The Role of Self-Efficacy and Modeling in Improvisation among Intermediate Instrumental Music Students

Abstract

Abstract The first purpose of this study was to investigate whether different modeling conditions (Aural and Aural/Notated Transcription) produced significant differences for improvisation achievement. Another purpose was to investigate whether music learning theory-based improvisation instruction had an effect on students' self-efficacy for improvisation and for instrumental music. Participants (N = 76) completed two researcher-designed self-efficacy scales before and after a 10 treatment session improvisation instruction. Following the treatment sessions, each participant was individually recorded and assessed. The posttest improvisation scores were subjected to an ANOVA, while the pretest and posttest self-efficacy scores were subjected to two Repeated Measures ANOVAs. The alpha level was adjusted from .05 to .017. The statistical analysis showed that there was no significant difference in improvisation achievement for the modeling conditions. Further analyses showed there were significant increases in students' self-efficacy for improvising and for instrumental music following the improvisation instruction. Self-Efficacy and Modeling in Improvisation Guiding music students in improvisatory music making experiences has become an educational pursuit with increasing support. For years, improvisation has been a key aspect of music teaching approaches such as Gordon, Orff, Kodaly, and others (Mark, 1996). Publications from organizations such as the Music Educators National Conference (1996) and the National Association of Schools of Music (2003) have advocated the study of improvisation as an integral component of music instruction. While many music educators have advocated the development of student improvisation skills in music classrooms (Azzara, 2002), there is a lack of consensus on how improvisation should be taught, or even how improvisation should be defined (Bitz, 1998). The term improvisation can embody a wide array of meanings and is highly dependent upon contextual surroundings. The disparity among definitions validates the premise that cognitive complexity and musical freedom involved in improvisation exist within a continuum. Azzara (2002) acknowledged that on the topic of improvisation in music education is relatively young and in need of replication and expansion (p. 182). While the practice of improvisation is valuable in its own right (Azzara, 2002), several researchers have found that guiding students in improvisation learning experiences may actually be linked with the development of other musical outcomes such as music achievement (Azzara, 1992; McDaniel, 1974) and rhythmic accuracy in sight reading (Montano, 1983). In order for music educators to reach the goal of students being musically fluent, Azzara (1992) mentioned that continued research needs to be done involving audiation-based improvisation, or improvisation relating to music learning theory. Audiation is when one hears and comprehends music silently when the music is not physically present and is the foundation of musicianship (Gordon 1980, 1997). Gordon stated, Without audiation as the source, at most, music can elicit only emotional response, much like eating and not digesting food (2003, p. 11). Since various improvisation approaches contain learning experiences with a wide range of perceived difficulty, it is possible that a student's confidence for being successful at improvising may be contingent upon the student's perceived difficulty of the various approaches. While not an empirical research study, one of the most cited sources of improvisation pedagogy (Aebersold, 1992) has documented the importance of self -perception while explaining why some students choose not to improvise. Aebersold said, I find a strong corollary between low and those wanting to improvise but are afraid (p. 103). Although Aebersold used the term self-esteem in a general sense, the meaning of this message is clear. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.