Toward a Systematized Pedagogy of Musical Expression:
An Observational Study of Instrumental Teaching
Catherine Massie-Laberge
Music Research Department
Schulich School of Music
McGill University, Montreal
December, 2013
A thesis submitted to McGill University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
of the degree of Master of Arts in Music Education.
© Catherine Massie-Laberge, 2013
Table of Contents
Abstract ………………………………..……………………………………….………...v
Résumé ………………………………..……………………………………….………..vi
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................. vii
Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1
Background and Rationale ......................................................................................... 1
Aims and Objectives .................................................................................................. 2
Chapter 1: An Overview of Musical Expression ....................................................... 4
1.1 Early and Modern Views on Musical Expression ............................................... 4
1.1.1 Early views .................................................................................................... 5
1.1.2 Modern definitions ........................................................................................ 5
1.1.2.1 Definition of expression and expressiveness .......................................... 5
1.1.2.2 Expression intrinsic to music.................................................................. 6
1.1.2.3 Expression extrinsic to music ................................................................. 8
1.1.3 Modern theories and models ......................................................................... 9
1.1.3.1 Meaning and coherence ........................................................................ 10
1.1.3.2 Matching patterns ................................................................................. 11
1.1.3.3 Dynamics and form .............................................................................. 11
1.1.3.4 Similarity with human speech and behavior ........................................ 12
1.1.3.5 Emotional communication.................................................................... 13
1.1.3.5 Expression as a multidimensional model ............................................. 16
Chapter 2: Instrumental Music Teaching................................................................. 18
2.1 Informative Feedback in Teaching .................................................................... 18
2.2 Learning as a Dynamic Process ......................................................................... 19
2.3 Methods, Interactions, and Activities in Instrumental Lessons ......................... 21
2.3.1 Challenges in the analysis of instrumental studio lessons .......................... 21
2.3.2 Interactions .................................................................................................. 23
2.3.3 Activities ..................................................................................................... 23
2.4 Traditional Teaching Strategies ......................................................................... 24
2.4.1 Metaphors and imagery ............................................................................... 25
2.4.2 Aural modeling............................................................................................ 25
2.4.3 Focus on felt emotions ................................................................................ 27
i
2.4.4 Verbal instructions ...................................................................................... 28
2.5 How Is Musical Expression Taught in Instrumental Lessons? .......................... 29
2.5.1 Teachers’ and students’ conceptualization of expression ........................... 30
2.5.2 Popularity of strategies ................................................................................ 32
Chapter 3: Integration of Technology in the Teaching of Musical Expression ....... 34
3.1 Technology in Instrumental Teaching ............................................................... 34
3.1.1 Real-time feedback...................................................................................... 35
3.1.2 Feel-ME software ........................................................................................ 35
3.1.2.1 Practical handlings................................................................................ 36
3.1.2.2 Potential benefits for instrumental teaching ......................................... 38
3.2 Attitudes Toward Technology in Teaching Musical Expression....................... 39
Chapter 4: Methodology .......................................................................................... 40
4.1 Participants......................................................................................................... 40
4.2 Procedure ........................................................................................................... 41
4.2.1 Observation of instrumental lessons. .......................................................... 42
4.2.1.1 Analysis of data .................................................................................... 42
4.2.2 Perceptions of expression and technology. ................................................. 47
4.2.2.1 Analysis of data. ................................................................................... 47
Chapter 5: Results .................................................................................................... 50
5.1 Observation of Instrumental Lessons ................................................................ 50
5.1.1 Time allocation to various activities in every expressive unit within the
instrumental lessons ............................................................................................. 50
5.1.2 Comparing strategies ................................................................................... 51
5.1.3 Modeling ..................................................................................................... 54
5.1.4 Verbal .......................................................................................................... 54
5.2 Perceptions of Musical Expression and Technology – Results of the
Interviews…............................................................................................................. 57
5.2.1 Conceptualizing expression. ....................................................................... 58
5.2.2 Teaching expression .................................................................................... 61
5.2.3 Learning expression .................................................................................... 63
5.2.4 New technological strategies....................................................................... 64
Chapter 6: Discussion .............................................................................................. 68
6.1 Observations of the Instrumental Lessons ......................................................... 68
6.1.1 The general teaching approach.................................................................... 68
ii
6.1.2 Interactions between teachers and students ................................................. 70
6.1.3 Expressive message units ............................................................................ 70
6.1.4 Strategies ..................................................................................................... 72
6.1.4.1 Outcome feedback ................................................................................ 72
6.1.4.2 Modeling............................................................................................... 73
6.1.4.3 Informative feedback ............................................................................ 74
6.1.4.4 Motor-affective language ..................................................................... 74
6.1.4.5 Questions .............................................................................................. 74
6.1.4.6 Focus on felt emotions.......................................................................... 75
6.1.4.7 Additional strategies ............................................................................. 76
6.2 Questionnaire Interviews ................................................................................... 77
6.2.1 Comparing teachers’ and students’ conceptions of expression to
observations ........................................................................................................ 77
6.2.2 Organization and goals ................................................................................ 79
6.2.3 The importance of technique as compared to expression ........................... 79
6.2.4 Technology: well-received or not?.............................................................. 80
Chapter 7: Limitations and Conclusion ................................................................... 83
7.1 Limitations ......................................................................................................... 84
7.1.1 Identification of expressive units ................................................................ 84
7.1.2 Intrusiveness of the lesson observations ..................................................... 84
7.1.3 Sample size of participants.......................................................................... 84
7.1.4 Clarity of some items of the questionnaire ................................................. 85
7.1.5 Procedure used to gather data from and provide information to the
participants about the software............................................................................. 85
7.1.6 Musical dialogue ......................................................................................... 86
7.1.7 Technical difficulties ................................................................................... 86
7.2 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 86
7.2.1 Observation of lessons ................................................................................ 87
7.2.2 Questionnaire interviews ............................................................................. 88
7.2.1 Further studies ............................................................................................. 89
Bibliography ............................................................................................................ 92
Appendices: Recruitment material; Consent form; Extract from lessons;
Questionnaire interviews; Participants’ responses to the questionnaire; Feel-Me
software description; Debriefing session………………………...……………….107
iii
List of figures
Figure 1. Modified Brunswikian lens model of communication of emotion in
musical performance ............................................................................... 15
Figure 2. Hevner’s (1936) adjective circle of 67 words ......................................... 27
Figure 3. The Feel-ME software interface .............................................................. 37
Figure 4. Path of musical expression development in instrumental teaching ......... 44
Figure 5. Frequency distribution of verbal language use (in %) for teachers and
students within expressive message units ............................................... 54
Figure 6. Frequency distribution of verbal language use (in %) for teachers and
students within the instructional function ............................................... 55
List of tables
Table 1. Demographic data for teachers. ................................................................ 41
Table 2. Demographic data for students ................................................................. 41
Table 3. Measures of time allocation to various activities devoted to students’
expressive development within the instrumental lessons ........................ 51
Table 4. Mean of frequency usage of the different strategies used by each teacher
within all the expressive units ................................................................. 52
Table 5. Strategies to develop students’ personal expression ................................. 53
Table 6. Teachers and students’ occurrence of statements associated with
educational functions............................................................................... 56
Table 7. Teachers’ respective use of educational functions. .................................. 57
Table 8. Frequency distribution of each teacher’s and student’s responses on their
preferred characteristics in musical artists .............................................. 59
Table 9. Frequency distribution of each teacher’s and student’s responses on their
conceptualization of expression .............................................................. 60
Table 10. Frequency distribution of each teacher’s and student’s responses about
what music can express. .......................................................................... 61
Table 11. Reported strategies used by teachers to teach expression during
instrumental lessons. ............................................................................... 62
Table 12. Teachers’ perception of the use of technology before and after
information on the Feel-ME software ..................................................... 64
Table 13. Students’ perception of the use of technology before and after
information on the Feel-ME software ..................................................... 65
iv
Abstract
Observational studies of instrumental teaching present limited data on the
efficiency of various teaching methods (Karlsson & Juslin, 2008; Kennell, 2002).
More studies are needed on the structural aspects of lessons, the dynamics of social
interactions, and the prospects of using computer-based instruction in teaching
expression (Laukka, 2007). Although technology has been demonstrated to improve
emotional communication (Karlsson, 2008), musicians may have a negative attitude
toward using it for learning expressive skills (Lindström, Juslin, Bresin, &
Williamon, 2003). The aims of this thesis are to (a) explore the nature of instrumental
teaching with an emphasis on expression, (b) assess how teachers and students
conceptualize expression and the teaching of it, and (c) see how they appraise the use
of technology in teaching expression.
In order to do this, we (a) observed
instrumental lessons and (b) interviewed participants (12 university undergraduate
students and their teachers: n=6). Interactions from 12 lessons were analyzed based
on four educational functions of language (testing, instructional, accompanying,
expressive). Results showed that 18% of the lessons were devoted to students’
expressive development and that teachers used mainly the verbal mode of
communication, in which the outcome feedback strategy was prevalent.
Questionnaire responses revealed that expression was the preferred characteristic of
music performance and that it was conceived as multidimensional and that the
teachers’ approach was based on the “instrumental-technical” view. Strategies, such
as questioning, experimenting with sound, modeling, and using metaphorical
language, are suggested as efficient ways to develop students’ own expression.
Teachers’ interest towards the use of technology to teach expression decreased after
they had received information on the underlying mechanisms of the Feel-ME
software used, while students’ interest remained positive. A concept map that
integrates informative feedback and strategies to help students develop their own
expression was created as a model for explicit music expression teaching.
Keywords: musical expression, emotions, instrumental studio teaching, technology,
software, feedback, teaching strategies, communication
v
Résumé
Les études sur l'enseignement instrumental présentent un nombre limité de
données concernant l'efficacité des différentes méthodes d'enseignement (Karlsson
& Juslin, 2008; Kennell, 2002). Davantage d’études doivent être effectuées quant à
l’utilisation de la technologie dans l’apprentissage de l’expression (Laukka, 2007).
Bien qu'il ait été démontré que la technologie améliore la communication
émotionnelle (Karlsson, 2008), les musiciens peuvent avoir une attitude négative
envers son utilisation pour l'apprentissage des compétences expressives (Lindström,
Juslin, Bresin, & Williamon, 2003).
Les objectifs de cette recherche étaient (a)
d'étudier la nature de l'enseignement instrumental, en particulier l'expression, (b)
d'évaluer la façon dont les enseignants et les élèves conceptualisent l’expression et
son enseignement, et (c) de vérifier les perceptions de l'utilisation de la technologie
dans l’enseignement de l’expression. Nous avons (a) observé des leçons
instrumentales, et (b) réalisé des entrevues (12 étudiants instrumentistes de premier
cycle et leurs enseignants : n = 6). Les interactions entre professeurs et élèves de 12
leçons furent analysées en fonction de quatre fonctions éducatives (test, instruction,
accompagnement, expression). Pour la durée totale des cours instrumentaux, 18% fut
consacré au développement des compétences expressives. Les professeurs utilisaient
davantage les stratégies verbales pour enseigner l’expression, plus précisément la
stratégie «outcome feedback».
Les réponses au questionnaire ont révélé que
l'expression, caractéristique la plus appréciée, est définie comme un concept
multidimensionnel.
Les stratégies, telles que l’expérimentation sonore, la
modélisation, les métaphores, aident à développer l’expression des élèves. L’intérêt
des professeurs quant à l’utilisation de la technologie pour l’enseignement de
l’expression a diminué après avoir reçu de l’information concernant le logiciel FeelME, tandis que celui des étudiants est demeuré positif. Un schéma de stratégies
comprenant un feedback informatif est suggéré comme modèle d’enseignement
systématique pour aider les étudiants à développer leur expression.
Mots clés : expression musicale, émotions, enseignement instrumental en studio,
technologie, logiciel, feedback, stratégies d’enseignement, communication
vi
Acknowledgements
First, I would like to thank all the teachers and students who participated in this
research project. Their contribution made this project achievable. I want especially
to thank my supervisor, Dr. Isabelle Cossette, for her contribution, her support, and
her encouragement. She had a significant influence on my scientific approach.
Without her precious and helpful advice, this study would never have been possible.
I also would like to acknowledge the Schulich School of Music for its financial
support through the Graduate Excellence Fellowships. I am grateful to my friend and
colleague Audrey-Kristel Barbeau, who generously gave me her time to answer my
many questions, who suggested worthwhile references to me, and who carefully
listened to my progress reports and concerns. I want to recognize the support of
Professor Fabrice Marandola (McGill) for his useful recommendations and
references, and of Professor Sylvain Caron (Université de Montréal), who gave me
the opportunity to actively participate in the research group on music performance,
analysis,
and
expression
(GRIMAE)
affiliated
with
the
Observatoire
interdisciplinaire de création et de recherche en musique (OICRM). Thanks to
Professor Richard Cooper (McGill) who proofread my project.
Je tiens à remercier spécialement Isabelle Janes de m’avoir transmis sa passion
pour la musique et l’enseignement, elle qui a également été une grande confidente
pour moi à d’importants moments dans ma vie. Merci à ma mère et à mon père pour
leur appui dans les moments heureux comme difficiles, qui m’ont constamment
écouté, conseillé, et dirigé. Finalement, un énorme merci à Patrice Nicolas, pour son
support chaleureux et sincère tout au long de ma maîtrise, ainsi qu’à mes amies Kate,
Mariam, et Frédérique, avec qui je n’aurais pu traverser ces années avec autant de
rires n’eût été de leur présence.
vii
Introduction
Background and Rationale
Musical expression in instrumental teaching.
One of music’s most
captivating aspects is the musician’s ability to play expressively while performing
(Juslin & Laukka, 2004; Karlsson, 2008; Laukka, 2004; Lindström, Juslin, Bresin &
Williamon, 2003). Although the notion of musical learning differs from one cultural
and political context to another, students must be taught to hear and interpret musical
expression (Elliott, 2005). Studies reveal that expression can be enhanced with
training and teaching (Johnson, 1998; Juslin & Laukka, 2000; Marchand, 1975;
Sloboda, Minassian & Gayford, 2003; Woody, 1999). In addition, there has been
empirical research that helps to define how expression and emotional communication
are really conceived and that has produced theories which can enhance and guide the
teaching of expression (e.g. Juslin, 2003).
What goes on in individual instrumental lessons is mainly hidden from the
outsider’s view (Hallam, 1998). Indeed, there is a limited amount of data regarding
the efficiency of the various teaching methods (Kennell, 2002) and real-time
investigations of instrumental teaching are still rare and limited (Karlsson & Juslin,
2008). This paucity is mainly caused by the reluctance among teachers to participate
in studies about instrumental teaching because they are accustomed to giving their
lessons in private (Lindström et al. 2003). As previous studies were conducted on a
limited number of cases (e.g. Karlsson & Laukka, 2008; Lindström et al. 2003;
Rostvall & West, 2001, 2003; Tait, 1992; Young, Burwell & Pickup, 2003), it is
therefore essential to accumulate further evidence in various teaching contexts in
order to evaluate the generalizability of the strategies and teaching patterns used.
More observational studies are needed to describe the structural aspects of the
teaching process and to capture the complex dynamics of social interactions between
teachers and students.
1
Integration of technology to teach expression. Research demonstrates that
there is a need to identify what prevents teachers from systematizing and organizing
their teaching of expression (Persson, 1993; Tait, 1992) but research may also help
further develop and implant novel approaches to teaching expression and emotional
communication, and therefore enhancing instrumental studio teaching.
Indeed,
several studies (Juslin, Friberg, Schoonderwaldt & Karlsson, 2004; Juslin, Karlsson,
Lindström, Friberg & Schoonderwaldt, 2006; Karlsson, 2008) have demonstrated the
efficacy of technology in improving emotional communication. Nevertheless, other
studies demonstrate that musicians may have a negative attitude toward using
technology for the learning of expressive skills (e.g. Lindström et al., 2003). The
needs and perceptions of instrumental teachers and students need first to be more
fully documented before new technologies can be integrated into lessons, and more
evidence is required about what the prospects of using computer-based instruction in
teaching expressivity are (Laukka, 2007).
Aims and Objectives
The overall purpose of this thesis is to explore the nature of instrumental
teaching as ecologically as possible with an emphasis on expression and emotions.
This research will provide a systematic view of how expression is taught and learned
in instrumental lessons.
The main questions that this thesis seeks to respond to are: How explicit are the
instructions regarding expression and emotional communication, as well as the
learning outcome and how often they appear in lessons? What strategies are used to
teach expression and how often are they used? These questions are answered by
conducting lesson observations and interviews.
Through lesson observations, the thesis aims to (a) identify the types of strategies
used (e.g. use of motor-affective language, use of modeling, focus on felt emotion,
use of verbal instruction), (b) verify whether strategies used by teachers provide
informative feedback to students, (c) demonstrate whether the learning outcome is
clearly discussed by teachers, and (d) underline the instrumental lessons’ structural
characteristics, such as the time allocated to various activities, the language used, and
2
the frequency usage of specific feedback strategies. It is expected that teachers will
use more strategies within the verbal mode of communication to convey their
knowledge about musical expression to students.
Through administration of a questionnaire interview, the thesis also evaluates
how instrumental music teachers and their students (a) conceptualize expression and
its teaching, (b) appraise the use of novel technology for expression learning within
instrumental lessons, and (c) change their perception after the theoretical basis and
nature of one particular technology (i.e. the Feel-ME software) based on empirical
research have been explained. It is hypothesized that participants’ concepts and
judgments regarding technology will change positively after having been informed
about the nature and functions of the Feel-ME software.
The results of this study should permit the eventual development of instrumental
teaching strategies of expression adapted to actual needs that will integrate empirical
research and that will facilitate the achievement of specific goals. Furthermore,
understanding how technologies are perceived by the teachers and their students will
provide a solid framework that may eventually help to develop, implement or adapt
technologies to serve the needs of instrumental teachers and students. Finally, the
development and implantation of such technological intervention in instrumental
teaching will benefit from knowing what teachers’ and students’ judgments and needs
are.
This thesis is divided into seven chapters. Chapter 1 presents definitions,
terminologies, theories and models used in different fields of research (e.g. music
psychology, music philosophy) in relation to expression, meaning, and emotion.
Chapter 2 reviews the literature on the dynamics and interactions within instrumental
studio teaching and the way expression is currently taught. Chapter 3 presents
different technologies used in instrumental lessons. Chapter 4 explains the methods
used for this research. Chapter 5 describes the results of the observations and
interview questionnaires. Chapter 6 interprets the results through a discussion.
Finally, Chapter 7 presents the limitations of the study, the expected contribution to
the field, and further research possibilities.
3
Chapter 1: An Overview of Musical Expression
In order to study the expressive content of instrumental lessons, it is important
to establish a methodological frame. Therefore, this section will discuss: (a) the early
perspectives on expression, (b) the modern definitions, and (c) the theories and
models of expression and related concepts.
1.1 Early and Modern Views on Musical Expression
Recent studies have demonstrated that one of the most essential aspects in
musical performance is the ability to play expressively (Juslin & Laukka, 2004;
Karlsson, 2008; Laukka, 2004; Lindström, et al., 2003). Moreover, it appears that
every musician has an artistic intention to communicate (Davidson & Lehmann,
2002).
At some level, every performance art is unavoidably creative: if the
analysis is sufficiently fine-grained there is bound to be something
new or unexpected somewhere. […] The most intensively studied
aspect of performance in the art music tradition, and one that is
closely related to a consideration of creativity, is expression. It
seems uncontroversial to assert that to play music expressively is to
be creative in performance. (Clarke, 2005, pp. 157-160)
Despite this ubiquitous presence within Western musical culture, expression often
appears abstract and indescribable when compared, for instance, to words, which
have clear semantic meaning. It can also be seen as a concept only expressible
through metaphorical and pictorial language (Gabrielsson & Juslin, 2003). “Music
is the only language with the contradictory attributes of being at once intelligible and
untranslatable” (Lévi-Strauss, 1964/1969, p. 18). In some branches of music research,
such as music psychology and music education, expression seems to be discussed
mainly in terms of the expression of emotions (e.g. Gracyk & Kania, 2011;
Gabrielsson, 1999, 2003; Thompson, 2009). In philosophical studies, the notion of
4
expression is conceptualized in accordance with the nature and value that one can
confer on the experience of hearing music (Davies, 2011).
1.1.1 Early views. Ever since antiquity, expressive meaning and the qualities
of Western music have been deliberated upon and deepened by a great many
philosophers, music theorists, music psychologists and music teachers.
The mimesis theory, introduced by ancient philosophers, suggests that anything
that music expresses will be induced in listeners as well (Allesch, 1987; Grout &
Palisca, 1996; Scruton, 1997). Aristotle’s theory of the emotions, mainly found in
his rhetoric1 and popular during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, underlies
the importance of affects as the most significant function of music. Similarly, the
German Affektenlehre is an aesthetic theory, mainly found in relation to vocal music,
which considers music as the expression of affects in the sense of idealized emotional
states. This doctrine claims that listeners feel these states as well (Buelow, 1983).
The German Affektenlehre gradually disappeared during the latter half of the
eighteenth century in favor of an Empfindungsästhetik, which consists in freedom of
means to express subjective feelings in music. With Johann Joachim Quantz (16971773) and Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach (1714-1788), music is promoted to the function
of expressive art with independent and various possibilities to move listeners.
1.1.2 Modern definitions. Before discussing the various modern theories and
models concerning musical expression, it is important to define the terms that are
going to be used, as well as two essential concepts present within the theories that are
going to be further discussed: expression as being intrinsic or extrinsic to music.
1.1.2.1 Definition of expression and expressiveness. Despite the fact that
expression is perhaps one of the most intriguing and discussed subjects in
instrumental music performance, there is no unanimous definition among the
different contexts in which the term expression is used (Alessandri, in press).
1
In the Greek and Latin art of rhetoric, mainly discussed by Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian, the
orator develops ways to influence and persuade his audience in the most effective manner.
5
Generally speaking, the term expression, as in musical expression, does not refer to
an explicit object of expression, such as emotional or gestural expression, imagery,
or synesthesia (Schubert & Fabian, in press). Expression in the arts is centered on
the artist’s expression, while the term expressiveness is related more to an “audiencecentered aspect” (Robinson, 2007). Indeed, expressiveness has been described as the
degree by which the expressive outcome (e.g. emotions, meaning) that the performer
is seeking to convey is understood by the audience (Robinson, 2007).
Seashore (1938), one of the first researchers to study musical performance
(Clarke, 2002a), defines expression as “the artistic expression of feeling in [which]
music consists in esthetic deviation from the regular – from pure tone, true pitch, even
dynamics, metronomic time, rigid rhythms, etc.” (p.9). Clarke (2005) describes
expressive features of a performance as the “unconscious symptoms of underlying
cognitive processes, and those which are the result of deliberate interpretative
choices” (p. 160). In other words, expression can be related to those musical elements
that constitute a unique performance, which depend on personal responses and also
vary between different interpretations. Similarly, Juslin (2003) refers to expression
as an ensemble of perceptual qualities that characterize the relationships between
subjective elements that shape a musical performance (e.g. personal life experiences)
and the general impressions of listeners.
Expression has also been referred to the systematic manipulation of acoustic
parameters (e.g. tempo, articulation, dynamics) that help in differentiating one
musical interpretation from another (e.g. Chapin, Jantzen, Scott Kelso, Steinberg &
Large, 2010; Gabrielsson & Juslin, 1996; Juslin, 2003, 2005; Palmer, 1996, 1997;
Repp, 1999; Seashore, 1938; Timmers, 2007b).
In order to facilitate the reading of this thesis, the term expression, will be used
to discuss the way expression is taught in instrumental lessons in a more general
manner, as opposed to more specific terms, such as emotional expression or gestural
expression.
1.1.2.2 Expression intrinsic to music. When listening to music, it is possible to
be charmed by the sole beauty of the music (Juslin & Sloboda, 2001). Intrinsic
6
expression is portrayed by a set of structural features inherent in the music (see
1.1.2.2.1) that result in an emotion felt by the listener (e.g. harmonic changes, melodic
appoggiaturas, syncope) (Sloboda, 1991, 1992). A performer might want to express
something through the use of specific musical parameters, such as a particular
musical topic (e.g. dance forms, pastoral) (Ratner, 1980). In other words, a musical
performance may contain important acoustic cues, such as articulation, timbre,
dynamic, tempo, which help performers convey their expressive intentions to an
audience.
According to Margolis (1993), music has historical peculiarities that show the
creative efforts of its composers and that have their own meanings. Elliot (2005)
adds that the successions of sounds and melodic patterns that characterize these
historical periods can exhibit stylistic characteristics common to other music of the
same traditions and practices. Elements intrinsic to the music, such as structural
features or tension and release, can help capture the expressive content present in the
music.
1.1.2.2.1 Musical structure. Structural features of a composition have been
shown to be truly related to musical expression. The communication of structure in
musical expression has been mostly studied by analyzing variations in dynamics and
tempo in expert musical performances. For instance, Kamenetsky, Hill and Trehub
(1997) compare the emotional expression contained in different versions of two
baroque and romantic keyboard pieces. The versions in which there were original
variations of dynamic and tempo were rated as significantly more expressive than
versions in which tempo variations were removed. Many studies consider tempo as
one of the most important musical features for understanding expression (e.g. Gagnon
& Peretz, 2003; Gundlach, 1935; Hevner, 1937; Juslin, 1997). Fast tempi, for
example, may be related to diverse expressions of excitement, surprise, emotions,
potency, while slow tempi may be associated with expressions of calmness,
tenderness, boredom, sadness. Sloboda (1985) also notices that pianists modify
articulation and note length in relation to the different metrical positions on which a
note arrives.
Finally, it appears that musical structure is intimately related to
7
expression particularly when we concentrate on performers’ intentions (Woody,
2000). Waterman (1996) focuses on how listeners respond to emotions created
through musical structure.
Indeed, musical structure strongly elicits emotional
responses from listeners, for example during a modulation. In addition, listeners can
identify more easily the expressive intentions of a performer when the expressive
modifications are suitable to the musical structure (Clarke, 1987, 1988, 1993), as well
as when the performer has a clear mental representation of it (Palmer, 1990).
1.1.2.2.2 Tension and release. One salient example of patterns of tension and
release resides in the harmonic and melodic tension. A frequent way to communicate
tension is to emphasize notes or passages marked by tension, such as chords more
distant from the initial key of the piece. Phrase boundaries are also organized
hierarchically, which may be communicated by changing tempo and dynamics. For
example, in music from the Romantic period, large variations in tempo are essential
to achieve an expected atmosphere. Phrases often start slowly, speed up in the
middle, and slow down again toward the end (Henderson, 1936; Repp, 1992).
Phrasing in Baroque music, however, generally involves fewer variations in tempo.
Baroque music tends to have a more metrical and constant character, with a final
ritardando at the end of sections. These typical shapes of timing and dynamics are
essential in order to convey stylistic features to listeners. Often, musicians emphasize
particular points in a piece in order to create a sense of arrival and departure and lead
the music toward certain meaningful goals or draw a trajectory of sound (LeechWilkinson & Prior, in press).
1.1.2.3 Expression extrinsic to music. Extrinsic emotions are characterized by
an association between the musical features and a personal experience carrying a
symbolic meaning or emotion to the listener (Gabrielsson & Juslin, 2003). Listening
to instrumental music can arouse non-musical phenomena, such as scenes from
nature, places, experiences, and persons (Meyer, 1956).
Another relevant example of a non-musical topic is the leitmotif, a musical
figure associated to a particular character, situation, or idea. This image confers on
8
the piece a dramatic effect, which at some points in the music complements the scene
or introduces new characters (Patel, 2008).
1.1.2.3.1 Individual aptitude. Extrinsic expression is commonly associated with
individual talent or aptitude. A major challenge faced by instrumental teachers when
teaching expressive skills is to reconcile the subjective world of student-performers
(e.g. imagery, metaphors, emotions) with the objective features of the music (e.g.
articulation, tempo, phrasing) (Juslin & Persson, 2002). The different teaching
approaches are further discussed in Chapter 2. When the process of associating
acoustical cues with personal feelings while performing music becomes internalized,
it no longer requires conscious control (Hallam, 1997). Both the identity (physical
appearance, self-esteem, and expression) and the ability (technical and interpretative
skills) of a performer, in addition to other performance-related variables (motivation,
concentration, or mood), may interfere with the perception and the induction of
emotion (Scherer & Zentner, 2001). However, having access to the subjective
emotional experience of a student is practically impossible without communication.
Therefore, it is primordial for teachers to establish good communication with students
and encourage them to verbalize how they feel about a piece.
1.1.3 Modern theories and models. The relationship between music and
expression has been studied for over fifty years by music psychologists, philosophers,
and music researchers. According to their field of research, they have developed
theories that expose their different conceptualizations of expression in music. These
theories relate expression to various concepts: (a) meaning and coherence; (b)
matching patterns; (c) dynamics and form; (d) similarity with human speech and
behavior; and (e) emotional communication.
One major problem facing research that concentrates on musical expression lies
in the tendency to perceive expression in terms of a single component or entity
(Juslin, 2003). For example, Todd (1992) created a model of musical dynamics and
tempo in order to develop a method of performance style analysis. However,
according to Clarke and Windsor (2000), Juslin (2000), and Repp (1989), these types
9
of study incorrectly conceive the concept of musical expression because they do not
consider what is expressed, and how this expression occurs. Consequently, it has
been suggested that expression can be regarded as a multidimensional model,
similarly to Juslin and Persson’s (2002) GERMS model, which will be further
discussed in this section.
Each of the following theories helps define the concept of expression as
accurately and transparently as possible in terms of a multidimensional concept.
They also help develop a theoretical basis and a method that aim at analyzing the
expressive content within the instrumental lessons of this study.
1.1.3.1 Meaning and coherence. Nattiez (1990) and Meyer (1956) both relate
musical expression to meaning. According to Meyer (1956), embodied meaning and
designative meaning can both result from musical experience.
1.1.3.1.1 Embodied meaning. Embodied musical meaning is a product of
musical expectations that are often created by a prolonged exposure to a particular
musical style (e.g. tonal music) in which certain structural features are repeated (i.e.
expression intrinsic to music).
For Meyer, listeners create expectancy schemes
according to musical patterns well established in Western musical culture. Stravinsky
(1882-1971), a composer who adopted the absolute view of music, which
characterizes the embodied meaning view, once declared that:
Music, by its very nature, is essentially powerless to express
anything at all, whether a feeling, an attitude of mind, a
psychological mood, a phenomenon of nature etc…. Expression has
never been an inherent property of music…. If, as is nearly always
the case, music appears to express something, this is only an
illusion…. It is simply an additional attribute that … we have lent it,
thrust upon it, as a label, a convention. (Stravinsky cited in Fisk,
1997, pp. 280-281).
1.1.3.1.2 Designative meaning. Designative meaning can be described as an
association between musical features (e.g. harmony) and a symbolic event in the life
of the listener. Nattiez believes that meaning exists when perception of an object or
10
event, for instance music, brings something to mind other than the object or event
itself (i.e. expression extrinsic to music). Moreover, this same object or event appears
to be meaningful or meaningless to performers depending on different circumstances
(Meyer, 1956) as the music unfolds. According to Gabrielsson (1999), a performer
does not have a performance plan consisting only of the formal representation of the
music, but rather relies upon non-cognitive components, such as images, messages,
or inventive musical characters. Musical stimuli can also evoke many different
meanings depending on the listener. Music can accentuate the meaning of a particular
valued experience (e.g. Hays & Minichiello, 2005) or reduce the stress induced by
recent events (e.g. Sloboda, 2005). It can also be used to enhance the significance of
an event or activity when it accompanies, for instance, a social rite, such as a wedding
or a funeral.
1.1.3.2 Matching patterns. Margolis’s (1987) theory of musical meaning claims
that all forms of thinking are derived from matching perceived patterns to patterns
preserved in memory. This principle of pattern matching is also a central element in
Johnson’s (1987) theory of embodied meaning. According to him, our thinking is
metaphorically defined by a mapping of patterns derived from our own bodily
experiences. More precisely, music conveys meaning in accordance to the mapping
of musical patterns that we hear: (a) intra-opus patterns, which are patterns that are
specific to the musical work itself, or that are simply related to musical events; (b)
musical schemas, which are patterns isolated from musical conventions; and (c)
image schemas, which are patterns separated from bodily experiences to make sense
of our experiences in more abstract domains (e.g. emotions, social interactions,
mathematics).
1.1.3.3 Dynamics and form. Hanslick (1986) denies that music can express
“definite feelings” because it does not have the possibility to stand for the “specific
representations or concepts” that characterize specific emotions. He also claims that
music cannot convey the emotions of the composer.
11
Music can represent only the dynamic aspects of feelings. [Love’s]
dynamic can appear as readily gentle as stormy, as readily joyful as
sorrowful, and yet still be love. This consideration by itself suffices
to show that music can only express the various accompanying
adjectives and never the substantive, e.g. love itself. (Hanslick, 1986,
p. 9)
Langer agrees with Hanslick’s theory, except for the fact that the representation
of dynamics is enough to convey emotions. In her book Feeling and Form (1953),
Langer depicts music as the expression of a dynamic form of feelings. Structural
features of a given composition are inseparable from the expression intended by the
composer. “Because the forms of human feelings are much more congruent with
musical forms than with forms of language, music can reveal the nature of feelings
with a detail and truth that language cannot approach” (Langer, 1957, p. 235).
According to her, it is only through formal characteristics, such as “patterns of motion
and rest, of tension and release, of agreement and disagreement, preparation,
fulfillment, excitation, sudden change” (Langer, 1957, p. 228), “growth and
attenuation, flowing and stowing, conflict and resolution” (Langer, 1953, p.27), that
the meaning of various symbolic elements can be understood.
1.1.3.4 Similarity with human speech and behavior.
Kivy’s (1989) theory
claims that music can only evoke an emotion if the music is the cognitive
representation of the emotion itself.
He claims that to hear the music is to
anthropomorphize2 the music. The music must clearly represent an expressive
similarity found in human speech or gesture. Indeed, some teachers make their
students sing the musical passage or find natural places to breathe in order to help
them embody the expression (Leech-Wilkinson, in press). Some musical phrases,
rhythms, or melodies possess certain cultural conventions well established within the
Western musical language (Kivy, 1990). Some emotions, such as joy, can be
reproduced by music only because joy possesses a normative behavioral expression
that can be “mimicked” because of its energetic character. Other emotions, such as
2
Anthropomorphism is the ascription of human form and characteristics to anything other than a
human being.
12
nostalgia or pride, require more complex cognitive processes, which instrumental
music cannot fully reproduce.
Davies’s theory is very similar to Kivy’s in that they both agree that musical
expression is featured by its appearing similar to human speech or behavior (Davies,
1994). Nevertheless, Davies thinks that it is possible to communicate more complex
emotions through music if the music is thoroughly organized in such way that it
enables listeners to capture the complex emotional content and the traditions of the
musical practice and style.
1.1.3.5 Emotional communication. Cooke (1959) once wrote: “And those who
have found music expressive of anything at all (the majority of mankind) have found
it expressive of emotions” (p. 12). Emotional reactions are often controlled or
regulated with respect to motor expression and subjective feeling (Ekman, 1984;
Goffman, 1959, 1971; Hochschild, 1983; Scherer, 2000b).
1.1.3.6.1 Between performers’ intentions and listeners’ reception.
Music
researchers have attempted to interpret musical expression by observing how
emotions are represented in performance with, for example, tessitura, tempo, key, or
dynamics. The concept of emotional communication involves both performers’
specific emotional intentions and listeners’ recognition of a particular emotion (Juslin
& Persson, 2002). Emotions also derive from a short but very intense affective
reaction resulting from physiological arousal, subjective feeling, expression, or
action tendency; and they involve intentional objects (Juslin & Sloboda, 2010).
However, when one refers to the notion of expression, there is not necessarily a
connection between what the performer intends to express and what the listener
perceives or feels (Juslin & Timmers, 2010). Consequently, one truly essential aspect
of performing music is to be capable of projecting to others the intended musical
interpretation: “unless you think of what the music carries, you will not convey it to
the audience” (Menuhim, 1996, p. 406).
In-depth interviews conducted with performers and listeners reveal that the
majority of listeners experience and feel emotions while listening to music, though
13
this does not systematically happen (Gabrielsson, 2010; Juslin & Laukka, 2004;
Juslin, Liljeström, Västfjäll, Barradas & Silva, 2010). From hundreds of extensive
verbal reports obtained from listeners on their strongest and most profound musical
experiences, Gabrielsson (2001, 2010) concludes that music can express everyday
human emotions. Interestingly, Gabrielsson also notices that emotions of positive
valence, such as happiness, tenderness or nostalgia, are experienced more than
emotions of negative valence. It appears that the types of emotions music induces in
listeners have little to do with whether the emotions are basic or complex,3 but rather
with the reasons why one listens to music.
1.1.6.3.2 Origins of the Code.
To study the process of emotional
communication, it is important to consider the underlying mechanisms, particularly
the Code,4 used by performers and listeners. Most listeners and performers define
musical expression in terms of emotional communication (Laukka, 2004; Lindström
et al., 2003). When referring to emotional communication, a distinction between the
performer’s expressive intentions and the recognition of these same emotions by the
listener must be made. The Brunswikian lens model (Brunswik, 1956) illustrates how
musicians express (encode) their emotions through a range of musical cues (e.g.
variations in tempo, timbre, articulation) (Juslin & Persson, 2002) (see Figure 1).
3
Basic emotions (e.g, anger, joy, sadness, tenderness) differ from complex emotions in that they are
more easily transmitted to listeners because they are closely related to gestures as well as emotional
expressions found in the voice. These emotions are also found in all cultures and appear early in
people’s cognitive development (Sloboda & Juslin, 2010).
4
The acoustical means (e.g. tempo, articulation) used to express and decode the intended emotion.
14
Figure 1. Modified Brunswikian lens model of communication of emotion in musical
performance (adapted by Juslin in 2010). The achievement refers to the precision
with which the intended emotion is transmitted to listeners. The cue weights refer to
the consistence with which the performer and listeners respectively encode and
decode the acoustic cues. The performer encodes emotions through musical cues,
such as tempo variations, sound level, timbre, etc. Then, emotions are decoded by
listeners who are using the same musical cues to deduce the expression (Juslin &
Timmers, 2010) (Reprinted with permission from Oxford University Press).
The emotions are then recognized (decoded) by listeners who use these same
cues to infer the expression. A study directed by Gabrielsson and Juslin (1996)
demonstrates that performers use a great variety of cues to express their emotions.
For instance, a fast tempo, with nuances forte and jerky attacks, is often employed to
express anger; or conversely, a slow tempo, a low sound level, and a legato
articulation are often used to express sadness. Similarly, Thompson (2009) found
that to communicate joy, performers often employ a fast tempo, a bright timbre and
exaggerated rhythmic contrasts. The results from over a hundred studies have
demonstrated that listeners, whether or not they are musically trained, are able to
identify and feel different basic emotions, such as happiness, anger, sadness, fear and
tenderness while listening to professional performers (for a review, see Juslin &
Laukka, 2003). Possibly because musicians’ behaviors (e.g. the way they move, their
15
facial expressions) and certain musical characteristics recall human gestures and
vocal expressions, performers are able to communicate basic emotions to listeners
(Juslin & Laukka, 2003). Because the acoustic cues are partly redundant and
uniform, it is possible to convey an emotion with high precision. Nevertheless, the
variability among performers still leads to a certain degree of uncertainty. Since
emotional reactions to music are not directly related to survival, they are more
difficult to explain. If the emotional communication is not successful, however, it
may be due to the fact that performers and listeners use the cues differently or
inconsistently (Karlsson, 2008). Because performers are not required to use the
acoustic cues uniformly, they can convey the desired emotion to the audience without
necessarily compromising their creativity and personal expression. Regardless of the
instrument, the melody played, or the performer, Gabrielsson and Juslin (1996) notice
that, overall, performers successfully communicate emotions to listeners.
1.1.3.5 Expression as a multidimensional model. Expression and emotional
communication are complex concepts to define. According to Juslin (2003), music
psychology can help define how musical expression is actually conceived by
discerning the source of performers’ behavior. Juslin and Persson (2002) assemble
theories, rather than leaving them in a fragmented state, and suggest a model that
defines musical expression. Through a review of the literature, it is proposed that
performance expression is a multidimensional concept consisting of five components
known as the GERMS model:
1) Generative rules: the ability of a performer to convey, as distinctly as possible, his
or her understanding of a musical structure to listeners (Clarke, 1995). Modifications
in timing, dynamics, and articulation help performers clarify group boundaries
(Garbielsson, 1987), metrical accents (Sloboda, 1983), and harmonic structure
(Palmer, 1996);
2) Expression of emotion: performers manipulate a great many acoustic features (e.g.
tempo, articulation, dynamics) in order to convey intended emotions to listeners
(Juslin, 2000);
16
3) Random variability: human limitations and uncontrollable movements regarding
motor precision (Gilden, 2001). Although they may be imperceptible, musical
performances always involve random fluctuations;
4) Motion principles: musicians’ particular gestures, intentional or non-intentional,
in accordance to basic constraints of biological motions (Shove & Repp, 1995). For
instance, the final ritardandi of a piece used to produce an aesthetically pleasant finale
can be compared to runners’ deceleration movement (Friberg & Sundberg, 1999). In
addition, other movements can be employed non-deliberately, thus reflecting
anatomical constraints (e.g. Wanderley & Vines, 2006);
5) Stylistic unexpectedness: performers deliberately attempt to deviate from the
expected performance, for instance, by creating tension (Meyer, 1956).
All of these parameters appear simultaneously and interact with each other,
reflecting the psychophysical relationship between the acoustic characteristics of a
performance and its listeners’ perceptions.
17
Chapter 2: Instrumental Music Teaching
Teachers play a central role in the development of students’ own expression and
creativity. Moreover, informative feedback has been shown to be an essential
component of instrumental teaching in students’ decision-making process.
Therefore, this chapter will highlight: (a) the necessity for informative feedback in
teaching; (b) the various elements needed for efficient learning; (c) the methods,
interactions, and activities in instrumental lessons; (d) the traditional teaching
strategies; (e) the way musical expression is currently taught in instrumental lessons.
2.1 Informative Feedback in Teaching
The term feedback can be describe as “the process by which an environment
returns to individuals a portion of the information in their response output necessary
to compare their present strategy with a representation of an ideal strategy” (Balzer,
Doherty & O’Connor, 1989, p. 412). Ericsson, Krampe and Tesch-Römer (1993)
suggest that three elements are required in a learning task for it to qualify as deliberate
practice and efficient learning: (a) a well-defined task, (b) informative feedback, and
(c) opportunities for repetition and correction of errors.
It appears that traditional teaching strategies of expression (i.e. metaphors and
imagery, modeling, focus on felt emotions, verbal instructions) that teachers employ
with their students do not provide adequate cognitive feedback.5 It is difficult for
humans to deduce the relationships between the performer’s expressive intentions
regarding the use of acoustic features and the listeners’ perception of the performer’s
intention. Often, teachers do not allow students to compare directly their playing
with an optimal performance (e.g. Balzer, Doherty & O’Connor, 1989; Juslin,
Friberg, Schoonderwaldt, & Karlsson, 2004; Persson, 1996; Sloboda, 1996).
According to Juslin and Persson (2002), teachers would profit from the inclusion of
5
The term cognitive feedback was first introduced by Hammond in 1971 in studies of human
judgment and decision making. Cognitive feedback also means that the performer is able to
compare his or her musical performance to an “optimal” way of playing (Juslin, 1998).
18
a pedagogical model that would help students establish better communication
between them and listeners. In addition, Hallam (1998) states that students need more
than simple exclamations concerning their performance, such as “this is good or bad”,
and require detailed informative feedback. Tait (1992) also indicates that “teaching
strategies need to become more specific in terms of tasks and feedback” (p. 532).
If music teachers encounter difficulties while attempting to provide sufficient
information or feedback to students concerning expressive skills, this is mostly due
to the fact that music education has suffered from a lack of explicit theories that could
guide the teaching of expression and emotional communication (Karlsson, 2008). As
emphasized by Tait (1992), teaching of expression could benefit from the inclusion
of more explicit goals, systematic teaching patterns, and specific feedback.
Integrating technology in the teaching of musical expression could help teachers and
students focus and work on more specific aspects as technology, which often uses
statistical methods, may provide a different cognitive feedback that the one usually
provided by teachers.
2.2 Learning as a Dynamic Process
Can we and should we teach music student-performers to hear, interpret, and
create musical expressions? What is idiosyncratic about a particular composition and
how our musical experiences affect our analysis of the expressive content? During
the nineteenth century, a trend emerged with the increasing amount of solo repertoire
to move toward a more historically and stylistically informed vision of performance.
This influence has probably contributed to less creative freedom in regard to the score
(Ritterman, 2002). Although it is vital for students to rely on style analysis in order
to enhance their perception of a composer’s richness of imagination (LaRue, 2011),
instrumental teachers need to help their students use strategies that involve creative
and critical thinking in order to help them make their own musical choices (Davidson
& Lehman, 2002; Hallam, 1998; Hepler, 1986; Juslin & Persson, 2002; Kennell,
1997; McPhee, 2011; Ritterman, 2002). According to Ritterman (2002), instrumental
teachers need to help their students progressively engage their personality in the
musical piece and remain as true to themselves as to the piece they are performing.
19
The composer’s ideas must be supplemented by students’ stylistic integrity and
personal experiences.
Instrumental teaching should progress toward a pedagogy in which teachers
encourage their students to participate actively by sharing personal experiences and
musical thoughts (Reid, 1999), asking questions, playing, taking risks, being
imaginative, and making connections (Burnard, Craft, Cremin, Duffy, Hanson,
Keene, Haynes & Burns, 2006; Craft, 2000). “If researchers can ask their subjects to
think aloud in order to find out what cognitive processes play a role during
performance, why should teachers not use similar strategies to get into their students’
head” (Davidson, 2002, p. 250). One of the most important objectives in music
training is to be able to conceptualize and apply what one learns and hears as a student
(Rogers, 2004). Nevertheless, little is known about the different types of interactions
occurring in instrumental teaching, and how these interactions between teachers and
students embody students’ opportunities to learn (Hallam, 1998; McPherson, 1993;
Rostvall & West, 2003; Rostvall & West, 2005; West & Rostvall, 2003). Research
suggests that the teaching of musical expression lacks specific strategies that help
students create their own expressive interpretation (Reid, 2001).
For learning to occur, students need to be actively involved in the instrumental
lesson. Rostvall and West (2005) define learning as: “[…] a dynamic process of
transformative sign making that actively involves both teacher and student” (p. 89).
Moreover, the brain learns best if it actively participates in exploring and
experimenting with musical features and gestures (Gruhn, 1997; Swanwick, 1999).
Musical properties should be connected to a specific kind of thinking that assigns
musical meaning to musical sound. Learning results have been shown in the coactivation of visual, sensory-motor, and aural interpretations (Bangert, Parlitz &
Altenmüller, 1998). To facilitate learning that is more directed toward an intrapsychological (individual) approach than an inter-psychological (social) one,
teachers should be sensitive toward the feelings of students (Burwell, 2012).
Students who are able to see relations between elements of their
understanding in a subject and are aware of how that
understanding and those relationships can be applied in new and
20
abstract contexts have a higher quality learning outcome than
students who cannot. (Prosser & Trigwell, 1999, p. 4)
Finally, research in higher music education suggests that the way students learn
within instrumental lessons is related to their conceptualization of the learning
contexts and their understanding of the teaching environments (Reid, 2001).
2.3 Methods, Interactions, and Activities in Instrumental Lessons
One major problem that researchers commonly face while studying instrumental
lessons is to capture and organize the dense flow of information in a consistent and
systematic way (Rostvall & West, 2005). Actually, there is no well-established way
to handle this information. However, a few studies have suggested methods and
procedures that aim at analyzing the interactions between teachers and students (e.g.
Rostvall and West, 2001, 2003, 2005; Young, et al., 2003). It is essential, when
studying the information that arises from these observations to (a) be aware of the
methods that were elaborated to analyze instrumental lessons, (b) understand how
teachers and students interact together, and (c) have a clear representation of the
various types of activities, such as improvisation, technique, playing by ear, or
expression, that may occur within instrumental lessons.
2.3.1 Challenges in the analysis of instrumental studio lessons. Young,
Burwell and Pickup (2003) developed a reflective approach to teaching and learning.
They examined what were teachers’ and students’ perceptions about the various areas
of study and their preferred strategies. Two approaches, first discussed in Hultberg
(2000), were considered: (a) instrumental-technical approach (teacher-oriented), and
(b) practical-empirical approach (student-oriented). The teacher-oriented approach
is similar to the “master-apprentice” view discussed by Persson (1993), which gives
a dominant role to the teacher who represents the knowledge transmitted to the
student.
Reid’s (2001) study considers that there are five levels of learning within
instrumental lessons: (a) the “Instrument category”, in which students “focus their
attention on the technical aspects [...] and learn by copying their teacher” (p. 28); (b)
21
the “Elements category”, which involves notational musical elements; (c) the
“Musical meaning category”, which focuses on the meaning arising from the music
and is characterized by the student’s reflecting on their teacher’s advice; (d) the
“Communicating category”, whereby the meaning of the performance is
communicated to the audience; and finally, (e) the “Express meaning category”, in
which students add their musical ideas and express them to an audience.
Three studies conducted by Rostvall and West (2001, 2003) and West (2007)
sought to improve knowledge regarding different patterns of interaction and
dynamics during instrumental lessons. The central purpose of their analysis consisted
in investigating the forms of knowledge occurring in the interaction process as
regards the type of language, music, and gesture employed to illustrate this
knowledge. They observed the effects of these patterns on students' learning process
and the development of their musical skills. These observations were obtained by
using a pre-determined codebook, a standard means to analyze verbal exchanges
between teachers and students. This codebook is divided into five educational
categories that occur in instrumental teaching (i.e. testing, instructional, analytical,
accompanying, expressive).
Karlsson and Juslin’s (2008) study investigates the nature of teaching patterns
used in instrumental music to teach expression and emotions and also explores the
interactions in teaching and learning settings. Their study considers only verbal
communication and does not examine the role of music and gesture in the learning
process of the different communicative modes.
The different modes of
communication that teachers employ may have consequences on students’ learning
(Rostvall & West, 2005). By analyzing the various modes of communication, such
as gesture, music, and language, it is possible to verify whether the message conveyed
by the teacher contains inconsistencies, and whether these inconsistencies are due to
contradictions between the different modes.
According to Rostvall and West (2005), previous studies conducted on musical
expression present gaps between the method of analysis used and the interpretation
of the data. It is important not to isolate utterances made by teachers and students
from their original context so as not to create false impressions. Finally, it is
22
especially important to make the process of analysis and categorization as clear and
systematic as possible to enable further replications of the study.
2.3.2 Interactions. Young et al. (2003) found that lessons were generally
dominated by talk, mostly by the teacher, as also discovered by Karlsson and Juslin
(2008), Kostka (1984), Persson (1993), Sang (1987), and Tait (1992). Strategies
dealing with interpretational aspects were rarely reported.
Questions asked to
students were hardly addressed or were considered as being more instructive than
student-oriented and open-ended. To include open-ended questions in instrumental
lessons could leave a place for students' interpretation and creativity and also engage
them in making meaningful musical decisions (Young et al. 2003). Moreover, doing
so could encourage students to develop a deeper sense of responsibility as regards the
musical consequences of their decisions. This sense of responsibility could also
motivate them to enhance their personal expression (Young et al., 2003). Other
studies using verbal transcripts also demonstrate that lessons, rarely pre-planned, are
hardly guided by explicit goals, tasks, or systematic patterns of teaching (Karlsson &
Juslin, 2008; Laukka, 2007).
Gaunt (2008) reports that although most teachers encourage their students to
acquire autonomy, confidence, and responsibility, it is not obvious whether students
should achieve this self-confidence on their own or within lessons. Many studies
have also noted that only a limited number of teachers use feedback as a basis for
their teaching (Goolsby, 1997; Speer, 1994; Yarbrough & Price, 1989).
2.3.3 Activities. Interestingly, Rostvall and West (2001) found that no utterance
made in the instrumental lessons observed in their study addressed expressive issues.
Teachers mainly refer to the printed score, as if it reveals in itself every aspect of
music performance, rather than privileging listening and playing by ear or from
memory. Basing their conclusions on earlier research (e.g. Kostka, 1984; Tait, 1992;
McPherson, 1993; Persson, 1993; Hallam, 1997a), Rostvall and West (2001) observe
that students would truly benefit from learning through improvisation and playing by
23
ear. Moreover, during lessons, speech mainly consists in short utterances and is
primarily characterized by giving instructions.
Altenmüller and Gruhn (2002) found that in instrumental teaching, the central
focus is mainly on the development of motor skills, more precisely on the automation
of patterns of movement.
Gaunt (2008) provides a review of 20 vocal and
instrumental teachers in one-to-one studio lessons and studies the aims, methods, and
contexts of these lessons.
She reports that teachers' lessons’ structure and
organization remain the same for every student, although there are divergences across
teachers in regards to the emphasis given to particular aspects. For instance, some of
them focus more on technical aspects than on musical ones. Others prefer to address
musical and expressive issues at the beginning of the lesson and then move on to
technique.
2.4 Traditional Teaching Strategies
Musical expression is a subject hard to define (Juslin & Persson, 2002).
Expressive skills in instrumental music reflect performers’ personal emotional
sensitivity. However, this subjective dimension does not imply that expression
cannot be learned. A first attempt to validate whether musical expression could be
learned or taught was made in 1975 by Marchand. This study not only revealed that
it was indeed the case, but also showed that there are several ways to teach the same
elements within a performance. Several subsequent studies reported that expression
can indeed be enhanced with training and with teaching (Johnson, 1998; Juslin &
Laukka, 2000; Sloboda, Minassian & Gayford, 2003; Woody, 1999).
In music teaching, most of the instructors use different strategies (i.e. verbal and
modeling strategies) in their lessons.
Many researchers have examined the
importance of varying teaching approaches in order to teach how to communicate as
accurately as possible emotion in performance (Ebie, 2004). Inconsistencies in the
manner teachers communicate musical expression might restrain students’
opportunities to learn. By not addressing directly issues with students, by assuming
that they will resolve problems intuitively, or by interrupting them without giving
adequate verbal informative feedback, teachers may affect students’ comprehension
24
of the music discussed (Rostvall & West, 2005). For instance, imprecise use of
speech or an instruction that divides a student’s concentration between too many
different tasks will not foster the student’s learning process. In fact, the previous
studies noted above show that teachers do use methods and strategies to teach
expression to students: metaphors and imagery, aural modeling, focus on felt
emotion, and verbal instruction.
2.4.1 Metaphors and imagery. A very common strategy involves the use of
metaphors and imagery. Metaphors can be used to emphasize the emotional qualities
arising from a musical performance, by evoking a specific mood or an emotional state
of mind in the performer (Barten, 1998; Davidson & Scripp, 1992). According to
Barten (1998), figurative language and heuristic imagery are something very valuable
in conveying musical expressive properties. Woody (2010) studies both the imagery
and metaphor conditions that teachers often use to capture the emotional peculiarities
of music. Metaphors also have a rhetorical function, as teachers try to influence or
nourish students’ imagination and ideas by capturing their attention with strong
images.
Although the use of metaphors has been shown to be an effective strategy to
develop students’ awareness of the acoustic cues needed to modify their performance
(Arrais & Rodriguez, 2007, 2009; Barten, 1998; Kohut, 1985), it also manifests some
weaknesses. The language used by teachers is often ambiguous for students, mostly
for children, because it is often related to teachers’ personal experiences that are not
necessarily shared by their students.
Therefore, students can become easily
discouraged and confused.
2.4.2 Aural Modeling. Aural modeling, often used in music performance for
teaching expression, helps students reproduce, as accurately as possible, a predetermined model (Ebie, 2004). The teacher performs in a desired way, and the
student is required to imitate this model (Dickey, 1992). Sang (1987) defines aural
modeling as the
25
[…] ability to demonstrate basic musical performance
behaviors on the instrument(s) he/she is teaching, such as
tone quality or articulation, […] the demonstration of the
more subtle aspects of musical performance such as
phrasing or vibrato, [and the] ability to demonstrate a
variety of musically-related performance behaviors such as
posture, playing position, or embouchure. (p. 156)
It is also reported that actions are found to be more effective than verbal
instruction in the music lesson (Davidson, 1997; Woody, 1999b). Indeed, the ability
to reproduce expression derived from a musical model is a prerequisite to incorporate
the original version inside one’s own interpretation (Woody, 1999b). Woody also
specifies that when a student is not able to identify a model’s expressive
characteristics, the teacher should perform it again by exaggerating and intensifying
the expressive traits of his performance.
Rosenthal, Wilson, Evans and Greenwalt (1988) claim that aural modeling is,
among other strategies such as singing, practicing on the instrument, and analyzing
the piece silently, the more efficient practice technique regarding rhythmic,
dynamics, and tempo accuracy. Dickey (1992) also suggests that modeling is a more
effective strategy than verbal description for teaching musical performance. In his
study, the students appeared to prefer explanations that imply more musical than
verbal content. However, modeling should be used in a way suitable to students. For
instance, if the teacher wants his or her student to revise one particular musical feature
of a piece, he will emphasize this element while also properly modeling other musical
parameters. For some students, however, it might be difficult to understand what to
listen to, what skills to use to reproduce the model, and, more importantly, how to
apply these skills to different situations.
Woody’s results (2000) reveal that students who benefit from instruction based
on the repetition of a pre-heard model rather than verbal instruction pay much more
attention to their emotions when practicing their instrument. According to Sloboda
(1996), this could be due to the fact that students will memorize a greater amount of
information when using a teaching model involving little verbal intervention.
Another, similar study conducted on musicians’ perception of expression (Woody,
2002) determined whether this perception was related to pre-determined expectations
26
of a piece of music. The ability of the subjects to identify expressive characteristics
was connected to their general expectations from the specific context of a piece. The
pre-heard model helps students understand the general idea and structure of a piece.
Therefore, when the teacher only wants to bring small changes to the expressive
performance, the modeling approach could be supplemented with verbal instructions.
Verbal instructions can help students adjust their performance regarding the smaller
details.
2.4.3 Focus on felt emotions. An interesting and effective way for teachers to
help students to connect particular musical properties to the emotion or mood felt is
to refer to the Hevner’s (1936) adjective circle (see Figure 2).
Figure 2. Hevner’s (1936) adjective circle of 67 words arranged in eight clusters
describing a variety of moods.
Hevner was one of the first psychologists to study expression in music. She
composed a list of adjectives used to obtain mood evaluations. Music teachers may
27
use the mood wheel with students of any level to relate the prevalent mood or emotion
to a musical theme or musical passage.
The results obtained in a study conducted by Sheldon (2004) reflect the
conclusions drawn by Gabrielsson and Juslin (1996) concerning the fact that
performers are skilled enough to deliberately communicate emotions to listeners.
However, some expressions are easier to convey than others. To focus on studentperformers’ felt emotions provides no assurance that the emotions will be
successfully communicated to listeners. Sloboda (1996) observes that students rarely
control the expressive outcomes of their own performance or rarely anticipate how
the resulting emotion will be perceived by listeners.
A study conducted by Ebie (2004) sought to determine whether there were
significant differences between male and female middle-school voice students’
abilities to transmit appropriately diverse emotions such as joy, sadness, anger or fear,
under four treatments. It appears that male and female students were equally capable
of communicating all these emotions, although boys communicated fear in a more
convincing manner.
2.4.4 Verbal instructions. Most of the time, teachers address expressive issues
that are directly aligned to acoustic features (Woody, 1999, 2006, 2010). However,
teachers often have difficulty in verbalizing explicitly their musical knowledge
(Lindström et al., 2003). It seems particularly difficult for teachers to transmit their
knowledge in an intelligible way to students. A fundamental element present in
verbal instruction is feedback (Price, 1983, 1992; Yarbrough & Hendel, 1993;
Yarbrough & Price, 1989, Yarbrough, Price & Mendel, 1994). However, when
feedback from the teacher is not accompanied with specific explanations or
questioning, the feedback may be quite poor in enhancing the intended learning
(Langer, 1983). Teachers may not always have explicit knowledge about expression
and other related concepts (e.g. emotional communication), which can affect their
feedback. Specific and instructive feedback occurs when teachers explain clearly
why the student did or did not achieve the desired performance by addressing the
specific performance aspects (e.g. rhythm, articulation, phrasing, intonation) that
28
could be improved (Goolsby, 1997). Interestingly, Goolsby (1997) found that more
experienced teachers tend to place more emphasis on expression than novice teachers,
and that they also use more specific positive feedback.
Moreover, an increasing number of teachers prefer to verbalize their expressive
ideas and musical performance behaviors to students rather than demonstrate the
desired performance (Sang, 1987). According to Sang (1987), this phenomenon
could be due to the fact that teachers themselves are unprepared to present an
adequate performance to students. Woody (1999b) evaluated 24 pianists at university
level who were asked to verbalize their thoughts after hearing a musical fragment.
He tried to establish whether the changes in dynamic and intensity of an expressive
performance were due to the explicit identification of the characteristics related to the
dynamic. Pianists who had consciously identified the variations of dynamic in their
performance played in a more expressive manner. They identified more accurately
the idiomatic characteristics of the music, and listeners perceived the same
characteristics more easily.
Studies have demonstrated that teachers use various and creative strategies to
teach expression.
However, there are still insufficient data to draw definitive
conclusions about the efficiency of these strategies.
2.5 How Is Musical Expression Taught in Instrumental Lessons?
It could be difficult to obtain insights from music teachers because they may be
insecure about discussing their own experiences and practice (Lindström et al., 2003).
They may also be reluctant to be scrutinized by an observer. Teachers’ understanding
and perception of musical expression might affect how they teach it. For instance, if
expression is viewed as a learnable skill, teachers will use specific strategies for the
purpose of developing students’ own expression.
However, much knowledge
regarding expression is implicit, and it is therefore difficult for the teacher to give
clear guidance to the student (Hoffren, 1964). According to Juslin and Persson
(2002), researchers have not yet been able to provide relevant theories promoting the
development of efficient strategies for teaching expression. This is due mostly to the
fact that many method books for music instrumental teaching do not mention
29
expression at all (Rostvall & West, 2001). The studies discussed in this section
provide an important overview of how teachers and students appraise musical
expression and emotional communication, as well as what types of strategies are
more commonly used to teach expression.
2.5.1 Teachers’ and students’ conceptualization of expression. Inquiries on
music teachers’ conceptions about musicality help describe how teachers assess
expression and how they teach it to their students. Despite the fact that teachers and
students consider expression as one of the most crucial aspects of a performer’s skills
(Laukka, 2004; Linström et al., 2003), it is still often seen as a notion that cannot be
taught, one that is more instinctive (Boyd & George-Warren, 1992; Hepler, 1986;
Persson, 1993; Tait, 1992; Young, Burwell & Pickup, 2003). Indeed, instrumental
music teachers focus their attention more on technical and sight-reading skills than
on expressive skills (Persson, 1993; Rostvall & West, 2001; Tait, 1992; Young et al.,
2003).
Several studies reveal music teachers’ and students’ conceptions about musical
expression and emotional communication.
For instance, with a questionnaire,
Laukka (2007) assessed how 51 teachers at music conservatories conceptualized
musical expression. First, expression was considered as an essential aspect of
instrumental music. Interestingly, the teachers considered that they devoted the
majority of their time to teaching expressive skills. It is important to note that,
although musical expression is usually depicted in terms of a multidimensional
concept (Juslin & Persson, 2002), the teachers in Laukka’s study defined expression
as predominantly the communication of emotions. It was also stressed that musical
expression and emotions should be introduced in instrumental music early on.
Brändström (1999) compared teachers’ conceptions of musicality in higher
education and in compulsory schools. In the first part of the study, three main
categories emerged from the interviews: (a) musical achievement, defined as the
capacity to produce something personal and unique from a given piece; (b) musical
experience, characterized by the experience and training that a musician gets in order
to appreciate and understand better music, and (c) musical communication, whereby
30
musicians express their musicality by conveying feelings to listeners. Moreover, two
different views resulted from the interviews: absolute and relativistic views. It
appears that teachers in higher music education adopt the absolute view, in which
musicality is viewed as an innate and genetic phenomenon that is unequally
distributed across musicians.
