approaches to creativity in the music classroom - University of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

with friends” (183). In this study’s school setting it appears that for faculties otherthan music, working with friends was a rarity because it was deemed disruptive andnot conducive to achieving the best result. This prohibition on working in friendshipgroups made these musical experiences all the more enjoyable for the students and ledthem to describe music as a “fun” subject.Irrespective of the size of groups, many students commented on the importance ofworking with friends. For one group, consisting entirely of fellow dormitorymembers, success was ascribed to knowing each other so well they had the capacity toresolve disputes amicably amongst themselves. They seemed able to respectfullyaccommodate their differing viewpoints and to incorporate them in an acceptableoutcome. Vincent described this as; “the group work went pretty well because ours isdorm mates and we know each other so we don’t to worry much about havingarguments with them”. In a study that explored “possibility thinking” in 9 to 11 yearolds, Craft suggests that through their tolerance of ongoing disagreement, friendshipgroups can continue to work productively in the face of an uncertain outcome: “theresolution of ideas toward one agreed perspective was not necessary; disagreementwas common between children and ways in which possibilities would be developedseldom resolved” (2011:56).Several students commented that they would have been unable to participate withoutthe support of their friends. “If I don’t have the help from my friends I wouldn’t beable to make a song” (Vincent). Jake also explained, “it is hard to make a song butwhen my friend was next to me, I could compose”. Some of these students came intothe elective with little musical knowledge and experience. In addition, they hadlimited English comprehension skills. Their friends were not only acting as translatorsbut also, in some cases, providing music tuition that enabled them to participate quiteeffectively. Green refers to this as “peer-directed learning” (2008a:183) and has foundthis arrangement has many benefits. Her research suggested that students were able tounderstand their friends’ explanations more easily because they were presented injargon free, age appropriate language or non-verbal communication.As suggested above, one negative aspect of working in friendship groups was theuneven spread of instrumental skills, which occasionally meant that students’ options33
were limited to one or two families of instruments, making it difficult for them toachieve a reasonable outcome. For one of the tasks, Howard’s group had “threepianists in our group, which made it very hard to co-operate with each other”.Similarly, for Daniel’s group it would have been more productive if “we could havemore piano because I don’t play keyboard”. With previous teaching providing themwith an understanding of the elements of music, it seems these students found that acombination of different instrument families presented a far greater source of tempoand rhythmic possibilities, with keyboards providing melodic shapes and harmonicinterest. So the benefits of these friendship groups needed to be weighed against theadvantages of non-friendship groups which were able to select from a more balancedrange of instrumental abilities, contributing to a broader knowledge of the domain.Composition of groupsFor some groups, the sort of personalities involved had a significant impact on theoutcomes. For instance, groups that included one particular student who appeared toblock ideas, not only of others but also his own, were sometimes unable to completethe designated task. Even in a larger group, the members were unable to deal with hisblocking mechanisms, even though he was working with friends. This participant, onthe other hand, found the experience very positive and enjoyed his involvement in thegroup. Possibly the cultural difficulties he had to overcome marred the experience forthe group but provided him with a rewarding encounter.Several groups found that a change of personnel created difficulties because of theirunfamiliarity with these new members. Vanessa explained “there were four people inour group, three of us had previously worked together but the fact that we hadn’tworked with one other member made it difficult as we didn’t have any prior chemistrywith him”. In this context, Macdonald, Miell & Mitchell suggest that participants whoare not friends “have to establish a way of working together before any productiveactivity can take place, a feature that comes naturally to friends with a history ofinteractions” (2002:160). For some students, working with particular individualsenhanced their performance because of a perceived empathy between them. Jacob, apercussionist, explained “I think I work very well with Simon D because he plays thepiano and the drum kit so it’s easy to communicate with him when he’s playingpiano”.34
Page 1 and 2: LYING ON THE FLOOR - YOUNG PEOPLES
Page 3 and 4: Declaration:This thesis does not co
Page 5 and 6: AbstractIn recent times, the import
Page 7 and 8: the avant-garde in Western Art Musi
Page 9 and 10: quality of products or responses ju
Page 12 and 13: 2.1 Defining Creativity2.1.1 From G
Page 14 and 15: place primacy on the processes that
Page 16 and 17: that most research pays little atte
Page 18 and 19: 2.1.4 Asian PerspectivesCultural co
Page 20 and 21: conforming behavior, inhibiting the
Page 22 and 23: According to Paynter (2008b), the b
Page 24 and 25: very important in supporting creati
Page 26 and 27: Chapter 3:Methodology3.1 The resear
Page 28 and 29: of 450 students, many of whom are i
Page 30 and 31: Table 1: Description of Tasks over
Page 32 and 33: also be used for the five interview
Page 34 and 35: and if necessary, to provide time f
Page 36 and 37: eflects a person’s character) ope
Page 40 and 41: An added benefit for most of these
Page 42 and 43: • Preparation;• Letting go;•
Page 44 and 45: I felt it was boring and slow” an
Page 46 and 47: [I] thought that we are not going t
Page 48 and 49: well: I used C major key with a sma
Page 50 and 51: Hard workThough students displayed
Page 52 and 53: struggling members of the group but
Page 54 and 55: EvaluationAlthough students did not
Page 56 and 57: The absence of a clear cut dichotom
Page 58 and 59: Steven, for example, reported that
Page 60 and 61: was thinking of something else”.
Page 62 and 63: Chapter 5:ConclusionMy aim in under
Page 64: learning generated by interaction w
Page 67 and 68: Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). The do
Page 69 and 70: Leung, K., Au, A. & Leung, B. W. C.
Page 71 and 72: Somekh, B. (2006). Action research:
Page 73 and 74: Appendix 1 - TasksTask 1Students we
Page 75 and 76: Appendix 3 - Consent FormPROJECT TI
Page 77 and 78: Appendix 4 - Interview questions•
Page 79: turns out really well and I like ma

approaches to creativity in the music classroom - University of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?