Practice

Ch 4 Our Projects

Self-Regulated Learning in Music Performance and Instrumental Practice pg 25 Narratives on Creative Engagements in Music pg 31

Self-Regulated Learning in Music Performance and Instrumental Practice

August 2018 to August 2019

Background

This research project arose from conversations with students from School of Music, who had a natural desire to improve self-directed learning and assessment practices. The project explores conditions and characteristics of feedback for efficacious self-regulation learning (SRL).

• Research collaborator: Dr Leong Wei Shin (Assistant

Dean, Degree and Student Life, Teacher Education;

Curriculum, Teaching and Learning Academic Group,

National Institute of Education-National Technological

University and now Specialist, Assessment Policy and

Practice and Curriculum Policy Office, MOE)

• NAFA Co-Investigators: Dr Rebecca Kan; Georgette Yu

• Research Assistance: Jonathan Chng and Kelvin Ke (August 2018 to January 2019)

Research participants in AY18/19:

4 students from School of Music, Lena Ching (Head, Keyboard Studies) and Tang Xiao Ping (Principal Tutor, Clarinet)

Research investigators with student participants from School of Music

Research studies advocate that formative feedback has the potential to facilitate SRL (Andrade & Brookhart, 2016). However, there is a limited research on SRL in the field of arts and in the understanding of feedback within the framework of SRL in music studies.

Over a period of 2 semesters in AY18/19, students were involved in reflections and interviews to identify characteristics of formative assessment that empowers learners to control and regulate learning and motivation in individual and ensemble music making. Teaching observations in Ms Lena Ching’s studio were also conducted to explore the students’ approach to SRL, and its effect on music practice and performance. The following research questions were posted in this study:

• What are the characteristics of formative feedback and

SRL in a tertiary-level music performance class?

• How does the experience of processing formative feedback supports student self- regulation in a tertiary level music class context?

Overall, participants demonstrated skills of self-regulation such as setting of long-term goals and sub-goals, deliberate use of various practice strategies, developing awareness of their learning, regulating their emotions and motivations and self-evaluating their performances.

Participants in this study used similar strategies to those prescribed in Leon-Guerrero’s (2008) study, such as dynamics, tone and phrasing as interpretational goals. There were also non-playing strategies such as visualising the performance, use of metaphor to guide practice, characterization as interpretational technique and the embodiment of body and gestures that were not mentioned in previous literature. Another distinctive point in this study was the use of slow practice to improve concentration and memory.

The process of SRL illustrated an iteration in goal setting, monitoring and self-evaluation of performance. Effective selfregulation was represented by the ability to close the loop between self-assessment of performance, goals and progressive monitoring one’s cognition, emotion and motivation. Long-term goals and sub-goals continually changed based on how students reflected and resolved problems during and after a performance.

Key Findings of Case Studies

1. Approach to SRL

2. Self-regulation Practice Strategies

3. Processes of Self-Regulation

4. Characteristics of Formative Feedback There was a clear scatter of feedbacks from both internal and external sources. Participants took the initiative to seek help from peers, teachers and others resources, such as books and recordings. The processing of feedback seems to have come from different loci of causality. One of the cases conveyed a clear turning point in the course of the semester, when the feedback became more productive. In most cases, the interactions between student and teacher were emotive and turbulent. However, the participants showed appreciation of the different feedback despite not-knowing what to do and not having genuine dialogue with the feedback sources. There was an excellent case that exemplified the advantage of ‘feedback literacy’ to allow for effective self- regulation of learning.

In NAFA’s dedication to prepare students leaving NAFA as self-regulated learners, the curriculum can be constructed to provide more guidance on self-regulated practices. The use of formative feedback in the curriculum can also consider components of SRL to encourage more realistic goal(s) setting that is achievable using checklist of practice strategies. In practical modules, there could be clearer year-on-year expectations about what can be celebrated as achievements.

Faculty members or tutors need be supportive or at least be familiar with the concept of self-regulation to promote SRL and foster students’ metacognition and cognitive flexibility. Teachers could consider development of formative assessment model that empowers learners to control and regulate learning in individual music making such as giving more opportunities for peer and self-assessment.

While standards of performance can be expected in certain seasons of practice, it is important to make a distinction between practice spaces of learning where safety of experimentation, making of mistakes, trying out of ideas can be more supported. Such learning spaces can be enhanced with feedback literacy for both students and faculty members.