Woody (2000) explored the nature of the teaching and learning of expression in
music performance with a particular focus on musicians' beliefs about how they think
expression is learned and taught. He interviewed 46 undergraduate music majors
regarding the way they learned musical expression and how they continued to
develop it after several years of musical training. Most of the responders considered
expression as one of the most indispensable aspects of performance. Woody also
found that at an early stage in students’ musical studies, they mainly learned to be
expressive through variations of dynamics and articulations, while later they were
more concerned with the communicative aspect of expression and concentrated on
the feelings within themselves while performing. It appears that expression is
addressed more in private instrumental lessons than in group classes.
In order to understand the nature of musical expression in performance,
Lindström et al. (2003) questioned 135 music students. Expression was the most
highly ranked aspect of performance, while theoretical knowledge appeared to be less
present in the instrumental lessons. The students also claimed that they would
appreciate focusing more on expression than is normally the case with their teacher.
In addition, the results demonstrated that the proportion of time devoted to expression
is likely to increase with experience and musical skill. In other words, performers
must generally achieve a certain level of technical skill before specifically addressing
expressive skills. Contrary to previous research findings (Karlsson & Juslin, 2008;
Persson, 1993, 1996; Richter, 1976; Rostwall & West, 2001, 2003; Tait, 1992; West,
2007), Lindström et al. (2003) concluded that many teachers at music conservatories
spent a significant amount of time on teaching expressive skills, even though there
were many individual differences among the instrumental teachers.
31
2.5.2 Popularity of strategies. It appears that teachers rarely try to connect the
musical features present in a piece with students’ personal feelings (Juslin & Persson,
2002). Therefore, students need to express and describe their personal thoughts and
perceptions of musical events in their own words and, eventually, transmit these
musical ideas through the music.
Results from studies on efficacy of strategies used to teach expression vary
significantly. Karlsson and Juslin (2008) observed how expression was being taught
in a natural context by five music teachers. They sought to demonstrate which
traditional strategies were the most commonly used and to verify whether these
strategies provided any informative feedback to the students. The results showed that
the most frequently used feedback strategies were outcome feedback 6 and verbal
instruction, rather than metaphors or modeling. The strategy involving a particular
focus on felt emotions was not addressed at all in the study. In opposition, Woody
(2000) discovered that aural modeling is one of the strategies most frequently used
by teachers, as was also concluded by Laukka (2007), followed by the felt emotions
and metaphor strategies. According to Lindström et al.’s (2003) results, the use of
metaphors was the most popular strategy used by teachers for developing and
improving expression.
What is interesting to note is that these observations
sometimes contradict teachers’ perceptions of their own teaching. For instance,
Laukka’s results revealed that the majority of the interviewed teachers said they
preferred to teach musical expression by using verbal methods (e.g. metaphors,
imagery), even though the observation of lessons demonstrated that they actually
used aural modeling the most.
Furthermore, Woody (2000) observed that students whose teachers frequently
addressed the expressive features of their performance reported spending
significantly more time on their own felt emotions during their individual practice.
They mentioned making extra musical analogies for the purpose of retrieving cues
expressed by their teachers (e.g. gestures, emotions, feelings). In the same study,
students who benefited from instruction based on the repetition of a pre-heard model
6
The teacher provides information to students about whether the musical performance is good or
bad, although no information or details are given regarding why and how such is the case.
32
rather than on verbal instruction give much more attention to their emotions when
practicing their instrument. Furthermore, Davidson (1989) argued that the use of the
aural modeling condition alone would be insufficient to teach expression in music.
Indeed, the combination of modeling and metaphor helps students acquire a
multidimensional understanding of music.
In opposition, Siebenaler (1997)
concluded that the quality and efficiency of a lesson, as well as students’
achievement, were not related to a high percentage of student performance. It was
rather associated with teachers’ ability to quickly and briefly react to various
situations and issues in the lesson. A passive behavior, characterized by the repetition
of inefficient strategies to cope with students’ difficulties, was indicator of students’
unsuccessful performance.
According to Woody (2006), it seems that certain techniques are more effective
depending on students’ specific needs. Woody compares the efficiency of three
different pedagogical approaches among graduate and non-graduate musicians, such
as aural modeling, verbal instruction (addressing concrete musical properties like
tempo), and motor-affective language. It appears that when a teacher has a specific
sound in mind, aural modeling is the best strategy, whereas when the aim is to add
life to a performance, metaphor is more appropriate. Despite the fact that some
researchers claim that certain strategies aiming at improving students’ expression in
instrumental music are more effective than others, Woody (2006) attests that the
strategies are equally efficient, and that students are able to adapt to different methods
of teaching musical expression.
33
Chapter 3: Integration of Technology in the Teaching of
Musical Expression
In order to address some of the present challenges that instrumental teaching is
facing in regards of explicit goals and systematic feedback, and to help musicians
improve, for instance, their gestural expression and emotional communication, new
technological applications have been created.
Some of these technologies are
discussed in this chapter, such as real-time feedback applications. There also exist
computer-based devices that offer real-time control of acoustic musical parameters,
which have been investigated by researchers, such as the robot interface Barrett
WAM (Zappi, Pistillo, Calinon, Brogni, Caldwell; 2011), which recreates gesture
interactions used with traditional instruments. However, gestural controllers are
beyond the scope of this research. The last technology discussed (i.e. the Feel-ME
software) is the most closely related to this research as it was created purposely to
enhance performer’s emotional communication with specific feedback on their use
of acoustic cues. This chapter will present: (a) technology in instrumental teaching,
and (b) the attitudes toward technology in teaching musical expression.
3.1 Technology in Instrumental Teaching
Given the apparent challenges that the actual teaching of expression is facing,
there is a need to develop new applications that could improve the learning of
expression and provide a more systematic kind of feedback to students (e.g. Juslin &
Persson, 2002; Tait, 1992). Technology may potentially offer some solutions to help
instrumental teaching evolve toward a more dynamic pedagogy, in which students
are challenged and can experiment with different expressive interpretations. That
being said, the music technology area is so vast, diversified, and is evolving at such
a staggering speed that there is no consensus on how technology should be used in
instrumental teaching.
What is needed is a scientific investigation project and a musicspecific technology assessment of the degree of change caused
34
by computer technology in all forms of musical production,
behavior, and views about music and music production.
(Enders, 2000, p. 235)
Research on music technology faces problems related mostly to this changing nature
of technology, but also to the lack of consideration for individual differences in
students (Higgins, 1992).
Technology could potentially be developed into
applications better adapted to actual needs and could, therefore, provide more
effective strategies for teachers and students. In this section, we present examples of
real-time feedback technologies and more specifically the theoretical basis,
underlying mechanisms and benefits of the Feel-ME software.
3.1.1 Real-time feedback. Several technologies use cognitive feedback in order
to help performers compare their performance with an optimal way of playing (Juslin,
1998). There exist different types of cognitive feedback, such as auditory, visual,
tactic, or kinesthetic feedback (Gabrielsson, 2003; Welch, 1985). For instance, the
use of visual feedback technology in the singing studio (e.g. VOXed or WinSINGAD
software) can enhance the communication between a teacher’s intention and the
student’s personal understanding of the music (Welch, 1985). The visual feedback
system provides an opportunity for teachers to discuss further their students’
performance, for it offers play back of the music performed (Hoppe, Sadakata &
Desain, 2006).
3.1.2 Feel-ME software. More directly related to the present research, Juslin,
Schoonderwaldt and Friberg (2004) have developed the software Feedback-Learning
of Musical Expressivity (Feel-ME), which provides instructions to musicians about
emotional communication. It allows performers to better understand the relations
between their intentions and listeners’ perceptions. The Feel-ME software includes
a reference model that has been built from the perceptions of how listeners typically
perceive the emotions of a musical performance. It was designed to help performers
enhance their emotional communication by experimenting with different possible
interpretations and by verifying how the listener would tend to perceive the resulting
35
expression. A study done with semi-professional guitarists has shown that the FeelME software enhances the musician’s efficiency regarding his or her emotional
communication (Juslin et al., 2004; Juslin et al., 2006; Karlsson, 2008). It also has
been demonstrated that the Feel-ME software may even be more efficient than a
teacher when it comes to the improvement of emotional expression (Juslin et al.,
2006). As previously mentioned, teachers tend to use vague and instinctive
explanations when it comes to the teaching of musical expression (e.g. Karlsson &
Juslin, 2008). Although the efficacy of the software was empirically confirmed in
several studies, results need to be verified with other performers, instruments,
melodies, and teaching contexts (Juslin et al., 2006).
3.1.2.1 Practical handlings.
The recently developed software Feedback-
Learning of Musical Expressivity (Feel-ME) was designed so that it would be easy
to use even for student-performers not very experienced with technology, with an
interface that reproduces the information contained in the Brunswikian lens model
(see Figure 3).
The achievement is associated with the precision with which
performers communicate an emotion to listeners. A high success rate for a specific
emotion, such as sadness, means that there is a correlation between the intention of
the interpreter to communicate sadness and the perception of that emotion by the
listener. When there is a poor matching between the performer’s emotional intention
and the listener’s perception, the software verbally suggests specific changes in the
use of acoustic cues (e.g. more staccato articulation).
36
Figure 3. The Feel-ME interface. The interface suggests informative feedback to
users regarding the intended emotion (i.e. sadness) (Juslin et al., 2004). The
achievement refers to the precision with which the emotion is transmitted to listeners.
The consistency refers to the consistence with which the performer and listeners
respectively encode and decode the acoustic cues (Reprinted with permission from
Oxford University Press).
As described below, the software works in three phases of interactions: (a) the
performer records various performances of the same musical passage with different
emotional intentions which are compared to a reference model based on listeners’
perceptions; (b) the software returns cognitive feedback to the performer in order for
him or her to enhance his or her performance; and (c) the process of recording the
performances is then reiterated.
a) In the first phase, the performer is instructed to record several different
performances of the same melodic fragment while he or she is asked to convey
various emotions (e.g. anger, happiness) selected at the beginning. The various
performances are stored in the computer’s memory and acoustic cues (e.g. tempo,
articulation, sound level) are analyzed by the software. Statistical analysis generates
indices of consistency and relationships between the performer’s expressive
37
intentions and the acoustic cues employed. The performances are then compared to
pre-stored data of listeners’ perceptions of emotions in music performance acquired
through numerous listening experiments.
b) The second phase provides immediate feedback to performers. It consists of visual
and numerical descriptions of the performer’s and listeners’ respective use of cues.
This makes it possible for performers to compare directly how their playing matches
listeners’ judgments. Based on the software suggestions (e.g. “use more legato
articulation to communicate sadness”), the performer may then try to modify his or
her performance.
c) In the last phase, performer is invited to redo the first task (i.e. record a number of
different music performances expressing specific emotions).
The recording of
acoustic cues and analysis are reiterated. The purpose of this final phase is to verify
whether performers have improved their emotional communication by changing their
use of acoustic cues.
3.1.2.2 Potential benefits for instrumental teaching.
Implementing such
software into instrumental teaching might equip students with precise informative
feedback as regards expression. It might also help them develop a more accurate
awareness of listeners’ perceptions when exposed to the emotions that emanate from
a musical performance. Performers might also develop an awareness of which cues
need continued attention and improvement. Another advantage of using this kind of
technology might be to enable student-performers to pursue their learning outside of
the instrumental lesson and repeat the feedback as many times as necessary according
to various goals. This software might also be considered as an effective complement
to music teaching. While humans are inventive and effective in interpreting more
ambiguous situations, technology is useful for providing precise and reliable
instructions.
38
3.2 Attitudes toward Technology in Teaching Musical Expression
Webster (2002) notes that technology has always played an important role in the
development of music and defines it as: “[...] inventions that help humans produce,
enhance, and better understand the art of sound organized to express feeling” (p. 416).
Although musicians seem generally positive about the use of technology in music
education and in musical performance (Webster, 2002), studies show that their
attitude tends to be more negative when technology is used for the learning of
expressive skills (e.g. Laukka, 2004; Lindström et al., 2003; Juslin, Karlsson,
Lindstöm, Friberg & Schoonderwaldt, 2006; Woody, 2000). It is important to note
that participants in these studies have never been informed of the theories underlying
the creation process of these technologies (i.e. relations between musical intentions,
acoustic cues, and listeners’ judgments). It is possible that the attitude of studentperformers would change if they became aware that the feedback, although coming
from a computer, actually reflects the human recognition of emotions (Juslin et al.,
2006; Karlsson, Liljeström & Juslin, 2009). The aim in using technologies in the
teaching of expression is not to impose a “standard” way of expressing emotions but
to offer tools to help users distinguish a connotative7 level of expression from a
personal one.
7
Professional musicians rely on a connotative expression level that provides them with references and
rules based on scientific research, but leaves room for creativity and personal expression in their
playing.
39
Chapter 4: Methodology
In order to understand the actual teaching of expression in instrumental lessons,
a starting point is to gather more information and details about how expression is
currently being taught at higher levels of education. The procedure will be presented
in two main sections: (a) the observation of instrumental lessons, and (b) the teachers’
and students’ perceptions concerning technology.
First the description of the
participants will be given, then the data acquisition procedure, and finally the analysis
of the data.
4.1 Participants
This research project consists of a series of case studies. For this purpose, 12
university undergraduate instrument students and their teachers (n=6) were recruited,
for a total of 12 different lessons. Teachers might have been observed for more than
one lesson, but not for more than three different students. Students were selected in
accordance with their age (i.e. more than 18 years old) and their academic level
(undergraduate). Each participant’s demographic characteristics (Tables 1 and 2)
were collected prior to the interviews in order to correlate the different background
variables (e.g. age, gender, instrument, playing experience, teaching experience,
educational level) to their perception of expression and their appraisal of the use of
technology in the teaching of emotional expression. Participants were recruited
among all instruments in order to expand the results to different instrument
categories, performers, and contexts of teaching. McGill University students and
teachers were contacted through email (friends, colleagues, and teachers) (see
Appendix A, p. 107). Before participating, teachers and their students signed the
Consent Form (see Appendix B, p. 110).
Once their participation was over,
participants were invited to give their names and email addresses to participate in a
draw for a $15 gift certificate from Archambault (5 prizes) that occurred at the end
of the study.
40
Table 1. Demographic data for teachers.
Teacher
A
B
C
D
E
F
Age
58
48
41
62
54
38
Gender
Instrument
taught
Instrument
played
Female
Female
Male
Piano
Percussion
Male
Organ and
harpsichord
Male
Flute
Male
Saxophone
and clarinet
Flute
Piano
Percussion
Saxophone
Organ
Violin
Style
C
C
C
C/jazz
C
C
Education
level
University
(undergraduate)
University
(graduate)
University
(graduate)
University
(graduate)
University
(graduate)
University
(graduate)
31 to 40
21 to 30
21 to 30
31 to 40
21 to 30
11 to 20
More than 60
0 to 15
More than
60
31 to 45
31 to 45
31 to 45
Years of
teaching
experience
Performances
per year
Violin
C= Classical
Table 2. Demographic data for students.
Student
Age
Gender
Instrumen
t
Style
Years of
musical
training
Hours per
week of
practice
A
21
F
B
18
F
C
19
M
C/
Rock
D
19
M
Alto
sax
Pop/
jazz
E
22
F
Alto
sax
C/jaz
z
Flute
Piano
Perc
C/jaz
z
C
11 to
15
21 to
30
F
19
F
G
19
M
H
21
M
I
19
M
J
20
F
K
20
F
L
19
M
Perc
Org
Org
Perc
Violin
Violin
Org
C
C
C
C/jaz
z
C
C
C
11 to
15
6 to
10
11 to
15
6 to
10
11 to
15
11 to
15
16 to
20
16 to
20
16 to
20
11 to
15
6 to
10
21 to
30
21 to
30
0 to
10
0 to
10
11 to
20
11 to
20
11 to
20
11 to
20
21 to
30
21 to
30
11 to
20
C= Classical; Perc= percussion; Org= organ
4.2 Procedure
This study proposes an analysis of teaching lessons using both qualitative and
quantitative methods.
Qualitative research involves a particular approach that
consists of a naturalistic view of phenomena in the form of the meanings people
attribute to them (Froehlich & Frierson-Campbell, 2012). In other words, since much
of the social interaction in instrumental lessons occurs in the form of conversation,
41
the contextual knowledge and subjective meanings must be taken into consideration
during data analysis. Quantitative research concerns differences and commonalities
(e.g. biological, physical, and/or socio-psychological characteristics) across a great
number of individuals (Froehlich & Frierson-Campbell, 2012). The purpose of
quantitative research is to test theories by means of reliable evidence. Evidence can
be presented in terms of the generalization of up-to-date findings as corroborated
facts. Examples of qualitative and quantitative data that were gathered in the present
study will be given in this section.
4.2.1 Observation of instrumental lessons. In order to study the nature of
social interactions in instrumental teaching, as ecologically as possible, teachers and
their students were not informed that the project was specifically focusing on the
teaching of expression. Observations took place during regular instrumental lessons,
as they naturally occurred. After the lesson, interview questions were asked to
participants. Instrumental lessons were observed and video recorded (camera Zoom
Q2HD Handy Video Recorder and audio recorder Sony 4GB digital voice recorder
with memory slot ICD-UX533F). The investigator was sitting at the back of the
room. Participants were informed that video and audio recordings would be used for
research purposes only.
4.2.1.1 Analysis of data. In order to systematically analyze the instrumental
lessons and the processes of teaching and learning, firstly, instrumental lessons were
transcribed; secondly, expressive message units defined according to the learning
outcome were identified; thirdly, within the expressive message units, types of
strategies were observed. Two modes of communication were observed: verbal and
modeling.
During the lessons, notes on the interaction patterns (e.g. particular gestures
made by teachers and students) occurring during the lessons were taken. Quantitative
data were extracted from the video recordings in order to describe the instrumental
lessons’ structural characteristics (e.g. activity time allocation, language usage,
teachers’ types of strategies, and feedback strategy frequency).
42
4.2.1.1.1 Defining message units. In the present study, most of the strategies that
we identified (i.e. outcome feedback, modeling, metaphors and imagery, focus on felt
emotions) lack informative feedback and do not require students’ involvement. In
order to understand better the efficiency of strategies used for the development of
expression, we selected an extract of a lesson that seemed to include both the
informative feedback and students’ engagement (see Appendix C, Example 1, p.
114). In this extract from lesson L, the teacher uses strategies that help the student
develop a personal reflection on the style and the structural features of the music. We
also identified the characteristics of this optimal teaching situation which eventually
led to the development of a concept map of the path for the development of expression
through teaching (see Figure 4, p. 44), which will also be further debated in the
Discussion section.
Expressive units were defined in accordance with the participation of students,
the strategies used to develop students’ self-expression, and the expressive outcomes
explicitly addressed. For instance, a teacher may ask his or her student specific
questions about what he or she desires to express through a piece, and how it might
be realized (Young et al., 2003). Then the teacher may propose a strategy to actively
involve the student (e.g. image, singing, experimenting with different possible
interpretations). For example, the strategy may facilitate the embodiment of
expression in relation to objective musical features present in the piece (Elliott, 1995).
Expressive outcomes were identified in accordance with theories on musical
expression found in the literature as well as with teachers’ and students’
conceptualization of expression.
Message units were also divided by “contextualized cues”, such as silent pauses,
prosody, gestures (Green, 1999; Green & Dixon, 1994; Green, Franquiz & Dixon,
1997).
Durations and frequencies of the different types of interaction were
calculated: musical activity for teachers and students, as well as teachers’ and
students’ respective talking. When the teacher’s feedback was related to what the
student had just played, the student’s playing was included within the same
expressive unit. When the teacher moved to another subject, the unit stopped before
43
the student played again. On some occasions, a unit may have been divided into two
or more sections, interspersed with issues that were not necessarily related to
expression. The unit was still considered as one as long as the learning outcome
remained the same. Although it was not the main subject of this research, teachers’
and students’ gestures were also qualitatively described for each expressive unit
message. This descriptive process helped us define the various types of interactions
between teachers and students that characterized the teaching of musical expression.
Figure 4. Path of musical expression development in instrumental teaching. The
level “Teacher intervention” was included in the performer’s expressive path in order
to demonstrate the central role of the teacher within instrumental lessons in the
development of students’ expressive intentions.
4.2.1.1.2 Time allocation to various modes of communication. Within expressive
message units, the time allocated to various activities (i.e. modeling and verbal modes
of communication: teacher playing and singing, teacher talking, student playing and
singing, and student talking) was measured in order to verify which type of traditional
teaching strategy is more commonly used by these teachers. This process also helped
44
in understanding how students respond and react to one particular type of teaching
and learning.
4.2.1.1.3 Strategies. In order to verify the popularity of traditional strategies
commonly discussed in the literature, the occurrence of each strategy was calculated
(i.e. question, outcome feedback, informative feedback, motor-affective language,
modeling, focus on felt emotions). This process helped in comparing strategies in
the verbal and modeling modes.
4.2.1.1.4 Modeling mode. Despite the fact that gestures are not the main subject
of this research, it is still important to discuss their influence on the learning of
musical expression, as teachers often physically demonstrate with gestures. Even if
the majority of time is devoted to verbal communication, its sole analysis is not
sufficient to fully represent the process and the didactic functions of various
activities. The time allocated to the verbal and modeling (singing and playing)
aspects was calculated within each expressive message unit in order to identify
whether expression is addressed more with speech or with gesture.
4.2.1.1.5 Verbal mode. Once all the expressive units had been identified, the
different patterns of interaction were analyzed on the basis of the five qualitative
educational functions of language (testing, instructional, analytical, accompanying,
expressive) as predetermined by Rostvall and West (2001, pp.81-82) in their study
on the interaction between teachers and students in instrumental lessons. However,
language usage was categorized slightly differently in the current study as is shown
below. The main difference between Rostvall and West’s study (2001) and the
present one is that this study classified analytical reasoning separately because it was
considered to be part of the instructional function. In the analysis of language, other
sub-categories emerged from the instructional function, such as suggestive,
informative, and evaluative. This subdivision helped to analyze more precisely the
nature of language used by teachers and students.
45
Qualitative educational functions of language categories used in the present study:
1) Testing: specific questions leading toward exploration and reasoning;
2) Instructional:
-Suggestive: language that seeks to explain or instruct how the performance
should be;
-Informative: language used to add informative content to the performance
(e.g. stylistic or historical reflections);
-Evaluative: language that evaluates the performance or encourages the
student’s progress;
-Analytical: a longer sequence of coherent reasoning in several steps that
serves to explain ‘cause-and-effect’ relationships (e.g. in order to play this
musical phrase, you need to use this type of fingering; otherwise, you will
not be able to change string and play the following phrase in time);
3) Accompanying: expression that guides the conversation by confirming or
invalidating what has been said, and that accompanies the student’s
performance (e.g. yes, no, I do not know);
4) Metaphorical: expressive statement that goes beyond the semantic content
of words, such as metaphors or images (e.g. “Hold the D a little more, and
now we will get the waterfall”).
Finally, to verify whether teachers refer to specific and explicit objectives to be
achieved in lessons, the transcripts were reviewed in order to identify whether
specific terms, such as expression, emotion, meaning or musicality, were used by the
teachers.
4.2.1.1.6 Interpretation. Finally, the video data were interpreted in the discussion
in order to evaluate the students’ learning process. Each message unit in which the
different modes (gesture, speech or/and music) interact was interpreted in order to
assess what strategy was more commonly used by the teachers and which mode
influenced the students’ possibilities to learn. Results were compared to different
46
approaches previously discussed in the literature, such as the “instrumental technical”
and “practical-empirical” approaches (Hultberg, 2000) or the “master-apprentice”
view (Persson, 1993), in order to evaluate whether the strategies used by teachers
promote a development that is based more on imitation or on creativity and
interactions.
4.2.2 Perceptions of expression and technology. Interview questionnaires,
featuring 23 items for teachers and 20 items for students, were developed in order to
assess how instrumental teachers and their students conceive expression and its
teaching, and how they would appraise novel teaching strategies and the use of
computers in teaching emotional expression. The questionnaire was a revised version
of the instrument used by Lindström et al. (2003). Teachers and students were
interviewed separately. The questionnaire, which included quantitative ratings and
open-ended items, was divided in three sections: (a) demographic data; (b) interview
questions about expression; and (c) interview questions on the perception of the
participants on the use of technology for teaching expression. Questionnaires for
both teachers and students are in Appendix D, p. 116.
Participants were interviewed in Dr. Cossette’s Music Performance and Body
Laboratory at McGill University after the observation of the lesson was conducted.
Then, they received information about the nature and underlying mechanisms of the
Feel-ME software (e.g. its theoretical basis, the technical principles underlying it, and
the practical handling to users) (See the text distributed to participants in Appendix
F, p. 135).
A debriefing session was done immediately after each subject’s
participation (see Appendix G, p. 138). Finally, for the purpose of assessing whether
or not teachers’ and students’ judgments and perceptions changed after receiving
information, the participants were asked another series of questions relating to the
software.
4.2.2.1 Analysis of data.
In order to evaluate how teachers and students
conceive expression, as well as their attitudes toward the use of technology (i.e. FeelME software) for the teaching of expression, the qualitative and quantitative data
47
were analyzed. The qualitative data included teachers’ and students’ definitions of
expression, their perception of the process of teaching and learning expression, and
their willingness to try novel strategies for teaching of expression. The quantitative
data included the change of perceptions regarding the Feel-ME software after
participants received information. The quantitative data were gathered by using a
Likert-type scale.
4.2.2.1.1 Categorizations. Four main themes included in the questionnaire: (a)
conceptualizing expression; (b) teaching expression; (c) learning expression; and (d)
new technological strategies. Categorizations of the participants’ responses were
created in accordance with these main themes. For instance, the category “personal
expression” was defined as “the experiences that one has made up to a specific time”
or the “involvement in the music”. The participants’ open-ended responses were
analyzed. The responses were then divided into post hoc categories that were
summarized and discussed qualitatively. Moreover, for other questions, participants’
responses were textually reported and the number of answers was calculated for each
participant. Interpretations were then made in regard to the importance given by the
participant to certain aspects of the answer.
4.2.2.1.2 Background variables. In order to examine whether their background
influenced the participants’ responses, qualitative correlations among each
participant’s demographic characteristics, his/her perception of expression, and
his/her appraisal of the use of technology in the teaching of expression, were
conducted in the discussion section. Relationships between the dependent variables
(participants’ answers) and the independent variables (background variables) were
qualitatively described to identify any correspondence between them.
48
On frémit quand on songe à ce
qu'il faut de recherches pour
arriver à la vérité sur le détail
le plus futile.8
8
Stendhal. (1829). Promenades dans Rome. Volume 1, p. 334. It is terrifying to think how much
research is needed to determine the truth of even the most unimportant fact. Translated by the author.
49
Chapter 5: Results
5.1 Observation of Instrumental Lessons
Two modes of communication were identified within the expressive message
units used by teachers and students during lessons: verbal and modeling. In the verbal
mode, teachers’ and students’ use of language is divided into four main educational
functions (testing, instructional, accompanying, and metaphorical), while in the
modeling mode, they mostly play, sing, or use gesture to mimic the desired sound.
First, time allocation to various activities will be discussed. Then, each mode of
communication (i.e. verbal and modeling) will be presented. Since gestures were not
the main subject in this research, but still important in the analysis of the different
interactions between teachers and students, their didactic functions are also
summarily described in this chapter. Finally, in order to compare the popularity of
each strategy, for the verbal and modeling modes, the occurrence of strategies used
by teachers was calculated (i.e. question, outcome feedback, informative feedback,
motor-affective language, modeling, focus on felt emotions).
5.1.1 Time allocation to various activities in every expressive unit within the
instrumental lessons. This section presents an overview of the structure of the
lesson provided by the measure of time allocated to various activities. Forty-two
message units, identified as units devoted to students’ expressive development,
correspond to 18% of the overall duration of the instrumental lessons (Table 3). The
mean duration of each unit was 3 minutes and 6 seconds. One lesson (D) did not
include any expressive message unit. The results highlight that, on average, 8.6% (5
min 7 sec) of the overall duration of instrumental lessons is spent by the teacher
talking about expressive issues, followed by the student’s modeling at 5.6% (3 min
19 sec), the teachers’ modeling at 2.2% (1 min 18 sec), and then the student’s talk at
1.7% (1 min 2 sec). Two lessons (B and L), given by different teachers, diverged in
that the overall time allocated to students’ playing was higher than the time allocated
to teacher’s talk. Although there are individual differences among teachers’ use of
50
various activities, there is an overall prevalence of teacher’s talk. Teachers with the
lower percentage devoted to students’ expressive development (i.e. teacher A: M=6%
for lesson A; teacher D: M=1.5% for lessons D and E), are the ones that have the
most years of teaching experiences (31 to 40 years).
Table 3. Measures of time allocation to various activities devoted to students’
expressive development within the instrumental lessons.
Lesson
Number of
expressive
units
Overall
duration of
instrumental
lessons
A
2
00:51:22
00:03:19
B
11
00:57:52
C
5
D
Overall duration of
units (%)
Mean per unit (SD) in
time
Teacher
talking
Teacher
modeling
Student
talking
Student
modeling
(6%)
00:00:48
(00:00:40)
00:01:31
00:00:22
00:00:07
00:01:11
00:22:06
(38%)
00:06:05
(00:04:51)
00:08:57
00:04:12
00:00:10
00:11:35
01:01:16
00:10:10
(17%)
00:02:40
(00:02:51)
00:06:47
00:01:03
00:00:30
00:02:20
0
01:04:03
00:00:00
(0%)
00:00:00
(00:00:00)
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
E
1
00:58:54
00:01:31
(3%)
00:00:20
(00:00:34)
00:01:11
00:00:00
00:00:10
00:00:00
F
3
00:57:56
00:04:57
(9%)
00:01:29
(00:01:26)
00:03:03
00:02:19
00:00:03
00:00:32
G
6
01:02:21
00:17:25
(28%)
00:03:48
(00:04:11)
00:08:39
00:00:12
00:05:54
00:00:25
H
1
01:00:38
00:08:44
(14%)
00:02:05
(00:02:29)
00:05:09
00:00:00
00:03:02
00:00:08
I
1
01:00:47
00:11:09
(18%)
00:02:46
(00:02:57)
00:04:45
00:00:22
00:00:06
00:05:50
J
4
01:01:02
00:15:39
(26%)
00:03:57
(00:03:20)
00:08:19
00:03:43
00:00:11
00:03:34
K
3
00:58:34
00:05:19
(9%)
00:01:28
(00:00:57)
00:02:06
00:01:53
00:00:03
00:01:50
L
5
00:55:40
00:27:08
(49%)
00:06:56
(00:05:54)
00:10:58
00:01:35
00:02:09
00:13:00
Mean
(SD)
4
(3.03)
00:59:12
(00:03:21)
00:10:45
(00:08:28)
18%
(15%)
00:03:06
(00 :02 :43)
00:05:07
(00:03:36)
00:01:18
(00:01:28)
00:01:02
(00:01:48)
00:03:19
(00:04:25)
Note. The total duration of the various activities may either be longer or shorter than
the real time duration of expressive units because activities may overlap or be
separated from other events. Teachers may, for instance, pause between their
explanations, sing during the student's performance or again play at the same time
they are talking.
5.1.2 Comparing strategies. In this section, the results highlight the frequency
of occurrence of the various strategies used by teacher (question, outcome feedback
[suggestive/evaluative], informative feedback [informative/analytical], motoraffective language, modeling, and focus on felt emotion) (Table 4).
51
Table 4. Mean of frequency usage of the different strategies used by each teacher
within all the expressive units.
Teachers
Question
Outcome
feedback
(sugg/eva)
Informative Metaphors
feedback
and
(info/ana)
imagery
Modeling
Focus on
felt
emotion
A
B
C
D
E
F
2
8
3
1
9
2
13
77
31
0
21
22
0
17
8
4
13
3
1
4
1
0
2
4
6
45
9
0
7
23
0
0
0
0
3
1
Total
25
164
45
12
90
4
Mean A-L (SD)
4 (3)
27 (26)
8 (6)
2 (2)
15 (17)
1 (1)
Sugg= suggestive; eva= evaluative; info= informative; ana= analytical
Teachers mainly use the outcome feedback strategy to teach expression (M=27),
followed by modeling (M=15), informative feedback (M=8), questioning (M=4),
metaphors and imagery (M=2) and finally focus on felt emotion (M=1) (for examples
of strategies see Table 5). Outcome feedback appears when teachers do not relate
specific expressive suggestions to objective musical features, as is demonstrated in
Example 2 of Appendix C, p. 114.
