B. J. Music. Ed.

2010 27:1, 71–87 Copyright 

C Cambridge University Press 2010
doi:10.1017/S0265051709990210

Informal music learning, improvisation and teacher education

Ruth Wright1 and Panagiotis Kanellopoulos2

1
Don Wright Faculty of Music, Talbot College, The University of Western Ontario, London,
Ontario N6A 3K7, Canada
2
Department of Early Childhood Education, School of the Humanities, University of Thessaly,
Argonafton & Filellinon, 38221 Volos, Greece

[email protected], [email protected]

This paper1 explores firstly the sense in which improvisation might be conceived of
as an informal music education process and, secondly, the effects of a course in free
improvisation on student teachers’ perceptions in relation to themselves as musicians,
music as a school subject and children as musicians. The results of a study conducted in
two Greek universities are presented. Using a narrative methodology, examples of data
from the reflective diaries or learning journals which 91 trainee teachers kept as part of
their participation in an improvisation module are presented and discussed. The argument
is made that improvisation, as a particular type of informal music learning process, has
an important role to play in fostering the qualities required of teachers to work with
informal pedagogies in music education. Furthermore, we would suggest that such musical
experiences might gradually lead to the development of a critical perspective on both music
education theories and practices. Improvisation might emerge as a moment and a practice of
rupture with linearity of progress, working against reification of knowledge and glorification
of received information. The findings suggest that improvisation might offer a route for
creating an intimate, powerful, evolving dialogue between students’ identities as learners,
their attitudes towards children and their creative potential, and the interrelationships of
the notions of expressive technique and culture, thus becoming ‘an act of transcendence’
(Allsup, 1997, p. 81). We propose that the issue of connecting informal learning and
improvisation might be resolved by regarding improvisation as an exemplary case of
creating a communicative context where most representations/conceptualisations/struggles
to solve problems are left implicit. Such experiences for pupils and teachers alike
might further extend the social and personal effectiveness of informal learning as music
pedagogy.

Introduction: Informal learning and the development of a critical

perspective towards music education

At the age of four, a child I knew drew extraordinarily vibrant, imaginative trees. Crayon,
chalk, colored pen, and silly putty were all useful. These trees were remarkable in how
clearly they showed the bulbous lobes and branchy veins of individual leaves in a
kind of cubist, all-the-way-around view that would have delighted Picasso. Meticulous
observation of real trees, and a certain daring that is characteristic of four-year-olds,
combined to produce these striking artworks.

71
Ruth Wright and Panagiotis Kanellopoulos

By the age of six, this child had gone through a year of first grade and had begun
drawing lollipop trees just like the other kids. Lollipop trees consist of a single blob of
green, representing the general mass of leaves with details obliterated, stuck up on top
of a brown stick, representing the tree trunk. Not the sort of place real frogs would live.

Another child, age eight, complained of the day her third-grade teacher pretended
that negative numbers don’t exist. While the class was doing subtraction tables, a boy
asked, ‘What’s 3 take-away 5?’ and the teacher insisted that there is no such thing. The
girl objected, ‘But everyone knows it’s minus 2!’ The schoolteacher said, ‘This is third
grade and you’re not supposed to know about those things!’ (Nachmanovitch, 1990,
pp. 115–116)

What is the responsibility of music teacher education as a process of preparation for

countering the stance towards education that the foregoing excerpt so vividly illustrates?
The purpose of this paper is to address one particular aspect of this critical question, by
examining the role of music improvisation in music teacher education. We will present
the results of a study conducted in two Greek universities with student teachers which
was designed firstly to investigate the sense in which improvisation might be conceived
of as an informal music education process and secondly the effects of such a course in
free improvisation on student teachers’ perceptions of themselves as musicians, music as
a school subject and children as musicians. Our study is based on data from the reflective
diaries or learning journals of 91 trainee teachers kept as part of their participation in an
improvisation university module.
We would argue here that improvisation, as a particular type of informal music learning
process, has an important role to play in fostering the qualities required of teachers to work
with informal pedagogies in music education. Furthermore, we would suggest that such
musical experiences might gradually lead to the development of a critical perspective on
both music education theories and practices. Improvisation might emerge as a moment and
a practice of rupture with linearity of progress, working against reification of knowledge and
glorification of received information. The findings suggest that improvisation might offer
a route for creating an intimate, powerful, evolving dialogue between students’ identities
as learners, their attitudes towards children and their creative potential, and the interre-
lationships of the notions of expressive technique and culture, thus becoming ‘an act of
transcendence’ (Allsup, 1997, p. 81). Such experiences for pupils and teachers alike might
further extend the social and personal effectiveness of informal learning as music pedagogy.

Informal learning
Awareness has grown during the last 30 years that important learning occurs in situations
other than the classroom (Rice, 1985; Bailey & Doubleday, 1990; Eraut, 2000; Colley
et al., 2003; Sefton-Green & Soep, 2007). Such learning has been described variously as
non-formal or informal, drawing a distinction between this kind of learning and formal
learning. Formal learning may be described as that which occurs in a traditional pedagogic
environment where clarity of goals and procedures are clearly defined in advance and
where learning results in certification or assessment. Non-formal learning occurs outside
traditional learning environments, is not the result of deliberation and does not normally

72
 Informal music learning, improvisation and teacher education

result in certification (Eraut, 2000). It is important to note here however that aural and
oral modes of learning should not automatically be thought of as informal just on the
basis of their difference from the formality of traditional western models of learning
(Nettl, 2007). In his critique of the theoretical rationale that underpins Green’s (2008a)
study of informal musical learning processes as classroom music pedagogy, Allsup (2008)
argued for the need to draw a distinction between ‘informal learning’ and ‘informalism’,
emphasised that ‘researchers must be careful not to make equivalent the notion of informal
learning ipso facto with that of popular music’ (p. 3) and maintained that informality
does not automatically lead to openness and to the transformation of classrooms into
spaces for the development of democratic thinking and practice. Folkestad (2006, p. 135)
has also suggested that: ‘Formal – informal should not be regarded as a dichotomy, but
rather as the two poles of a continuum; in most learning situations, both these aspects of
learning are in various degrees present and interacting’. We suggest that informal learning
could be understood as a deliberate attempt to be immersed in intense situations of non-
formal learning, and therefore results in the creation of non-traditional social learning
environments, combining interactive, non-linear and self-directed processes. Thus, the
introduction of informal learning in music education raises interesting questions regarding
definition of the term ‘informal’ in pedagogic contexts in music, the extent to which informal
learning is or is not linked to particular musical genres and the potential of informal learning
to facilitate openness and democracy in classrooms.
Green’s (2002, 2008a) development of a classroom music pedagogy based on informal
learning practices of popular musicians has had far-reaching impact upon the practices of
music education in schools in England. The core aim of her approach, explained in detail
in Green’s most recent book (2008a) has been to document and explore the processes
through which pupils learn when presented with an approach based on such informal
popular music learning practices. Informal learning as the preferred pedagogic modality in
music education was the basis of the Musical Futures Hertfordshire action research project.
In it Green introduced pedagogy based on the common processes used by some popular
musicians in their music making to classroom music lessons (see Green 2002, 2008a).
Often referred to as an ‘informal’ pedagogy, it locates production and development of
musical knowledge with pupils themselves. Among its features are that learners choose
the music they learn themselves, it is learnt by listening and copying, rather than from
notation, learning takes place in groups, with skills and knowledge acquired according to
individual need and the musical areas of performing, composing, improvising and listening
are integrated with the emphasis on creativity.2
Teachers’ roles changed significantly in Green’s approach. The first two or three lessons
in the first project involved pupils making a cover version of a song they brought in as an
audio recording, for which teachers were asked to: ‘establish ground rules for behaviour,
set the task going at each stage, and then stand back and observe what the pupils were
doing’ (Green, 2008a, p. 24). This element of Green’s work has been taken out of context
by some critics who have assumed that such was the role of teachers throughout, yet Green
clearly specified that:

During this time teachers were asked to attempt to take on and empathize with pupils’
perspectives and the goals that pupils set for themselves, then to begin to diagnose

73
Ruth Wright and Panagiotis Kanellopoulos

pupils’ needs in relation to those goals. After, and only after, this period, they were
to offer suggestions and act as ‘musical models’ through demonstration, so as to help
pupils reach the goals that they had set for themselves. (Green, 2008a, pp. 24–25)

This led to a new type of pedagogy which

involved teaching in a responsive, rather than directive way; metaphorically taking the
learner by the hand, getting inside their head and asking ‘What do they want to achieve
now, this minute, and what is the main thing they need to achieve it?’. In this way, the
teacher sits alongside the learner and is to a large extent a learner themselves. (Green,
2008a, p. 34)

