Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T05:36:06.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Negotiating musical problem-solving in ensemble rehearsals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2018

Aslaug Louise Slette
Aslaug Louise Slette*
Affiliation:
Oslo, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ensemble playing is considered central in specialist higher music education, not least because of its collaborative nature. It is a subject in which students are expected to take significant responsibility for learning together during their many unsupervised ensemble rehearsals. This article reports from a qualitative case study investigating the ways three undergraduate student chamber ensembles negotiate musical problem-solving, emphasizing their listening efforts. Findings reveal four ways of interacting – complete, incomplete, personal and expert negotiations – and also suggest new ways of understanding aural awareness within ensembles. Working from a sociocultural perspective, the study proposes that listening is also a collective phenomenon.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Music Education , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , March 2019 , pp. 33 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ALVESSON, M. & SKÖLDBERG, K. (2009) Reflexive Methodology. New Vistas for Qualitative Research (2nd edn.) London: Sage.Google Scholar
BRYMAN, A. (2012) Social Research Methods (4thedn.) Oxford: Oxford University press.Google Scholar
DAVIDSON, J. W. & GOOD, J. M. M. (2002) Social and musical co-ordination between members of a string quartet: An exploratory study. Psychology of Music, 30 (2), 186–201.Google Scholar
DVOŘÁK, A. (1973) Trio for Piano, Violin and Violincello E minor Op. 90 ‘Dumky’ (B166). London: Ernst Eulenburg Ltd.Google Scholar
ELLIOTT, D. J. (2005) Introduction. In Elliott, D. J. (Ed.), Praxial Music Education. Reflections and Dialogues (pp. 3–18). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
GODØY, R. I. & LEMAN, M. (2009) Musical Gestures: Sound, Movement, and Meaning. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
GORDON, E. E. (2012) Audiation Learning Sequences in Music. A Contemporary Music Learning Theory (pp. 3–24). Chicago: GIA Publications.Google Scholar
GRIMEN, H. (2008) Profesjon og kunnskap [Profession and Knowledge]. In Molander, A. & Terum, L. I. (eds.), Profesjonsstudier [Vocational Studies]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
GUBA, E. G. & LINCOLN, Y. S. (1989) Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
HUNTER, D. (2006) Assessing collaborative learning. British Journal of Music Education, 23 (1), 75– 89.Google Scholar
KARPINSKI, G. (2000) Aural Skills Acquisition. The Development of Listening, Reading, and Performing Skills in College-Level Musicians. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
KING, E. C. (2006) The roles of student musicians in quartet rehearsals. Psychology of Music, 34 (2), 262–282.Google Scholar
KRIPPENDORFF, K. (2004) Content Analysis. An Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd edn.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
KRUEGER, R. A. (1998) Analyzing & Reporting Focus Group Results. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
LEBLER, D. (2013) Using formal self-assessment as a proactive tool in building a collaborative learning environment: Theory into practice in a popular music programme. In Gaunt, H. & Westerlund, H. (eds.), Collaborative Learning in Higher Music Education. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
LINCOLN, Y. S. & GUBA, E. G. (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
LUDVIGSEN, S., LUND, A., RASMUSSEN, I. & SÄLJÖ, R. (2011) Introduction. Learning across sites; new tools, infrastructures and practices. In Ludvigsen, S., Lund, A., Rasmussen, I. & Säljö, R. (eds.), Learning Across Sites. New Tools, Infrastructures and Practices. (pp. 1–13). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
MILES, M. B. & HUBERMAN, A. M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd edn.) Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.Google Scholar
MØHL, P. (2003) Synliggørelsen. Med kameraet i felten. [Making it visible. In the field with the camera]. In Hastrup, K. (ed.), Ind i verden. En grundbok i antropologisk metode. [Into the World. A Basic Book in Anthropological Methods] (pp. 163–183). København: Hans Reitzels.Google Scholar
MORGAN, D. L. (1997) Focus Groups As Qualitative Research (2nd edn.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
PRATT, G. (1998) Aural Awareness. Principles and Practice. With Henson, Michael and Cargill, Simon. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
PRATT, G. & HENSON, M. (1987) Aural teaching in the first year of tertiary education: An outline for a course. British Journal of Music Education, 4 (2), 115–137.Google Scholar
ROSCHELLE, J. & TEASLEY, S. D. (1995) The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In O'Malley, C. (ed.), Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 69–97). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
RØNHOLT, H. (2003) Didaktiske irritationer [Didactical irritations]. In Rønholt, H., Holgersen, S.–E., Fink–Jensen, K. & Nielsen, A. M. (eds.), Video i Pædagogisk Forskning – Krop og Udtryk i Bevægelse [Video in Pedagogical Research – Body and Expression in Motion] (pp. 124–153). København: Forlaget Hovedland.Google Scholar
RØNHOLT, H., HOLGERSEN, S.–E., FINK–JENSEN, K. & NIELSEN, A. M. (2003) Anvendelse av video i pædagogisk forskning [Using video in pedagogical research]. In Rønholt, H., Holgersen, S.–E., Fink–Jensen, K. & Nielsen, A. M. (Eds), Video i Pædagogisk Forskning – Krop og Udtryk i Bevægelse [Video in Pedagogical Research – Body and Expression in Motion] (pp. 15–37). København: Forlaget Hovedland.Google Scholar
SÄLJÖ, R. (2001) Læring i Praksis. Et Sosiokulturelt Perspektiv [Learning in Practice. A Socio-Cultural Perspective]. Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag.Google Scholar
SÄLJÖ, R. (2006) Læring og Kulturelle Redskaper. Om Læreprosesser og Den Kollektive Hukommelsen [Learning and Cultural Tools. About Learning Processes and the Collective Memory]. Oslo: J. W. Cappelens.Google Scholar
SEDDON, F. A. & BIASUTTI, M. (2009) Modes of communication between members of a string quartet. Small Group Research, 40 (2), 115–137. doi: 10.1177/1046496408329277Google Scholar
SLETTE, A. L. (2014) Discussing the notion of aural awareness in ensemble rehearsals. Finnish Journal of Music Education, 15 (1), 49–61.Google Scholar
STAKE, R. E. (1994) Case studies. In Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 236–247). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
STAKE, R. E. (2006) Multiple Case Study Analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
VYGOTSKY, L. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
VYGOTSKY, L. (1981) The genesis of higher mental functions. In Wertsch, J. V., Cole, M. & Leont'ev, A. N. (eds.), The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology (pp. 134–188). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
WENGER, E. (1998) Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
WERTSCH, J. V. (1998) Mind as Action. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
WERTSCH, J. V. (2007) Mediation. In Daniels, H., Cole, M. & Wertsch, J. V. (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
WIBECK, V. (2000) Fokusgrupper. Om Fokuserade Gruppintervjuer som Undersökningsmetod [Focus Groups. Focus Group Interviews as a Research Method]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
WILLIAMON, A. & DAVIDSON, J. (2002) Exploring co-performer communication. Musicae Scientiae, 6 (1), 53–72.Google Scholar
YIN, R. K. (2009) Case Study Research. Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar