1 Introduction: Waking Up from a Deep Sleep

Some years ago, in an analysis on what is happening in primary and secondary education classrooms, one of us (Pozo, 2006) referred to the film “The Sleeper” directed by Woody Allen in 1973, to serve as a metaphor for the educational situation. Many readers and particularly the younger ones may not be familiar with this film. It is a comical narration of how, after hibernating for 200 years after forced cryogenic storage, Miles Monroe, a clarinettist, played by Woody Allen himself, wakes up in USA, his home country, finding himself in a police state with its citizens under surveillance. Leaving aside other more political aspects of the film (and of Allen himself) which coincide with other, perhaps better known dystopias such as “1984”, we wish to emphasize that Miles Monroe, the clarinettist stumbles upon situations which hilariously illustrate what changes have occurred in the most everyday culture and habits that Miles does not know how to respond or adapt to, giving rise to multiple comical situations. In this future, Miles the clarinettist does not go to any music classes to update his musical knowledge, but if he had, we would fear that his reaction would have been totally different because beyond shallow appearances and the presence of new artefacts and technologies, the ways of learning and teaching would have changed very little.

It has become a cliché to say that musical education is crisis-ridden and that the ways of teaching in conservatories and music classrooms in general have not adapted to social and cultural changes nor helped students to develop the skills and tools required for this new millennium. In fact, all the analyses carried out in recent years on the state of instrumental music teaching, many of them centred on conservatories but also encompassing other teaching environments, agree that it has reached a serious crossroads (e.g., Sarath et al., 2014; Tregear et al., 2016). For example, one report undertaken a few years ago which aimed at tracing the upgrading of the curriculum in North American conservatories categorically stated that “significant change is essential [in musical education] if we are to bridge the gap between academic music study and the musical world into which our students and the students of our future will graduate” (Sarath et al., 2014, p. 11).

Several authors (e.g., López-Íñiguez & Bennett, 2020, 2021; Tregear et al., 2016) agree with the insights of this report. It purports that the gap between the musical education being provided for future musicians and the competences they will need to deploy in their professional and personal future is increasingly broader and deeper. A similar gap exists between the “musician in the academy” and the “musician in the real world” (Sarath et al., 2014, p. 2) and as a result the report advocates radical or paradigmatic changes, to intensely rethink the suppositions, goals and methods of this type of musical education.

Many factors are involved in widening these gaps, some of which will be analysed in this chapter and some in the next. Improving the quality of education in musical interpretation beyond mere cosmetic changes in the periphery of the curriculum which characterises the new curricular proposals, means undertaking genuine paradigmatic change (Sarath et al., 2014), to overcome the traditional conservatory model (Burwell, 2005; Musumeci, 2002; Tregear et al., 2016). Jørgensen (2000, p. 68) describes this tradition as the arrangement “where the teacher is generally looked upon as a model to follow and a source of identification for the student, and where the dominant learning mode of the student is imitation”. The student is therefore, “the one who observes, listens, imitates and seeks [the] approval [from the teacher]” (Uzler, 1992, p. 584). This particular type of didactic relationship between teacher and learner (see Chapter “Teaching Music: Old Traditions and New Approaches” and also Burwell, 2012, 2016; Persson, 2000) inhibits the development of the autonomy of future musicians as learners, and the development of artistic identity (Gaunt, 2008, 2010, 2011).

However, it is not just the personal development of the learner that is limited by traditional teaching. The social function of music as a cultural activity is also encased in models which appear to respond, in a similar nature as that which occurred with Miles Monroe, some 200 years ago. This more or less corresponds to the foundation of the first conservatories we had, and not with today where we should be waking up to a new reality. Society which surrounds and sustains the conservatories is completely different from that which induced its first foundations, and the ‘social contract’ between society and the centres of musical education is therefore also burnt out, with the commitment between them in need of updating and modifying (Tregear et al., 2016).

Neither is the music which is taught and learned in the conservatories, for good or for bad, the same as that which is listened to and participated in within most social spaces. There is also a widening chasm between music which fills conservatory classrooms and its potential listeners, its public, who nobody bothers to train. It is increasingly necessary that conservatories work to promote attentive listening from their citizens.