Teachers are not intended to disappear from learning contexts but to operate as teacher-
student, as advocated by critical pedagogues.
This approach may hold significant potential for the extension of openness and
democracy in music classrooms but it also presents significant challenges to the
development of teacher education. It may require very different qualities of music teachers
entering the profession in the future. In the context of a recent discussion Green (2008b)
emphasised the need of prospective music teachers to develop musical skills which
will enable them to work intensely and effectively by employing informal music-making
strategies, such as ‘being able to aurally copy music from a recording of any kind of music
the students brought in, as well as from the provided curriculum materials; being able to
suggest how pupils can improve their instrumental skills, ensemble skills, compositional
and improvisational skills; being able to link the informal strategies to the school’s formal
curriculum’ (p. 6). Adding these comments to the issues raised by Green qua the qualities
required of teachers to work effectively with her conception of informal pedagogy in music
opens a rich field of research. Important questions are raised, which posit the need for
further research into how non-traditional modes of musical practice might form an integral
part of teacher education.

Informal learning and critical pedagogy

Advocates of critical pedagogy have long sought to develop a model in which learning
and teaching exist in a dialogic relationship. Based on notions of critical theory derived
from the ideas of Marx, Horkheimer and Adorno (Pongratz, 2005), Marcuse (1991) and the
work of those such as Freire (1970), Apple (2005), McLaren (2006), Giroux (1983a; 1983b;
1985; 1988a; 1988b; 1988c; 1997; Giroux and McLaren, 1994) and Habermas (1984),
they acknowledge the value of students’ lived experiences to their learning and advocate
a commensurate change in the power balance in classrooms. Teachers are to be no longer
the sole founts of knowledge in classrooms, their jobs are no longer to fill the empty vessels
of their students’ minds (following what Freire (1970) described as ‘a banking model’).
Instead, both teacher and students are to be regarded as having something to learn and
something to teach. Using that knowledge as a conduit to new learning results in a change
of perception for both students and their teachers (Abrahams, 2005).
We would argue that the work of Lucy Green (2008a) in the UK, which emphasised
students’ lived musical experiences as the foundation of their musical explorations and
placed teacher and student in a new, more egalitarian and dialogic relationship to previous

74
 Informal music learning, improvisation and teacher education

modes of music education has much in common with the aims of critical pedagogy. We
would further suggest that immersion in improvisation as a core element of music teacher
education might do much to prepare teachers to work in such ways with students.
The data we present in the following section of this paper illustrate the ways in which
free improvisation as a significant element of music teacher education might equip student
teachers with the skills required to work in such ways in music education. The data also
illustrates resonances between Green’s identified characteristics of informal learning in
music and the practice of improvisation. It is argued here that teachers who have been
seriously concerned with the value of improvisation in music education might proceed
to develop a teaching approach where deep involvement in improvisatory music-making
further demolishes preconceptions according to which children are ‘fed’ with information
and skills through a process that is cut off from musical creation and moves further towards
dialogic respectful learning situations in music education.

Introducing the study

A study was undertaken in two Greek universities (a University Music Department and a
University Department of Early Childhood Education) with 91 student teachers during the
period 2003–2007. During this period all the students were involved in a free improvisation
course designed as part of their teacher education programme. As part of the assessment
for the course, the students were required to produce reflective accounts/diaries recording
thoughts, questions, impressions, feelings related to their participatory experience in the
improvisations made in the class. It was also suggested that they record their possible
perceptions of how this experience might influence their ways of thinking as future teachers.
Recordings were made of work in progress and some students supplemented their written
diaries with illustrations. The form of these journals/diaries was not dictated in advance;
hence the data collected took various forms: diary-like regular entries, summative reflective
prose, and in some cases cartoon-like representations and conceptual rivers. These different
types of written accounts formed the data source drawn upon by the researchers to answer
the following research questions:

(1) To what extent can free improvisation be termed an informal music making practice?
(2) What are students’ perceptions of the nature and organisation of music making and
creativity in this improvisatory setting?
(3) To what extent did this improvisatory music-making facilitate openness and democratic
musical practice?

