425684 1311425684IsbellGeneral Music Today
GMT25210.1177/104837
Learning Theories: Insights for Music Educators
General Music Today 25(2) 19–23 © 2011 National Association for Music Education DOI: 10.1177/1048371311425684 http://gmt.sagepub.com
Dan Isbell1
Abstract Effective music educators often recognize that there is more than one way to teach a musical objective and understand that a specific approach may be more appropriate than another in a given setting. To meet contemporary demands, music educators need to be smart—understanding the nuances of various theories of learning, savvy—understanding their own learning style and how that may affect teaching effectiveness, and sensitive—understanding that teaching is situated in particular contexts. The music teacher’s full potential may not be fully realized, however, unless that person is skilled enough to teach in a variety of ways. In this article, the author provides a basic overview and examples of diverse approaches to the classroom and offers practical suggestions for implementing these ideas in music classrooms. Keywords music education, learning theories, learning styles, teaching strategies
Introduction Theorists, philosophers, psychologists, linguists, anthropologists, and others have all struggled with the puzzle of how people learn to make meaning from sounds. Ultimately, it is up to the teacher to make the important decisions about how to best meet the needs of the students in the music classroom. Complicating matters further is the notion that different objectives (i.e., playing an instrument, memorization, acquiring new skills) require different types of learning. As most teachers quickly learn, one method is not likely to work for all students and situations. If music educators are to be successful in meeting the needs of diverse student populations, they will need to not only understand multiple theories of learning but also know when a specific approach is most appropriate for a given situation. I have found that music educators who understand different learning theories and their applications can be characterized as smart, savvy, sensitive, and skilled. In this article, I first briefly define major learning theories and then describe how being smart, savvy, sensitive, and skilled allows the music educator to meaningfully apply these theories to his or her classroom.
Multiple Understandings of Learning Take a moment and consider some of the musical knowledge you have acquired. These understandings will
likely range from the basic (the violin is a stringed instrument) to the more complex (how the use of vibrato can effectively enhance a musical phrase). Now consider these understandings a bit more closely and compare and contrast them with one another. Were they learned suddenly or incrementally? Was there a teacher present? What was his or her role? Were other students involved? Did this learning linger for years or was it temporary? What were your reasons for wanting to learn? Reflecting on your own learning experiences will probably lead you to the conclusion that you learned various concepts in vastly different ways. Because different situations require different approaches to learning, it is important for teachers to understand how to give students these multiple types of experiences. The primary learning theories in education can be loosely broken down into categories and can be applied to any music classroom. Although these categories may overlap to some extent with one another, they differ regarding the purpose of education, the definition of learning, the role of the student, and the role of the teacher. Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, and humanism 1
Ithaca College, Ithaca, NY, USA
Corresponding Author: Dan Isbell, Whalen Center for Music, Ithaca College, 953 Danby Road, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA Email:
[email protected]
Downloaded from gmt.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
20
General Music Today 25(2)
create a big tent under which are various interpretations of specific ways music educators can use these large concepts to meet the needs of their students. Together they provide music educators with a vocabulary, a conceptual framework for interpreting the examples of learning, and help to show where to look for solutions to practical problems.
Smart: Understanding Learning Theories in Music Behaviorism. Largely based on the work of Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936) and John Watson (1878-1958), behaviorists have been concerned with observable behaviors and ways of modifying those behaviors (Hodges & Sebald, 2011). Their stance can be (rather coarsely) summarized—learners want to repeat behaviors that are rewarded and feel good and avoid behaviors that are punished and feel bad. In this respect, behaviorism (also called associationism) is based on the notion that influences on human behavior come from outside the person. In strict behaviorist settings, the teacher controls the classroom, makes the decisions, and attempts to “shape” students who are passive in the sense that they respond to instruction rather than make active individual decisions. In a music classroom, teachers may often find that their students will be more likely to come into class in an orderly fashion, take out, use, or put away instruments appropriately, and behave well in class if certain reinforcements are in place. Behaviorism is a common lens through which to interpret these experiences. Rewards can also be used in intermittent, strategic ways so that students continue to behave in a desired way in the absence of a reward. These rewards can take on many forms—stickers on written work, stars on the board for following class procedures, treats for good behavior, or performance awards. In each of these situations, the drive to attain an extrinsic reward is a primary goal for pursuing music. Teachers who have tried these strategies often discover that some rewards work in some settings better than they do in others. What works in one class, does not always work in another. Nevertheless, teachers often favor behaviorist techniques because they are typically easy to use or explain and work well when the objectives are simple and straightforward. Behavioral reinforcement is often used to reinforce simple behaviors associated with classroom management, but it sometimes can be used in more sophisticated situations as well. If, for example, a student is unable to successfully perform in a multilayered Orff ensemble, behavior modification can be used to “shape” a student toward the desired outcome. Rather than simply waiting for the final desired behavior to be demonstrated, a teacher chooses instead to reward “successive approximations”
(baby steps) that lead to the final outcome. First, the teacher can reward or reinforce a performance of a single part played by the entire class. This can then be repeated with each additional part where the teacher reinforces successful performances of two voices, then three, and then four. In this manner the arrangement is broken down into its basic components and the teacher rewards each step toward the final objective, which in this case would be a satisfying group performance. It is important that effective, appropriate reinforcement is used at each step of this process so that the student gradually approaches the goal behavior. Cognitivism. Behaviorists may acknowledge that hidden mental processes could be at work during the learning process; however, they believe that because these processes are not observable—and hence not measurable— they should not be the focus of attention. Cognitivists on the other hand, believe that the hidden processes of categorization, organization, storage, and retrieval are at the heart of the learning process and although invisible, should be a primary consideration for teachers (Phillips & Soltis, 2009). Furthermore, cognitivist teachers believe that learners bring different understandings and ways of knowing to the classroom. The goal of the teacher is to assist in the process of understanding the material. The term cognitivism is a very broad term encompassing a variety of viewpoints. There are however, two distinct approaches regarding the role of the teacher and student in this process. On one hand, there are those who believe the focus is best centered on the teacher who designs structured educational events for students whose role is to be passive recipients of knowledge (reception method). Contrasting with this approach is an approach in which students are active learners, engaging with content in their own unique and individual way (discovery method). In this view, the teacher’s role is more of a facilitator guiding the students toward the educational objectives. The discovery method serves as a foundation for understanding constructivist theories on learning. Reception method. In a teacher-centered music classroom, instruction typically proceeds in a very structured and sequential fashion. David Ausubel (1918–2008) is closely associated with this approach to learning and believed that learning should be carefully structured so that connections to previously learned material can be more readily made. His work developing “Advanced Organizers” has helped educators present content in ways that are, in his words, “structured” and “meaningful” (Ausubel, 1960). Cognitivist Robert Gagne (1916-2002) detailed a cognitive approach when he presented the educational community with his “Events of Instruction” (1965). Gagne’s “events” are a classic example of a teacher-centered approach that outlines nine clearly articulated steps (appearing in quotes
Downloaded from gmt.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
21
Isbell below) toward teaching a given objective. If syncopation was the topic of the day, for example, instruction would begin with the first event, “gain attention.” Recorded music with syncopation could be played as students entered the room. Next, the teacher “describes the goal” and then “stimulates the recall of prior knowledge” and explains how this class is related to other rhythm lessons from recent classes. This step is followed by the “presentation of the material to be learned,” perhaps a rhythm tree on the board or eighth notes with ties across the bar lines showing a syncopated pattern. The teacher would then allow students to repeat the rhythms on the board while they “provide guidance.” During the next two events, the teacher “elicits student performance” in an informal way and provides “informative feedback” as the students are playing. This in turn would be followed by the eighth event, a group performance at the conclusion of the class. Here the teacher “assesses performance” in a summative fashion. The final “event of instruction” would be to “enhance student retention and transfer” to other songs containing syncopation. This type of teacherdirected expertise is favored by many people because of the security associated with knowing exactly where the class is in relation to meeting the objective and what steps remain to satisfy the goals of the lesson. Constructivism and the discovery method. In contrast to the belief that the role of the teacher is someone dictating content while adhering to clearly established sequence of teaching music, a constructivist music teacher acts more the role of a facilitator, believing that knowledge cannot simply be transferred from one person to another, but rather is made or acquired within an individual. Constructivism proponents contend that individuals form or construct much of what they learn and understand (Bruning, Schraw, Norby, & Ronning, 2004). Lev (Leo) Vygotsky (18961934) is one of the early psychologists whose work has served as a foundation for social constructivist psychology. The ideas of John Dewey (1859-1952), Jean Piaget (18961980), and Jerome Bruner (1915-) have also been particularly influential. In constructivist settings, students are allowed the opportunity to interact with the content and each other in a way that they find most meaningful. Revisiting the music classroom described above, a constructivist approach might be based on syncopated music examples that students bring in to class themselves. During the class, students would perform with and for one another, manipulate rhythms creatively, and represent their understanding by creating unique, personalized notation for their own syncopated rhythms. The teacher in this classroom could move from group to group providing support and clarification where needed or presenting new questions and challenges as appropriate. In this manner, student learning of syncopation is based on the understandings of rhythm that were brought to the class and developed individually,