Informative feedback arises, most of the time, under the form of historical and
stylistic reflections, as is the case in lesson G (Appendix C, Example 3, p. 114), and
in the example ‘Informative feedback – Teacher E’ of Table 5.
extra techniques not reported in the literature.
Teachers also use
These techniques were not
quantitatively analyzed in this study but Table 5 provides examples of the various
strategies that seemed to best enhance students’ personal creativity and expression,
and also encourage them to actively participate in lesson: focus on felt emotions,
informative feedback, story, metaphor, experimenting with sound, questioning, and
internalizing the sound.
52
Table 5. Strategies to develop students’ personal expression.
Strategy
Focus on felt
emotions
Informative
feedback
Story
Metaphor
Experimenting
with sound
Questioning
Internalizing the
sound (singing,
breathing,
hearing)
Example
Teacher E: “All right. Good. So I think then you should try to emphasize what you are
describing so you said we have this little a bit more sad parts, make it even more sad.
The joyful bits, make it more joyful. So this meaning, sad parts, more connected, joyful,
less connected. So that you can work with different...”
Teacher C: “If you add a lot of energy in the physical playing there, you have to keep
doing it or doing something with it, because you cannot just add it and then do nothing
with it. You have to go all the way. Then you are quitting just the playing, the performing
aspect of it, also the visual aspect even more.”
Teacher E “And I think it’s interesting to put it in a context. Also look up neoclassicism.
This is neoclassical music: what is that? […] And perhaps also the question why is the
music the way it is? Within a sort of social context? [...] I think we need to be very aware
of the time where we are living and that’s why it’s important for you to put this music that
you are playing, that you are putting so much time with in a context. Not only in a context
back then, but in a context today.
Teacher E “I think every performance could tell stories, and if it’s a story that helps you
find your path through this, it’s wonderful. Because of course, perhaps it’s not possible to
communicate exactly that story but it sorts of getting a greater variety. At the very end,
when the spirit is sort of descending into heaven, you could take a little bit more time
before the low.”
Teacher F: “After a while, I feel as a listener I know what to expect from what is going to
happen next. I would like as a listener to be more surprised by things that I don’t expect,
which is the whole thing of stories. A story that you already know what is going to happen
next is not a story. [...] The two first movements actually, it’s about story telling. And so
the more interesting you can make that story, the happier will be the listeners.”
Teacher E: “Even though he notates dash dote on every note, I think you should make a
difference between (playing), like a sort of a stiff dance.”
Teacher F: “If you translate the instruction of the rallentando so it gets slower, you have
many different way, you can translate it in many different ways: you could make it the
hesitation, or you can try to withhold something, or you can create a moment of tension.
A sort of motivation for slowing down could be many different things. So, in this case you
know, if you play with hesitation, like you don’t want to go there, to me it’s not the same
as the teasing. The teasing is a little bit like come on come on.”
Teacher B: “What’s our personal score card? What you got, what you achieve? What do
you want to work on different, more?”
Teacher E “So what was the difference now from where you started to the playing
manner that you adopted later when I told you, when we discussed what was
happening?”
Teacher C: “Yeah but you still need to be able to really know where you are in the beat.
When you are doing it by yourself it’s one thing but when you are doing it with others that
is kind of tough [...] and that’s why it’s not bad to hide it somewhere even slightly in your
body. Even when you play in chamber music settings, you can amplify it for others in the
way you are. You have to use it a lot actually so that is why tapping is one thing, but if
you can transfer it to other parts of your body that’s good too. Ok so play it from the
beginning again slightly slower and just what we want to hear is (singing). No roar, no
whatsoever it should be (singing). Just imagine you are playing them.”
The following sections present a qualitative analysis of both teachers’ and students’
behavior, as well as an in-depth analysis of the semantic meaning of what teachers
and students said.
53
5.1.3 Modeling.
Even though speech seems predominant in the lessons
observed, gestures have an accompanying function which complements other actions,
such as talking. Most of the time, it appears that students do not execute particular
gestures other than playing. When teachers demonstrate how the performance should
be, students usually merely listen to them. Nevertheless, some of them imitate the
teacher by singing the discussed musical passage. Teachers’ gestures illustrate their
verbal explanations. For instance, specific gestures, such as moving arms and hands,
were used in order to demonstrate how the performance should sound. Other
examples include the use of onomatopoeia, counting, pointing at the score, foot and
hand tapping. Strategies common between the two modes will be discussed later with
respect to the learning outcomes.
5.1.4 Verbal. Teachers used the verbal mode (8.6%) more than modeling
(2.2%) (see Table 3).
Overall language use for teachers and students during
instrumental lessons is represented in Figure 5.
70
Frequency distribution (in %)
60
50
40
Teacher
30
Student
20
10
0
Testing
Instructional
Accompanying
Metaphorical
Educational functions
Figure 5. Frequency distribution of verbal language use (in %) for teachers and
students within expressive message units.
54
For the great majority of the instrumental lessons, the teachers talked more than
the students did. For the teachers, language use was predominantly instructional
(60%), while for the students it was both instructional (12%) and accompanying
(11%). The instructional function is divided into four sub-categories: suggestive,
informative, evaluative, and analytical. Figure 6 shows the overall distribution of
verbal language use within the instructional function for teachers and students.
50
45
Frequency distribution (in %)
40
35
30
25
Teacher
20
Student
15
10
5
0
Suggestive
Informative
Evaluative
Analytical
Instructional function sub-categories
Figure 6. Frequency distribution of verbal language use (in %) for teachers and
students within the instructional function.
Teachers mainly use the suggestive means (44%), while students’ use of the
instructional function is more equally divided between the suggestive (6%), the
informative (5%), and the evaluative means (4%), suggesting no clear pattern of
language use for the students. Analytical means are, however, clearly less often used
by students (1%) than by teachers (12%).
Table 6 shows the teachers’ and students’ statement occurrences associated with
each educational function within the expressive units of each lesson. Teachers use
the instructional function the most, and students use the accompanying one more than
55
the teachers do. Moreover, teachers are much more verbal than students in terms of
occurrences.
Table 6. Teachers and students’ occurrence of statements associated with educational
functions within the expressive units of instrumental lessons (A-L).
Lesson
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
Teachers
H
I
J
K
L
Md
Testing
2
8
8
0
1
0
12
8
2
1
2
6
2
Instructional
13
94
67
0
7
13
33
17
36
69
8
51
25
Suggestive
10
43
43
0
0
7
6
10
21
42
7
25
10
Informative
0
1
2
0
6
0
16
3
0
0
0
6
0,5
Evaluative
3
34
8
0
0
3
7
3
11
18
0
12
5
Analytical
0
16
14
0
1
3
4
1
4
9
1
8
3,5
Accompanying
0
0
4
0
0
0
12
2
0
9
2
8
1
Metaphorical
1
4
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
5
2
4
1
Students
Md
Testing
0
1
3
0
0
1
0
1
0
3
0
2
0,5
Instructional
0
2
6
0
3
0
27
13
1
7
3
19
3
Suggestive
0
1
2
0
3
0
9
1
0
3
1
10
1
Informative
0
0
1
0
0
0
13
8
0
1
0
3
0
Evaluative
0
0
3
0
0
0
2
3
1
3
0
6
0,5
Analytical
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
2
0
0
Accompanying
4
7
10
0
0
2
6
3
17
12
0
11
5
Metaphorical
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
Note. There is a significant variability between results obtained from the different
instrumental lessons. For instance, in the instructional function, results go from 0 to
94 statements for teachers and from 0 to 27 statements for students.
Md= Median
However, not all teachers use the same strategies. For instance, lesson G focuses
more on the testing function than do the other lessons. Students from lessons G, H,
and L, which are given by the same teacher, use the instructional function more than
56
students in other lessons (G: f= 27; H: f= 13; L: f= 19). The metaphorical function is
the least used function among teachers and students.
Although there are differences among teachers, there is not a large variability
between individual teachers (see Table 7). For every teacher, the instructional
function is largely prevalent.
Table 7. Teachers’ respective use of educational functions.
Teacher
Testing
Instructional
Accompanying
Metaphorical
A
2
13
0
1
B
8
94
0
4
C
3
39
1
1
D
1
4
0
0
E
9
34
7
2
F
2
39
6
4
Mean (SD)
4 (3)
37 (31)
2 (3)
2 (2)
Table 6 does not present the use of explicit language concerning musical expression,
which hardly appears in instrumental lessons: the words expression, musicality,
emotions, or meaning, were used only five times by teachers and students.
5.2 Perceptions of Musical Expression and Technology – Results of the
Interviews
The questionnaire, conducted after the lesson observations, was divided in three
sections: (a) demographic data; (b) interview questions about expression; (c)
interview questions on the perception of the participants on the use of technology for
teaching and learning expression. Demographic data are provided in Tables 1 and 2
(see Method section, p. 41). Results are provided here in four different sections: (a)
conceptualizing expression; (b) teaching expression; (c) learning expression; and (d)
new technological strategies. The questionnaire is provided in Appendix D, p. 116,
and the full answers to the questionnaire in Appendix E, p. 120-134. The questions
are stated here when appropriate.
57
5.2.1 Conceptualizing expression.
Q1. (Teachers and Students) Which
characteristics do you appreciate the most in musical artists? Five themes were
identified in the answers: (a) technique; (b) expression; (c) stage presence; (d)
uniqueness; and (e) storytelling. Table 8 shows the overall distribution of teachers’
and students’ responses (n=26) regarding the musical characteristic(s) they appreciate
the most in an artist. The majority of responses reveals that participants appreciate
an expressive and artistic performance more than a technical one, that is, one not
showing any signs of musicality (n=15). Two students and two teachers mention
technique as well as expression. Four students mention uniqueness, while two
teachers say that they like that a performance tells a story. One teacher mentions
stage presence. Note that many participants provide more than an answer.
58
Table 8. Frequency distribution of each teacher’s and student’s responses on their
preferred characteristics in musical artists.
Teacher
Technique
Expression
A
B
C
D
E
F
Total
●
●
●
●
●
●
2
●
5
1
0
2
Student
Technique
Expression
Stage presence
Uniqueness
Story telling
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
Total
Stage presence
Uniqueness
●
Story telling
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
2
●
●
●
●
●
10
●
0
●
●
4
0
Note. For teachers and students, results clearly reveal that expression is the most
preferred characteristic in musicians.
Q2. (Teachers and Students) How do you define musical expression? The
answers were divided into five main categories among teachers and students: (a)
personal expression (e.g. “all the experiences that you have had up to a specific time”,
“involvement in the music”); (b) emotions (e.g. “a way of communicating emotions
that the artist is feeling”); (c) focus on musical features (e.g. “being loyal to the
composer’s intentions”, “a sensitivity to the harmony”, “musicality, phrasing,
appropriate pauses”); (d) communication with an audience (e.g. “the expressivity has
to be from the perspective of the audience”); and (e) meaning and coherence (e.g.
“the form has a coherence, a meaning”).
Table 9 reveals each teacher’s and student’s response (n=24). According to their
answers, students associate playing expressively with personal expression (n=8),
while teachers’ answers are equally distributed amongst the associations of
expression as communication of emotions (n=2), as a focus on musical features
59
(n=2), as communication with an audience (n=2), and as personal expression (n=2).
Both teachers and students do not consider expression to be a single entity, but rather
a multidimensional concept, as exemplified by the fact that many participants provide
more than an answer.
Table 9. Frequency distribution of each teacher’s and student’s responses on their
conceptualization of expression.
Teacher
A
B
C
D
E
F
Total
Student
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
Total
Personal
expression
Focus on
musical
features
Communication of
emotions
Communication
with audience
Meaning and
coherence
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
2
●
2
Personal
expression
Communication of
emotions
●
2
Focus on
musical
features
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
2
1
Communication
with audience
Meaning and
coherence
●
●
●
●
●
●
8
●
3
2
2
0
Note. Students’ answers indicate that they associate playing expressively to personal
expression.
Q3. (Teachers and Students) What can music express? The answers were
arranged into five main categories: (a) emotions (e.g. “anger”, “sadness”, “the
composer’s emotion in mind”); (b) everything that a human can express; (c) personal
experiences; (d) visual images (e.g. “landscapes, “colors”, “pictures”); and (e)
message. Table 10 demonstrates each teacher’s and student’s responses (n=28).
Teachers and students respond differently. For most teachers (n=5), music can
express everything; for most students (n=10), music expresses emotions.
60
Table 10. Frequency distribution of each teacher’s and student’s responses about
what music can express.
Teacher
Everything
Emotions
A
B
C
D
E
F
Total
●
●
●
●
Student
Everything
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
Total
●
●
5
Personal
experiences
Visual
Images/stories
Messages
●
●
●
3
Emotions
●
2
Personal
experiences
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
0
Visual
Images/stories
0
Messages
●
●
●
●
●
4
1
●
●
●
●
●
2
10
2
Note. According to students’ answers, music seems to express emotions more than
other features, such as messages. Almost every teacher mentions that music can
convey everything a human can express.
Q4. (Teachers and Students) How important is expression in music
performance? More or less than technique? The majority of students prioritize
expression (n=9), while a few others were categorical concerning the importance of
both skills in order to achieve an ideal performance (n=3). Two teachers show a clear
preference for expression over technique, while four teachers could not separate both
skills.
Q5. (Teachers and Students) According to you, can expressive playing be
taught/learned? Results show that teachers unanimously consider expression a
teachable skill. However, students regard expressive skills as innate (n=4) and
learned abilities (n=8).
5.2.2 Teaching expression. The second theme of the questionnaire concerned
the way expression is taught from the point of view of the teachers. These questions
61
were asked to the teachers only. The complete transcript of their answers is provided
in Appendix E, page 120-134.
Q6. (Teachers) When should one start teaching/learning expressive skills? The
teachers all responded that expression should be a musical aspect integrated from the
beginning of a student’s learning process. Expression also appears to be strongly
related to tone quality. According to many teachers (n=3), when tone quality is
discussed early in musical development, it sensitizes students to understand better
musical elements related to expression (e.g. shaping musical phrases, style).
Q7. (Teachers) In a typical lesson, how much time do you devote to the
development of expressive skills as compared to technical skills? Results indicate that
for half of the teachers (n=3), the organization of the lesson strongly depends on the
student’s level of musical experience or on his or her needs at particular moments in
the year, while the other half (n=3) claims that technique and expression go hand in
hand and it is not possible to separate both skills.
Q8. (Teachers) What strategies do you use to teach expressivity? According to
the lessons observed, it appears that teachers vary their strategies, which means that
they do not consider only one way to become expressive (Table 4, p. 54). Modeling
(n=4) and metaphor/imagery (n=3) were the more cited instructions in teachers’
questionnaire responses (n=13) (see Table 11), while Table 4 shows that they
primarily use outcome feedback.
Table 11. Reported strategies used by teachers to teach expression during
instrumental lessons.
Teacher
Breathing/
singing
Story telling
A
B
Verbal
instruction
Metaphor/
imagery
Questioning
●
●
●
●
●
●
C
D
●
●
●
E
●
●
F
Total
Modeling
●
2
1
2
62
3
●
1
4
Q9. (Teachers) Are you aware of strategies to teach expressive skills other than
those you are already using with your students? Two main categories emerged in
the participants’ answers. Teachers were either: (a) rejecting a strategy that would
impose their own way or musical vision of certain pieces, such as telling their
students about their own life experience (n=3), or (b) using every method or idea they
had learned during their own musical training (n=3).
Q10. (Teachers) From the expressivity point of view, do you use explicit and
specific goals (plans) to teach? Only one teacher responded that he usually creates a
plan that includes specific goals he wants to reach with every student. Others prefer
to leave room for flexibility, setting goals in a more general and spontaneous manner
in order not to miss opportunities to learn from musical issues that may arise over
time. However, in the instrumental lessons, one teacher was discussing with his
student various ways to practice, as demonstrated in lesson G (see Appendix C,
Example 4, p. 114).
5.2.3 Learning expression. The questionnaire’s third theme relates to the
students’ perception of the learning process of musical expression.
Q6. (Students) When should one start learning expressive skills? In order to
compare answers between teachers and students regarding their perceptions of the
teaching and learning of expression, students were questioned about the moment one
should begin to work on expressive skills. Two-thirds of the students (n=8) answered
that expression should be part of the musical training right from the beginning. Other
students (n=4) replied that expression should be integrated into the learning only
when beginning students have mastered technical skills (e.g. notes, variety of
repertoire).
Q7. (Students) How and when did you begin to consciously work on your
expressivity? Nine students answered that, to a certain extent, their learning of
expression was accomplished with the help of their teacher. One student stated that
such learning should be effectuated by the student alone. One specified that it occurs
mostly through listening, and one mentioned that it is a combination of listening,
learning with his teacher, and experience.
63
Q8. (Students) In a typical lesson, how much time is devoted to expressive skill
development as compared to technical skills? According to the students’ answers, in
a typical lesson, the time devoted to expressive skills either is equal to the time
devoted to technique (n=7), does not fill the whole lesson but is still more present
than technique (n=4), or occupies the whole lesson (n=1). It was specified (n=4) that
sometimes, the organization of the lesson depends on the learning progression of a
piece or on the musical training. For instance, at the beginning of the leaning process
of a piece, technique may be more present than expression, but when the piece
becomes more familiar and solid, expression may take more importance over
technical matters.
5.2.4 New technological strategies. The questionnaire’s last theme focuses on
how teachers and students appraise the use of new technological strategies in the
teaching of expression.
Q9. (Students) Q11. (Teachers) To what extent would you be willing to try new
strategies involving technology for teaching/learning expressive skills?
This
question was asked before and after receiving information about the specific software
(Feel-Me). A script of the information provided can be found in Appendix F, p. 135.
At both times, teachers and students were asked to rate their willingness to try new
strategies involving technology on a Likert-type scale (not at all – not very likely –
maybe – very likely – surely). Table 12 shows that before receiving the information,
one teacher reported “maybe”, four said “very likely”, and one stated “surely”, while
after receiving the information two said “not very likely” and four stated “maybe”.
Table 12. Teachers’ perception of the use of technology before and after information
on the Feel-ME software.
To what extent would you be willing to try new strategies involving technology for teaching/learning
expressive skills?
Scale
Not at all
Not very likely
Maybe
Very likely
Surely
Before
0
0
1
4
1
After
0
2
4
0
0
64
Table 13 shows that before receiving the information, two students said “maybe”, six
stated “very likely”, and four others claimed “surely”, while after receiving
information, one stated “not at all”, six said “maybe”, four stated “very likely”, and
one claimed “surely”.
Table 13. Students’ perception of the use of technology before and after information
on the Feel-ME software.
To what extent would you be willing to try new strategies involving technology for teaching/learning
expressive skills?
Scale
Not at all
Not very likely
Maybe
Very likely
Surely
Before
0
0
2
6
4
After
1
0
6
4
1
Q10. (Students) How would you react if you were to receive performance
feedback provided by software? Students were asked to rate their response on a
Likert-type scale (strongly negatively – mostly negatively – neutrally – mostly
favorably – strongly favorably). Their answers revealed that the majority of students
is mostly favorable to the use of such a technological strategy (n=8), two were
strongly favorable toward such software, one considered this technology mostly
negatively, and one was strongly opposed to receiving feedback from a computer.
Q11. (Students) Do you think you would like to use such feedback software at
home during your routine practice? Students were asked to answer on a Likert-type
scale (not at all – not very likely – maybe – very likely – surely), but also to develop
their answers. Six said they were very likely to use it because they would like to
receive another opinion to verify how they might sound to others, but they also
mentioned that they would like to try it first before being completely confident about
the reliability of the software; three students said maybe; two were negative because
according to them it would be time consuming; and one student was absolutely
positive about it, and one was not attracted at all by the idea of using it at home.
Q12. (Teachers and Students) Would such technology help you reach more
specific goals regarding the teaching/learning of expression? After the theoretical
basis and the nature of the Feel-ME software was explained, the participants were
questioned about whether they thought such technology might help them reach more
65
specific goals in the instrumental lesson in regard to the teaching and learning of
expressive skills. The students were mainly positive about the potential benefits of
the software (n=9), although they mentioned that it should not be a replacement for a
teacher, but rather a tool or another perspective. Two were hesitant and one was
highly opposed because they did not think it could help them better achieve specific
goals. Five teachers were not sure about the possible benefits of such software,
claiming that it would strongly depend on the context or the student’s level. Only
one teacher remained positive regarding its advantages.
Q13. (Teachers) Would you be inclined, in the future, to use such software with
your students in instrumental lesson? Teachers and students answered on a Likerttype scale (not at all – not very likely – maybe – very likely – surely) and further
developed their answers. Three teachers said maybe; however, among these, three
specified that they would certainly be disposed to try it to see what type of feedback
it might provide to students. Two others did not think that it would be helpful within
the instrumental lesson, although they would be inclined to use it as a discussion point
in a studio class. One teacher said that he could not commit himself before trying the
software.
Q13. (Students) Q14. (Teachers) Would such technology help you better
understand how listeners perceive the emotion you want to convey through your
musical performance? For 10 students, this technology could undeniably be a useful
tool. One was not sure and one answered “maybe”. The teachers’ answers were
nebulous, attesting that it again would depend on the context and the student’s level
(“it would not definitely help more advanced performers, but it would help
intermediate students a lot”). Two teachers were afraid that such technology might
systematize and affect the performers’ originality. Three did not know and one said
“maybe”.
Q15. (Teachers) Do you think that up-to-date theories and findings about
expression and emotional communication could help you better organize your
teaching of musical expression and give more explicit instruction to your students?
The majority of teachers respond that they would certainly benefit from such
knowledge (n=5), claiming that to use a variety of strategies could help them identify
66
how each student respond the best to one particular method. One mentions that the
actual teaching of expression does not need technological tools to achieve different
and more specific goals.
67
Chapter 6: Discussion
The main purposes of this study were: first, to investigate the actual methods for
teaching musical expression in instrumental lessons by (a) observing the strategies
used by teachers, (b) verifying what kind of feedback was provided to students
through these strategies, (c) demonstrating whether the learning outcome was clearly
addressed by teachers, and (d) exposing the structural organization of the various
activities; and second, to understand how teachers and students (a) conceptualize
musical expression and its teaching and learning; (b) appraise the use of technological
tools for learning expression within instrumental lessons; and (c) change their
perception after the underlying mechanisms of the Feel-ME software have been
explained.
6.1 Observations of the Instrumental Lessons
Although teachers integrate the personal experiences that have influenced their
own musical path and teaching, distinct tendencies arise in their teaching of musical
expression. This section will discuss the general teaching approach, the interactions
occurring between teachers and students, the attention spent on expression
(expressive message units), and the strategies used by teachers.
6.1.1 The general teaching approach. Our results show that teachers devote
most of their time in lessons to the teaching of technical skills (e.g. posture, fingering,
scales, rhythm, and sound quality) and focus more on the written score than on
musical expression. On average, 18% of the overall duration of instrumental lessons
was dedicated to students’ development of expression. These findings may have been
influenced by the methodological frame employed for the analysis of data.
Expressive message units were first defined in accordance with both the students’
active engagement within the lesson and the teachers’ intention to develop their
students’ own expression. The conceptual schema of the path of musical expression
68
development in instrumental teaching is presented in the Methods section and will be
discussed further in section 6.1.3.
The fact that teachers devote more time to technical work than to expressive
issues can clearly be associated with the “instrumental-technical” approach
(Hultberg, 2000 as cited in Young et al., 2003), which primarily focuses on technical
and manual skills. The students observed in this study were rarely encouraged to
experiment with different possible interpretations. Indeed, improvisation or playing
by ear rarely occurred, which is consistent with results of previous studies (e.g.
Altenmüller & Gruhn, 2002; Gaunt, 2008; Kostka, 1984; Persson, 1993; Rostvall &
West, 2001, 2003; Sang, 1987; Tait, 1992; Young et al., 2003).
Although our results show divergences between teachers, a clear teaching
pattern is drawn in which teachers suggest to students how their performance should
be. On average, 8.6% of the overall duration of lessons was devoted to teacher’s talk
about expression, while students talked only 1.7% during expressive message units.
This approach is also consistent with the “master-apprentice” view (Persson, 1993),
in which the teacher has a dominant role and represents the source of knowledge
transmitted to the student. This suggests that, while teachers debate on expression,
most of the time, they are not engaging in discussion with students.
In the present study, one teacher diverged from the others by asking more
questions to students. He engaged them in discussions and encouraged them to share
their stylistic reflections about the music performed. It seems that more interactions
occurred between this teacher and his students during their lessons than in other
lessons.
When the dominant model of learning implies the master-apprentice
approach, it may seem difficult to find appropriate strategies to enhance students’
creative thinking and personal expression (McPhee, 2011). Hultberg (2007) and
Rostvall and West (2003) indicate that teachers who focus more on technical skills at
the expense of expressive aspects of music might lead students to question their own
musicality or even quit musical studies. Future teachers should be advised of this
risk if they rely only on technical skills without consideration of creativity and
musicality.
69
6.1.2 Interactions between teachers and students. Most of the time, the way
teachers address expression with students corresponds to Reid’s (2001) third level
“musical meaning category”, in which the emotion or the meaning are discussed, but
the students’ personal thoughts and feelings are not. Sometimes, teachers help
students find their own way of playing, for instance, by encouraging them to
experiment with sound; however, no explicit mention of the expressive outcome is
made. Most of the time, teachers failed to relate students’ personal expression (i.e.
subjective elements of their personal experiences) to more objective musical
parameters (e.g. style, form). According to the Figure 4 (p. 44) concept map, which
is based on literature, doing so could help students acquire additional tools to better
communicate with the audience.
Kivy (1980) specifies that “musical expressiveness is such an integral part of our
musical culture and experience that it is almost impossible to imagine full musical
competence in the absence of the ability to make the basic emotive distinctions in
music” (pp. 147-148). Therefore, without sharing their thoughts and feelings, and
without expressing themselves on specific historical and stylistic features of the
music performed, students may have difficulty achieving independence in regard to
the musical decisions they make.
6.1.3 Expressive message units.
Earlier studies identified teaching of
expression as such when teachers explicitly used the terms “expressivity” and related
terms, such as “musicality” or “emotions” (Karlsson & Juslin, 2008; Rostvall &
West, 2001). Consequently, those studies reported that expressive issues were
addressed by teachers respectively less than 10% of the overall duration of lessons or
not at all. Although the words “expression”, “musicality”, “emotion”, or “meaning”
were rarely used within the observed instrumental lessons of the present study, which
suggests that discussions regarding musical expression were mostly implicit rather
than explicit, musical expression was still a significant portion of the lessons (18%).
This divergence in results seems to be due to the way musical expression is defined
and conceptualized and to the method used to categorize the activities.
70
According to Juslin and Persson (2002), Clarke and Windsor (2000), and Repp
(1989), musical expression should be conceptualized in terms of a multidimensional
concept. In this study, we considered many different theories on musical expression
from various fields of research (i.e. meaning and coherence, dynamic and form,
matching patterns, similarity with human speech and behavior, emotions) to build a
theoretical basis for the analysis of the expressive content. This was not the case in
the other observational studies mentioned here. Another major difference from these
studies was that, in the present study, participants’ understanding of expression was
taken into consideration to build the theoretical framework of analysis. In order to
do so, two questions were asked to both teachers and students: (a) how they define
musical expression (e.g. the ability to convey a particular emotion, to experience as
a listener what the musician intends to communicate, playing with feeling, focus on
the music itself); and (b) what can music express or reflect (e.g. emotions, images,
personal understanding). Moreover, a third difference resides in the fact that we
consider the teacher’s intervention in the performer’s path of musical expression,
which is important in order to expose the essential role of the teacher in the
development of students’ creative thinking and expressive intentions. Therefore,
expressive units were defined in accordance with the engagement of the student, the
types of strategies used by the teacher to achieve the expressive outcome, and the
expressive outcome explicitly addressed by the teacher (e.g. meaning, emotions,
directions, form).
The observed teachers who focused the least on expressive skills were those with
the highest teaching experience. This may suggest that younger teachers may be
more interested in current research on musical expression, or that they are more
inclined to adapt their teaching patterns to their students’ needs.
Moreover, in the present research, gestures were taken into account, conversely
to Karlsson and Juslin’s (2008) study. Although gestures were not the main subject
of the present study, they were still considered in the analysis (i.e. modeling).
Gestures often complement verbal explanations, singing or playing, and help
illustrate the abstract images that expression might evoke. According to Rostvall and
West (2005), students often have to concentrate on several aspects (score, motor
71
control, teacher’s verbal feedback and gestures). When teachers’ gestures and
language contradict each other, students may be less efficient at focusing on the issue
at stake. It might be interesting to further investigate how the gestural mode of
communication may contribute to the way instructions are understood by students.
6.1.4 Strategies. Every traditional strategy reported in the literature for teaching
musical expression was found within the overall instrumental lessons (i.e. outcome
feedback, informative feedback, motor-affective language, question, focus on felt
emotion, modeling). Some studies mention that actions are more effective than
verbal instruction in music lessons (Davidson, 1997; Woody, 1999b), mostly because
they help students to quickly reproduce a musical fragment and to memorize it better
than if they had only received verbal explanations. However, it is not clear how
influential external factors, such as students’ motivation, life experiences,
preferences, emotional disposition to the use of strategies in lessons, are. For
instance, the metaphor and imagery strategy may be better adapted to certain students
than others, as it may remind them of meaningful memories.
Woody (2006)
concludes that most strategies are equally effective, and that students are capable of
adapting to different teaching methods. However, he specifies that some techniques
are more successful, depending on the needs of the student. This strongly supports
the fact that teachers should use various strategies that correspond to each student’s
needs. The strategies observed during the lessons are reported in the Results section.
We discuss here their influence on students’ learning process.
6.1.4.1 Outcome feedback. The results show that the teachers use the outcome
feedback strategy (i.e. suggestive and evaluative language) most often, with an
average of 27 occurrences per lesson. This strategy does not develop the musical and
expressive personality of students because it does not force them to make their own
musical choices.
The teachers rarely explain why a particular expressive
interpretation is more appropriate than another. Moreover, they usually do not
associate specific musical features (e.g. tempo, articulation, rhythm) with specific
expressive suggestions.
72
On some occasions, the teachers used strategies that clearly relate particular
features of the music to expressive outcome (see Chapter 4, Figure 4, p. 44). Teachers
B and C mainly related expression to musical meaning, and encouraged their students
to find a particular signification and coherence in their performance. In lesson B, the
teacher helped the student find some sense of direction through the dynamics, the
various intensities, and the form of the piece (e.g. phrase boundaries) (see Appendix
C, example 5, p. 115).
In the observed lessons, emotions were rarely part of the expressive outcome.
Even when the expressive issues were related to emotions at particular moments in
the music, they were never discussed in terms of variations of acoustic features (see
Appendix C, example 6, p. 115).9 Several teachers also used the idea of coherence
and uniformity to achieve a certain level of musical expression. For them, a good
performance is meaningful when it shows coherence.
Coherence may be
demonstrated through a sense of direction. In Lesson I, this sense of coherence
appears in accordance with a sensation of growing tension within the lesson (see
Appendix C, example 7, p.115).
The results of this study support McPhee (2011) statements that instrumental
studio teaching should move progressively toward a constructivist approach in which
teachers’ priorities reside in how the students learn and evolve, rather than in the way
they teach them. Moreover, frequent public performances should be encouraged so
that students can test and put into practice the musical choices they discussed with
their teacher. Although the participating teachers had a clear preference for the
outcome feedback strategy (i.e. M=27), similarly to Karlsson and Juslin’s (2008)
study, they also used variously the strategies at their disposal (i.e. modeling,
informative feedback, metaphors and imagery, question, and focus on felt emotion).
6.1.4.2 Modeling. Modeling was the second most popular strategy among
teachers; but its frequency of usage varied greatly across teachers, ranging from 0 to
45 occurrences, for an average of 15 per lesson. This learning mode is based mainly
9
Gabrielsson and Juslin (1996), Juslin and Laukka (2003), and Seashore (1938) associate the
communication of emotions with the manipulation of specific acoustic cues (e.g. changes in tempo,
articulation, dynamics).