Methodology

This study adopts a narrative approach to tell the stories of the thoughts and feelings of
two groups of student teachers as they experienced a course in improvisation. Narrative
is becoming a widely adopted approach to the study of human action, and its value
has recently begun to be acknowledged within the field of music education as well
(Benedict, 2007; Georgii-Hemming, 2007; McCarthy, 2007). It is an interpretive paradigm
used primarily in the social sciences and employs storytelling methodology. It is the story

75
Ruth Wright and Panagiotis Kanellopoulos

that becomes the object of study, with the aim of understanding how individuals or groups
of individuals understand events in their lives (Clandinin, 2007). Ethnographic techniques
are used to gather data capturing the subject’s story focusing on how individuals or groups
make sense of events and actions in their lives. Situated within a postmodernist stance,
narrative approach emphasises that knowledge is socially constructed, value-laden, and
based on multiple perspectives. Thus stories are taken as being constitutive of reality and as
such as playing a crucial role in the researcher’s understanding of the subject’s construction
of reality. This is not a kind of research that aims at the advancement of abstract theoretical
knowledge, nor does it attempts to provide holistic accounts of ‘how things are’ within
a particular setting. Rather, it retains a strong educative component, using a way of data
gathering that is at the same time a means for enabling students to actively reflect on their
learning experiences (see also Benedict, 2007). And as Maxine Greene has asserted we
are currently becoming increasingly aware of the knowledge potential that inheres in the
pursuing of narrative inquiry and also ‘of the connection between narrative and the growth
of identity, of the importance of shaping our own stories and, at the same time, opening
ourselves to other stories in all their variety and their different degrees of articulatedness’
(1995, p. 186).
The diaries were kept as a required assessment element while students were studying
the module ‘Improvisation in Music Education’. One of the authors was the module leader.
During this course, students were involved in free small and whole group improvisations,
semi-structured improvisations, group improvisational composing based on a variety
of ideas and stimuli (e.g. the work of John Paynter, 1992), reading and discussion of
relevant literature, as well as in ongoing group discussions of the work developed and
the issues that emerged.3 Sometimes children also attended the sessions and improvised
alongside the students. This was an attempt to begin working with small groups of young
children within the protective environment of the university classroom; these formative
experiences were becoming the basis of creating a link between the study of relevant
music education literature and the personal experience of creating improvisations. This
course did not aim at teaching models for applying improvisation in the classroom. It
involved students in a process intended to develop their musical selves and to begin
realising the importance of improvisation for their own relationship to music. Asking the
students to keep diaries was aiming at creating a place for reflection, through which
the students could be able to form and explore their own ideas about their relationship
with improvisation and with its educational potential. For only through realising the
importance of improvisation for the teacher’s own music-making practices, could students
be able to gradually apprehend the idea that children too might regard improvisation as
a valuable musical process. In this context, our study of the students’ accounts provides
us the opportunity of developing another level of analysis, with the aim of clarifying
the role of improvisation in teacher education. The decision to make a collaborative
analysis, made by two researchers one of whom was also the course tutor, adds a
further dimension to this effort. It denotes our wish to initiate a dialogue between the
data, the insider’s point of view and theoretical orientations, and a further critical ‘eye’,
that of the first researcher, who acted as a critical friend in debating the conclusions
drawn from the data and bringing contrasting theoretical perspectives to discussion of
the data.

76
 Informal music learning, improvisation and teacher education

Data analysis

In the course of thematic analysis (Van Manen, 1990) the researchers retained a descriptive-
interpretive stance, which refrained from extensive coding procedures. An attempt was
made to remain close to the data, providing extensive segments-examples that allow
the reader to challenge interpretations, preferring ‘direct interpretation and narrative
description’ rather than ‘formal aggregation of categorical data’ (Stake, 1995, p. 77).
However, Wolcott (1995) argues that, ‘while the effective story should be ‘specific and
circumstantial’, its relevance in a broader context should also be apparent. The story must
transcend its own modest origins: ‘The case remains particular, its implications broad.’
(p. 174). Against evidence-based research which ‘limits the opportunities for educational
professionals to exert their judgment about what is educationally desirable in particular
situations’ (Biesta, 2007, p. 20), this account offers critical observations and interpretations
of a particular musical/educational experience. And this is offered as an invitation for
dialogue about the ‘oughts’ of music education and the training of teachers, and not as
measurable evidence that something ‘works’. Our intention is to offer a research approach
that ‘can provide different understandings of educational reality and different ways of
imagining a possible future’ (Biesta, 2007, p. 21). In the light of this, when analysing the
data we found a number of themes which fall under three main conceptual categories:
‘Autonomy: in search of foundations’, ‘Developing the (musical) self’ and ‘Developing an
open attitude towards children and music’. Each of these categories will be explained and
elaborated upon in the sections that follow, illustrated by quotations from the students’
diaries, musical examples and our reflections upon this material. Translations were made
from the original Greek to English by the second researcher. Every attempt was made to
preserve the original tone of the diary entries. Students’ names have been changed to
protect confidentiality.