as each student had the opportunity to personally and actively engage with the content. This approach necessitates more flexibility on the part of the teacher and a willingness to let student attention and performance dictate the direction and outcomes of the lesson. This element of risk and uncertainty can make even veteran teachers uncomfortable. In considering these distinct approaches to music instruction, it is important to keep in mind that there is a time and place for everything. For example, while some situations may call for a more collaborative, constructivist approach, music educators can also benefit from heeding Webster’s (2006) reminder that music teachers “need never be afraid to share our more teacher-directed expertise at appropriate times.” Furthering this idea, Scott (2006) has provided advice on how these seemingly disparate approaches can coexist in a classroom. She explained the challenge for the music educator is to find a balance between the teacher as authority figure and teacher as facilitator, thereby assisting students in their quest for new knowledge and deeper understandings in relation to questions and problems negotiated among the members of a collaborative learning community. (p. 18) Along with Scott, Morford (2007) and Wiggins (2009) have applied constructivist psychology to the teaching of music. Humanism. It is possible to place the learning examples discussed above on a continuum of sorts with the strict teacher-controlled environments and clear outcomes of behaviorism on one end and the student-centered classrooms and subjective outcomes of constructivist settings on the other. If this continuum were to continue toward an approach that is entirely student centered, we would encounter learning environments reflecting a humanist perspective. Humanists believe that self-actualization, the natural, healthy development of a person to become fully who he or she has the potential to become, is a primary focus (Hodges & Sebald, 2011). Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) and Carl Rogers (19021987) are among the most notable individuals in humanist psychology. Maria Montessori’s (1870-1952) belief that a child’s “true normal nature” should guide instruction is an approach to education that remains in use in schools around the globe (Standing, 1998). Humanist teachers believe that people cannot be reduced to components and that learning occurs in environments where people can feel safe and secure. Only if certain needs are met can students progress toward a deeper, more fulfilling understanding of themselves and their role in the classroom. Humanist teachers believe that their primary role is to
Downloaded from gmt.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
22
General Music Today 25(2)
help students reach their potential. In this way, humanist teachers act as counselors and mentors more than transmitters of required content. One of the most popular contributions from the humanist perspective comes from Maslow (1943) who created a hierarchy of human needs. Maslow believed that each of the primary needs must be satisfied if the person is to move on to the more sophisticated, deeper needs at the top. Humanists believe that students should be allowed the freedom and opportunity to make their own decisions as they progress through the hierarchy. They also believe that the deepest, most meaningful and lasting educational moments occur at the top of the hierarchy. Looking at the syncopation lesson from a humanist perspective, we might see students bringing in their own examples of syncopated music, as was the case in the constructivist classroom. However, here the students would choose the time, location, and method of instruction, and means for assessment. The humanist teacher could allow students to choose whether to participate on their own, experiment with instruments in the classroom, visit other students in the class to observe their peers at work, or spend time with a separate activity until they feel ready to work on syncopation. After spending time on their own or watching others create syncopated rhythms, perhaps this student would then try to make their own rhythms. The teacher could then collect examples of student work to share to the class and discuss similarities and differences between the student excerpts.
Savvy:The Reflective Practitioner Educational researchers and teacher educators have embraced the concepts of “reflection” and “reflective practice” for many years. Some have suggested that rather than speaking of reflection in an “either you are or are not doing it” way, we should “focus our attention on what kind of reflection teachers are engaging in, on what it is teachers are reflecting about, and on how they are going about it” (Zeichner, p. 18, 1994). Reflection of course need not be limited to lesson planning, implementation, and assessment on the part of the teacher. It can also be expanded to include student self and peer evaluations. Just as important perhaps is the serious consideration and reflection savvy teachers give to their own learning style and how this may promote or hinder their effectiveness in certain classroom situations. When music educators become aware of their own learning styles, strengths, weaknesses, and areas of expertise, they can become more capable of enhancing the educational opportunities and options they provide in their classroom. Teachers will be naturally drawn to the approaches that they are most comfortable with and
are most closely aligned with their own learning style. Other approaches, however, may be more difficult and may require specific types of professional development. For example, a music teacher who has welldeveloped logical–mathematical intelligence may be very effective breaking down rhythms with charts and theoretical comparisons but may feel less capable or comfortable implementing movement activities. This scenario is good news for the logical–mathematical students in the room but may not be so for the bodily– kinesthetic learners. Savvy teachers are aware of their own learning styles and consciously reflect on how they can expand out of their comfort zone to reach more students in different ways.