73
on imitation, whereby the student reproduces the teacher’s model according to the
teacher’s verbal suggestions. This approach strongly contrasts with other models of
teaching, such as the “practical-empirical” approach (Hultberg, 2000) or the
“facilitation of learning” model (Hallam, 1998), in which the student’s creativity and
personal experiences are central to the learning process.
6.1.4.3 Informative feedback. Five teachers used informative feedback, for an
average of eight occurrences per lesson. It often took the form of historical and
stylistic discussions. Indeed, teacher E associated stylistic reflections with today’s
expression and meaning (see Appendix C, Example 3, p. 114). He discussed with his
students the socio-political context in which the composition was created, and then
tried to find with them a new meaning, a new identity adapted to today’s performance
practice.
6.1.4.4 Motor-affective language. Only on rare occasions (i.e. 2 times/lesson
on average) did teachers use the motor-affective language strategy in order to help
their students develop a musical meaning. This strongly diverges from Woody’s
(2000) results, where teachers mainly used metaphors and imagery to discuss
expressive issues with their students. Most of the time, previous studies state that
teachers address expressive issues that are directly related to acoustic features
(Woody, 1999, 2006, 2010). However, the figurative language and images that
teachers employ to capture the students’ attention are not necessarily associated with
students’ personal experiences. If the metaphors and images are not meaningful to
them, it is possible that students do not fully understand the message being conveyed.
As a result, they may not know how to integrate the image or metaphor in their
expressive performance.
6.1.4.5 Questions. It was found that teachers often ask questions to students, but
without giving them much time to respond. As with Young et al.’s (2003) results,
questions were more of an instruction-based type (i.e. the teacher dictates how the
performance should be) than a student-oriented one, where a response from the
74
student follows the question. However, students’ answers were often musical instead
of verbal, which might explain the lack of verbal participation across the whole
lesson. According to Young et al. (2003), the use of questions is an effective strategy
to develop further students’ independent, critical, and creative faculties, and they can
also enhance their autonomy and originality. Other strategies, such as internalizing
the sound, experimenting with sound, or telling a story, might be other ways to
encourage the development of these skills (see section 6.1.4.7).
6.1.4.6 Focus on felt emotions. Teachers who used the focus on felt emotions
strategy relied on students’ internal feelings and their capacity to translate their
emotions into perceivable musical features. This strategy was the least popular one
and was used by two teachers. As Sloboda (1999) mentions, beginner students rarely
anticipate how the resulting emotion will be perceived by listeners. Karlsson and
Juslin’s (2008) study reports that this strategy was not used at all, but their
participants’ levels of education varied (i.e. from primary school to conservatory),
and the teachers’ teaching experience ranged from three to 40 years. In the present
study, the student participants were all undergraduate students and the teachers’
teaching experience ranged from 11 to 40 years. It is possible that some teachers
were reluctant to use the focus on felt emotions strategy because of the musical level
of certain students. It would be interesting to assess which students (e.g. beginner,
undergraduate, graduate) are capable of concentrating on a particular emotion and
can control the related musical features, in order to find out which ones would benefit
the most from using this strategy in instrumental lessons.
In this study, the disparity across teachers might be explained by the closed
working environment (e.g. Jorgensen, 1986; Gaunt, 2004). The teachers appeared
often to reproduce what they liked about their own teachers’ methods and practices.
Encouraging exchanges among teachers might be beneficial for teachers who would
like to try to adopt new ideas and methods.
75
6.1.4.7 Additional strategies. Interestingly, the teachers also used additional
techniques that were not reported in the literature, such as internalizing the sound,
experimenting with sound, or telling stories.

Internalizing the sound. The teachers in this study helped the students
improve their musical expression through the internalization of the sound.
The concept of internalizing the sound was often associated with singing the
musical passage, with breathing, or by hearing the music internally before
playing it.

Experimenting with sound.
The teachers encouraged their students to
experiment with sound and with style, or to try different interpretations. This
technique helps students focus on different musical parameters and find
more meaningful ways of playing. Teachers should teach their students to
listen, compare, and contrast different musical performances of a
composition in order to help them contextualize and evaluate the musical
work and, thus, acquire an awareness of musical norms and traditions.

Story. Two teachers encouraged their students to associate a story with their
performance. These teachers firmly believe that every piece of music
narrates or shares something unique. For them, a story can add color to the
performance, perceived by varying the acoustic features, even if the story
itself may not be fully understood by listeners. These teachers did not
impose a story to their students. They rather suggested what such a process
could bring to their performance. As was the case in Barten’s (1998) and
Davidson and Scripp’s (1992) studies, these two teachers told their students
that stories might evoke a specific mood or emotional state of mind in the
performer. This might help the performer emphasize a particular passage of
the musical performance and make the performance more interesting to the
audience.
76
6.2 Questionnaire Interviews
Verifying how teachers and students perceive musical expression, as well as the
way it is taught and learned, helped corroborate or invalidate common beliefs
regarding how expression is actually taught in studio instrumental lessons. This
section will highlight teachers’ and students’ conceptions of expression, the
organization and goals of lessons, the importance of expressive skills as compared to
technique, and the reception of technology in teaching and learning musical
expression.
6.2.1 Comparing teachers’ and students’ conceptions of expression to
observations. Every teacher and most of the students in the present study believe
that expression is an important musical aspect that can be taught, similarly to Laukka
(2004) and Linström et al.’s (2003) findings. No teacher considered expression as an
intuitive and innate ability that was impossible to improve with experience and
training. This is in opposition to Boyd and George-Warren’s (1992), Hepler’s (1986),
Persson’s (1993), Tait’s (1992), and Young et al.’s (2003) conclusions.
Four
students, however, evoked the notion of talent and considered expression as an innate
skill.
Although the teachers and the majority of the students presumed that expression
can be taught and learned, they did not completely agree regarding the means to
achieve such learning. For instance, certain students thought they had developed
their expression while working alone (n=2), through practice and experience (n=4),
through experimentation (n=1), with their teacher (n=8), and/or through listening and
seeing other performances (n=1). Moreover, it is surprising to note that eight students
mentioned having learned expression with their teacher, whereas four of them
testified that expression was not a learnable or teachable skill. This might be
explained by the fact that their teacher first encouraged them to find a meaning to the
music they were performing; but the process of finding the meaning was
accomplished by themselves, using personal reflections that were not necessarily
shared by or with their teachers.
77
Conversely to the teachers in Laukka’s (2004) study, who defined expression to
be a single concept predominantly as the communication of emotions, the teachers’
answers in the present study were more equally distributed among the categories
“personal expression”, “communication of emotions”, “focus on musical features”,
“meaning and coherence”, and “communication with audience”. This suggests that
these teachers defined musical expression in terms of a multidimensional concept, as
is also suggested by Juslin et al. (2002), Karlsson and Juslin (2008), and Lindström
et al. (2003).
Indeed, students’ views on musical expression are very similar to
teachers’ in that they both perceive it as a multidimensional concept. It is possible
that teachers might have influenced their students’ ideas about expression by the way
they communicate it to them.
Overall, teachers’ understanding and conceptualization of musical expression in
the present study correspond to the way they teach it. For instance, one teacher
specifically mentioned that expression is related to performance, “that is developing
something that has coherence in itself; where the form has coherence in itself, a kind
of uniformity.” His students are actually encouraged to find a form of coherence
within the music they perform, develop an idea and play with it until the end of the
work. The performance has to mean something from the beginning to the end.
The teachers do not seem to be fully aware of the strategies proposed in the
literature, nor do they seem to be completely cognizant of the strategies they are
actually using. For example, one teacher noted using a lot of metaphors, imagery, and
stories. This was indeed the case; however, that teacher, who also uses a lot of
questions, did not mention this strategy in his answers. By observing more than one
lesson per teacher, it was possible to evaluate whether or not teachers used similar
strategies with different students.
For example, one teacher reproduced
approximately the same pattern with the three students who were observed: first, the
student plays; then, the teacher and the student discuss the piece (e.g. stylistic and
historical reflections) and the various ways it could be interpret; and finally, the
student plays again.
Most of the students considered expression as the expression of self (“personal
expression”). According to Davidson (2002), every musician has an artistic intention
78
when performing. Students' musical ideas might be better expressed after they clearly
verbalize their thoughts. Unfortunately, most of the time, teachers do not debate the
expressive outcome with their students. In order to develop a unique expression, it
could be beneficial for students to discuss their personal reflections with their teacher
during lessons. Woody (1999b) found that pianists who verbalize their thoughts about
musical excerpts before playing them better convey idiomatic features of the music,
such as dynamics, articulation, phrasing, and tempo. Indeed, instrumental teachers
need to help students acquire creative and critical thinking skills so that the students
can make their own musical choices.
6.2.2 Organization and goals. As was found in Hallam’s (1998), Laukka’s
(2007), and Karlsson and Juslin’s (2008) studies, lessons are rarely planned
beforehand. The observation of the lessons also showed that teachers do not use
explicit goals and systematic teaching patterns regarding expression. Moreover, the
questionnaire interviews reveal that, some teachers expressly do not pre-plan the
lesson beforehand because they want to keep the opportunity to respond
spontaneously to a need that might occur unexpectedly during a lesson. It is difficult
to assess the usual organization of the instrumental lessons because each student was
observed only once. However, some teachers did explicitly discuss a plan with their
students to help them organize their routine practice and reflect on essential aspects
of the performance (see Appendix C, Example 4, p. 114). Moreover, another teacher
mentioned in his interview that he was planning to have a studio class in which he
would be able to assess every student’s progress over the year and thus be more
prepared to change his teaching methods according to his students’ needs.
6.2.3 The importance of technique as compared to expression. The results
from the questionnaire also reveal that three teachers consider expression and
technique to be inseparable skills. According to them, to discuss technical issues is
meaningless if the musical vision does not support it. For three other teachers, the
lesson activities depend on the student’s personal needs at the time of the lesson.
Indeed, in one lesson, the teacher did not discuss expressive issues at all with the
79
student, emphasizing more the technical aspects of the performance. It appeared that
when a student was less advanced technically, the teaching would tend to focus more
on technical skills than on expressive skills. However, this is surprising, considering
that every teacher clearly mentioned that expression should be addressed in the early
stages of a student’s musical training. Woody (2000) indicates that when students
are at an early stage in their musical studies, they learn expression mostly by varying
dynamics and articulation. Later, they reach another level at which their own feelings
and the communicative qualities of music are taken into consideration. In the present
study, despite the fact that the student-participants were skilled enough to be able to
concentrate on aspects other than technique, most of the teachers barely concentrated
on the aspects mentioned by Woody for advanced students.
When the students positioned themselves on the importance of technical skills
as compared to expressive skills, there was a relation between the participants’
answers and the style in which they were trained (e.g. jazz). Those who mainly rated
expressive skills higher than technique were all trained at least in the classical style.
The styles in which musicians are trained may influence the way they organize their
routine practice in respect of technique and expression. Improvisation is strongly
related to jazz (Thompson & Lehmann, 2004).
Jazz requires a conscientious
knowledge of style and structure. Therefore, jazz musicians may rely more on wellestablished stylistic norms than classical musicians do.
According to the questionnaire answers, the teachers and students considered
that expression was addressed either more or equally to technique during instrumental
lessons. This seems to indicate a difference in perception, for the results of the
present study show that 18% of the overall lessons were devoted to the development
of expressive skills.
6.2.4 Technology: well-received or not? On the whole, the results show that
most students would be favorable to using the Feel-ME software during their routine
practice (for question 910: 10 positive answers; for question 1011: 10 positive answers;
10
To what extent would you be willing to try new strategies involving technology for teaching/learning
expressive skills?
11
How would you react if you were to receive performance feedback provided by software?
80
for question 1112: 7 positive answers and two maybe; for question 1213: 9 positive
answers and two maybe).
Students’ mainly positive answers indicate that
undergraduate students might be an appropriate population to further develop such
informative feedback. Indeed, beginner musicians might experience difficulties
understanding the feedback regarding the use of various cues. Advanced students,
however, with sufficient knowledge about the manipulation and variation of the
acoustic cues, might benefit from using this kind of software. Such informative
feedback might help the latter develop a more accurate perception of the cue-emotion
relationships and, as a result, might increase their control over the emotions they want
to convey. Furthermore, because the students were interested in pursuing their
musical formation outside of the instrumental lessons, the idea of receiving another
opinion and feedback was really appealing to them, especially for musical repertoire
such as modern music. They were also interested in receiving a more precise
feedback, which may suggest that systematic and specific feedback is required for an
effective learning.
One student was opposed to the use of such software, partly because of the time
investment it might require and partly because of a lack of interest in integrating
another technique into the practice routine. Another reason that might explain the
reluctance toward the use of such software is that music making requires selfreflection. Students may think that self-reflection is hardly possible with the help of
technology.
The students who were skeptical about the Feel-ME software’s
potentialities concerning the achievement of specific goals in lessons were amongst
those with less musical training experience or those who practiced fewer hours per
week. This may suggest that these students are more dependent on their teacher’s
advice than others who may be more open to pursuing their musical training outside
of lessons without the feedback of their teacher.
After having received information about the underlying mechanisms of the
software, the teachers became skeptical about the use of the Feel-ME software.
12
Do you think you would like to use such feedback software at home during your routine practice?
Would such technology help you reach more specific goals regarding the teaching/learning of
expression?
13
81
Before they received information, answers were mainly positive (for question 1114:
five positive answers and one maybe). After teachers received information, answers
were mainly negative (for question 1215: four maybe and two negative answers; for
question 1316: five maybe and one positive answers; for question 1417: four maybe
and two negative answers). We had hypothesized that participants would change
positively their answers after receiving information on the Feel-ME software.
However, teachers’ perception became negative, while students’ perception remained
relatively positive. These responses invalidate our hypothesis. Negative perceptions
may reflect a misconception about musical expression (e.g. “expression cannot be
explained in an objective manner”, or “it is impossible to measure the use of acoustic
cues”).
By staying up to date with actual research, teachers would learn that it is indeed
possible to measure and manipulate the correlations between the judgments of
auditors (Juslin & Persson, 2002). Hoffren (1964) indicates that teachers often
discuss expression in various and abstract ways, but they are still reluctant to study it
objectively: “[expression] is too subjective and individualistic for measurement and
categorization” (p. 32). Interestingly, some students revealed that sometimes they
feel that the feedback provided by their teacher is too abstract and that they would
like to receive more precise indications. This seems in opposition to teachers’
responses revealing that they do not consider essential to include systematic teaching
patterns and explicit goals, because they fear that pre-planned lessons might restrain
creativity, individual expression, and spontaneity. This opposition made us realize
that one important aspect of this study – systematizing the teaching of expression –
is based on the assumption that optimal teaching should be systematic and goal
oriented. Even though previous research on learning and teaching processes in
instrumental lessons (e.g. Ericsson et al., 1993; Karlsson & Juslin, 2008; Laukka,
14
To what extent would you be willing to try new strategies involving technology for teaching/learning
expressive skills?
15
Would such technology help you reach more specific goals regarding the teaching/learning of
expression?
16
Would you be inclined, in the future, to use such software with your students in instrumental lesson?
17
Would such technology help you better understand how listeners perceive the emotion you want to
convey through your musical performance?
82
2007) support this assumption, the question whether or not teaching should be more
systematic and goal oriented warrants more research.
Finally, most teachers were positive toward the integration of up-to-date theories
to their teaching of expression, mostly because they consider that a musician must
possess a variety of tools to respond, as accurately as possible, to the widest range of
students’ needs. One teacher stated that it was difficult to measure the efficiency of
a teaching strategy for expression because it has many layers, influences, and
parameters. The fact that instrumental teachers remain up to date regarding actual
research and theories about expression (e.g. current practices in instrumental studio
teaching, the importance of informative feedback) might lead them to reappraise the
inclusion of computer-assisted learning and teaching. Indeed, one teacher, who
seemed more acquainted with research on expression than others, was more able to
imagine the potential benefits and disadvantages of the integration of technology in
lessons (see Appendix C, Example 8, p 115).
As for students’ answers, they are inconsistent with other studies. In Lindström
et al.’s (2003), Karlsson’s (2008), and Karlsson et al.’s (2009) studies, students were
suspicious and could not conceive how computer-based applications would help
enhance emotional communication. For instance, in Lindström et al.’s study (2003),
the student participants were mostly skeptical about using such technological tools
(83%). In Karlsson et al.’s (2009) study, the participants rated the feedback higher
when they thought it was provided by the teacher, although the feedback derived from
the Feel-ME software. The participants in these studies were not informed about the
theoretical basis of one particular technology. In order to verify the efficacy of this
new technological teaching strategy in the context of instrumental teaching, the FeelME software should be tested near a greater instrumentalist population and in new
teaching contexts (e.g. music classes, individual lessons, at different musical levels).
83
Chapter 7: Limitations and Conclusion
7.1 Limitations
The limitations and biases of this research project must be acknowledged.
Limitations that might have influenced the results concern mainly aspects of the
protocol, data acquisition, and analysis. These will be presented in categories: (a) the
identification of expressive units; (b) the intrusiveness of the lesson observations; (c)
the sample size of participants; (d) the clarity of some items of the questionnaire; (e)
the procedure used to gather data from and provide information to the participants
about the software; (f) the musical dialogue; and (g) the technical problems.
7.1.1 Identification of expressive units. The methodological frame used to
define how expression is conceptualized might have affected the analysis of data.
What is defined as being expressive might appear subjective and create a bias in the
analysis. However, this bias was reduced because participants’ understanding of
musical expression was also taken into consideration in the definition of the
expressive message.
The delimitation of the expressive message units were
effectuated in accordance with the learning outcome (i.e. the student’s playing was
included within the unit as long as the subject remained the same). This approach
should be further tested in order to verify whether the same results can be obtained
in analogous contexts.
7.1.2 Intrusiveness of the lesson observations. Another potential limitation
concerns the fact that participants were video and audio recorded. Even if they were
not specifically informed about the nature of the study, it is possible that, to some
extent, teachers were influenced by the camera and therefore deviated from their
usual teaching patterns. Participants might also have taken more or less time to
reflect on the questions than if they had been in their usual lesson settings.
84
7.1.3 Sample size of participants. Most studies that observed instrumental
lesson have a small sample size (e.g. Gaunt, 2008; Karlsson & Juslin, 2008, McPhee,
2011; Young et al, 2003). To observe 12 lessons allows us to investigate further
music instrument learning and teaching processes. However, it does not enable us to
generalize our results to other instruments, performers, or contexts of teaching.
Neither does it allow us to verify the reproducibility of strategies and teaching
patterns used. Moreover, the questionnaire could have been distributed by email to
more teachers and students. It was also difficult to generalize or make correlations
between the results and participants’ background characteristics because of the small
sample size.
7.1.4 Clarity of some items of the questionnaire.
questionnaire might have been difficult to understand.
Some items of the
In order to clarify the
questions, some examples were provided to participants. Sometimes, the participants
changed their answer after having received clarification. The clarification and the
way it was given by the investigator might have influenced participants in that regard.
7.1.5 Procedure used to gather data from and provide information to the
participants about the software. The procedure used to gather data from and to
provide information to the participants about the software could have altered the
answers. There was a flaw regarding the questions asked before and after receiving
the information about the software: “Do you think you would like to use such
feedback software at home during your routine practice?” to students; and “Would
you be inclined, in the future, to use such software with your students in instrumental
lessons?” to teachers.
Before receiving the information about the software,
participants responded using a Likert-type scale. After receiving the information
about the software, the Likert-type scale was inadvertently not used. In order to truly
compare participants’ perceptions before and after the information transmission,
teachers and students were asked by email to rate their answer on a Likert-type scale
regarding their willingness to use the Feel-ME software.
This was done
approximately two months after the study was finished. Responses slightly diverged
85
from their initial free comments. It is possible that participants did not re-read the
Feel-ME software guideline that was provided again in the email.
It was important to inform the participants about the origins and underlying
mechanisms of the software (see Appendix F, p. 136). However, it was difficult for
participants to estimate the potential advantages and reliability of the Feel-ME
software without having tried it beforehand. To present the software’s interface to
participants might have helped teachers’ and students’ understand its underlying
mechanisms. They probably would have had a better representation of the different
processes and phases of learning.
7.1.6 Musical dialogue. We did not take into account the musical dialogue that
is established in the whole instrumental lesson between a teacher’s question or
comment and a student’s musical response. To consider this factor in the analysis
could help nuance certain statements relative to the small amount of time devoted to
musical expression during a lesson. To measure the time allocated to various
activities (i.e. talk versus playing) through the entire lesson instead of only within the
expressive units could provide an overall view of the structure of the lesson.
7.1.7 Technical difficulties. There were some technical difficulties with the
camera for the second and last observations. Lessons were audio recorded and notes
were taken about other aspects than the verbal one, such as gestures and behaviors.
Nevertheless, because of these technical problems, we were not able afterwards to
observe the actions and gestures of teachers and students.
7.2 Conclusion
Despite the fact that many musicians will never reach a professional level,
students should possess the ability to be self-sufficient (Davidson, Pitts, & Correia,
2001). Therefore, a central place for reflection, creative musical work, and students’
active listening to their own and others’ performances should be given during lessons
(Elliot, 2005). Although a few methods and procedures already exist to analyze the
information encompassed within instrumental lessons (e.g. Karlsson & Juslin, 2008;
86
Persson, 1993; Rostvall and West, 2001, 2003; Young, et al., 2003), none of them
establishes a methodological frame based on actual theories and findings on
expression. Indeed, a more systematic analysis might enable researchers to clearly
analyze the expressive content of the lessons. This thesis has been done in order to
fulfill the imperative need to explore instrumental lessons and the interactions
occurring between teachers and students.
7.2.1 Observation of lessons. 18% of the overall duration of instrumental
lessons was devoted to students’ development of expressive skills. This result is
higher than the results of previous studies. Indeed, expression was not addressed at
all in Rostvall and West’s (2001) study and was discussed for less than 10% of the
overall lessons in Karlsson and Juslin’s (2008) and Karlsson’s (2008) studies. These
differences are a result of the way we conducted the data analysis. In the present
study, three important aspects were taken into account in order to identify the
expressive content of the message units. First, expressive units were defined in
accordance with the active engagement of the student in lessons. Secondly, units
were defined in relation to the strategies used by teachers in lessons to help students
achieve the intended expression (e.g. metaphors, experimenting with sound, telling a
story, modeling). Finally, in order to be considered an expressive message unit, an
expressive outcome had to be explicitly addressed by teachers (e.g. meaning, form,
dynamic, direction, emotion). In the studies mentioned earlier, expressive message
units were identified as such only when teachers were using metaphors, or when
specific words such as expression, musicality, or emotion had been used. In order to
observe how expression is taught we chose a more inclusive strategy. As in previous
studies, the teachers rarely explicitly discussed the expressive outcome with students.
The words “communication”, “emotion”, and “interpretation” were barely used,
suggesting that expression is addressed in an intuitive manner.
The diversity of the strategies (i.e. outcome feedback, informative feedback,
story, metaphors and imagery, questions, experimenting with sound, internalizing the
sound, modeling, and focus on felt emotions) employed in instrumental lessons
revealed that teachers can be quite creative in conveying their knowledge about
87
musical expression to students. Results from the observations, in accordance with
previous studies (Karlsson & Juslin, 2008; Rostvall & West, 2001), indicate that
teachers use the verbal mode of communication most frequently to teach musical
expression; and in it, the strategy outcome feedback (i.e. suggestive and evaluative
language) was prevalent.
Teachers seem to prefer an “instrumental-technical”
approach with students (Hultberg, 2000), one that is based more on technique and
posture than on expression and improvisation, as well as a “master-apprentice” view
(Persson, 1993), in which teachers’ participation is predominant. More specific and
systematic feedback could potentially help students apply teachers’ explanations to
other contexts (e.g. variety of repertoire) and, therefore, help them become more
independent and self-sufficient.
7.2.2 Questionnaire interviews.
Questionnaire responses revealed that
expression was the most indispensable characteristic of music performance according
to every teacher and most of the students, as was also concluded in Laukka’s (2004)
and Linström et al.’s (2003) studies. Unanimously, teachers considered expression
as a learnable skill. Moreover, teachers and students estimated the time spent on
expression to be predominant or equal to technical work.
According to the
interviews, teachers and students estimate that expression is more present during
lessons than was revealed by the observation of the lessons. Although teachers
mentioned in their interviews that expression is an important aspect to address from
the beginning of students’ musical studies, they tended in practice to address more
technical aspects of the performance than expressive issues.
In addition, contrary to Laukka’s (2007) results, both teachers and students
consider musical expression as a concept that encompasses various aspects of musical
performance, such as communication with an audience, self-expression, emotions,
focus on musical features, and meaning and coherence. These responses corroborate
our theory, also adopted by Juslin and Persson (2002), that expression should be
considered as a multidimensional notion gathering together various theories and
findings on music performance. A schema was developed in order to demonstrate
the importance for the teacher to relate the subjective world of the performer (e.g.
88
personal experiences) to more objective features present in the music (e.g. structure,
style) by using various strategies (e.g. questions, metaphors, experimenting with
sound) and addressing explicitly the expressive outcome (e.g. emotion, meaning) (see
Chapter 4, Figure 4). Participants’ answers also contributed to the creation of the
schema, representing the path of expression in instrumental teaching, which we used
to analyze the expressive content of the instrumental lessons observed.
In opposition to what we hypothesized, teachers became more skeptical after
receiving additional information about the specific software used to teach expression.
This is in alignment with Lindström et al.’s (2003), Karlsson’s (2008), and Karlsson
et al., (2009) studies, in which students were skeptical about the use of this
technology in teaching expressive skills mainly because they could not conceive how
computers could understand human feelings. However, results from students’
answers, which remained positive, are in opposition to these findings.
7.2.1 Further studies. Although some studies (e.g. Barten, 1998; Davidson,
1989; Woody, 2010) explore the efficiency of the various strategies used by teachers
to transmit expression, more observations need to be made in order to further explore
the generalizability of strategies and teaching patterns used.
It would also be
interesting to verify how strategies, types of feedback, and dynamics and interactions
vary over time by observing multiple lessons per student. Further studies should also
take into consideration the very different ways in which students experience learning
musical expression (Reid, 2001).
Teaching strategies and methods should be
adaptable to the various needs of individual students.
Open-ended interviews
distributed after each instrumental lesson during a period of a few weeks would
provide an opportunity for students to describe freely their experience of learning and
verify whether they find that strategies and methods are efficient. It is not clear what
aspects of a student’s life experiences, emotional predispositions, or motivation can
influence the results of music teaching that widely uses, for instance, modeling or
metaphors. It is essential for students to be aware of their personal feelings and
express them to their teacher. Consequently, teachers will be more susceptible to
using the appropriate strategies with students.
89
In traditional teaching strategies, there is often a delay between the performance
and the feedback from the teacher, which is transposed from a musical gesture into
linguistic form (Welch, 2005). Consequently, students might experience difficulty
in interpreting the feedback provided by the teacher. It would be interesting to assess
whether the actual teaching of expression would benefit from the inclusion of
technological intervention that provides explicit objectives and feedback to students.
The technology for teaching expression is still at a preliminary stage of development.
It might be interesting to develop more extensively a technology that would give realtime feedback to students while recording their performances instead of presenting
the feedback afterwards, as is the case with the current Feel-ME software. In
addition, the efficiency of the technology should be further tested in order to extend
the results to all performers, instruments, melodies and teaching contexts.
Furthermore, the existing technology provides feedback only on acoustic cues.
It would be interesting to investigate how to provide the performers with a feedback
on the gestural dimension of their expression.
In occidental musical culture,
musicians execute particular gestures and move their bodies so that they manage to
intentionally convey emotions to their public (Dahl & Friberg, 2007). Dahl and
Friberg (2007) have demonstrated that a close correspondence exists between
movement and auditive cues for the four basic emotions (i.e. anger, sadness, fear,
happiness). Body movements allow listeners to extract visual information that brings
a better understanding of the performer’s emotional intentions. To combine gestural
feedback with auditive feedback could help musicians concentrate on and manipulate
consistently acoustic and movement cues aimed at conveying specific emotions to
listeners.
The findings from this research have led to a better understanding of how
expression in Western musical repertoire is currently taught at the undergraduate
level in a Canadian university. Empirical research and up-to-date theories integration
into teaching of musical expression would help adapt the teaching strategies of
expression to the actual needs of students and facilitate the achievement of specific
goals. These new strategies with a stronger focus on expressive skills could help
students develop their motivation and creativity and, thus, achieve a deeper approach
90
to learning. This research provides a way for better apprehending how different
interaction patterns influence students’ opportunities to learn expression and develop
their own tools for a unique and original interpretation. Based on the existing research
and on the data acquired through this study, we created a concept map of teaching
and learning musical expression (“Path of musical expression development in
instrumental teaching”). This new approach would need to be tested by verifying if
efficient strategies are consistently aligned with this framework. If it deems that they
are, this concept map may be proposed to teachers in order to enhance the overall
communication between them and their students, so they can learn progressively to
make their own musical choices.
91
Bibliography
Alessandri, E. (in press). The notion of expression in music criticism. In D. Fabian,
R. Timmers, & E. Schubert (Eds.), Expressiveness in music performance:
Empirical approaches across styles and cultures. Oxford University Press.
Altenmüller, E., & Gruhn, W. (2002). Brain mechanisms. In R. Parncutt & G.
McPherson (Eds.), The science and psychology of music performance: Creative
strategies for teaching and learning (pp. 63-81). New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Arrais, N., & Rodriguez, H. (2007). Cognitive feedback and metaphors in emotional
communication instruction of musical performance. In A. Williamon (Cochair) & D. Coimbra (Co-chair), Theories, methods, and applications in music.
International Symposium on Performance Science, Lisbon, Portugal.
Arrais, N., & Rodrigues, H. (2009, May). Metaphorical cognitive feedback:
Rethinking musical emotion communication enhancement. In A. Williamon
(Co-chair), S. Pretty (Co-chair), & R. Buck (Co-chair), Performing excellence.
International Symposium on Performance Science, Aveiro, Portugal.
Balzer, W. K., Doherty, M. E., & O’Connor, R. (1989). Effects of cognitive feedback
on performance. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 410-433.
Bangert, M., Parlitz, D., & Altenmüller, E. (1998). Audio-motor integration in
beginner and expert pianists: A combined dc-eeg and behavioral study. In N.
Elsner & R. Wehner (Eds.), Göttingen Neurobiology Report (p. 753). Stuttgart:
Thieme.
Barten, S. S. (1998). Speaking of music: The use of motor-affective metaphors in
music instruction. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 32 (2), 89-97.
Boyd, J., & George-Warren, H. (1992). Musicians in tunes: Seventy-five
contemporary musicians discuss the creative process. New York, NY:
Fireside.
Brändström, S. (1999). Music teachers’ everyday conceptions of musicality. Bulletin
of the Council for Research in Music Education, 141, The 17th International
Society for Music Education: ISME Research Seminar, Summer 1999, 21-25.
Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of experiments.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Buelow, G. J. (1983). Johann Mattheson and the invention of the Affektenlehre. In
G. J. Buelow & H. J. Marx (Eds.), New Mattheson studies (pp. 393–407).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
92
Burnard, P., Craft, A., Cremin, T., Duffy, B., Hanson, R., Keene, J., Haynes, L., &
Burns, D. (2006). Documenting ‘possibility thinking’: A journey of
collaborative enquiry. International Journal of Early Years Education, 14 (3),
243–262.
Burwell, K. (2012). Studio-based instrumental learning. Farnham, UK: Ashgate
Publishing Limited.
Castagne, N., Cadoz, C., Florens, J., & Luciani, A. (2004). Haptics in computer
music: A paradigm shift. Proceedings of EuroHaptics, Munich, Germany,
422–425
Chapin, H., Jantzen, K., Scott Kelso, J. A., Steinberg, F., & Large, E. (2010).
Dynamic emotional and neural responses to music depend on performance
expression and listener experience. [doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0013812]. PloS
One, 5 (12), e13812.
Clarke, E. F. (1987). Levels of structure in the organization of musical time.
Contemporary Music Review, 2, 211–238.
Clarke, E. F. (2002a). Understanding the psychology of performance. In J. Rink (Ed.),
Musical performance. A guide to understanding (pp. 59-72). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Clarke, E. F. (1988). Generative principles in music performance. In J. A. Sloboda
(Ed.), Generative processes in music: The psychology of performance,
improvisation, and composition (pp. 1–26). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Clarke, E. F. (1993). Imitating and evaluating real and transformed musical
performances. Music Perception, 10 (3), 317–341.
Clarke, E. F. (2005). Creativity in performance. Musicae Scientiae, 19 (1), 157-182.
Clarke, E. F., & Windsor, W. L. (2000). Real and simulated expression: A listening
study. Music Perception, 17, 277–313.
Craft, A. (2000). Creativity across the primary curriculum. London: Routledge
Falmer.
Cooke, D. (1959). The language of music. London: Oxford University Press.
Davidson, L. (1989). Observing a Yang Ch’in lesson: Learning by modeling and
metaphor. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 23, 85–99.
93
Davidson, J. W. (1997). The social psychology of performance. In D. J. Hargreaves
& A.C. North (Eds.), The social psychology of music (pp. 209-226). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Davidson, L., & Scripp, L. (1992). Surveying the coordinates of cognitive skills in
music. In R. Colwell (Ed.), Handbook of research on music teaching and
learning (pp. 392-413). New York, NY: Schirmer.
Davidson, J. W., Pitts, S. E., & Correia, J. S. (2001). Reconciling technical and
expressive elements in musical instrument teaching: Working with children.
Journal of Aesthetic Education, 35 (3), 51-62.
Davidson, J. W., & Lehmann, A. C. (2002). Taking an acquired skills perspective on
music performance. In R. Colwell & C. Richardson (Eds.), The new handbook
of research on music teaching and learning (pp. 542-560). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Davis, S. (1994). Musical meaning and expression. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University
Press.
Davies, S. (2011). Musical understandings & other essays on the philosophy of
music. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dickey, M. R. (1992). A review of research on modeling in music teaching and
learning. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 113, 27-40.
Ebie, B.D. (2004). The effects of verbal, vocally modeled, kinaesthetic, and audiovisual treatment conditions on male and female middle-school vocal music
students’ abilities to expressively sing melodies. Psychology of Music, 32, 405417.
Ekman, P. (1984). Expression and the nature of emotion. In K. R. Scherer & P.
Ekman (Eds.), Approaches to Emotion (pp. 319-344). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Elliott, D. J. (1995). Music matters: A new philosophy of music education. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Elliot, D. J. (2005). Musical understanding, musical works, and emotional
expression: Implications for education. Educational Philosophy and Theory,
37 (1), 93-103.
Enders, B. (2000). Musical education and the new media: The current situation and
perspectives for the future. In H. Braun (Ed.), Music and technology in the
Twentieth Century (pp. 223–238). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University
Press.
94
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate
practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100,
363-406.
Fisk, J. (1997). Composers on music: Eight centuries of writings (2nd ed.). Boston,
MA: Northeastern University Press.
Friberg, A., & Sundberg, J. (1999). Does music performance allude to locomotion?
A model of final ritardandi derived from measurements of stopping runners.
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 105, 1469–84.
Friberg, A., Schoonderwaldt, E., Juslin, P. N., & Bresin, R. (2002). Automatic realtime extraction of musical expression. In Proceedings of the International
Computer Music Conference, ICMC 2002, Göteborg, 365-367.
Gabrielsson, A. (1987). Once again: The theme from Mozart’s piano sonata in A
major (K. 331): A comparison of five performances. In A. Gabrielsson (Ed.),
Action and perception in rhythm and music (pp. 81-103). Stockholm:
Publications issued by the Royal Swedish Academy of Music, No. 55.
Gabrielsson, A. (2003). Music performance research at the Millennium. Psychology
of Music, 3, 221-272.
Gabrielsson, A., & Juslin, P. N. (1996). Emotional expression in music performance:
Between the performer’s intention and the listener’s experience. Psychology
of Music, 24, 68-91.
Gabrielsson, A. (1999). Music performance. In D. Deutsch (Ed.), The Psychology
of music (2nd ed., pp. 501–602). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Gabrielsson, A. (2001). Emotions in strong experiences with music. In P. N. Juslin
& J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Music and emotion: Theory and research (pp. 431452). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Gabrielsson, A. (2010). Strong experiences with music. In P. N. Juslin & J. A.
Sloboda (Eds.), Music and emotion: Theory and research (pp. 547-574). New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Gabrielsson, A., & Juslin, P. N. (1996). Emotional expression in music performance:
Between the performer's intention and the listener's experience. Psychology of
Music, 24 (1), 68-91.
Gabrielsson, A., & Juslin, P. N. (2003). Emotional expression in music. In R. J.
Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective
sciences (pp. 503-534). New York, NY: Oxford University Press
95
Gagnon, L., & Peretz, I. (2003). Mode and tempo relative contributions to happysad judgements in equitone melodies. Cognitive and Emotions, 17, 25-40.
Gaunt, H. (2008). One-to-one tuition in a conservatoire: The perceptions of
instrumental and vocal teachers. Psychology of Music, 36 (2), 215-245.
Gilden, D. L. (2001). Cognitive emissions of 1/f noise. Psychological Review, 108,
33-56.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY:
Doubleday Anchor.
Goolsby, T. W. (1997). Verbal instruction in instrumental rehearsals: A comparison
of three career levels and preservice teachers. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 45, 21–40.
Gracyk, T., & Kania, A. (Eds.). (2011). The Routledge companion to philosophy and
music. New York and London: Routledge.
Grout, D. J., & Palisca, C. V. (1996). A history of Western music (5th ed.). New
York, NY: Norton.
Gruhn, W. (1997). Music learning: Neurobiological foundations and educational
implication. Research Studies in Music Education, 9, 36-47.
Gundlach, R. H. (1935). Factors determining the characterization of musical phrases.
American Journal of Psychology, 47, 624-644.
Hallam, S. (1997a). What do we know about practicing? Towards a model
synthesizing the research literature. In H. Jørgensen & A. C. Lehmann (Eds.),
Does practice make perfect? Current theory and research on instrumental
music practice. Oslo: Norges musikhögskola.
Hallam, S. (1998). Instrumental teaching: A practical guide to better teaching and
learning. Oxford: Heinemann.
Hanslick, E. (1986). On the musically beautiful: A contribution towards the revision
of the aesthetics of music (G. Payzant, Trans. and Ed.). Indianapolis, IN:
Hackett.
Hays, T., & Minichiello, V. (2005). The contribution of music to quality of life in
older people: An Australian qualitative study. Ageing and Society, 25 (2), 261278.
Henderson, M. T. (1936). Rhythmic organization in artistic piano performance. In
C. E. Seashore (Ed.), Objective analysis of musical performance, University of
96
Iowa Studies in the Psychology of Music (Vol. 4, pp. 281-305). Iowa City, IA:
University of Iowa Press.
Hepler, L. E. (1986). The measurement of teacher/student interaction in private
music lessons and its relation to teacher field dependence/field independence.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University,
Cleveland, Ohio.
Hevner, K. (1936). Experimental studies of the elements of expression in music.
American Journal of Psychology, 48, 246-268.
Hevner, K. (1937). The affective value of pitch and tempo in music. American
Journal of Psychology, 49, 621-630.
Higgins, W. (1992). Technology. In R. Colwell (Ed.), Handbook of research on
music teaching and learning (pp. 480–497). New York, NY: Schirmer Books.
Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart: The commercialization of human
feeling. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Hoffren, J. (1964). A test of musical expression. Council for Research in Music
Education, 2, 32-35.
Hoppe, D., Sadakata, M., & Desain, P. (2006). Development of real-time visual
feedback assistance in singing training: A review. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning, 22, 308-316.
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination,
and reason. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Johnson, C. M. (1998). Effect of instruction in appropriate rubato usage on the onset
timings and perceived musicianship of musical performances. Journal of
Research in Music Education, 46, 436–445.
Juslin, P. N. (1997). Perceived emotional expression in synthesized performances of
a short melody: Capturing the listener’s judgment policy. Musicae Scientiae,
1, 225-256.
Juslin, P. N. (1998). A functionalist perspective on emotional communication in
music performance. Comprehensive summaries of Uppsala dissertations from
the Faculty of Social Sciences 78. Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala University
Library.
Juslin, P. N. (2000). Cue utilization in communication of emotion in music
performance: Relating performance to perception. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1797-1813.
97
Juslin, P. N. (2003). Five facets of musical expression: A psychologist’s perspective
on music performance. Psychology of Music, 31, 273-302.
Juslin, P. N. (2005). From mimesis to catharsis: Expression, perception, and
induction of emotion in music. In D. Miell, R. MacDonald, & D. J. Hargreaves
(Eds.), Musical communication (pp. 85-115). New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Juslin, P. N., & Sloboda, J. A. (Eds.). (2001). Music and emotion: Theory and
research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Juslin, P. N., & Timmers, R. (2010). Expression and communication of emotion in
music performance. In Juslin, P.N. & Sloboda, J.A. (Eds.), Handbook of music
and emotion: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 453-489). New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Juslin, P. N., & Persson, R. S. (2002). Emotional communication. In R. Parncutt &
G. McPherson (Eds.), The science and psychology of music performance:
Creative strategies for teaching and learning. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Juslin, P. N., & Laukka, P. (2003). Communication of emotions in vocal expression
and music performance: Different channels, same code? Psychological
Bulletin, 129, 770-814.
Juslin, P. N., & Laukka, P. (2004). Expression, perception, and induction of musical
expressions: A review and a questionnaire study of everyday listening. Journal
of New Music Research, 33 (3), 217-238.
Juslin, P. N., Friberg, A., Schoonderwaldt, E., & Karlsson, J. (2004). Feedback
learning of musical expressivity. In A. Williamon (Ed.), Musical excellence:
Strategies and techniques to enhance performance (pp. 247-270). New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Juslin, P. N., Karlsson, J., Lindström, E., Friberg, A., & Schoonderwaldt, E. (2006).
Play it again with feeling: Computer feedback in musical communication of
emotions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12 (2), 79-95.
Juslin, P. N., Liljeström, S., Västfjäll, D., & Lundqvist, L.-O. (2010). How does
music evoke emotions? Exploring the underlying mechanisms. In P. N. Juslin
& J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Handbook of music and emotion: Theory, research,
applications (pp. 605-642). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Kamenetsky, S. B., Hill, D., & Trehub, S. E. (1997). Effect of tempo and dynamics
on the perception of emotion in music. Psychology of Music, 25, 149-160.
98
Karlsson, J. (2008). A novel approach to teaching emotional expression in music
performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Uppsala University, Uppsala,
Sweden.
Karlsson, J., & Juslin, P. N. (2008). Musical expression: An observational study of
instrumental teaching. Psychology of Music, 36 (3), 309-334.
Karlsson, J., Likeström, S., & Juslin, P. N. (2009). Teaching musical expression:
Effects of production and delivery of feedback by teacher vs. computer on rated
feedback quality. Music Education Research, 11 (2), 175-191.
Kennell, R. (1997). Teaching music one-on-one: A case study, dialogue in
instrumental music education, 21 (1), 69-82.
Kivy, P. (1980). The corded shell: Reflections on musical expression. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Kivy, P. (1989). Sound sentiment: An essay on the musical emotions. Philadelphia,
PE: Temple University Press.
Kivy, P. (1990). Music alone: Philosophical reflections on the purely musical
experience. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Kivy, P. (2002). Introduction to a philosophy of music. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Kohut, D. L. (1985). Musical performance: Learning theory and pedagogy.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kostka, M. J. (1984). An investigation of reinforcements, time use, and student
attentiveness in piano lessons. Journal of Research in Music Education, 32,
113–22.
Kreutz, G., Ott, U., Teichmann, D., Osawa, P., & Vaitl, D. (2007). Using music to
induce emotions: Influences of musical preference and absorption. Psychology
of Music, 36 (1), 101-126.
Langer, S. (1953). Feeling and form. London: Routledge.
Langer, S. K. (1957). Philosophy in a new key (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Langer, S. (1983). Instruction and the feedback dilemma. Unpublished paper
presented at the meeting of the Rocky Mountain Psychological Association.
Salt Lake City, UT.
99
LaRue, J. (2011). Guidelines for style analysis. In M. G. LaRue (Ed.). Sterling
Heights, MI: Harmonie Park Press.
Laukka, P. (2004). Instrumental teachers’ views on expressivity: A report from music
conservatoires. Music Education Research, 6, 45-56.
Laukka, P. (2007). Uses of music and psychological well-being among the elderly.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 8, 215-241.
Leech-Wilkinson, D., & Prior, H. (in press). Heuristics for expressive performance.
In D. Fabian, R. Timmers, & E. Schubert (Eds.), Expressiveness in music
performance: Empirical approaches across styles and cultures. Oxford
University Press.
Lévi-Strauss, C. (1964/1969). The raw and the cooked: Introduction to a science of
mythology (J. Weightman & D. Weightman, Trans.). New York, NY: Harper
and Row.
Lindström, E., Juslin, P. N., Bresin, R., & Wiliamon, A. (2003). Expressivity comes
from within your soul: A questionnaire study of music students’ perspectives
on expressivity. Research Studies in Music Education, 20, 23-47.
Mancini, M., Bresin, R., & Pelachaud, C. (2007). A virtual head driven by music
expressivity. In IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language
Processing, 15 (6), 1833-1841.
Marchand, D. J. (1975). A study of two approaches to developing expressive
performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 23 (1), 14-22.
Margolis, H. (1987). Patterns, thinking, and cognition: A theory of judgment.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Margolis, J. (1993). Music as ordered sound. In M. Krausz (Ed.), The interpretation
of music (pp. 141-153). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
McPhee, E. (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.
McPherson, G. E. (1993). Factors and abilities influencing the development of
visual, aural and creative performance skills in music and their educational
implications. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney,
Australia.
Menuhim, Y. (1996). Unfinished journey. London: Methuen.
100
Meyer, L. B. (1956). Emotion and meaning in music. Chicago, IL: The University
of Chicago Press.
Nattiez, J.-J. (1990). Music and discourse: Toward a semiology of music. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Palmer, C. (1990). Mental representations for musical meter. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16 (4), 728774.
Palmer, C. (1996). Anatomy of a performance: Sources of musical expression. Music
Perception, 13 (3), 433-453.
Palmer, C. (1997). Music performance. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 115-138.
Paradiso, J. (1997). New ways to play: Electronic music interfaces. IEEE Spectrum,
34 (12), 18–30.
Patel, A. D. (2008). Music, language, and the brain. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Pennycook, B. W. (1985). Computer-music interfaces: A survey.
Surveys, 17 (2), 267–289.
Computing
Persson, R. S. (1993). The subjectivity of musical performance: An exploratory
music-psychological real world enquiry into the determinants and education of
musical reality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Huddersfield University,
Huddersfield, United Kingdom.
Persson, R. S. (1996). Concert musicians as teachers: On good intentions falling
short. In A. J. Cropley & D. Dehn (Eds.), Fostering the growth of high ability:
European perspectives (pp. 303-320). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Plato (1993). Republic. R. Waterfield (Trans.). Oxford, England: Oxford University
Press.
Price, H. E. (1983). The effect of conductor academic task presentation, conductor
reinforcement, and ensemble practice on performers’ musical achievement,
attentiveness, and attitude. Journal of Research in Music Education, 31, 245257.
Price, H. E. (1992). Sequential patterns of music instruction and learning to use them.
Journal of Research, 40, 14-29.
Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The
experience in higher education. Milton Keynes: Oxford University Press.
101
Ratner, L. G. (1980). Classic music: Expression, form, and style. New York, NY:
Schirmer.
Reid, A. (1999). Conceptions of teaching and learning instrumental and vocal
music: A study of the ways musicians and their students experience the
phenomenon of teaching and learning music at a tertiary level. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
Reid, A. (2001). Variation in the ways that instrumental and vocal students
experience learning music. Music Education Research, 3 (1), 25-40.
Repp, B. H. (1992). Diversity and commonality in music performance: An analysis
of timing microstructure in Schumann’s “Träumerei”. Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America, 92 (5), 2546-2568.
Repp, B. H. (1999). A microcosm of musical expression. III. Contributions of timing
and dynamics to the aesthetic impression of pianists' performances of the initial
measures of Chopin's Etude in E major. Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America, 106 (1), 469-478.
Richter, C. (1976). Theorie und Praxis der didaktischen Interpretation von Musik
[The theory and practice of teaching and learning the interpretation of music
for performance]. Frankfurt: Moritz Diesterweg.
Ritterman, J. (2002). On teaching performance. In J. Rink (Ed.) Musical
performance: A guide to understanding (pp. 75-88). Cambridge: Oxford
University Press.
Roads, C. 1996. The computer music tutorial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Robinson, J. (2005). Deeper than reason: Emotion and its role in literature, music,
and art. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Robinson, J. (2007). Expression and expressiveness in art. Postgraduate Journal of
Aesthetics, 4 (2), 20-41.
Rogers, M. R. (2004). Teaching approaches in music theory: An overview of
pedagogical philosophies. Great Lakes, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Rosenthal, R. K., Wilson, M., Evans, M., & Greenwalt, L. (1988). Effects of different
practice conditions on advanced instrumentalists’ performance accuracy.
Journal of Research in Music Education, 36 (4), 250-257.
Rostvall, A-L., & West, T. (2001). Interaktion och Kunskapsutveckling [Interaction
and learning. A study of music instrument teaching]. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, KMH Förlaget, Stockholm.
102
Rostvall, A.-L., & West, T. (2005). Theoretical and methodological perspectives on
designing video studies of interaction. International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 4 (4), 87-108.
Sang, R. C. (1987). A study of the relationship between instrumental music teachers’
modeling skills and pupil performance behaviors. Bulletin of the Council for
Research in Music Education, 91, 155-159.
Seashore, C. E. (1938). Psychology of music. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Scherer, K. R. (2000b). Emotional expression: A royal road for the study of behavior
control. In A. Grob & W. Perrig (Eds.), Control of human behavior, mental
process, and awareness (pp. 227-244). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Scherer, K. R., & Zentner, M. R. (2001). Emotional effects of music: Production
rules. In P. N. Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.) Music and emotion: Theory and
research (pp. 361-392). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Schubert, E., & Fabian, D. (in press). A taxonomy of listeners’ judgments of
expressiveness in Music Performance. In D. Fabian, R. Timmers, & E.
Schubert (Eds.), Expressiveness in music performance: Empirical approaches
across styles and cultures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Scruton, R. (1997). The aesthetics of music. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sheldon, D. A. (2004). Listeners’ identification of musical expression through
figurative language and musical terminology. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 52 (4), 357-368.
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.
Sloboda, J. A. (1983). The communication of musical meter in piano performance.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 35A, 377-396.
Sloboda, J. A. (1985). The musical mind: The cognitive psychology of music. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Sloboda, J. A. (1991). Music structure and emotional response: Some empirical
findings. Psychology of Music, 19, 110-120.
Sloboda, J. A. (1992). Empirical studies of emotional response to music. In M. RiessJones & S. Holleran (Eds.), Cognitive bases of musical communication (pp. 3346). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Sloboda, J. A. (1996). The acquisition of musical performance expertise:
Deconstructing the ‘talent’ account of individual differences in musical
103
expressivity. In K. A. Ericsson (Ed.), The road to excellence (pp. 107-126).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sloboda, J. A. (2005). Exploring the musical mind: Cognition, emotion, ability,
function. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Sloboda, J. A., Minassian, C., & Gayford, C. (2003). Assisting advanced musicians
to enhance their expressivity: An intervention study. Paper presented at the
Fifth Triennial Conference of the European Society for the Cognitive Sciences
of Music, Hanover, Germany.
Shove, P., & Repp, B. H. (1995). Musical motion and performance: Theoretical and
empirical perspectives. In J. Rink (Ed.), The practice of performance: Studies
in musical interpretation (pp. 55-83). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sloboda, J. A., & Juslin, P. N. (2010). At the interface between the inner and outer
world: Psychological perspectives. In P. N. Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.),
Handbook of music and emotions: Theory, research, applications (pp. 73-97).
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Speer, D. R. (1994). An analysis of sequential patterns of instruction in piano lessons.
Journal of Research in Music Education, 42, 14-26.
Swanwick, K. (1999). Teaching music musically. London: Routledge.
Tait, M. (1992). Teaching strategies and styles. In R. Cowell (Ed.), Handbook of
research on music teaching and learning (pp. 525-534). New York, NY:
Schirmer.
Thompson, W. F. (2009). Music, thought, and feeling, understanding the psychology
of music. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Thompson, A., & Lehman, A. C. (2004). Strategies for sight-reading and
improvising music. In A. Williamon (Ed.), Musical excellence: Strategies and
techniques to enhance performance (pp. 143-159). New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Timmers, R. (2007b). Vocal expression in recorded performances of Schubert songs.
Musicae Scientiae, 11 (2), 237-268.
Todd, N. (1992). The dynamics of dynamics: A model of musical expression.
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 91, 3540–50.
Torff, B. (2006). Making music and sense through music. In Colwell, R. (Ed.),
MENC Handbook of musical cognition and development (pp. 1-48). New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
104
Wanderley, M. M., & Orio, N. (2002). Evaluation of input devices for musical
expression: Borrowing tools from HCI. Computer Music Journal, 26 (3), 6276.
Wanderley, M. M., & Vines, B. W. (2006). Origins and functions of clarinetists’
ancillary gestures. In A. Gritten & E. King (Eds.), Music and gesture (pp. 165191). Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Waterman, M. (1996). Emotional responses to music: Implicit and explicit effects in
listeners and performers. Psychology of Music, 24, 53-67.
Webster, P. R. (2002). Computer-based technology and music teaching and learning.
In R. Colwell & C. Richardson (Eds.), The new handbook of research on music
teaching and learning (pp. 416-439). New York: Oxford University Press.
Welch, G. F. (1985). A schema theory of how children learn to sing in-tune.
Psychology of Music, 13 (1), 3-18.
Welch, G., Howard, D. M., Himonides, E., & Brereton, J. (2005). Real-time feedback
in the singing studio: An innovatory action-research project using new voice
technology. Music Education Research, 7 (2), 225-249.
West, T. (2007). Multilayed analysis of teacher-student interactions: Concepts and
perspectives guiding video analysis with Tattoo, the analytic transcription tool.
Pedagogies: An International Journal, 2 (3), 130-150.
West, T., & Rostvall, A.-L. (2003). Analysis of interaction and learning in
instrumental teaching. Music Education Research, 5 (3), 213-226.
Woody, R. H. (1999b). The relationship between explicit planning and expressive
performance of dynamic variations in an aural modeling task. Journal of
Research in Music Education, 47, 331-342.
Woody, R. H. (2000). Learning expressivity in music performance: An exploratory
study. Research Studies in Music Education, 14, 14-23.
Woody, R. H. (2002). The relationship between musicians’ expectations and their
perception of expressive features in an aural model. Research Studies in
Music Education, 18, 57-65.
Woody, R. H. (2006). The effect of various instructional conditions on expressive
music performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54 (1), 2136.
Woody, R. H. (2010). Emotion, imagery and metaphor in the acquisition of musical
performance skill. Music Education Research, 4 (2), 213-224.
105
Yarbrough, C., & Hendel, C. (1993). The effect of sequential patterns on rehearsal
evaluations of high school and elementary students. Journal of Research in
Music Education, 41, 246-257.
Yarbrough, C., & Price, H.E. (1981). Prediction of performer attentiveness based on
rehearsal activity and teacher behavior. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 29, 209-217.
Yarbrough, C., Price, H.E., & Mendel, C. (1994). The effect of sequential patterns
and models of presentation on the evaluation of music teaching. Bulletin of
the Council for Research in Music Education, 120, 33-45.
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, 139-155.
Zappi, V., Pistillo, A., Calinon, S., Brogni, A., & Caldwell, D. (2012). Music
expression with a robot manipulator used as a bidirectional tangible
interface. EURASOP Journal on Audio, Speech, and Music Processing, (2),
1-11.
106
Appendix A
Recruitment material
107
1. Recruitment of teachers for observations of instrumental lessons
Hi,
My name is Catherine Massie-Laberge. I am doing a Master in Music Education at McGill
University under the supervision of Dr. Isabelle Cossette.
You are invited to participate in a study about instrumental music teaching.
Undergraduate instrumental teachers and students are needed in this study which consists of
instrumental lesson’s observations and interviews about teaching strategies used in
instrumental lessons. The interview will also include questions about teachers’ and students’
perceptions on new methods for teaching music performance.
The observation of the lesson will not require any additional time from you and the
interview section will only last between 20 and 30 minutes.
Participants may have the chance to win a 15$ Archambault gift-card (approximately 25%
chance of winning the gift-card). Moreover, when it will become available, you may have
the chance to try a new technological teaching strategy.
If you are interested, please contact me at [email protected] for
more information.
Thank you for your consideration!
Researchers:
Catherine Massie-Laberge
Master student (Music Education)
Schulich School of Music, McGill University,
Tel: 514-346-2925
Email: [email protected]
Supervisor: Dr. Isabelle Cossette,
Schulich School of Music, McGill University,
Department of Music Research
555, Sherbrooke Street West,
Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3A 1E3,
Tel: 514-398-4535, ext. 089797,
Email: [email protected]
2. Recruitment of students for observations of instrumental lessons
Hi,
My name is Catherine Massie-Laberge. I am doing a Master in Music Education at McGill
University under the supervision of Dr. Isabelle Cossette.
You are invited to participate in a study about instrumental music teaching.
Undergraduate instrumental teachers/students are needed in this study which consists of
instrumental lesson’s observations and interviews about teaching strategies used in
instrumental lessons. The interview will also include questions about teachers’ and students’
perceptions on new methods for teaching music performance.
The observation of the lesson will not require any additional time from you and the
interview section will only last between 20 and 30 minutes.
Participants may have the chance to win a 15$ Archambault gift-card (approximately 25%
chance of winning the gift-card). Moreover, when it will become available, you may have
the chance to try a new technological teaching strategy.
108
If you are interested, please contact me at [email protected] for
more information.
Thank you for your consideration!
Researchers:
Catherine Massie-Laberge
Master student (Music Education)
Schulich School of Music, McGill University,
Tel: 514-346-2925
Email: [email protected]
Supervisor: Dr. Isabelle Cossette,
Schulich School of Music, McGill University,
Department of Music Research
555, Sherbrooke Street West,
Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3A 1E3,
Tel: 514-398-4535, ext. 089797,
Email: [email protected]
109
Appendix B
Consent form
110
McGill University
Information and Consent Form
Project title:
Toward a Systematized Pedagogy of Emotional Communication in Music:
An Observational Study of Instrumental Teaching
Researchers:
Catherine Massie-Laberge
Master student (Music Education)
Schulich School of Music, McGill University,
Email: [email protected]
Supervisor: Isabelle Cossette, D. Mus.
Schulich School of Music, McGill University,
Department of Music Research
555, Sherbrooke Street West,
Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3A 1E3,
Tel: 514-398-4535, ext. 089797,
Email: [email protected]
You are invited to participate in the following study.
Research project
The overall purpose of this study is to explore the nature of instrumental teaching. Moreover,
teachers’ and students’ perceptions toward the use of new technology are of great interest
since a particular application will not be adopted if it is not well received by users, no matter
how well it works. Therefore, a second objective of the project consists in evaluating how
instrumental music teachers and their students appraise novel teaching strategies using
technology. Then, it will aim at evaluating their attitude regarding a new method for teaching
music performance with the help of computer feedback software.
Methodology
The research will be conducted during individual instrumental lessons but without
interrupting the natural flow of lessons in order to get information about how the lessons
normally occur. Depending on availability, the investigator will observe one or several studio
lessons per professor. The investigator will also interview separately teachers and students
after the lessons. Meetings will be video recorded and interviews will be audio recorded only
with participants’ consent.
Benefits and risks
There is a minimal risk of being influenced to participate if your professor agreed to
participate. You are free to participate or not without any prejudice.
A debriefing session on the study will be done immediately after each subject’s participation.
In addition, if you participate, you may have the chance to win a $15 Archambault gift-card.
111
Participants have approximately 25% chance of winning the gift-card. Participation to the
draw will be on a voluntary basis and will take place at the end of the study.
Participants’ rights
All participation is voluntary and every participant can discontinue their participation at any
time without prejudice. You may also refuse to answer any question. If you are a student:
even if your professor agrees to participate, you are free to participate or not without any
prejudice.
Confidentiality
Neither the identity of teachers nor the identity of students will be revealed in this project.
No performance will be judged. Only didactic and pedagogical content will be analyzed.
Video recordings will be used for data analysis only and not used in teaching or presentations
or linked to publications. Audio recordings will be used for data analysis purposes only. The
results of the analysis may be published but the participants’ names will never be identified.
The consent forms, videos, audio recordings and transcripts as well as any backups will be
stored in locked cabinet in Dr. Cossette’s offices. As soon as recorded, the names of the
teachers and students will be replaced by numbers. Only Prof. Cossette and Catherine
Massie-Laberge will view the videos and listen to the audio recordings. They will solely have
access to the key linking the codes on the transcripts to the participant’s identities. Data may
be revised after the study is finished only for future-related studies on the same topic. Once
the study is finished, identifiable data will be destroyed.
Contacts
If you have any questions or concerns, do not hesitate to contact Dr Isabelle Cossette
([email protected]),
Catherine
Massie-Laberge
([email protected]). If you have any questions or concerns about your rights or welfare
as a participant in this research study please contact the McGill Research Ethics Officer at
514-398-6831 or Lynda McNeil ([email protected]).
Signature
I acknowledge that I have read the above statement, which explains the nature, object, and
the possible risks of the investigation.
I agree to participate in the experiments described above.
I accept to be (audio) recorded: yes – no (video): yes – no
____________
DATE
____________________
Participant’s Name
____________________
Participant’s Signature
____________
DATE
____________________
Name of investigator
____________________
Signature of investigator
112
Appendix C
Extracts from lessons
113
Example 1 -_Lesson L
Teacher E: “Can you tell me a little bit what this middle part is? What does it stand for you? What are the pictures
that you get in your head when you are playing it, if you get pictures?”
Student L: “At times, at the opening sections, it feels kind of triumphant. It is almost like the opening is the
prelude and then this is like the first hymn rises. And then as you go through it, it goes through little episodes,
that is kind of fun. There are also some serious sections, and then the very last bit, especially with (playing)
towards the very end, I find that almost uplifting because the pedal and the hands are moving towards, very
fluidly. And then of course the ending, what happens there?
Teacher E: “What?”
Students L: “Oh I don’t know like surprises. I don’t know. I don’t have too much imagery when I play it but I kind
of feel I am in different atmospheres at different points in the middle section.”
Teacher E: “All right. Good. So I think then you should try to emphasize what you are describing. So you said
we have this little, a bit more, sad parts. Make it even sadder. The joyful bit, make it more joyful. So this meaning,
sad part, more connected; joyful, less connected, so that you can work with different...”
Student L: “Almost like emotions?”
Teacher F: “Yeah yeah. Absolutely. And one theological explanation of this, the first part being father; second,
the son and the Holy Spirit. So this is sort of the deeds and the 40 years of the son on earth, and then you know
it’s just getting more and more complex. And of course it’s getting quick, and more painful, crucifixion and then
the sort of spirit gesture.”
Example 2 – Lesson A
Teacher A: “And stay as open as you can on the E before. You might want to trill a little longer on the low C#.”
Example 3 – Lesson G
Teacher E: “This neoclassical music, which had, of course, its historical importance in the 40s-50s, when
Hindemith wrote this sonata?”
Student G: “In the 30s”.
Teacher E: “Yeah and what was the situation like in the late 30s in Germany?”
[...]
Student G: “Things were expanding with a lot of stuff going on. They had elected Hitler.”
Teacher E: “Yeah.”
Student G: “So we had the Nazi regime. So, it’s in 1937. Hindemith was, I think, in first really enthusiastic about
this because he thought he would be backed... because he was interested in music education. So, young people
will be taught classical music at a young age and... since Hitler was into classical music. He taught he could
have a chance to do that.”
Teacher E: “Yeah. And how did that work out?”
Student G: “I don’t know.”
Teacher E: “Not so well. And you know we talked about the organ movement but there was also a
Singbewegung. And that had to do also with the educational system as you mentioned it. Composers like
Hindemith and Carl Orff, but of course you had other composers that really were following this new system. For
them they saw this as a great opportunity. So, what was neoclassicism, what was that?