Maybe the problem of passive audiences in concert halls, invoked with such frequency, is due to the fact that the embodied part of the musical experience has become irrelevant and yet the embodied element of music is central to the listening experience. (Tregear et al., 2016, p. 10)

Recognition of this gap or possibly now chasm, therefore, has a good many dimensions which do not peter out in the relationships taking place in the classroom between teacher, student and music, often determined by a specific instrument. Although this book precisely centres on how to improve or radically change these forms of making music and learning it and teaching it in classrooms, we believe it is necessary in this first chapter to also point out other dimensions that in our opinion are also essential for defining a new educational culture in conservatories and in general in music education spheres. We will therefore identify three pillars or essential dimensions in this chapter, as we shall see in the following subsections. These appear to be intertwined into current research on new musical educational culture, which both researchers and a growing number of music teachers appear to be pursuing in recent decades, and also with the professional practices and educational policies of institutions where music is taught and learnt:

  • The integrating aspect of musical education, by which holistic competences are defined that expand instrumental mastery, since they are required for the musicians to find their professional function in an increasingly changing society.

  • The social function of musical education and interpretation, as the organising centre of musical practices and musical education which benefit people in many aspects of life, particularly the diversity of existing cultural expressions.

  • The restructuring element inherent to music through which autonomous, open, creative, expressive and flexible learning and teaching practices are brought about. Also, as explained in this and successive chapters of the book, there is a need for this restructuring element to acquire greater presence in institutional curriculums, instructional practices and education policies.

2 Comprehensive Preparation in Music Education: Towards Professionalism in Higher Level Instrument Studies

The need to accept restructuring instruction in formal musical education contexts, which is the very kernel of this book is strongly connected to more general research studies on education and psychology that define effective learning as that which promotes autonomy but also resilience and competencies to confront new problems (Biggs & Tang, 2011; Boud, 2012; Pozo & Pérez Echeverría, 2009; Yeager & Dweck, 2012). This wouldn’t be a bad thing for our clarinettist Miles Monroe as a learner in a society which is so impacting for him. However, teachers usually have difficulties in accepting these ideas, both theoretically and practically, (see Chapter “How Teachers and Students Envisage Music Education: Towards Changing Mentalities”) and the same occurs with students who seem to be particularly focused on the instrumental issues (Gaunt, 2010; Presland, 2005), forgetting that in order to develop their careers they also need other, different skills (Burwell, 2005; Carey, 2008; Gaunt, 2008, 2010; Gaunt et al., 2012; Jørgensen, 2000; López-Íñiguez & Bennett, 2020, 2021; Mills, 2002; López-Íñiguez & Burnard, 2021). This is why Lebler (2008) suggests that for future music professionals to know how to navigate the working world, today’s music conservatories need to provide students with comprehensive instruction which is musically inclusive and leads to both flexibility and a great variety of musical skills. Such issues as these, as will be illustrated in this section, do not appear as frequently as they should in the classroom.

This is extremely worrying since we know that the employability of musicians who graduate is minimal, but also “complex and disorganised” (Bennett, 2016, p. 112), and when they leave the higher conservatories or music universities with their diploma as professional instrumentalists, they will have to address their professional options, not only in keeping with their skills as instrumentalists, but also with other informal aspects and their ability to take decisions and adopt a variety of professional roles in the music area (Burnard, 2014), a rather uncertain career for those who are professionally dedicated to it (Bennett, 2007; Bennett & Bridgstock, 2015; Shihabi, 2017). Being the principal player or tutti in an orchestra, or establishing a chamber musical group with an agenda replete with concerts and commercial recordings is attainable to very few instrumentalists (Bartleet et al., 2012; Bennett, 2014). Furthermore, a great majority of them will be dedicated to teaching their instrument and for this, as we shall see in Chapter “Instrumentalist Teacher Training: Fostering the Change Towards Student-Centered Practices in the Twenty-First Century”, comprehensive teaching of instrumentalists as music teachers is essential to ensure them an empowering and motivating future.