Sensitive:To Diverse Learning Environments Many teachers have been left scratching their heads after discovering that a particular approach that has worked in the past is no longer effective. The consummate behaviorist B. F. Skinner (1904-1990) urged people to keep in mind that although behaviorism may sound like a very straightforward approach to the classroom, it is often difficult to identify effective reinforcement and what is motivating in one class may not be the case in another. This situation can be a perplexing one even for those teachers who understand that students bring their own unique understandings (schema) to the classroom (Philips & Soltis, 2009). Used extensively by Jean Piaget (1896-1980) and later by Richard Anderson (1934-) the term schema has been used to refer to the abstract mental plans that function as guides for action, as structures for interpreting information, or as frameworks for solving problems. According to schema theorists, these ways of knowing often act as “filters” for the learning that takes place in the classroom. Furthermore, schema filters are not limited to the students. Administrators, other faculty members, and community members all have unique notions of the goals and importance of education. Wise music teachers are sensitive to the diversity associated with music education careers. What works in a rural school in Colorado may not work so well in New York City. A lesson plan focusing on composition that was so well received in a second grade general music class will likely need to be significantly altered to be effective in an older grade level. The strict structure and sequence with a teacher-directed theory lesson may not transfer very well to a setting with more abstract subjective outcomes, such as improvisation and creativity. In each new setting, students bring unique opinions of what is valuable and meaningful in music and share these understandings with peers, who learn from and with them: a phenomenon known to social learning theorists as “situated cognition” (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989). A sensitive teacher is
Downloaded from gmt.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
23
Isbell aware of the fact that different objectives and classroom settings are likely best suited to a particular approach and that perhaps students are learning from one another just as much as they are learning from the teacher.
Skilled: Capable of Teaching in a Variety of Ways Take a moment to consider a recent music education graduate who is smart—understands the nuances of behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, and humanism, is savvy—understands their own learning style and how that information affects their teaching effectiveness, and is sensitive—understands that teaching is situated in particular contexts. The full potential of that graduate will not be fully realized unless that person is skilled enough to actually teach in a variety of ways. The necessary changes in teaching may be subtle or obvious, explicit or implicit, occur in front of a live classroom or develop between classes after dialogues with colleagues, students, and visits to professional literature. In any case, the teacher’s flexibility in meeting the needs of diverse student learners and educational settings must be coupled with versatile skill in pedagogy—certainly a tall order for any educator but a necessity if teaching potential is to be realized.
Conclusion There is no single explanation regarding how best to teach music, but one commonality in all music teaching and learning scenarios is that students need to get from Point A to Point B. In some cases, the distance between these two places is small, other times it is vast. The path may be clear and straightforward with obvious goals. It may be ambiguous, leading into unknown territory with subjective outcomes. If a teacher pushes too hard, students become frustrated and resist; push too little and they become apathetic and the appetite for learning fades. These uncertainties can be a source of confusion and stress or they can be considered a source of intrigue and curiosity for smart, savvy, sensitive, and skilled music teachers. Researchers are constantly shedding new light on how people learn and how these learning theories intersect with teaching practice. Shareholders in music education—students, parents, audiences, administrators— are understandably interested that music educators continue to adapt to the latest knowledge about learning. If music educators are going to keep pace with these contemporary demands, it will require music teachers who are smart, savvy, sensitive, and skilled.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References Ausubel, D. P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 267-272. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42. Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J., Norby, M. M., & Ronning, R. R. (2004). Cognitive psychology and instruction (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Gagne, R. (1965). The conditions of learning. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Hodges, D., & Sebald, D. (2011). Music in the human experience: An introduction to music psychology. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Morford, J. (2007). Perspectives-constructivism: Implications for postsecondary music education and beyond. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 16(2), 75-83. Phillips, D. C., & Soltis, J. F. (2009). Perspectives on learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Scott, S. (2006). A constructivist view of music education: Perspectives for deep learning. General Music Today, 19(2), 17-21. Standing, E. M. (1998). Maria Montessori: Her life and work. London, England: Plume. Webster, P. (2006). Constructivism: Some cautions about constructivism. The Mountain Lake Reader, 4, 92-93. Wiggins, J. (2009). Teaching for musical understanding (2nd ed.). Rochester, MI: Center for Applied Research in Musical Understanding. Zeichner, K. (1994). Research on teacher thinking and different views of reflective practice in teaching and teacher education. In I. Carlgren, G. Handal, & S. Vaage (Eds.), Teachers’ minds and actions: Research on teachers’ thinking and practice (pp. 9-27). London, England: Falmer Press.
Bio Dan Isbell, PhD, is an assistant professor at Ithaca College where he teaches undergraduate and graduate classes in music education, supervises music student teachers, and conducts the Campus Band.
Downloaded from gmt.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016