Findings

Autonomy: in search of foundations4

[I felt] like a person who for the first time in his life tries to speak without a script, or
like someone who has just begun to discover the power of difference, and tries to talk
about this power, when up to that moment he believed in, or rather, was taught only
how to judge better from worse, right from wrong, without being able to think about
‘difference’. [Extract from diary of Vassilis]

In improvisation students began to experience the issue of how to judge difference without
having to regress to ready made criteria. For some, this was the beginning of thinking about
the power of difference. Initiation into hierarchical modes of thinking about music are seen
not only as one-sided, but as leading to closure and exclusion dictated from above. Speaking
‘without a script’ leads students to assuming personal responsibility for developing their
judgement. In terms of the role of improvisation as a means of transformative or liberatory
education this could be termed the beginning of this student’s development of critical

77
Ruth Wright and Panagiotis Kanellopoulos

consciousness. But this is not an exercise in rational thinking:

The people in the group should be really present with their whole self and their whole
interest in what is happening. What happens there should be really important to them,
and each one of the players should believe in it. [Extract from diary of Kosmas]

Being present means entering in a distinctive realm of musical experience where rational
thinking is suspended. At times this experience comes close to that of dreaming:
Sometimes when I close my eyes and relax I can stop my thinking and a moment
comes when I begin to see images; it is as if I am dreaming but without being asleep.
The moment I make the slightest thought, everything disappears; it is difficult to remain
present . . . in free improvisation there is an element of fleetingness. As long as it lasts,
you do not have, but you are. [Extract from diary of Kosmas]

Improvisation leads to the immersion in a form of musical experience that moves beyond
the conception of musical knowledge as an object to be mastered. But it also posits the
issue of the individual-group relationship in a direct way. Ideally, individuality and group
identity are complementary:
That freedom [experienced in improvisation], is a feeling that isolates but at the same
time incorporates one inside the group. You are in a bouquet of flowers, with your
own aroma but at the same time you are part of a whole together with the rest equally
distinctive flowers. [Extract from diary of Niki]

This sense of creating our own goals is crucial for the development of both individual and
collective identity:
each of the players [should try] to get into the rhythm and style used by the rest of the
group. In this way one will be able to follow the melody without being thoroughly
absorbed by what one plays [. . .] but more with answering to the rest of the group and
with participating in the dialogue creating one’s own answers which, nevertheless fit
to the whole melody, resulting in coherence and continuation of the whole thought of
the group. [Extract from diary of Peter]

This ‘whole thought of the group’ cannot be dictated and cannot be given in advance.
The creation of a heightened sense of presence is a collective enterprise that goes beyond
individual rational control, for in free improvisation there is ‘nothing’ to coordinate the
musical intentions of the participants. Joint creation of a common musical space where
freedom is debated is a valuable educational pursuit:
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry has noted that to love the other does not mean to look into
the eyes of the other; it means that both look towards the same direction . . . we need to
be involved in processes which allow us to realise that we could find common points
of (musical) reference, a common, however vague or obscure, goal. [Extract from diary
of Georgia]

Developing the self

One of the most persistent points which was raised by the students was the shortcomings of
dominant formal music education training approaches to which they had been subjected.

78
 Informal music learning, improvisation and teacher education

That this was seen as a major obstacle in their development as teachers should be regarded
as a source of hope.

I believe that we ourselves have deprived ourselves of the freedom of expression

through music. I am terrified of the thought that one day a child will ask me: ‘What
is music?’, ‘How do people make music?’, ‘Can I not make music?’ and I will have to
give her an answer like this: ‘I do not know, my dear child. I only take a book full of
notes, put it in front of me, and play what’s written on it’. No! I won’t let this happen.
[Extract from diary of Alkistis]

But for this to be achieved, student teachers themselves should be given the opportunity to
explore how these questions can be given alternative answers. The experience of musical
improvisation might be one way forward. But this does not happen automatically:

At the beginning I was systematically avoiding being involved, for I was unable to
unlock myself [Extract from diary of Georgia]

This was a frequent comment read at or near the beginning of students’ diaries, for the
narrative pattern which described the relationship of improvisation with previous music
education often looked like this:

As a child I used to sit at the piano and improvise. When I began taking lessons, I
had great difficulties in reading the notes, so I was memorizing the pieces right after
listening to them by the piano teacher, and then was pretending that I was reading
them. [. . .] When the teacher discovered that I was cheating, he intensified his efforts
to get me learn to read. And that was the end of improvisation for me. [Extract from
diary of Alan]

Trying to unlock oneself was a continuous process that led to certain peak moments where
individual participation in improvisation took the form of a revelation.