Here, studies undertaken by Zhukov (2019, among others) repeat the need for change in dyadic teaching in higher conservatories and music universities, putting emphasis also on creative aspects and professional development during studies (e.g., López-Íñiguez & Bennett, 2021). Moreover, Perkins (2013) advocates authentic learning activities which arouse students’ curiosity and therefore their motivation, beyond the necessary skills with the instrument. These specific skills of the instrumental discipline have been defined in a range of studies (in the American context, e.g., Chin, 2002; Young, 2016), for example, with pianists, indicating those which are truly important in interpretation evaluation: sight-reading, playing the Western canonical repertory, harmonizing melodies, transposition, improvisation and accompaniment. We all agree that skills with the instrument must necessarily have to be refined to the utmost. It is a fact that students of musical instruments in higher education centre their efforts on this (Creech et al., 2008; Gaunt, 2010). However, these skills are not enough to make a musician successful nor adapt to the contextual and professional demands of this society.

Hence, the curriculums of music teaching have always considered this a central aspect (Barrett, 2007; Carey & Lebler, 2012; Walmsley, 2013). However, the addition of representative subjects of the aspects mentioned in the previous paragraph in the curriculums as we have just suggested, do not appear to be sufficient and therefore, students must also be exposed to pedagogic environments where they develop traits which are relevant in our current western society, including adaptability, flexibility and resilience (Burnard, 2012; Gaunt et al., 2012). Our students also need to develop their social skills and organisation, their motivation, their confidence, their artistic agency and autonomy, and the necessary strategies to cope with their professional demands (Burland & Davidson, 2004; Juuti & Littleton, 2012; MacNamara et al., 2006, 2008). They also have to be able to reflect critically on their professional learning pathways (López-Íñiguez & Burnard, 2021), and on their abilities and profiles as future music professionals (Blom et al., 2014; Brown, 2009). Essential qualities, without forgetting also generic matters such as critical thinking, leadership or working in a team (Bennett, 2009; Bennett & Bridgstock, 2015).

Recent research studies conducted within the Icelandic framework (Jónanson & Lisboa, 2019) or the Australian framework (Lebler, 2008, 2019), emphasize the offer of additional engagement in investigation for music students in higher studies (see also Chapter “Instrumentalist Teacher Training: Fostering the Change Towards Student-Centered Practices in the Twenty-First Century”), since it is only in this way that they may be prepared to lead in bringing about the necessary change we have been suggesting and to improve the curriculums of the different centres where they will work in the future. Such is the significance of these aspects that, for example, in the Australian framework, after having researched these issues, they have insisted on designing the higher musical education curriculum to be more centred on offering authentic learning and assessment experiences (Carey & Lebler, 2012; Harrison et al., 2013). As a result the students come out of what several authors (e.g., Burwell et al., 2017; Rostvall & West, 2003) define as the ‘secret garden’ or the ‘black box’ of the conservatory classroom or the rehearsal soundproof booth to new and inspiring environments (Perkins & Williamon, 2014; Smilde, Page & Alheit, 2014) which include collaboration (Gaunt & Westerlund, 2013; Pozo et al., 2008); innovation in musical styles and pedagogic practices (Lebler, 2007), and diverse creativities (Burnard & Haddon, 2015).

All of these issues, but also aspects such as the criticism of musical studies in formal institutions, the lack of exposure to professional situations during studies, or the focalising on soloist careers (Bartleet et al., 2012)—which really is a dream only within the reach of very few (Juuti & Littleton, 2012)—comes to light when professional musicians are asked whether their musical education prepared them for what truly was their profession within the musical framework (López-Íñiguez & Bennett, 2020), i.e., a comprehensive or holistic education in which a broad identity was developed as musical citizens their whole life long, as identified in research in musical education as the ‘living curriculum’ (Bath et al., 2014; Johnsson & Hager, 2008). For this reason several studies in music have identified the need to expose students to real experiences with professionals who enrich them and help them develop a variety of essential competences in life as musicians, such as versatility, personal growth or social and emotional skills (Ascenso et al., 2019; Burland & Davidson, 2004; MacNamara et al., 2006, 2008).

