy emerges from problem-​posing and problem-​solving; “students create new and personal challenges, and view music as something to be constantly questioned, changed and transformed” (Schmidt, 2005, p.  7). This view is reinforced by Cohen and Duncan (2015, pp. 557–​558), who discuss “criticality” in relation to the transformative potential of music learning with vulnerable communities:  “to encourage transformative learning, teachers need to guide students to develop greater self-​awareness of their own assumptions, to be critical of these, and to understand assumptions that others carry”. In this vein, within dialogic conversation and authentic, socially relevant learning experiences, trusting relationships are established, and contextual meanings are constructed. A further key framework concerned with cultivating criticality, agency and “musical flourishing” among music learners is that of Transformative Music Engagement (O’Neill, 2012, 2014, 2015). Transformative music engagement, with its aim of empowering “learners to take an active role in bringing about positive change in matters that are of importance to them” (O’Neill, 2015, p. 607), has theoretical roots in Mezirow’s (1978a) work exploring the emancipatory role of learning. Furthermore, the cornerstone idea of person–​context–​content interactions proposed by Illeris (2014) in relation to transformative learning is expressed in transformative musical engagement as “learning ecologies” within which learners engage with expansive learning opportunities (O’Neill, 2015). Learning, from the perspective of Transformative Music Engagement, may be conceptualised as a journey. O’Neill (2012, p.  164) refers to this journey as a process of “becoming music learners”, involving making connections with past lived experience while also exercising agency; for example, going beyond reproductive musical practices, taking musical risks, and exploring creative musical goals (O’Neill, 2014). Conceptualised in terms that are reminiscent of Illeris’ representation of the multidirectional and reciprocal influences of person–​context interaction, Transformative Music Engagement is thought to occur within entangled “zones of complexity” that connect the “learner, culture, teaching knowledge production, and curriculum” (O’Neill, 2012, p. 172). Within this paradigm, learner musical identities are ‘situated’, in the sense that multiple avenues and contexts for musical engagement are connected in meaningful ways. Learning is furthermore thought to be dynamic and inclusive, fostering transformative change through critical reflection and the integration of experience. As Illeris (2014) would suggest, interaction –​that could be experienced as perception, transmission, imitation, activity and participation –​is crucial, as it is within the interactive space that musical learning is shaped by new perspectives that emerge through communication, encounters with disjuncture and creative innovation. It is worth underscoring that the interaction dimension can be experienced in equal measure during group music-​making, where opportunities for social contact are abundant, as well as during music-​making under conditions that lack social interplay, such as individual practice in a music studio. Individual practice ultimately involves perception  –​a cognitive interplay between the learner and the creator of the materials studied and performed –​and imitation of a model (teacher or other performer) that the learner is emulating. These experiences could lead to deep-​rooted transformations in the identity of the learner. This new identity could then be shared with and affirmed by friends, teachers and audience. Further questions thus arise concerning the specific pedagogies that may nurture the multifaceted, experiential processes (Heron, 1999) and dimensions of transformational learning (Illeris, 2014) in music education and music in the community. Indeed, as Mullen and Deane (2018, p. 189) note, “in order to allow appropriate transformations to occur, we 173

174

Maria Varvarigou and Andrea Creech

need first to know what types of change we are looking for … practice wisdom suggests that music leaders can develop pedagogic strategies to gently direct participants towards each of these outcomes.” Abrahams and Abrahams (2015) describe “sociotransformative apprenticeship”, explaining that this form of mentor–​apprentice musical learning is situated within a community of practice where the aim is to effect a change in the meaning perceptions of the apprentice (learner) with regards to the social and cultural significance of the new musical experience, knowledge or skill. This change in “critical consciousness” (Freire, 1970) is achieved through a focus on reflexivity and the development of metacognition as well as interactive learning processes that are intended to be “empowering and lead both to deeper understandings of the subject content matter and to skills in ways that stimulate critical thinking and action in socially relevant ways” (Abrahams & Abrahams, 2015, p. 544). The authors suggest a typology of learners, including imaginative, analytic, common sense and dynamic profiles. The proposed categories of learning styles can be mapped to the levels of manifold learning proposed by Heron (1999). For example, Heron’s idea of experiential learning describes the orientation to learning found amongst “imaginative learners” (Abrahams & Abrahams, 2015), who emphasise their feelings and experience in the moment, and through sharing ideas. Furthermore, Abrahams and Abrahams’ characterisation of “analytic learners”, who gather and synthesise data, think critically about ideas and often prefer to work alone, is reminiscent of “conceptual learning” in Heron’s model of manifold learning. In this orientation to learning, one may discern an emphasis on learning about music rather than learning through music. “Common-​sense learners” (Abrahams & Abrahams, 2015) gravitate towards developing musical skills and competencies through practical, participatory experience; this orientation may be mapped to Heron’s idea of “practical learning”. Finally, Abrahams and Abrahams explain that “dynamic learners” are risk-​takers, learning through experimentation and trial and error and exploring creative expression. This dynamic orientation to learning aligns with Heron’s notion of “imaginal learning”, concerned with creative exploration and visualisation. The typology of learners (Abrahams & Abrahams, 2015) may thus be reimagined as a reflective cycle of learning processes or orientations, as suggested by Heron (1999). Situated within different social contexts and influenced by the interplay between content, incentive and interaction, learners may orient themselves towards one or another facet of manifold learning and may be facilitated or guided towards a fluid and dynamic zone of learning that comprises engagement with multiple orientations to learning. It is perhaps within the context of formal one-​to-​one instrumental and vocal learning and teaching that transformative learning principles meet the greatest resistance. Here, an orientation towards hierarchical transfer learning within a master–​apprentice relationship has prevailed (Carey & Grant, 2014; Creech & Gaunt, 2012), focused on tightly defined notions of excellence and perpetuating teacher dependency and passive, decontextualised learning. Notwithstanding the predominance of the master–​apprentice model, some formal music education contexts have begun to consider pedagogies for formal one-​to-​one learning that challenge traditional paradigms and better equip their students for the complex demands and responsibilities of 21st-​ century music careers (Bennett, 2007; Canham, 2016; Carey & Grant, 2014; Creech et al., 2008). As Carey and Grant (2014) explain, transformative pedagogies are flexible, responsive to individual needs of students and expansive in the sense that notions of excellence are open to debate and innovation. Content is clearly contextualised and scaffolded, with the focus on supporting students in making personal sense of their learning in relation to their wider knowledge, goals and aspirations. Ultimately, the role of the teacher is to guide students in taking ownership of 174

175

Transformational models of music learning

the process of making sense of musical experience using imagination, exploration and critical reflection to construct and reconstruct musical knowledge. Carey and Grant (2016, p. 55) argue in favour of the strong “potential of transformative pedagogical approaches to improve short-​ and long-​term learning outcomes, to increase student engagement and motivation in learning, to support students’ personal and professional growth, and to help them develop strong career and life skills.”

Transformative learning in formal, informal and non-​formal contexts: Case study examples We have emphasised so far that transformative learning “provides a catalyst for deep change” (Qi & Clements, 2019) in the identity of the learner –​it nourishes the being and turns it into becoming (O’Neill, 2012) –​through a cyclical process that passes through the stages of emotion, imagery, discrimination and action, not necessarily moving in that order all the time. In addition, we have argued that transformative learning generates fundamental changes in the content of what is experienced, it influences the motivation of the learner(s) to pursue these experiences, and it affects their interaction with others. There are several examples from music education research that point towards transformative learning in music, drawing on the experiences of the learners.

Formal contexts Lucy Green’s seminal work on informal learning within formal music education contexts (2008) has transformed the music learning of secondary school students who engage in music-​making across the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia,1 Singapore,2 Brazil3 and, recently, Ireland.4 First, adopting informal music learning practices, such as playing by ear from recordings and by “watching and imitating musicians around them and by making reference to recordings or performances and other live events involving their chosen music” (Green, 2008, p.  5), music learners within organised and structured contexts with clear learning objectives (so-​called “formal” contexts) exercise agency in shaping the content dimension of their learning  –​the musical knowledge, skills and understanding that they experience and acquire (Illeris, 2009). Second, such an approach to learning has been reported as highly motivational by the students as learners (O’Neill & Bespflug, 2012) and by the teachers as learners (Hallam et  al., 2011; Varvarigou, 2014) (incentive dimension). The interaction of content and incentive has been found to influence the way music learners engage in musical collaborations with teachers and fellow music learners (interaction dimension).Third, informal learning practices in formal contexts endorse manifold learning (Heron, 1999). That is to say, music learners select music that they like and identify with (affective level), and they create improvised and composed renditions of this music through experimentation and exploration (imaginal level) (see also Varvarigou, 2017). Furthermore, such musical experiences lead them to inquire about theoretical concepts (conceptual level) and how these are connected with and applied to their practical musicing. It could be argued that through this process of learning, “musicers” (Elliot and Silverman, 2015) in formal contexts maintain interest in learning and build confidence and autonomy in the knowledge and skills that they have acquired, which enable them to transfer to other contexts (e.g., when performing, composing, listening or analysing music). Such learning experiences are considered transformative because they trigger a shift in the learners’ identity, helping them develop musical possible selves (Creech et al., 2020). 175

176

Maria Varvarigou and Andrea Creech

A case study of transformative musical learning from the Musical Futures programme5 mentioned above is illustrated here.Through the lens of Illeris’ theory of transformative learning, this case study reveals how three English secondary school music teachers engaged in transformative music education, in the sense that the music curriculum was transformed, as were the ways that students engaged with music learning and developed their musical identities in and out of school. As the teachers highlighted, the content of learning grew from students’ musical interests. For instance, the students had opportunities to create new sounds (imaginal learning) as well as perform existing repertoire (practical learning), which they selected. Moreover, although the music was learned mainly by ear, students could access notation, tab or graphic scores (conceptual learning) if they wished. In addition, music technology was utilised for creating, producing and recording sounds (experiential learning) (see Box 11.1). The head of music in one of the schools explained that a shift from a “traditional formal approach” to an informal approach transformed the music curriculum at her school:

Box 11.1  Content, incentive and interaction dimensions of Musical Futures in two schools School

Content dimension

Incentive dimension

Interaction dimension

School A

• Students are engaged through a hands-​on approach. • The teacher provides lessons “musically”, i.e., by modelling singing and playing.

• Music technology is used for reviewing musical work. • The teacher sets high expectations. • A sense of progression is designed into the curriculum.

School B

• Students and generalist primary school teachers of feeder schools experience the Just Play teaching and learning strategies, principles and materials, which promote whole-​class music-​making on a range of instruments, regardless of the participants’ prior musical experiences.

• Musical work in class results in a performance.

• Music technology enables evaluation and discussion of music learners’ own work and that of others. • There is a sense of community in the school as students organise their own rehearsals during lunchtime and after school. • The music teacher supports the primary generalist teachers from feeder primary schools on how to use the Just Play strategies, principles and materials. • There are external partnerships with professional musicians and ex-​students.

176

177

Transformational models of music learning

The success of our KS5 [Key Stage 5, 16–​18 years old) programme have been about transforming what an A Level [Advanced Level] /​KS5 student looks like. Students do not need to have followed the “traditional, formal” approach to learning in order to be successful. A number of KS5 students are popular based and have gained entrance to institutions such as Royal Northern [Conservatoire of Music], Guildhall School of Music and Drama, Trinity [Laban Conservatoire], LIPA [the Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts], and ACM [the Academy of Contemporary Music]. Second, music learners’ incentives for music participation included having their music creations recorded and performed for peers within the classroom or externally –​in school assemblies, and school and other concerts; using music technology to review their work and to receive feedback; and experiencing a sense of progression weaved into the curriculum. For example, the head of music in another school emphasised that what was produced in class during the music sessions became a publicly presented performance. This motivated the students “to sound good in front of their peers”. Similarly, students at KS4 (14–​16 years old) worked towards ABRSM6 Grade 5 theory in their second year to bridge a gap between GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) and A Level (General Certificate of Education Advanced Level).This incentive offered self-​taught musicians the opportunity to progress and apply musical concepts in different ways. Furthermore, high expectations from the teachers acted as incentives. One of the teachers stated that “[i]‌f a student is going to play a cello, then they should try to produce the best possible sound they can”. The interaction dimension was supported by cooperation and collaboration among teachers and learners during music-​making as well as through music partnerships and input from professional musicians or ex-​students. For example, one of the music teachers trained the generalist primary school teachers of the feeder primary schools on how to use the Musical Futures ‘Just Play’ teaching and learning strategies, principles and materials. Furthermore, one of the schools had built partnerships with a professional symphony orchestra, together delivering music projects across the school and involving professional musicians and ex-​students in Music Department activities. Similarly, since the adoption of the Musical Futures programme, the change in uptake in music had reportedly been dramatic: a large number of students engaged in extracurricular music, including school shows, choirs, string orchestras, jazz ensembles and rock bands. What is more, students had become more independent in organising their own rehearsals during lunchtime and after school, and they had built a strong sense of a music community in the school.

Informal contexts Within an informal context, Qi and Cesetti (2019) investigated the transformative musical learning experiences of Yan, a Chinese immigrant in Northern Brazil. This study illustrates how self-​directed musical engagement, without any input from an expert teacher, supported Yan’s learning “to be a person in society” (Jarvis, 2009, p. 19), bringing about a deep change in his identity. Yan taught himself to sing música sertaneja songs, a style of Brazilian music, and he performed these songs in public. Learning and performing these songs acted as a “political tool to assert both his Brazilian-​ness and his identity as musician” (Qi & Cesetti, 2019, p. 19). By learning música sertaneja songs,Yan developed new knowledge and skills (content dimension of learning); for instance, he started keeping a song diary where he would write the song lyrics so that he could practise them “at any free moment he had” (p. 13). As his knowledge of the genre grew (changes in the content dimension) he sought opportunities to sing in public (incentive dimension). By performing to people “he re-​negotiated his relationship with Brazilians” and developed new relationships (p. 13) (interaction dimension). Content, incentive and interaction 177

178

Maria Varvarigou and Andrea Creech

intersected in a perpetual mode to bring about Yan’s transformation as a musical learner. The transformative learning cycle is summarised below. Yan was curious about this new music style from his adopted country [content], he had a desire to master and become completely fluent in it [incentive], and he also wished to achieve greater respect and acceptance from Brazilian society [interaction]. His music learning provides valuable lessons for music educators and for society in general. (Qi & Cesetti, 2019, p. 13) Qi and Cesetti underscore that “personal agency and environmental influences from other individuals are both important factors behind a transformative learning experience” (2019, p. 15), and they urge music educators to facilitate musical activities that are “inclusive and appreciative of everyone’s cultural capital” (p.  15) especially now that the musical classrooms around the world have increasingly become multicultural and diverse. An example of a transformative learning experience within the informal music context of a rehearsal appears in Alf Gabrielsson’s book Strong Experiences with Music (2011). Here, a male singer describes a magical moment while rehearsing ‘Mondnacht’ by Robert Schumann, that transformed him. This example illustrates how the dimension of interaction –​here translated as perception of Schumann’s musical work and embodied interaction with the pianist –​acted as catalyst in the overall learning experience being transformative. Man, middle-​aged, 1970s … Very suddenly … I was “inside” the song. It was almost like a mystical experience. It felt as if the ceiling in the practice room disintegrated, and I was standing there under the stars in the moonlight and living in the song –​not singing it. And every note meant something very special, and I understood what every note meant. And she and I were not singer and pianist but had some sort of joint revelation. It was like an enchantment. (Gabrielsson, 2011, p. 160)

Non-​formal contexts The charity Keys of Change7 funds music education projects, working in conjunction with local music teachers to support at-​risk children and young people through collective music-​ making and performance. Musical learning is the vehicle through which Keys of Change advances learners’ social capital, alters their sense of identity and nurtures a sense of community and belonging. In Ecuador, for example, the charity supports weekly guitar and violin lessons for young people from deprived backgrounds. These young people have in turn already begun to give their own performances to local children in hospitals. In Fukushima, India and Mexico, the charity makes regular visits to work with young musicians to help them improve their playing and to offer them performance opportunities in joint concerts with Keys of Change musicians. These learning experiences are transformative as they provide “important disorientating dilemmas to the students, who change their meaning schemes about themselves and about life in general” (Qi & Veblen, 2016, p. 111). Learners participating in Keys of Change

178

179

Transformational models of music learning

initiatives develop possible selves as musicians as a result of the transformative music experiences that they are offered. For example, one of the music learners from Japan said the following about the programme: Only music gave me courage and strength when I changed school from my home town, Minami Soma, because of the radiation. I feel very nervous to play in such a prestigious hall [The Queen Elizabeth Hall], but I would like to convey my appreciation to music. I have been practising hard with my friends, aiming to become a symbol of restoration of Fukushima. I wish the audience today will share our excitement. (Kyosuke Takano, Fukushima, Keys of Change newsletter 2014)8 A second case study focuses on the Music for Life Project (Creech et al., 2014). The project explored the transformative learning experiences of seniors in the Third and Fourth ages9 who participated in active music-​making in non-​formal community settings. The musical groups investigated included choirs, rock groups, classes for guitar, ukulele, steel pans, percussion, recorder and keyboard, music appreciation and creative music-​making. The content dimension of learning differed depending on the nature of the group, but at the core of all participants’ musical engagement was the focus on developing musical skills and knowledge through active learning and through making use of prior knowledge (see Box 11.2). The participants in the project reported a variety of incentives that nurtured their enthusiasm and sense of purpose in musical engagement. These included maintaining or enhancing cognitive wellbeing (concentration, memory and keeping an active mind; bringing back significant memories from the past; enhancing creativity and self-​expression); and physical wellbeing (lung functions, movement, posture and reducing stress and anxiety). What is more, the music programmes that catered for the seniors’ desire for progression pathways had many seniors participating in the activities that they offered. In addition, opportunities for purposeful and meaningful performing and sharing of music-​making within the community reinforced the desire for musical participation and learning.

Box 11.2  Music for Life Project: Transformative learning experiences Content dimension Active learning I promised myself when I was 60 I would restart learning the piano because I wouldn’t be able to sing any more, but because I can still sing I haven’t started to play the piano …! The trouble with going to concerts is I want to join in! (Participant, p. 92)

Making use of prior knowledge It is essential that repertoire is appropriate to the group; it’s always helpful if we are doing songs that the group recognises or relates to. …We did the Abba [song] for the first week and I just thought it was quite interesting to see Hilda, 92, singing Abba and really, really involved. (Facilitator, p. 90)

179

180

Maria Varvarigou and Andrea Creech

Incentive dimension Cognitive wellbeing It keeps my mind active, and I have felt better emotionally after singing sessions. I do think that being involved in music definitely keeps you young … because, like I am saying, you are using this mental ability all the time and that’s got to be good, hasn’t it? (Participant, p. 39)

Physical wellbeing Singing in choirs has helped me relax and feel more healthy –​those breathing exercises really are good for you! (Participant, p. 59)

Need for progression pathways I am up for a challenge! I need a challenge … I wouldn’t want to be involved in something that has far too many beginners, real beginners. I mean, it’s nice to try and help beginners, but I think you need to have segregation of ability to some extent, because it can become very frustrating for the better players who are wanting to play music to have a constantly disrupted and spoiled [rehearsal] for people who are not up to it. (Participant, p. 72)

Meaningful musical performances In performing, you are allowing people to hear you; you want to feel that what you’ve learnt is going to be enjoyed by someone else. … You feel that it’s a nice ending to weeks and weeks of hard work, you know. (Participant, p. 97)

Interaction dimension That’s the beauty of music. It really pulls people together, and once you have played music with somebody, especially if you have gone out and performed it, you are always going to be more connected than you ever were before. (Participant, p. 18) Source: Creech et al. (2014)

Finally, the interaction dimension of learning was particularly significant for older learners, as through active participation in musical activities, many built new social networks that fostered their social and emotional wellbeing. Active music-​making for people in the Third and the Fourth ages was transformational to the extent that many participants developed musical possible selves as musicians. As one participant stated: “It has made a big difference to my life. After 180

181

Transformational models of music learning

retiring at 59, I now (65) consider that I have become a musician. I write songs, I perform and I play guitar”; while another added that “I think if I was doing that on my own I wouldn’t feel like a musician but when I hear the sound of everybody playing together, I do” (Creech et al., 2014, p. 77).

Implications for music education and music in the community If a goal of transformative learning is to “teach individuals to question authority, develop critical thinking skills and engage in collective action” (Qi & Veblen, 2016, p. 102), then some compelling arguments may be made in favour of the role of the teacher as a “facilitator” of learning (Heron, 1999). The term “facilitator” refers to a leadership role that involves creating the conditions for awakening or reawakening the capacity to learn and change. Supported by expert facilitation, learners are empowered in the development of their capacity for self-​direction and self-​regulation, the celebration of the self and others, and social competencies such as cooperation, communication and interpersonal awareness (Creech et  al., 2020). In this vein, music facilitators in education and in the community have a multifaceted role to play, involving the promotion of manifold learning and the utilisation of a full range of facilitation modes. These modes enable them to have control of the teaching (hierarchical) but also to engage in cooperative learning alongside the learners or offer the learners space to be autonomous, recognising the “centrality of personal agency” (Qi & Veblen, 2016, p. 112). Whilst alternating these modes, facilitators can plan and structure musical activities in ways that most effectively support their students to make sense of their learning. This can be achieved when learning is placed “within the context of [the students’] broader life and career” (Carey & Grant, 2014, p. 5). Furthermore, facilitators and teachers need to be equipped to respond to barriers to learning, such as identity defence, ambivalence and mental resistance (Illeris, 2009, pp. 15–​16), with the utmost respect and consideration. A  key message is that manifold learning as described above creates the conditions that would allow musical learners to develop lifelong musical learning and flexible musical possible selves (Creech et al., 2020). Qi and Veblen (2016, p.  117) emphasise that transformative learning could be generated through “a combination of reflection and discourse”. Reflection and discourse enable learners to adopt increasingly inclusive world views, allowing them to develop musical possible selves and a renewed sense of agency. Both reflection and discourse should be promoted as part of people’s learning experiences regardless of whether learning takes place in formal, non-​ formal or informal contexts or whether musicing is experienced within a group or as individual undertaking (Costes-​Onishi, 2019). Combining reflection and discourse with action empowers learners to become active agents in their lives, fosters learning across the life course and honours and celebrates the diversity of learning narratives of the people who experience the learning (Carey & Grant, 2014; Costes-​Onishi, 2019; O’Neill, 2014).

Implications for research Research designs that give voice to people’s narratives of learning and living promote an understanding of how people experience transformative learning. To date, narrative inquiry has been used to illuminate the transformative learning experiences of musical learners (Qi & Cesetti, 2019; Qi & Veblen, 2016). More studies could adopt this design to explore the transforming potential exerted by musical learning across the life course. Similarly, adopting arts-​based approaches with foundations on artistic exploration could stimulate transformative learning experiences both in the researcher and the people studied (Taylor et al., 2012). 181

182

Maria Varvarigou and Andrea Creech

In this chapter, we have adopted the theoretical lens of transformative learning as articulated by Illeris (2009) to explore transformative learning experiences in music. This lens could offer an interesting insight into how music learners across the life course and in different social contexts use music as a means of widening their knowledge and experiences of the world, and how through new knowledge and experiences they make positive adaptations that enable their transformations to occur. More studies could use Illeris’ framework of transformative learning to show how content, incentive and interaction nurture transformative change in musical identities and practices.

Reflective questions 1. Take a moment to reflect on a transformative learning experience that you have had. Use Illeris’ framework as your lens: a. What was the content (knowledge, skills, insight, method, strategy) of learning? b. What motivated you to pursue this learning experience? c. How did the environment (people, setting) support this learning experience? 2. How can teachers or facilitators support deep and transformative learning in the face of resistance to unfamiliar ideas or interpretations?

Notes 1 Musical Futures:  UK –​ www.musicalfutures.org; Canada –​ www.musicalfuturescanada.org; Australia –​www.musicalfuturesaustralia.org 2 An adaptation of the classroom project in Singapore: www.star.moe.edu.sg/​resources/​star-​post-​music-​ archive 3 Musical Futures in Brazil –​www.musicalfutures.org/​musical-​futures-​international/​informal-​learning-​ brazil 4 Musical Futures in Ireland  –​ www.musicalfutures.org/​musical-​futures-​international/​musical-​futures-​ ireland 5 Details can be found at: www.inspire-​music.org/​case-​studies/​60-​musical-​futures (retrieved 25 March 2020). 6 The ABRSM is an examinations board and registered charity based in London, United Kingdom, which provides examinations in music at centres around the world. The ABRSM is one of four examination boards accredited to award graded exams and diploma qualifications in music within the United Kingdom’s National Qualifications Framework. In the United Kingdom, the boards tend to adopt a system of eight grades, with Grade 8 being the most advanced. 7 For more information on the organisation Keys of Change, please see www.keysofchange.org 8 The Keys of Change newsletter for 2014 can be found at:  https://​12dd7ba8-​f89b-​8fcb-​8d70-​ 1dc6cb483b8e.filesusr.com/​ugd/​5c723f_​4a6f72a01d1646158d10bc62a9e968d2.pdf 9 The Third Age refers to a time in the life course when individuals, post-​work and free from some of the responsibilities of earlier adulthood, may still pursue goals and lead creative and fulfilling lives. The Fourth Age refers to the final stage of the life course, which may be characterised by physical and cognitive decline (Creech et al., 2012).

Suggestions for further reading Heron, J. (1999). The complete facilitator’s handbook. Kogan Page Ltd. Illeris, K. (2009). A comprehensive understanding of human learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists … in their own words (pp. 7–​20). Routledge.

182

183

Transformational models of music learning O’Neill, S. (2015). Transformative music engagement and musical flourishing. In G. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of musical development (2nd ed.; pp. 606–​625). Oxford University Press. Qi, N., & Cesetti, D. (2019). Transformative music learning experiences:  A Chinese immigrant in Northeastern Brazil and his love for música sertaneja. Per Musi, 39, 1–​22. https://​doi.org/​10.35699/​ 2317-​6377.2019.5324

References Abrahams, F., & Abrahams, D. (2015). Child as musical apprentice. In G. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of musical development (pp. 538–​556). Oxford University Press. Ansdell, G. (2014). How music helps in music therapy and everyday life. Ashgate. Benedict, C., Schmidt, P. K., Spruce, G., & Woodford, P. (2015). The Oxford handbook of social justice in music education. Oxford University Press. Bennett, D. (2007). Utopia for music performance graduates. Is it achievable, and how should it be defined? British Journal of Music Education, 24(2), 179–​189. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​s0265051707007383 Canham, N. L. (2016). Making mavericks: Preparing musicians for independent artistic culture. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 15(3–​4), 407–​413. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1474022216647709 Carey, G., & Grant, C. (2014, 15–​18 July).Teachers of instruments or teachers as instruments? From transfer to transformative approaches to one-​to-​one pedagogy. In G. Carruthers (Ed.), Relevance and reform in the education of professional musicians. Proceedings of the 20th International Seminar of the ISME Commission on the Education of the Professional Musician (CEPROM), Belo Horizonte, Brazil (pp. 42–​54). Carey, G., & Grant, C. (2016, 20–​23 July). Enacting transformative pedagogy in the music studio: A case study of responsive, relational teaching. In E. K. M. Chong (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21st International Seminar of the ISME Commission on the Education of the Professional Musician, Saint Andrews, Fife, Scotland (pp. 54–​63). Cohen, M., & Duncan, S. P. (2015). Behind different walls: Restorative justice, transformative justice, and their relationship to music education. In C. Benedict, P. Schmidt, G. Spruce, & P. Woodford (Eds.), Oxford handbook of social justice in music education (pp. 554–​566). Oxford University Press. Costes-​Onishi, P. (2019). Community music-​based structures of learning (CoMu-​Based SL): Pedagogical framework for the nurturance of future-​ready habits of mind. International Journal of Music Education, 37(3), 346–​369. Creech, A., & Gaunt, H. (2012). The changing face of individual instrumental tuition: Value, purpose and potential. In G. McPherson & G.Welch (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music education (pp. 694–​711). Oxford University Press. Creech, A., Hallam, S., & Varvarigou, M. (2012). Facilitating music-​making for older people –​facilitators handbook:  A continuing professional development resource for music leaders, facilitators and teachers. Institute of Education, University of London. Creech, A., Hallam, S.,Varvarigou, M., & McQueen, H. (2014). Active ageing with music: Supporting wellbeing in the third and fourth ages. Institute of Education, University of London. Creech, A., Papageorgi, I., Haddon, L., Potter, J., Morton, F., Duffy, C., de Bezenac, C., Whyton, T., Himonides, E., & Welch, G. (2008). From music student to professional:  The process of transition. British Journal of Music Education, 25(3), 315–​331. Creech, A., Varvarigou, M. & Hallam, S. (2020). Contexts for music learning and participation: Developing and sustaining musical possible selves through informal, non-​formal and formal practices. Palgrave Macmillan. Elliott, D. J., & Silverman, M. (2015). Music matters (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum. Gabrielsson, A. (2011). Strong experiences with music: Music is much more than just music (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. Green, L. (2008). Music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom pedagogy. Ashgate Publishers. Hallam, S. (2006). Music psychology in education. Institute of Education, University of London. Hallam, S., Creech, A., & McQueen, H. (2011). Musical futures:  A case study investigation. Institute of Education, University of London. Hargreaves, D., & Lamont, A. (2017). The psychology of musical development. Cambridge University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​9781107281868 Heron, J. (1999). The complete facilitator’s handbook. Kogan Page Ltd.

183

184

Maria Varvarigou and Andrea Creech Heron, J. (2009). Life cycles and learning cycles. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists … in their own words (pp. 129–​146). Routledge. Illeris, K. (2004). Transformative learning in the perspective of a comprehensive learning theory. Journal of Transformative Education, 2(2),  79–​89. Illeris, K. (2006). How we learn: Learning and non-​learning in school and beyond. Routledge. Illeris, K. (2009). A comprehensive understanding of human learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists … in their own words (pp. 7–​20). Routledge. Illeris, K. (2014). Transformative learning and identity. Routledge. Jarvis, P. (2009). Learning to be a person in society: Learning to be me. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists … in their own words (pp. 21–​34). Routledge. Kegan, R. (2009). What “form” transforms? A  constructive-​developmental approach to transformative learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning:  Learning theorists … in their own words (pp. 35–​52). Routledge. Mezirow, J. (1978a). Perspective transformation. Adult Education, 28(2), 100–​110. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 074171367802800202 Mezirow, J. (1978b). Education for perspective transformation: Women’s re-​entry programs in community colleges. Teacher’s College, Columbia University. Mezirow, J., & Taylor, E. W. (2009). Transformative learning in practice: Insights from community, workplace, and higher education. Jossey-​Bass. Mullen, P., & Deane, K. (2018). Strategic working with children and young people in challenging circumstances. In B.-​L. Bartleet & L. Higgins (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of community music (pp. 177–​ 194). Oxford University Press. O’Neill, S. (2012). Becoming a music learner:  A theory of transformative music engagement. In G. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1, pp. 163–​186). Oxford University Press. O’Neill, S. (2014). Mind the gap:  Transforming music engagement through learner-​centred informal music learning. The Recorder: Journal of the Ontario Music Educators’ Association, 56(2),  18–​22. O’Neill, S. (2015). Transformative music engagement and musical flourishing. In G. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of musical development (2nd ed.; pp. 606–​625). Oxford University Press. O’Neill, S., & Bespflug, K. (2012). Musical Futures comes to Canada: Engaging students in real-​world music learning. Canadian Music Educator, 53(2),  25–​34. Peretz, I., & Zatorre, R. (2005). Bran organisation for music processing. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 89–​114. Qi, N., & Cesetti, D. (2019). Transformative music learning experiences:  A Chinese immigrant in Northeastern Brazil and his love for música sertaneja. Per Musi, 39, 1–​22. https://​doi.org/​10.35699/​ 2317-​6377.2019.5324 Qi, N., &Veblen, K. (2016).Transformative learning through music: Case studies from Brazil. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 5(2), 101–​125. http://​act.maydaygroup.org/​articles/​QiVeblen15_​2.pdf Schmidt, P. (2005). Music education as transformative practice:  Creating new frameworks for learning music through a Freirian perspective. Visions of Research in Music Education, 6. www.rider.edu/​~vrme Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7),  4–​14. Shotter, J. (1989). Vygotsky’s psychology: Joint activity in a developmental zone. New Ideas in Psychology, 7(2), 185–​204. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​0732-​118X(89)90025-​1 Smilde, R. (2018). Community engagement and lifelong learning. In B.-​L. Bartleet & L. Higgins (Eds.), Oxford handbook of community music (pp. 673–​692). Oxford University Press. Smilde, R., Page, K., & Alheit, P. (2014). While the music lasts: On music and dementia. Eburon Delft. Taylor, E., Canton, P., & Associates (2012). The handbook of transformative learning: Theory, research, and practice. Jossey-​Bass. Varvarigou, M. (2014). Play it by ear: Teachers’ responses to ear-​playing tasks during one to one instrumental lessons. Music Education Research, 16(4), 471–​484. Varvarigou, M. (2017). Group playing by ear in higher education: The processes that support imitation, invention and group improvisation. British Journal of Music Education, 34(3), 291–​304. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1017/​S0265051717000109 Waldron, J., Mantie, R., Partti, H., & Tobias, E. S. (2018). A brave new world: Theory to practice in participatory culture and music learning and teaching. Music Education Research, 20(3), 289–​304.

184

185

12 LEARNING TO PLAY AN INSTRUMENT Katie Zhukov

Instrument choice The first step in learning to play an instrument is deciding which instrument appeals to and suits the learner. This is a major financial and time commitment for children and their families, independent young people and older adults, and individual and social factors, as well as the instrument itself, influence how the choice of instrument is made. Hallam and colleagues (2008) showed that individual issues affecting decisions include physical attributes (lung capacity, hand size and physical stamina); personal preferences in terms of the sounds the instrument makes; the type of music typically played (e.g., classical violin versus band music); and the value attached to perceptions of gender-​acceptable instruments. Social factors influencing choice of instrument incorporate cultural and religious issues; role models (for example, whether the instrument was demonstrated by a male or female player at the time of choosing); parental preferences; and peer pressure and sibling impact. In choosing a particular instrument, the learner and (in the case of children) their family will also consider practical aspects such as access (e.g., whether the school will provide the instrument on loan) and cost of tuition (with small group lessons being less expensive than individual lessons); the size and weight of the instrument (would the child be able to carry it when travelling to school, or would an older adult be able to lift and carry it?); the quality of sound; and whether it is a solo instrument or can be played in a group. Cultural gender stereotyping of musical instruments has been entrenched for centuries, with certain instruments viewed as preferable for girls to learn to play and others for boys. Generally, girls seem to prefer playing smaller, high-​pitched instruments, such as flute and violin, while boys tend to choose brass instruments, such as trombone and tuba, percussion instruments and electric guitar (Hallam et al., 2008). A large survey by Sheldon and Price (2005) of over 8,000 children from 170 ensembles in 25 countries showed that female students dominated the woodwind section, playing flute, clarinet, oboe and bassoon. Male students were over-​represented in the brass instruments (saxophone, trumpet, horn, trombone, euphonium and tuba) and the percussion section. Gender stereotypes seem to apply also to world instruments unfamiliar to students who normally play Western instruments. For example, Kelly and VanWeelden (2014) presented 10 unique world instruments to 455 band and string students and asked them to rate the instruments on a 10-​point continuum scale from masculine to feminine after viewing brief 185

186

Katie Zhukov

audio, visual and audiovisual examples in random order. The type of presentation, student primary instrument and sex did not affect the rating of instruments. Instrument size was the main factor in gender association, with larger instruments viewed as more masculine and smaller instruments as more feminine, in line with previous research. These studies suggest that making a decision to learn a particular instrument is complex and requires careful consideration of many factors to ensure that learners choose an appropriate instrument to promote long-​term engagement with music learning, instead of being simply swayed by stereotype conventions.

Reasons for dropping out While many children and adults begin learning to play an instrument, the dropout rate in the first 3 years of learning is quite high. There are many reasons why this happens. During the first 3  years of learning, a healthy relationship between teacher, parent (or carer) and child is very important for the success of learning (see Chapter 25 in this volume). For example, Creech (2011) suggests that discordant parent–​teacher–​student relationships may contribute to dropout, while “harmonious trios” tend to persist after 3 years of learning, indicating that positive interactions between teachers, parents and students play a role in continuation of music instruction. Costa-​Giomi et al. (2005) found that beginner pianists who dropped out early tended to seek teacher approval more (yet receive less approval) and achieve less in lessons and in exams than students who persevered with piano lessons. These findings suggest that the effort students make on a regular basis and consequent progress and results are linked to dropout. The strongest factor for maintaining participation in instrumental music learning that started at primary school and continues during early adolescence is the importance of music in students’ home life (Krupp-​Schleußner & Lehmann-​Wermser, 2018). This large survey of German children in Years 6 and 7 highlights the need for music educators to liaise with parents to support music learning at school by providing music activities in the home. Research has shown that the reasons adolescents stop instrumental lessons and playing in a band are often psychological and linked to reduced sense of competence, relatedness and autonomy (Evans et al., 2013). In order to maintain student interest, teachers need to provide challenging lessons and opportunities to learn new skills, thus building student competence. Social interactions with like-​minded peers are important for building musical relationships and enhancing relatedness. To promote student autonomy, teachers could involve students in choice of repertoire for study and decisions regarding various music activities (see Chapter 11, concerned with transformative learning, and Chapter  21, concerned with constructivist approaches in one-​to-​one learning and teaching). These suggestions differ from the typical studio teaching that is often dominated by technical work and study of exam repertoire and could lead to loss of motivation for learning to play an instrument. A large survey of students playing in orchestras in three different US high schools reported similar results (Evans & Liu, 2019). The study showed that participant satisfaction and frustration were affected by three main factors: intention to continue in the programme (45%), global self-​esteem (34%) and practice time (22%). Satisfaction of psychological needs played a major role in students’ intention to continue playing in the orchestra and also had a positive impact on global self-​esteem and motivation to practise. While frustrated students practised more than satisfied students, the quality of this practice was probably ineffective. Frustration also negatively affected participants’ self-​esteem, which in the long term may impact their ability to productively participate in orchestral playing. 186

187

Learning to play an instrument

These studies indicate that parental support plays an important role during the early stages of instrumental learning. Parents or carers need to demonstrate the value of music, help children maintain their effort (see also “Time practising” later in this chapter) and liaise with teachers to prevent dropout. During adolescence, psychological factors come into play and require careful handling by instrumental teachers and band/​orchestra directors (see “Practising in ensembles” later in this chapter).

Student learning styles Over the past 20  years, research focus has shifted from investigating teaching approaches to examining student learning processes. Collaborative learning in higher music education in particular has received much attention with the publication of a book canvassing a range of approaches across various genres (Gaunt & Westerlund, 2013). While the chapters in this book discuss the benefits of peer learning, group learning and co-​learning, little is known regarding the learning styles of advanced music students. One study of 24 higher education instrumentalists observed their behaviours in lessons and identified six different student learning styles: Extrovert (2 males, 1 female); Serious (5 males, 1 female); Compliant (1 male, 6 females); Apologetic (2 males); Disappointed (1 male, 3 females); and Frustrated (1 male, 1 female) (Zhukov, 2007). The greatest number of students utilised the Compliant style, that demonstrates passive learning typically linked to a master–​apprentice style of teaching still entrenched in higher education (see Chapter  21, this volume). Similar numbers of students displayed positive (Serious and Extravert) and negative (Apologetic, Disappointed and Frustrated) approaches to learning. Gender differences emerged, showing that female students were over-​represented in Compliant and Disappointed style and that male students favoured Serious, Extravert and Apologetic styles. However, this study describes a small group of higher education music students, and teachers need to be aware that each student may have a preferred style of learning and thus require a flexible teaching approach. Gender stereotyping has already been discussed above with regard to instrument choice, but it is also evident in student approaches to learning. For example, Zhukov (2006) showed that higher education male students were more assertive in lessons, playing longer and asking more questions but also receiving more teacher criticism than their female peers. Female students were more compliant during lessons, which resulted in longer sessions and more teacher praise and demonstration. These gender differences were evident even in non-​verbal behaviours during instrumental lessons, with male students displaying more deceit gestures (hand over the mouth or face, touching the nose, rubbing the eyes, coughing and clearing the throat) and female students utilising more courting gestures (brushing or playing with own hair) (Zhukov, 2013). At the same time, all students engaged in joking during lessons to forestall teacher criticism. These studies indicate that teachers need to be aware of gender differences in student learning behaviours and adjust their teaching approaches accordingly.

Informal self-​directed music learning With instant access to video lessons on any instrument available on YouTube, it has never been easier to start learning an instrument in one’s bedroom, without formal instruction. For example, Hong and colleagues (2016) surveyed over 100 users of the most popular YouTube guitar-​learning channel in Taiwan and highlighted positive aspects of learning music via social media, such as the ability to repeat the playback and rewind and fast-​forward the video. The self-​directed learning was particularly effective for learners with high levels of self-​efficacy 187

188

Katie Zhukov

and interest. A study by Keebler and colleagues (2014) compared an augmented reality guitar learning system (Fretlight® guitar) with standard instructional material. The results showed that over a 2-​week period, interactive learning using Fretlight® led to better performance outcomes and longer retention of information than using traditional learning materials such as diagrams. Even the typical teenage band rehearsing in the garage has undergone a digital transformation. The garage band experience today includes practices such as remixing songs to create mash-​ups, collaborative songwriting online, producing videos for YouTube and sharing of performance videos on Guitar Hero and Band Game (Väkevä, 2010). While some of the strategies from formal instrumental learning described in this chapter will apply to self-​directed learning, more research on informal approaches in the digital age is needed urgently.

Learning later in life Adults learning musical instruments later in life tend to have different goals and approaches to learning than child beginners, who tend to focus on acquisition of musical skills (see Chapter 21 in this volume). For example, playing a traditional fiddle is typically taught in workshops utilising folk melodies and learning by ear rather than reading notation and lessons built on scales and exercises (Cope, 2005). This type of (less formal) learning is often centred on social interactions and enjoyment of music-​making –​qualities of learning found to be valued highly by adults (Creech et al., 2013). Helton (2020) reported similar positive attitudes from 12 returning beginners in a New Horizons Band in the United States. The reasons for returning to instrumental learning included family encouragement, positive memories of playing during youth and the need for social interactions instead of wanting to learn music. Participant feedback focused on individual (return to ability, awareness of physical changes and consciousness of ability) and social issues (continual progress and ensemble concerns). The programme also demonstrated different attitudes towards practising, with problematic passages being practised for the good of the ensemble rather than for personal success. Unsurprisingly, the participants preferred group rehearsals to individual practice. Research has shown that piano lessons improve executive functioning and working memory in older adults (ages 60–​85) and could reduce age-​related cognitive decline (Bugos et al., 2007). Older beginner pianists undertaking group piano instruction valued opportunities for musical performance, acquiring knowledge of music theory and developing social networks (Bugos, 2014). They indicated preference for group rather than individual piano lessons. Participating in a masterclass with an expert piano teacher is another activity that provides opportunity for group learning and may contribute to musical interactions and motivation (Taylor, 2010). Master classes could facilitate acquisition of new musical skills and boost older pianists’ self-​ esteem, musical self-​efficacy and identity.

Reading notation The debate regarding when and how to introduce reading of music notation to instrumental beginners continues in music education. Some educators advocate “sound before sign” (i.e., the ability to generate sounds on the instrument before starting to read music notation), while others believe it is important to introduce notation from the very first lesson. Mills and McPherson (2016) highlight that it is not necessary for children to decode music notation before starting to play, as many music activities could be engaged in without the need for notation. The early 188

189

Learning to play an instrument

introduction and excessive emphasis on notation can lead to negative student experiences, misunderstanding of musical concepts and deterioration of creativity and ability to memorise music. In the traditional way of teaching notation from the start, students tend to connect the music symbols to a particular fingering on their instrument, thus creating eye-​to-​hand connection and bypassing the link from visual notation to auditory sound. To develop fluent music reading, eye, ear, and hand need to work together. While instrumental teachers find the process of reading music easy and automatic after many years of doing so, some students struggle to master music notation and achieve reading fluency. A study by Tan and colleagues (2009) showed that many fundamental aspects of music notation are confusing to beginners. The researchers surveyed 50 university students who could not read music notation regarding their understanding of a wide range of musical symbols and found that many music pitch and rhythm conventions were misunderstood.The results show that even young adults find the music notation system complex, suggesting that introducing notation to young beginners requires special strategies. Classroom music teachers are often taught Kodály and Gordon approaches for introducing music notation as part of their undergraduate degree. These include teaching sound first, using sol-​fa syllables, and providing substantial preparation before attempting to read notation (Jacobi, 2012). Unfortunately, many studio/​instrumental teachers do not utilise this approach and begin by having their students generate sounds on the instrument and read notation simultaneously. Jacobi (2012) states that it is important for children to hear sound before seeing it on the page, and she suggests various activities to break down music reading into logical steps that make sense to young children, such as: • • • •

singing simple melodies; identifying high and low sounds; using hand gestures to demonstrate the contour of a melody; and placing pictures on music staff before using whole notes.

McPherson and Gabrielsson (2002) recommend the use of music familiar to children and already learned to play by ear when introducing notation. Any new concepts (e.g., note durations) need to be immediately illustrated by a piece of music and put into practice (Mills & McPherson, 2016). Modern method/​tutor books tend to employ this approach and commonly include only the information needed to play a particular piece, rather than overwhelming learners with unnecessary facts. Young children today tend to learn visually, having grown up with electronic devices virtually from the cradle. Therefore, introducing music notation using a graphic approach might be an alternative to the traditional methods. Kuo and Chuang (2013) developed a colour system of music notation, matching 12 musical pitches to 12 primary colours and utilising various shapes and signs to represent note durations. Their version of “Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star” appears simple to read and should help beginners identify various musical elements and memorise music. While this system is yet to be trialled on participants, it is worth considering as a preparatory approach to reading music notation. Colour has been utilised in beginner string instruction in Finland since the late 1970s and is now popular in 23 countries around the world (see Colourstrings, n.d.). The programme employs colours and pictures to teach number pizzicato, natural and octave harmonics and changing positions as well as to develop aural skills such as relative sol-​fa, inner hearing and transposition. Colour notation systems have also assisted learners with special needs to participate in music activities (Ruokonen et al., 2012). 189

190

Katie Zhukov

Playing by ear Playing by ear is a principal learning strategy in jazz, folk and world music contexts, but is rare in classical music instruction. Suzuki violin and Yamaha piano methods start with exploration of the instruments, learning simple tunes by ear and acquiring some confidence in playing before adding notation-​reading. Once students are able to read music, playing by ear tends to disappear from most instrumental lessons, despite research highlighting its importance. McPherson (2005) states that it is especially important for teachers to include activities that teach children how to coordinate their eyes, ears and hands, so that they develop their capacity to “think in sound”. This ability to “think in sound” is typical of many musically gifted children who, soon after commencing an instrument, will often delight in picking out tunes by ear. (p. 30–​31) Research has shown that it is possible to introduce playing by ear into instrumental instruction at any stage of learning. For example, Green (2012) trialled playing by ear with 15 students aged 10 to 17 and playing a variety of instruments. Participants ranged from Grade 2 to Grade 6 (beginner to intermediate), and none had ever learned a new piece of music by ear. Students listened to a recording of a specially composed pop/​funk piece and attempted to find the pitches of the riff on their instrument.They learned more riffs in the same way and then played along with the recording, embellishing the riff with their own improvisations. In the second phase of the project, students applied the same approach to classical pieces and in the third phase, to music chosen themselves. While students used different learning strategies to achieve the desired outcomes, all had indicated that they would like to use both approaches (notation and playing by ear) in their lessons. This suggests that some students might be more inclined towards aural, less formal learning approaches. Playing by ear could complement typical music lesson activities and add an element of fun to the routine. Playing by ear is also a useful method for adult learners who are interested in returning to the band playing of their school days. Hartz and Bauer (2016) trialled an approach that involved playing familiar songs by ear, playing along with pre-​recorded music and improvising with 10 members of a community band in the United States. Instead of music notation, the researchers used a pitch ladder (a graphic representation of a scale), audio files of tunes being studied for home practice, singing and playing of scales and triads, echoing and improvising patterns, gradually adding passing tones and embellishments as players gained skills. After eight 1-​hour group sessions, the participants reported improvement in their ability to play by ear as well as enhanced technical, composition and theoretical skills. These studies show that playing by ear is a useful addition to instrumental lessons and could play a positive role in encouraging continuation of student engagement with music learning and also contribute to the development of a wide range of musical skills.

Acquisition of technical skills Each instrument poses specific challenges for students learning to play. While the early years of learning tend to focus on the basic technique and sound production, at the intermediate level issues such as intonation, quality of sound, range of dynamics, expressiveness of playing and stylistic interpretation become important. 190

191

Learning to play an instrument

Learning to play the piano appears to be straightforward for beginners, requiring only location of the correct key and pressing it with a finger. However, developing piano technique will require many years of concentrated practice, and various issues regarding how best to play the instrument are still being debated (Parncutt & Troup, 2002). For example, should a player use curved or straight fingers? Typically, curved fingers are preferred nowadays to distribute the weight evenly amongst all finger joints; however, a flatter finger touch is often needed to accommodate a stretched hand position and to create a cantabile touch. Should fingers and arms be used? Playing virtuosic repertoire on a modern grand piano will require more strength than just fingers, and arm weight can be used for power and relaxation. Both finger and arm contribute to the dynamic range, with loudness being affected by the speed of striking the key (arm movement) and the shape of finger at the time of contact with the key. One of the significant issues in piano playing is optimal fingering, since the pianist has only 10 fingers to manipulate 88 keys. This is why most piano teachers insist that students learn scales and arpeggios to automate standard finger patterns that are used in much of the piano repertoire. The pedals are an additional expressive mechanism on the piano.The sustaining pedal helps to prolong the sound, as it starts to decay from the moment the key is struck. Soft pedal (una corda) produces a muffling effect suitable for delicate and ethereal passages. Using the pedals is typically introduced at the intermediate level of learning, and advanced pianists develop more refined pedalling techniques, such as half-​pedalling and flutter pedalling. In contrast to visual simplicity of keyboard, learning to play a string instrument involves imprecise location of each pitch, different actions between the bowing and fingering hand and a myriad of factors affecting the quality of sound. Guettler and Hallam (2002) suggest that to learn effective finger action, string players should develop noise-​free attacks with a focus on how stiff or supple their joints are and on the pitch; for bowing, the starting point on the bow (frog, middle or tip), the speed of bowing, smooth bow change and bow pressure will all impact sound production. The use of vibrato (or how much the string is allowed to vibrate) is a major issue for string players, and advanced techniques include pizzicato, spiccato, ricochet and harmonics. Due to the difficulty of playing string instruments, most students start learning very young and will need to develop excellent aural skills in order to play in tune. Wind and brass instruments require good lung capacity to blow the air into the instrument and a combination of fingering to cover the holes, valves and levers or move the slides to generate a particular pitch. The shape of the mouth and lips, called “embouchure”, has a major impact on the quality of sound (Fuks & Fadle, 2002). Much of wind teaching focuses on breathing and generating steady blowing pressure, as this has a significant effect on intonation and loudness.Tongue articulation is another vital technique taught from early on.Yet even advanced students entering higher music education study may have little in-​depth understanding of technical aspects involved in playing of wind instruments. Through action research at the Guildhall School of Music in London, Gaunt (2007) discovered that oboe students had limited knowledge of anatomy and physiology of breathing and could not articulate differences between clavicular, thoracic and abdominal breathing. It took an anatomy seminar to improve their understanding of these concepts and many workshops to practise a variety of breathing techniques. Students realised that there exists a strong relationship between breathing and bodily tension, anxiety or self-​criticism and the negative impact these issues may have on sound production and performance. Participating students improved their breathing and were able to focus on broader aspects of their playing and articulate their learning goals, while the control group remained vague about their short and medium-​term aims. While learners can reach a reasonable level of competency in a relatively short amount of time to enjoy playing for pleasure or participate in community music programmes, literature 191

192

Katie Zhukov

suggests that acquiring expert technical skills on an instrument is a long journey, requiring many years of dedication and effort from learners and close supervision and guidance from expert teachers. At every stage of learning, teachers need to provide suitable explanations for playing in a particular way and reasons for choosing exercises and repertoire that build the learner’s technique. This will help to actively engage students in the learning process and promote lifelong music participation.

Sight-​reading The ability to read a new piece of music and execute this on the instrument accurately and at a reasonable speed without practising is called sight-​reading (Lehmann & Kopiez, 2009). To do this fluently requires fast processing of musical notation and automatic physical responses. For teachers and students, having expert sight-​reading skills is the Holy Grail of instrumental learning, as it facilitates faster learning of repertoire and playing of more complex music, leads to collaborative music activities and plays an important role in professional music careers. While research has focused on eye movement during sight-​reading and perceptual, aural and memory skills as predictors of expert sight-​reading, teachers and students are interested in how fluent sight-​reading could be developed during lessons (Zhukov & McPherson, in press). Many teachers believe that sight-​reading can be improved by simply practising the skill regularly. This myth was recently debunked by a study that analysed diaries of 80 advanced pianists (Zhukov, 2017). The amount of informal sight-​reading practice accumulated over 10 weeks did not predict improvement in sight-​reading performance from pre-​test to post-​test, and neither did different practice patterns (regular weekly sight-​reading or more sight-​reading at the start/​ end of the 10-​week period). These results suggest that targeted approaches to enhance sight-​ reading skills could be more beneficial than mere sight-​reading practice. On reviewing 60  years of sight-​reading research, Mishra (2016) found that counting and rhythmic drills improve rhythm accuracy and that collaborative playing enhances pitch accuracy in sight-​reading. In particular, rhythm training is important, as rhythmic errors tend to do­minate sight-​reading mistakes, and students who are able to sight-​read rhythm accurately typically make fewer pitch errors (Henry, 2011). Collaborative playing is more demanding than solo playing as it involves coordinating with other musicians at the same time as reading and playing one’s own part. However, it is not clear whether musicians with better sight-​reading skills tend to gravitate towards collaborative playing more than others or whether participation in such activities develops their sight-​reading. Most likely, both of these processes interact and enhance each other. Since many different factors contribute to fluent sight-​reading and each student possesses individual musical, physical, cognitive and psychological skills, a holistic approach that combines several strategies previously identified as effective in improving sight-​reading might be more beneficial generally than individual training approaches. One such intervention was developed and implemented by Zhukov and colleagues (2016).The new programme consisted of 10 weeks of materials aimed at advanced pianists and focused on three areas: rhythm training (utilising scales and arpeggios), solo repertoire (of lesser-​known accessible pieces by famous composers) and duet playing. Each week students worked on improving their understanding of rhythm, recognition of patterns typically employed in the Baroque, Classical, Romantic and 20th-​century to 21st-​century compositional styles, and maintaining flow when sight-​reading by playing with a duet partner (teacher or another student).The participants were tested before and after the 10-​ week training and demonstrated greater improvement in sight-​reading than students involved 192

193

Learning to play an instrument

in single-​focus training programmes. This approach shows potential to be implemented with different instruments and with beginner–​intermediate musicians. There are many strategies teachers could employ to improve the sight-​reading skills of their students; for example: •

Make sight-​reading a regular activity in lessons (not something to be practised two weeks before examinations) and provide suitable materials for home sight-​reading practice (typically 2–​3 grades below the student’s current level). • Introduce duet playing as a regular fun activity in lessons. • Give students strategies before sight-​ reading instead of correcting errors. These include:  scanning the whole piece for difficulties, understanding key and time signatures, focusing on linear movement instead of reading note by note, clapping the rhythm and singing the melody. • Ask for expressive playing at a comfortable speed rather than fast performance. • Aim at building student confidence in sight-​reading by starting with easier materials and gradually increasing complexity (Zhukov & McPherson, in press).

Approaches to practising In addition to instruction, home practice is essential for the development and consolidation of skills being taught during instrumental lessons. Over the past 30 years, different terminology has been used to describe music practice: • • • • •

deliberate practice with focus on achieving specific goals; formal practice that shows deliberate effort; informal practice such as enjoyable leisure music-​making; structured practice consisting of a detailed regime and sequence of practising; unstructured practice with freedom to practise in any order and with no particular goals (Zhukov, 2009).

While deliberate, formal and structured practice approaches lead to skill mastery and achievement of performance goals, unstructured practice is not efficient in terms of developing expertise (Barry & Hallam, 2002). Informal practice assists in maintaining student motivation to continue learning and enjoying music-​making.

Time practising How much to practise is a hot topic of debate amongst music teachers, students and parents. Research suggests that at least 10,000 hours accumulated over 10 years is needed to achieve an expert level of performance (Ericsson, 1996).Young children learning to play an instrument will start with short practice times, and as their skills and ability to concentrate develop, they will gradually increase the amount of practice during primary school. High school students often play in school ensembles (bands and orchestras), and this will augment their practice time in order to learn additional repertoire. Higher education music students are expected to practise daily and longer since they are working on advanced repertoire. The strongest predictors of achieved level of expertise are the length of time spent learning and the amounts of weekly practice, as shown by Hallam (2013), who surveyed 163 UK students aged 7–​17, half playing wind instruments and the other half, strings, and 193

194

Katie Zhukov

ranging from Preliminary to Grade 8 in skill level. The study reported that 91% of students practised more frequently and longer before an examination. Parents played an important role in reminding students to practise (65%) and helping them with practice (47%). Support from parents and grandparents contributed to motivation to practise. Similarly, Davidson et al. (1996) has shown that parents play an important role in encouraging students to maintain regular practice. While overuse and injury among professional musicians has been reported, there is little evidence as to whether this begins during childhood instrumental practice and how this could be linked to the amount and frequency of practice. A recent study by Ranelli and colleagues (2015) surveyed 731 children aged 7–​17 and reported that musculoskeletal problems were associated with changes in practice routines, such as playing less than usual or playing for longer and more often than usual, and with students experiencing performance anxiety. This study highlights the importance of teachers and parents monitoring the time students practise to prevent overuse and injury.

Quality of practice and strategy use Researchers have argued that the quality of practice is more important than its duration. For example, a survey in the United States of 224 band and orchestra students aged 11–​12 that investigated practice motivation and regulation found that the practice environment at home did have an impact, with students who had a quiet and comfortable place to practise reporting significantly higher practice motivation and regulation than students without such surroundings (Austin & Berg, 2006). A  study by Duke and colleagues (2009) showed that the strategies employed by advanced pianists during practice had a greater impact on the quality of performance than how much and how long they practised. The quality of practice depends largely on the type of practice strategies used. Beginner and intermediate students (primary to high school age) tend to play their pieces from start to finish or repeat the same passages over and over (McPherson & Renwick, 2001). It is hoped that as students gain more skills and maturity, they become more self-​regulating during practice and more focused on making progress. However, research shows that this is frequently not the case. A study examining practice approaches of 16 middle school instrumentalists when learning a new piece of music and immediately reflecting on the strategies they used to practise showed that repetition was used more often than any other strategy (Leon-​Guerrero, 2008). Miksza and colleagues (2012) videotaped 30 instrumentalists (Grades 6 to 8) practising their band repertoire for 20 minutes alone and found that those students only addressed pitch errors and practised at different speeds. Hallam’s (2013) survey of 163 wind and string students in the United Kingdom showed that many adopted low-​level practice strategies, such as playing through the piece or correcting a single note.Very few students used a metronome in practice, listened to recordings of the works being studied or evaluated their own playing by recording themselves. In the United States, 11-​to 12-​year-​old instrumentalists did not show consistent use of effective practice strategies (Austin & Berg, 2006). The practice effort was linked to whether students experienced negative emotions, such as boredom, frustration and anger, while practising or positive emotions, such as enjoying favourite pieces. These studies demonstrate a rather limited self-​regulation ability among intermediate-​level musicians. Even students studying for undergraduate music degrees do not always implement a full range of practising strategies. Miksza and Tan (2015) surveyed 241 wind and brass students from

194

195

Learning to play an instrument

25 higher education institutions in the United States and found that the three most frequently reported practice strategies were to practise slowly, gradually increase speed and chunk/​chain difficult passages. The two factors that predicted student achievement were their grit when learning and reflection when practising. In Europe, a survey of 130 first-​year students from six higher education institutions in Norway showed that the link between their performance goals and practice strategies was weak and that students needed to improve their practice strategies to achieve their goals (Nielsen, 2008). These findings suggest that even higher music education students could learn more about approaches to practising. Jørgensen (2004) proposes that effective practice should be structured in three stages:  “planning and preparation of practice; execution of practice; observation and evaluation of practice” (p. 86). Planning includes setting relevant goals; execution may utilise part-​ whole strategies, tempo increase and mental practice; monitoring the effectiveness of practice and concentration are meta-​strategies that improve self-​regulation (Jørgensen & Hallam, 2011). Application of these ideas will vary depending on the age and experience of the learner. To improve quality of practice in beginners, McPherson (2005) suggests the following strategies: • • • •

keeping track of what is to be learned by keeping a practice diary; deciding on the order of practice; practising to improve; and self-​correction.

Intermediate students may use a wider range of instrumental practice strategies, as demonstrated by 65 middle school students in a study by Rohwer and Polk (2006): • • • •

run-​through without stopping; stopping for errors on a run-​though; stopping to remediate sections of a piece; and jumping around the score to correct errors.

Unsurprisingly, students who focused on sectional work and correcting all errors were able to discuss more practice techniques and made greater improvement in their performance than those who utilised a run-​through approach (Rohwer and Polk, 2006). To help high school students develop effective practising strategies, Mieder and Bugos (2017) created a new curriculum for self-​regulated learning that was implemented over a 2-​week period with 30 instrumentalists who were tested before and after the programme. The training consisted of one 90-​minute group session each week, during which participants were guided through warm-​ups, breathing exercises, goal setting, peer collaboration, verbal mediation, group discussion, questioning, practice and performance. The training approaches were re-​enforced during the regular music classes. The programme resulted in enhanced self-​efficacy, better practice strategy use and more thoughtful intent. Examination of effective practice strategies of advanced pianists showed that identification of precise location of errors and systematic variation of practice tempo were used exclusively by the best-​performing students (Duke et al., 2009). The literature suggests that effective practice strategies will differ with age and skill level of players.Teachers and students need to be aware of this and continue to develop and adjust practice approaches relevant to a particular stage of learning.

195

196

Katie Zhukov

Practising in ensembles Research has shown that participating in ensembles such as band, orchestra and choir tends to have a positive impact on instrumental/​vocal practising of high school students. For example, a survey of 528 Canadian high school band players showed that students valued participating in band festivals, enjoyed receiving adjudicator feedback and considered band festivals a positive educational experience (Gouzouasis & Henderson, 2012). Participating in band festivals had a positive impact on student practice, raised enthusiasm for working together and improved attention to details. The social nature of festivals also had a positive overall impact on the adolescents. Practising/​rehearsing in ensembles is quite different from individual practice (see Chapters 19 and 20, this volume). Davidson and King (2004) highlights that group dynamics do affect the ensemble rehearsal process: to be effective, the basic operational principles of rehearsals need to be “established, understood and complied with” (p. 107). At the same time, each player needs to feel that they are able to voice their opinion. Musical goals should be shared and agreed on, and enough time should be allocated for dealing with unexpected difficulties. Verbal and non-​verbal communication (such as cuing or expression gestures) between the conductor and players and amongst the players is essential for technical coordination and unity of expression. The effectiveness of rehearsals also depends on player preparation; that is, on how well they have practised at home between the rehearsals. Ensemble directors play an important role in helping students to build up a range of effective strategies for home practice. For example, Prichard (2012) proposes that conductors of large ensembles model practice strategies to students in a four-​step process, making sure that students: • • • •

focus on specific features of demonstration; retain modelled behaviours in long-​term memory; reproduce the desired musical action; and are rewarded with positive feedback for correctly displaying the modelled behaviours.

Prichard provides a practical application of this process in a week’s practice plan that includes slow practice, whole–​part–​whole practice, chunking and self-​recording. In a similar approach, Hart (2014) developed three versions of a practice handout, aimed at novice, intermediate and advanced musicians, that encourages them to monitor frequency and duration of practice, select practice goals, evaluate progress, reflect on practice strategies used and keep a journal of their practice. This approach is useful for developing metacognition –​ thinking about how to make practice more efficient. These studies suggest that ensemble directors/​conductors could aim beyond rehearsing repertoire and provide structures for home practice in order to achieve high-​quality performance outcomes.

Implications for education and music in the community This chapter has considered many issues involved in learning to play a musical instrument:  choosing an instrument that suits the learner without being swayed by cultural and gender stereotypes; trying to prevent dropout in the first 3  years of learning, both through parental involvement and, in high school, through understanding of psychological issues; being aware of student learning styles; and the reasons for learning later in life. Best ways of introducing reading notation to beginners were discussed, and the benefits of playing by ear as part 196

197

Learning to play an instrument

of ongoing instruction were highlighted. Big-​picture issues associated with learning to play piano, strings and wind instruments were articulated as reminders to teachers who may become accustomed to their own teaching routine. Myths associated with acquisition of fluent sight-​ reading were debated, and practical applications such as rhythmic drill, collaborative playing and holistic training were discussed. Analysis of approaches to practice showed that while the amount of practice is a factor in acquisition of expertise, the quality of practice and specific strategies used have a greater impact on the progress students make. Students of all ages and skill levels typically demonstrate lack of familiarity with a full range of effective practice strategies and tend to utilise a limited number of approaches. Research-​based practice strategies suitable for beginner, intermediate and advanced students are available for teachers. Ensemble directors could also play a positive role in providing practice advice in addition to motivating students to continue music learning. Some differences between music education and community music approaches have been articulated in this chapter. In particular, learning instruments in community music settings tends to be conducted in workshops and groups rather than in individual lessons, involves more playing by ear than notation reading, and includes more fun activities and social interactions while still aiming to develop music playing skills. Participation in community instrumental music learning results in different attitudes towards practice and a positive impact on participants’ self-​esteem and musical self-​efficacy. By contrast, learning to play an instrument in a formal music education setting, such as a private studio, school or university, is focused on one-​to-​one lessons with an expert musician supplemented by performance classes and masterclasses; relies heavily on notation reading and faithful reproduction of composer intentions; often has limited opportunities for playing by ear (apart from jazz and contemporary music contexts); values technical mastery and perfect execution; and typically is highly competitive. The emphasis on achieving certain musical goals and outcomes rather than on the learning process may lead to frustration, poor practice strategies, lack of motivation and eventual dropout.There is much that music education could borrow from community music teaching in order to keep students engaged in learning and enjoying music-​making over the lifetime.

Reflective questions 1. Is this instrument right for the student? Have you considered the student’s age, size, gender, cultural and musical preferences and family situation? 2. How would you introduce music notation reading? Have you considered playing by ear and providing sight-​reading strategies? 3. What do your students know regarding approaches to practising? What practical steps could you take to increase their knowledge of practice strategies?

Suggestions for further reading Hallam, S., Rogers, L., & Creech, A. (2008). Gender differences in musical instrument choice. International Journal of Music Education, 26(1), 7–​19. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761407085646 Jørgensen, H., & Hallam, S. (2011). Practising. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 265–​273). Oxford University Press. Lehmann, A. C., & Kopiez, R. (2011). Sight-​reading. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 334–​351). Oxford University Press.

197

198

Katie Zhukov Mills, J., & McPherson, G. E. (2016). Music literacy: Reading traditional clef notation. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician:  A handbook of musical development (2nd ed.; pp. 177–​ 191). Oxford University Press.

References Austin, J. R., & Berg, M. H. (2006). Exploring music practice among sixth-​grade band and orchestra students. Psychology of Music, 34(4), 535–​558. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735606067170 Barry, N., & Hallam, S. (2002). Practice. In R. Parncutt & G. McPherson (Eds.), Science and psychology of music performance (pp. 151–​166). Oxford University Press. Bugos, J.  A. (2014). Adult learner perceptions:  Perspectives from beginning musicians (ages 60–​ 86  years). Update:  Applications of Research in Music Education, 32(2), 26–​34. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 8755123314521034 Bugos, J. A., Perlstein, W. M., McRae, C. S., Brophy, T. S., & Bedenbaugh, P. H. (2007). Individualized piano instruction enhances executive functioning and working memory in older adults. Aging and Mental Health, 11(4), 464–​471. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​13607860601086504 Colourstrings. (n.d.) The method. www.colourstrings.fi/​the-​method-​2/​#:~:text=Colourstrings%20 introduced%20as%20a%20first,to%20move%20the%20fingers%20independently Cope, P. (2005). Adult learning in traditional music. British Journal of Music Education, 22(2), 125–​140. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​S0265051705006108 Costa-​ Giomi, E., Flowers, P. J., & Sasaki, W. (2005). Piano lessons of beginning students who persist or drop out. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53(3), 234–​247. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 002242940505300305 Creech, A. (2011). The role of the family in supporting learning. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 295–​306). Oxford University Press. Creech, A., Hallam, S., McQueen, H., & Varvarigou, M. (2013). The power of music in the lives of older adults. Research Studies in Music Education, 35(1), 87–​102. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1321103X13478862 Davidson, J. W., Howe, M. J. A., Moore, D. G., & Sloboda, J. A. (1996). The role of parental influences in the development of musical performance. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14(4), 399–​412. Davidson, J. W., & King, E. C. (2004). Strategies for ensemble practice. In A. Williamon (Ed.), Musical excellence: Strategies and techniques to enhance performance (pp. 105–​122). Oxford University Press. Duke, R. A., Simmons, A. L., & Cash, C. D. (2009). It’s not how much; it’s how: Characteristics of practice behavior and retention of performance skills. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56(4), 310–​321. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0022429408328851 Ericsson, K. A. (1996).The acquisition of expert performance: An introduction to some of the issues. In K. A. Ericsson (Ed.), The Road to excellence (pp. 1–​50). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Evans, P., & Liu, M. Y. (2019). Psychological needs and motivational outcomes in a high school orchestra program. Journal of Research in Music Education, 67(1), 83–​105. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0022429418812769 Evans, P., McPherson, G. E., & Davidson, J. W. (2013). The role of psychological needs in ceasing music and music learning activities. Psychology of Music, 41(5), 600–​619. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735612441736 Fuks, L., & Fadle, H. (2002). Wind instruments. In R. Parncutt & G. E. McPherson (Eds.), The science and psychology of music performances:  Creative strategies for teaching and learning (pp. 319–​334). Oxford University Press. Gaunt, H. (2007). Learning and teaching breathing and oboe playing: Action research in a conservatoire. British Journal of Music Education, 24(2), 207–​231. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​S0265051707007425 Gaunt, H., & Westerlund, H. (Eds.). (2013). Collaborative learning in higher music education: Why, what and how? SEMPRE studies in the psychology of music. Ashgate. Gouzouasis, P., & Henderson, A. (2012). Secondary student perspectives on musical and educational outcomes from participation in band festivals. Music Education Research, 14(4), 479–​498. https://​doi. org/​10.1080/​14613808.2012.714361 Green, L. (2012). Musical “learning styles” and “learning strategies” in the instrumental lesson:  Some emergent findings from a pilot study. Psychology of Music, 40(1), 42–​65. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735610385510

198

199

Learning to play an instrument Guettler, K., & Hallam, S. (2002). String instruments. In R. Parncutt & G. E. McPherson (Eds.), The science and psychology of music performances:  Creative strategies for teaching and learning (pp. 303–​317). Oxford University Press. Hallam, S. (2013). What predicts level of expertise attained, quality of performance, and future musical aspirations in young instrumental players? Psychology of Music, 41(3), 267–​291. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735611425902 Hallam, S., Rogers, L., & Creech, A. (2008). Gender differences in musical instrument choice. International Journal of Music Education, 26(1), 7–​19. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761407085646 Hart, J. T. (2014). Guided metacognition in instrumental practice. Music Educators Journal, 101(2), 57–​64. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0027432114552569 Hartz, B., & Bauer, W. (2016). The effect of ear playing instruction on adult amateur wind instrumentalists’ musical self-​efficacy: An exploratory study. Contributions to Music Education, 41, 31–​51. www.jstor.com/​ stable/​24711127 Helton, B. C. (2020).The phenomenon of adults relearning instrumental music in an American wind band. International Journal of Music Education, 38(1), 66–​78. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761419869137 Henry, M. L. (2011). The effect of pitch and rhythm difficulty on vocal sight-​reading performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59(1),  72–​84. Hong, J.-​C., Hwang, M.-​Y., Szeto, E., Tsai, C.-​R., Kuo, Y.-​C., & Hsu, W.-​Y. (2016). Internet cognitive failure relevant to self-​efficacy, learning interest, and satisfaction with social media learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 55(Part A), 214–​222. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.chb.2015.09.010 Jacobi, B. S. (2012). Kodály, literacy and the brain: Preparing young music students to read pitch on the staff. General Music Today, 25(2), 11–​18. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1048371311414182 Jørgensen, H. (2004). Strategies for individual practice. In A. Williamon (Ed.), Musical Excellence: Strategies and techniques to enhance performance (pp. 85–​103). Oxford University Press. Jørgensen, H., & Hallam, S. (2011). Practising. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 265–​273). Oxford University Press. Keebler, J. R., Wiltshire, T. J., Smith, D. C., Fiore, S. M., & Bedwell, J. S. (2014). Shifting the paradigm of music instruction: Implications of embodiment stemming from an augmented reality guitar learning system. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 471–​471. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2014.00471 Kelly, S. N., & VanWeelden, K. (2014). Gender associations with world music instruments by secondary school music students from the USA. International Journal of Music Education, 32(4), 478–​486. https://​ doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761413515808 Krupp-​Schleußner, V., & Lehmann-​Wermser, A. (2018). An instrument for every child: A study on long-​ term effects of extended music education in German primary schools. Music Education Research, 20(1), 44–​58. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613808.2016.1249361 Kuo, Y.-​T., & Chuang, M.-​C. (2013). A proposal of a color music notation system on a single melody for music beginners. International Journal of Music Education, 31(4), 394–​412. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0255761413489082 Lehmann, A. C., & Kopiez, R. (2009). Sight-​reading. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 334–​351). Oxford University Press. Leon-​Guerrero, A. (2008). Self-​regulation strategies used by student musicians during music practice. Music Education Research, 10(1), 91–​106. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613800701871439 McPherson, G.  E. (2005). From child to musician:  Skill development during the beginning stage of learning an instrument. Psychology of Music, 33(1), 5–​35. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735605048012 McPherson, G. E., & Gabrielsson, A. (2002). From sound to sign. In R. Parncutt & G. E. McPherson (Eds.), The science and psychology of musical performance: Creative strategies for music teaching and learning (pp. 99–​ 115). Oxford University Press. McPherson, G. E., & Renwick, J. (2001). Longitudinal study of self-​regulation in children’s musical practice. Music Education Research, 3(1), 169–​186. Mieder, K., & Bugos, J. A. (2017). Enhancing self-​regulated practice behavior in high school instrumentalists. International Journal of Music Education, 35(4), 578–​587. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761417689921 Miksza, P., Prichard, S., & Sorbo, D. (2012). An observational study of intermediate band students’ self-​ regulated practice behaviors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 60(3), 254–​266. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0022429412455201 Miksza, P., & Tan, L. (2015). Predicting collegiate wind players’ practice efficiency, flow, and self-​ efficacy for self-​regulation:  An exploratory study of relationships between teachers’ instruction and

199

200

Katie Zhukov students’ practicing. Journal of Research in Music Education, 63(2), 162–​179. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0022429415583474 Mills, J., & McPherson, G. E. (2016). Music literacy:  Reading traditional clef notation. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician:  A handbook of musical development (2nd ed.; pp. 177–​191), Oxford University Press. Mishra, J. (2016). Rhythmic and melodic sight-​reading interventions:  Two meta-​analyses. Psychology of Music, 44(5), 1082–​1094. Nielsen, S. G. (2008). Achievement goals, learning strategies and instrumental performance. Music Education Research, 10(2), 235–​247. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613800802079106 Parncutt, R., & Troup, M. (2002). Piano. In R. Parncutt & G. E. McPherson (Eds.), The science and psychology of music performances: Creative strategies for teaching and learning (pp. 285–​302). Oxford University Press. Prichard, S. (2012). Practice makes perfect? Effective practice instruction in large ensembles. Music Educators Journal, 99(2), 57–​62. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0027432112458458 Ranelli, S., Smith, A., & Straker, L. (2015). The association of music experience, pattern of practice and performance anxiety with playing-​related musculoskeletal problems (PRMP) in children learning instrumental music. International Journal of Music Education, 33(4), 390–​412. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0255761415597151 Rohwer, D., & Polk, J. (2006). Practice behaviors of eighth-​grade instrumental musicians. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(4), 13–​350. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​002242940605400407 Ruokonen, I., Pollari, S., Kaikkonen, M., & Ruismäki, H. (2012). The Resonaari Special Music Centre as the developer of special music education between 1995–​2010. Procedia –​Social and Behavioral Sciences, 45, 401–​406. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.sbspro.2012.06.576 Sheldon, D. A., & Price, H. E. (2005). Sex and instrumentation distribution in an international cross-​section of wind and percussion ensembles. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 163, 43–​51. www.jstor.com/​stable/​40311594 Tan, S.-​L., Wakefield, E. M., & Jeffries, P. W. (2009). Musically untrained college students’ interpretations of musical notation: Sound, silence, loudness, duration, and temporal order. Psychology of Music, 37(1), 5–​24. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735608090845 Taylor, A. (2010). Participation in a master class: Experiences of older amateur pianists. Music Education Research, 12(2), 199–​217. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613801003746576 Väkevä, L. (2010). Garage band or GarageBand®? Remixing musical futures. British Journal of Music Education, 27(1), 59–​70. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​S0265051709990209 Zhukov, K. (2006). Gender issues in instrumental music teaching in Australian conservatoriums. Research Studies in Music Education, 26(1), 22–​36. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1321103X060260010501 Zhukov, K. (2007). Student learning styles in advanced instrumental music lessons. Music Education Research, 9(1), 111–​127. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613800601127585 Zhukov, K. (2009). Effective practising: A research perspective. Australian Journal of Music Education, 1,  3–​12. Zhukov, K. (2013). Interpersonal interactions in instrumental lessons: Teacher/​student verbal and non-​ verbal behaviours. Psychology of Music, 41(4), 466–​483. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735611430434 Zhukov, K. (2017). Experiential (informal/​non-​formal) practice does not improve sight-​reading skills. Musicae Scientiae, 21(4), 418–​429. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864916684193 Zhukov, K., & McPherson, G. E. (in press). Acquisition of music reading fluency. In G. E. McPherson & P. Miksza (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music performance. Oxford University Press. Zhukov, K., Viney, L., Riddle, G., Teniswood-​Harvey, A., & Fujimura, K. (2016). Improving sight-​reading skills in advanced pianists:  A hybrid approach. Psychology of Music, 44(2), 155–​167. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0305735614550229

200

201

13 THROUGH SINGING TO MUSIC ACROSS THE LIFE COURSE Annabel J. Cohen

Singing is one of the most accessible forms of music-​making at every stage of the lifespan. It is also one of the few leisure activities in which large numbers of people can engage synchronously. Its accessibility allows it to play a role in strengthening community, with implications for society at large. Although singing is a natural human behaviour, it can be taught (Apfelstadt, 2020). Such teaching, based on pedagogies handed down over centuries, can guide an individual in performance of musical styles, cultures and difficulty levels that might otherwise be out of reach. Singers not only learn repertoire but may add to it through their own compositional creativity. Singing can also be used to teach. Its application here is as unlimited as the ingenuity of a teacher in applying singing engagement to the goal of a lesson, be it learning a foreign language, poetry, dramatic skills, mathematics, geography, understanding people from a culture different from one’s own, or playing a musical instrument. Typically, adults educate children, rather than the reverse. All children can sing, but by adulthood, in Western society, many adults are uncomfortable singing, and consequently cannot teach children or build community through singing. This situation is not a necessary one. History shows that engagement in singing is subject to many forces.

Evolutionary and historical considerations From an evolutionary perspective, singing and speech developed from the same capacity for vocalisation and self-​expression (Bannan, 2020; Belyk & Brown, 2017; Mithen, 2005). Reference to singing appears in ancient Greek and biblical texts (Norton, 2016). Singing has served in war, encouraging soldiers to battle, enhancing nationalistic spirit, be it for good or evil. From solo voice to mass choir, singing is powerful in its emotional reach. Societies worldwide have held the beautiful voice in awe. Late 20th-​century and current 21st-​century Western societies place on a pedestal the vocal superstar, from Renée Fleming and Plácido Domingo in the classical world to Beyoncé and Freddie Mercury in the pop world (Krueger, 2019). Before the mid-​20th century, families and friends commonly made music at home, often singing hymns or popular music around a piano (Parakilas et al., 1999). From the 1920s to the 1940s, singing was part of the programme in movie theatres, which most people in America attended on a weekly basis (Morgan-​Ellis, 2018). Such participatory singing has given

201

202

Annabel J. Cohen

way to listening to recorded music and large amplified concert performances. Although measurement of singing as compared to speech has been relatively neglected, recent reviews of the mechanics of the singing voice (Wolfe et al., 2020) and the underlying neuroscience (Cohen, Levitin & Kleber, 2020; Kleber & Zarate, 2014) emphasise how remarkable it is that the majority of humans, beginning with very young children, are able to control the pitch of their voices as well as they do.Yet, surprisingly, only in recent years has the social and psychological significance of singing become a subject of interdisciplinary scholarly investigation (Cohen, 2020a; Cohen & Trehub, 2011; Pfordresher & Demorest, 2015; Welch et al., 2019). As is argued in this chapter, as knowledge emerges, so too do opportunities for enabling individuals and society to benefit from the human ability to sing.

Complex processes underlying singing The singer is constantly determining whether the sound produced is the one expected. If the sound differs from the one imagined, the present or future match is improved through rapid changes by the muscles controlling the physical properties of the vocal folds (e.g., tension and length). An intricate tri-​part system involves the lungs, vocal folds and vocal tract (Sundberg, 1987). Vocal training and practice can assist in learning to develop the underlying neural network that manages this complex motor system, integrating it with the network representing the melodic structure. Although singing is more than producing the right pitch at the right time, relatively accurate singing is fundamental in highly developed musics of the world in which melody plays a key role (e.g., Western European, Chinese, East Indian). A minority of individuals have great difficulties in matching pitch. They have been referred to colloquially as “tone-​deaf ” (Cuddy et al., 2005) or as poor-​pitch singers (Welch, 1979), and may suffer from vocal pitch imitation deficit, as described by Pfordresher and Nolan (2019).The deficit may affect either or both the auditory image and the motor image or co-​ordination of the two. Music perception tasks would seem to tap into the auditory imagery system, although musical embodiment theories argue for the engagement of the motor system even here (Overy & Molnar-​Szakacs, 2009; Russo, 2020). Investigating the relationship between vocal production and vocal perception, Pfordresher and Nolan (2019) conclude that singing and music perception rely on the same abstract representation of musical structure and that deficits in music perception may predict deficits in singing accuracy, concurring with the linked-​dual representation model (Hutchins & Moreno, 2013) and the vocal sensorimotor loop model (Berkowska & Dalla Bella, 2009). A study by Tsang and Trainor (2020) with 117 children (age range 5.0 to 9.9 years) also tested perceptual discrimination and pitch production on individual pitches, pitch intervals and 4-​note melodies, but did not show the same relation between melodic perception and production found by Pfordresher and Nolan. The preliminary results available to date for 21 children (age range 7 to 9 years) have shown that all three of these vocal production tasks were significantly intercorrelated (range .73 to .92), but only pitch accuracy and melody discrimination were significantly correlated (.47), even though it might have been expected that melodic production would correlate with melodic discrimination, as found by Pfordresher and Nolan (2019) with adults. These preliminary results of the study of the relation between perception and production in children might point to challenges for children in developing separate competencies in representing and vocalising melodic information and the subsequent integration. How competence in singing develops across the lifespan is further discussed in the next section.

202

203

Singing to music across the life course

Development of singing across the lifespan Infancy and preschool years It is sometimes said that the child learns to sing at the same time as she learns to speak. Elements of singing indeed are evidenced in infancy. Stadler Elmer (2020) notes that infants’ repetition of a syllable, referred to as “reduplicated babbling”, offers training for both singing and speaking, as the syllable plays a role in both domains. Singing is slower than speaking and offers the infant time to focus on the attributes of a syllable. Singing also contains repetition, further offering training opportunity. Several researchers have focused on the reciprocal behaviour of the mother–​infant dyad when engaged in vocal communication (Addessi, 2020; see Trehub & Russo, 2020, for a review). Recursively, the mother repeats the sounds made by the infant, who imitates the sounds made by the mother. The infant and caregiver are rarely in perfect synchrony. The typical asynchrony requires continual active negotiation of synchronous activity that entails engagement (Jurgens & Kirchhoff, 2019). In other words, the imperfect coordination keeps the attention of the participants in the communication interaction. This imperfect entrainment is characteristic of the interactions between components of complex systems. Some research suggests that the infant matches the pitches of the mother’s voice by hitting either the same chroma (if the mother sings the note C or do, the infant would similarly sing C or do) or a harmonic of the C (e.g., E or G, mi and sol, respectively, which are the fifth and third harmonics of C, respectively) (Van Puyvelde et al., 2015).Yet most research suggests that the ability of infants to match pitch is less systematic. By early childhood, greater mastery is developed over vocal production. The child can both speak and sing, but as Stadler Elmer (2011, 2020) describes, there is wide variability in singing accuracy. Some toddlers show the ability to sing simple melodies recognisable to adults. Gudmundsdottir and Trehub (2018) asked adults to recognise songs found on YouTube that were performed by toddlers. The toddlers had much greater vocal range than some tests of singing ability would suggest (Rutkowski, 1990; Welch,  1998). As part of the natural behaviour of singing in early childhood, the child engages in making up songs and moves from verbalising to singing and back while self-​absorbed in an activity, as noted by Michael Forrester (2010) in a case study of his young daughter. Barrett (2006) notes, however, that by about the age of 8, there is a decline in making up songs. Moreover, in a study of 57 children aged 8–​9 years in three primary schools, only 31% of boys responded that they liked singing at school, and there was a statistically significant gender difference favouring girls (Joyce, 2005; see also Welch et al., 2010;Welch, personal communication, 2020). However, when asked about singing at home, 63% of the boys said that they enjoyed this activity and only 33% said they did not sing songs “in their bedroom” (Joyce, 2005). The influence of the school system may be the cause, possibly doing little to encourage singing and vocal creativity. General teachers are not trained to engage children in singing. If teachers are not comfortable singing, encouragement of their students cannot be expected.

Adolescence Adolescence is a special time in the vocal development of boys. The larynx descends, and the vocal folds enlarge, lowering the vocal register by approximately an octave from the original pitch range, which earlier overlapped that of the female voice range. The changes in the female voice during this time, though not insignificant, are negligible by comparison. The transition

203

204

Annabel J. Cohen

from child to adult male voice may provoke anxiety and frustration and sadness due to lack of control over one’s vocal pitch and loss of the quality of the child voice (Freer, 2010). In three studies of singer-​songwriters (N  =  18, 45 and 219), Cohen, Robison et  al. (2020) obtained self-​assessments of current singing performance level, their level starting out and their future level. Both males and females showed increasing self-​assessed level of performance over the past, present and future, but males rated their singing as significantly lower than that of females in all three studies. Popular music is important in adolescent identity formation. When young people meet for the first time, the topic of favourite music is one of the most common to be discussed. Popular music typically relies on melody and the vocalist for its success. Popularity, almost by definition, is established by being memorable, and what makes popular music memorable is often its singability. Though adolescents may be reluctant to join a community choir, they seem to have no hesitation in bursting into song at rock concerts. Singing together entails performing in synchrony, hitting the beat together. Such an act of entrainment may offer a sense of belonging and large-​scale social bonding (Launay et al., 2016).

Emerging and later adulthood For emerging adults, songs may provide a way toward intimacy. New parents use music (lullabies and playsongs) to engage emotionally with their infants as well as to control their infants’ behaviour (Trehub & Russo, 2020). Parents and their adolescent children may find common ground by enjoying popular music together, either recorded or live concerts. Krumhansl and Zupnick (2013) showed that university students know and like currently popular music most, but also they know and enjoy the music that was popular in their parents’ adolescence and young adulthood. This familiarity with the parents’ music may have arisen when the parents played such music in the hearing range of their infants and small children. The situation may reverse when parents come to know the songs of their children. Thus, songs played in the household or family vehicle can bring parents and children together. Because of declining neural plasticity with age, there may be an asymmetry in the relative ease with which different generations pick up each other’s musical style. A speculation is that adolescence is a time when brains are just over the hurdle of learning language and could be primed for acquiring the music of the current culture. In later adulthood, the opportunity to join a choir may add the positive experience of sharing an activity with other adults and of making new friends (Lamont et al., 2018). A phenomenon by which singing in a choir quickly leads to a sense of bonding between strangers has been referred to as the “ice-​breaker effect” (Pearce et al., 2015).This feeling extends to members of a large choral gathering (Weinstein et al., 2016). Singing is linked to moderating the effect of vocal ageing (Lortie et al., 2017). Although for females, reduced oestrogen associated with menopause can negatively affect the voice and make it difficult for some singers to sing well, Rodney and Sataloff (2020) suggest that vocal training and healthy practices can help to preserve the voice into senior years. Longitudinal studies of voice change (or stability) in later years would be illuminating. One case study was carried out with a gentleman who, over a 3-​year period (between the ages of 84 to 87), took singing lessons and completed a test battery of singing skills on seven occasions. This collection of singing tests entailed singing “Brother John” (“Frère Jacques”) several times. Although he had not had formal music training other than the current singing lessons, his choice of music key for the song paralleled that of young person in a university music programme as compared to students who lacked musical training (Cohen, Pan et al., 2020). 204

205

Singing to music across the life course

Summary of this section The complexities of the development of singing at the various stages of the lifespan are revealed by the research in this area. The complexities are to some extent mastered at a very young age. Unlike language which proceeds more systematically, greater variability appears in the degree of mastery and comfort level attained from middle childhood onward. Many factors, such as exposure to other singers, family and gender, may play a role. Singing together influences behaviours and wellbeing at every age, and it is to this that we now turn.

Singing together Much attention has been given to the benefits of group singing in general and in managing specific diseases. Community choral groups represent one of the most popular leisure activities across the Western world. Participation rates of 17% in the United States (Grunwald Associates LLC & Chorus America, 2019) and Canada (Choral Canada, 2017) and 4.5% in Europe (Bartel & Cooper, 2015) have been reported. Community choral groups and church choirs attract an older demographic (see Cohen, 2020b, for a review). Bailey and Davidson (2005) conducted pioneering work showing the value of singing for not only middle-​class persons but also marginalised individuals in several countries. Clift et al. (2010) conducted a cross-​national survey showing the impact of choral singing on wellbeing. The value of group singing for persons with physical and mental challenges has been shown through empirical studies of singing groups for persons with cancer (Fancourt & Warran, 2020; Fancourt et al., 2016), Parkinson’s Disease (Tanner, 2020), aphasia (Tarrant et al., 2016), lung disease (Cave et al., 2020) and dementia (Särkämö et al., 2016), as well as for persons who have been incarcerated (Kerchner, 2020), have learning disabilities (Hassan, 2017) or belong to the LGBTQI community (Bird, 2017). Studies have been conducted with vulnerable older people to determine if cognitive decline can be slowed by singing (Johnson et al., 2018; Tan et al., 2018). The significance of choral singing is well exemplified by choral groups who sing regardless of being able to hear (Yennari et al., 2020), are unable to see either the conductor or music notation because of blindness (McCarthy, 2014) or have undergone laryngectomy (e.g., the Shout at Cancer choir).1 Research shows the benefits of these special singing groups; however, more research is required to determine how choral directors might better include singers with special needs into school and community choirs (Salvador, 2013).

Methodological issues Field research such as the study of choral groups already formed faces many challenges in controlling for such variables as socio-​economic status, age and frequency of attendance. Ideally, to measure the benefits of choral singing, participants should be randomly assigned to the choral singing group and one or more active control groups in which participants are engaged in another activity for an equal amount of time. Studies running for months or years are costly. However, recognising that participation in a choral group could offer older adults resistance to neurodegenerative disease and maintain or increase wellbeing and quality of life, a recent 2-​year longitudinal study in Singapore has completed a first phase of testing2 (Tan et al., 2018). In this study approximately 100 older adults of mean age 70 years (standard deviation less than 1) were randomly assigned to one of two groups. The choral group met weekly for a 2-​hour singing class, and the control group met weekly to discuss healthy lifestyles. A pre-​test revealed that the two groups were matched for age, education, gender, living alone and scores on a variety of 205

206

Annabel J. Cohen

mental tests including the Mini Mental State Examination, a depression scale and a music knowledge index. Preliminary results from the first phase of the research will soon be available. Dingle et al. (2019) reviewed research on choral singing in five countries and offered several guidelines to aid in the rigor of future studies and promoted the importance of interdisciplinarity in setting an agenda for best practice in research on group signing.

Singing versus playing a musical instrument: Does singing match up? Studies of the benefits of music training often focus only on persons with training on musical instruments (e.g., Rogenmoser et  al., 2018; Schneider et  al., 2018; Strong & Mast, 2018; Strong & Midden, 2018), in part because degree of singing experience may be difficult to track. But without including singers, the results may be suspect when generalising effects of musical experience. For example, in a neuroscientific study aiming to determine whether music training protects against the ageing of the brain, Rogenmoser and colleagues (2018) obtained anatomical magnetic resonance images from participants with an average age of 25 years and differing levels of music-​making over the lifetime. Brain-​AGE was measured in terms of the difference (in years) between chronological age and the “age of the brain”, the latter computed by an algorithm based on prior knowledge of anatomical correlates of brain ageing. The participant groups reflected either no experience of playing a musical instrument, experience of playing an instrument non-​professionally or experience of playing an instrument professionally. Prior to testing, the three groups differed significantly in regard to age at which music training began, years of training, total hours of music training over the lifetime and daily hours of music training. Brain-​AGE scores were significantly lower for both musician groups combined; however, the professional musician group showed less decrease in brain ageing than the amateur group, and it did not differ significantly from the non-​musician group in terms of brain ageing. In addition to their conclusion that engaging in music-​making may reduce the speed of ageing-​related structural changes of the brain, the authors also suggested that making music has a stronger age-​decelerating effect when it is not performed as a main profession, but as a leisure or extracurricular activity, possibly enriching a person’s life with multisensory, motor, and socio-​affective experiences in addition to other main activities that an amateur musician would engage in. (Rogenmoser et al., 2018, p. 302) But do these conclusions pertain to making music with the human voice? Do professional vocalists have a Brain-​AGE no different than that of persons who have no musical experience? Compared to performers on musical instruments, who in this study reported playing their instrument 3.95 hours per day within the last year, professional vocalists typically practice less, by necessity, because the voice must be protected.3 Vocalists must learn to balance periods of vocal activity with vocal rest, as even speaking takes its toll (Gaskill & Hetzel, 2017, p. 263). Science has yet to provide information regarding the best balance between warm-​up, exercises and practice of repertoire. Does the fact that professional vocalists spend less time practicing than professional instrumentalists bear any relation to brain ageing? Can the benefits to brain ageing be achieved as easily through amateur singing as through amateur performance on a musical instrument? Do professional vocalists engage more than instrumentalists in different kinds of practice strategies, like mental rehearsal?

206

207

Singing to music across the life course

The few studies that have included both instrumentalists and singers have typically found similar effects of the music training dimension. In one study, as described by Rauscher (2009), preschool at-​risk children were assigned to one of five different training groups for 2 years: piano, singing, rhythm, computer or no instruction. Following instruction, the three music groups scored significantly higher on a mental imagery task; however, rhythmic instruction was associated with significantly higher performance on tasks requiring mathematical ability or temporal cognition. Notably, there was no difference between piano and vocal instruction groups.4 This absence of difference between vocalists and instrumentalists appears in studies of children (Schellenberg, 2004) and adults (Bialystock & DePape, 2009; Schirmer-​Mowka et al., 2015; for further details, see Cohen, 2020b). Comparisons of percussionists, vocalists and persons without music training have shown higher cognitive scores among both music groups than in the control group (Slater et al., 2017; Slater & Kraus, 2016), with percussionists having an edge on tasks requiring timing and vocalists showing superiority on melodic tasks. Even if learning to play an instrument versus learning to sing were to show a small instrumentalist advantage in learning outcomes (e.g., Mansens et  al., 2017), given the far greater number of students who, for practical reasons, can be taught to sing compared to those who can be taught to play a musical instrument, such differences could be regarded as negligible from the standpoint of the greater good. Knowledge acquired from learning to sing (i.e., learning music through singing) provides a foundation for learning any other instrument and offers a segue to music-​instrument instruction for those who are so motivated or have shown musical aptitude. It is a question for research as to whether a massive programme based on inexpensive instruments (e.g., recorders, ukuleles) could compete with the musical training and learning outcomes achieved through a vocal music programme.

The need to maintain singing skills into adulthood Participating in group musical activities and performance offers children important social experiences and training in the lifelong “soft” skills of collaboration (Putnam, 2015). There is no research to date, to the best of the author’s knowledge, to suggest that time spent singing –​ be it for pleasure, learning to sing, or practising singing  –​is any less worthwhile than time spent playing a musical instrument.Yet, although engaging every schoolchild musically through singing is less costly than through band or orchestra programmes, decision-​makers may opt for instrumental music for an elite minority rather than singing for the majority. It is hard not to conclude that this must stop if all children are to receive fair access to music education and music-​making. A further argument in favour of singing is evidence that singing songs of cultures for which there is systemic discrimination can help to reduce this discrimination provided that the songs are taught in their appropriate cultural context. An example is provided by the work of Neto et al. (2015), which introduced a programme of learning music of the people of Cape Verde, a black minority community in the mainland of Portugal. Prior to the programme, children in both a control group and an experimental group showed poor attitudes toward children from Cape Verde. After a 3-​month intervention during which the children learned the Cape Verde culture and its music and songs, negative opinions significantly declined; moreover, these were retained throughout a 2-​year period. No such decline in negative attitude was seen in the control group that did not learn about the music and songs of Cape Verde. Lai et al. (2016), in a review article, describe the enormous difficulty of changing implicit racial preferences and cited the Neto et al. (2015) cross-​cultural music study as a rare example of an effective intervention.

207

208

Annabel J. Cohen

Theoretical framework that accommodates the discontinuities in singing behaviour Persons who sing, whether or not they take voice lessons, are often motivated to improve their singing ability for a variety of reasons, such as personal pleasure of experiencing music, being able to sing well enough to pass an audition for a choir or being able to sing before an audience. But as has previously been discussed, beyond early childhood, many people become disinterested in singing. The contrasting aspects of singing, on the one hand, being a natural, accessible way of engaging in music-​making and, on the other, being a potentially embarrassing uncomfortable activity, particularly for males, begs for a theoretical framework that encompasses these various forces, showing whether the decision not to sing is inevitable, and if not, providing a foundation for positive change. One useful theoretical perspective is that of “possible selves”, first proposed by Markus and Nurius (1986) in the context of conceptions of self-​knowledge (see also Chapter 23 of this volume). Their concept of a self that extends both backward and forward also found expression in the earlier writings of influential psychologists such as William James, Sigmund Freud and Carl Rogers as well as those of symbolic interactionists such as George Herbert Mead, influential in sociological thought. Conceptualisations of possible selves –​what individuals think they might become, would like to become, or fear becoming –​link cognitions to motivation, influencing the course of future behaviour. It has been argued that possible selves are expressed as engagement in behaviours that are congruent with one’s constructed identity or, alternatively, as disengagement from behaviours that are not congruent (Oyserman & Destin, 2010): “positive possible selves can be exceedingly liberating … negative possible selves can be powerfully imprisoning” (Markus & Nurius, 1986, p.  963). It follows that if one’s feared self includes embarrassment associated with poor singing, one may avoid singing altogether. A recent survey of the research literature on choral pedagogy (Noble, 2020) revealed a high number of publications directed to the problem of the low number of male choral singers, referred to as the problem of the “missing males” (Freer, 2010). The lack of male singers challenges the integrity of the mixed-​voice and male choir traditions (leaving only female vocal ensembles) and also means that males lose out on all the benefits of choir participation. The concept of possible selves may explain why males choose not to participate in choral groups. Freer (2015) systematically studied this period of transition in males through interviews of a total of 85 participants in England, Ireland, Greece and Spain who currently sang in a choir, had withdrawn from singing or who had never sung in choirs. The analysis revealed 17 topics of discussion across all countries, interpreted within a framework of six stages of development of the possible self. Three stages referred to “discovering”, “thinking” and “imagining” in relation to the future self (conceptualisation), and three stages referred to “reflecting”, “growing” and “performing” the potential self (realisation) (Freer, 2015, p. 92). A stunning finding was the absence of male role models (typically family members or older students) for every boy who had withdrawn from singing and the presence of such a model for 86% of the boys who were continuing choristers. In all countries but Spain, some singers were bullied because singing was regarded as unmasculine, feminine or homosexual, and 77% of those who had withdrawn from choir gave this as one of their reasons. Other reasons were dislike of (the sound of) their singing and the repertoire (73%), lack of male peers (68%), lack of focus on individuality (64%) and traumatic loss of child voice (46%). Participants from all countries expressed a sense of loss due to the voice change. Freer concluded that three factors influenced boys’ attitudes to choral singing and continued participation: (a) teacher personality and interest in adolescent males; (b)  high level of teacher musicianship and quality of music; and (c)  the social environment, 208

209

Singing to music across the life course

specifically peer support and the positive influence of older male role models. Participation and attitudes were thus independent of culture or nationality, but more vulnerable to specific situations. An understanding teacher who was also a fine musician with high choral standards and the presence of male role models would be sufficient to maintain good choral attitudes and associated participation in singing by adolescent males. However, if males stop singing in high school or earlier, then there will be exponentially fewer role models for younger males. Consistent with the theory of possible selves, Gaunt and Hallam (2009, 2016) propose an interactionist approach to musical learning and development, drawing on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of human behaviour (1979; see Chapter 9) and a biosocial model of interactions (Hettema & Kenrick, 1992). These three theoretical perspectives of possible selves, the ecological model and the biosocial model are similar in their consideration of complex interactions among systems, be they factors influencing the concept of self, the influences of various hierarchical environmental affordances on an individual’s behaviour or the reciprocal interactions between an individual and environments. Going one step further is a theoretical focus on changes that occur suddenly as a result of small changes in subsystems that individually would have a negligible effect. Abrupt discontinuities (having positive or negative implications) from one state to another characterises many aspects of singing. One example of discontinuity in singing is that of the young male who belongs to a choir but withdraws immediately when his voice changes, after which he does not return. Another example is of the young female child in a school choir who is told by the choir director to mouth the words for the performance. That child may never sing again (Knight, 2019; Numminen et al., 2015). Pearce et al.’s (2015) “ice-​breaker effect” offers a more positive example, highlighting the greater feeling of closeness that persons who sing together have for each other after only a short time, compared to the same amount of time spent together in other activities such as crafts or writing. Further, voice students and teachers know that breakthroughs are a part of vocal learning (McCoy, 2016). Descriptions of breakthroughs include renewed passion, more fun, new confidence, greater presence, longer endurance, and increased capability in range, tone, projection, flexibility, breath control, sostenuto technique, or a vibrato that isn’t forced, yielding a degree of physical and artistic freedom that inspired joy in the singers who experienced them. (Jensen 2015, p. 220) A final example of discontinuity in singing is the transformative experience associated with choral singing that offers incomparable meaning to the lives of older adults (Balsnes, 2016) or offers psychological if not physiological healing to those who have health problems (see examples of singing for health, for intercultural understanding and in intergenerational choirs in Heydon et al., 2020). To accommodate the many discontinuities in the experience of singing across the lifespan, Cohen (2019, pp. 724–​726) and Cohen and Ilari (2020) drew on a dynamical systems theory (DST) approach. DST has its roots in observations of early physiologists Nikolai Bernstein and Erich von Holst, who acknowledged the need to understand motor coordination “as a function of temporary assemblages of multiple underlying subsystems” (Amazeen et al., 1998, p. 238). These subsystems both cooperate and compete until an equilibrium activity is obtained. The DST perspective enables modelling of change over time by focusing on a smaller number of variables that capture the system’s essence (Krpan, 2017). An important concept in DST is that of attractor –​ “a stable state toward which a system evolves over time” (Krpan, 2017). Imagine the stable states of feeling comfortable (Attractor 1) and of feeling uncomfortable (Attractor 209

210

Annabel J. Cohen

2) and an unstable state (Repeller) that corresponds to a behaviour falling between these two states –​a state of disequilibrium. An Attractor 2 state involving the tendency to consider oneself a non-​singer in childhood might be rare, and external influences may have little effect on this status; while an Attractor 1 singer status is more common in childhood but subject to external influences (e.g., a teacher saying “mouth the words”) that might change the behaviour to the unstable Repeller status and ultimately lead to the stable non-​singer status of Attractor 2. A further concept is the “self-​organisation” that characterises the tendency of complex systems to achieve a stable state. The concept of “emergence” refers to the whole new behaviour that goes beyond the sum of its parts, as when a non-​singing deaf child, provided with appropriate scaffolding and encouragement by a teacher and electronic visual or vibrotactile feedback, experiences a sudden new joy of singing (this example is from Yennari et al., 2020). Both Thelen and Smith (1994) and Van Geert (2009) note that infant motor behaviour and child language developed more heterogeneously than the literature suggested. Milestones were arrived at in a wide variety of ways. Similarly, individual trajectories of singing development are heterogeneous as even simple singing tests reveal. One infant behaviour that has been described from the DST perspective is that of learning to reach. The infant’s control of the vocal cords that enables, metaphorically, the reaching of a note is compared to the infant’s control over arm muscles that enable reaching for an object. In the former situation, movement is not so obvious as in reaching of the arm, but intricate sensorimotor coordination takes place invisible to the onlooker. Every time an infant produces a sound that changes pitch, a complex coordination of muscle activity must occur. In summary, theories that consider development of the self-​concept (Freer, 2015), the influence of environmental layers and reciprocal interactions between individual and environment (Gaunt & Hallam, 2016) indicate that motivation to sing and improve one’s singing depend on many factors. A  DST approach emphasises and accommodates the potentially discontinuous nature of singing behaviours which can arise from very small changes and complementary conditions in two or more subsystems simultaneously.

Conclusion: From theory to the practice of singing for all If singing provides one of the most accessible means to music-​making and enjoyment of music as well as to additional social and health benefits, then we may ask what small changes can be made in the systems that govern our lives in order to foster singing for all. A suggested first step is to find a way of sustaining the interest of boys in singing. The research of Freer (2015) offers guidelines focused around role models and teacher development. Two other large-​scale programmes carried out in the United Kingdom also provide prototypes, elements of which might apply to the massive issues at hand. The Sing Up programme brought singing twice a week to every public school in Britain (Welch et al., 2011), and the Out of the Ark music programme (reviewed by Hallam, 2017) taught generalist teachers to sing and also provided a singing programme for young children. The future of singing in families, schools, communities and societies would seem to depend on the provision of male role models, development of appropriate teaching materials and curriculum and the inclusion of singing as part of teacher education programmes. As implied in this chapter, there is little reason to suspect that learning to sing is any less beneficial than learning to play a musical instrument.To fully maximise access to quality music learning through singing requires the slow but steady transformation of the complex systems and subsystems that influence lives, embracing a relatively easy and low-​cost process. Decision-​makers in music education or community music would do well to consider the benefit of directing music, arts, educational, community and social programme funding to 210

211

Singing to music across the life course

singing and of encouraging all students to engage in singing through to their adult years. If such programmes were successful, emerging adults should be hooked on singing and be able to both serve as role models for their children and pupils and participate in community or specialised choirs which are effective for strengthening society and enhancing the wellbeing of individuals.

Reflective questions 1. As the principal of a school, you must authorise a budget dedicated to music education. Given that funds are not adequate for providing access to musical instruments for all students, what proportions should go to training on a musical instrument versus a choral programme and learning to sing? 2. To what extent is it possible to improve one’s ability to sing in middle age or more senior years as compared to beginning such training in adolescence or early adulthood? 3. Should governments support community choirs? 4. Can one learn as much about music, other disciplines and life through training of the voice as compared to training on a musical instrument?

Notes 1 On the choir of persons with laryngectomy, see Shout at Cancer (2017) and BBC News (2019). 2 Unfortunately, the second phase could not be completed due to COVID-​19, which prevented testing of the participants after almost 2 years of training. 3 Occupational health standards exist for the upper limit of tissue vibration of parts of the body (e.g., when operating machinery). “[T]‌he vocal folds routinely exceed the reported safety limit for tissue vibration” (Gaskill et al., 2013, p. 11). 4 Rauscher and Hinton (2011) offer further details including that the singing group was taught to reproduce pitches sung by the instructor:  “Unlike piano training, the visual representation of pitches is absent” (p. 217). It should be pointed out, however, that a music notation component can be readily added to voice lessons.

Suggestions for further reading Cohen, A. J. (Series Ed). (2020). Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing.Volume I: Development. Volume II: Education.Volume III: Well-​being. Routledge. Freer, P. K. (2015). Perspectives of European boys about their voice change and school choral singing: Developing the possible selves of adolescent male singers. British Journal of Music Education, 32(1), 87–​106. Gaunt, H., & Hallam, S. (2016). Individuality in learning of musical skills. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & G.Thaut (Eds.), Handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 463–​477). Oxford University Press. Welch, G. F., Howard, D. M., & Nix, J. (Eds.). (2019). Oxford handbook of singing. Oxford University Press.

References Addessi,A. R. (2020).The role of reflexivity during vocal interactions with caregivers in diaper change daily routine. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing.Vol. 1. Development (pp. 262–​275). Routledge.

211

212

Annabel J. Cohen Amazeen, P. G., Amazeen, E. L., & Turvey, M. T. (1998). Dynamics of human intersegmental coordination:  Theory and research. In D. A. Rosenbaum & C. E. Collyer (Eds.), Timing of behavior:  Neural, psychological, and computational perspectives (pp. 237–​259). Cambridge University Press. Apfelstadt, H. (2020). Foreword. In H. R. Gudmundsdottir, C. Beynon, K. M. Ludke, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing.Vol. 2. Education (pp. xx–​xxi). Routledge. Bailey, B. A., & Davidson, J. W. (2005). Effects of group singing and performance for marginalised and middle-​class singers. Psychology of Music, 33(3), 269–​303. Balsnes, A. H. (2016). Hospitality in multicultural choral singing. International Journal of Community Music, 9(2), 171–​189. Bannan, N. (2020). An evolutionary perspective on the human capacity for singing. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing. Vol. 1:  Development (pp. 39–​51). Routledge. Barrett, M. S. (2006). Inventing songs, inventing worlds: The “genesis” of creative thought and activity in young children’s lives. International Journal of Early Years Education, 14(3), 201–​220. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1080/​09669760600879920 Bartel, R., & Cooper, C. F. (2015). Singing Europe. European Choral Association Europa Cantat. www. artshealthresources.org.uk/​wp-​content/​uploads/​2020/​04/​2015-​Singing-​Europe-​.pdf BBC News. (2019, 5 May) Laryngectomy patients learn to sing without a voice box [Video]. www.bbc.co.uk/​ news/​av/​uk-​england-​berkshire-​48147525 Belyk, M., & Brown, S. (2017). The origins of the vocal brain in humans. Neuroscience and Biobehavioural Reviews, 77, 177–​193. Berkowska, M., & Dalla Bella, S. (2009). Uncovering phenotypes of poor-​pitch singing: The sung performance battery (SPB). Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 714. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2013.00714 Bialystok, E., & DePape, A. M. (2009). Musical expertise, bilingualism, and executive functioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(2), 565–​574. Bird, F. (2017). Singing out: The function and benefits of an LGBTQI community choir in New Zealand in the 2010s. International Journal of Community Music, 10(2), 193–​206. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press. Cave, P., Lewis, A., & Fancourt, D. (2020). Singing for lung health. In R. Heydon, D. Fancourt, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing. Vol. 3:  Wellbeing (pp. 86–​97). Routledge. Choral Canada. (2017). Detailed national findings from Choral Canada’s survey of choirs, choruses, and singing groups in Canada. Hill Strategies Research Inc. www.saskchoral.ca/​images/​file/​Choral%20Canada/​ Census%202016-​17/​2017%20Report%20-​%20Complete.pdf Clift, S., Hancox, G., Morrison, I., Hess, B., Kreutz, G., & Stewart, D. (2010). Choral singing and psychological wellbeing: Quantitative and qualitative findings from English choirs in a cross-​national survey. Journal of Applied Arts and Health, 1(1),  19–​34. Cohen, A. J. (2019). Singing. In P. J. Rentfrow & D. J. Levitin (Eds.), Foundations in music psychology: Theory & research (pp. 685–​750). MIT Press. Cohen, A.  J. (Series Ed.). (2020a) The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing. Volume I: Development.Volume II: Education.Volume III: Wellbeing. Routledge. Cohen, A. J. (2020b). Singing and choirs. In L. L. Cuddy, S. Belleville, A. Moussard (Eds.), Music and the aging brain (pp. 245–​303). Academic Press. Cohen, A. J., & Ilari, B. (2020). Conclusion –​singing development: The importance of research on the development of singing. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing.Vol. 1: Development (pp. 435–​451). Routledge. Cohen, A. J., Levitin, D. J., & Kleber, B. A. (2020). Brain mechanisms underlying singing. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing.Vol. 1: Development (pp. 79–​96). Routledge. Cohen, A. J., Pan, B.-​Y., da Silva, E., & Dutton, K. (2020). Performance of Canadians on the Automated AIRS Test Battery of Singing Skills: Music training and age. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing. Vol. 1: Development (pp. 357–​371). Routledge. Cohen, A. J., Robison, C., Beck, Q., & Speelman, M. (2020). Antecedents to the career of singer-​songwriter as revealed by interviews and on-​line surveys. In H. R. Gudmundsdottir, C. Beynon, K. Ludke, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing. Vol. 2: Education (pp. 156–​168). Routledge.

212

213

Singing to music across the life course Cohen, A. J., & Trehub, S. E. (Eds.). (2011). Singing and psychomusicology. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind & Brain, 21(1–​2),  1–​267. Cuddy, L. L., Balkwill, L.-​L., Peretz, I., & Holden, R. R. (2005). Musical difficulties are rare: A study of “tone deafness” among university students. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1060, 311–​324. Dingle, G. A., Clift, S., Finn, S., Gilbert, R., Groarke, J. M., Irons, J. Y., Bartoli, A. J., Lamont, A., Launay, J., Martin, E. S., Moss, H., Sanfilippo, K. R., Shipton, M., Stewart, L., Talbot, S., Tarrant, M., Tip, L., & Williams, E. J. (2019). An agenda for best practice research on group singing, health, and well-​being. Music & Science, 2, 1–​15. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​2059204319861719 Fancourt, D., & Warran, K. (2020). Singing for cancer: Implications for psychoneuroimmunology. In R. Heydon, D. Fancourt, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing. Vol. 3: Wellbeing (pp. 74–​85). Routledge. Fancourt, D., Williamon, A., Carvalho, L. A., Steptoe, A., Dow, R., & Lewis, I. (2016). Singing modulates mood, stress, cortisol, cytokine and neuropeptide activity in cancer patients and carers. ecancer, 10, 631. https://​doi.org/​10.3332/​ecancer.2016.631 Forrester, M.  A. (2010). Emerging musicality during the pre-​school years:  A case study of one child. Psychology of Music, 38(2), 131–​158. Freer, P. K. (2010). Two decades of research on possible selves and the “missing males” problem in choral music. International Journal of Music Education, 28(1),  17–​30. Freer, P.  K. (2015). Perspectives of European boys about their voice change and school choral singing:  Developing the possible selves of adolescent male singers. British Journal of Music Education, 32(1), 87–​106. Gaskill, C. S., Cowgill, J. G., & Many, S. (2013). Comparing the vocal dose of university students from vocal performance, music education, and music theater. Journal of Singing, 70(1),  11–​19. Gaskill, C., & Hetzel, A. (2017). Managing “vocal dose” and the acting voice: How much is too much? Voice and Speech Review, 11(3), 262–​278. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​23268263.2017.1389811 Gaunt, H., & Hallam, S. (2009). Individuality in learning of musical skills. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & G.Thaut (Eds.), Handbook of music psychology (pp. 274–​284). Oxford University Press.Gaunt, H., & Hallam, S. (2016). Individuality in learning of musical skills. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & G. Thaut (Eds.), Handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 463–​477). Oxford University Press. Grunwald Associates LLC & Chorus America. (2019). The chorus impact study: Singing for a lifetime. www. arts.gov/​sites/​default/​files/​Research-​Art-​Works-​ChorusAmerica.pdf Gudmundsdottir, H., & Trehub, S. (2018). Adults recognize toddlers’ song renditions. Psychology of Music, 46(2), 281–​291. Hallam, S. (2017). Report on the Out of the Ark Music Singing School Project. www.outoftheark.co.uk/​ext/​ pdfs/​Report_​on_​the_​Research_​About_​the_​Out_​of_​the_​Ark_​Music_​Singing_​School_​Project_​by_​ Prof_​Susan_​Hallam_​MBE.pdf Hassan, N. (2017). Re-​voicing:  Community choir participation as a medium for identity formation amongst people with learning disabilities. International Journal of Community Music, 10(2), 207–​225. Hettema, J., & Kenrick, D. T. (1992). Models of person-​situation interactions. In G.V. Caprara & G. L. van Heck (Eds.), Modern personality psychology:  Critical reviews and new directions (pp. 393–​417). Harvester Wheatsheaf. Heydon, R., Fancourt, D., & Cohen, A. J. (Eds.) (2020). The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing.Vol. 3: Wellbeing. Routledge. https://​doi.org/​10.4324/​9781315162546 Hutchins, S., & Moreno, S. (2013). The linked dual representation model of vocal perception and production. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 825. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2013.00825 Jensen, K. (2015). The significance and pedagogic applications of the vocal breakthrough. Part one: Conditions and stages. Journal of Singing, 71(2), 219–​224. Johnson, J. K., Stewart, A. L., Acree, M., Nápoles, A. M., Flatt, J. D., Max, W. B., & Gregorich, S. E. (2018). A community choir intervention to promote well-​being among diverse older adults: Results from the Community of Voices Trial. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 75(3), 549–​559. https://​doi. org/​10.1093/​geronb/​gby132 Joyce, H. (2005). The effects of sex, age and environment on attitudes to singing in Key Stage 2 [Unpublished master’s dissertation]. Institute of Education, University of London. Jurgens, A., & Kirchhoff, M. D. (2019). Enactive social cognition: Diachronic constitution and coupled anticipation. Consciousness and Cognition, 70, 1–​10. Kerchner, J.  L. (2020). Group singing in prison:  Discovering and developing best possible self. In R. Heydon, E. Fancourt, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing. Vol. 3: Wellbeing (pp. 158–​169). Routledge.