And the important thing is that when all this is happening there is no feeling of pressure,
no anxiety about what you are doing, because at that moment you are so full that there
is no space for anxiety. [Extract from diary of Kosmas]

The moment of improvisation is a moment of personal and collective responsibility. Yet

this does not entail anxiety. Free improvisation might be a way of musical practice that
relieves student teachers from the sense of intimidation experienced so often in skill-based
competitive musical contexts. In this way it fosters the creation of an intimate relationship
with music:

It is amazing how simple are the forms/thoughts that are needed in order to make music.
I guess I always favoured simple ideas, but I had never imagined myself working with
simple ideas without fear. [Extract from diary of Lisa]

Without fear. That is a theme that kept coming up again and again. And this says something
about our ways of educating musicians: elitist, competitive, alienating music education
contexts not only ensure ‘excellence’ but also instigate fear. The following comment is

79
Ruth Wright and Panagiotis Kanellopoulos

characteristic of how the feeling of trusting one’s own ideas is as real as it is unexpected:

And the funny thing is that I always wanted to have a xylophone or a metallophone
in my hands. From then on, I was playing what I was thinking, and the strange thing
is that I wanted to suggest improvements. That was very funny for me indeed! . . . I
realised that music does not only mean songs or notes, but also things which you may
not be aware that you know, and which now come out in a spontaneous and natural
way. [Extract from diary of Natasha]

The process of finding one’s personal voice within the improvisation practice often includes
heated collaborative discussions about the group’s practice. At the beginning discussions
were difficult to initiate, for to many students to discuss meant to expose one’s shortcomings:

[initially] I was terrified about the prospect of talking about our music. But I realised
that not making judgments about abilities and talents, had a liberating effect in respect
to my improvisations. [Extract from diary of Katerina]

And this might lead to a more self-confident relationship between musician and instrument.
Not being afraid that one is always ‘behind schedule’ might be important for creating
intimate relationships between self and sounds:

Now I feel much more ready to try and improvise using my own instrument, the flute.
Now I love my little flute more, and every musical phrase written or one that comes
from my mind fills me up. I always used to listen to a piece and imagine pictures, now
I try to turn pictures into music. [Extract from diary of Estelle]

This student had reengaged with her instrument in a new and more fulfilling way. Her
confidence in her own musicality was evidently raised.

Developing an open attitude towards children and music

Trying to find one’s own personal voice within improvisational practice reveals to the
student many of the obstacles and the preconceptions that conservatory education may
have placed deep down in our thinking. Through involvement in improvisation these
obstacles are gradually removed, opening the way for more open approaches to teaching.

How much harm has been done by the conservatory training. If you don’t play the
instrument in all kinds of unorthodox ways, how are you going to learn it, to discover
it? Through improvisation the child learns the sounds, learns the joy of playing without
following rules that are beyond it. Experiment, play, listen, and the forms emerge by
themselves. You need only to listen and to be there. [Extract from diary of Lisa]

Notice the important issue that emerges out of the statement ‘without following rules that
are beyond it’. This is how the educational potential of improvisation is linked to the project
of autonomy. Learning to set the rules through interaction and not through reference to some
universal musical norm is what improvisation might offer to education and this is one way
in which music education might be linked to emancipation. Learning with both children
and adults would ideally result in a deep sense of respect for children-as-musicians. A
sense that emerges out of the following statement where the student-teacher attributes an

80
 Informal music learning, improvisation and teacher education

exceptional sense of value to an improvisation he played with a six-year-old:

only a few times was I really present in the improvisation moment. One of those, maybe
the one that really stands out, was when I played the metallophone with Katerina. In
this improvisation I felt that I was really there with my whole attention and my whole
interest in what was happening. [Extract from diary of Kosmas]

We see here emerging mutual respect between the student and teacher, one of the
fundamental principles of critical pedagogy. Often the student-teachers-participants of this
study documented their efforts to begin forging a personal pathway in their own teaching.
Finally I would like to say that I tried to get a little girl, whom I teach the piano, into
the adventure of improvisation. Despite my lack of substantive experience, I think that
this experience, the discussion we had with my pupil and the joy I felt right after this
lesson is the most important outcome [of my involvement with improvisation during
this university course]. [Extract from diary of Georgia]