Research-Led Recommendations for Consideration

Curriculum

Pedagogy

The participants have contributed considerably to advance the knowledge of SRL within the context of learning at NAFA. All shared the enthusiasm of learning and wanting to be better in their chosen profession. The four participants shared three key areas that benefited them in participating in this research: first, the advantage of selfreflection that “is worth the effort, as it prevents us from getting looped in a cycle of bad habits”, secondly, the understanding of teacher feedback that “definitely instilled in me a sense of responsibility and motivation for my own learning”, and lastly, the research provided scaffoldings with “the few questions that guided… to what was crucial” and “sets me on another path to keep going at self-discovery”.

The research model can be replicated in other arts disciplines to widen understanding of SRL in art education.

Key Findings

1. Overall, participants demonstrated skills of self-regulation through prescribed reflective questions and interviews.

2. One distinctive point in this study was the use of slow practice to improve concentration and memory.

3. Effective self-regulation was represented by the ability to close the loop between self- assessment of performance, goals and progressive monitoring one’s cognition, emotion and motivation.

Long-term goals and sub-goals continually changed based on how students reflected and resolved problems during and after a performance.

4. In most cases, the interactions between student and teacher were emotive and turbulent.

5. There was an excellent case that exemplified the advantage of

‘feedback literacy’ to allow for effective self-regulation of learning.

Feedback from student participants:

The outcome of the research was mostly surprising and enlightening to me, and it brought to my attention things that I had no awareness of doing during my own practice, when it was compared with a theoretical framework of self-regulated learning. One of which was that a lot of my reflections were on goal setting and feedback. Thinking back on my process of reflecting, I suppose a lot of my reflections were around goal-setting because not only was I heavily involved in my own research project on formative feedback, it was also related to the timing of my reflections.

As most of my reflections were documented right after my principal study lessons, I would mostly be talking about the feedback given to me and what I would like to work on during my practice for the week. I suppose it did not seem as surprising that I was talking a lot more about feedback and my practice goals. Another thing that brought to my attention was the differences pointed out between my practice in Singapore and that in London. It made me realise that the kind of feedback given to me can vastly change the way I approach my own practice. Needless to say, I have greatly benefitted from learning with both teachers during my final year at NAFA, and both of them have definitely instilled in me a sense of responsibility and motivation for my own learning.

It was a weird experience watching the conclusions of the project being unveiled on the screen one-by-one. I did not think much when recording my reflections, but I’m once again reminded that whatever I feed into my mind on a daily basis is important, as they will shape my perspective subconsciously and have repercussions on my interactions with others. This project also made me realize that self-reflection is worth the effort, as it prevents us from getting looped in a cycle of bad habits. All in all, it was a good experience trying to look into secluded world of music-making, in an attempt to improve on longestablished ways of learning.

Thank you for having me in this research project over the past year and it has been rewarding for me as well. I was able to see and confirm for myself how some of the challenges that I constantly faced were because I was self-regulating.

I also felt that the results were representative of what I felt of myself during my practices - having many practice strategies but some of them do not work out all the time. That also sets me on another path to keep going at self-discovery to find out what would be the best solution for different problems that I face along the way. The reflections also served as a good platform for me to sort out my thoughts along the way as I practised in the week.

Despite the vulnerability and exposure during the presentation, (due to me being the only wind player out of the 4 participants, examples given were quite obviously pointed to me) the journey has been a meaningful one. With the research outcomes, I saw myself in the light of a 3rd person.

Personally, it was difficult for myself to describe to other people, my way of practice or how I function, but through jotting down honest thoughts, and working in what seems to be aimless, turns out to be a progressive learning journey where I get to pat myself on the back, telling myself how far I have come. Often times, I would lose sight of what is my main goal of all these, caused by frustration and constant drilling, but thanks to the few questions that guided me, I kept drawing myself back to what was crucial.

The biggest challenge of this particular research was I had other commitments in school, academics and performances that eats into personal time and space for reflection; and due to the inconsistency factor, I had to put the reflections on hold due to lack of time management- naturally, without the consistency of journaling, going back to it was not an easy task, especially when you had to admit your shortcomings in that task. I managed to pull through and drag myself back to do it as it was still an ongoing research.

I’m glad I get to see to the end of it, and evaluate myself through that. Thank you for giving me the opportunity.