213

214

Annabel J. Cohen Kleber, B. A., & Zarate, J. M. (2014). The neuroscience of singing. In G. F. Welch, D. M. Howard, & J. Nix (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of singing. Oxford University Press. http://​doi.org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​ 9780199660773.013.015 Knight, S. (2019). Addressing the needs of the adult “non-​singer” (NS). In G. F. Welch, D. M. Howard, & J. Nix (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of singing (pp. 621–​650). Oxford University Press. Krpan, D. (2017). Behavioral priming 2.0: Enter a dynamical systems perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 1204. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01204 Krueger, A. B. (2019). Rockonomics. Currency/​Penguin Random House. Krumhansl, C. E., & Zupnick, J. A. (2013). Cascading reminiscence bumps in popular music. Psychological Science, 24(10), 2057–​2068. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0956797613486486 Lai, C. K., Skinner, A. L., Cooley, E., Sohad, M., Brauer, M., Devos, T., Calanchini, J., Xiao, Y. J., Pedram, C., Maarshburn, C. K., Simon, S., Blanchar, J. C., Joy-​Gaba, J. A., Conway, J., Redford, L., Klein, R. A., Roussos, G., Schellhaas, F. M.  H., Burns, M. … Nosek, B. A. (2016). Reducing implicit racial preferences: II. Intervention effectiveness across time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(8), 1001–​1016. Lamont, A., Murray, M., Hale, R., & Wright-​Bevans, K. (2018). Singing in later life: The anatomy of a community choir. Psychology of Music, 46(3), 424–​439. Launay, J., Tarr, B., & Dunbar, R. I. (2016). Synchrony as an adaptive mechanism for large-​scale human social bonding. Ethology, 122(10), 779–​789. Lortie, C. L., Rivard, J., Thibeault, M., & Tremblay, P. (2017). The moderating effect of frequent singing on voice aging. Journal of Voice, 31(1), 112.e1–​112.e12. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.jvoice.2016.02.015 Mansens, D., Deeg, D. J. H., & Comijs, H. C. (2017). The association between singing and/​or playing a musical instrument and cognitive functions in older adults. Aging & Mental Health. Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​136078 63.2017.1328481 Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954–​969. McCarthy, M. (2014). United in song, Part  2:  The Braille Tones of Edmonton, Alberta. Anacrusis, 33(1),  30–​31. McCoy, S. (2016). Imagine. Journal of Singing, 72(5), 573–​575. Mithen, S. J. (2005). The singing Neanderthals: The origins of music, language, mind and body. Weidenfield & Nicholson. Morgan-​Ellis, E. (2018). Everybody sing! Community singing in the American picture palace. University of Georgia Press. Neto, F., Pinto, M., & Mullet, E. (2015). Can music reduce anti-​dark-​skin prejudice? A test of a cross-​ cultural musical education programme. Psychology of Music, 44(3), 388–​398. Noble, J. (2020). Choral practice and research at the beginning of the 21st century. In H. R. Gudmundsdottir, C. Beynon, K. Ludke, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing.Vol. 2: Education (pp. 295–​312). Routledge. Norton, K. (2016). Singing and wellbeing: Ancient wisdom, modern proof. Routledge. Numminen, A., Lonka, K., Rainio, A. P., & Ruismäki, H. (2015). “Singing is no longer forbidden to me –​ it’s like part of my human dignity has been restored.” Adult non-​singers learning to sing: An exploratory intervention study. European Journal of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 12(1), 1660–​1674. Overy, K., & Molnar-​Szakacs, I. (2009). Being together in time: Musical experience and the mirror neuron system. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26(5), 489–​504. Oyserman, D., & Destin, M. (2010). Identity-​ based motivation:  Implications for intervention. The Counseling Psychologist, 38(7), 1001–​1043. Parakilas, J. (1999). Piano roles: Three hundred years of life with the piano.Yale University Press. Pearce, E., Launay, J., & Dunbar, R. I. (2015). The ice-​breaker effect: Singing mediates fast social bonding. Open Science, 2(10), 1–​9. https://​doi.org/​10.1098/​rsos.150221 Pfordresher, P. Q., & Demorest, S. (Eds.). (2015). Special issue on singing accuracy. Music Perception, 32(3), 227–​302. Pfordresher, P. Q., & Nolan, P. (2019).Testing convergence between singing and music perception accuracy using two standardized measures. Auditory Perception and Cognition, 2(1–​2),  67–​81. Putnam, R. (2015). Our kids: The American dream in crisis. Simon & Schuster. Rauscher, F. H. (2009). The impact of music instruction on other skills. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 244–​252). Oxford University Press. Rauscher, F. H., & Hinton, S. C. (2011). Music instruction and its diverse extra-​musical benefits. Music Perception, 29(2), 215–​226.

214

215

Singing to music across the life course Rodney, J., & Sataloff, R. T. (2020). The effects of hormones and age on the voice. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing. Vol. 1:  Development (pp. 121–​135). Routledge. Rogenmoser, L., Kernbach, J., Schlaug, G., & Gaser, C. (2018). Keeping brains young with making music. Brain Structure and Function, 223, 297–​305. https://​doi.org/​10.1007/​s00429-​017-​1491-​2 Russo, F.  A. (2020). Motor system involvement in the perception of singing. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing. Vol. 1: Development (pp. 276–​288). Routledge. Rutkowski, J. (1990). The measurement and evaluation of children’s singing voice development. The Quarterly: Center for Research in Music Learning and Teaching, 1(1–​2), 81–​95. Salvador, K. (2013). Inclusion of people with special needs in choral settings:  A review of applicable research and professional literature. National Association of Music Education, 3(2)  37–​44. Särkämö, T., Laitinen, S., Numminen, A., Kurki, M., Johnson, J. K., & Rantanen, P. (2016). Pattern of emotional benefits induced by regular singing and music listening in dementia. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 64(2), 439–​440. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​jgs.13963 Schellenberg, E. G. (2004). Music lessons enhance IQ. Psychological Science, 15(8), 511–​514. Schirmer-​Mowka, K. L., Fard, P. R., Zamorano, A. M., Finkel, S., Birbaumer, N., & Kleber, B. A. (2015). Evidence for enhanced interoceptive accuracy in professional musicians. Frontiers in Behavioural Neuroscience, 9, Article 349. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fnbeh.2015.00349 Schneider, C. E., Hunger, E. G., & Bardach, S. H. (2018). Potential cognitive benefits from playing music among cognitively intact older adults: A scoping review. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 38(12), 1763–​ 1783. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0733464817751198 Shout at Cancer. (2017, 28 May). Laryngectomy choir sings: Somewhere over the Rainbow –​Harold Arlen [Video]. YouTube. www.youtube.com/​watch?v=vjGRUd0OUow Slater, J., Azem, A., Nicol, T., Swedenborg, B., & Kraus, N. (2017). Variations on the theme of musical expertise:  Cognitive and sensory processing in percussionists, vocalists and non-​musicians. European Journal of Neuroscience, 45(7), 952–​963. Slater, J., & Kraus, N. (2016). The role of rhythm in perceiving speech in noise:  A comparison of percussionists, vocalists and non-​musicians. Cognitive Processing, 17(1),  79–​87. Stadler Elmer, S. (2011). Human singing: Towards a developmental theory. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind & Brain, 21(1–​2),  13–​30. Stadler Elmer, S. (2020). From canonical babbling to early singing and its relation to the beginnings of speech. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing.Vol. 1: Development (pp. 25–​38). Routledge. Strong, J. V., & Mast, B. T. (2018). The cognitive functioning of older adult instrumental musicians and non-​musicians. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 26(3), 367–​386. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​ 13825585.2018.1448356 Strong, J.V., & Midden,A. (2018). Cognitive differences between older adult instrumental musicians: Benefits of continuing to play. Psychology of Music, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735618785020 Sundberg, J. (1987). The science of the singing voice. Northern Illinois University Press. Tan, J., Maurine Tsakok, F. H., Ow, E. K., Lanskey, B., Siong, K., Lim, D., Gan Goh, L.,Tan, C.-​H., Cheah, I. K., Larbi, A., Foo, R., Loh, M.,Wong, C. K. Y., Suckling, J., Li, J., Mahendran, R., Kua, E.-​H., & Feng, L. (2018). Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of choral singing intervention to prevent cognitive decline in at-​r isk older adults living in the community. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 10, Article 195. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fnagi.2018.00195 Tanner, M. (2020). Singing and Parkinson’s disease. In R. Heydon, D. Fancourt, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing.Vol. 3: Wellbeing (pp. 124–​135). Routledge. Tarrant, M., Warmoth, K., Code, C., Dean, S., Goodwin,V. A., Stein, K., & Sugavanam, T. (2016). Creating psychological connections between intervention recipients: Development and focus group evaluation of a group singing session for people with aphasia. British Medical Journal Open, 6(2), Article e009652. doi: 10.1136/​bmjopen-​2015-​009652 Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. MIT Press. Trehub, S. E., & Russo, F. A. (2020). Infant-​ directed singing from a dynamic multimodal perspective:  Evolutionary origins, cross-​cultural variation, and relation to infant-​directed speech. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing. Vol. 1: Development (pp. 249–​261). Routledge.

215

216

Annabel J. Cohen Tsang, C. D., & Trainor, L. J. (2020). An exploration of the relationship between perception, production, cognition and environment in the development of singing in children. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing. Vol 1: Development (pp. 201–​ 213). Routledge. Van Geert, P. (2009). A comprehensive dynamic systems theory of language development. In K. de bot & R. W. Schrauf (Eds.), Language development over the lifespan (pp. 60–​104). Routledge. Van Puyvelde, M., Loots, G., Gillisjans, L., Pattyn, N., & Quintana, C. (2015). A cross-​cultural comparison of tonal synchrony and pitch imitation in the vocal dialogs of Belgian Flemish-​speaking and Mexican Spanish-​speaking mother-​infant dyads. Infant Behavior and Development, 40,  41–​53. Weinstein, D., Launay, J., Pearce, E., Dunbar, R. I., & Stewart, L. (2016). Singing and social bonding: Changes in connectivity and pain threshold as a function of group size. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 37(2), 152–​158. Welch, G. F. (1979).Vocal range and poor pitch singing. Psychology of Music, 7(2),  13–​31. Welch, G. F. (1998). Early childhood musical development. Research Studies in Music Education, 11(1), 27–​41. Welch, G. F., Himonides, E., Saunders, J., Papageorgi, I., Preti, C., Rinta,T.,Vraka, M., Stephens Himonides, C., Stewart, C., Lanipekun, J., & Hill, J. (2010). Researching the impact of the National Singing Programme “Sing Up” in England: Main findings from the first three years (2007–​2010). Children’s singing development, self-​ concept and sense of social inclusion. International Music Education Research Centre, Institute of Education. Welch, G. F., Himonides, E., Saunders, J., Papageorgi, I., Rinta, T., Preti, C., Stewart, C., Lani, J., & Hill, J. (2011). Researching the first year of the national singing programme Sing Up in England: An initial impact evaluation. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind, & Brain, 21(1–​2),  83–​97. Welch, G. F., Howard, D. M., & Nix, J. (Eds.). (2019). The Oxford handbook of singing. Oxford University Press. Wolfe, J., Garnier, M., Henrich Bernardoni, N., & Smith, J. (2020). The mechanics and acoustics of the singing voice: Registers, resonances and the source-​filter interaction. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing.Vol. 1: Development (pp. 64–​78). Routledge. Yennari, M., Schraer-​Joiner, L. E., & Toole, G. (2020). Singing and the child who is deaf: Focusing on the individual. In F. A. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. J. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing.Vol. 1: Development (pp. 227–​239). Routledge.

216

217

14 ACQUIRING SKILLS IN MUSIC TECHNOLOGY Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides

In English-​speaking countries, the term “skill” is associated with professional employment (Canning, 2015), the implication being that one must acquire prerequisite skills through educational or praxial activity before successful entry to a particular occupation (Ericsson, 2006). In recent decades, the traditional definition of a skill as an acquired, specialised cognitive or psychomotor behaviour has evolved in response to new patterns of employment and industrial change (Gregory, 2004). It is now common for educators and employers to differentiate between these more traditionally conceived “hard” skills and those “soft” skills related to various interpersonal and intrapersonal qualities (Melser, 2018). The likelihood of individuals needing to move between different forms of employment over a working lifetime has resulted in the concept of “transferable” or “generic” skills. In contrast to “specific” skills, these are regarded as having relevance to multiple occupational domains (European Commission, 2011). Reflecting these vocational origins, music technology skills were traditionally defined in relation to the requirements of the professional recording studio. The influence of behaviourist models of learning led to attempts to define and codify specific, hard skills deemed necessary for success in this environment.Yet, a review of some 30 years of literature confirms two important developments. The first relates to the significance of constructivist models of learning, introduced to help music technologists acquire a range of soft and transferable skills to complement and enrich specific, hard skills. The second, more recent, development relates to the growing influence of metacognitive learning. This is leading to entirely new ways of conceiving music technology skills, a development that partly reflects the importance of lifelong learning at a time of both sunrise industries (e.g., online and virtual music platforms) and sunset industries (e.g., analogue equipment and physical media). Fundamentally, however, it also reflects more fluid, individualised notions of what it means to make music—and to make a living from music –​in the 21st century. In this chapter, we explore each of these conceptualisations of music technology “skill” through the lens of relevant psychological theory. While acknowledging a chronological precedence, we wish to avoid the suggestion that any one of these conceptualisations is inherently “better” than the other two. All three have enduring value for music and music technology educators. Indeed, they resonate with the first three “big topics” outlined in the forward of The Oxford Handbook of Technology and Music Education: “(1) the trade-​offs between constructionist

217

218

Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides

and direct instruction, (2)  the encouragement of creative and critical thinking, [and] (3)  the role of interdisciplinary engagement, both within music and between music and other fields” (Webster & Williams, 2017, p. xiii).

Music technology skills as ‘learning outcomes’: Behaviourist perspectives Learning outcomes are “statements of what a successful learner is expected to be able to do at the end of the process of a learning experience” (Gogus, 2012, p. 2534). The increasing popularity of learning outcomes in education has been cited as evidence of a renewed influence of behaviourism (Murtonen et al., 2017). While they are most frequently encountered within higher education, there are also examples of outcomes-​based models in other phases, such as Education Scotland’s (2018) school music curriculum and the European Commission’s Learning Outcomes in Music Teacher Training (Institut für Musikpädagogik Wien, 2009). Underlying motivations for these initiatives include concerns over educational access and cultural entitlement, assessment and quality assurance, increasing globalisation and marketisation of education and a belief that learners need more systematic preparation for professional life: the so-​called ‘employability agenda’. A number of researchers have employed empirical methods to construct lists of pertinent music technology skills typically expressed as learning outcomes. We review three examples of these studies, relating to the perceived technological requirements of undergraduate musicians, students of music education and intending audio engineers. Webster and Williams (2018) conducted a 6-​year study intended to identify core technology competencies for undergraduate music students. The authors use “competence” to describe the “critical understandings that underpin the application of the music technology skills” (2018, p. 22). An initial longlist of 51 competencies was constructed in areas of acoustics, file and disk formats, digital audio recording and editing, notation, teaching, collaboration, distance learning, multimedia, digital citizenship and historical trends. Then 772 teachers of music in higher education, mainly from the United States, rated this list to produce a final set of 11 competencies for which there was consistent support (Table 14.1 (a)). Dorfman (2015) sought to identify technology “skills and conceptual understandings” (p.  1) regarded as especially useful for music teachers to possess and which might, therefore, be prioritised within programmes of initial teacher education. Pre-​and in-​ service music teachers (n = 237) were asked to rate 48 such skills, adapted from Webster and Williams’ interim findings, resulting in nine particularly highly rated items (Table  14.1 (b)). Tough’s (2010) study attempted to predict the competencies likely to be required by audio engineering students graduating in 2019. Like others, Tough employed the term “competence” as a composite construct to describe “the possession of particular knowledge, attitudes, or skills that enable an audio graduate to serve at an acceptable level of performance” (2010, p. 153). Three rounds of panel surveys were held with music and audio industry professionals. An initial longlist of 255 competencies in the areas of general audio, the Musical Instrument Digital Interface (MIDI), digital audio, business skills, music, electronics, communications and leadership was generated by these professionals, reduced to 160 through subsequent rounds, then rated. Tough’s top 12 items are shown in Table 14.1 (c). Lists of music technology skills such as these raise interesting questions both about their derivation and application.With regard to the former, methodological divergence may help explain why the top-​rated skills/​competencies vary in the three studies. Specifically, whilst the first two studies prioritised mainly harder skills, participants in the third appear to have been more concerned with generic, soft(er) skills. This may relate to rater background, not least because participants in the first two studies were drawn from the education sector, where the influence 218

219

Acquiring skills in music technology Table 14.1  Highly rated music technology skills for (a) undergraduate musicians, (b) students of music education and (c) intending audio engineers

(a)

(b)

(c)

  1. Enter and edit music using notation software.   2. Understand the basics of digital audio and how to edit digital audio files.   3. Record and mix a performance with digital audio software.   4. Demonstrate an understanding of copyright and fair use.   5. Create a music presentation with production software and appropriate hardware.   6. Create a streaming audio file (sharing recordings).   7. Demonstrate an understanding of MIDI and its applications including performing with electronic, digital and non-​ traditional instruments.   8. Demonstrate setting up a computer music workstation/​ problem solve technical issues.   9. Demonstrate an understanding of acoustics and audiology. 10. Create and edit a simple music video 11. Use and manage a variety of social music sharing tools.

1. Use notation software to create worksheets and other teaching materials for music. 2. Edit a score with a music notation programme, including transposing parts, copying and pasting notation, and saving scores in different formats 3. Use a digital audio programme to record a music performance and save the file for listening. 4. Create a musical score with a notation programme that includes expressions, articulations, and appropriate music notation conventions. 5. Burn an audio or data CD with a computer. 6. Use a computer or other device to control a video projector or “SmartBoard” projection system. 7. Use presentation software to support a presentation about music that uses text, animation, digital video and graphics. 8. Understand the capabilities of different levels of music notation software, including options for online notation. 9. Use hardware and software to assist in improving music performance skills.

  1. Demonstrate the ability to work hard and complete projects.   2. Recognise the need for personal responsibility.   3. Demonstrate the ability to be an effective listener towards co-​workers and clients.   4. Demonstrate the ability to communicate clearly and tactfully with clients and co-​workers.   5. Develop the ability to be professional around clients.   6. Demonstrate a BASIC knowledge of effects including EQ, reverbs, delays, gates, limiters.   7. Demonstrate dependability.   8. Demonstrate the ability to pay attention to detail.   9. Show a strong passion for what they do. 10. Analyze BASIC audio signal flow in the recording studio. 11. Work effectively on a team. 12. Put into practice the ability to handle criticism.

Sources: (a) (Webster & Williams, 2018, p. 25), (b) (Dorfman, 2015, p. 10) and (c) (Tough, 2010, p. 161)

219

220

Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides

of behaviourist psychology has placed great emphasis on observable, quantifiable assessment outcomes (Murtonen et  al., 2017). Second, in the case of Webster and Williams (2018), the initial 51 competencies were generated by the researchers in consultation with experienced teaching colleagues, then subjected to moderation during a series of presentations at professional education conferences. Collectively, these raters possessed diverse music specialisms and worked in differing higher education institutions. Perhaps reflecting this diversity, the final shortlist prioritises ‘building block’ skills with wide applicability to a range of musical activities. Subsequently, Webster and William’s longlist was adapted by Dorfman (2015), who recruited participants drawn from two specific populations: intending and serving school music teachers. Perhaps as a consequence, Dorfman’s shortlist appears to reinforce traditional identities of the musically-​literate performing musician and classroom practitioner. Of the top nine skills, four concern notation software. Whilst Dorfman acknowledges that these might have been used by respondents to facilitate creative work, he nonetheless notes a tension with the growing emphasis on ‘sound before symbol’ composition activities in music education.Two of the nine skills relate to making and displaying presentations using slide software and projector hardware, both rooted in the realities of daily life in the classroom rather than saying anything specific about being a music teacher. Skills 3 and 9 in Dorfman’s list suggest an extension of the traditional performer identity rather than helping to define a digitally creative music educator. The skill “Burn an audio or data CD” was the highest-​rated hard skill included in Dorfman’s list.Yet whilst it may have reflected the state of computer hardware when the research was conducted, this skill also illustrates a time-​bound limitation, given computers are now routinely manufactured without optical media drives and rely instead on cloud-​based or solid-​state storage. CD burning is thus an example of a “transient skill” (Gower, 2015, p. 30), just as the manufacture of optical media may be an example of a sunset industry. As Dorfman (2015) acknowledges, it is understandable that raters might privilege skills which they already possess, not least because they remain less appreciative of the usefulness of skills not possessed. Given their undeniable relevance to modern classroom practice (Thompson, 2014), it is somewhat surprising that, for instance, abilities to “edit a sound file by cutting, copying and pasting portions” and “add simple effects such as loudness control and fade in and out” were not rated higher. In contrast, the inclusion of so many generic, soft skills within Tough’s (2010) shortlist—also those featuring prominently in a further survey of US audio professionals conducted by Bielmeier (2014)—suggests a pragmatic acceptance that this industry is too diverse and fast-​moving to bother listing transient hard skills. Instead, high-​rated items like “recognizing the need for personal responsibility” (Tough, 2010, p.161) and “life-​long learning and continuing personal development” (Bielmeier, 2014, p. 3) imply a general expectation that music technologists will actively acquire new hard skills as novel technologies bring them to the fore. In both surveys, those few hard skills which were rated highly relate to basic audio signal flow, microphone and recording techniques, and effects processing. These arguably constitute “enduring skills” within music technology (Gower, 2015, p. 30), being both durable and readily transferable between, for instance, analogue and digital domains and live, studio or laptop-​based workspaces. Notwithstanding the implications of methodological and rater variance, lists of discrete skills have an important place in education, particularly as a means of defining curricular coverage. Music technology workflows typically combine multiple pieces of hardware and software, each requiring specific techniques to operate effectively (Dorfman, 2015). Some studies suggest that learners value opportunities to gain confidence with each stage in the process without having to simultaneously apply their new skills for creative ends (Gall & Breeze, 2007; Herbst, 2016).Yet as Toulson (2011) notes, whilst these skills can be taught in isolation, this is not the same as learning 220

221

Acquiring skills in music technology

to apply them in dynamic studio environments. To an extent, the usefulness of context-​free skills acquisition depends on the stage of education reached. Once sufficiently inducted into a working studio environment, for instance, it may again be appropriate for learners to undertake more focused engagement with tools and processes in order to plug any remaining gaps in the systematic acquisition of skills (Gower, 2015). Defining music technology skills as learning outcomes risks becoming particularly contentious if these outcomes come to drive rather than inform curricula, pedagogy and assessment. This is a well-​known risk of relying too strongly on traditional behaviourist learning theory (Murtonen et al., 2017) and, at its worst, can risk education becoming reduced to a series of atomised, context-​free ‘skill checklists’, devoid of appropriate musical, professional or social contexts (O’Neill & Senyshyn, 2011). Drawing on Bloom’s taxonomy (Murtonen et al., 2017), Toulson (2011) argues that context-​free music technology learning activities cannot go beyond knowledge transfer, the lowest level in Bloom’s system. Accessing the higher levels requires situating skills in context, where “practitioners can develop their own ideas, put them into practice and evaluate and evolve to perfection” (Toulson, 2011). With the rapid growth in formal programmes of music technology over the past 30 years, the extent and quality of this contextualisation may have varied. Bielmeier (2014) documents concerns expressed by US audio engineers that many fresh graduates entering the field in the 1990s and 2000s lacked communication skills and a sense of the “social dynamics of the studio” (p. 2).They were also perceived to have “poor attitudes and misguided expectations” (Bielmeier, 2014, p. 2) about their industry, lacking responsibility and the ability to respond to feedback or take criticism. In contrast, for industry professionals, “the ability to work well under stress, be an astute observer, be easy to work with, and have a sense of humour was paramount for aspiring engineers” (Bielmeier, 2014, p. 1). Surveys of UK-​based audio professionals over the same period suggest some educational programmes may have had a similar focus on “tools and technology rather than the social, aesthetic and human skills” (Davis & Parker, 2013, p. 1). None of this is to suggest Webster and Williams, Dorfman or Tough would wish their lists to influence education in such teleological directions. In fact, Webster and Williams note that the implementation of technology within some American tertiary music programmes is “often deterministic with tech driving application and content” (2018, p. 22). Furthermore, of the top 20 skills in Tough’s (2010) study, 18 related to communications, leadership and personal skills. Skills in business were regarded as no less essential as those in basic electronics, troubleshooting and MIDI. Moreover, like many audio professionals (Bielmeier, 2014; Davis & Parker, 2013), these researchers identify a need for music technology skill acquisition to take place within integrated and interdisciplinary settings which place equal and holistic emphasis on the development of a wide range of contextual soft skills.

Developing music technology ‘skills’ through holistic learning experiences: Constructivist perspectives Our review of the international literature from a 30-​year period confirms a strong trend for music technology education to have refocused on skill acquisition within contextualised learning experiences. Many claims about the benefits of these kinds of learning have been made, and we next explore these through the lens of constructivist psychology. According to Taetle and Cutietta (2002), constructivist theories of learning music acknowledge the interconnections between the learner and his or her environment as crucial for understanding the process of learning itself.  … Interactive theories 221

222

Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides

acknowledge the multifaceted, multidimensional complexity that ensues when an individual encounters and responds to musical stimuli not only in the context of the group(s) of which he or she is a part but also in the context that is created by the mental and physical environments surrounding the interactions. (p. 284) In accordance with constructivist learning, which emphasises interaction with oneself, one’s peers and the surrounding environment, music technology is an inherently interdisciplinary field, best taught and learned within integrated settings; for example, in learning partnerships with advertising, photography and business (Walzer, 2017). In particular, Walzer highlights particular value in collaborations with ‘STEM’ subjects –​those within science, technology, engineering and mathematics –​thereby strengthening the case of those wishing to add arts to this quadrumvirate so that it becomes ‘STEAM’ (e.g., Welch, 2012). Walzer looks towards sunrise industries to provide vocational models for all such collaborations, particularly those such as “gaming, social networking, new media, digital humanities that require coding, programming [and] teamwork” (2017, p. 152). Music technologists require strong communication and teamwork skills. Walzer (2017, p.  147) argues for the importance of “honing one’s craft, while simultaneously participating with a group of like-​minded practitioners”. When collaborators have competing skills or propose alternative approaches, being able to articulate, justify and debate one’s position also becomes vital (Gower, 2015; Herbst, 2016). No less important is the need to develop strong client liaison skills (Bielmeier, 2014; Tough, 2010; Walzer, 2017). As Reddington (2016) notes, music technologists must learn to be effective “suppliers” to third-​party “clients”, balancing personal creativity with commercial imperatives. The ability to work independently and to remain self-​aware have also been highlighted (Rosas et al., 2016). Particularly relevant are self-​ motivation, self-​reliance and personal accountability for meeting project deadlines. Moreover, whilst personal skills in analysis, logical reasoning and decision-​making may seem mundane, educators cannot afford to take them for granted; not all learners will master them without active support (Lefford & Berg, 2015; Ronan & O’Shea, 2018; Walzer, 2017). Some learning activities are rich enough to support development in several of these areas simultaneously. For instance, Cheng (2019) found that participation in laptop-​based performance ensembles aided skills in leadership, motivating oneself and others, decision-​making, interpersonal communication, oral communication and problem-​solving. Much collaboration is no longer face to face. Musicians of all kinds must now be skilled in networking, gathering material and distributing their outputs online (Reddington, 2016). Distance learning programmes have an important role in this regard. Rosas and colleagues (2016) found that students using a virtual learning environment to collaborate on a composition project were still able to develop proactive social skills. These could then feed back into improved technical skills, since exchanging musical material required learners to handle diverse file formats. The European Union’s Open Sounds project has put such a vision into practice, developing an online composition environment specifically intended to promote collaboration among diverse groups of learners on both creative ideas and project management (Himonides, 2013). The need to integrate skill development in music technology and in music is important. The sophistication of digital audio workstation (DAW) software is now such that effective development can occur in both domains simultaneously and interchangeably. As a common ‘entry point’, DAW software offers learners multiple aural and visual methods of revising and revisiting creative work over time, potentially helping to develop ideation, editing and appraisal skills with 222

223

Acquiring skills in music technology

as much relevance to traditional musical composition as to audio editing (Gall & Breeze, 2007; Schroth et al., 2009). However, school-​age learners’ ability to make the most of music technology in areas such as composition, listening, theory and notation, and vocal and instrumental technique has been linked to more advanced pre-​existing musical and computing experience (Hernández-​Bravo et al., 2016; Merrick, 2002). In professional life, traditional musical skills in aural awareness, staff notation, music theory and orchestration remain in demand for music technologists; for instance, to support live recording sessions (Reddington, 2016). A challenge of constructivist learning is that it is not always possible to assess the extent to which targeted, individual skills have been fostered by an activity. Instead, the activity’s final ‘product’ may need to stand as a holistic indicator of overall success. This is a central tenet of constructionism, a variant which highlights the potential for learning through creating physical artefacts, effectively ‘thinking’ through one’s fingers and via the objects that one creates (Papert, 1991). Thaler and Zorn (2010) report on a year-​long interdisciplinary, collaborative initiative for Austrian high school students. Utilising both off-​the-​shelf music technologies and various makerspace materials, learners overcame design challenges to realise various end products. For instance, a Nintendo Wii controller was modified via Pure Data programming to become an ‘air piano’, whilst sound and video-​editing projects involved effects processing and the use of sample libraries. These served as implicit illustrations of the technological skills acquired. For Thaler and Zorn, such products are “externalized thoughts. They either work properly or they do not. Thereby, they demonstrate the existence and quality of thought and action” (2010, p. 449). The developmental benefits of collaborative, interdisciplinary music technology activities are maximised when there is sufficient openness on the part of learners to different forms of creativity (Gower, 2015); flexible working contexts (Klein & Lewandowski-​Cox, 2019); unfamiliar sonic resources and musical languages (Rosas et al., 2016); and the critical evaluation of one’s own work (Bielmeier, 2014; Walzer, 2017). Educators should actively challenge, encourage and support this openness while simultaneously developing technical proficiencies (Gower, 2015). Cognitive apprenticeship can be an effective means of introducing students to “new modes of culturally relevant learning through watching, interacting, teaching, guiding, and listening –​just as the apprenticeship trade has done for years” (Walzer, 2017, p. 148). Undertaken in ‘situated learning’ environments mimicking real-​world settings, cognitive apprenticeship blends formal knowledge transfer learning with less formal approaches such as mentoring, peer learning and, crucially, providing a safe space in which to make mistakes. As the nod to the ‘apprenticeship trade’ suggests, the classroom is only one –​and not necessarily the best –​of many environments in which learning can occur. In the past, the well-​trodden path from studio ‘tea boy’1 to assistant engineer was a common means of inducting newcomers into the “rich culture of music recording and mixing expertise, built up over decades” (Tingen, 2015, p. 52). Yet with progress in equipment reliability and miniaturisation, the rise of laptop studios and software virtualisation and the associated decline of mid-​range recording studios, these informal apprenticeships have all but vanished (Bielmeier, 2014; Huws, 2017; Reddington, 2016). There have been growing calls for the formal education programmes that have filled this void to adopt apprentice-​like learning conditions, even if apprenticeships themselves are now unviable (Bielmeier, 2014, Davis & Parker, 2013). Methods including fixed-​term internships and pairing learners with professional mentors or musicians have found favour (Nordström & Stenbacka Nordström, 2013;Tough, 2010).The considerable potential of extracurricular service learning, work-​based or practice-​based learning, community outreach and capstone projects has also been demonstrated (Gower, 2015; Walzer, 2017; Webster & Williams, 2018). Even when faced with challenges of cost, resourcing and staff-​to-​student ratios, the argument goes that 223

224

Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides

educators must still strive to recreate the benefits of these approaches when possible (Bielmeier, 2014; Lefford & Berg, 2015). Similar kinds of cognitive apprenticeship strategies have proved effective in informal, alternative and community education settings. Here, the absence of “teacher” and “student” labels can promote strong collaboration and skill sharing between facilitators and participants, some of whom might be considered disenfranchised or disadvantaged in terms of traditional music education (Baker & Cohen, 2008; Brader & Luke, 2013; Hesnan & Dolan, 2017).These settings also potentially legitimise certain forms of music technology skill acquisition not traditionally found in formal education; for example, learning through social media or via respected members of the local community. As such, they support the acquisition of skills in music technology and many associated soft skills in networking and employability. Moreover, as implied by the earlier use of the gendered term ‘tea boy’, the demise of some aspects of studio culture might be less lamented than others. These apprenticeships did not always provide an equally conducive atmosphere for aspiring female music technologists (Wolfe, 2019). In a bid to confront gendered stereotypes within the discipline, particular efforts have been made to support girls’ and women’s skill development through community workshops and school outreach programmes in various countries (Baker & Cohen, 2008; Hayes, 2017). Key research findings here include the importance of female role models and facilitators, opportunities for structured collaboration (so that no one group dominates), peer sharing and encouragement. Single-​sex environments may have a place during initial stages or in order to support specific skill development for a limited period. However, they may also be counterproductive, reducing the pool of learners with whom skills can be learned and shared as well as implying that certain skills sit more comfortably with certain social groups (Grugulis & Vincent, 2009) and that ‘special’ forms of support are therefore required. The Internet offers significant potential to replicate aspects of the traditional studio apprentice experience. As Huws (2017) notes, tutorial videos and live-​ streamed studio sessions enable learners to observe technical practices, and perhaps also professional and interpersonal interactions to an extent. In developing countries with fewer formal education options but rapidly improving mobile telecoms networks, there are particular opportunities in this regard (Gleeson, 2013). However, with no ability to clarify or question what is shown, well-​developed critical thinking skills are needed to evaluate contradictory or dubious advice. Specially authored multi-​camera angled and/​or multi-​audio tracked video footage offers one (albeit resource-​intensive) solution (Toulson, 2011). Yet there is still a need for learners to apply this observational learning and remain reflective about how far these experiences can prepare them for unfamiliar working environments (Huws, 2017). In time, the growing potential of virtual reality may lead to still more immersive and sensorially rich observations. Finally in this section, the constructivist emphasis on learning-​ in-​ context necessitates acknowledgement that the acquisition of music technology skills occurs alongside  –​and interacts with –​the acquisition of technological skills in other-​than-​musical areas. The latter might usefully be described as ‘perimusical’, since many of these skills have become conceptually integral to musical engagement of all kinds, even though they are not directly involved in production of music itself (Torres Mulas, 2000). There are links here, first, with Savage and Challis’ (2001) observation that some technologies become sufficiently musically aligned to be rendered invisible in the learning process and, second, with Purves’ notion of “intermediate” music technologies as “small, low-​cost, and increasingly pervasive technological tools” (2018, p.  143). Pertinent examples of contemporary perimusical technologies include social media, now a means of not only promoting one’s profile, performances and recordings (Reddington, 2016) but also of coordinating rehearsals and undertaking administration (Webster & Williams, 224

225

Acquiring skills in music technology

2018). When combined with streaming and downloading, social media also become important means for keeping abreast of musical trends, troubleshooting and developing one’s critical voice through discussion (Hyang et  al., 2014; Wise, 2010). In fact, as Court-​Jackson’s (2011) study of older people’s limited confidence with online music demonstrates, the importance of perimusical skills involving the Internet is now such that an individual’s failure to master them may severely curtail their continuing engagement with music. Given the entrepreneurial nature of many contemporary musicians’ work (see the next section), presentation software used to engage audiences in impactful ways is another important form of perimusical technology (Dorfman, 2015). Even musicians who eschew technology as a pedagogical or creative tool are still likely to make use of office-​style software within administration tasks (Webster & Williams, 2018). Notation skills can be fruitfully combined with those in online searching, as in Wise’s (2010) fieldwork example of students collating printed chord sheets and tablature from the Internet into personal songbooks. For those active in music-​based research, there are yet further technology skills to acquire. Bauer’s (2016) survey suggests that expertise in handling e-​journals, bibliographic databases and management, portable audio/​video recorders, data analysis and online conferencing software are particularly crucial in this regard.

Developing music technology ‘skills’ in a world of metacognition and metalearning In the case of music technology education, constructivist learning emphasises interactions that are often with others sharing similar career aspirations and enacted within environments modelled on traditional music industry workplaces. There is, then, a strong sense in which learners are being prepared to join the ranks of a ‘credentialed’ workforce; they are being exposed to  –​and evaluated against  –​professional standards and expectations, even if this is implicit. A preoccupation with the employability agenda means that this is to be expected within higher education. However, a vocational subtext often pervades other settings; for instance, community programmes touting ‘music industry links’ (Gardiner & Peggie, 2003) or school websites boasting of ‘industry-​standard’ studio equipment (Purves, 2018). Ultimately, these all rely to greater or lesser extent on the availability of a relatively stable, economically viable music ‘industry’. To be “industry-​ready implies that we have some understanding of the nature of the industry” (Davis & Parker, 2013, p. 5). Yet, as noted, technological and socio-​economic change has now eroded many of the music industry’s traditional structures. We have also witnessed the reduced influence of multinational record labels and the overwhelming rise of the Internet as a distributing and marketing medium (Reddington, 2016). Taken together with broader economic and cultural shifts, this suggests that fundamental aspects of musicianship are now subject to change. In the United States, these factors motivated the College Music Society’s decision in 2013 to convene a task force to “consider what it means to be an educated musician in the twenty-​first century” (Sarath et al., 2017, p. 49). The result was a curricular re-​conceptualisation based on the three pillars of creativity, diversity and integration. Musicians of the future, concluded the task force, will need stronger creative skills in areas of improvising, composing and performing than they will in areas relating to the interpretation of existing works. Webster and Williams (2018) have in turn argued cogently for the central role that music technology will continue to take in this re-​conceptualisation. The task force highlighted the ongoing evolution away from traditional performing careers towards an “intentional integration of audience engagement, self-​management, artistry and education work” (Sarath et  al., 2017, p.  129). A  focus on integration also underpins other 225

226

Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides

contemporary reappraisals of skill acquisition. ‘T-​Skilled’ or ‘T-​shaped’ professionals are those who possess highly specialist expertise in one area but who have also acquired so-​called ‘threshold’ skills necessary to engage effectively in related fields (Baguyos & Shafer, 2018; Gower, 2015). Music technology education adhering to this concept typically augments creative musical skills with those in computer programming and networking, graphics, broadcast and interactive media, web technologies and intellectual property management. Reinforced through the promotion of soft skills in project management, agile methods and the kinds of communication and personal skills outlined in previous sections, this breadth is intended to enable learners to flexibly reposition their careers in allied fields such as computer games development. There is resonance too with “fusion skills” (Bamford, 2019). Highly transferable, adaptable and blendable within multiple disciplines, these embrace many of the personal, organisational, collaborative and communication skills already outlined. In the ‘fusion’ manifestation, however, they are regarded not as supplementary to a core discipline but of equal or greater importance, since the very survival of this discipline may come to depend on them. For instance, musicians now face competition from “content professionals”, adept at working creatively across a broad range of media (Gower, 2015). Whilst the latter might not always have the depth of expertise and subject knowledge of the former, content professionals may nonetheless have the fusion skills needed to thrive in a highly fluid online environment. Just as professional photographers needed to redefine themselves in the wake of the introduction of mass-​market, low-​cost cameras in the 1950s, music technologists must now adapt to a world in which high-​quality music production tools are accessible to anyone who has a computer and an Internet connection (Tough, 2010). As Bamford (2019) notes, technology is not only the key agent of change but also an essential means by which fusion skills can be harnessed for creative empowerment. The Internet has disrupted the physical distribution of music, depleting musicians’ traditional forms of revenue. Yet for adaptable musicians who can embrace the technology, Bamford points to the growing potential of Blockchain (the distributed, digital ledger system) as a means of reconnecting with paying audiences in more equitable and profitable ways. Examples such as this give hope that we might be entering an era when music technology skills are no longer dictated by the perceived requirements of a homogeneous ‘music industry’ but are instead shaped by individuals’ creative aspirations within increasingly diverse social, cultural and economic contexts. Musicians, notes Hallam, have always required effective metacognitive strategies to help them “identify their own strengths and weaknesses, assess task requirements and develop strategies to overcome particular task difficulties and optimize performance” (2001, p. 37). However, the rapid evolution of both the music industry and of the musician archetype (see Chapter 23) may now have reached a stage where more is required. Musicians of all kinds will increasingly need to remain in a permanent state of ‘horizon scanning’, ready to reconfigure their skills and undertake associated cost–​benefit–​r isk analyses. Originally defined by Biggs as “being aware of and taking control of one’s own learning” (1985, p. 204), metalearning has been reappraised by Bialik and Fadel (2015), who use the term to describe a model of metacognition augmented through the inclusion of Dweck’s (2006) growth mindset concept. An education emphasising metalearning, they argue, “sets students up to succeed in lifelong, self-​directed learning, in the productive careers they may choose, and in continuing to grow throughout their lives, as the world continues to shift” (p. 6). Having sketched out a radically altered musical terrain, we must next ask what constitutes metacognitive ‘readiness’ for today’s music technologists? One term that repeatedly jumps from the literature is ‘entrepreneurism’. Reddington (2016) points out that musical innovation and entrepreneurial activity typically both flourish at the margins of cultural and commercial activity, 226

227

Acquiring skills in music technology

both requiring dedication to the cause in the face of limited resources and the absence of a foolproof plan for success. They are underpinned by an ability to spot gaps in the market, develop niche specialisms and, fundamentally, adopt a “say yes to everything mentality” (Reddington, 2016, p. 5). Yet the concept of entrepreneurism is not limited to the commercial sector and also relates to innovative leadership in teaching and learning, social enterprise or community activities (Baker & Cohen, 2008; Dorfman, 2015; Webster & Williams, 2018). Commonalities include the need to ‘pitch’ new strategies to others, capitalise on emerging opportunities and function effectively as agents of change. Whilst music was always a freelancer’s industry (Cilleti, 2005), the rate of change means that is increasingly less viable to carve out a stable career identity as, say, a ‘freelance engineer’ or a ‘freelance producer’. Many educators recognise the need to actively incubate entrepreneurial skills within music programmes (Crawford, 2014; Gower, 2015; Huws, 2017; Miksza & Hime, 2015); for instance, through the incorporation of formal “design thinking” methodologies (Ronan & O’Shea, 2018). One particularly fraught implication of adopting an entrepreneurial approach as a music technologist is accepting the inherent (and likely) risk of failure if things do not work out as planned (Shepherd et al., 2016; Thorley, 2018). Learning from failure can be highly emotive and difficult but also offers enormous potential to drive the acquisition of new knowledge and skills (Reddington, 2016). However, whilst failure might sometimes be regarded as a ‘badge of honour’ for entrepreneurs who ultimately achieve success (Shepherd et al., 2016), it can have different connotations in formal education. In situations where music learners put in a great deal of effort and still find themselves falling short, the experience can be demotivating and frustrating, compounding culturally embedded self-​perceptions of musical ability as fixed and unchanging (Legette, 2012; McPherson & Hallam, 2009). Thus, despite the educational potential of supported failure being well recognised professionally, music technology teachers can often be understandably reticent to embrace its potential in their classrooms (Thorley, 2018). In the neoliberal climate of results league tables, student satisfaction polls and concerns over student recruitment and retention, the idea of intentionally exposing learners to risk seems perverse, even if it is evident to all that risks nonetheless loom large beyond graduation. Risk aversion may actually go some way to explaining the enduring appeal of programmes of music technology education despite the existence of low-​cost technologies and free learning materials online. Scaffolded learning activities supervised by experienced tutors provide opportunities to make mistakes in relatively safe and stable environments (Davis & Parker, 2013; Walzer, 2017). Thorley (2018) researched the learning potential of failure in supported yet authentic ways. Undergraduate students were given pre-​recorded multitrack audio files to remix as desired, with no tutor guidance issued. The mixes were evaluated by an independent music professional, who identified elements of ‘success’ and ‘failure’ within each. No assessment criteria were used  –​anathema in the behaviourist, outcomes-​driven world in which many contemporary educators must operate. Yet despite inherent uncertainty, the task proved successful in providing students with opportunities to develop not only technical expertise but also thinking and creativity skills. Specifically, they developed abilities to work with third-​party materials, apply stylistic references, pursue personal visions, manage production processes and undertake self-​evaluation. Importantly, students did not appear thrown by the lack of criteria, instead valuing the authentic nature of the feedback received. Such a finding lends weight to Legette’s (2012) suggestion that music teachers should actively assist in the constructive analysis of learners’ failures, making explicit links with potential future successes. Put another way, failure must be “domesticated” within music technology education (Ronan & O’Shea, 2018). 227

228

Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides

One means of achieving this domestication is to emphasise the importance of risk and change management practices (Della Ventura, 2014; Dumbreck et  al., 2003). A  pertinent example relates to the need of music technologists to manage inevitable trade-​offs between mastering current technologies and learning skills in novel areas (White, 2018). Engaging meaningfully with unfamiliar technologies typically requires significant investments of time and money, and these must be carefully offset against existing creative and/​or employment opportunities. In postmodern creative contexts, this requires more than simply remaining abreast of leading-​edge developments. We are currently witnessing the re-​emergence of analogue synthesisers and recording systems, vinyl records and even compact cassettes. This retro revivalism (Brøvig-​Hanssen & Danielsen, 2016) is a reminder that the direction of technological travel is not one-​way. Those engaging with such trends are apt to discover that they must suddenly be skilled in techniques long since regarded as obsolete. The contemporary need to master music for the limited frequency response of a mobile phone speaker presents similar paradoxical challenges for music technologists whose training and experience has privileged ‘high fidelity’ playback. Thus, developing a “radar” for promising creative trends and scenes, helping limit investment in passing musical fads and highlighting the need to migrate to new tools or reappraise old ones is vital (Reddington, 2016). Music technologists must remain reflexive, aware of how their own discipline will impact on musical performance practice (Himonides, 2019), ready to move between amateur, semi-​professional and professional working contexts and cross from one hardware or software platform to another with ease.With the need to scan, evaluate and risk-​assess now so apparent, some have proposed that critical thinking, reflection, networking, evidence gathering, synthesis, analysis and working with a sense of purpose are not merely key skills for music technologists. They have essentially attained the status of technological skills in their own right (Huws, 2017; Hyang et al., 2014; Thorley, 2018; Walzer,  2017). As will be clear by now, preparing music technologists for this new world is not easy, yet there are further challenges. Some of the ‘skills’ listed above, such as risk tolerance and resilience, are more accurately described in psychological terms as personal attributes or traits. Although debate continues, many regard attributes linked to occupational preparedness as relatively stable in practical terms; while change is possible, this requires significant time and cost (Arnkelsson & Smith, 2000; Heckman & Kautz, 2012). Learners require sufficiently powerful educative experiences that can bring about metacognitive awareness of the potential for change (De Corte, 1990). We may also ask whether the active preparation of music technology students to survive in precarious economic climates inadvertently condones unfair, divisive and unsustainable working practices. After all, one economist’s dream of an ‘agile’, ‘flexible’ creative industry workforce is another’s neoliberal nightmare of an unstable, unpredictable ‘gig’ economy. Whilst music might indeed be the original gig economy, the socio-​economic shifts outlined above have emphasised some of the worst aspects of this epithet (Haynes & Marshall, 2018). Given that critical thinking skills are now strongly promoted, should learners be encouraged to use these to critique the economic systems they will soon be expected to join? Recent growth in music teaching cooperatives in the United Kingdom demonstrates that other, viable educational models exist (Musicians’ Union, 2015). Educational and community programmes offered by artist-​run collectives can evolve alternative forms of pedagogy emphasising self-​directed learning and personal experimentation (Joss, 2010; Prestianni, 2003). Developing creative skills in situations where teachers view themselves as co-​creators and where learners are free to “make and remake their own and each other’s work … offers potential push back to … the

228

229

Acquiring skills in music technology

individualization, competition and commodification upon which neoliberal education policy relies” (Wright, 2019, p. 223). At the very least, there are strong arguments for the contemporary music technology skill set to embrace resilience not only in the professional sense but also in the psychological sense. As Gross and Musgrave (2017, p. 29) observe, “there is no ‘Health and Safety Manual’ for the music industries”. They call for educators to embed mental health provision, helping ensure that musicians are prepared emotionally for an uncertain future. Collectively, these factors present those with the responsibility of educating today’s music technologists with great challenges, since they must bring about deep personal development, including within complex and emotive psychological areas and in the face of limited time and resources. Delivering on this responsibility has exercised many, and there is evidence from some countries of an increasing emphasis on metacognitive skills including adaptive, divergent and computational thinking and new media literacy. Some have begun to promote concepts such as social intelligence and cognitive load management skills (Gower, 2015; Klein & Lewandowski-​Cox, 2019). In the case of one Australian undergraduate music technology programme, the curriculum has been refocused away from “20th century recording studio practice” to “interactive creative music making” using mobile, online and desktop technologies (Klein & Lewandowski-​Cox, 2019, p.  3). To support this change, teaching has shifted to embrace cultural diversity, virtual and interdisciplinary collaboration, problem-​based and ‘flipped’ learning scenarios which promote not only technology and engineering skills but also those in performance, composition and improvisation. Taking forward the principles of T-​shaped skill acquisition, students continue to specialise but also gain experience translating musical skills into a range of allied disciplines.

Conclusion By way of a conclusion, we join with Kaiser (2018) in asking what it might mean to be a virtuoso music technologist in the contemporary era. The notion of musical virtuosity is historically linked to the demonstration of prodigious physical skill and instrumental technique, an association reaching its zenith with the Romantic-​era performances of Liszt and Paganini. Yet the continuing, rapid evolution of all forms of music technology forces us to consider this association afresh. Kaiser’s ethnographic study of contemporary musicians working in the field of electro-​acoustic improvisation identified at least three re-​conceptualisations of virtuosity. The first of these would best be described as the anti-​virtuosic view, in that some of Kaiser’s interviewees felt completely alienated by the traditional meaning of the term, unable to disassociate it with displays of motoric skill or the idea that performers should be evaluated against others’ standards. Instead, they wished their work to be considered as the expression of individual creative identity. Some of Kaiser’s other interviewees saw value in redefining the virtuoso concept to embrace physical skills more aligned to modern music technology interfaces, such as fader control. We see parallels here with the theme running throughout this chapter of the importance of regular, committed and critical development of skills. Others move the virtuoso concept away from physical skills entirely to a conceptual definition more closely aligned with ‘artistry’, thereby embracing notions of virtuosic listening, knowing, decision-​making, managing, exploring, cross-​domain working, imagining, remembering and metaphor using. It is no coincidence that this is one of the strongest themes to come from our chapter: many of the most highly prized skills for modern music technologists are not technological (in the traditional sense) at all. We are, as Clements (2018) notes, entering the post-​digital

229

230

Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides

era, characterised by “the growing hybridity of digital and traditional music making, and the influence of digital technology on human artistic practice” (p. 48). We find Landy’s (2007) use of the term faktura, as developed from the thinking of French electro-​acoustic composer Marc Battier, helpful here as it reminds us of the intrinsic connection between sets of tools and their transformation or adaptation in creative use. Those able to exploit this connection to the full may become the true music technology virtuosi of the future. As we have suggested, many aspects of this dawning era are as yet uncertain or unfixed, and so music technologists have an opportunity to reimagine their tools and their discipline’s defining skills. One of us (Himonides, 2017) has already set out some of the implications of recent, linked developments in ‘big data’, social media technologies and evidence-​based practice on the education and development of future music teachers. But we hope that this chapter makes it clear that similar challenges await all musicians, who must be similarly “ready to polish old tools, forge new ones, creatively abuse existing tools, methods, and processes” (Himonides, 2017, p. 629). It will be only through the agile acquisition, application and cross-​fertilisation of the widest range of hard, soft, and metacognitive skills that music technologists will meet the creative, educational and professional challenges of the future.

Issues for further research •

•

•

•

Country-​specific studies (e.g., Gower, 2015; Klein & Lewandowski-​Cox, 2019) help us understand music technology skill acquisition within policy, economic and cultural contexts. Further, comprehensive studies would be welcome for other territories, although international reviews and benchmarking are also important. It is possible that big data, data mining and social media-​based research methods may enable more dynamic curations of pertinent music technology skills that reflect musical, economic and technological trends over time. Both ethnographic and quantitative system-​level approaches are valuable in this field. We need to understand the impact of change on patterns of musical activity as a whole but also implications for individual creative artists. Further work should help educators evaluate the creative and occupational efficacy of placing increased emphasis on metacognitive skills relating to music technology.

Implications for education and music in the community Skill acquisition in music technology should no longer be dictated by the perceived needs of a homogeneous ‘music industry’. Industry professionals still have a very important role to play in helping educators design music technology programmes, but their insights will be just as useful in regards to the acquisition of metacognitive, interpersonal and intrapersonal skills as acquiring skills in particular technologies and tools. Learning music technology skills of all kinds relies on enriching, integrated and diverse learning environments. These environments may be fruitfully nurtured in both traditional classrooms and community settings. The Internet plays an increasingly important role in supplementing and complementing face-​to-​face settings. Augmenting classroom-​based music technology education with apprentice-​like learning scenarios offers powerful learning opportunities.

230

231

Acquiring skills in music technology

Reflective questions 1. What music technology skills do you rely on in your day-​ to-​ day musical practices? Think about the full range of skills covered in this chapter. How many of these are hard, specific skills, and how many are soft (e.g., metacognitive, intrapersonal or interpersonal)? How has your music technology skill set changed over time? 2. What are the most powerful learning experiences you have encountered during your lifelong music technology ‘journey’? Where did these take place? Who and what was involved? 3. How do you learn best when engaging with music technology? Do you read the manual? Look for videos online? Follow structured tutorials in magazines? Just ‘mess around’ or ‘try to break it’?

Note 1 The gendered connotations of this term are considered below.

Suggestions for further reading On the increasingly blurred boundaries between human creativity and digital technology: Clements, A. (2018). A postdigital future for music education: Definitions, implications, and questions. Action, Criticism & Theory for Music Education, 17(1),  9–​41.

On the practical challenges and opportunities faced by music technology educators in the transition to more metacognitive teaching and learning approaches: Klein, E., & Lewandowski-​Cox, J. (2019). Music technology and Future Work Skills 2020: An employability mapping of Australian undergraduate music technology curriculum. International Journal of Music Education, 37(4), 636–​653.

Comparison of music technology skill acquisition in simpler, exercise-​based contexts and richer, holistic learning experiences: Toulson, R. (2011). Creation of media based learning material for audio and music technology. Journal on the Art of Record Production, Issue 5:  Proceedings of the 2010 Art of Record Production Conference, Leeds Metropolitan University. www.arpjournal.com/​asarpwp/​creation-​of-​media-​based-​ learning-​material-​for-​audio-​and-​music-​technology/​

231

232

Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides

Exploration of several decades of music technology evolution and the implications for the skills required by musicians, teachers and learners: Webster, P., & Williams, D. (2018). Technology’s role for achieving creativity, diversity and integration in the American undergraduate music curriculum: Some theoretical, historical and practical perspectives. Journal of Music,Technology and Education, 11(1),  5–​36.

References Arnkelsson, G., & Smith, W. (2000). The impact of stable and unstable attributes on ability assessment in social comparison. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(8), 936–​947. Baguyos, J., & Shafer, S. (2018).T-​shaped music tech curriculums: Preparing music technology students for the 21st century creative and technology workforce. In E. Himonides, A. King, & F. Cuadrado, (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sempre MET2018: Researching Music, Education, Technology (pp. 91–​96). International Music Education Research Centre. Baker, S., & Cohen, B. M. (2008). From snuggling and snogging to sampling and scratching:  Girls’ nonparticipation in community-​based music activities. Youth & Society, 39(3), 316–​339. Bamford, A. (2019). The fusion factor [White paper]. City of London Corporation. Bauer, W. I. (2016). Technological affordances for the music education researcher. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 34(3),  5–​14. Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2015). Metalearning for the 21st century:  What should students learn? Center for Curriculum Redesign. Bielmeier, D. (2014, 30 September–​1 October). Apprenticeship skills in audio education: A  comparison of classroom and instructional focus as reported by educators [Conference presentation]. 137th Audio Engineering Society Convention. Los Angeles, United States. Biggs, J. B. (1985). The role of metalearning in study process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 55(3), 185–​212. Brader, A., & Luke, A. (2013). Re-​ engaging marginalized youth through digital music production: Performance, audience and evaluation. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 8(3), 197–​214. Brøvig-​Hanssen, R., & Danielsen, A. (2016). Digital signatures:  The impact of digitization on popular music sound. MIT Press. Canning, R. (2015). Education: Skills training. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioural sciences (pp. 215–​217). Elsevier Health Sciences. Cheng, L. (2019). Musical competency development in a laptop ensemble. Research Studies in Music Education, 41(1), 117–​131. Cilleti, E. (2005). To school or not to school. Mix, 29(11), 104. Clements, A. (2018). A postdigital future for music education:  Definitions, implications, and questions. Action, Criticism & Theory for Music Education, 17(1),  9–​41. Court-​Jackson, A. (2011). Don’t stop the music: Why it is important that the over 55s stay abreast of new music technology. Working with Older People, 15(1),  19–​25. Crawford, R. (2014). The evolution of technology:  Landmarking Australian secondary school music. Australian Journal of Music Education, 2,  77–​92. Davis, R., & Parker, S. (2013, 25–​27 July). Collaboration, creativity, and communities of practice: Music technology courses as a gateway to the industry [Paper presentation]. Audio Engineering Society 50th International Conference: Audio Education, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, United States. De Corte, E. (1990).Towards powerful learning environments for the acquisition of problem-​solving skills. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 5(1), 5–​19. Della Ventura, M. (2014). Problem-​based learning and e-​learning in sound recording. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 4(5), 426–​429. Dorfman, J. (2015). Perceived importance of technology skills and conceptual understandings for pre-​ service, early-​and late-​career music teachers. College Music Symposium, 55. www.jstor.org/​stable/​ 26574400 Dumbreck, A., Hermanns, K. S., & McBain, K. (2003). Sounding out the future: Key skills, training, and education in the music industry. National Music Council. Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Ballantine Books.

232

233

Acquiring skills in music technology Education Scotland. (2018). Curriculum for excellence. https://​education.gov.scot/​education-​scotland/​ scottish-​education-​system/​policy-​for-​scottish-​education/​policy-​drivers/​cfe-​building-​from-​the-​ statement-​appendix-​incl-​btc1-​5/​what-​is-​curriculum-​for-​excellence Ericsson, K. A., Hoffman, R. R., Kozbelt, A., & Williams, A. M. (Eds.). (2006). The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. Cambridge University Press. European Commission. (2011). Transferability of skills across economic sectors: Role and importance for employment at European level. Publications Office of the European Union. Gall, M., & Breeze, N. (2007). The sub-​culture of music and ICT in the classroom. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 16(1),  41–​56. Gardiner, R., & Peggie, A. (2003). Opportunities in youth music making.Youth Music, Arts Council England. https://​network.youthmusic.org.uk/​file/​6186/​download?token=LqXfRdUw Gleeson, D. (2013, 25–​27 July). Education for music production in Africa:  An imperative for progress. [Paper presentation]. Audio Engineering Society 50th International Conference:  Audio Education, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, United States. Gogus, A. (2012). Outcomes of learning. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 2534–​ 2539). Springer. Gower, A. (2015). Cultivating creativity: A study of UK policy and Singaporean practice in tertiary arts education, with special reference to creative skill development relevant for the digital industries. National Arts Council. Gregory, R. L. (2004). The Oxford companion to the mind. Oxford University Press. Gross, S. A., & Musgrave, G. (2017). Can music make you sick? A study into the incidence of musicians’ mental health –​Part 2: Qualitative study and recommendations. University of Westminster. Grugulis, I., & Vincent, S. (2009). Whose skill is it anyway? “Soft” skills and polarization. Work, Employment & Society, 23(4), 597–​615. Hallam, S. (2001). The development of metacognition in musicians:  Implications for education. British Journal of Music Education, 18(1),  27–​39. Hayes, L. (2017). Sound, electronics, and music: A radical and hopeful experiment in early music education. Computer Music Journal, 41(3),  36–​49. Haynes, J., & Marshall, L. (2018). Reluctant entrepreneurs: Musicians and entrepreneurship in the “new” music industry. The British Journal of Sociology, 69(2), 459–​482. Heckman, J., & Kautz, T. (2012). Hard evidence on soft skills. Labour Economics, 19(4), 451–​464. Herbst, J. (2016). Remixing dub reggae in the music classroom: A practice-​based case study on the educational value of music production for listening skills and stylistic analysis. Journal of Music, Technology and Education, 9(3), 255–​272. Hernández-​Bravo, J. R., Cardona-​Moltó, M. C., & Hernández-​Bravo, J. A. (2016). The effects of an individualised ICT-​based music education programme on primary school students’ musical competence and grades. Music Education Research, 18(2), 176–​194. Hesnan, J., & Dolan, E. (2017). SoundSurfers: Developing a high-​quality and empowering youth program. Queensland Review, 24(1),  80–​92. Himonides, E. (2013).Technology enhanced learning in the 21st century: The ethos of OPEN SoundS. In G. Fiocchetta (Ed.), OPEN SoundS: Peer education on the internet for social sounds (pp. 285–​292). Editoriale Anicia Srl. Himonides, E. (2017). Educators’ roles and professional development. In S. Ruthmann & R. Mantle (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of technology and music education (pp. 620–​632). Oxford University Press. Himonides, E. (2019). Perceived quality of a singing performance:  The importance of context. In G. Welch, D. Howard, & J. Nix, (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of singing (pp. 315–​325). Oxford University Press. Huws, C. (2017, 18–​21 October). The education of the next generation of pro-​audio professionals [Paper presentation]. Audio Engineering Society 143rd Convention, University of South Wales, Cardiff, Wales. Hyang, O. J., Jeong, J., & Seog, M. (2014). Technology competencies in 21st–​century music education. Korean Journal of Research in Music Education, 43(4), 187–​209. Institut für Musikpädagogik Wien. (2009). meNet learning outcomes in music teacher training. Institut für Musikpädagogik Wien. Joss, T. (2010). Community music development in Great Britain. International Journal of Community Music, 3(3), 321–​326. Kaiser, J. (2018). Improvising technology, constructing virtuosity. Cuadernos de Música, Artes Visuales y Artes Escénicas, 13(2),  87–​96.

233

234

Ross Purves and Evangelos Himonides Klein, E., & Lewandowski-​Cox, J. (2019). Music technology and Future Work Skills 2020: An employability mapping of Australian undergraduate music technology curriculum. International Journal of Music Education, 37(4), 636–​653. Landy, L. (2007). Understanding the art of sound organization. MIT Press. Lefford, M. N., & Berg, J. (2015). Training novice audio engineers to observe: Essential skills for practical development and analytical reasoning [Paper presentation]. Audio Engineering Society 26th Conference, UK. Legette, R. (2012). In-​service teacher beliefs about the causes of success and failure in music. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 192,  75–​81. McPherson, G., & Hallam, S. (2009). Musical potential. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M.Thaut (Eds.), Handbook of music psychology (pp. 255–​264). Oxford University Press. Melser, N. (2018). Teaching soft skills in a hard world: Skills for beginning teachers. Rowman & Littlefield. Merrick, B. (2002). Self-​regulation, motivation and computer composition. How does music technology impact on teaching and learning in the music classroom? In J. Rosevear & J. Callaghan (Eds.), Research matters:  Linking outcomes with practice (pp. 118–​126). Australian Association for Research in Music Education. Miksza, P., & Hime, L. (2015). Undergraduate music program alumni’s career path, retrospective institutional satisfaction, and financial status. Arts Education Policy Review, 116(4),  1–​13. Murtonen, M., Gruber, H., & Lehtinen, E. (2017). The return of behaviourist epistemology: A review of learning outcomes studies. Educational Research Review, 22, 114–​128. Musicians’ Union. (2015). Altogether now: A guide to forming music teacher co-​operatives. Musicians’ Union. Nordström, E., & Stenbacka Nordström, C. (2013, 25 July). Learning experience in a multi-​professional university learning environment [Paper presentation].Audio Engineering Society 50th International Conference, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden. O’Neill, S. A., & Senyshyn,Y. (2011). How learning theories shape our understanding of music learners. In R. Colwell & P. R. Webster, (Eds.), MENC handbook of research on music learning (pp. 279–​298). Oxford University Press. Papert, S. (1991). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 1–​11). Ablex. Prestianni, S. (2003). Learn by doing –​and redoing. JAZZIZ, 20(10), 34. Purves, R. (2018). Technology and the educator. In G. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), Creativities, technologies, and media in music learning and teaching (pp. 143–​161). Oxford University Press. Reddington, H. (2016). Entrepreneurship and music technology practitioners. In A. Dumbreck & G. McPherson (Eds.), Music entrepreneurship (pp. 141–​162). Bloomsbury Methuen Drama. Ronan, M., & O’Shea, D. (2018, 23–​26 May). Graduate attributes in music technology:  Embedding design thinking in a studio design course [Paper presentation]. 144th Audio Engineering Society Convention, Milan, Italy. Rosas, F. W., Rocha Machado, L., & Behar, P. A. (2016, 28–​30 October). Music technology competencies for education: A proposal for a pedagogical architecture for distance learning [Paper presentation].The International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in the Digital Age, International Association for Development of the Information Society, Mannheim, Germany. Sarath, E.W., Myers, D. E., & Shehan Campbell, P. (2017). Redefining music studies in an age of change: Creativity, diversity, and integration. Routledge. Savage, J., & Challis, M. (2001). Dunwich revisited: Collaborative composition and performance with new technologies. British Journal of Music Education, 18(2), 139–​149. Schroth, S. T., Helfter, J. A., & Dammers, R. (2009). Using technology to assist gifted children’s musical development. Gifted Child Today, 32(2),  54–​61. Shepherd, D., Williams, T., Wolfe, M., & Patzelt, H. (2016). Learning from entrepreneurial failure:  Emotions, cognitions, and actions. Cambridge University Press. Taetle, L., & Cutietta, R. (2002). Learning theories as roots of current musical practice and research. In R. Colwell & P. R. Webster (Eds.), The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning: A project of the Music Educators National Conference (pp. 279–​298). Oxford University Press. Thaler, A., & Zorn, I. (2010). Issues of doing gender and doing technology: Music as an innovative theme for technology education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(4), 445–​454. Thompson, D. (2014). An overview of audacity. General Music Today, 27(3),  40–​43. Thorley, M. (2018).The role of failure in developing creativity in professional music recording and production. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 30, 160–​170. Tingen, P. (2015). Inside track  –​Secrets of the mix engineers:  Dan Lancaster. Sound on Sound, 31(1), 51–​59.

234

235

Acquiring skills in music technology Torres Mulas, J. (2000). El documento musical: Ensayo de tipología. Cuadernos de Documentación Multimedia, 10, 743–​748. Tough, D. (2010). Shaping future audio engineering curricula: An expert panel’s view. Journal of the Music and Entertainment Industry Educators Association, 10(1), 149–​171. https://​doi.org/​10.25101/​10.8 Toulson,R.(2011).Creation of media based learning material for audio and music technology.Journal on theArt of Record Production,Issue 5:Proceedings of the 2010Art of Record Production Conference,Leeds Metropolitan University.    www.arpjournal.com/​asarpwp/​creation-​of-​media-​based-​learning-​material-​for-​audio-​ and-​music-​technology/​ Walzer, D.  A. (2017). The curricular soundtrack:  Designing interdisciplinary music technology degrees through cognitive apprenticeship and situated learning. In S. B. Fee, A. M. Holland-​Minkley, & T. Lombardi (Eds.), New directions for computing education (pp. 143–​160). Springer. Webster, P., & Williams, D. (2017). Forward. In S. Ruthmann & R. Mantle (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of technology and music education (pp. xiv–​xx). Oxford University Press. Webster, P., & Williams, D. (2018). Technology’s role for achieving creativity, diversity and integration in the American undergraduate music curriculum: Some theoretical, historical and practical perspectives. Journal of Music,Technology and Education, 11(1),  5–​36. Welch, G. F. (2012). The arts and humanities, technology and the “English Baccalaureate”: STEAM not STEM. Journal of Music,Technology & Education, 4(2–​3), 245–​250. White, H. (2018). Technological growth:  The demand for music technology knowledge is on the rise. Music Teacher, 97(5),  34–​35. Wise, S. (2010). Teacher and student perceptions of digital technology in secondary school music education: A case study. E-​Journal of Studies in Music Education, 9(1),  49–​63. Wright, R. (2019). Envisioning real utopias in music education: Prospects, possibilities and impediments. Music Education Research, 21(3), 217–​227. Wolfe, P. (2019). Women in the studio: Creativity, control and gender in popular music sound production. Routledge.

235

236

15 COMMUNITY MUSIC LEARNING AND CREATIVITY Beatriz Ilari1, Susan Helfter and Peter Webster

Humans are endowed with a potential for music learning and engagement, seen very early in ontogeny. From the musical dialogues of mothers and infants, spontaneous vocalisations and songs by young children and musical performances and creations of teenagers to the musical experiences and memories of older adults, music gives meaning to life events in the moment and retrospectively. In recent years, much has been written about the importance of creative music engagement in human development and wellbeing (e.g., Croom, 2015; Gouk et al., 2019). Most of these works were written before the outbreak of COVID-​19; before measures of social and physical distancing became the norm in many parts of the world. As we isolated ourselves, the need to be with others become more evident.This was clearly reflected in how music emerged in cities and spaces across the world. It did not take long for isolated professional and amateur musicians from Siena (Italy) to São Paulo (Brazil) to sing, perform on their instruments or drum on their buckets and pans, from their balconies, alone or with neighbours, as a way to express their emotions and bring solace to those around them (Corvo & DeCaro, 2020). Likewise, the internet became a space to share music with the world, in multiple ways. Aside from ‘lives’ and footage of concerts recorded before the lockdown, video performances of songs and musical pieces by various musicians that were carefully edited began to emerge along with virtual drum circles on Zoom with hard of hearing populations, beautiful collaborations between new and seasoned artists –​in music and other fields –​and instrumental, recording, jazz and songwriting classes, to name a few. Reports of an increase in virtual music lessons were also described in the popular press.That is, the coronavirus pandemic highlighted aspects of our lives that were often taken for granted, like the role of creative musical engagement in human existence and in strengthening communities. These two topics have been featured in recent debates by scholars in community music and creativity. While the literature on creativity and music education is quite extensive (e.g., Kratus, 1989; Webster, 2002; Wiggins, 2015), the coverage of creativity and community music is less comprehensive. Although the focus of this book is on the intersection between education, psychology and community music, in this chapter we have chosen to concentrate more heavily on creativity and community music. We begin the chapter with a brief contextualisation of community music and creativity, with an eye towards possible convergences. Next, we offer a brief discussion of research on creativity over time, pointing out the associations with community music. Through this exercise, we arrive at several themes and connections between the two fields, 236

237

Community music learning and creativity

which are used to analyse six cases of community music and creativeness across the lifespan. We conclude the chapter by proposing ways forward for research and practice.

Community music and creativeness There is a wide range of music activities that may be considered community music, and there has been much debate about what is and what is not community music. Since community music activities are contextually based and can look vastly different from one another, it is challenging to determine shared key elements. As we note in the following section, Higgins (2012) and others have provided credible descriptions. Schippers and Bartleet (2013) have created a framework that can help understand key elements of community music projects. The framework comprises nine “domains” addressing structural elements, people/​community and practice/​pedagogy. Within the topic of pedagogy, for example, one key element is “dynamic music-​making”, involving composition, improvisation, performance and thoughtful listening.They note that community music tends to focus on process or engagement rather than performance, which often has a narrow and predetermined definition. “Community music needs to be responsive to the ambitions, needs and possibilities of the participants above the tastes and ambitions of the facilitator, although the two can never be fully separated” (Schippers & Bartleet, 2013, p. 468).This domain of dynamic music-​making, featuring a balance of process and performance that is responsive to the ambitions and needs of participants, was central in virtually all community music projects examined later on in the chapter. There are similarities in concept with creativity in terms of focusing on process rather than primarily on product and individual preferences and choices. To that end, dynamic music-​making, or focus on the process of engagement, as well as other elements of the Schippers and Bartleet (2013) framework serve as a unifying thread in the creative community music examples in this chapter. As noted in the next section, discussions concerning creativity and human creativeness have recently emerged within the field of community music, many of which offer perspectives for researchers and practitioners. Burnard and colleagues (2018) suggest intercultural creativity as a central element in community music practices. Intercultural creativity builds community by promoting “co-​participation, reciprocity, openness, mutuality, intercultural understanding and affective alignment” (p. 231) as well as negotiations of otherness. This is seen in the examples offered by Odena (2018), where creative musical activities serve the purpose of cross-​community integration. Similarly, Moser (2018) argues that participation in community music affords the release of creativity, which changes the immediate community and the world. Through creative acts, humans open their minds and souls, translating their experiences through imagination and shared endeavours. Brown and Lima (2018), in turn, focus on modes of creative engagement –​ appreciation, evaluation, direction, exploration and embodiment –​and their intersections with ubiquitous technologies, those that are so pervasive in our contemporary lives.

Scholarship on creativity and its relationship to community music There are clear examples of research and some conceptual writing that identify linkages between community music across the life course and creativity.The domain of dynamic music-​making as noted by Schippers and Bartleet (2013) is a clear example. But a marriage of the scholarship of creativeness with community music as a whole is not always easy to discern directly in the language chosen by researchers; however, our sense is that it lurks in the background as part of the deeply human and social nature of community music as it is developing today. To help unpack this, we begin with some attention to definitions and then to the listing of some exemplars of 237

238

Beatriz Ilari et al.

work in creativity research that we believe are important for this effort.We arrive at some overall themes that might apply to the entire field of community music and attempt to note these in our carefully chosen case studies. Finally, we leave each reader to match the themes in their own way to other work where appropriate. It turns out that a consensus on the definition of community music and its role in music for the life course is not an easy enterprise (Higgins, 2012;Veblen et al., 2013). In fact, attempts to do so are seen by many to be counterproductive due to the amazing complexity and diversity of what it entails. Higgins (2012, p. 2) felt it might be better to identify contextual dispositions: (1) music of a community (e.g., choro music of Brazil); (2) communal music-​making within a community (e.g., Irish Fest in Milwaukee, Wisconsin); or (3) educative work between leaders and participants generally outside of formal statutory settings (e.g., San Francisco Community Music Center).2 More specifically,Veblen and Waldron (2012) suggest that community music programmes are shaped by five aspects: (1) the kinds of music and active music-​making; (2) the participants; (3) the intentions and aspirations of those involved; (4) the teaching/​learning practices; and (5) interplay between informal and formal social/​educational/​cultural contexts. (p. 203) Fair enough, but given these dispositions and aspects that leave us with a general notion of the settings and general characteristics, we are challenged to consider how the construct of creativity fits, beyond the obvious generation of musical products. There are clues when we turn to the generally accepted definitions of creativity, which surprisingly are a bit more straightforward. Consider two often-​cited definitions: Plucker et al. (2004) have suggested that “creativity is the interaction among aptitude, process, and environment by which an individual or group produces a perceptible product that is both novel and useful as defined within a social context” (p. 90, italics in the original). Sawyer (2012) put it a bit differently: “Creativity is the generation of a product that is judged novel and also to be appropriate, useful, or valuable by a suitably knowledgeable social group” (p. 8, italics in the original). Clearly both definitions centre on social context, some kind of product, novelty and judged usefulness. It would seem likely that such attributes are also evidenced in many activities that are central to community music across the life course and perhaps connected to the nine domains of Schippers and Bartleet (2013, p. 460), that address such dimensions as practice/​pedagogy, people/​personnel and structures/​practicalities, as well as to the aspects and dispositions noted above. Also, clearly of interest to creativity researchers and those engaged in community music work are levels of creative ability/​potential and the focus on what is being studied or celebrated. For example, the often-​used designation of “little c and Big C” for creative ability/​potential and the more nuanced levels of creative ability that are often identified (Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009; Webster, 2019) apply. In terms of what is being studied, the classic four P’s of creative research –​product, process, person and place –​may work equally well for community music and life course study, especially considering the intersections of person and place that is seen in both literatures.

Research exemplars: Creativity scholarship Digging deeper, we offer a brief snapshot of the creativity scholarship in both the general literature and the more specific work in music teaching and learning as a platform for possible

238

239

Community music learning and creativity

intersection with community music. Space restrictions force us to only note exemplars in brief. Each selected publication is chosen with an eye toward importance for community music scholarship. We place in bold print those foci of work that have importance, as understood by the authors, for the music community. Note that these foci may or may not appear in so many words in the text of studies.

Three waves of research in the modern era Most scholars mark the 1950 presidential address of J. P. Guilford to the American Psychological Association featuring a call for new programmes of study on the topic of creativity as the beginning of credible research on the topic. By all accounts, this came as a major surprise to the association at that time, since the dominant view of creativeness was then vested within what was later to be found to be a misguided unidimensional view of ‘high intelligence’. Also, behaviourism and Freudian psychoanalysis were coins of the realm for psychologists. Systematic and credible research on creativity began soon thereafter, working from more varied conceptual perspectives. Sawyer (2012, p.  4) earmarked three waves of creative work following the Guilford address:  wave 1 (1950s/​1960s)  –​creative personality; wave 2 (1970s/​1980s)  –​ cognitive processes; and wave 3 (1990s to the present) –​interdisciplinary sociocultural influences. This third wave matches very well with community music goals, as do several of the aspects of individual difference as played out in the arts.

Waves 1 and 2 (focus on individual difference) • •

• •

•

• • •

•

Guilford (1967) and Torrance (1974). Factors of intellect models; early work on creative thinking assessment with words/​figures using divergent thinking tasks. MacKinnon (1962/​ 1978) Work on personality assessment of creative people discovering links to preference for complexity, discernment and tolerance for risk, among others. Gruber (1974). Study of Darwin which lead to understandings of creative work as an incremental process over time –​a network of enterprises. Simonton (1988). Historical data on creatives; “historiometric” system demonstrated creative work (quantity/​quality) over the life course; U-​shaped model applied to many disciplines. Bandura (1986). Self-​efficacy as the belief in one’s abilities; social learning theory endorsing interaction between cognitive, behavioural and environmental influences. Gardner (1983). Theory of multiple intelligences; multiple sources of evidence included music as a basic intelligence. Boden (1990/​2004). Groundbreaking notions of creativity across disciplines, including music; transformational thinking. Csikszentmihalyi (1990). “Flow” and peak experience; experience sampling to study daily work and affect; high levels of consciousness connected to creative work. Sawyer (2012). Provided a detailed comparison of eight process models of creativity; problem identification, information gathering, incubation, idea generation, selection, and execution.

239

240

Beatriz Ilari et al.

Wave 3 (sociocultural influences) •

• •

•

Becker (1982/​2008). Focused on creativeness as a function of sociocultural influence; major contributor to the sociology of art with strong implications for creativity in music. Sawyer (2003). Group creativity including music, theatre and art; creativity as mediated action. John-​Steiner (2000). Established the notion that scientific and artistic work come from collaborative thinking, passionate conversations, emotional connections and shared struggles. Feldman et  al. (1994). Influential systems model of creativity that is based on the concepts of domain, person and field and their intersection to explain creative work across disciplines.

Music teaching and learning scholarship The exemplars below represent the strong influence of the general work noted above, especially the turn in recent times to a blend of the individual with sociocultural. They are organised into two categories: (1) single monographs/​research studies and (2) collected reports of studies in large edited volumes (a trend in the last 8 years, as noted by the very volume that contains this chapter).3

Single monographs/​research studies • • •

•

• •

• •

•

Kratus (1989). Early study on the use of time in compositional processes; use of musical exploration, repetition and development; proficiency in replication. Nachmanovitch (1990). Celebration of group improvisation; focus on improvisation in art and in life; encouraged development of authentic voice. Small (1998). Established the concept of “musicking”, a verb that describes the active making of music in a wide, social context that includes a variety of participant identities. Webster (2002). Development of a model of creative thinking in music based on assessment of data and writings in psychology and music; includes divergent/​convergent thinking over time informed by enabling conditions and skills in the context of an intended product. Sloboda (2005). Landmark book on generative processes in music, including performance, improvisation and composition; generation of expression in music. Green (2017). Established the importance of “informal” learning, the kind of learning that happens in popular music settings as a possible partner to formal settings in schools. Campbell (2010). Underscored children’s musical thinking through case studies; bridged the fields of music education, ethnomusicology, and folklore. Burnard (2012). Established the sociocultural importance of creativeness in music teaching and learning; argued for a new way to think about creativities in a variety of settings by providing data on active and diverse creators of music. Kerchner (2014). Detailed contemporary approaches to music listening skill development for K-​12 educators; stressed a multisensory approach including meaning making. 240

241

Community music learning and creativity

•

• •

Wiggins (2015). Content-​r ich suggestions for guiding student learning grounded in constructivist theories; stress placed on agency and student voice; guidance for teaching a wide range of music experiences. Riley (2016). Focus on music creation by children across diverse cultures. Odena (2018). Documented a number of research traditions that have studied creativity in the context of music; formal and informal settings are included; other topics include musical development, neuroscience, cross-​community integration; Chapter 5 is notable for its data on music creativity and cross-​community engagement in service to social and ethnic inclusion worldwide  –​a topic of major importance.

Collected studies in edited volumes • •

•

•

•

•

Hargreaves et al. (2002). Handbook devoted to critical concepts and data related to musical identities in a cross-​disciplinary way. McPherson and Welch (2012). Massive two-​volume set of scholarly summaries of research and practice in music teaching and learning; Volume 1 contains sections on the role of music in people’s lives, including community music;Volume 2 features separate and significant sections on community music, adult learning, creativity, and technology. McPherson (2016). Handbook on child development; significant sections on musical play, engagement, multiple creativities, music technology and child development. Thaut and Hodges (2019). Compendium of the most recent work in music and neuroscience; considers not only technical issues but also social and developmental content; stresses music, the brain and health. Brophy (2019). Massive, two-​volume set of handbooks on assessment, including summary chapters on assessing creative music potential, music improvisation, adult learning, music listening, music composition, and music technology. Ruthmann and Mantie (2020). Landmark edition of scholarly readings in music technology for teaching and learning; includes historical, philosophical and cross-​ cultural perspectives on informal and formal learning and technology affordances for the creation and understanding of music.

Themes and connections Themes By way of summary, we propose the following themes that have deep meaning for community music. In many cases, these themes are implicit in the goals and objectives of studies and not completely articulated. Other times, these are clearly celebrated. Again, key phrases appear in bold. 1. Individual differences are important in terms of creative capacity, personality, thinking processes, and developmental learning patterns. 2. Creative work is incremental over time and is the product of consistent hard work. 3. Motivation, persistence, risk-​taking and strong self-​efficacy are important. 241

242

Beatriz Ilari et al.

  4. Multiple intelligences may frame creative work together with environmental support and personal motivations.   5. Stages of creative work flows over time, often beginning with skills in problem finding, then proceeding to periods of incubation and active divergent and convergent thinking and concluding with the ability to externalise the final product.   6. Creative work in all domains requires social interactions and a disposition to collaborate and learn from others.  7. Creative work is supported by individual attributes together with a domain of traditions/​expectations and a field of recognised intermediators and gatekeepers.   8. It is important to experience a wide range of musical experience consistently in either formal or informal settings, or both.   9. Music experience is essentially a social one where learners are given agency but also carefully crafted guidance. 10. Creative work in music can lead to feelings of self-​worth, personal identity, inclusion and a sense of community. 11. Musical play is important in creative development. 12. The affordances of technology, and specifically music technology, are major environmental conditions that can assist in creative music pedagogy. 13. Understanding of neurological evidence connected to music creativeness is important for health and wellbeing, individualised instruction and differentiated learning.

Connections We close this section by citing a book recently published by ethnomusicologist and music education/​performance practices scholar Juniper Hill. Becoming Creative: Insights from Musicians in a Diverse World (2018) is the result of an extensive field study of over 100 musicians in Helsinki, Cape Town and Los Angeles. She conducted interviews with classical, jazz and local folk or traditional musicians. She was driven by questions of societal restrictions for creativity, influences on musicians from the environment and individual perceptions of personal creativity. Similar to the thinking of Burnard (2012), Hill was interested in what it means to be creative –​knowing that the world is filled with a multiplicity of creativities. Part of her findings resulted in a cross-​cultural experiential model of musical creativity which, in fundamental ways, speaks to the heart of the connections between creativity literature and community music. She found six “processes” (Hill, 2018, pp. 4–​11) that musicians seemed to identify consistently as part of their creative work. 1. Generativity: the building, making, creating or construction of music (composition, improvisation, arranging and performing) and the discipline for follow-​through to completion. 2. Agency: the personal freedom to determine one’s actions, the ability to make one’s own decisions about music and its meaning. 3. Interaction:  the stimulation that comes from other musicians, audiences and the overall environment. 4. Nonconformity: creating something new in the face of possible restrictions, but with the likely support of the culture to experiment. 5. Recycling: reusing or remixing, and building on traditions of others (“re-​creativity”). 6. Flow: the Csikszentmihalyian notion of a feeling state that comes from work going well during a heightened state of consciousness.

242

243

Community music learning and creativity

Now that we have summarised the intersections between community music and creativeness, we turn our focus to examples of their manifestations across the lifespan.

Creative engagement, community music and the early years of life Babies and young children are musical agents (Custodero et  al., 2016) who both transform and are transformed by the musical experiences that they encounter in their daily lives (Young & Ilari, 2012). Music learning in early childhood occurs through different modes of engagement: implicit (i.e., learning by immersion), reactive (i.e., reacting and responding to music and sounds in one’s environment), deliberate (i.e., learning through carefully planned musical activities by a teacher or other companion) and self-​initiated (i.e., learning through one’s own initiative and volition) (Young & Ilari, 2012; Ilari, in press). Although adult-​initiated activities (the deliberate mode) are conducive to the development of creativeness (Robson, 2014), the reactive and self-​initiated modes are perhaps the most conducive ones (e.g., Custodero et al., 2016; Gluschankof, 2020). Self-​initiated musicking, in particular, is a central feature of musical play (Marsh & Young, 2006), a form of child’s play. Considered a primary learning mode in childhood, play involves signs and symbols that generate meanings at the metalevel which are expressed in multimodal ways (Wood, 2014): The child sings as he draws, dances as he sings, tells stories while at play in the bathtub or in the backyard.  … Children move readily and even eagerly from one form to another, combine the forms, and play them off one against another. (Gardner, 1980, p. 99) Multimodality and play are, therefore, at the heart of learning, creativeness and invention in early (and also middle) childhood, as seen ahead.

Case study: Batucrim, Brazil “Batuque” is a polysemic term used to designate drumming, a form of Afro-​Brazilian religion and a musical genre from Cape Verde. Batuque also relates to the verb bater (to beat), and is a term that many use to invoke the beating of drums, usually in group settings. Combining batuque and alecrim (rosemary, and also the name of the school in question), Batucrim is an online music education programme for young children, developed by two experienced music teachers as a response to the pandemic. Batucrim invites children to play individually and collectively during virtual meetings. Children learn basic rhythms of Brazilian music (e.g., jongo, maracatu, bossa nova) through imitation and purposeful listening, and they are encouraged to explore sounds at home, create their own instruments (mainly percussive) with objects that they find, improvise and perform. In one instance, a 4-​year-​old girl is singing a long, invented song infused with motifs from familiar songs, directly from her living room. With a mallet in each hand, she drums on her instrument, a plastic bowl with a few empty glass jars, two empty cans, a rubber ball and some unidentified plastic objects. She sings and plays, using expressive gestures, and then talks about “her music”. In another instance, a 4-​year-​old boy taps with his mallets on the wooden floor. He begins in a slow tempo that gradually picks up, imitating the sounds of a train in motion. Once he reaches an upbeat tempo, he stops drumming and sings Villa-​Lobos’ “Trenzinho do caipira”, a song extracted from his Bachianas Brasileiras No. 2 with added lyrics by poet Ferreira

243

244

Beatriz Ilari et al.

Goulart. He finishes the song with a drumming pattern from the beginning, demonstrating knowledge of musical form. It is clear how comfortable children are in their communities of musical practice at Batucrim and how the themes of choice, agency and self-​expression, discussed previously, live side by side with clear instructional contents and goals. This case of deliberate learning illustrates Higgins’ (2012) notions of communal music-​making within a community and educative work.

Creative music engagement in school-​age children in community settings Child developmentalists often speak of the entrance into formal schooling as a rite of passage. With formal schooling, children are socialised into wider social norms. Entrance into formal schooling promotes a gradual differentiation of local cultures, traditions and communities from the social expectations defined by wider social, economic and political forces (Trevarthen et al., 2014). The start of formal schooling also overlaps with middle childhood, which is a time when children gradually depart from the ‘institutional charge’ of the family to a new social arrangement, marked by influences and responsibilities stemming from the family, peers, the school and the wider community (Eccles, 1999). Such influences and responsibilities continue to expand over time. Children and adolescents’ musical lives also broaden considerably as children develop and grow, being influenced not only by environmental issues, but also by their developing brains and bodies, behaviours and genetics (see Russo et al., 2020). Although research on school-​age children’s creativity has focused predominantly on formal settings (e.g., Kratus, 1989), scholars have turned their attention to creativity within community music settings (e.g., Odena, 2018). Reports are now emerging and will hopefully offer insights into the plethora of existing programmes and initiatives that aim to foster creativity in children and youth from across the world. Here, we highlight two: one from Italy and one from Hong Kong.

Case study: Segni mossi, Italy The Italian project Segni mossi (in English, ‘wavy signs’) is described by its creators, artist Alessandro Lumare and choreographer Simona Lobefaro, as a “drawing dance project for children and adults”. Music is a central component to all activities carried out at Segni mossi, as it is intimately connected with dance and motion. This project was born in 2014 out of a need to promote social inclusion in public schools in Rome, using art as a vehicle. From the early days, Segni mossi has been carrying out artistic experiments and holding workshops across the world for children and adults using a wide range of media (paper, acrylic, objects, hammocks), musical genres and gestures. On their web page, there are several videos that showcase their artistic experiments with children and adults across the world. One of these experiments, Al Cubo (the cube), has been described as “an interactive experience between music, movement and signs” (Segni mossi, 2014). The experience begins with live piano music and a giant glass cube with two open sides. The choreographer and the artist interact with the object, using music to guide their action. Through their improvised gestures, they invite children to join in by moving and drawing on the cube, all to the sound of music. The Segni mossi team took Al Cubo to Dubai and Brazil. In the Brazilian video, they offer the following words to describe their experience: An experience between music, movement and mark. A  permeable and transparent cubic structure. People are free to move around it. A dancer goes through the structure, she inhabits the space. 244

245

Community music learning and creativity

A designer marks the traces of her activity and inactivity on the transparent walls of the cube. A musician builds his musical score in relation to what happens. The audience gradually becomes confident with the mechanism, they are led to take part. Some markers start going round, passing from hand to hand: people start drawing, discovering themselves through the walls of the structure. Everyone is immersed in their own research, everyone is part of the collective action. Marks, gestures reverberate in music. The experience finally dissolves. The sound stops. Buzz, words, smiles, running children into the space. (www.segnimossi.net/​en/​about.html) Another aspect of Segni mossi is how their experiments and workshops are shaped by the individuals who take part and the communities where they take place. Although there may be deliberate learning goals, it is participants’ reactions to the multimodal artistic space (music, dance, art) that leads into improvisation, discovery and self-​initiated gestures. At the time of writing, no academic papers were found about Segni mossi.Yet this project seems to follow in the footsteps of other artists and scholars (Maffioli, 2010) who have stressed the importance of igniting the senses through motion and dance, and in theories of embodied music cognition (Nijs & Bremmer 2019). Thus, this case exemplifies at least four processes identified by Hill (2018): generativity, agency, interaction and nonconformity. It also highlights risk-​taking, collaboration and flow.

Case study: Cantonese Opera, Hong Kong This case study focuses on the partnership between a community artist, seven music teachers with their elementary and secondary school students, and university researchers in Hong Kong. The aim was to examine motivational change in participants’ views of Cantonese opera after an 8-​week period of instruction led by the community artist with music teacher assistance. Data were collected using a mixed-​ methods approach with pre-​and post-​ questionnaire comparisons and rich description of teaching and student opinions. Results were mixed with primary school children showing more changes in motivation to learn about Cantonese opera but little change among secondary students. Music experiences included listening, performing and composition of rhythm speech called bak lam, endemic to Cantonese opera. This is an excellent example of community music and formal education crossover and includes frank appraisals of its success.4 This case exemplifies Higgins’ (2012) disposition of educative work, Veblen and Waldron’s (2012) aspect of informal and formal learning and certain key themes in creativity, such as agency, personal identity, motivation, musicking, divergent/​convergent thinking and environmental influence. It also fits with several of Schippers and Bartleet’s domains.

Creative music engagement by adults Community music programmes embrace music participation throughout the lifespan, with entry points throughout adulthood. Though there are numerous ways in which adults participate in community music throughout adulthood, a core element of many programmes is valuing equally the personal or social wellbeing of the participants and their music learning (Veblen, 2007). This focus on both social and musical experiences colours and shapes the ways in which many community music programmes operate but also the contexts in which they have 245

246

Beatriz Ilari et al.

been developed, whether as a grassroots initiative of community singing or an intergenerational ukulele collective. Schippers (2018) distinguishes three such contexts for community music. 1. Community music as an organic phenomenon  –​when music practices have developed over time and often in a single location. Resources usually come from the community which help make these practices enduring and self-​renewing. 2. Community music as an intervention –​where there is a desire to restore existing music practices or develop new ones. Since necessary resources are mostly from external sources, programmes often have a short to medium duration. 3. Institutionalised community music –​where community music needs are addressed through organisational structures that aim for longer-​term opportunities. Having developed from an expressed community need, this community music is often funded from central or larger sources that may also play a role in shaping the project. The following programmes and case studies have been selected to highlight aspects of these values and contexts in community music programmes for adults.

Case study: Lullaby Project-​NL, Canada The Lullaby Project-​NL at the Women’s Correctional Centre in Clarenville, Newfoundland, is a programme that supports participants’ expression of what is meaningful in their lives through poetry, visual art and songwriting. Lullabies create a structure to reflect on one’s own experiences, with writing songs being part of a much larger process for the women in Clarenville prison. According to David Buley (a programme facilitator along with his wife, Jan) “[c]‌reativity can only really happen after a supportive relationship is formed with humility and vulnerability” (Memorial University, 2020, para. 8). The process requires building trust over time and creating an environment where the women are known. This takes time, kindness and co-​creation, which can be seen in the design of the sessions. Jan and David Buley incorporate rituals, engage in many conversations or storytelling, and include arts and crafts and music listening to scaffold sessions to support the women. The women engage in reflective writing that opens up their expression and generates ideas for song lyrics. The facilitators work with each participant to craft lyrics and then gently and carefully support them in creating a melody and general feel for the song, while not overstepping in the creative process. Harmonies are added to finalise the songs, which are performed for participants or sometimes in an open-​house setting with guests. Some songs are about places the women miss; some are uplifting, joyful or despairing; but they all express something within the songwriter (Buley & Buley, 2020). Through this process, that unfolds over time, the facilitators of Lullaby Project-​NL deepen their own understanding of the creative abilities of each human being and are humbled by the context in which the creativity and beauty is emerging (Memorial University, 2020). The songs written by the women at Clarenville prison are a manifestation of the Lullaby Project founded by Thomas Cabaniss over 20 years ago and now part of Carnegie Hall’s community programmes. Originally for parents and babies in New York, the Lullaby Project now exists throughout North America and four additional continents, nurturing the undiscovered expression of first-​time songwriters in a variety of communities (Antle, 2019). The music programme at Clarenville prison aligns with Veblen’s (2007) observation that with community music, the social and personal wellbeing of participants is of equal, if not more, 246

247

Community music learning and creativity

importance to their musical learning.The carefully guided activities and social interactions promote the development of agency for the women in prison, which is then expressed in writing and songwriting that, in turn, further strengthens agency.This reinforcing cycle is sustained over time, allowing new musical practices to emerge. This exemplifies Schippers (2018) second context for community music and Hill’s (2018) components of agency, interaction, nonconformity and generativity.

Case study: Foxes and Fossils, United States Foxes and Fossils5 is an intergenerational cover band that originated in Atlanta, Georgia, in 2010. They began when the Mustangs, an important regional cover band, had a lull in their activities during an economic recession. To continue making music at home, band member Tim taught Sammie, his teenage daughter, harmonies to a few songs. Encouraged by what he heard, Tim continued to experiment musically by adding two of Sammie’s peers and a few of his original band members. The new band, Foxes and Fossils, performed locally in modest settings. They also recorded, edited and posted videos of their performances on YouTube before the young vocalists dispersed to college and the band’s activities waned. Eight years later, the inactive Foxes and Fossils started to see considerable and unexpected attention for their early recordings, with one song reaching over 3 million views on YouTube (Emerson, 2020). The band members were surprised and moved by the warm response and listeners’ appreciation for their music. As band members were now living in different cities, technology was, again, key for the band as they began creating new arrangements of songs. During the coronavirus pandemic, the band actively recorded new music remotely. In August 2020, the band released the song “Don’t Worry Baby” by the Beach Boys to great acclaim from their listeners from around the world, gaining over 600,000 views on YouTube 1  month after its release. Foxes and Fossils is the result of a series of creative and organic processes that align with Hill’s (2018) experiential model of musical creativity and the contexts for community music identified by Schippers (2018). The genesis of the band, the musical practices, the stimulation among band members and the connection with community members are related to Hill’s components of generativity, agency, interaction, nonconformity and recycling. Technology was also critical for generating music, making it available for listeners, interaction among the members and recording remotely.

Case study: Guitars for Vets, United States Guitars for Vets is a music initiative to support war veterans and particularly those who experience high anxiety and distress resulting from their military service. The programme has a network of more than 100 chapters in 40 states throughout the United States, supporting veterans and their families through music-​making, building a sense of community and attending to the needs of the veterans. The guitar classes are free, with teachers donating their time and the instruments being donated by sponsors. Through this programme, veterans “can join a community where they learn to play guitar and find solace in the songs they love as well as the songs they have yet to write” (https://​guitars4vets.org). While not all veterans experience the same levels of mental, physical and emotional distress, some experience symptoms that meet the criteria for a diagnosis of post-​traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or another mental disorder. Other veterans experience significant distress though do not meet a sufficient number of markers for a diagnosis and are, therefore, not 247

248

Beatriz Ilari et al.

eligible for the same levels of support. Clinically, there is emerging data suggesting that Guitars for Vets may be an effective intervention addressing symptoms of PTSD and depression among the participants (Pezzin et al., 2018). Participants find that when they pick up a guitar and start playing, hours pass quickly, because they are so engaged in what they are doing. “You are at peace for those 2 hours. You are having a good time, your mind quiets down and things just become ok. This is how it helps veterans with PTSD” (Reverb, 2017). The veterans benefit from the music-​making and from engaging with their teachers and others in the musical community. It just helps you calm down and de-​stress. It is the best de-​stressor that I know of. … You have got nothing to lose by doing it. It is a great program and we know it can help. All non-​judgmental, come in and enjoy. (Reverb, 2017) The Guitars for Vets case exemplifies Hill’s (2018) inclusion of flow in the experiential model, Schippers’ (2018) context of community music as offered through organisational structures and Veblen’s (2007) description of a wide range of participants with differing wants and needs. The programme attends to the individual differences of the participants and can lead to feelings of self-​worth, personal identity, inclusion and sense of community for all involved.

Conclusions and recommendations for future research As we have seen, there are many intersections between community music and creativity across the lifespan. The cases showcased in this chapter illustrate how creativity permeates community music initiatives by affording individuals and groups with opportunities to release their creativity in and through music, in a wide range of settings and with different companions. Figure  15.1 depicts some intersections between community music and creativity that were presented in this chapter, with a focus on individuals, groups, creative processes, music product and possible outcomes as well as environmental issues that impinge upon them. We include it here as a summary of our reflection on the intersections between these two fields and as a point of departure for future work. We also offer some recommendations for future research. The field of community music has grown substantially in the past decade, with many inventive programmes emerging across the globe. While some of these programmes refer to creativity as one of their aims or outcomes, there is little mention of scholarship in the field. That is, creativity is at times defined in vague terms in some reports. Therefore, one of our recommendations is that community music researchers stress creative scholarship more as they describe their projects and programmes. At the same time, we would like to point out the need for research on creative thinking within the context of community music. Future studies could examine how creative thinking manifests itself within different members of a community of musical practice, including leaders, facilitators and participants, and through qualitative and quantitative approaches. Such data will strengthen the body of knowledge pertaining to both creativity and community music, and it will offer important insights for practitioners in contexts of leisure, education and health. As we conclude this chapter, many of us are still living under the restrictions imposed by the COVID-​19 pandemic. From the early days of the pandemic, music continues to play a major role in our lives, reducing loneliness, bringing solace and hope and enhancing social cohesion

248

249

Community music learning and creativity

Individual: dispositions, motivations, persistence, risktaking, selfefficacy, brain and behaviour

CONTEXT: environmental issues, social, cultural and political issues and expectations, zeitgeist

Groups: collaboration, interaction, learning from and learning with

Creative process and product: generativity, nonconformity, recycling Mediators: technology, environmental affordances

Possible outcomes: agency, musical knowledge, health, wellbeing, identities, responses to environment

Figure 15.1  Intersections between creativity and community music with a focus on individual, groups, creative process and product and possible outcomes

(Corvo & DeCaro, 2020). The disruptions caused by the pandemic have forced us not only to adapt to a new reality, but also to call on our creative senses to reinvent routines and rituals (see Imber-​Black, 2020). Community and social interaction have gained (and continue to gain) new meanings as we experienced disruptions to our social lives and learned to socially distance and discovered new ways to interact and be with one another. As we reinvent our lives in the post-​ pandemic era, it seems reasonable to believe that community music and creativity will play central roles in our lives due to their potentials for self-​discovery, collaboration, social interaction and cohesion, agency, learning and wellbeing. Understanding how these two fields intersect is therefore an urgent task.

249

250

Beatriz Ilari et al.

Reflective questions 1. Consider the important themes that have been identified in the creativity literature from both general and music resources.Which of these seem most important for you in terms of community music and study of the life course? 2. A number of exemplar case studies are reported in this chapter. Is there one in particular that captures your interest in terms of its engagement with creativeness as defined here? Why? Are there other case studies that you can think of that could have been chosen for this chapter? 3. Two aspects of the intersection of creativeness and community music were identified as music technology and music and neuroscience, which may seem surprising. Why do you think they were included?

Notes 1 All authors are professors in the Department of Music Teaching and Learning, Thornton School of Music, University of Southern California, Los Angeles. 2 Examples of dispositions were added by authors. 3 For a much more in-​depth accounting of the music literature, especially in relation to composition and improvisation, see Part 8 of the Oxford Handbook of Music Psychology, 2nd edition (Hallam et al., 2018), with chapters by Jonathan Impett, Richard Ashley and Peter R. Webster. 4 Rich descriptions and documentation can be found in Leung and Leung (2010) and in Colley et al. (2012). 5 See https://​foxesandfossils.com

Suggestions for further reading Burnard, P., Ross, V., Hassler, L., & Murphy, L. (2018). Translating intercultural creativities in community music. In B. Bartleet & L. Higgins (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of community music (pp. 229–​242). Oxford University Press. Odena, O. (2018). Musical creativities revisited: Educational foundations, practices, and research. Routledge.

References Antle, A. (2019). From Carnegie Hall to Clarenville: Writing lullabies in a Newfoundland women’s prison. CBC News. www.cbc.ca/​news/​canada/​newfoundland-​labrador/​lullaby-​prison-​correctional Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-​cognitive view. Prentice-​Hall. Becker, H. S. (2008). Art worlds. University of California Press. (Original work published 1982) Boden, M.  A. (2004). The creative mind:  Myths and mechanisms. Routledge. (Original work published 1990) Brophy, T. (2019). The Oxford handbook of assessment policy and practice in music education. Oxford University Press. Brown, K. D., & Lima, M. H. (2018). How ubiquitous technologies support ubiquitous music. In B. Bartleet & L. Higgins (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of community music (pp. 131–​153). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780190219505.013.5 Buley, D., & Buley, J. (2020, 11 June). Building a meaningful lullaby project [Conference presentation]. Carnegie Hall Lullaby Project National Convening, New York. Burnard, P. (2012). Musical creativities in real world practice. Oxford University Press. Burnard, P., Ross, V., Hassler, L., & Murphy, L. (2018). Translating intercultural creativities in community music. In B. Bartleet & L. Higgins (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of community music (pp. 229–​242). Oxford University Press.

250

251

Community music learning and creativity Campbell, P. (2010). Songs in their heads: Music and its meaning in children’s lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. Colley, B., Eidsaa, R., Kenny, A., & Leung, B. (2012). Creativity in partnership practices. In G. McPherson & G.Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol 2.). Oxford University Press. https://​doi. org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199928019.013.0027 Corvo, E., & DeCaro, W. (2020). COVID-​19 and spontaneous singing to decrease loneliness, improve cohesion, and mental well-​being: An Italian experience. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 12(Suppl. 1), S247–​S248. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​tra0000838 Croom, A. M. (2015). Music practice and participation for psychological well-​being: A review of how music influences positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment. Musicae Scientiae, 19(1), 44–​64. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864914561709 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. HarperCollins. Custodero, L., Cali, C., & Diaz-​Donoso, A. (2016). Music as a transitional object and practice: Children’s spontaneous musical behaviors in the subway. Research Studies in Music Education, 38(1),  55–​74. Eccles, J. (1999).The development of children ages 6 to 14. Future of Children, 9(2), 30–​44. https://​doi.org/​ 10.2307/​1602703 Emerson, B. (2020). Father and daughter lead Smyrna cover band to YouTube success. The Atlanta Journal-​Constitution. Feldman, D., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Gardner, H. (1994). Changing the world: A framework for the study of creativity. Praeger. Gardner, H. (1980). Artful scribbles: The significance of children’s drawings. Basic Books. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books. Gluschankof, C. (2020). When the music ends it stays in the brain: Agency and embodiment in young children’s engagements with recorded music in preschool. International Journal of Music in Early Childhood, 15(1), 75–​93. https://​doi.org/​10.1386/​ijmec_​00013_​1 Gouk, P., Kennaway, J., Prins, J., & Thormählen, W. (2019). The Routledge companion to music, mind and well-​ being. Routledge. Green, L. (2017). How popular musicians learn: A way ahead for music education. Routledge. Gruber, H. (1974). Darwin on man: A psychological study of scientific creativity. University of Chicago Press. Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5(9), 444–​454. Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. McGraw-​Hill. Hallam, S., Cross, I., & Thaut, M. (Eds.). (2018). The Oxford handbook of music psychology. Oxford University Press. Hargreaves, D., MacDonald, R., & Miell, D. (2002). Musical identities. Oxford University Press. Higgins, L. (2012). Community music: In theory and in practice. Oxford University Press. Hill, J. (2018). Becoming creative: Insights from Musicians in a Diverse World. Oxford University Press. Ilari, B. (in press). Elton’s back: Parenting and children’s musical participation in the aftermath of a pandemic. In G.Welch & M. Barrett (Eds.), Oxford handbook on early childhood music learning and development. Oxford University Press. Imber-​Black, E. (2020, 14 July). Rituals in the time of COVID-​19: Imagination, responsiveness, and the human spirit. Family Process. Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​famp.12581 John-​Steiner,V. (2000). Creative collaboration. Oxford University Press. Kaufman, J., & Beghetto, R. (2009). Beyond big and little:  The Four C Model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1–​12. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​a0013688 Kerchner, J. L. (2014). Music across the senses: Listening, learning, and making meaning. Oxford University Press. Kratus, J. (1989). A time analysis of the compositional processes used by children ages 7 to 11. Journal of Research in Music Education, 37(1), 5–​20. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3344949 Leung, B. W., & Leung, E. C. K. (2010). Teacher-​artist partnership in teaching Cantonese opera in Hong Kong schools: Student transformation. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 11(5),  1–​26. MacKinnon, D. (1978). What makes a person creative? In D. W. MacKinnon (Ed.), In search of human effectiveness (pp. 178–​186). Universe Books. (Original work published 1962) Maffioli, M. (2010). Il gesto, la musica, la dimensione artistica del movimento. In A. R. Addessi, I. Macchiarella, M. Privitera, & M. Russo (Eds.), Con-​scientia musica: Contrappunti per Rossana Dalmonte e Mario Barone (pp. 75–​87). Libraria Musicale Italiana. Marsh, K., & Young, S. (2006). Musical play. In G. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician:  A handbook of musical development. Oxford University Press. https://​oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/​view/​ 10.1093/​acprof:oso/​9780198530329.001.0001/​acprof-​9780198530329-​chapter-​15

251

252

Beatriz Ilari et al. McPherson, G. (2016). The child as musician:  A handbook of musical development (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. McPherson, G., &Welch, G. (2012). The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1–​2). Oxford University  Press. Memorial University. (2020, September). Featured Researchers at the Faculty of Education –​Drs. Jan and David Buley. www.mun.ca/​educ/​research/​researcherProled.php Moser, P. (2018). Growing community through a sense of place. In B. Bartleet & L. Higgins (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of community music (pp. 131–​153). Oxford University Press. Nachmanovitch, S. (1990). Free play: Improvisation in life and art. Jeremy P. Tarcher/​Putnam. Nijs, L., & Bremmer, M. (2019). Embodiment in early childhood music education. In S.Young & B. Ilari (Eds.), Music in early childhood: Multi-​disciplinary perspectives and inter-​disciplinary exchanges (pp. 87–​102). Springer. Odena, O. (2018). Musical creativities revisited: Educational foundations, practices, and research. Routledge. Pezzin, L. E., Larson, E. R., Lorber, W., McGinley, E. L., & Dillingham, T. R. (2018). Music-​instruction intervention for treatment of post-​traumatic stress disorder: A randomized pilot study. BMC Psychology, 6(1), Article 60. https://​doi.org/​10.1186/​s40359-​018-​0274-​8 Plucker, J., Beghetto, R., & Dow, G. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 83–​96. https://​doi.org/​10.1207/​s15326985ep3902_​1 Reverb. (2017, 10 November). Guitars for vets [Video].YouTube. https://​youtu.be/​nkhareCOK3U Riley, P. (2016). Creating music: What children from around the world can teach us. Rowman & Littlefield. Robson, S. (2014). Whose activity is it? The role of child-​and adult-​initiated activity in young children’s thinking. In S. Robson & S. F. Quinn (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of young children’s thinking and understanding (pp. 433–​447). Routledge. Russo, F., Ilari, B., & Cohen, A. (2020). Introduction:  Singing, development, interdisciplinarity and the biopsychosocial framework. In F. Russo, B. Ilari, & A. Cohen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to interdisciplinary studies in singing (pp. 1–​14). Routledge. Ruthmann, A., & Mantie, R. (Eds.). (2020). The Oxford handbook of technology and music education. Oxford University Press. Sawyer, R. K. (2003). Group creativity: Music, theater, collaboration. Erlbaum. Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. Schippers, H. (2018). Community music contexts, dynamics and sustainability. In B. Bartleet & L. Higgins (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of community music. Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​ oxfordhb/​9780190219505.013.29 Schippers, H., & Bartleet, B. (2013). The nine domains of community music: Exploring the crossroads of formal and informal music education. International Journal of Music Education, 31(4), 454–​471. Segni mossi. (2014, 11 June). AL CUBO, first Segni mossi experiment [Video].YouTube. www.youtube.com/​ watch?v=CasT-​T-​ZPf4 Seligman, M. (2010). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and wellbeing. Free Press. Simonton, D. (1988). Scientific genius: A psychology of science. Cambridge University Press. Sloboda, J. (2005). Generative processes in music: The psychology of performance, improvisation, and composition. Clarendon Press. Small, C. (1998). Musicking: The meanings of performing and listening. Wesleyan University Press. Thaut, M., & Hodges, D. (Eds.). (2019). The Oxford handbook of music and the brain. Oxford University Press. Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-​technical manual. Personnel Press/​Ginn. Trevarthen, C., Gratier, M., & Osborne, N. (2014). The human nature of culture and education. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 5(2), 173–​192. https://​doi.org/​10.1002/​wcs.1276 Veblen, K. (2007).The many ways of community music. International Journal of Community Music, 1(1), 5–​12. https://​doi.org/​10.1386/​ijcm.1.1.5_​1 Veblen, K., Messenger, S., Silverman, M., & Elliott, D. (2013). Community music today. Rowman & Littlefield Education. Veblen, K., & Waldron, J. (2012). Fast forward: Emerging trends in community music. In G. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 2). Oxford University Press. https://​doi. org10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199928019.013.0014 Webster, P. (2002). Creative thinking in music: Advancing a model. In T. Sullivan & L. Willingham (Eds.), Creativity and music education (pp. 16–​33). Canadian Music Educators’ Association.

252

253

Community music learning and creativity Webster, P. (2019). Assessment of creative potential in music. In T. Brophy (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of assessment policy and practice in music education (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​ oxfordhb/​9780190248093.013.26 Wiggins, J. (2015). Teaching for musical understanding. Oxford University Press. Wood, E. (2014). “I wonder why our dog has been so naughty?” Thinking differently from the perspective of play. In S. Robson & S. F. Quinn (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of young children’s thinking and understanding (pp. 19–​30). Routledge. https://​doi.org/​10.4324/​9781315746043 Young, S. & Ilari, B. (2012). Musical participation from birth to three: Towards a global perspective. In G. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1; pp. 279–​295). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199730810.013.0017_​update_​001

253

254

16 MOTIVATION AND DEVELOPING A MUSICAL IDENTITY Maria Spychiger

One may understand motivation to be the psychological structure that represents the vitality and expression of life. Motivation, taken from the etymological root of movere, is the basic source of all living creatures independent of the level of complexity of their mind and its consciousness. It is then ex ante an equivalent to life energy, the movement of life or life as to be moved. Entering the next section of this chapter, readers are introduced to Sara, an aspiring musician who perseveres in pursuit of a professional music performance career even in the face of economic uncertainty (Box 16.1). Taking Sara as an example, psychological theories of motivation offer an array of explanations as to how individuals sustain the long-​term commitment required to develop expertise in music. Theories are introduced and issues discussed that may influence motivation, such as risk assessment, task difficulty, subjective task value, desire to achieve, self-​ efficacy and social affiliation. The second section of this chapter discusses motivation in contexts of music learning and participation that are less oriented around achievement and expertise. Music’s physical and emotional effects, its connecting agency and its role in the life course as a reserve capacity come into focus. Musical self-​concept is highlighted for its role in steering musical behaviour and experience and, thus, nurturing musical identity. Throughout the entire chapter, attention is paid to the function of music as a connector to personal inner and immanent social worlds as well as a mediator of transcendent experiences. I suggest thinking of human motivation as being triggered by the specific human ability of imagination –​the ability to think of possible selves and worlds –​and that music plays a role in this by its potential ‘to go there’. Closing remarks highlight the responsibility of educators to provide exposure to many options for engaging with musical activities and being part of music-​related culture, underpinned by the principle that everyone can develop musical identity.

254

255

Motivation and developing musical identity

Motivation to achieve and to reach professional levels of musical expertise Learning to play an instrument may not in every phase be intrinsically rewarding, and it certainly requires a great deal of discipline. In 1993, Ericsson and colleagues published groundbreaking research advancing the view that there is a direct link between deliberate practice and expert performance. Expert performance, according to their research, results from 4 hours of deliberate practice per day, accumulated over a period of 10 years. This raises the question of how this long-​term commitment can be sustained and what factors promote such motivation. Ericsson and colleagues (1993) named a set of what they called “constraints”; that is, circumstances which enable deliberate practice. The first constraint is resources for the learner: a high level of parental attention and material investment as well as excellent pedagogical support. Thinking of Sara’s life, we can therefore surmise that her parents and teachers escorted her throughout the years of practice. Second, the researchers highlighted that deliberate practice is not inherently motivating, but rather undertaken when musicians perceive the utility (in service of their longer-​term goals) of doing so. This tension is referred to as the motivational constraint. Finally, the specific volitional aspect of situational effort, the third constraint, points to the possibility that deliberate practice may be most effectively carried out when focused toward specific events, such as performances, exams and the like. Overall, Ericsson et al. rejected notions of talent, claiming instead that expertise in music-​ making is determined by the amount of achieved deliberate practice. It remains a fact, however, that one person will commit to long-​term deliberate practice while another will not even if given equal access to resources. Further explanation is needed in order to understand the motivation that sustains the effort required for achieving high-​level musical expertise. Some potential theoretical approaches are consulted in the following sections.

Expectancy-​value theories Aspiring musicians like Sara (Box 16.1) typically make decisions to enter higher music education after having invested extensive time and material resources into their musical training, without assurances that this training will lead to the achievement of specific career goals. What

Box 16.1  Vignette 1 –​Sara and the many other applicants for higher education degrees in music Every year at the time of entrance exams, faculty members in universities of music face the task of evaluating potential applicants for their programmes. So many young people want to enter their institutions. All of them have histories –​mostly long ones –​of vocal or instrumental success, and most of them have worked through intense preparatory courses in order to be admitted as a candidate to what they see as the crucial step along the path of fulfilling a life dream. In our story, Sara, 19 years old, has finished secondary school and will undergo the entrance tests. With her 9 years of intense practice on the bassoon and becoming a member of a regionally known youth symphony orchestra at the age of 15, she has a good chance of meeting the examiners’ standards and being accepted into a programme at the major university of music of this region. She is one of the many individuals who intend to get a higher education degree and become an artist, although their future is more uncertain than if they were to choose a different course of study or professional training.

255

256

Maria Spychiger

is it that makes the goal of entry to higher music education for Sara so valuable and desirable in spite of a likely economically precarious future? A large corpus of psychological concepts and theories of motivation has emerged throughout the 130 or so years of psychology’s existence as an academic discipline. Amongst this work, expectancy-​value theories provide one perspective on the motivation to pursue expertise in music.

The risk preference model Expectancy-​value theories attempt to relate action to expected outcomes. Major elements of action are choice, performance and perseverance, whereas expected outcomes are identified by their perceived attractiveness (Wigfield, 1994). Atkinson’s risk preference model, developed in the 1950s, belongs to the expectancy-​value perspective on motivation; it predicts “that performance level should be greatest when there is greatest uncertainty about the outcome” (1957, p. 371). Atkinson’s concept in some ways reverses our everyday psychological expectation that uncertainty of outcome would actually hinder a specific behaviour. While the prestige of a desired career requires greater effort to achieve, it is also part of everyday experience that something uncertain can hold high potential value. Further, the likelihood of success is inversely related to difficulty. Individuals are more strongly motivated to work hard at moderately difficult tasks (i.e., potentially achievable through hard work) than easy tasks (i.e., require little or no effort) or extremely difficult tasks (i.e., impossible to achieve). Choice of behaviour does not rely as much on facts as on beliefs and wishes. The astonishing risk-​taking decisions of Sara and other aspiring young musicians can be well explained by this model. It has sustained its validity across the decades and in various topical contexts (Beckmann & Heckhausen, 2018). This model is strong in the prognosis of choice behaviour and persistence in achievement-​oriented situations, but does less well in predicting actual performance (Schneider, 1978).

Motivational beliefs and the role of societal norms The expectancy-​value model was extended by Eccles and colleagues (1983), who researched juvenile students in public education. Trying to understand the students’ choices of elective subjects, Eccles and colleagues found that the decisions were based not only on subject preference, but also on the estimated probability of successful achievement. Alongside estimations of success, the model comprises four dimensions of subjective task value: attainment value; interest and pleasure associated with the task (intrinsic value); short-​and long-​term benefits (utility value); and cost (the estimated loss if the task is not carried out). More recently, researchers have agreed that task values are high if the task allows for the expression and confirmation of self (Wigfield & Cambria, 2010;Yurt, 2015). Applying this model to the question of what motivates applicants for advanced degree music programmes, we can assume that they may expect to be successful. Eccles’ model bridges the gap between expectancy-​value theories and self-​theories of motivation, discussed later in this chapter. Similarly, attribution theory (Weiner, 1980) suggests that motivation can be explained by our self-​beliefs, conceived as external (e.g., difficulty of task) or internal (e.g., competency or learning strategy) attributions for failure or success. According to Weiner (1980), “information seeking” regarding what one can or cannot do is a major factor in decision-​making and explains most of its variance. Success in easy tasks or failure in difficult tasks is often attributed to task characteristics. Since moderate tasks have a fifty-​fifty chance of failure or success, performance on such tasks provides information about the person and his or her abilities to complete the 256

257

Motivation and developing musical identity

task. This may contribute to understanding the puzzle in our introductory vignette concerned with the many applicants for the few places at the arts university. Individuals like Sara may simply want to know whether or not their musical competence is sufficient in order to pursue becoming a professionally trained musician. Another motivation researcher, Rokeach (1973), looked at individual beliefs regarding what is desirable, arguing that values rely on and emerge from societal norms and trends and are entangled with a person’s psychological needs and sense of self (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002, p. 121). Feather (1988, 1992) built on Rokeach (1973) and Atkinson (1957), reinforcing the view that value and ability perceptions are related in many ways. Features of the considered object and the individual valence of success and failure are motivational factors that extend beyond the difficulty of a task (such as an entrance exam). Feather’s work represents a shift from expectancy-​ value theories to self-​theories. With regard to the connection between personal values and motivation, Feather uncovered considerable gender differences regarding the attitudes toward, preferences for, and achievement patterns in school subjects and in the relationship between expectations and valences. As for playing instruments, Hallam and colleagues (2018) revealed that choice of instruments is highly gendered as well, but did not find gender differences with regard to musical motivation at different levels of expertise in playing. Strong gender differences appeared in musical self-​concepts of third and fourth graders to the extent that persistently throughout an intervention for the enhancement of singing skills, girls scored significantly higher than boys (Spychiger, 2017a, pp. 50–​51). This leads us to self-​theories, discussed in the next section.

Perseverance, self-​defining goals and the possibility of symbolic self-​expansion Commitment to deliberate practice –​as emphasised at the start of this ­chapter –​may also be explained by the extent that persons (like Sara) who engage with it have become, first with the help of caregivers and educators, self-​regulated learners. They use a variety of strategies, believe they can perform efficaciously, set numerous and varied goals for themselves and engage in three important processes (Zimmerman, 2000): self-​observation (monitoring of one’s activities), self-​judgment (evaluation of how well one’s own performance compares to a standard or to the performance of others) and self-​reactions (reactions to performance outcomes). When these reactions are favourable, particularly in response to failure, students are more likely to continue. This last aspect includes the ability to deal effectively with mistakes as a characteristic of the self-​regulated, competent learner and of self-​completion.

Motivation for self-​completion Lewin (1926) was an early proponent of self-​theory perspectives, proposing that once a resolution is undertaken, the wish and will of that person –​the volition –​to attain a given goal takes on its own life and becomes a quasi-​need that pushes for its own realisation.Wicklund and Gollwitzer (1982) integrated Lewin´s ideas into their theory of symbolic self-​completion, assuming that individuals hold their long-​term accomplishments as symbols of an extended and completed self. Similarly, some researchers have argued that motivation is driven by representations of what we may yet become. Markus and Nurius (1986) introduced the term “possible selves” in order to capture this phenomenon, referring to cognitive manifestations of enduring goals, aspirations, motives, fears and threats. Adding to this idea, emerging from empirical investigations of musical self-​concept, is the concept of “ideal self ” (Spychiger, 2017b, pp. 276–​277). 257

258

Maria Spychiger

Music students often hold a set of ideals (e.g., concerning musical creativity, musicianship, understanding and knowledge, etc.) that frame their possible selves, encompassing what more they would like to know and be able to do, what they would like to learn and how proficient they possibly could become. Markus and Nurius (1986, p. 954) argue that much of motivation emerges from these possible, imagined selves: “Possible selves provide the specific self-​relevant form, meaning, organisation and direction to these dynamics. As such, they provide the essential link between the self-​concept and motivation.” Later, Erikson (2007, pp. 348–​349) sharpened the construct by conceptualising possible selves as concerned with self-​stories relevant to the present time, not just as a projection into the future. Possible selves are not static, but rather fluid; thus, while Sara may begin her higher education journey with one particular and fairly well defined possible self, that is likely to transition in various different ways when it is shaped by experience and new understandings as she navigates through the years of studying. These considerations highlight the specific human capacity of thinking fictional things and creating entire worlds in the mind. Austrian writer Robert Musil (1943) calls this “sense of possibility” –​the sense of thinking in options, prospects and/​or variations. Humans have always embraced fictional worlds. Their importance is key to our current understanding of motivation and is further support for Atkinson’s approach to risk-​taking decisions: people make choices based on desires and ideals even when the probability of attaining such goals may be less than 50%. In other words, people attach themselves –​their energy, plans, activities –​to things that are not yet real. They strive toward bringing what they (ideally) have in mind into (actual) existence. Accordingly, ideal selves and possible selves are the mediators of possible or ideal worlds.

Musical self-​concept and identity in music From the perspective of self-​theories, expectations of success are tied to domain-​specific self-​ concepts of ability. Intertwined with motivation, self-​concepts are outcomes and agents of consciousness and powerful predictors of what individuals feel confident to do (Spychiger, 2017b, p. 267). Marsh (2005, p. 2) spoke of self-​concept as “a ‘hot’ variable that makes things happen”, evoking behaviour, perception and action, learning and development. A  domain-​ specific and socially constructed view of self-​concept was argued by Shavelson and colleagues in 1976 (followed by Byrne, 1996; Harter, 1999), theorising that one individual may have a multitude of self-​concepts depending on what domain of life is in play. This perspective would suggest that individuals who accumulate expertise in musical performance will develop a specific self-​concept of ability and identity related to their musical experiences (Hargreaves et al., 2017). In recent decades, psychological research has paid increasing attention to self-​processes. As Bandura (1993, p. 118) summarises: “the impact of most environmental influences on human motivation, affect, and action is heavily mediated through self-​processes. They give meaning and valence to external events.” Pioneers of this view, notably George Herbert Mead (1934), expanded upon the idea of the self as a social product (James, 1890), later summarised in the term “symbolic interactionism”. Today, dialogical self-​theory is established as an academic domain (Hermans & Gieser, 2012).

Needs satisfaction theories Whereas expectancy-​value theories offer explanations for action, needs satisfaction theories draw from the basic psychological needs which humans strive to fulfil. The identification of three basic psychological needs has been prominent through the history of motivation. 258

259

Motivation and developing musical identity

Early motivation research named three domains from which the so-​called three-​needs theory of motivation was derived (McClelland, 1961). This includes (1)  achievement; (2)  affiliation; and (3) power. More recently, self-​determination theory, as developed and presented by Deci and Ryan (2012; first discussed in the 1990s), proposes three basic needs that align with McClelland’s model: (1) competence translates well into achievement; (2) social embeddedness resembles affiliation; and (3) autonomy, a term that reflects societal shifts throughout past decades towards individualisation and the mastering and designing of the self, is similar to McClelland’s domain of power. The vocabulary of self-​determination theory is more contemporary; we can connect it to life experience and to Sara, whose short-​and longer-​term motivation and development as a musician will be influenced by the extent to which her needs are met in each of these domains. For example, in addition to having developed a high level of competency as a musician, Sara most likely experienced pedagogies and parental support that privileged her development as an autonomous, self-​determined learner, and she may have developed a strong identity in being a part of a musical community. A further needs satisfaction approach, proposed by Norbert Bischof (1985), identifies two motivational systems –​“autonomy” and “security” –​antagonistic to a certain extent and, thus, requiring a balancing process. If a person goes too long prioritising his or her self-​determination and freedom, security and social attachment may decrease. To rebalance this, a certain amount of freedom may have to be given up. The ability to balance is part of the “arousal” system in the author’s “Zurich cybernetic model of social motivation” (Bischof, 1993; an elaboration of Bischof, 1985). In terms of the three basic needs, the balancing ability stands for the factor of achievement or competence. There is a fourth additional element in the Zurich model, called the coping system, which comes into play when one of the three other systems is blocked. Coping may figure as a somewhat clinical extension of achievement/​competence. Abraham Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs is a needs satisfaction theory as well. In this popular model, the basic physiological needs of safety and nourishment are followed by the social needs of love and belonging and completed by the need of self-​actualisation. The latter two are representative of connectedness to others and to oneself. Music’s effects and musical engagement may well be considered mediators in fulfilling those needs. Music, in the same vein as speech, is a semiotic system which belongs to the human species for its ecological embeddedness and communicative functions (addressed later in the chapter). Music mediates, just as speech does, all the basic needs in theories of motivation laid out so far. Some possible theoretical explanations that might underpin the extraordinary motivation required to sustain long-​term commitment in pursuit of the development of high levels of musical expertise have been discussed in this section. The focus was on cognitive perspectives encompassed in concepts such as perception of risk, attributions for success or failure, expectations of success, values, self-​concept and identity as well as approaches to needs satisfaction. In the following section, we move on to discuss motivation to participate in music in contexts of lives that are not centred as much on developing professional expertise as on the general benefits of music participation or music in everyday life (Clarke et al., 2010).

Music engagement in everyone’s and everyday life Across the life course, there are many contexts and possibilities for individual learning and engagement with music. Musical development begins before birth and may continue through all the years of life (Gembris, 2015; Lecanuet, 1996). Papoušek and Papoušek (1987) address the plentiful meanings of early musical behaviour, believing preverbal social interaction to be the 259

260

Maria Spychiger

basis for further cognitive development. More recently, Trevarthen and Malloch (2017) suggest that infants have a musical self. Spychiger (2017b) proposes that early vocal interactions are based on musical parameters such as melody, pitch, timbre, rhythm and coordination and that they are the experiences from which musical domain-​specific identity derives. From this view, the sense of identity (Erikson, 1959) only later comes into existence.

Individual life course and societal contexts of music engagement

Sector 3 Individual educaon, early educaon, private tuion in music schools, special schools for the gied, music gymnasiums, art schools

individual

Sector 4 Study programmes for professional training at private and state instuons, universies of music, art schools, conservatoires, etc.

BABIES, CHILDREN, ADOLESCENTS, YOUNG/MID-AGE ADULTS, SENIORS, ELDERLY

Sector 1

GENERAL EDUCATION / LEISURE TIME MUSIC-MAKING

Axis 1: Age

PROFESSIONAL TRAINING

Figure  16.1 provides an overview of societal fields for music engagement by combining two axes: (1) the individual life course and (2) societal supplies and institutions. Sectors 1–​4, intersecting with these two axes, represent the many ways that individuals may encounter music learning and related cultural participation across their lives. While in the first part of the chapter, motivation was highlighted within Sectors 3 and 4 of Figure 16.1, this second part focuses on Sectors 1 and 2 –​in which most persons do not strive for professional musical expertise yet are motivated to sustain engagement with music in their lives. Having investigated young people (aged 11–​18) from middle-​and working-​class families, O’Neill (2017) spoke of “music learning ecologies”. Mapping their activity led to a typology

Musical socialisaon and educaon in families, elementary music educaon kindergarten, public schools and other societal instuons

Sector 2 Musical acvies and educaon (public and private, secular and church related) for adults: music associaons, wind bands, choirs, workshops, etc.

Axis 2: Educaon societal Figure 16.1  Sectors of musical activity related to societal opportunities and to varieties of musical motivation and development in musically active individuals Source: Spychiger (2017a, p. 62)

260

261

Motivation and developing musical identity

of musical engagement that included: “agentive” for persons who are musically active in self-​ determined ways and well integrated in their life and peer groups; “situative” when active in a variety of places including the internet and digital technology; and “segmented” when domains of musical activity such as instrumental lessons are separated from other music educational domains, such as school.

Music in identity Some further explanations for motivation for lifelong music learning and participation among non-​professionals may be provided by the concept of music in identity (MII), proposed by Hargreaves and colleagues (2002, p. 2) This is distinct from identity in music (IIM). The former refers to the relationship of individual identity with music (e.g., encompassing the ways in which we foster and cherish music in specific, personal ways), whereas the latter is representative of individuals for whom music is much at the centre of their lives. Over the life course, both MII and IIM, and therefore motivation to engage with music, are socially mediated and influenced by significant others and educators. Belief in one’s competencies often requires a mentor, caregiver or educator who supports and shapes an individual’s sense of self, bolstering expectations of success, promoting subjective task values and providing clear information that underpins motivational attributions for success or failure. Such encounters and experiences may occur at any point in a person’s life (see Gembris, 2015; Spychiger, 2017b). Some researchers and practitioners have extended their work to include intergenerational learning in music. Projects such as Younger than Seven, Older than Seventy-​ Seven (see Europäisches Institut für Musik und Generation, 2013), in which preschool children repeatedly get together with seniors in nursing homes in order to make music together, are vivid examples. The elderly as well as the children bear testimony to the rewarding and changing experience. Members of staff report short-​term as well as long-​term health improvements in the elderly, which they attribute to this type of engagement.

Music as a reserve capacity MII may be nourished at any point in the life course (Creech et al., 2020). To illustrate this, Vignette  2 (Box 16.2) describes a person who learned to play an instrument relatively late in life.

Box 16.2  Vignette 2 –​in honour of her late brother, Gina learns to play guitar at the age of 61 In a conversation with the author, Gina revealed that she had considered herself to be a non-​musical person until recently when she started to learn to play the guitar. She kept practicing every day.The reason for this change was sad: Her brother, a guitar player and the only musical person in the family (as she declares), had died unexpectedly. She soon after made the decision to learn to play the guitar, in order to honour him and feel close to him while working with the instrument. She aimed to play well enough so that one day, perhaps at the one-​year anniversary of his death, she could stand at her brother’s grave and sing a song for him. At the time of the conversation, she had started to love playing and singing, and she sometimes did it also for reasons other than grieving.

261

262

Maria Spychiger

As expectancy-​value perspectives might suggest, Gina’s motivation manifested itself in action (i.e., daily, focused musical activity), but it may also be interpreted through the lens of self-​ theories and needs satisfaction theories. Meeting new musical challenges has become a source of competency belief and self-​efficacy. No longer does Gina think that she is not musical. Furthermore, she found through music-​making a response to her wish to connect to her late brother and to acknowledge his life and musicianship, achieving a feeling of belongingness, and she may also have found opportunities to express her autonomy as a learner (Deci & Ryan, 2012). In terms of the theory of life span development (Baltes et al., 2006), to a certain extent Gina balanced the loss in her life with a gain, having retrieved and explored her (as yet) undetected musical capacity. Baltes describes lifelong development as a constant process of such balancing. The bereavement of beloved ones represents a significant part of increasing losses (be it physical or mentally) during older age. Before the final situation of death, much of the decline can be balanced with strategies that sustain motivation. Retrieving reserve capacities is part of the theory of successful ageing (Baltes & Baltes, 1990). Gina got access to a music-​related reserve capacity (Gembris, 2015). As her story shows, making music can provide opportunities for gains at any point in life. Wider benefits may also emerge from listening to music, such as consolation, focusing of attention and distraction from pain. With the aid of assistive digital instruments, even a person with significant mobility limitations may still listen to music or even make music (Creech, 2019), experiencing effects on emotion, cognition, memory and power for mood management, seen also in Alzheimer research (Cevasco & Grant, 2003; Freund & Baltes, 1998).

Functions of music This leads us to the many functions of music, which further help to explain motivation for lifelong participation in music. Human interaction, relatedness, bonding and socialising may well be mediated by music or be important factors of music’s anthropological functions (as listed by Merriam, 1964). One strong expression of affiliation in the sense of connectedness with others is prosocial behaviour. Music has the potential to mediate motivation to help others, and musically induced feelings of solidarity may translate into action. As Kirschner and Tomasello (2010) discovered, 4-​year-​old children brought together in groups of two were much more ready to carry out this type of prosocial behaviour following engagement in joint music-​making. Many people seek musical experience in large gatherings of people, and the feelings which go along with it. For example, the memory of the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales, will forever be dominated by Elton John singing “Candle in the Wind” at Westminster Abbey. Music established a sense of belonging among mourners all around the globe. A further example can be found in the singing revolution in the Baltic countries, where people gathered all along the borders and built the longest human chain in history, constantly singing and dancing, finally achieving freedom without using weapons (Warren, 2012). More recent e­xamples  –​from 2020 –​are those in Lombardy shaken by COVID-​19 who, while keeping social distance, sang together evening after evening from the balconies of their homes and the large crowds of folks in Belarus who peacefully protested while singing folk songs. These events are as social and political as they are musical. A famous historical example serves as the third vignette in this chapter (Box 16.3).

262

263

Motivation and developing musical identity

Box 16.3  Vignette 3 –​Freddie Mercury singing with 72,000 people for solidarity In July of 1985, the Live Aid concert took place at Wembley stadium, London. Rock band Queen with their vocal genius Freddie Mercury gave a 20-​minute performance in which 72,000 people engaged with him in singing songs for solidarity, including legendary songs like “We Will Rock You”, “We Are the Champions” and in particular “Bohemian Rhapsody”. The concert was in support of large parts of Africa which, at that time, were shaken by famine. The impression of the performance was so strong that it has become a historic event, known to very many people and played on social media millions of times. The recent film Bohemian Rhapsody reinforces its memory.

The reported incidents relate to a multitude of individuals who have been part of a self-​ expanding, perhaps self-​transcending atmosphere created when thousands of people gather and experience music-​making or music listening together. This leads to the final remarks of this chapter, with conclusions regarding motivation for music in education and the community.

Summary and outlook The motivational roots of engaging with music reach deep. Humans strive to go beyond the given, transcend the immanent by creating further worlds and strive for connections into these worlds, and music is hypothesised to be a strong agent of this interest, becoming a quasi-​need (Lewin, 1926) or a “further worlds” need (Spychiger, 2019). This has led to an amendment of the theory of motivation.

An amendment to the three basic needs in the theory of motivation The amendment ventured here relates to the human ability to imagine, and it concerns all three needs but most of all the need for affiliation. An individual connects not just to oneself and social others, but also the worlds beyond the material and immediate, which are worlds of the mind, of imagination and knowledge. Humans are strongly moved by what their minds create. They make staggering efforts to go beyond what is, to further worlds. Becoming acquainted with and connected to those further worlds requires mediation. The terms “sacred” and “holy” highlight the significance of the processes which link person, place, object and environment. Transcending processes take place in “sacred spheres” (Spychiger, 2019), experienced in positive, self-​extending or self-​completing ways. They occur within religious environments as well as in secular non-​religious contexts –​in philosophical, aesthetic, scientific and everyday situations. As the Freddie Mercury vignette indicates, music has a transcending and connecting capacity and is interwoven with this crucial part of human motivation. Reimer, in the context of music and aesthetic experience, speaks of “beyondness” (1993, p. 202). He associates aesthetics with the possibility of experiencing transcendence, accompanied by feelings of fulfillment, meaning and intrinsic value. Also, Pirner (1999) sees musical experience as interjection or escape from everyday experience, extending and opening it up to the experience of transcendence. Earlier, Dewey (1934/​1980) used similar terms when differentiating between everyday experience and aesthetic experience. In Dewey’s conception, experiences of transcendence

263

264

Maria Spychiger

have particular qualities, such as meaningfulness, beauty, reflection and surrender, a certain irresistibility and the need for a frame, since the material world dissolves. Framing provides this quality and allows for this type of consciousness. Music often acts as a framer: it leads beyond, to the further worlds, transfers from immanent to transcendent and sets time frames to do so (see Spychiger, 2019). I conceptualise the long-​held dimension of motivation, the human need for affiliation, as being directed twofold: to immanent and to transcendent. In terms of the expectancy-​value theory of motivation, going beyond has high value. The expectancy of participating in going beyond is mediated and enhanced through music. It is one of the means of ‘getting there’. Music can create an atmosphere of reception, imagination and encounter with non-​material things; it can bring ‘other worlds’ into existence so that they can be experienced in the immanent world. Further, music fuels the physical body in order to, for example, run longer until release of neurotransmitters; or it unites energies in a group of people so that they can resist severe stress and reach higher physical achievement. There are many ways and means to fulfil the need for immanent affiliation, and so it is for the transcendent. Music is a strong and reliable connector. Privation and withdrawal from that specific means may cause a sense of deprivation. Looked at from a capitalist perspective, it may be for these reasons that the market value of music is so high. We have to keep in mind that the relations between music, emotion and action are multifold and complex.The effects of music on motivation can result in actions of all kinds, including martial and inhumane ones. This latter circumstance calls for ongoing critical thinking and research in the intersecting domains of music, motivation and identity.

Personal experience and sharing the values of music Motivation for music engagement at all levels and stages in the life course relates firmly to personal experience and to the social and emotional benefits of music participation. Emotional and motivational effects, such as calming, consoling, refreshing, activating, rejoicing, and many more, are addressed in the Geneva Emotion Music Scales (Zentner et al., 2008). Individuals may feel closer to themselves in that they think about oneself while listening to music. The introductory scenario of this chapter highlighted the many young people who are prepared to commit years of intense labour in pursuit of musical expertise and the possibility of professional careers. Given the economic risks and the intense effort required, this condition was considered to be a puzzle. Focusing on psychological constructs such as belief, value, goal, and so on has led to important advances in the academic field of motivation. These foci may, however, as pointed out by Eccles and Wigfield (2002, p. 127), overemphasise rational processes at the expense of affective and other influences on motivation. Slovic et al. (1982) also argue that the logical, rational decision-​making processes of determining expectancies and valences often do not come into play “because people prefer simpler, but more fallible and optimistic, decision-​making strategies. They also [argue] that task values shift fairly rapidly, particularly for unfamiliar tasks” (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002, p. 122). Societal improvements toward networks and progress in acknowledging the shared needs of life and the role that artists play in them may build a bridge to fewer risks. Being a professor at a school of music, I have a sense that the aspiring candidates, students and finally graduated young professionals do not want to fulfil just their own needs and standards –​feeling competent, successful, autonomous and, most of all, affiliated; rather, they want to share and contribute to wide participation in the unique values of music. They know that children and young people individually need music and that society as a whole craves music.

264

265

Motivation and developing musical identity

One major and unique aspect of musical experience throughout the life course is its capacity for transcendence, and musicians are, thus, protagonists of this process, a position which may well provide a deep motivation for the arduous training and risks involved in preparation for a future professional life in music. Individuals who commit to the effort required to reach high levels of musical proficiency are very often motivated not just by the desire to express themselves and personally go beyond –​on a most refined level –​in the musical medium, but also by the effect of empowering others while mediating their beyond experience.

Implications for contemporary education Looking at the development of musical identity in our time and culture from the perspective of human motivation first of all elicits admiration for the young people who pursue expertise as musicians and music teachers. Even more importantly, musical motivation is to be understood in the majority of people, who do not seek musical careers but, nevertheless, pursue music in their lives. With this group, educators may first recognise the musical need in general and how this may be expressed individually (e.g., in relation to gender, minority status and other issues) and then turn their comprehension into feedback and opportunities for experience and learning. Notwithstanding many threats, music education remains a school subject in general education in many countries. It has many advocates and intercessors, and it is supported by many sources, including organisations who believe in the importance of musical activity and expression, outcome and promotion of imagination. As imagination is the home of human thinking and feeling, it is certainly also the home of motivation and, thus, the starting point of action that leads to human culture. Music educators bring skills and musical culture in their breadth and depth to the next generations so that they can participate in its fullness, in turn developing their own music ecologies. There are many goals of music education. From the perspective developed within this chapter, musical behaviour is greatly motivated by its capacity to transcend, similar to what proponents of aesthetic education attribute to aesthetic experience. Music educators then stand in a somewhat sacred place in facilitating this process. They are players in the immanent world as well as gatekeepers of idealism, inspiration and beyondness; they promote musical activity and the connecting agency of music, be it for the learners themselves or in relation to one another in groups or further worlds of imagination. According to sociologist Alan Merriam (1964, p. 229), the arts are often understood to be expressive and representative of the inner workings of an individual, but he also remarks that “the arts are more than this”. Inhabiting various music learning ecologies means that music-​related behaviour is a socially embedded activity and an integrative part of creating life and environment. Thus, societal systems of education (and specifically, music education) must ensure that learning environments, personnel and tools are available to the new generations, and all generations living. The paradigm of capability, and the associated research approach, is appropriate for investigating and promoting this view (Krupp-​Schleußner & Bartels, 2018). Future research should be concerned with questions of how networks can be built and how existing institutions at all levels of expertise –​public and private schools, nursing schools and homes, associations, music and choir corporations in villages and towns, educational radio formats, streaming services and social media platforms –​can be connected. Participation should be possible and available to all segments of people and society, providing opportunities for motivation to sustain the development of musical identity.

265

266

Maria Spychiger

Reflective questions 1. Looking at the societal contexts and sectors of music engagement as shown in Figure 16.1: a. What are contexts that you have experienced? In which sectors have you been, and are you, “home”? b. What motivation have you developed, perhaps excelling at the chosen goal, in order to participate in music activities? c. While motivation is required for practicing and learning music, music may also impact on motivation for other activities. Is this your experience, and, if yes, in what kind of experiences have you found this?

Suggestions for further reading Hermans, H., & Gieser, T. (2012). Handbook of dialogical self-​theory. Cambridge University Press. Kallio, A. A., Alperson, P., & Westerlund, H. (Eds.). (2019). Music, education, and religion:  Intersections and entanglements. Indiana University Press. MacDonald, D., Hargreaves, J., & Miell, D. (Eds.). (2017). Handbook of musical identities. Oxford University Press. Merriam, A. P. (1964). The anthropology of music. Northwestern University Press.

For a literary read Powers, R. (2019). The time of our singing.Vintage.

References Atkinson, J.  W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-​taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64(6), 359–​372. Baltes, P. B., & Baltes, M. M. (1990). Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The model of selective optimization with compensation. In P. B. Baltes & M. M. Baltes (Eds.), Successful aging:  Perspectives from the behavioral sciences (pp. 1–​ 34). Cambridge University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​ CBO9780511665684.003 Baltes, P. B., Lindenberger, U., & Staudinger, U. M. (2006). Life span theory in developmental psychology. In R. M. Lerner & W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 569–​664). John Wiley & Sons Inc. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-​ efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–​148. Beckmann, J., & Heckhausen, H. (2018). Motivation as a function of expectancy and incentive. In J. Heckhausen & H. Heckhausen (Eds.), Motivation and action (3rd ed.; pp. 163–​220). Springer. https://​ doi.org/​10.1007/​978-​3-​319-​65094-​4 Bischof, N. (1985). Das Rätsel Ödipus. Piper. Bischof, N. (1993). Untersuchungen zur Systemanalyse der sozialen Motivation I:  Die Regulation der sozialen Distanz: Von der Feldtheorie zur Systemtheorie. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 201,  5–​43. Byrne, B.  M. (1996). Measuring self-​ concept across the life span:  Issues and instrumentation. American Psychological Association. Cevasco, A. M., & Grant, R. E. (2003). Comparison of different methods for eliciting exercise-​to-​music for clients with Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Music Therapy, 40(1),  41–​56. Clarke, E., Dibben, N., & Pitts, S. (2010). Music and mind in everyday life. Oxford University Press. Creech, A. (2019). Using music technology creatively to enrich later-​life: A literature review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 117. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2019.00117

266

267

Motivation and developing musical identity Creech, A.,Varvarigou, M., & Hallam, S. (2020). Contexts for music learning and participation: Developing and sustaining musical possible selves. Palgrave. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Self-​determination theory. In P. A. M.Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 416–​436). Sage Publications. https://​doi. org/​10.4135/​9781446249215.n21 Dewey, J. (1980). Art as experience. Perigee Books. (Original work published 1934). Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 75–​146). Freeman. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–​132. Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R.T., & Tesch-​Römer, C. (1993).The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–​406. Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the life cycle. International Universities Press. Erikson, M. G. (2007). The meaning of the future: Toward a more specific definition of possible selves. Review of General Psychology, 11(4), 348–​358. Feather, N. T. (1988).Values, valences, and course enrollment: Testing the role of personal values within an expectancy-​value framework. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 381–​391. Feather, N.  T. (1992). Expectancy-​value theory and unemployment effects. Journal of Occupantional and Organizational Psychology, 64(4), 315–​330. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​j.2044–​8325.1992.tb00508.x Freund, A. M., & Baltes, P. B. (1998). Selection, optimization, and compensation as strategies of life management: Correlations with subjective indicators of successful aging. Psychology and Aging, 13(4), 531–​543. Gembris, H. (2015). Musikalische Begabung und Alter(n). Lit Verlag. Hallam, S., Creech, A.,Varvarigou, M., & Papageorgi, I. (2018). Gender differences in musical motivation at different levels of expertise. Psychology of Music, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735618815955 Hargreaves, D. J., Miell, D., & MacDonald, R. A. R. (2002). Musical identities. Oxford University Press. Hargreaves, D. J., Miell, D., & MacDonald, R. A. R. (2017). The changing identity of musical identities. In R. A. R. MacDonald, D. J. Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), Handbook of musical identities (pp. 3–​23). Oxford University Press. Harter, S. (1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. Guilford Press. Hermans, H., & Gieser, T. (2012). Handbook of dialogical self-​theory. Cambridge University Press. James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. Macmillan. Europäisches Institut für Musik und Generation. (2013, 18 July). Kinder und Senioren machen gemeinsam Musik [German-​language video].YouTube. www.youtube.com/​watch?v=_​-​cwL6tGtRs Kirschner, S., & Tomasello, M. (2010). Joint music making promotes prosocial behavior in 4-​year-​old children. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(5), 354–​364. Krupp-​Schleußner,V., & Bartels, D. (2018, 10–​13 July). Music education and the question of freedom. Applications of Amartya Sen’s and Martha Nussbaum’s capability/​ capabilities approach [Paper presentation]. ISME Commission on Music Policy: Culture, Education, and Media 19th International Seminar, Munich, Germany. Lecanuet, J.-​P. (1996). Prenatal auditory experience. In I. Deliege & J. Sloboda (Eds.), Musical beginnings: Origins and development of musical competence (pp 3–​35). Oxford University Press. Lewin, K. (1926).Vorsatz, Wille und Bedürfnis. Psychologische Forschung, 7, 330–​385. Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954–​969. Marsh, H. (2005). Big fish little pond effect on academic self-​concept: Cross-​cultural and cross-​disciplinary generalizability [Paper presentation]. Australian Association of Research in Education AARE, Parramatta, New South Wales, Australia. www.aare.edu.au/​data/​publications/​2005/​mar05389.pdf Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–​396. McClelland, D. C. (1961). The achieving society. D.Van Nostrand. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society. University of Chicago Press. Merriam, A. P. (1964). The anthropology of music. Northwestern University Press. Musil, R. (1943). Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften [The man without qualities]. Imprimerie Centrale. O’Neill, S. (2017).Young people’s life. Learning ecologies, identities, and connectedness. In D. J. Hargreaves, R. MacDonald, & D. Miell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook on musical identity (pp. 79–​104). Oxford University Press. Papoušek, H., & Papoušek, M. (1987). Intuitive parenting: A dialectic counterpart to the infant´s integrative competence. In J. D. Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of infant development (2nd ed.; pp. 669–​720). Wiley.

267

268

Maria Spychiger Pirner, M.  L. (1999). Musik und Religion in der Schule:  Historisch-​systematische Studien in religions-​und musikpädagogischer Perspektive.Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Reimer, B. (1993). Essential and nonessential characteristics of aesthetic education. In E. R. Jorgensen (Ed.), Philosopher, teacher, musician: Perspectives on music education (pp. 193–​214). University of Illinois Press. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. The Free Press. Schneider, K. (1978). Atkinson’s “risk preference” model. Should it be revised? Motivation and Emotion, 2(4), 333–​344. https://​doi.org/​10.1007/​BF00993328 Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-​concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 407–​441. Slovic, P., Fischoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1982). Why study risk perception? Risk Analysis, 2(2), 83–​93. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​j.1539–​6924.1982.tb01369.x Spychiger, M. (2017a). Das musikalische Selbstkonzept als vermittelnde Variable musikalischer Lern-​ und Entwicklungsprozesse. Erläuterungen und Implikationen für Unterricht und Forschung. In J. Buschmann & B. Jank (Eds.), Belcantare Brandenburg –​Jedes Kind kann singen (pp. 45–​67).Wissenschaftliche Edition, Potsdamer Schriftenreihe für Musikpädagogik. Spychiger, M. (2017b). Musical self-​concept as a mediating psychological structure: From musical experience to musical identity. In D. J. Hargreaves, R. MacDonald, & D. Miell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of musical identity (pp. 267–​287). Oxford University Press. Spychiger, M. (2019).The sacred sphere. Its equipment, beauty, functions, and transformations under secular conditions. In A. A. Kallio, P. Alperson, & H. Westerlund (Eds.), Music, education, and religion: Intersections and entanglements (pp. 142–​156). Indiana University Press. Trevarthen, C., & Malloch, S. (2017). The musical self: Affection for life in a community of sound. In D. J. Hargreaves, R. MacDonald, & D. Miell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of musical identity (pp. 155–​175). Oxford University Press. Waren, W. (2012). Theories of the singing revolution: An historical analysis of the role of music in the Estonian Independence Movement. International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music, 43(2), 439–​451. Weiner, B. (1980). Human motivation. Rinehart and Winston. Wicklund, R. A., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1982). Symbolic self-​completion. Lawrence Erlbaum. Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-​value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6(1),  49–​78. Wigfield, A., & Cambria, J. (2010). Students’ achievement values, goal orientations, and interest: Definitions, development, and relations to achievement outcomes. Developmental Review, 30(1),  1–​35. Yurt, E. (2015). Understanding middle school students’ motivation in math class: The expectancy-​value model perspective. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3(4), 288–​297. Zentner, M., Grandjean, D., & Scherer, K. (2008). Emotions evoked by the sound of music: Characterization, classification, and measurement, Emotion, 8(4), 494–​521. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-​regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-​regulation (pp. 13–​39). Academic Press. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1016/​B978-​012109890-​2/​50031-​7

268

269

17 THE ROLE OF MUSIC PERFORMANCE THROUGH THE LIFE COURSE Ioulia Papageorgi

Musical performance engages auditory and visual perception skills, attention, precise timing, extended control over movement, learning, memory and emotion (Kanduri et  al., 2015). Developing expertise in instrumental performance is, therefore, a complex process requiring the development of aural, cognitive, technical, musical, communication and performing skills (Hallam, 2006) and is categorised under complex skill learning. The biological basis of this complex cognitive function of the human brain remains largely unknown (Kanduri et  al., 2015). Advances in the study of the brain have enabled scientists to obtain a more in-​depth understanding of how active engagement with music might extend to non-​musical areas of cognition, a notion known as “far transfer” (Rose et al., 2019). The purpose of this chapter is to draw together available research evidence from studies using a variety of methodologies including brain imaging, quantitative measures and qualitative methods that focus on how engagement with music performance might affect individuals across the lifespan. Effects are discussed in the context of cognitive development, academic skills and achievement, motivation and engagement with learning, socio-​emotional development and prosocial behaviour. This is followed by a consideration of the benefits of community-​based music interventions supporting at-​r isk or disaffected individuals. Issues for further research and implications for education are considered at the end of the chapter.

Music training and cognitive development Intellectual development Brain studies show structural differences between musicians and non-​musicians in brain regions involved in sensorimotor and auditory skills (e.g., the primary auditory cortex is larger in musicians). Brain imaging shows that musicians (compared to non-​musicians) have a bigger and thicker corpus callosum, thereby speeding the transfer of information between the two hemispheres (Schlaug et  al., 1995). Brain imaging studies show differences in structural and functional specialisations of the brain between musicians and non-​musicians, and they have provided evidence to support the view that music training stimulates neuroplasticity, including changes in the grey and white matter architectures and in cerebellar volume (Kanduri et al., 2015). Undertaking music lessons has been shown to result in small increases in general 269

270

Ioulia Papageorgi

intelligence and fluid intelligence IQ (Meyer et al., 2018; Rose et al., 2019; Papageorgi et al., 2011; Schellenberg, 2004). Similar results have been reported by Criscuolo et al. (2019), who found a positive association between music training and measures of IQ, verbal intelligence and executive functions in adulthood.

Memory One of the first studies investigating the association between instrumental learning and memory was conducted by Chan et  al. (1998). University students with at least 6  years of music training before the age of 12 recalled significantly more words than individuals with no training, indicating improvements in verbal memory as a result of the training. In a follow-​up study with children aged 6–​15 (Ho et al., 2003), children with music training outperformed those with no music training in verbal memory but not visual memory, results consistent with findings in adults (Chan et al., 1998). The researchers concluded that music training systematically affects memory processing consistent with possible neuroanatomical modifications in the left temporal lobe. A positive association between music training and auditory memory has been supported by a plethora of studies (e.g., Brandler & Rammsayer, 2003; George & Coch, 2011; Jakobson et al., 2003; Karapetsas et al., 2011; Oechslin et al., 2013; Rickard et al., 2010; Roden et al., 2012; Roden et al., 2014). Music training improves aspects of cognitive functioning strongly related to auditory information processing (Roden et al., 2014).

Spatial reasoning Interest in the association between music and spatial reasoning was generated after a publication in Nature by Rauscher et al. (1993) in which they reported an improvement in spatial task performance after listening to Mozart for 10 minutes.Various studies attempted to replicate the effect but were unsuccessful (e.g., Steele et al., 1999), and those who did succeed found that it lasted no more than 12 minutes following music listening (Jenkins, 2001). Meta-​analyses have confirmed that there is little evidence to support significant enhancements in cognitive performance that can be attributed to the Mozart effect (see, for example, Chabris, 1999; Pietschnig et al., 2010). Nonetheless, the idea sparked scientific curiosity, and various researchers have attempted to investigate whether active music engagement (rather than passive listening, as in the Mozart effect studies) has an impact on spatial reasoning skills. Evidence suggests that music engagement improves spatial reasoning (Hallam, 2010). Music training, especially rhythmic instruction, has been found to have positive effects for children (Rauscher & Hinton, 2011; Rauscher et al., 1993; Rauscher et  al., 1997). Research with adult musicians suggests that they outperform non-​musicians in spatial abilities such as mental rotation (Pietsch & Jansen, 2012; Sluming et al., 2007). A meta-​analysis by Hetland (2000) concluded that music instruction has a strong and reliable association with spatial memory, spatial recognition, mental rotation and spatial visualisation performance. Younger children (3–​5 years old) appear to benefit more than older children (6–​12 years old), which raises the question as to whether there is a sensitive period for learning during which the effects of music instruction are more profound. Holmes and Hallam (2017) conducted a quasi-​experimental study in which 178 children between the ages of 4 and 7 took part in a music programme over a period of 2 years. Their results indicated a beneficial effect of music instruction on the development of spatial-​temporal skills.

270

271

Music performance through the life course

Association between music participation and academic skills Mathematics The development of spatial-​temporal skills has been reported as a strong predictor of mathematics attainment in primary education (Booth & Siegler, 2008). It is therefore not surprising that a number of studies have investigated whether active music engagement (e.g., instrumental lessons) influences performance in mathematics. Gardiner et al. (1996) reported that after 7 months of participating in a music and visual arts curriculum emphasising sequenced skill development, children aged 5–​7 years surpassed the control group in scores of standardised mathematical tests. Rauscher and Zupan (2000) observed that children starting keyboard lessons at the age of 3 had higher scores on spatial-​ temporal and arithmetic tests in the 2 years of training, with the effects still evident 2 years after the training was terminated. Furthermore, Rauscher and LeMieux (2003) tested children aged 3–​4 who were undertaking keyboard lessons, singing training or rhythmic instruction. Researchers found that all music groups had higher scores in arithmetic tests compared to the control group, with the rhythm group scoring higher than all groups in sequencing and arithmetic tasks. Graziano et al. (1999) found that preschool children undertaking piano lessons for 6 months improved dramatically on spatial-​temporal reasoning, whereas children in the control group did not. In a following experiment, the researchers studied children aged 6–​8 and found that those undertaking keyboard instruction scored significantly higher on proportional mathematics and fractions. Cheek and Smith (1999) compared the performance of eighth-​ g raders in mathematics standardised tests and found that those undertaking private lessons for 2 or more years performed significantly better compared to those not taking private lessons. Students taking keyboard lessons had the highest scores overall. The age of commencement of music training is crucial (Hallam, 2015). Studies show gains in spatial reasoning for children as young as 3 years old (e.g., Rauscher et al., 1993; Rauscher et al., 1997; Rauscher & LeMieux, 2003) as well as those in preschool and early primary school (Graziano et al., 1999; Rauscher & Hinton, 2011). Rauscher and Hinton (2011) conducted longitudinal studies of middle-​income and economically disadvantaged preschoolers and found that children receiving music instruction prior to the age of 7 performed better on spatial-​temporal and numerical reasoning tasks than children in control groups, with the effects still evident 2 years after the end of the intervention. Findings indicate that the earlier the commencement of music training, the greater the gains in spatial reasoning abilities. Some studies found no effect of music training on mathematics performance in children (e.g., Costa-​Giomi, 2004), while others reported mixed results with children in music training improving in mathematics performance in a similar manner to children undertaking drama lessons (Rickard et al., 2010). A meta-​analysis of studies looking at music training and mathematics achievement provided some tentative support for a positive effect (Vaughn, 2000). A small positive association was concluded from the 20 correlational studies included, whereas a small causal relationship was inferred from the 6 experimental studies included. A systematic review by Jaschke et al. (2013) concluded that the transfer from music to mathematical skills is controversial, with mixed results being reported. Holmes and Hallam (2017) provided further support for this, as they did not consistently find differences in general mathematics attainment between the intervention and control groups in their study. Reasons for the inconclusive association between music and mathematics attainment could be methodological, as studies differ in research designs, tests administered and domain of

271

272

Ioulia Papageorgi

mathematics measured (Jaschke et al., 2013). It may also be that musical training relates to particular aspects of mathematics but not others (Hallam, 2015). Areas where music and mathematics share a structural overlap (e.g., pattern recognition, symbol usage) appear to have a positive correlation (Bahr & Christensen, 2000), possibly because this similarity facilitates near transfer of skills.

Language and literacy According to Hallam (2017), evidence from a range of research suggests a complex overlap of neural systems responsible for the processing of language and music. Active music-​making facilitates the development of aural perceptual processing systems, which support the encoding and identification of speech sounds and patterns, thus enhancing language skills (Hallam, 2017). Musicians appear to be more sensitive to changes in pitch during speech. Brain imaging studies have found that compared with non-​musicians, musicians evidence enhanced evoked potentials in the cortex and brainstem in response to changes in pitch during speech processing (Besson et al., 2007; Magne et al., 2006). Musically trained children have stronger neural activation responses to pitch patterns of their native language (Besson et al., 2007), have a richer vocabulary (Forgeard et al., 2008) and are more able readers (Corrigall & Trainor, 2011;Tallal & Gaab, 2006) in comparison to children who are not musically trained.Tierney and Kraus (2013) propose that music training can function as an effective developmental educational strategy for both children with typical developmental profiles and children with language learning impairments. According to Kraus and Chandrasekaran (2010), the cognitive-​sensory features involved in music training promote neural plasticity, which facilitates auditory processing of sound in both music and speech. In one longitudinal study (Norton et al., 2005), children taking music and violin lessons showed improvements in fine motor and auditory discrimination (melodic and rhythmic) skills after 15  months of training. Long-​term training with musical pitch patterns can improve pitch pattern processing in foreign languages (Besson et  al., 2007; Wong & Perrachione, 2007). Based on their systematic review, Jaschke et  al. (2013) reported that most studies investigating the effect of music education on reading indicate benefits for children. In a more recent meta-​analysis, Gordon et al. (2015) reported modest gains in phonological awareness as a result of music training but no impact on reading fluency. Overall, there seems to be inconclusive evidence with regard to reading skills, as some studies report positive effects (Standley, 2008), whereas others report no effect (Butzlaff, 2000). The benefits of active music-​making are evident throughout the lifespan. According to Bidelman and Alain (2015), musical training can counterbalance the decline in auditory brain processing as a result of ageing. Older adults with even modest musical training showed higher temporal precision in speech-​evoked responses and were superior at differentiating phonetic categories.

Academic achievement Morrison (1994), in his analysis of data from more than 13,000 high school students obtained from the National Center for Educational Statistics in the United States, concluded that students participating in music had higher grades in English, mathematics, history and science. Fitzpatrick (2006) analysed data from over 15,000 student records in grades 4, 6 and 9 and found that instrumental students outperformed non-​instrumental students in citizenship, mathematics, 272

273

Music performance through the life course

science and reading, with the effects more evident in students with low socio-​economic status. Johnson and Memmott (2006), in a study of over 4,000 elementary and middle school students, found associations between participation in music programmes and performance on standardised tests in English and mathematics. Schellenberg (2006) reported that long-​term engagement with music lessons had positive associations with scores in mathematics, reading and spelling, even when controlling for general intelligence (IQ). In a study conducted in the United Kingdom, Hallam and Rogers (2016) analysed attainment data from 608 pupils at ages 11 and 16.They found that pupils playing a musical instrument performed better than those not playing a musical instrument at age 16 in national examinations in English, mathematics and overall attainment. Those playing the longest had better results, performing almost one standard deviation higher. Miksza (2010) analysed data from over 12,000 pupils from the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 in the United States and reported that music participation was significantly associated with higher standardised scores in mathematics, concern over community ethics and commitment to school. Southgate and Roscigno (2009), drawing on longitudinal data collected from the US Department of Education for kindergarten and high school students, found positive associations between music participation inside and outside school and measures of mathematics and reading. The largest study conducted to date, a population-​level analysis of high school students’ (aged 12–​17) education records (n = 112,916) in Canada, found associations between school music participation and academic achievement in mathematics, science and English. Children highly engaged in instrumental learning were found to be as much as 1 academic year ahead of their peers (Guhn et al., 2019). Only a small number of experimental studies have investigated the effect of music participation on attainment. These include a study by Barr et al. (2002), who reported that a 16-​week intervention designed to improve listening skills in elementary school students in the United States had positive effects in academic growth and progress across the curriculum as well as in social interaction. Cabanac et  al. (2013) concluded that secondary school students selecting musical courses performed better in all subjects, despite equally high initial achievements. Other studies did not find significant effects (e.g., Schneider & Klotz, 2000), and thus experimental evidence is mixed.

Effects of engagement with music on educational motivation Positive experiences from engagement with music can foster the development of a mastery-​ oriented approach to learning if music engagement is associated with the mastery of complex skills and achievement of goals (Guhn et al., 2019). Research has shown that participation in an extended music curriculum can have positive effects on academic self-​concept (Dege & Schwarzer, 2018). A sense of efficacy in music can generalise to other academic areas if similar sub-​skills are involved, if the social structures of learning are similar and/​or if the engagement leads to powerful mastery experiences that serve as evidence of a person’s capacity to achieve personal change (Bandura, 2006). Research by Guhn et al. (2019) looking at concepts such as academic motivation, self-​esteem and self-​concept indicated positive associations between music training and characteristics related to motivation. Indicative of the transformative effects that the engagement with music can produce is a review of 15 Youth Music-​funded projects in the United Kingdom (Qa Research, 2012) engaging at-​risk youth and individuals who are not in education, employment or training. Authors noted various positive results arising from the engagement with 273

274

Ioulia Papageorgi

music, such as an increase in motivation to engage in education, employment or voluntary activity and an overall more positive attitude towards learning. An evaluation of a European Commission project entitled Engaging Disaffected Young People (Lancashire Learning Skills Council, 2003) concluded that music and sport activities had the potential to change negative attitudes towards education and encourage participants to return to education. Engagement with music can have beneficial effects for juvenile and adult offenders, individuals detained in the criminal justice system and persons at-​r isk of delinquency. A systematic review of research looking at the effects of active music-​making on at-​risk youth within the criminal system in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, Canada and South Africa concluded that music participation can improve self-​efficacy, self-​esteem and self-​concept, increase motivation, empower youth and decrease negative emotions such as anger (Daykin et al., 2013). Baker and Homan (2007) investigated the implementation of an active music-​making programme in a youth detention centre in the United States and observed a range of benefits related to fostering of individual creativity, self-​esteem and social communication. Anderson and Overy (2010) found that young offenders in Scotland participating in a 10-​week programme focusing on music and art reported increased engagement with education during and after completion of the project. De Viggiani et al. (2013) also reported that participants from 15 youth justice programmes in the United Kingdom who were taking part in an enactive music initiative experienced life-​changing benefits as a result. Woodward et al. (2007) investigated the effects of lessons in African marimba and djembe ensemble performance for juvenile offenders in South Africa. Researchers found that participants progressed rapidly in musical skills development and had more positive attitudes towards school. Positive outcomes have also been reported with adult offenders, who have been reported to be more likely to seek opportunities for further education and training following participation in music programmes (Wilson & Logan, 2006).

Music making and socio-​emotional development Social inclusion According to Minguella and Buchanan (2009), music-​making in a group can foster feelings of social inclusion. Welch et al. (2014) reported data from over 6,000 children and concluded that singing can be beneficial in building a sense of community, as children rated higher in singing ability were more likely to have a more positive sense of self and of being socially included. Rinta et al. (2011) reported that children had higher levels of social inclusion when they actively engaged in music-​making with their friends (playing an instrument or singing), and there was a positive association between the frequency of engagement and the social inclusion level. Music participation has the potential to support the development of social inclusion in children facing challenging conditions, such as immigration and disability. Marsh (2012a, 2012b) reported that a secondary school programme served to support the integration of newly arrived immigrants in Australia. Lindblom (2017) reported that music interventions can provide foundations for social inclusion for individuals with developmental disabilities such as autism, giving individuals a place to be proud.

Emotional intelligence Resnicow et al. (2004) suggest that identification of emotion in music performance draws on some of the same sensibilities that constitute emotional intelligence. In early studies, young 274

275

Music performance through the life course

children of preschool and primary school age who took part in a music empathy intervention, focusing on singing and song composition, developed high levels of empathy (Kalliopuska & Ruokonen, 1986, 1993; Kalliopuska & Tiitinen, 1991). In a correlational study, Hietolahti-​ Ansten and Kalliopuska (1990) reported that 12-​year-​olds who were musically active scored significantly higher on scores of empathy compared to their non-​musically-​active counterparts. Rabinowitch et al. (2013) designed an intervention delivered over the course of 1 school year in a primary school in the United Kingdom. Children between the ages of 8 and 11 engaged in a musical group interaction programme consisting of interactive musical games that applied a range of empathy-​promoting musical components. The empathy scores of children in the experimental group improved at the end of the study compared to the beginning, and the scores were significantly higher than children in the control group. Schellenberg (2011) administered tests of IQ and emotional intelligence to musically trained and untrained undergraduate students. Musically trained individuals scored higher in the IQ Composite score and on its Verbal and Nonverbal subtests, but there were no differences between the two groups in emotional intelligence scores. Similar results were reported by Kim and Kim (2018) in a study of 7-​to 12-​year-​olds in Korea. Each of these studies used measures conceptualising emotional intelligence as an ability. Studies using measures of trait emotional intelligence have reported positive correlations between duration of music training and components of trait emotional intelligence, such as wellbeing, self-​control and emotionality (Petrides et al., 2006).

Mental health and wellbeing Lifelong engagement with music has many benefits for mental health and wellbeing (Rickard & McFerran, 2012). Benefits are evident across the lifespan, from infants through to seniors. In non-​adult populations, music has been used as a therapeutic agent in premature infants and has been found to support cognitive development in childhood and adolescence as well as to facilitate the establishment of identity and emotional wellbeing in adolescence. In adult populations, it can support emotional wellbeing, it can be used as a tool in therapeutic practice with patients dealing with mental illness, and it has been shown to enhance brain function in ageing adults and to challenge cognitive decline in elderly patients with dementia and Parkinson’s disease (Rickard & McFerran, 2012). Croom (2015), taking a positive psychology perspective and drawing on Seligman’s (2010) PERMA (Positive emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning and Accomplishment) framework for wellbeing, discussed how music can be used to positively influence emotions, engagement, interpersonal relationships, the experience of meaning in life and one’s sense of accomplishment. Welch et al. (2010) reported that children participating in Sing Up activities tended to have a more positive self-​concept. Harland (2000) reported that engagement with music in school and particularly learning to play a musical instrument increased self-​esteem and sense of identity in secondary school children. Rickard et al. (2013) reported that increased frequency of school-​based music classes has positive effects on the self-​esteem of young children in Grades 1 and 3. The benefits of music participation extend to children exhibiting problem behaviour, such as aggression, in school. Choi et al. (2010) found that children participating in a 15-​week group music activities intervention had reduced aggression and increased levels of self-​esteem. Cain et al. (2020), in a qualitative study of participatory music-​making within immigrant cultural practice, found that participants reported benefits in mental wellbeing (where music participation assists with introspection, personal growth, self-​esteem and confidence); emotional 275

276

Ioulia Papageorgi

wellbeing (through which music participation evokes emotion and facilitates expression); and social wellbeing (whereby music strengthens social belonging and group cohesion and helps to reduce isolation). Hesser and Heinemann (2010) reported that music participation can support the social inclusion of refugees. A systematic review of the role of music participation in positive health and wellbeing outcomes for migrant populations (Henderson et  al., 2017) concluded that engagement with music improves social wellbeing, reduces stress, enhances self-​esteem and supports emotional health. Engagement with music is beneficial for the wellbeing of children with disabilities. A short-​ term group music therapy intervention led to significant improvements in parent mental health, child communication and social skills, parenting sensitivity, parental engagement with children and acceptance of children, child responsiveness to parents and child interest and participation in programme activities (Williams et al., 2012). Music participation can benefit individuals facing challenging life conditions. Nicholson et al. (2008) found that a 10-​week group music therapy programme for children from disadvantaged backgrounds led to significant improvements in parent and child behaviours, irritable parenting, educational activities in the home, parent mental health, child communication and social play skills. Dillon (2010) reviewed evidence on the effects of music participation for looked-​after children and concluded that music-​making contributed to negotiation skills and cooperative working, development of trust in peers, self-​expression, sense of self-​awareness, self-​discipline and responsibility, sense of achievement, feelings of belonging, the opportunity to make friends and develop positive relationships with adults and increased self-​confidence. Engagement with music can support the healing of children who have experienced adverse life conditions such as warfare. Evidence from Osborne (2009), concerning children in zones of conflict and post-​ conflict, and Heidenrich (2005), on children in war-​effected areas, suggests that music participation can facilitate the development of self-​esteem, trust, identity and social cohesion. Benefits have been reported in adolescents experiencing serious and/​or multiple life stressors. A music intervention programme targeting individuals with behavioural difficulties supported the development of resilience, specifically facilitating positive peer relations, self-​efficacy, coherence and creativity (Waaktaar et al., 2004) Cohen et al. (2002) reported that music is important for seniors as it contributes to quality of life, regardless of their mental capacity. Lehmberg and Fung (2010), in a review of the literature on the benefits of music participation for senior citizens, concluded that the benefits are numerous and include (a) an overall sense of physical and mental wellbeing (e.g., lessening of stress, pain and medication usage); (b) a slowing of age-​related cognitive decline; (c) feelings of pleasure and enjoyment; (d) pride and a sense of accomplishment in learning new skills; (e) creation and maintenance of social connections; (f) a means of creative self-​expression; and (g) the construction of identity at a time in life when sense of identity may be in flux. Creech, Hallam et al. (2013) note that it is active music engagement within social settings that has the greatest potential to support the fulfilment of basic psychological needs, offering a sense of purpose, and a degree of autonomy and control in the lives of participants.

Effects of active music-​making on prosocial behaviour Active music-​ making has benefits for prosocial behaviour. Instrumental teachers in UK schools reported that children learning to play a musical instrument develop, among many other things, social skills and teamwork skills (Hallam & Prince, 2000). Kirschner and Tomasello (2010) reported that 4-​year-​old children were more likely to engage in spontaneous helping 276

277

Music performance through the life course

and cooperative problem-​solving after participating in joint music-​making activities, and they concluded that such activities promote prosocial behaviour. Rose et  al. (2019) reported no overall effect of extracurricular instrumental lessons on socio-​emotional behaviour as measured with the Behavior Assessment System for Children (second edition), but trends in the data pointed towards an effect of musical activity in promoting prosocial behaviour. University students reported that active music-​making supports the development of sense of belonging and enhances social skills (Kokotsaki & Hallam, 2007, 2011). Participation in group music-​making in the context of singing lessons increased trust and cooperation among co-​workers (Anshel & Kipper, 1988).

Community music interventions to support at-​risk individuals In recent years, to try to counteract the lifelong challenges presented by poverty, there have been increasing efforts to offer community music interventions to at-​r isk youth (Campbell et al., 2014; Neville et al., 2013). As a result, there has been a growing interest in the literature to investigate the potential benefit of engagement with instrumental learning for children from low socio-​economic backgrounds, in the context of programmes such as El Sistema (Venezuela), Sistema Scotland (United Kingdom), Demos (France) and Harmony (United States). Recent studies suggest that children participating in such programmes benefit from developing stronger brain encoding of speech (Kraus et  al., 2014), improvements in cognitive skills (e.g., improvements in IQ, processing speed, concentration ability and reading precision) (Barbaroux et al., 2019) and positive socio-​emotional and behavioural development (e.g., improvements in self-​control and reduced behavioural difficulties) (Aleman et al., 2017). Harkins and Moore (2019) consolidated 5 years of evaluation learning from Sistema Scotland and reported that the programme is achieving important impacts on children, through: • • • • • • •

boosting engagement with learning and education; developing and building life skills; securing emotional wellbeing; building social skills and networks; respite and protection; developing as a musician; and encouraging healthy behaviours.

In a literature review covering research, evaluation and critical debates of Sistema and Sistema-​inspired programmes, Creech, Fairbanks et al. (2013) found that research demonstrates that participation in music-​making has social, emotional and cognitive benefits. According to the authors, “the global El Sistema community of practice provides an extraordinary example of how, given excellent support, high expectations, and high-​quality resources, individuals and groups can achieve remarkable things through participation in joyful music-​making” (Creech, Fairbanks et al., 2013, pp. 10, 37).

Conclusion The evidence suggests that active engagement with music-​making, and particularly playing a musical instrument, has benefits for cognitive development, academic performance, educational motivation and engagement with learning, socio-​emotional development and prosocial 277

278

Ioulia Papageorgi

behaviour.The positive effects are evident across the life course, with reported benefits in cognitive, socio-​emotional and behavioural development in infants through seniors. Music participation has been shown to result in benefits for individuals with exceptionalities such as disabilities and mental illness, and it can also support the emotional and mental wellbeing of individuals facing challenging life conditions such as immigration, displacement and warfare. Community music interventions have been very successful in engaging at-​r isk youth and have led to many social, emotional and cognitive benefits.

Issues for further research While there is convincing evidence for the overall benefits of engagement with music, there are still many unanswered questions that merit further research. The evidence points towards the idea that music training facilitates cognitive development. What is still unclear is the extent and the specificity (Kraus & Chandrasekaran, 2010). For example, it has not yet been clarified whether the improvements are an effect of the music training in itself (as an activity) or a result of the cognitive load involved in the process of learning and playing a musical instrument (which facilitates the development of a range of cognitive skills). Many of the existing studies have utilised correlational research designs, rendering the drawing of solid conclusions regarding causality unfeasible, as correlation does not imply causation. Future research would benefit from further experimental studies manipulating target variables under controlled conditions in order to be able to draw solid conclusions concerning potential transfer effects arising from engagement with music. Furthermore, the majority of research suggesting positive benefits is based on studies where participants engaged in extracurricular instrumental learning (in the context of one-​to-​one tuition or community programmes). Further research is needed to elucidate the potential benefits of music education delivered as part of the school curriculum, utilising longitudinal study designs. Evidence from existing longitudinal studies suggests that primary school children participating in the UK government-​funded programme Sing Up had a developmental advantage which was maintained across 2 school years over non-​participating peers (Welch et al., 2012). Finally, another area that can benefit from further research relates to brain plasticity and transfer effects. Evidence suggests that structural brain differences in adult music experts are a result of training-​induced brain plasticity (Hyde et al., 2009). Further evidence suggests that there is a sensitive period for music training, with individuals commencing training before the age of 7 performing better on visual-​motor and auditory-​motor synchronisation tasks (Bailey & Penhune, 2012; Penhune, 2011). Future studies of a longitudinal nature comparing children before and after they commence musical training are necessary to illuminate whether changes in brain structure and any transfer effects observed relate to training during a specific window of time in childhood.

Implications for education and music in the community Evidence highlights the need to provide children with opportunities to engage with music early in life. We must also ensure that children have equal opportunities for music participation and training, something that can only be accomplished through the education system. The growing interest in expanding the more traditional STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) approach in education into a STEAM approach, through integrating arts in the

278

279

Music performance through the life course

school curriculum, can serve as a platform through which to promote active music engagement in the school curriculum. Simply increasing the quantity of music in the school curriculum will not expedite its potential benefits. As mentioned by Hallam (2010), the positive effects on personal and social development only take place if music engagement is an enjoyable and rewarding experience.The positive effects can only be cultivated if musical activities are relevant to the individuals, are embedded within a carefully designed curriculum and go hand in hand with high-​quality evidence-​based teaching to maximise student engagement and motivation to learn. Teachers should be aware of and monitor for potential negative experiences arising from engagement with music. Issues such as performance anxiety and physiological problems relating to sensorimotor and musculoskeletal functions (resulting from excessive practice and/​ or wrong posture) can place significant strain on developing musicians and render engagement with music a stressful experience. Appropriate technical and psychological preparation in combination with the development of appropriate coping strategies can minimise the negative impact of performance anxiety (Papageorgi, 2014). Teachers have an important role in supporting learners.They should remain aware so that they can identify signals of psychological and physiological problems and support musicians in dealing with them effectively (Papageorgi & Kopiez, 2018), ensuring that they are referred to specialised services (psychologists, medical doctors) when necessary. Programmes offering opportunities for engagement with music in community settings can counteract early life challenges and can improve adult health considerably. It is therefore imperative that communities and governments continue to place faith in, and intensify efforts to invest in and promote, community music initiatives so that they succeed in fulfilling their potential for individual transformation and social development. The power of music lies in its potential to support cognitive, socio-​emotional, behavioural and personal development through the life course and empower individuals facing challenges to transform their lives.

Reflective questions 1. How does engagement with music performance support the development of individuals across the lifespan? 2. How can active music participation be further promoted in education and community settings so that more individuals are able to benefit from the power of music? 3. What case can we put forward to policymakers to encourage investment in high-​ quality music programmes in education and the community?

Suggestions for further reading Creech, A., Fairbanks, S., Gonzalez-​Moreno, P., Lorenzino, L., Sandoval, E., & Waitman, G. (2013). El Sistema and Sistema Inspired Programmes: A literature review of research, evaluation and critical debates. Sistema Global. Hallam, S. (2015). The power of music: A research synthesis of the impact of actively making music on the intellectual, social and personal development of children and young people. International Music Education Research Centre (iMERC). Jaschke, A. C., Eggermont, L. H. P., Honing, H., & Scherder, E. J. A. (2013). Music education and its effect on intellectual abilities in children:  A systematic review. Reviews in the Neurosciences, 24(6), 665–​675.

279

280

Ioulia Papageorgi

References Aleman, X., Duryea, S., Guerra, N. G., McEwan, P. J., Munoz, R., Stampini, M., & Williamson, A. A. (2017). The effects of music training on child development: A randomized trial of El Sistema in Venezuela. Prevention Science, 18(7), 865–​878. Anderson, K., & Overy, K. (2010). Engaging Scottish young offenders in education through music and art. International Journal of Community Music, 3(1),  47–​74. Anshel, A., & Kipper, D. A. (1988).The influence of group singing on trust and cooperation. Journal of Music Therapy, 25(3), 145–​155. Bahr, N., & Christensen, C. (2000). Inter-​domain transfer between mathematical skill and musicianship. Journal of Structural Learning and Intelligent Systems, 14(3), 187–​197. Bailey, J., & Penhune,V. B. (2012). A sensitive period for musical training: Contributions of age of onset and cognitive abilities. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1252, 163–​170. Baker, S., & Homan, S. (2007). Rap, recidivism and the creative self: A popular music program for young offenders in detention. Journal of Youth Studies, 10(4), 459–​476. Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-​efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-​efficacy beliefs of adolescent (pp. 307–​337). Information Age Publishing. Barbaroux, M., Dittinger, E., & Besson, M. (2019). Music training with Demos program positively influences cognitive functions in children from low socio-​economic backgrounds. PLoS ONE, 14(5), Article e0216874. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal. pone.0216874 Barr, L., Dittmar, M., Roberts, E., & Sheraden, M. (2002). Enhancing student achievement through the improvement of listening skills [Dissertation]. https://​files.eric.ed.gov/​fulltext/​ED465999.pdf Besson, M., Schon, D., Moreno, S., Santos, A., & Magne, C. (2007). Influence of musical expertise and musical training on pitch processing in music and language. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 25(3–​ 4), 399–​410. Bidelman, G. M., & Alain, C. (2015). Musical training orchestrates coordinated neuroplasticity in auditory brainstem and cortex to counteract age-​related declines in categorical vowel perception. Journal of Neuroscience, 35(3), 1240–​1249. Booth, J. L., & Siegler, R. S. (2008). Numerical magnitude representations influence arithmetic learning. Child Development, 79(4), 1016–​1031. Brandler, S., & Rammsayer, T. H. (2003). Differences in mental abilities between musicians and non-​ musicians. Psychology of Music, 31(2), 123–​138. Butzlaff, R. (2000). Can music be used to teach reading? Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34(3–​4), 167–​178. Cabanac, A., Perlovsky, L., Bonniot-​Cabanac, M. C., & Cabanac, M. (2013). Music and academic performance. Behaviour Brain Research, 256, 257–​260. Cain, M., Istvandity, L., & Lakhani, A. (2020). Participatory music making and well-​being within immigrant cultural practice: Exploratory case studies in South East Queensland, Australia. Leisure Studies, 39(1),  68–​82. Campbell, F., Conti, G., Heckman, J. J., Moon, S., Pinto, R., Pugello, E., & Pan,Y. (2014). Early childhood investments substantially boost adult health. Science, 343(6178), 1478–​1485. Chabris, C. F. (1999). Prelude or requiem for the “Mozart effect”? Nature, 400, 826–​827. Chan, A. S., Ho,Y. C., & Cheung, M. C. (1998). Music training improves verbal memory. Nature, 396, 128. Cheek, J. M., & Smith, L. R. (1999). Music training and mathematics achievement. Adolescence, 34(136), 759–​761. Choi, A. N., Lee, M. S., & Lee, J. S. (2010). Group music intervention reduces aggression and improves self-​ esteem in children with highly aggressive behavior:  A pilot controlled trial. Evidence-​Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 7(2), 213–​217. Cohen, A., Bailey, B., & Nilsson, T. (2002). The importance of music to seniors. Psychomusicology, 18(1–​2), 89–​102. Corrigall, K. A., & Trainor, L. J. (2011). Associations between length of music training and reading skills in children. Music Perception, 29(2), 147–​155. Costa-​Giomi, E. (2004). Effects of three years of piano instruction on children’s academic achievement, school performance and self-​esteem. Psychology of Music, 32(2), 139–​152. Creech, A., Fairbanks, S., Gonzalez-​Moreno, P., Lorenzino, L., Sandoval, E., & Waitman, G. (2013). El Sistema and Sistema Inspired Programmes: A literature review of research, evaluation and critical debates. Sistema Global.

280

281

Music performance through the life course Creech, A., Hallam, S., McQueen, H., & Varvarigou, M. (2013). The power of music in the lives of older adults. Research Studies in Music Education, 35(1),  83–​98. Criscuolo, A., Bonetti, L., Sarkamo, T., Kliuchko, M., & Brattico, E. (2019). On the association between musical training, intelligence and executive functions in adulthood. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 1704. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2019.01704 Croom, A. M. (2015). Music practice and participation for psychological well-​being: A review of how music influences positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment. Musicae Scientiae, 19(1),  44–​64. Daykin, N., de Viggiani, N., Pilkington, P., & Moriarty,Y. (2013). Music making for health, well-​being and behaviour change in youth justice settings: A systematic review. Health Promotion International, 28(2), 197–​210. De Viggiani, N., Daykin, N., Moriarty,Y., & Pilkington, P. (2013). Musical pathways: An exploratory study of young people in the criminal justice system engaged with a creative music programme. Department of Health & Applied Sciences, University of the West of England. Dege, F., & Schwarzer, G. (2018). The influence of an extended music curriculum at school on academic self-​concept in 9-​to 11-​year-​old children. Musicae Scientiae, 22(3), 305–​321. Dillon, L. (2010). Looked after children and music making: An evidence review.Youth  Music. Fitzpatrick, K.  R. (2006). The effect of instrumental music participation and socio-​economic status on Ohio fourth-​sixth-​and ninth-​grade proficiency test performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(1),  73–​84. Forgeard, M., Winner, E., Norton, A., & Schlaug, G. (2008). Practicing a musical instrument in childhood is associated with enhanced verbal ability and nonverbal reasoning. PLoS ONE, 3(10), Article e3566. Gardiner, M. E., Fox, A., Knowles, F., & Jeffrey, D. (1996). Learning improved by arts training. Nature, 381(6580), 284. George, E. M., & Coch, D. (2011). Music training and working memory: An ERP study. Neuropsychologia, 49(5), 1083–​1094. Gordon, R. L., Fehd, H. M., & McCandliss, B. D. (2015). Does music training enhance literacy skills? A meta-​analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 1777. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2015.01777 Graziano, A. B., Peterson, M., & Shaw, G. L. (1999). Enhanced learning of proportional math through music training and spatial temporal reasoning. Neurological Research, 21(2), 139–​152. Guhn, M., Emerson, S. D., & Gouzouasis, P. (2019). A population-​level analysis of associations between school music participation and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology. Advance online publication. https://​dx.doi.org/​10.1037/​edu0000376 Hallam, S. (2006). Music psychology in education. Institute of Education, University of London. Hallam, S. (2010). The power of music: Its impact on the intellectual, social and personal development of children and young people. International Journal of Music Education, 28(3), 269–​289. Hallam, S. (2015). The power of music: A research synthesis of the impact of actively making music on the intellectual, social and personal development of children and young people. International Music Education Research Centre (iMERC). Hallam, S. (2017). The impact of making music on aural perception and language skills: A research synthesis. London Review of Education, 15(3), 388–​406. Hallam, S., & Prince, V. (2000). Research into instrumental music services. Department for Education Employment London. Hallam, S., & Rogers, K. (2016). The impact of instrumental music learning on attainment at age 16: A pilot study. British Journal of Music Education, 33(3), 247–​261. Harkins, C., & Moore, K. (2019). People change lives: Consolidating five years of evaluation learning from Sistema Scotland’s Big Noise centres in Stirling, Glasgow and Aberdeen. Glasgow Centre for Population Health. Heidenrich,V. (2005). Music therapy in war-​effected areas. Intervention, 3(2), 129–​134. Henderson, A., Cain, M., Istvandity, L., & Lakhani, A. (2017). The role of music participation in positive health and wellbeing outcomes for migrant populations: A systematic review. Psychology of Music, 45(4), 459–​478. Hesser, B., & Heinemann, H. (Eds.). (2010). Music as a natural resource: Solutions for social and economic issues. United Nations. Hetland, L. (2000). Learning to make music enhances spatial reasoning. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34(3/​ 4), 179–​238. Hietolahti-​Ansten, M., & Kalliopuska, M. (1990). Self-​esteem and empathy among children actively involved in music, 71(3), 1364–​1366.

281

282

Ioulia Papageorgi Ho,Y. C., Cheung, M. C., & Chan,A. S. (2003). Music training improves verbal but not visual memory: Cross sectional and longitudinal explorations in children. Neuropsychology, 17(3), 439–​450. Holmes, S., & Hallam, S. (2017). The impact of participation in music on learning mathematics. London Review of Education, 15(3), 425–​438. Hyde, K. L., Lerch, J., Norton, A., Forgeard, M., Winner, E., Evans, A. C., & Schlaug, G. (2009). Musical training shapes structural brain development. The Journal of Neuroscience, 29(10), 3019–​3025. Jakobson, L. S., Cuddy, L. L., & Kilgour, A. R. (2003). Time tagging: A key to musicians’ superior memory. Music Perception, 20(3), 307–​313. Jaschke, A. C., Eggermont, L. H.  P., Honing, H., & Scherder, E. J.  A. (2013). Music education and its effect  on  intellectual abilities in children:  A systematic review. Reviews in the Neurosciences, 24(6), 665–​675. Jenkins, J. S. (2001). The Mozart effect. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 94(4), 170–​172. Johnson, C. M., & Memmott, J. E. (2006). Examination of relationships between music programmes of differing quality and standardised test results. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(4), 293–​307. Kalliopuska, M., & Ruokonen, I. (1986). Effects of music-​education on development of holistic empathy. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 62(1), 187–​191. Kalliopuska, M., & Ruokonen, I. (1993). A study with follow-​up of the effects of music education on holistic development of empathy. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76(1), 131–​137. Kalliopuska, M., & Tiitinen, U. (1991). Influence of two developmental programs on the empathy and pro-​ social behaviour of preschool-​children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 72(1), 323–​328. Kanduri, C., Kuusi, T., Ahvenainen, M., Philips, A. K., Lahdesmaki, H., & Jarvela, I. (2015). The effect of music performance on the transcriptome of professional musicians. Scientific Reports, 5, Article 9506. https://​doi.org/​10.1038/​srep09506 Karapetsas, A., Laskaraki, E.-​R., & Zygouris, N. (2011). The impact of music training in mnemonic function of school aged children. Social Science Tribune, 60,  79–​98. Kim, H. S., & Kim, H. S. (2018). Effect of a musical instrument performance program on emotional intelligence, anxiety, and aggression in Korean elementary school children. Psychology of Music, 46(3), 440–​453. Kirschner, S., & Tomasello, M. (2010). Joint music making promotes prosocial behaviour in 4 year old children. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 31(5), 354–​364. Kokotsaki, D., & Hallam, S. (2007). Higher education music students’ perceptions of the benefits of participative music making. Music Education Research, 9(1), 93–​109. Kokotsaki, D., & Hallam, S. (2011). The perceived benefits of participative music making for non-​music university students: A comparison with music students. Music Education Research, 13(2), 149–​172. Kraus, N., & Chandrasekaran, B. (2010). Music training for the development of auditory skills. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11, 599–​605. Kraus, N., Hornickel, J., Strait, D. L., Slater, J., & Thompson, E. (2014). Engagement in community music classes sparks neuroplasticity and language development in children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 1403. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2014.01403 Lancashire Learning Skills Council. (2003). Evaluation of European Social Fund project engaging disaffected young people. Lancashire County Council. Lehmberg, L. J., & Fung, V. C. (2010). Benefits of music participation for senior citizens: A review of the literature. Music Education Research International, 4,  19–​30. Lindblom, A. (2017). “It gives them a place to be proud”: Music and social inclusion. Two diverse cases of young First Nations people diagnosed with autism in British Columbia, Canada. Psychology of Music, 45(2), 268–​282. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735616659553 Magne, C., Schon, D., & Besson, M. (2006). Musician children detect pitch violations in both music and language better than nonmusician children: Behavioral and electrophysiological approaches. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(2), 199–​211. Marsh, K. (2012a). The beat will make you be courage: The role of a secondary school music program in supporting young refugees and newly arrived immigrants in Australia. Research Studies in Music Education, 34(2), 93–​111. Marsh, K. (2012b). Music in the lives of refugee and newly arrived immigrant children in Sydney, Australia. In P. Campbell & T. Wiggins (Eds.), Oxford handbook of children’s musical cultures (pp. 492–​509). Oxford University Press. Meyer, J., Gupses Oguz, P., & Sledge Moore, K. (2018). Superior fluid cognition in musicians. Psychology of Music, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735618808089

282

283

Music performance through the life course Miksza, P. (2010). Investigating relationships between participation in high school music ensembles and extra-​musical outcomes:  An analysis of the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 using a bio-​ ecological development model. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 186,  7–​25. Minguella,M.,& Buchanan,C.(2009).The use of music as a tool for social inclusion.Cork City Council.www.yumpu. com/​en/​document/​read/​31675661/​music-​as-​a-​tool-​for-​social-​inclusion-​pdf-​cork-​city-​council Morrison, S. J. (1994). Music students and academic growth. Music Educators Journal, 81(2),  33–​36. Neville, H., Anderson, A., Bagdale, O., Bell, T., Currin, J., Fanning, J., Klein, S., Lauinger, B., Pakulak, E., Paulsen, D., Sabourin, L., Stevens, C., Sundborg, S., & Yamada, Y. (2013). Effects of music training on brain and cognitive development in under-​privileged 3-​to 5-​year-​old children: Preliminary results. In C. Asbury & B. Rich (Eds.), Learning, arts and the brain: The Dana Consortium report on arts and cognition (pp. 105–​116). Dana Press. Nicholson, J. M., Berthelsen, D., Abad,V.,Williams, K., & Bradley, J. (2008). Impact of music therapy to promote positive parenting and child development. Journal of Health Psychology, 13(2), 226–​238. Norton, A.,Winner, E., Cronin, K., Overy, K., Lee, D. J., & Schlaug, G. (2005). Are there pre-​existing neural, cognitive or motoric markers for musical ability? Brain and Cognition, 59, 124–​134. Oechslin, M. S., Van De Ville, D., Laseyras, F., Hauert, C.-​A., & James, C. E. (2013). Degree of musical expertise modulates higher order brain functioning. Cerebral Cortex, 23(9), 2213–​2224. Osborne, N. (2009). Music for children in zones of conflict and postconflict: A psychobiological approach. In S. Malloch & C.Trevarthen (Eds.), Communicative musicality: Exploring the basis of human companionship (pp. 331–​356). Oxford University Press. Papageorgi, I. (2014). Developing and maintaining expertise in musical performance. In I. Papageorgi & G. Welch (Eds.), Advanced musical performance:  Investigations in higher education learning (pp. 303–​318). SEMPRE Studies in the Psychology of Music. Ashgate Press. Papageorgi, I., & Kopiez, R. (2018). Psychological and physiological aspects of learning to perform. In G. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 3; pp. 184–​208). Oxford University Press. Papageorgi, I., Saunders, J., Himonides, E., & Welch, G. (2011). The Chorister Outreach Programme: A research evaluation 2008–​2011. Institute of Education. Penhune, V. B. (2011). Sensitive periods in human development: Evidence from musical training. Cortex, 47(9), 1126–​1137. Petrides, K. V., Niven, L., & Mouskounti, T. (2006). The trait emotional intelligence of ballet dancers and musicians. Psicothema, 18, 101–​107. Pietsch, S., & Jansen, P. (2012). Different mental rotation performance in students of music, sport and education. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(1), 159–​163. Pietschnig, J., Voracek, M., & Formann, A. K. (2010). Mozart effect-​shmozart effect:  A meta-​analysis. Intelligence, 38(3), 314–​323. QA Research. (2012). Young people not in education, employment or training (NEET) and music making. Youth Music. Rabinowitch, T. C., Cross, I., & Burnard, P. (2013). Long-​term musical group interaction has a positive influence on empathy. Psychology of Music, 41(4), 484–​498. Rauscher, F. H., & Hinton, S. C. (2011). Music instruction and its diverse extra-​musical benefits. Music Perception, 29(2), 215–​226. Rauscher, F. H., & LeMieux, M. T. (2003, 29 March–​1 April). Piano, rhythm, and singing instruction improve different aspects of spatial-​temporal reasoning in Head Start children [Poster presentation]. Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, New York, United States. Rauscher, F. H., & Zupan, M. (2000). Classroom keyboard instruction improves kindergarten children’s spatial-​temporal performance: A field experiment. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(2), 215–​228. Rauscher, F. H., Shaw, G. L., & Ky, K. N. (1993). Music and spatial task performance. Nature, 365, Article 611. https://​doi.org/​10.1038/​365611a0 Rauscher, F. H., Shaw, G. L., Levine, L. J., Wright, E. L., Dennis, W. R., & Newcomb, R. (1997). Music training causes long-​term enhancement of preschool children’s spatial-​temporal reasoning abilities. Neurological Research, 19(1),  1–​8. Resnicow, J. E., Salovey, P., & Repp, B. H. (2004). Is recognition of emotion in music performance an aspect of emotional intelligence? Music Perception, 22(1), 145–​158. Rickard, N. S., Appelman, P., James, R., Murphy, F., Gill, A., & Bambrick, C. (2013). Orchestrating life skills:  The effect of increased school-​based music classes on children’s social competence and self-​ esteem. International Journal of Music Education, 31(3), 292–​309.

283

284

Ioulia Papageorgi Rickard, N. S., & McFerran, K. (2012). Lifelong engagement with music: Benefits for mental health and wellbeing. Nova Science Publishers. Rickard, N. S., Vasquez, J. T., Murphy, F., Gill, A., & Toukhsati, S. R. (2010). Benefits of a classroom based music program on verbal memory of primary school children: A longitudinal study. Australian Journal of Music Education, 1(1),  36–​47. Rinta, T., Purves, R., Welch, G., Stadler Elmer, S., & Bissig, R. (2011). Connections between children’s feelings of social inclusion and their musical backgrounds. Journal of Social Inclusion, 2(2),  35–​57. Roden, I., Grube, D., Bongard, S., & Kreutz, G. (2014). Does music training enhance working memory performance? Findings from a quasi-​ experimental longitudinal study. Psychology of Music, 42(1), 284–​298. Roden, I., Kreutz, G., & Bongard, S. (2012). Effects of a school-​based instrumental music programme on verbal and visual memory in primary school children: A longitudinal study. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, Article 572. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2012.00572 Rose, D., Jones Bartoli, A., & Heaton, P. (2019). Measuring the impact of musical learning on cognitive, behavioural and socio-​emotional wellbeing development in children. Psychology of Music, 47(2), 284–​303. Schellenberg, E. G. (2004). Music lessons enhance IQ. Psychological Science, 15(8), 511–​514. Schellenberg, E.  G. (2006). Long-​term positive associations between music lessons and IQ. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 457–​468. Schellenberg, E. G. (2011). Music lessons, emotional intelligence, and IQ. Music Perception, 29(2), 185–​194. Schlaug, G., Jancke, L., Huang, Y., Staiger, J. F., & Steinmetz, H. (1995). Increased corpus callosum size in musicians. Neuropsychologia, 33(8), 1047–​1055. Schneider, T. W., & Klotz, J. (2000, 15–​17 November). The impact of music education and athletic participation on academic achievement [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the Mid-​South Educational Research Association, Bowling Green, Kentucky. https://​files.eric.ed.gov/​fulltext/​ED448186.pdf Seligman, M.  E. P. (2010). Flourish:  Positive psychology and positive interventions. The Tanner lectures on human values. University of Michigan Press. Sluming, V., Brooks, J., Howard, M., Downes, J. J., & Roberts, N. (2007). Broca’s area supports enhanced visuospatial cognition in orchestral musicians. The Journal of Neuroscience:  The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 27(14), 3799–​3806. https://​doi.org/​10.1523/​JNEUROSCI.0147-​07.2007 Southgate, D. E., & Roscigno,V. J. (2009). The impact of music on childhood and adolescent achievement. Social Science Quarterly, 90(1),  4–​21. Standley, J. M. (2008). Does music instruction help children learn to read: Evidence of a meta-​analysis. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 27(1),  17–​32. Steele, K. M., Bass, K. E., & Crook, M. D. (1999). The mystery of the Mozart effect: Failure to replicate. Psychological Science, 10(4), 366–​369. Tallal, P., & Gaab, N. (2006). Dynamic auditory processing, musical experience and language development. Trends in Neurosciences, 29(7), 382–​390. Tierney, A. T., & Kraus, N. (2013). The ability to tap to a beat relates to cognitive, linguistic and perceptual skills. Brain and Language, 124(3), 225–​231. Vaughn, K. (2000). Music and mathematics:  Modest support for the oft-​claimed relationship. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34(3–​4), 149–​166. Waaktaar, T., Christie, H. J., Inger Helmen Borge, A., & Torgersen, S. (2004). How can young people’s resilience be enhanced? Experiences from a clinical intervention project. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 9(2), 167–​183. Welch, G. F., Himonides, E., Saunders, J., & Papageorgi, I. (2010). Researching the impact of the National Singing Programme “Sing Up” in England: Main findings from the first three years. Children’s singing development, self-​concept and sense of social inclusion. International Music Education Research Centre (iMERC). Welch, G., Himonides, E., Saunders, J., Papageorgi, I., & Sarazin, M. (2014). Singing and social inclusion. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 803. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2014.00803 Welch, G. F., Saunders, J., Papageorgi, I., & Himonides, E. (2012). Sex, gender and singing development:  Making a positive difference to boys’ singing through a national programme in England. In Perspectives on Males and Singing (pp. 27–​43). Springer. Williams, K. E., Berthelsen, D., Nicholson, J. M., Walker, S., & Abad,V. (2012). The effectiveness of a short-​ term group music therapy intervention for parents who have a child with a disability. Journal of Music Therapy, 49(1),  23–​44.

284

285

Music performance through the life course Wilson, D., & Logan, M. (2006). Breaking down walls: The good vibrations project in prison. Birmingham Centre for Criminal Justice Policy and Research. Wong, P. C. M., & Perrachione, T. K. (2007). Learning pitch patterns in lexical identification by native English-​speaking adults. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28(4), 565–​585. Woodward, S. C., Sloth-​Nielsen, J., & Mathiti,V. (2007). South Africa, the arts, and youth in conflict with the law. International Journal of Community Music, 1(1),  69–​88.

285

286

18 HEALTH ISSUES FOR THOSE PARTICIPATING IN MUSICAL ACTIVITIES Bronwen Ackermann

The act of making music requires the integration of many systems of the body in order to achieve the desired sound outcomes. However, little attention is paid to learning about these topics in the education of musicians. For some time in the health professions, in recognition of the highly demanding and complex demands on the mind and body of a musician striving to achieve musical success, musicians have been regarded as specialised types of elite athletes (Paull & Harrison, 1997; Quarrier, 1993). Research highlights lifelong benefits from active music participation, including improved brain function and cognition, improved hearing, maintenance of communication skills, reduced stress, benefits for the immune system, reduction of high blood pressure and improved physical conditioning, to name just a few (Comeau et al., 2020; Harvey, 2017; Kenny & Ackermann, 2016; Rui et al., 2018; Strong & Mast, 2019; Sutcliffe et al., 2020). Paradoxically however, statistics consistently reveal alarmingly high levels of performance-​ related health problems (PRHPs) across the lifespan among professional musicians, mostly related to some kind of overload, whether it be physical, psychological or auditory (Ackermann et al., 2012; Fishbein et al., 1988; Gembris et al., 2018; Leaver et al., 2011; Paarup et al., 2011). Amateur musicians appear to suffer far less overload-​related performance health problems (Bonde et al., 2018), reinforcing the widely held belief that system overload appears to be a key contributing factor in many PRHPs. Mental burnout, overuse injuries and auditory overload can all be consequences of poor training practices, and while exposure to multiple risk factors are likely to lead to health issues, high playing loads are a consistent causative factor (Ackermann et al., 2012; Wu, 2007). Approximately 10,000 hours (over about 10 years) of deliberate practice has been reported to be necessary on average to achieve a high level of musical skill, with a variety of additional factors such as environmental variables, heritable traits (e.g., general intelligence and working memory) and task and situational factors likely to moderate performance outcomes for each individual musician (Ericsson et  al., 1993; Hambrick et  al., 2014; Macnamara et  al., 2014). However, peak performance usually occurs after 16 years of training (Manturzewska, 1990), and optimal outcomes occur when the musician commences training before the age of 7 (Steele et al., 2013). Common PRHPs occurring in musicians include musculoskeletal disorders (commonly affecting the face, neck, back, shoulder and upper limb), fatigue, neurological conditions such as focal dystonia, hearing loss and mental health issues like depression and anxiety (Wijsman & 286

287

Health issues

Ackermann, 2019). The majority of these problems are modifiable and therefore preventable when appropriate health education and support are available (Chan & Ackermann, 2014). It is increasingly argued, therefore, that musicians need specifically applied health education both for performance optimisation and to reduce the risk of suffering adverse health issues (Chesky et al., 2006; Dick et al., 2013; Hagglund & Jacobs, 1996). Music educators are most often the primary person consulted by the student for their health concerns (Williamon & Thompson, 2006) despite them receiving little or no training in how to best teach in a way that optimises not only the performance output of their students, but that also encourages lifelong healthy practice and performance habits (Norton, 2016). This has led to low levels of health literacy across the musical profession as a whole (Baadjou et al., 2019). Consequently, when it comes to health within the music industry, there is division, discord and stigma surrounding health issues (Ackermann, 2017c). Injury concealment and low healthcare utilisation are reported by professional musicians, who feel embarrassment over PRHPs –​seen as a sign of weakness or of poor technique –​and this has frequently been linked with loss of musical proficiency and chronic neuromuscular health issues (Rickert et al., 2014a).

Health issues across the lifespan Music-​related health problems may affect musicians across their lifespan. For example, up to 67% of school children report injuries as a consequence of exposure of the child musician to multiple risk factors, including high repetition (Ranelli et al., 2008). Alarmingly, parents of secondary school music students already show signs of acceptance towards adverse physical and psychological health issues as a normal consequence of music participation (Ackermann & Driscoll, 2013). School-​age children are also vulnerable to recurrent musculoskeletal problems during physiological growth changes in adolescence (Lehman & Carl, 2017), further complicated by the concurrent change to a larger instrument with increased physical demands. At such a time, it may be prudent to adjust music practice schedules to allow the body to better recover; for example, temporarily having more frequent, shorter practice sessions. The training demands of prolonged repetitive work with little rest continue to increase as the musician progresses in age and skill level (Andersen et  al., 2013). For this reason, transitioning from high school music into conservatoires can be traumatic for some students, with rapid increases in music performance demands and sudden exposure to psychological challenges increasing the risk of adverse health conditions developing (Pecen et  al., 2018; Wijsman & Ackermann, 2019). Tertiary music students typically show poor awareness of the physical and psychological issues they face and may demonstrate a low level of self-​efficacy and responsibility for their own performance health (Ginsborg et  al., 2009; Williamon & Thompson, 2006). Once reaching a professional career, health issues escalate, compounded by many factors that can range from a lack of performance autonomy in classical orchestral musicians (Rickert et al., 2013) to lifestyle and economic challenges in rock musicians (Raeburn, 1987). Rock and pop stars show 1.7–​2 times higher mortality rate compared to demographically matched population samples, with a higher incidence of deaths predominantly related to violence (e.g., suicide) and liver disease (Bellis et al., 2007; Kenny & Asher, 2016). While professional musicians may have long careers if relatively free from PRHPs, vulnerable periods include the early career stage for young classical musicians, who suffer higher levels of anxiety when entering an orchestra job (Kenny et al., 2014), and increasing age with the potential for an increased burden of physical injuries (Gembris et  al., 2018). Literature on PRHPs in older musicians is mixed, with the possibility that a musical career can be physically sustained and beneficial in older ages if the 287

288

Bronwen Ackermann

musician pays adequate attention to technique, training schedules and physical conditioning to avoid overload (Kenny & Ackermann, 2016; Strong & Mast, 2019).

Performance-​related musculoskeletal problems in musicians Musicians of all ages, levels of skill and genre of music are potentially vulnerable to injury, with risks typically increased with higher practice/​performance duration in combination with a multitude of other risk factors including poor posture, fatigue, depression and music performance anxiety (Ackermann et al., 2012; Chan & Ackermann, 2014; Kenny & Ackermann, 2015). The majority of injuries reported affect the musculoskeletal system (e.g., muscles, tendons, ligaments and joints). Research indicates that 82%–​97% of professional orchestral musicians will report injuries over a 12-​month period (Ackermann et al., 2012; Fishbein et al., 1988; Leaver et al., 2011; Paarup et al., 2011), with similarly high musculoskeletal injury rates of 63%–​74% reported in popular musicians (Raeburn et al., 2003). In army bands, 50%–​60% of musicians sought medical advice or reported injuries in a 1-​year period (Ackermann, 2007; Knapik et al., 2007), while college-​level marching bands in the United States reported similarly high rates of injury (Rhode et al., 2017). Classical music students at the conservatoire level reported high injury rates, typically ranging from 53%–​88% –​a much higher range than their non-​music student peers (Ginsborg et al., 2009; Ingle 2014). Many neuromuscular health issues are instrument specific, suggesting that physical PRHPs reflect the impact of different instrument shapes, sizes and playing techniques on body structures (Ackermann & Driscoll, 2013; Ackermann et al., 2012; van Selms et al., 2020). For example, marching and army bands show a higher prevalence of lower limb and spine injuries in contrast to the much higher prevalence of upper extremity, orofacial, laryngeal and neck issues in other musicians. Of note, these injury rates have not changed in the last few decades and highlight the need for a paradigm shift towards a health-​promoting approach to optimise performance outcomes and prevent PRHPs in music students and professional musicians.

Practice habits Clear evidence exists among musicians and music students of overload-​ related injuries developing in response to sudden increases in performance time, lack of rest breaks and poor music performance preparation and scheduling (Ackermann et  al., 2012; Kok et  al., 2016). When highly repetitive fine motor skills are practised repeatedly over long duration, and often under stressful conditions, muscles can easily become fatigued with subsequent maladaptive changes in muscle usage patterns (McCrary et  al., 2016; Möller et  al., 2018). Ericsson and colleagues (1993) coined the term “deliberate practice” whereby the most successful performers pay high attention to the structure and quality of practice, rather than just the duration. Despite this, a culture of over-​practice or dramatic changes in practice habits persists in the music industry. Even in amateur musicians, sudden increases in practice time are linked with the development of PRHPs (Newmark & Lederman, 1987), and it is well established that longer hours of practice are associated with increased injury risk (Kok et al., 2016; Ranelli et al., 2008; Rotter et al., 2020). Orchestral rehearsal durations are often longer than normal physiological tolerance, and the reasoning for this often lies in schedule convenience or conductor/​administrator preferences with insufficient consideration of the performance capacity of the musicians themselves (Ackermann, 2017a).

288

289

Health issues

In sports medicine research, monitoring training loads, by keeping track of work:rest and acute:chronic workload ratios in conjunction with the use of injury surveillance techniques, has been highlighted as an effective method of injury prevention (Combes et al., 2017; Ekegren et al., 2016; Finch, 2006, 2011; Gabbett, 2020; Hulin et al., 2016; Liederbach & Richardson, 2007). Injury surveillance has been attempted in music populations but with little success; in other elite domains, this is achieved with support from health managers and does not rely on self-​reporting (Ackermann et al., 2014). Nonetheless, to avoid unnecessary risks of developing a PRHP, musicians should adjust practice schedules depending on the intensity of the repertoire they are playing or on signs of mental and/​or physical fatigue (Dugan & Frontera, 2000).

General health Lower general health has been linked to increased PRHPs (Ginsborg et  al., 2009). In addition, there is debate as to whether hypermobility syndromes (excessive joint mobility) offer an advantage in terms of instrumental agility (e.g., Paganini) or a disadvantage in terms of higher injury rates (Larsson et al., 1993). However, using a cut-​off score of 5 for the Beighton hypermobility score (Beighton et al., 2011), more elite music populations have low levels of hypermobility, with only 8.2% of professional orchestral musicians (Driscoll & Ackermann, 2012) and 5% of music students found to be hypermobile. Other comorbidities may require more careful attention to performance and practice schedules and medical support. Musicians often receive little or no education regarding nutrition and hydration, despite clear benefits of such education in athletic populations for improving health and optimising performance (Tam et al., 2019). Relevant information has now been developed for musicians and is freely available online (American Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 2020). While a balanced diet with adequate proteins, carbohydrates, fats, minerals and vitamins is essential to provide the fuel for performance and regulate body systems (Mahurkar, 2019), adequate hydration is also essential to optimise performance, prevent metabolic strain and provide thermoregulation during exercise (Magro, 2019).

Posture and music performance biomechanics The importance of good posture stems from reducing unnecessary physical overload on musculoskeletal structures while allowing freedom of movement, often challenging in the asymmetrical and repetitive movements typical when playing an instrument (Chan & Ackermann, 2014). Poor posture is frequently cited by both musicians and health professionals as an injury risk factor for musicians (Ackermann et al., 2014). While good posture is recognised as important, few music teachers are able to define clearly what this is (Quarrier, 1993), a likely consequence of the traditional master–​apprentice music teaching model (Altenmüller & McPherson, 2007). Performance posture and actions can be influenced either positively or negatively by factors such as ergonomic accessories, shapes and sizes of instruments, whether players are sitting or standing (and the types of chairs, costumes or shoes), and other performance variables including genre, venue, musical director, fatigue, injury, pain, and so on. Barriers to an ideal performance posture may be addressed by ergonomic or instrument positioning modifications, although there is minimal evidence to support how this may best be achieved (Chi et al., 2020). Performers recognise that technical and expressive capacities of performers need to be concurrently optimised to achieve the state of performance ease (Cardoso et al., 2019). Posture for performance needs to provide a stable base of support for music-​related healthy biomechanical

289

290

Bronwen Ackermann

movements (i.e., those based on musically applied anatomy and physiology principles) to ensure better outcomes for both music performance and performer health (Chan & Ackermann, 2014).

Vocal issues The translation of vocal research into music education and teaching practice is arguably the most advanced in the music field, which is perhaps unsurprising given that for singers, their voice is their instrument and no compensations via an external instrument can be made. Adult voice pedagogy is reported to include anatomy, vocal function and remediation, although these advances are purportedly not so well integrated into singing teaching for children (Trollinger, 2007). It has been recommended that vocal teachers educate themselves about scientific facts and terminology so that they can recognise issues early and make appropriate referrals and suggestions to best manage any impending issues (Trollinger & Sataloff, 2018). Vocalists are still vulnerable to PRHPs including vocal fold lesions (such as polyps and nodules), vocal fold oedema and haemorrhage, vocal fold scarring and vocal fold dystonia, caused by exposures (for instance, smoke inhalation), muscle dysphonia, concurrent jaw/​neck or tongue tension and laryngopharyngeal reflux (Franco & Andrus, 2007). Professional singers have higher risk of laryngeal pathologies: 69%–​75% of classical singers presented with vocal fold or laryngeal pathologies over a 12-​month period (Kwok & Eslick, 2019; Phyland et al., 1999), and a greater incidence of pathologies has been reported in first-​year singing students from contemporary and musical theatre genres (Lloyd et al., 2020). Adolescent singers may be vulnerable to injuries due to age-​related growth changes, particularly males whose vocal folds develop to over twice their length from 4 millimetres to 11 millimetres on average (Emerich, 2002). Problematic issues are reported in Broadway singers, and injury disclosure may have deleterious effects on the long-​term career and reputation of a singer (Bradshaw & Cooper, 2018). Raising awareness and providing specific education on ways to avoid or modify vocal risks to musicians and management is important for the reduction of unnecessary injuries.

Neurological health issues Musical performance involves developing, storing and constantly improving complex sensorimotor processes through prolonged and repeated execution of motor patterns under the controlled monitoring of the auditory system, and for this reason, it is considered one of the most complex tasks faced by the human central nervous system (Altenmüller & McPherson, 2007). The peripheral nervous system is tasked with carrying the messages between the brain and the body regions involved in performance, and at sites along this system in musicians, issues can arise due to body positioning creating a compression or strain force to these nerves (e.g., carpal tunnel syndrome) that results in symptoms such as numbness or tingling. For musical actions to occur in an integrated and meaningful way, messages conducted by peripheral nerves to and from the brain lead to many functional music-​specific brain adaptations to coordinate the highly complex and integrated demands of music performance (Gaser & Schlaug, 2003; Steele et al., 2013).With various forms of overload, this process can become disrupted and lead to a loss of motor control, resulting in fatigue, overuse injuries, choking under pressure, dynamic stereotype and focal dystonia (Altenmüller et al., 2015). The pathophysiological mechanisms underlying movement dysfunctions such as dynamic stereotypes and focal dystonia are multifactorial, related to dysfunctional brain plasticity (reduced sensory perception and integration), lack of inhibition in sensorimotor systems and psychological factors including higher levels of anxiety, perfectionism, neuroticism, social phobia and other specific phobias (Ioannou & Altenmüller, 290

291

Health issues

2014). Treatment for these conditions generally aims to re-​establish functional neural networks, and this is attempted via many approaches, including psychological interventions, movement retraining programmes, medication and botulinum toxin injections (Altenmüller et al., 2015).

Injury prevention and management Preventing injuries in musicians is clearly the most desirable course of action, and perhaps the most obvious place to start is with education for musicians about training load management, given that risk factors like overuse, sudden increases in playing time, insufficient rest and muscle fatigue are consistently among the most common causative factors for injury in professional musicians (Ackermann et  al., 2012). Health education should ideally be routinely included as a core component of conservatoire studies to improve health literacy and give students the knowledge that can empower them to make constructive and positive decisions in regard to their health and musical career (Ginsborg et al., 2009; Matei et al., 2018;Wijsman & Ackermann, 2019;Williamon & Thompson, 2006). Moreover, it would seem that health education initiatives in conservatoires need to be mandatory, covering the range of topics relevant to musicians, so that students don’t just focus on topics that reflect their own past health problems (Wijsman et al., 2019). Numerous health education initiatives for musicians have been trialled successfully (Árnason et al., 2018; Palac, 2008; Spahn et al., 2017), although these are still not consistently implemented internationally, and a gap exists between education and knowledge translation into practice (Araújo et al., 2020).

Psychological health issues While a certain degree of arousal has long been suggested to enhance performance (Hamann & Sobaje, 1983; Kenny, 2005), excessive arousal is recognised as an impediment to performance outcomes (Kenny et al., 2014). Musicians from all genres face many stressors and demands in their training and professional career that can manifest in performance anxiety, depression and occupational stress (Berg et al., 2018; Williamon & Philippe, 2020). The presence of these psychological conditions creates poor health and performance outcomes (Simoens et al., 2015). For example, musicians with focal dystonia can be up to six times more likely to exhibit elevated anxiety and perfectionistic and stress characteristics (Altenmüller et al., 2015).

Music performance anxiety Music performance anxiety (MPA) has been defined as “the experience of marked and persistent anxious apprehension related to musical performance that has arisen through specific anxiety-​ conditioning experiences and which is manifested through combinations of affective, cognitive, somatic and behavioural symptoms” (Kenny, 2009, p. 433). MPA is associated with changes in muscle usage, with raised anxiety levels being associated with an increase in peripheral tension in the forearms of pianists (Yoshie, 2009) and flautists (Kenny et al., 2013), perhaps reflecting an increased sympathetic nervous system stimulation. Increasing levels of MPA and depression in classical musicians are strongly associated with increased severity of performance-​related pain (Kenny & Ackermann, 2015), and links exist not only between pain and higher playing-​related stress but with other physical factors such as a lack of warm-​up and inadequate rest breaks in the workplace (Davies & Mangion, 2002). The five highest-​ranked causes of MPA in orchestral musicians are pressure from self, difficulty managing excess performance arousal, lack of preparation, poor health and general anxiety (Kenny et al., 2014). MPA is reported in other music 291

292

Bronwen Ackermann

genres, with rock musicians reported to be twice as anxious as controls (35.1% versus 17.5%) and almost three times as prone to depression (13.6% versus 5%) (Stormer et al., 2017). Age and sex can also affect MPA.Young professional orchestral musicians under 30 years of age, particularly females, are significantly more anxious compared with musicians over the age of 50, and female musicians may display higher levels of trait anxiety, MPA, social anxiety and depression than male musicians (Kenny et al., 2014). For both professional musicians and music students, past negative performance experiences play a major role in ongoing MPA issues, with both groups rarely consulting psychologists or psychiatrists about these problems (Ackermann et  al., 2014). MPA symptoms may be effectively reduced by learning targeted strategies to reduce avoidant behaviours and re-​direct attention to the achievement of valued performance outcomes (Osborne & McPherson, 2019).

Depression Depression is a common mental disorder characterised by persistent sadness and a lack of interest or pleasure in previously rewarding or enjoyable activities; it can disturb sleep and appetite, with tiredness and poor concentration common (World Health Organisation, 2020). Depression, pain and anxiety can be closely linked in musicians as well as in the general population (Kenny & Ackermann, 2015); with little advice sought from specialised health professionals, this can be suboptimally managed, and musicians report inappropriate use of beta blockers when they actually have symptoms of depression (Kenny et  al., 2014). Psychotherapy, medications and combined approaches are good evidence-​informed approaches to managing depression (Anxiety and Depression Association of America, n.d.), but the first step should be consulting a qualified psychological health professional.

Chronic pain Chronic pain can have highly complex physical and psychological effects, as pain itself involves a brain-​mediated response influenced by many individual factors across somatic, psychological and social domains –​pain does not directly measure damage to a body structure, and this relationship becomes less linked the longer pain persists (Moseley, 2007). The presence of pain in musicians has been linked to instrument played, hours of practice, altered patterns of muscle activity and early muscle fatigue (Ackermann et al., 2012; McCrary et al., 2016; Möller et al., 2018). It is a particular problem for musicians, as, for example, less than half of professional orchestral musicians recover fully from PRHPs (Ackermann et al., 2012).The high rates of pain reported in young musicians are cause for concern given that pain conditions that develop in adolescence increase the likelihood of future problems emerging in adulthood (Dunn et  al., 2013). When pain becomes long-​lasting, the brain becomes hyper-​responsive, resulting in more widespread and more easily triggered pain that needs to be addressed from a biopsychosocial paradigm (Moseley & Butler, 2015). For this reason, musicians should not adopt fear-​avoidance behaviours or radical rest, but address pain-​related issues early and seek health professional advice and modify their musical practice in a carefully organised manner without aggravation of injury (Kenny & Ackermann, 2009).

Hearing health issues The prolonged daily exposure to sound as a consequence of their work makes professional musicians vulnerable to noise-​induced hearing loss (NIHL) and/​or audiological disorders, such 292

293

Health issues

as tinnitus, hyperacusis and diplacusis (Di Stadio et al., 2018). Orchestral musicians are at risk of NIHL while playing in the orchestra, but also face significant additional exposure during solitary practice, compounding their risk (Ackermann et al., 2014). Hearing problems occur in all professional musicians at a rate higher than explained by normal ageing effects on the auditory system, with to 74% of 139 rock/​jazz musicians reporting symptoms of NIHL in one study (Kahari et al., 2003). Sound levels and amplification in popular music performance may be excessively high to satisfy audiences, resulting in more hearing problems among popular musicians compared with classical musicians (Chesky & Henock, 2000; Dibble, 1995; Di Stadio et al., 2018).Young musicians are also vulnerable to NIHL; one study found 100% of daily noise exposure limits being exceeded in 47% of student musicians compared with 10% of non-​music students (Tufts & Skoe, 2018). Moreover, a higher risk is observed with increased duration of participation. Musicians’ use of devices such as personal music players, particularly above the occupational limits of 80 dB(A) and 85 dB(A), can increase the risk of developing NIHL (Twardella et al., 2017). Musicians should carefully monitor exposure to noise in their personal practice as well as in ensemble work. Recent research indicates very high levels of exposure may occur; for example, professional brass musicians were found to exceed daily limits in under an hour of solitary practice (O’Brien et al., 2013a, 2013b). Musicians should use hearing protection whenever possible, particularly in solitary practice, and follow the rapid advances in hearing protection technology to optimise hearing protection (O’Brien et al., 2013a).

Self-​efficacy Self-​efficacy has been shown to be one of the most important factors in successful performance outcomes for music students (McCormick & McPherson, 2003; Ritchie & Williamon, 2012), and yet students show lower self-​efficacy in relation to healthy behaviours than their peers in other fields of study (Ginsborg et al., 2009). Greater self-​efficacy has been correlated with lower MPA for both rehearsals and concert performances (Ginsborg et al., 2009). Music students suffer a relatively wider range of more severe health symptoms than their peers, and consequently student health should be addressed not only individually but also educationally by institutions such as conservatoires in order to optimise health and wellbeing (Perkins et al., 2017). In other similarly challenging physical and psychological elite performance domains, such as sport, individuals are provided with health education specifically designed to optimise performance and prevent injury, as well as access to specially trained health providers, with corresponding improvements in physical, psychological and performance outcomes (Stanhope, 2016; Williamon & Philippe, 2020).

Health literacy Health literacy may be defined as the degree to which individuals have the capacity to obtain, process and understand basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions (Ratzan & Parker, 2006). The lack of access to reliable and evidence-​informed musically applied health knowledge has led to low levels of health literacy within the music profession (Baadjou et  al., 2019), resulting in poor management of injuries with approaches that are not medically informed. Many musicians accept chronic pain as a consequence of elite performance, and ignoring pain becomes an unsuccessful but all too common strategy (Rickert et al., 2014a). The lack of change in injury rates over the last few decades highlight, again, the need for a paradigm shift towards a health promotion approach that optimises both performance outcomes and healthy use of body and mind in music students. Increasing health literacy by 293

294

Bronwen Ackermann

improving access to reliable and music-​specific health information from collaborative ventures between qualified health professionals and music educators seems to be the optimal way to address this knowledge gap in a musically sensible manner (Baadjou et al., 2019). Additionally, music-​specific health education should be routinely included in conservatoire or musicians’ training to provide a more holistic educational training and increase the possibility of music educators developing more advanced and healthy approaches (Pecen et al., 2016).

Conclusion Across the lifespan, from the young child to the mature adult, active participation in music-​ making in any genre carries with it a risk of adverse effects on health when the intensity of physical and psychological demands exceeds the capacity of the individual musician. The increased research into musicians’ PRHPs has highlighted that many are preventable and that health education should become a fundamental component of music participation and training to minimise the burden of injury during training and into a professional career.

Reflective questions 1. “No pain, no gain” attitudes have led to pain being accepted among musicians.What strategies to change this state of play are likely to be most effective? 2. Exposure to sound is unavoidable when music-​making, so how can the risk of developing noise-​induced hearing loss or problems be reduced? 3. Good nutrition and hydration are fundamental to providing adequate energy for the body to be able to perform musical tasks. How should musicians best organise their diet over the course of a busy working day?

Suugestions for further reading Ackermann, B. J., Kenny, D. T., O’Brien, I., & Driscoll, T. R. (2014). Sound Practice: Improving occupational health and safety for professional orchestral musicians in Australia. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 973. Doi: 10.3389/​fpsyg.2014.00973 Altenmüller, E., Ioannou, C. I., & Lee, A. (2015). Apollo’s curse: Neurological causes of motor impairments in musicians. In E. Altenmüller, S. F. Finger, & F. Boller (Eds.), Music, neurology, and neuroscience: Evolution, the musical brain, medical conditions, and therapies (pp. 89–​106). Elsevier. Matei, R., Broad, S., Goldbart, J., & Ginsborg, J. (2018). Health education for musicians. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 1137. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2018.01137

References Ackermann, B. J. (2007). Injury characteristics in the Australian Army band [Unpublished survey results]. Ackermann, B.  J. (2017a). How much training is too much? Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 32(1),  61–​62. Ackermann, B. J. (2017c). The sickness of stigmas. Medical Problems of Perform Artists, 32(3), 183–​184. Ackermann, B., & Driscoll,T. (2013). Attitudes and practises of parents of teenage musicians to health issues related to playing an instrument. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 28(1),  24–​27. Ackermann, B. J., Driscoll,T., & Kenny, D.T. (2012). Musculoskeletal pain and injury in professional orchestral musicians in Australia. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 27(4), 181–​187.

294

295

Health issues Ackermann, B. J., Kenny, D. T., O’Brien, I., & Driscoll, T. (2014). Sound practice: Improving occupational health and safety for professional orchestral musicians in Australia. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 973. Doi: 10.3389/​fpsyg.2014.00973 Altenmüller, E., & McPherson, G. (2007). Motor learning and instrumental training. In W. Gruhn & F. Rauscher (Eds.), Neurosciences in music pedagogy (pp. 121–​143). Nova Science Publishers. Altenmüller, E., Ioannou, C. I., & Lee, A. (2015). Apollo’s curse: Neurological causes of motor impairments in musicians. In E. Altenmüller, S. F. Finger, & F. Boller (Eds.), Music, neurology, and neuroscience: Evolution, the musical brain, medical conditions, and therapies (pp. 89–​106). Elsevier. American Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. (2020). Athlete and the Arts Nutrition Fact Sheets. www. scandpg.org/​scan/​educational-​resources/​fact-​sheets/​athlete-​in-​the-​arts Andersen, L. N., Roessler, K. K., & Eichberg, H. (2013). Pain among professional orchestral musicians: A  case study in body culture and health psychology. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 28(3), 124–​130. Anxiety and Depression Association of America. (n.d.) Clinical Practice Review for Major Depressive Disorder. https://​adaa.org/​resources-​professionals/​practice-​guidelines-​mdd Araújo, L. S.,Wasley, D., Redding, E., Atkins, L., Perkins, R., Ginsborg, J., & Williamon, A. (2020). Fit to perform: A profile of higher education music students’ physical Fitness. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 298. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2020.00298 Árnason, K., Briem, K., & Árnason, Á. (2018). Effects of an education and prevention course for university music students on their body awareness and attitude toward health and prevention. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 33(2), 131–​136. Beighton, P. H., Grahame, R., & Bird, H. A. (2011). Hypermobility of joints. Springer Science & Business Media. Bellis, M. A., Hennell, T., Lushey, C., Hughes, K., Tocque, K., & Ashton, J. R. (2007). Elvis to Eminem: Quantifying the price of fame through early mortality of European and North American rock and pop stars. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 61(10), 896–​901. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1136/​jech.2007.059915 Bonde, L. O., Juel, K., & Ekholm, O. (2018). Associations between music and health-​related outcomes in adult non-​musicians, amateur musicians and professional musicians: Results from a nationwide Danish study. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, 27(4), 262–​282. Baadjou, V. A., Wijsman, S. I., Ginsborg, J., Guptill, C., de Lisle, R., Rennie-​Salonen, B., Visentin, P., & Ackermann, B. J. (2019). Health education literacy and accessibility for musicians: A global approach. Report from the Worldwide Universities Network Project. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 34(2), 105–​107. Berg, L., King, B., Koenig, J., & McRoberts, R. L. (2018). Popular musician responses to mental health treatment. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 33(2), 124–​130. Bradshaw, N., & Cooper, A. L. (2018). Medical privacy and the professional singer: Injury stigma, disclosure, and professional ramifications on Broadway. Journal of Singing, 74(5), 513–​520. Cardoso, M., Morgado, E., & Leonido, L. (2019). From incidence to strategy:  A systematic review in playing-​related musculoskeletal disorders. Motricidade, 15(4),  59–​64. Chan, C., & Ackermann, B. (2014). Evidence-​informed physical therapy management of performance-​ related musculoskeletal disorders in musicians. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 706. https://​doi.org/​ 10.3389/​fpsyg.2014.00706 Chesky, K., Dawson,W. J., & Manchester, R. (2006). Health promotion in schools of music. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 21(3), 142–​144. Chesky, K., & Henoch, M. A. (2000). Instrument-​specific reports of hearing loss: Differences between classical and non-​classical musicians. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 15(1),  35–​39. Chi, J. Y., Halaki, M., & Ackermann, B. J. (2020). Ergonomics in violin and piano playing: A systematic review. Applied Ergonomics, 88, Article 103143. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.apergo.2020.103143 Combes, A., Dekerle, J., Bougault, V., & Daussin, F. N. (2017). Effect of work:  Rest cycle duration on fluctuations during intermittent exercise. Journal of Sports Sciences, 35(1),  7–​13. Comeau, G., Chen, K. C. J., Swirp, M., Russell, D., Chen, Y., Gawad, N., Jabagi, H., Tran, A., & Balaa, F. (2020). From music to medicine: Are pianists at an advantage when learning surgical skills? Music and Medicine, 12(1), 6–​18. http://​dx.doi.org/​10.47513/​mmd.v12i1.697 Davies, J., & Mangion, S. (2002). Predictors of pain and other musculoskeletal symptoms among professional instrumental musicians: Elucidating specific effects. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 17(4), 155–​169.

295

296

Bronwen Ackermann Di Stadio, A., Dipietro, L., Ricci, G., Della Volpe, A., Minni, A., Greco, A., & Ralli, M. (2018). Hearing loss, tinnitus, hyperacusis, and diplacusis in professional musicians: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(10), Article 2120. doi: 10.3390/​ijerph15102120 Dibble, K. (1995). Hearing loss and music. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, 43(4), 251–​266. Dick, R.W., Berning, J. R., Dawson,W., Ginsburg, R. D., Miller, C., & Shybut, G.T. (2013). Athletes and the arts: The role of sports medicine in the performing arts. Current Sports Medicine Reports, 12(6), 397–​403. https://​dor.org/​10.1249/​JSR.0000000000000009 Driscoll, T., & Ackermann, B. (2012). Applied musculoskeletal assessment:  Results from a standardised physical assessment in a national population of professional orchestral musicians. Rheumatology S2:005. https://​doi.org/​10.4172/​2161-​1149.S2-​005 Dugan, S. A., & Frontera,W. R. (2000). Muscle fatigue and muscle injury. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America, 11(2), 385–​403. Dunn, K. M., Hestbaek, L., & Cassidy, J. D. (2013). Low back pain across the life course. Best Practice & Research: Clinical Rheumatology, 27(5), 591–​600. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.berh.2013.09.007 Ekegren, C. L., Gabbe, B. J., & Finch, C. F. (2016). Sports injury surveillance systems: A review of methods and data quality. Sports Medicine, 46(1), 49–​65. https://​doi.org/​10.1007/​s40279-​015-​0410-​z Emerich, K. A. (2002).Young singers and vocal health. Perspectives on Voice and Voice Disorders, 12(2), 26–​27. https://​doi.org/​10.1044/​vvd12.2.26 Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R.T., & Tesch-​Römer, C. (1993).The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–​406. Finch, C. F. (2006). A new framework for research leading to sports injury prevention. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 9(1–​2), 3–​9. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.jsams.2006.02.009 Finch, C. F. (2011). No longer lost in translation: The art and science of sports injury prevention implementation research. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 45(16), 1253–​1257. https://​doi.org/​10.1136/​ bjsports-​2011–​090230 Fishbein, M., Middlestadt, S. E., Ottati,V., Straus, S., & Ellis, A. (1988). Medical problems among ICSOM musicians: Overview of a national survey. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 3(1),  1–​8. Franco, R. A., & Andrus, J. G. (2007). Common diagnoses and treatments in professional voice users. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America, 40(5), 1025–​1061. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.otc.2007.05.008 Gabbett, T. J. (2020) Debunking the myths about training load, injury and performance: Empirical evidence, hot topics and recommendations for practitioners. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 54(1), 58–​66. https://​doi.org/​10.1136/​bjsports-​2018–​099784 Gaser, C., & Schlaug, G. (2003). Brain structures differ between musicians and non-​musicians. Journal of Neuroscience, 23(27), 9240–​9245. https://​doi.org/​10.1523/​JNEUROSCI.23-​27-​09240.2003 Gembris, H., Heye, A., & Seifert, A. (2018). Health problems of orchestral musicians from a life-​span perspective: Results of a large-​scale study. Music & Science, 1. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​2059204317739801 Ginsborg, J., Kreutz, G., Thomas, M., & Williamon, A. (2009) Healthy behaviours in music and non-​ music performance students. Health Education, 109(3), 242–​258. https://​doi.org/​10.1108/​ 09654280910955575 Hagglund, K. L., & Jacobs, K. (1996). Physical and mental practices of music students as they relate to the occurrence of music-​related injuries. Work, 6(1), 11–​24. https://​doi.org/​10.3233/​WOR-​1996–​6103 Hamann, D. L., & Sobaje, M. (1983). Anxiety and the college musician: A study of performance conditions and subject variables. Psychology of Music, 11(1), 37–​50. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735683111005 Hambrick, D. Z., Oswald, F. L., Altmann, E. M., Meinz, E. J., Gobet, F., & Campitelli, G. (2014). Deliberate practice:  Is that all it takes to become an expert? Intelligence, 45, 34–​45. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​ j.intell.2013.04.001 Harvey, A. (2017). Music, evolution and the harmony of souls. Oxford University Press. Hulin, B. T., Gabbett, T. J., Caputi, P., Lawson, D. W., & Sampson, J. A. (2016). Low chronic workload and the acute: Chronic workload ratio are more predictive of injury than between-​match recovery time: A two-​season prospective cohort study in elite rugby league players. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 50(16), 1008–​1012. Ingle, M. (2014). Evaluation of a trial of an e-​ health promotion course aimed at Australian tertiary music students [Master’s thesis]. University of Sydney, Sydney eScholarship Repository. https://​ses.library. usyd.edu.au/​ b itstream/​ h andle/​ 2 123/​ 1 0097/​ I ngle%2C%20Michael%20-​ % 20Final%20thesis. pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y Ioannou, C. I., & Altenmüller, E. (2014). Psychological characteristics in musician’s dystonia:  A new diagnostic classification. Neuropsychologia, 61, 80–​88. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.neuropsycholo gia.2014.05.014

296

297

Health issues Kahari, K., Eklof, M., Sandsjo, L., Zachau, G., & Moller, C. (2003). Associations between hearing and psychosocial working conditions in rock/​jazz musicians. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 18(3), 98–​106. Kenny, D. T. (2005). A systematic review of treatments for music performance anxiety. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 18(3), 183–​208. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​10615800500167258 Kenny, D. T. (2009). Negative emotions in music making: Performance anxiety. In P. Juslin & J. Sloboda (Eds.), Handbook of music and emotion: Theory, research, applications (pp. 425–​451). Oxford University Press. Kenny, D. T., & Ackermann, B. (2009). Optimizing physical and psychological health in performing musicians. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 390–​ 400). Oxford University Press. Kenny, D. T., & Ackermann, B. J. (2016). Hitting the high notes:  Healthy aging in professional orchestral musicians. In A.-​S. Antoniou, R. J. Burke, & S. C.  L. Cooper (Eds.), The aging workforce handbook: Individual, organizational and societal challenges (pp. 355–​376). Emerald Publishing. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1108/​978-​1-​78635-​448-​820161014 Kenny, D. T., & Asher, A. (2016). Life expectancy and cause of death in popular musicians: Is the popular musician lifestyle the road to ruin? Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 31(1),  37–​44. Kenny, D. T., Fortune, J. M., & Ackermann, B. (2013). Predictors of music performance anxiety during skilled performance in tertiary flute players. Psychology of Music, 41(3), 306–​328. Kenny, D., & Ackermann, B. (2015). Performance-​related musculoskeletal pain, depression and music performance anxiety in professional orchestral musicians: A population study. Psychology of Music, 43(1), 43–​60. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735613493953 Kenny, D., Driscoll, T., & Ackermann, B. (2014). Psychological well-​ being in professional orchestral musicians in Australia: A descriptive population study. Psychology of Music, 42(2), 210–​232. https://​doi. org/​10.1177/​0305735612463950 Knapik, J. J., Jones, S. B., Darakjy, S., Hauret, K. G., Nevin, R., Grier, T., & Jones, B. H. (2007). Injuries and injury risk factors among members of the United States Army Band. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 50(12), 951–​961. Kok, L. M., Haitjema, S., Groenewegen, K. A., & Rietveld, A. B. M. (2016). The influence of a sudden increase in playing time on playing-​related musculoskeletal complaints in high-​level amateur musicians in a longitudinal cohort study. PloS ONE, 11(9), e0163472. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal. pone.0163472 Kwok, M., & Eslick, G. D. (2019). The impact of vocal and laryngeal pathologies among professional singers: A meta-​analysis. Journal of Voice, 33(1), 58–​65. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.jvoice.2017.09.002 Larsson, L. G., Baum, J., Mudholkar, G. S., & Kollia, G. D. (1993). Benefits and disadvantages of joint hypermobility among musicians. New England Journal of Medicine, 329(15), 1079–​1082. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1056/​NEJM199310073291504 Leaver, R., Harris, E. C., & Palmer, K. T. (2011). Musculoskeletal pain in elite professional musicians from British symphony orchestras. Occupational Medicine, 61(8), 549–​555. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​occmed/​ kqr129 Lehman, P. J., & Carl, R. L. (2017). Growing pains: When to be concerned. Sports Health, 9(2), 132–​138. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1941738117692533 Liederbach, M., & Richardson, M. (2007). The importance of standardized injury reporting in dance. Journal of Dance Medicine & Science, 11(2),  45–​48. Lloyd, A. T., Gerhard, J., Baker, P., Lundy, D. S., Diaz, J., Bretl, M. M., Landera, M. A., Anis, M., Marchman, J., & Rosow, D. E. (2020). Prevalence of vocal fold pathologies among first-​year singing students across genres. The Laryngoscope, 130(8), 1996–​2002. https://​doi.org/​10.1002/​lary.28354 Macnamara, B. N., Hambrick, D. Z., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). Deliberate practice and performance in music, games, sports, education, and professions: A meta-​analysis. Psychological Science, 25(8), 1608–​1618. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0956797614535810 Magro, D.  O. (2019). Nutrition and hydration. In S. Rocha Piedade, A. B. Imhoff, M. Clatworthy, M. Cohen, & J. Espregueira-​Mendes (Eds.), The Sports Medicine Physician (pp. 85–​98). Springer International Publishing. https://​doi.org/​10.1007/​978-​3-​030-​10433-​7 Mahurkar, A. (2019). Importance of balance diet & nutrition for athletes performance. Indian Journal of Applied Research, 9(11). Doi: 10.36106/​ijar Manturzewska, M. (1990). A biographical study of the life-​span development of professional musicians. Psychology of Music, 18(2), 112–​139. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735690182002 Matei, R., Broad, S., Goldbart, J., & Ginsborg, J. (2018). Health education for musicians. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 1137. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2018.01137

297

298

Bronwen Ackermann McCormick, J., & McPherson, G. (2003). The role of self-​efficacy in a musical performance examination: An exploratory structural equation analysis. Psychology of Music, 31(1), 37–​51. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0305735603031001322 McCrary, J. M., Halaki, M., & Ackermann, B. J. (2016). Effects of physical symptoms on muscle activity levels in skilled violinists. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 31(3), 125–​131. Möller, D., Ballenberger, N., Ackermann, B., & Zalpour, C. (2018). Potential relevance of altered muscle activity and fatigue in the development of performance-​related musculoskeletal injuries in high string musicians. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 33(3), 147–​155. Moseley, G. L. (2007). Reconceptualising pain according to modern pain science. Physical Therapy Reviews, 12(3), 169–​178. https://​doi.org/​10.1179/​108331907X223010 Moseley, G. L., & Butler, D. S. (2015). Fifteen years of explaining pain: The past, present, and future. The Journal of Pain, 16(9), 807–​813. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.jpain.2015.05.005 Newmark, J., & Lederman, R. J. (1987). Practice doesn’t necessarily make perfect: Incidence of overuse syndromes in amateur instrumentalists. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 2(4), 142–​144. Norton, N. (2016). Health promotion for musicians:  Engaging with instrumental and vocal teachers. Arts and Humanities as Higher Education. www.artsandhumanities.org/​health-​promotion-​for-​ musicians-​engaging-​with-​instrumental-​and-​vocal-​teachers O’Brien, I., Driscoll, T., & Ackermann, B. (2013a). Sound exposure of professional orchestral musicians during solitary practice. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 134(4), 2748–​2754. https://​doi. org/​10.1121/​1.4820900 O’Brien, I., Driscoll, T., & Ackermann, B. (2013b). Noise exposure and attitudes to hearing protection in orchestral brass musicians. In A. Williamon & W. Goebl (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium on Performance Science (pp. 28–​31). European Association of Conservatoires. Osborne, M. S., & McPherson, G. E. (2019). Precompetitive appraisal, performance anxiety and confidence in conservatorium musicians: A case for coping. Psychology of Music, 47(3), 451–​462. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0305735618755000 Paarup, H. M., Baelum, J., Holm, J.W., Manniche, C., & Wedderkopp, N. (2011). Prevalence and consequences of musculoskeletal symptoms in symphony orchestra musicians vary by gender: A cross-​sectional study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 12(1), Article 223. https://​doi.org/​10.1186/​1471-​2474-​12-​223 Palac, J. (2008). Promoting musical health, enhancing musical performance: Wellness for music students. Music Educators Journal, 94(3),  18–​22. Paull, B., & Harrison, C. (1997). The athletic musician: A guide to playing without pain. Scarecrow Press. Pecen, E., Collins, D. J., & MacNamara, Á. (2018).“It’s your problem. Deal with It.” Performers’ experiences of psychological challenges in music. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 2374. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​ fpsyg.2017.02374 Pecen, E., Collins, D., & MacNamara, Á. (2016). Music of the night: Performance practitioner considerations for enhancement work in music. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 5(4), 377–​395. https://​ doi.org/​10.1037/​spy0000067 Perkins, R., Reid, H., Araújo, L. S., Clark, T., & Williamon, A. (2017). Perceived enablers and barriers to optimal health among music students: A qualitative study in the music conservatoire setting. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 968. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2017.00968 Phyland, D. J., Oates, J., & Greenwood, K. M. (1999). Self-​reported voice problems among three groups of professional singers. Journal of Voice, 13(4), 602–​611. Quarrier, N.  F. (1993). Performing arts medicine:  The musical athlete. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 17(2), 90–​95. https://​doi.org/​10.2519/​jospt.1993.17.2.90 Raeburn, S. D. (1987). Occupational stress and coping in a sample of professional rock musicians (second of two parts). Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 2(3),  77–​82. Raeburn, S. D., Hipple, J., Delaney, W., & Chesky, K. (2003). Surveying popular musicians’ health status using convenience samples. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 18(3), 113–​119. Ranelli, S., Straker, L., & Smith, A. (2008). Prevalence of playing-​ related musculoskeletal symptoms and  disorders in children learning instrumental music. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 23(4), 178–​185. Ratzan, S. C., & Parker, R. M. (2006) Health literacy:  Identification and response. Journal of Health Communication, 11(8), 713–​715. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​10810730601031090 Rhode, A., Westdorp, C., & Berry, D. C. (2017). The prevalence, risk, and rate of musculoskeletal injuries and sudden illnesses in marching band and color guard members: A systematic review. Journal of Athletic Training, 52(6), S152.

298

299

Health issues Rickert, D. L., Barrett, M. S., & Ackermann, B. (2013). Injury and the orchestral environment:  Part I. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 28(4), 219–​229. Rickert, D. L., Barrett, M. S., & Ackermann, B. J. (2014a). Injury and the orchestral environment: Part II. Organisational culture, behavioural norms, and attitudes to injury. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 29(2), 94–​101. Ritchie, L., & Williamon, A. (2012). Self-​efficacy as a predictor of musical performance quality. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(4), 334–​340. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​a0029619 Rotter, G., Noeres, K., Fernholz, I., Willich, S. N., Schmidt, A., & Berghöfer, A. (2020). Musculoskeletal disorders and complaints in professional musicians: A systematic review of prevalence, risk factors, and clinical treatment effects. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 93, 149–​187. https://​doi.org/​10.1007/​s00420-​019-​01467-​8 Rui, M., Lee, J. E.,Vauthey, J. N., & Conrad, C. (2018). Enhancing surgical performance by adopting expert musicians’ practice and performance strategies. Surgery, 163(4), 894–​900. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​ j.surg.2017.09.011 Simoens, V. L., Puttonen, S., & Tervaniemi, M. (2015). Are music performance anxiety and performance boost perceived as extremes of the same continuum? Psychology of Music, 43(2), 171–​187. https://​doi. org/​10.1177/​0305735613499200 Spahn, C.,Voltmer, E., Mornell, A., & Nusseck, M. (2017). Health status and preventive health behavior of music students during university education: Merging prior results with new insights from a German multicenter study. Musicae Scientiae, 21(2), 213–​229. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864917698197 Stanhope, J. (2016). Physical performance and musculoskeletal disorders: Are musicians and sportspeople on a level playing field? Performance Enhancement & Health, 4(1–​2),  18–​26. Steele, C. J., Bailey, J. A., Zatorre, R. J., & Penhune, V. B. (2013). Early musical training and white-​matter plasticity in the corpus callosum: Evidence for a sensitive period. Journal of Neuroscience, 33(3), 1282–​ 1290. https://​doi.org/​10.1523/​JNEUROSCI.3578-​12.2013 Stormer, C. C. L., Sorlie, T., & Stenklev, N. C. (2017). Tinnitus, anxiety, depression and substance abuse in rock musicians a Norwegian survey. The International Tinnitus Journal, 21(1),  50–​57. Strong, J. V., & Mast, B. T. (2019). The cognitive functioning of older adult instrumental musicians and non-​musicians. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 26(3), 367–​386. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​ 13825585.2018.1448356 Sutcliffe, R., Du, K., & Ruffman, T. (2020). Music making and neuropsychological aging:  A review. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 113, 479–​491. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.neubiorev.2020.03.026 Tam, R., Beck, K. L., Manore, M. M., Gifford, J., Flood,V. M., & O’Connor, H. (2019). Effectiveness of education interventions designed to improve nutrition knowledge in athletes: A systematic review. Sports Medicine, 49(11), 1769–​1786. https://​doi.org/​10.1007/​s40279-​019-​01157-​y Trollinger, V. L. (2007). Pediatric vocal development and voice science: Implications for teaching singing. General Music Today, 20(3), 19–​25. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​10483713070200030105 Trollinger, V. L., & Sataloff, R. T. (2018). It’s all about the voice… For wind instrumentalists, too! Music Educators Journal, 105(2), 36–​42. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0027432118803430 Twardella, D., Raab, U., Perez-​Alvarez, C., Steffens, T., Bolte, G., & Fromme, H. (2017). Usage of personal music players in adolescents and its association with noise-​induced hearing loss:  A cross-​sectional analysis of Ohrkan cohort study data. International Journal of Audiology, 56(1), 38–​45. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1080/​14992027.2016.1211762 Tufts, J. B., & Skoe, E. (2018). Examining the noisy life of the college musician: Weeklong noise dosimetry of music and non-​music activities. International Journal of Audiology, 57(Suppl. 1), S20–​S27. https://​doi. org/​10.1080/​14992027.2017.1405289 van Selms, M. K., Wiegers, J. W., van der Meer, H. A., Ahlberg, J., Lobbezoo, F., & Visscher, C. M. (2020). Temporomandibular disorders, pain in the neck and shoulder area, and headache among musicians. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 47(2), 132–​142. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​joor.12886 Wijsman, S., & Ackermann, B. J. (2019). Educating Australian musicians: Are we playing it safe? Health Promotion International, 34(4), 869–​876. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​heapro/​day030 Wijsman, S., Ackermann, B. J., & Halaki, M. (2019, July 16–​17). Sound performers:  Factors affecting student engagement with online health education [Paper presentation]. International Symposium on Performance Science, Melbourne, Australia. https://​research-​repository.uwa.edu.au/​en/​publications/​ sound-​performers-​factors-​affecting-​student-​engagement-​with-​online Williamon, A., & Thompson, S. (2006). Awareness and incidence of health problems among conservatoire students. Psychology of Music, 34(4), 411–​443.

299

300

Bronwen Ackermann Williamon, A., & Antonini Philippe, R. (2020). Wellbeing in and through performance: Perspectives from sports and music. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 399. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2020.00399 World Health Organization. (2020). Depression. www.who.int/​health-​topics/​depression#tab=tab_​1 Wu, S. J. (2007). Occupational risk factors for musculoskeletal disorders in musicians: A systematic review. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 22(2),  43–​52. Yoshie, M., Kudo, K., Murakoshi, T., & Ohtsuki, T. (2009). Music performance anxiety in skilled pianists:  Effects of social-​evaluative performance situation on subjective, autonomic, and electromyographic reactions. Experimental Brain Research, 199(2), Article 117. https://​doi.org/​10.1007/​ s00221-​009-​1979-​y

300

301

PART IV

Pedagogy in education and community music

302

303

INTRODUCTION Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

Music teaching and learning in education and the community is the focus of Part IV. Music pedagogy varies from large ensembles (Chapter 19) to small groups (Chapter 20) to one-​to-​one instruction (Chapter  21). Some instruction is oriented toward learners who have disabilities and/​or additional needs (Chapter  22). Almost all practising musicians hold multiple musical identities (Chapter 23). Finally, assessment is a critical component of all pedagogy (Chapter 24). Across all these topics, there are considerations of age (from infants to senior citizens), of expertise (from beginner to artist), of environments (from formal to informal to non-​formal situations) and of places (from educational institutions to community settings). Connecting all this disparity is the central core of how we teach and how we learn music. As stated in Wendy K. Matthews’ overview of music pedagogy for large groups (Chapter 19), educators whose principal role is conducting a large ensemble are known as conductor-​ educators. In contrast to professional conductors who primarily prepare ensembles for public performances, conductor-​educators utilise public performances as a visible demonstration of the learning that has occurred over the previous instructional period. As such, they are responsible not only for providing inspirational musical leadership but also for planning and executing an instructional curriculum through rehearsals, motivating ensemble members as individuals and as a group and making certain that rehearsal experiences are age and ability appropriate. Rather than the autocratic approach a professional conductor might take, the conductor-​educator may incorporate a collaborative approach involving a dialogue between conductor and ensemble members. Thus, in addition to traditional rehearsals, students might be engaged in improvisation, composition, playing by ear, collaboration on music decisions such as repertoire or interpretation, peer-​directed learning and incorporating popular and folk instruments. Strategies chosen must fit age and ability levels from beginners through school and college groups to community groups, including groups for senior citizens. In Chapter 20, Elaine King describes working with small musical groups as commonly found within particular musical-​cultural contexts (e.g., a chamber orchestra as opposed to a symphony orchestra). She divides small groups into two types:  formal groups that are supervised by a teacher or facilitator and informal groups that are self-​directed or “leaderless”. In supervised groups, someone –​often a teacher, conductor, facilitator, mentor, coach, artist or director –​is in charge and responsible for the activities of the group. Leadership can be autocratic/​authoritarian, democratic/​participative or laissez-​faire/​delegative. Research often focuses on composing and 303

304

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

songwriting with young people, singing and performing with students and adults and general music-​making with older people. Informal, unsupervised groups emphasise aspects of leadership, teamwork, communication and peer-​to-​peer learning. Characterised as self-​managed teams, these small groups rely on shared and collaborative responsibilities. However, even small groups such as a string quartet need a variety of leadership roles fulfilled. In a study of three student quartets, King (2006) identified the following roles, that may sometimes shift among members: leader, deputy-​leader, contributor, inquirer, fidget, joker, distractor and quiet one. Often, communication among small group members is non-​verbal, relying on facial expressions, eye contact and physical gestures. In contrast to Matthews’ discussion of large ensembles and King’s coverage of smaller musical groups, Helena Gaunt, Guadalupe López-​Íñiguez and Andrea Creech (Chapter  21) are concerned with one-​to-​one teaching and learning contexts. Rather than the polarised positions of ‘teacher-​centred’ or ‘learner-​centred’, these authors use a model by Gerald Jones (2005) that focuses on three shifting relationships between teacher and learner –​“gatekeeper”, “midwife” and “fellow traveller” –​and their relationship with content. In the gatekeeper paradigm, teacher and content are tightly aligned, and the teacher closely monitors what will be learned, how it will be learned and in what sequence. This is similar to the long-​held tradition of master–​apprentice that has been prominent in music pedagogy for centuries. In contrast, the midwife orientation places the learner and content in close alignment, and the teacher serves as a guide. In this situation, learning is the construction of new understandings rather than the transmission of accepted tradition. Finally, in the fellow traveller orientation, teacher and learner collaborate on the exploration of content as they discover together. Reflection, exploration and dialogue are key processes. Undoubtedly, investigations of one-​to-​one music instruction have not been very prominent in the research literature until lately. This is a field that is ripe for increased attention. In Chapter 22, David Baker writes about pedagogical considerations and additional needs (e.g., resources) for those with disabilities in music learning. Categories of disability include sensory (e.g., hearing or vision), physical (e.g., musculoskeletal or respiratory), neurological, cognitive, intellectual and psychiatric issues. Baker emphasises a social model wherein impairments are seen as part of the spectrum of human functioning and society has a responsibility to reorganise policy, the physical environment (e.g., buildings) and funding to allow everyone an equal chance at a fulfilling life. This might mean such things as creating effective school policies (e.g., mainstreaming, individual education plans), providing specialised musical instruments (e.g., woodwind instruments that can be played one-​handed) and furnishing assistive technologies (e.g., modified notation or computer software). Adequate teacher training and appropriate attitudes on the parts of administrators, teachers and fellow students are also critical. Although musicians have always created employment opportunities wherever they could –​ after all, Bach was responsible for the music in four different churches in Leipzig –​the current situation of musicians holding multiple musical identities is explored by Jennifer Rowley, Anna Reid and Dawn Bennett (Chapter 23). The so-​called portfolio musicians are those who engage in self-​employed, project-​based, hourly paid and/​or permanent musical work. The type and amount of such work contributes significantly to musician identity. Often, identity shifts across the lifespan as successes and failures, opportunities gained and lost, and shifting focuses shape one’s career development. To better understand these factors, the authors investigated identity formation among 24 music students. Participants frequently pursued multiple career paths (e.g., performing and teaching) as they moved toward their “possible selves”. The complex relationships attending these situations help form the developing identity of portfolio musicians. 304

305

Introduction

A critical component of music teaching and learning is assessment, and this is the topic undertaken by Mathieu Boucher and Andrea Creech in Chapter 24. They organise their topic into formative and summative assessments. Formative assessment is focused on particular assignments, performances, and the like as a means of guiding students’ growth and development; feedback given during a lesson, class or rehearsal is one example. Summative assessment aims at a long-range view to summarise overall growth over a period of time; final exams or jury performances before a panel of judges are examples.While formative and summative assessments are often conducted by outside agencies (e.g., teachers, expert judges), self-regulation – where learners monitor their own progress toward goals via self-assessment, self-observation, selfdirected learning, and so on – is another critical component. Difficult as it may be for individuals to monitor their own performances or products (e.g., compositions, essays), it is critical that mentors intentionally aid in the development of these skills through the use of such strategies as reflection, peer learning, teacher feedback and the use of audio and video playback. Successful musical growth may depend on an integration of external and internal assessments. Music teaching and learning is a topic of critical interest to anyone working in music education or music in the community. It is also a topic on which music psychologists have much to offer.The chapters in this part offer an in-depth look at the current literature and offer many suggestions for future research. As well, they provide much food for thought for practitioners.

References Jones, G. (2005). Gatekeepers, midwives, and fellow travelers: The craft and artistry of adult educators. Mary Ward Centre. King, E. (2006). The roles of student musicians in quartet rehearsals. Psychology of Music, 34(2), 263–283.

305

306

19 MUSIC PEDAGOGY FOR LARGE GROUP TEACHING The conductor-​educator Wendy K. Matthews Music pedagogy for large group teaching: The conductor-​educator This chapter considers learning and pedagogy in the formal context of the large ensemble. These ensembles are present throughout the world and can be vocal or instrumental; the most common are choirs, bands, and orchestras. They can be curricular, extracurricular, or private, and they reside in secondary or university education settings, as part of a professional musical organisation, within a community, or independently.The repertoire in these large ensembles can also vary and is often organised around a particular family of instruments (e.g., string orchestras, brass bands) or style of music (such as classical, gospel, or jazz) (Lee & Worthy, 2012). This large ensemble setting provides an opportunity to participate in a community that highlights both musical and social growth (Lee & Worthy, 2012). Furthermore, this setting can include programmes focused on music literacy within the context of social change, such as Venezuela’s El  Sistema, Portugal’s Project Orquestra Geracao, or El  Sistema-​inspired programmes in the United States, such as Youth Orchestra Los Angeles-​YOLA (Mota & Figueriredo, 2012). This variety of settings requires educators to design instruction to meet a range of musical goals while at the same time considering ensemble members’ aspirations for participating. The principal educator in large ensembles is the conductor, who must be able to combine skill and pedagogies to create a dynamic ensemble experience that fosters individual expression, group accomplishment, and connection to traditions and culture (Gates, 2000; Matthews, 2017; McCarthy, 2012). Elizabeth Green (1987), a highly esteemed teacher of conducting in the United States, describes the conductor as a genuine and inspiring leader who knows the musical score thoroughly and can convey its meaning to the musicians through gestures. Furthermore, the conductor’s responsibility is to teach musical interpretation, style, and precision through physical gestures, demonstrations, and verbal instructions (Labuta & Matthews, 2017).Yet artistry in conducting, seemingly the most critical skill used by conductors, is not the only aspect needed to be successful. The large group setting also requires a thorough and complete understanding of the motivation of both the individual and the group as well as an expert understanding of pedagogies specific to the ensemble context. This teaching context can focus on a specific genre or a range of genres as well as unique combinations of voices and instruments coupled with different coaching techniques dependent on the age and musical level of the musicians. Therefore, to guide in this musical collaboration, one must be a conductor-​educator. 306

307

Music pedagogy for large group teaching

This chapter discusses pedagogy and learning in the large ensemble from the conductor-​ educator perspective, considering the symbiosis of the many aspects that must be reflected on when working in this setting. First, the chapter describes the conductor-​educator’s use of non-​verbal communication through the conducting gesture and music-​making in the rehearsal and includes an overview of planning and executing rehearsals. This will be followed with a discussion of motivating the ensemble from both the individual and group viewpoint. Second, the chapter will outline several pedagogical concerns specific to teaching across the lifespan, specifically working with children, adolescents, emerging adults, and older adults in both the academic and community ensemble settings.The chapter concludes with conclusions regarding large group music making and suggestions for future research.

Non-​verbal communication Expert conductors spend many years in specialised training and, although no two conduct exactly alike, there are certain expectations of what these gestures portray. These conductors have a vast collection of non-verbal gestures from their hands and arms, body movements, and facial expressions to indicate time and musical elements that contribute to the group’s performance (Byo & Austin, 1994). These body movements and facial expressions are mutually understood performance cues which serve as a means of communication, developed during rehearsals to remind musicians of the conductor’s musical intentions (Ripley, 2003). These movements guide and aid the performers in monitoring their skills and coordination with other members of the ensemble (Chaffin & Imreh, 2001). Thus, the clarity of these gestures is central to the conductor’s success (Holden, 2003). These shared cues, as defined by Ginsborg et al. (2006), are organised into three hierarchical levels: (1) basic, which includes features of the score specified by the composer, such as rhythm; (2)  interpretive, which includes markings that represent articulations, phrasings, and tempo; and (3) expressive, which contains features beyond what is in the score and characterises the emotion or composer’s intent of the piece to be communicated to the audience. For example, basic cues include entrances and cadence points; interpretive cues reflect choices regarding phrasing, rubato, and accents; and expressive cues integrate the affective interpretation of the composition. Additionally, conductors supplement their gestures with facial expressions and audible breath to represent the mood of the music, indicate entrances or phrasing, or communicate feedback on the ensemble’s performance. The conductor’s use of expressive shared performance cues can increase the musicians’ individual and collective performance by establishing the structure and the manner in which they perform and contribute to the whole ensemble (Matthews & Kitsantas, 2012). Taking time to explain or teach the meaning of the gestures will help develop a communal lexicon of gestures that are meaningful for the ensemble members and improve performance response (Cofer, 1998).

Music-​making in the rehearsal The conductor-​educator of large ensembles makes a variety of decisions as they plan, implement, and reflect on their teaching (Shavelson & Stern, 1981). These multifaceted decisions are shaped by the needs of the individual and the group, which in turn builds the ensemble’s collective music-​making (Duke & Byo, 2012). These decisions are also influenced by the music teacher’s intuitions, values, musical skill, and pedagogical knowledge (Lee & Porter, 1990; Matthews & Johnson, 2019; Vanlommel et  al., 2016). Specifically, conductor-​educators select appropriate repertoire and materials and design instructional activities based on contextual 307

308

Wendy K. Matthews

factors and curriculum standards. Reflection on the success or failure of their teaching guides their next rehearsals, building to a culminating performance. Planning or designing instruction in ensembles begins with identifying goals and objectives for student learning and then “working backwards” to develop instruction (Duke & Byo, 2012, p. 284; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). These short-​term and long-​range goals and objectives can encompass a small topic, a rehearsal, a concert cycle, or a programme of study over many years. Repertoire choices serve as the curriculum to meet these goals and objectives and are the basis for instruction providing the problem-​solving environment and fostering musical growth (Labuta & Matthews, 2017). This repertoire helps conductor-​educators create lessons to develop individual and group skills that build collective musicianship (Duke & Byo, 2012). To successfully select literature, conductor-​educators must consider curriculum standards (e.g., district, state, or national) and contextual factors such as student needs, preferences, prior knowledge, and skill levels (King-​Sears & Emenova, 2007; Lutnpe & Chambers, 2001).The conductor must also consider the technical and physical limitations of the members, especially for young beginners and aging adults. The music itself must be well-​crafted with creative melodies, harmonic imagination, rhythmic vitality, and emotional impact (Cramer, 2009). Additionally, programming must include diverse styles and origins and be appealing for the ensemble members and the audience. Planning rehearsals also includes the analysis and preparation of the score. Here, the conductor-​educator must spend time learning scores and determining the composer’s intent by analysing the music’s structure and expressive meaning. Best practice recommends that the conductor-​educator doesn’t learn the scores with the ensemble, as being unprepared leads to wasted rehearsal time and frustration of the ensemble members. Labuta and Matthews (2017) suggest three steps to score analysis:  acquiring an aural concept, anticipating problems of conducting, and anticipating problems of the ensemble and rehearsal. Initially, the conductor-​ educator develops a sound image of the music that guides interpretation and serves as an aural model for rehearsals.This inner sound image influences the development of conducting gestures and facial expressions. No matter the level being taught, it is essential to prepare this before the initial rehearsal, and it must be of high quality and consistent throughout all rehearsals.The culmination of these three steps has the conductor-​educator identifying and preparing strategies to address potential errors and misconceptions. During rehearsals, conductor-​ educators focus on students’ conceptual understanding and musical performance and provide any adjustments needed to improve student learning (Parmigiani, 2012). This is often done as “reflection-​ in-​ action” (Schon, 1986), where the conductor-​educator analyses the music-​making for errors and quickly provides strategies for improvement. Rehearsal structure includes identifying, evaluating, and correcting errors though the strategy of direct instruction, a teacher-​centred approach (Arnold, 1995; Goolsby, 1999; Price, 1983; Yarbrough & Price, 1989), “synthesis–​analysis–​synthesis” (Labuta & Matthews, 2017), or “macro–​micro–​macro” (Feldman & Contzius, 2016). Similarly, each of these approaches include steps where conductor-​educators rehearse a section to compare ensemble errors to their aural representation of the score, then the conductor isolates and improves musical errors through questioning, modelling strategies, providing time for practice, and assessing the performance through formative or summative feedback.The details of assessment are discussed in Chapter 24, in this book. More recent rehearsal pedagogies have incorporated collaborative learning to create a dialogue between the conductor and ensemble. This can bridge the gap between formal and informal group music-​making and address some of the limitations of Western pedagogy in the context of teaching diverse music (Davis, 2012; McCarthy, 2012). This constructivist, student-​centred 308

309

Music pedagogy for large group teaching

perspective highlighting ensemble members’ multiple perspectives and experiences has included improvisation, composing, playing by ear, collaboration on music decisions such as repertoire or interpretation, peer-​directed learning, and incorporating popular and folk instruments (Allsup & Benedict, 2008; Campbell et al., 2007; McGillen, 2007). Conductorless ensembles, which utilise chamber music skills within the large ensemble setting, have also begun to be incorporated as rehearsal strategies which can open a dialogue between members, improve collaboration, and heighten appreciation of multiple perspectives within the ensemble (Hedgecoth, 2018). Incorporating both teacher-​centred and peer-​directed learning can provide opportunities for the development of musical goals, cooperation skills, and leadership skills and lead to investment into meaningful music making.

Motivating the ensemble Motivation compels students to initiate learning activities, stay steadfast in learning tasks, and remain dedicated to the process of learning (Ames, 1990). People join and continue in ensembles for a variety of musical and social reasons. They value the opportunity for musical expression (Adderley et al., 2003), engagement with a supportive network of peers (Abril, 2012; Dagaz, 2012), social and mental health benefits (Coffman & Adamek, 1999; Kruse, 2012), and how participation contributes to their identity as an important and valued member of a community (Eccles & Barber, 1999). These diverse motivations create microcultures within the array of large ensemble settings and require the conductor-​educator to understand these microcultures and then apply the most appropriate pedagogies to both motivate the individual and enhance the collaboration of the group as a whole. Recognising these cultural aspects of music-​making complements our understanding of pedagogy in large ensembles (Morrison, 2001). Motivation in large ensemble settings can be understood through three concepts which focus on the individual, self-​efficacy, and the group through collective efficacy and group cohesion. Albert Bandura (1986), noted social cognitive psychologist, defines self-​efficacy as personal beliefs regarding one’s capabilities to perform certain behaviours successfully, and collective efficacy, as an indicator of the group’s judgement of their combined capabilities to accomplish a task. Group cohesion, which is similar to collective efficacy is the tendency for group members to unite in the mission of the group and/​or for social needs (Carron et al., 2002). Self-​efficacy beliefs can influence achievement and perseverance (Pajares, 2002) and are essential to many self-​regulatory processes, such as strategy use and intrinsic interest (Zimmerman, 2000). Additionally, to perform any behaviour, a person should believe not only that a positive result develops from specific actions, but also that he or she can produce these actions (Schunk, 2020). Bandura believed that there are four distinct ways to build self-​efficacy: mastery experiences, modelling, social persuasions, and judgements of physiological indicants of personal capabilities and vulnerabilities (Evans, 1989). Conductor-​educators can encourage positive self-​ efficacy by aiding ensemble members to set appropriate goals, communicating strategies for improvement, providing constructive feedback, being supportive, and helping musicians feel comfortable in rehearsals. Furthermore, when ensemble members feel supported, they may be more willing to take musical risks and, in turn, create performances that are more expressive. Many of the rehearsal issues reflect group problems which require sustained collective effort to solve. A conductor-​educator is in a unique situation to positively guide the cooperative effort of the ensemble to overcome challenges and their desire to contribute towards group goals. Therefore, it is essential to facilitate everyone working together during the rehearsal. Observing the group’s collective efficacy and group cohesion provides ways to examine the inner workings of large ensembles. Collective efficacy and group cohesion have been explored across many 309

310

Wendy K. Matthews

varied contexts and disciplines and have been shown to impact a team’s performance outcomes (Greer, 2012), affiliation to the group (Jowett et al., 2012), and intention to participate in the future (Spink, 1995). Conductor-​educators can build positive collective efficacy and group cohesion by instilling a rehearsal environment that values members’ contributions, focuses on expectations of collaboration, models trust, and highlights positive feedback and critique. It is also important to note that as members work together throughout the season, their confidence in their ability and the abilities of others can fluctuate, creating moments of discord (Laine, 2007; Matthews, 2017). Knowing that there is a potential for a pejorative atmosphere, especially in the middle of a rehearsal cycle, conductor-​educators can plan ways to help ensemble members understand their frustrations and provide opportunities to develop coping strategies, whether it be team building exercises, social events, or helping members access resources to help balance demands of their personal life outside of the ensemble. As Bandura (1986) asserts, working in groups requires unity and sustained collective efforts, and the strength of a group rests partly in its members’ sense of unity and belief that they can solve their problems through working together. By taking into consideration individual and group frustrations as part of their pedagogy, conductor-​educators can guide how their groups connect around the task of music-​ making, which in turn can influence the group’s rehearsals and performance.

Teaching throughout the lifespan As the conductor-​educator considers working with their ensembles, it is important that they not only hone their gestures, plan productive rehearsals, and motivate their ensembles, but also understand the music makers in their ensembles and their developmental needs. Having a ‘toolbox’ full of developmentally appropriate pedagogical and motivational strategies is essential. Furthermore, understanding this context aids in designing better instruction and rehearsal atmosphere tailored to the musicians in their particular ensembles. This section discusses four specific periods of human development that can influence the conductor-​educator’s decisions: teaching the beginner, the adolescent, the emerging adult, and the older adult.

Teaching the beginner For many, the beginning ensemble is their first introduction or only access to learning an instrument or singing with a group. This instruction typically begins in the school music classroom, with classes of either homogenous or heterogenous instruments or voices (Webb & Seddon, 2012). Beginning ensembles help students develop artistic expression and individual and ensemble skills, the goal being to lay strong foundations for the rest of the students’ musical lives (Duke & Byo, 2012).The conductor-​educator’s personal qualities and expertise play a considerable role in instructing and motivating students through the initial stages of musical study, which can be fraught with many frustrations (Davidson et al., 1998). As the conductor-​ educator focuses on developing musicianship and the psychomotor aspects of performing in this setting, they should emphasise instruction centred on “sound to symbol”, which imitates the way we learn languages by first speaking the language. This approach can enrich listening and social skills, foster motivation, and develop sight-​reading skills (Grutzmacher, 1987; Varvarigou, 2017). Additionally, working with a variety of familiar melodies can create contexts in which students apply their new aural and rhythmic learning (Duke & Byo, 2012). Beginning ensembles can also, from their earliest stages, improvise, compose, and arrange music collaboratively to help develop creativity and increase student engagement and sense of ownership (McGillen & McMillian, 2003; Varvarigou, 2017). These activities can 310

311

Music pedagogy for large group teaching

include small and large group work with traditional voice parts or instrumentation as well as adding guitars, drum sets, vocals, and technology-​based instruments and working with contemporary popular music and jazz genres (McGillen, 2007; McGillen & McMillian, 2003).

Teaching the adolescent During the adolescent years, typically between the ages of 10 and 18, students are motivated to participate in musical ensembles as they highly value their music-​making and performing, balancing their other schoolwork with artistic activities, and the affective connection between music and their personal lives (Adderley et al., 2003; Campbell et al., 2007). Furthermore, for this age group, active arts participation can predict intentions to complete schooling and the ability to manage academic setbacks (Martin et al., 2013) and contributes to their identity as an important and valued member of a community (Eccles & Barber, 1999). For adolescents, participating in these ensembles helps them connect to each other and their communities. Members of both instrumental and vocal ensembles develop friendships which they often refer to as a “family”, and for many adolescents, ensemble participation is a primary reason they attend and enjoy school (Dagaz, 2012, Eccles & Barber, 1999; Parker, 2014). Additionally, adolescents identify the importance of individual responsibility and valuing group success over individual needs (Dagaz, 2012). Ensemble members also express their personal and global identity. An example of this is described in Bartolome’s (2018) collective case study of children and youth participating in choral ensembles in Pretoria, South Africa. The directors and students spoke of how local performances and competitions, which include the music of their culture, convey a message of national identity and pride. This is a very fertile time not only to continue building on early training in music literacy, but also to develop self-​expression and positive social interactions. Recognising how to engage with these adolescents helps the conductor-​educator design instruction to meet their needs and interests. Musical concepts for this age group work well when presented in a fast-​paced and engaging manner with high levels of intensity, which can also improve student engagement.The optimal rehearsal pacing is generally short incidences of conductor instruction balanced with ensemble performance (Duke et al., 1998). While conductor-​educators, especially of adolescent groups, must focus on pacing and intensity, they should also continue to monitor their ensembles to see how individuals are progressing. Young ensembles can have a range of student abilities, as students develop at different rates and can enter ensemble instruction at varying levels of proficiency. This creates an issue for conductor-​educators, who must differentiate between instruction to meet the needs of the group and that which supports the individual who is struggling or is progressing quickly and needs supplemental work. This could include well-​crafted arrangements or student-​arranged popular music and vernacular music. Additionally, the conductor-​educator should continue to develop students’ creativity by incorporating playing by ear, composing, and improvisation to help students formulate their understanding of music (Wiggins, 2015).

Teaching the emerging adult The term “emerging adulthood”, as described by Arnett (2000), refers to the years between ages 18 and 25 and is characterised by exploration of possible direction and identity, feelings of being ‘in-​between’, instability, and self-​focus. Many of this age group are enrolled in universities, which can be a very stressful time as students cope with being away from home and balancing academic challenges, extracurricular activities, work, and social activities (Ferrer 311

312

Wendy K. Matthews

et al., 2014). Joining curricular or extracurricular groups, such as musical ensembles, can help students become involved in campus life and is a predictor of student persistence (Tinto, 1993). Collegiate music majors and non-​music majors are attracted to large musical ensembles for their connectedness, the sense of belonging, the acceptance an ensemble creates between the members and their school community culture, and the continuation of their secondary school experience (Kokotsaki & Hallam, 2007; Mantie & Dorfman, 2014; Matthews & Kitsantas, 2016). Ensemble members appreciate their intragroup relationships and often refer to their ensembles in terms of a fraternity, sorority, or, most often, a family (Duchan, 2012). Rehearsals should include a broad range of repertoire and genres that appeal to this age group, moments to develop musical skill, whether for personal or professional reasons, and opportunities for sight-​reading. Furthermore, the conductor-​educator must find the balance between high music standards, attainable challenges, and supporting the musicians with a relaxed atmosphere and a reasonable rehearsal structure that works with the students’ other time demands (Kokotsaki & Hallam, 2011). When teaching music majors, it is important to focus on their ultimate goals and provide opportunities to develop skills that are valuable in pursuing a professional life in music. They have similar beliefs in the social aspects of ensemble participation; however, they also value development of their musical skill and performing opportunities that prepare them for careers in music (Kokotsaki & Hallam, 2007; Lamont, 2012). For music majors, rigorous repertoire and rehearsal pacing are important to meet these expectations.

Teaching the adult Community ensembles are a fixture in many areas of the world and vary in size, purpose, and affiliation. Community ensembles can also be intergenerational (e.g., Conway & Hodgman, 2008) and include a range of musical abilities (Cunha & Lorenzino, 2012). Research on adult ensemble musicians outside of the college experience highlights reasons for participating, including attaining new knowledge, improving musical skills, and the influence of participation on mental and physical health (Coffman & Adamek, 1999; Judd & Pooley, 2014); developing positive self-​esteem (Kruse, 2012); and being part of a professional community and remaining musically active in singing or with their instrument (Shansky, 2010). Members also comment on the positive aspects of long-​term participation, social interaction with the various generations in the ensemble, and the enjoyment of performing and rehearsing (Cavitt, 2005; Conway & Hodgman, 2008; DeVries, 2012). But they may report frustrations as well, such as the physical effects of ageing, finding time to practice, schedule conflicts, and taking too much time away from family obligations (Kramer, 2011; Rohwer, 2013; Taylor et al.,  2011). Furthermore, choirs can safeguard and bridge relationships for marginalised communities. For example, singing in choirs provides opportunities for refugees to share their culture with others, practice their new language, and connect to their new city (Raanaas et al., 2019). For members of the gay chorus in Henderson and Hodges’ (2007) study, the songs and lyrics they perform provide avenues to express themselves and for advocacy. Likewise, choirs also create spaces for incarcerated people to develop social relationships, build self-​confidence, and experience enjoyment (Cohen, 2012). Supplementing healthcare with choral participation can improve the physical and mental health of adults in a variety of contexts. For example, in New Zealand, Fogg and Talmage’s (2011) study of people with diseases impairing communication, found participation in choir helped them gain more confidence in verbal capabilities and improved their sense of wellbeing. These improvements were also found in patients experiencing aphasia after a stroke 312

313

Music pedagogy for large group teaching

(Tamplin et al., 2013). Cancer patients and patients with Alzheimer’s disease who participated in choirs exhibited comparable results. These patients experienced lower anxiety and improved perceptions of pain and found singing with others uplifting, supportive, and a positive distraction from their illness (Clements-​Cortés, 2015; Reagon et al., 2017). Similar findings regarding participation in an ensemble have been reported with older adults who participate in ensembles specifically designed to include senior citizens, such as the New Horizon Bands in the United States (Coffman, 2002; Dabback, 2008; Jutras, 2011) or the Music for Life Project in the United Kingdom (Varvarigou et al., 2012). Older ensemble members reported that the experience of playing in ensembles or singing in choirs offers opportunities to tackle new challenges with others who value music and want to perform ensemble music (Coffman, 2002; Joseph & Southcott, 2018; Jutras, 2011). They valued social interaction with all ages, sharing their culture, and developing new musical identities (Dabback, 2008). This is illustrated in a study by Joseph and Southcott (2018) of five choirs in Victoria, Australia, where the members indicated that they enjoyed educating and entertaining their audiences about their particular culture, language, and heritage. They also cherished the shared histories of the group and expressed how participating in the group helped them cope with their increased feelings of loneliness as they grew older. Research with older adults also found that participants believe music-​making is a deterrent against stress and depression and that it motivates them to be active by attending rehearsals and practicing (Varvarigou et al., 2012).The atmosphere of rehearsals in community ensembles tend to be more relaxed and enjoyable, reflecting the importance of members valuing social interaction and how these groups support their mental health (Coffman, 2008; Rohwer, 2005). Conductor-​educators in this setting need to understand the physical and psychological needs, limitations, and challenges of older adults (Sataloff & Davidson, 2012). Pedagogical decisions in this environment should include choosing repertoire that is accessible cognitively and physically and which is attainable within the number of rehearsals available. Conductors-​educators should also consider adapting the pacing of rehearsals so that older adults have time to control motor skills. In some instances, these members struggle with hearing and vision loss, and this requires the conductor-​educator to speak slowly and articulately from the podium and prepare large print versions of music when necessary.

Conclusions Conductor-​educators are often interested in the factors that influence students’ performance and motivation in the ensemble setting and the role the conductor plays in the students’ musical development. Although many factors beyond the conductor-​educator’s influence bring about an excellent performance, the clarity of their gestures as well as their ability to educate the ensemble and inspire the rehearsal environment can play an essential role in their success. A conductor-​educator must be able to recognise different elements of musical notation and structural forms in a score, select motor strategies that involve specific types of gestures, and convey the emotion and particular interpretation of the piece to the audience via the ensemble musicians. Creating a productive rehearsal plan and implementing this plan is vital to a conductor-​educator’s successful interactions with their ensembles. However, conductor-​ educators must also be able to motivate and engage their ensembles individually and collectively. Conductor-​educators must be relentless in their musical demands and motivate their students to believe in themselves. A conductor-​educator needs the skill to attract diverse members into music and keep them motivated to learning music. The conductor-​educator should support participation in 313

314

Wendy K. Matthews

these ensembles by always considering the groups’ abilities and motivations for participation (Kokotsaki & Hallam, 2011). It is important for conductor-​educators to monitor and respond to the culture of their ensembles and the culture of the multiple communities they reside in, attending to both positive and negative interactions. Today, it is critical to train our current music educators to see the value in varied pedagogical approaches for shaping their future choir, band, or orchestra environment. Music educators must balance between conducting and educating in the ensemble setting. Understanding and excelling in both one-on-one instruction (educator), and directing large ensembles (conductor), and responding to the context of the group, is required now and in the future.

Suggestions for future research Traditional music education with the conductor-​ educator initiating all of the musical decisions has been criticised for being culturally irrelevant, endorsing authoritarianism and meritocracy, and for being disconnected from students’ lives outside of the ensemble (Allsup & Benedict, 2008; Kratus, 2007). To respond to this criticism, the large ensemble context in academic settings is expanding to include ensembles that perform popular and folk music and is incorporating learning that includes playing by ear, improvisation, composition, and technology. Research needs to explore these pedagogical ideas and how these constructivist, student-​centred pedagogies influence learning in the traditional ‘formal’ learning contexts of choirs, orchestras, and bands. Research also needs to focus on specific age groups and the pedagogies for these environments, especially emerging adults, as the research literature on this group is limited. Research should also continue to develop an understanding of ensembles that are not academically situated, asking how these contexts are supported by conductor-​educator professional development. Finally, research needs to critically examine the access to and content of music education through ensembles worldwide, as the musical ensemble doorway should be open for all persons.

Reflective questions 1. What is the function of the conducting gesture and non-​verbal communication in rehearsals and performances? 2. What preparations does a conductor-​educator need to consider prior to rehearsals? 3. Compare and contrast the direct-​ instruction approach and the student-​ centred approach to a rehearsal. 4. How can the conductor-​educator guide individual and group motivation, and how might that impact their performance in rehearsal? 5. Compare and contrast rehearsal environments for beginners, adolescents, emerging adults, and older adults.

Suggestions for further reading Hallam, S., & Gaunt, H. (2012). Preparing for success: A practical guide for young musicians. Institute of Education. Lind,V. R., & McKoy, C. (2016). Culturally responsive teaching in music education: From understanding to application. Routledge. Maiello, A. J. (2008). Conducting nuances: Little things mean a lot. GIA publications.

314

315

Music pedagogy for large group teaching McPherson, G. E., & Welch, G. F. (2018). Vocal, instrumental, and ensemble learning and teaching: An Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 3). Oxford University Press. Millican, S. (2012). Starting out right: Beginning band pedagogy. Scarecrow Press.

References Abril, C. R. (2012). Perspectives on the school band from hardcore American band kids. In P. S. Campbell & T. Wiggins (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of children’s musical cultures (pp. 434–​448). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199737635.013.0026 Adderley, C., Kennedy, M., & Berz, W. (2003). “A home away from home”: The world of the high school music classroom. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(3), 190–​205. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​ 3345373 Allsup, R. E., & Benedict, C. (2008).The problems of band: An inquiry into the future of instrumental music. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 16(2), 156–​173. https://​doi.org/​10.2979/​PME.2008.16.2.156 Ames, C. A. (1990). Motivation: What teachers need to know. Teachers College Record, 91(3), 409–​421. Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–​480. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​0003-​066X.55.5.469 Arnold, J. A. (1995). Effects of competency-​based methods of instruction and self-​observation on ensemble director’s use of sequential patterns. Journal of Research in Music Education, 43(2), 127–​138. https://​doi. org/​10.2307/​3345674 Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-​Hall. Bartolome, S. J. (2018). “We sing to touch hearts”: Choral musical culture in Pretoria East, South Africa. Research Studies in Music Education, 40(2), 265–​285. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1321103X18768101 Byo, J. L., & Austin, K. R. (1994). Comparison of expert and novice conductors: An approach to the analysis of nonverbal behaviors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 30(1),  11–​34. Campbell, P. S., Connell, C., & Beegle, A. (2007). Adolescents’ expressed meanings of music in and out of school. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55(3), 220–​236. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 002242940705500304 Carron, A.V., Brawley, L. R., & Widmeyer,W. N. (2002). Group environment questionnaire: Test manual. Fitness Information Technology. Cavitt, M.  E. (2005). Factors influencing participation in community bands. Journal of Band Research, 41(1),  42–​57. Chaffin, R., & Imreh, G. (2001). A comparison of practice and self-​report as sources of information about the goals of expert practice. Psychology of Music, 29(1), 39–​69. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735601291004 Clements-​Cortés, A. (2015). Singing for health, connection and care. Music and Medicine, 7(4),  13–​23. Cofer, R. S. (1998). Effects of conducting-​gesture instruction on seventh-​grade band students’ performance response to conducting emblems. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46(3), 360–​373. https://​ doi.org/​10.2307/​3345548 Coffman, D. D. (2002). Banding together: New horizons in lifelong music making. Journal of Aging and Identity, 7, 133–​143. https://​doi.org/​10.1023/​A:1015491202347 Coffman, D.  D. (2008). Survey of new horizons international music association musicians. International Journal of Community Music, 1(3), 375–​390. Coffman, D. D., & Adamek, M. S. (1999).The contributions of wind band participation to quality of life of senior adults. Music Therapy Perspectives, 17(1), 27–​31. https://​doi.org 10.1093/​mtp/​17.1.27 Cohen, M. L. (2012). Harmony within the walls: Perceptions of worthiness and competence in a community prison choir. International Journal of Music Education, 30(1), 46–​56. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0255761411431394 Conway, C., & Hodgman, T. M. (2008). College and community choir member experiences in a collaborative intergenerational performance project. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56(3), 220–​237. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0022429408327297 Cramer, R. (2009). What materials are you going to use to teach “about music” “through music” while “performing music”. In L. Blocher, E. M. Corporon, R. Cramer, T. Lautzenheiser, E. Lisk, & R. Miles (Eds.), Teaching music through performance in band (Vol. 1; pp. 7–​10). GIA publications. Cunha, R., & Lorenzino, L. (2012). The secondary aspects of collective music-​making. Research Studies in Music Education, 34(1), 73–​88. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1321103X12439134

315

316

Wendy K. Matthews Dabback, W. M. (2008). Identity formation through participation in the Rochester New Horizons Band programme. International Journal of Community Music, 1(2), 267–​286. https://​doi.org/​10.1386/​ ijcm.1.2.267_​1 Dagaz, M. C. (2012). Learning from the band: Trust, acceptance, and self-​confidence. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 41(4), 432–​461. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0891241612447813 Davidson, J.W., Moore, D. G., Sloboda, J. A., & Howe, M. J. A. (1998). Characteristics of music teachers and the progress of young instrumentalists. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46(1), 141–​160. https://​ doi.org/​10.2307/​3345766 Davis, S. G. (2012). Instrumental ensemble learning and performance in primary and elementary schools. In G. E. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1; pp. 417–​436). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199730810.013.0025 DeVries, P. (2012). Intergenerational music making: A phenomenological study of three older Australians making music with children. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59(4), 339–​354. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0022429411423581 Duchan, J. S. (2012). Powerful voices: The musical and social world of collegiate a cappella. University of Michigan Press. https://​doi.org/​10.3998/​mpub.911758 Duke, R. A., & Byo, J. L. (2012). Building musicianship in the instrumental music classroom. In G. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music teaching and learning (pp. 712–​730). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199730810.013.0043 Duke, R. A., Prickett, C. A., & Jellison, J. A. (1998). Empirical description of the pace of music instruction. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46(2), 265–​280. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3345628 Eccles, J. S., & Barber, B. L. (1999). Student council, volunteering, basketball, or marching band: What kind of extracurricular involvement matters? Journal of Adolescent Research, 14(1), 10–​43. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0743558499141003 Evans, R. I. (1989). Albert Bandura: The man and his ideas: A dialogue. Praeger Publishers. Feldman, E., & Contzius, A. (2016). Instrumental music education: Teaching with the musical and practical in harmony (2nd ed.). Routledge. Ferrer, E., Lew, P., Jung, S. M., Janeke, E., Garcia, M., Peng, C., Poon, G., Rathod,V., Beckwith, S., & Tam, C. F. (2014). Playing music to relieve stress in a college classroom environment. College Student Journal, 48(3), 481–​494. Fogg, L., & Talmage, A. (2011).The CeleBRation Choir: Establishing community group choral singing for people living with neurological conditions. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind and Brain, 21(1–​2), 264–​267. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​h0094030 Gates, J. T. (2000) Why study music? In C. K. Madsen (Ed.), Vision 2020: The Housewright symposium on the future of music education (pp. 55–​82). MENC. Ginsborg, J., Chaffin, R., & Nicholson, G. (2006). Shared performance cues in singing and conducting: A content analysis of talk during practice. Psychology of Music, 34(2), 167–​194. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735606061851 Goolsby, T. W. (1999). A comparison of expert and novice music teachers’ preparing identical band compositions: An operational replication. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(2), 174–​187. https://​ doi.org/​10.2307/​3345722 Green, E. A. H. (1987). The modern conductor. Prentice-​Hall. Greer, L. L. (2012). Group cohesion: Then and now. Small Group Research, 43(6), 655–​661. https://​doi. org/​10.1177/​1046496412461532 Grutzmacher, P. A. (1987).The effect of tonal pattern training on the aural perception, reading recognition, and melodic sight-​reading achievement of first-​year instrumental music students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 35(3), 171–​181. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3344959 Hedgecoth, D.  M. (2018). Student perspectives and learning outcomes from self-​ guided ensemble rehearsal. Research & Issues in Music Education, 14(1), Article 5. https://​commons.lib.jmu.edu/​r ime/​ vol14/​iss1/​5 Henderson, S. D., & Hodges, S. H. (2007). Music, song, and the creation of community and community spirit by a gay subculture. Sociological Spectrum, 27(1), 57–​80. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​ 02732170601001052 Holden, R. (2003). The technique of conducting. In J. A. Bowen (Ed.), Conducting (pp. 3–​16). Cambridge University Press. Joseph, D., & Southcott, J. (2018). Music participation for older people: Five choirs in Victoria, Australia. Research Studies in Music Education, 40(2), 176–​190. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1321103X18773096

316

317

Music pedagogy for large group teaching Jowett, S., Shanmugam, V., & Caccoulis, S. (2012). Collective efficacy as a mediator of the association between interpersonal relationships and athlete satisfaction in team sports. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 10(1), 66–​78. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​1612197X.2012.645127 Judd, M., & Pooley, J. A. (2014). The psychological benefits of participating in group singing for members of the general public. Psychology of Music, 42(2), 269–​283. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735612471237 Jutras, P. J. (2011).The benefits of new horizons band participation as self-​reported by selected new horizons band members. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 187, 65–​84. https://​doi.org/​ 10.2307/​41162324 Kramer, M.  W. (2011). A study of voluntary organizational membership:  The assimilation process in a community choir. Western Journal of Communication, 75(1), 52–​74. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​10570314. 2010.536962 King-​ Sears, M. E., & Emenova, A. S. (2007). Premises, principles, and processes for integrating TECHnology into instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(1), 6–​14. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 004005990704000101 Kokotsaki, D., & Hallam, S. (2007). Higher education music students’ perceptions of the benefits of participative music making. Music Education Research, 9(1), 93–​109. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​ 14613800601127577 Kokotsaki, D., & Hallam, S. (2011). The perceived benefits of participative music making for non-​music university students:  A comparison with music students. Music Education Research, 13(2), 149–​172. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613808.2011.577768 Kratus, J. (2007). Music education at the tipping point. Music Educators Journal, 94(2), 42–​48. https://​doi. org/​10.1177/​002743210709400209 Kruse, N. B. (2012). Adult community musicians’ self-​esteem of music ability. Research Studies in Music Education, 34(1), 61–​72. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1321103X12438655 Labuta, J., & Matthews, W. K. (2017). Basic Conducting Techniques (7th ed.). Routledge Music. Laine, K. (2007). American band: Music, dreams, and coming of age in the heartland. Gotham Books. Lamont, A. (2012). Emotion, engagement and meaning in strong experiences of music performance. Psychology of Music, 40(5), 574–​594. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735612448510 Lee, O., & Porter, A. C. (1990). Bounded rationality in classroom teaching. Educational Psychologist, 25(2), 159–​171. Lee,W. R., & Worthy, M. D. (2012). North American School Ensembles. In G. E. McPherson & G.Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1; pp. 417–​436). Oxford University Press. Lutnpe, A. T., & Chambers, E. (2001). Assessing teachers’ context beliefs about technology use. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(1), 93–​308. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​15391523.2001.10782337 Mantie, R., & Dorfman, J. (2014). Music participation and nonparticipation of nonmajors on college campuses. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 200, 41–​62. https://​doi.org/​10.5406/​ bulcouresmusedu.200.0041 Martin, A. J., Mansour, M., Anderson, M., Gibson, R., Liem, G. A. D., & Sudmalis, D. (2013).The role of arts participation in students’ academic and nonacademic outcomes: A longitudinal study of school, home, and community factors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 709–​727. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​ a0032795 Matthews, W. K. (2017). “Stand by me”: A mixed-​methods study of collegiate musician’s group beliefs in a division II throughout a performance season. Journal of Research in Music Education, 65(2), 179–​202. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0022429417694875 Matthews, W. K., & Johnson, D. C. (2019). Instructional decision-​making among expert choral and instrumental directors: How musical setting influences pedagogy. Research & Issues in Music Education, 15(1), Article 4. https://​commons.lib.jmu.edu/​r ime/​vol15/​iss1/​4 Matthews, W. K., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). The role of the conductor’s goal orientation and shared performance cues on collegiate instrumentalists’ motivational beliefs and performance in large musical ensembles. Psychology of Music, 41(5), 630–​646. https://​doi.org/​10.11.1177/​0305735612441738 Matthews, W. K., & Kitsantas, A. (2016). Examining instrumental ensemble musicians’ group cohesion, motivational climate, and collective efficacy beliefs in the university and community band settings. Journal of Band Research, 51(2),  1–​17. McCarthy, M. (2012). International perspectives. In G. E. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1; pp. 40–​62). Oxford University Press. McGillen, C. (2007). The whiz band orkestra:  An alternative approach to band classes and classroom ensembles. Australian Journal of Music Education, 1,  17–​28.

317

318

Wendy K. Matthews McGillen, C., & McMillian, R. (2003). Cooperative song writing: Adventures in anarchy and engagement with adolescents. Australian Journal of Music Education, 1,  25–​38. Morrison, S. J. (2001). The school ensemble: A culture of our own. Music Educators Journal, 88(2), 24–​28. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3399738 Mota, G., & Figueriredo, S. (2012). Initiating music programs in new contexts: In search of a democratic music education. In G. E. McPherson & G. F.Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1; pp. 188–​201). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199730810.013.0011_​ update_​001 Pajares, F. (2002). Overview of social cognitive theory and of self-​efficacy. www.emory.edu/​EDUCATION/​ mfp/​eff.html Parmigiani, D. (2012). Teacher and decision-​making processes: An Italian exploratory study on individual and collaborative decisions. Canadian Journal of Education, 35(1), 171–​186. Parker, E. C. (2014).The process of social identity development in adolescent high school choral singers: A grounded theory. Journal of Research in Music Education, 62(1), 18–​32. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0022429413520009 Price, H.  E. (1983). The effect of conductor academic task presentation, conductor reinforcement, and ensemble practice on performers’ musical achievement and attitude. Journal of Research in Music Education, 31(34), 245–​257. https://​doi.org/​ 10.2307/​3344628 Raanaas, R. K., Aase, S. Ø., & Huot, S. (2019). Finding meaningful occupation in refugees’ resettlement: A study of amateur choir singing in Norway. Journal of Occupational Science, 26(1), 65–​76. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1080/​14427591.2018.1537884 Reagon, C., Gale, N., Dow, R., Lewis, I., & van Deursen, R. (2017). Choir singing and health status in people affected by cancer. European Journal of Cancer Care, 26(5), 1–​10. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​ ecc.12568 Ripley, R.  L. (2003). The orchestra speaks. In J. A. Bowen (Ed.), Conducting (pp. 79–​90). Cambridge University Press. Rohwer, D. (2005). Teaching the adult beginning instrumentalist:  Ideas from practitioners. International Journal of Music Education, 23(1), 37–​47. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761405050929 Rohwer, D. (2013). Making music as an adult: What do the spouses think? Texas Music Education Research, 40–​46. www.tmea.org/​assets/​pdf/​ research/​Roh2013.pdf Sataloff, R. T., & Davidson, J. W. (2012). The older singer. In G. E. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1; pp. 610–​625). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199730810.013.0037 Schon, D. (1986). Educating the reflective practitioner. Jossey-​Bass. Schunk, D. H. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective (8th ed.). Pearson. Shansky, C. (2010). Adult motivations in community orchestra participation:  A pilot case study of the Bergen Philharmonic Orchestra (New Jersey). Research and Issues in Music Education, 8(1). www. stthomas.edu/​r imeonline/​vol8/​shansky.htm Shavelson, R. L., & Stern, P. (1981). Research on teachers’ pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisions, and behavior. Review of Educational Research, 51(4), 455–​498. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​1170362 Spink, K. S. (1995). Cohesion and intention to participate of female sport team athletes. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 17(4), 416–​427. https://​doi.org/​10.1123/​jsep.17.4.416 Tamplin, J., Baker, F. A., Jones, B., Way, A., & Lee, S. (2013). “Stroke a chord”: The effect of singing in a community choir on mood and social engagement for people living with aphasia following a stroke. NeuroRehabilitation, 32(4), 929–​941. Taylor, D. M., Kruse, N. B., Nickel, B. J., Lee, B. B., & Bowen, T. N. (2011). Adult musicians’ experiences in a homogeneous ensemble setting. Contributions to Music Education, 38(1),  11–​26. Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college:  Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. Vanlommel, K., Vanhoof, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2016). Data use by teachers: The impact of motivation, decision-​making style, supportive relationships and reflective capacity. Educational Studies, 42(1), 36–​53. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​03055698.2016.1148582 Varvarigou, M. (2017). Promoting collaborative playful experimentation through group playing by ear in higher education. Research Studies in Music Education, 39(2), 161–​176. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 1321103X17704000 Varvarigou, M., Creech, A., Hallam, S., & McQueen, H. (2012). Benefits experienced by older people in group music-​making activities. Journal of Applied Arts & Health, 3(2), 183–​198. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1386/​jaah.3.2.183_​1

318

319

Music pedagogy for large group teaching Webb, M., & Seddon, F. A. (2012). Musical instrument learning, music ensembles, and musicianship in a global and digital age. In G. E. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1; pp. 417–​ 436). Oxford University Press. Wiggins, J. (2015). Teaching for musical understanding. Oxford University Press. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.), Alexandria, VA:  Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [Book review]. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 19(1), 140–​142. Yarbrough, C., & Price, H. (1989). Sequential patterns of instruction in music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 37(3), 179–​187. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3344668 Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-​regulation:  A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrinch, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-​regulation (pp. 13–​39). Academic Press.

319

320

20 WORKING WITH AND IN SMALL GROUPS Elaine King

This chapter provides insight into two kinds of small group work: “supervised” –​guided by a supervisor, such as a teacher or facilitator; and “unsupervised” –​self-​managed or without supervisory input. Evidence about group work is discussed, drawing on research across a range of educational and community contexts, including the ways in which teachers guide students in the activity of composing or performing music together and how facilitators work with community musicians in therapeutic settings. Studies of small groups working without an official leader or supervisor, such as when musicians rehearse in chamber ensembles, will provide alternative insights into learning, including the ways in which individuals acquire experience, knowledge and valuable life skills through peer interactions and teamwork. The chapter begins with a definition of “small” group work along with discussion of characteristics and assumptions about group work. Next, theoretical and empirical research is reviewed in relation to the two main areas:  first, working with small groups (supervised); and second, working in small groups (unsupervised). Finally, issues for further research and implications for education and music in the community are identified.

Defining “small” group work By definition, a group involves two or more individuals who come together intentionally with shared needs and aims (Jacques & Salmon, 2007). A transition in psychological functioning takes place when individuals move into a group setting:  personal identity processes shift to social identity processes. According to Brown (2000), social identification can be recognised when the behaviours of individuals become “rather uniform” and their treatment of one another becomes “stereotyped” (p. 20). There is, however, no specific number that determines the size of a group as small or large –​this will depend on the set of circumstances and context about which a group is operating. A “chamber” music ensemble, for example, is typically regarded as small because of its historical and practical function in Western performance practice –​the group was intended to play in a palace chamber –​yet within this context, the string octet is large in comparison to the string trio. Similarly, a Western chamber orchestra with 25 or so musicians is small relative to a full-​scale “symphony” orchestra comprising upwards of 50 players. For the purpose of this chapter, “small” will be regarded as a highly flexible description of group size (two or more 320

321

Working with and in small groups

members) to allow for the varying kinds of group work to which it may typically refer within a particular music-​cultural context. In general, group work, regardless of size and supervisory input, involves some form of task-​ related activity. One of the first steps to be taken by a group is to establish the nature of the task and how it will be achieved, which often involves setting short-​and long-​term goals. Working together on a task necessarily involves interaction among group members, including listening to, giving or asking for information, putting forward ideas, making suggestions, and helping one another. Interactions may involve verbal and non-​verbal exchanges, including bodily gestures, hand signals, facial actions and eye contact (e.g., King & Ginsborg, 2011). Although these interactions may be about the task at hand, they will be interpreted within the social context of the group and according to the emotional states and behaviours of individual members. As such, interactions in group work reflect both task activity and socio-​emotional behaviour. These two aspects of group work are categorised in early research on the analysis of small group interactions (see Bales, 1950). As noted above, this chapter focuses on two kinds of small group work:  supervised and unsupervised. The first kind is characterised by the presence of a designated authority figure, such as a teacher, conductor, leader, mentor or facilitator, who is responsible for overseeing the activity of the group. Some supervisors will participate in the group work, such as when a conductor directs a music ensemble, while others will monitor from outside, like a teacher who provides guidance to young pupils as they compose a song together.The degree of involvement of a supervisor will vary. The second kind is characterised by the absence of an authority figure; there is no designated group director or official leader, so the group is effectively unregulated. By definition, self-​managed teams are groups that have total responsibility for a defined project (Gilboa & Tal-​Schmotkin, 2012; also see Wellins et al., 1991).This is not to say, however, that the group is without a person(s) in charge. Four key assumptions can be made about groups based on research evidence. First, every group needs a leader. There are debates about the roles of leaders, especially in relation to their impact on group success (Hackman, 1990), although the general consensus is that groups function better with someone in charge. For unsupervised groups, the establishment of a leader-​type figure(s) is critical in shaping task activity (Butterworth, 1990; King, 2006). Second, every group is unique. Even though there are similar kinds of groups in a society or culture, such as “girl bands” or “boy bands” in the Western popular tradition, the individual members define its identity (Brown, 2000). A change of personnel will alter the functioning and socio-​emotional relationships among the members of an established group.This is perhaps most noticeable in smaller unsupervised groups where members have specific musical parts, such as lead singer or bassist, so replacing one player will result in the formation of a completely new ensemble. Third, groups change over time. Evidence suggests that groups are evolving organisms in a constant state of flux (Blum, 1986; Douglas, 1970). The lifespan of a group is marked by its formation (beginning) and disbandment (ending), wherein there are phases of working out, growth, stability and progression (Levinger, 1983; Tuckman,  1965). Fourth, a group is greater than the sum of the individuals in it. In other words, a group is capable of achieving more than the combined output of its individual members (Brown, 2000). Even though group work is shaped (if not limited) by the skills, knowledge, ideas and experiences of its members, evidence suggests that individuals can produce more when working together than independently (Forsyth, 1983). However, social facilitation theory indicates that while positive relationships can bring about cooperation, cohesion and enhanced performance, negative relationships can lead to competition, reduced liking and lower performance (Brown, 2000). 321

322

Elaine King

Working with small groups (supervised) Different types of supervisors can be employed in the context of small group work, including facilitators, teachers, mentors, coaches, artists, conductors and directors. Even though specific duties and responsibilities may be associated with these different kinds of supervisor, there are crucial overlaps. Broadly speaking, supervisors assist others by assuming some level of leadership responsibility, giving guidance and offering support and advice to help people work together efficiently and effectively as well as helping them to achieve goals.The ensuing section discusses leadership styles as well as the practice of facilitating, both of which provide theoretical insight into supervisory work.

Leading and facilitating Research in the domain of organisational management provides insight into the nature and effects of different styles of leadership. Seminal research by Lewin and colleagues (1939) defined three main styles. 1) Autocratic (or authoritarian). Leaders determine decisions, goals, methods and outcomes. This style allows rapid decisions to be made and affords control in high-​risk situations. There is likely to be a lack of creative input by group members. 2) Democratic (or participative). Leaders determine decisions based on discussion of goals, methods and outcomes with group members. This style encourages creative and innovative solutions in competitive situations. It is most applicable in non-​emergency contexts. 3) Laissez-​faire (or delegative). Leaders allow group members to determine decisions, goals, methods and outcomes.This style allows members to have ownership of their work and entails high levels of trust. It may be ineffective if everyone has different intentions. Despite a proliferation of other leadership styles emerging in recent research (e.g., charismatic, innovative, strategic, transformative, transactional), the above three styles are widely applicable in a range of contexts. The situational model (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977), however, articulates leadership as flexible and dependent on the capabilities and experiences of the “followers” (group members), which is important for supervisors in education and community settings. Conductors and band directors merit specific attention as supervisors. Faulkner (1973) describes a conductor as a “focal superior”, implying that the rest of the ensemble is somehow inferior. Nevertheless, as with the situational model, he argues that the “system of authority” should be flexible: he urges conductors to build trust, respect and reciprocity among musicians, so leadership becomes adaptive (or “transformative”; Atik, 1994). Recent research on choral conducting in educational contexts highlights adaptability as a core competency alongside practical experience (Jansson et al., 2019). Facilitators, as leaders, will use different styles and strategies to work with groups. A widespread philosophy is to encourage independence (e.g., of thinking, of creating) in group work; there is a difference between telling people what to do and letting people think and do for themselves. In a recent discussion of facilitating learning in small groups, Creech and Hallam (2017) argue that there is a continuum of leadership strategies between facilitation (learner-​centred) and transmission (directive, top-​down, teacher-​centred). There are two important points. First, it is necessary to shift strategy (or style) from “teacher-​centred” to “learner-​centred” to enable a group to take “ownership” of its learning and creativity. Second, from a practical viewpoint, 322

323

Working with and in small groups

strategies can be divided into “task-​based” and “support” (i.e., socio-​emotional):  task-​based strategies include setting agenda, promoting development of deep learning, clarifying ideas, refocusing attention, challenging and evaluating; support strategies include supporting, encouraging inclusive participation and releasing tension (Creech & Hallam, 2017, p. 70). There are numerous examples of music-​based programmes involving facilitators, taking place in education and community settings around the world for people of different age ranges. Empirical evidence is discussed in the remainder of this section according to three principal areas of research: composing and songwriting with young people; singing and performing with students and adults; and general music-​making with older people.

Composing and songwriting with young people In the last few decades, a growing number of youth-​based music programmes have emerged with composing, especially songwriting, as the core focus. A preliminary study by Hogg (1994) involved extensive observation of music composition activity in small group teaching in secondary schools across England and Australia. Hogg identified 16 facilitation strategies, the majority task-​based (preparatory, logistical, managerial) and the rest supportive (to promote independent thinking and trust), in line with Creech and Hallam (2017). Hogg noticed that teachers shifted between three approaches in their lessons: music as knowledge (playing or singing to learn about music); music as accomplishment (learning about music in order to play or sing well); and music as empowering agent (using music to enrich and empower students). In the latter, considered the most effective approach, children were encouraged to develop expressive ideas, musical outcomes and personal meanings. The recognition of creative and personal development through music engagement, especially to foster independence and ownership, underpins later studies in the domain. Songwriting, which involves composing both music and lyrics, has been incorporated into a range of programmes about positive youth development, some of which have a wellbeing or therapeutic focus (e.g., increasing “connectedness”; Barrett & Bond, 2015) as well as an educational emphasis (e.g., Baker, 2016; Baker & Wigram, 2005). Clennon and Boehm (2014) provided a range of insights into facilitating small youth groups in songwriting activities as part of a large-​scale heritage project in Cheshire (United Kingdom). Interestingly, they reported on time as a crucial factor: they described an “extended period of relationship building” (p. 318) as necessary to allow different youth groups to establish ownership of the project and to develop knowledge about each other’s competencies. Furthermore, they found that time enabled them to update and continually revise the project aims. Researchers have highlighted other contextual factors in achieving positive wellbeing outcomes in youth-​based songwriting programmes, including using high-​quality resources (McFerron & Teggelove, 2011), ensuring the feeling of safety via physical spaces (Baker, 2013) or group size (Baker et al., 2018) and using well-​established professionals to lead sessions (e.g., the SongMakers programme in Australia; see Hunter et al., 2015). On group size, it was found that larger groups can promote feelings of safety because quieter individuals can more easily blend in. Successful facilitation strategies included giving clear structure and positive feedback to group participants (Barrett & Bond, 2015), creating a fun, playful, chaotic or even “party-​like” atmosphere (Baker et al., 2018; MacDonald & Viega, 2012) and enabling participants to “push beyond” typical boundaries through hard work (Baker et al., 2018). In the MusoMagic programme in Victoria, Australia, which targeted adolescents facing barriers to mainstream education settings, Baker et al. (2018) explored the effectiveness of artist-​ leaders as facilitators. They observed tension between artist influence and participant autonomy 323

324

Elaine King

as youth members seemed less engaged when the artists decided on the lyrics for the songs. As discussed previously, independence and learner-​centred approaches seem to be associated with successful facilitation because they promote ownership of a task and co-​creativity as well as adaptability among teachers, leaders and group participants (see McGillen & McMillan, 2005).

Singing and performing with students and adults The focus of research on supervisors working with students and adults in small performing groups, including community choirs, has been on rehearsal activity. There are three key issues:  rehearsal structure; group communication; and group bonding. The way in which conductors organise rehearsal activity has been scrutinised (e.g., Cox, 1989; Goolsby, 1999; Weeks, 1996). Cox (1989) looked at three different kinds of rehearsal structure according to the alternation of fast-​and slow-​paced activity in choir rehearsals with secondary school directors. Even though the majority preferred one approach, all were deemed to be effective. Cox asserts that the important point is that conductors have an organisational strategy in place so that there is awareness about the pace of activity and management of time in rehearsal. In his observations of communication between band directors and ensemble members, Goolsby (1999) found differences in the styles of communication between experienced and novice leaders or teachers. Experienced band directors talked less and used more non-​verbal modelling (e.g., singing or playing parts to illustrate how to perform) than inexperienced directors. Likewise, compared to less experienced directors, experienced leaders allocated their time more effectively when working on different pieces and managed to engage the ensemble more quickly on a set task. These findings point towards the importance of “scaffolding” techniques, such as modelling and goal setting, in leading small groups in educational contexts (Creech et al., 2014). It is well known that music-​making results in released endorphins akin to what is experienced in social bonding (Dunbar et al., 2012). There is a wealth of research on the health and wellbeing benefits of singing in choirs, especially community groups (e.g., Launay & Pearce, 2015). Weinstein et al. (2016) looked at the effect of group size on social bonding in small (20 to 80 singers) and large (“megachoir”; over 200 singers) pop choirs. Singing led to increased positivity and social bonding regardless of group size (even in a megachoir, participants experienced heightened levels of closeness). What is not clear, however, is the impact of facilitation on these experiences, and this is an area for further research.

Music-​making with older people According to Creech and colleagues (2014), there is an accepted need for initiatives to support older people’s wellbeing. While some studies have looked at how such activities may be facilitated (e.g., Baker & Ballantyne, 2012), others have derived insights about wellbeing outcomes based on facilitators’ perspectives (e.g., Schiavio et al., 2019). As part of the large-​scale Music for Life project (United Kingdom), Creech and colleagues (2014) observed scaffolding techniques, organisational structures and interactions used by facilitators working with older people in community music activities. Facilitators spent the majority of their time scaffolding, yet were highly variable in their approaches: they adopted different styles of interaction, adapted the pace of their work and used their time differently depending on the type of group and group context. Creech et al. (2014) suggest that facilitators may develop their practice with older participants in the following four ways:  (a) by making more extensive use of non-​verbal modelling and 324

325

Working with and in small groups

encouraging this as a form of peer support; (b) by creating space for open questioning and discussion to encourage people to offer their own insights and goals; (c) by making more extensive use of attributional feedback (i.e., related to specific outcomes) to empower learners to understand and control their learning; and (d) by varying the organisational structure and style in order to meet different needs. In a related community music-​ making project called Meet4Music in Graz, Austria, Schiavio et al. (2019) examined facilitators’ experiences of providing weekly workshops to a range of participants, including elderly members of the population. The three facilitators were each responsible for different activities, namely singing, improvisatory drumming and dance. Interviews with facilitators highlighted three points: the need for a shared sense of leadership (to work as a “collaborating team”) (Schiavio et al., 2019, p. 712); the use of non-​verbal language to communicate with the group (especially non-​native speakers); and the importance of recognising the needs of individuals and the group as a whole. Experienced co-​facilitators, therefore, may seek connectedness as leaders and rely on non-​verbal language. In an earlier study, Baker and Ballantyne (2012) investigated the therapeutic benefits for elderly participants in a group songwriting project in Brisbane, Australia, using inexperienced (student) facilitators. For the retirees, the activities provided possibilities for three wellbeing features: a “pleasant” life (they were stimulated by the activity); an “engaged” life (they looked forward to sessions); and a “meaningful” life (they gained a sense of satisfaction from the activity). The researchers commented that the student facilitators, who matched the number of elderly participants, offered “significant attention and support” which may have biased the positive findings. They also indicated that a more skilled leader may have offered the retirees a greater sense of ownership with regard to the songs.This study raises two interesting questions: first, do experienced facilitators offer greater autonomy for participants than inexperienced facilitators; second, do participants experience greater positive effects with one-​to-​one support within the small group context? Ballantyne (2013) subsequently reported that this project offered the students opportunities to reflect on learning about facilitating and, in so doing, learning about the self, musical processes and ageing. As further opportunities for music-​making projects with the ageing population are developed, greater understanding of the best ways to facilitate such work, particularly for younger students, is afforded. Related research on teaching older learners indicates that interpersonal qualities, such as enthusiasm, respect for participants, clarity and organisation, as well as teaching strategies are more important than the session content itself (see Creech et al., 2014). Facilitating groups, then, is as much about interpersonal communication and time management as it is about musical outcomes. Ownership of the music-​making process is important: it potentially yields high levels of engagement and positivity from group participants. The skill required in empowering group members may depend on the levels of experience of facilitators.The issue of ownership, of course, is entirely different in the context of unsupervised small groups where there is no designated authority figure.

Working in small groups (unsupervised) Unsupervised small groups can be regarded as self-​managed teams (see Cohen, 1994; Cohen et al., 1996). To date, the majority of studies on small group music-​making have focused on the organisational, social and musical functioning of string quartet ensembles (e.g., Blum, 1986; Butterworth, 1990; Gilboa & Shmotkin, 2012; Murnighan & Conlon, 1991;Tovstiga et al., 2005; Young & Colman, 1979; also see Lim, 2014, on vocal ensembles). Gilboa and Tal-​Shmotkin (2012) hypothesise that the string quartet ensemble reflects higher levels of self-​managed 325

326

Elaine King

characteristics than other (comparable) music ensembles: “the smaller the unit, the more likely it will function as a [self-​managed team]” (p. 32). To this end, the main focus of discussion in the ensuing section is on quartet-​sized and smaller ensembles, specifically to explore research about their functionality in terms of leadership, teamwork and communication. Following this, research about unsupervised small group work in other contexts, notably educational, is reviewed with particular consideration of peer learning.

Leading and teamworking The establishment of a leader and the appearance of supervisory behaviour is integral to the functioning of a small group. Research indicates that there are two main factors influencing the emergence of leaders in such contexts: stereotypes and personality. Sociocultural and musical stereotypes underpin small self-​managed music groups. In the Western classical tradition, the string quartet typically comprises four musicians (first violinist, second violinist, violist and cellist) arranged in a semicircle. Much of the repertoire assigns the main melody to the first violinist; over time, this player has become established as the musical leader of the ensemble. The first violinist typically sits in the first chair (on the left edge of the semicircle) and leads the ensemble by providing relevant cues to coordinate the group. By extension, this player is expected to oversee the direction of rehearsal activity. Other quartet and chamber ensembles mirror the string quartet model as well as the stereotypical relationships between chairs, players and parts. Research has indicated, however, that the collaboration among musicians in small ensembles is far more complex than the stereotype suggests. In one of the earliest studies of string quartets, Young and Colman (1979) found that two complementary leaders exist in string quartets: the “task specialist” (the most competent player, but not especially likeable) and the “social-​emotional specialist” (very likeable, but not particularly competent). In a later study of British string quartets, Murnighan and Conlon (1991) found that the most successful groups had strong first violinists who acted as leaders, but advocated democracy; the unsuccessful groups sought stronger leadership and less democracy.Tovstiga et al. (2005), however, argues that leadership can and should be flexible, hence “situational” (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977): in their case study of the Carmina String Quartet, they noticed that players assumed the role of leader on an “as needed basis” (Tovstiga et al., 2005). Similarly, Butterworth (1990) described the management of the Detroit String Quartet as “invisible” even though the players remarked that they worked on their group process “constantly”, like the “constant working-​out process” alluded to by the Guarneri String Quartet (Blum, 1986, p. 7). The issue of time and pace (discussed previously) influenced the invisibility of the Detroit quartet’s work ethic: it was harmonious because it was “unhurried” and “slow-​moving” (Butterworth, 1990). The influence of personality on the leadership of self-​managed groups plays out alongside sociocultural and musical stereotypes. In a study by Murnighan and Conlon (1991), first violinists described themselves as extraverted or naturally dictatorial; moreover, those in more successful quartets attributed their position mainly to personality, with ability being less important. Likewise, successful second violinists were “content” or “resigned” to their position. In a case study of collaboration in a British student string quartet, Davidson and Good (2002) highlighted the potential challenges that might surround the paradoxical position of a second violinist in a student-​level ensemble when that player manifests a dominant personality. Research in the field of organisational management indicates that extraverted individuals may appear to ‘lead’ groups by dominating in the following ways: they talk more than others; they assert their opinions more forcefully than others; and they build strong relationships with other members so that they can access their support when needed (Ashton et al., 2002). 326

327

Working with and in small groups

However, not all leaders are extraverted. Recent research indicates that extraverted leaders may be more or less effective depending on the proactivity of other group members: if others are highly proactive, extraverted leaders are less effective (mainly due to perceptions of threat); conversely, introverted leaders may be more successful if others are proactive (Grant et al., 2011). Related research on team role theory provides insight into the roles of leaders and other members in small, unsupervised groups. In his seminal research on successful teamwork in managerial organisations, Belbin (1993) distinguished between the tasks that people fulfil (“functional roles”) and the ways in which they behave when working together (“team roles”). He defined nine team roles and argued that there is a finite range of “useful behaviours” for effective teamwork (p. 21). He asserted that successful teams are well balanced (all team roles are represented), contain a nucleus pairing of “plant” and “coordinator”, and evidence stable and versatile behaviour. In an observational and interview study with three British student quartets, King (2006) identified eight team roles in the ensembles: “leader”, “deputy-​leader”, “contributor”, “inquirer”, “fidget”, “joker”, “distractor” and “quiet one”. Students shifted roles across rehearsals to create equilibrium in group dynamics, but the quartet with the strongest leader exhibited the most stable team role behaviour (and the most successful performance).

Communicating Numerous studies have focused on the modes of communication used between musicians in small performing ensembles. The type, function and frequency of verbal and non-​verbal discourse, especially in rehearsal contexts, reveals that musicians rely heavily on non-​verbal utterances to communicate technical and expressive information, such as through having “conversations with the eyes” (Davidson & Good, 2002) or “playing rather than talking” (King & Ginsborg, 2011; Murnighan & Conlon, 1991). Research indicates that levels of expertise and familiarity impact on the nature of communication in small group rehearsals. King (2013) found that unfamiliar musicians in duo ensembles exhibited longer periods of “hesitancy” in their communication (e.g., broken-​up dialogue, rapid verbal exchanges) than familiar musicians in the early stages of a single rehearsal. By the later stages of rehearsal, all of the musicians started to produce “flowing” dialogue (e.g., long utterances with sustained focus). Evidence also shows that the proximity of performance impacts on co-​performer communication: in a quantitative analysis of non-​verbal gestures between piano duo performers, an increase in “significant” non-​verbal behaviour was found as rehearsals progressed towards performance (Williamon & Davidson, 2002). In related studies, the influence of expertise on the amount of talking and playing in rehearsal has been debated: in general, it has been found that student musicians talk more than professional musicians (Goodman, 2000; King & Ginsborg, 2011; Williamon & Davidson, 2002), although it is acknowledged that amounts of verbal communication will depend on whether or not there are talkative members in a group (Davidson & Good, 2002). The analysis of non-​verbal communication in small music ensembles has provided insight into the function of facial expressions, eye contact and physical gestures. In an observational study of performers’ gestures using quantitative coding, King and Ginsborg (2011) found that singers and pianists rehearsing together in duo combinations on new songs from the Western classical tradition used physical gestures to a greater extent when working with familiar and same-​ expertise partners than unfamiliar and different-​expertise partners. Non-​verbal communication was used primarily for task-​related activity (e.g., to consolidate technical details, establish tempo, convey musical information, coordinate entries). Interestingly, this study also showed that musicians who have not worked together before can synchronise their body movements 327

328

Elaine King

relatively quickly in new partnerships as they anticipate, attend and adapt to their own and each other’s playing (King & Ginsborg, 2011).These cognitive processing abilities (Keller, 2008) underpin group music-​making. King and Ginsborg (2011) suggest that performers in familiar partnerships produced more frequent and varied non-​verbal gestures because they had more efficient and effective (i.e., superior) cognitive processing abilities. Evidence suggests, therefore, that talking is not the only way to communicate in small groups; rather, non-​verbal discourse is vital in enabling people to work together. As already noted, in relation to facilitation, supervisors may use non-​verbal communication in their interactions with group members, especially if they are experienced; the same is true for musicians working in performing ensembles, particularly those who are experienced and familiar with one another. Technology, however, has been found to impact on communication in learning environments. In a recent study of children’s collaborative creative musical activity using tablets (iPads) versus traditional acoustic instruments, Huovinen and Rautanen (2019) found that group “flow” was inhibited in the former context as solitary planning processes and abstract, conceptual interplay took place. They suggested that acoustic instruments offer richer possibilities for gestural and tactile qualities, visual cues and concrete musical interaction.

Peer-​to-​peer learning The importance of ownership of a task has been discussed in relation to facilitators working with small groups. In unsupervised groups, where the members of a group already effectively ‘own’ the task and automatically assume independence, there is opportunity for peer-​to-​peer learning. In an educational context, peer learning takes place when students learn with and from each other by sharing ideas, knowledge and experiences: it is described as a way of moving beyond independent learning to interdependent or mutual learning (Boud, 1988, 2001).Typical developmental aspects of peer learning include increasing information and understanding about a task as well as socio-​emotional skills, such as explaining ideas to peers, leadership, confidence, organisation and collaboration (Boud, 2001). There are two key issues about peer-​to-​ peer learning via music-​making in small groups: mentoring and friendship. In the heritage youth music project described above (in “Composing and songwriting with young people”), it was observed that older members of groups developed mentoring skills in co-​creating songs with younger peers through passing on information and knowledge to younger members (Clennon & Boehm, 2014). Aspects of situated learning (Lave & Wenger, 1991) were also evident as older members acquired new leadership and social skills, including enhanced self-​esteem, confidence, self-​awareness and emotional awareness. By extension, older members used their new social skills to mentor others in the group about their developing social identities. Likewise, a peer-​to-​peer approach was observed when youth mentors worked with new members of a group to create lyrics together in a songwriting programme (Baker et al., 2018). The issue of friendship is an important aspect of small group work. In an observational study of children’s musical interactions in a composition task where pupils were divided into groups comprising random, friendship and non-​ friendship configurations, Burland and Davidson (2001) found that social groupings did not influence the standard of the creative product, but they did influence the social interaction, notably their personal sense of achievement and enjoyment about the set task. Similarly, in a study of bonding in small singing groups using friendship “cliques”, Pearce et al. (2016) found that university students experienced increased levels of closeness when singing cooperatively (i.e., trying to get the whole group to sing loudly

328

329

Working with and in small groups

together), but reduced levels of closeness when singing competitively (i.e., trying to sing louder than other people in the group). Finally, related research on shared understanding in free improvisatory jazz practice provides an interesting comparison with research on peer-​to-​peer learning as these players construct musical pieces in live contexts via peer-​to-​peer performing. In a qualitative enquiry involving interviews with professional jazz improvisers working in trios, Wilson and MacDonald (2017) found that familiarity between musicians was important in building trust during uncertain musical moments. They indicated that shared understanding is not a prerequisite for participation in this kind of music-​making, but shared experience enriches the possibilities for interaction in these groups. It is plausible to suggest that shared experiences may also enhance peer-​to-​peer interactions in other kinds of group work involving musical creativity.

Conclusion This chapter has provided insight into supervised and unsupervised small group work involving music-​based activities, specifically drawing on evidence about leadership, facilitation, teamwork, communication and peer-​to-​peer learning in educational and community contexts across the life course. General assumptions about group work were established at the outset, and it was noted that small groups can vary in size, depending on their cultural context. The following six key points emerged across the discussion. First, leading and facilitating needs to be flexible and adaptable depending on the situation (Atik, 1994; Hersey & Blanchard, 1977). Different styles and strategies were identified (Creech & Hallam, 2017). Second, time is an important factor. Long-​term projects have been described as particularly rewarding because they allow for group relationships to build and goals to be reviewed (Clennon & Boehm, 2014). Time is also vital in the management and organisation of rehearsals, sessions and programmes: evidence suggests that the way in which group work is organised can and should vary across different contexts depending on the nature of music activity, the target age group and the group’s goals (Cox, 1989; Creech et al., 2014). Third, ownership and independence are critical in small group work. When working with groups, supervisors should allow space for people to contribute their own ideas as well as provide appropriate feedback to empower learners to take ownership of what they are doing (Baker & Ballantyne, 2012; Creech & Hallam, 2017). A level of independence is assumed in self-​managed groups (Cohen, 1994; Gilboa & Tal-​Schmotkin, 2012). Fourth, non-​verbal discourse is an effective mode of communication in small group work. Researchers have found that experienced facilitators, conductors and ensemble co-​performers use more non-​verbal behaviour than those with less experience (King & Ginsborg, 2011). In certain contexts, such as music-​making with older people, non-​verbal modelling can be particularly helpful as a scaffolding technique for enhancing communication in everyday life (Creech et al., 2014). Fifth, in unsupervised groups, individuals will assume one or more team roles (i.e., behavioural attributes), and certain combinations will work better together than others in enabling successful task production (Belbin, 1993). Research has shown that music ensembles work most effectively when there is strong leadership and stable patterns of behaviour (King, 2006). Finally, peer-​to-​peer interactions in unsupervised groups can allow individuals to develop valuable shared knowledge and experiences as well as social skills, such as the ability for older youths to mentor younger youths (Baker et al., 2018; Clennon & Boehm, 2014). Friendship can impact on these social interactions and influence people’s sense of enjoyment about them (Burland & Davidson, 2001; Pearce et al., 2016).

329

330

Elaine King

Issues for further research There is scope to develop research on small group work in relation to the six key points identified above. It would be helpful to examine more closely how leaders and facilitators become flexible and adaptable in their work as well as to scrutinise how shifts of ownership are achieved in different contexts. The role of non-​verbal behaviour in this process merits further consideration. Comparisons between music-​based programmes that run with similar goals across different timescales (short, medium and long term) will provide further insight into the influence (and management) of time on task activity and socio-​emotional behaviour. There is potential to develop the preliminary research on team role behaviour in chamber music ensembles further, particularly to examine performers at different levels of expertise and in different music-​making contexts (beyond the Western art tradition). Research could also usefully focus on the training and experiences of facilitators, leaders and group members, such as to identify preferred styles and strategies for working together. Fresh perspectives could be developed in future research by challenging whether or not our assumptions about group work  –​largely drawn from theoretical and empirical research in the domain of organisational management –​are appropriate, especially given technological developments in recent decades. Other insights could be gained by encouraging self-​reflective and experimental enquiry alongside the more typical survey and observational approaches evidenced to date. Case study research has provided a wealth of insight into small group music-​ making practices in education and community settings, although it would be interesting (albeit challenging) to roll out a global programme involving multiple related projects targeted at people of different ages and in different contexts so as increase our understanding of how people from across the life course experience and make music together around the world.

Implications for education and music in the community Small group work involving music-​making provides vital creative and social experiences for individuals of all ages. Most importantly, research indicates that valuable life skills can be acquired through participation in such endeavour, including leadership and team skills, independence, confidence, non-​verbal communication and, perhaps most important, friendships. There are implications for education and music in the community arising from this research, reflected in the following suggestions. 1. Develop training in non-​verbal communication to enhance interactions among facilitators, teachers, leaders and other group members. 2. Increase opportunities for mixed-​age small group work, such as older youths working with younger youths or students facilitating older people; professional performers working with amateur or student performers; and older school-​age children working with younger school-​age children. 3. Deliver long-​term community and education programmes (e.g., 12 months or more) to enable small musical groups to have time to build up working relationships and to experience working together over a lengthy period of time; 4. Explore different kinds of music-​making activities across all ages and stages in education and community settings, including instrumental performing, rhythm-​building, listening, composing, songwriting, free improvisation, composing and singing. Free improvisation, for instance, could allow group members to develop call-​and-​response interactions through

330

331

Working with and in small groups

musical signals along the lines of early human communication (Mithen, 2006), while composing with traditional acoustic instruments allows rich possibilities for gestural communication (Huovinen & Rautanen, 2019). For practitioners working with groups, they should be prepared to be flexible in their practice, to change and know that groups will evolve. They should be encouraged to use self-​ reflection to critically evaluate their team role in group work and to consider group evaluation sessions to allow members to discuss their group practice. It would be helpful for them to identify different people’s roles in a small group and to respect and challenge them. An appreciation of different styles and strategies of leadership and facilitation would be beneficial, especially to recognise differences between teacher-​centred and learner-​centred approaches as well as the value of peer-​to-​peer learning in unsupervised contexts. Above all, the sense of achievement gained from working with and in small groups should be recognised.

Reflective questions 1. 2. 3. 4.

What is the relationship between our personal identity and our social identity? What strategies and insights about effective small group work should be taught? How do supervisors transfer from a teacher-​centred to a learner-​centred approach? What styles of leadership and facilitation are evident in different music-​making contexts? Which ones are effective, and why? 5. What practices can supervised groups learn from unsupervised groups and vice versa? 6. How do experienced and inexperienced groups differ in their work?

Suggestions for further reading Brown, R. (2000). Group processes: Dynamics within and between groups. Blackwell. Creech, A., & Hallam, S. (2017). Facilitating learning in small groups:  Interpersonal dynamics and task dimensions. In J. Rink, H. Gaunt, & A. Williamon (Eds.), Musicians in the making: Pathways to creative performance (pp. 29–​74). Oxford University Press. King, E., & Ginsborg, J. (2011). Gestures and glances: Interactions in ensemble rehearsal. In A. Gritten & E. King (Eds.), New perspectives on music and gesture (pp. 177–​201). Ashgate.

References Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & Paunonen, S.V. (2002).What is the central feature of extraversion? Social attention versus reward sensitivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 245–​251. Atik, Y. (1994). The conductor and the orchestra: Interactive aspects of the leadership process. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 51(1),  22–​28. Baker, F. A. (2013). The environmental conditions that support or constrain the therapeutic songwriting process. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 40(2), 230–​238. Baker, F. A. (2016). The future of songwriting in music therapy. In C. Dileo (Ed.), Envisioning the future of music therapy (pp. 123–​133). Temple University. Baker, F. A., & Ballantyne, J. (2012).You’ve got to accentuate the positive: Group songwriting to promote a life of enjoyment, engagement and meaning in ageing Australians. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, 22(1),  7–​24. Baker, F. A., & Wigram, T. (Eds.). (2005). Songwriting:  Methods, techniques, and clinical applications for music therapy clinicians, educators and students. Jessica Kingsley.

331

332

Elaine King Baker, F. A., Jeanneret, N., & Clarkson, A. (2018). Contextual factors and wellbeing outcomes: Ethnographic analysis of an artist-​led group songwriting program with young people. Psychology of Music, 46(2), 266–​280. Ballantyne, J. (2013). Leading together, learning together: Music education and music therapy students’ perceptions of a shared practicum. Research Studies in Music Education, 35(1),  67–​82. Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis.A method for the study of small groups. University of Chicago Press. Barrett, M. S., & Bond, N. (2015) Connecting through music: The contribution of a music programme to fostering positive youth development. Research Studies in Music Education, 37(1), 37–​54. Belbin, M. (1993). Team roles at work. Butterworth-​Heinemann. Brown, R. (2000). Group processes: Dynamics within and between groups. Blackwell. Blum, D. (1986). The art of quartet playing:  The Guarneri quartet in conversation with David Blum. Cornell University Press. Boud, D. (1988). Moving towards autonomy. In D. Boud (Ed.), Developing student autonomy in learning (pp. 17–​39). Kogan Page. Boud, D. (2001). Making the move to peer learning. In D. Boud, R. Cohen, & J. Sampson (Eds.), Peer learning in higher education: Learning from and with each other (pp. 1–​20). Kogan Page. Burland, K., & Davidson, J.W. (2001). Investigating social processes in group musical composition. Research Studies in Music Education, 16(1),  46–​56. Butterworth, T. (1990). Detroit string quartet. In J. R. Hackman (Ed.), Groups that work (and those that don’t): Creating conditions for effective teamwork (pp. 207–​224). Jossey-​Bass Inc. Clennon, O., & Boehm, C. (2014).Young musicians for heritage project: Can a music-​based heritage project have a positive effect on well-​being? Music Education Research, 16(3), 307–​329. Cohen, S. G. (1994). Designing effective self-​managing teams. In M. M. Beyerlein, & D. A. Johnson (Eds.), Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work teams (pp. 67–​102). JAI Press. Cohen, S. G., Ledford, G. E., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). A predictive model of self-​managing work team effectiveness. Human Relations, 49(5), 643–​676. Cox, J. (1989). Rehearsal organisational structures used by successful high school choral directors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 37(3), 201–​218. Creech, A., & Hallam, S. (2017). Facilitating learning in small groups:  Interpersonal dynamics and task dimensions. In J. Rink, H. Gaunt, & A. Williamon (Eds.), Musicians in the making: Pathways to creative performance (pp. 29–​74). Oxford University Press. Creech, A.,Varvarigou, M., Hallam, S., McQueen, J., & Gaunt, H. (2014). Scaffolding, organizational structure and interpersonal interaction in musical activities with older people. Psychology of Music, 42(3), 430–​447. Davidson, J. W., & Good, J. M. M. (2002). Social and musical co-​ordination between members of a string quartet: An exploratory study. Psychology of Music, 30(2), 186–​201. Douglas, T. (1970). A decade of small group theory 1960–​1970. Bookstall Publications. Dunbar, R. I., Kaskatis, K., MacDonald, I., & Barra,V. (2012). Performance of music elevates pain threshold and positive affect: Implications for the evolutionary function of music. Evolutionary Psychology, 10(4), 688–​702. Faulkner, R. (1973). Orchestra interaction: Some features of communication and authority in an artistic organisation. The Sociological Quarterly, 14(2), 147–​157. Forsyth, D. R. (1983). An introduction to group dynamics. Brooks/​Cole Publishing Co. Gilboa, A., & Tal-​Shmotkin, M. (2012). String quartets as self-​managed teams: An interdisciplinary perspective. Psychology of Music, 40(1),  19–​41. Goodman, E. C. (2000). Analysing the ensemble in music rehearsal and performance: The nature and effects of interaction in cello–​piano duos [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of London. Goolsby, T.  W. (1999). A comparison of expert and novice music teachers’ preparing identical band compositions: An operational replication. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(2), 174–​187. Grant, A. M., Gino, F., & Hofman, D. A. (2011). Reversing the extraverted leadership advantage: The role of employee productivity. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 528–​550. Hackman, R. (Ed.). (1990). Groups that work (and those that don’t): Creating conditions for effective teamwork. Jossey-​Bass  Inc. Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1977). Management of organizational behaviour:  Utilizing human resources. Prentice Hall. Hogg, N. (1994). Strategies to facilitate student composing: A focus on music as an empowering agent. Research Studies in Music Education, 2(1),  15–​24.

332

333

Working with and in small groups Huovinen, E., & Rautanen, H. (2019). Interaction affordances in traditional instruments and tablet computers: A study of children’s musical group creativity. Research Studies in Music Education, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1321103X18809510 Hunter, M. A., Broad,T., & Jeanneret, N. (2015). SongMakers: An industry-​led approach to arts partnerships in education. Arts Education Policy Review, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​ 10632913.2016.1163308 Jacques, D., & Salmon, G. (2007). Learning in groups: A handbook for face-​to-​face and online environments (4th ed.). Routledge. Jansson, D., Elstad, B., & Døving, E. (2019). Choral conducting competencies:  Perceptions and priorities. Research Studies in Music Education, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​ 1321103X19843191 Keller, P. (2008). Joint action in music performance. In F. Morganti, A. Carassa, & G. Riva (Eds.), Enacting intersubjectivity: A cognitive and social perspective on the study of interactions (pp. 205–​221). IOS Press. King, E. (2006). The roles of student musicians in quartet rehearsals. Psychology of Music, 34(2), 263–​283. King, E. (2013). Social familiarity: Styles of interaction in chamber ensemble rehearsal. In E. King & H. M. Prior (Eds.), Music and familiarity: Listening, musicology and performance (pp. 253–​270). Ashgate. King, E., & Ginsborg, J. (2011). Gestures and glances: Interactions in ensemble rehearsal. In A. Gritten & E. King (Eds.), New perspectives on music and gesture (pp. 177–​201). Ashgate. Launay, J., & Pearce, E. (2015). Choir singing improves health, happiness  –​and is the perfect icebreaker. The Conversation. https://​theconversation.com/​choir-​singing-​improves-​health-​happiness-​and-​is-​the-​ perfect-​icebreaker-​47619 Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning:  Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. Levinger, G. (1983). Development and change. In H. H. Kelley, E. Berscheid, A. Christensen, J. H. Harvey, T. L. Huston, G. Levinger, E. McClintock, L. A. Peplau, & D. R. Peterson (Eds.), Close relationships (pp. 315–​359). W. H. Freeman & Company. Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., & White, R. K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created “social climates”. Journal of Social Psychology, 10(2), 269–​308. Lim, M. C. (2014). In pursuit of harmony: The social and organisational factors in a professional vocal ensemble. Psychology of Music, 42(3), 307–​324. MacDonald, S., & Viega, M. (2012). Hear our voices:  A music therapy songwriting program and the message of the little saints through the medium of rap. In S. Hadley & G.Yancy (Eds.), Therapeutic uses of rap and hip-​hop (pp. 153–​171). Routledge. McFerran, K., & Teggelove, K. (2011). Music therapy with young people in schools:  After the Black Saturday fires.Voices, 11(1). https://​doi.org/​10.15845/​voices.v11i1.285 McGillen, C., & McMillan, R. (2005). Engaging with adolescent musicians:  Lessons in song writing, cooperation and the power of original music. Research Studies in Music Education, 25(1),  1–​20. Mithen, S. (2006). The singing neanderthals:  The origins of music, language, mind and body. Harvard University Press. Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. (1991). The dynamics of intense work groups: A study of British string quartets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(2), 165–​186. Pearce, E., Launay, J., van Duijn, M., Rotkirch, A., David-​Barrett, T., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (2016). Singing together or apart: The effect of competitive and cooperative singing on social bonding within and between sub-​g roups of a university fraternity. Psychology of Music, 44(6), 1255–​1273. Schiavio, A., van der Schyff, D., Gande, A., & Kruse-​Weber, S. (2019). Negotiating individuality and collectivity in community music: A qualitative case study. Psychology of Music, 47(5), 706–​721. Tovstiga, G., Odenthal, S., & Goerner, S. (2005). Sense making and learning in complex organisations: The string quartet revisited. International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy, 1(3). https://​doi.org/​ 10.1504/​IJMCP.2005.008514 Tuckman, B. (1965). Development sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384–​399. Weinstein, D., Launay, J., Pearce, E., & Dunbar, L. S. (2016). Singing and social bonding: Changes in connectivity and pain threshold as a function of group size. Evolution and Human Behavior, 37(2), 152–​158. Williamon, A., & Davidson, J. W. (2002). Exploring co-​ performer communication. Musicae Scientiae, 6(1),  53–​72. Wilson, G. B., & MacDonald, R. A.  R. (2017). The construction of meaning within free improvising groups: A qualitative psychological investigation. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(2), 136–​146.

333

334

Elaine King Weeks, P. (1996). A rehearsal of a Beethoven passage: An analysis of correction talk. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 29(3), 247–​290. Wellins, R. S., Byham, W. C., & Wilson, J. M. (1991). Empowered teams: Creating self-​directed work groups that improve quality, productivity and participation. Jossey-​Bass. Young, V., & Colman, A. M. (1979). Some psychological processes in string quartets. Psychology of Music, 7(1),  12–​16.

334

335

21 MUSICAL ENGAGEMENT IN ONE-​TO-​ONE CONTEXTS Helena Gaunt, Guadalupe López-​Íñiguez1 and Andrea Creech

In musical learning, the concept of apprenticeship is pervasive and has ancient roots (Loges & Lawson, 2012). Indeed, it is inherent across musical cultures and genres, from Western classical music to Indian classical music, from Ghanaian drumming or Indonesian gamelan traditions to jazz (Nettl, 1995; Schippers, 2010). These traditions share characteristics of learning by doing, building expertise on the job and novices learning from working in close proximity to those more experienced, including master players. Musical apprenticeship tends to be scaffolded through stages of development in flexible and holistic ways, in some contexts being more formal and explicit and in others, less formal and more implicit. One-​to-​one tuition is a particular focused form of musical apprenticeship. While central to the tradition of Western classical music (Hallam, 1998), it is by no means exclusive to this domain. Through the later 20th century, for example, professional training in jazz has become more formalised and has sometimes adopted one-​to-​one specialist tuition at its core. Equally, some approaches to popular music tuition have embedded one-​to-​one interactions, although other approaches have been fundamentally premised on more informal peer learning (e.g., Green, 2002). Until fairly recently, one-​to-​one tuition has been relatively little examined in the research literature (Gaunt, 2010). Nevertheless, some of its particular characteristics have been captured iconographically over many centuries, bringing to life some of its notable characteristics. Examples range from vase paintings in ancient Greece depicting a lesson on the double aulos to classic paintings such as Vermeer’s The Music Lesson from the 17th century. Such iconography clearly points to a detailed and intimate exchange, one that enables deep exploration of embodied skill in the expert–​novice interactions. Powerful master–​apprentice dynamics are evident, suggesting concentration, imagination and passion involved in music-​making and, at times, strong hierarchy that highlights respect afforded to the master’s skill and experience and the influence of the master on the pupil. Alongside evidence of great satisfaction and joy, the delicacy and precarity of the interpersonal learning space, underpinned by an inevitable imbalance in expertise and authority, is palpable. These characteristics have all been researched more thoroughly in the last 20 years (Carey et al., 2013; Creech & Gaunt, 2012; Perkins, 2013). In spite of one-​to-​one tuition being pervasive across eras, it has remained very much an informal professional discipline, and it has not been subject to the same kind of professional regulation as other domains within education (Westerlund & Gaunt, in press). Although details 335

336

Helena Gaunt et al.

of requirements to practice vary across cultural contexts and jurisdictions, specific qualifications are rarely required, and professional frameworks remain relatively informal both in terms of curricula and professional ethical standards. In recent decades, issues of safeguarding young people and a range of other vulnerable groups have taken centre stage. Beyond questions of appropriate pedagogical style, evidence of maltreatment right through to extreme abuse and of manipulation for political ends has come to light (e.g., Baker, 2014; Dudt, 2012; Midgette & McGloe, 2018). More stringent regulation has therefore been put in place, particularly in some publicly funded contexts. Nevertheless, one-​to-​one tuition is by no means confined to formal educational settings. It takes place in diverse settings and with diverse groups, from young people to older adults, with those actively pursuing a professional trajectory and equally those solely seeking personal development. Tuition may be situated within individuals’ homes as well as in public or private organisations, and increasingly it is taking place remotely through digital platforms.The detailed purpose of lessons can also be widely divergent. Structured assessment frameworks, such as graded exams, provide one clear driver for musical learning, but equally objectives may focus on real-​world performances or indeed on nurturing individual discipline, confidence or creativity. Furthermore, just as lesson goals differ, so do learning outcomes (Gaunt & Hallam, 2008). Given these diverse dimensions of one-​to-​one tuition, it is perhaps also puzzling that the conduct of one-​to-​one tuition appears remarkably consistent in some ways. At the most fundamental level, the construction of one-​to-​one tuition as apprenticeship seems to bring with it a premise that the student performs for the master, who in turn offers critique (Carey & Grant, 2014; Jørgensen, 2000; Schön, 1987). Nevertheless, significant developments in research practice have begun to make important contributions to understanding the complex concept of apprenticeship and its possibilities (Creech, 2012; Gaunt, 2017; López-​Íñiguez, 2017).

Theoretical framework Notwithstanding the ubiquity of the master–​apprentice model (e.g., Burwell et al., 2019; Carey et al., 2018; Creech & Gaunt, 2012), in recent years a growing interest in self-​directed learning, critical thinking, learner agency and self-​regulation, as well as systematic enquiry into how musicians in popular music genres acquire expertise, has led to critical questions relating to how learning is achieved in one-​to-​one contexts. For example, the idea of transformative pedagogies (Carey & Grant, 2014; Carey et  al., 2018) promotes responsive and differentiated approaches. Within this paradigm, content is clearly contextualised and scaffolded and students construct new understandings, building on prior knowledge. The role of the transformative teacher is to guide and “support students’ personal and professional growth, and to help them develop strong career and life skills” (Carey & Grant, 2016, p. 55). In this vein, learners and teachers have increasingly explored a continuum of approaches, encompassing hierarchical, facilitative and collaborative pedagogies (Gaunt & Westerlund, 2013). To explore these differences between directive, teacher-​centred approaches and facilitative, learner-​centred pedagogies, in this chapter we frame our discussion with a model representing three overarching configurations of teacher, learner and content (Jones, 2005). Finding the ‘teacher-​centred’ versus ‘learner-​centred’ dichotomy to be too simplistic, Jones developed his model around the idea that teacher, learner and content are aligned in various ways, arguing that the alignment among these three core elements shapes the pedagogical context. Jones identifies “gatekeeper”, “midwife” and “fellow traveller” orientations, each one corresponding with a specific alignment resembling hierarchical, cooperative or more collaborative styles 336

337

Musical engagement in one-to-one contexts

of learning and teaching. Within each of these orientations, two of the three core elements (teacher, learner, content) are closely aligned and the third positioned separately. To understand the three orientations fully requires an analysis of the relationship between the paired elements (i.e., teacher–​content; teacher–​learner; and learner–​content) as well as an exploration of the nature of the space between the paired elements and the third ‘free’ element. As gatekeeper to knowledge, teacher and content are closely aligned. This top-​down, hierarchical approach to learning and teaching has roots in behaviourism; the focus tends to be on the cumulative acquisition of skills and behaviours (Garnett, 2013). With the teacher having responsibility for decisions about what to learn, when to learn it and how to approach the learning  –​and vested with the authority to admit learners (or alternatively deny entry) to communities of recognised competence –​the gatekeeper alignment risks encouraging passive learning focused largely around diagnosis, correction, imitation and repetition. This orientation further reinforces a teacher–​learner power relationship in which the value of the content and the value attached to the teacher may become conflated. Jones cautions that it is therefore important that teachers create a space for critical reflection within the space between teacher–​ content and learner. Similar to the gatekeeper orientation (Jones, 2005) and inspired by the framework of implicit theories2 in the psychology of education (e.g., Pozo et al., 2006; Scheuer et al., 2009), Pozo and colleagues (2020) explain that a hierarchical and externalist (Pramling, 1983) relationship between music teacher, student and content (including musical instrument) is strongly linked to the way in which we conceptualise teaching and learning. These authors argue that music teachers and students within traditional, master–​apprentice settings hold a ‘direct conception’ of teaching and learning that has a strong influence on instructional practices. As these conceptualisations are acquired implicitly, teachers and students have difficulties in changing what they do in lessons, thus perpetuating the centuries-​old model of musical knowledge acquisition. A midwife orientation, in contrast, places the learner and the content in close alignment, with the teacher’s role being to guide the learner–​content interactions. The midwife teacher is therefore facilitative, providing ‘scaffolding’ focused around learning outcomes. This orientation can be traced to cognitive theories of learning; learning is defined as the construction of new understandings rather than the transmission and acquisition of behaviours (Garnett, 2013). The focus on scaffolding is reminiscent of instructional scaffolding in music teaching and learning, discussed in Byrne (2005) and based on Vygotsky’s (1978) four stages of modelling, scaffolding, coaching and fading. Advocates of cognitivist pedagogies argue that learning can be more meaningful and potentially transferable to other contexts when learners connect new understandings with prior knowledge, adding that guided “discovery” is likely to be more relevant and memorable than knowledge gained through transmission-​style pedagogies (Yilmaz, 2011). Jones cautions that the midwife orientation differs from learner-​centred pedagogies in some fundamental ways. First, the teacher retains responsibility for identifying what is to be learned and plans the activities that frame that learning. However, this directive function is disguised in a pedagogical approach whereby activities allow the learners to ‘discover’ the material for themselves. In this vein, teachers guide (rather than direct) and scaffold learning in differentiated ways. Therefore, the learning outcomes may be defined in a hierarchical manner, but the learning processes are cooperative and responsive to learner needs. A risk in the midwife orientation is that learners perceive they are being asked to ‘reinvent the wheel’, becoming frustrated when they detect that time could be used more efficiently were the teacher to share information or model behaviours directly. Nevertheless, the midwife orientation can provide the conditions within which learners become actively engaged in the development of expertise and criticality in relation to the material. 337

338

Helena Gaunt et al.

Finally, the fellow traveller orientation may be conceptualised as collaborative, as the learner and teacher are closely aligned in egalitarian relationships, together pursuing and constructing new knowledge that may include unintended learning outcomes. As fellow travellers, learners and teachers together engage in critical thinking and exploration of content, each contributing ideas and sharing leadership. Like the midwife orientation, the fellow traveller orientation is concerned with how we know more than what we know. In this sense, the fellow traveller may be conceptualised as a transformative approach (contrasting with an informational approach – see Chapter 11, this volume), whereby learning involves change that is achieved through reflection, exploration and dialogue (Kegan, 2009). However, while this alignment provides the conditions within which criticality and student-​centred learning may flourish, there is nevertheless a risk that learning may become unfocused, core content may be overlooked and the relevance of what is being learned may become obscure. The three alignments thus have distinctive theoretical roots and consequently frame learning and teaching in different ways. As Jones highlights, these need not be fixed or deterministic; expert pedagogy may involve a fluid interplay between the three broad orientations. Within different contexts, or serving diverse purposes, the three elements (teacher, learner, content) may be variously aligned, while the three orientations (gatekeeper, midwife, fellow traveller) may intersect with task dimensions (e.g., planning and structuring learning) and interpersonal facets (e.g., emotional responses, relationships) of learning in flexible ways. Pozo and colleagues (2006, 2020) add a ‘constructive’ conception of teaching and learning which could be understood as a higher-​order combination of the midwife and fellow traveller orientations (Jones, 2005). Here, learning is constructed collaboratively and could be described as a ‘meeting of minds’ (Olson & Bruner, 1996). Students learn experientially (Pramling, 1996), becoming more autonomous, agentic and self-​regulated as they assume control of learning. Beyond answering the what and how of knowing, constructive teachers and students specifically focus on the why and for what of knowing.3 Thus, processes (cognitive, metacognitive, motivational) and conditions of learning (dialogical interactions, pedagogical activities) are aligned with the personal intentions of the student, avoiding unfocused learning.

Contexts This section introduces examples of investigations concerned with diverse one-​ to-​ one contexts for music learning across the lifespan. Whereas literature is scarce for some of the age groups –​particularly concerning the early years, where we have purposely pushed the boundaries to suggest a new perspective on the early foundations of our conceptions of music teaching and learning –​the reported research as we reach tertiary education increases exponentially. Most of the literature focuses on Western institutions where classical music repertoires are learned, but contexts with diverse repertoires and practices have also been taken into consideration. Summarising the studies is no mean task; we do not try to be exhaustive, but rather offer an overview of research concerned with one-​to-​one learning and teaching that aligns in various degrees with the theoretical models proposed. Looking across the range of available research literature indicates that notwithstanding a persistent gravitation towards particular pedagogical orientations, a plurality of learning views exists among instrumental and vocal teachers (e.g., López-​Íñiguez et al., 2014). In this spirit, we recognise that real-​life teaching and learning is complex and is not adequately represented by a pedagogical typology, but frameworks such as the ones described here can serve as reflective tools for exploring flexible practices. 338

339

Musical engagement in one-to-one contexts

Early years To the best of our knowledge, case studies of newborns, infants, toddlers or small children up to 7 years old involved in one-​to-​one music instruction are rather scarce. However, we suggest that some examples of early music-​making may be interpreted as one-​to-​one contexts of musical learning and teaching in the earlier years of life. First, in the field of developmental psychology of music, the sung language between caretaker and baby –​infant-​directed singing or “motherese” –​(Cirelli et al., 2020; Nakata & Trehub, 2011; Trehub & Trainor, 1998) could be considered to some extent as a one-​to-​one learning activity. In this case, the singing contributes to emotional connection and the musical enculturation of the newborn and, therefore, may be of apparently unintentional educational value. These musical communications are both directive and interactive; while the parent or caregiver may take the role of gatekeeper in initiating singing, choosing songs based on their own experience and so on, both infant and adult may then communicate musically in a fellow traveller fashion that is exploratory and reciprocal. An interpretation of such baby–​caretaker interaction within a family or clan as one-​to-​one music tuition relates to the psychological perspective proposed by Tomasello (2009) that acknowledges human beings as a species in which individuals attempt to educate others. Continuing with children aged 4–​7  years, Sorlí and colleagues (2020) adopted a cognitive perspective in their study of intuitive musicality. The facilitator engaged the children in implicit and spontaneous one-​to-​one learning activities intended to support metacognition and awareness of the embodied expression of musical concepts (e.g., piano = soft; fast = happy). The children were asked to communicate different emotions to their baby toys through singing. When taking the role of parents of their ‘babies’, the children changed the musical parameters of their spontaneous songs according to the emotion they wanted to express to their toys. Within these role-​play musical encounters, the children demonstrated clear pedagogical intentions and intuitive musicality; for example, selecting specific songs and changing the musical parameters in order to help their baby-​toys to sleep, relax, be fearless or be happy. These results relate to the work of Wellman (1990), who proposes that children aged 3–​7 already possess a representational theory of mind and an intention for desired outcomes, expressed as intention or desire to represent a direct copy of the world generally and more specifically the immediate learning contexts in which they interact. Furthermore, it is believed that humans are the only species to have a ‘mentalist’ capacity, as already in the earlier years we continuously assess what others lack, through some sort of pedagogical instinct (Premack & Premack, 1996). In this vein, children’s theory of mind is strongly associated with their conceptions of teaching (Strauss et al., 2002), which tend to be a kind of (naïve) behaviourism as found in the gatekeeper orientation described in the framework. Thus, this example of small children and toy-​baby emotional connection through singing represents a case of clear educational intention, a ‘learned behaviour’.

Primary school age group In their psychological studies on classical music training in Spain, López-​Íñiguez and colleagues (2014) examined the conceptions of and instructional practices of string instrument teachers and their influence on musical comprehension of their young students aged 7 and 12 (López-​ Íñiguez & Pozo, 2014a, 2014b). A clear difference was found between the responses by those students exposed to one-​to-​one instrumental teachers holding a direct conception of learning (master–​ apprentice approach) and those holding a constructive conception (dialogic and 339

340

Helena Gaunt et al.

collaborative interaction). For instance, regardless of the type of instrument, child’s age or years of their teachers’ professional experience, the children studying with direct teachers preferred more content-​and teacher-​centred approaches to learning, emphasising the importance of rote learning practice and extrinsic motivation by means of external rewards and error avoidance when reproducing musical scores. In contrast, children ascribed to the constructive group favoured reflective, metacognitive and self-​regulated practice, artistic agency and autonomy, student-​oriented processes and intrinsic motivation. Not only did these students describe the teaching model they were more familiar with, but they also approached the learning of canonic music in completely different ways (reproductive versus expressive and holistic). The authors set out to describe in depth what a constructive teacher actually does in practice at elementary levels of music instruction. Adopting a validated system for analysing one-​to-​ one instruction in music contexts (e.g., Pozo et al., 2020), they carried out a ‘good’ or ‘better’ practices case study in Finland, focused on the dialogical interaction of a cello teacher identified to hold a constructive conception of learning in relation to her 7-​year-​old student (López-​ Íñiguez & Pozo, 2016). The teacher and student consistently focused on the student’s learning processes, fostering conditions that enabled her learning and achieving long-​lasting, student-​ driven, transferable learning outcomes.Their relationship was grounded within a friendly environment with the possibility for digressions and breaks, where errors were used for reflection and musical material was related to the child’s interests. The student was rarely stopped by the teacher when making mistakes, the teacher modelled very little, and they both talked extensively about what, how and why to learn. Using a similar approach, Méndez and Pozo (2020) carried out a descriptive case study concerned with the composition practices of an 8-​year-​old female student in home-​based individual lessons. They aimed to understand the student’s self-​regulation strategies, demonstrated in her ways of processing the symbolic material on musical scores when composing in complex and creative ways. The study indicated that complex learning strategies aligned with constructive practices were promoted with a pedagogical approach that began with the expression of the student-​composer rather than with traditional music notation. In addition, while working with expressive and holistic aspects of the music, the student became familiar with symbolic and analytical concepts and techniques employed in composing, as a top-​down strategy. This differs from more traditional ways of approaching the creation of new works, which start from the notation and do not necessarily include structural, aesthetic or expressive aspects of the music at elementary levels. In the Swedish context, Rostvall and West (2003) also videorecorded the lessons of 11 wind and guitar teachers and their 21 students. Several of these teachers expressed strong support for the existence of ‘talent’ among certain students. The teachers studied in this research focused exclusively on their students’ learning the symbolic material of the scores, without any reference to, for example, melodic phrasing. There was no presence of dialogical interaction in the lesson studio (described as a “black box”, p. 214); rather, the teachers retained control of questioning and assessing and even ridiculed the students if they started talking in the lessons. Earlier studies have also explored how children learn in one-​to-​one instrumental or vocal settings. However, these investigations have mainly focused on selected aspects of the lesson structure, such as the proportion of verbal/​musical production and type of reinforcement and relevance of corrections (e.g., Costa-​Giomi et  al., 2005; Duke & Henninger, 1998; Kostka, 1984; Siebenaler, 1997; Speer, 1994), instructional effectiveness (Duke, 1999/​2000) and the possible environmental and personal reasons for student dropout (e.g., Pitts et al., 2000). The instructional practices described in these studies could be framed within the gatekeeper model and a direct conception of teaching and learning, as the main features identified were the 340

341

Musical engagement in one-to-one contexts

modelling and verbal preponderance of the teacher, the student seeking the teacher’s approval and instructions and the constant diagnoses, corrections and even penalisations of errors issued by teachers.