Developing the improvisation ethic in the university may well be regarded as the spring-
board for valuing the constituents of this improvisation ethic for music education itself:
For now I have learned that [. . .] even a little primary school child can create wonderful
and very clever things when she is given the opportunity, and when you really engage
with her. [Extract from diary of Jimmy]

So I became conscious that when you try to do something without having tons of rules
in your mind about what should and should not be done, . . . and when you are given
due respect as a human being and as a personality, you can create from the simplest
to the most elaborate piece of music. [Extract from diary of Hannah]

Essentially through participation in improvisation one might be led to regard this practice
as an ever-present mode of educational action. Learning to develop ways of musico-social
relationships, learning to focus on the moment, on the unique qualities of each moment
and of the participants, might be important not only in musical but also in interpersonal
terms. This was observed by one student teacher as one of the most important things she
had learnt from taking part in the module:
Learning to improvise on a variety of musical instruments, but most importantly,
learning to improvise in [building] our relationship towards a child/student. [Extract
from diary of Donna]

Discussion
Green (2008a) suggests that there is a strong correlation between the pedagogy experienced
in music education and student success and/or persistence in studying music. We suggest
here that the three analytical categories identified as arising from our data: autonomy,
developing the self and developing an open attitude towards children and their music,
indicate three important areas in which involvement in free improvisation might contribute
positively to the pedagogic preparation of teachers. Furthermore, the comments of the
students whose journals we studied seem to indicate potential fruitful linkages between
improvisation and the development of the qualities of empathy, mutual respect, willingness

81
Ruth Wright and Panagiotis Kanellopoulos

to take risks and openness to new conceptions of music and musicking necessary for music
teachers to be able to work with new approaches to music education such as Green’s. The
development of such qualities could moreover be crucial for such approaches to develop
their potential to function as critical pedagogy, working towards musically and possibly
even socially transformative practice.
Viewed as a core means of educating prospective teachers (both music specialists and
particularly generalist teachers), improvisation allows for a direct confrontation of learning
as a search for self-transformation. Learning how to build our relationships with children
and music: this is maybe the most fundamental value of learning through improvisation.
This belief rests on an apprehension of the improvisation process as an exemplary case of
situated learning (Lave & Wenger, 1991). In this way improvisation becomes a means for
unsettling dominant conceptions of music learning and for engaging with informal learning
practices. Improvisation not only offers a way of active engagement with music, but also is
situated in a presentational epistemology, that is, in an epistemology that does not regard
knowledge as ‘an accurate representation of a pre-existing reality’ (Biesta & Osberg, 2007,
p. 16) but emphasises the situatedness of knowledge construction as a form of creative
socio-cultural praxis. Following Lave and Wenger (1991), we suggest that learning through
improvisation should be seen as a constituent feature of participation in communities of
improvisation practice. This leads to a change of relationship between children and music,
to a move away from music as a given, towards music as an emergent. It further contributes
to a move away from apprehending learning as a cognitive process, towards regarding
learning, thinking, and knowing, as ‘relations among people in activity in, with, and arising
from the socially and culturally structured world’ (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 51). Regarding
learning as participation places emphasis on how children, through interaction, define their
ways for making music, and assign particular meanings to their activities. Moreover, it goes
far beyond knowledge as comprised of entities waiting to be internalised:

Learning is a process that takes place in a participation framework, not in an individual

mind. This means, among other things, that it is mediated by the differences of
perspective among the co-participants . . . . Learning is, as it were, distributed among
co-participants, not a one-person act. (Hanks, 1991, p. 15)

Two of the most important tenets of the situated learning approach are the
acknowledgement of context as an essential aspect of learning and secondly, the value
of implicit knowledge. ‘The perceptions resulting from actions are a central feature in both
learning and activity. How a person perceives activity may be determined by tools and
their appropriated use. What they perceive, however, contributes to how they act and
learn. Different activities produce different indexicalized representations not equivalent,
universal ones. And, thus, the activity that led to those representations plays a central role
in learning’ (Brown et al., 1989, p. 36). Moreover, many aspects of learning to act within a
particular musical practice need to remain implicit. Talking specifically about conceptual
representations and their development from the perspective of situated learning, Brown
et al. (1989) argue that ‘indexical representations gain their efficiency by leaving much of
the context underrepresented or implicit’ (p. 41).
Thus we propose that the issue of connecting informal learning and improvisation,
might be resolved by regarding improvisation as an exemplary case of creating a