Student G: “They would go back to baroque or classical forms and try to bring them back to life.”
[...]
Teacher E: “So this happens every time and this is something we can learn as artists. We can learn to see this
and avoid that this happens again. We see it, and understand it and take position. I think we need to be very
aware of the time where we are living and that’s why it’s important for you to put this music that you are playing,
that you are putting so much time with in a context. Not only in a context back then, but in a context today.”
Example 4 – Lesson G
Teacher E: “And that takes some time to plan what you are going to do. If you just run into the instrument, throw
up the score and start practicing, nothing stays. Because you are not prepared... the stage up here from what is
going to happen. The actors up here and in your head, they are running around like maniacs, they don’t know
what they are supposed to do. But if you take the five minute time, to prepare: “Ok today I am going to do this.”
114
Equally important, is after, to take five minutes to check: “Did I do, did I achieve what I wanted?” And not be
depressed if you didn’t, but just to analyze what you have done. So every practicing hour should contain a
planning and a reflection.”
Student G: “How specific does the plan need to be?”
Teacher E: “Not specific at all. Today I am going to work at these 8 bars. But you decide within your repertoire
that you have to learn, right. And if you did this that day, and the next time you get to the instrument, you think a
little bit differently, and you should plan your activities.”
[...]
Teacher E: “So let’s say next session that you are practicing would be this piece. So what do you do, you say
today I am going to do... You are coming to the studio you have one hour.”
Student G: “I have to look at the music first. I would start, for me it would make sense to start here because that
is where I feel it starting to be shaky so... interesting pedal. And I would play it into section so maybe
approximately 8 bars each... 8 bars is a good number. And you... it’s mostly manual work so I would play with
the soloing out which I have been doing. And that helps a lot hear what you are doing. And then you play it
though, when you practice sections by section, you say OK I am going to focus on making it the lines come
through, the big architecture and then I focus on the (singing). So focus on different things.”
Teacher E: “Now how could you get that?”
Student G: “Play all legato.”
Teacher E: “OK. Good.”
Student G: “Play it all staccato.”
Teacher E: “Good very inventive.”
Student G: “Play it, if there is no trouble, I like to put it in different rhythms.”
Example 5 – Lesson B
Teacher B: “So, più rinforzando. I mean, I don’t know what you are interpreting the rinforzando as being... but I
think it’s continuation of the intensity. But the accelerando was taking way too...”
Student B: “I thought like we just had to make it different or something?”
Teacher B: “Well, when you have a marking that has “dot dot dot dot” you know, I think it’s carrying through all
the way to the end. So, dynamically and everything I would say that this is growing. And then the bottom can
follow up.”
Student B: “Yeah.”
Teacher B: “Try it maybe from this calando and see if you can make sense of this as one big build up.”
Example 6 – Lesson L
Teacher E: “So I think then you should try to emphasize what you are describing so you said we have this little
a bit more sad parts, make it even more sad. The joyful bits, make it more joyful. So this meaning, sad parts,
more connected, joyful, less connected. So that you can work with different...”
Student L: “Almost like emotions?”
Example 7 – Lesson I
Teacher C: “Yeah it’s too much, unless you want to give us the spectacular aspect, the visual aspect. You want
to be in the mood, you are building up your craziness.”
Student I: “Yeah.”
Teacher C: “So, you add a little bit of that. But then you have to play with it, to act it a bit more.”
Student I: “OK.”
Teacher C: “If you add a lot of energy in the physical playing there, you have to keep doing it or doing something
with it, because you cannot just add it and then do nothing with it. You have to go all the way. Then you are
quitting just the playing, the performing aspect of it, also the visual aspect even more.”
Example 8 - Interview teacher C
Teacher C: “I always have a problem when we try to categorize too much: the expression, emotion and judgment.
It also depends on the type of music you use. That, it works well on tonal music, which was strongly associated
with the cinema. The link between musical perception and emotions was strengthened, especially because of
this association. And through songs as well. Therefore, [I will not use it] generally speaking, but yes in some
contexts.”
115
Appendix D
Questionnaire interviews
116
1. Teachers demographic Data
1) Age:
2) Gender: female or male
3) Where did you receive your musical formation (school, university, country)?
4) What instrument(s) do you teach?
5) Which instrument do you perform the most?
6) In which style(s) were you trained in (e.g. classical, jazz, popular, rock)? If there is more
than one, how many years did you perform in each one of them?
5) What is your education level achieved (circle):
◦ College
◦ University (undergraduate)
◦ University (graduate)
◦ Other
6) How many years of teaching experience do you have (circle)?
From: 0 to 10 - 11 to 20 - 21 to 30 - 31 to 40 - more than 40
7) How many time(s) per year do you perform (circle)?
From: 0 to 15 - 16 to 30 - 31 to 45 - 46 to 60 - more than 60
Interview questions for teachers: To be asked following the lesson recordings
1) Which characteristics do you appreciate the most in musical artists (e.g. technical skills,
expressive performance, stage presence, respect of style, a special sound, other)?
2) How do you define musical expression (e.g. the ability to convey a particular emotion, to
experience as a listener what the musician intends to communicate, playing with feeling,
focus on the music itself, the ability to vary musical parameter, such as the tempo or the
dynamics, to give your own interpretation of the piece)?
3) What can music express (e.g. emotions, moods, your understanding of the piece, personal
experiences, images)?
4) How important is expression in music performance? More or less than technique?
Develop
5) According to you, can expressive playing be taught/learned? If so, how? If not, why?
If yes:
6) When should one start teaching/learning expressive skills?
7) In a typical lesson, how much time do you devote to the development of expressive skills
as compared to technical skills?
8) What strategies do you use to teach expressivity?
9) Are you aware of strategies to teach expressive skills other than those you are already
using with your students?
10) From the expressivity point of view, do you use explicit and specific goals (plans) to
teach?
11) Would you be willing to try new strategies involving technology for teaching/learning
expressive skills? Not at all - Not very likely - Maybe - Very likely - Surely.
117
Questions to be asked following the explanation of the Feel-ME software
12) Would such technology help both you and your student(s) to reach more specific goals
regarding the teaching/learning of expression?
13) Would you be inclined, in the future, to use such software with your students in
instrumental lessons?
14) Would such technology help users better understand how listeners perceive the emotion
they want to convey through their musical performance?
15) Do you think that up-to-date theories and findings about expression and emotional
communication could help you better organize your teaching of musical expression and give
more explicit instruction to your students (e.g. If you were to receive more information about
how listeners typically judge a musical performance according to expression, would it change
the way you teach expressivity? Would you give more attention to particular emotions a
musical passage could evoke to listeners? Or again, if you knew that a particular strategy for
teaching expressivity is more effective than others, would you use it more)?
2. Students demographic Data
1) Age:
2) Gender: female or male
3) Where did you receive your musical formation (school, university, country)?
4) What is your main instrument?
5) In which style(s) were you trained in (e.g. classical, jazz, popular, rock)? If there is more
than one, how many years did you perform in each one of them?
6) How many years of musical training do you have (circle)?
From: 0 to 5 - 6 to 10 - 11 to 15 - 16 to 20 - more than 20
7) On average, how many hours per week do you spend practicing (circle)?
From: 0 to 10 - 11 to 20 - 21 to 30 - more than 30
Interview questions for students: To be asked following the lesson recordings
1) Which characteristics do you appreciate the most in musical artists (e.g. technical skills,
expressive performance, stage presence, respect of style, a special sound, other)?
2) How do you define musical expression (e.g. the ability to convey a particular emotion, to
experience as a listener what the musician intends to communicate, playing with feeling,
focus on the music itself, the ability to vary musical parameter, such as the tempo or the
dynamics, to give your own interpretation of the piece)?
3) What can music express (e.g. emotions, moods, your understanding of the piece, personal
experiences, images)?
4) How important is expression in music performance? More or less than technique?
Develop.
5) According to you, can expressive playing be learned? If so, how? If not, why?
If yes:
6) When should one start learning expressive skills?
118
7) How and when did you begin to consciously work on your expressivity (e.g. with the help
of your teacher, alone, with practice, listening, modeling)?
8) In a typical lesson, how much time is devoted to expressive skill development as compared
to technical skills?
9) To what extent would you be willing to try new strategies involving technology for
teaching/learning expressive skills? Not at all - Not very likely - Maybe - Very likely
- Surely.
10) How would you react if you were to receive a performance feedback provided by a
software? Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably Strongly favorably.
Questions to be asked following the explanation of the Feel-ME software
11) Do you think you would like to use such feedback software at home during your routine
practice?
12) Would such technology help both you and your teacher to reach more specific goals
regarding the teaching/learning of expression?
13) Would such technology help you better understand how listeners perceive the emotion
you want to convey through your musical performance?
119
Appendix E
Participants’ responses to the questionnaire
120
1. Teachers’ responses
1) WHICH CHARACTERISTICS DO YOU APPRECIATE THE MOST IN MUSICAL ARTISTS (E.G. TECHNICAL SKILLS, EXPRESSIVE PERFORMANCE, STAGE PRESENCE, RESPECT OF STYLE, A SPECIAL SOUND, OTHER)?
Musicality.
Expressivity. You can really be expressive without some technical fluency. But I appreciate a musical voice that is both respectful of the composer’s intentions but also isn’t afraid to – that does go beyond
that – take control, and is actively listening all the time.
When I go see an artist performing, to embark in the story. A good performance means something that has coherence. At some point, makes you forget about the reality or just brings you to something
different. Expressivity of course but it’s not only expressivity. It’s an ensemble. It has also to do with stage presence. And that is probably why I prefer way more to go to live music. Recordings, there is
always something missing.
At one time, all younger musicians will appreciate the technical skills. Expressive performance, both of them. They have to be together because it’s hard to be expressive and beautiful if your technique is
not solid. They go together.
Curiousness. I would like any performers to tell a story. I want to be excited because life is too short to hear a boring performance. The story telling is important. Arousement, excitement.
I respond the stronger to a genuine artistry. Something that feels, with the values behind the artistry, sort of feel genuine. And I think it is important to me that the technical side of the playing is completely
integrated into that. And support the artistic vision. But I have run into this sort of competition jury sometimes where usually the jury gets divided. It’s either the person playing perfectly but is completely
flat, or the person who is very inspired and miss every other notes. So ideally I like to have it all. But in the end if I have to chose, given an adequate level of technique, the message in the playing is more
important than the technical brilliance.
2) HOW DO YOU DEFINE MUSICAL EXPRESSION?
I guess to make the audience feel something. Some emotions.
Musical expression is almost like an actor’s expression, being able to adopt the voice. If you think of method acting as a model for acting, you try to make them come out of your voice in a way that sounds
natural. Sometimes in the context of the time period that is unrelated to who you are as a person, but you have to become tuned in to the inflections that would make sense for that voice. So musical
expression is really similar: Musical expression is sensitivity to the harmony, it’s an ability to spin an harmonic line in a way that has the punctuation in the right places so that we listen to it and we are not
even conscious in a sense of the punctuation. I guess I fundamentally believe that expressivity is finding some resonance with what the composer has either struggled with, or not necessarily struggling
because some music is just fun and expressive too, but it’s playing in a way that allows your audience to experience it as oppose to being expressive like emoting as a performer. So when the performer is
experiencing the expression the audience does not necessarily experience it. So the expressivity has to be from the perspective of the audience.
When you are able to express things through music. But then you have the problem of semiotic so meaning, and music is a self reference language so you don’t have necessarily a meaning in the sense of
a story, but it has a meaning, back to the coherence thing. So you are actually developing something which has a coherence in itself. And the form has a coherence in itself, a kind of uniformity.
For me, it’s singing with the instrument, you are not singing with your voice but you are singing with the instrument. It’s being loyal to the composer’s intentions and at the same time to sing with the
instrument in such way that you have this communication with the audience and they appreciate what you are doing.
I define musical expression as the sum of all experiences that you have made up to a specific time.
I think it is a combination of knowing the language of music and then to be able to express any human emotions, any emotions that we are capable of, using this language or different dialogues of this
language, using different époques (baroque, romantique, moden).
3) WHAT CAN MUSIC EXPRESS?
Just about anything happiness, sadness, heartbreak, fear, anger… boredom…(emotions)
Humanity. It can express humor, it can express loss, memory. It can express anything that a human can experience, music can express.
It can express anything, I truly believe it. What the performer express is not what the receiver, the audience receives. It does not necessarily match in terms of what the expression is. So, you can express
anything.
121
Emotions, whole range of emotions, happiness, anger, sadness, joy. Every type of emotions. I Think it is much more expressive than language. You can be more subtle and expressive with music more
than speech.
Everything and nothing. there is no boundary to what music can express depending on if you talk the same language as the listeners. It can obviously express sorrow and joy. But it is so multifaceted. I
rarely want to speculate in how people will react. Because there is such a complex variety of reactions. There is no music, silent is the most important music. That is because you have to go into yourself.
Silence is very important because that is my only inspiration. If I have silence and I feel that I can feel this silence with music, then it probably needs to ask questions.
Music can be a complete mirror of how we experience the world. And it is capable of expressing everything that humans are capable of feeling.
4) HOW IMPORTANT IS EXPRESSION IN MUSIC PERFORMANCE? MORE OR LESS THAN TECHNIQUE?
Much more. But you know if you don’t have good technique you can really be expressive.
Again in my mind there are intrinsically connected. I think you can’t, I mean I would prefer to work with a student who has instinct for expressivity but is lacking technique than one who has technique and
has no ability to express. Because I feel that you can more successfully help somebody develop technique than you can teach them how to feel.
If I am very rough, I would say technique is a mean, expression is a goal. I really push my students on a technical side, I always use an analogy of a “palette de couleurs”. The more your technique is refined,
the more you add color into your palette. I really think that technique is really important to be able to do whatever you want. And then it’s a tool. But these tools, you are suppose to play an instrument and
you don’t know how to play, at some point, whatever you want to do musically speaking you are limited by your lack of technique in the instrument. The more your technique, that is why people are going to
see virtuosos, it’s because they are able to produce varieties of nuances, of subtleties, and they are the only one to produce. And that is what makes their expressivity so interesting because they are able
to modulate things very precisely.
I would say more but it is hard to do if you don’t have the technique behind it. So, playing musically and expressively is by far the most important thing but you need the technique to back it up.
Extremely. The good quotes: “Technique without passion is boring, passion without technique is embarrassing”. They need to go hand in hand very much.
I would say that everything is musical expression and the technique is ideally part of the musical expression. It becomes part of the musical expression. So I think that the ideal is not to have to separate
the two.
5) ACCORDING TO YOU, CAN EXPRESSIVE PLAYING BE TAUGHT/LEARNED? IF SO, HOW? IF NOT, WHY?
It can be taught. There has to be some talent. It can be brought out, it can be taught.
It can be encouraged. I think a lot of students are afraid to be expressive because they don’t know if they are doing it the right way. They don’t know how far they can go or they don’t know whether it’s
allowed. But if you can hear, if you can be sensitive to an augmented seventh, or an augmented sixth chord, or if you can feel and recognize in the music something, I’m not sure that can really be learned.
I mean you can learn the theory and you can say oh! This is a Neapolitan chord it must mean something. But not feel it, where somebody cannot identify it and be able to be extremely expressive as a
performer. So it’s a different kind of work that you do with a student who feels it but can’t create a successful paradigm that is stylistically convincing. You don’t want to play Mozart the same way you play
Chopin. There are parameters that should be explored.
It is. What I am trying to do, on the long term, is to make every student himself or herself as an individual. And that is the hard part because you can’t give recipes. Often a student needs these references.
You need references for example how I am doing it, so you demonstrate it. And that is one way of being expressive and you have an example of something which is expressive. So by trying to copy that you
discover your own way of expressing things. And often the goal of the teacher is to unlock things, unlock what we have inside. You have to help people to be able to put what they think and realize what they
think is as important as everybody else. And it’s hard because at start you feel fragile. But after that you learn to be able to project that without projecting your whole self, it’s just your artistic self there. Your
emotions can still be safe inside. It’s a hard balance to find that is why teaching is interesting because everybody is different there.
Yes I think it can be taught. Because if someone is not born with a certain musicality it is hard to get blood out of a stone, it is hard to get music out of somebody who is not musical. So yes it can be improve,
yes it can be taught, yes it can be learned but I think you need something to start from, you need a little bit of ability. Some people are definitely born with more innate musicality and more innate ability. I
always say that some students are so mechanically inclined they move the fingers fast but they have no musicality, other students are very musical but have no mechanical ability. They can’t move their
fingers at all. The ones that make it have both. They have ambition and they have the temperament to make it. Overall whatever is there can be improve and refine.
122
Yes very much I think it can be taught. Differently on every level. Depending on this sort of base, foundation that a player has, what experiences. You can recommend people to go in different directions.
To listen to but also to face your ideas with yourself. I often tell my students to take the piece that they are playing for a walk and you see what they can feel. But for it to have a real value on its own it
needs to mirror the person’s personality. So my work as a teacher is to try to make the person believe in themselves and that what they have to say is important.
I think it can be taught because there are certain instrument specific tools that we can use to create expression. So violin players we talk about the use of vibrato or the use of glissando, or slides. You can
talk about phrases are build, how the intentions of the phrase happens, how do you develop that. I think the elements you can teach, but what a person has to express is much broader than that. That is
something that comes with general life experience. But in the end intrinsically every human being is capable of feeling things and therefore should be able to express it once there is a way to express this.
6) WHEN SHOULD ONE START TEACHING/LEARNING EXPRESSIVE SKILLS?
From the first day you pick up the instrument, in one way or the other.
From the start. I think that a large part of expressivity is tone quality for example. For a pianist there is a sort a immediate gratification a least you get a sound as oppose to a wind player or a brass player
or you have to use a note that is in tune, which can take a very long time to learn how to coordinate all those elements. But it does sensitize you immediately to sound production in a way that a lot of
pianists are not. Certainly when I was in high school and in college I taught young kids and experimented with different methods. If you are listening to a range of music that is part of your education and so
hopefully that is translating in teaching expressivity.
From the beginning. I always teach with the quality of sound in mind. A sound is you put a second sound on the first one. At the beginning of something. And there is some kind of coherence there which
has to happen. And you expressive something here right there. If you make them exactly the same, you are expressing the lack of humanity. From the beginning your expression is important. Because
you breathe and you shape something, even a lot of time people don’t realize they are doing it. Singing is expressive.
Almost from the beginning. I taught hundreds of young students and they did not really understand musical phrasing, shaping, being expressive. You have to modulate your play, you have to show your
emotions. As soon as possible.
From the beginning.
I think it happens right away, when children are born. I think they are designed expressive creatures. They express how they feel in a very unfiltered way and this is the only way that they can
communicate. On violin we talk about sound quality and that is directly connected with expression because it is a specific sound for a specific purpose. And you have to train beginners right away to listen
for that.
7) IN A TYPICAL LESSON, HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU DEVOTE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF EXPRESSIVE SKILLS AS COMPARED TO TECHNICAL SKILLS?
I could not say it’s all a mixture. It all goes together. You don’t work on a scale without talking about expression either. Sometimes it’s pure technique but at the university level, not too much.
It depends on what I hear. I really can’t separate the two because often changing the technique is affecting the expressivity or giving an idea of the expressivity can naturally change the technique. So they
work hand in hand.
It depends on what the student needs at the time of the lesson. When you are a bachelor you have three or four levels to achieve, some kind of level. And by then I want students to be able to have their
method of learning and practicing and be able to play in every instrument at a certain skill level, and also to be able to use expressivity as much as they can in a coherent way. In a lesson, sometimes I
spend most of the time on the technique because that is what is blocking someone to go further in the expressivity. Sometime can spend most of the lesson on shaping musical phrases in a piece and
working on different parts of the piece and say ok where are the contrasts, what are the appoggiaturas around that and how do you manage them. It really varies depending on the needs and I am trying
have this balance between what is the student prepared for what he is thinking about taking out of the lesson.
It depends on the level of the student. I have had advanced students, ¾ of the lesson. Because I trusted them to do a proper warm up I trusted them to do their technical warm up. ¾ at least was just
working on the music. The technique with the music but all music. Some other students it can be 50/50 work on music compared to technique. With others it is probably more 2/3 technique 1/3 musical.
As they go hand in hand, I try to in any case, make the play really believe in what they have to say, what they are performing and by that going deeper into their own ideas. It’s a very sensitive relationship
and you have to know where you are in order to open doors. I very often tell my students that I am providing them with keys to open locks, it could be technique, it could be style, it could be fingering, it
could be sound color, performance, manners. And my duty as a teacher is to provide as many keys as possible so that when we are finish with each other they have keys to open or lock or not to open or
lock. Knowledge as a tool. I think expressivity is essential. But in order to express something you must have experiences.
123
That goes hand in hand. I do differentiate between working on things like scales and in tune just to build technical skills. But when it comes to working on a piece, usually what I try to do is to develop with
the student a vision of what they are trying to achieve, some kind of intention of what they are trying to do, with certain parts of the piece or phrases. And then translate that, breaking down in sort of find
ways to execute this and make this vision become reality in the instrument. Then you talk about a lot of technical things but the technical details are kind of meaningless if you don’t add a musical vision
behind it.
8) WHAT STRATEGIES DO YOU USE TO TEACH EXPRESSIVITY?
It depends on the students. Some students react best when I say listen to me or play it like this. Some react better to precise verbal instruction. Most react best to listening (most of the better students I
think).
Breath, signing line. I sometimes use graph images almost. Sort of draws. How our line is taking shape sometimes that is physical often. I don’t believe that there is just one way to be expressive. I definitely
teach that there are consequences to your actions. So if you begin something in one way, you have to follow through in a way that is convincing. Voicing has to change, pedaling has to change, momentum
has to change, if you eliminate one of those variables, something that was successful for somebody else won’t be successful for you and if you’re not understanding why somebody is able to be convincing
with what there are doing then you’re not expressive anymore. Sometimes demonstration for sure, just modeling behaviors I mean, especially with younger students, there are different phases to teaching
expressivity, and a lot of it is through listening and watching at the earlier stages, just to reinforce a sense of what can be done. What the possibilities are. And hopefully explaining in a way that allows them
to make a similar decision later on. With older students, a lot of discussion, asking more questions, what are you trying to do here. Where are you trying to go with the phrase? Because I don’t really want to
impose.
One is to show myself. I have a period of my life, specifically when I was at University, where I was speaking a lot. And demonstrating very few. And then I was working on the field of research, musicology,
where these people are not speaking about music, they do music. I use some of both because you show that it is possible to do and there are a lot of details in your stanza for example and the way I breathe.
The way I move, like things that you are not aware sometimes. Students can see, observe and then they replicate or not. But why it’s not good? Probably because of something that lacks of coherence within
what has been established by the person. So then we are discussing that. But you have to understand what the kind of music is because you have to grab the language of the composer. Études are very
good for that because they are simple in their forms. But then it forces you to pay more attention to details and how they are constructed. I show things and how they could be done.
Shaping, not playing static and the notes develop. When you sing with instrument. And the instrument start here with the breathing (pointing at his stomach), you become the instrument when you play. It is
really important that they understand the idea of singing with the instrument and that they are the instrument, and that instead of singing with the voice they are singing with the instrument.
Very much metaphors. I try to find stories. It tricks the imagination.
A lot of it I realize is how the student hears something. So sometimes I will, for example, if they are not aware of what they could listen for, then they might miss sort of an expressive element in there. I will
try to guide them to listen for this, and what to do with this information. We often talk about sound color that we make. In our case, they are based in harmony often. So we play melodic instrument, we learn
our part so we don’t play the piece necessarily with piano right away. So you look at the notes, and create musical lines, but this specific color only comes when you understand the harmony and once you
listen for that. To put their ears into the harmony when they play with piano and then discover how that changes their expressivity just by listening and responding.
9) ARE YOU AWARE OF STRATEGIES TO TEACH EXPRESSIVE SKILLS OTHER THAN THOSE YOU ARE ALREADY USING WITH YOUR STUDENTS?
I don’t think I do anything differently than other teachers, we all do kind of the same things. Some people speak more, you know stories or whatever. That’s a mixture.
I definitely use metaphors for sure, making connections to arts, making connections to literature. I personally don’t like telling an actual story. I don’t mind if the student is telling me the story. So I don’t
really want to impose a strict story line so I do kind of avoid that but I encourage some kind of narration to take place. Possible an image, art work related. But I am more abstract in my relationship with
music. I think it really depends on how the student is responding. And definitely orchestration that’s a big strategy for expressivity you know whether you’re imagining a string sound or wind sound or brass
sound, is it the whole orchestra, is it a solo?
I remember one of them had a huge difference on the quality of my performance, when I was 18-19. He did not know how to explain things really but he was showing them. And at this time it was exactly
what I needed, to have an example. And so I produced a lot with that and then compared to what others were doing. There is also the peer thing. So if you take someone in your lesson, you have a master
class kind of stuff, you learn a lot. It’s a good way to make people aware of differences and make people aware of different paths to reach the same goal which is to perform the piece. If you do only that
you miss the opportunity to go deeper with each student. I didn’t really manage to have to right balance. Ideally, I think we should have master class once a month and two or three lessons in between,
individual things so people can go with their own problems and sometimes they are a little shy to show their problems in front of an audience.
124
No because everything that I have learned from other teachers and master classes… if I like them I use them. I can’t that I dislike anything else. I might have forgotten something but try to use everything
that I know.
I have seen many master class and seen other people work with students. One strategy that you sort of impose your own way or your own musical vision of certain pieces, which sometimes you have to do
in order to open some doors. That is only the beginning because it has to be a part of the student.
When you have very little influence of sort of life experience, and you can sometimes talk about how certain life experiences has influenced what you do expressively, but there is sort of a limit as an
instrument teacher, how far you want to go with that. In the end it is all about how big is the imagination. Because my life experience is meaningless to them. The only thing that they can get from that it is
the mechanism to keep expanding it.
10) FROM THE EXPRESSIVITY POINT OF VIEW, DO YOU USE EXPLICIT AND SPECIFIC GOALS (PLANS) TO TEACH?
With my students here it’s a very high level. So I ask them at the beginning of lesson what they want to get through or achieve in the lesson. And the goals change if – for example the lesson you
observed, was the final lesson before a big audition, it was more a confidence building, the mental tactic was more – so the goal is different for every lesson, depending on the context, the student, what’s
coming, what happened last week.
Making sure to install a responsibility, at least figuring out what can be figured out on your own. At least understanding the markings that the composer has indicated, knowing where the composer lived. I
will direct them to a range of pieces, like if they are learning something from a composer, especially for the first time. Have them listen to an orchestral piece, a chamber piece, something surrounding it to
help them develop the ear for it. And ask them if they know anything about the piece. To do a little bit of preliminary research. I am not the kind of teacher that has a set agenda on what I know what I am
going to teach about a piece. Maybe the first time that you do Baroque music with a student or working on Bach, I know that there are inevitably issues that are going to come up that needs to be discussed,
such as articulations.
I don’t have to make it clear I don’t have a set plan because every time you try to do that you miss something. Because you miss the opportunity to respond to a need. You need the opportunity to grab
something that appears at this moment and you didn’t have the opportunity to speak before or something you want to speak for the long term. I try to have goals on the long term. I give goals in a general
manner, I say them in terms of which music I want them to be able to play. You are at etude one now I want to be able at the end of the year to do etude 12. They know those études. They know them by
listening. So they know what kind of progression, what kind of technique they have to learn. I find it quite efficient actually. Along the way you can speak about other goals. If you just give the big general
thing at the beginning that is not efficient.
No, they have a book where I write down anything that I want them to do and they have certain goals for the next lesson. My term mark is an impression of the progress made musically and technically
through the term as well as attendance, their punctuality, their preparedness and how much they work. If they are having trouble with a concept or a musical issue, we will work on that. So the lesson has
to be flexible enough to adjust and move from here to there.
No I don’t think so. In the ideal world is that when I meet a student for let’s say working with him two, three years, I try to be very present in the beginning, if you want even dominating in the beginning in a
positive manner. Really quite supervising. In the ideal world, towards the end of the education, I make a big diminuendo so that at their final recital they are free of me. And they should be able to stand on
their own feet.
There are different points of focus with different students and there are certain students that have this innate expressive personality. I do come up with a plan with what I want to work with every student
sort of over the year. I have not done this yet but I will. A studio class and have people perform or studio recital. That is sort of a moment for me to evaluate if I compare to the beginning of the year where
are we now. What do we need to change?
11) WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO TRY NEW STRATEGIES INVOLVING TECHNOLOGY FOR TEACHING/LEARNING EXPRESSIVE SKILLS?
Not at all - Not very likely - Maybe - Very likely - Surely. PC… if it’s hard forget it.
Not at all - Not very likely - Maybe - Very likely - Surely. Depends on what it is.
Not at all - Not very likely - Maybe - Very likely - Surely.
Not at all - Not very likely - Maybe - Very likely - Surely.
Not at all - Not very likely - Maybe - Very likely - Surely. It depends what it contains of course. Anything that could develop further than I would say yes.
125
Not at all - Not very likely - Maybe - Very likely - Surely. Depending on the technology. If something is useful and develop something that can’t be develop in another way or sort of inspire things
than I think it is great.
12) WOULD SUCH TECHNOLOGY HELP BOTH YOU AND YOUR STUDENT(S) TO REACH MORE SPECIFIC GOALS REGARDING THE TEACHING/LEARNING OF EXPRESSION?
Depending on the student. If I have a student who is very quick, but the other you repeat the same thing week after week, it could be useful. Like I said just have another voice saying the same thing. The
quick students are going to need it.
Possibly. Maybe.
J’ai toujours un problème quand on essaie de catégoriser un peu trop, l’expression, l’émotion et le jugement. Tout dépend aussi du type de musique qu’on utilise. Ça, ça fonctionne bien sur la musique
tonale, qui a été archi associée au cinéma. Il y a eu un renforcement énorme du lien entre la perception musicale et puis les émotions, notamment à cause de cette association. Le baser sur c’est joyeux,
ça ne l’est pas, et puis le principe qui me bogue le plus c’est : tiens on va jouer la même musique et puis on va l’interpréter de différentes façons. Ça va tellement à l’encontre de ce que je pense que ça
devrait être. Parce qu’en fait, on joue une musique, on se pose la question de savoir comment on va la jouer et pourquoi on va la jouer. Alors si une musique on peut la jouer de plusieurs façons
différentes, ça veut dire que la musique elle dit quoi alors. N’empêche qu’on peut peut-être l’utiliser. Peut-être qu’il y a des choses qu’on peut en ressortir, qui peuvent apporter des choses.
Moderately to very probable. As a part of it because very often there is so many things to do in a lesson and half the time, once I learn how to use it may be more useful outside the lesson almost then
inside the lesson.
Could be. Not definitely. I am not sure without having tried it. I put this warning triangle, danger of a manipulative thinking. It could influence you negatively. I respect your work, I respect what I read and I
would be willing to try it.
It would be worth a try. See that is interesting because I do the same thing, I ask students to play a passage in different ways. Sometimes they don’t know how to actually capture that specific emotion.
13) WOULD YOU BE INCLINED, IN THE FUTURE, TO USE SUCH SOFTWARE WITH YOUR STUDENTS IN INSTRUMENTAL LESSONS?
Probably not, maybe, but I have to see it first. It might be interesting for a bunch of teachers to have access to it on a lesson and then discuss what we think works and does not work. The thing is time,
getting something and learning it and then doing it in a lesson.
I would be more inclined to use it as a discussion point in a studio class. To maybe see what the feedback is from a performance and discuss it from that perspective. I would not use it as a significant part
of a regular lesson. (Even if you knew that it was working to enhance the emotional communication?) Maybe but the computer isn’t an emotional person. I have a healthy degree of skepticism that it can’t
replace a person or multiple people. If my students would find it helpful I would encourage them but I would want to monitor it. I would want to use it a little bit so I could understand it. So that we can learn
what the potential was. But I don’t think I would use it during a lesson because there may be extreme differences interpretative possibilities for reaching the same goal that the machine isn’t going to deal
with.
Après dans le contexte de moi, la musique que j’enseigne, aucun problème pour l’essayer, mais après ça dépend de c’est quoi le niveau de raffinement qu’on obtient. Ça m’intéresse de voir comment ça
fonctionne, c’est toujours facile de dire non a priori. De voir qu’est-ce qu’on peut obtenir comme résultat et est-ce que ça apporte vraiment quelque chose, pourquoi pas.