Young people –​pre professional training Prior to the 2000s, many of the studies concerned with formal pre-​professional training dealt with individual components of one-​to-​one lessons, such as isolated technical aspects of performance or time devoted to playing and talking  –​thus considerably fragmenting studio teaching into small pieces of a puzzle which is arguably much more complex (e.g., Cowden, 1972; Duke et al., 1997; Gillespie, 1988; Jensen, 1990; Smith, 1987). Whether it responds to the design and methodologies employed, or the particular characteristics of Western instrumental and vocal instruction patterns around that period, the majority of this literature aligns with the gatekeeper orientation. At the turn of the millennium, studies began to emerge that investigated a wider spectrum of details observed in instrumental learning. For example, McPhee (2011) studied secondary school age students learning brass and strings with their early-​career teachers. The research focused particularly on the teaching strategies used when working on musical expression and how the students responded to and understood them. While the teachers adopted a traditional master–​apprentice model, many used scaffolding to help their students understand the expressive qualities of their playing and the learning strategies needed. The authors recommended working creatively and in constructive ways with students in order to support expressive playing prior to higher education. Notwithstanding the authors’ descriptions of these lessons as constructive, the results indicate that they were more closely aligned with the midwife approach, as scaffolding in itself would need other metacognitive (e.g., planning and monitoring appropriate learning strategies) and motivational (e.g., meaningful learning tasks, intrinsic motives, personal interests) processes in order to qualify as the constructive approach identified in the system for analysing one-​to-​one instruction in music contexts. The interpersonal context has also been a focus of research concerned with one-​to-​one instrumental learning. For example, Creech (2009, 2012) explored how learning outcomes, encompassing musical attainment as well as motivation, self-​efficacy and love of music, were influenced by interpersonal interactions in one-​to-​one violin lessons with pupils aged between 8 and 16  years. Learning was conceptualised as an emergent property of the interpersonal dynamic among teachers, pupils and their parents. Creech developed a typology representing teacher–​pupil–​parent trios that differed according to the ways in which ‘control’ and ‘responsiveness’ were articulated among the three constituents. Overall, the most positive learning outcomes were found among those who were classified as the ‘harmonious trio’, characterised by teachers who offered strong leadership yet were also highly responsive and differentiated in their practice. Furthermore, ‘responsive leadership’ in some cases seemed to influence musical attainment even more than the number of hours of weekly practice (Creech, 2010). Highly directive teachers were found to engage most often in scaffolding, while the most responsive teachers encouraged dialogue with pupils and provided more feedback attributed to specific strategies or efforts. Crucially, some teachers adjusted their interaction style (with potential for positive implications with regard to the learning outcomes) in flexible ways, while others seemed to be more wedded to a ‘one size fits all’ approach. Studies involving one-​ to-​ one learning since 2000 have been advocating for research within more diverse locations. Thus, in addition to formal contexts where musical scores are used extensively, within informal one-​to-​one contexts without notation, a similar polarity of 341

342

Helena Gaunt et al.

reproduction or co-​construction in the learning modes can be found. For example, Casas-​ Mas and colleagues studied the cognitive and emotional learning processes as well as the psychological processes and conditions underpinning one-​to-​one guitar learning in informal Flamenco gypsy communities (Casa-​ Mas, 2018), non-​ formal jazz contexts (Casas-​ Mas, Montero & Pozo, 2015) and formal classical guitar learning settings (Casas-​Mas, 2013) in pre-​ professional stages. From these diverse groups, in the classical and Flamenco learning cultures, the musical piece –​whether written or not –​was treated as a fixed learning objective for the learner. Here, Flamenco learners studied from the perspective of gestures communication in one-​to-​one traditional contexts (‘maestro’ and apprentice). However, in the case of jazzists, the authors identified that the end product of instruction was not necessarily the reproduction of a predefined musical piece, but rather could be more open and creative, with the final result dependent on the performer(s) or improviser(s) (Casas-​Mas, Pozo & Scheuer, 2015).

Young adults –​professional training Prior to the 2000s, research concerned with one-​ to-​ one contexts for professional music training has encompassed pioneering observational studies in formal and informal (private tuition) Western contexts (e.g., Abeles, 1975; Gipson, 1978; Hepler, 1986; Persson, 1996). Much of the research in formal higher education after that dealt with the practice behaviours of highly experienced tertiary teachers who had limited training in instrumental pedagogy but were excellent performers (e.g., Purser, 2005). Overall, during the last two decades, several of the studies in higher education one-​to-​one contexts revealed that the dominant pedagogical framework for applied music instruction was the master–​apprentice model (Burwell, 2005; Hays et al., 2000; Jørgensen, 2000), the main aspect examined within that model being the training of performance (Carey et al., 2013; Nerland, 2007; Perkins, 2013). Young and colleagues (2003) researched the teaching and learning characteristics among 10 Australian instrumental teachers and their students, using questionnaires, observations and interviews. This study highlighted the importance of technical mastery of the instrument and the acquisition of mechanical abilities, where the main learning process identified was that of imitating the teachers. Also, in Australia, Zhukov (2006, 2013) pointed towards the predominance within higher music education of intense teacher modelling, general verbal instructions and praise during studio lessons. More recently, Burwell (2020) carried out a single-​case qualitative study with a saxophone teacher, which showed the strong presence of authoritative discourses in the one-​to-​one instrumental music tuition in higher education. The intensity of one-​to-​one professional training has been highlighted from numerous perspectives in recent years (Burwell, 2011; Gaunt & Hallam, 2008, 2010; Kennell, 2002). This has particularly served to indicate the importance of ‘fit’ or shared understanding between teacher and student about the purpose of this kind of tuition, the role of specific objectives at different times and according to the individual, and the responsibilities on both sides to facilitate the emergent learning (Carey & Grant, 2016; Collens & Creech, 2013; Gaunt, 2017; Wirtanen & Littleton, 2004). The complexity of the interpersonal space and ways in which learning may be scaffolded effectively through it in different ways have become increasingly evident, and equally the potential for one-​to-​one tuition to be problematic for both student and teacher has been clarified. Similarly, tertiary education case studies have investigated psychological violence in one-​on-​ one music settings within the Argentinian context. For instance, Musumeci (2001) interviewed six families, exploring why some siblings within the same family achieved musical excellence 342

343

Musical engagement in one-to-one contexts

while others dropped out or showed a lower level of proficiency. The results indicated that studying a musical instrument could be linked to psychological ‘ill-​being’.This was explained by teaching and administrative practices in music conservatoires that support the notion of ‘talent’, leading to pressure from the parents on the siblings who show less proficiency and fostering feelings of hopelessness among those deemed less talented as well as tensions with the siblings considered talented. Students depicted as less talented described their first relationships with music teachers at conservatoires in the early years as a ‘constant crying’ experience.The presence of this type of teaching–​learning environment was also observed by the author in the context of solfège (Musumeci, 2005) and instrumental exams in higher music education (Musumeci, 2008), where similar features of power abuse and unethical behaviours were highlighted during interviews by both students and expert musicians. The author, thus, coined the terms “humanly compatible” and “non-​humanly compatible” music education  –​which can be linked to the traditional and constructive approaches. Beyond the traditional European model of one-​to-​one instruction, we find the narrative study by Rakena and colleagues (2015) with indigenous and minority students in New Zealand (Māori and Pasifika) on their experiences of one-​to-​one studies within conservatoires. This study revealed that diverse issues of power were enacted in the music teaching studio, mostly represented by teachers using complex language that students could not comprehend, teachers undervaluing the minority and indigenous students’ cultural backgrounds and students feeling excluded by the regular codes of participation of others previously involved in such learning culture.

Adults –​independent adults learning in the community and older adults with more complex needs While acknowledging some limited research concerned with professional learners (e.g., Collens, 2015), we focus here on independent adults learning in diverse communities and older adults with more complex needs. For instance, in the context of adult learning in the piano studio, Coutts (2019), a proponent of ‘transformative’ pedagogies, has recently focused on empowering adults towards self-​directedness in their learning, adopting a collaborative approach similar to the fellow traveller model. Here, the researcher is aware of the negative emotions that adult learners typically bring to lessons due to a history of being neglected as musically capable learners or due to physical constraints arising because of age-​related biological factors. Thus, she prepared an optimal non-​judgemental classroom environment that facilitated discussion and collaboration. In the United Kingdom, Taylor (2010a, 2010b; see also Taylor & Hallam, 2008) investigated the personal growth, musical motivation and identity construction of older amateur students engaged in one-​to-​one piano education, either attending regular one-​to-​one music lessons or masterclasses with experts. These situations enhanced a type of democratic learning different from the master–​apprentice approach, which had a positive impact on their wellbeing and confidence as well as on their enjoyment with peers in group-​setting performances and learning contexts. Similar sorts of outcomes were reported for older amateur piano students in the United States (Jutras, 2006). In addition, Perkins and colleagues (2015) studied the learning acquired by students who were enrolled in higher music education while teaching older people to play musical instruments in a 10-​week educational programme, Rhythm for Life. Results indicated not only the development of transformative, pedagogical skills and knowledge of the students in charge of educating others, but also a positive, meaningful learning experience for both younger and older pupils. 343

344

Helena Gaunt et al.

To conclude this section, we highlight that the majority of research concerned with older learners has focused on the health and wellbeing benefits (see Chapters 3 and 5) of music participation in groups and that there is a need for research that both acknowledges and explores the pedagogical processes that may underpin lifelong instrumental learning within one-​to-​one contexts.

Conclusion In this chapter, we have illuminated the ways in which one-​to-​one tuition in music takes place both across the lifespan and within diverse contexts in terms of purpose and stage of musical development. Unifying characteristics appear to be an experienced practitioner working with more of a novice through a detailed and embodied practice, where the novice essentially learns by doing through scaffolded stages and the exchange is intensified by the intimate nature of the interpersonal learning space.These unifying characteristics have most often been conceptualised in terms of apprenticeship. As a professional practice, one-​ to-​ one tuition remains remarkably unsystematised and unregulated. Nevertheless, traditions of apprenticeship, underpinned by largely tacit principles and values, have tended to play a central role in influencing much practice. Looking across a wide range of contexts and example practices in this chapter has served to highlight the importance of critical reflection on apprenticeship and its theoretical foundations in order to respond to the particularities of different contexts and their priorities and to shape teaching interactions effectively. Furthermore, the range of research identified in our analysis suggests that there may be significant potential for dialogue and exchange between different one-​to-​one situations and that shared understanding may usefully be developed through this in relation to apprenticeship and its potential to be nuanced for contemporary practices. From this perspective, it has been important to us to push the boundaries about what may be understood as one-​to-​one tuition in early years work. It is apparent that these early interactions are critical to individual musical and wider development, will often be informed by the adult’s experiences of one-​to-​one tuition and, equally, may impact on later experiences of learning an instrument or singing in one-​to-​one contexts. Further research is undoubtedly needed in this field, and as research methods expand and deepen for early years research generally, this looks to be increasingly feasible for one-​to-​one musical interactions. In terms of developing the field of one-​to-​one tuition, through both research and the reflective development of practice, we suggest that a framework such as that proposed by Jones offers invaluable structure. Easily accessible and broad in scope, it also problematises some terminology that has frequently been used, such as ‘learner-​centred teaching’ which may be valuable as a loose label but remains largely undefined. Jones’ framework opens a space for examining complexities within the teaching interactions, and it promotes a more nuanced and dynamic understanding of alignments between teacher, student and content, and their multiple layers. Furthermore, this is a framework that invites critical questions about purpose, learning outcomes and motivation within one-​to-​one tuition, adding this into the specifics of what is taught and how in any particular context. Overall, the growing body of research on one-​to-​one tuition and its spread across the lifespan and diverse contexts brings to the fore how issues of purpose and values –​the why and for what questions –​are as fundamental to the coherence and success of these practices as the detailed materials and processes used at any time. The recognition of this balance between why, what and how may represent something of a shift for some practices of one-​to-​one tuition.

344

345

Musical engagement in one-to-one contexts

It seems to have potential to assist a movement away from more fixed approaches (perhaps particularly those with an exclusively gatekeeper stance) to more agile approaches with constructivist strategies that seek transformative outcomes according to context and which are, therefore, more likely to develop a fluid mix of Jones’ different alignments, as was developed by Pozo and colleagues (2006, 2020), for example. As a result, further research may usefully extend and deepen understanding of the purpose and value of one-​to-​one tuition across the lifespan, connecting this to theoretical foundations such as Jones’ framework. In addition, there is limited research concerned with the role of one-​to-​one tuition within professional musicians’ career development post initial training (López-​Íñiguez & Bennett, 2020). Anecdotally, it is widely understood that many professional singers continue to engage with one-​to-​one tuition, whereas instrumentalists are much less likely to do so; the latter are more likely to continue their development informally through peer-​to-​peer interactions on the job. Much remains to be explored in terms of the relationship between such professional development and professional success, sustainable career development and personal wellbeing. Lastly, it is clear that the extensive presence of one-​to-​one tuition in music and the growing body of research in this field has insights that may be relevant to other fields, both within education and in other professional learning spheres, such as mentoring and coaching. It will, therefore, be valuable to give further consideration to the ways in which these insights from music education may be communicated more broadly and connected to interdisciplinary research initiatives.

Reflective questions 1. In what ways may a framework such as Jones’ gatekeeper, midwife and fellow traveller orientations be used to stimulate reflection and the development of practice for instrumental/​vocal teachers in different settings? 2. In what ways does context influence the articulation of pedagogical purpose and approaches in one-​to-​one teaching and learning? 3. What specific forms of learning may the one-​to-​one context particularly (and potentially) enable?

Notes 1 This work was partly supported by the Academy of Finland under Grant 315378 awarded to the second author, and the Center for Educational Research and Academic Development in the Arts (CERADA) at the University of the Arts Helsinki. 2 These are cognitive beliefs that people hold on what learning is, how we can learn better, and why and for what it should happen in certain ways. These beliefs, ideas or conceptions are usually acquired unconsciously, without effort or intention, through our various interactions (and perceptions of regularity) with the social world around us. They are rather complex, embodied and difficult to modify, change or remove, and they guide our actions. 3 The constructive conception approach introduced here is close to the constructivism defended in instructional science. It is positioned within the triple epistemology of knowledge, as it not only answers to the goals, results (what) and processes (how) of knowing but also looks at the acquisition of knowledge as a search for personal meanings (why) as well as at the preservation, promotion and regeneration of artistic knowledge and the creation of artistic experiences, always respecting the tradition of each artistic discipline, but aiming to transcend it (for what).

345

346

Helena Gaunt et al.

Suggestions for further reading Creech, A., & Gaunt, H. (2012). The changing face of individual instrumental tuition: Value, purpose and potential. In G. McPherson & G.Welch (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music education (pp. 694–​711). Oxford University Press. Polifonia Working Group for Instrumental and Vocal Music Teacher Training. (2010). Instrumental and vocal teacher education: European Perspectives. Association Européenne des Conservatoires, Académies de Musique et Musikhochschulen. www.aec-​music.eu/​userfiles/​File/​aec-​handbook-​instrumental-​vocal-​ teacher-​education-​european-​perspectives-​en.pdf Jones, G. (2005). Gatekeepers, midwives and fellow travellers: The craft and artistry of the adult educator. Mary Ward Centre. López-​Íñiguez, G. (2017). Promoting constructivist instrumental music education as a mechanism for pedagogical equality. Toolkit for instrumental music teachers in Finland [Green paper]. ArtsEqual Research Initiative, University of the Arts. https://​doi.org/​10.13140/​RG.2.2.21656.08963

References Abeles, H. F. (1975). Students perceptions of characteristics of effective applied music instructors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 23(2), 147–​154. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3345287 Baker, G. (2014). El Sistema: Orchestrating Venezuela’s youth. Oxford University Press. 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. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​S0265051705006601 Burwell, K. (2011). Studio-​based instrumental learning. Ashgate. Burwell, K. (2020). Authoritative discourse in advanced studio lessons. Advance online publication. Musicae Scientiae, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864919896085 Burwell, K., Carey, G., & Bennett, D. (2019). Isolation in studio music teaching: The secret garden. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 18(4), 372–​394. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1474022217736581 Byrne, C. (2005). Pedagogical communication in the music classroom. In D. Miell, R. MacDonald, & D. Hargreaves (Eds.), Musical communication (pp. 301–​319). Oxford University Press. Carey, G., Coutts, L., Grant, C., Harrison, S., & Dwyer, R. (2018). Enhancing learning and teaching in the tertiary music studio through reflection and collaboration. Music Education Research, 20(4), 399–​411. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613808.2017.1409204 Carey, G., & Grant, C. (2014, July 15–​18).Teachers of instruments or teachers as instruments? From transfer to transformative approaches to one-​to-​one pedagogy. In G. Carruthers (Ed.), Relevance and reform in the education of professional musicians, Proceedings of the 20th International Seminar of the ISME Commission on the Education of the Professional Musician (pp. 42–​54). International Society for Music Education. Carey, G., & Grant, C. (2016). Enacting transformative pedagogy in the music studio:  A case study of responsive, relational teaching. In E. K. M. Chong (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21st International Seminar of the ISME Commission on the Education of the Professional Musician (pp. 54–​63). International Society for Music Education. Carey, G., Grant, C., McWilliam, E., & Taylor, P. (2013). One-​to-​one pedagogy: Developing a protocol for illuminating the nature of teaching in the conservatoire. International Journal of Music Education, 31(2),148–​159. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761413483077 Casas-​Mas, A. (2013). Culturas de aprendizaje musical: Concepciones, procesos y prácticas en clásico, flamenco y jazz [Doctoral dissertation, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid]. Biblos-​e Archivo Repositorio Institucional UAM. https://​repositorio.uam.es/​handle/​10486/​14310 Casas-​Mas, A. (2018). Developing an approach to the Flamenco learning-​teaching culture: An innovative (traditional) learning. In B.-​W. Leung (Ed.), Traditional musics in the modern world: Transmission, evolution, and challenges (pp. 25–​39). Springer. Casas-​Mas, A., Montero, I., & Pozo, J. I. (2015). Discourse on practice of a semi-​professional jazz guitarist: A case study of constructive musical learning. Journal of the International Association for the Study of Popular Music, IASPM@Journal, 5(1), 54–​80. https://​iaspmjournal.net/​index.php/​IASPM_​Journal/​ article/​view/​722/​pdf_​20 Casas-​Mas, A., Pozo, J. I., & Scheuer, N. (2015). Musical learning and teaching conceptions as sociocultural productions in classical, Flamenco, and jazz cultures. Journal of Cross­Cultural Psychology, 46(9), 1191–​ 1225. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0022022115603124

346

347

Musical engagement in one-to-one contexts Cirelli, L. K., Jurewicz, Z. B., & Trehub, S. E. (2020). Effects of maternal singing style on mother–​infant arousal and behavior. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 32(7), 1213–​1220. Collens, P. (2015). The relational dimension of one-​to-​one tuition: Conservatoire vocal studies education [Doctoral dissertation]. University College London Institute of Education. https://​discovery.ucl.ac.uk/​ id/​eprint/​10021728 Collens, P., & Creech, A. (2013). Intersubjectivity in collaborative learning in one-​to-​one contexts. In H. Gaunt & H. Westerlund (Eds.), Collaborative learning in higher music education (pp. 151–​164). Ashgate. Costa-​Giomi, E., Flowers, P. J., & Sasaki,W. (2005). Piano lessons of beginning students who persist or drop out: Teacher behavior, student behavior, and lesson progress. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53(3), 234–​247. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​002242940505300305 Coutts, L. (2019). Empowering students to take ownership of their learning:  Lessons from one piano teacher’s experiences with transformative pedagogy. International Journal of Music Education, 37(3), 493–​ 507. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761418810287 Cowden, R. L. (1972). A comparison of first and third position approaches to violin instruction. Journal of Research in Music Education, 20(4), 505–​509. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3343811 Creech, A. (2009). Teacher-​ parent-​ pupil trios:  A typology of interpersonal interaction in the context of learning a musical instrument. Musicae Scientiae, 13(2), 163–​182. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 102986490901300208 Creech, A. (2010, August 23–​27). The role of interpersonal interaction in supporting progression in instrumental learning [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition, Seattle, Washington, WA, United States. Creech, A. (2012). Interpersonal behaviour in one-​to-​one instrumental lessons: An observational analysis. British Journal of Music Education, 29(3), 387–​407. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​S026505171200006X Dudt, S. (2012). From Seoul to Bonn: A journey through international and European music education policies. In C. Harrison & S. Hennessy (Eds.), Listen out:  International perspectives on music education (pp. 126–​137). Matlock. www.emcimc.org/​fileadmin/​7_​Cultural_​Policy/​listen_​out_​excerpt_​dudt.pdf Duke, R. A. (1999/​2000). Measure of instructional effectiveness in music research. Bulletin for the Council of Research in Music Education, 143, 1–​48. www.jstor.org/​stable/​40319011 Duke, R. A., Flowers, P. T., & Wolfe, D. E. (1997). Children who study piano with excellent teachers in the United States. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 132, 51–​84. https://​eric.ed.gov/​ ?id=EJ592302 Duke, R. A., & Henninger, J. C. (1998). Effects of verbal corrections on student attitude and performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46(4), 482–​495. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3345345 Garnett, J. (2013). Beyond a constructivist curriculum: A critique of competing paradigms in music education. British Journal of Music Education, 30(2), 161–​175. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​S0265051712000575 Gaunt, H. (2010). One-​to-​one tuition in a conservatoire:  The perceptions of instrumental and vocal students. Psychology of Music, 38(2), 178–​208. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735609339467 Gaunt, H. (2017). Apprenticeship and empowerment: The role of one-​to-​one lessons. In J. Rink, H. Gaunt, & A. Williamon (Eds.), Musicians in the making:  Pathways to creative performance (pp. 28–​56). Oxford University Press. Gaunt, H., & Hallam, S. (2008). Individuality in the learning of musical skills. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 274–​284). Oxford University Press. https://​doi. org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199298457.013.0026 Gaunt, H., & Westerlund, H. (2013). Collaborative learning in higher music education. Routledge. https://​doi. org/​10.4324/​9781315572642 Gillespie, R. (1988). Identification of factors for evaluating upper string instrument spiccato bowing and a comparison of two instructional approaches. Dialogue in Instrumental Music Education, 12(1), 21–​33. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3345394 Gipson, R. C. (1978). An observational analysis of wind instrument private lessons [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Pennsylvania State University. Green, L. (2002). How popular musicians learn: A way ahead for music education. Ashgate. Hallam, S. (1998). Instrumental teaching. Heinemann. Hays, T., Minichiello,V., & Wright, P. (2000). Mentorship: The meaning of the relationship for musicians. Research Studies in Music Education, 15(3), 3–​14. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1321103X0001500102 Hepler, L.  E. (1986). The measurement of teacher/​student interaction in private music lessons and its relation to teacher field dependence/​field independence [Doctoral Dissertation]. Case Western Reserve University, ProQuest.

347

348

Helena Gaunt et al. Jensen, L. L. (1990). A comparison of initial violin bow hold approaches in undergraduate string technique classes, including assessments of the influence of baseline ratings of subjects’ finger dexterity and mental image of bow hold. Dialogue in Instrumental Music Education, 14(1),  10–​30. Jones, G. (2005). Gatekeepers, midwives and fellow travellers: The craft and artistry of the adult educator. Mary Ward Centre. Jørgensen, H. (2000). Student learning in higher instrumental education: Who is responsible? British Journal of Music Education, 17(1), 67–​77. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​S0265051700000164 Jutras, P. (2006). The benefits of adult piano study as self-​reported by selected adult piano students. The Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(2), 97–​110. Kegan, R. (2009). What “form” transforms? A  constructive-​ developmental approach to transformative learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists –​in their own words (pp. 35–​52). Routledge. Kennell, R. (2002). Systematic research in studio instruction in music. In R. Colwell & D. Richardson (Eds.), The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning (pp. 243–​256). Oxford University Press. Kostka, M.  J. (1984). An investigation of reinforcements, time use, and student attentiveness in piano lessons. Journal of Research in Music Education, 32(2), 113–​122. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3344978 Loges, N., & Lawson, C. (2012). The teaching of performance. In C. Lawson & R. Stowell (Eds.), The Cambridge history of musical performance (pp. 135–​168). Cambridge University Press. López-​Íñiguez, G. (2017). Promoting constructivist instrumental music education as a mechanism for pedagogical equality. Toolkit for instrumental music teachers in Finland [Green paper]. ArtsEqual Research Initiative, University of the Arts. https://​doi.org/​10.13140/​RG.2.2.21656.08963 López-​Íñiguez, G., & Bennett, D. (2020). A lifespan perspective on multi-​professional musicians:  Does music education prepare classical musicians for their careers? Music Education Research, 22(1), 1–​14. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613808.2019.1703925 López-​Íñiguez, G., & Pozo, J. I. (2014a). Like teacher, like student? Conceptions of children from traditional and constructive teachers regarding the teaching and learning of string instruments. Cognition and Instruction, 32(3), 219–​252. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​07370008.2014.918132 López-​Íñiguez, G., & Pozo, J. I. (2014b). The influence of teachers’ conceptions on their students’ learning: Children’s understanding of sheet music. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(2), 311–​ 328. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​bjep.12026 López-​Íñiguez, G., & Pozo, J. I. (2016). Analysis of constructive practice in instrumental music education: Case study with an expert cello teacher. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 97–​107. https://​doi. org/​10.1016/​j.tate.2016.08.002 López-​Íñiguez, G., Pozo, J. I., & de Dios, M. J. (2014). The older, the wiser? Profiles of string instrument teachers with different experience according to their conceptions of teaching, learning, and evaluation. Psychology of Music, 42(2), 157–​176. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735612463772 McPhee, E. A. (2011). Finding the muse: Teaching musical expression to adolescents in the one-​to-​one studio environment. International Journal of Music Education, 29(4), 333–​346. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0255761411421084 Méndez, E., & Pozo, J. I. (2020). Aprender música componiendo: Redescribiendo las metas expresivas al escribirlas [Learning music by composing: Redescribing expressive goals on writing them]. In J. I. Pozo, M. P. Pérez-​Echeverría, J. A. Torrado, & G. López-​Íñiguez (Eds.), Aprender y enseñar música: Un enfoque centrado en el alumno [Teaching and learning music: A student-​centred approach] (pp. 273–​289). Morata. Midgette, A., & McGloe, P. (2018, July 29). Classical music: Harassment on a grand scale #MeToo and classical music. The Washington Post, E1. Musumeci, O. (2001). Diferentes niveles de logro en hermanos que tocan el mismo instrumento [Different levels of achievement in siblings who play the same instrument]. Actas de la Primera Reunión Anual de SACCoM. www.saccom.org.ar/​2001_​reunion1/​actas/​Musumeci/​Musumeci.htm Musumeci, O. (2005, 22–​23 September). Hacia una educación auditiva humanamente compatible. ¿Sufriste mucho con mi dictado? [Towards a humanly compatible auditive education. Did you suffer a lot with my dictation?]. In F. Shifres (Ed.), Actas de las Primeras Jornadas de Educación Auditiva, Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Musumeci, O. (2008). Dos exámenes (uno ficticio), dos entrevistas (una fallida) y varias víctimas: violencia académica en un Conservatorio y la representatividad y legitimidad de la investigación [Two exams (one fictitious), two interviews (one failed) and various victims: Academic violence in a conservatory and the representation and legitimacy of the research]. In M. Espejo (Ed.), Primer encuentro internacional de investigación en música, memorias (pp. 138–​159). UPTC.

348

349

Musical engagement in one-to-one contexts Nakata, T., & Trehub, S. E. (2011). Expressive timing and dynamics in infant-​directed and non-​infant-​ directed singing. Psychomusicology: Music, mind and brain, 21(1–​2),  45–​53. Nerland, M. (2007). One-​to-​one teaching as cultural practice: Two case studies from an academy of music. Music Education Research, 9(3), 399–​416. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613800701587761 Nettl, B. (1995). Heartlands excursions:  Ethnomusicological reflections on schools of music. University of Illinois Press. Olson, D. R., & Bruner, J. S. (1996). Folk psychology and folk pedagogy. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), Handbook of education and human development:  New models of learning, teaching and schooling (pp. 9–​27). Blackwell. Perkins, R. (2013). Hierarchies and learning in the conservatoire: Exploring what students learn through the lens of Bourdieu. Research Studies in Music Education, 35(2), 197–​212. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 1321103X13508060 Perkins, R., Aufegger, L., & Williamon, A. (2015). Learning through teaching: Exploring what conservatoire students learn from teaching beginner older adults. International Journal of Music Education, 33(1), 80–​90. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761414531544 Persson, R. (1996). Brilliant performers as teachers:  A case study of commonsense teaching in a conservatory setting. International Journal of Music Education, 28(1), 25–​36. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 025576149602800103 Pitts, S., Davidson, J., & McPherson, G. (2000). Models of success and failure in instrumental learning: Case studies of young players in the first 20 months of learning. Bulletin of the Council of Research in Music Education, 146, 51–​69. www.jstor.org/​stable/​40319033?seq=1 Pozo, J. I., Pérez-​Echeverría, M. P., Torrado, J. A., & López-​Íñiguez, G. (Eds.). (2020). Aprender y enseñar música: Un enfoque centrado en el alumnado [Learning and teaching music. A student-​centred approach]. Morata. 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 [New ways of thinking about teaching and learning: The views of teachers and students]. Graó. Pramling, I. (1983). The child’s conception of learning. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Pramling, I. (1996). Understanding and empowering the child as a learner. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The handbook of education and human development (pp. 565–​592). Blackwell. Premack, D., & Premack, A. J. (1996). Why animals lack pedagogy and some cultures have more of it than others. In D. R. Olson (Ed.), The handbook of education and human development: New models of learning, teaching and schooling (pp. 302–​323). Blackwell. Purser, D. (2005). Performers as teachers:  Exploring the teaching approaches of instrumental teachers in conservatoires. British Journal of Music Education, 22(3), 287–​298. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​ S0265051705006546 Rakena, T. O., Airini, A., & Brown, D. (2015). Success for all: Eroding the culture of power in the one-​to-​ one teaching and learning context. International Journal of Music Education, 34(3), 1–​14. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0255761415590365 Rostvall, A. L., & West, T. (2003). Analysis of interaction and learning in instrumental teaching. Music Education Research, 5(3), 213–​226. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​1461380032000126319 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. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​02671520902928903 Schippers, H. (2010). Facing the music: Shaping music education from a global perspective. Oxford University Press. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. Jossey-​Bass. Siebenaler, D. J. (1997). Analysis of teacher-​student interactions in the piano lessons of adults and children. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45(1), 6–​20. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3345462 Smith, C. M. (1987).The effect of finger placement markers on the development of intonation accuracy in fourth and fifth-​grade beginning string students. Dialogue in Music Education, 11(2),  71–​77. Sorlí, A., Pozo, J. I., & Torrado, J. A. (2020). La iniciación temprana al aprendizaje musical: Los pequeños también son músicos [Early initiation to music learning: Little children are musicians too]. In J. I. Pozo, M. P. Pérez-​Echeverría, J. A. Torrado, & G. López-​Íñiguez (Eds.), Aprender y enseñar música: Un enfoque centrado en el alumno [Teaching and learning music: A student-​centred approach] (pp. 205–​219). Morata. Speer, D. R. (1994). An analysis of sequential patterns of instruction in piano lessons. Journal of Research in Music Education, 42(1), 14–​26. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3345333

349

350

Helena Gaunt et al. Strauss, S., Ziv, M., & Stein, A. (2002). Teaching as a natural cognition and its relation to preschoolers’ developing theory of mind. Cognitive Development, 17(3–​4), 1473–​1487. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​ S0885-​2014(02)00128-​4 Taylor, A. (2010a). Older amateur keyboard players learning for self-​fulfilment. Psychology of Music, 39(3), 345–​363. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735610376262 Taylor, A. (2010b). Participation in a master class: Experiences of older amateur pianists. Music Education Research, 12(2), 187–​204. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613801003746576 Taylor, A., & Hallam, S. (2008). Understanding what it means for older students to learn basic musical skills on a keyboard instrument. Music Education Research, 10(2), 285–​306. http://​doi.org/​10.1080/​ 14613800802079148 Tomasello, M. (2009). Why we cooperate. MIT Press. Trehub, S. E., & Trainor, L. (1998). Singing to infants: Lullabies and playsongs. In C. Rovee-​Collier, L. P. Lipsitt, & H. Hayne (Eds.), Advances in infancy research (Vol. 12; pp. 43–​77). Greenwood Publishing Group. Wellman, H. M. (1990). The child’ s theory of mind. MIT Press. Westerlund, H., & Gaunt, H. (in press). Invitation. In H. Westerlund & H. Gaunt (Eds.), Expanding professionalism in music and higher music education: A changing game. Routledge. Wirtanen, S., & Littleton, K. (2004). Collaboration, conflict and the musical identity work of solo-​piano students:  The significance of the student-​teacher relationship. In D. Miell & K. Littleton (Eds.), Collaborative creativity: Contemporary perspectives (pp. 26–​39). Free Association Books. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Yilmaz, K. (2011).The cognitive perspective on learning: Its theoretical underpinnings and implications for classroom practices. Clearing House, 84(5), 204–​212. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​00098655.2011.568989 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. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1080/​1461380032000085522 Zhukov, K. (2006). Gender issues in instrumental music teaching in Australian conservatoriums. Research Studies in Music Education, 26(1), 22–​36. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1321103X060260010501 Zhukov, K. (2013). Interpersonal interactions in instrumental lessons: Teacher/​student verbal and non-​ verbal behaviours. Psychology of Music, 41(4), 466–​483. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735611430434

350

351

22 ADDITIONAL NEEDS AND DISABILITY IN MUSICAL LEARNING Issues and pedagogical considerations David Baker This chapter explores issues, literature and music pedagogy when working with learners with additional support needs. Additional needs are considered broadly to include those who are disabled and non-​disabled.The former group is the primary focus, however. Given the multiplicity of health conditions and experiences of disability, the discussion merely aims to spur readers’ reflections. Another essential caveat is that teaching should be specific to the particular needs of individuals and groups, but factoring in health conditions, individual capacities, personal circumstances, and so on. Readers are thus encouraged to explore the list of suggested readings at the end of the chapter. “Additional needs” are first defined. The chapter then explores disability causes and categories before turning to commonplace models. Next Fautley and Daubney (2018) illustrate how additional needs in music are culturally situated, thus applying to wider populations. General themes in disabled people’s musical lives are subsequently provided before discussing an example of disability and music (i.e., visual impairment). Finally, some reflections are offered.

Additional needs An additional need occurs when learning cannot occur effectively through, for example, teacher–​pupil interactions, resources and strategies customarily used with the general population. This applies to some people society considers non-​disabled, but particularly to the disabled. Additional needs in music are not merely about teaching practices, training and resources though, but concern deeper issues such as how society frames disability, wider experience and the learner’s confidence, even travel and the learner’s mobility.

Reflecting on disability: Causes and categories Causes Causes of disability are: genetic (e.g., ocular albinism, cystic fibrosis); environmental, resulting from injury, disease or infection (e.g., meningitis leading to a learning disability); due to ageing (e.g., age-​related macular degeneration, arthritis); and sometimes unknown. These are non-​discrete 351

352

David Baker

and have complex interactions, as one’s genetics affect how we respond to environmental factors (e.g., our diets), sometimes resulting in debilitating health issues (e.g., a stroke or diabetes).

Categories Categories of disability are: sensory (e.g., impacting on hearing or vision); physical (e.g., the absence of, poor development of or inability to use a body part, including issues relating to the musculoskeletal or respiratory systems); neurological (atypical brain and nervous system functioning affecting bodily movement); cognitive (affecting how a person perceives and understands); intellectual (affecting thought processes such as problem-​solving and judgment, memory, communication and learning, with these being part of wider cognition); and psychiatric (concerned with emotions and/​or how thought processes adversely affect behaviours). Disability can also be episodic, as in some mental illness, or lifelong. It can be stratified by whether or not it is a congenital condition (i.e., whether it appears in the prenatal child or in the first months of life, as in Down syndrome or cerebral palsy). Some disabilities are not easily perceived by others (e.g., consider a person hiding poor visual acuity or dyslexia), and assistive devices (a prosthetic limb, implant or hearing aid) can be discrete. Fearing stigmatisation, a disabled person may withhold declaring his or her circumstances (formally or informally), so there are hidden disabilities. These do not appear in statistical reports, go unseen by support services and can be overlooked by educators. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) (World Health Organization [WHO], 2001; also see WHO, 1992, 1996)1 proposes three interconnected areas of disability: “impairments” or issues with the body’s structure; “activity limitations” (e.g., affecting eating, walking, or mobility); and “participation restrictions” (e.g., challenges with accessing education, experiencing employment discrimination or underemployment). Disability occurs where all three areas are affected (WHO, 2011) due to the person’s physical, neurological, cognitive, intellectual or psychiatric functioning. This applies to a limited number of a society’s members (it is low incidence) so warrants formal recognition as atypical (often there is registration by medical practitioners). Disabilities occur in all ethnicities, cultural groups and nations. The WHO estimates that “[a]‌bout 15% of the world’s population lives with some form of disability, of whom 2–​4% experience significant difficulties in functioning” (2020, n.p.).

Learning difficulties In the United Kingdom and North America, the term “specific learning difficulty” (SpLD; sometimes referred to as specific learning disability) is used (e.g., Learning Disabilities Association of America, 2019; National Center for Learning Disabilities, 2014; Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2020). Conditions include: dyscalculia, or issues with mathematical processing; dysgraphia, or problems with the fine motor skills, affecting writing; dyspraxia, or difficulty organising motor tasks and thoughts (e.g., troubling hand–​eye coordination); attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), affecting concentration and attention and sometimes including impulsivity and hyperactivity; and dyslexia, affecting processing written language, causing problems with reading comprehension, writing and spelling (e.g., mixing up multisyllabic words, spelling errors, missing vowels). Literature suggests that musical participation has various benefits for those with SpLDs (e.g., Ockelford, 2000; Oglethorpe, 2002; Overy, 2000, 2003). The United Kingdom’s National Health Service (NHS) distinguishes between mild, moderate, or severe learning difficulties (SLDs) (see NHS, 2018), stating that adults in the lower two tiers can live independently but take longer to learn new skills. Profound and multiple learning 352

353

Additional needs and disability

difficulties (PMLDs) occur where a person has an SLD and other disabilities that “significantly affect their ability to communicate and be independent” (NHS, 2018, n.p.).The NHS estimates there are 1.5 million UK citizens with a learning disability and 350,000 with an SLD (NHS, 2018). The estimated 2018 UK population2 was 66,435,600 (Office for National Statistics, 2019), suggesting 2.26% of the population has a learning disability of some type and 0.53% an SLD (see Ockelford, 2000, for UK statistics). In 2017–​2018, the number of US students (3–​21 years) who received special education in schooling was 7 million, or 14% of the population, with 34% of these students having an SLD (National Center for Education Statistics, 2020).

Terminology and deficits “Disabled” (with its opposite “able-​bodied”), “dysfunction” and “visually impaired” (and various associated terms such as “sight impairment” and “partially sighted”) are used here. These are suggestive of a deficit viewpoint; that is, focusing on what a person cannot do. It seems more productive to consider what a person can do musically or otherwise under the right circumstances. These terms are only used here because they are widespread –​for example, “visually impaired” is officially part of UK registration  –​and recognisable to readers. All humans have different levels of capability in boundless domains, such that they are “differently abled”. Disability is, therefore, an equally valid part of humanity’s spectrum. Someone with severe autism, for instance, can be an exceptionally good musician, the autistic savant Derek Paravicini being an example (Ockelford, 2007, 2008), whereas a non-​disabled person can have meagre capabilities. Limitations, too, are a normal part of human maturation. Almost everyone will be temporarily or permanently impaired at some point in life, and those who survive to old age will experience increasing difficulties in functioning. Most extended families have a disabled member, and many non-​disabled people take responsibility for supporting and caring for their relatives and friends with disabilities. (WHO, 2011, p. 3)

Selected models This section outlines three models of disability: the religious model, the medical model and the social model.

Religious model The religious model considers disability either a punishment or a test of faith from God. In some cultural groups and historical periods, this stems from personal sin, that of a family member or an ancestor’s misdemeanour. Special dispensations have sometimes been attached, such as increased religious wisdom or heightened human capacity (e.g., hearing, musicianship), in the absence of the fully functioning body. In historical traditions of the visually impaired, there have been: blind Ukrainian minstrels, c. 1850–​1930, thought to be “repositories of tradition and culture … disseminators of the word of God and a major source of folk historical and religious information” (Kononenko, 1998, p. 3); from medieval times, a tradition of blind Japanese musicians including biwa hōshi lute priests associated with Shintoism (see De Ferranti, 2009; Groemer, 2012; Isaki, 1987; Lubet, 2011); and blind musicians in tribal cultures in Sierra Leone (Ottenberg, 1996). Disabled people with seemingly extraordinary musical abilities form a historical backcloth to the identities of today’s disabled people, with some of this cultural script 353

354

David Baker

manifested through the marketing of successful disabled musicians (see Baker & Green, 2017).3 Where disability can be hidden by performers, this “involves the choices that a disabled person must make to conceal or reveal features of his or her body and the assumptions an audience might make” (Howe, 2016, p. 192).4 Reified historic-​religious lore affects some music educators’ vision of appropriate pedagogy. Specialist teachers working with the visually impaired have pointed to learners’ aural skills being above the norm, thus making playing by ear appropriate (Baker & Green, 2017).5 They have downplayed using notation (Braille, adapted stave notation, etc.). For some children, this reduces future access points to certain musical genres (i.e., wherein notation and faithful representation of scores are necessary) or integration into predominantly sighted ensemble contexts where notation is used (e.g., classical orchestras, some bands). Despite research on cortical plasticity in the blind (Melcher & Zampini, 2011) or on higher incidence of absolute pitch (Dimatati et al., 2012; Hamilton et al., 2004; Welch, 1988), it seems myopic to suppose that every blind person has elite aural abilities as the basis for discarding other viable pedagogical approaches.

Medical model The medical model (see Beaudry, 2019; Pfeiffer, 2000, 2003; Smart, 2004) considers disability a human defect or failure resulting from a health condition, disease or trauma. Disability is inherently abnormal. It assumes that medical treatment or intervention (i.e., to cure, ameliorate and rehabilitate) are ways to address a person’s insurmountable limitations vis-​à-​vis society. Medical professionals or social services are placed in an empowered position over those deemed helpless or needy. Ableist terms like “handicapped” (implying going cap in hand, begging and dependence) come from this model (Creamer, 2009).

Social model The social model emerged in the 1960s and 1970s and challenged the medical view (Barnes & Mercer, 2004; Beaudry, 2019; Bunbury, 2019; Craddock, 1996; Dorenlot, 2005; Gilliard et  al., 2005; on music education, see Abramo, 2012; Pickard, 2019; Purtell, 2013). Disability no longer resided in a person’s body but, instead, outside it. Poor organisation by and of society (e.g., through policy, the built environment, institutional and financial resourcing) were blamed for challenges faced by disabled people (Beaudry, 2019). This model contended that everyone should be given equal life chances with disability being seen as a positive identity, like race or cultural or religious group. According to the social model, society actively “disables people with impairments, and therefore any meaningful solution must be directed at societal change rather than individual adjustment and rehabilitation” (Barnes et al., 2010, p. 163). Table 22.1 compares the three models.

Pedagogical considerations The school music curriculum: Distinguishing disability from additional support needs Fautley and Daubney (2018) reflect that “sometimes in music education we treat social capital –​ or lack thereof –​as a hidden disability, and seem to do very little about it” (p. 220). They blame society for forming music curricula that cause some able-​bodied children’s lack of attainment,

354

355

Additional needs and disability Table 22.1 The religious, medical and social models of disability compared

Religious

Medical

Social

Disability comes from …

God (i.e., as a test of faith, the abnormal body punishment)

outside the disabled person’s body

Disability is …

abnormal

abnormal

a positive identity, part of the spectrum of human functioning

treatment, rehabilitation, adaptations or acceptance of deficit

reorganisation of society (the built environment, policy and funding, etc.)

fitting in

being accommodated in society

A more equitable life comes from … Disability means …

dispensations, specialness, pity

casually terming this a “hidden disability”. Belonging, for example, to a minority ethnic group or a disempowered social class means encountering exclusory practices and disadvantage. This goes unnoticed compared to ‘visible’ disabilities. Inclusion … is sadly sometimes the “feel-​good factor” for the audience … the nice children with disabilities enjoying themselves singing, the boy in a wheelchair playing a keyboard, the girl on crutches playing the guitar. … Music education has contained within it all sorts of exclusory practices which have nothing to do with being physically disabled whatsoever.  … In England  … GCSE and A-​Level [national school examinations] … most benefit children who play a Western classical instrument. … [T]‌hey privilege students whose socio-​economic background is one where they bring with them into the classroom a store of cultural capital. (Fautley & Daubney, 2018, p. 219) The argument is that affluent middle-​class people of European heritage are more likely to comprehend, value, feel motivated by and achieve in a school music curriculum rooted in Eurocentric classical traditions. They may have substantially more prior knowledge of its logic, theory, terminology, notation and the manipulative skills of performing it, sourced from privately funded instrumental lessons. Contrariwise, the economically weak, immigrants and diaspora with differently prized musical-​cultural backgrounds are placed at a disadvantage. The basis of this sociological argument is Young’s (1971, 2008) view that Western governments, curriculum designers and teachers (i.e., through the enacted curriculum) perpetuate curriculum knowledge that supports their own stronger social categories while marginalising others (also see Green, 1988, and Philpott, 2010, on music education). The able-​bodied schoolchildren that Fautley and Daubney (2018) claim have hidden disabilities certainly do experience sustained, systematic disadvantage. There is a “participation restriction” (i.e., trouble accessing the music curriculum). However, they do not have “activity limitations” or “impairments” due specifically to atypicality in their bodies meaning they are classed as “disabled” according to the WHO (2001) classification. Neither race nor ethnicity can be deemed “disabilities”; nor can class, for the same reason.

355

356

David Baker

Some general considerations for disability and music Table  22.2 illustrates additional support considerations for music educators working with disabled learners.These are not specific to particular health conditions or meant to be exhaustive. Access to a musical learning or participation experience begins with getting to it (see Table 22.2, “Physical environments”). Where the disabled participant is located on the spectrum from completely dependent to entirely independent in his or her mobility is significant. Dependency is not purely about the person’s physical condition or society’s resourcing and adaptations, but also about his or her life experiences and confidence. Indeed “critics of the

Table 22.2  Disability, music teaching and learning

Physical environments Mobility and travel (getting to musical learning experiences) The built environment (accessibility, movement around it) Educational organisation

• Independent versus dependent mobility • Where the learner lives (proximity to musical or music learning experiences) • Induction loops, ramps, accessible doorways, removal of trip hazards, etc. • Distraction and sensory obstructions (intangibles) • Special school, mainstream school or a unit within the latter (and access to appropriate teaching and resources) • Integration and social skills in the learner

The learner Medical condition Identity Complex health and social care needs

• Health condition and implications for responding to music, manipulative abilities and instruments, aims, etc. • Background, stigma, confidence and self-​esteem • (In)ability to articulate specific needs • Care needs, time and financial pressures (prioritisation of learning music or otherwise)

The teacher and the school Aims and expectations

Training and awareness

• Specialist knowledge and the teacher’s expectations • Implications of the particular disability for the aims of music education • Reasonable adjustments • Awareness of, for example, conditions, pedagogies, formats, assistive technologies, support systems • Recognition of hidden disabilities (non-​diagnosed or undeclared) • Availability of training

Resources Teaching resources

Curricula, pedagogy and developmental frameworks Time Money

• • • • •

Score media (physical, digital) Accessible text (as above) Assistive technologies Music production technologies Published research and scholarship

• Time to acquire appropriate formats • Time for the learner to digest the above • Funding (personal and the priorities of schools, governments, etc.)

356

357

Additional needs and disability

social model hold that its focus on oppression fails to attend to the body and impairments as subjectively experienced” (Beaudry, 2019, p.  6; also see French, 1993). Assistive technologies may be important too (e.g., a wheelchair, a white cane, an iPhone, a Braille GPS device).Where the learner lives in relation to available opportunities needs consideration (e.g., in a rural area, in a city, in a residential school). Travel may bring challenges for the wheelchair user boarding a bus or the blind person needing to be guided from a platform to a station entrance. Barriers encountered in transit signal deficiencies in societal adaptations espoused through the social model (Barnes et  al., 2010; Beaudry, 2019). On arrival, there is the resourcing of rooms to consider (e.g., the need for induction loops or accessibility ramps for wheelchairs), with some modifications possible by those organising activities (e.g., removal of trip hazards, adjustment of lighting for learners with photophobia). There may be intangibles too, such as distracting noise coming from other rooms when working with learners with ADHD or dyslexia. Where a child is educated (i.e., in a special school, in the mainstream or in a unit within a mainstream school) may affect his or her adjustment and social skills.This also suggests the need for access to teachers with specialist knowledge and for special resources (e.g., assistive technologies, adapted text or musical formats). Since the 1960s, children with visual impairments have been increasingly educated in mainstream schools, with “reasonable adjustments” having been made (e.g., McCall, 1997, on the United Kingdom; Ruddock & Bishop, 2006, on Australia; Atkin et al., 2003, on Canada; and the Individuals with Disabilities Act [IDEA], 1997, on the United States). Baker and Green’s (2017) special school teachers and some blind and partially sighted musicians argued that in this context: children could be isolated, become bullied and thus disengage from music in the mainstream; insufficient resources were available; and teachers were poorly trained.Yet some participants countered that healthy social adjustment best occurred in the mainstream. The type and extent of the disabled person’s condition will affect the musical learning aims, whether or not learning is cognisant and, thus, how he or she engages (see Table 22.2, “The learner”). Disability may affect the person’s ability to hold and manipulate an instrument as well as what type of instrument he or she can play (if at all).The UNK One-​Handed Woodwinds Program seeks to increase access to instruments with a prototype toggle-​ key saxophone designed by Jeff Stelling; and paralyzed former trumpet player Clarence Adoo has been performing with Headspace, an electronic instrument controlled by head movements and an air column.6 Life experiences will shape the person’s self-​identity, confidence and willingness to engage. So, where cognitive and intellectual conditions do not impede a person’s ability to articulate specific needs to educators, confidence may be a barrier (e.g., Baker & Green, 2017). Disabled learners can also have complex health and social care circumstances soaking up substantial time and money, thus adversely affecting musical participation. Realistic aims for music education must be considered in light of the type and severity of the disability (see Table 22.2,“The teacher and the school”). For children with a PMLD, music might simply be “for the pleasurable sensory and emotional responses [it] can engender” (Ockelford, 2000, p. 202), whereas for those mainstreamed, it might be about the learner acquiring aesthetic awareness or social skills, or about producing a highly skilled instrumental performer or creative musician. The Sounds of Intent7 developmental framework was developed by University College London, University of Roehampton London and the Royal National Institute of the Blind (Voyajolu & Ockelford, 2016; Welch et al., 2009). The Sounds of Intent framework of musical development begins with “makes sounds unknowingly” before proceeding to “makes simple patterns in sound intentionally, through repetition or regularity”, arriving at “seeks to communicate through expressive performance, with increasing technical competence” (Sounds 357

358

David Baker

of Intent, n.d.). So, it addresses those with a PMLD as much as, for example, savants with exceptional capabilities. Music educators, schools and others must also be willing to make reasonable adjustments, as affirmed in law (e.g., Atkin et  al., 2003; Australian Government, 2020; IDEA, 1997; New Zealand Parliamentary Counsel Office, 2020; Ruddock & Bishop, 2006; UK Government, 2020). Sadly, many school music teachers, community musicians and private instrumental teachers lack knowledge of the ramifications of health conditions, support mechanisms, adapted score formats and assistive technologies for music. Music and the disabled may involve specialist teaching resources (see Table 22.2,“Resources”), including, for instance, appropriate score formats for dyslexic learners, large print or modified stave notation for some partially sighted people or digital or physical Braille for some blind people. Some may use assistive technologies (e.g., magnification software, a refreshable Braille display, screen reader software  –​JAWS [Job Access With Speech] and NVDA [Non-​Visual Desktop Access] –​or a Braille embosser). Computers can be used to access text documents or web pages, with screen readers assisting both the visually impaired and dyslexics (e.g., Dawson et al., 2018), or they can be used to interact with mainstream music production software (e.g., with a Digital Audio Workstation or engraving software). Various approaches are described in Baker and Green (2017) in relation to visually impaired people. Usage rests on: the learner’s capacities; parents’, carers’ and music teachers’ knowledge; and the learner’s background.Time is also a resource; for instance, the additional time to produce and acquire adapted score formats or for the learner to digest them. Braille music, as an example, has a tactile, linear format with component lines in a piano texture, that is not notated one above the other as is customary. Re-​ compositing this is time-​consuming. However, an overarching resource issue is funding, as this relates to many of the considerations in Table 22.1, including travel, teacher training, resourcing or the purchase of assistive technologies.

An example of music and disability: Visual impairment Visually Impaired Musicians’ Lives The Visually Impaired Musicians’ Lives project8 (Baker & Green, 2017) explored blind and partially sighted musicians’ experiences broadly, including history and identity, assistive technologies, schooling and Braille use (see also Baker, 2014; Baker & Green, 2016, 2018). Data were collected from 27 countries through an international online survey and detailed life history interviews; there were 231 respondents overall and input from over 400 stakeholders.9 Visually impaired musicians and learners, but also specialist music teachers contributed interviews. The WHO has estimated that 285  million people globally had visual impairments in 2010 (many through cataracts, refractive errors, myopia or hyperopia), 39 million of whom were blind, with 90% of these cases in developing countries and 82% aged 50 years and over (WHO, 2007; see also WHO, 2013). Although Baker and Green’s (2017) project encompassed a wide variety of sight conditions and pedagogical approaches, the musicians did not have SLDs or PMLDs (with visual impairments).Thus, it is representative of a particular visually impaired learner type; on PMLDs and music, see Ockelford (2000, 2007, 2008) or Voyajolu and Ockelford (2016).

Music pedagogy and the visually impaired On pedagogy, several themes were identified:  high differentiation; light; touch; language use; and gesture. 358

359

Additional needs and disability

High differentiation was needed due to the plethora of sight conditions encountered.10 For instance, some learners had some functional vision (e.g., they could use light perception to navigate around rooms, or they could read a score with magnification software) but poor acuity, whereas others had non-​functional light perception or were completely blind (with no light perception). Dependence in mobility was various too, affecting movement around teaching spaces and the arrangement of these spaces. Approaches included score media (Braille, large print, modified stave notation, etc.) or its absence (i.e., playing by ear) and assistive technologies (e.g., computers with screen reader software, hardware devices, optical or software magnification, embossed Braille) as well as resourcing and pupils’ backgrounds. Louisa Maddison,11 a specialist music teacher, noted how teachers in classes of children with many different needs had a demanding, specialist role. Paradoxically, light was a significant consideration. Loss of contrast when light shone from a window through semi-​translucent large-​print paper scores disrupted some low-​vision learners. Equally, intense light suddenly shining through windows challenged those with photophobia. Light and its intensity, or the placement of pupils in relation to it, needed to be considered. Simply raising light levels in teaching spaces to help the visually impaired is a naïve strategy. The importance of touch was underscored, albeit part of all children’s musical learning. Some visually impaired students could not see the mouth shape to produce a particular sound when singing or the correct posture when holding an instrument or the momentum of a finger when pressing a piano key. Educators’ demonstrations meant agreeing boundaries with pupils, parents or carers, considering child protection policies and sometimes transcending uncomfortable boundaries. Effective language meant verbalising information the learner could not otherwise receive. This suggests the need for behaviour management –​for instance, to counter the ineffectiveness of raising an eyebrow in disapproval –​or the need to explain distractions such as the sound of someone entering class. Respondents also noted the commonplace metaphor of sight in relation to music: “a dark timbre”, “an angular motif ”, “a flowing melody”, or “a bright tone”. There could be conceptual gaps in understanding, particularly with the youngest congenitally blind learners. They would not have immediate understanding without verbal explanations or tactile demonstrations. Participants also commented on sighted people’s physical gesturing; for example, signalling approval following a good performance through a smile or indicating that the musician should play more softly by placing an index finger against the lips. The meaning of gestures such as these must be vocalised.

Facilitating ensemble participation with a haptic technology Baker et  al. (2019) explored how a conductor’s gestures might be conveyed to a visually impaired person to support ensemble participation.12 Human–​computer interaction studies have investigated “sonification” and “haptification” (e.g., Blattner et  al., 1989; Brewster & Brown, 2004; Csapó et al., 2015). Sonification entails substituting information received thorough sight with auditory communication, synthetic verbal instruction or patterns of tones. Haptification parallels this process through tactile means.13 Baker et  al.’s endeavour, a collaboration with Sian Edwards and Kakou electronic engineers,14 concentrated on haptification. A device was developed for a sighted conductor; this comprised a Bluetooth ring that communicated with a haptic vest, worn and tested by five visually impaired musicians (all adults with non-​functional light perception; two woodwind players, two singers and a guitarist). The vest had vibration 359

360

David Baker

Figure 22.1  Left to right: Graphic representation of the LRA matrix and a conductor’s gesture, an LRA and the haptic vest

controllers (linear resonance actuators; LRAs) similar to those in smartphones.15 It tracked a conductor’s gestures (right arm only) in two dimensions across the wearer’s chest (Figure 22.1). The device sought to close a sensory gap for these performers, who regularly participated in conducted ensembles. The integration of visually impaired instrumental musicians into predominantly sighted ensembles has connotations for equality of opportunities in schools and informal learning and community contexts. Experimentation showed that two-​ dimensional representations of a conductor’s swing were less effective than a single pulsating controller for keeping the musicians in time, particularly as the tempo changed. Participants commented that for those congenitally blind with no experience of seeing conductors, the demands were too high in terms of decoding gestures for tempo and metre, let alone understanding interpretive characterisation. More abstract signals, or “hapticons”, were thought a more effective solution, but starting with the visually impaired performer’s specific needs for cues in the music. Attempting to transfer what sighted people see (i.e., in momentum, size and direction of arm movements) was considered a “sighted perspective” on technology development, ableist and potentially “another way in which disabled people are marginalized” (Baker et al., 2019, p. 311).

Conclusion The social and medical models discussed at the beginning of this chapter are reductionist: “The main advantage of a reductionist view seems to be that it targets specific issues (e.g., medical care or social oppression) and draws policymakers’ attention to them” (Beaudry, 2019, p. 6). However, many factors affect the musical participation of disabled people (e.g., the physical environment, medical conditions and identity, the educator’s knowledge and aims, and resources, including time and money). But not all reside either in the body or can be blamed entirely on others in contemporary society. These encompass historical-​cultural scripts, life experiences and disabled people’s personalities and confidence. Fautley and Daubney (2018) also raise culturally related support needs impacting musical learners, whether disabled or not. The social model brings to our attention inadequacies in teacher training and poor resourcing, and the medical view recognises encumbrance from health and the body, but perhaps we might also look to disabled music participants’ accounts as insiders. In doing so, we might adopt a mixed model with 360

361

Additional needs and disability

disability “an inability or limitation in performing socially defined roles and tasks expected of an individual within a sociocultural and physical environment” (Nagi, 1991, p. 315). However, scholarship in this arena, including on music pedagogy and participation, is highly challenged by the variety of health conditions and disabilities, multifarious individual circumstances, inaccessible groups and the very low incidence of some disability. Propagation of music and assistive technologies means rapid expansion in possible musical approaches for disabled people (see Baker & Green, 2017; see also Adkins et al., 2013; Collins, 1992; Rush, 2015; Stimpson, 1995). Benefits are subdued by the high differentiation needed and specialist training required for educators. In opposition to the social model, technologies also sometimes attempt to reproduce able-​bodied people’s perceptual mechanisms while overlooking disabled users’ needs. Rather than society adapting to new musical approaches, adapted instruments or repertoire, the disabled person is forced to adapt. Music is the right of every person. It is accessible to those with SpLDs, sensory impairments, even the severest learning challenges. Ockelford (2000), for example, calls for “children with SLD and PMLD [to] have access to a rich variety of listening experiences, both within school and beyond, to enable their listening skills to develop … for the pleasurable sensory and emotional responses music can engender” (p.  202). Music’s structural properties produce non-​encultured human responses, which are present in newborn babies, as well as associations through experience (Hargreaves, 1986). These are even “evolving in many children with severe or profound learning difficulties” (Ockelford, 2000, p.  202). Those holding an inclusive, lifelong vision for musical engagement cannot lay blame on the disabled person for any absence of opportunity. Unfortunately, disability often “disrupts and exposes ingrained societal prejudices … for a ‘constructed normalcy,’ blithely enabling some bodies while disabling others” (Howe, 2016, p. 191).

Reflective questions 1. How is musical participation in education and the community affected by disability? 2. Do the terms used in relation to disabled people (e.g., “disability”, “dysfunction”, “impairment”, “handicapped”) have connotations for musical participation? 3. How might society change to better integrate disabled people and their musical engagement, and what are disabled people’s responsibilities in terms of adapting to available opportunities?

Notes 1 The 2001 ICF has aimed “to provide a unified and standard language and framework for the description of health and health-​related states”, and this includes “components of health and some health-​related components of well-​being (such as education and labour)” (WHO, 2001, p. 3). 2 This is the latest Office for National Statistics data available for the UK population (released on 26 June 2019). 3 Baker and Green’s (2017) visually impaired respondents either found benefits in a “disabled identity as a musician” or were uncomfortable with it, wishing instead to have their musicianship assessed on an equal footing to sighted counterparts (see also Baker & Green, 2018). 4 This point is discussed in relation to deaf percussionist Evelyn Glennie (Howe, 2016); one-​handed flautist Chevalier Rebsomen (Lancaster & Spohr, 2008); one-​handed pianists Géza Zichy, Paul Wittgenstein, Cor de Groot, Leon Fleisher and Gary Graffman (Howe, 2016); and trumpeter Clarence Adoo, who is paralysed below the shoulders.

361

362

David Baker 5 Another reason for improvisation and “oral tradition” (McLucas, 2010) being in people’s minds are traditions and scholarship on blind musicians in early ragtime, blues and jazz; for example, Tom Bethune a.k.a. “Blind Tom” Wiggins (1849–​1908), John William “Blind” Boone (1864–​1927), Lemon Jefferson (1893–​1929) and the vocal ensemble The Blind Boys of Alabama (e.g., Fuqua, 2011; Gray, 2008; Harrah, 2004; Rowden, 2009). Blind musicians are also notable in more recent jazz and popular music; for example, George Shearing (Shearing & Shipton, 2005), Art Tatum (Lester, 1994), Ray Charles (Charles & Ritz, 1978; Evans, 2005) and Stevie Wonder (Ribowsky, 2010; Williams,  2002). 6 On the UNK One-​Handed Woodwinds Program, see University of Nebraska at Kearney (n.d.). On Clarence Adoo and Headspace, see HeadSpace (2007) www.youtube.com/​watch?v=Npg4SvIWsAc (both accessed 3 January 2020). 7 Information on Sounds of Intent is available at:  www.soundsofintent.org/​ (accessed 8 November 2019). The project was supported by the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and The Amber Trust. 8 The Visually Impaired Musicians’ Lives project at University College London was funded by the United Kingdom’s Arts and Humanities Research Council, 2013–​2015, (Ref. AH/​K003291/​1). David Baker was the Principal Investigator and Lucy Green, Co-​Investigator. This was supported by major stakeholders (e.g., the Blind and Low Vision Network New Zealand, the European Blind Union, the National Braille Press, United States, the Royal National Institute of Blind People, United Kingdom, Vision Australia, the World Blind Union). Additional interviews were conducted across India through the Baluji Music Foundation’s British Council and Arts Council England Re-​Imagine India grant in 2016 (Ref. 29237470). 9 On biographical, life history and narrative research methods, see, for example, Armstrong (1987), Barrett and Stauffer (2009, 2012), Bertaux (1981), Goodson and Sikes (2001) and Sparkes (1994). 10 For a general discussion of disability, differentiation and music, see Darrow (2003). 11 Louisa Maddison is the music teacher at The Royal Blind School in Edinburgh, Scotland. 12 This work was supported by a University College London seed corn grant (Ref. REC 905). 13 Human–​ computer interaction authors refer to “earcons” (i.e., sonification as an abstract pattern of tones) (Blattner et  al., 1989), “tactons” (the tactile equivalent) (Brewster and Brown, 2004) and “hapticons” (Csapó et al., 2015, p. 276).These convey information about a computer interaction to the visually impaired. 14 Professional conductor Sian Edwards has worked with, for example, the English National Opera, with the London Sinfonietta, at Glyndebourne and at the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden. Kakou is a not-​for-​profit organization seeking to raise disabled musicians’ participation (see www.kakou.org.uk/​; accessed 20 July 2017). 15 Further details of the hardware used in this project can be found in Baker et  al. (2019):  The ring comprised an accelerometer and gyroscope transmitting via Bluetooth to a 20-​by-​20 vibration matrix of 10 millimetre LRAs.

Suggestions for further reading Baker, D., & Green, L. (2017). Insights in sound: Visually impaired musicians’ lives and learning. Routledge. Baker, D., & Green, L. (2018). Disability arts and visually impaired musicians in the community. In L. Higgins & B.-​L. Bartleet (Eds.), Oxford handbook of community music (pp. 477–​502). Oxford University Press. DiBernardo Jones, J. (2016). Imagined hearing:  Music-​making in deaf culture. In B. Howe, S. Jensen-​ Moulton, N. Lerner, & J. Straus (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music and disability studies (pp. 1–​20). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199331444.013.3 Oglethorpe, S. M. (2002). Instrumental music for dyslexics: A teaching handbook (2nd ed.). Whurr. Reifinger, J. L. (2019). Dyslexia in the music classroom:  A review of literature. Update:  Applications of Research in Music Education, 38(1),  9–​17. Straus, J. N. (2011). Extraordinary measures: Disability in music. Oxford University Press.

References Abramo, J. (2012). Disability in the classroom:  Current trends and impacts on music education. Music Educators Journal, 99(1),  39–​45. Adkins, B., Summerville, J., Knox, M., Brown, A. R., & Dillon, S. (2013). Digital technologies and musical participation for people with intellectual disabilities. New Media and Society, 15(4), 501–​518.

362

363

Additional needs and disability Armstrong, P. (1987). Qualitative strategies in social and educational research: The life history method in theory and practice [Paper presentation]. School of Adult and Continuing Education, University of Hull. Atkin, M.-​M., Holbrook, C., MacCuspie, A., Mamer, L., McConnell, D., McConnell, R., Muller, C., Nagel, K., Rannelli, P., Sitar, D., & Studholme, L. (2003). Canadian national standards for the education of children and youth who are blind or visually impaired, including those with additional disabilities. National Coalition for Vision Health, Toronto, Canada. Australian Government. (2020). The Disability Standards for Education 2005. www.education.gov.au/​ disability-​standards-​education-​2005 Baker, D. (2014). Visually impaired musicians’ insights:  Narratives of childhood, lifelong learning and musical participation. British Journal of Music Education, 31(2), 113–​135. Baker, D., Fomukong-​Boden, A., & Edwards, S. (2019). “Don’t follow them, look at me!” Contemplating a haptic digital prototype to bridge the conductor and visually impaired performer. Music Education Research, 21(3), 295–​314. Baker, D., & Green, L. (2016). Perceptions of schooling, pedagogy and notation in the lives of visually impaired musicians. Research Studies in Music Education, 38(2), 193–​219. Baker, D., & Green, L. (2017). Insights in sound: Visually impaired musicians’ lives and learning. Routledge. Baker, D., & Green, L. (2018). Disability arts and visually impaired musicians in the community. In L. Higgins & B.-​L. Bartleet (Eds.), Oxford handbook of community music (pp. 477–​502). Oxford University Press. Barnes, C., & Mercer, G. (Eds.). (2004). Implementing the social model of disability: Theory and research. The Disability Press. Barnes, C., Mercer, G., & Shakespeare, T. (2010). The social model of disability. In A. Giddens & P. Sutton (Eds.), Sociology: Introductory readings (3rd ed.; pp. 161–​166). Polity Press. Barrett, M., & Stauffer, S. (Eds.). (2009). Narrative inquiry in music education: Troubling certainty. Springer. Barrett, M., & Stauffer, S. (Eds.). (2012). Narrative soundings: An anthology of narrative inquiry in music education. Springer. Beaudry, J.-​S. (2019). Theoretical strategies to define disability. In A. Cureton & D. T. Wasserman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy and disability (pp. 1–​21). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780190622879.013.3 Bertaux, D. (Ed.). (1981). Biography and society: The life history approach in the social sciences. Sage. Blattner, M., Sumikawa, D., & Greenberg, R. (1989). Earcons and icons:  Their structure and common design principles. Human-​Computer Interaction, 4(1),  11–​44. Brewster, S., & Brown, L. (2004, 18–​22 January). Tactons: Structured tactile messages for non-​visual information display [Paper presentation]. Fifth Conference on Australasian User Interface, Dunedin, New Zealand. Bunbury, S. (2019). Unconscious bias and the medical model: How the social model may hold the key to transformative thinking about disability discrimination. International Journal of Discrimination and the Law, 19(1),  26–​47. Charles, R., & Ritz, D. (1978) Brother Ray: Ray Charles’ own story. Da Capo Press. Collins, D. (1992). Creativity and special needs: A suggested framework for technology applications. British Journal of Music Education, 9(2), 103–​110. Craddock, J. (1996). Responses of the occupational therapy profession to the perspective of the disability movement, Part 1. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59(1),  17–​22. Creamer, D. (2009). Disability and Christian theology:  Embodied limits and constructive possibilities. Oxford University Press. Csapó, A.,Wersényi, G., Nagy, H., & Stockman,T. (2015). A survey of assistive technologies and applications for blind users on mobile platforms: A review and foundation for research. Journal of Multimodal User Interfaces, 9(4), 275–​286. Darrow, A.-​A. (2003). Dealing with diversity: The inclusion of students with disabilities in music. Research Studies in Music Education, 21(1),  45–​57. Dawson, K., Antonenko, P., Lane, H., & Zhu, J. (2018). Assistive technologies to support students with dyslexia. Teaching Exceptional Children, 51(3), 226–​239. De Ferranti, H. (2009). The last biwa singer: A blind musician in history, imagination and performance. Cornell University Press. Dimatati, M., Heaton, P., Pring, L., Downing, J., & Ockelford, A. (2012). Exploring the impact of congenital visual impairment on the development of absolute pitch using a new online assessment tool: A preliminary study. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind and Brain, 22(2), 129–​133. Dorenlot, P. (2005). Editorial: Applying the social model of disability to dementia: Present-​day challenges. Dementia, 4(4), 459–​461.

363

364

David Baker Evans, M. (2005). Ray Charles: The birth of soul. Omnibus Press. Fautley, M., & Daubney, A. (2018). Editorial: Inclusion, music education, and what it might mean. British Journal of Music Education, 35(3), 219–​221. French, S. (1993). Disability, impairment or something in between? In J. Swain,V. Finkelstein, S. French, & M. Oliver (Eds.), Disabling barriers, enabling environments (pp. 17–​25). Sage. Fuqua, C. S. (2011). Alabama musicians: Musical heritage from the heart of Dixie. The History Press. Gilliard, J., Means, R., Beattie, A., & Daker-​White, G. (2005). Dementia care in England and the social model of disability: Lessons and issues. Dementia, 4(4), 571–​586. Goodson, I. F., & Sikes, P. (2001). Life history research in educational settings: Learning from lives. Open University Press. Gray, M. (2008). Hand me my travelin’ shoes: In search of Blind Willlie McTell. Bloomsbury. Green, L. (1988). Music on deaf ears: Musical meaning, ideology, education. Manchester University Press. Groemer, G. (2012). The spirit of tsugaru: Blind musicians, Tsugaru-​Jamisen and the folk music of northern Japan (2nd ed.). Tsugaru Shobo Hirosaki. Hamilton, R., Pascual-​Leone,A., & Schlaug, G. (2004).Absolute pitch in blind musicians. Neuroreport: Auditory and Vestibular Systems, 15(5), 803–​806. Hargreaves, D. J. (1986). The developmental psychology of music. Cambridge University Press. Harrah, M. (2004). Blind Boone: Piano prodigy. Carol Rhoda Books. HeadSpace. (2007) HeadSpace [video of performance by the HeadSpace ensemble]. YouTube. www. youtube.com/​watch?v=Npg4SvIWsAc (accessed 3 January 2020). Howe, B. (2016). Disabling music performance. In B. Howe, S. Jensen-​Moulton, N. Lerner, & J. Straus (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music and disability studies (pp. 191–​209). Oxford University Press. https://​ doi.org/​10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780199331444.013.30 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (1997). Pub. L. No. 105–​117. United States Department of Education. Isaki, M. (1987). Japanese music and the blind. British Journal of Visual Impairment, 5(3), 103–​105. Kononenko, N. (1998). Ukrainian minstrels: And the blind shall sing. M. E. Sharpe. Lancaster, J., & Spohr, P. (2008).The extraordinary Chevalier Rebsomen. Pan: The Journal of the British Flute Society, 27(1),  35–​41. Learning Disabilities Association of America. (2019). Types of learning disabilities. https://​ldaamerica.org/​ types-​of-​learning-​disabilities Lester, J. (1994). Too marvellous for words: The life and genius of Art Tatum. Oxford University Press. Lubet, A. (2011). Music, disability, and society. Temple University Press. McCall, S. (1997). Historical perspectives. In H. Mason & S. McCall (Eds.), Visual impairment: Access to education for children and young people (pp. 3–​12). David Fulton Publishers. McLucas, A. D. (2010). The musical ear: Oral tradition in the USA. Ashgate. Melcher, D., & Zampini, M. (2011). The sight and sound of music:  Audiovisual interactions in science and the arts. In F. Bacci & D. Melcher (Eds.), Art and the Senses (pp. 265–​292). Oxford University Press. Nagi, S. Z. (1991). Appendix A: Disability concepts revisited: Implications for prevention. In A. M. Pope and A. R. Tarlow (Eds), Disability in America:  Toward a national agenda for prevention (pp. 309–​327). National Academy Press. National Center for Education Statistics. (2020). Children and youth with disabilities. https://​nces.ed.gov/​ programs/​coe/​indicator_​cgg.asp National Center for Learning Disabilities. (2014). The state of learning disabilities (3rd ed.). www.ncld.org/​ wp-​content/​uploads/​2014/​11/​2014-​State-​of-​LD.pdf New Zealand Parliamentary Counsel Office. (2020). Education Act 1989. www.legislation.govt.nz/​act/​ public/​1989/​0080/​latest/​whole.html#DLM177470 National Health Service. (2018). Overview:  Learning disabilities. www.nhs.uk/​conditions/​ learning-​disabilities Ockelford, A. (2000). Music in the education of children with severe or profound learning difficulties: Issues in current UK provision, a new conceptual framework, and proposals for research. Psychology of Music, 28(2), 197–​217. Ockelford, A. (2007). A music module in working memory? Evidence from the performance of a prodigious musical savant. Musicae Scientiae, 11(2),  5–​36. Ockelford, A. (2008). In the key of genius: The extraordinary life of Derek Paravicini. Penguin.

364

365

Additional needs and disability Office for National Statistics. (2019). Population estimates [online]. www.ons.gov.uk/​peoplepopulationand community/​populationandmigration/​populationestimates Ottenberg, S. (1996). Seeing with music: The lives of three blind African musicians. University of Washington Press. Overy, K. (2000). Dyslexia, temporal processing and music: The potential of music as an early learning aid for dyslexic children. Psychology of Music, 28(2), 218–​229. Overy, K. (2003). Dyslexia and music: From timing deficits to musical intervention. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 999(1), 497–​505. Pfeiffer, D. (2000). The disability paradigm. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 11(2),  98–​99. Pfeiffer, D. (2003). The disability studies paradigm. In P. Devlieger, F. Rusch, & D. Pfeiffer (Eds.), Rethinking disability: The emergence of new definitions, concepts and communities (pp. 95–​110). Garant Uitgevers. Philpott, C. (2010). The sociological critique of the music curriculum in England: Is radical change really possible? In R. Wright (Ed.), Sociology and music education (pp. 81–​92). Ashgate. Pickard, B. (2019). A framework for mediating medical and social models of disability in instrumental teaching for children with Down syndrome. Research Studies in Music Education, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1321103X19855416 Purtell, R. (2013). Music and the social model of disability. In J.Williams (Ed.), Music and the social model: An occupational therapist’s approach to music with people labelled as having learning disabilities (pp. 26–​32). Jessica Kingsley. Ribowsky, M. (2010). Signed, sealed, and delivered:  The soulful journey of Stevie Wonder. John Wiley and Sons. Rowden, T. (2009). The songs of blind folk: African American musicians and the cultures of blindness. University of Michigan Press. Royal College of Psychiatrists. (2020). Specific learning disabilities. www.rcpsych.ac.uk/​mental-​health/​ parents-​ a nd-​ young-​ p eople/​ i nformation-​ f or-​ p arents- ​ a nd- ​ c arers/ ​ s pecific- ​ l earning- ​ d isabilities-​ for-​parents-​and-​carers Ruddock, P., & Bishop, J. (2006). Disability standards for education 2005. Commonwealth of Australia. Rush, T. W. (2015). Incorporating assistive technology for students with visual impairments into the music classroom. Music Educators Journal, 102(2),  78–​83. Shearing, G., & Shipton, A. (2005). Lullaby of Birdland: The autobiography of George Shearing. Bloomsbury. Smart, J. (2004). Models of disability: The juxtaposition of biology and social construction. In T. Riggar & D. Maki (Eds.), Handbook of rehabilitation counselling (pp. 25–​49). Springer. Sounds of Intent. (n.d.) Sounds of Intent Framework [online]. https://​soundsofintent.org/​sounds-​of-​intent Sparkes, A. C. (1994) Understanding teachers: A life history approach. Research Support Unit, University of Exeter. Stimpson, M. (1995). Technology and visual impairment: A review of current options in music education. British Journal of Music Education, 12(3), 215–​224. UK Government. (2020). Disability rights:  Education. www.gov.uk/​r ights-​disabled-​person/​education-​ rights University of Nebraska at Kearney. (n.d.). UNK One-​Handed Woodwinds Program. www.unk.edu/​academics/​ music/​unk-​one-​handed-​winds-​program.php (accessed 3 January 2020). Voyajolu, A., & Ockelford, A. (2016). Sounds of Intent in the early years: A proposed framework of young children’s musical development. Research Studies in Music Education, 38(1), 93–​113. Welch, G.  F. (1988). Observations on the incidence of absolute pitch (AP) ability in the early blind. Psychology of Music, 16(1),  77–​80. Welch, G., Ockelford, A., Carter, F.-​ C., Zimmermann, S.-​ A., & Himonides, E. (2009). “Sounds of Intent”: Mapping musical behaviour and development in children and young people with complex needs. Psychology of Music, 37(3), 348–​370. Williams, T. (2002). Stevie Wonder: Overcoming adversity. Chelsea House Publishers. World Health Organization. (1992). The ICD-​10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders:  Clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines. WHO  Press. World Health Organization. (1996). The ICD-​10 guide for mental retardation. WHO  Press. World Health Organization. (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). WHO Press. World Health Organization. (2007). Vision 2020, the right to sight: Global initiative for the elimination of avoidable blindness, action plan 2006–​2011. WHO  Press.

365

366

David Baker World Health Organization. (2011). Understanding disability. In World Report on Disability (pp. 1–​17). WHO Press. www.who.int/​disabilities/​world_​report/​2011/​chapter1.pdf World Health Organization. (2013). World eye health: A global action plan, 2014–​2019. WHO  Press. World Health Organization. (2020). World report on disability. WHO Press. www.who.int/​disabilities/​ world_​report/​2011/​report/​en Young, M. F. D. (Ed.). (1971). Knowledge and control: New directions in the sociology of education. Collier-​Macmillan. Young, M. F. D. (2008). What are schools for? In H. Daniels, H. Lauder, & J. Porter (Eds.), Knowledge, values and educational policy: A critical perspective (Vol. 2). Routledge.

366

367

23 HOLDING MULTIPLE MUSICAL IDENTITIES The portfolio musician Jennifer Rowley, Anna Reid and Dawn Bennett Typical of industries which feature fierce competition for work (Bennett & Bridgstock, 2015), music work tends to be both insecure and highly mobile (Connell & Gibson, 2003). As such, musicians typically hold a portfolio of concurrent roles located in community, educational, digital, professional arts and other industry contexts (Bartleet et al., 2012; Masnick & Ho, 2012), contributing to the intangible cultural heritage of society (Brown, 2005; Petocz et al., 2014). Individual roles within the portfolio musician’s career (Cawsey, 1995), which is more accurately described as being protean or boundaryless, can take the form of self-​employed, project-​ based, hourly paid and/​or permanent work. Music work is therefore typified by a do-​it-​yourself career model which demands the continual navigation of new contexts and new business models, the development of new and diverse capabilities and a willingness to engage across a range of markets (Jones & DeFillippi, 1996). With this in mind, emerging musicians need to develop an informed, realistic but positive understanding of the nature of music careers, including in relation to the precarious or insecure nature of music work (Umney & Kretsos, 2015). Critical reflection on current and future selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986) with the support of trusted others is thus crucial to creating and sustaining a career in music. In this chapter, we explore how this might be achieved by looking at how musician identity is experienced among emerging musicians.

Musician identity Musician identity is crucial to discussions of music careers and the preparation of musicians. However, the salience and parameters of musician identity change according to context, experience and personal beliefs. In practice, most musicians hold multiple concurrent identities, and these might be aligned or conflicting. Musician identity is a socially constructed concept formed through and within music and influenced by the ways in which society defines or labels music roles (Hargreaves et al., 2002) as more or less “successful”. Musician identity has its roots in psychological identity literature, where identity has been discussed in generic terms (Rowley, 2012). In this chapter, we place the development of musician identity first in the background of psychosocial and psychosexual theories and then within the context of various developmental theories.The chapter then turns to the lived experiences of a specific cohort of music learners. 367

368

Jennifer Rowley et al.

Erikson (1968) contends in his psychosocial theory that personality (and, thus, identity) develops across a series of stages. Similarly, Freud’s psychosexual theory posits that who you were and who you became also advanced through stages. Erikson’s theory, however, differs from that of Freud because, as a psychosocial theory, it deals directly with the impact of a person’s social experience across the lifespan and not just with the events of childhood. In addition, Freud’s psychosexual theory looks at the importance of basic needs and biological forces, while Erikson’s psychosocial theory is based on social and environmental factors into adulthood. As Erikson (1968, p. 87) notes: the wholeness to be achieved through the stages I have called a sense of inner identity. The young person, in order to experience wholeness, must feel a progressive continuity between that which he [sic] has come to be during the long years of childhood and that which he promises to become in the anticipated future; between that which he conceives himself to be and that which he perceives others to see in him and to expect. In these specifics of Erikson’s theory, we note that he refers to psychosocial development concerning the formation of a sense of personal identity, which has more recently been termed “ego identity”. Research on ego identity by Marcia (1988) posits four associated and yet independent aspects of identity formation. The first of these is identity diffusion, referring to a person who has not experienced a crisis in identity or made a commitment to a specific identity role other than the one they are seen to occupy. A premature commitment to identity based only on the perception of others is identity foreclosure (the second aspect of identity formation). People in the process of exploring their identity are, according to Erikson, in identity crisis, which Marcia (1988) terms identity moratorium. The fourth and final stage is identity “achieved”, which is the term given to people who have reached a sense of self. Erikson (1968) uses the term “progressive continuity” to describe both the relationship between present and future self and that between self-​concept and the perceptions and expectations of others. By addressing Erikson’s notion of identity crisis or flux, Marcia (1988) posits that the adolescent stage consists of neither identity resolution nor identity confusion, but rather the degree to which one has explored and committed to an identity in a variety of life domains, including vocation, religion, relational choices and gender. Again, Erikson notes that: Individually speaking, identity includes, but is more than, the sum of all the successive identifications of those earlier years when the child wanted to be, and often was forced to become, like the people he depended on. Identity is a unique product, which now meets a crisis to be solved only in new identifications with age mates and with leader figures outside of the family. (1968, p. 87) Experiencing a failure in establishing a recognisable sense of identity within society (e.g., as in the age-​old saying, “I don’t know what I want to be when I grow up”) can lead to role confusion. Role confusion, then, involves the individual not being sure about themselves or their place in society. In response to role confusion or identity crisis, a person may begin to experiment with different lifestyles (e.g., work, education or political activities). Similarly, pressuring someone into an identity can result in rebellion, in the form of establishing a negative identity, and feelings of unhappiness. 368

369

Holding multiple musical identities

Some people identify as musicians (often as performers) from childhood (Lamont, 2002), and their musician identity is a central determinant of self-​concept. Moreover, intrinsic motivation, or career “calling”, is often aligned with strong career self-​efficacy (Bernard, 2005; Dobrow et al., 2015; Smilde 2009). The early development of a musician identity can be highly motivational (Reid et al., 2019); however, unexpected or negative events can also impede motivation, damaging resilience and psychological welfare (Beech et  al., 2016; Burland, 2005; Oakland et al., 2013). Incoming tertiary music students have invested in several years of intensive study prior to enrolment, and they have often been the ‘star’ performer in their cohort. This leads many students to mythologise about musicians’ careers and lives. Within the tertiary (post-​ secondary) environment, however, standards are reappraised within a new cohort of peers and “a questioning of musical knowledge and skill takes place, generated by comparison with new peers in different circumstances” (Pitts, 2004, p. 91). For some students, this reappraisal will lead to identity conflict and considerable doubt about their abilities to ‘make it’ as a musician (see Yau, 2019).

Identity management Oakland and colleagues’ (2013) study of opera singers concludes that the voice can be a major resource with which musicians establish an internal coherent sense of self, even when they have encountered an enforced transition away from their ideal or preferred career. The same could be said for instrumentalists. There is an assumption that workers seek to resolve incompatible identities or identity conflict (Alvesson & Willmott, 2002).This was not the case in Bennett and Hennekam’s (2018) study of musicians’ careers across the career lifespan. In contrast to traditional understandings of the identity struggle resolution paradigm, Bennett and Hennekam (2018) found that musicians may not seek to resolve multiple incompatible identities, because they are self-​invested in their careers. Bennett and Hennekam’s finding might relate to the perpetuation of salient identity among some individuals, even when their self-​schema changes. In Bennett and Hennekam’s study, this may be more prevalent within professions which feature strong career calling. Indeed, both intrinsic motivation and career calling are likely contributors to the tendency for musicians to be so self-​invested in their careers as to sustain rather than resolve multiple incompatible identities. Beech et al. (2016) describe this behaviour as “self-​questioning” identity work in which identity tensions form a fundamental part of a musician’s identity. An example of this is found in Umney and Kretsos’ 2015 study, which found that musicians embraced and even created greater precarity, contextualising this as a necessary component of their early career work. Scharff (2017) agrees that the assumed norms of identity management often do not apply within music. Bennett and Hennekam (2018) employed lifespan development perspectives to understand how musicians manage change across the career lifespan. The authors concluded that adaptive strategies –​strategies to respond to changes in industry and in individual needs and preferences –​are particularly important in music, where work is notoriously precarious and changeable; within 10 years of beginning their professional work, 85% of the 74 participating musicians had changed their career goals at least once. Early career musicians were focused on performance goals and outcomes. However, they quickly began to optimise their potential by rethinking career success in terms other than performance. By mid-​career, the initial focus on performance and lack of broader career awareness had limited the musicians’ ability to maximise their potential. Emphasising declining income, the mid-​career musicians compensated by leaving music or adopting multiple roles and associated skills within and beyond music. By late 369

370

Jennifer Rowley et al.

career, musicians applied their broad skills and experience to roles within and outside music; however, these were often entrepreneurial, often featured more insecure work, and were most often the result of an enforced transition. Moving into the realm of the education of musicians, we note that emerging musicians need to develop an informed, realistic understanding of the nature of music careers, including in relation to the precarious or insecure nature of music work (Umney & Kretsos, 2015). As such, critical reflection on current and future selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986; Rowley & Munday, 2018) with the support of trusted others is crucial to creating and sustaining a career in music. In this chapter, we consider how this might be achieved by exploring how musician identity is experienced among emerging musicians. We begin with definitions of musician identity and its formation and management. We then describe the procedures employed in the empirical aspect of the study. We end with a discussion of the findings and implications for tertiary educators to better align curriculum with the identity development of emerging professional musicians.

Theoretical framework Both Bennett (2018) and Freer (2010) suggest that the ability of musicians to construct broad musician identities relates directly to perceived alignment between music work and the self. By examining the self through the lens of both identity theory and social identity theory, we see how, in combination, they can move us toward a general theory of the self. In times of identity construction, we note that situational identity is present when an individual construct presents any one of a number of possible social identities. These possible identities depend on the situation a person is experiencing. The situations can range from religion, ethnicity or lifestyle, and the context deems a particular identity choice desirable or appropriate.The situation accounts for the influence of social theory and contextual information that characterises a particular experience. So, in context, situational identity incorporates what we see as a purposeful construction of an identity with a strategic outcome in mind. Choices that encourage the formation of identity and are congruent in one situation do not necessarily feel identity-​congruent in another situation.This flexibility is part of what makes the sense of self a useful tool.There is a feeling of knowing oneself and the dynamic construction of who one is in the moment.With this in mind, we note that self-​understanding is useful because people look to their identities in making choices and because these identities are situated, pragmatic and attuned to the affordances and constraints of the immediate context. The students in our study were undeniably combining the concurrent roles of professional worker and full-​time student.Within the context of such a situational identity space, the preferable outcome for the students can be expressed in terms of desired privacy, monetary benefits, safety or other factors. As Stauffer (2012, n.p.) suggests, “if we want change, we need to start telling different stories.  … Maybe we should tell stories of self-​making, of re-​making and replacing ourselves. Of preparation as a constantly evolving teacher story. Maybe then transformation can be the norm.”

Research approach Sample and procedures The study reported in this chapter explores how identity conflict was experienced and resolved within a cohort of emerging musicians.The sample consisted of 24 full-​time music students (18 370

371

Holding multiple musical identities

females and six males) who were enrolled in a semester-​long elective internship programme offered to students in the Bachelor of Music and Master of Music programmes at an Australian conservatorium. The programme was delivered as three 2-​hour workshops, two assessments (building an ePortfolio and presenting that work) and 60–​80 hours of internship (placement) within the arts industry. All students in the internship class created personalised employability profiles using Bennett’s (2018) social cognitive employABILITY online self-​assessment tool, which comprises 134 items and five open-​response questions. The sample for analysis was selected on the basis of the following criteria: year of birth between 1991 and 1997; major field of study in music; and currently in year 4 or 5 of study. To enable gendered comparisons, participants self-​identified as male, female, gender non-​conforming, non-​binary or other. Only the male and female categories elicited sufficient responses to enable gendered analysis; hence we report only on those two categories. Human research ethics approvals were in place before the study commenced. Student participation was voluntary, and students could withdraw from the study at any time without prejudice or negative consequences. Students received a written consent form and information sheet, and they were assured of their anonymity. In this chapter, participants are identified by a participant number from P1 to P24 and a suffix of “m” for male and “f ” for female.

Analysis Following Strauss and Corbin (1990), analysis of the open-​response data involved inductive coding to reveal themes which the researchers may not have expected (Rivas, 2012). The text was then compressed into categories to expose recurrent instances (Wilkinson, 2011). Quantitative data were analysed using SPSS v16, to determine the gendered mean for each of five subscales within the employABILITY measure. 1. Lent et al.’s (2017) decisional self-​efficacy scale relates to career exploration and awareness and considers students’ career anxiety. The eight items utilise a 10-​point Likert-​style scale to assess whether students are confident in their ability to align career decisions with their personal strengths and preferences; this includes their ability to amass sufficient information with which to make such decisions. 2. Ethical and responsible behaviour was self-​assessed using an adaptation of Coetzee’s (2014) ethical and responsible behaviour scale.The scale comprises five items relating to personal and professional actions and decision-​making and employs a 6-​point Likert-​style scale. 3. Academic self-​efficacy was measured using an adapted version of Byrne et  al.’s (2014) scale of the same name, which utilises a 7-​point Likert-​style scale. The 26 questions probe students’ confidence in relation to seeking help and feedback, understanding required standards and managing their studies. 4. Students assessed their self-​esteem using an adapted version of Rosenberg’s (1965) self-​ esteem scale. The 10 items are rated on a 4-​point Likert-​style scale. 5. Finally, students considered their occupational mobility and agility using Lent et al.’s (2017) decision coping efficacy factor.The four items are rated on a 10-​point Likert-​style scale. The quantitative data complements the qualitative findings, enabling a suitable interpretive lens. This chapter looks at the words and meaning of the words the participants used relating to the question stated below. The quantitative data allows us to look at related matters such as confidence or gendered actions. 371

372

Jennifer Rowley et al.

Findings [I]‌dentity is never a priori, nor a finished product; it is only ever the problematic process of access to an image of totality. (Bhabha, 1994, p. 51) Student participants were asked “Please tell us about your work and career until now”. There is an implicit assumption made at the tertiary level that educators’ work is to prepare students for their future career. The participants’ responses to this question showed that all students were employed and that they were mostly employed in musical or para-​musical fields while studying. In this section, we have an in-​depth look at our participants’ experience of work and the way that it may be related to their learning and future work experiences. Participant P4m represents what could be a ‘typical’ early career musician plan. P4m initially worked in Kmart and McDonalds, in what was probably a post-​school phase of life. A year later, P4m was working as a double bass teacher in a local school, as an organist in a church and as a freelance performer undertaking various music ‘gigs’. By the second year of study, P4m had transitioned from traditional post-​school work to work directly related to his specific musical interest. This participant was clearly a double bass player, and the instrument suggests some specific forms of music-​making. P4m’s described his music-​making broadly as “gigs around Sydney” but was also very specific in stating that he had sought and won work in all the major orchestras in Australia and New Zealand. P4m gave his account of work in reverse chronological order, highlighting first what he thought were his most significant experiences. It appears from the qualitative data that P4m had a strong affinity with the professional music world and a clear identity as a musician at this stage of his education. P3f had a somewhat different experience because most of her work was in para-​arts fields, namely marketing, teaching and adjudication. I am currently interning at the [hidden] Recital Hall in the marketing department but prior [to that] completed some casual work, mostly in the education and arts sectors –​for example, as a music and piano extracurricular tutor at a primary school and a debating adjudicator for a school competition. I am currently still studying at the university. This participant had a concurrent working career that involved engagement with the arts sector through the internship programme, but she was also engaged as a music educator in primary schools. Unlike P4m, this participant still had a rather loose working identity that fluidly moved from context to context. In this case, P3f was still open to the possibility of diverse forms of work and left open the opportunity for situational identity development. Some participants demonstrated an entrepreneurial approach to work and studies. P10f, for instance, had a successful tutoring business with over 60 private students. Curiously, she did not mention whether she was tutoring in music or other disciplines. By telling us that she had a business, however, she was also indicating that she had a professional approach to life where music, tutoring and her own education co-​mingled to create her identity. P10f indicated that she was a bassoonist, usually a rare instrument in a music school. Despite this, she was probably not looking for a permanent position as a bassoonist but was, rather, going to use her musician skills to support a portfolio and para-​arts career. To build this career, it appears that she had successfully applied to orchestral management programmes and had experiences of internship and fellowship with amateur and professional orchestras. She proudly 372

373

Holding multiple musical identities

stated at the end of her response to the question that she had been “hired by the [hidden] Youth Orchestra”. In this case, she was able to adapt her musician identity to the workplaces in which she found herself. P10m’s experience mirrored that of P1m: In my industry I  have a lot of performance experience, I  have performed leading roles for amateur opera companies such as the role of Giuseppe in the [name hidden] Opera Company’s production of The Gondoliers. I also have experience in sales and marketing for arts organisations, having worked as an Outbound Sales Representative for organisations including [name hidden] Opera Company and [name hidden] Symphony Orchestra. Performing in amateur opera companies is a rite of passage for vocal students aspiring to an opera career. P1m wrote that he had “a lot of performance experience” but that at this stage of his career, it appeared that working in those companies was on the periphery of professional work. Like P10m, P1m used his music experience to find work in sales and marketing in other music organisations.Working for the major arts companies seemed to be a common experience for aspiring musicians. Logically, working in these environments provides insider knowledge of the industry and builds personal relationships that may be of use later. P1m was keeping his options open through the work he chose to do during his education. About 5  years older than the rest of the participant cohort, P11f came to tertiary music studies after being a music performance teacher. She has already been an active instrumental teacher, having undertaken courses set by the Australian Music Examinations Board. P11f undertook terminal diplomas in flute, piano and viola. Extending this knowledge base, she also taught violin and music theory and ran a private music teaching studio for 10 years. P11f is an example of someone who is determined to broaden her career through tertiary studies but maintained her concurrent teaching career. P23f had a different career trajectory, working on the university campus in a residential college. In Australia, the majority of students do not live on campus, but P23f did, having found accommodation and associated work there. She had also undertaken administrative work in a professional development company for a government department for justice and community safety. P23f extended her generic skills by working with a composer, doing gigs, and she later added teaching work in piano and singing. Her music work increased as she progressed through her studies. Through her formal studies, she developed confidence in her ability as a musician as well as in her work in more general arts areas. She wrote: “I also spend time volunteering for [name hidden] Opera. My volunteering stems from a university internship with the company.” We see that P23f had been able to transform her involvement in an internship unit to working in a voluntary position at a prominent company aligned with her musical interests. P19m described a completely different work experience from that of his student colleagues. From work as an electrical supplies wholesaler to being a merchandising and data entry worker, followed by facilitating at a cleaning company, this participant articulated clearly the professional skills that he used and acquired at each workplace. I then had to overlook staff at various locations, which required me to be more organised with my time as I had to delegate jobs and tasks to the team of facilitators. Also, I was required to maintain rosters, meet deadlines and constantly report to the director. 373

374

Jennifer Rowley et al.

P19m’s account highlighted that career transitions and associated learning can occur across the life course. P19m was transitioning from a career in which music-​making had been a supplementary activity to his regular, non-​music employment. With his main focus being music study and intending to forge a career in music, P19m presents the experience of an older learner whose musician identity and career calling provided the impetus for his career decisions. Although P16m was one of the younger members of the cohort, he recounted broad work experiences and was still exploring options for a potential future music career. Of all the participants in this group, he showed strong positive indications of music preparation as a musician and engagement with studies, and he was one of two participants with non-​music concurrent work. The other, P5f, simply stated that “work has been a mix of retail, sales and administration”. These students showed a persistence in relation to music, formalised in their music study, and they were able to move fluidly from their non-​music work into exploring their musical identity. The remaining participants indicated their involvement in a combination of work roles, including gigging, instrumental/​vocal teaching in schools, internships in music-​oriented companies, musical charity work and work in sound studios. Our attention was drawn particularly to the amount of music and para-​arts work that was taking place within this current tertiary student cohort. We turn now to the quantitative findings (illustrated in Figure 23.1). We observed that gender was a possible contributor to the manner in which participants spoke about their experiences. Our analysis of the quantitative results for these 24 participants showed an unexpected result. On every measure, males demonstrated a more positive response than females. Because the numbers were so small with this sample group, it was not possible to assign statistical significance to any measure. However, we noted that the widest gap was in relation to academic self-​efficacy, suggesting that this is an area on which tertiary institutions might focus attention.

Career exploration and awareness

7.0

Occupational mobility and agility

6.6

7.6

7.3

Ethical and responsible behaviour

9.0

Academic self-efficacy

9.7

8.6

6.9

9.0 8.6

Self-esteem 0

2

4 Male

6

8

10

Female

Figure 23.1  Student self-​assessment by gender, scaled to a 10-​point Likert-​style scale Notes: Means: n = 24. On the Likert scale, 1 = no confidence at all and 10 = complete confidence.

374

12

375

Holding multiple musical identities

Implications for research and practice in music education and music in the community The participant data allow us to appreciate a more nuanced position on career aspirations as they relate to professional experience and education. For instance, studies such as those reported by Bennett and Hennekam (2018) illustrate that career aspirations are not always achievable and/​or sustainable in fiercely competitive sectors such as music, necessitating the negotiation of identity in line with transition and change (Oakland et al., 2013). However, in the context of this cohort of participants, we can assert that many graduates enter the workforce with a raft of professional experience. Concepts of transition and change could therefore be considered less linear than we imagined. Perhaps a contrasting view is that transition and change could be softer if graduates understood the transferability of their musical and non-​musical experiences to their professional lives. The music industry is complex and demands broad and changing skills, some of which may well have been developed in students’ non-​music or concurrent work environments. What our data make clear is that aspiring musicians work towards multiple professional outcomes and have the potential to adeptly combine and transfer their broad life experiences. Whether they can do this depends to a large extent on the presence or otherwise of explicit career conversations, industry experience. Our participants demonstrated the capacity to shift their career thinking and, consequently, their musician identity as their specific work and learning situations allowed. Situated learning theory posits how effective education requires learning that is embedded into various authentic contexts of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1990). Our findings provided evidence wherein the students engaged in increasingly more complex tasks within their work/​social learning communities. The combination of tertiary studies and concurrent work provided students with an informed set of choices for their future career. We expect that in many cases there is a segue into professional life, building on these concurrent work experiences. Such contemporaneous experience can support a proposed career plan but can also support a career plan different from commencing desires, thus engaging in a view of “possible selves”. The theory of possible selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986) is a forward-​oriented approach identifying both desired and feared conceptions of self. Where much identity research is focused on antecedents to present identity, possible selves is focused on the planning and implementation of strategies toward realisation or avoidance of possible future identities. The thinking behind the possible selves framework aligns with established development theories such as that posited by Maehr (1983), who describes two distinct types of goal situations that have opposite effects on participants. In Maehr’s ego situation, competitive activities such as performance competitions and graded examinations lead to external rewards and labels of talent. They also lead to being assigned the ‘best’ instructors and performance coaches and being placed into the top ensembles. In the case of music students, the same ego situations can result in the perception that one belongs to a less able or valued cohort. In contrast, task-​goal situations encourage participants to attempt tasks for their intrinsic value and to determine success based on the realisation or development of personal goals, developed by exploring possible selves and futures. The ways in which students approach their own career and life planning will be impacted by their adoption of these positions. The experience of our participants provides us with some interesting ideas to consider in relation to work experience and formal learning. Among these is how the participants experienced cognitive conflict or dissonance in relation to their work, their work and formal studies, and their work/​formal studies and possible future thinking. P4m strongly identifies with 375

376

Jennifer Rowley et al.

his work as a bass player in many major orchestras. His response itemises these experiences in an extremely understated manner in which he simply lists all of them. In contrast, his experience at McDonalds is privileged with a special entry. It is apparent from the qualitative data that he has developed a confidence in his performance ability, and this is also evidenced by his early career success in high-​status organisations. We would expect then that related quantitative data would also develop high levels of confidence. However, of all the participants in this group, his confidence level in his ability to perform and job-​seek was the lowest. His response to the possibility of working in a breadth of fields was also low. One explanation may be that he knew that through his specific expertise, he had also limited his overall job-​seeking and that this awareness had contributed to his lower confidence levels. By way of contrast, P10f expressed a relation between her tutoring business (non-​music based, we extrapolate) and her studies. Undertaking studies had enabled her to rethink her work identity as a music work identity. Now, she could take her experience from teaching individuals to a ‘higher-​status’ area of arts management. Her final statement suggests a sense of pride as she is hired by the youth orchestra. A further dimension of future thinking was found with P11f. As an experienced and adult learner, P11f used her tertiary studies to enable a more fulfilling work life in the future. Our data revealed an interesting gender difference. The manner in which the participants reported their current work suggested not only different levels of confidence, but also a possible gender difference.The males provided short but definitive lists of their work achievements, whereas the females presented their experience as a narrative story (a few men did too). Although our present data is too small to make assertions regarding work practice in general, we noted that women were more likely to be teaching in primary schools or undertaking administrative work in arts organisation. Some of the men had already undertaken work in high-​ ranking organisations, both in performance and non-​performance areas, and this was combined with a confident literary style. Our data spoke to participants working for professional music organisations where the organisations were named. In communicating their professional work experience, participants seemed to find it essential to let us know the scope and importance of the location of their work. The location then became a means of interpreting the participants’ statements located within specific contexts. However, gigs, weddings and other ad hoc music activities were simply lumped together without an importance modifier. Most participants had demonstrated engagement with their local communities as educators, with some disclosing the school names –​again providing us with a context for interpretation of the data. The context of their concurrent work gives an insight into the way that the participants applied their agency within those contexts and, curiously, how researchers should understand and appreciate the data provided by each individual. In that sense, there is an intertextual dialogue between the researched and the researcher as well as a dialogue between their concurrent work and their learning situation. As our participants change between different forms of work, and as their musical understanding and experience develops over study, there appear to be certain forms of transference that move between sites of activity. Of course, each individual is a complete person who shifts and moves their identity as specific situations demand. There is an interplay between the participants’ identity as music workers and their identity as music learners. Our broader data set suggests that this interplay is not isolated to this specific group of participants and, hence, tertiary educators could make more of students’ concurrent work to consolidate and contextualise academic learning. The boundaries between formal experience of learning, formal work situations and non-​ formal aspects of living are blurred, malleable, permeable and developing. Each individual’s 376

377

Holding multiple musical identities

self-​knowledge and reflection on different situations ensure that the movement from student and toward professional is fluid. P4m provides evidence of this movement from work to his new music work environment. In his case, the freshness of the music work was initially greeted with feelings of low self-​esteem –​largely because the new bass playing workplace was novel and the complexities of the workplace unknown. As situations become more familiar, so are the possibilities of a rich engagement with it –​becoming the reflected ‘sum’ of all experience. The experience of concurrent work with learning also identifies situations where participants are able to shift identities, and now we note that the experiences provide specific contexts for the researchers to inform an understanding of the manner in which musician identity fluidly shifts from work to learning context. In some instances, the instrument was a strong influence for concurrent work. Some participants spoke of their specific instruments (double bass, bassoon) with some force and with detailed explanations of their work. Others listed a large scope of engagement that included several instrument groupings (violins, piano, voice, musicology). While the former were able to detail the relation between their specific instrument and work, the latter were describing a comprehensive engagement with music work. At this stage, we are not sure of a link between a total focus on a specific instrument versus a comprehensive engagement and the status, complexity or regularity of work. However, we do know that all of our student participants were employed and that for most of them, this was meaningful music work. This is in opposition to the regular, populist view that musicians cannot find regular work. Our sample group suggests that it may be more usual than unusual for tertiary music students to be engaged in music work while they are students. They already demonstrate a portfolio approach to their work, where several different forms of music work (and some non-​music work) are taken concurrently. In this sense, our participants have already learned to negotiate a portfolio career prior to their formal tertiary graduations. Perhaps these early experiences of portfolio work, in turn, generate an expectation for future work as graduates. Mancini and colleagues (2015) extended Marcia’s identity status model to explore professional identity among university students and found that students with achievement or foreclosure identities had higher scores on measures of academic self-​esteem and intrinsic work value and higher commitment to completing their studies. The authors note that many recent studies have focused on intra-​individual processes relevant to the development of professional identity (exploration and commitment), neglecting the social dynamics of professional identity development. Mancini et  al. (2015) conclude that a university education should provide and enrich not only declarative knowledge but also more practical knowledge and career-​related capabilities and competences. This kind of knowledge can ‘anticipate’ the practical aspects and contents related to students’ future professions and can contribute to the acquisition of a professional identity. However, the assumption in this and similar studies is that students arrive at university as empty vessels with little or no experience of their chosen field of study. This is seen in terms such as “aspiring”, “student” or “pre-​service” professionals. In this study, all 24 students were, in fact, practising musicians who were concurrently professionals and students. The associations between identity status and academic factors noted by Mancini et al. (2015) highlight the importance of exploring professional identity status as part of interventions to improve students’ academic experiences, including enhancing academic self-​efficacy and self-​ esteem. Similarly, associations between identity status and work-​related factors show that evaluating the processes which govern professional identity construction might be useful to improve new graduates’ approaches to the search for work, help them make good career decisions and develop a positive attitude toward work in general. 377

378

Jennifer Rowley et al.

Conclusion Twenty-​four participants provided the core data for this chapter. We acknowledge that other interesting phenomena could be observed using a larger data set. The data in this chapter also come from a single Australian institution, and the claims made in this paper may not accurately reflect the views and attitudes of learners and early career professionals at other locations. Our data lead us to consider the complex relationships that exist between our participants’ experiences of concurrent work and learning. It would be naïve to persist in a rhetoric that assumes that tertiary education provides the means of attaining music work when our participants were already engaged in that work whilst studying. Instead we could more affectively think of providing tertiary contexts where their current professional world is enhanced and supported through a more flexible and reflective form of curriculum. At the same time, our curriculum also needs to project towards future work which can include traditional roles such as orchestral positions. Certainly, the extrinsic rewards for work and learning are quite different where work ends in remuneration and learning in a qualification. The intrinsic rewards for each activity could be investigated. Musician identity seems to be attained and developed across the lifespan and in the situations that people find themselves in. As we have suggested, musician identity is a socially constructed concept formed through and within music. It is also influenced by people’s lived experience of paid and unpaid work. Students’ experiences of learning music provide a means of reflecting on music work and non-​music work and project into anticipated work. In this way, they establish agency towards their current and future professions. Situational identity is purposeful (Reid et al., 2019). In the context of this chapter, the situation includes early adulthood, concurrent work, formal studies and a myriad of other social situations. Tertiary educators need to be aware of the complexity experienced by students and work sympathetically to provide learning spaces that enrich the students’ life world. It can be tempting to think that tertiary education provides a core of practice and critical thinking for potential music workers. It would be more accurate to suggest that tertiary music education contributes to the musician identity that is enacted in students’ early workplaces.

Reflective questions 1. What is your musical identity: how do you define yourself in relation to your musical activities? 2. How can tertiary students be adequately prepared to create and sustain their careers? 3. How do tertiary music students learn to develop the multiple musical identities required for musicians’ complex work? 4. How might the learning from emerging musicians’ formal and informal learning, work and life experience be better understood and articulated? 5. Thinking about the diverse roles within and outside music, how would you define a musician? 6. What is success in music to you, personally?

378

379

Holding multiple musical identities

Suggestions for further reading Bennett, D. (n.d.). Developing EmployABILITY:  Student starter kit [self-​ assessment tool and resources, including the Music Toolkit]. EmployABILITY. https://​student.developingemployability.edu.au Dromey, C., & Haferkorn, J. (2018). The classical music industry. Routledge. Reid, A., Bennett, D., & Petocz, P. (2016). Is creative work sustainable? Understanding identity and motivation in a complex workforce. Australian Journal of Career Development, 25(1), 33–​41. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​1038416216637089 Rowley, J., Bennett, D., & Schmidt, P. (2019). Leadership of pedagogy and curriculum in higher music education. Routledge.

References Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (2002). Identity regulation as organizational control: Producing the appropriate individual. Journal of Management Studies, 39(5), 619–​644. Bartleet, B., Bennett, D., Bridgstock, R., Draper, P., Harrison, S., & Schippers, H. (2012). Preparing for portfolio careers in Australian music: Setting a research agenda. Australian Journal of Music Education, 2012(1), 32–​41. https://​eprints.qut.edu.au/​54873 Beech, N., Gilmore, C., Hibbert, P., & Ybema, S. (2016). Identity-​in-​the-​work and musicians’ struggles: The production of self-​questioning identity work. Work, Employment and Society, 30(3), 506–​522. https://​ doi.org/​10.1177/​0950017015620767 Bennett, D. (2018). Embedding EmployABILITY thinking across Australian higher education. Australian Government Department of Education and Training. https://​altf.org/​wp-​content/​uploads/​2017/​06/​ Developing-​EmployABILITY-​draft-​fellowship-​report-​1.pdf Bennett, D., & Bridgstock, R. (2015). The urgent need for career preview:  Student expectations and graduate realities in music and dance. International Journal of Music Education, 33(3), 263–​277. https://​ doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761414558653 Bennett, D., & Hennekam, S. (2018). Lifespan perspective theory and (classical) musicians’ careers. In C. Dromey & J. Haferkorn (Eds.), The classical music industry (pp. 112–​125). Routledge. Bernard, R. (2005). Making music, making selves: A call for reframing music teacher education. Action, Criticism and Theory for Music Education, 4(2). https://​eric.ed.gov/​?id=EJ844813 Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. Routledge. Brown, M. F. (2005). Heritage trouble: Recent work on the protection of intangible cultural property. International Journal of Cultural Property, 12(1), 40–​61. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​S09407391050 50010 Burland, K. (2005). Becoming a musician: A longitudinal study investigating the career transitions of undergraduate music students [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Sheffield. Byrne, M., Flood, B., & Griffin, J. (2014). Measuring the academic self-​efficacy of first-​year accounting students. Accounting Education, 23(5), 407–​423. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​09639284.2014.931240 Cawsey, T. (1995). The portfolio career as a response to a changing job market. Journal of Career Planning & Employment, 56(1),  41–​46. Coetzee, M. (2014). Measuring student graduateness: Reliability and construct validity of the Graduate Skills and Attributes Scale. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(5), 887–​902. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1080/​07294360.2014.890572 Connell, J., & Gibson, C. (2003). Music and movement: Overcoming space. In J. Connell & C. Gibson (Eds.), Sound tracks: Popular music identity and place (pp. 45–​70). Taylor and Francis. Dobrow, R. S., & Heller, D. (2015). Follow your heart or your head? A longitudinal study of the facilitating role of calling and ability in the pursuit of a challenging career. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(3), 695–​712. https://​doi.org/​10.1037/​a0038011 Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. W. W. Norton & Company. Freer, P. K. (2010). From the academic editor: Responding to challenging times. Music Educators Journal, 97(2), 23–​24. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0027432110387392 Hargreaves, D. J., Miell, D. E., & MacDonald, R. A. R. (2002).What are musical identities and why are they important? In R. A. R. MacDonald, D. J. Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), Musical Identities (pp. 1–​16). Oxford University Press. Jones, C., & DeFillippi, R. J. (1996). Back to the future in film: Combining industry and self-​knowledge to meet the career challenges of the 21st century. The Academy of Management Executive, 10(4), 89–​103.

379

380

Jennifer Rowley et al. Lamont, A. (2002). Musical identities and the school environment. In D. J. Hargreaves, D. Miell, & R. A. R. MacDonald (Eds.), Musical Identities (pp. 41–​78). Oxford University Press. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1990). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. Lent, R. W., Ezeofor, I., Morrison, A., Penn, L. T., & Ireland, G. W. (2017). Applying the social cognitive model of career self-​management to career exploration and decision-​making. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 93(2016), 47–​57. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.jvb.2015.12.007 Maehr, M.  L. (1983). The development of continuing interests in music [Paper presentation]. Ann Arbor Symposium in the Application of Psychology to the Teaching of and Learning of Music, Reston, VA, United States. Mancini, T., Caricati, L., Panari, C., & Tonarelli, A. (2015). Personal and social aspects of professional identity: An extension of Marcia’s identity status model applied to a sample of university students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 89, 140–​150. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.jvb.2015.06.002 Marcia, J. E. (1988). Common processes underlying ego identity, cognitive/​moral development, and individuation. In D. K. Lapsley & F. C. Power (Eds.), Self, ego, and identity. Springer. https://​doi.org/​10.1007/​ 978-​1-​4615-​7834-​5_​10 Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954–​969. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1037/​0003-​066X.41.9.954 Masnick, M., & Ho, M. (2012). The sky is rising! A  detailed look at the state of the entertainment industry. Techdirt. Oakland, J., MacDonald, R., & Flowers, P. (2013). Identity in crisis: The role of work in the formation and renegotiation of a musical identity. British Journal of Music Education, 30(2), 261–​276. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1017/​S026505171300003X Petocz, P., Reid, A., & Bennett, D. (2014). The music workforce, cultural heritage and sustainability. International Journal of Cultural and Creative Industries, 1(2), 4–​16. https://​doi.org/​10.3402/​jac.v6.24476 Pitts, S. (2004). Lessons in learning: Learning, teaching and motivation at a music summer school. Music Education Research, 6(1), 81–​95. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​1461380032000182858 Reid, A., Rowley, J., & Bennett, D. (2019). From expert student to novice professional: Higher education and sense of self in the creative and performing arts. Music Education Research, 21(4), 399–​413. https://​ doi.org/​10.1080/​14613808.2019.1632279 Rivas, C. (2012). Coding and analysing qualitative data. In C. Seale (Ed.), Researching society and culture (3rd ed.; pp. 366–​392). Sage Publications. Rowley, J. (2012). Final year music students’ identities: Music student or music teacher? Victorian Journal of Music Education, 1,  22–​33. Rowley, J., & Munday, J. (2018).The evolved landscape of ePortfolios: Current values and purposes of academic teachers and curriculum designers. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 9(1), 3–​22. https://​doi.org/​10.21153/​jtlge2018vol9no1art669 Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-​image. Princeton University Press. Scharff, C. (2017). Gender, subjectivity, and cultural work: The classical music profession. Routledge. Smilde, R. (2009). Musicians as lifelong learners: Discography through biography. Eburon Academic Publishers. Stauffer, S. (2012). Trading places: Transformation in progress in the lives of music educators [Paper presentation]. MayDay Group Colloquium 24, East Lansing, MI, United States. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications. Umney, C., & Kretsos, L. (2015). “That’s the experience”:  Passion, work precarity, and life transitions among London jazz musicians. Work and Occupations, 42(3), 313–​334. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0730888415573634 Wilkinson, S. (2011). Focus group research. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research (pp. 168–​184). Sage Publications. Yau, C.  N. L. (2019). The leadership role of instrumental teachers in students’ career development: Negotiating professional identities. In D. Bennett, J. Rowley, & P. Schmidt, (Eds.), Leadership and musician development in higher music education (pp. 149–​166). Routledge.

380

381

24 THE ROLE OF FORMATIVE AND SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT IN MUSICAL LEARNING AND PARTICIPATION Mathieu Boucher and Andrea Creech Assessment forms a cornerstone of learning and participation, highlighting what is valued, shaping the learning organisation and driving decisions about what, how, when and where to learn (Boud & Associates, 2010; Kapsalis et  al., 2019). Indeed, it is widely accepted that assessment frames what students will privilege in their learning and “orients all aspects of learning behaviour” (Gibbs, 2006, p. 23). Many researchers have advocated a move away from “assessment of learning” towards “assessment for learning”, with a focus on formative assessment practices framed by transparent learning objectives and criteria that support quality learning, progress and development (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Shepard, 2000). However, Torrance (2007) cautions that an overemphasis on learning objectives and criterion-​referencing risks reinforcing a culture of assessment as learning, characterised by criteria compliance and student dependence on tutor feedback. There is thus a strong argument to turn our attention to self-​and peer assessment practices and their potential to support learner agency. In music learning, whether it takes place within a formal institutional context, a non-​formal extracurricular context (e.g., a structured programme in the community) or even within the context of self-​directed informal learning (e.g., in a garage band), assessment may be seen as a fundamental part of the continuous process of teaching and learning (Boyce-​Tillman, 2002) (see Box 24.1 for more information on formal, informal and non-​formal learning contexts). As Harris and Brown (2018) point out, it is natural for learners to use available information such as their own observations, comments from peers or external evaluations to inform judgements about their own performance. However, without some guidance, self-​ assessments can be unrealistic and lead to negative outcomes, such as poor self-​efficacy beliefs, decreased motivation or disengagement from learning. Conversely, we suggest that when guided appropriately, assessment practices (and self-​assessment in particular) can help music learners to become their own teachers and architects of their own musical development.