To conclude, the future instrumentalists will have greater or lesser success as professionals depending on the variety and quality of their interpretation activities during their studies and the potentiality of these for promoting self-discipline and autonomy (Creech et al., 2008). However they will also possess realistic anticipation about the professional opportunities available to them (Brown, 2019; Reid et al., 2011), which will necessarily have to be defined within a framework of expansion within and without the educational framework in the professional environment.

3 The Social Function of Music: Playing and Learning Music in an Increasingly Open, Diverse, and Changing Society

During the last few decades, the expressive and creative dimensions of music have changed considerably, and as a result, Miles Monroe would need not only to understand which novel questions would occur musically around them but to understand that these new artistic manifestations of great diversity respond to constant social changes. These changes respond, for example, to the diverse cultural influences of a global society which is increasingly more interconnected and constantly expanding, to the growing interest of professional musicians in improvisation and composition, to the artistic expression mixing a great variety of musical genres, or the acoustic and electronic productions and interpretations which take place in unconventional contexts and which are enabled in turn, by the genuine technological advances that facilitate their access and transmission to audiences who are different from those of the opera or classical ballet.

Furthermore, as stated by Tregear et al. (2016), educating professional musicians has been highly selective and exclusive, particularly over the last two centuries, and for this reason we may call it “elitist” since a “talent” or musical predisposition was required, which supposedly only some people had, and which was something that could not be taught. At the same time, these people interpreted for elitist audiences because the language to communicate was highly intellectual and therefore accessible to select and erudite audiences. Throughout this book we will try to demonstrate that a more open view is required regarding musical education and that it should not be reduced to the virtuosity of the individual interpreter. Instead of being merely limited to an exclusive form of musical education it should open up to new audiences, new social settings outside of the ones it has been used to. To do so, greater efforts need to be dedicated to educating not just the musicians but the audiences too, without whom those musicians would not be able to professionally develop (Tregear et al., 2016).

However, if understanding all of this were not enough for Mr. Monroe, he also should accept that music not just evolves as a response to social changes but that it also occasions them (e.g., Green, 2017; Regelski, 2006), with the relationship between music and society being a similar dilemma to the ‘what came first, the chicken or the egg?’. The social function of the music would therefore be more related to cultural enrichment through its multidisciplinary and trans-disciplinary character (see Chapter “Learning Outside the Music Classroom: From Informal to Formal Learning as Musical Learning Cultures”), connecting it both to other arts and diverse scientific domains. A dialogue therefore arises which could contribute to sensitisation on ecological sustainability through more local cultural projects in small communities, or exercising as the essential focus in the development of social justice through the integration of immigrants in musical experiences derived from their folklore. Some of these issues have come about in macroprojects of relatively recent research such as the ArtsEqual in Finland which includes interventions of social cohesion and integration through projects in which the arts are used to improve peoples’ health. Educational policies are designed to support the development of artistic institutions which act in the most responsible manner possible towards society. The impact of the arts on equality and wellbeing has been studied, as has the importance of the arts as an element creating diversity in general schools (e.g., Anttila & Suominen, 2018; Jääskeläinen & López-Íñiguez, 2017; Kallio & Heimonen, 2018; Kivijärvi & Väkevä, 2020). In Latin America we also found individual research initiatives on the accessibility of music in schools of developing countries such as Chile (Angel-Alvarado & Lira-Cerda, 2017), or “El Sistema” in Venezuela. The latter originated as an experience which went on to have great success in these social aspects according to several authors, (e.g., Verhagen et al., 2016), and was then adapted to other countries such as the United States (e.g., D’Alexander & Ilari, 2016), although it also received severe criticism regarding its results, which were far from conclusive on the said social benefits. Further rigorous research is required as to the real effects of their practices (Baker et al., 2018).