I would be very likely if I had the hardware and software. Definitely hardware.
Not before knowing what it does.
I would love to try it see what it does. In reality, it often is the case that students are not specific enough in defining what they are trying to express. They have trouble saying the intention. That is largely what
I do, I try to formulate an intention for them. My question is how complex it gets. In terms of what you are trying to express because all great music that we play is basically that, the complexity of the expression
comes exactly from the fact that you can’t pin point every emotion. So it would be interesting to see this in action and see what it really can’t do and what kind of feedback it gives. When I see an example
(using more legato…) that sounds pretty simplistic to me. That would be something that would love to see, how relevant and fine tune the feedback is and actually how relevant it is for the performer to have
those information. The listener may not be completely able to analyze the piece. They understand the language. The relationship between the listener and the performer what it does not take in consideration
is what the listener knows and what their background is.
126
14) WOULD SUCH TECHNOLOGY HELP USERS BETTER UNDERSTAND HOW LISTENERS PERCEIVE THE EMOTION THEY WANT TO CONVEY THROUGH THEIR MUSICAL PERFORMANCE?
I don’t know until I see the technology.
Yes I am sure.
Il y a un moment que j’ai arrêté de me poser la question qu’est-ce que pense le public. L’originalité de l’artiste se fait en créant des nouvelles limites. Le danger de ce genre de truc est de formater un peu.
Ça dépend comment c’est fait.
Moderately probable. I think the more advanced people become the more suspicious they might become of technology. The more advanced a player becomes; I think this is probably a better tool for a
moderate level to slightly higher level. At the undergraduate level it might be useful. At the master level, they are already into pretty heavy repertoire and by the time we accept master students, they are not
musically, incredibly mature yet but they are suppose to have all of the musical issues out of the way. Some student doesn’t have a clue how people are going to perceive their performance, not yet. To
understand the connection with listeners, yes I think moderately probable.
I am a little bit afraid of if I know how people would react, if I know this, this effect that I could do even more. That is one of my biggest inspiration is to see and to get the reactions.
I don’t know about the software I can’t really make a statement about this but I think there is potential, that might happen.
15) DO YOU THINK THAT UP-TO-DATE THEORIES AND FINDINGS ABOUT EXPRESSION AND EMOTIONAL COMMUNICATION COULD HELP YOU BETTER ORGANIZE YOUR TEACHING OF MUSICAL EXPRESSION AND GIVE MORE EXPLICIT
INSTRUCTION TO YOUR STUDENTS?
We should keep up and read just like a doctor reads about… The tradition is oral. From what we learn, from our colleagues, conductors, teachers.
Possibly. You have to try a variety because students respond to one more than another, even if the majority responds to one thing it doesn’t mean that that particular student is. So part of the joy of
teaching is getting to know the individual and learning what makes their mind opened. There is part of what I want to teach is the potential for exploration not reaching a set goal. There is no such thing as
perfection in performance. You are always going toward infinity. I would worry that a student might say I did everything that was successful on the machine and therefore I am done. You should always
want to reach more because the possibilities are endless.
J’ai des phases où je suis beaucoup plus ouvert à l’expérimentation, apprendre des choses des autres et d’autres phases où j’ai l’impression que je suis, pas conservateur, mais je solidifie mes façons de
faire. Et il y a des phases où je me dis d’un seul coup, ah c’est vrai j’ai oublié de parler de ça ou ça fait un moment que je n’en parle plus, j’ai jamais pensé à le présenter de cette façon la.
Automatiquement ça j’intègre. Les étudiants sont tous différents donc plus on a d’outils pour en arriver à répondre aux différentes personnes, mieux c’est. Et plus on est efficace. Donc oui évidemment.
If a strategy was shown to be effective and to work well yes I would use it. I like to think of myself as being open enough that I can change.
Yeah.
It is very difficult to measure the efficiency of teaching expression. It’s much easier to measure the efficiency of teaching technical skills, for example being able to play tense or finger octave. Expression, it
has so many layers, so many parameters and so many influences. Right now, without the help of technology, I don’t think that we are missing sort of a part of expression that we could get with technology.
I think it could actually be helpful in training teachers. If somebody is capable of expressing themselves on his instrument, and is very skilled at expressing himself, I am not sure how much can be gain.
Generally speaking it is good to be open to new ideas and new influences. Technologies are part of our lives now, pretty much all the time. Why not take a look at it?
2. Students’ responses
1) WHICH CHARACTERISTICS DO YOU APPRECIATE THE MOST IN MUSICAL ARTISTS?
Expressivity is number one, modesty.
Expressive performance.
Expressive skills. At a high level essentially everyone has technical skills already so that is sort of a given. Musicality and expressivity it’s a lot… I appreciate that more.
I kind of have a balance between both technical and expressive skills.
Expressiveness, technique but not so much. I prefer seeing musicality.
127
For me technique, for others expressivity.
I like hearing performances that, not like it’s manufactured out of certain rules they have learned in a school so OK we are just playing rules, so they have to have a certain personal approach to the music.
They have their own ideas put into the music, because if we don’t have our own ideas for the music then what are we doing?
Artistic expression would come first. Which is really difficult for organist because organ and harpsichord are limited because they don’t have individual dynamic control.
Expressive performance. I liked something that sounds great, looks great and is unique.
Expressivity and stage presence.
Expressive performance.
Technical skills just prove that they are good at what they do but I think that personality that really brings out a musician. We are a unique group of people so we all have something to offer. Very
expressive music, something that could evoke emotions.
2) HOW DO YOU DEFINE MUSICAL EXPRESSION?
Being able to interpret what is on the page as oppose to just playing what is on the page. To play in the way the composer wanted.
It’s kind of a language that normal human language can’t speak I guess. It’s kind of like… I don’t know it can paint an image when sometimes words can’t really do it. It’s a really broad concept because
there are many things again that music can express out.
Musicality, phrasing, appropriate pauses. Being able to communicate depending on the setting. Communicate with the audience more than just playing a piece rigidly and more like structurally, rather than
actually getting something from the piece. Phrasing in a way that makes… it’s interpretation I guess. It’s not just strict, it’s interpretation versus written music.
Very cheery, very relax, you are having fun, you are smiling out there. That is pretty much my expression whenever I play. Uniqueness.
Passion. Desire to want to play and play beautifully.
I think it’s how performers try to tell the story of what the piece is about. Their own interpretation.
I think you start with the notes and then try to almost decode what the composer is trying to do with these notes because there is always more behind the notes that are on the page. The context, the style.
And then you have to ask what these notes make me of. And then it’s a combination of what you think the composer’s intentions are and then adding your personal view. you always have to challenge
yourself and try to find what you are trying to express.
Basically a way of communicating emotions that the artist is feeling at a certain time, without using word.
Taking a piece and trying to make it yours so you put a piece of you inside the piece. So sure two people may play the same piece but one may sound differently from the other. One person can play it the
contraire to the next.
The transmission of emotions through music in such way that the audience share an experience with you.
Involvement in the music and how (musicians) present that to the audience.
Musical expression is the ability for music to evoke emotions.
3) WHAT CAN MUSIC EXPRESS?
To express what words can’t. I guess it’s the closest to feelings.
Obviously emotions, colors, landscapes, images, a picture. If you are a visual thinker, that’s what you can express through music.
I think when it’s composed it is mostly meant for a certain prupose, a certain emotion I guess, like anger or furioso it’s like aggressive. So when it’s composed, it is composed with an emotion in mind but I
guess the performer can definitely take that emotion and manipulate it in a way that communicate better to the audience.
It really depends on what you are playing, it depends on the mood, the setting. It all depends on what is given in front of you then it will help to turn out what type of expression you want to get out of it.
Moods, emotions, poetry. It can deliver messages, metaphors. That music can without having the words.
A mixture of emotions and your understanding of the piece.
128
Some people think it can express nothing. I think for me, there are certain pieces that I associate with emotions or times in my life. So you can tap into those in your performance. There are certain pieces
that remind me of happy times at a family vacation because that piece of music was always playing, so if I play that piece, usually piano pieces, when I play those pieces it kind of reminds me I could play
better because I have that kind of association with it.
I think it can express just about every human emotions there is. And then it can also express just stuff for fun. It also has the technical aspects as well so it does not even have to be expressive just ear
candy I guess.
Music can express a lot of things. Emotions, a part of you, it could express you as a person. A piece that you are practicing can represent you and that point in your life or the emotion that you feel when
you practice it. Emotions you are putting into when you are performing.
Everything, happy, sad, stories, program music, political agendas, above and beyond what words can express.
Any type of emotions, stories.
Music can express programmatic music, it can displays imagery, it can display feelings, it can display basically whatever you want. It is all imagination, you just hear the notes, the high, the low, and you
kind of paint this mental picture of something.
4) HOW IMPORTANT IS EXPRESSION IN MUSIC PERFORMANCE? MORE OR LESS THAN TECHNIQUE? DEVELOP.
More. Definitely more.
More than technique.
More.
It’s kind of more important just to get the certain feel and make sure that your audience kind of responds and knows what is going on when they are listening to you.
I think more than technique because you can be good and play all the notes but if it is just steady it is not interesting, you need to shape.
I think they should be the same.
Of course you can’t have the expression without the notes, but if you have just the notes and you are not doing what you are suppose to do, then you… I would say it’s more important than the notes, if I have
to choose. It’s like one of those… good and evil, you can’t have one without the other right? But they kind of feed off each other.
I think it’s more important than technique.
I would say more. I find that if you are more expressive and more… you make it sound a lot better than the technique is already there. I don’t really have a very good technique because I started percussions
later than some of my colleagues so I find that when I take a piece, I do work on the technical aspects but I work on the technical aspects to make them sound more expressive. I am trying to make the piece
sounds like as good as I can possible can from my perspective.
More. Because something that is technically perfect can only touch so many people and they have to understand that it’s technically perfect but something that is full of expression and not necessarily
perfect can touch the whole world even those who know that it’s not perfect.
I would say more important in way it’s harder to achieve. But if you have only expression without the technique behind it it’s kind of pointless. So I think you have to have both.
I mean you can listen to a very well played performance that is very technical but also very boring. So definitely expressive music is better than technical I think.
5) ACCORDING TO YOU, CAN EXPRESSIVE PLAYING BE LEARNED? IF SO, HOW? IF NOT, WHY?
To a certain extent I think so. To some extent you have to have it innately. If you have the capability, a music teacher or a performer that you listen to can teach you.
I think it can be learned. I don’t know I think that sometimes it can be learned, it can be developed but you need to have a bit of it before. You need to have that kind of innate thing.
Yes it can. I think it can be learned with experience. More than just instruction because instruction helps to flow with technique. It does help with expression but I think that is something that you learned
from experience and from doing performances yourself. It’s more like a self reflection rather than external learning experience.
I think you will learn it, it just comes with years of experience. I mean you develop become a much better performer as well as a better technical player. It just counts practicing and timing.
Yes it can be learned. By seeing other people play and by showing them how expressive they can be. Some people just have it and some people don’t do it is a bit of both.
129
No I think it should be developed by yourself.
Yes.
I think there are tools that could be learn to help facilitate expression. You really can’t communicate how, exactly how to do it, you can’t teach that to someone so that is something they have to let it work on
their own.
I think it’s more on the individual. It can’t really be learned, it’s something you just have. I find that one can play expressively, it takes a lot of practice to get what you want out. I find that my musical
training can help get out of it so playing expressively is kind of learned but it has to come from you.
Yes, through practice and experimentation.
Yes.
I think it can be learned through experience of performing and through inspiration of other artists but I think it’s probably easier to learn technique than expression.
6) WHEN SHOULD ONE START LEARNING EXPRESSIVE SKILLS?
Right away.
As soon as possible I think.
Around the same time that you have mastered the technical skills. That how it works from me at least. I practiced rudiments everyday and I practiced technique everyday basically all high school. And it
was not really until I started University that I started actually being able to express what I felt through the music.
A couple of years after you start playing. Once you start enjoying… you know your notes, you pretty know your basics and after that your teacher will probably ask you to go beyond what is expected from
what you are playing.
I think whenever they want. If you are starting to play anything when you are young you can be very expressive until when you are very old. It just depends on when you want to I think.
I think it should be developed when you start. When you know you are able to complete a piece with, understanding it and go through all the stuff.
Probably from the very start of music. And I think it would be easier to do that if they sing. Because it’s easier to put expression into your voice than in the instrument that you are just learning how to use.
The singing helps you find what is the phrasing and the expression that you want to put into the lines you play with your hands. I guess that is the point of solfège course.
I think right from the beginning.
I find right away because a lot of people do technique and then that is all they do. And then you just learn to be very good technically but when, later on, technique is just not enough, everyone is just as
good as you. So it needs something else. So I find if you incorporate the expressiveness with your technique then…
From the beginning. I think it’s important to express from the first moment you start making music. So it’s never a separate thing from learning the piece and expressing the piece. It should always be one
whole idea.
Once you can play somehow, once you get a piece of technique. Play your instrument first.
After they have found a good foundation in what they are doing. They have a good idea of the different styles for their instrument, they have gone through a variety of repertoire and then they can be oh I
can do this and here… it’s like gaining through experience as you learn all this music and you can hear it it’s like oh I can develop this into something else, doing this somehow to something I like.
7) HOW AND WHEN DID YOU BEGIN TO CONSCIOUSLY WORK ON YOUR EXPRESSIVITY?
Pretty early. I started taking private flute lessons when I was eleven. Probably right away in grade six.
With my teacher, pretty long time ago. Like when I’m done with learning the notes, how to read music.
When I started University. When I was in high school it was technique and then after that it became more a combination of both I think eventually, expressivity will take over to some extent because technique
would be sort of a given rather than… you have it already so you don’t have to focus on it as much. The focal point becomes expressiveness. Teachers definitely help, by giving sort of advice and
suggestions like, musical suggestions rather than just focusing on technique all the time, and listening definitely listening a lot helps.
130
A little bit of everything. With my teacher, when I am learning it for myself. It came along really quickly.
I think it was when I came to McGill. In Cegep it was all about technique and learning the notes and just mastering the… It was by my teacher because he was always telling me to shape, to phrase. He
wanted music, music has to breathe. It doesn’t mean anything if you can play all the notes but you have to put out the ones that are better important.
My piano teacher would always make me learn the notes first and then say ok now we are going to work on phrasing. I think it’s harder to add the expression three weeks into a piece. That is a good way
to start with musical expression and that was from a very early age. The teacher was always the person who gives me that kind of idea of what you could do with the music.
I think alone, probably one or two years after I have started playing piano I was getting bored with the pieces and then I actually realized I could make them sound different ways even by playing the same
notes.
Mostly from my teacher and on my own. I find, when I first started percussions, I was not very expressive but when I was playing other things I was very expressive. So I just melt my expressive musical…
I just take away the piece and where it is coming from, how it feels. My teacher would tell me that I should do this, do that and that I would probably get the sound that I want.
I think probably by listening. I grew up in a house with a lot of classical music. Si it was pretty much natural to me that every musical gesture should be expressive.
With the help of my teachers, it was not one of my strengths when I started so I tried to develop it consciously when I was 12 I guess. I started later than I think it’s ideal.
Definitely guided by my teacher for sure. But I started to look at music on my own in a more technical way and analyzing and like oh this is like this and I could change into this. Probably four or five years
into playing.
A combination of everything.
8) IN A TYPICAL LESSON, HOW MUCH TIME IS DEVOTED TO EXPRESSIVE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AS COMPARED TO TECHNICAL SKILLS?
When you first starting to take lessons, much more time is devoted to technical skills but I think at this point in my career, it’s not really necessary for my teacher to really stress that. At this point it is not
much of a factor at all.
Probably half of the lesson.
A lot of time, even the snare drum is super technical rather than… I think that more technical are a lot of instruments because… but we still talk about the melody all the time. We talk about bringing out the
melody and play musical phrase rather than just focusing on what I am doing with my hands, how I am suppose to phrasing it. I think a lot of it is devoted to expression rather than just technique.
Fair balance like half time. Half expressiveness and half technical skills.
I think all the time. The whole lesson. Unless we are specifically working on a technical part, it’s just based on technique, when every time we play anything it is always about expressivity.
When you practice your technique, expression is developed throughout your practice and technical stuffs. [My teachers] suggest me that I should probably do this and do that but it depends on if you want
to do that, or if you don’t want to do that you want to try this. 50/50.
It’s probably mostly expressive. We have not focused really much with technique, and I would like to focus more on technique because I am sure my technique could be improve very much, At the beginning
he has this thing called open legato which is technique that I have not learned before. He adds expressivity over the technical skills. It deals with the touch as well and when you release so it’s technical.
But it’s a technical thing that is very easily used for expressive means.
So I think more or less 50/50.
For me it’s more half and half because I have as much technical problem as I have for expressive problems because I find that my teachers are very good at determining what kind of sound that I want.
And we work on the technique until I get the expressive sound that I want.
Probably when you are starting a piece, half. And then as it continues on, more.
Usually if we are working on a big piece or something, that probably is half and half because it is a very technical piece. The way to play this piece is using light touch which on the organ doesn’t really
mean much. So there is a lot of that but there is also bring out the music at the same time.
I would say, especially at this level of music making, about 70% of the time is devoted to expressive skills and 30 to how do you make this.
131
9) TO WHAT EXTENT WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO TRY NEW STRATEGIES INVOLVING TECHNOLOGY FOR TEACHING/LEARNING EXPRESSIVE SKILLS?
Not at all
Not at all
Not at all
Not at all
Not at all
Not at all
Not at all
Not at all
Not at all
Not at all
Not at all
Not at all
-
Not very likely
Not very likely
Not very likely
Not very likely
Not very likely
Not very likely
Not very likely
Not very likely
Not very likely
Not very likely
Not very likely
Not very likely
-
Maybe
Maybe
Maybe
Maybe
Maybe
Maybe
Maybe
Maybe
Maybe
Maybe
Maybe
Maybe
-
Very likely
Very likely
Very likely
Very likely
Very likely
Very likely
Very likely
Very likely
Very likely
Very likely
Very likely
Very likely
-
Surely. I would be interesting in trying new things.
Surely.
Surely.
Surely.
Surely. I think I don’t see why we would need a new system or a new way if old things work.
Surely.
Surely. It depends on what it is but I am sure there is many methods out there that could help me.
Surely.
Surely. I like to try new things, see what can come out of it.
Surely.
Surely.
Surely.
10) HOW WOULD YOU REACT IF YOU WERE TO RECEIVE A PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK PROVIDED BY A SOFTWARE?
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably.
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably.
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably. Less favorably. I guess part of music is consciousness which is not a trait that of any computer has really.
Self reflection and consciousness are really important in that respect.
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably. I love getting feedback as I want to learn from my mistakes. I am someone that want to improve and get
better. Feedback I love getting feedback.
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably. It doesn’t know music… a machine.
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably.
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably. I would be curious to see what is going on.
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably.
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably. I think it could be fine to have a program that would give you feedback so if it is negative or bad it’s what
they hear so you can take to into consideration when you are practicing. I think that is kind of good. I think I would use that.
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably. I am very curious.
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably.
Strongly negatively - Mostly negatively - Neutrally - Mostly favorably - Strongly favorably.
11) DO YOU THINK YOU WOULD LIKE TO USE SUCH FEEDBACK SOFTWARE AT HOME DURING YOUR ROUTINE PRACTICE?
I would be interested to try it just to see what sort of feedback it gives me. I don’t know how helpful it would be. I think I would have to try it first.
Yeah.
I would probably not use it often or at all because it seems like it is time consuming to record every single musical fragment and play it back to myself. I think it would just take too much time for me
personally.
I am open to that, I am very open-minded. I am sure that is something I would like to try.
132
No. I don’t feel I need a machine to tell me how to play. I think back then when technology was not as advance, people would just use their ears to tell them what was good and what was bad.
Yes.
Perhaps. I would actually like to compare it, say if I am at home with my family, and then compare what they think of it with what the software thinks. I would be open to that. Test it.
Yeah I think it could be worthwhile. I mean certain things professor * makes suggestions: “Oh well you can change this and this”, but then when you are at home, practicing, or practicing at the practice
room, the only person listening to what you are doing is yourself. So you don’t have a second opinion. Even when you record yourself, what you hear from the recording could be completely different from
what you thought you were hearing when you were playing.
Yeah I think it would be useful. Yeah I would definitely use this if it was available. It think it would be very interesting to get feedback. It is nice to have feedback when you are practicing because you don’t
know. You are like ok this sounded right to me but you don’t know if it sounded right for other people. It is good to have an outside opinion because sometimes you don’t want to show other people because
it is not ready. So it is good to have another presence in the room that gives you feedback.
I would be interested to try it. First of all I would need to see it before but yeah I would be interested to try it.
Maybe. Because personally I do struggle with the difference between what you are hearing and how the listeners are perceiving it. So I use other strategies to work on that, I record myself a lot. But
another approach would be interesting to try.
Absolutely because it makes me note that my playing is pleasing an audience without there being an audience.
12) WOULD SUCH TECHNOLOGY HELP BOTH YOU AND YOUR TEACHER TO REACH MORE SPECIFIC GOALS REGARDING THE TEACHING/LEARNING OF EXPRESSION?
I think so, I mean I have not tried it so I don’t know how well it will even work but… I am sure it works well people are smart in doing things like that but it seems kind of odd that a computer is trying to feel
human emotions.
I think it would help me understand what my teacher wants to say because I find like in lessons many times… I think I understand what she is saying but I think it would be more precise.
Yeah I think it could help especially in more intermediate students, high school band teachers versus intermediate students. I think it would help more as a focus group. Yes I think it could help definitely. I
think it definitely has potential in working on specific goals, yeas I agree. It would help more intermediate students rather than advanced students. I think at the university level I don’t think that it would help
as much in a practice session.
Maybe, a little bit would be great. It’s a holly different ballpark out there and it’s a different experiment and I am open to try new things. When I try for a bit the experiment and if I like it well I will continue
with it. And if you don’t like it then you won’t. Stick to the old guns I guess.
It could but then it might not be your way of expressing yourself. I think it might be artificial. I just think that it can’t read your mind and it doesn’t know what you want to express. I think music is meant for
ears, not for a machine.
I think it could be part of it but it won’t be a big part of it though. It could be a tool but not a big part in the learning.
I suppose that depends on what he thinks of it but yes I think it would help because it is an objective thing but if you are into a piece and you say surely I am expressing this, and you are not really I think it
would be helpful to open your eyes to that, kind of missing pieces in your performance. But you would almost be like we have a computer second guessing my teacher in that case but we have to try it out.
So I am open to try it out, to experience it.
Yes I think it’s possible. I think it could take a while to get use to before it could be a time efficient tool but I think in the long * it could help.
I would think so. It depends because the teacher might have one expressive opinion about the piece and the software might have another one. So you might agree with it or might disagree with it. But it’s
nice to have another perspective.
I think it could the only thing is, I feel it would have to come not as a replacement to a teacher but with the teacher because the human can connection important.
Maybe. I feel with my teacher he explains it very well so when I am with him I understand the idea. I feel that I am able to understand pretty well. But in my own time it would be beneficial when I don’t have a
teacher around.
Absolutely especially with more expressive and more modern music, where it’s implied that you need to bring out certain emotions. With this kind of software it will point you in the right direction to achieve
what you really want in the piece and it will give you all these guidelines.
133
13) Would such technology help you better understand how listeners perceive the emotion you want to convey through your musical performance?
Yeah, I mean obviously you are not going to play for someone every time but if you have a computer telling you what someone would potentially feel then I guess it is better than not having anyone there at
all.
I think so.
Yes it definitely could. I like that a lot actually, it’s kind of cool. It is a sort of generic cues (more legato for being more sad). It seems like a good program. I think it would definitely help a group of people
more specifically than other I think. I think that it would not definitely help more advanced performers. It would help intermediate students a lot, that would help them more. It could definitely help intermediary
stage. Right after they finish maybe developing technique and then starting to work on expressivity it would help that transition a lot more I think.
Definitely, by listening you get a feel of like, I mean obviously you get the original feeling of what they are asking for but then by listening, by listening to yourself. And then you compare whether it kind of
meet the expectations of what the piece is about.
Maybe for the non musical people. Maybe for people who are not musically challenged. Maybe they will see what they are trying to express more but then again, I am not [really optimistic] for this. It’s all
about the heart, not about a machine.
It could be a tool that tells you what you can do but yourself, you have to define which one, like do you really want to this. I do not agree with this tool, am I still going to follow, am I still playing in a sad mood
if I don’t do that.
Of course you can’t ask every person in the audience, exactly how they felt, so I think for specific I think it’s something we should try out and see what’s up. But if we compare that to what listeners think of
it and if there is some discrepancies I would be a bit suspicious, but I think it’s something that we should try out. [I would maybe change my performance] depending on the listeners because there are some
listeners that are “I don’t care”.
Yes I think it would add a bunch of valuable tools but I don’t think it would change entirely how emotion is conveyed it just allows more tools to facilitate it I guess.
Yeah I believe so.
Yes. It’s interesting because I think sometimes we believe we are doing so much more than we are doing and seeing a recording of ourselves or hearing it is one way, but then working with the software
that really sort of analyze what you are doing takes that a step further and really helps you to see what you believe you are doing, what you are actually doing, and what is really being pick up. So it’s
interesting.
Yeah I think so.
Yes very much so.
134
Appendix F
Feel-ME software description provided during the interview
135
1. The Feel-ME software: theoretical basis, technical principles underlying it,
and the practical handling to users
Research on expression and emotion in music
Most listeners and performers define musical expression in terms of emotional
communication.i,ii When referring to emotional communication, it is important to
distinguish the performer’s expressive intentions from the recognition of these same
emotions by the listener. It has been shown that musicians express their emotions through
a range of musical cues (e.g. variations in tempo, timbre, articulation). iii,iv The emotions
are recognized by listeners who use these same cues to infer the expression. For instance,
a fast tempo, with forte nuances and staccato attacks are often employed to express anger.
The results from over a hundred studies have demonstrated that listeners, whether they are
musically trained or not, are able to identify and feel different basic emotions, such as
happiness, anger, sadness, fear and tenderness while listening at professional performers.
With precision and consistency, and through the use of various acoustic features,
performers are able to communicate different emotions to listeners. Possibly because
musicians’ behaviors (e.g. the way they move, their facial expressions) and certain musical
characteristics recall human gesture and vocal expression, performers are able to
communicate different emotions to listeners.v
For learning to occur, a teaching strategy requires three elements: a) a well-defined
task, b) an informative feedback, and c) opportunities for repetition and correction of
errors.vi Unfortunately, it appears that traditional teaching strategies of expression (e.g.
metaphors, aural modeling, verbal instructions) often do not provide adequate cognitive
feedback to students. Indeed, in traditional teaching strategies, there is a delay between the
performance and the feedback.
The Feel-ME software
The recently developed software, Feedback-Learning of Musical Expressivity (Feel-ME)
enables performers to enhance their personal emotional communication.vii It was designed
so that it would be easy to use even for student-performers slightly experienced with
technology. One of the main goals of the Feel-ME software is to help performers acquire
a better understanding of the relationships between performers’ intentions and listeners’
perceptions, and that through different possible interpretations. This software also helps
musicians verify how listeners would tend to perceive the resulting emotion of their
performance. Studies have shown that the Feel-ME software enhances musicians’
efficiency regarding their emotional communication, especially in guitarists. viii,ix But how
does it work?
1) In the first phase, performers are instructed to record several different performances
of the same melodic fragment from a piece of their repertoire, by trying to convey various
emotions (e.g. anger, happiness) that are selected at the beginning. The various
performances are stored in the computer memory and acoustic cues (e.g. tempo,
articulation, sound level) are automatically analyzed by the software. Statistical analysisx
136
is used in order to generate indices of consistency and understand the relationships between
performers’ expressive intentions and the acoustic cues they employed. The performances
are then compared to pre-stored data of listeners’ judgments of emotions in music
performance acquired through numerous listening experiments.
2) The second phase provides an immediate feedback to performers. It consists of
visual and numerical descriptions of performers’ usage of cues and listeners’ one. This
makes it possible for performers to compare directly how their playing matches listeners’
judgments. Based on the software suggestions (e.g. “use more legato articulation to
communicate sadness”), the performers may then try to modify their performance.
3) In the last phase, performers are invited to redo the first task again (i.e. recording a
number of different music performances expressing specific emotions). The process of
recording and analyzing the acoustic cues is reiterated. The purpose of this final phase is
to verify whether performers have improved their emotional communication by changing
the use of acoustic cues.
Implementing such software into instrumental teaching might provide students with a
precise cognitive feedback regarding emotional communication. Performers might also
develop an awareness of which cues need continued attention and improvement. Another
advantage of using such technology may be to enable student-performers to pursue their
learning outside of the instrumental lesson, and repeat the feedback as many times as
necessary according to the different performers’ goals. This software might also be
considered as an effective complement to music teaching. While humans are inventive and
effective regarding the interpretation of more ambiguous situations, technology is useful to
provide precise and reliable instructions.
________________________________________________
i
Laukka, P. (2004). Instrumental Teachers’ Views on Expressivity: a Report from Music
Conservatoires. Music Education Research, 6, 45-56.
ii
Lindström, E., Juslin, P. N., Bresin, R. & Williamon, A. (2003). Expressivity Comes from Within
Your Soul: a Questionnaire Study of Music Students’ Perspectives on Expressivity. Research
Studies in Music Education, 20, 23-47.
iii
Juslin, P.N. & Persson, R.S. (2002). Emotional Communication. In R. Parncutt & G. McPherson
(Eds.), The Science and Psychology of Music Performance: Creative Strategies for Teaching and
Learning. New York, NY : Oxford University Press.
iv
Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of experiments. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
v
Juslin, P.N. & Laukka, P. (2003). Communication of Emotions in Vocal Expression and Music
Performance: Different Channels, same Code? Psychological Bulletin, 129, 770-814.
vi
Ericsson, K.A., Krampe, R.T. & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The Role of Deliberate Practice in the
Acquisition of Expert Performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363-406.
vii
Juslin, P.N., Friberg, A., Schoonderwaldt, E. & Karlsson, J. (2004). Feedback Learning of
Musical Expressivity. In A. Williamon (Ed.), Musical excellence: Strategies and Techniques to
Enhance Performance (pp. 247-270). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
viii
Juslin, P.N., Karlsson, J., Lindström, E., Friberg, A. & Schoonderwaldt, E. (2006). Play it again
with Feeling: Computer Feedback in Musical Communication of Emotions. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 12 (2), 79-95.
ix
Karlsson, J. (2008). A Novel Approach to Teaching Emotional Expression in Music Performance
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
x
Multiple regression analysis estimates the relationships among variables.
137
Appendix G
Debriefing session
138
1. Debriefing session
The overall purpose of this thesis is to explore the nature of instrumental teaching as it
naturally occurs, with a particular focus on expression and emotion. It aims at
identifying the different types of strategies used by instrumental instructors to teach
expression, but also the limits of the actual strategies preventing teachers to systematize
their teaching of expression. It also consists in describing the instrumental lessons’
structural characteristics such as the time allocation to various activities, the language
used, and the frequency usage of specific feedback strategies. Moreover, this study
verifies whether issues regarding emotional communication and expression are
explicitly addressed by teachers and whether lessons are planed beforehand.
Teachers’ and students’ perceptions toward the use of new technology are of great
interest, since a particular application will never be adopted if it is not well received by
users, no matter how well it works. Therefore, a second objective of this project
consists in evaluating how instrumental music teachers and their students appraise
novel teaching strategies and the use of computers in teaching expressivity. It is
necessary to accumulate more evidence about what the prospects of using computerbased instruction, such as the Feedback- Learning of Musical Expressivity (Feel-ME),
in teaching expressivity are.
Results should permit the eventual development of instrumental teaching strategies of
expression adapted to teachers’ and students’ actual needs. Hence, strategies should
provide adequate feedback to students and facilitate the achievement of specific goals.
I did not inform you about the specific nature of the project before your consent because
I wanted to explore the nature of instrumental teaching as ecologically as possible and
did not want to influence it. I agree that my data may remain on the study.
___________
DATE
___________
DATE
___________________
Participant’s Name
___________________
Name of Investigator
139
_____________________
Participant’s Signature
_____________________
Signature of Investigator