381

382

Mathieu Boucher and Andrea Creech

Box 24.1  Definitions of formal, informal and non-​formal contexts of learning Formal learning In the formal learning situation, the minds of both the teacher and the students are directed towards learning how to play music (learning how to make music), whereas in the informal learning practice the mind is directed towards playing music (making music). (Folkestad, 2006, p. 138) In the formal learning situation, the activity is sequenced beforehand. That is, it is arranged and put into order by a “teacher”, who also leads and carries out the activity. (Folkestad, 2006, p. 141)

Informal learning In an informal learning context the learning context is “real life” without interference of any kind of educational authority. It involves all learning without a (qualified) teacher. All aspects of learning –​what to learn, how to learn and for how long –​are controlled by the individual learner. Learning is strongly motivated and directed by personal needs. (Mak, 2006, p. 6) The informal learning situation is not sequenced beforehand; the activity steers the way of working/​playing/​composing, and the process proceeds by the interaction of the participants in the activity. It is also described as “self-​chosen and voluntary learning”. (Folkestad, 2006, p. 141) Folkestad suggests that formal–​informal should not be regarded as a dichotomy, but rather as the two poles of a continuum, and that in most learning situations, both these aspects of learning are in various degrees present and interacting in the learning process. (2006, p. 143)

Non-​formal learning Non-​formal learning is linked with community groups and other organisations, “covering highly contextualized, highly participatory educational activities” (Mak, 2006, p. 2)

Our argument is that, irrespective of the context, expert assessment practices encourage music learners in the development of realistic self-​appraisals, criticality, ownership and responsibility for learning (Tan, 2007)  –​competencies which could in turn contribute to learner agency and self-​regulated, continuing participation. Therefore, in this chapter, we consider the 382

383

Formative and summative assessment

ways in which assessment approaches may enhance or hinder self-​regulated musical learning (McPherson et al., 2018;Varela et al., 2016) within formal, informal and non-​formal contexts.

Summative or formative assessment of musical learning and development: Intertwined practices Two predominant concepts have dominated research concerned with the assessment of music learning and development:  formative approaches, which are implicated in assessment for learning and, in contrast, summative approaches, which are aligned with assessment of learning (see Box 24.2 for more information on summative and formative assessments). Although there is some overlap, and indeed Torrance (2012, p. 325) argues that “all assessment is formative, of student dispositions and self-​identities as learners, as well as of knowledge and understanding”, the key difference between the two concepts lies in the underlying intention.

Box 24.2  Definitions for summative and formative assessments Formative assessment is concerned with how judgments about the quality of student responses (performances, pieces, or works) can be used to shape and improve the student’s competence by short-​circuiting the randomness and inefficiency of trial-​and-​error learning. (Sadler, 1989, p. 120) Summative contrasts with formative assessment in that it is concerned with summing up or summarizing the achievement status of a student, and is geared towards reporting at the end of a course of study especially for purposes of certification. (Sadler, 1989, p. 120)

The overarching aim in formative assessment for learning is to support the learner’s progress and provide specific points for development. In music learning contexts, formative assessment most often takes the form of feedback, or “instant reinforcement that occurs within short teaching frames” (Parkes, 2010, p. 102). This feedback may occur within a behaviourist framework concerned with the accumulation of knowledge, referenced around performance targets and aiming to provide information that will help students to close the gaps in their skills in relation to those targets (Valle et al., 2016). Alternatively, formative feedback may emerge within a social constructivist framework with an emphasis on an interactive process of knowledge construction and deep changes in understanding (Torrance, 2012). In this vein, musicians, their peers and their teachers engage in formative feedback whenever they listen critically and reflect together on learning processes, identifying emergent learning development goals or actions (Denis, 2018; Goolsby, 1999; Shepard, 2000). Summative assessments, on the other hand, evaluate the learner’s competencies at a particular point in time, often measuring attainment against a benchmark, grading protocol, competency framework or criteria. Summative assessments of musical learning and development can have high stakes; for example, placement auditions, concerts or competitions (Goolsby, 1999). However, every summative assessment may function in a formative fashion, influencing learning and learner identities in multiple ways (Torrance, 2012). Whether this is a positive influence may depend on the ways in which the assessor frames feedback and the ways in which the learner receives and processes the information. 383

384

Mathieu Boucher and Andrea Creech

A long-​standing and pervasive summative approach to assessment of musical learning is by a panel of judges chosen on the basis of their experience and expertise in the domain. This approach echoes the Consensual Assessment Technique (Amabile, 1996; Byrne et  al., 2003), advocated for as an alternative to criterion-​based assessment of musical compositions. Accordingly, “the acknowledged expert who, by this acknowledgement of his/​her experience and standing, has a right to exercise judgement without declaring the basis on which judgements are made, has been part of many assessment regimes in music” (Boyce-​Tillman, 2002, p.  43). One problem with the consensual approach to assessment is that experts may assess what they value, acting as gatekeepers and controlling what variations to traditional practice survive (Burnard, 2012). In other words, judges may value their own expert practice to the extent that they do not recognise or acknowledge new interpretations or approaches. A further problem with the Consensual Assessment Technique is that the focus is the end product, the performance, and so it may not accurately assess processes of learning and development (Cowdroy & de Graaff, 2005). Notwithstanding the problematic aspects of the Consensual Assessment Technique, this approach can offer opportunities for supporting further learning and development. Such opportunities depend on feedback being focused around mastery goals that support the idea that development is possible (Creech & Gaunt, 2012).Therefore, although a distinction has been drawn between summative and formative assessment, the two are often inextricably linked. For example, formative assessment may incorporate summative elements in that the reference point may be a performance at a specific point in time. Equally, summative assessment can play a formative role, providing information that can underpin reflection and subsequent self-​assessment, teacher recommendations or transfer to other learning. Thus, musicians might find elements of formative assessment (assessment for learning) in summative assessment experiences, or vice versa. One key issue is how assessments are framed, understood and applied to other learning situations. A second key issue is that a predominant focus on high-​stakes summative assessment might take the learner’s attention away from the formative assessment that happens hundreds of times per week with self-​assessment during practice (Boucher et al., 2019). We argue that for summative assessments to be used effectively to support learning, students must be deeply engaged with their learning goals and the criteria for success and be capable of using the summative assessment to inform their responses to the questions: “Where am I now?”, “Where am I going?” and What do I need to do to get there? (Brookhart, 2016, p. 361). A third key issue is that summative assessments are premised on the idea of musical “products” and, therefore, do not capture the imaginative and creative musical intent of the musician. In response, Cowdroy and de Graaff (2005) have proposed “authenticative assessment” –​summative assessments framed by student-​derived (rather than teacher-​derived or institutional) criteria. For example, Boyce-​Tillman (2002, p. 44) engaged students in self-​ and peer assessment of their musical performances, training the students in the use of criteria that included “musical communication … expressive character” and notably an “original musical statement”. In Boyce-​Tillman’s example, the assessment also included “performing journals” (p. 48) which captured students’ critical reflections on expressive intention and values in their own music-​making. This example demonstrates again how summative and formative approaches to assessment are often intertwined, with the beneficial outcomes dependent on the scope for students to be self-​directed and responsible for their own learning and development.

384

385

Formative and summative assessment

Self-​regulated learning Irrespective of the context (i.e., formal music education, self-​directed learning, non-​formal extracurricular music learning and participation), learning and development in music requires deliberate practice and revision, involving multiple moments of creation, playing, reflecting and adapting to progressively attain a specific goal. This cycle has been studied in various learning contexts through the lens of self-​regulated learning, or self-​regulation (Cleary & Zimmerman, 2001; Mega et al., 2014; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011). Self-​regulated learning refers to “the processes whereby learners personally activate and sustain cognitions, affects, and behaviours that are systematically oriented towards the attainment of personal goals” (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011, p. 1). It comprises a variety of cognitive processes and motivational beliefs, working in a continuous cycle of goal setting, self-​evaluation and adaptation of the strategies and goals according to the learner’s self-​evaluation (Zimmerman, 1998). Feedback obtained while performing helps the learner adjust the next performance (McPherson & Zimmerman, 2002). Whether the work is done individually or collaboratively, typically musicians evaluate their work during and after performing or creating. For example, in a study reported by Boucher et al. (2019), the “think-​aloud” self-​assessment strategies of college-​level musicians were observed during a series of 20-​minute practice sessions. The students paused between 10 and 73 times (mean = 28.57) during the practice sessions, articulating their self-​assessment and choosing their strategy for the next playing segment. Extrapolating from this result, it may be that musicians would stop hundreds of times during a week of practice, each of these pauses representing an opportunity for improvement premised on efficient self-​regulation. According to Sadler (2013), in order to self-​regulate efficiently, students should understand and recognise high-​quality work, judge their own work and external feedback accurately and be able to choose between various strategies for closing the gap between the two.

The acquisition of musical self-​regulation skills While it would be logical to assume that musicians develop self-​regulation skills after lengthy periods of personal or collective creative work, practice and investment in music learning and participation, the evidence demonstrates that this may not always be the case. Studies where musical self-​regulation has been evident have focused primarily on music performance (although self-​regulation has also been discussed in relation to composition –​e.g., see Merrick, 2002). Researchers have reported that musicians were able to self-​assess effectively, evidenced by identification and correction of performance errors (Duke et al., 2009; Leon-​Guerrero, 2008) and subsequently anticipating these errors and slowing down to avoid them (Duke et al., 2009). The ability to effectively self-​assess the process and the product of a musical performance thus represents an essential aspect of self-​regulated music practice. However, McPherson and Renwick (2001) observed limited capacity for self-​assessment during the practice sessions of seven instrumentalists aged between 7 and 9, reporting that some children spent most of their practice time playing their pieces only once and without stopping to correct their errors. Similarly, Pike (2017) reported that among nine teenaged piano students, six could not identify musical problems and fix them while practising. Finally, Mornell et al. (2018) studied the practice behaviour of 14 elite performers and observed that despite their level of expertise, they seemed unable to recognise when they were improving, focusing on general rather than specific issues and attending to more than one issue at a time. Bonneville-​Roussy &

385

386

Mathieu Boucher and Andrea Creech

Bouffard (2015) found that practising without elements of self-​regulation such as goal direction and focused attention might actually be detrimental to musical achievement. Therefore, it appears that musicians do not develop self-​ regulation skills (with direct implications for self-​assessment skills) as a natural consequence of the development of their technical and musical skills over years of training and tuition. Moreover, the aforementioned studies involved musicians engaged in formal training, raising questions about the ways in which musicians develop and exercise musical self-​regulation in non-​formal or informal community contexts. In accordance with the idea of assessment for learning, the capacity for formative self-​and peer assessments may play an integral and important role in equipping musicians with self-​regulatory skills, irrespective of context.

Supporting self-​regulated learning with self-​and peer assessment The term “self-​assessment”, understood here as encompassing evaluation and appraisal, represents all judgements made by learners of their work (Taras, 2010). According to Taras (2010, p. 200) “self-​assessment is considered one of the most important skills that students require for effective learning and for future professional development and lifelong learning”. Taras proposes several models for self-​assessment, ranging from self-​marking against exemplars or criteria to interactive approaches comprising student self-​assessment integrated alongside tutor feedback. Arguably, music learners regularly engage with self-​assessment, whether in formal, informal or non-​formal contexts. As McPherson and Renwick (2011) state, self-​assessment is a key characteristic of effective independent practising and a cornerstone of the development of musical expertise. Outside of structured educational environments, Lebler (2008) notes that popular music learning is often self-​directed and self-​assessed and includes peer feedback; such self-​ directed approaches to music learning can be found in many community contexts and among musicians learning diverse genres of music (e.g., O’Neill, 2014; Waldron,  2013). Self-​assessment is a key element in the development of self-​regulation as it is involved in self-​ observation (“mentally tracking one’s performance”) and self-​evaluation afterwards (McPherson & Renwick, 2011, p. 241). The information perceived and retained during the performance affects the following self-​evaluation, which in turn affects how the musician will then adapt her or his learning strategies. However, early publications on self-​regulated learning suggest that performing and monitoring the performance concurrently could represent a challenge for any learner (Winne, 1995; Zimmerman, 1995). This affirmation has been observed in studies in which musicians modified their initial evaluation of their performance after having listened or watched a recording of the same performance (Boucher, 2019; Daniel, 2001; Masaki et al., 2011; Silveira & Gavin, 2016; Waggoner,  2011). The inherent difficulties associated with performing and monitoring a performance concurrently might explain why developing musicians (Hewitt, 2015; McPherson & Renwick, 2001; Pike, 2017), but also elite musicians (Mornell et al., 2018), can experience difficulties in assessing their own work. Nevertheless, the development of efficient self-​assessment skills remains an essential part of a musician’s training. According to Tan (2007), self-​assessment develops the students’ critical skills and responsibility that leads to lifelong learning. Moreover, higher education music students consider that self-​assessment represents a “vital skill” that they should develop during their studies to prepare for the future (Lebler et al., 2015, p. 52). In accordance with the models of integrated self-​assessment proposed by Taras (2010), teachers could encourage students to self-​assess before the teacher shares feedback and recommendations, and subsequently the teacher could offer feedback on the students’ self-​assessment.

386

387

Formative and summative assessment

Peer learning activities might also represent a promising way to develop self-​assessment skills. Lebler (2013) highlights that peer assessment occurs naturally in ensemble contexts, adding that [in] a collaborative learning environment where students are active participants in the learning activity, it would seem logical to include some forms of active assessment, processes that include students as assessors in addition to their more usual role as recipients of assessments. (p. 108) In this vein, according to Majdoddin (2010), self-​and peer assessment offer similar benefits for the students, as the students’ assessment of their peers would also represent an occasion for personal self-​reflection. Peer assessment for learning has been advocated as a powerful approach to enhancing learner autonomy and engagement. For example, El Sistema-​inspired programmes around the world have been founded on the idea that students learn best from peer feedback (Creech et  al., 2016).Vignettes of El Sistema practices (Hernández-​Estrada, 2012) demonstrate the important role that formative peer assessment plays within the programme núcleos (non-​formal community music centres), taking place outside of the classroom in informal and impromptu ways. According to Uy (2012, p. 14), informal peer assessment opportunities foster a sense of ownership and deep engagement, allowing “students to view themselves as resources rather than as problems”. A considerable body of research has demonstrated positive outcomes associated with both self-​assessment and peer assessment in formal music learning contexts. For example, as demonstrated in Box 24.3, secondary school music students participating in self-​assessment and peer assessment have been shown to develop a sense of being a co-​shaper of their own learning, fostering enhanced motivation, positive attitudes towards assessment and better musical achievements (Kordes et al., 2014).

Box 24.3  Assessment in a Musical Futures secondary school classroom Musical Futures, derived from the work of Green (2008), is an approach to implementing informal learning within secondary school classrooms. It is based on the idea of emulating the ways in which popular musicians learn. Research carried out in eight Musical Futures Champion Schools in England (Hallam et al., 2011, pp. 62–​63) revealed some tensions in relation to assessment, whereby the imperative to conform to National Curriculum standards risked too great an emphasis on the product and not enough on the learning process. However, teachers perceived advantages in being able to assess the work of individuals more easily in the context of the small group work and of being able to implement formative assessment procedures that included self-​and peer assessment. The latter contributed to the development of students’ listening and critical skills. A lot of our focus is assessment for learning and there’s all the feedback when we’re going ’round the groups … we do a lot of peer assessment. … A group will perform and their peers will basically look at the success criteria and say “have they done that, have they done this, yes I agree, what do you think they can improve upon?” (Music teacher, Hallam, Creech & McQueen, 2011, p. 64)

387

388

Mathieu Boucher and Andrea Creech

We do a huge amount of self-​assessment and peer-​assessment. Say we’re doing a keyboard topic with a Year 8, say we’re doing the blues … the first ten minutes you’re modelling at the front, then they’ll go off and practise the ingredients and then fifteen or twenty minutes before the end everybody gets back into the middle. It’s performance time, they’ll showcase what they’ve done. They’ll play, the kids will say what they thought was successful about their performance and an area for improvement, or it could be three stars and a wish. … I do that every week.The kids get used to talking about their work in a supportive way. (Music teacher, Hallam, Creech & McQueen, 2011, p. 64)

In the context of primary school classrooms,Valle et al. (2016) reported on the use of a constructive critique (focused on the task and not the individual) protocol, premised on four steps that include opportunities for peers to seek clarification, identify strengths, raise concerns and offer suggestions for improvement. Participant teachers indicated that self-​and peer assessment approaches fostered independent learning:  “as students became more independent in their learning, they were free to assist students most in need. … Through peer and self-​assessment, students not only made great strides in their learning and performance but also became more self-​directed and self-​sufficient” (Valle et al., 2016, p. 49). In higher music education, music performance students involved in peer assessment activities have claimed to have benefitted through engaging with criteria by which they could self-​assess their own performances (Daniel, 2004; Latukefu, 2009, 2010). Students valued the process of observing colleagues develop and of learning with them (Latukefu, 2009; Lebler et al., 2015), becoming more proactive and motivated learners (Bjøntegaard, 2014; Latukefu, 2010). Finally, students have also indicated that working with peers was an important preparation for professional life (Hanken, 2016). Regarding the challenges associated with peer assessment activities, students have indicated that teachers should supervise and act as a mediator (Latukefu, 2009). Issues with the process included difficulties in determining a grade (Latukefu, 2010) and reluctance to include peer assessments in summative evaluation (Lebler et al., 2015), possibly because of a matter of trust in students’ expertise as assessors (Christophersen, 2013). Nonetheless, formative feedback offered by peers could complement the traditional one-​to-​one teaching approach (Hanken, 2016; Latukefu & Verenikina, 2013), offering opportunities for learners to develop self-​regulation skills through identifying problems in their peers’ playing and formulating appropriate feedback and recommendations.

Self-​and peer assessment in the context of community music making Self-​and peer assessment in the context of community music-​making, while not explicit, may play an important role in supporting learning and participation. Non-​formal or informal music-​ making in the community can be characterised as situated, pluralistic and diverse, often framed with a focus on holistic outcomes such as self-​actualisation, wellbeing and building community (Camlin & Zeserson, 2018;Veblen, 2007).The highly diverse nature of community music means that assessment of or by community music leaders and facilitators can be problematic. As Camlin and Zeserson (2018, p. 727) highlight, “the process of qualification of practice is an ongoing journey … rather than a destination to be achieved”. Similarly, although the role of assessment may not be paramount among participants in community music, continued music learning, 388

389

Formative and summative assessment

participation, and development can be framed by formative, self-​and peer assessments that take “the form of continuous, constructive, personal assessment by self-​reflective learners guided by reflective community music workers. Constructive feedback is the norm in community music programs” (Veblen, 2007, p. 3). These informal assessment practices can foster understandings of individual and group progression within specific contexts and can be powerful in terms of enhancing motivation, a sense of belongingness and a sense of purpose (Box 24.4) (Creech et al., 2014).

Box 24.4  Formative assessment in community music contexts Creech et al. (2014) researched learning and teaching processes within a diverse range of community-​ supported music-​making for older adults. A key finding was the importance (for participants’ sense of social affirmation, sense of purpose, autonomy, and enjoyment) of progression and performance and the role that formative feedback played in fostering musical self-​concept and an enhanced sense of wellbeing. I can now sing in tune and I am so excited and longing for our gala concert and to hear my family’s reaction. (Hallam, Creech, Pincas et al., 2011, p. 96) I get a sense of achievement from participation especially when we perform for an audience. (Hallam, Creech, Pincas et al., 2011, p. 96) Extracts from field notes revealed some informal peer assessment practices, with participants asking for help from one another, offering explanations to peers and acknowledging with applause instances where peers overcame musical challenges. Overall, the facilitators encouraged formative peer feedback; learning from one another was seen as motivating and was thought to encourage ongoing participation. I think it’s best if some people teach other people because it helps the one who is teaching –​it helps them know what they are playing as well and then it helps the other person with what they are doing as well. (Group facilitator, Hallam, Creech, Pincas et al., 2011, p. 109) In lifelong learning contexts such as those reported here, where the importance of supporting progression has been relatively underexplored, the idea of a musical “process-​folio” (Elliott & Silverman, 2015) may have strong potential as a formative self-​or peer assessment tool that supports the wider benefits noted above. A process-​folio, containing examples of creative work over time (e.g., recordings, programmes, annotated sheet music, listening logs), could capture the multidimensional, situated processes of music learning and participation, evidencing musical progression, preferences, strengths, areas for development and potential compensatory strategies. In turn, this portfolio approach may contribute greatly to building and sustaining musical self-​concept and musical “possible selves” (Creech et al., 2014).

389

390

Mathieu Boucher and Andrea Creech

Using audio and visual technology to support self-​and peer assessment in music learning and participation The ever-​expanding accessibility of technological tools offers many opportunities for musicians to develop their self-​and peer assessment skills with self-​recording (see Box 24.5). Using audio or video recording allows musicians to free cognitive resources at the time of performing and to concentrate on assessing their performance afterwards (Fautley, 2013; Zimmerman, 1995). Hallam et al. (2012) found that the personal use of recordings for modelling and feedback was among the few significant predictors of expertise level among developing musicians. A general conclusion from studies of audio or video feedback as a self-​assessment tool is that musicians may self-​assess differently after listening or watching a recorded performance compared with self-​assessment immediately after a performance with no recourse to a recording. For example, Silveira and Gavin (2016) compared how middle school instrumentalists rated their performance after playing, after hearing a recording of this performance and after hearing the same recording two days after the initial hearing. They reported that the participants self-​assessed the various aspects differently depending on the assessment condition and that on each subsequent assessment of the recorded performance, the mean ratings decreased. Further evidence in support of the contribution that technology can make to well-​ developed self-​assessments was reported by Daniel (2001), who surveyed 35 university-​level musicians after a 1-​year performance class in which they used video recordings. In this study, 49% of respondents claimed they could identify more errors through watching the video than by simply reflecting on their performance, while 37% assessed their performances more favourably after viewing them compared to after playing. Similarly, Masaki et al. (2011) compared the self-​assessment ratings of university-​level pianists immediately after playing and immediately after viewing video of the same performance, and with the evaluation of an expert evaluator after viewing the videos. They found that student assessments after watching the recorded performance were closer to those of the expert than were student self-​assessments immediately after playing.

Box 24.5  Using video feedback to foster self-​regulation skills among college-​level guitarists In a series of studies, Boucher et al. (2017, 2019, 2020) compared a group of college-​level guitarists who used or did not use video feedback on four occasions during the first 10 practice sessions devoted to learning a new piece. The comparison focused on the participants’ self-​evaluation comments after performing and after watching a video of the same performance, as well as their think-​aloud self-​evaluation comments and their choice of strategies during practice. The analysis of the self-​evaluative comments of the video feedback group (n = 8) after performing or after watching a video of the same performance revealed that they commented on different aspects of their performances in the video assessments and performance assessments (Boucher, 2019). Also, comparison of the post-​performance assessments for each group demonstrated that the video feedback group made more comparative comments (“better”, “worst”, “as compared to my last performance”) than the other group (Boucher et al., 2017), implying that video feedback had had an effect on its users’ subsequent evaluation (that did not use video). While practising, the video feedback group made progressively more think-​aloud comments related to problem-​solving and to their choice of strategies, but progressively fewer comments

390

391

Formative and summative assessment

associated with a general happy/​not happy reaction (Boucher et al., 2019). Finally, the video feedback group played longer segments of the piece and at a slower tempo during the first practice sessions compared to the participants who did not use video feedback (Boucher et al., 2020).

Implications for education and music in the community In this chapter, we have demonstrated that assessment offers the potential to support critical and reflective self-​regulatory music learning. Be it in a formal music education context or within community music contexts, self-​assessment practices have been shown to be integrally linked with the self-​regulated learning activities that musicians must engage in to attain their learning goals. In turn, self-​regulation can be fostered through peer learning, teacher feedback and the use of audio and video technologies, which can contribute significantly as valid sources of feedback. Consequently, there are evident implications for teaching and facilitation of music learning and participation. For example, teachers and music leaders could guide self-​assessment within a social constructivist paradigm (Shepard, 2000; Torrance, 2012) whereby learners and more knowledgeable others collaborate in flexible and reflective assessment processes that allow for new and creative learning to emerge. In this vein, integrated approaches that engage students in the process of developing criteria and incorporate self-​assessment alongside expert feedback (Taras, 2010) may be most effective in supporting autonomous, engaged learners. We also demonstrated that collaborative peer learning and assessment activities may be associated with numerous wider benefits. Formulating peer feedback could help learners to identify and diagnose strengths and weaknesses, prioritise areas for development, celebrate achievements and reflect on their own learning process. Within a range of contexts, there is some evidence that peer learning and assessment may be related to an enhanced sense of community, mutual support and positive learning outcomes (Creech et al., 2014; Hallam, Creech, Pincas et al., 2011). With regard to the benefits of using technology, student musicians might use digital recordings of their own work for the purpose of critical and collaborative reflection with teachers, peers and/​or facilitators. In addition, multiple recordings could illustrate improvements or recurring issues over time. Furthermore, the use of audio or video recordings to support self-​assessment may foster qualitative changes in the ways that musicians self-​assess, including directing their focus to musical development points that are not otherwise noted. This new perspective could offer an important and valid source of information in the absence of a teacher’s feedback.

Implications for research Is technology a game changer? There seems to be limited exploration in the music learning and participation literature with regard to the role that technology may play in supporting innovative assessment practices that could, in turn, foster greater musical self-​regulation. Within a rapidly developing technological landscape, this may be an important area for future research. For example, in addition to the obvious use of digital audio or video feedback discussed above, research could focus on the ways in which technology could be used to capture creative learning processes and to promote creative approaches to collaborative problem-​solving in music learning and participation. Furthermore, technology could be used to explore the 391

392

Mathieu Boucher and Andrea Creech

reliability issues that have been raised in relation to students’ self-​and peer assessments; for example, by providing material for exemplars of criteria, by allowing for comparison of repeated self-​assessments of the same performance or by enabling comparisons of self-​assessments, peer assessments and expert assessments of the same performance. Studies on self-​regulation in young musicians’ practice have involved school-​age children (Bartolome, 2009; McPherson & Renwick, 2001). A  potentially interesting area of research would be to explore how and at what age children can initiate self-​assessment strategies, since numerous studies have already focused on preschool children’s (Hedden, 2012; Rutkowski, 2015) and even babies’ (Perani et al., 2010; Trainor & Heinmiller, 1998) perceptive skills. In the context of lifelong learning in community contexts, the importance of progression, meeting new challenges and developing a strong sense of competency has been highlighted (e.g., Creech et  al., 2014). However, the role of assessment practices within community contexts is relatively underexplored. For example, there is limited research concerning the role of formative assessment in promoting self-​regulated learning, self-​efficacy beliefs or musical development and progression among adults. Given the growing literature concerned with the wider benefits of lifelong musical participation, this may be a salient area of research; for example, examining the ways in which self-​or peer assessments may contribute indirectly to the cognitive, social and emotional benefits that can be derived from music participation across the life course. In conclusion, while there can be little doubt of the risks associated with assessment as a driver of learning and participation, student-​centred, reflective and dialogic assessment practices may deepen our musical understandings and skills. There remains considerable scope for further explorations of the ways in which formative self-​and peer assessment (in particular) may be framed so as to support self-​regulated and sustained learning and participation in a range of musical contexts.

Reflective questions 1. How can we use exemplars and criteria in a manner that encourages rather than constrains creativity and risk-​taking in music learning and participation? 2. What further possibilities does technology offer for supporting musical self-​ regulation in education and community contexts? 3. How can technology be used to mediate and promote deep learning within a master–​apprentice  model? 4. How can institutional practices be modified to support the students’ perception of the formative aspect of summative assessment situations?

Suggestions for further reading Gaunt, H., & Westerlund, H. (2013). Collaborative learning in higher music education. Routledge. Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. L. (2018). Using self-​assessment to improve student learning. Routledge. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–​112. Lebler, D., Carey, G., & Harrison, S. (2015). Assessment in music education: From policy to practice. Springer International Publishing.

392

393

Formative and summative assessment

References Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Westview  Press. Bartolome, S.  J. (2009). Naturally emerging self-​regulated practice behaviours among highly successful beginning recorder students. Research Studies in Music Education, 31(1),  37–​51. Bjøntegaard, B. J. (2014). A combination of one-​to-​one teaching and small group teaching in higher music education in Norway: A good model for teaching? British Journal of Music Education, 32(1),  23–​36. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box:  Raising standards through classroom assessment. Kings College. Bonneville-​Roussy, A., & Bouffard, T. (2015). When quantity is not enough: Disentangling the roles of practice time, self-​regulation and deliberate practice in musical achievement. Psychology of Music, 43(5), 686–​704. Boucher, M. (2019). L’utilisation de la reprise vidéo comme outil de rétroaction pendant le travail instrumental du guitariste de niveau collégial [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Laval University. Boucher, M., Dubé, F., & Creech, A. (2017).The effect of video feedback on the self-​assessment of a music performance by pre-​university level classical guitar students. In G. Hughes (Ed.), Ipsative assessment and personal learning gain (pp. 197–​219). Springer. Boucher, M., Creech, A., & Dubé, F. (2019). Video feedback and the self-​evaluation of college-​level guitarists during individual practice. Psychology of Music, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0305735619842374 Boucher, M., Creech, A., & Dubé, F. (2020). Video feedback and the choice of strategies of college-​level guitarists during individual practice. Musicae Scientiae, 24(4), 430–​448. Boud, D., & Associates. (2010). Assessment 2020: Seven propositions for assessment reform in higher education. Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Boyce-​Tillman, J. (2002). Assessing Diversity. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 2(1),  41–​62. Brookhart, S. M. (2016). Building assessments that work in the classroom. In G.T. L. Brown & L. R. Harris (Eds.), Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 351–​365). Routledge. Burnard, P. (2012). Rethinking “musical creativity” and the notion of multiple creativities in music. In O. Odena (Ed.), Musical creativity: Insights from music education research (pp. 5–​28). Ashgate. Byrne, C., MacDonald, R., & Carlton, L. (2003). Assessing creativity in musical compositions:  Flow as an assessment tool. British Journal of Music Education, 20(3), 277–​290. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​ S0265051703005448 Camlin, P., & Zeserson, K. (2018). Becoming a community musician: A situated approach to curriculum, content and assessment. In B.-​L. Bartleet & L. Higgins (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of community music (pp. 711–​734). Oxford University Press. Christophersen, C. (2013). Perspectives on the dynamics of power within collaborative learning in higher music education. In H. Gaunt & H. Westerlund (Eds.), Collaborative learning in higher music education (pp. 77–​86). Routledge. Cleary, T. J., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Self-​regulation differences during athletic practice by experts, non-​experts, and novices. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13(2), 185–​206. Creech, A., Fairbanks, S., Gonzalez-​Moreno, P., Lorenzino, L., Sandoval, E., & Waitman, G. (2016). El Sistema and Sistema-​Inspired Programmes: A literature review of research, evaluation, and critical debates. Sistema Global. Creech, A., & Gaunt, H. (2012). The changing face of individual instrumental tuition: Value, purpose and potential. In G. McPherson & G.Welch (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music education (pp. 694–​711). Oxford University Press. Creech, A., Hallam, S.,Varvarigou, M., & McQueen, H. (2014). Active ageing with music: Supporting wellbeing in the Third and Fourth Ages. Institute of Education Press. Cowdroy, R., & de Graaff, E. (2005). Assessing highly creative ability. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(5), 507–​518. Daniel, R. (2001). Self-​assessment in performance. British Journal of Music Education, 18(3), 215–​226. Daniel, R. (2004). Peer assessment in musical performance: The development, trial and evaluation of a methodology for the Australian tertiary environment. British Journal of Music Education, 21(1), 89–​110. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​S265051703005515 Denis, J. M. (2018).Assessment in music: A practitioner introduction to assessing students. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 36(3),  20–​28. Duke, R. A., Simmons, A. L., & Cash, C. D. (2009). It’s not how much; it’s how: Characteristics of practice behavior and retention of performance skills. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56(4), 310–​321.

393

394

Mathieu Boucher and Andrea Creech Elliott, D. J., & Silverman, M. (2015). Music matters:  A philosophy of music education (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. Fautley, M. (2013). The potential of audio and video for formative assessment purposes in music education in the lower secondary school in England: Issues arising from a small-​scale study of trainee music teachers. Journal of Music,Technology & Education, 6(1),  29–​42. Folkestad, G. (2006). Formal and informal learning situations or practices vs formal and informal ways of learning. British Journal of Music Education, 23(2), 135–​145. Gibbs, G. (2006). How assessment frames student learning. In C. Bryan & K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (pp. 23–​36). Routledge. Goolsby, T. W. (1999). Assessment in instrumental music:  How can band, orchestra, and instrumental ensemble directors best assess their student’s learning? Here are some evaluation tools and techniques to consider. Music Educators Journal, 86(2), 31–​50. https://​doi.org/​10.2307/​3399587 Green, L. (2008). Music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom pedagogy. Ashgate. Hallam, S., Creech, A., & McQueen, H. (2011). Musical futures: A case study investigation. Final report. Institute of Education, University of London. Hallam, S., Creech, A., Pincas, A.,Varvarigou, M., McQueen, H., & Gaunt, H. (2011). Music for Life Research Project: Promoting social engagement and well-​being in older people through community supported participation in musical activities. Final project report. Institute of Education, University of London. Hallam, S., Rinta, T., Varvarigou, M., Creech, A., Papageorgi, I., Gomes, T., & Lanipekun, J. (2012). The development of practising strategies in young people. Psychology of Music, 40(5), 652–​680. https://​doi. org/​10.1177/​0305735612443868 Hanken, I. M. (2016). Peer learning in specialist higher music education. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 15(3–​4), 364–​375. Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. L. (2018). Using self-​assessment to improve student learning. Routledge. Hedden, D. (2012). An overview of existing research about children’s singing and the implications for teaching children to sing. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 30(2),  52–​62. Hernández-​ Estrada, J.  L. (2012). Aesthetics of generosity:  El  Sistema, music education, and social change. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. Hewitt, M. P. (2015). Self-​efficacy, self-​evaluation, and music performance of secondary-​level band students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 63(3), 298–​313. Kapsalis, G., Ferrari, A., Punie,Y., Conrads, J., Collado, A., Hotulainen, R., Rämä, I., Nyman, L., Oinas, S., & Ilsley, P. (2019). Evidence of innovative assessment: Literature review & case studies. Publications Office of the European Union. https://​doi.org/​10.2760/​552774 Kordes, U., Sicherl Kafol, B., & Brunauer, A. H. (2014). A model of formative assessment in music education. Athens Journal of Education, 1(4), 295–​307. Latukefu, L. (2009). Peer learning and reflection: Strategies developed by vocal students in a transforming tertiary setting. International Journal of Music Education, 27(2), 128–​142. Latukefu, L. (2010). Peer assessment in tertiary level singing: Changing and shaping culture through social interaction. Research Studies in Music Education, 32(1),  61–​73. Latukefu, L., & Verenikina, I. (2013). Expanding the master-​apprentice model: Tool for orchestrating collaboration as a path to self-​directed learning for singing students. In H. Gaunt & H. Westerlund (Eds.), Collaborative learning in higher music education (pp. 101–​109). Routledge. Lebler, D. (2008). Perspectives on assessment in the learning of music. In D. Bennett & M. Hannan (Eds.),  Inside, outside, downside up:  Conservatoire training and musicians’ work (pp. 181–​ 193). Black Swan Press. Lebler, D. (2013). Using formal self-​and peer-​assessment as a proactive tool in building a collaborative learning environment: Theory into practice in a popular music program. In H. Gaunt & H.Westerlund (Eds.), Collaborative learning in higher music education (pp. 111–​121). Routledge. Lebler, D., Holmes, J., Harrison, S., Carey, G., & Cain, M. (2015). Assessment in music in the Australian context: The AiM project. In D. Lebler, G. Carey, & S. D. Harisson (Eds.), Assessment in music education: From policy to practice (pp. 39–​54). Springer. Leon-​Guerrero, A. (2008). Self-​regulation strategies used by student musicians during music practice. Music Education Research, 10(1), 91–​106. Majdoddin, K. (2010). Peer assessment:  An alternative to traditional testing. Modern Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(5), 396–​405. Mak, P. (2006). Learning music in formal, non-​formal and informal contexts. Hanzehogeschool Groningen. https://​research.hanze.nl/​ws/​files/​12409231/​mak14_​1_​.pdf

394

395

Formative and summative assessment Masaki, M., Hechler, P., Gadbois, S., & Waddell, G. (2011). Piano performance assessment: Video feedback and the Quality Assessment in Music Performance Inventory (QAMPI). In A. Williamon, D. Edwards, & L. Bartel (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium on Performance Science 2011 (pp. 503–​508). European Association of Conservatoires. McPherson, G. E., Miksza, P., & Evans, P. (2018). Self-​regulated learning in music practice and performance. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-​regulation of learning and performance (pp. 181–​193). Routledge. McPherson, G. E., & Renwick, J. M. (2001). A longitudinal study of self-​regulation in children’s musical practice. Music Education Research, 3(2), 169–​186. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613800120089232 McPherson, G. E., & Renwick, J. M. (2011). Self-​regulation and mastery of musical skills. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-​regulation of learning and performance (pp. 234–​248). Routledge. McPherson, G. E., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Self-​regulation of musical learning:  A social cognitive perspective. In R. Colwell & C. Richardson (Eds.), The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning: A project of the Music Educators National Conference (pp. 327–​347). Oxford University Press. Mega, C., Ronconi, L., & De Beni, R. (2014). What makes a good student? How emotions, self-​regulated learning, and motivation contribute to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 121–​131. Merrick, B. (2002). Self-​regulation, motivation and computer composition. How does music technology impact on teaching and learning in the music classroom? In J. Rosevear & J. Callaghan (Eds.), Research matters: Linking outcomes with practice. Proceedings of the XXIVth Annual Conference (pp. 118–​126).  AARME. Mornell, A., Osborne, M. S., & McPherson, G. E. (2018). Evaluating practice strategies, behaviour and learning progress in elite performers: An exploratory study. Musicae Scientiae, 24(1), 130–​135. O’Neill, S. A. (2014). Mind the gap: Transforming music engagement through learner-​centred informal music learning. The Recorder: Journal of the Ontario Music Educators’ Association, 56(2),  18–​22. Parkes, K. A. (2010). The use of criteria specific performance rubrics for student self-​assessment: A case study. In T. S. Brophy (Ed.), The practice of assessment in music education: Frameworks, models, and designs (pp. 453–​458). GIA Publications. Perani, D., Saccuman, M. C., Scifo, P., Spada, D., Andreolli, G., Rovelli, R., Baldoli, C. & Koelsch, S. (2010). Functional specializations for music processing in the human newborn brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(10), 4758–​4763. Pike, P. (2017). Self-​regulation of teenaged pianists during at-​home practice. Psychology of Music, 45(5), 1–​13. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735617690245 Rutkowski, J. (2015). The relationship between children’s use of singing voice and singing accuracy. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32(3), 283–​292. Sadler, D.  R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–​144. Sadler, D. R. (2013). Opening up feedback: Teaching learners to see. In S. Merry, M. Price, D. Carless, & M. Taras (Eds.), Reconceptualising feedback in higher education: Developing dialogue with students (pp. 54–​63). Routledge. Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7),  4–​14. Silveira, J. M., & Gavin, R. (2016). The effect of audio recording and playback on self-​assessment among middle school instrumental music students. Psychology of Music, 44(4), 880–​892. Tan, K. (2007). Conceptions of self-​assessment: What is needed for long-​term learning? In D. Boud & N. Falchikov (Eds.), Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term (pp. 114–​127). Routledge. Taras, M. (2010). Student self-​assessment: Processes and consequences. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(2), 199–​209. Trainor, L. J., & Heinmiller, B. M. (1998). The development of evaluative responses to music: Infants prefer to listen to consonance over dissonance. Infant Behavior and Development, 21(1),  77–​88. Torrance, H. (2007). Assessment as learning? How the use of explicit learning objectives, assessment criteria and feedback in post-​secondary education and training can come to dominate learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 14(3), 281–​294. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​09695940701591867 Torrance, H. (2012). Formative assessment at the crossroads: Conformative, deformative and transformative assessment. Oxford Review of Education, 38(3), 323–​342. Uy, M. (2012). Venezuela’s national music education programme El Sistema: Its interactions with society and its participants’ engagement in praxis. Music & Arts in Action, 4(1), 5–​21.

395

396

Mathieu Boucher and Andrea Creech Valle, C., Andrade, H., Palma, M., & Hefferen, J. (2016). Applications of peer assessment and self-​assessment in music. Music Educators Journal, 102(4),  41–​49. Varela, W., Abrami, P. C., & Upitis, R. (2016). Self-​regulation and music learning:  A systematic review. Psychology of Music, 44(1), 55–​74. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735614554639 Veblen, K. (2007).The many ways of community music. International Journal of Community Music, 1(1),  5–​21. Waggoner, D. T. (2011). Effects of listening conditions, error types, and ensemble textures on error detection skills. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59(1),  56–​71. Waldron, J. (2013).YouTube, fanvids, forums, vlogs and blogs: Informal music learning in a convergent on-​ and offline music community. International Journal of Music Education, 31(1), 91–​105. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​0255761411434861 Winne, P. H. (1995). Inherent details in self-​regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 173–​187. Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-​regulation involves more than metacognition: A social cognitive perspective. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 217–​221. Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Developing self-​fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An analysis of exemplary instructional models. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-​regulated learning:  From teaching to self-​reflective practice (pp. 1–​19). Guilford Press. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Self-​regulated learning and performance: An introduction and an overview. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-​regulation of learning and performance (pp. 1–​12). Routledge.

396

397

PART V

Support for musical learning

398

399

INTRODUCTION Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

The previous two parts have dealt with the acquisition of specific musical skills and pedagogical approaches to teaching music, where a primary focus was on teacher–​student relationships. In recognition that no person develops musicality in a vacuum, the chapters in this part are concerned with three additional sources of support –​the family, peers and technology. In Chapter  26, Stephen F.  Zdzinski examines the critical role of families in supporting music learning. First, he surveys a number of family support models and in so doing identifies nine primary components: parent–​child communication, parent–​school communication, music programme support, family musical background, family musical participation, musical home structure, musical home environment, musical attitudes and parental expectations. Research into childhood and school-​based music learning primarily concerns parental and teacher influences on social, emotional, cognitive, physical, linguistic and creative development within musical contexts. Common musical experiences were singing, playing, moving, listening and creating. With older children comes an interest in playing a musical instrument. Parents play a crucial role in the success of their children by providing ancillary support, such as paying for private lessons, providing transportation, and so on. More directly, behavioural, cognitive and personal support are critically important, as exemplified by parents monitoring practice sessions, encouraging a positive attitude and strong work ethic, discussing musical progress and challenges, and so on. Parental and family support and encouragement influences lifelong involvement with music. Of course, there are numerous influences outside the home as well, such as peers, school teachers and mentors, that shape childhood musical experiences. Siw Graabræk Nielsen and Guro Gravem Johansen address the role of peers in support of music learning (Chapter 26). Based on the notion that music is inherently a social activity (Creech & Hallam, 2017), peer interactions represent a powerful influence on musical development. Group learning, whether in pairs or collaborative learning situations, allow the learner to become both helper and helped. Vygotsky’s (1978) zone of proximal development recognises borderlands between tasks children can perform independently and tasks they can do with guidance from adults or peers. However, social relationships among peers (e.g., in play activities) create different learning opportunities from those that occur in adult interactions. Play, and the use of imagination and imitation, are paramount in vicarious experiences, which in turn are critical components of social cognitive theory. Although perhaps commonly observed in 399

400

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

informal situations such as garage band rehearsals, peer-​learning opportunities can also occur in more formal settings like schools.There are also many ways that peer-​supported learning can be mediated through digital technology. As important as peer-​supported learning is, there are risks and limitations, and thus it should be integrated into a comprehensive music learning strategy that acknowledges both strengths and weaknesses. In Chapter 27, Aaron Liu-​Rosenbaum and Andrea Creech extend the discussion of the role of technology in mediating collaborative learning in music. Of course, technology can play an important role in self-​directed learning, but the focus in this chapter is on ways technology can facilitate social connections in collaborative music learning. Computer supported collaborative learning creates community with shared goals, social support and enhanced flow of information among participants. Music-​making, learning and social connections can occur in virtual environments and through social media. For young children, technology allows for playful experiences in creativity, improvisation and social communication in pairs or small groups. At the other end of the life course, online music communities have facilitated creative and collaborative music learning experiences for senior adults. In both instances, technology allows for users to explore and have fun with music with peers in a mutually supportive environment without being restricted by inability to play a musical instrument proficiently. Technology, of course, can also support collaborative efforts among those who do possess sophisticated musical skills but are interested in working with others.Whether students who are developing their craft or working professionals, musicians can work with others with space and time barriers largely mitigated. In all these instances, technology is seen not as something that dehumanises musical experiences, but rather something that enhances and facilitates social interchange. As these three chapters demonstrate, no musician develops in isolation. Family members, peers and technology all provide crucial lines of support. Ideally, these means of support, along with that from teachers and mentors, help the learner to develop independence, agency and self-​confidence with the eventual goal of a musical life that brings pleasure and fulfilment throughout the life course.

References Creech, A., & Hallam, S. (2017). Facilitating learning in small groups:  Interpersonal dynamics and task dimensions. In J. Rink, H. Gaunt, & A. Williamon (Eds.), Musicians in the making: Pathways to creative performance (pp. 57–​74). Oxford University Press. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

400

401

25 THE ROLE OF THE FAMILY IN SUPPORTING MUSICAL LEARNING Stephen F. Zdzinski

Family support has long been recognised as important in maximising educational success (see Fan & Chen, 2001, for a review). Nolan (2008), citing the No Child Left Behind law in the United States, recognises shared responsibilities of educators and families. In the British white paper Excellence in Schools (Department for Education and Employment, 1997), family support is recognised as a tool to help the most disadvantaged members of society. This chapter examines music research related to family support of musical outcomes throughout the lifespan. Topics include family support models, family support in childhood, school music, music performance study, intergenerational music-​making and encouraging musical family support. It concludes with implications for music education practice.

Models of family support A major limitation in understanding musical home environments is that much musical family support research uses different definitions, and as a result, research results are mixed. Baker and Soden (1997) advocate that researchers clearly define which aspects of home educational environments are being studied.

Educational family support models Research concerned with family support research for music has borrowed from definitions found in general education. Epstein (1996) used a six-​component structure: parenting, learning at home, decision-​making, school–​parent communication, volunteering and collaborating with community and school. Keith and Keith (1993) suggested four components: school-​based involvement, parental expectations about achievement, educational home environment and provision of structure, and parent–​child communication about school. Grolnick and Slowiaczek (1994) created a multidimensional model including three factors. Personal support includes parental involvement, autonomy support and home structure for learning. Cognitive/​intellectual support includes cultural and intellectual activity involvement, providing educational materials and conservations with child. Behavioural support includes participation in school events, attending school conferences and meeting with teachers. Hoover-​Dempsey and Sandler’s (1997) model of parental involvement includes motivators of parental involvement, 401

402

Stephen F. Zdzinski

parent choice of involvement (based on skills, knowledge, time and energy), parental support techniques (reinforcement, modelling, instruction, encouragement), child perceptions of home environment, and summative measures of educational outcomes (see Figure 25.1).

Music-​specific family support models General education models have served as a starting point for defining family support of music learning. While general education elements are included in these models, they also have a number of music-​specific elements. Creech (2016) describes a parental support model similar to Grolnick and Slowiaczek’s (1994) model, including behavioural support (supervising music practice, attending lessons and serving as a home teacher), cognitive/​intellectual support (attending concerts, providing a place to practice, discussing and listening to music at home, encouraging student musical engagement and providing musical materials) and personal support (parental attitudes, parental interest in lessons and home musical participation). Creech’s model also includes interpersonal interaction among teachers, parents and students and age-​based interaction pattern changes. Other models attempting to define musical family support have identified underlying structures of support for various ages.Wills (2011), describing preschoolers, identified adult value of music, adult music experiences, musical interactions with child, musical materials, music listening and concert attendance. Brand (1985), examining elementary students, identified parental attitudes toward music/​musical involvement with child, parental musical participation, ownership of musical materials and parental concert attendance. Zdzinski (2013), studying elementary and secondary students, identified attitudes toward music, parental expectations, musical home environment, musical home structure, family musical background, family musical participation and music programme support. Family music support components are listed below. • • • • • •

parent–​child communication (Creech, 2016; Zdzinski, 2013); parent–​school communication (Creech, 2016); music programme support (Zdzinski, 2013); family musical background (Creech and Hallam, 2003; Zdzinski, 2013); family musical participation (Brand, 1985; Creech, 2016; Wills, 2011; Zdzinski, 2013); musical home structure (Brand, 1985; Creech, 2016; Davidson et al., 1996;Wills, 2011; Zdzinski, 2013); • musical home environment (Brand, 1985; Creech, 2016; Davidson et al., 1996; Wills, 2011; Zdzinski, 2013); • musical attitudes (Brand, 1985; Creech, 2016; Wills, 2011; Zdzinski, 2013); • parental expectations (Borthwick & Davidson, 2002; Brand, 1985; Creech, 2016; Zdzinski, 2013).

Childhood music learning Early childhood music family support research has examined benefits, parental roles, activities and the impact of family musical backgrounds. Benefits included life enrichment (Johnson-​ Green & Custodero, 2002; Scott, 2004;Youm, 2013), stimulation, socialisation, mood regulation, developing cognitive knowledge and motor skills (Ilari et  al., 2011; Wu, 2005) and creating family traditions (Byrn & Hourigan, 2010; Cardany, 2004). A  child’s interest in music was a

402

403

newgenrtpdf

Level 5

Student achievement

leads to

lead to

Level 4

Child attributes that lead to achievement

influences

influence

Level 3

Children’s perceptions of parents’ involvement

Home-based involvement

403

Level 2

School-based involvement

Social self-efficacy for relating to others

Modelling Encouragement

Parental involvement behaviours

mechanisms include

Parents’ motivational beliefs

Parents’ perceptions of invitations for involvement from others

Parents’ perceived life context

defined as

defined as

defined as

Parental role construction

Parental selfefficacy for helping the child succeed in school

Reinforcement Instruction

contribute to

contributes to

Level 1

Self-regulatory strategy knowledge and use

including

mediated by Forms either or both

Intrinsic motivation to learn

The role of the family

mediated by

Academic self-efficacy

Perceptions of general school invitations

Perceptions of specific child invitations

Figure 25.1  Hoover-​Dempsey and Sandler’s (1997) model of parental involvement

Perceptions of specific teacher invitations

Self-perceived time and energy

Self-perceived skills and knowledge

404

Stephen F. Zdzinski

motivating factor for parents providing musical enrichment; parents were seen as a key motivational element (Cardany, 2004; Davidson & Borthwick, 2002; McPherson, 2009; Pomerantz & Dong, 2006). While teachers recognised benefits of family support related to music learning, parents identified social and emotional benefits as well as musical socialisation benefits (Pitt & Hargreaves, 2017). Parents also believed language development was enhanced by including both message and emotion in musical activity (Cassasola & Cohen, 2000), and researchers identified emotional bonding among family members (Byrn & Hourigan, 2010; Custodero, 2006; Custodero & Johnson-​Green, 2003; Custodero et  al., 2002). Parents saw themselves as social partners, transmitters and co-​players with their children, and music involvement helped them to better adapt to their children’s developmental needs in musical, emotional, social, cognitive, physical, language and creative areas and as preparation for future learning (de Vries, 2012; Wu, 2005; Youm, 2013). Providing musical materials was recognised as an important aspect of family support of infants and toddlers (Byrn & Hourigan, 2010; de  Vries, 2012; Ilari et  al., 2011; Lamont, 2008; Wills, 2011; Young, 2008). Recorded music, musical mobiles, instruments, toys and listening devices were common. Singing was reported as a common musical interaction with infant and preschool children, used to communicate and bond, to calm or stimulate, or for play (Byrn & Hourigan, 2010; Custodero, 2006; Ilari et al., 2011; Trainor & Desjardins, 2002; Trehub et al., 1997). Trehub et al. (1997) also mentioned that caregivers are sensitive to their infant’s responses and adjust singing accordingly. Many parents remembered being sung to as children, valuing singing as a shared musical experience (Byrn & Hourigan, 2010; Custodero, 2006). Music-​making in automobiles was examined by Koops (2014) as a unique aspect of early childhood musical interactions, including singing, singing games, moving and imitating musical instruments. Car seats were seen as a safe kid’s space, promoting child reflection, sibling interaction and active music-​making. While car activities were similar to those in home and music class settings, parents reported fewer distractions and found that children liked musical participation so much that parents would sometimes have to tell them to stop. Music listening was another important activity among preschool children (Ilari et al., 2011; Wills, 2011; Youm, 2013). Mothers made distinctions between music they liked as adults and music appropriate for their children. They also reported listening to their own music when their children slept. Parents reported listening habit changes both before and after the birth of their children, including a move to music more suitable for children (with a softer, calmer and more child-​specific repertoire). Common genres included children’s music, popular music and children’s movie music. Custodero and Johnson-​Green (2003) found that parental musical experience impacted the nature of infant musical engagement. Parents with previous musical experience sang more, played more classical music and made up more songs. Memories of their participation was related to their own musical interactions. Ilari (2005) found that Brazilian mothers who had careers sang more than stay-​at-​home mothers and had expectations concerning social norms for children’s music. In early childhood music classroom settings, Savage (2015) found that parents believed music classes would help their children to gain confidence in music-​making and appreciate music better, foster cognitive development and provide educational enrichment. They also wanted to enrol their children because of their own enjoyable musical experiences. Reay (1998) found that children developed social skills in early childhood music classes. Youm (2013) determined Korean parents were interested in having their children interact musically, learn instruments and enhance music appreciation. The primary reasons for choosing 404

405

The role of the family

a particular music instruction programme were proximity, teacher impressions and small class sizes, as parents were not aware of other differences among programmes. Parent interactions with children included singing, listening, playing instruments and moving to music. Parents were also interested in encouraging musical interaction with other children, and they sometimes expressed a reticence to musically interact with their child due to a lack of confidence in their own musical abilities (Creech & Hallam, 2003; Temmerman, 2000;Youm,  2013).

School-​based music learning Once students enter elementary school, parental involvement models (Epstein, 2011), including family support influences, school influences (including peer influences) and community-​based influences, have more impact. Cali (2015) found that as students mature, there was a shift from the early childhood focus on music as a source of expressive communication and bonding to an interest in middle childhood in the development of musical skills and achievement.This reflects a change from children having only parental influence on their musical development to being influenced by parents, friends and teachers. However, family support is still very influential. Music listening achievement was related to strong family support. Grice (1995) found family support to be related to higher musical responses among first-​g rade participants, while Freeman (1976) and Brand (1986) replicated these results with students in Grade 2 to Grade 6. Ilari and Young (2016) found that school and family life (including parent, siblings and child) were motivating agents, and families saw music participation as a means to enhance expression and psychological wellbeing. Cali (2015) reported music was seen as a powerful means for creating and sustaining informal family interactions. Informal family musical participation (singing at home and the car with siblings and parents, experimenting with sound toys, dancing) was seen as a way to experience emotional closeness (Cali, 2015; Ilari & Young, 2016). Children’s repertoires came from songs learned at school, singing games, pop songs from either adult or youth culture, or religious instruction (Ilari & Young, 2016). Parents’ musical backgrounds and experiences, preferences and expectations as well as sociocultural factors shaped their attitudes towards music study (Ilari & Young, 2016). Parents wanted to provide their children with musical experiences they had not received. Cali (2015) mentioned combining parental musical backgrounds with current musical interactions helped to create shared meanings for common musical experiences. Ilari & Young (2016) noted parents’ musical knowledge was not a major influence on music education attitudes, and music was appreciated regardless of geography, social or educational background. Cali (2015) observed musical parenting to be more developmentally focused for parents who were not professional musicians, while children of professional musicians described music as the core of family life. Cali (2015) reported that music instruction becomes central in family interactions, with parents facilitating musical activities and interests, supporting instructional collaboration with teachers, providing transport and attending concerts and other musical events. Parents at higher income levels reported more formal involvement, such as providing lessons, attending musical events and extracurricular activities as well as active participation in studying and practising music (Ilari & Young, 2016), while schools also provided these activities. As students transition to secondary school, the nature of musical parental support changes. Cognitive musical achievement relationships with family support were found to decrease as student age increased (Dregalla, 1983; Zdzinski, 1996). Hickok (2009) found relationships between Nebraska all-​state band and choir membership and musical parent support. Henderson (1999) observed that families of all-​state string students in Iowa demonstrated high levels of integration 405

406

Stephen F. Zdzinski

PIHEM

.27

MS

.54

.27 .07

PS

.07

.12

.32

AS .12

PSM

Figure 25.2  Zdzinski and Russell’s (2014) SEM model of the influence of parental involvement/​home music environment, parenting style and psychosocial maturity on musical success and academic success Notes: PIHEM = parental involvement-​musical home environment; PS = parenting style; PSM = psychosocial maturity; MS = musical success; and AS = academic success

(support and harmony) and differentiation (involvement and freedom), low levels of marital stress and high expectations for music study. Zdzinski et al. (2015) found that parental involvement of students (Grade 4 to Grade 12) was related to musical outcomes (music achievement scores and music grades), academic outcomes and psychosocial maturity. Musical home environment factors, parenting style, socio-​economic status and grade level accounted for 50% of variance in musical outcomes. Strongest home environment predictors of musical outcomes included musical home structure (ß  =  .23), musical background (ß = .19) and music attitudes (ß = −.19). Zdzinski and Russell (2014) used the same data set to test a structural equation model (SEM) of parental involvement/​musical home environment, parenting style and psychosocial maturity influencing academic success and musical success. A  large total effect (ß  =  .27) for musical success was found for musical home environment. For academic success, a large effect was found with musical success (ß = .27), while musical home environment exerted an indirect effect on academic outcomes (see Figure 25.2).

Music performance study Lifespan influences Sosniak (1985), Manturzweska (1990) and Gabor (2009) examined socialisation processes of professional classical musicians. Parents provided early exposure to music through listening and concert activities, recognising musical promise both informally and formally. Parents were committed and valued their children learning an instrument, and they supported lessons by taking notes, scheduling practice times, listening to and rewarding their children’s practice and transporting them to lessons. Children were held to high expectations during lessons. Parents worked with their children to develop a work ethic so they would be intrinsically motivated to practice. Children were given fewer chores, while parents sacrificed time to help their children develop their talent. Parents were less directly involved as students got older, but they provided students with more demanding teachers and continued with transport, financial and emotional support. Sosniak (1985) noted that among professional pianists, most parents were involved and had valued music before having children, though not all were professional musicians themselves, 406

407

The role of the family

while Manturzweska (1990) found that her sample of Polish musicians came mostly from families with musical backgrounds.

Behavioural support An important aspect of family support has been the use of behavioural support (supervising music practice, attending lessons and serving as a home music teacher), as outlined by Creech (2016) in a music performance study. Creech (2001) suggests that replacing imposed practice with a supportive yet challenging environment, with children eventually taking responsibility for their own practice will result in enhanced performance outcomes. Parental supervision and support of home practice was found to be critical in forming good practice habits, especially among younger students (Bugeja, 2009; Graziano, 1991; McPherson & Davidson, 2006; Shen, 2016). Parents should attend lessons (Bugeja, 2009; Mariotta, 2011; Zhang, 2016), take notes and ask questions (Bugeja, 2009; Kalverboer, 2008; Zhang, 2016). In a study of Chinese and US parental involvement in private piano lessons, Shen (2016) found that American teachers were less likely to recommend that parents attend lessons, while Chinese parents were more likely to attend. Graziano (1991) and Mariotta (2011) recommend common goals and expectations for lessons, while Creech (2013) recommends that parents ask children their opinion of the parental role, negotiate practice parameters and provide a structured home practice environment. Zhang (2016) found some conflicts between student and parental expectations:  Chinese immigrant parents expected their children to be obedient, but immigrant children wished to make their own decisions. Creech and Hallam (2011) stress that there should be a balance between independence and being engaged with others. While parents can offer support for practice, children needed to be receptive to the support. Highest achievers were most supported, while the parents of children who discontinued lessons provided less parental support for music (Davidson et al., 1995). As roles evolved over time, older children needed the nature of the support to evolve to develop autonomy, self-​regulation, self-​motivation and active engagement in their own music study (Bugeja, 2009; Davidson et al., 1996; Kalverboer, 2008). Davidson and Pitts (2001) found that a supportive rather than authoritarian parenting style was most common, balancing support and challenge. Early support was more extrinsic and reward based, facilitating early music participation; but later on, students with greater degrees of intrinsic motivation continued and less intrinsically motivated children dropped out. Parental support of practice was a major focus in Upitus et al. (2017).They found that parents asked their children to practice 4–​7 days a week, at the same time and usually in the living room of the house, and practice time increased as lesson difficulty increased. About 15% of the students had a dedicated practice room. Parents recorded performances, set goals for children with teachers (particularly at earlier ages) and encouraged children to become self-​regulating musicians. Ilari & Young (2016) also described a hierarchy of parent listening to practice: just listened; attended music practice without feedback; and gave comments while listening.

Cognitive support Another important element in the family support literature related to music performance study is cognitive support (attending concerts, providing a place to practice, discussing and listening to music at home, encouraging student musical engagement and providing musical materials) (Creech, 2016). Sloboda and Howe (1992) found that parents pursued instruction because 407

408

Stephen F. Zdzinski

music study was thought to be valuable, and this sparked child interest to improve. Upitus et al. (2017) found that 60% of decisions to start music study came from either the student or the parent and student together. Music lessons were valued by parents, as they wished their children to enjoy music, both as children and later as adults, and wanted to promote self-​discipline. Upitus et  al. (2017) found that parents were pleased with their children’s music teachers, believed the teachers were responsive to the children’s needs and were encouraging and gave clear expectations; although they also found their children’s lessons to be challenging. Parents would allow music students to have fewer chores in order to complete their music obligations. Bugeja (2009) and Mariotta (2011) both supported the encouragement of progress and of practicing (including initiating, reminding, supervising and providing moral support). McPherson and Davidson (2006) and Mariotta (2011) found parents were supportive of all aspects of music development. After age 10, parents supported social and group experiences related to music, such as ensemble enrolment, providing transport to music events, additional music materials and monitoring the many forces impacting music student learning. Kalverboer (2008) and Bugeja (2009) endorsed listening to recordings to support repertoire development. Ho (2009) found that parents and children were strong listeners and had similar musical tastes. Ho (2009), studying children and parents in Hong Kong, noted they sought out listening at home and out-​of-​school musical experiences. However, these parents placed music lower among their educational priorities as they were more concerned with academic issues related to later educational attainment, and this impacted their children’s attitudes toward music study. Other influences (school music teachers, instrument teachers, classmates, friends and siblings) were more influential than parents in generating musical interest. While encouraged to do ABRSM (Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music) exams at earlier ages, they were discouraged from continuing at older ages due to academic challenges. Parents were involved financially (buying instruments and CDs) and in musical life (listening, attending concerts, listening to practice and attending school performances), and they viewed music learning as a means to enrich life, build cooperation, provide balance, gain musical knowledge and refine character; however, they saw student interest as the most important outcome and did not encourage music as a career.

Personal support Personal support (parental attitudes, parental interest in lesson, and home musical participation) is an important aspect of family support related to music performance study. Graziano (1991) and Sloboda and Howe (1992) mentioned that parents initiated music study because music was thought to be valuable, and this sparked children’s interest to improve. The authors suggested that first lessons should be with a teacher the child will like and that they will be much more likely to pursue music if they have an interest in it. When music study was instigated by parents without initial interest on the part of the student, success was less likely. Sloboda and Howe (1991) also found family interest in music was not contingent on parental musical expertise. Graziano (1991) and Zhang (2016) stated that parents were happy to support their child’s musical development, wanting early music instruction to provide musical skills and related academic benefits as well as develop discipline, commitment and perseverance. Zhang (2016) felt that parents wanted their children to play even if they were not interested; parents thought study would instil children with confidence and provide a basis for later education. Providing transport, accompanying children to musical activities and concerts and giving financial support were commonly mentioned as ways parents provide support (Bugeja, 2009; Graziano, 1991; Kalverboer, 2008; Shen, 2016; Zdzinski, 1992, 1996). 408

409

The role of the family

Upitus et  al. (2017) found parents to be interested in their children’s music lessons and that they were still active as musicians themselves, while Mariotta (2011) noted that musically inclined families knew strategies not as obvious to non-​musician families who did not understand practice. Kalverboer (2008) and Bugeja (2009) mentioned providing emotional support and modelling the importance of music, while Creech and Hallam (2003) stated the importance of parental self-​efficacy for sustaining child musical interest and motivation.Vispoel and Austin (1993) and Sichivitsa (2004) found that parents who valued music were more involved and provided children with opportunities to show musical interest, resulting in higher music ability attributions which led later to intrinsically motivated music practice. The impact of parental involvement related to attitudinal outcomes may increase over time, helping to sustain musical engagement. Zdzinski (1996) found attitudinal and motivational variable correlations with musical home environment; these correlations were stronger for older students, with no significant relationships at the elementary level but moderately strong relationships at the senior high level. Zanders (2011) observed that when music involvement was encouraged with children in foster care, a more positive relationship with the foster family was achieved. If foster children had a relationship with music with the biological parent, it was lost on entering foster care, however.When the relationship with the foster family was not ideal, foster children tended to listen to music alone as a way of coping with trauma, grief and loss associated with their life situation. Davidson et al. (1996), Pitts et al. (2000), Barry and Hallam (2002), McPherson and Davidson (2006) and Bugeja (2009) all supported the idea that parent-​supported motivation for continuing music study at younger ages leads to intrinsic motivation as students continue to develop, which would explain the above-​mentioned increased correlation strength at older ages. They also noted the importance of parent–​teacher communication as a key factor increasing student motivation. Davidson and Borthwick (2002) mentioned that expectations about music study were a factor in student success, and parents sometimes gave more attention to children perceived as more musically talented, which led to sibling conflict and development of other interests among siblings. Creech and Hallam (2011) reported that student receptiveness to parental support resulted in positive outcomes, and when parents were seen as supportive and promoting student autonomy, this led to higher student self-​esteem and more self-​regulation. Several research studies support the notion that sustained family musical support leads to stronger attitudes about music and greater retention. Papinchak (1992) found that parental support influenced retention in a string programme, while Cannava (1995) found a similar result among band students. Davidson (1999) found that music student dropouts had parents who were less supportive and valued music less than the parents of students who continued study, in line with the findings of Davidson and Borthwick (2002) and Creech and Hallam (2003). To decrease student attrition, Bushong (2005) created a parallel instrument instruction programme for parents of beginning instrumental music students. Seventy percent of participants in the programme continued versus only 27% of participants who did not enrol in the programme. Continuers cited parental support, better practising, the importance of music study and a desire to play their instrument. Parents monitored student practice at home, encouraged their children and attended social events, extra rehearsals, fundraisers and musical performances. Dropouts did not practice and found other demands more important than their instrument study. In a related study (Moyer, 2010), parents of children who dropped band enjoyed the social aspects of participation but had less parental involvement and used school-​owned instruments, suggesting socio-​ economic status may also be a factor limiting instrumental participation. The combination of 409

410

Stephen F. Zdzinski

students with a school-​owned instrument and low parental involvement was found to be the most likely reason for dropping instrumental study. Among piano student dropouts, Govel (2004) found that parents were not involved in practice sessions or piano lessons, did not support practice schedules, did not listen to practising and did not have high levels of musical skill themselves. Students who dropped lessons cited a lack of interest, competing activities, scheduling issues and homework concerns. Davidson et al. (1995) found that parents’ support for their children’s interests and actions involved in music learning was a more important factor than parents having high levels of musical skill. Related to Govel (2004), Camilli (2010) also examined parental support types predicting length of piano study. Camilli found that behavioural and personal support were positively correlated to months of piano study, while cognitive support and demanding parenting style were negatively related. Cognitive support appeared to be less necessary as students progressed, and demanding parenting style appeared to lead to dropout. McClellan (2011) examined parental influences among music students deciding to major in music education. He found that parents influenced the students’ decision to be a music education major, and parental involvement was related to their self-​concept as a music education major. Davidson and Burland (2006) also found parents to be influential in career decision-​ making in music.

Intergenerational music-​making Pitts (2009) studied family influences on adult music-​making. Music listening and music performance, support of music practice and lessons, home resources, attitudes about music, and concert and church music activity were influential in future music-​making, providing opportunity and encouragement in forming adult musical identity. Parental attitudes were more important than musical skills. School performance group activity at all levels, as well as inspiring teachers, were influential. Pitts found that a balance between home and school served as a source of encouragement, opportunity and musical identity formation for young people. Among mature keyboard performers,Taylor (2011) found that family musical interest served as a motivation to participate, and piano was used for social enrichment at family gatherings. Partners, as well as memories of parents and grandparents who enjoyed music, helped participants to reconnect with the music of their youth, recreating a positive music identity and serving as a foundation for their current musical interests. Family and friends provided self-​affirmation of their musical ability, providing for informal learning opportunities which helped overcome past negative musical experiences and facilitated role shifts from music listener to music performer. Participants used music as a way to cope with difficult life challenges, and as a source of personal growth, self-​confidence and happiness. Bowles (1991) found that home and parents were influences on developing musical interests as adults. In this study, adults enjoyed choir participation and private study on piano, voice and guitar as well as learning about music history. Significant relationships were found between current participation and previous formal and informal musical involvement. Bowles suggested that musically active adults may promote greater musical involvement of children. Coulson (2010) also found that professional musicians were influenced by social environment and family support. Barnes et  al. (2016) compared ratings of family musical support among students in community music programmes in Brazil and the United States. Similar ratings were obtained for music home structure, expectations for music and valuing music. Students in Brazil gave higher ratings for musical home environment, while musical background ratings were higher among US participants, perhaps due to higher socio-​economic status. It would appear that 410

411

The role of the family

home musical environment characteristics support community music programme goals as well, and that family musical support influences intergenerational musical participation and adult musical activity. Halko (2014) described a programme intended to promote family bonding through shared stringed instrument performance. Adolescent participants taught adults how to play, serving as their parents’ teacher.These role changes developed patience and communication between children and adult relatives. Parents in this intergenerational music-​making programme benefitted through active music-​making and child–​adult bonding. In comparison, de Vries (2012) found that older adults developed positive attitudes about young people, and their experience promoted positive social engagement in which they felt valued and respected (including their choice to make music). Both parties learned as a result of their experiences, in line with Varvarigou et  al.’s (2011) findings. Informal music-​making appeared to support children’s formal school music learning and enhance the life experiences of older adults through intergenerational music-​making.

Encouraging family musical support While we know a great deal about how family support for music study can be helpful, this does not happen automatically. Levinowitz (1993) advocates parental education to inform parents about supporting music learning. Macmillan (2004) found that while 40% of teachers encouraged parental lesson attendance, 30% discouraged attendance, and other teachers only wanted younger students to attend lessons. While 20% encouraged parents to assist with practice, 55% of parents were discouraged from helping with practice by their teacher. Teachers expressed concerns about parents interfering with lessons, inhibition of independent teacher–​ student relationships, students not taking responsibility for their own practice and students being confused by too much parental involvement. Macmillan also found a relationship between teacher encouragement of parental involvement and home environment.Teachers who supported parental involvement believed practice and enjoyment could be enhanced and that it is especially helpful for younger students and students preparing for performance examinations. Piano teachers with more training were more comfortable involving parents. Abrams and Gibbs (2000) identified barriers to implementing parental involvement programmes in school settings, including minimal opportunities for involvement, work and time pressures, lack of parenting skills and poor school to parent communication as well as conflicting roles for parents and schools. Rapp (2009) found that although choral directors supported parental involvement, they communicated only infrequently and via email, asking parents for music programme support, but not for parental supervision of music practice or to develop musicianship at home. In a study of parents in rural, suburban and urban communities, Droe (2014–​2015) determined that rural parents rated their connectiveness with schools the strongest, and suburban parents the weakest, while suburban schoolteachers rated their connection with families strongest. A recent study examining promotion of musical home environments, conducted by Colon-​ Leon (2018), focused on predictors of school-​based parental involvement for special learners in music, as parental involvement is a strong component of education for special learners (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2004). Parent involvement differed significantly by students’ disability category. Her SEM included a large effect for school values and practices on parent’s motivational beliefs (ß = .66) and moderate effects for parents’ motivational beliefs and school-​based parental involvement (ß = .31) and parents’ impressions about music and school-​ based parental involvement (ß = .29) (Figure 25.3). 411

412

Stephen F. Zdzinski

Parents’ motivational beliefs .31

.66 Schools’ values and practices

.29

School-based parental involvement

Parents’ impressions about music

Figure 25.3  Colon-​Leon’s (2018) SEM model predicting school-​based parental involvement for special learners in music

Implications The research literature examining family support of musical learning suggests the following implications for education and music in the community. 1. Family support for music is multidimensional, and different strategies work for different types of learners and outcomes. 2. A number of family support models exist in general education and music and include family support behaviours as well as mediating elements. 3. In relation to childhood music learning, music researchers have examined perceived benefits, parental roles, family activities and musical backgrounds. Singing, music listening and providing musical experiences in home and early childhood classrooms have been found to be valuable, especially for promoting early music achievement. 4. In school music learning, family support continues to be influential, but additional school influences change the impact and nature of family participation. Family support is related to sustained musical commitment and to music achievement, and indirectly related to academic achievement. 5. In music performance learning, Creech’s (2016) family support categories have been found to be important in the development of music performance achievement. Behavioural support with lesson attendance and music practice, cognitive support related to listening and discussing music, providing home structure, encouraging musical engagement and personal support related to parental attitudes, expectations and family musical activity were all found to be valuable to music performance success. 6. Family musical support was influential for both adult and intergenerational music participation. Early family support predicted later musical activity, and adults found that intergenerational music participation was a valuable way to connect with other family members. 7. While family music support benefits are well documented, music teachers are reluctant to implement parental involvement strategies.

Issues for further research A number of issues seem to be worthy of additional research. These include: 1. How does family music support literature fit into existing general models of educational home environment? 412

413

The role of the family

2. How does family music support differ by types of music instruction, music student and music outcome? 3. How are family music support influences mediated by student (gender, age, ethnicity), family (family structure, siblings, extended family) and demographic characteristics (socio-​ economic status, mobility, culture)? 4. What motivates parents to become involved in their children’s music education? 5. What are the attitudes of music teachers towards promoting family music support, and what predicts their attitudes? How would education of pre-​service and in-​service teachers influence their responsiveness to encouraging family musical involvement? 6. How does family musical support fit into a larger model of the social environment of music  instruction that includes family, peers, media and school and community influences?

Reflective questions 1. What types of family support activities best promote the following: a. music achievement b. music motivation c. music performance d. enjoying  music e. musical participation? 2. How can music teachers promote family support to further musical development in children? 3. How should we train current and future music teachers to encourage family involvement in music study?

Suggestions for further reading Family support models in education Grolnick, W. S., & Slowiaczek, M. L. (1994). Parents’ involvement in children’s schooling: A multidimensional conceptualization and motivational model. Child Development, 65(1), 237–​252.

Family support models in music Creech, A. (2016). The role of the family in supporting music learning. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology. Oxford University Press. Zdzinski, S. F., & Russell, B. (2014, 14–​18 July). A model of musical home environment, parenting style, and psychosocial maturity predicting academic and musical success [Paper presentation]. International Society for Music Education Research Commission Conference, João Pessoa, Brazil.

Family musical support Ilari, B., & Young, S. (Eds.). (2016). Children’s home musical experiences across the world. Indiana University Press.

413

414

Stephen F. Zdzinski

References Abrams, L. S., & Gibbs, J.T. (2000). Planning for school change: School-​community collaboration at a full-​ service elementary school. Urban Education, 35(1), 79–​103. Baker, A., & Soden, L. M. (1997, 24–​28 March). Parent involvement in children’s education: A critical assessment of the knowledge base [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Asociation, Chicago. https://​eric.ed.gov/​?id=ED407127 Barnes, G. V., DeFreitas, A., & Grego, J. (2016). Parental involvement and home environment in music:  Current and former students from selected community music programs in Brazil and the United States. International Journal of Music Education, 34(2), 208–​218. Barry, N., & Hallam, S. (2002). Practice. In R. Parncutt & G. McPherson (Eds.), The science and psychology of music performance (pp. 151–​165). Oxford University Press. Borthwick, S., & Davidson, J. (2002) Developing a child’s identity as a music:  A family “script” perspective. In R. MacDonald, D. Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), Musical Identities (pp. 60–​78). Oxford University Press. Bowles, C.  L. (1991). Self-​expressed adult music education interests and music experiences. Journal of Research in Music Education, 39(3), 191–​205. Brand, M. (1985). Development and validation of the home musical environment scale for use at the early elementary level. Psychology of Music, 13(1),  40–​48. Brand, M. (1986). Relationship between home musical environment and selected musical attributes of second-​grade children. Australian Journal of Research in Music Education, 34(2), 111–​120. Bugeja, C. (2009). Parental involvement in the musical education of violin students: Suzuki and traditional approaches compared. Australian Journal of Music Education, 2009(1),  19–​28. Bushong, M. F. (2005). Parental involvement: An investigation of influences of a parent instrumental program on beginning instrument success [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Temple University. Byrn, M. D., & Hourigan, R. (2010). A comparative case study of music interactions between mothers and infants. Contributions to Music Education, 37(1),  65–​79. Cali, C. (2015). Music in family: Experiences of mutuality in middle childhood [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Columbia University Teacher’s College. Camilli, T. C. (2010). Parental and personality factors that predict students’ length of piano study [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Oklahoma. Cannava, E. S. (1995). Professionally guided instrument selection as a factor of beginning band retention [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Colorado at Boulder. Cardany, A. A. (2004). Music education for preschool children: Perspectives and experiences of parents [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Arizona State University. Cassasola, M., & Cohen, L. B. (2000). Infants association of linguistic labels with causal actions. Developmental Psychology, 36(2), 155–​168. Colon-​Leon, V. (2018). A model of parental involvement in the music education of students with special education needs [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Miami. Coulson, S. (2010). Getting “capital” in the music world: Musicians’ learning experiences and working lives. British Journal of Music Education, 27(3), 255–​270. Creech, A. (2001). Play for me: An exploration into motivation, issues and outcomes related to parental involvement in their children’s violin study [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Sheffield. Creech, A. (2013). Learning a musical instrument: The case for parental support. Music Education Research, 12(1),  13–​32. Creech, A., & Hallam, S. (2003). Parent-​teacher-​pupil interactions in instrumental music tuition: A literature review. British Journal of Music Education, 20(1),  29–​44. Creech, A., & Hallam, S. (2011). Learning a musical instrument: The influence of interpersonal inaction on outcomes for school-​aged pupils. Psychology of Music, 39(1) 102–​122. Creech, A. (2016). The role of the family in supporting music learning. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 493–​508). Oxford University Press. Custodero, L. A., Britto, P. R., & Xin,T. (2002). From Mozart to Motown, lullabies to love songs: A preliminary report of the Parents’ Use of Music with Infants Survey (PUMUS). Zero to Three, 23(1),  41–​46. Custodero, L. A. (2006). Singing practices in 10 families with young children. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(1),  37–​56. Custodero, L. A., & Johnson-​Green, E. A. (2003). Passing the cultural torch: Musical experience and musical parenting of infants. Journal of Research in Music Education, 52(2), 102–​114.

414

415

The role of the family Davidson, J. W. (1999). Self and desire: A preliminary exploration of why students start and continue with music learning. Research Studies in Music Education, 72(1),  30–​37. Davidson, J.W., & Borthwick, S. J. (2002). Family dynamics and family scripts: A case study of music development. Psychology of Music, 30(1), 121–​136. Davidson, J. W., & Burland, K. (2006). Musician identity formation. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of musical development (pp. 475–​490). Oxford University Press. Davidson, J. W., Howe, M., Moore, D., & Sloboda, J. (1996). The role of parental influences in the development of musical performance. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14(4), 399–​412. Davidson, J. W., & Pitts, S. E. (2001). “People have talents”: A case study of musical behavior in an adoptive family. British Journal of Music Education, 18(2), 161–​171. Davidson, J. W., Sloboda, J., & Howe, M. (1995). The role of parents and teachers in the success and failure of instrumental learners. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 127,  40–​44. Department for Education and Employment. (1997). Excellence in Schools. Cm 3681. Her Majesty’s Stationary Office. www.educationengland.org.uk/​documents/​wp1997/​excellence-​in-​schools.html de Vries, P. (2012). Intergenerational music making: A phenomenological study of three older Australians making music with children. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59(4), 339–​356. Dregalla, H.  E. (1983). A study of predictors of music achievement among students from selected high schools of Nebraska [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Case Western Reserve University. Droe, K. L. (2014–​2015). Investigating parent and teacher perceptions of school, family, and community connectedness. Contributions to Music Education, 40,  57–​70. Epstein, J. L. (1996). Improving school-​family-​community partnerships in the middle grades. Middle School Journal, 28(2),  43–​48. Epstein, J. L. (2011). School, family, and community partnerships:  Preparing educators and improving schools. Westview Press. Fan, X., & Chen, M. (2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: A meta-​analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 13,  1–​22. Freeman, J. (1976). Developmental influence on children’s perception. Educational Research, 19(1), 435–​452. Gabor, E. (2009). When work starts in childhood:  The anticipatory socialization process of classical musicians [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Purdue University. Govel, L. M. (2004). Parental involvement among piano student dropouts [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Southern California. Graziano, V. (1991). A descriptive analysis of various relationships between home environment and success in piano study [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Columbia University Teachers College. Grice, J. M. G. (1995). The effect of various timbres on the aural perception of young children. Dissertation Abstracts International, 55(2), 3776. Grolnick, W. S., & Slowiaczek, M. L. (1994). Parents’ involvement in children’s schooling: A multidimensional conceptualization and motivational model. Child Development, 65(1), 237–​252. Halko, G. (2014). The family orchestra project: Examining adult-​child bonding during adolescence through group music making [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Arizona. Henderson, S. J. (1999). Family correlates of exceptional adolescent achievement [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Iowa. Hickok, S. C. (2009). The relationships of parental involvement, motivating factors, and SES to HS All-​State choir and band membership [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Auburn University. Ho, W. C. (2009). The perception of music learning among parents and students in Hong Kong. Council for Research in Music Education Bulletin, 181,  71–​93. Hoover-​Dempsey, K.V., & Sandler, H. M. (1997).Why do parents become involved in their children’s education? Review of Educational Research, 67(1),  3–​42. Ilari, B. (2005). On musical parenting of young children: Musical beliefs and behaviors of mothers and infants. Early Child Development and Care, 175(7–​8), 647–​660. Ilari, B., Moura, A., & Bourscheidt, L. (2011). Between interactions and commodities: Musical parenting of infants and toddlers in Brazil. Music Education Research, 13(1),  51–​67. Ilari, B., & Young, S. (Eds.). (2016). Children’s home musical experiences across the world. Indiana University Press. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2004). Pub. L. No. 101–​476. Reauthorized through PL 114–​ 95, the Every Students Succeeds Act, December 2015. https://​sites.ed.gov/​idea/​ Johnson-​Green, E., & Custodero, L. A. (2002). The toddler top 40: Musical preferences of babies, toddlers, and their parents. Zero to Three, 23(1),  47–​48.

415

416

Stephen F. Zdzinski Kalverboer, K. (2008). Parental involvement in private violin lessons:  Survey of teacher attitudes and practices [Unpublished master’s thesis]. McGill University. Keith, T. Z., & Keith, P. B. (1993). Does parental involvement affect eighth-​grade student achievement? Structural analysis of national data. School Psychological Review, 22(3), 474–​495. Koops, L. H. (2014). Songs from the car seat: Exploring the early childhood music-​making place of the family vehicle. Journal of Research in Music Education, 62(1),  52–​65. Lamont, A. (2008).Young children’s musical worlds: Musical engagement in 3.5-​year-​olds. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 6(3), 247–​261. Levinowitz, L.  M. (1993). Parent education as a beginning solution to musical childhood at risk. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 12,  9–​13. Macmillan, J. (2004). Learning the piano: A study of attitudes to parental involvement. British Journal of Music Education, 21(3), 295–​311. Manturzewska, M. (1990). A biographical study of the life-​span development of professional musicians. Psychology of Music, 18, 112–​139. Mariotta, M. (2011). Parental support in the development of young musicians: A teacher’s perspective from a small-​scale study of piano students and their parents. Australian Journal of Music Education, 1(1),  16–​30. McClellan, E. R. (2011). Relationships among parental influences, selected demographic factors, and adolescent self-​concept as a future music educator, and the decision to major in music education. Council for Research in Music Education Bulletin, 187,  49–​64. McPherson, G. E. (2009). The role of parents in children’s musical development. Psychology of Music, 37(1), 91–​110. McPherson, G. E., & Davidson, J. W. (2006). Playing an instrument. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of music development (pp. 331–​351). Oxford University Press. Moyer, J. R. (2010) Dad had a horn in the attic: Relationships between instrument sources, parental involvement, SES, and attrition among beginning band students [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Boston University. Nolan, M. R. (2008). Parental involvement in instrumental music: A parent’s perspective [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Phoenix. Papinchak, A. E. (1992). The identification of factors that influence the retention of middle school string students in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Dissertation Abstracts International, 53(7), 2287. Pitt, J., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2017). Attitudes towards and perceptions of the rationale for parent-​child group music making with young children. Music Education Research, 19(3), 292–​308. Pitts, S. (2009). Roots and routes in adult musical participation:  Investigating the impact of home and school on lifelong musical interest and involvement. British Journal of Music Education, 26(3), 241–​256. Pitts, S. E., Davidson, J. W., & McPherson, G. E. (2000). Models of success and failure in instrumental learning: Case studies of young players in the first 20 months of learning. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 146,  51–​69. Pomerantz, E. M., & Dong,W. (2006). Effects of mother’s perceptions of children’s competence: The moderating role of mother’s theories of competence. Developmental Psychology, 42(5), 950–​961. Rapp, J. (2009). Directors’ attitudes regarding parental involvement in the middle school choral setting. Research & Issues in Music Education, 7(1), Article 4. www.stthomas.edu/​r imeonline/​vol7/​rapp.htm Reay, D. (1998). Class work:  Mothers involvement in their children’s primary schooling. University College Press. Savage, S. (2015). Understanding mothers’ perspectives on early childhood music programs. Australian Journal of Music Education, 2, 127–​139. Scott, L. K. (2004). Early childhood brain development and elementary music curricula: Are they in tune? General Music Today, 18(1),  20–​27. Shen, D. (2016). A survey of parent, student and teacher attitudes about perceived parental involvement in Chinese and American private piano lessons [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Toledo. Sichivitsa,V. (2004). Music motivation: A study of fourth, fifth, and sixth graders’ intentions persist in music. Contributions to Music Education, 31(2),  27–​41. Sloboda, J., & Howe, M. J. (1991). Biographical precursors of musical excellence:  An interview study. Psychology of Music, 19,  3–​21. Sloboda, J., & Howe, M. J. (1992).Transitions in the early musical careers of able young musicians: Choosing instruments and teachers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 40(4), 283–​294. Sosniak, L. (1985). Learning to be a concert pianist. In B. Bloom (Ed.), Developing talent in young people (pp. 19–​67). Ballentine Books.

416

417

The role of the family Taylor, A. (2011). Continuity, change and mature musical identity construction: Using “rivers of music experience” to trace the musical lives of six mature-​age keyboard players. British Journal of Music Education, 28(2), 195–​212. Temmerman, N. (2000). An investigation of the music activity preferences of preschool children. British Journal of Music Education, 17(1),  51–​60. Trainor, L. J., & Desjardins, R. N. (2002). Pitch characteristics of infant-​directed speech affect infant’s ability to discriminate vowels. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9(2), 335–​340. Trehub, S. E., Unyk, A. M., Kamenetsky, S. B., Hill, D. S.,Trainor, L. J., Henderson, J. L., & Saraza, M. (1997). Mothers’ and fathers’ singing to infants. Developmental Psychology, 33(3), 500–​507. Upitus, R., Abrami, P. C., Brook, J., & King, M. (2017). Parental involvement in children’s independent music lessons. Music Education Research, 19(1),  74–​98. Varvarigou, M., Creech, A., Hallam, S., & McQueen, H. (2011). Bringing different generations together in music-​making: An intergenerational music project in East London. International Journal of Community Music, 4(3), 207–​220. Vispoel, W. P., & Austin, J. R. (1993). Constructive response to failure in music: The role of attribution feedback and classroom goal structure. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 110–​129. Wills,A. M. (2011). Relationships among musical home environment, parental involvement, demographic characteristics, and early childhood music participation [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Miami. Wu, S. M. (2005). A survey of Taiwanese parents’ attitude toward early childhood music education and their participation in music activities at home [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Southern California. Youm, H. K. (2013). Parents’ goals, knowledge, practices, and needs regarding music education for their young children in South Korea. Journal of Research in Music Education, 61(3), 280–​302. Young, S. (2008). Lullaby light shows: Everyday musical experience among under twos. International Journal of Music Education, 26(1), 33–​46. Zanders, M. L. (2011). The musical and personal biographies of adolescents with foster care experience [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Temple University. Zdzinski, S. F. (1992). Relationships among parental involvement, music aptitude, and musical achievement of instrumental music students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 40(2), 114–​125. Zdzinski, S. F. (1996). Parental involvement, selected student attributes, and learning outcomes in instrumental music. Journal of Research Education, 44(1),  34–​38. Zdzinski, S. F. (2013). The underlying structure of parental involvement-​home environment in music. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 198, 69–​88. Zdzinski, S. F., Gumm, A., Orzolek, D., Cooper, S., Russell, B., Dell, N., Rinnert, N.,Yap, C. C., & Keith, T. (2015). Musical home environment, family background, and parenting style on success in school music and in school. Contributions to Music Education, 40(1),  71–​90. Zdzinski, S. F., & Russell, B. (2014, 14–​18 July). A model of musical home environment, parenting style, and psychosocial maturity predicting academic and musical success [Paper presentation]. International Society for Music Education Research Commission Conference, João Pessoa, Brazil. Zhang, J. (2016). Chinese immigrant parents and children’s perspectives and behaviors in extra-​curriculum music learning [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Windsor.

417

418

26 THE ROLE OF PEERS IN SUPPORTING LEARNING IN MUSIC Siw Graabræk Nielsen and Guro Gravem Johansen

As Creech and Hallam (2017, p.  57) point out, “music performance is an inherently social activity”. This quality points to how music activity may offer a powerful context for peer-​ supported learning. Regardless of the factors involved in peer interactions –​including the size of the group, the different levels of experience between the members, and the specific context –​peer learning represents an important resource for learning in music education as well as music in the community. Luce (2001) claims that, traditionally, music education focuses on teaching musical skills and knowledge by “relating the skills and knowledge to personal experience and growth” (p. 20); however, within our 21st-​century context, there is an increasing focus on the imperative for music educators to engage diverse communities and cohorts in inclusive and collaborative practices. In this chapter, we address the role of peers in supporting learning in music. We draw evidence from a body of research that has explored different types of peer-​supported learning at different ages in both formal and informal learning contexts (Folkestad, 2006) as well as web/​ technology-​driven contexts. To begin, we discuss different understandings of peer-​supported learning. At the end of the chapter, we discuss implications for music education, suggestions for further research, and potential pitfalls or limits of peer learning.

The role of peers in learning Peer-​supported learning can take different forms and operate in different contexts for music learning and participation. Topping (2005, p.  631) defines peer learning as “the acquisition of knowledge and skill through active helping and supporting among status equals or matched companions” –​in other words, peer learning occurs when people who are not professional teachers help both each other and themselves to learn. Topping (2005) points out that peer learning may be an old form of community action that can take place “implicitly and vicariously” (p. 631). More recently, explicit and deliberate forms of peer learning have received increased attention in educational and community music learning settings (Gaunt & Westerlund, 2013; Hanken, 2016). In such formal or informal learning situations, the role of peers and their interactions may differ depending on whether they are working together (as in using buddy systems), whether they are working in a small group of peers who share 418

419

The role of peers

similar specific goals (as in collaborative learning) or whether one of the peers has taken on or was assigned the role of either tutor or mentor (as in peer tutoring, peer mentoring or peer assessment) (Riese et al., 2012; Topping, 2005). Thus, depending on the situation, the characteristics of the peer may differ between being the helped, the helper or, in more collaborative forms of learning, the helped and the helper interchangeably. Further, the quality of peer relations may stem from the distribution of prior subject knowledge among peers or from “the social relationships between peers and their prior knowledge of each other” (Riese et al., 2012, p. 602). “[T]‌here is a potential productiveness in interdependency –​independently of the instructional design. The presence of interdependency appears in the findings on the importance of the quality of the peer relations ensuring trust and allowing disagreement” (Riese et al., 2012, p. 616). Hence, in order to understand the factors that affect peer learning quality, it is important to look at what characterises social relations between peers, the peers’ degree of mutual identification (Johansen & Nielsen, 2019) and internal status, and whether the peers have a hierarchical or equal relationship. As such, the notion of peer learning may be understood in different ways based on different theoretical perspectives. In the following section, we look specifically at two theoretical foundations for understanding the dimensions of peer learning: the respective theories of Lev Vygotsky and Albert Bandura.

Peers in the zone of proximal development In Western educational and developmental psychology, interest in the social nature of learning and development can be traced back to Russian developmental psychologist Lev Vygotsky (1896–​1934). According to Vygotsky, learning processes start when a child begins interacting with their environment. Such interactions precede the internalisation of learning processes and, as a result, the child’s independent developmental achievements. Children are able to solve problems and act beyond their actual level of development when they are guided by adults or when they collaborate with “more capable peers” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86). Vygotsky conceptualises this social space as the zone of proximal development. Children’s ability to perform beyond their actual individual competence can be explained as a “functional loan by social others and by culture” (del Río & Álvarez, 2007, p. 280). The status between participants is an important factor to examine when it comes to understanding the ways in which social interaction facilitates development (Daniels, 2007). While others define peer learning as a process between participants with equal status (see Topping, 2005), learning within the zone of proximal development depends, according to Vygotsky, on interacting with more capable or knowledgeable interlocutors, whether these be adults or peers. In other words, learning seems to depend on an asymmetrical status, at least in terms of the amount of knowledge possessed by the participants. A topic of particular interest in this chapter is when peer learning has something to offer that is qualitatively different to learning from adults in the zone of proximal development. From this perspective, it is interesting to note how Vygotsky gave a significant amount of attention to children’s play as the most important activity for their learning. One distinctive feature of play, and consequently the learning processes that emerge from it, is the absence of adults. In play, the initial status of the participants can be equal and still foster learning. A major characteristic of play that allows learning to happen is its experimentation with rules and roles. Rogoff (1990) claims that “[i]‌t may be the absence of external control, the freedom to play with the rules themselves and to recast the goals of an activity from moment to moment, that is unique and valuable in peer interaction” (p. 186). 419

420

S. G. Nielsen and G. G. Johansen

Vygotsky claims that in group play, a child is able to subordinate their behaviour to social rules before they are capable of voluntary self-​regulation. In their play children project themselves into the adult activities of their culture and rehearse their future roles and values. Thus, play is in advance of development, for in this manner children begin to acquire the motivation, skills, and attitudes necessary for their social participation. (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 129) When children use imitation and imagination to take different roles, they are stretching their conceptual abilities to act out their perceptions of meanings and rules in certain situations. In doing so, they “generate opportunities for intellectual development” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 129). Hence, role play is crucial for children to learn how to change their perspectives, establish intersubjectivity (Daniels, 2007) and develop their identity (Holland & Lachocotte, 2007).

Making vicarious experiences The significance of peer interaction in broadening children’s and students’ sense of personal competence, as well as the social loan of competence in a particular area (as we have noted), is also central to social cognitive theory. Bandura (1997, p. 173) emphasises that in a vast amount of learning, peers serve “as a major agency” in constructing children’s and students’ sense of personal efficacy when organising and executing competent performances. That is, in social cognitive theory, interacting with peers in learning activities is an important tool for developing “efficacious styles of thinking and behaviour” (p. 173). The central notion of learning put forth by Bandura (1997) is the phenomenon of vicarious experiences that may “enhance or neutralize the impact of direct experiences” (p. 89) through the “transmission of competencies and comparison with the attainments of others” (p. 79). It is especially through the impact of observational learning that peer interactions may prove valuable, as “seeing or visualizing people similar to oneself perform successfully typically raises beliefs in observers that they themselves possess the capabilities to master comparable activities” (Bandura, 1997, p. 87). Equally important is the peer interaction that occurs when a student fails a task or when they observe others fail, which “is most likely to raise perceived efficacy when seeing what has not worked for others raises the observer’s confidence in better alternatives” (p. 89). This may alter the student’s subsequent personal self-​efficacy beliefs in a positive and constructive way. However, as we have mentioned, social relations between peers –​among other factors in the learning environment –​also govern these vicarious experiences. According to social cognitive theory, in structuring learning activities, ensuring trust and allowing disagreements in peer relations are crucial to interpreting success or failure. Whether activities are structured cooperatively or competitively also affects children’s judgements of their capabilities, and the esteem with which they hold themselves and their associates. Results of comparative studies show that cooperative structures, in which members encourage and teach one another, generally promote higher performance attainments than do competitive and individualistic ones. (Bandura, 1997, p. 175) Regardless of skill level, the above applies if the performer feels more capable and self-​ satisfied in cooperative learning activities than in competitive ones (Bandura, 1997, p.  175). 420

421

The role of peers

Further, vicarious experiences are seen as being mediated through various peers, or modes, which, in addition to actual modelling, may include technology-​based modelling such as participating in virtual communities or using other visual media. In all modes, the “problem of observability” (Bandura, 1997, p. 93) of covert performances in learning arises; thus, shared monitoring, evaluation and reflection may be required in order to influence peers’ capacity to “actively control their own learning and outcomes” (Hadwin et al., 2011, p. 66). This calls for seeing observational learning as also a kind of socially shared regulation of learning, where peer interaction may foster “beliefs towards shared outcomes” and “align task awareness to co-​construct a common task space for a problem” for the empowerment of one another (Hadwin et al., 2011, p. 70). This type of interdependent collaborative learning emphasises the social aspects of belonging and participating in learning as well as the more individual aspect of knowing how to regulate one’s own learning (Järvenoja & Järvelä, 2009).

The impact of peers on musical learning Here, we review research on different forms of peer-​supported learning in a selection of formal and informal music learning contexts. This section is divided into five subsections. We first discuss conceptual understandings of formal and informal learning contexts, highlighting research on peer learning in informal music practices. Then, we present research on peer-​supported learning in formal learning contexts such as preschool music education, specialised pre-​college music education, instrumental tuition/​music schools and higher music education. Lastly, we discuss web-​supported peer learning.

Peer learning in formal and informal contexts Distinctions of formal and informal learning The role of peers in learning music has been particularly salient in the field conceptualised as informal music practice, since a major difference between informal and formal educational settings is the absence in the first of a teacher or “a person who takes on the task of organising and leading the learning activity” (Folkestad, 2006, p. 141). Conceptualising informal learning at one end of a continuum, such processes are driven “by the interaction of the participants in the activity” (Folkestad, 2006, p. 141). Folkestad (2006) identified four dimensions in defining formal and informal learning. The first dimension is the situation in which learning happens; that is, whether or not it occurs within formally constituted educational institutions (Hager & Halliday, 2009).The second dimension is learning style, which Folkestad explains as the character, nature and quality of the learning process (Folkestad, 2006, p. 141); Folkestad specifically refers to whether musical learning happens predominantly by ear or from written music.1 Folkestad’s third dimension is ownership; that is, who decides what to do, how to do it, where to do it and when to do it. The fourth dimension is intentionality, which refers to whether the learners are directing their minds toward the music-​making activity (a musical framing of the situation) or learning to make music (a pedagogical framing of the situation). Most learning situations contain both formal and informal features when examined from this four-​dimensional perspective, and according to Folkestad, there is a fluid relationship between them. Addressing peer learning in this section leads to an emphasis on informal situations in which the teacher or facilitator is absent or in the background. Thus, we place particular emphasis on the ownership dimension; that is, decision-​making processes among the participants of an activity. 421

422

S. G. Nielsen and G. G. Johansen

Informal learning in formal contexts Learners’ ownership of their decision-​making and learning processes is often considered crucial to making music education more democratic. Several studies have examined how organising for informal learning, as opposed to “authority-​based learning”, can increase democracy and ownership within formal contexts (Allsup, 2002, pp. 26–​27). In Violet, a Belgian community-​based string orchestral programme, which is aimed at children and young people from the ages of 8 to 26, formal and informal approaches are blended into what Dakon and Cloete (2018) frame as the eclectic practice of music-​making. The informal dimensions are seen through a high degree of peer interaction and support between participants of different ages and levels of experience, as the older individuals often teach the younger ones.Thus, peer-​supported learning often takes the form of an apprenticeship, which enhances a sense of group unity and a safe social space. A model that is derived from learning within popular music (Green, 2008), sometimes referred to as garage band culture (Allsup, 2002), places responsibility on participating peers to make decisions on what to play and how to go about the music-​making process. Jaffurs (2004) undertook a study in which she observed band practice sessions with five children, each a student at US elementary schools. She noted how the children gave each other feedback through subtle, often inarticulate comments and non-​verbal communication. The children were constantly listening to all the parts of the music and were able to negotiate tempi, form, chord changes and balanced intonations. Through such negotiation processes, the children composed the music collaboratively, as there was no leader in the group, although an ad hoc leadership did seem to emerge when some children had more knowledge of particular issues than other children. Jaffurs saw these processes as an expression of a more democratic practice than her own classroom teaching, since the music represented the children’s own choices in a socially shared repertoire from “a world that is theirs, a world they understand, a world that defines who they are” (2004, p. 35). Allsup (2002) conducted a study in a US high school in which he functioned as a facilitator for two bands, consisting of nine instrumentalists altogether. Each band chose their own instrumentations and genres, and they decided how to work creatively with the chosen repertoire in terms of composing and/​or arranging. The main purpose of the participant-​led work was to enhance a democratic learning environment that allowed for dialogue and the negotiation of power through shared decision-​making. Although the participants highlighted several advantages of this model, Allsup also detected challenges. One of these pertained to the status of members and equality (or lack thereof) between them. The self-​selection that is common in informal practices was impossible in the formal setting of a high school. This led to the formation of groups with members at different skill levels, which was difficult for the participants to handle. Further, the process of composing in garage band culture was perceived by some of the female participants as a “male activity” (Allsup, 2002, p. 33). The girls were in the minority and felt intimidated, as they had to adjust to the male participants’ behaviours. Male participants in the group did not think that gender was an issue.

Informal learning trajectories among professional musicians Studies on learning trajectories among professional musicians have revealed that musicians who have not received formal education within their specific genre instead engage in social groups or micro-​communities of peers with similar interests; these studies point to such practices as having a major influence on musicians’ learning (Berliner, 1994; Green, 2002; Kamin et  al., 2007). 422

423

The role of peers

Such peer-​oriented learning practices have mainly been described within jazz (Berliner, 1994), popular music (Green, 2002) and folk music (Kamin et  al., 2007). Berliner (1994) describes what he calls “the jazz community” on the east coast of the United States, where informal apprenticeships in the forms of jamming and sitting in (joining an established band on gigs) with fellow musicians were crucial to the musicians’ development. Ownership of learning in the sense that the learner is responsible for pointing out their own direction as opposed to relying on their teacher’s leadership is also emphasised by Berliner (1994) within the jazz community. In popular music, developing specialised musical and instrumental or vocal skills can occur through self-​study. In her study of British popular musicians, Green (2002) emphasised the significance of learning from peers, although a lot of the participants’ music learning, whether playing their own instruments or listening to recordings, was done alone. Längler et al. (2018) investigated expertise development among guitar players in the field of popular music and found that “peers and being part of a band were perceived by the expert group as the most supportive for the development of expertise” (p.  240), while parents and teacher-​supported learning were perceived as less important. Peers had proved helpful for the expert-​guitarist-​to-​ be in structuring their practice activities and in motivating them to learn their instrument and build a career. However, Längler et al. (2018) also point out that their study did not address in detail how these peer learning situations were organised to be evidently helpful; thus, this may be a suitable area to investigate further. Green (2002) makes an interesting popular music observation (that contrasts with Berliner’s description) that there is little to no access to a “community of practice” where younger musicians can learn from older and more experienced musicians in apprentice-​like relations. In the practices Green studied, social learning groups were composed of peers of the same age and level. In Berliner’s description of a jazz community, the degree of experience seemed to be more varied. How access to more experienced peers may affect the development of knowledge and skills and whether (and how) hierarchies between participants emerge, compared to when the peers from whom one is learning are at a similar learning stage, are questions that warrant further investigation. Another question is whether social positioning between peers is related to genre. Both Allsup (2002) and Jaffurs (2004) emphasise the democratic dimension of peer collaboration and informal learning within popular music. Jazz culture is often, in contrast, described as monolithic and hierarchical, oriented around “the iconic genius figure (typically male) [that] transcends time and context” (Whyton, 2006, p. 70). The idealisation of peer-​directed learning in informal practices as being more democratic and authentic than in formal practices is problematic. Although Allsup (2002) highlights the self-​selection of participants in informal practices as positive in terms of member equality, Annfelt (2003) claims that, from a gender perspective, this promotes homosociality. Green (2002) found that recruitment in informal popular music practices often happens along social boundaries, which may hinder democracy in terms of equal access to learning and making music. In her study, she found that males entered popular music at approximately 15  years old, while females generally started in their 20s. Further, the popular band arena invites, and reproduces, stereotypical masculinity (Green, 2002). Thus, males are given the opportunity to develop a common gender identity. For females, the situation is often the opposite; they are denied experiences of gender identification due to inherently masculine connotations, possibly leading to alienation (Green, 2002); this was confirmed in Allsup’s (2002) study. When informal practice is implemented as a model for music learning in schools, the ideal of peer-​ directedness may exclude participants based on such social criteria as gender. Thus, instead of necessarily strengthening equity among peers, informal music practices may reinforce implicit power battles and hidden hierarchies (Dyndahl & Nielsen, 2011). 423

424

S. G. Nielsen and G. G. Johansen

Peers in preschool music education While the field of research on music in early childhood acknowledges that, broadly speaking, children worldwide undergo similar patterns of development, young children’s musical lives are characterised more by cultural differences and diversity than by commonalities (see Young & Ilari, 2018). As a result, less interest is placed on individual development and learning music as an object. Instead, music is conceptualised as an activity in which to participate; hence, music in early childhood is predominantly a social activity (Young & Ilari, 2018), whereas learning is understood as shared meaning making (Wassrin, 2019). As such, many studies have focused on parent–​infant interactions (see Trevarthen & Malloch, 2018; Young & Ilari, 2018), while peer-​ to-​peer interactions among young children has been investigated to a lesser degree. Even so, toddlers may form a community “with peers or older companions who are prepared to play” by using vocal inventions, making sounds with objects and creating patterns in tone and pulse (Trevarthen & Malloch, 2018, p. 27). Thus, social play is characteristic of very young children’s meaning making in music. Wassrin (2019) studied music activities in a preschool environment with children aged 1 to 3 years. She observed that when the pedagogues deliberately did not set traditional boundaries for music activities, the children would choose to use music intertwined with other bodily expressions, such as drawing while singing or jumping while playing with instruments. When the adults allowed this spontaneous and simultaneous activity, in which music represented one of many expressive means, the children were able to explore their surroundings and communicate with the other toddlers on their own terms.Wassrin claims that allowing such improvised, holistic and interactive expressions is particularly important for children who have not yet developed the ability to communicate verbally. Settings in which children are given increased choices of action and agency affect how these children relate to their peers. However, this may not necessarily be a purely positive and constructive experience. In another study in a preschool setting, slightly older children (exact ages are not provided) who participated in creative improvisation workshops were given tools to lead musical group improvisations (MacGlone, 2019). These tools enabled them to take the initiative to make musical decisions in their group, such as conducting signs. At times, the children could use these tools to deliberately exclude or mute other children during a music-​making passage. Hierarchical roles that had emerged among the children caused conflict. As MacGlone (2019) suggests, “[t]‌hese unresolved power relationships perhaps demonstrate a difficulty the children have in balancing their own needs with the needs of others” (p. 126).

Peer learning in instrumental tuition Specialised pre-​college music education In a fairly recent report on pre-​college music education in Europe by the Association Européenne des Conservatoires (AEC) (2007), pre-​college music education is defined as “the specific phases within music education focused on preparation of students for the entrance examination of higher music education institutions in order to become a professional musician” (p.  8). This type of specialised music education may prove valuable for access to other professional studies in higher music education (e.g., teaching or composing music). However, this phase of developing specialised musical and instrumental or vocal skills can take place within formal (music schools, primary and secondary schools or junior conservatoires) or informal (private tuition or self-​ study) settings (AEC, 2007, p.  8) and is often characterised by a highly individualised focus (Davidson & Jordan, 2007; Stabell, 2018). In this context, we take a closer look at recent research 424

425

The role of peers

that addresses the role of peers in supporting musical learning in specialised pre-​college music education in formal settings. Johansen (2018) examined a publicly founded music talent programme in Western classical music for students aged 10 to 16 years. This programme was established as a specialised part of a primary and secondary school programme and was organised as a “school within a school”, the overall aim being “to create a space that offers the opportunity to make a realistic choice to become a musician” (Johansen, 2018, p. 8, our translation). On a weekly basis, the students were given six additional music lessons in subjects such as main instrument, music theory and chamber music. In designing the programme, Johansen (2018, p.  35) found that the school management had prioritised facilitation of a good learning environment to ensure inspiration and interaction with students of the same level, regardless of age. The results of Johansen’s study showed that the school management may have succeeded with their priorities at the outset of the programme, as 70% of the graduates rated social learning as the most important outcome of the music talent programme (p. 135), and they unanimously rated “main instrument” as the most important subject in the programme (Johansen, 2018, p. 100). Conversely, none of the graduates rated “reaching a high level on their main instrument” as the most important outcome (p. 135). Johansen also found that while some students had previously felt peripheral to or outside the community of peers in their old school, most of them now seemed to have formed a closer peer learning community within the programme. Nevertheless, a few students still perceived themselves as being outsiders and experienced negative competitive pressure (Johansen, 2018). This study led to another important finding. The students were organised into set groups based on their skills (e.g., in music theory) as a didactic strategy to ensure peer interaction between students at the same level. Despite being in groups of the same skill level, however, the students did not find this arrangement beneficial to their development (Johansen, 2018, p. 135). Still, the findings of this study imply that the potential for peer-​supported learning in this kind of formal pre-​college music education may be present if it is emphasised by the management and teachers involved. In Stabell’s (2018) study of junior conservatoires in Western classical music  –​pre-​college programmes run by higher music education institutions in Norway and England –​an important finding was that using peers as learning resources can be challenging within a programme perceived by students as very competitive. As Stabell (2018, p. 223) states, the teachers “perceived the hierarchy naturally created by students in different levels as a resource for learning”. However, not all students were motivated or stimulated by being part of such a high-​achieving environment. Some students found the learning environment “to be a source of distress” (p. 218) and significantly emotionally detrimental. Hence, if the environment is not a collaborative one, observing peers succeed and becoming aware of the “standards of performance excellence” for one’s own instrument may not in itself produce positive vicarious experiences in less-​skilled peers. As noted earlier, peer-​supported learning in formal pre-​college music education can positively influence students’ learning, making of friends and development of social skills. However, in formal pre-​college programmes, a highly individualised focus can make it difficult to build the learning culture of collaboration and interdependence on which peer learning relies.

Private studios/​music schools/​municipal schools The importance of peer-​supported learning in instrumental tuition in private studios or music schools/​municipal schools has been outlined in several studies. Hallam (2012, p. 652) reminds 425

426

S. G. Nielsen and G. G. Johansen

us that instrumental/​vocal teachers need to bear in mind “the long-​term prospects for learners to engage in music-​making in the community”, which may be facilitated when students are encouraged “to engage in deep learning, to collaborate, to debate, to explore together, and to construct new interpretations, knowledge and understanding” (Creech & Hallam, 2017, p. 69). As described above, Dakon and Cloete (2018) argue –​in line with Folkestad (2006) –​for a more eclectic understanding of instrumental/​vocal tuition practices as “amalgamated informal and formal learning practices” (p. 60) that nurture both students’ social engagement and their musical self-​appreciation. In an ethnographic study of Norwegian instrumental jazz tuition practice for children from 7 to 15 years of age, Johansen (2021) observed the significant impact of children identifying with other children who also play jazz on sustaining motivation and perseverance in playing. Peer identification among the children was considered particularly important, since jazz improvisation among young children is rare. For instance, in Johansen’s study, a 13-​year-​old saxophonist was more able and motivated to copy details and nuances from a recording of improvisations with a peer with whom she had socially interacted than from recordings of historically well-​ known jazz musicians. A  shared repertoire of jazz tunes and codes for improvised interplay helped in transcending differences when children from different countries met and were able to play concerts with minimal rehearsal time. Despite the lack of a common verbal language, their shared affinity for jazz improvisation created a sense of identification and belonging that was visible in their joint effort and engagement when they played together. Johansen also discussed the gender aspects of peer identification. As opposed to identification with “idols” from the canon of jazz performers, the significance of peer identification was perhaps stronger for female learners than for male learners, since the jazz canon is predominantly male (McKeage, 2014). Observing and getting to know other female peers with the same interests may thus make up for the potential alienation young girls may experience when confronted with the cohort of “great” jazz musicians (McKeage, 2014) and could further limit the effect known as the stereotype threat, which is commonly felt among girls in male-​ dominated environments (Wehr, 2016).

Peer learning in higher music education Research on peer-​supported musical learning in higher music education has examined students’ learning activities in various subjects, study programmes and levels, and musical genres. This field has received increasing interest during the last 20  years (Gaunt & Westerlund, 2013; Hanken, 2016), which seems to have reflected the growing interest in initiating peer learning projects among teachers, students and management in higher music education institutions. The incentives for implementing peer-​supported learning appear to be manifold and varied. These may include motivations such as relieving the increased workloads of faculty and staff in basic musicianship courses (Furby, 2016) or aims such as enhancing student engagement in learning (Burkholder, 2002; Hund, 2012), empowering students musically (Johnson, 2011; Slette, 2019) and enhancing students’ self-​regulated learning and artistic autonomy (Hanken, 2015; Latukefu & Verenikina, 2013; Long, 2013). Further, as in pre-​college programmes, peer learning may improve students’ sense of belonging, intrinsic motivation, self-​esteem and social skills (Johansen, 2016; Kokotsaki & Hallam, 2007). However, in music academies and conservatoires –​especially in Western classical music –​ facilitating peer-​supported learning could prove particularly challenging within the subject of main instrument study where the teacher is considered to hold the central position as the master, as well as where an understanding of learning may imply that: 426

427

The role of peers

The transmission of knowledge takes place in a vertical line from master/​teacher to apprentice/​student in a teaching situation, which often take place one-​to-​one. The role of [sic.] peers –​the fellow students –​can play in one another’s development in a more horizontal line, is often neither articulated nor encouraged. (Hanken, 2016, p. 366) This lack of seeking help from or practising with peers is also found in studies on instrumental practising by Western classical music students (Nielsen, 2004; Nielsen et al., 2018), where an “individualized view on practising” often continues to appear predominant (Davidson & Jordan, 2007, p. 741).Yet within jazz, popular and folk music, several studies have reported on learning in social settings, including practising in ensembles, listening to recordings and discussing lessons with peers (Creech et al., 2008; Johansen, 2016; Nielsen et al., 2018; Sandgren, 2009). In popular music, Lebler (2007) reported on a study of a “master-​less studio” in an Australian conservatory that aims to facilitate “horizontal rather than vertical feedback mechanisms” in students’ creative work (p. 218). Instead of offering one-​on-​one lessons, a peer learning environment is offered “in which the rich resource of students’ abilities and expertise is readily accessed” (p. 211). Lebler argues that this type of flexible peer-​supported learning may prove invaluable to educating portfolio musicians, as it bears a resemblance to how professional musicians do their creative work in different ensembles. MacRitchie et al. (2018) take a similar stance, referring to skills in peer learning as generic skills of high value in professional life.They investigated opportunities for peer learning between student composers and student performers of contemporary piano music. Their research showed that peer learning is necessary when “prescriptive music notation on the one hand, and extended techniques on the other, are involved in the creative process” (p.  169), and they claimed that student performers and student composers need to develop these generic skills in order to be employable as artists. Other studies have made the same claim for vocal artists within classical music (Jung, 2014; Rumiantsev et al., 2017), students of the piano and saxophone (Reid & Duke, 2015) and conservatoire students in general (Gaunt et al., 2012). By interacting, graduate students learn to listen more critically to each other as a basis for experimenting themselves (Jung, 2014) and supporting their professional development (Gaunt et al., 2012). In other words, having these types of vicarious experiences is seen as constituting an important part of the learning content in higher music, which is in line with arguments for peer learning in higher education in general (e.g., Riese et al., 2012).

Web-​supported peer learning As mentioned above, peer-​supported learning can be mediated through various peers and can use many modes, including digital technology. Research on music technology as a supporting tool for learning in music has increased rapidly (Webster, 2016), and advances in technology now include both cloud-​based software programmes and smartphones and tablets to make and listen to music (Webster, 2016, p. 30). A study conducted by Bauer (2014) showed how digital technology is capable of supporting not only creative work and listening but also performance and ensemble playing. Hence, the opportunities for web-​supported learning in music are ubiquitous in both formal and informal learning environments. In line with this, Hallam (2012) states that new technological developments “have led to major changes in the extent to which we can access music, the ways that we do so, and also the types of instruments played.These changes are increasingly impacting on pedagogy” (p. 651). Furthermore, the influence of technology may “contribute to processes of democratization, widening the accessibility of one-​to-​one teaching” (Creech & Gaunt, 2012, p. 701), and, most importantly, “new technologies can enhance the 427

428

S. G. Nielsen and G. G. Johansen

promotion of cultural diversity in music education” (Ruthmann & Hebert, 2012, p. 569).There is no doubt that new technologies may also act as forums of collaborative learning and facilitate peer learning in music (Salavuo, 2006); however, in order to empower students, as discussed above, different technologies should also be assessed according to their offering of aspects of co-​construction and interaction among peers (Johnston et  al., 2014). One quality of virtual learning environments in music can be conceptualised as whether such environments facilitate “richly synchronous interactivity, meaning environments that enable instant multimedia communication and responsiveness between musicians, teachers, and students” (Ruthmann & Hebert, 2012, p. 570, italics in original). Ruthmann and Hebert (2012) also emphasise the importance of exploiting the unique possibilities in the “attainment of objectives and accomplishments that could not otherwise be achieved” (p. 570), such as virtual environments designed for joint “detailed analysis of performance … or even interactive projects that enable online visitors to contribute to ongoing musical creations” (p. 571). Notably, an online environment “that is perceived to be as ‘real’ in some cases as in-​person musical interactions” may offer a “sense of transcendence” (p. 571). Ideally, adhering to these qualities may lead to the formation of web-​supported learning forums that facilitate a sense of belonging and participation as well as musical experiences. However, Savage (2012, p. 499) reminds us to ask, in “respect of modes of learning, is successful engagement in processes such as musical performance or composition the same when technologies are involved? What are the potential losses or gains within such a process?” In that respect, new technologies are not neutral matters.

Conclusion In this chapter, we presented examples of the significance of peers in supporting children’s, students’, and musicians’ learning in music, suggesting, among other things, that peers can benefit their individual development, nurture their social engagement, and develop their generic skills of high value in their professional lives. We have seen that there are disparate views both in psychology and in empirical research regarding how the internal status between peers leads to positive learning processes –​whether equal or asymmetrical. These differences may be owing to the fact that success in equal or asymmetrical relations depends on the situation. We touched on successful processes that arise from a peer cohort with different degrees of knowledge and experience, and we looked at the strengths and disadvantages of allowing self-​selection when it comes to working with partners. Furthermore, we discussed different types of peer learning according to different music genres, such as popular music, jazz/​improvised music and Western classical music, as well as different contexts of learning. Based on the research presented here, peer learning should, first and foremost, be promoted because of its significance in the development of the musical achievements of children, students, and musicians in predominantly social activities.