4 Creativity and Restructured Pedagogies: Towards Genuine Change in Instrument Learning and Teaching

The dimensions dealt with in the previous sections and others we cannot embark upon here, conclude that there is a need for profound change in the ways music is taught and learned in our classrooms - the key aim of this book. Since the millennium, several studies in educational sciences (e.g., Bransford et al., 2000; Mayer & Alexander, 2016; Pozo, 2008, 2016; Pozo & Pérez Echeverría, 2009; Sawyer, 2015), and in the psychology of music and musical education have stressed the need for a change in model to reinforce the role of the learner with respect to taking decisions on their own learning, so that their learning processes are appropriated (Hallam, 2001a, 2001b, 2006; Gatien, 2009; O’Neill, 2012; Virkkula, 2015; see also Chapters “Teaching Music: Old Traditions and New Approaches” through “How Teachers and Students Envisage Music Education: Towards Changing Mentalities”) and to autonomously manage which goals and contents should be learned (Gilbert, 2016; see, e.g., Chapters “SAPEA: A System for the Analysis of Instrumental Learning and Teaching Practices” and “Student-Centred Music Education: Some Ideas to Improve Learning and Teaching”) through the most innovative and constructive approaches, centred on the student and on the development of their competences (Bautista et al., 2006; Musumeci, 2005; Zarzo, 2017). According to these studies, the traditional teacher-learner approach—currently the most used in the majority of musical teaching institutions in the Western world (Daniel & Parkes, 2017; Duffy, 2016)—, do not encourage students to be autonomous nor to self-regulate their learning (Gaunt, 2005; López-Íñiguez & Pozo, 2014a, 2014b), but neither do they exercise the necessary critical, reflexive and independent thinking to continue learning throughout life, something which is crucial in the musical environment (Boud, 1989; Boud et al., 1999; Carey, 2010; Carey et al., 2017; Daniel & Parkes, 2017; Duffy, 2016; Falchikov, 2007; Gaunt, 2008; López-Íñiguez & Burnard, 2021; Montalvo & Torres, 2004), and without which professional opportunities in music would be limited (Hennekam & Bennett, 2017), as we saw in the previous section.

Improving the quality of education in musical interpretation therefore requires, as we noted at the beginning, overcoming the traditional conservatory model (Burwell, 2005; Tregear et al., 2016) which has been so much in vogue since the eighteenth century. This model will be analysed in detail in Chapter “Teaching Music: Old Traditions and New Approaches” and revisited in Chapter “Instrumentalist Teacher Training: Fostering the Change Towards Student-Centered Practices in the Twenty-First Century”. Both researchers and teachers, and even students themselves are increasingly demanding a change in instructional practices in instrument or voice classes which results in student centred teaching. In fact, this type of teacher is the main focus of higher musical educational reforms in Europe (Klemenčič, 2017). Thus, for example, the new pedagogic forms which appeal to the social change confronting this passivity and reproductively by music learners is reminiscent in our context with the demand for change proposed by the European Association of Conservatoires (AEC), which urges educational institutions to develop more comprehensive and enlightened curriculums where contemporary traditional teaching approaches which are “almost damaging the development of the student as a reflexive and innate musician” are eliminated (Cox, 2007, pp. 12–13). Recent auto-ethnographic articles have reflected critically on the complex trajectory in educational institutions of professional musicians (López-Íñiguez, 2019; López-Íñiguez & Bennett, 2020).

In fact, this enlightened vision in musical education which appears to lead to the best results in learning (Biggs, 2003; Carey & Grant, 2014, 2015; Cranton, 1994; McGonigal, 2005; Mezirow, 1997, 2000; Taylor, 1998, 2007), has been receiving strong support from several groups and research projects during recent years. Beyond these and other specific investigations there are numerous initiatives by institutions, associations, universities or projects both on a national or international level, focused on improving musical education which shares to greater or lesser extent, the concerns expressed in this chapter. Since it is not the aim of this book to list all the possible associations, institutions or research and dissemination networks involved from different paradigms and methodologies, and so as not to overwhelm the reader, some of the initiatives we believe to be more relevant are listed overleaf in an appendix. The interested reader may thus probe deeper into whichever direction they choose. In any event, all of these initiatives, like many others from different and more or less global, but we believe complementary perspectives, coincide in the need to promote radical changes to the traditional forms of learning and teaching music in musical institutions and in the functioning of the music industry in general (Tregear et al., 2016). These traditions consequently require rethinking and alternative models must also be put forward to help close the deep chasm between the academy and the society with which we began this book. This is the aim of Chapter “Teaching Music: Old Traditions and New Approaches”: to propose new approaches after a critical analysis of still dominant traditions in our classrooms and educational institutions.