Hanken’s (2016) recent review of the literature on peer feedback in instrumental instruction confirms that this topic has not received a lot of formal attention in the scholarly literature. Indeed, as we discussed in class on Monday, we Western Art Musicians typically rely on an ad hoc sense of etiquette around the roles we play in our social circles, whether we define our social circle by instrument, instrumental teacher, ensemble, or ensemble section. Though the world has changed tremendously, we still participate in an apprenticeship model the age of which can counted in centuries.
That’s not to say that peer learning is irrelevant to us. In fact, Hanken utilizes a situated theory of learning (Lave and Wenger, 1991) as motivation to characterize in more detail the implicit role of peer learning in our WAM tradition. She notes that peer learning is already an important part of our apprenticeship, whether we pay attention to it or not. Her research aims to increase awareness of peer learning among musicians and teachers to effect positive social change.
She offers three case studies of studios that embrace aspects of peer learning in the apprenticeship model. Two of these studios are run by instrumental teachers who have created instructional roles for students in masterclasses and group lessons. These teachers step back and allow students to provide feedback to each other, offering mentorship as needed along the way. The third case study employs Liz Lerman’s Critical Response Process as more of an intervention for peer feedback, and I think it may be useful to consider this intervention as we carry out peer feedback activities in our class.
- Peer offers descriptive response
- Performer asks for specific feedback
- Peer asks open-ended questions to stimulate reflection
- Peer asks permission to offer opinion to performer
Students in my class will notice, very coincidentally, this list starts with “descriptive response.” We are currently working with descriptive responses in our peer review training module (though our instructional module comes from an integration of ideas from a different scholarly tradition). Kristin Kjølberg, the vocal teacher who uses this intervention, reported that students initially had difficulty forming a response other than an evaluative one (great job, too bad it was out of tune). Their experience seems to have highlighted the specific problem inherent in description – what are we paying attention to? I’ll leave that with you for now.
Whether or not our instrumental teachers explicitly embrace a role for peer feedback, it is useful for music students to think about how we manage our social interactions – we are only as good as our peers, so anything we can do to support each other will ultimately reflect well on us.
References:
Hanken, I. M. (2016). “Peer learning in specialist higher music education.” Arts & Humanities in Higher Education. 15(3-4): 364-375.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning – legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lerman, L. & Borstel, J. (2003). Critical Response Process: A Method for Getting Useful Feedback on Anything You Make, From Dance to Dessert. Tacoma Park: Liz Lerman Dance Exchange.