Suggestions for further research Although research on peer learning in music has expanded rapidly, it is still necessary to obtain more detailed and focused knowledge on what characterises the organisation of successful peer learning situations in all ages, levels and contexts. Another issue is the limits of peer learning; what characterises situations in which participants benefit more from working alone or in a teacher-​directed setting than working with peers?

428

429

The role of peers

Organising peer learning also holds potential tensions; for example, regarding the issue of status between peers. Different genres have different traditions for how hierarchies and positions of power are played out, whether explicitly or implicitly. How do such “traditions of power” affect the learning outcomes of working with peers? Additionally, how do the ideals of equal peer status and participant ownership affect learning outcomes when peer learning is incited not by the participants, but by management and teachers?

Implications for music education As discussed in this chapter, peer learning holds unique potential in terms of its developmental benefits for participants, especially when considering the fundamental social character of music-​ making. However, in line with Sfard (1998), we wish to warn against a situation where trendy educational practices become “one-​for-​all practical recipes” (p. 10). It is crucial to facilitate peer learning situations that draw on factors that can contribute positively and to mitigate what we have pointed to as potentially problematic aspects of social learning processes. Peer learning can be effective when it is self-​chosen and the participants experience a high degree of ownership; however, the risk exists that participants may feel overwhelmed with responsibility when peer learning as a method is imposed by the teacher. Moreover, knowing that trust and identification between participants are important, teachers may draw on established social relationships when assigning learners in groups of peers. However, using informal peer-​directed learning as a model in music education may reinforce hidden hierarchies among the participants. Self-​selection holds the risk of homosociality in gendered music practices or the exclusion of students who are perceived as less skilled or popular than the rest of their peers. Teachers may, therefore, employ strategies to help participants develop trust and vicarious identification in teacher-​selected groups. As a final point, we wish to re-​emphasise Vygotsky’s emphasis on play, which involves using different perspectives to develop identification among peers. Summing up, students may benefit greatly from peer learning in terms of their sense of ownership and flexibility in perspective through identification with others. We argue that increased awareness of the risks and limits of peer learning may help teachers in utilising this important form of learning in a reflective way, and we hope that this chapter is a contribution to such an awareness.

Reflective questions 1. How might different kinds of peer learning in music be beneficial for different age groups, learning objectives and contexts? 2. How could teachers or facilitators create a balance between the advantage of participants’ self-​selection and the need to maintain inclusion regardless of gender, ethnicity and social status?

Note 1 Hence, Folkestad’s use of “learning style” should not be conflated with the use of the concept within cognitive psychology, where it refers to learning styles that are visual, auditory, tactile, and so forth.

429

430

S. G. Nielsen and G. G. Johansen

Suggestions for further reading Bandura, A. (1997). Self-​efficacy.The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman. Creech, A., Hallam, S.,Varvarigou, M., & McQueen, H. (2014). Active ageing with music: Supporting well-​being in the third and fourth ages. Institute of Education Press.

References Allsup, R. E. (2002). Mutual learning and democratic action in instrumental music education. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(1),  24–​37. Annfelt, T. (2003, July 17). Jazz as masculine space. Kilden genderresearch.no. http://​kjonnsforskning.no/​ en/​2003/​07/​jazz-​masculine-​space Association Européenne des Conservatoires. (2007). Final report: Pre-​college education in Europe;The Polifonia pre-​college working group. AEC Publications. www.aec-​music.eu/​userfiles/​File/​pre-​college-​nm.pdf Bandura, A. (1997). Self-​efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman. Bauer, W. I. (2014). Music learning today:  Digital pedagogy for creating, performance, and responding to music. Oxford University Press. Berliner, P. (1994). Thinking in jazz: The infinite art of improvisation. University of Chicago Press. Burkholder, J. P. (2002). Peer learning in music history courses. In M. Natvig (Ed.), Teaching music history (pp. 205–​223). Ashgate. Creech, A., & Gaunt, H. (2012). The changing face of individual instrumental tuition:  Value, purpose, and potential. In G. E. McPherson & G. F. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1; pp. 694–​711). Oxford University Press. Creech, A., & Hallam, S. (2017). Facilitating learning in small groups:  Interpersonal dynamics and task dimensions. In J. Rink, H. Gaunt, & A. Williamon (Eds.), Musicians in the making:  Pathways to creative performance (pp. 57–​ 74). Oxford University Press. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​acprof:oso/​ 9780199346677.003.0004 Creech, A., Papageorgi, I., Duffy, C., Morton, F., Hadden, E., Potter, J., de Bezenac, C., Whyton, T., Himonides, E., & Welch, G. (2008). Investigating musical performance:  Commonality and diversity among classical and non-​classical musicians. Music Education Research, 10(2), 215–​234. Dakon, J. M., & Cloete, E. (2018).The Violet experience: Social integration through eclectic music learning practices. British Journal of Music Education, 35(1),  57–​72. Daniels, H. (2007). Pedagogy. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 307–​331). Cambridge University Press. Davidson, J. W., & Jordan, N. (2007). Private teaching, private learning, and exploration of music instrument learning in the private studio, junior and senior conservatoires. In L. Bresler (Ed.), The international handbook of research in arts education (pp. 729–​744). Springer. del Río, P., & Álvarez, A. (2007). Inside and outside the zone of proximal development:  An ecofunctional reading of Vygotsky. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J.V. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 276–​306). Cambridge University Press. Dyndahl, P., & Nielsen, S. G. (2011). Musikkpedagogikk og autentisitet. In M. Lindgren, A. Frisk, I. Henningsson, & J. Öberg (Eds.), Musik och kunskapsbildning: En festskrift till Bengt Olsson (pp. 47–​56). Art Monitor. Folkestad, G. (2006). Formal and informal learning situations or practices vs formal and informal ways of learning. British Journal of Music Education, 23(2), 135–​145. Furby, V. J. (2016). The effects of peer tutoring on the aural skills performance of undergraduate music majors. National Association for Music Education, 34(3), 33–​39. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​8755/​233/​ 4556547 Gaunt, H., Creech, A., Long, M., & Hallam, S. (2012). Supporting conservatoire students towards professional integration:  One-​to-​one tuition and the potential of mentoring. Music Education Research, 14(1),  25–​43. Gaunt, H., & Westerlund, H. (2013). Collaborative learning in higher music education. Routledge. Green, L. (2002). How popular musicians learn: A way ahead for music education. Ashgate. Green, L. (2008). Music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom pedagogy. Ashgate. Hadwin, A. F., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2011). Self-​regulated, co-​regulated, and socially shared regulation of learning. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-​regulation of learning and performance (pp. 65–​84). Routledge.

430

431

The role of peers Hager, P., & Halliday, J. (2009). Recovering informal learning. Springer. Hallam, S. (2012). Commentary: Instrumental music. In G. E. McPherson, & G. F.Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1; pp. 651–​657). Oxford University Press. Hanken, I. M. (2015). Listening and learning in master classes. Music Education Research, 17(4), 453–​464. Hanken, I. M. (2016). Peer learning in specialist higher music education. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 15(3–​4), 364–​375. Holland, D., & Lachocotte, W., Jr. (2007). Vygotsky, Mead, and the new sociocultural studies of identity. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 101–​135). Cambridge University Press. Hund, J. L. (2012). Writing about music in large music appreciation classrooms using active learning, discipline-​specific skills and peer review. Journal of Music History Pedagogy, 2(2), 117–​132. https://​ creativecommons.org/​licenses/​by/​3.0./​ Jaffurs, S. (2004). The impact of informal music learning practices in the classroom, or how I learned how to teach from a garage band. International Journal of Music Education, 22(3), 189–​200. Järvenoja, H., & Järvelä, S. (2009). Emotion control in collaborative learning situations: Do students regulate emotions evoked by social challenges? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(3), 463–​481. Johansen, G. (2018). Musikktalent i grunnskolen. En forskningsbasert evalueringsstudie av Musikk på Majorstuen. NMH Publications. Johansen, G. G. (2016). To practise improvisation. A  qualitative study of practice activity among jazz students, with a particular focus on the development of improvisation competence. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, Digital Special Issue, 153(4). www.artsandhumanities.org/​to-​practise-​ improvisation-​a-​qualitative-​study-​of-​practice-​activity-​among-​jazz-​students-​with-​a-​particular-​focus-​ on-​the-​development-​of-​improvisation-​competence/​ Johansen, G. G. (2021). Children’s guided participation in jazz improvisation: A study of the “improbasen” learning centre. Routledge. Johansen, G. G., & Nielsen, S. G. (2019). The practising workshop:  A development project. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(2696), 1–​9. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2019.02695 Johnson, E. (2011). Developing listening skills through peer interaction. Music Educators Journal, 98(2), 49–​ 54. https://​doi.org./​10.1177/​0027432111423440 Johnston, S. C., Greer, D., & Smith, S. J. (2014). Peer learning in virtual schools. Journal of E-​Learning & Distance Education, 28(1), 1–​31. www.ijede.ca/​index.php/​jde/​article/​view/​853 Jung, J.Y. (2014). The role of peer directed learning on the journey toward becoming a vocal artist. Journal of Singing, 70(5), 541–​551. Kamin, S., Richards, H., & Collins, D. (2007). Influences on the talent development of non-​classical musicians: Psychological, social and environmental influences. Music Education Research, 9(3), 449–​468. Kokotsaki, D., & Hallam, S. (2007). Higher education music students’ perceptions of the benefits of participative music making. Music Education Research, 9(1), 93–​109. Längler, M., Nivala, M., & Gruber, H. (2018). Peers, parents and teachers: A case study on how popular music guitarists perceive support for expertise development from “persons in the shadows”. Musicae Scientiae, 22(2), 224–​243. Latukefu, L., & Verenikina, I. (2013). Expanding the master-​apprentice model: Tool for orchestrating collaboration as a path to self-​directed learning for singing students. In H. Gaunt & H. Westerlund (Eds.), Collaborative learning in higher music education (pp. 101–​109). Ashgate. Lebler, D. (2007). Student-​as-​master? Reflections on a learning innovation in popular music pedagogy. International Journal of Music Education, 25(3), 205–​221. Long, M. (2013). Exploring cognitive strategies and collaboration in master classes. In H. Gaunt & H. Westerlund (Eds.), Collaborative learning in higher music education (pp. 135–​149). Ashgate. Luce, D.W. (2001). Collaborative learning in music education: A review of the literature. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 19(2), 20–​25. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​87551233010190020105 MacGlone, U. (2019). Young children’s talk about improvising:  How conceptual tools and workshop roles are formed through musical improvisation workshops. In G. G. Johansen, K. Holdhus, C. Larsson, & U. MacGlone (Eds.), Expanding the space for improvisation pedagogy in music: A transdisciplinary approach (pp. 115–​132). Routledge. MacRitchie, J., Zicari, M., & Blom, D. (2018). Identifying challenges and opportunities for student composer and performer peer learning through newly-​composed classical piano scores. British Journal of Music Education, 35(2), 153–​175.

431

432

S. G. Nielsen and G. G. Johansen McKeage, K. (2014). “Where are all the girls?” Women in collegiate instrumental jazz. GEMS (Gender, Education, Music, & Society), 7(7),  11–​19. Nielsen, S. G. (2004). Strategies and self-​efficacy beliefs in instrumental and vocal individual practice: A study of students in higher music education. Psychology of Music, 32(4), 418–​431. Nielsen, S. G., Johansen, G. G., & Jørgensen, H. (2018). Peer-​learning in practicing. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 339. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2018.00339 Reid, A., & Duke, M. (2015). Student for student: Peer learning in higher music education. International Journal of Music Education, 33(2), 222–​232. Riese, H., Samara, A., & Lillejord, S. (2012). Peer relations in peer learning. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 25(5), 601–​624. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​09518398.2011.605078 Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. Oxford University Press. Rumiantsev, T. W., Maas, A., & Admiraal, W. (2017). Collaborative learning in two vocal conservatoire courses. Music Education Research, 19(4), 371–​383. Ruthmann, S. A., & Hebert, D. G. (2012). Music learning and new media in virtual and online environments. In G. E. McPherson & G. F. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 2; pp. 567–​581). Oxford University Press. Salavuo, M. (2006). Open and informal online communities as forums of collaborative musical activities and learning. British Journal of Music Education, 23(3), 253–​271. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​ S0265051706007042 Sandgren, M. (2009). More similarities than differences among elite music students in jazz, folk music and classical genre: Personality, practice habits and self-​rated music-​related strengths and weaknesses. In J. Louhivuori,T. Eerola, S. Saarikallio,T. Himberg, & P.-​S. Eerola (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th triennial conference of ESCOM (pp. 463–​467). Jyväskulä University Press. https://​urn.fi/​URN:NBN:fi:jyu-​2009411315 Savage, J. (2012). Driving forward technology’s imprint on music education. In G. E. McPherson, & G. F. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education. (Vol. 2; pp. 492–​511). Oxford University Press. Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–​13. https://​doi.org/​ 10.2307/​1176193 Slette, A. (2019). Negotiating musical problem-​solving in ensemble rehearsals. British Journal of Music Education, 36(1), 33–​47. https://​doi.org/​10.1017/​S0265051718000141 Stabell, E. M. (2018). Being talented –​becoming a musician: A qualitative study of learning cultures in three junior conservatoires, NMH Publication No. 2018:5 [Doctoral dissertation]. Norwegian Academy of Music. Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631–​645. Trevarthen, C., & Malloch, S. (2018). Musicality and musical culture: Sharing narratives of sound from early childhood. In G. E. McPherson & G. F.Welch (Eds.), Music learning and teaching in infancy, childhood, and adolescence: An Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 2; pp. 26–​39). Oxford University Press. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Wassrin, M. (2019). A broadened approach towards musical improvisation as a foundation for very young children’s agency. In G. G. Johansen, K. Holdhus, C. Larsson, & U. MacGlone (Eds.), Expanding the space for improvisation pedagogy in music: A transdisciplinary approach (pp. 33–​50). Routledge. Webster, P. R. (2016). Creative thinking in music, twenty-​five years on. Music Educators Journal, 102(3), 26–​32. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0027432115623841 Wehr, E. L. (2016). Understanding the experiences of women in jazz:  A suggested model. International Journal of Music Education, 34(4), 472–​487. Whyton, T. (2006). Birth of the school:  Discursive methodologies in jazz education. Music Education Research, 8(1),  65–​81. Young, S., & Ilari, B. (2018). Musical participation from birth to three: Toward a global perspective. In G. E. McPherson & G. F. Welch (Eds.), Music learning and teaching in infancy, childhood, and adolescence: An Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 2; pp. 58–​74). Oxford University Press.

432

433

27 THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY IN MEDIATING COLLABORATIVE LEARNING IN MUSIC Aaron Liu-​Rosenbaum and Andrea Creech In this chapter, we explore the potential for technology to mediate social connection and ­collaboration in musical learning and participation.Whereas Chapter 14 in this volume focused on competencies and skills that underpin musical learning with technology (including among school-​age young people) and the ways that those competencies shape musical understandings, we focus here specifically on sociocultural theories of learning and the idea that technology as a cultural tool or artefact can mediate collaborative learning. We begin the chapter by discussing the theoretical roots that underpin the idea that social connection and collaboration are integral to learning generally and, more specifically, in music. We set out the idea of ‘mediation’ and propose that social connection can be mediated by technology, whether this be within online environments or tangible physical environments. Following this, we set out examples drawn from four different non-​formal and formal contexts for music learning and participation, representing opposite ends of the life course (early childhood and later adulthood) as well as the ‘mid-​points’ of higher education and professional, work-​based learning in young adulthood. With regard to the former (early childhood and later adulthood), we highlight some research examples from non-​formal and formal early years settings, followed by a case study drawn from our research where we have explored the use of electronic and digital technologies in mediating collaborative and creative learning among community-​based adult learners. With regard to the latter (higher education and professional learning) we highlight research concerned with technology-​mediated collaborative creative practices. Some critical questions are raised concerning traditional dichotomous ways of thinking about virtual and physical spaces for formal as well as informal music learning and participation. Finally, we discuss the commonalities as well as differences in the ways in which technology can mediate collaborative learning within those contrasting contexts and life stages.

A sociocultural perspective on collaborative technology-​mediated learning Across a range of contexts for learning and teaching, social connectedness (sometimes expressed as a sense of community) has been associated with deep engagement in learning and motivation (Ragusa & Crampton, 2018). Indeed, according to Abedin et  al. (2010, p.  585), “it is 433

434

Aaron Liu-Rosenbaum and Andrea Creech

believed that the notion of community is at the heart of learning”. The value attached to social connectedness in relation to learning can be traced to sociocultural perspectives, whereby learning, social interaction and cultural context are thought to be inextricably linked (Vygotsky, 1978). Broadly, learning is conceptualised as necessarily interactive, participatory and culturally located. Sociocultural theory does not deny the idea of individual agency, but conceptualises the individual–​social relationship as a vital condition for cognitive development. It has been argued that social connectedness and community may be achieved in educational contexts through collaborative learning. Collaborative learning has been aligned with the idea of “intersubjective learning”, whereby “learning is not only accomplished through the interactions of the participants, but also consists of those interactions … [which] involve disagreement as well as agreement about shared information” (Suthers, 2006, p. 317). Intersubjectivity, or sharing of perspectives, is thought to be a necessary condition of collective learning activities (Wallerstedt & Lagerlof, 2011). For example, collaborative learning communities are characterised by discursive processes that involve cumulative talk (building and layering common knowledge), disputational talk (disagreement) or exploratory talk (joint reasoning that involves both cumulative and disputational talk) (Dobson & Littleton, 2016). In successful collaborations within learning settings, participants build on each other’s ideas in order to reach an understanding that was not available to any of the participants initially … the sharing of information between peers within a community or network is critical to the creation and the use of new knowledge, including new musical ideas. (Rowe et al., 2017, p. 47) Collaborative pedagogies privilege prior knowledge and active involvement of learners in activities that include collective approaches to enquiry and problem-​solving (Biasutti, 2015; Cayari, in press; Mercer & Howe, 2012; Vygotsky, 1978) as well as emotional support for one another (Ragusa & Crampton, 2018). “Complementarity” is a feature of collaborative learning whereby the co-​construction of knowledge is premised on interaction and communication yet also requires negotiation among peers who “may differ widely in their cultural backgrounds, perspectives, prior knowledge, worldviews and expertise (including musical expertise)” (Rowe et al., 2017, p. 47). The sociocultural paradigm has been extended to encompass the idea that creativity, like learning, is similarly embedded within a social context and contingent on social interaction (Glaveanu, 2011). In relation to learning and teaching, a sociocultural understanding of creativity is concerned with the processes that underpin collaborative and creative learning, such as cyclical processes of reflection, planning and activity and various forms of verbal or non-​ verbal communication (Biasutti, 2015). A key idea introduced by Vygotsky (1978) is that learning is mediated by cultural artefacts, or cultural tools, which can encompass physical tools, language or non-​verbal cues. The idea of mediation refers to how these tools or artefacts function as the means with which knowledge is constructed or people (i.e., learners and more knowledgeable others, or groups of peers) connected. Accordingly, ‘technology-​mediated’ learning can encompass a wide and complex array of tools –​ranging from blogs and wikis to virtual environments –​that mediate communication, connection and knowledge construction (Bower, 2019). These technological cultural tools or artefacts function as intermediaries that “in and of themselves have no intentions, but rather are featured objects used to convey meaning between participants” (Bower, 2019, p. 1037). In this vein, while cultural tools may influence or even alter that which is communicated and learned in unintended ways, the tools in and of themselves do not have agentic intention. Bower argues that while some technological tools may perform functions, such as allocating individuals 434

435

The role of technology

to groups or providing feedback, these ‘agentic’ behaviours exercised by technologies are ultimately programmed by people. Therefore, it may be argued that technology, used as a mediating tool, is essentially a manifestation of human agency. Bower (2019) proposes a set of principles that position technology-​mediated learning as part of a complex environment, intersecting with the facilitative and mutually interactive role of the teacher; the beliefs, prior knowledge and practices of learners and facilitators; envi­ ronmental characteristics; and affordances and configurations of the technologies themselves (i.e., their utility in relation to multiple properties, such as spatial, temporal and navigational) (Bower, 2008). Of particular relevance to the idea that collaborative learning may be achieved in and through digital technologies is the emphasis Bower (2019) places on the role that technology can play in mediating learning through networks of interconnected people and devices. Accordingly, an affordance of technology-​mediated learning is the social connection of people, sharing of information and linking of new ideas. In this vein, computer-​supported collaborative learning has been found to be associated with “a strong feeling of community [which] enhances the flow of information among students, social support, commitment to group goals, and consequently, satisfaction with the learning experience” (Abedin et  al., 2010, p.  585). However, notwithstanding its “substantial role in shaping collaboration”, effective technology-​mediated learning “is also heavily influenced by the way educators design tasks, support groupwork processes, provide scaffolding and guide the overall learning experience” (Bower, 2019, p. 1041).

Social connectedness and technology-​mediated collaborative music learning and participation Just as in many contexts for learning, the social dimension –​including social connectedness and information/​idea sharing –​plays a vital role in collaborative music learning and participation mediated by digital technologies (Biasutti, 2015). In this vein, it has been argued that technology offers the potential to mediate inclusive access to the “social and connective functions of music making” (Samuels & Schroeder, 2019, p. 476; see also Creech, 2019). Within virtual environments and social media, opportunities abound for the development of online communities of practice focused around music-​making, music learning or social connection through music (Cayari, in press, 2020). For example, within contexts where participants are ‘physically’ rather than ‘virtually’ present, collaborative learning has been found to be characteristic of digitally mediated composition and music-​technology-​based improvisation (Dobson & Littleton, 2016). As Dillon and Jones (2009, p. 164) highlight, the potential for technology to mediate collaborative musical learning points to the idea of “the computer as an instrument, the network as an ensemble and cyberspace as venue for performance”. Discussing “informal music learning practices 2.0”,Waldron (2018, p. 113) argues that culturally situated and interactive musical encounters are perfectly possible when technologically mediated: “belonging to an online community serves to ‘grow’ the music in question because it allows people to locate, share content  –​most often user-​generated  –​and discourse with like-​minded musicians” (p. 100). She furthermore critiques the idea that digital and acoustic music-​making represent a dichotomy, highlighting reciprocity between online and offline communities. In this vein, Cayari (in press) found that collaborative vlogging (within a semi-​private YouTube space) among higher education music students fostered a sense of community and personal relationships that bridged online and offline contexts. Rowe et al. (2017, p. 48) adds that “new music technologies … serve as a shared space for the negotiation of emerging ideas … [and] technologies also offer the opportunity to extend spaces for creativity by bringing communities together”. 435

436

Aaron Liu-Rosenbaum and Andrea Creech

The following sections of this chapter explore some practical examples that demonstrate these theoretical ideas in more detail. We turn now to examples drawn from research in early childhood settings.

Context 1: Early childhood Around the globe, music-​making is an integral part of early childhood experience, with much of that experience focused around musical play as a medium for improvisation, communication and the development of healthy social attachment (Barrett, 2012; Charissi & Rinta, 2014). Increasingly, young children’s improvisatory and communicative musical practices are mediated by accessible digital technologies such as smartphones or tablets, a phenomenon that will continue to shape children’s musical lives and musical learning (Young & Ilari, 2012). As Rowe et al. (2017, p. 32) state, “the enjoyable, playful experience of working with music technology, together with the rewarding sounds that can be produced by it, provide strong motivators for young children to experiment and develop their musical ideas”. In this section, we explore two examples of early years collaborative musical learning mediated by technology. Children’s musical and social behaviours in the process of collaborative computer-​supported music-​making have been explored (Charissi & Rinta, 2014). Four Year 1 children (three boys and one girl, aged 6 years) took part in an exploratory, naturalistic study which was carried out in a multilingual West London school in the United Kingdom over a four-​week period. The participant-​observer researcher facilitated the children’s play (in pairs) with Sibelius Groovy Shapes and JamMo software packages, designed for use by children as young as 3 years. Groovy Shapes encompasses ‘explore and create’ functions that are designed to introduce children to musical elements represented with shapes, making music by dragging and combining those elements. JamMo is a singing and composition game where users can select tempi, scales and musical patterns that are represented by images. JamMo has “specifically been designed with usability issues in mind for children with special educational needs (moderate learning difficulties) and those coming from multicultural backgrounds where host country language may be in development” (Charissi & Rinta, 2014, p. 44). Video data, collected during four sessions of approximately 40 minutes each, were analysed using the Sounds of Intent framework, which identifies proactive, reactive and interactive levels of musical development (Voyajolu & Ockelford, 2016). Overall, the children’s collaborative learning, mediated by the software, was found to be organised into exploration, planning and assessment. During the exploratory play, children interacted for the most part through singing and also non-​verbally through eye contact and body gestures. Planning and assessment were similarly achieved with non-​verbal communication as well as verbal expression of feelings, discussing next steps or helping one another. This small-​scale study pointed to the potential for technology-​mediated activities to foster collaborative musical exploration and learning. MIROR-​Impro is another interactive music technology, that has been researched as part of an international, interdisciplinary research project focusing on the use of technology to support young children’s musical learning (Rowe et  al., 2017). MIROR-​Impro, a computer programme connected to a synthesiser, supports interactive improvised musical dialogues; users initiate a dialogue by playing a sequence of notes, and the computer generates a similar but modified response. As part of the overarching project, Wallerstedt and Lagerlof (2011) explored the ways in which MIROR-​Impro mediated social learning, and in particular turn-​taking, among 20 Swedish children aged 4 to 8 years. Eight hours of video data and interviews with

436

437

The role of technology

the children were analysed, exploring the social learning among the children and their teachers. When playing along with the system, the children sometimes needed scaffolding in order to grasp the idea of turn taking –​a fundamental pedagogical goal of this software. However, when playing with peers or adults, the activity became collaborative; the children used gestures to coordinate musical dialogues, and turn-​taking was quickly achieved through attentive listening and watching. As the researchers state, “[w]‌hen a child plays alone, the only source of inspiration, except from the child him/​herself, is the computer.  … [T]he mirroring answer from the computer does not always fill the role of ‘inspiring partner’ ” (Wallerstedt & Lagerlof, 2011, p. 26). A later case study (Lagerlof et al., 2013) reinforced these findings. Collaborative musical play was explored; this involved two 5-​year-​olds interacting with the technology and scaffolded in this activity by their teachers. In this example, the adult framed the musical turn-​taking as a make-​believe game: The children, if initially reluctant to try out the technology, come through the playful framing provided by the adult to become engaged participants who take the initiative and lead in these joint activities. With the adult, they also engage in analysing the output (what it sounds like). They contributed to the activity by taking turns playing the chords and inspired each other with ideas of how to proceed. (Lagerlof et al., 2013, p. 333) In a subsequent study, Lagerlof (2015) investigated emergent communication, negotiation and peer scaffolding among a group of three Swedish preschool children (aged 6) in the context of their interactive play with the same MIROR-​impro technology. Here, the analysis focused on one case study example of children’s communication and mutual scaffolding as they played with the technology and navigated a technological malfunction during a 25-​minute free-​play interaction with the technology, drawn from over 20 hours of video data captured over a 5-​week period. The excerpt demonstrates the children responding to the technology malfunction by using the tools (the synthesiser and screen) to role-​play other musical practices they had experienced in preschool, scaffolding one another as directors and performers of known songs. When the technology was restored to its intended purpose, the children adapted, first engaging in the intended turn-​taking approach (guided by an adult) and then negotiating a change in the rules; for example, playing together, rather than individually, and jointly exploring clusters of notes rather than melodic sequences. In this sense, the technology mediated playful and involved music-​making, where the children quickly discovered the potential for collaboration and exploration. Both of these studies concerned with MIROR-​Impro suggest that in an early childhood environment, music technology does offer the potential to mediate collaborative play and turn-​taking; furthermore, notwithstanding the technology’s intended function as a musicking partner, the children were less interested in musical dialogues when interacting individually with the technology. The examples in this section provide some evidence that music technologies could mediate learning that was embedded within social interactions, as a sociocultural perspective would suggest. Even when employing a technology like MIROR-​Impro, which arguably could be said to exhibit some semblance of ‘agency’ in that it acts as a proxy ‘partner’ in musical improvisation, it was clear that the pedagogical goals of turn-​taking, joint exploration and musical dialogue were achieved when children collaborated with peers or were scaffolded by teachers. We turn now to an example of technology-​mediated musical learning involving learners at the opposite end of the life course.

437

438

Aaron Liu-Rosenbaum and Andrea Creech

Context 2: Adult music learning and participation in the community In this section, we describe the transition to online community music in the context of our Creative Later Life research, focused around innovative approaches to creative and participatory music-​making among older adults. As Erikson and Erikson (1998, p. 227) eloquently note, later life may be experienced as a period of growth and creative expression that is accessed through “contact with one another and […] a regaining of lost skills, including play, activity, joy, and song”. Active music learning and participation, in particular, has been found to function as a context where older adults experience fellowship and social affirmation (Creech et al., 2014). However, barriers to participation have been identified, including challenges related to the physical demands of acoustic instruments as well as structural barriers relating to time of day, transport and access to physical spaces. To this end, we aimed to explore the ways in which digital technologies and electronic musical instruments could mitigate both physical and social barriers, mediating social connectedness through music and creative lifelong learning in music. As Creech (2019, p. 11) has reported: Technologies that support […] active musicking (e.g., motion sensor devices, digital musical instruments, singing apps and music composition or improvisation technologies) have been found to support access to the multiple personal, social, cognitive, and physical benefits that have been associated with musicking. Accordingly, in September 2019 we established two community groups, comprising adults aged 50 and over and living independently in the community, with a plan to meet weekly (90-​minute sessions) over the course of 1 academic year. Following a participatory action research approach (Kapoor & Jordan, 2009), our intention was to allow the project to evolve in response to, and in collaboration with, our participants. The number of participants in each group fluctuated somewhat, tending to range from 4 to 12. We learned from previous research that weekly commitments could pose a barrier to participation, and therefore we intentionally made it clear that participants could drop in and out as and when they wished. Therefore, this ‘fluid’ group number was considered an important characteristic of the groups that provided opportunities for differentiated pedagogies and peer learning. The groups settled into a pattern of activities that comprised rhythmic and improvisatory warm-​ups, exploring a range of digital and electronic instruments, learning known songs and composing new songs. Everything changed when, in March 2020, we entered into a lengthy period of ‘sheltering at home’ in response to the global pandemic that posed a particular threat to our older participants. Like many music educators who “found themselves wondering how they could continue to teach music when their students were not allowed to meet face-​to-​face in a physical space” (Cayari, 2020), our team took the decision to offer our participants a transition to online groups. Meeting synchronously via Zoom, the focus would be songwriting using the Thumbjam app on an iPad, supported by video resources that we created and posted to a YouTube channel. Nearly all of the group members opted to participate in this transition to a virtual environment. Within our groups, technology mediated learning in two different ways. First, during the face-​to-​face sessions, we explored digital instruments and iPad applications, eventually focusing on Thumbjam because of its multiple affordances for creative improvisation and musical performance (e.g., users can choose from an extensive number of instruments, keys and modes, while the range and span of notes is flexible). In addition, Thumbjam provided an interface with the Figurenotes system of notation (Kivijärvi, 2019) which we had introduced to support learning known songs and exploring chord progressions.This meant that the Thumbjam players 438

439

The role of technology

could be easily integrated into a ‘band’ alongside electric and bass guitars, keyboards and some acoustic instruments, and band members could transfer their learning from iPads to other instruments. Second, the learning in our groups was mediated by the use of a videoconferencing technology (Zoom) that enabled synchronous collaborative songwriting within a virtual environment. This transition to an online mode of communication posed many challenges; many group members had very limited experience of videoconferencing of any sort, and the tools at their disposal included a diverse array of laptops, tablets and mobile telephones offering various levels of capacity and user-​friendliness. It quickly became evident that we needed a designated troubleshooter whose role was to contact participants by telephone to scaffold the process of setting up and accessing Zoom and problem-​solve various connection issues. While our facilitators played a guiding role, they also participated alongside the group members in finding creative pedagogical solutions that would involve all of the members in the songwriting. In one group, new members joined during the online phase, and it was notable that the ‘old-​timers’ took on the role of the ‘more experienced other’, guiding and demonstrating the app as well as how to navigate in Zoom. Undoubtedly, the months that had been spent engaging with our participants in face-​to-​ face sessions were invaluable in the sense that we had built relationships and explored music technology in a hands-​on manner, using familiar collaborative and interactive pedagogies such as small group work, discussion, improvisation and exploration. In this way, we entered into the online phase having established familiarity with musical concepts and working with the technological tools (the iPads with Thumbjam); thus there was continuity between the offline and online environments. As Waldron (2018) has suggested, our experience demonstrated the influence that in-​person music learning can have when learners transfer into an online environment. Overall, in both the offline and online contexts, digital technologies played a vital role in mitigating some barriers to participation, as all of the group members could contribute to the collaborative learning, whether it was via an app or with an electronic or acoustic instrument. However, the transition to online learning meant that facilitators and group members alike had to reimagine possibilities and expectations. As Bower (2019, p. 1036) states, when a lesson takes place using video-​conferencing software, the technologies, both hardware and software, mediate the entire set of interactions … [and] in reality the technologies, their features, and the way in which they are used, do have a substantial influence on activity and learning. For example, group members were disappointed by the limitations of Zoom, meaning that performing songs synchronously was only possible with muted microphones (i.e., not hearing one another, owing to the sound lag).Through a process that involved guided facilitation as well as exploratory and disputational talk (Dobson & Littleton, 2016), our groups collectively found new ways to work together and in the space of 8 weeks had composed and recorded three original songs, complete with melody, harmony, rhythm and lyrics. The songwriting activity using Thumbjam provoked curiosity and creativity and promoted peer learning. A collaborative spirit predominated at a time when all of our members were trying to find ways to be ‘distant yet together’ as we all struggled to make sense of the unprecedented devastation caused by COVID-​ 19. During a feedback focus group, one participant spoke about how the online environment was preferable owing to her mobility issues, while others reported that the focus on Thumbjam had framed their musical learning in particular ways; for example, consolidating understandings of chord progressions and encouraging exploration of different instrumental sounds. Overall, 439

440

Aaron Liu-Rosenbaum and Andrea Creech

the focus group revealed that the participants greatly missed the face-​to-​face music-​making, but that the online experience had mediated a deeper sense of connection and shared problem-​ solving strategies. Importantly, the online sessions had enabled creative social connection during a time when this would otherwise have been impossible. In this section, we have demonstrated some ways in which hardware (iPad), software (Thumbjam) and virtual environment (Zoom) mediated access to collaborative music learning and participation. Just as in the early childhood examples, the mediating role of the technologies needs to be understood within a more complex environment, particularly with regard to the interpersonal relationships and peer-​to-​peer interactions, including facilitative musical as well as technical support. This section concerned with older adulthood and the previous section concerned with early childhood encompassed formal and non-​formal contexts where technology-​mediated collaborative music learning was undertaken as a vehicle for promoting social connectedness, collaboration and creative expression. In the next two sections, we turn to formal and non-​formal contexts where collaborative learning supported and framed by technology is seen as one facet of an environment devoted to the development of musical expertise.

Context 3: Higher education Digital technology as a tool that mediates collaborative composition practices Music coursebooks at universities abound with images and descriptions of composers, solitary nocturnal creatures at the keyboard, quill in hand, midnight oil burning –​their creativity, a kind of magic conjured in utter isolation, removed from society in both space and time. Conversely, a sociocultural approach understands creativity not simply as “an individual creative act” (Biasutti, 2015, p. 118) where “creative individuals … are working in isolation” (Fisher, as cited in Biasutti, 2015, 118), but rather recognises that the context of creation plays a role in the creative process. According to Fisher, the technologies we use “embody collective knowledge [and] are important contributors to the [creative] process” (as cited in Biasutti, 2015, 118). That knowledge can be embodied in technologies is a fundamental principle in the field of design. Although it is best when people have considerable knowledge and experience using a particular product … the designer can put sufficient cues into the design … [such] that good performance results even in the absence of previous knowledge … . How can the designer put knowledge into the device itself? (Norman, 2013, p. 77) The answer to the above question, according to the author, lies in how “signifiers, physical constraints, and natural mappings” are designed into the product to provide “perceivable cues” as to how the product is supposed to be used (Norman, 2013, p. 79). These design elements in the physical domain lend themselves readily to the virtual domain as well: the technologies that mediate our creative learning rely on such design mappings (e.g., keys and buttons that are easily manipulated) and signifiers (e.g., culturally informed symbols that provide information about how the technology functions, such as an analogue phone icon to place a call). Technologies also have constraints (e.g., a maximum number of audio tracks or of simultaneous users, etc.) defining how and to what degree we may create and even be social. Dobson & Littleton (2016) explored the ways in which digital technologies mediated the intersection between social interaction, collaboration and the construction of shared meanings 440

441

The role of technology

in a face-​to-​face composition activity. Carrying out a longitudinal ethnographic case study, the researchers interrogated the emerging collaborative ecology of practice among two undergraduate composition students who, working together in a variety of ‘physical’ environments, composed a soundtrack for a contemporary dance film. The students shared prior knowledge and explored, evaluated and tested a range of software and configuration solutions that could serve their compositional intent. In order to analyse moment-​to-​moment collaborative practices, the researchers collected audio and video recordings. Semi-​structured interviews added contextual information about the participants’ backgrounds and prior knowledge of using digital technologies in composition. A  micro-​analysis was carried out using discourse analysis, revealing four key findings. First, digital music technologies were found to be anticipatory, in the sense that they influenced emergent practice in imagined and anticipated ways. For example, the students drew on their prior experience and preferences related to using technology in imagining possible ways of working together. Second, the process of pooling knowledge and working through hypothetical problem-​based scenarios fostered “possibility thinking” articulated as moments of “little c creativity” (Craft et al., 2012). Third, a process of developing knowledge was observed, focused around the integration of digital technologies into the composition activity. In this vein, through exploratory talk and negotiation of shared meanings, the composition activity became an interactional accomplishment. Finally, these collaborative processes formed a foundation for individual and collective reflection within an emerging ecology of practice. Accordingly, “computer-​supported collaborative learning is particularly suited to the induction of students into dialogue as an end in itself and, through this, to promote the skills of creativity and of learning to learn” (Wegerif, 2006, as cited in Biasutti, 2015). We return to these reflective affordances of technology below. Interestingly, one of the “most persistent and sustained areas of creative work” (p.  337) discussed by the students in Dobson and Littleton’s study was the use of space, specifically how the physical performance space would be used by the dancers and how certain spaces would be prioritised for sound recording and music diffusion. Space was thus defined as a “collaborative conceptual creative theme” (Dobson, 2012, p.  95). In another study of creative space design in education, Thoring et al. (2012) sought to identify the characteristics (e.g., silent or noisy, accommodation for group work, available creative resources) and roles that different types of spaces (including classrooms, libraries, cafeterias and even outdoor spaces on campus) could play in facilitating creativity. While their study focused on physical spaces rather than virtual ones, their observations may nonetheless help us to formulate questions about how virtual and other online spaces can contribute to creativity and social connection in music-​making. After conducting a literature review, the authors settled on a typology of five types of creative spaces: the solitary space; the team space; the tinker space; the presentation space; and the transition space. They also identified five functions of creative spaces: space as a knowledge repository (how knowledge is represented, stored and accessed in a given space); space as an indicator of culture (how a space establishes an “appropriate atmosphere” for its use [p. 5]); space as a process manifestation (how a space’s configuration can promote specific workflows); space as a social dimension (how a space impacts the kinds of interactions that may take place); and space as a source of stimulation (how a space may foster or inhibit creativity). It is not difficult to imagine how this typology could be applied to virtual spaces to assist in designing better creative and collaborative technologically mediated experiences, whether for complex online environments like Moodle, Blackboard or Canvas or for software interfaces more focused on audio and video creation, such as digital audio workstations. Students in Thoring et al.’s (2012) study described spaces where layouts supported group work as positive, validating the link between social connectedness and motivation in learning. In this regard, the 441

442

Aaron Liu-Rosenbaum and Andrea Creech

way a physical space supports group work may be understood as analogous to how an online interface supports creative collaboration; both are examples of technologically mediated social connection in creative learning. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the authors also found that no single space satisfied all five of the different functions, which highlights how important it is that a space be adaptable to its users. One might suppose that if no single physical space can suit all the different functions of creative spaces, nor could any single virtual environment. Yet this is where digital technologies offer a potential advantage in fostering social connection in music-​ making: the relative ease with which they can be reconfigured to accommodate a wide variety of tasks and needs. Thoring et al. further concluded that “different types of creative activities require different types of spaces supporting them” (2012, p. 5). If this is true, then the flexibility of virtual spaces, and digital technologies in general, becomes an even more important potential asset in promoting learning and social connection in a creative context. At the same time, there are challenges associated with digitally mediated learning, such as the consistent concerns reported by Delahunty et al. (2014) that higher education students in distance learning contexts experience more social isolation as compared with their on-​site peers, leading to higher levels of dropout. Given the current state of technology, it is important to recognise the phenomenological importance of physical presence and contact in learning, including collaborative learning. Thus, using technology as a means of “extending the physical and temporal bounds of the music classroom” (Ruthmann, 2007) is perhaps the most prudent strategy. This may change when distinctions between real and virtual become less pronounced as we adapt to a more digitised environment and lifeworld.

Context 4: Professional development and work-​based learning in music Whereas in the above section we discussed how technologies mediated face-​to-​face musical collaboration among university students, in this section, we examine how they mediate a strictly online collaboration in a professional setting. Collaborative composition within an online rather than physical face-​to-​face environment was the focus of a study carried out by Biasutti (2015). The study focused on the mediating role of a virtual learning environment (VLE) with regard to the asynchronous and synchronous communication that occurred over the course of the online composing task carried out over 2½ months. Three adult musicians, specialists in ‘electronic rock’, took part in a professional development opportunity where they ventured into online composition for the first time. The musicians collaborated within a VLE (Moodle), supported by a range of tools to facilitate synchronous and asynchronous communication (e.g., real-​time audio and video communication tools, blogs, wikis, access to an online tutor). While planning and exchange of ideas tended to occur asynchronously, exploration and refinement of musical ideas took place synchronously during four sessions.Video recordings of the synchronous sessions were analysed, revealing both non-​verbal and verbal communication strategies. Overall, the group composed an entirely new piece in a systematic and cyclical process that encompassed listening, improvisation, performing, evaluating and refining the musical material as well as generating new compositional principles. The online tools were found to mediate collaborative strategies, in particular promoting reflection and scaffolding divergent thinking, a key facet of creativity. Biasutti’s (2015) study also affords us the opportunity to observe some of the general challenges with regard to using, as well as assessing, the role of technology in collaborative and creative learning contexts. In order to focus on the participants’ different modes of collaborative communication online, the study required that they not discuss their collaborative work on the phone or in the presence of another; rather, all their communication was channelled through 442

443

The role of technology

the online interface. This restriction is understandable given the study’s specific goals, but in reality –​as suggested by the participants themselves (p. 127) –​online technologies would more likely be used in conjunction with other technologies such as email, text messages or phone calls, not to mention along with direct discussion. What emerges, therefore, is more accurately a portrait of how online technologies mediate communication when online technologies are the exclusive means of communicating and not necessarily how technologies are actually used during real-​life situations of collaborative composition, where their roles may be more limited or where they may be used differently. It is likewise difficult to determine the impact of the technologies on the communicative process versus other factors: was it the “online environment [that] enhanced the participants’ reflection on the performed task” or was it the fact that the participants were asked to take notes whenever they worked individually and then “inform the other participants of your work through the platform” (p. 121)? One may thus ask to what degree the enhanced reflection was a product of using the online interface, the participants note-​taking or perhaps their awareness that they were participating in a study that documented all of their creative activities. Another challenge in technologically mediated collaboration could be seen in how the forums were employed in the study. There were seven forums in all, each designated a specific purpose: listening; software; session planning; composition; instruments; technical issues; and events and concerts. Despite the forums’ designated roles, participants used them in a more fluid manner; for example, “there was an overlap of topics. … [C]‌omposing issues were discussed both in the composing forum and in the listening forum” (p.  122). While such designations are useful in learning contexts, it is also important to keep in mind that technologies are often employed in creative ways, regardless of their intended function, and just as communication is itself a fluid, creative act, technologically mediated communication is also bound to overstep predefined categories. It is precisely in how users express their agency by producing information, sharing knowledge and creating and disseminating artefacts in diverse forms that technology has the power to fundamentally impact learning (Murphy, 2013), as opposed to unidirectional uses of technology that, at best, have little impact and, at worst, tend to “reinforce instead of reinventing existing” teaching methods (Kpolovie & Akpelu, 2017, p. 2). This suggests that both our technologies and the ways we use them (i.e., how they mediate) are bound in a kind of permanent cyclical ‘dance’ where both are constantly evolving and adapting to each other. It also belies the notion of a technology “perfectly suited” to a given task. Some technologies may be better suited than others, but regardless, they are necessarily emplaced and co-​evolving within a particular sociocultural context.This cyclical rapport between technology and usage is analogous to the cyclical processes underpinning creating and learning from a sociocultural perspective. In Biasutti’s (2015) study, the technological mediation impacted not only the creative process, but also the product; as one of the participants remarked, the piece they composed “is different from our previous pieces” (p. 126). What is intriguing is that they did not qualify that difference. Another participant reported that the online interface –​specifically, the forums –​ enhanced a sense of “continuity” in the group’s collaborative work “which is lost in a face-​to-​ face situation”, where “when we finish the sessions, we ‘pull the plug’ and everyone reworks the material on his own” (p. 127). The accessible traces of prior forum conversations offered by the VLE thus provided a kind of ‘resonance’ that supported the discursive practices underlying  the participants’ collaboration. This supports the experience of participants in another online collaborative music professional learning environment, who, according to Ruthmann and Hebert (2012, p. 576), shared “a common perception … that the depth and timeliness of information shared on the … website … [were] of more value to teaching practice than traditional 443

444

Aaron Liu-Rosenbaum and Andrea Creech

face-​to-​face professional development opportunities”. Indeed, a forum, as a kind of enshrined model of cumulative talk de-​tethered from time, provides at least some advantages with respect to face-​to-​face communication, including the opportunity to consult past discussions and to take time to reflect before replying. Moreover, it seems that these primary affordances allow secondary affordances such as helping users develop a greater awareness and “a more logical approach” in the collaborative process (Biasutti, 2015, p. 126). Therefore, just as in the prior section, we note that these technologies mediate both external (physical) and internal (cognitive) processes.

Conclusion We have discussed how technologically mediated collaborative learning has brought some pedagogical challenges into focus (such as enabling social connection across physical, structural and psychological barriers and influencing creative outcomes), while obscuring others (such as traditional notions about digital versus acoustic music-​making and fixed categorisations of space and function). Pedagogical discussions on collaborative learning in music often focus on technological or human resources, but as Thoring et al. (2012) point out, “space is part of the didactic arsenal of any educator”, and a better understanding of how space –​be it virtual or physical –​can promote different types of creativity or social connection can be an important asset in meeting students’ creative needs (p.  6). Technology will likely continue to challenge both the language we use and the concepts behind that language, and as its applications expand, it will certainly take on a more agential role, not just as mediator but as full-​fledged creative collaborator  –​perhaps even teacher  –​as part of the “emerging inter-​relationships between social interaction, technologies used and collaborative music practices”, all of which contribute to constructing shared knowledge (Dobson & Littleton, 2016, p. 333). As we have observed, human intervention is still vital in facilitating a more engaged interaction with technology in creative collaborations, and our own conditioning is certainly part of that equation. We cannot presume to know the social role these technologies may ultimately play in collaborative learning, especially as they become more adept at performing ‘human’ roles, but we can remark how social connection appears capable of transcending the dichotomy between real and virtual. One day, it may call into question that dichotomy altogether. Interestingly, participants in the Biasutti study felt that the online composition process “closely resembled face-​to-​face collaboration” (2015, p. 127), which hints at a successful bridging of the real and the virtual. It is also worth remembering that any agency attributable to technology is ultimately negotiated between the user, the social context and the technology itself, as reflected, for example, in how the students in Dobson and Littleton’s (2016) study sometimes chose to postpone or forego integrating technology into their activity in order to “maintain familiar practices” (p. 345). If “digital technology has a valuable role to play in education where it is remembered and imagined as well as when … being used” (Dobson & Littleton, 2016, p. 347), then one of its fundamental roles in this regard appears to be as a conceptual tool around which to formulate ideas of collaboration and creation: it provides for us a framework for our interior and exterior discourses, and it offers a means of envisioning and realising our engagement with the world of ideas, people and things, all of which constitute new knowledge. Music is an ideal medium for creative technological exploration in that it encourages people to “generate a shared creative product” (Biasutti, 2015, p. 118). Indeed, among the vast panoply of human activities, few offer greater opportunity to collaborate and create than music, where knowledge-​creation may require more non-​verbal means of communication (Biasutti, 2015). It has been suggested that at least part of musical learning occurs through strictly musical, as 444

445

The role of technology

opposed to verbal, means (Morgan et al., as cited in Biasutti, 2015, p. 119), and that this part “may not be replaced easily by forms of communication other than music itself ” (Biasutti, 2015, p. 119). If this is true, then it is imperative to rethink the kinds of technologies we use in learning contexts involving music and other creative arts before simply borrowing or adapting technologies, platforms or software from other domains, which may prove less effective than thinking ‘techno-​musically’ from the ground up. As we look forward to imagine how technology might mediate future collaborative music learning contexts, it is worth considering how the human body itself may influence musical creativity: “The interaction between the human body, with its intrinsic modes of operation, and the morphology of the instrument may shape the structure of the music, channelling human creativity in predictable directions” (Baily, cited in Windsor & de Bézenac, 2012). The technologies discussed here mediate not only experience but also bodies, transforming, if not rupturing, the isomorphism between instrument and user. Modes of musical collaboration and learning, when technologically mediated, are less and less dependent on a predominant body type that functions in a preconceived manner, thus opening up possibilities for access to those whose bodies function in unique ways. One such example is the Soundbeam,1 although there are numerous others. Current research is already exploring ways to bypass the body entirely to enable socially connected music-​making on a more cognitive level (e.g., Groskin, 2020, and Sifferlin, 2012). It is reasonable to assume that as technology enables less normative body-​dependent music-​making, our ways of collaborating musically will, in turn, multiply as new modes of social connectedness are explored and more diverse participants included. It is possible  –​likely even  –​that the links between body–​instrument–​music will become less pronounced, if not ultimately replaced by a new model in which ‘performance’ as a physical gesture is reconceptualised as a mental gesture. Such changes would consequently impact notions of the social and what it means to collaborate. Lastly, while we have discussed how technologies, when used as a mediating tool, are essentially expressions of human agency, we recognise that a duly comprehensive discussion of technology and agency is beyond the scope of this chapter. Suffice it to say that our relationship with technology is more than mere tool use; whether it be an activity, an artefact or a Heideggerian “way of revealing”, technology is never merely technical; it is social as well. And lest we accept unquestioningly that being technologically connected equals being socially connected, we can recall Heidegger’s still timely admonition that despite technology’s seeming ability to circumvent space and time, “no abridging or abolishing of distances [necessarily] brings nearness” (1971, p.  175). Thus, we encounter today the paradox of social isolation amidst abundant technological connectedness. In response, he reminds us that technology, as techne, once referred not just to “activities and skills” but also to “arts of the mind and the fine arts” (Heidegger, 1977, p. 13) and that the path to the essence of technology –​as well as to our own essence –​is revealed in the arts (1977, p. 35). In our creative technological endeavours, it would seem, then, that we are on the right path.

Reflective questions 1. Agency: If we may attribute agency, on some level, to the technologies we use while teaching, in what ways does this impact our own agency as educators? How might technology both diminish and augment our own agency, and when is the trade-​off worthwhile?

445

446

Aaron Liu-Rosenbaum and Andrea Creech

2. Space: In what ways could the types and functions of spaces described by Thoring et al. (2012) be applied to describe or develop the virtual spaces you use for music learning and participation? How much control, as an educator, do you have over the configuration of the physical and/​or virtual spaces you use to teach?

Note 1 The Soundbeam is an assistive music technology that enables touch or touch-​free music-​making via motion detectors. See www.soundbeam.co.uk​

Suggestions for further reading Fishman, B., & Dede, C. (2016). Teaching and technology:  New tools for new times. In D. Gitomer & C. Bell (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 1269–​1334). American Educational Research Association. https://​doi.org/​10.3102/​978-​0-​935302-​48-​6_​21 Webster, P. (2016). Creative thinking in music, twenty-​five years on. Music Educators Journal, 102(3), 26–​32. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0027432115623841

References Abedin, B., Daneshgar, F., & D’Ambra, J. (2010). Underlying factors of sense of community in asynchronous computer supported collaborative learning environments. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(3), 585–​596. Barrett, M. (2012). Commentary:  Music learning and teaching in infancy and early childhood. In G. E. McPherson & G. F. Welch (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1; pp. 227–​228). Oxford University Press. Biasutti, M. (2015). Creativity in virtual spaces:  Communication modes employed during collaborative online music composition. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 17, 117–​129. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​ j.tsc.2015.06.002 Bower, M. (2008). Affordance analysis –​Matching learning tasks with learning technologies. Educational Media International, 45(1), 3–​15. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​09523980701847115 Bower, M. (2019). Technology-​mediated learning theory. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(3), 1035–​1048. https://​doi.org/​10.1111/​bjet.12771 Cayari, C. (in press). Collaborative video logs: Virtual communities of practice and aliveness in the music classroom. In R.Wright, P. A. Kanellopoulos, G. Johansen, & P. Schmidt (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of the sociology of music education. Routledge, Advance online publication. www.academia.edu/​download/​ 62351496/​Cayari_​inpress_​-​_​Collaborative_​Video_​Logs_​Virtual_​CoPs_​and_​Aliveness20200312-​ 60600-​1h1n31v.pdf Cayari, C. (2020). Popular practices for online musicking and performance: Developing creative dispositions for music education and the Internet. Journal of Popular Music Education, Advance online publication. https://​doi.org/​10.1386/​jpme_​00018_​1 Charissi, V., & Rinta, T. (2014). Children’s musical and social behaviours in the context of music-​making activities supported by digital tools: Examples from a pilot study in the United Kingdom. Journal of Music Technology & Education, 7(1), 39–​58. https://​doi.org/​10.1386/​jmte.7.1.39_​1 Craft, A., Cremin, T., Burnard, P., Dragovic, T., & Chappell, K. (2012). Possibility thinking: Culminative studies of an evidence-​based concept driving creativity? Education 3–​13, 41(5), 1–​19. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1080/​03004279.2012.656671 Creech, A. (2019). Using music technology creatively to enrich later-​life: A literature review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 117. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2019.00117 Creech, A., Hallam, S.,Varvarigou, M., & McQueen, H. (2014). Active ageing with music: Supporting wellbeing in the third and fourth ages. IOE Press.

446

447

The role of technology Delahunty, J., Verenikina, I., & Jones, P. (2014). Socio-​emotional connections:  Identity, belonging and learning in online interactions. A literature review. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 23(2), 243–​265. http://​doi.org/​10.1080/​1475939X.2013.813405 Dillon, S., & Jones, A. (2009). Exploring new kinds of relationships using generative music-​making software. Australasian Psychiatry: Bulletin of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists, 17(Suppl. 1), S163–​S166. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​10398560902948415 Dobson, E. D. (2012). An investigation of the processes of interdisciplinary creative collaboration: The case of music technology students working within the performing arts [Doctoral dissertation, Open University]. University of Huddersfield Repository. http://​eprints.hud.ac.uk/​id/​eprint/​14689/​ Dobson, E., & Littleton, K. (2016). Digital technologies and the mediation of undergraduate students’ collaborative music compositional practices. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(2), 330–​350. Erikson, E. H., & Erikson, J. M. (1998). The life cycle completed (extended version). W. W. Norton. Glaveanu,V. P. (2011). How are we creative together? Comparing sociocognitive and sociocultural answers. Theory & Psychology, 21(4), 473–​492. Groskin, L. (2020, 27 May). Making music with brain waves and heartbeats. Science Friday. www.sciencefriday. com/​videos/​music-​brain-​body/​ Heidegger, M. (1971). Poetry, language, thought (Albert Hofstadter, Trans.). Harper & Row. Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays. (William Lovitt, Trans.). Garland Publishing. Kapoor, D., & Jordan, S. (2009). Education, participatory action research and social change international perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan. http://​link.springer.com/​book/​10.1057/​9780230100640 Kivijärvi, S. (2019). Applicability of an applied music notation system:  A case study of Figurenotes. International Journal of Music Education, 37(4), 654–​666. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0255761419845475 Kpolovie, P. J., & Akpelu, W. D. (2017). Educational software impact on technology mediated learning. International Journal of Network and Communication Research, 4(1), 1–​33. www.eajournals.org/​wp-​ content/​uploads/​Educational-​Software-​Impact-​on-​Technology-​Mediated-​Learning.pdf Lagerlof, P. (2015). Musical make-​ believe playing:  Three preschoolers collaboratively initiating play “in-​between”. Early Years, 35(3), 303–​316. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​09575146.2015.1044501 Lagerlof, P., Wallerstedt, C., & Pramling, N. (2013). Engaging children’s participation in and around a new music technology through playful framing. International Journal of Early Years Education, 21(4), 325–​335. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​09669760.2013.867170 Mercer, N., & Howe, C. (2012). Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), 12–​21. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1016/​j.lcsi.2012.03.001 Murphy, E. (2013). Technology-​mediated learning. The morning watch: Educational and Social Analysis, 41(1–​ 2), 1–​4. www.mun.ca/​educ/​faculty/​mwatch/​fall13.html Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things. Basic Books. Ragusa, A. T., & Crampton, A. (2018). Sense of connection, identity and academic success in distance education: Sociologically exploring online learning environments. Rural Society, 27(2), 125–​142. https://​ doi.org/​10.1080/​10371656.2018.1472914 Rowe, V., Triantafyllaki, A., & Pachet, F. (2017). Children’s creative music-​making with reflexive interactive technology: Adventures in improvising and composing. Routledge. Ruthmann, S. A. (2007). Strategies for supporting music learning through online collaborative technologies. In J. Finney & P. Burnard (Eds.), Music education with digital technology (pp. 131–​141). Continuum. Ruthmann, S. A., & Hebert, D. G. (2012). Music learning and new media in virtual and online environments. In G. E. McPherson & G. F. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 2; pp. 567–​584). Oxford University Press. Samuels, K., & Schroeder, F. (2019). Performance without barriers: Improvising with inclusive and accessible digital musical instruments. Contemporary Music Review, 38(5), 476–​489. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​ 07494467.2019.1684061 Sifferlin, A. (2001, 19 November). Creating music using brain waves:  Just for fun or clinically important? Time. https://​healthland.time.com/​2012/​11/​19/​creating-​music-​using-​brain-​waves-​just-​ for-​fun-​or-​clinically-​important/​ Suthers, D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making:  A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer-​Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 315–​337. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1007/​s11412-​006-​9660-​y

447

448

Aaron Liu-Rosenbaum and Andrea Creech Thoring, K., Luippold, C., & Mueller, R. M. (2012, 6–​7 September). Creative space in design education: A typology of spatial functions [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education, Antwerp, Belgium. www.researchgate.net/​publication/​234065479_​CREATIVE_​ SPACE_​IN_​DESIGN_​EDUCATION_​A_​TYPOLOGY_​OF_​SPATIAL_​FUNCTIONS Voyajolu, A., & Ockelford, A. (2016). Sounds of intent in the early years: A proposed framework of young children’s musical development. Research Studies in Music Education, 38(1), 93–​113. https://​doi.org/​ 10.1177/​1321103X16642632 Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press. Waldron, J. (2018). Questioning 20th century assumptions about 21st century music practices. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 17(1), 97–​113. https://​doi.org/​10.22176/​act17.1.97 Wallerstedt, C., & Lagerlof, P. (2011). Exploring turn-​taking in children’s interaction with a new music technology. He Kupu, 2(5),  20–​32. Windsor, W. L., & de Bézenac, C. (2012). Music and affordances. Musicae Scientiae, 16(1), 102–​120. https://​ doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864911435734 Young, S., & Ilari, B. (2012). Music participation from birth to three: Toward a global perspective. In G. E. McPherson & G. F. Welch (Eds.), Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1; pp. 279–​295). Oxford University Press.

448

449

PART VI

Future directions

450

451

INTRODUCTION Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

In Chapter 28, the first of the two chapters in Part VI, we consider two fundamental aspects of implications for research and practice in music education and community music. The chapter starts with a commentary on music psychology research related to applications in music education and music in the community. In this part of the chapter, we imagine the history of music psychology in four phases: (1) establishing a new discipline; (2) investigating basic perceptual processes; (3) maturing into more musical investigations; and (4) increasing focus on applications.Whether a hypothesised shift toward increasing applications from music psychology research to music education and music in the community will occur remains to be seen. In the second part of Chapter 28, we discuss music in a time of COVID-​19. From anecdotal reporting, there is a keen awareness of what people are missing with cancellations of performances, an increase in creative ways of continuing to share musical experiences (e.g., virtual ensembles) and fond hopes that we may soon move to a post-​COVID musical life. The remainder of the chapter presents what we know (and don’t yet know) about research and practice during the coronavirus pandemic. Although very little peer-​reviewed research has been published at the time of writing, some basic understandings are beginning to emerge. General principles of risk mitigation relating to all musical performances include the possibility of reducing exposure risks by (a) entrance screening; (b) attention to physical parameters, including air and ventilation, room, space and duration parameters (e.g., staying 6 feet apart, limiting performances to 30 minutes); and (c)  individual protective measures (e.g., frequent hand-​washing, wiping down surfaces, wearing masks or face shields, spit protection, use of bell covers, separation partitions). Specific findings related to various categories are presented by performance type. In Chapter 29, we synthesise and summarise the key, overarching messages that have emerged in this volume. First, we review some of the current debates and themes relating to a current conception of music learning and participation that recognises an integration of music education and community music. Such a holistic view of music learning has arisen from recent music psychology research emanating from neuroscience, biology (e.g., genetics) and cognitive and sociocultural perspectives. Two additional aspects of an integrated view of music in education and the community are the validity of musical experiences throughout the life course

451

452

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

and the critical balance between unity and diversity –​that is, acknowledging that musicality is a universal attribute of being human and also recognising the uniqueness and validity of a wide variety of musical cultures. Other critical themes in this book are: • Interdisciplinarity:  The multifaced nature of musical experiences, exemplified in the WARIS model (Wellbeing, Art, Ritual, Identity and Social networks), is best investigated through an interdisciplinary approach to music psychology. • Music and wellbeing:  Numerous chapters in this volume present summaries of research on the wider cognitive, social, emotional and health benefits associated with music learning and participation. • Music and identity: Personal and social identities are influenced and expressed by and through music. • Developing musical expertise. Key to this is a notion of learning that involves conceptual changes in deeply personal and meaningful ways. Implications for practice include: • Quality of provision: Expertise in leadership and the quality of programmes are critically important. • Social connection through music: Music learning experiences afford numerous opportunities for interactions between facilitators and learners and between different age groups and ability levels as well as a diversity of sociocultural backgrounds. • Opportunities to be expressive: In a similar vein, people of all ages, ability levels and personal and social characteristics can explore self-​expression alone or with others through music. • Active listening:  Musical pedagogies can include learning by ear, open-​ earedness, embodied cognition (e.g., through movement) and personalised listening goals. • Differentiation:  Music learning can be both personalised and inclusive, where inclusivity requires differentiated approaches, especially among differently abled individuals. • Peer learning: Learning from one’s peers has enormous potential, whether a peer is someone of the same age, of the same ability level, of the same sociocultural background or any other relevant stratification. • Self-​directed learning and assessment: Learning music is not limited to instruction from a ‘teacher’ or a peer; in fact, one objective of formal, informal and non-​formal contexts is to foster critical and reflective self-​regulatory music learning. • Technology:  Technological skills have been re-​conceptualised to include both ‘hard’ skills (e.g., ability to edit a music video) and ‘soft’ skills (e.g., inter-​and intra-​personal skills such as ability to take personal responsibility or ability to work collaboratively with clients and co-​workers). • Family support: Although families can be an enormous source of support, many music teachers are reluctant to involve them in the process of their children’s music learning.

452

453

Introduction

Overall, the message of this book is that music psychology has a great deal to offer in relation to how we structure and engage in music in education and the community. As the lines begin to blur between formal, informal, and non-formal settings in education and the community, a natural growth phase could include more collaborative partnerships intentionally organised to involve both practitioners and music psychologists.

453

454

28 IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE 1 Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

In the final two chapters of this volume, our aim is to share implications for research and practice based on the previous 27 chapters. In working on these final chapters, we have discovered that it is sometimes difficult to separate implications for research from implications for practice. Thus, to avoid unnecessary redundancy, we have placed a discussion of research and practice implications in a series of themes drawn from the entire book that appears in Chapter 29. This chapter is divided into two sections: first a commentary on music psychology research related to applications in music education and music in the community; and second a presentation of what we know (and don’t yet know) about research and practice during the COVID-​19 pandemic.

A four-​phase view of music psychology research Taking a broad view of music psychology, one might imagine four overlapping phases. Let us call them: (1) establishing a new discipline; (2) investigating basic perceptual processes; (3) maturing into more musical investigations; and (4) increasing focus on applications. There are no firm beginnings/​endings for these phases, and their overlapping nature means that work continues in one or more phases at any given time. Finally, the labels and discussions are somewhat arbitrary, focusing as they do on the perspectives of this volume. As shown in Phase 1 in Figure 28.1, the beginnings of what would later become music psychology lie in the work of Pythagoras in the 6th century BCE. Other early efforts came from Galen (c. 131–​203), Muhammad ibn Zakariya al-​Razi (known in the West as Rhazes; 854–​925), Abū Al-​Faraj ‘Alī Ibn al-​Husayn ibn Hindū (d. 1019–​1032), Moses ben Maimon (Maimonides; 1138–​1204), Gioseffo Zarlino (1517–​1590) and Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius (c. 475/​ 7–​526). The darker shading indicates that the definition of what we now call music psychology (or psychology of music) came into sharper focus in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The lighter shading indicates that discussions are continuing even today, focusing on where the boundaries should be. As Ockelford (2016) indicates, the borderlines of music psychology need to be somewhat flexible to accommodate contributions from new fields of study (see also the relevant discussion in Chapter 2, this volume). Phase 2 encompasses the work of a burgeoning number of scholars from Germany, England and America.The following are representatives of this period of the 19th and early 20th century. 454

455

Implications for research and practice 1

Figure 28.1  Four phases of music psychology research Notes: Darker colours represent a sharper research focus; lighter colours indicate more limited research. Dots following each label indicate ongoing work.

•

Germany: Gustav Theodor Fechner (1801–​1887), Hermann von Helmholtz (1821–​ 1894), Theodor Bilroth (1829–​ 1894), Wilhelm Wundt (1832–​ 1920), Ernst Mach (1838–​ 1916), Carl Stumpf (1848–​ 1936), Theodor Lipps (1851–​ 1914), Richard Wallaschek (1860–​1917) and Robert Lach (1874–​1958). In addition, Hungarian Géza Révész (1878–​1955) trained in Germany. • England:  John Hughlings Jackson (1835–​1911), James Sully (1843–​1923), William Gowers (1845–​1915), and Edmund Gurney (1847–​1888). • America:  Carl Seashore (1866–​ 1949), Max Schoen (1888–​ 1959), James Mursell (1893–​1963), Jacob Kwalwasser (1894–​1977) and Paul Farnsworth (1899–​1978). Studies in the 19th century can be classified generally as Tonpsychologie (tone psychology), with a focus on sensation and perception of musical elements and the physiology of hearing, or Musikpsychlogie (music psychology) with a broad emphasis on mental processes and a more global view of musical behaviours and involving work in neurology, philosophy and aesthetics, psychology, ethnomusicology and comparative musicology. Seashore is credited with bringing greater coherence to the field in the first half of the 20th century. For most of these early pioneers, music was one topic among many of interest, while for Seashore it was a primary focus. His own perspective was extremely broad, encompassing physics, physiology, psychology, anthropology, philosophy and metaphysics (Seashore, 1938). However, it may be fair to say that the bulk of research in music psychology was concerned with basic perceptual processes, indicated by the darker colour in Figure 28.1. An example of this is Seashore’s aptitude test; the first version (1919) consisted of Sense of Pitch, Intensity Discrimination, Sense of Time, Sense of Consonance and Tonal Memory. A sixth test, Sense of Rhythm, was added in 1925 (George, 1980). The lighter colour from the mid-​20th century until now indicates that there is still work being done on basic perceptual processes (e.g., Sears et al., 2020), although it is no longer the central focus. Phase 3 is characterised by two trends. First, there was a turn toward placing research into a more musical context. For example, consider Kendall’s (1986) study of timbre as evidence of a shift. Based on his review of psychoacoustic approaches to the study of timbre, he states that 455

456

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

“[t]‌he artificially created sine and complex tones normally used in such investigations are, in a word, unmusical” (p. 187), and “[t]he psychoacoustic phenomena so far selected for study are products of the laboratory, bearing little relation to what we call music” (p. 188). Specifically, Kendall identified a number of studies that demonstrated the importance of the attack transient in identifying musical timbre; listeners had difficulty identifying timbres when onsets or attack transients were removed. This led to a general notion that attacks were the most important determinant of timbre identification. However, when listeners heard three musical phrases performed on clarinet, violin or trumpet, with and without attacks and decays (i.e., beginnings and endings removed), the attacks and decays were “neither sufficient nor necessary” (p. 185) for correct identification of timbre. In other words, creating musically valid tasks changed the outcome. This was reinforced by the finding that music majors performed tasks better than non-​majors. Collectively, Meyer (1956), Campbell and Heller (1980) and Kendall (1986) identified four concerns of music psychology research that prevailed during the 19th century and early part of the 20th century: (1) an atomistic or fractional approach, separating the elements of music (e.g., pitch from rhythm) and viewing music as a succession of discrete sounds; (2) use of musical stimuli unrepresentative of any musical culture (e.g., computer-​generated sounds devoid of musical context); (3)  disregard for the role of the listener; and (4)  disregard for the role of the performer. Certainly, these concerns do not pertain to all the music psychology research published prior to the 1960s and 1970s, and a strong argument can be made for the necessity of building a strong foundation on which to base the more musical studies that were to follow. Nevertheless, the turn toward greater musical validity in the last decades of the 20th century ushered in a new era of understanding, with increasing ecological validity. The ‘new era’ is reflected in the second trend of Phase 3, which had to do with a shift from a Cartesian to a Humean view, as discussed by Campbell and Heller (1980). In a Cartesian view, after René Descartes (1596–​1650), there is one Truth and it is external to human perceptions. From a Humean perspective, after David Hume (1711–​1776), there are many truths as each individual constructs their own reality. A  music psychologist who follows a Cartesian view privileges objective measurements, such as those made by an electronic tuner, over listener perceptions. “Seashore is representative of many Cartesians, who believe that the physical sciences describe the world as it ‘really is,’ and that any ‘merely human’ perceptions which do not correspond are somehow in error” (Campbell & Heller, 1980, p.  32). Recalling the study described previously, Kendall (1986) states that “Campbell & Heller (1980) note that the privileged status accorded the acoustical frame of reference in many studies is the product of a Cartesian mentality” (p. 188). Connecting these two trends, we see that beginning in the latter third of the 20th century, music psychologists moved steadily toward investigations that were increasingly musical and more frequently acknowledged that music really only becomes music inside the human mind. Among the many that could be chosen, exemplars of this maturing approach are Juslin and Sloboda’s Music and Emotion (2001) and the expanded version, Handbook of Music and Emotion (2010), and Alf Gabrielsson’s Strong Experiences with Music (2011). In Music and Emotion (2001), Juslin and Sloboda recognised that emotional responses to music have been discussed for centuries. However, in terms of scientific research on music and emotion, they state that “this topic has been seriously neglected during the last decades. None of the recent books on music psychology, or emotion psychology, have treated emotional aspects of music, other than sparingly” (p. 3). Music and Emotion consists of 20 chapters (487 pages), written by 21 scholars. A clear indication of the growth of this topic, and surely a reflection of its importance to the field, is that the 456

457

Implications for research and practice 1

Handbook of Music and Emotion, written only 9 years later, consists of 33 chapters (975 pages), written by 43 scholars. In the introductory chapter of the handbook, Juslin and Sloboda recount the burgeoning efforts in the field of music and emotion, citing new journals, special issues in journals, specialised conferences and numerous books and articles. Emotional responses to music is now a highly regarded and critical topic of study in music psychology and emotion science. Gabrielsson’s book was the culmination of many studies conducted over more than two decades. It recounts the personal descriptions chosen from 1,350 narratives written by 965 people who responded to the following prompt: “Describe in your own words the strongest (most intense, most profound) experience with music you have ever had” (2011, p. 7). Thus, the book focuses on both trends  –​music and personal accounts. Here there are no incorrect opinions, no conflicts with external, objective analyses. We read through these highly idiosyncratic reminiscences as confirmation of the subtitle of the book: Music is Much More than Just Music. Among the hundreds of accounts –​from young and old, listeners and performers, and involving all styles and genres –​here is one from an older woman writing about her experience in the 1930s of hearing the Bach’s Toccata and Fugue in C Major played by the cantor in an otherwise empty church: I sat there in the gloom in the empty church hall and it felt as if my heart would burst because I was in such raptures. I myself and the church hall expanded in some way and merged in a larger context –​a part of the universe, perhaps. (Gabrielsson 2011, p. 163) Music psychology has a long way to go to fully explain such experiences, which after all are not that infrequent. Maslow (1968) famously said that music was one of the two most common ways to have a peak experience. Another step in the direction of confirming Gabrielsson’s thesis that music is more than just music came from a neuroscientific investigation.Via fMRI, Wilkins and colleagues (2014) collected brain scans on 21 volunteers as they listened to six musical examples, each 5 minutes long; the first four were iconic exemplars of classical, country, rock and rap genres, followed by an excerpt of Chinese opera (chosen for its unfamiliarity) and an individually chosen personal favourite. Using network science methodology, they analysed 21,000 voxels (three-​dimensional pieces of brain tissue) for each musical example and constructed real-​time connectivity maps (Wilkins et al., 2012), indicating that the default mode network had a higher degree of functional connectivity during preferred and especially the most-​liked music, regardless of the style or type of music (e.g., with or without lyrics). The default mode network is implicated in re-​processing of emotional and autobiographical memories. Analysis revealed that when a person listens to music he or she prefers, the brain increases connectivity within the Default Mode Network. This supports what people often report: They find themselves considering unsolicited personal thoughts while listening to music that they like. They are essentially “looking in” –​ruminating on personally relevant memories and emotions  –​rather than “looking out”  –​paying attention to external events. (Hodges & Wilkins, 2015, p. 43) That the brain responded to favourite music in this way, regardless of genre, is perhaps a partial explanation for why people all over the world, in all times and in all places, find music so moving. 457

458

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

According to Figure  28.1, Phase four is a period of increasing applications in the past few decades; the question mark indicates uncertainty over whether this is a wish more than a reality. It may take more time before we can look back and determine whether, in fact, more applications have come out of music psychology research to inform practices in music education and community music. An early attempt to bring psychologists and music educators into more collaborative arrangements was the Ann Arbor Symposia. These were a series of gatherings held in 1976, 1979 and 1981 (DOCUMENTARY REPORT, 1981, 1983; Mark, 1986). While these meetings did open dialogues between the two disciplines, there were no long-​lasting outcomes. This was evidenced by a perceived gap between music psychology and music education that was addressed by Hargreaves (1986), who wrote in the journal Psychology of Music, “[t]‌he gulf between research in music psychology and practice in music education presents a perennial and pressing problem” (p. 83). In the same issue, the Editor, John Sloboda, struggled “in some perplexity and in a genuine desire to understand how scientists can best contribute to music education” (Sloboda, 1986, p. 144). After all, the journal was published by the Society for Research in Psychology of Music and Music Education. He went on to say that although a significant amount of research had been conducted with an earnest desire to improve music teaching, “this body of research has not yielded the results, nor had the impact on the educational community, that all of us could have hoped for” (p. 144). Thirty years later, it was apparent that the problem persisted, as evidenced in the following, also quoted in Chapter 2 of this volume: It is probably fair to say that the majority of research efforts in music psychology have not been in applied or translational research for educational, developmental, or therapeutic purposes.This applied or translational focus may become one of the many new future directions in the psychology of music. (Thaut, 2016, p. 902) Before leaving this introductory discussion, it is certainly pertinent to acknowledge several positions contrary to the notion that music psychologists ought or might begin to focus more on applications to music education and community music. • • •

Music psychologists may be more interested in basic than applied research. Music psychologists may lack the professional background and expertise to be conversant with relevant issues in music education and community music. Music psychologists may feel that their counterparts in music education, music therapy and community music should carry out applied research in their fields. Perhaps music researchers should endeavour more frequently to form partnerships with collaborators from fields outside music whose expertise enhances their own.

Thus, it is not axiomatic that ‘Phase 4’, as we have called it, will be a time of fruitful music psychology research leading to direct applications in music education and community music. Whether, and to what extent, music psychology has contributed to music education, music therapy and music in the community is somewhat answered by this entire volume. Each of the authors has reviewed published findings and has indicated needs for continued research in selected areas. Details on the implications this literature has for continued research and for best practices moving forward are presented in Chapter 29. In the meantime, we turn our attention in the remainder of this chapter toward the circumstances of music during a worldwide health crisis. 458

459

Implications for research and practice 1

Music in a time of COVID-​19 A brief vignette in a small-​town newspaper contains a poignant story about the power of music as told by a nurse providing palliative care to a COVID-​19 patient. Anna Henderson, one of the unit’s care partners, recalled a patient’s reaction when she started singing for him. “He just started weeping, just breaking down, crying from his heart, crying from his gut. It was all I could do to keep singing, but I did. But, you know, it’s times like that music and this job just go hand-​in-​hand.” (Associated Press, 2020) In the opening chapter of this volume, Raymond MacDonald not only acknowledges the disruptive influence of the COVID-​19 pandemic but also notes that it is still too early to know with any certainty what the eventual outcomes will be in school and community music experiences. Many of the chapters were written before the global crisis arose, and even those written during the early stages of it were necessarily focused on published literature. Therefore, very little in this volume has recognised the effects of COVID-​19 on music education and music in the community. As a result, this chapter is devoted to sharing the small amount of information available so far.

Performing and teaching during a pandemic Cancelations of live music performances throughout the spring and summer of 2020 have been devastating for musicians and audiences alike. Not only have symphony and opera seasons, summer festivals, rock concerts and numerous other performances been cancelled, but the management teams, venues and all other components (e.g., restaurants, hotels, parking, travel and booking agencies) have been affected as well. The Metropolitan Opera, for example, announced that they have cancelled the entirety of the 2020–​2021 season and will not reopen until September 2021 (Metropolitan Opera, 2020). Losses have mounted into multibillions of dollars (Hall, 2020), and according to one source, live music revenues may drop by as much as 75% due to these cancelations (Meredith, 2020). Live music accounts for half of the global music industry’s yearly revenue of $50 billion, which primarily comes from ticket sales (Hall, 2020). On a more positive note, streaming services are experiencing a rise in subscribers and downloads (Hall, 2020), and some long-​term projections for streaming services and live music revenues foresee a global rebound to reach $142 billion by 2030, an 84% increase over 2019 figures of $77 billion (Meredith, 2020). An analysis of 1.5 trillion streaming transactions from 500  million viewers in 180 countries led to the encouraging finding that people who live-​ stream a concert are 67% more likely to buy a ticket to a similar event (Wassenberg, 2020). For example, even before the pandemic hit, the Pickathon music festival in Portland, Oregon, went from a digital audience of 11,000 in 2015 to over 200,000 global viewers in 2016. In the absence of live, in-​person concerts, many have found solace in live-​stream performances. Classic fM posts “an updating list of major classical concerts, operas and other music events being streamed online as a result of the impact of coronavirus measures continuing around the world” (Pentreath, ongoing). Andrea Creech shares her own perspective in the following: I know that in my own limited experience of “attending” live-​streamed concerts, these were quite special in that there was an awareness that I was listening as part of a much wider (sometimes global) community of people, all experiencing this event 459

460

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

at the same time. For example, I was absolutely transfixed by a special performance of Bach’s St John’s Passion from Leipzig, performed by a small number of musicians spaced out around the cathedral, and live-​streamed. That sense of being together, yet apart, united by the music, was truly special. While I would not want to diminish the devastation we are witnessing in the arts world, perhaps there are unexpected new initiatives as well. (Personal communication) Although many virtual choirs, orchestras and bands have been posted on the internet, probably no one would suggest that they replace the real experience. That caveat aside, certainly, many professional orchestras have posted inspiring virtual performances, such as the ending of Mahler’s Third Symphony played by the Boston Symphony Orchestra (bso-​virtual-​orchestra/​) and there are additional glimmers of hope: In locked-​down Italy, the media took note as arias drifted from balconies. In the U.K., five BBC stations synched up for a national sing-​along. In Seattle, in Chicago, in Dallas, apartment complexes and cul-​de-​sac driveways now regularly host socially distanced renditions of Bon Jovi, of Queen, and –​of course –​of Withers. Nuns have gone caroling; gospel choirs have video-​harmonized. (Kornhaber, 2020) The pandemic has had devasting effects on school and community music programmes. Schools from preschool to university level cancelled in-​person classes, many moving to online instruction.This, necessarily, had major consequences for music classes, ensemble rehearsals and private lessons. Similarly, houses of worship were shuttered, meaning no choirs, no hymn singing, and the like. There is considerable fear that the long-​term consequences of these closings may, in some cases, become permanent. Will school boards use these (hopefully) short-​term situations as an excuse to make these kinds of cuts permanent? Will churches, whose choir members are largely in the older, vulnerable age range, have difficulties in returning to their former practices of full choirs and sometimes orchestras? Only time is likely to answer these questions. In another interesting move, that comes as a non sequitur, Venugopal (2020) reports that scientists using sonification have translated the structure of the coronavirus into music. Far from being an idle curiosity, this process enables scientists to find places on the virus where antibodies or drugs may be able to bind and thus prevent the spread of infection.

Music psychology research in a pandemic As can be imagined at the time of this writing (August 2020), very little published research deals with the effects of coronavirus on music experiences. How does the virus affect music-​making? Unfortunately, in the short term there is precious little research into the effects of the coronavirus on singing and playing musical instruments. One of the earliest papers published was a risk assessment regarding coronavirus infections in music-​making (Spahn & Richter, 2020). Initiated by the Bamberg Symphony Orchestra, an initial study was conducted in May 2020 of orchestral wind instruments, recorder, saxophone and both classical and popular singing styles.Virus transmission is by droplets and aerosols and, therefore, measurements were made of “both qualitative tests for flow visualization and quantitative measurements of air velocities at different distances” (p. 4). General principles of risk mitigation relating to all musical performances include the possibility of reducing exposure risks by (a) entrance screening, (b) physical parameters, including 460

461

Implications for research and practice 1

air and ventilation and room, space and duration parameters, and (c)  individual protective measures such as face masks, face shields, spit protection and separation partitions. The College Band Directors National Association (CBDNA) is collecting a repository of information about performing during COVID-​19 (Spede & Weaver, 2020). In addition, the CBDNA is partnering with nearly 100 other performing arts organisations to commission a study on the return to rehearsal and concert halls during the pandemic. The study will be conducted with environmental engineers, specialising in urban air, as lead researchers. The first two of a series of reports have been released (Miller & Srebric, 2020a, 2020b), though neither have yet been peer reviewed. Most of their ‘general considerations’ are similar to the guidelines from Spahn and Richter, with a few additional comments such as brass instruments emptying condensation onto an absorbent pad which can be discarded later and the use of bell covers. Specific findings from these and others studies are presented subsequently by performance type.

Singing Singing, both individually and in choral settings, is strongly affected by the coronavirus. The National Association for Teachers of Singing, the American Choral Directors Association, Chorus America, the Barbershop Harmony Society and the Performing Arts Medicine Association sponsored a webinar entitled “A conversation: What do science and data say about the near-​term future of singing?” (see National Association for Teachers of Singing, 2020). The European Choral Association posted “The big COVID survival Choral doc” (Peithmann, 2020) providing dozens of online links and resources, hyperlinks to lessons, worksheets, assignments, best practices, videos and demos, assessment ideas and choral related concerns/​questions. These, and many other resources, are available to help singers, teachers and conductors navigate through this difficult time. Singers, especially those classically trained, have been called “superemitters” (Asadi et  al., 2019). That is, they breathe more deeply and expel droplets more forcefully. Morawska and colleagues (2009) determined that continuous speaking (a sustained ‘aah’) increased the concentration of particles over larger distances.While singing was not investigated, by inference one might posit that singing would likewise increase the distance droplets travel. Spahn and Richter (2020) found that no air movement could be detected beyond 2 metres (6.5 feet), which is considered a protective distance, even with forceful projection and explosive articulation. Time is also a critical factor, as the longer singing continues in a closed space, the larger the build-​up of aerosol concentrations (Miller & Srebric, 2020b). In-​person studio teaching of voice is possible given a number of proper mitigation protocols. In larger studio spaces, it should be possible to keep a minimum of 6 feet between teacher and student. Some teachers are experimenting with clear plastic face shields (Figure  28.2), and initially medical experts suggested that these are more effective than cloth or paper masks (Perencevich et  al., 2020). Face shields can be cleaned, they are more comfortable to wear than masks, and they allow visibility of facial expressions. However, other medical experts have cautioned that face shields are not as effective as masks (Miller, 2020; Miller & Srebric, 2020b), saying that aerosols can move around the sides of shields and they do not mitigate against smaller aerosols. Some teachers are wearing both face shields and masks, as shown in the top panel of Figure 28.2. Singing with a mask reduced aerosols considerably (approximately 0.1 airborne particles per cubic centimetre) compared to singing without a mask (approximately 1.4 airborne particles per cubic centimetre) (Miller & Srebric, 2020b). Also, infection risk increased significantly the longer the singing went on. Singer’s masks, shown in the lower panel of Figure 28.2, have also been developed as a means of providing more resonance. Although 461

462

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

Figure 28.2  Personal protective equipment for singers Notes: Top panel: face shield with face mask. Bottom panel: singer’s face mask, providing more resonance.

there are no known studies on singer’s masks yet, one caution is that any mask needs to fit well, with no gaps around the edges. Thus, with the use of masks, frequent hand cleaning, proper physical distancing and limited singing times, in-​person voice lessons are possible. Involving a pianist as a third person does complicate matters somewhat, such as the need to wipe down the keyboard after each lesson. Also, besides shorter lesson times (i.e., no longer than 30 minutes), there should be time between lessons for the HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) system to complete at least one air change for the room and ideally three complete changes. Choral singing under normal circumstances –​many singers in close proximity in a relatively small space  –​exacerbates the distribution and accumulation of aerosols. Precautions might mitigate the risks somewhat; these would include proper spacing, air ventilation, individual protection and rehearsing in a much larger space and in shorter durations than normal. In one unfortunate case of “superspreading”, 102 of 130 members of a choir in Amsterdam became infected (Lebrecht, 2020). As a result of one choral rehearsal in the US, 53 individuals (87% of the 61 members present) contracted COVID-​19, and two died (Baker, 2020). The US Centers 462

463

Implications for research and practice 1

for Disease Control and Prevention said the cause might have been a superemitter. These and other similar situations stand as examples of the dangers inherent in choral singing. As mentioned previously, many churches and synagogues have cancelled in-​person worship and are relying instead on recorded or live-​stream services. Some churches are beginning to hold in-​person services with enhanced safety protocols, such as physical distancing, wearing masks, availability of hand sanitisers, frequent, deep cleaning and the elimination of hymnals, bulletins, prayer cards and other elements that can be handled. For those services involving congregational singing, this appears possible if the distancing rule of 2 meters/​6 ½ feet is observed and face masks are worn, since it can be assumed that there is no greater risk of being infected by singing than by speaking. In addition, services usually take place in large to very large spaces. (Spahn & Richter, 2020, p. 21) When schools and universities were closed, including the elimination of rehearsals and performances, many choral directors rushed to develop online, virtual choirs. Olson and Edgar (2020) decided to investigate how the students felt about this. Not surprisingly, they found that some students loved the idea –​“Yes! I feel like it would be really cool to do a virtual choir at a time like this because it’s like we’re showing that this social distancing thing isn’t going to stop us from using our voices” –​but others did not –​“No because of all the internet difficulties, and there is always lag, along with everyone sounding different on video.” While a virtual choral experience may be better than ‘nothing’, “it is not enough to replicate what makes our classrooms special –​coming together to make music with those who mean so much to us.” Another issue to consider is the difficulty of creating virtual ensembles, a topic discussed subsequently.

Instruments Brass and woodwind instruments Spahn and Richter (2020) found that no air movement was detected beyond a distance of 1.5 metres (4’1”) for recorder and 2 metres (6’6”) for flute. One suggestion is that flutists use a vertical headjoint, as this reduces dispersion of aerosols (Montesinos, 2020). Unfortunately, these are quite expensive and are not likely to be a good alternative for school band programmes. Although Spahn and Richter (2020) found that, with the exception of flute and recorder, no droplets were released into the air from the mouth of brass and woodwind instrumentalists while playing, Miller and Srebric (2020b) recommend that wind players wear a mask with a slit allowing the insertion of reeds or mouthpieces (see Figure 28.3).Their data indicated that there was greater dispersion of airborne particles when wind players performed without wearing a mask. With brass and woodwind instruments, air escapes through the bell or through open keys. An assumption is made that some aerosol particles stick to the insides of the instrument and that further reduction occurs with longer airways, smaller bore sizes and more curved shapes (Spahn & Richter, 2020). There is one published study on the dispersion of aerosols by a so-​ called ‘wind instrument’, the vuvuzela, a plastic blowing horn used at sporting events (Lai et al., 2011). Comparing blowing on a vuvuzela to shouting, researchers found that the plastic horn dispersed more aerosols of a larger size, with an airflow 6.1 litres per second, compared to 463

464

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

Figure 28.3  Oboist wearing a mask Notes: Left panel: Reed is inserted through a slit in the mask with the covering flap lifted up. Right panel: Covering flap is closed over the reed. The flap can be snapped shut when not performing.

1.8 for shouting. This topic needs more investigation, and until more data are gathered, some recommend a cloth covering for the bells of brass instruments (Kähler & Hain, 2020; Willich et al., 2020; see Figure 28.4). For obvious reasons, this recommendation applies less stringently to woodwind instruments (i.e., because of venting from keys), although bell bonnets or covers for woodwind instruments have been developed. Cloth bags have been created to cover open-​ holed wind instruments, but these have not yet been scientifically tested. Until more data are available, wind players (except flute) are encouraged to wear masks with slits for the mouthpiece or reeds. Also, brass players should use masks and fabric bell covers lined with a MERV 13 filter material, as performing with mask and bell cover reduces emissions (Miller & Srebric, 2020b). The use of masks, bell covers or bags with wind instruments is not without problems. Some players have expressed concern that the use of instrument bags will trap aerosols inside that can be released in greater density when the instrument is removed. Wind players frequently have to take the instrument away from the face; for example, during measures of rest, between movements or during rehearsal breaks. This is much more difficult with a mask. Here is one oboist’s comment: For me, I do feel very awkward wearing it while playing. I can’t really take the reed off my lip as finding the opening quickly is not easy and can damage the reed if you are not sure of where your lips are in relation to the mask. I never realized how much I use my eyes, even peripherally, to see the reed. To get it in my mouth without destroying it, I have to use my hand and fingers to feel where the mask opening is. I also feel like I can’t get a proper breath or manage my air as I do without the mask. I do both inhale

464

465

Implications for research and practice 1

Figure 28.4  Horn bell cover Notes: Some horn bell covers have a slit allowing insertion of the hand. This bell cover has a long sleeve, which allows for a better seal with the hand inserted. However, the sleeve makes it much more difficult to maneuver the horn for emptying condensation.

and exhales to avoid stacking my air. [Other players and I feel that] our musicality was hampered by dealing with the mask. (Personal communication) Because brass mouthpieces are larger inside the mask than outside, pulling the instrument away from the face can actually cause the mask to come off. Bell covers for most instruments do not pose any difficulty but, as noted in the caption of Figure 28.4, horn bell covers with a sleeve make manoeuvring the instrument to empty condensation extremely awkward and there is no chance of removing the arm and hand from the sleeve in a quick manner. As with many new things, continued experience is likely to make performing with masks, bell covers and bags easier, but it does require a period of adjustment. Playing brass instruments creates condensation which must be emptied periodically, and it has not yet been determined what the viral load is in condensed water. In the meantime, the recommendation is to empty spit valves (i.e., condensation) onto puppy pads or other absorbable material that can be disposed of, rather than directly onto the floor (Miller & Srebric, 2020b). Measurements are also pending concerning whether aerosol particles adhere to inner surfaces of the instrument. Further, whether the deep breathing required for wind instrument playing increases risk of infection has not been scientifically investigated.

465

466

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

Keyboard, bowed and plucked string instruments, percussion The American String Teachers Association convened a COVID-​19 Task Force and developed guidelines for resuming classroom and studio instruction for string teaching (American String Teachers Association, 2020). In addition to general protocols previously enumerated, there are instructions for cleaning string instruments and other specialised guidelines. Also, in a welcome departure from health protocols, they reposted a statement released from a consortium of 54 national organisations to support arts education as essential for students during the COVID-​19 pandemic: It is imperative that all students have access to an equitable delivery of arts education that includes dance, media arts, music, theatre, and visual arts that supports their educational, social, and emotional well-​being, taught by certified professional art educators in partnership with community arts providers. (American String Teachers Association,  2020) Spahn and Richter (2020), physicians and heads of the Freiburg Institute for Musicians’ Medicine worked collaboratively with three medical consultants on a risk assessment of the coronavirus in music.Throughout their report, they are cautious in presenting any conclusions and note the need for continued investigations. Nevertheless, their report is a significant step forward in the early stages of musicians dealing with the pandemic: From our point of view, there is no increased risk to other instrumentalists through music making when compared to other social situations with regard to the question of droplet infection or increased aerosol formation, provided that the applicable rules are strictly observed. (Spahn & Richter, 2020, p. 28) In conclusion, they state: As long as we do not have a sufficiently scientifically verified understanding, we must err on the side of over-​rather than underestimating the possible risks. In this way, the overall risk of infection can be reduced as much as possible by combining risk-​reducing measures. However, it must be clearly pointed out that according to the ALARP principle (As Low as Reasonably Practicable) there will be residual risk that is currently not quantifiable. (p. 32) In other words, following all recommended protocols mitigates risk but does not eliminate it entirely. A general summary of singing and instrument playing includes the following recommendations (Miller & Srebric, 2020b): • • • • •

Wear masks that are well fitting and include at least two layers of dense fabric. Keep a minimum of 6 feet apart (9 feet for trombones). Keep rehearsals or practice sessions to 30 minutes or less. Practice proper hygiene, with frequent hand-​washing and wiping down all surfaces. Allow for proper ventilation with an HVAC system that changes the air at least three times per hour. 466

467

Implications for research and practice 1

Because several other phases of this research project are planned, many more findings from this and other investigations are likely to add to our base of knowledge, even as this volume goes to press. With many school and universities closed, many teachers have moved to remote, online teaching. There are many video chat platforms available, such as Zoom, FaceTime, or Skype. Online lessons solve many of the problems of in-​person sessions, such as physical distancing and facial covering requirements. However, many teachers complain about lag time, poor audio quality, freezing, pixilating and other problems inherent in videoconferencing, to say nothing about the limitations on personal interactions (Browning, 2018).

Ensembles A number of projects are underway to increase our understanding of performing in an instrumental ensemble. The West Point Music Research Center (2020) published some early guidelines for performing live, including rehearsing and performing outdoors when possible, expanding distances between musicians (see Figure  28.5) and using barriers (i.e., plexiglass shields) between performers (Figure 28.6). For audiences, recommendations include outdoor performances, widely spaced seating, limiting audience size, broadcasting via live-​stream and ‘drive-​in’ concerts where audience members stay in their cars.

Virtual ensembles Videos of virtual choirs, bands, orchestras and many other ensembles have appeared on the internet with increasing frequency. One of the earliest and most well-​known examples is Eric Whitacre’s Virtual Choir, involving more than 8,000 singers from 120 countries and generating 40 million views (see Eric Whitacre’s Virtual Choir, n.d.). Other examples include the Chicago Youth Symphony (ABC 7 Chicago Digital Team, 2020), the Arctic Philharmonic based

Figure 28.5  The Boise Baroque Orchestra, conducted by Robert Franz Notes: The orchestra placed a summer 2020 concert online because of the pandemic. They performed with masks (except wind instruments), were spatially distanced, and had no audience members present. Difficult to see are the plexiglass barriers in front of each wind player, which is shown more clearly in Figure 28.6.

467

468

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

Figure 28.6  Karlin Coolidge, principal flutist of the Boise Baroque Orchestra Notes: The flutist is shielded from other members of the ensemble by a plexiglass barrier as she performs in an online concert. Miller and Srebric (2020b BIB-​034), however, caution that plexiglass barriers may impede proper circulation and air changes in HVAC systems.

in Tromsø, Norway (see Arctic Philharmonic, n.d.) and a virtual concert band featuring 225 musicians from 29 countries (Campbell, 2020). As attractive and inspirational as these may be, they require a tremendous amount of work and some degree of technological expertise. Elizabeth Reed describes the work of melding hundreds of students from around the US into a virtual orchestra as a “huge undertaking” (Griesinger & Rogelstad, 2020), and the aforementioned virtual concert band performance required 60 hours of editing. Fortunately, there are a number of articles and videos providing tutorials. Here are just a few examples: • • • • •

“Virtual learning: Taking your choir rehearsals online” (Cook, 2020); “How to record chamber music in lockdown” (Oppenheimer, 2020); “How to create a virtual choir or orchestra –​Tutorial” (Friedhoff, 2020); “Connecting technology and music:  The virtual orchestra project” (Griesing & Rogelstad, 2020); “How to create a virtual ensemble –​for music teachers” (Harvick, 2020).

Conclusions In the first section of this chapter, we presented a historical long view of music psychology, organised into four phases. Phase 1, dating from antiquity and continuing until today, is concerned with the emergence of a new discipline and boundaries that define it. While the field came into clearer focus during the 19th century and early part of the 20th century, especially with the work of Seashore, there are still ongoing discussions about the purview of music psychology. In Phase 2, a primary focus of music psychology research was on basic perceptual processes. Investigating basic acoustical principles, how our sense of hearing works, psychoacoustical relationships such as frequency and pitch and the perception of melody, rhythm, harmony and form laid the groundwork for more advanced work in Phase 3. Beginning in the mid-​20th 468

469

Implications for research and practice 1

century, music psychology research turned toward placing fractionated elements into more musical contexts and from a Cartesian to a Humean perspective. Combined, these two trends emphasised the notion that music becomes music inside the human mind. Phase 4 concerns a hypothesised shift toward increasing applications from music psychology research to music education and music in the community. Whether this will happen more frequently remains to be seen. Paradoxically, music’s role in schools and communities during the COVID-​19 pandemic is both diminished and heightened. Classes, rehearsals, lessons and performances have all been cancelled or curtailed. The very presence of music in some schools and some community venues may be threatened. At this juncture, it is difficult to peer through the fog of confusion to see how things may stand once we are past this health crisis.What will the landscape look like? Will we ever return to ‘normal’? On a more positive note, in times of crisis, music (and all the arts) play a powerful role in reminding us of the “better angels of our nature” (Lincoln’s first inaugural address, 1861; Lincoln, 2018). When we are deprived of something highly valued that we may have come to take for granted, we experience an aching desire, indeed a deep craving to have it back in our lives. Professional musicians, church choir members, students and teachers, audiences for all types of music, who may have tired of the regular round of rehearsals, classes, lessons and performances, will eagerly return to that routine when allowed. In the meantime, we sing or play to ourselves or to each other through social media. We log on to view live-​stream and virtual performances or listen again to favoured recordings. It could well be that empty performance venues will be filled to the brim once the pent-​up desire to return is possible. Amid all the fear, doubt and confusion, one thing we know for certain is that music will remain. Just as the cellist of Sarajevo (Galloway, 2008) played on through the rubble of a bombed-​out city, we will continue to lift our voices and sing and play our way through to a better and brighter day.

Reflective questions 1. Do you think music psychologists will increasingly turn toward applied research that will serve to enhance practices in music education and community music? 2. Is it fair to place the burden of applied research on the shoulders of music psychologists? Should we, instead, be asking them to collaborate with music educators, music therapists and community musicians in solving practical problems? 3. If you are reading this while the pandemic is still raging, how do you view the role of music in these times? If you are reading this after the storm has passed, what struggles do we still face in restoring music to its rightful place in schools and the community?

Suggestions for further reading On applied music psychology research Hargreaves, D. (1986). Developmental psychology and music education. Psychology of Music, 14(2),  83–​96. Sloboda, J. (1986). Achieving our aims in music education research. Psychology of Music and Music Education, 14(2), 144–​148.

469

470

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech

On music during COVID-​19 Hall, S. (2020, May 27). This is how COVID-​19 is affecting the music industry.World Economic Forum. www. weforum.org/​agenda/​2020/​05/​this-​is-​how-​covid-​19-​is-​affecting-​the-​music-​industry/​ Kornhaber, S. (2020, April 9). People are remembering what music is really for. The Atlantic.www. theatlantic.com/​culture/​archive/​2020/​04/​coronavirus-​has-​forced-​repurposing-​music/​609601/​ Miller, S., & Srebric, J. (2020b). International coalition of performing arts aerosol study, round 2. www.nfhs.org/​ media/​4119369/​aerosol-​study-​prelim-​results-​round-​2-​final-​updated.pdf Spahn, C., & Richter, B. (2020). Risk assessment of a coronavirus infection in the field of music. University of Freiburg. www.mhfreiburg.de/​fileadmin/​Downloads/​Allgemeines/​engl._​Risk_​AssessmentCoronaMu sicSpahnRichter19.5.2020.pdf

References ABC 7 Chicago Digital Team. (2020, 12 June). Chicago Youth Symphony Orchestra releases virtual concert showcasing student performers. ABC7 Eyewitness News. https://​abc7chicago.com/​chicago-​youth-​symphony-​ orchestra-​virtual-​concert-​children-​childrens-​performance/​6243560/​ American String Teachers Association. (2020). ASTA joins 53 other national organizations to support arts education as essential for students during COVID-​ 19 pandemic. www.astastrings.org/​Web/​Resources/​ Advocacy/​Arts_​Education_​Is_​Essential.aspx Arctic Philharmonic. (n.d.). In Facebook [videos].www.facebook.com/​watch/​?ref=external&v=22335 8632369649 Asadi, S., Wexler, A. S., Cappa, C. D., Barreda, S., Bouvier, N. M., & Ristenpart, W. D. (2019). Aerosol emission and superemission during human speech increase with voice loudness. Scientific Reports  –​ Nature, 9(1), Article 2348. doi:10.1038/​s41598-​019-​38808-​z Associated Press. (2020, 30 June). Coffeetalk. The Joplin Globe, p. 3A. Baker, S. (2020, 13 May). An infamous Washing choir practice led to 53 COVID-​19 cases and 2 deaths  –​ and could have been down to a “super-​emitter” in the choir. Business Insider. www.businessinsider.com/​ coronavirus-​cdc-​says-​washington-​choir-​session-​53-​cases-​2-​deaths-​2020–​5 Browning, D. (2018, 3 December). Remotely running a voice studio. CS Music. www.csmusic.net/​content/​ articles/​remotely-​running-​a-​voice-​studio/​ Campbell, L. (2020, 7 April). 225 Musicians. 29 Countries. 1 Band. (Virtual Concert Band) [video].YouTube. www.youtube.com/​watch?v=0zeoHtfkxQg Campbell,W., & Heller, J. (1980).An orientation for considering models of musical behaviour. In D. Hodges (Ed.), Handbook of music psychology (pp. 29–​36). National Association for Music Therapy. Cook, T. (2020, 17 March). Virtual learning: Taking your choir rehearsals online. Chorus Connection. https://​ blog.chorusconnection.com/​virtual-​learning-​taking-​your-​choir-​rehearsals-​online Documentary report of the Ann Arbor symposium:  Applications of psychology to the teaching and learning of music. (1981). Music Educators National Conference. Documentary report of the Ann Arbor symposium session III: Applications of psychology to the teaching and learning of music. (1983). Music Educators National Conference. Eric Whittaker’s Virtual Choir. (n.d.). About the virtual choir. https://​ericwhitacre.com/​the-​virtual-​choir/​ about Friedhoff, P. (2020, 9 April). How to create a virtual choir or orchestra –​Tutorial.YouTube. www.youtube.com/​ watch?v=2gtazh8EoSA Gabrielsson, A. (2011). Strong experiences with music: Music is much more than just music. Oxford University Press. Galloway, S. (2008). The cellist of Sarajevo. Penguin. George,W. (1980). Measurement and evaluation of musical behavior. In D. Hodges (Ed.), Handbook of music psychology (pp. 291–​392). National Association for Music Therapy. Griesing, K., & Rogelstad, M. (2020, 17 March). Connecting technology and music: The virtual orchestra project. Cued In. https://​blogs.jwpepper.com/​index.php/​connecting-​technology-​and-​music-​the-​virtual-​ orchestra-​project/​ Hall, S. (2020, 27 May). This is how COVID-​19 is affecting the music industry.World Economic Forum. www. weforum.org/​agenda/​2020/​05/​this-​is-​how-​covid-​19-​is-​affecting-​the-​music-​industry/​ Hargreaves, D. (1986). Developmental psychology and music education. Psychology of Music, 14(2),  83–​96.

470

471

Implications for research and practice 1 Harvick, J. (2020, 1 April). How to create a virtual ensemble –​for music teachers [video].YouTube. www.youtube. com/​watch?v=JxZlm6YcG1o Hodges, D. A., & Wilkins, R. W. (2015). How and why does music move us? Answers from psychology and neuroscience. Music Educators Journal, 101(4),  41–​47. Juslin, P., & Sloboda, J. (Eds.). (2001). Music and emotion: Theory and research. Oxford University Press. Juslin, P., & Sloboda, J. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of music and emotion: Theory, research, applications. Oxford University Press. Kähler, C. J., & Hain, R. (2020). Musizieren während der Pandemie  –​was rät die Wissenschaft?  –​ Über Infektionsrisiken beim Chorsingen und Musizieren mit Blasinstrumenten [Making music during the pandemic –​what does science advise? –​About infection risks when singing and playing music with wind instruments]. Institut für Strömungsmechanik und Aerodynamik. www.unibw.de/​home/​news-​rund-​ um-​corona/​musizieren-​waehrend-​der-​pandemie-​was-​raet-​die-​wissenschaft Kendall, R. A. (1986). The role of acoustic signal partitions in listener categorization of musical phrases. Music perception, 4(2), 185–​213. Kornhaber, S. (2020, 9 April). People are remembering what music is really for. The Atlantic. www. theatlantic.com/​culture/​archive/​2020/​04/​coronavirus-​has-​forced-​repurposing-​music/​609601/​ Lai, K. M., Bottomley, C., & McNerney, R. (2011). Propagation of respiratory aerosols by the vuvuzela. PloS ONE, 6(5), Article e20086. https://​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.pone.0020086 Lebrecht, N. (2020, 11 June). A full assessment of the COVID risk of playing wind instruments. Slipped Disk. https://​slippedisc.com/​2020/​06/​a-​full-​assessment-​of-​the-​covid-​r isk-​of-​playing-​wind-​instruments/​ [This article contains the text of an article intended for publication in a medical journal: Schwalje, A., & Hoffman, H., Wind musicians’ risk assessment in the time of COVID-​9.] Lincoln, A. (2018). The writings of Abraham Lincoln. Seltzer Books. Mark, M. (1986). Contemporary music education (3rd ed.). Schirmer Books. Maslow, A. (1968). Music education and peak experience. Music Educators Journal, 54(6), 72–​75, 163–​164. Meredith, S. (2020). Music industry to nearly double in value by the end of the decade, Goldman Sachs says. www.cnbc.com/​2020/​05/​20/​coronavirus-​music-​industry-​to-​nearly-​double-​in-​value-​by-​2030-​ goldman-​sachs-​says.html Metropolitan Opera. (2020). A message to our audience. www.metopera.org/​user-​information/​2020-​21-​ season-​update/​ Meyer, L. (1956). Emotion and meaning in music. University of Chicago Press. Miller, J. (2020, 14 July). Swiss doctor pans plastic visors after COVID-​19 hits restaurant workers. Reuters World News. www.reuters.com/​article/​us-​health-​coronavirus-​swiss-​visor/​swiss-​doctor-​pans-​plastic​visors-​after-​covid-​19-​hits-​restaurant-​workers-​idUSKCN24F239 Miller, S., & Srebric, J. (2020a). Performing arts aerosol study: Round one preliminary results. www.nfhs.org/​ media/​4029952/​preliminary-​testing-​report-​7-​13-​20.pdf Miller, S. & Srebric, J. (2020b). International coalition of performing arts aerosol study, round 2. www.nfhs.org/​ media/​4119369/​aerosol-​study-​prelim-​results-​round-​2-​final-​updated.pdf Montesinos, S. (2020). Wind instruments may not be as contagious as we thought. https://​medium.com/​@ SixtoFMontesinos/​wind-​instruments-​may-​not-​be-​as-​contagious-​as-​we-​thought-​b821e590b29a Morawska, L. J. G. R., Johnson, G. R., Ristovski, Z. D., Hargreaves, M., Mengersen, K., Corbett, S., Chao, C., & Katoshevski, D. (2009). Size distribution and sites of origin of droplets expelled from the human respiratory tract during expiratory activities. Journal of Aerosol Science, 40(3), 256–​269. National Association for Teachers of Singing. (2020, 5 May). A conversation: What do science and data say about the near-​term future of singing? [video].YouTube. www.youtube.com/​watch?v=DFl3GsVzj6Q Ockelford, A. (2016). Beyond music psychology. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M.Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 877–​892). Oxford University Press. Olson, B., & Edgar, S. (2020, 14 April). Virtual choirs: Student thoughts on taking performance online. National Association for Music Education. https://​nafme.org/​virtual-​choirs/​ Oppenheimer, G. (2020, 11 June). How to record chamber music in lockdown. The Strad. www.thestrad.com/​ playing-​and-​teaching/​how-​to-​record-​chamber-​music-​in-​lockdown/​10783.article Peithmann, L. (2020). The big COVID survival choral doc [in Google Docs]. https://​docs.google.com/​document/​d/​1rPUGd19SMm-​x0acbHdEUmEoXK-​ElGPCWr_​vpSDwTzH8/​edit?fbclid=IwAR1tBYX 60PFIkqufPK1uJ7oaEgkZhQEnTujHgNOmHbEqY5NfvWFQqK8d5YU Pentreath, R. (ongoing). The best classical music and opera online streams available. Classic fM. www.classicfm. com/​music-​news/​live-​streamed-​classical-​music-​concerts-​coronavirus/​

471

472

Donald A. Hodges and Andrea Creech Perencevich, E., Diekema, D., & Edmond, M. (2020). Moving personal protective equipment into the community: Face shields and containment of COVID-​19. Journal of the American Medical Association, 323(22), 2252–​2253. doi:10.1001/​jama.2020.7477 Sears, D. R., Spitzer, J., Caplin, W. E., & McAdams, S. (2020). Expecting the end: Continuous expectancy ratings for tonal cadences. Psychology of Music, 48(3), 358–​375. Seashore, C. (1938). Psychology of music. McGraw-​Hill. Sloboda, J. (1986). Achieving our aims in music education research. Psychology of Music, 14(2), 144–​148. Spahn, C., & Richter, B. (2020). Risk assessment of a coronavirus infection in the field of music. University of Freiburg. www.mh-​freiburg.de/​fileadmin/​Downloads/​Allgemeines/​engl._​Risk_​AssessmentCoronaM usicSpahnRichter19.5.2020.pdf Spede, M., & Weaver, J. (2020). Unprecedented international coalition led by performing arts organizations to commission COVID-​19 study. National Federation of State High School Associations. www.nfhs.org/​articles/​unprecedented-​international-​coalition-​led-​by-​performing-​arts-​organizations-​to-​commission-​ covid-​19-​study/​ Thaut, M. (2016). History and research. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (2nd ed.; pp. 893–​904). Oxford University Press. Venugopal, V. (2020, 3 April). Scientists have turned the structure of the coronavirus into music. Science. www. sciencemag.org/​news/​2020/​04/​scientists-​have-​turned-​structure-​coronavirus-​music Wassenberg, A. (2020, 20 April). Live streaming is here to stay –​the future of an emerging technology. Ludwig van Toronto. www.ludwig-​van.com/​toronto/​2020/​04/​20/​report-​live-​streaming-​is-​here-​to-​stay-​the-​ future-​of-​an-​emerging-​technology/​ West Point Music Research Center. (2020, 3 June). Army Band COVID-​19 risk mitigation for large groups. West Point Band. www.westpointband.com/​westpointmusicresearchcenter/​army-​band-​covid-​19-​r isk-​ mitigation-​for-​large-​g roups.html?fbclid=IwAR3JF6HrSCTpid44GXlPsnjgfk80cgEou3wVpYGNSf QKLwkiFuNSgwp0W8c Wilkins, R. W., Hodges, D. A., Laurienti, P. J., Steen, M. R., & Burdette, J. H. (2012). Network science: A new method for investigating the complexity of musical experiences in the brain. Leonardo, 45(3), 282–​283. Wilkins, R. W., Hodges, D. A., Laurienti, P. J., Steen, M., & Burdette, J. H. (2014). Network science and the effects of music preference on functional brain connectivity: From Beethoven to Eminem. Scientific Reports, 4, Article 6130. https://​doi.org/​10.1038/​srep06130 Willich, S., Berghöfer, A., Wiese-​Posselt, M., Gastmeier, P. and the orchestra boards and directors of Berlin orchestras (Berliner Philharmoniker, Deutsches Symphonie-​Orchester Berlin, Konzerthausorchester Berlin, Orchester der Deutschen Oper Berlin, Orchester der Komischen Oper Berlin, Rundfunk-​ Sinfonieorchester Berlin, Staatskapelle Berlin). (2020). Stellungnahme zum Spielbetrieb der Orchester während der COVID-​19 Pandemie [Statement on the orchestra’s performance during the COVID-​19 pandemic]. www.konzerthaus.de/​media/​filer_​public/​07/​c1/​07c103ca-​b01b-​47b3-​8663-​4cb48db9503e/​ stellungnahme_​spielbetrieb_​orchester.pdf

472

473

29 IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE 2 Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

Our intention with this handbook was to explore some of the commonalities as well as points of divergence with regard to psychology as applied within music education and community music contexts. In particular, we set out to explore the relevance and implications of music psychology in relation to diverse contexts for music learning and participation across the life course. We set out on this journey with the idea of challenging and possibly even deconstructing some of the silos that have been constructed around various spheres of practice and pedagogy, leading to a compartmentalised view of how we engage with music learning across our lives. This volume began with a strong and clear message about the function of music in our societies: “Music is universal, music is accessible and music is sociable” (see Chapter 1, p. 16). Some distinct overarching messages have emerged from the subsequent chapters, elaborating on –​and sometimes challenging –​these fundamental principles concerned with the role of music in society, as well as exploring how these principles can be articulated or supported in pedagogical practice. For example, while some aspects of music may be universal (e.g., Jacoby et al., 2019), music educators have increasingly turned their attention to issues around diversity in relation to learners, contexts, musical preferences, emotional responses, musical styles and practices. Furthermore, in this volume the accessibility of music has been both highlighted and critiqued, with an increasing focus on the need for differentiated resources and innovative pedagogies and practices that serve individual and group goals. Indeed, there is an increasing awareness among educators of the need to be responsive to the multiplicity of needs among diverse groups in society so as to ensure that the development of music in identity is accessible to all. Finally, the chapters collected here demonstrate that the idea that music is sociable has been explored extensively in music education and community music initiatives that aim to promote collaborative learning, foster social skills and contribute to social wellbeing. In a similar vein, the chapters collectively highlight that interdisciplinarity and collaboration are relevant across contexts and are a concern for music leaders, facilitators and teachers working towards many kinds of goals. In this chapter, we first outline some current prominent debates and themes concerning music psychology in education and the community. We then consider some specific implications for practice that have emerged from individual chapters and from the volume as a whole. We begin with a caveat. As we write, we are navigating the COVID-​19 pandemic, which has certainly had (and will continue to have) far-​reaching consequences in music education and music in the 473

474

Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

community. The key issues that emerge from the chapters will take on new significance (more or less) in the shadow of the pandemic, and many unintended or unexpected implications for practice are certain to arise. We discuss this in more detail in Chapter 28, while focusing in this chapter on the key messages that have emerged from chapters written in a pre-​pandemic world.

Music psychology in education and the community: Current debates and themes Over the first two decades of the 21st century, we have witnessed increasingly blurred boundaries between ‘music education’ and ‘community music’. Demographic change alongside a focus on the right to lifelong, inclusive education (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], 2016) and (in particular) access, quality and social justice in the arts (UNESCO, 2010) has pushed practitioners to reflect on –​and in some cases re-​conceptualise –​notions of ‘musical expertise’, ‘musical development’ and the rationale for music learning. It is now not uncommon for music teachers, facilitators and learners to engage with multiple contexts, translating their practices, pedagogies and learning from one space to another. As Matsunobu and Bresler (2019) np state: While the field of music education research has long focused on school music and institutional teaching, it is increasingly reaching out to the wider community, in the process involving people at different life stages who are operating in a variety of societal contexts. Consequently, research in music education explores a broad spectrum of musical engagements (including composition and improvisation, in addition to singing, playing, and listening) and a wide-​ranging repertoire (including jazz, popular music, folk, and world music), together with diverse pedagogies both inspired by and borrowed from these genres.This process reveals how these forms of musical transmission can, on the one hand, create new meanings and experiences at individual levels, and, on the other, shape collective identity formation through the facilitation of cultural sustainability and transformation. Therefore, rather than clinging to dichotomous ways of thinking about context (e.g.,‘education’ or ‘community’), we may more effectively serve our society with a model of music learning and participation that recognises the complex and multiple ways that we engage with music, creating “a form of music education that exists simultaneously in both school and community” (Wright, 2019, p. 223). Such an integrated understanding of music learning may be premised on an environment that recognises and promotes transfer of learning across contexts as well as collaborative practices among learners, professional musicians, community artists and teachers. Collectively, the chapters in this volume demonstrate that this holistic vision of music learning can be traced to emergent implications from neuroscientific, biological, cognitive and sociocultural perspectives in music psychology. Indeed, reciprocal links between music psychology and music pedagogy offer great potential for leaders of lifelong music learning within a continuum of formal, non-​formal and informal contexts to further develop evidence-​based practices that honour the UNESCO (2010) principles and address social, cognitive and pedagogical issues. As reinforced throughout this volume, there is widespread agreement that music is a universal human construct, notwithstanding the individual and cultural differences in what is conceptualised as music (Hallam, 2006). As Wright (2019, p. 218) highlights,“ethnomusicologists and anthropologists from Blacking (1974) onwards have concluded that being human is being musical”. The idea of music as a human phenomenon existing alongside a commitment to 474

475

Implications for research and practice 2

lifelong, inclusive education as a human right (UNESCO, 2016), points to the significance of music psychology in informing music pedagogies that develop fully each person’s talents and abilities and maximise the potential for individuals and groups to experience the wider benefits of music participation (Hallam, 2015). Indeed, “access to rewarding music learning throughout the life course should be one measure of a socially just society” (Wright, 2019, p. 218). Notwithstanding cultural differences, music (like language) provides important common ground for diverse groups. In this vein, music psychology has contributed to our understandings of the ways in which music participation may foster a sense of group belonging (Schäfer & Eerola, 2018), affinity (Vuoskoski et al., 2016) and empathy (Rabinowitch et al., 2012) as well as promoting imagination and creativity (e.g., Sawyer, 2006). Music participation is furthermore significant in the development of individual and collective identities. These social and potentially transformative qualities may accord a prominent role to music learning and participation in relation to the 21st-​century interest in global citizenship, whereby learners seek sociocultural understandings and are prepared “to be the inventors of an unknown future that continues to be shaped by global forces” (Mellizo, 2019, p. 3). Mellizo (2019, p. 11) calls for “culturally responsive” music educators who focus pedagogies and practices around the ways in which students find music meaningful. Culturally responsive music educators and facilitators seek to create music-​making experiences that build on the musical lives and preferences of their learners within an inclusive approach that incorporates experiential, imaginative, conceptual and practical learning (Creech et al., in press). In this vein: A culturally responsive music educator tends not to use the word “talent” or make judgmental statements about particular genres of music, because he/​she understands that everything an educator says and does within the confines of the classroom walls has a direct impact on students’ personal, cultural, and musical identities in both positive and negative ways. (Mellizo, 2019, p. 12) The notion of culturally responsive, inclusive and non-​judgemental leadership of music learning and participation raises critical questions about concepts of musical ability (Hallam, 2010), how we have traditionally conceptualised ‘musicians’ as compared with ‘non-​musicians’ and what the implications of these labels may be for the ways in which music educators and facilitators support musical engagement and development. Debates around this issue have emerged in music psychology research, where research designs concerned with measuring individual responses to music, or the wider outcomes associated with engagement with music, frequently depend on comparisons between musicians and non-​musicians. Zhang et al. (2018, 2020) carried out literature reviews with the aim of ascertaining whether there was some consensus in the music psychology literature with regards the definition of musician. Their research revealed a three-​component model of a musician comprising musical identity, skill and predisposition. The idea of musician as an identity has gained much traction. Be it as musician or non-​musician, these identity labels have been described as self-​bestowed or socially bestowed (O’Neill, 2002). Creech et al. (in press) explore the development of ‘musical possible selves’, arguing that these musical ‘self-​stories’ are shaped throughout the life course by intersections between musical experience (including affective, imaginative, conceptual and practical engagement with music), pedagogies and contexts for learning and participation. With regard to musical skill, a body of music psychology research has been invested primarily in issues concerned with the ability to play a musical instrument, including the acquisition of skills (e.g., Hallam, 2011; Papageorgi et al., 2009). More recently, music educators have 475

476

Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

been introduced to the idea of ‘embodied cognition’, premised on the holistic notion of musical skill achievement involving our “brains, bodies, and the social, cultural and physical features of the environment” (Schiavio et al., 2019, p. 3). From this perspective, becoming a musician is not solely related to perceived individual musical traits and behaviours (the third component in Zhang et al.’s model), but rather emerges through a dynamic interplay between brain, body and environment. Accordingly, leaders of music learning have increasingly focused on opportunities for participation, collaboration, reciprocal interactions and group flow. The following sections of this chapter discuss some specific themes and debates that have emerged from this volume, highlighting the implications of music psychology in educational and community contexts.

Interdisciplinarity The move towards a more holistic understanding of musicianship, musical development and musical learning has highlighted the multifaceted nature and interdisciplinarity inherent in music learning and participation, as reflected in the model proposed by Raymond MacDonald in Chapter  1. Here, exploring the function of music in our societies, MacDonald proposes that music’s overarching communicative function may be understood as touching on and intersecting with the domains of wellbeing, art, ritual, identity and social networks (WARIS). The interdisciplinary implications of the WARIS model are reinforced in Chapter  2, where Donald Hodges highlights the state of contemporary trends and approaches in music psychology research, pointing to the potential for interdisciplinary groups working together to foster groundbreaking knowledge and innovations in pedagogical practices. This focus on interdisciplinarity (particularly the idea of collaboration among researchers, practitioners and theory makers) and partnership working suggests that a discussion of ‘implications for practice’ may be difficult to disentangle from ‘implications for research’. Certainly, it points to the possibility for enquiry-​based approaches in pedagogical practice to foster deep learning and insight, in particular privileging the learner perspective.

Music and wellbeing Chapters 3, 4 and 5 in Part I of this volume focus specifically on the wider cognitive, social, emotional and health benefits associated with music learning and participation; and this theme of wider benefits recurs throughout the volume. As highlighted by Sylwia Holmes in Chapter 3, the underpinning rationale for music education and music in the community is often dominated by discourse around the wider cognitive benefits of music. While we need to exercise caution around the idea that ‘music makes you smarter’, there is some evidence that music can promote the development of executive functions; and brain plasticity allows for this to continue throughout childhood, adolescence and well into adulthood (Chapter  3). Indeed, research findings concerned with the cognitive benefits of music lend support to the idea that opportunities for music learning and participation remain salient across our lives (see Chapter 17).The challenge for practitioners is to know how best to structure musical activities so as to maximise access to the potential wider benefits. An overarching message, expressed by Ioulia Papageorgi (Chapter  17), is that the potential positive wider benefits of music learning and participation can be achieved when musical activities are relevant to the individuals, are carefully planned and are led by expert teachers or facilitators. Specifically, the potential social and emotional benefits of music education and music in the community are discussed by several authors in this volume (e.g., Chapters 1, 4, 476

477

Implications for research and practice 2

5, 13, 16, 17 and 19). Programmes are often designed with one objective being the contribution to enhanced wellbeing (see Chapter 4), and even where this is not an explicit goal, there is widespread acknowledgement of the role that music learning and participation can play in providing an outlet for personal expression and creativity, strengthening social bonds, enhancing positive attitudes to school and contributing to positive identity. Singing, in particular, is highlighted as an accessible and inclusive way of making music that offers significant physiological, social and emotional benefits (see Chapter 13). Recognition of these wider social and emotional outcomes seems to be characteristic of formal music education contexts as well as community music contexts. This raises questions for practitioners relating to the specific pedagogies, musical choices and musical practices that can promote positive wider benefits in various contexts. Further critical questions relate to the important (but often neglected) issue of potential deleterious effects of music, pointing to the need for music leaders, teachers and facilitators to be cognisant of –​and responsive to –​the potential negative outcomes of particular musical materials or practices with specific groups. These same leaders, teachers and facilitators should perhaps consider more active involvement, if not opposition, when ‘outside’ (i.e., non-​ educational) agencies use music for deleterious purposes (e.g., when a government uses music as a means of torture) (Cusick, 2006). There are some tensions concerned with whether and how aims concerned with wider benefits can be complementary to goals focused on the development of expertise. Maria Spychiger, in Chapter 16, positions these two trajectories as being distinctly different, while others (see Chapter 19, for example) suggest that these objectives are not necessarily mutually exclusive. With an increasing focus on wellbeing within music education and community music contexts, formal as well as non-​formal, there is a corresponding shift towards student-​focused and inclusive pedagogies (see Chapters 11 and 19). As noted time and again throughout this volume, there is no ‘one size fits all’ pedagogy; nor is there a specific book of guidelines that can specify the dos and don’ts in this regard. However, a key message for practitioners is that excellent pedagogies, be this within music education and training or community music contexts, are reflective and responsive, supporting the development of musical identities and taking account of learner characteristics, cultural context, individual preferences and group dynamics.

Music and identity Throughout this volume, authors lead us to understandings of how multifaceted identities can be explored and achieved in and through music –​be this within formal music education or more non-​formal or informal community music participation. The social function of music is emphasised (Chapter 1), particularly its role in the shaping our evolving sense of who we are. As Lamont and Hargreaves (Chapter 9) discuss, individual musical preferences can serve as a badge of identity. In groups, too (see Chapter 20), collective identity can be expressed through musical style or genre. Indeed, music may be one of the most stable expressions of cultural identity (see Chapter  9), while at a more specific level, musical choices can express something profound about group identity. As discussed in Chapters 19 and 20, in ensemble contexts, group identity processes, including social identification and communication, come to the fore. MacDonald (Chapter 1) adds that distributed identity and creativity in a group can be a motivating factor, contributing to social and psychological bonds. Annabel Cohen (Chapter 13) draws attention to the universal nature of singing and its role in identity formation. Cohen points out the curious conundrum whereby all children sing but many adults do not, having had discouraging experiences that fostered a belief that they were 477

478

Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

not ‘musical’ –​in other words, experiences that threatened the idea that music was part of their identity, or indeed that their identity could be in music. While research has demonstrated that singing is a ubiquitous, natural and spontaneous early childhood behaviour, singing activities seem to decline around age 8. Cohen attributes this to the problem of the adult non-​singer, which has effects beyond the adult population, because it is adults who parent, teach and provide role models for children. This certainly has implications for the role of singing in teacher education. With a greater emphasis on singing, music leaders as well as teachers of various subject areas would then be equipped to embed singing in their pedagogical practices, thus strengthening music in identity among the children they work with. The distinction between ‘music in identity’ and ‘identity in music’ is discussed (e.g., Chapters 1, 4 and 16). Broadly, as defined in Chapter 16, these concepts align with ‘expert musician’ (music in identity) and ‘non-​expert-​musician’ (identity in music). However, these concepts of musician and non-​musician are contested and shifting (see Chapters 8, 10 and 23). In this vein, the notion of musical ability may be less related to advanced technical skills and more closely aligned with capacity to engage with the expressive and communicative components of musical experience (see Chapter 10). Furthermore, even among those whose self-​concepts are strongly framed by the idea of musician identity, versatility and flexibility are key words. Rowley et al. (Chapter 23) argue in favour of tertiary music education that prepares students to construct their own expansive ‘portfolio’ careers, maximising opportunities where they can apply both musical and transferable skills. Similarly, Chapter 4 considers the term ‘dropout’ and what dropout in music might mean in relation to music in identity or identity in music. Critical questions are raised concerning the meaning of dropout. As discussed in Chapter 4, dropout from commitment to musical studies may be understood as a positive identity choice (e.g., ‘dropping up’ to something different, potentially with the benefits of the wider cognitive, social and emotional learning outcomes that may be associated with earlier musical engagement). Accordingly, the implications for practice lie in the ways that we conceptualise and reinforce the role of music in participants’ lives, in particular pointing to the problematic nature of a dichotomous view of musician and non-​musician identities.

Developing musical expertise –​what is it, and how do we learn? Some key messages have emerged from this volume about how we become engaged in music and acquire musical expertise, with implications for how learning –​and musical identities –​can be facilitated. An overarching framework for deeply engaged and personally meaningful learning is discussed by Varvarigou and Creech (Chapter 11). Here, the focus is on the idea of transformative learning, or learning that involves profound conceptual change. From this perspective, learning may be understood as the development of deep, personally meaningful understandings rather than accumulation of facts. Transformative learning, they argue, is characterised by a sense of empowerment among learners; learning involves an experiential cycle that comprises affective awareness, imagination, conceptual understanding and embodied practical competencies. Such learning, which involves both reflection and action, is facilitated by teachers or leaders who organise learning activities in a responsive manner, drawing on a full range of hierarchical, cooperative and autonomous approaches. This emphasis on flexible facilitation of learning is reinforced throughout the volume; for example, Elaine King (Chapter 20) argues that pedagogies that recognise and embrace different styles and strategies of leadership and facilitation would contribute to effective learning and teaching. Many perspectives are offered, throughout this volume, concerned with the underpinning practices that may be associated with transformative learning. The key implications for practice are discussed below: quality of provision; 478

479

Implications for research and practice 2

social connection; expressivity in musical learning; active listening; differentiation; peer learning; self-​directed learning and assessment; the role of technology; and the wider support found within families.

Quality of provision As noted in Chapter 4, wider social and emotional benefits of music learning and participation may be contingent on the quality of programmes and musical experience. This would suggest that the qualifications of those who lead music learning and participation are of great importance. Some key messages concerned with the potential substance of such qualifications have emerged from this volume (see Chapters 12 and 21). Leadership of quality music learning would seem to involve a high degree of interpersonal skill; differentiation with regards to pedagogies and practices; and expert musicianship, including confidence in singing. Cohen (Chapter 13) adds to the discussion of quality, highlighting that continuing participation in singing (in this case, addressing the problem of male dropout from singing) depends on: (a) teacher personality and interest in the participants; (b) a high level of musicianship of the teacher and the quality of the music; and (c) the social environment, specifically peer support and positive influence of role models. With regard to music leader qualifications, some sectors of music education and music in the community remain unregulated in this sense. For example, as discussed by Gaunt et al. in Chapter  21, instrumental learning in formal or non-​formal contexts may be led by expert musicians who nevertheless have limited experience of teacher training, while musical activities in non-​formal or informal community contexts may similarly be led by individuals who may not necessarily have teaching qualifications. Arguably, there could be a greater emphasis on partnership working in some contexts (e.g., active, performing specialists working alongside qualified teachers). To support widespread high standards, professional codes of practice could be further developed as well as opportunities for pedagogical training for musicians working in a whole range of contexts, pursuing portfolio careers (see Chapter 23). Such initiatives could be, for example, coordinated by organisations such as the International Society for Music Education adopting an inclusive approach that could be representative of multiple cultural perspectives and practices in music education.

Social connection through music As highlighted in Chapter 1, music can facilitate a sense of fellowship and social connection. This can be achieved through musical activities that provide scope for the sharing of ideas and mutual creative engagement. In Chapter 27, Lui-​Rosenbaum and Creech discuss the specific ways that technology can mediate social connection through music, while earlier chapters (e.g., Chapters 19, 20, 21 and 26) repeatedly highlight the ways in which inclusive practices can be articulated. Chapters 3, 4 and 5 reinforce the view that collaborative music-​making is a particularly powerful way to engage with music, fostering wider cognitive, social, emotional and health benefits. Several authors in this volume have highlighted in particular the implications relating to the quality of interactions among facilitators and learners and the ways in which social cooperation is expressed through the pedagogical approach (e.g., through peer learning and assessment practices –​ see Chapters 24 and 26). For example, Elaine King (Chapter 20) explores pedagogical strategies that focus on the quality of social connection. Discussing the context of learning in small groups, King advocates for training concerned with the interpersonal dimension of 479

480

Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

learning and teaching; for example, raising awareness of how non-​verbal communication can influence group dynamics. King also raises the important issue of duration of music programmes in relation to the implications for formulating positive interpersonal contexts for learning. Writing from a UK perspective, where secondary school music provision has become fragmented and is often offered in short units that alternate with other arts subjects, and where community music interventions often take the form of short-​term projects, King highlights that long-​term programmes are needed in order for learners to build relationships and develop collaborative practices. King furthermore argues that practitioners need to be flexible and responsive to the ways that groups evolve over time, allocating time for groups to focus both on group dynamics and task-​oriented learning. Matthews (Chapter 19) concurs, highlighting that while conductor-​educators must be rigorous in matters concerned with musicianship, they must also cultivate positive interactions that keep learners motivated. Being cognisant of the power of music in relation to supporting social connection and affiliation, practitioners have an opportunity to develop practices that are inclusive and reflect the diversity found among their learner or participant groups.

Opportunities to be expressive As suggested by the emphasis in Chapter 11 on an experiential learning cycle, transformative learning in music may be achieved when music makers experience opportunities for self-​expression with music. Jane Davidson and Stephanie MacArthur (Chapter 10) discuss the concept of musical expertise, highlighting its contested and highly individualised meaning. Musical ability, they argue, manifests as expressive and communicative musical experience, irrespective of level of achievement; as such, musical ability may be intricately entwined with personal and social identity. In this vein, Davidson and MacArthur conclude Chapter 10 with a proposal that self-​determined and sustained musical development may be underpinned by opportunities for experiential, fun and expressive music-​making embedded in the learning process. These opportunities to be expressive (in particular), they argue, can (and should) be promoted within diverse contexts by facilitative teaching and peer learning characterised by open questions and encouragement to explore musical parameters. Concurring with the evidence concerned with the importance of acknowledging diverse musical preferences (discussed by Lamont and Hargreaves in Chapter  9), Davidson and MacArthur reinforce the view that it is vital for music leaders and facilitators to respond to the intrapersonal and contextual characteristics of learners in order to structure engaging activities Accordingly, differentiated ways of making music can stimulate emotional responses, making music’s expressive, communicative and affective powers accessible for learners at all stages in their musical development.

Active listening and embodied cognition Transformative and expressive learning may encompass the idea of active and focused listening, which has also been a central principle in informal pedagogical approaches premised on something akin to ‘discovery learning’. An example is the Musical Futures approach (discussed in Chapters  8, 11 and 23) where the principal tenets are learning by ear and recreating music through exploration and aural copying. Playing by ear is further discussed by Katie Zhukov in Chapter 12, where she emphasises the importance of ‘sound before symbol’ when beginning to learn to play an instrument as well as the continuing importance of playing by ear in supporting the development of the learner’s capacity to think in sound. 480

481

Implications for research and practice 2

In a similar vein, some research evidence highlighted in Chapter 8 supports the view that active listening involves motor activities (e.g., encouraging movement in response to music listening) and may contribute to the development of learner engagement and deep understandings of musical parameters such as pitch, rhythm and phrasing, as well as greater open-​earedness with regards to unfamiliar music. A related idea is the notion of embodied cognition, thought to be linked to the development of deep musical understanding. Embodied cognition may be one framework for explaining the impact that breathing and bodily tension may have on anxiety, self-​criticism and the capacity to form learning goals among advanced-​level wind players (reported by Zhukov, Chapter  12). Wilfried Gruhn (Chapter 6) draws attention to the involvement of movement in the process of developing musical understandings, pointing to the importance of embracing new ways of teaching and learning that involve the entire body in musical responses. In this vein, and as noted in Chapter 3, rhythmic activities may be particularly important in relation to the enhancement of executive functions, improving attention and even strengthening goal-​directed behaviour. Rhythmic activities are also associated with entrainment, linking rhythmic information to motor activity and forming part of our emotional response to music (see Chapter 7). However, harmony and other structural features of the music, as well as familiarity, may be facets that interact in promoting physically and mentally engaged responses to music, as discussed by Fulford et al. in Chapter 7. Alexandra Lamont, in Chapter  8, reminds us that active listening can be facilitated in personalised ways; for example, guiding individual listeners towards specific musical parameters or alternatively towards focusing on emotional responses as the music unfolds. Underpinning many of the studies concerned with active listening and embodied cognition is the principle that music learning will be most salient when learners can make meaningful connection with prior experience. Accordingly, Lamont furthermore emphasises that such guidance should, ultimately, equip learners with the competencies to set their own active listening goals.

Differentiation Differentiation, whereby tasks or outcomes may be personalised in response to individual or group needs, may be a key issue in supporting inclusive, deeply engaged learning and development in music. The authors of Chapter 4 ask us to consider Cross’s (2009) concept of “floating intentionality”, whereby music may be interpreted in divergent ways. Echoing Davidson and MacArthur’s emphasis on the multiple ways in which the expressive and communicative power of musical experience can be made accessible, the idea of intentionality suggests that inclusive and expert pedagogical practice may require a highly responsive and differentiated approach that acknowledges and celebrates the prior musical preferences and experiences of learners. In this vein, King (Chapter 20) advocates an openness to exploration of many ways of making music (e.g., instrumental music-​making, composition, improvisation, singing and so on) across all ages, stages and contexts for music learning and participation. Differentiated practices are salient also in the context of large musical ensembles. Wendy Matthews (Chapter  19) highlights that conductor-​educators face the challenge of attracting and retaining diverse learners; effective responses involve exploring creative, age-​appropriate responses to cultural differences and diverse musical preferences. The closely interrelated issues of differentiation and inclusion are further reinforced by David Baker in Chapter 22. He highlights the vast continuum of persons living as ‘differently abled’, those whose needs require flexibility and responsiveness –​framed by critical thinking about the notion of ‘normalising’ musical engagement  –​on the part of music leaders or facilitators. Going further, Lui-​Rosenbaum and Creech (Chapter 27) consider the role of technology in reframing our thinking about what intentional music participation and collaborative musical practices can ‘look like’. Lui-​Rosenbaum and Creech discuss the affordances of virtual spaces that can be configured 481

482

Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

to meet different types of learner needs and learning objectives. Here, the authors furthermore highlight that technology can mediate accessible and inclusive ways of creating social connection through music-​making, even suggesting that an affordance of groundbreaking technologies may be that ‘performance’ as a physical gesture could be re-​conceptualised as a mental gesture.

Peer learning Surprisingly, given the social nature of music-​making, peer learning is still novel within many music education settings. However, as noted in Chapter 26 (Nielsen & Johansen), peer learning offers multiple developmental benefits for participants. Peer learning may be symmetrical and exploratory, where participants experience a high degree of autonomy and the scope for playful experimentation with rules and roles. Alternatively, it may be asymmetrical, with one peer scaffolding the other in a ‘helper–​helped’ relationship. Intergenerational peer learning (see Chapters 20 and 25) is another approach that may be particularly effective in terms of providing role models and opportunities for reciprocal scaffolding (e.g., constructing new knowledge through sharing musical preferences from different generations; developing competencies through sharing practical knowledge concerned with technology or instrumental skills). In any of these scenarios, care needs to be taken that learners continue to feel supported and guided when appropriate. Furthermore, careful thought needs to be given to the way that peer learning groups are formed; in some cases, it may be most effective to build on the trust and identification within existing friendship groups. However, self-​selection based on friendship groups risks revealing and reinforcing hidden hierarchies and excluding some learners. Therefore, as noted in relation to positive interactions, a key message is that time devoted to developing positive interpersonal dynamics and collaborative approaches to learning may be an essential facet of effective peer learning.

Self-​directed learning and assessment Throughout this volume, key messages have been concerned with sustained participation in music. Accordingly, a shared objective within formal, non-​formal and informal contexts for music learning is to equip music learners with the tools needed to be autonomous and self-​ directed in their musical journeys. One of the ways that learner agency can be supported is through self-​and peer assessment, discussed in Chapter 24. Here, Boucher and Creech argue that such assessment practices offer the potential to support critical and reflective self-​regulatory music learning, be it within formal music education contexts or community music contexts. Boucher and Creech discuss several approaches, including involving students in the development of criteria, incorporating self-​assessment alongside expert feedback, engaging learners in peer feedback as a means to develop skill and identify strengths and areas for development and celebrating achievements and reflecting on their own development. Careful scaffolding may be required in order to develop trust and confidence among learners with regard to self-​or peer assessment (particularly within formal contexts). However, Boucher and Creech argue that engaging learners with assessment practices, within a range of contexts, can provide them with competencies in self-​regulation and opportunities to exercise agency in their own musical development.

Technology Theoretical perspectives concerned with how we acquire skills in the use of music technology have developed in accordance with broader trends in psychological perspectives on music 482

483

Implications for research and practice 2

learning (Chapter 14). In this vein, technological skills have been conceptualised, within a behaviourist perspective, as learning outcomes encompassing long lists of ‘hard’ (e.g., edit digital files) and ‘soft’ (e.g., demonstrate dependability) competencies. These typologies perhaps responded to, or informed, music educators’ early attempts to codify the ways in which music technology could or should be embedded in their pedagogies and practices. More recently, as explained by Purves and Himonides (Chapter 14), we have seen a move towards interdisciplinary frameworks for understanding the place of technology in music education, with pedagogical understandings based on the idea of apprenticeship as well as situated and contextualised musical activities. Finally, within a social context where technologies are advancing rapidly and becoming ever more integral to our daily lives, music learners of all ages and in diverse contexts use technology in flexible and adaptive ways that support critical thinking, interpersonal communication, listening and applied research (see Chapter 27). Indeed, music learning and creative music-​making in virtual worlds and with digital technology tools has become a priority area of practice. Technology has become a central tool in mediating learning and creating a sense of community (Chapter 27) and in supporting learning and collaboration. As noted in Chapter 27, technologies can function as conceptual tools around which to formulate structures of collaboration and creation.

Family support Chapter  25 in this volume considers several perspectives that can frame our understandings of the role that families can play in supporting music learning and participation. The various models discussed comprise issues relating to family support behaviours, musical experience in the home, parental roles and attitudes and musical background of family members. Overall, a key message is that family support for music learning and musical engagement is multidimensional. Just as with the idea of differentiated pedagogies, different strategies are relevant and effective for different types of learners and outcomes. A further key message is that family support has been found to be related to sustained musical engagement and positive wider benefits of music learning. Furthermore, family support has been found to be influential for children and adults alike, and intergenerational music learning has been found to be a particularly valuable context within which families can develop deeper connection. It is therefore rather disheartening to be reminded by Zdzinski that notwithstanding the well-​documented benefits associated with family support, many music teachers are reluctant to involve parents or other extended family members in children’s and young people’s musical learning. An implication here is that pedagogical innovation and curricular change could include the idea of ‘families as partners’, with a greater emphasis on integrated partnership working among institutions, teachers, parents or carers, and students. With appropriate scaffolding for the interpersonal as well as the task dimensions of learning, the wider benefits of deepening family support may become accessible to learners of all ages.

Conclusions The overarching implications emerging from this volume point to a holistic approach to music learning and participation which reflects the growing interest in music psychology around the complementarity of perspectives concerned with the brain, the body, the environment and features of the music itself. Table 29.1 sets out the key messages, aligning these with reflective questions for practitioners and potential pedagogical applications.

483

484

Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges Table 29.1  Key messages, reflective questions and pedagogical applications

Interdisciplinarity of music learning and participation How could interdisciplinary practice influence learning outcomes or patterns/​modes of participation in music? Where can your practices be enriched or expanded through interdisciplinary partnership working?

Explore partnership working in musical practices; for example: • teacher–​artist–​community  group; • school–​community–​professional arts organisation; • composition–​performance–​education. Explore pedagogical ideas borrowed from other art forms, through engaging in multi-​arts projects; for example: • music–​drama–​dance–​visual arts–​literature. Develop innovative practices through exchange of ideas in interdisciplinary projects: for example: • older people using technology for musical engagement (gerontechnology–​music education–​ psychology of ageing); • music interventions with disadvantaged youth for promoting social wellbeing (music education–​social pedagogy–​psychology–​sociology).

Music and wellbeing In what ways do your practices support or pose challenges to the emotional, cognitive, social or physical wellbeing of learners? How can goals concerned with the wider benefits of music be embedded within pedagogies that aim to promote the development of musical expertise?

Develop strategies ascertaining what kinds of musical activities will resonate with the different ways that learners experience and engage with music. Clearly specify wellbeing goals and plan specific activities around those goals, focusing on activities that are relevant to learners. Embed rhythmic activities in music-​making, promoting entrainment, concentration and executive functions. Embed group singing in learning (promoting emotional, social and physiological benefits), and promote ‘role models’ who sing.

Music and identity In what ways do your pedagogical practices provide the scope for participants and learners to express their cultural identities through music? What kinds of practices promote ‘music in identity’ or alternatively ‘identity in music’? Are these practices mutually exclusive or complementary? In what ways can our pedagogies and musical practices support learners and participants in developing multifaceted, personally meaningful and coherent musical identities? Are there tensions in achieving coherence in musical identities; and if so, how can these be resolved?

Develop learner-​led activities that provide opportunities for participants to explore and express their cultural and social identities. Promote and embed singing across interdisciplinary contexts for learning and participation. Make use of role-​modelling, discussion and exploration in order to support the recognition of ‘musical possible selves’.

484

485

Implications for research and practice 2 Table 29.1 Cont.

The development of musical expertise How do you conceptualise musical expertise, and in what ways do your pedagogies reinforce this? Are there more expansive ways of thinking about musical expertise, and how could your pedagogies expand accordingly? Are there professional skills or competencies that you would like to develop to support the needs of specific learner groups? If so, how could these be achieved (e.g., partnership working; qualifications; self-​directed learning; collaborative approaches)?

Explore learning by ear, promoting active listening. Devote time to establishing and maintaining a positive interpersonal climate alongside time focused on achievement of musical objectives. Structure learning with expressive activities that integrate music with movement, promoting embodied cognition and active listening. Practise differentiation by task (devise different types of activities to support development towards the common objective) and differentiation by outcome (devising different ways for learners to demonstrate the same skill, competency, or knowledge). Implement peer learning activities, encompassing ‘symmetrical’ (learners as equals engaged in collaboration and exploration) activities as well as ‘asymmetrical’ (learners in mentor–​mentee or helper–​helped roles; learners as role models). Prepare learners for peer learning with appropriate ground rules for interpersonal dynamics and (in the case of asymmetrical pairs or groups) strategies for scaffolding learning. Provide opportunities for music learning and participation to be learner led (e.g., give learners responsibility for choice of repertoire and formation of groups; introduce self-​and peer assessment activities. Promote inclusivity and creativity by exploring ways in which technology can mediate learning and participation in music, either within virtual environments or supporting inclusive musical practices within face-​to-​face ‘physical’ environments. Develop frameworks within which families can actively support learning and be involved in music-​making (e.g., intergenerational groups; parent–​learner–​teacher communication; families as partners).

Each of the chapters has revealed a synergy between different contexts for music learning and participation. Across contexts, there is increasing interest in how the transformational potential of music can be achieved through learner autonomy as well as collaboration and creativity in music-​making. Several authors have considered how transformative learning can be mediated by differentiated pedagogies as well as by technologies, interpersonal strategies and pedagogical expertise. Across education and community contexts, there is increasing emphasis on the idea of music as a social phenomenon. Music is used to create community, to promote a sense of belonging and 485

486

Andrea Creech and Donald A. Hodges

to strengthen group identity. In turn, learning and acquiring expertise in music are seen as being embedded within social structures –​there is increasing interest in peer learning, peer assessment and family support, for example. At the same time, differentiation, individual preferences and personalised approaches to understanding learner engagement with, and response to, music continue to have great significance for educators and leaders of music participation. In this regard, what has perhaps changed is the increasing emphasis on the idea that the learner is situated within a context and that learning itself is a social act. Authors here have identified areas where there is particular potential, within our current 21st-​century social context, for pedagogical innovation. Specifically, interdisciplinarity offers great potential for creative and collaborative musical engagement and for preparing music learners to meet 21st-​century challenges. In a similar vein, the emerging field of embodied cognitive science points to the importance of acknowledging both individual differences as well as cultural and environmental contextual factors that influence our relationship with music. Finally, technology, while discussed as a discrete category in this volume, in practice (particularly within a post-​pandemic world) plays a vital role in mediating continuing, lifelong learning and participation in music across multiple groups and genres.

References Blacking, J. (1974). How musical is man. University of Washington Press. Creech, A.,Varvarigou, M., & Hallam, S. (in press). Contexts for music learning and participation: Developing and sustaining musical possible selves. Palgrave. Cross, I. (2009). The evolutionary nature of musical meaning. Musicae Scientiae, 13(2 Suppl.), 179–​200. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​1029864909013002091 Cusick, S. G. (2006). Music as torture/​music as weapon. Transcultural Music Review, 10,  1–​13. Hallam, S. (2006). Music psychology in education. Institute of Education, University of London. Hallam, S. (2010). 21st century conceptions of musical ability. Psychology of Music, 38(3), 308–​330. Hallam, S. (2011). What predicts level of expertise attained, quality of performance, and future musical aspirations in young instrumental players? Psychology of Music, 41(3), 267–​291. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735611425902 Hallam, S. (2015). The power of music: A research synthesis of the impact of actively making music on the intellectual, social and personal development of children and young people. Institute of Education University College. Jacoby, N., Undurraga, E. A., McPherson, M. J., Valdés, J., Ossandón, T., & McDermott, J. H. (2019). Universal and non-​universal features of musical pitch perception revealed by singing. Current Biology, 29(19), 3229–​3243. https://​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.cub.2019.08.020 Matsunobu, K., & Bresler, L. (2019). Music education research [online]. In G. W. Noblit (Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of education. https://​doi.org/​10.1093/​acrefore/​9780190264093.013.32 Mellizo, J. M. (2019, 1 July). Music education as global education: A developmental approach. Topics for Music Education Praxis. http://​topics.maydaygroup.org/​2019/​music-​education-​as-​global-​education​a-​developmental-​approach/​ O’Neill, S. A. (2002). The self-​identity of young musicians. In R. A. R. Macdonald, D. J. Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), Musical identities (pp. 79–​96). Oxford University Press. Papageorgi, I., Creech, A., Haddon, E., Morton, F., De Bezenac, C., Himonides, E., Potter, J., Duffy, C., Whyton, T., & Welch, G. (2009). Perceptions and predictions of expertise in advanced musical learners. Psychology of Music, 38(1), 31–​66. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735609336044 Rabinowitch, T.-​C., Cross, I., & Burnard, P. (2012). Long-​term musical group interaction has a positive influence on empathy in children. Psychology of Music, 41(4), 484–​498. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​ 0305735612440609 Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Group creativity: Musical performance and collaboration. Psychology of Music, 34(2), 148–​165. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735606061850 Schäfer, K., & Eerola, T. (2018). How listening to music and engagement with other media provide a sense of belonging: An exploratory study of social surrogacy. Psychology of Music, 48(2), 232–​251. https://​doi. org/​10.1177/​0305735618795036

486

487

Implications for research and practice 2 Schiavio, A., Gesbert,V., Reybrouck, M., Hauw, D., & Parncutt, R. (2019). Optimizing performative skills in social interaction: Insights from embodied cognition, music education, and sport psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1542–​1542. https://​doi.org/​10.3389/​fpsyg.2019.01542 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2010). The Seoul Agenda: Goals for the development of arts education [Report from UNESCO’s Second World Conference on Arts Education]. www.unesco.org/​new/​fileadmin/​MULTIMEDIA/​HQ/​CLT/​CLT/​pdf/​Seoul_​Agenda_​EN.pdf United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2016). Education 2030: Incheon declaration and framework for action for the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. https://​unesdoc.unesco.org/​ ark:/​48223/​pf0000245656 Vuoskoski, J. K., Clarke, E. F., & DeNora, T. (2016). Music listening evokes implicit affiliation. Psychology of Music, 45(4), 584–​599. https://​doi.org/​10.1177/​0305735616680289 Wright, R. (2019). Envisioning real utopias in music education: Prospects, possibilities and impediments. Music Education Research, 21(3), 217–​227. https://​doi.org/​10.1080/​14613808.2018.1484439 Zhang, J. D., Susino, M., McPherson, G., Schubert, E. (2018). Using the three-​component model of the musician definition, a musician is someone who has six years of musical expertise. In R. Parncutt & S. Sattmann (Eds.), Proceedings of ICMPC15/​ESCOM10 (pp. 503–​505). Centre for Systematic Musicology, University of Graz. Zhang, J. D., Susino, M., McPherson, G. E., & Schubert, E. (2020). The definition of a musician in music psychology: A literature review and the six-​year rule. Psychology of Music, 48(3), 389–​409. https://​doi. org/​10.1177/​0305735618804038

487

488

INDEX

Note: The terms children and adults have only been indexed where they are discussed at length as they appear throughout. Page numbers in italics indicate figures, bold numbers indicate tables, on the corresponding pages. 10,000 hours of deliberate practice over 10 years recommendation 160, 192–​3, 286 Abbott, A. 162 Abedin, B. 433–​4 ability and expertise paradigm 153–​65; appraisal 163–​4; biological bases 158–​9; definition 153–​5; in everyday lives of everyday people 159–​61; expertise model 156–​7; failures 161–​2; measurement 155–​6; prodigies 157–​8; stimulation 164; sustaining 162–​3 Abrahams, D. 174 Abrahams, F. 174 Abrams, L.S. 411 Abril, C.R. 125, 126 ABRSM (UK) 182n absolute expressionism 24 absorption 123–​4, 126 Absorption in Music Scale 123 academic self-​efficacy scale 371 accomplishment, music as 323 accomplishment, sense of 57–​8 achievement 153–​4, 163, 259, 272–​3, 309, 331; see also PERMA model Ackerman, B. 151–​2 action 172, 258, 262, 264 active learning 14, 179 active listening 122, 452; and embodied cognition 480–​1 active participation in music and cognition 40–​4; auditory skills, reading and literacy 43–​4; executive functioning 42–​3; intellectual development 41–​2; musicians and

non-​musicians 40–​1; spatial-​temporal reasoning and mathematics 44 adaptive strategies 369 additional needs see disabilities and additional needs adolescents and young adults 12, 30, 83–​4, 86, 89, 151, 368, 476; ability and expertise paradigm 157, 162; cognitive benefits of engagement 43; community music learning and creativity 244; composing and songwriting 323–​4; family support 411; instrument learning 186–​7, 196; large group teaching 307, 310, 311; listening, evaluating and appraising music 119–​21, 123; performance, role of 275–​6; performance-​ related health issues 287, 290, 292; personal and social benefits of engagement 52, 55–​6; pre-​ professional training 341–​2; preferences 131, 134–​41; responses to music 104–​5, 109–​11; singing 203–​4, 208–​9 Adoo, C. 357 adults: cognitive benefits of music engagement 45–​6; community music learning and creativity 245–​8; large group teaching 311–​13; one-​ to-​one contexts 342–​3; personal and social benefits of engagement 56–​8; preferences 135–​8; responses to music 105–​8; singing and performing 204, 324; see also adolescents and young adults; older adults affect 102, 103, 105–​6, 258; negative 109; positive 70, 107, 108, 110; psychological 6; regulation 53, 55, 56–​7 affective level and transformational models of learning 175

488

489

Index affiliation 135, 259, 263–​4 Africa 11, 28, 139 age factors: ability and expertise 160; chronological and brain age, difference between 206; commencement of music training 271; instrument playing 188; performance-​related health problems (PRHPs) 292; preferences 131–​3, 135–​6, 137; singing 205 agency 58, 150, 242; community music learning and creativity 244, 245, 247, 249; engagement 261; one-​to-​one contexts 336, 338; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 435; transformational models of learning 173, 175, 178, 181 agreeableness 137 Al Cubo (the cube) 244 Alain, C. 272 Albinioni, T. 39, 118 Allesch, C.G. 29 Allsup, R.E. 422, 423 Alzheimer’s disease see dementia and Alzheimer’s disease ambivalence to learning 171, 181 American Choral Directors Association 461 American Psychological Association (APA) 61n American String Teachers Association -​ COVID-​19 Task Force 466 Amir, D. 24 Amunts, K. 31 amusia (musical deficits) 153, 159 analogic mode of engagement 116, 119 analytic mode of engagement 116–​17, 119, 122, 123, 174 Anderson, K. 274 Anderson, W.T. 124 Anglada-​Tort, M. 28 Ann Arbor Symposia 458 Annfelt, T. 423 Antonovsky, A. 69 anxiety 57, 72, 287, 292, 313; see also music performance anxiety (MPA) aphasia 205 applied research 25–​6 appraising music see listening, evaluating and appraising music apprenticeship 56, 174, 230, 344, 422–​3, 483; cognitive 223–​4; see also master-​apprentice approach aptitude 153–​6 aptitude test (Seashore) 455 Arctic Philharmonic (Norway) 467 Argentina 342 arithmetic task 118 Armstrong, L. 157–​8, 164 Arnett, J.J. 311 arousal 40, 57, 118, 132–​3, 138, 259; cognitive benefits 39; negative consequences 118; optimal

moderate 133; physiological 105–​6, 108; potential 131, 137 arousal and mood hypothesis 118, 121 art (C-​WARIS) 3, 10–​11, 17 artificial invented patterns 138, 139 assessment see formative and summative assessment assimilation and accommodation distinction 170 Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music (ABRSM) 408 Association Européenne des Conservatoires (AEC) 424 associative mechanism 7–​8, 16 asymmetrical status of learning 419 at-​r isk individuals 4–​5, 55, 178, 207, 269, 273–​4, 277–​8 Atkinson, J.W. 256, 257, 258 attainment value 256 attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) 357 attribution theory 256 audiation 88–​90, 92; notational 93–​4 audible breath 307 auditory attention 43 auditory imagery 92 auditory learning 88 auditory memory 41, 270 auditory and motor interaction 91–​2 auditory perception 93 auditory skills, reading and literacy 43–​4 Austin, J.R. 409 Australia 28, 41, 54, 55, 56, 175, 274; ability and expertise 154; disabilities and additional needs 357, 358; large group teaching 313; one-​to-​ one contexts 342; peer support 427; portfolio musicians 371, 378; ritual 11; small group teaching 325; technology skills 229 Austria 223 autism 53, 158, 274; see also savants autobiographical memory 107–​8, 126, 136, 457 autocratic (or authoritarian) style of leadership 322 autonomic nervous system 70–​1 autonomy: ability and expertise 160, 162; family support 407; instrument playing 186; motivation and identity development 259, 262; one-​to-​one contexts 338; peer learning 482; portfolio musicians 389; transformational models of learning 175, 181 Bach 117, 457, 460 Bach effect 39 background music 38–​9, 84, 117–​18, 121, 125 Bailey, B.A. 71, 205 Baker, A. 401 Baker, D. 304 Baker, F. 24, 323–​4, 325 Baker, S. 274 Ballantyne, J. 325

489

490

Index Baltazar, M. 55 Baltes, P.B. 262 Baltic countries -​singing revolution 262 Bamberg Symphony Orchestra 460 Bamford, A. 226 bands 12, 14, 55, 73–​4, 116, 186–​7, 423, 439; community 108, 190; family support 405, 409; garage 28, 188, 381, 400, 422; instrument learning 194, 196; research and practice implications 463, 468 Bandura, A. 14, 17, 239, 258, 309–​10, 420 banking model of education 170 Bannister, S. 106 Barbershop Harmony Society 461 Barnes, G.V. 410 Barrett, M.S. 203 Barry, N. 409 Bartleet, B. 237, 245 Bartolome, S.J. 311 basic research 25–​6 Battier, M. 230 Batucrim online music education programme (Brazil) 243–​4 Bauer, W. 190, 225, 427 Beach, P. 126 beat deafness 159 beat perception, rhythm and tempo 103, 106 Beatles, The 136 Beck, R.J. 71–​2 Becker, H.S. 240 Beech, N. 369 Behaviour Assessment System for Children 277 behaviour and experience distinction 116 behavioural support 401–​2, 410, 412 behaviourist framework 14–​15, 170, 221, 383 Belarus -​peaceful protest by singing folk songs 262 Belbin, M. 327 Belgium -​Violet community-​based string orchestral programme 422 belonging, sense of 108, 262, 277, 475, 485; large group teaching 311–​12; peer support 425, 428; singing 204; see also community, sense of; togetherness, sense of Bennett, D. 304 Bentley, A. 156 Berliner, P. 423 Berlyne, D.E. 132–​3, 137 Bernard, L. 57 Bernstein, N. 209 Bhabha, H. 372 Bialik, M. 226 Biasutti, M. 442–​3, 444 Bidelman, G.M. 272 Bielmeier, D. 220, 221 big, hairy audacious goal (BHAG) 31–​3 Biggs, J.B. 226

biological approach 33 biopsychological mediation model 70–​1 biopsychosocial model 108–​9 biosocial model of interactions 209 Bischof, N. 259 Biswas-​Diener, R. 30 Blackboard 441 Blacking, J. 6–​7, 11, 474 blindness see visual impairment and blindness Blockchain 226 Bloom’s taxonomy 221 Blur 39, 118 Boal-​Palheiros, G.M. 117, 118, 119, 121 Boden, M.A. 239 Boehm, C. 323 Boer, D. 29 Boise Baroque Orchestra 467, 468 Bolden, B. 126 bonding: emotional 404; see also social bonding Bonneville-​Roussy, A. 132–​3, 135, 136, 385–​6 Bonshor, M. 72 Borthwick, S.J. 409 Boscaki, S.L. 104 Boschi, E. 116 Boston Symphony Orchestra 460 Bottiroli, S. 39 Boucher, M. 305 Bouffard, T. 385–​6 Bower, M. 434–​5, 439 Bowles, C.L. 410 Boyce-​Tillman, J. 384 Boyle, D. 153, 155 Braille music 358 brain health 74–​5 Brand, M. 402, 405 Brazil 28, 29, 103, 151, 175, 177, 404, 410; Al Cubo (the cube) 244–​5; Batucrim online music education programme 243–​4 breakthroughs 209 breathing techniques 191 BRECVEMA framework 102, 107 Bresler, L. 474 Brodman, K. 90 Bronfenbrenner, U. 132, 138, 209 Brophy, T. 241 Brown, G.T.L. 381 Brown, K.D. 237 Brown, R. 320 Bruner, J. 29 Buchanan, C. 274 Bugeja, C. 408, 409 Bugos, J.A. 74, 195 Buley, D. 246 Buley, J. 246 bullying 208 Burland, K. 83–​4, 328, 410 Burnard, P. 73, 237, 240, 242

490

491

Index Burwell, K. 342 Bushong, M.F. 409 Butterworth, T. 326 Byrd, W. 71 Byrne, C. 337 Byrne, M. 371 Byron, T. 23 C-​WARIS see communication, wellbeing, art, ritual, identity and social networks (C-​WARIS) Cabanac, A. 43, 273 Cabaniss, T. 246 Cage, J. 11 Cain, M. 275 Cali, C. 405 Camilli, T.C. 410 Camlin, P. 388 Campbell, P. 240 Campbell, W. 24, 456 Canada 28, 59, 151; disabilities and additional needs 357; instrument playing 196; performance through lifecourse 273, 274; rehabilitation in prisons 108; singing 205; transformational models of learning 175 cancer 55, 205, 313 Cannava, E.S. 409 Cantonese Opera case study (Hong Kong) 245 Canvas 441 capacity 153–​4, 156; latent 155 career ‘calling’ 369 Carey, G. 174–​5 Carmina String Quartet 326 Carver, M. 139 Casas-​Mas, A. 342 Cassidy, G. 118 Castell, K.C. 134 catecholamines 70 Cayari, C. 435 Center for Educational Research and Academic Development in the Arts (CERADA) 345n Cesetti, D. 177–​8 Challis, M. 224 Chambers, C. 33 Chan, A.S. 270 Chandrasekaran, B. 44, 272 Cheek, J.M. 271 Cheng, L. 222 Cheong-​Clinch, C. 120 Chicago Youth Symphony 467 children: community music learning and creativity 243–​5; engagement in one-​to-​one contexts 339–​41; personal and social benefits of musical engagement 53–​5; preferences 133–​4; responses to music 102–​8; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 436–​7; see also infants and pre-​school years children’s play 419–​20, 429

children’s songs 39, 118 chills (thrills or frisson) 27, 102, 106, 123 China 28, 42, 407 Chmiel, A. 133 Choi, A.N. 275 choice 121, 125, 244 choirs 9, 13, 27, 196, 265, 462; cognitive benefits 41, 45; family support 405, 410; health and wellbeing benefits 68–​9, 71–​3; large group teaching 306, 312–​14; personal and social benefits 54, 56, 58–​9; responses to music 105, 107; singing 201, 204, 208–​9, 211; transformational models 177, 179–​80; see also community choirs; virtual choirs Chorus America 461 Chuang, M.-​C. 189 Cirelli, L.K. 53 Clark, I.N. 105, 108 Clements, A. 229–​30 Clennon, O. 323 Clift, S. 71, 73, 205 Cloete, E. 422, 426 codes of practice 479 Coetze, M. 371 Coffman, D. 73 Cogburn, D. 31 cognition 30; embodied 476, 480–​1; musical 29 cognitive abilities, emergence of during schooling 89–​90 cognitive beliefs 345n cognitive benefits 38–​48, 479; active participation 40–​4; adults and older people 45–​6; community music and education 46–​7; duration of intervention 40; individual preferences 40; listening and cognitive performance 38–​40; moderating factors 40; portfolio musicians 392; research and practice implications 46–​7, 476; socio-​economically disadvantaged students 44–​5; type of cognitive activity 40; type of music used 40 cognitive changes 170 cognitive conflict or dissonance 43, 375–​6 cognitive flexibility tests 42 cognitive learning 89, 478 cognitive level and transformational models of learning 169 cognitive load management skills 229 cognitive processes 7 cognitive representation and neural processing 90 cognitive style 132 cognitive support 401–​2, 410, 412 cognitive theories 170, 337 Cohen, A. 150, 276 Cohen, G.D. 59, 74 Cohen, M. 173 co-​learning 187

491

492

Index collaboration 172, 177, 336, 476; community music learning and creativity 245, 249; instrument playing 187, 192; large group teaching 308–​9, 310; peer support 419, 421, 428, 482; singing 207; skills 226; small group teaching 326; social connections 480; technology skills 224; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 436, 437, 439–​40, 442–​3; vlogging 435 collective efficacy and group cohesion 309–​10 collective identities see group identities collective processes and transformational models of learning 170 collectivistic societies 30 College Band Directors National Association (CBDNA) 461 College of Music Society (United States) 225 Collins, D. 162 Collins, J. 31 Colman, A.M. 326 Colon-​Leon, V. 411 colour system of music notation 189 Coltrane, J. 118 common-​sense learners 174 communication 16, 57, 181; group communication 13, 16; interpersonal communication 325; power 7; skills 10, 221, 222, 226; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 436, 437; unsupervised small groups 327–​8; verbal communication 327–​8, 436, 442; see also non-​verbal communication communication, wellbeing, art, ritual, identity and social networks (C-​WARIS) 5–​17, 452, 476; art 10–​11, 17; communication 6–​8, 17; identity 12–​13, 14–​15, 17; ritual 11, 17; social networks 13–​14, 17; theoretical considerations 14–​15; wellbeing 8–​10, 17 community choirs 10, 15, 107, 204–​5, 324 community music and education programmes 95, 126, 140–​1, 196–​7, 205, 375–​7; ability and expertise 160; at-​r isk individuals 277; cognitive benefits of engagement 42, 46–​7; health and wellbeing 9–​10; research and practice implications 474; responses to music 101, 106, 110–​11; skills acquisition in technology 230; small group teaching 330; transformational models of learning 169–​70, 172; see also community music learning and creativity community music learning and creativity 236–​50; adulthood 245–​8; collected studies in edited volumes 241; connections 242–​3; definitions 237–​8; early years 243–​4; first wave (creative personality) 239; future research recommendations 248–​9; institutionalised community music 246; intervention 246; organic phenomenon 246; scholarship on creativity 237–​9; school-​age children 244–​5;

second wave (cognitive processes) 239; single monographs/​research studies 240–​1; teaching and learning scholarship 240–​1; themes 241–​2; third wave (interdisciplinary sociocultural influences) 240 community of practice 174 community, sense of 178, 248, 274, 391, 433–​5, 485 competency 58, 160, 161, 162, 164, 259; belief 262; instrument playing 186; portfolio musicians 382; social competency 181; technology skills 218 complementarity 434 composition 22, 123, 190, 201, 275, 303, 305; community learning and creativity 237, 240–​2, 245; formative and summative assessment 384–​5; large group teaching 307, 314; one-​to-​one contexts 340; peer support 428; research and practice implications 474, 481, 484; skills acquisition 220, 222–​3, 229; small groups 323, 328; songwriting 323–​4; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 435–​6, 438, 440–​4 conceptual learning 174–​6 conductors and band directors 322, 481; see also large group teaching -​conductor-​educator confidence 10, 162, 175, 328, 343, 357, 371, 376 conflict zones, displacement and warfare 276, 278; see also refugees, migrants and diasporic communities Conlon, D.E. 326 connectedness 55, 56, 154, 259, 311–​12, 325; see also social connectedness conscientiousness 124, 137 Consensual Assessment Technique 384 constructive conception of learning 186, 217, 221–​5, 339–​40, 341, 345, 345n content dimension and transformational models of learning 170, 171, 172, 174, 175, 177–​9 contextual factors 60, 70, 75, 140, 170, 480 continuity, sense of 443 controlled emotion perception tasks 110 Cook, D. 6 Cook, N. 116, 122, 123 Coolidge, K. 468 Cooper, P.K. 42 cooperation 54, 57, 177, 181, 277 coordination of actions 57 co-​pathy (social function of empathy) 57 coping strategies 259, 279, 310 Corbin, J.M. 371 Corrigall, K.A. 46 cortisol 70–​2 Costa-​Giomi, E. 186 Coulson, S. 410 Court-​Jackson, A. 225 Coutts, L. 343

492

493

Index COVID-​19 pandemic 15–​16, 150, 262, 451, 459–​69, 473–​4; community music learning and creativity 236, 243, 247, 248–​9; condensation and spit valves 465; duration of singing times and increased risk 461–​2; ensembles 467; entrance screening 460; individual protective measures 461–​2, 464–​5; instruments 463–​7; live-​stream performances 459, 463; performing and teaching 459–​60; physical parameters 460–​1, 467; remote online teaching 467; research 460–​1; risk assessment and mitigation 460–​1, 466; singing 211n, 461–​3; ‘superemitters’ 461, 463; ‘superspreading’ 462; technology-​mediated collaborative learning and virtual ensembles 438–​9, 467–​8 Cowdroy, R. 384 Cox, J. 324 Creative Later Life research 438 creativity 7, 42, 225, 227; distributed 14; research and practice implications 475, 477; technology-​ mediated collaborative learning 434, 435, 440, 441, 442, 444–​5; see also community music learning and creativity Creech, A. 46, 149–​50, 186, 276, 277, 304, 305, 322, 323, 324, 400, 402, 407, 409, 412, 418 Criscuolo, A. 270 critical consciousness 174 critical literacy approach 126 critical reflection 173, 175 critical thinking 224, 228, 336 criticality 172–​3, 382 Croom, A.M. 56, 67–​70, 275 Cross, I. 7, 33, 52, 481 cross-​cultural model of musical creativity 150–​1 crystallised intelligence 95 Csikszentimihalyi, M. 116–​17, 119, 121, 123, 239, 242 cultural artefacts 434 cultural factors 6–​10, 12, 16, 33, 39, 41, 138, 169; ability and expertise 153–​4, 156–​7, 163; community music learning and creativity 237, 242; cross-​cultural model of musical creativity 150–​1; health and wellbeing 70; instrument playing 185; large group teaching 309, 314; one-​to-​one contexts 336; peer support 424, 428; research and practice implications 475, 477; responses to music 101, 102, 103, 106–​7; singing 207; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 434, 436; see also refugees, migrants and diasporic communities cultural tools 434 ‘cultural turn’ 29–​30 cumulative talk 434 curiosity 138 current (present) self 367, 368, 370 Currie, G. 23 Custodero, L.A. 140, 404

Cutietta, R. 221–​2 Cyrus, M. 107 dabblers 56 Dahary, H. 124 Dakon, J.M. 422, 426 Daniel, R. 390 ‘Darling they are playing our tune’ effect 7 Daubney, A. 351, 354–​5, 360 Davidson, J.W. 71, 149, 194, 196, 205, 326, 328, 407, 408, 409, 410 Davies, J.B. 7 de Graaff, E. 384 De Viggiani, N. 274 de Vries, P. 411 Deane, K. 173–​4 Deci, E.L. 259 decision-​making, shared 422 decisional self-​efficacy scale 371 default mode network (DMN) 58, 457 definitions of music psychology 22–​3 deindividuation 14 Delahunty, J. 442 deliberate practice 257, 288; and expert performance link 255; see also 10,000 hours of deliberate practice over 10 years recommendation Delsing, M.J.M.H. 135 dementia and Alzheimer’s disease 58, 59, 74, 108–​9, 135, 160, 262; large group teaching 313; performance through lifecourse 275; singing 205 democratic (or participative) style of leadership 322, 422 Demos (France) 277 DeNora, T. 119 depression 57, 72, 124, 288, 291, 292; ability and expertise 160; community music learning and creativity 248; large group teaching 313; responses to music 104, 109; singing 206 Descartes, R. and Cartesian perspective 24, 456, 469 Detroit String Quartet 326 developmental psychology 339 developmental theories 367–​8, 375 Dewey, J. 263–​4 diasporic communities see refugees, migrants and diasporic communities Diaz, F.M. 125 Dibben, N. 105, 123 Diener, E. 30 differentiation 92, 452, 481–​2 Dillon, L. 276 Dillon, S. 435 Dingle, G.A. 206 direct conception of learning 339–​41

493

494

Index disabilities and additional needs 53, 274, 276, 278, 351–​62; causes 351–​2; cognitive disabilities 352; congenital disabilities 352; distinction of in curriculum 354–​5, 356; ensemble participation and haptic technology 359–​60; environmental causes 351; episodic disabilities 352; genetic causes 351; hidden disabilities 352, 355; impairments 352; intellectual disabilities 352; learner 356; lifelong disabilities 352; medical model 354, 355, 360; neurological disabilities 352; physical disabilities and activity/​ participation limitations 352, 355; physical environments 356; psychiatric disabilities 352; religious model 353–​4, 355; resources 356; sensory disabilities 352; social model 354, 355, 357, 360; terminology and deficits 353; type of and severity 352, 357; unknown causes 351; see also hearing health issues; learning difficulties; special needs; visual impairment and blindness disagreements, allowing and peer support 419, 420 discovery-​invention cycle 25 discrimination skills 138, 172 disputational talk 434, 439 distance learning programmes 150, 218, 222, 442; see also virtual learning environment (VLE) divergent/​convergent thinking 245 diversity 136, 225, 424, 473 Dobson, E. 440–​1, 444 Dobson, M.C. 121, 125 domestic abuse 55 Dorfman, J. 218, 220, 221 Dragovic, T. 73 driving and music-​making 118, 404 Droe, K.L. 411 dropout/​student attrition 55, 478, 479; ability and expertise 161; family support 409–​10; instrument choice 186–​7, 197; technology-​ mediated collaborative learning 442 drumming 104, 243–​4, 325, 335; circles 9, 42, 103, 236 dual-​stream model of information processing 91 Dubai 244 duet playing 192–​3 Duke, R.A. 194 Duncan, S.P. 173 Dweck, C. 226 dynamic learners 174 dynamical systems theory (DST) approach 209–​10 dyslexia 357 Eagle, C.T. Jr. 32 Eccles, J.S. 256, 264 Echaide, C. 118 eclectic practice 422 ecological model of human behaviour 209 ecological perception theory 88 ecological systems theory 132, 138

ecstatics and trance states 106 Ecuador 178 Edgar, S. 463 Education Longitudinal Study (USA) 273 education and music in the community see community music and education programmes Education Scotland’s school learning curriculum 218 educational settings 7, 68, 73–​4, 139; responses to music 101, 102, 105 Edwards, S. 359, 362n Eerola, T. 110, 133 efficacy 273–​4; see also self-​efficacy ego situation 375 Ekholm, E. 121 El Sistema (Venezuela) 54, 106, 123, 277, 306, 387 Elbert, T. 91 Elliott, D.J. 169 emancipatory role of learning 172–​3 embouchure 191 emotion 39, 55–​6, 137, 164, 169, 172, 262, 264, 275; adolescents 55; classical music 6; feeling and knowing 122; function 29; listening, evaluating and appraising music 118, 120–​2; negative 10, 104, 107, 194, 274; research and practice implications 456–​7; responses to music 102–​3, 105–​6; see also positive emotions emotional awareness 328 emotional benefits 117, 392, 404, 476–​7, 479 emotional bonding 404 emotional contagion 106, 120 emotional intelligence 110, 274–​5 emotional learning 478 emotional mechanisms theory 120 emotional memories 457 emotional response 105 empathiser scales 137 empathy 54, 73, 123–​4, 126, 275, 475 empowerment 58, 274, 323 enculturation 7, 103, 105, 106, 109, 110, 138 endocannabinoids 72 endorphins 57, 72 engagement 7, 10–​12, 172, 175, 273–​4, 279; ability and expertise 162, 164; analogic mode of 116, 119; analytic mode of 116–​17, 119, 122, 123, 174; deliberate 243; enhancement 124–​6; in everyone’s and everyday life 259–​60; implicit 243; large group teaching 309, 313; listening, evaluating and appraising music 116–​17, 121, 123, 126; portfolio musicians 387; preferences 132; reactive 243; segmented 261; self-​directed 177; self-​initiated 243; sensory 116; situative 261; social 426; technology-​ mediated collaborative learning 433; see also health and wellbeing benefits of engagement; PERMA model

494

495

Index enjoyment see fun and enjoyment ensembles 16, 92–​3, 95, 122, 149–​50, 274, 303–​4, 451; cognitive benefits 44; disabilities and additional needs 354, 359–​60; family support 408; formative and summative assessment 387; health issues 293; health and wellbeing benefits 68–​9, 72–​5; instrument playing 185, 187–​8, 193, 196–​7; participation and haptic technology 359–​60; peer support and learning 427; personal and social benefits 56; portfolio musicians 375; research and practice implications 460, 463, 467–​8, 477, 481; singing 208; skills acquisition 222; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 435; transformational models 177; see also bands; choirs; groups; large group teaching -​ conductor-​educator; orchestras; small groups; string quartets entrainment 102, 105; imperfect 203 entrepreneurism 226–​7 environmental factors 155–​7, 178, 258, 368; community music learning and creativity 244, 245, 248; disabilities and additional needs 352; singing 210 episodic memory 102 Epstein, J.L. 401 Ercikan, K. 26 Eric Whitacre’s Virtual Choir 467 Ericsson, K.A. 156, 255, 288 Erikson, E. 368, 438 Erikson, J.M. 438 Erikson, M.G. 258 error corrections 195 ethical considerations and standards 106, 336, 342–​3, 371 ethnomusicology 11–​12, 14, 22, 29, 32, 138, 455, 474; community music learning and creativity 240, 242 Europe 28, 139, 195, 205 European Choral Association -​‘The big COVID survival Choral doc’ 461 European Commission: Engaging Disaffected Young People project 274; Learning Outcomes in Music Teacher Training 218 evaluating music see listening, evaluating and appraising music Evans, P. 55 Excellence in Schools white paper (UK) 401 executive functioning 42–​3, 188, 270 exosystem 132, 139 expectancy-​value theories 255–​6, 258, 262, 264 experiential learning cycle of manifold learning 171, 174, 175, 176, 181, 338, 480 experiential model of musical creativity 247–​8 experimental aesthetics 131, 132–​3 expertise development 452, 478–​83, 485; active listening and embodied cognition 480–​1;

differentiation 481–​2; expressiveness 480; family support 483; peer learning 482; quality of provision 479; self-​directed learning and assessment 482; social connection through music 479–​80; technology 482–​3; see also ability and expertise paradigm exploratory talk 434, 439, 441 expressive hierarchical level 307 expressiveness 256, 452, 477, 480 extraversion 124, 137, 326–​7 eye contact 327, 436 FaceTime 467 facial expressions 307, 327 facilitative teaching 322, 323, 336, 439, 478, 480 Fadel, C. 226 failure 161–​2; learning from 227–​8; see also dropout/​student attrition Fairbanks, S. 277 familiarity 109; active listening 481; listening, evaluating and appraising music 125, 126; with parents’ music 204; preferences 133–​4; responses to music 105, 106; small group teaching 329 family, feeling of in large group teaching 311–​12 family support 161, 401–​13, 452, 483, 486; behavioural 407; benefits 404; childhood music learning 402–​5; cognitive 407–​8; educational models 401–​2; encouragement of 411–​12; implications 412; instrument playing 187, 188, 194; intergenerational music-​making 410–​11; lifespan influences 406–​7; motivation and identity development 255, 257, 261; music performance study 406–​10; parental involvement 401–​2, 403, 406–​7; personal support 408–​10; research implications 412–​13; school-​based music learning 405–​6 Farnsworth, P.R. 6 fatigue 286, 288–​92 Faulkner, R. 322 Fautley, M. 351, 354–​5, 360 Feather, N.T. 257 feedback 383, 389; positive 310; see also reciprocal feedback model Feldman, D. 240 fellow traveller orientation 336–​8, 339, 343 fellowship 438, 479 Figurenotes system of notation 438 fine motor and auditory discrimination 272 fine-​grained discrimination 133–​4 Finland 28, 42, 59, 110–​11, 151, 189, 242, 345n; good or better practices case study 340 Finnäs, L. 105 Fischer, R. 29 fit or shared understanding 342 Fitzpatrick, K.R. 272 floating intentionality 8, 52, 481 flow 57, 116, 122, 151, 242, 245, 248, 327–​8, 476

495

496

Index Flowers, P.J. 125, 126 fluid intelligence 95, 270 focus and focused listening 117, 120, 121, 124, 125 foetal/​prenatal responses to music 53, 83, 86, 87–​9, 102 Fogg, L. 312 Folkestad, G. 27, 382, 421, 426, 429n formal contexts 24, 27–​8; cognitive benefits 38, 41, 42, 43, 47; formative and summative assessment 381, 382–​3, 386–​7; instrument playing 197; one-​to-​one contexts 341; portfolio musicians 376; preferences 138, 139; research and practice implications 477; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 440; transformational models of learning 169, 172, 174, 175–​6 formal and informal learning distinctions 421 formative and summative assessment 381–​92; authenticative assessment 384; community music and education programmes 388–​9, 391; definitions 383; formal learning 381, 382–​3, 386–​7; formative approach (assessment for learning) 383; informal/​non-​formal learning 381, 382–​3, 386–​7, 388; intertwined practices 383–​4; peer assessment 384, 386–​9, 390–​1, 392; research implications 391–​2; self-​regulation 385–​8, 390–​1, 392; self-​sufficiency 388; summative approach (assessment of learning) 383; see also self-​assessment Forrester, M. 203 forward-​oriented approach 375 foster care 409 Foxes and Fossils intergenerational cover band (United States) 247 frames of reference 170–​2 framing 264, 421 France 28; Demos 277 Franz, R. 467 free recall and phonemic fluency tasks 39 Freeman, J. 405 Freer, P.K. 208, 210, 370 Freire, P. 172, 174 Freud, S. 208, 368 Frieler, K. 30 friendship groups 13, 15, 139–​40, 328–​9, 482 Frischen, U. 42 Frith, S. 135 frustration 186, 312 Fulford, R. 83–​4 fun and enjoyment 10, 164, 188, 197, 312, 389; see also playful music-​making functions of music 262–​3 Fung, C.V. 59, 124, 276 fusion skills 226 future research implications 32–​3 future self (conceptualisation) 208, 367, 368, 370

Gaab, N. 40 Gabor, E. 406 Gabrielsson, A. 24, 32, 57, 122, 178, 189, 456–​7 Gagné, F. 154–​5, 159 garage band culture 28, 188, 381, 400, 422 Gardiner, M.E. 271 Gardner, H. 134, 239, 243 Garland, J. 163 Garrido, S. 104 gatekeeper orientation 336–​7, 338, 339, 340–​1, 345 Gates, J.T. 56 Gaunt, H. 191, 209, 304 Gavin, R. 390 Geake, J.G. 117 Geertz, C. 29 gender factors 30, 106, 132, 137; instrument playing 185–​6, 187; listening, evaluating and appraising music 123; motivation and identity development 257; peer support 422–​3, 425, 429; performance-​related health problems (PRHPs) 292; portfolio musicians 371, 374, 376; singing 203, 208; technology skills 224 gender self-​assessment scale 374 general intelligence 269–​70 generativity 150, 242, 245, 247 genetic analyses and heritability 75, 159, 161, 163 Geneva Emotion Music Scales 264 Geringer, J.M. 24, 124, 125 Germany 28, 29, 30, 41, 42, 103, 186, 454–​5; Music Council 69 Gerry, D. 53 gestures 307, 313, 327, 359, 436–​7 Gibbs, J.T. 411 Gibson, J.J. 88 giftedness (genetic endowment) 154–​5, 156 Gilboa, A. 325–​6 Ginsborg, J. 307, 327–​8 Glasgow Improvisers Orchestra 16 global perspectives of music 28–​9 Gobet, F. 41–​2 Gold, C. 24 Goldsmith’s Musical Sophistication Index 122, 124 Gollwitzer, P.M. 257 Good, J.M.M. 326 Goolsby, T.W. 324 Gordon, E. 88, 89–​90, 92, 156 Gordon music notation approach 189 Gordon, R.L. 272 Gosling, S.D. 137 Goulart, F. 243–​4 Govel, L.M. 410 Grant, C. 174–​5 Graziano, A.B. 271 Graziano, V. 407, 408 Greasley, A. 83–​4

496

497

Index Greece 55, 208 Green, L. 33, 125, 141, 175, 190, 240, 358, 361n, 362n, 387, 423 Greenberg, D.M. 137 Greenland -​Sondre Stromford 31 Grice, J.M.G. 405 Griffin, S.M. 120 Groarke, J.M. 107 Grolnick, W.S. 401, 402 Gromko, J.E. 124 Gross, S.A. 229 groups 14, 108, 111, 173; belonging 475; communication 13; dynamics 477, 480; identities 14, 475, 477, 486; in-​groups 15, 17, 139; instrument playing 187; out-​groups 15, 17, 140; rehearsals 188; singing 54, 70, 123; size 323–​4; see also bands; choirs; ensembles; large group teaching -​conductor-​educator; orchestras; small groups; string quartets Gruber, H. 239 Gruhn, W. 83 Guarneri String Quartet 326 Gudmundsdottir, H. 203 Guettler, K. 191 Guhn, M. 273 guided facilitation 439 guided listening 121 Guilford, J.P. 150, 239 Guitars for Vets initiative (USA) 247–​8 Habibi, A. 46 habitutation 87 Halko, G. 411 Hallam, S. 32, 39, 41, 44, 46, 74, 110, 118, 185, 191, 193–​4, 209, 226, 257, 270, 271, 272, 273, 276, 279, 322, 323, 387–​8, 389, 390, 407, 409, 418, 425–​6, 427 Hancox, G. 71, 73 Hanken, I.M. 427 Hanley, B. 25 Hanna-​Pladdy, B. 74 haptic technology and ensemble participation 359–​60 Hargreaves, D.J. 7, 84–​5, 102, 104, 117, 118, 119, 121, 241, 261, 458 Harkins, C. 277 Harmony (USA) 277 Harris, L.R. 381 Hart, J.T. 196 Hartz, B. 190 Headspace 357 health education initiatives in conservatories 291 health issues see performance-​related health problems (PRHPs) Health Uses of Music Scale 104 health and wellbeing benefits of engagement 68–​75, 479; amateur singing and instrumental

ensembles 69; brain health 74–​5; educational settings 73–​4; human stress and immune responses 70–​1; instrument playing 72–​3; models 69–​70; older adulthood 74; singing 71–​2, 209 hearing health issues 74, 292–​3, 313 hearing and listening distinction 116 Hebert, D.G. 428, 443 Heidegger, M. 445 Heidenrich, V. 276 Helfter, S. 150–​1 Heller, J. 24, 33, 456 Helton, B.C. 188 Hemming, J. 136 Hemsworth, K. 108 Henderson, S.D. 312 Henderson, S.J. 405 Henemann, H. 276 Hennekam, S. 369, 375 Herbert, R. 105, 123 Hernandez-​Ruiz, E. 124 Heron, J. 171–​2, 174 Hesser, B. 276 Hetland, L. 270 Hickok, S.C. 405 hidden hierarchies 423–​4, 429, 482 Hidden Youth Orchestra 373 hierarchical environmental affordances 209 hierarchical level 307 hierarchical pedagogies 336–​7 hierarchical transfer learning 174 hierarchy of needs 259 Hietolahti-​Ansten, M. 275 Higgins, L. 237, 238, 244, 245 higher education and technology-​mediated collaborative learning 440–​2 Hill, J. 150, 242, 245, 247–​8 Himonides, E. 150 Hinton, S.C. 211n, 271 Ho, W.C. 408 hobbyists 56 Hodges, D. 3, 4, 241 Hodges, S.H. 312 Hogan, M.J. 107 Hogg, N. 323 Holbrook, M.B. 136 holistic approach 483; constructivist perspectives 221–​5; instrument playing 192; portfolio musicians 388; research and practice implications 474, 476; transformational models of learning 169, 170, 172 Holmes, S. 4, 270, 271 Homan, S. 274 Hong, J.-​C. 187 Hong Kong 28, 29, 41, 151, 408; Cantonese Opera case study 245 Hoover-​Dempsey, K.V. 401

497

498

Index Horowitz, V. 95 hospitals and music involvement 108 Howe, M.J. 407–​8 Human Brain Project 31, 90 human stress and immune responses 70–​1 Hume, D. and Humean perspective 24, 456, 469 Huovinen, E. 328 Huron, D. 6, 24 Huws, C. 224 hypermobility syndromes 289 hypothalamic-​pituitary-​adrenal axis 70–​1 ice-​breaker effect 204, 209 ideal self 257–​8 ideals, set of 258 identity 117, 126, 162, 245, 248, 261, 452; adolescents 55; C-​WARIS 3, 12–​13, 14–​15, 17; constructed 208; cultural 477; development 139; distributed 14, 477; family support 410; group 14, 475, 477, 486; individual 475; instrument playing 188; large group teaching 309, 311; one-​to-​one contexts 343; peer support 420, 425, 429, 482; performance through lifecourse 275; personal (ego) 368; personal and social benefits 56; preferences 135, 136, 139, 141; research and practice implications 475, 477–​8, 484; responses to music 104, 108–​9, 110; singing 204; small group teaching 320; transformational models of learning 171–​3, 175–​8, 181–​2; work-​related factors 377; see also motivation and identity development; multiple musical identities; social identity Ilari, B. 123, 134, 150–​1, 209, 404, 405, 407 Illeris, K. 170–​1, 172, 173, 176, 182 imaginal learning and imagination 420; motivation and identity development 254, 263, 265; transformational models of learning 170–​2, 174–​6 imitation 88, 171, 173, 243, 337, 399, 420 immunoglobulin A 71–​2 improvisation 11, 12, 14, 16, 22, 41, 303, 400; community music learning and creativity 237, 240–​2, 245, 250n; disabilities and additional needs 362n; instrument learning 190; large group teaching 309, 311, 314; peer support 424, 426; research and practice implications 474, 481; skills acquisition 229; small groups 330; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 435–​9, 442 incentive 170, 171, 172, 174, 175, 177–​9, 180 inclusion 248, 481 independent adults learning in the community 343–​4 India 178 individual beliefs 257 individual factors and instrument playing 185, 188

individual life course and societal contexts of engagement 260–​1 individual practice 173 individual processes and transformational models of learning 170 individualistic societies 30 Individuals with Disabilities Education (IDEA) Act 357, 358, 411 infant-​directed singing (motherese) 88, 138, 339 infant-​mother bonding 12, 53, 87, 203 infants and pre-​school years 26, 83, 260, 275, 278, 404, 424; community music learning and creativity 236; personal and social benefits of engagement 52–​5; preferences 133–​4; premature infants 26, 53, 87, 275; processing music across life course 87–​9; responses to music 102–​3, 109; singing 203–​4, 210; see also infant-​directed singing (motherese) informal contexts 27–​8, 33, 139, 422; cognitive benefits 38, 41, 42, 43, 47; family musical participation 405; formative and summative assessment 381, 382–​3, 386–​7, 388; instruments 187–​8; one-​to-​one contexts 336, 341; professional and portfolio musicians 376, 422–​3; research and practice implications 477; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 440; transformational models of learning 169, 175, 177–​81 in-​groups 15, 17, 139 inhibition and interference control 42 injury prevention and management 291 instant reinforcement 383 instrument playing 185–​97; choice of instrument 185–​6; dropping out 186–​7; education and music in the community 196–​7; ensembles and demographics 69; informal self-​directed learning 187–​8; learning styles 187; older adults 188; peer support 424–​6; playing by ear 190; psychobiological effects 72–​3; quality of sound 185; reading notation 188–​9; sight-​reading 192–​3; technical skills acquisition 190–​2; weight and size of instrument 185–​6; see also practice intellectual development 41–​2, 269–​70 intelligence: crystallised 95; emotional 110, 274–​5; fluid 95, 270; general 269–​70; verbal 270 intense musical experiences (IMEs) 57, 106, 117, 457 intensity of rehearsal 311 intentionality 60, 125, 421; floating 8, 52, 481 interactions 150, 170–​1, 262; community music learning and creativity 242, 245, 247; instrument playing 188; pattern changes 402; person-​context-​content 173; reciprocal 209, 210, 476; singing 209; small group teaching 321, 324; technology-​mediated collaborative

498

499

Index learning 439; transformational models of learning 171, 172, 173, 174, 177–​8; see also social interactions intercultural creativity 237 interdisciplinarity 452, 476, 484 intergenerational music-​making 247, 261, 410–​11, 412 intermediate music technologies 224 International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) 352 International Society for Music Education 479 interpersonal awareness 181 interpersonal catalysts 155 interpersonal communication 325 interpersonal contexts 169–​70, 479–​80 interpersonal dynamics 482 interpersonal interaction and family support 402 interpersonal learning space 344 interpersonal one-​to-​one contexts 341 interpersonal skills 230, 479 interpersonal space 342 interpersonal synchrony 53, 57 interpretive hierarchical level 307 intersubjective learning 434 intrapersonal characteristics and expressiveness 480 intrapersonal skills 230 intuitive musicality 339 investment stage 163 IQ Composite score 275 Iran 41 Ireland 175, 208 Israel 28, 41 Italy 151, 460; Segni Mossi programme 244–​5 Ivanov, V.K. 117 Jacobi, B.S. 189 Jaffurs, S. 422, 423 James, W. 208 JamMo software package (UK) 436 Jansen, P. 44 Janssen, S.M.J. 136 Japan 39, 59, 178–​9, 353 Jaschke, A.C. 42, 271, 272 Jensen, K. 209 Johansen, G.G. 399–​400 John, E. 262 John-​Steiner, V. 240 Johnson, C.M. 46, 273 Johnson-​Green, E.A. 404 Jones, A. 435 Jones, G. 304, 336–​7, 338, 344–​5 Jørgensen, H. 195 Joseph, D. 313 judging panel 384 Juslin, P.N. 6, 456–​7 juvenile offenders 274

Kaiser, J. 229 Kakou electronic engineers 359, 362n Kallipuska, M. 275 Kalverboer, K. 408, 409 Kämpfe, J. 39 Kaufmann, C. 108 Kaviani, H. 41 Keebler, J.R. 188 Kegan, R. 171 Keith, P.B. 401 Keith, T.Z. 401 Kelly, S.N. 185 Kendall, R.A. 455–​6 Kennedy, M.C. 27 Kenny, D.T. 26–​7 Kenya 30, 55 Kerchner, J.L. 240 Keys of Change charity 178–​9 Kim, H.S. 275 King, E. 196, 303–​4 Kirschner, S. 262, 276–​7 knowledge :accumulation of 170; music as 323; prior, making use of 179 Kodály music notation approach 189 Koelsch, S. 7, 57 Koops, L.H. 404 Korea 275, 404–​5 Korngold, E. 163 Kornhaber, S. 460 Krakauer, P.M. 29 Krampe, R. 160 Kratus, J. 240 Kraus, N. 44, 272 Kretsos, L. 369 Kreutz, G. 4, 123 Krumhansl, C. 90, 107, 136, 204 Kuo, Y.-​T. 189 Laban, R. 88 Labuta, J. 308 Lagerlof, P. 436, 437 Laiho, S. 55 laissez-​faire (or delegative) style of leadership 322 Lamont, A. 84–​5, 104 Landy, L. 230 Längler, M. 423 language and literacy and music participation 91, 151, 272, 404 Laplane, L. 23–​4 large group teaching -​conductor-​educator 306–​14; adolescents 311; adults 312–​13; beginners 310–​11; emerging adult 311–​12; future research 314; motivation 309–​10; music-​making in rehearsal 307–​9; non-​verbal communication 307 Larrouy-​Maestri, P. 121

499

500

Index leadership 478; autocratic (or authoritarian) 322; democratic (or participative) 322, 422; laissez-​ faire (or delegative) 322; skills 221, 222; small group teaching 321, 329; supervised small groups 322–​3; teacher-​centred 308–​9, 322, 336–​7, 340; unsupervised small groups 326–​7 learner-​centred approaches 322, 336–​8, 344 learning by doing 335 learning difficulties 158, 205, 352–​3, 357–​8, 361, 436 learning styles 187, 421 learning to learn 441 LeBlanc, A. 102, 137, 138 Lebler, D. 386, 387, 427 Legette, R. 227 Lehmberg, L.J. 59, 276 LeMieux, M.T. 271 Lent, R.W. 371 Letter-​Number Sequencing 39 Levinowitz, L.M. 411 Lewin, K. 257, 322 LGBTQ1 community 205, 312 life experiences 357 life satisfaction and happiness 69, 72 life span development theory 262 lifelong inclusive education 392, 474–​5 lifespan development perspectives 369 Lima, M.H. 237 Lindblom, A. 274 Lindström Wik, S. 122 linked-​dual representation model 202 listening 9, 10; and active participation distinction 9; and cognitive performance 38–​40; family support 404; preferences 132, 134; purposeful 243; see also listening, evaluating and appraising music listening, evaluating and appraising music 116–​26; background music 117–​18; engagement enhancement 124–​6; factors influencing listening skills 122–​4; focused listening 117, 120, 121, 124; guided listening 121; just listening 119–​21; listening as main activity 117; mindful listening 125; performing experience 121–​2; self-​chosen music while doing other activities 117–​19 Littleton, K. 440–​1, 444 Liu-​Rosenbaum, A. 400 Live Aid concert 263 live and recorded music distinction 120 Llinás, R. 94 Lobefaro, S. 244 loneliness 248, 313 Long, M. 43 long-​term memory 118 López-​Íñguez, G. 304 Luce, D.W. 418 Ludke, K.M. 45

lullabies and playsongs 53, 204 Lullaby Project, Clarenville prison (Canada) 246–​7 Lumare, A. 244 lungs: capacity 191; disease 205; problems 72–​3 MacArthur, S. 149 McClellan, E.R. 410 McClelland, D.C. 259 McDermott, O. 109 MacDonald, R. 3, 4, 39, 118, 329, 459 McFerran, K. 52, 55, 120 MacGlone, U. 424 MacKay, A. 74 MacKinnon, D. 239 Macmillan, J. 411 McPhee, E.A. 341 McPherson, G.E. 55, 155, 157, 159–​60, 162, 164, 165n, 188, 189, 190, 195, 241, 385, 386, 408, 409 McQueen, H. 387–​8 MacRitchie, J. 427 macro-​micro-​macro 308 macrosystems 132 Maddison, L. 359, 362n Madsen, C. 24, 124, 125 Maehr, M.L. 375 Mahler, G. 39, 460 Mahrer, A.R. 24 maintenance stage 163 Majdoddin, K. 387 Mak, P. 382 maladaptive uses of music 105, 107; see also negative connotations of music in conflict situations and as form of torture Malloch, S. 260 Malone, G. 16 Mancini, T. 377 Mantie, R. 241 Manturzewska, M. 406, 407 Marcia, J.E. 368 Margulis, E.H. 124, 125 Mariotta, M. 407, 408, 409 Markus, H. 208, 257–​8 Marsh, H. 258 Marsh, K. 274 Marshall, N. 134 Mas-​Herrero, E. 123 Masaki, M. 390 Maslow, A. 57, 259, 457 master classes 188 master-​apprentice approach 174, 187, 289, 335–​6, 337, 339, 341–​2, 343 mastery-​oriented approach 273 mathematics and music participation 4, 38, 42, 44–​5, 151, 271–​3 Matsunobu, K. 474 Matthews, W.K. 303

500

501

Index Mead, G.H. 208, 258 meaning see PERMA model Measures of Musical Abilities 156 medical model (disabilities) 354, 355, 360 Meet4Music (Austria) 325 Mehr, S.A. 138 Mellizo, J.M. 475 melody 7, 10–​11, 134, 246, 260, 359, 468; ability and expertise paradigm 156; instrument learning 189, 193; listening, evaluating and appraising music 120; processing music 92, 94; singing 202, 204; small group teaching 326; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 439 Memmott, J.E. 46, 273 memory 74, 87, 92, 262, 270; auditory 41; autobiographical 107–​8, 126, 136, 457; booster 108; emotional 457; episodic 102; long-​term 118; procedural 92; short-​term 41, 45; spatial 270; transnatal 133; verbal 43, 270; visual 41–​2; working 39, 40, 42, 45, 158, 188 Méndez, E. 340 mental disorders 10, 95, 120, 247, 278; see also anxiety; depression; post-​traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) mental health 72, 73, 124, 275–​6, 286; large group teaching 309, 312–​13; responses to music 104, 107, 109, 110 mental resistance to learning 181 mental rotation tasks 44, 270 mentoring and coaching 174, 261, 328, 329, 345 Merriam, A. 6, 138, 265 mesosystems 132, 139 Messenger, J. 154 metacognition and metalearning 174, 217, 225–​9, 230 Metha, B. 163 Mexico 30, 178 Meyer, L. 24, 32, 456 Mezirow, J. 170–​1, 173 microsystems 132, 139, 140 midwife orientation 336–​8, 341 Mieder, K. 195 migrants see refugees, migrants and diasporic communities Miksza, P. 44, 194–​5, 273 Miller, S. 463 Mills, G. 137 Mills, J. 188 Minguella, M. 274 Mini Mental State Examination 206 Miranda, D. 30 MIROR-​Impro 436–​7 Mishra, J. 192 Montgomery, J. 25 mood 120, 123, 126, 262; cognitive benefits 39, 40; health and wellbeing benefits 74; maintenance, enhancement and change 9;

personal and social benefits 55; positive mood 121; preferences 137; responses to music 105–​6 Moodle 441, 442 Moore, K. 277 Morawska, L.J.G.R. 461 Morgan, J.P. 140 Morley, I. 33 Mornell, A. 385 Morrison, C.D. 122 Morrison, S.J. 272 Moser, P. 237 Mosling, M.A. 159 motivation 14, 45, 74, 273–​4, 279; ability and expertise 153, 157–​8, 164; aesthetic motivation 107; community music learning and creativity 245; family support 409; instrument playing 188, 194, 197; intrinsic motivation 369, 409; large group teaching 309–​10, 313; one-​to-​one contexts 343; portfolio musicians 387; responses to music 107, 110; singing 210; technology-​ mediated collaborative learning 433, 441; transformational models of learning 172, 175; see also motivation and identity development motivation and identity development 254–​66; belief 264; constraints 255; contemporary education 265; engagement in everyone’s and everyday life 259–​60; expectancy-​value theories 255–​6; functions of music 262–​3; higher education degrees in music 255; individual life course and societal contexts of engagement 260–​1; motivational beliefs and societal norms 256–​7; motivational constraint 255; needs satisfaction theories 258–​9; perseverance, self-​ defining goals and symbolic self-​expansion 257; personal experience and sharing values of music 264–​5; professional levels of expertise 255; reserve capacity, music as 261–​2; risk preference model 256; self-​completion 257–​8; self-​concept and identity 258; situational effort 255 Mozart 39, 117, 120 Mozart effect 38, 89, 118, 270 Mulder, J. 135 Mullen, P. 173–​4 Müllensiefen, D. 30 multidimensional nature of music learning 169 multifaceted learning 169 multifactorial gene-​environment interaction 159 multimodality 243 multiple musical identities: achievement of (sense of self) 368–​9, 370, 377; conflict of 369; construction of 370; crisis of (moratorium) 368; diffusion of 368; foreclosure of 368, 377; formation of 370; identity struggle resolution paradigm 369; identity theory 370; management of 369–​70; musician 367–​9; negative 368; professional 377; self-​questioning 369; situational 370, 378; status model 377

501

502

Index multiple regression analysis 46 Murnighan, J.K. 326 musculoskeletal problems 74, 279, 286, 287, 288 Musgrave, G. 229 Music For Life Project (UK) 74, 313, 324 music in identity (MII) 261; and identity in music distinction 478 Music for Life Project (UK) 179–​80, 313 MUSIC model 135, 137 music performance anxiety (MPA) 194, 279, 288, 291–​2, 293 Music Preferences in Adulthood Model 135 music therapy 9–​10, 24, 33, 104, 107 Music Use and Background Questionnaire 122 musical ability and appreciation tests (dependent on prior musical experience) 156 Musical Aptitude Profile 156 musical development stages 163 Musical Futures programme (UK) 124–​5, 141, 176–​7, 387–​8, 480 musical and musicological listening delineation 116 Musil, R. 258 MusoMagic programme (Australia) 323–​4 Musumeci, O. 342–​3 Nachmanovitch, S. 240 Nan, Y. 43 Nantais, K.M. 39 Narayanamurti, V. 25 Nater, U. 4 National Association for Teachers of Singing 461 National Songbook 139 needs satisfaction theories 258–​9, 262 negative connotations of music in conflict situations and as form of torture 10, 52, 57, 477 negative emotions 10, 104, 107, 194, 274 negative experiences of music 13, 60, 111, 139, 162, 477 Nelson, W. 5 Nepal 28 Netherlands 28, 42–​3, 55, 462 Neto, F. 207 neurodegenerative disease 205; see also dementia and Alzheimer’s disease neurological processes 7 neuroplasticity 90–​1, 269, 272 neuroscience 29 New Horizons Band (USA) 59, 188, 313 New Zealand 29, 30, 56, 312–​13, 343, 358 Nicholson, J.M. 276 Nielsen, S.G. 399–​400 Nigeria -​Anang Ibibo people 154, 157 Nolan, M.R. 401 Noland, P. 202 non-​formal contexts see informal contexts

non-​verbal communication 307, 324–​5, 327–​8, 329–​30, 422, 436, 442, 480 non-​WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialised, rich and democratic) countries 28, 33 nonconformity 151, 242, 245, 247 Norman, D. 440 North, A.C. 7, 136, 140 North America 11, 28, 352; see also Canada; United States Norway 59, 195, 425–​6; Arctic Philharmonic 467 notation 14, 190, 192, 225; colour system 189; Figurenotes system 438; reading 188–​9, 197; software 220 novelty 133, 136, 137, 238 numerical reasoning task 271 Nurius, P. 208, 257–​8 Nusbaum, E. 123, 124 nutrition and hydration 289 Oakland, J. 369 observational learning 420–​1 Ockelford, A. 22–​3, 158, 361, 454 O’Connor, E. 33 Odena, O. 237, 241 Odendaal, A. 4 Odumosu, T. 25 older adults 4, 38, 84, 94–​5, 272, 304, 389, 411, 484; ability and expertise paradigm 160, 163–​4; cognitive benefits of engagement 45–​6; community music learning and creativity 236; health and wellbeing benefits 68, 72, 74–​5; instrument learning 185, 188; large group teaching 307, 310, 313; one-​to-​one contexts 336, 343–​4; performance-​related health problems 287; personal and social benefits 52–​3, 55, 58–​9; preferences 135–​6; responses to music 107–​10; singing 205, 209; skills acquisition 225; small group teaching 234–​5, 323–​5, 329–​30; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 438–​40; transformational models 180 Olson, B. 463 one-​to-​one contexts 335–​45; early years 339; independent adults learning in the community 343–​4; instrument playing 186; older adults with complex needs 343–​4; pre-​professional training (young adults) 341–​2; primary school age group 339–​41; professional training (young adults) 342–​3; theoretical framework 336–​8; transformational models of learning 174 O’Neill, S. 104, 173, 260–​1 online learning see distance learning; virtual learning environment (VLE) Open Science Collaboration 30 Open Sounds project (European Union) 222 open-​earedness 131, 137–​8, 139, 140 openness to experience 106, 123, 137, 138, 140–​1

502

503

Index orchestras 14, 16, 108, 116, 149, 207; cognitive benefits 41, 45; disabilities and additional needs 354; health benefits 68; health issues 287–​9, 291–​3; instrument playing 186–​7, 193–​4, 196; large group teaching 303, 306, 314; motivation and identity development 255; peer support 422; personal and social benefits of engagement 57–​8; portfolio musicians 372–​3, 376, 378; preferences 134; research and practice implications 460, 467–​8; skills acquisition 223; small groups 320; transformational models 177 Orff music lessons 41 organisational skills 226 Osborne, N. 276 ‘othering’ 154 Out of the Ark music programme 210 out-​g roups 15, 17, 140 Overy, K. 274 ownership dimension 325, 328, 329–​30; peer support 421, 423, 429; portfolio musicians 382, 387 oxytocin 54, 57, 72 pacing of rehearsals 311, 313 pain, chronic 292 Papageorgi, I. 151 Papinchak, A.E. 409 Papoušek, M. 259–​60 Paravicini, D. 158, 164, 353 parent and child relationship 53, 405 parent and infant interactions 424; see also infant-​mother bonding parental early exposure of music to children 406 parental lesson attendance 411 parental musical backgrounds and experiences, preferences and expectations 404–​5 parental preferences for child’s instrument playing 185 parent-​teacher communication 409 parent-​teacher-​student relationships 186 Parkinson’s Disease 205, 275 Parncutt, R. 53 participation 10, 173, 476 participatory action research approach 438 passion for music 135 peak experience see intense musical experiences (IMEs) Pearce, E. 328 peer assessment 419 peer mentoring 419 peer pressure and instrument playing 185 peer support and learning 329, 345, 418–​29, 452, 486; buddy system 418; expertise development 482; expressiveness 480; formal and informal learning distinctions 421; formal learning 418, 424, 426–​7; future research 428–​9; higher education 426–​7; impact of support 421–​8;

informal learning 418, 422–​3, 424, 426–​7, 429; instrument playing 187, 424–​6; large group teaching 309; music education implications 429; one-​to-​one contexts 335; preschool music education 424; private studios/​music schools/​municipal schools 425–​6; quality of provision 479; role of in learning 418–​19; social connections 479; specialised pre-​college education 424–​5; unsupervised small groups 328–​9; vicarious experiences 420–​1; web-​ supported learning 427–​8; zone of proximal development 419–​20; see also under formative and summative assessment peer tutoring 419 perception 29–​30, 94, 173 Peretz, I. 159 performance experience 121–​2 performance through life course 269–​79; academic achievement 272–​3; at-​r isk individuals 277; community music and education 277–​9; emotional intelligence 274–​5; further research 278; intellectual development 269–​70; language and literacy and music participation 272; mathematics and music participation 271–​2; memory 270; mental health and wellbeing 275–​6; motivation and musical engagement 273–​4; prosocial behaviour and active music-​making 276–​7; social inclusion 274; spatial reasoning 270; training and cognitive development 269–​70 performance-​related health problems (PRHPs) 194, 286–​94; across lifespan 287–​8; general health 289; health literacy 293–​4; injury prevention and management 291; neurological health issues 290–​1; pain, chronic 292; posture and biomechanics 288–​90; practice habits 288–​9; psychological health issues 291–​2; self-​efficacy 293; vocal issues 290; see also anxiety; depression; hearing health issues; musculoskeletal problems; music performance anxiety (MPA) Performing Arts Medicine Association -​‘A conversation: What do science and data say about the near-​term future of singing?’ webinar 461 performing journals 384 perimusical technologies 224–​5 peripheral nervous system 290 Perkins, R. 343 PERMA model 56–​7, 58, 59, 69–​70, 275 perseverance and persistence 45, 164, 257, 309 person-​context-​content interactions 173 personal experience and sharing values of music 264–​5 personal and social benefits of engagement 52–​60; adolescents and young adults 55–​6; adults 56–​8; infants and children 53–​5; older adults 58–​9; research implications 59–​60

503

504

Index personal support 401–​2, 410, 412 personality 14–​15, 17, 75; listening, evaluating and appraising music 123, 126; portfolio musicians and multiple identities 368; preferences 132, 137, 138; responses to music 106; small group teaching 326 Pfordresher, P.Q. 202 Philippines 29, 30 philosophy and music psychology interactions 23–​4 phonological awareness 272 physical attributes and instrument playing 185 physical health 312–​13 physical performance space 441–​2 physiological benefits 477 physiological effects 39 physiological needs 259 physiological problems 279 physiological responses to music 109 Piaget, J. 89, 170 Pietsch, S. 44 Pike, P. 385 Pincas, A. 389 Pinker, S. 10 Pirner, M.L. 263 pitch 10, 30, 133, 227, 260, 272, 354; ability and expertise paradigm 154, 164; absolute 87, 89, 93, 354; accuracy and melody discrimination 202; cognitive benefits of engagement 40, 43, 45; instrument learning 189–​92, 194; ladder 190; listening, evaluating and appraising music 116, 121, 123–​4, 126; memory task 40; processing music 87–​93, 95–​6; research and practice implications 456, 468, 481; singing 202–​4, 210 Pitch Perception Preference Test 93 Pitts, S. 407, 409, 410 Platz, F. 136 playful music-​making 243, 436, 437, 482 playing by ear 190, 197, 480 Plucker, J. 238 Poland 407 Polk, J. 195 Polka, I. 134 Porras, J.I. 31 portfolio musicians -​multiple musical identities 367–​78, 478; analysis 371; community music and education 375–​7; findings 372–​4; research implications 370–​1, 375–​7; sample and procedures 370–​1; theoretical framework 370; see also multiple musical identities Portugal 58, 119, 121, 207; Project Orquestra Geracao 306 positive emotions 105, 107, 194; see also PERMA model possibility thinking 441 possible selves 208–​9, 254, 257–​8, 375, 389, 475

post-​positivism 26 post-​traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) 57, 247–​8 posture and biomechanics 288–​90 potential self (realisation) 208 power 259, 262, 343; see also empowerment power battles and peer learning and support 423–​4, 429 Pozo, J.I. 337–​8, 340, 345 practical learning 174, 176 practice 91–​2, 158–​9, 163, 193–​6, 288–​9; chunking 196; duration 186, 193–​4, 196; eclectic 422; ensembles 196; execution 195; frequency 196; goals 196; home environment 194; journals 196; observation and evaluation 195–​6; planning and preparation 195; quality of practice 194–​5, 197; self-​recording 196; slow practice 196; strategies 194–​5, 196–​7; whole-​part-​whole 196 precarity and insecurity of music work 369–​70 predisposition to music 475 preferences 123, 126, 131–​41, 185, 477; adolescence 131, 134–​41; adulthood 135–​8; age-​related patterns of development 132–​3; context 138–​40; definitions 131–​2; early childhood 133–​4; genres and styles over time 133–​8; open-​earedness 137–​8 prenatal responses to music 53, 83, 86, 87–​9, 102 preschool music education 424 prescribed medications 292 Presley, E. 136 Pressler, M. 95 Price, H.E. 185 Prichard, S. 196 prisons/​prisoners 108, 205, 246–​7, 274, 312 procedural memory 92 process-​folio 389 processing music across life course 86–​96; auditory imagery, audiation and memory 92; cognitive abilities emergence during schooling 89–​90; cognitive representation and neural processing 90; language 91; neuroplasticity 90–​1; older adults 94–​5; perception and action 94; performance and practice 91–​2; pitch (absolute) 93; prenatal development and early childhood 87–​9; sight-​reading 93–​4 processing speed 158 prodigies 153, 157–​8; see also savants professional development and work-​based learning 442–​4 professional musicians 12–​13, 151, 194, 345; ability and expertise paradigm 160; family support 405–​6, 410; health and wellbeing 72; peer support 422, 424, 427; performance-​ related health issues (PRHPs) 286–​8, 291–​3; personal and social benefits of engagement 58; processing music 93; research and practice implications 469, 474; singing 206; small groups

504

505

Index 327; transformational models 177; see also portfolio musicians -​multiple musical identities progression 162, 164; pathways 179–​80 Project Orquestra Geracao (Portugal) 306 prosocial behaviours 53–​4, 262, 276–​7 psychoacoustic features 6 psychological functions 9 psychological goals 9 psychological health issues 279, 291–​2 psychological internal dispositions 132 psychological needs 257–​9 psychological processes 7 psychological resource, music as 12 psychological significance of singing 202 psychological traits 123 psychological violence 342–​3 psychosexual theories 367–​8 psychosocial theories 367–​8 psychotherapy 292 purpose, sense of 389 Purves, R. 150 Putkinen, V. 40 Pythagoras 6, 454 Qi, N. 177–​8, 181 qualifications (leader) 479 qualitative research 26–​7, 33 quality control 30 quality of life 59, 70, 71–​2, 73, 75, 205, 276 quality of provision 452 quantitative research 26–​7, 33 Rabinowitch, T.-​C. 73, 275 Radbourne, J. 120 Radocy, R. 153, 155 Rakena, T.O. 343 Ranelli, S. 194 Rapp, J. 411 Rauscher, F.H. 41, 44–​5, 118, 207, 211n, 270, 271 Rautanen, H. 328 Ravel 134 reading comprehension tasks 118 Reay, D. 404 reciprocal determinism 14–​15, 17 reciprocal feedback model 102, 132 reciprocal interactions 209, 210, 476 recreationists 56 recycling 151, 242, 247 Reddington, H. 222, 226–​7 reduplicated babbling 203 Reed, E. 468 referential meanings 24 reflection-​in-​action 308 reflection/​reflexivity 170, 172, 174, 181, 195 refugees, migrants and diasporic communities 14, 54–​5, 274–​6, 278, 312

rehabilitation 45, 46, 72, 92, 108, 354 Reid, A. 304 Reimer, B. 25, 263 relatedness 57–​8, 160–​2, 186, 262 relationships see PERMA model religiosity 138, 185 religious model (disabilities) 353–​4, 355 reminiscence bump 55, 136; cascading 136 Rentfrow, P.J. 135, 137 Renwick, J.M. 385, 386 replications 30–​1, 33 research and practice implications 454–​69, 473–​86; cognitive benefits of engagement with music 46–​7; community music and education 59–​60; current debates and themes 474–​6; identity 477–​8, 484; interdisciplinarity 476, 484; phase 1 454, 455, 468; phase 2 454–​5, 468; phase 3 455–​7, 468–​9; phase 4 458, 469; portfolio musicians 375–​7; skills acquisition in music technology 230; transformational models of music learning 181–​2; wellbeing 476–​7, 484; see also COVID-​19 pandemic; expertise development research ruminations 21–​34; basic and applied research 25–​6; cultural aspects 29–​30; definition and conductors of research 22–​3; formal and informal experiences 27–​8; future research implications 32–​3; global perspectives 28–​9; philosophy and psychology interactions 23–​4; quantitative and qualitative research 26–​7; replications 30–​1; research collaboratory 31–​2; theory, research and practice 24–​5; see also research and practice implications reserve capacity, music 261–​2 resilience 276 resistance to learning 171 Resnicow, J.E. 274 responses to music 30, 101–​11; adolescence 104–​5; adulthood 105–​8; early years 102–​8; emotional responses 101–​2; future steps 110–​11; implications 109–​10; older adults 108–​9; physical responses 101–​2; physiological responses 102; psychological or intellectual responses 102, 108; psychosocial responses 105; theoretical perspectives 101–​2 rhythm 7–​8, 10–​11, 71, 134, 260, 271; ability and expertise paradigm 154, 161; cognitive benefits of engagement 42–​4; community music learning and creativity 245; instrument learning 189, 193; large group teaching 307; listening, evaluating and appraising music 116, 120, 123–​4, 126; processing music 92, 96; research and practice implications 456, 468, 481; responses to music 103, 105; singing 207; small group teaching 330; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 439; training 40, 192 Rhythm for Life 343

505

506

Index Richter, B. 461, 463, 466 Rickard, N.S. 54, 275 Rideout, R. 25 Riley, P. 241 Rinta, T. 274 risk aversion 227–​8 risk preference model 256 risk tolerance and resilience 228 risk-​taking 245, 258 ritual 120; C-​WARIS 3, 7, 8, 11, 17 Robison, C. 204 Rodney, J. 204 Rogenmoser, L. 206 Rogers, C. 208 Rogers, K. 273 Rogoff, B. 419 Rohwer, D. 73, 74, 195 Rokeach, M. 257 role changes (adolescents teaching adults in family group) 411 role confusion 368 role culture 29 role models 185, 210 role play 420, 437 Rosas, F.W. 222 Roscigno, V.J. 273 Rose, D. 277 Rosenberg, M. 371 Rostvall, A.L. 340 Roth, W.M. 26 Roulston, K. 57–​8 Rowe, V. 434, 435–​6 Rowlands, M. 89 Rowley, J. 304 run-​through approach 195 Russell, B. 406 Russo, F.A. 123 Rust, J. 136 Ruthmann, S.A. 241, 428, 443 Ryan, R.M. 259 Saarikallio, S. 55, 104 Sadler, D.R. 383, 385 Sala, G. 41–​2 salutogenetic approach 69–​70, 95 sampling stage 163 Sandler, H.M. 401 Sandstrom, G.M. 123 Sanfilippo, K.R.M. 28 Sataloff, R.T. 204 satisfaction 164, 186 Savage, J. 224, 428 Savage, S. 404 savants 158, 358 Sawyer, R.K. 238, 239, 240 scaffolding: family support 483; one-​to-​one contexts 337, 341–​2, 344; peer learning 482;

small group teaching 324; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 437, 439 Schäfer, T. 57, 133 Scharff, C. 369 Schellenberg, E.G. 39, 40, 43, 46, 273, 275 Schiavio, A. 325 Schindler, R.M. 136 Schippers, H. 237, 245–​6, 247–​8 Schladt, T.M. 72 Schlaug, G. 40 Schmidt, P. 172 Schneider, C.E. 75 Schneider, P. 93 school-​owned instruments and socio-​economic status 409–​10 Schubert, E. 133, 136, 138 Schubert effect 39 Schumann, R. 178 Seashore, C. 22, 156, 455, 456 sectional work 195 Sedlmeier, P. 133 Segni Mossi programme (Italy) 244–​5 self, sense of 54, 55, 257, 274 self, theory of 370 self-​actualisation 259, 388 self-​appraisal 382 self-​appreciation 425 self-​assessment 381, 384, 385, 386–​9, 390–​1, 392 self-​awareness 328 self-​belief 256 self-​care 117 self-​categorisation theory 15 self-​chosen music 121; while doing other activities 118–​19 self-​completion and motivation 257–​8 self-​concept 104, 273–​5, 389; motivation and identity development 254, 258, 259; portfolio musicians 369; singing 210 self-​confidence 162 self-​control 42, 275 self-​defining goals 257 self-​determination 164; theory 160, 161–​2, 259 self-​directed learning 181, 228, 336, 343, 388, 452, 482 self-​discovery 73, 249 self-​efficacy 15, 45, 107, 262, 392; health issues and participation 287, 293; health and wellbeing benefits 70; instrument playing 187, 188, 197; large group teaching 309; peer support 420; portfolio musicians 369, 377 self-​esteem 14, 54, 107, 273–​6; family support 409; instrument playing 186, 188, 197; large group teaching 312; portfolio musicians 377; scale 371; small group teaching 328 self-​evaluation 122, 386 self-​expression 55, 244, 311 self-​judgment 257

506

507

Index self-​knowledge 208 self-​motivation 407 self-​observation 257, 386 self-​organisation 210 self-​other merging 57 self-​processes 258 self-​reactions 257 self-​reflection 331 self-​regulation 41, 70, 74, 181, 257; family support 407, 409; formative and summative assessment 385–​8, 390–​1, 392; instrument playing 194, 195; one-​to-​one contexts 336, 338, 340; personal and social benefits 53, 54, 55, 56; portfolio musicians 383 self-​selection 429, 482 self-​stories 258 self-​study 423–​4 self-​sufficiency 388 self-​theories 256, 257, 262 self-​worth 248 Seligman, M.E.P. 56, 59, 69, 275 Serbia 28 Sfard, A. 429 shared experience 329 shared meanings, negotiation of 440–​1 shared understanding 329 Shavelson, R.J. 258 Sheldon, D.A. 185 Shen, D. 407 Shen, Y. 42 Shibazaki, K. 134 short-​term memory 41, 45 Shout at Cancer choir 205 Sibelius Groovy Shapes software (UK) 436 sibling impact and instrument playing 185 Sichivitsa, V. 409 Sierra Leone 353 sight-​reading 93–​4, 95, 192–​3 silence as music 11, 39 Silveira, J.M. 390 Silverman, M. 169 Silvia, P.J. 123, 124 Simonton, D. 239 Sing Up programme (UK) 210, 275, 278 Singapore 29, 175, 205–​6 singing 69, 71–​2, 201–​11, 324, 404, 477–​8; adolescence 203–​4; complex processes 202; emerging and later adulthood 204; evolutionary and historical considerations 201–​2; groups 205; infancy and preschool years 203; maintaining singing skills into adulthood 207; methodological issues 205–​6; theoretical framework and discontinuities in singing behaviour 208–​10; versus musical instruments 206–​7; see also infant-​directed singing (motherese) Sistema Scotland 277

situated learning 328, 375 situational factors 17, 322, 421 skills acquisition in music technology 217–​31; behaviourist perspective 218–​21; building block skills 220; client liaison skills 222; education and music in the community 230; enduring skills 220; further research issues 230; ‘hard’ skills 217, 218, 220; holistic learning 221–​5; intending audio engineers 219; metacognition and metalearning 225–​9; music education students 219; personal skills 221, 222; ‘soft’ skills 217, 218, 220, 224, 226; specific skills 217; threshold skills 226; transferable or generic skills 217; undergraduate musicians 219 Skype 467 Slevc, L.R. 43 Sloboda, J.A. 57, 117, 122, 156–​7, 240, 407–​8, 456–​7, 458 Slovic, P. 264 Slowiaczek, M.L. 401, 402 Small, C. 240 small groups 320–​31; definition 320–​1; education and music in the community 330–​1; further research 330; string quartets 304, 325–​7; see also supervised small groups; unsupervised small groups smartphones and tablets 105, 328, 360, 427, 436, 439 Smilde, R. 169 Smith, J.D. 12 Smith, L.B. 210 Smith, L.R. 271 social affirmation 389, 438 social attachment 436 social barriers 438 social benefits 264, 476, 477, 479; family support 404; large group teaching 309; portfolio musicians 392; see also personal and social benefits of musical engagement social bonding 15, 106, 107, 204, 262, 324, 477 social categorisation theory 17 social cognition 57 social cognitive employABILITY online self-​assessment tool 371 social cognitive theory 420 social cohesion 14, 57, 248–​9 social connectedness 57, 104, 126, 452, 479–​80, 482; technology-​mediated collaborative learning 433–​6, 438, 440–​2, 444–​5 social constructivist framework 383 social contexts 6, 7, 14–​15, 16, 17, 73, 105, 106, 238, 483; ability and expertise 154, 158; instrument playing 185, 188; portfolio musicians and multiple identities 368; singing 202 social desirability effects 110

507

508

Index social embeddedness 259 social functions of music 29, 477; see also communication, wellbeing, art, ritual, identity and social networks (C-​WARIS) social goals 9 social identity 477; theory 15, 17, 370 social inclusion 110–​11, 274, 276 social influence and preferences 136 social intelligence skills 229 social interactions: community music learning and creativity 249; instrument playing 186, 188, 197; large group teaching 311–​12; technology-​ mediated collaborative learning 440 social isolation 135, 161 social learning 425, 436–​7, 478 social media 187, 224–​5, 230, 435 social model (disabilities) 354, 355, 357, 360 social needs 259 social networks 55, 188; C-​WARIS 3, 13–​14, 17 social play 424 social relationships 419 social skills 276, 277 socialisation processes 406 sociocultural factors 105, 106, 405, 433–​5, 440 sociocultural models of learning 169–​70 socio-​economically disadvantaged students 44–​5 socio-​emotional behaviour 330 socio-​emotional specialist 326 Soden, L.M. 401 solidarity 16, 56 SongMakers programme (Australia) 323 songwriting 28, 188, 236, 246–​7, 304, 438–​9; small group teaching 323, 325, 328, 330 sonification 359, 460 Sorlí, A. 339 Sosniak, L. 406 sound before symbol approach 220, 310, 480 Soundbeam 445, 446n Sounds of Intent developmental framework 357–​8, 436 South Africa 55, 59, 139, 151, 242, 274, 311 South America 29, 139 Southcott, J. 313 Southgate, D.E. 273 Spahn, C. 461, 463, 466 Spain 28, 58–​9, 208, 339 spatial memory 270 spatial reasoning 270 spatial recognition 270 spatial visualisation performance 270 spatio-​temporal reasoning 41, 44, 45, 117–​18, 271 special needs 189, 205, 411, 436 specialisation stage 163 SpLDs 361 Spychiger, M. 151 Srebric, J. 463 Stabell, E.M. 425

Stadler Elmer, S. 203 Stauffer, S. 370 Steinbeis, N. 7 Stelling, J. 357 STEM and STEAM subjects 222, 278–​9 stereotype threat 425 stereotypes 326 Stevens, C. 23 Stone, N.L. 72 Strauss, A. 371 stress 70, 71–​2 string quartets 304, 325–​7 stroke 312 structural equation model (SEM) 406, 411, 412 structural features 6, 7–​8, 105, 138, 438 style 140; categories 135 subjective task value 256 summative assessment see formative and summative assessment Sundara, M. 134 supervised small groups 32–​5, 320–​1, 329; composing and songwriting with young people 323–​4; leading and facilitating 322–​3; music-​ making with older people 234–​5; singing and performing with students and adults 324 Suzuki violin method 190 Swaminathan, S. 43, 46 Swanwick, K. 124 Sweden 340, 436–​7 symbiotic relationship 24 Symbol Search subtest 39 symbolic interactionism 258 symbolic self-​expansion 257 synthesis-​analysis-​synthesis 308 systemising 123–​4, 126 T-​skilled or T-​shaped professionals 226 Taetle, L. 221–​2 Tal-​Shmotkin, M. 325–​6 talent development process 155 Talmagge, A. 312 Tan, K. 386 Tan, S.-​L. 189, 194–​5 Taras, M. 386 task specialist 326 task-​based activity 321, 323 task-​goal situations 375 task-​oriented learning 480 taste and preferences 12–​13, 131, 133, 136, 140; omnivorous 138, 139 Taylor, A. 343, 410 Taylor, E.W. 170–​1 teacher-​centred leadership 308–​9, 322, 336–​7, 340 teacher-​pupil-​parent trios 341 team role theory 327 teamwork skills 222, 276

508

509

Index technology 7, 452; differentiation 481; expertise development 482–​3; skills 190–​2, 230; see also skills acquisition in music technology; technology-​mediated collaborative learning technology-​based modelling 421 technology-​mediated collaborative learning 433–​46; early childhood 436–​7; formal context 433; higher education 440–​2; informal learning 435; non-​formal context 433; older adults 438–​40; professional development and work-​ based learning 442–​4; social connectedness 435–​6, 438, 440, 444–​5; sociocultural perspective 433–​5, 437, 440 tempo 70–​1, 120, 195, 243, 307, 327, 360, 391; responses to music 102–​3, 108 ter Bogt, T.F.M. 123 Thagard, P. 23–​4 Thailand 28 Thaler, A. 223 Thaut, M. 33, 241, 458 Thelen, E. 210 theory of mind 339 theory, research and practice triumvirate 24–​5 therapeutic focus of music 323; see also music therapy thinking skills 227 Thomas, L. 25 Thompson, S. 125 Thoring, K. 441–​2, 444 Thorley, M. 227 three-​component model of musical identity, skill and predisposition 475 three-​needs theory of motivation 259 threshold skills 226 Thumbjam app 438–​40 Tierney, A.T. 272 timbre 10, 40, 93, 120, 260, 359, 455–​6 togetherness, sense of 16, 73; see also belonging, sense of; community, sense of Tomasello, M. 262, 276–​7, 339 tone 6, 10, 24, 58, 72, 359, 424, 455; ability and expertise paradigm 156, 161; instrument learning 190; processing music 90, 93; singing 209 tone-​deafness 13, 154, 159, 202 Topping, K.J. 418 Torrance, E.P. 239 Torrance, H. 381 Tough, D. 218, 220, 221 Toulson, R. 220–​1 Tovstiga, G. 326 training and cognitive development 269–​70 Trainor, L.J. 202 transcendent experiences 254, 263–​5, 428 transformational models 169–​82; content, incentive and interaction dimensions 176; facets of transformative learning 171–​2;

formal contexts 175–​7; implications for music education and music in the community 181; informal contexts 177–​8; Music for Life Project 179–​80; Musical Futures programme 176–​7; non-​formal contexts 178–​81; research implications 181–​2 transformative learning 170–​5, 176, 186, 209, 336, 478, 480, 485; see also transformational models Trehub, S.E. 102, 203, 404 Trevarthen, C. 12, 260 trust 173, 277; community music learning and creativity 246; large group teaching 310; peer learning and support 419, 420, 429, 482; small group teaching 329 Tsang, C.D. 202 tuition costs 185 Turkey 28, 30 turn-​taking 436–​7 Ukraine 353 Umney, C. 369 UNESCO principles of lifelong, inclusive education as a human right 474–​5 unhealthy uses of music 104 United Arab Emirates (UAE) 28 United Kingdom 28, 54, 71; ability and expertise 154, 156; disabilities and additional needs 357, 358; instrument playing 193–​4; listening, evaluating and appraising music 119, 121; National Health Service (NHS) 352–​3; one-​ to-​one contexts 343; peer support 423–​4, 425; performance through lifecourse 273, 274, 275, 276; preferences 139, 141; research and practice implications 454–​5, 460; responses to music 110; singing 208, 210; small group teaching 323, 326; social connections 480; teaching cooperatives 228; technology skills 221; transformational models of learning 175, 176 United States 29, 41, 54, 59, 151; ability and expertise 156; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 462–​3; cognitive benefits 41; community music learning and creativity 242; Department of Education 273; detention centres 56; disabilities and additional needs 353; family support 405, 407, 410; health and wellbeing benefits 74; instrument playing 186, 190, 194–​5; jazz community 423; listening, evaluating and appraising music 124; National Center for Educational Statistics 272; No Child Left Behind law 401; one-​to-​one contexts 343; peer support 422; performance-​related health problems (PRHPs) 288; Pickathon music festival (Portland, Oregon) 459; research and practice implications 455, 460, 468; responses to music 107, 108; singing 201, 205; technology skills 218, 220, 221

509

510

Index UNK One-​Handed Woodwinds Program 357 unsupervised small groups 320–​1, 325–​9; communicating 327–​8; leading and teamworking 326–​7; peer-​to-​peer learning 328–​9 UPDATE: Application of Research in Music Education 25 Upitus, R. 407, 408, 409 Uy, M. 387 Väkevä, L. 28 Valle, C. 388 van Geert, P. 210 van Goethem, A. 57 Van Zijl, A. 122 vanWeelden, K. 185 Varvarigou, M. 45, 149–​50, 411 Veblen, K. 181, 238, 245, 246, 248 Vella, E.J. 137 Venezuela 28; El Sistema 54, 277, 306 Venugopal, V. 460 verbal communication 327–​8, 436, 442 verbal fluency tests 40 verbal intelligence 270 verbal memory 43, 270 Verbal and Nonverbal subtests 275 verbal reasoning 41 Verghese, J. 74 virtual choirs 16, 460, 463, 467–​9 virtual learning environment (VLE) 222, 224, 428, 435, 439, 442–​3, 468 Vispoel, W.P. 409 visual impairment and blindness 74, 158, 313, 353–​4, 357, 358–​60, 362n visual memory 41 Visually Impaired Musicians’ Lives project 358, 362n visuospatial working memory 42 vocal ageing/​voice change (or stability) in later years 204 vocal issues 290 vocal learning 88 vocal pitch imitation deficit 202 vocal production and vocal perception relationship 202 vocal rest 206 vocal sensorimotor loop model 202 voice change in adolescent boys 26–​7, 56, 203–​4, 208, 209 von Holst, E. 209 Vuoskoski, J. 110 Vygotsky, L.S. 169, 337, 399, 419–​20, 429, 434 Wagner, R. 106 Waldron, J. 238, 245, 435, 439 Wallerstedt, C. 436 Walzer, D.A. 222

Wassrin, M. 424 web-​supported peer learning 427–​8 Webster, P. 32, 150–​1, 218, 220, 221, 225 Weiner, B. 256 Weinstein, D. 324 WEIRD (Western, educated industrialised, rich and democratic) countries 28–​9, 110 Welch, G.F. 111, 241, 274, 275 wellbeing 9, 116–​17, 275, 452; ability and expertise 154, 160; C-​WARIS 3, 8–​10, 17; cognitive wellbeing 179, 180; community music learning and creativity 249; emotional wellbeing 180, 275–​6, 278; mental wellbeing 276, 278; one-​to-​one contexts 343, 344; personal and social benefits 55, 56, 58–​9, 60; personal wellbeing 246–​7; physical wellbeing 179, 180, 276; portfolio musicians 388; research and practice implications 476–​7, 484; responses to music 104, 107, 108, 111; singing 205; small group teaching 323, 324, 325; social wellbeing 180, 245, 246–​7, 276; see also health and wellbeing benefits of engagement Wellman, H.M. 339 Wengenroth, M. 93 West Point Music Research Center 467 West, T. 340 Westbury, I. 25 Whitacre, E. 467 Wicklund, R.A. 257 Wigfield, A. 264 Wiggins, J. 241 Wilkins, R.W. 457 Williams, D. 218, 220, 221, 225 Williams, L.R. 120 Williams, P. 107 Williamson, V.J. 72 Willisa, E.C. 26–​7 Wills, A.M. 402 Wilson, G.B. 329 Wing, H./​Wing Musical Aptitude Test 156 Wise, S. 225 Wolf, T. 136 Wolpert, D. 94 Woodward, S.C. 274 working memory 39, 40, 42, 45, 158, 188 World Health Organisation (WHO) 355, 358 Wright, R. 474 Wu, C.C. 40 Wulf, W. 31 Yamaha piano method 190 Yennari, M. 210 Youm, H.K. 404 Young, L. 24 Young, M.E.D. 355 Young, S. 405, 407 Young, V. 326, 342

510

511

Index Younger than Seven, Older than Seventy-​Seven project 261 Youth Music (UK) 273 Youth Orchestra Los Angeles (YOLA)(USA) 306 YouTube 435 Zanders, M.L. 409 Zdzinski, S.F. 399, 483 Zeserson, K. 388 Zhang, J. 407, 408, 475–​6 Zhang, W. 28–​9 Zhao, T.C. 40

Zhukov, K. 150, 342 Zimprich, D. 136 zone of proximal development 419–​20 zones of complexity 173 Zoom 16, 236, 438–​9, 440, 467 Zorn, I. 223 Zuk, J. 43 Zupan, M.A. 41, 271 Zupnick, J.A. 107, 136, 204 Zurich cybernetic model of social motivation 259 Zwaan, R.A. 31

511

512