82
 Informal music learning, improvisation and teacher education

communicative context where most representations/conceptualisations/struggles to solve

problems are left implicit. Through the perspective of situated cognition and the importance
it gives to leaving things implicit, we could arrive at a solid conceptualisation of the
value of improvisation as a mode of learning. Thus its value as a learning resource
might be formulated in the following manner: creating a context where implicitness is
deeply valued, recognised but not analytically pursued, leading to sustained engagement
with the workings of musical structuring and communication from the ‘inside’: ‘Authentic
activity . . . is important for learners, because it is the only way they gain access to the stand-
point that enables practitioners to act meaningfully and purposefully’ (Brown et al., 1989,
p. 36).
Repeated engagement with improvisation and borrowing ideas by attending to other
people’s improvisations are the means by which improvisation generates its own future.
All musical, structural and expressive problems are created and solved within it. The
heuristic aspect of improvisation (Prévost, 1995) is, essentially, its driving force. Intensive
and prolonged engagement of the participants of the present study with improvisation
should be seen as a case of practising spontaneity, which is regarded as a vital source
of knowledge of the workings of musical spontaneity and as a ‘tool’ for student teacher
engagement in musical dialogues with their future students. Improvisation emerges as a
mode of practice that redefines creativity, through rejecting its individualistic perception
as a ‘problem-solving’ process that has dominated the concept of creativity through its
appropriation by psychological research.5
Improvisation creates a musical context where inventiveness and responsiveness
always get their meaning in situ, in the course of emerging ways of working together,
and of drawing on different aspects of musical cultures and musical practices. The balance
between inventiveness and responsiveness cannot be predefined, or pre-decided. Attending
and listening closely to the generation of improvised music is constitutive of the meaning
of the music-making process itself. It contributes to its transformation from an exploratory
activity to a communicative one, from a private enterprise to a public event. It brings
into the musical experience a vital ingredient: the exploration of the listener’s response.
Each improvisation had an impact upon the group, it made them think and feel, and the
researcher’s response has been an embodiment of this. Improvisation might be a powerful
means in which to forge future teachers’ identities through action and reflection that might
help them be more open and responsive to their future students. Learning and accumulation
of experience is the result of identifying important issues that pertain to music making which
were then tackled and worked upon in subsequent improvisations.
Improvisation might be a way of placing musical imagination at the centre of the
educational process, and to proceed to modes of musical practice that address issues of
being and thinking together, thus becoming a form of socio-musical and thus political
practice. It might be a way of going beyond Maxine Greene’s (1995) thesis that ‘the role of
imagination is not to resolve, not to point the way, not to improve. It is to awaken, to disclose
the ordinarily unseen, unheard, and unexpected’ (p. 28). To be able to go a step beyond
this, is to be able to apprehend musical practice as a social locus for the development
of distributed imaginative practice, and thus as an active mode of critique of the current
state of affairs through imagining possibilities and actively searching for how to realise
them musically. Improvisation permits students to become agents of musico-social action.

83
Ruth Wright and Panagiotis Kanellopoulos

Through processes of sound organisation students are actively engaged in the construction
of social relationships.
Thus musical creativity and musical creation might be regarded as analogous to
the processes of social creation of autonomous forms of social organisation. There are
strong links here with Castoriadis’ (1991, 1997) notion of autonomy as a project of radical
democracy: ‘autonomy is the ability to call the given institution of society into question –
and that institution itself must make you capable of calling it into question, primarily
through education’ (2007, p. 176). (Musical) autonomy should therefore be understood as
the deliberate process of searching for and reflecting upon the rules of musical practice.
Free musical improvisation is a musical context that allows the unlimited questioning of its
very practice, thus becoming a way of pursuing the project of autonomy in musical terms.
Herein lies the political significance of free improvisation, which ‘neither resides in the
political commitment of improvisers, nor in their declarations of intent, but it is revealed
through the aesthetics that their practice confers’ (Saladin, 2009, p. 148). Saladin argues
that its openness does not lead to an ‘anything goes’ stance but is a consequence of
its ‘lack of identity’ (Saladin, 2009, p. 148): ‘This constituting lack is not a gap which
should be bridged within free improvisation; on the contrary, this lack is the empty space
which allows it to exist. This empty space manifests itself both in the absence of rules
which would come to outline its contours and in the absence of a right required to
practice it’ (Saladin, 2009, p. 148). In this paper we have argued that this empty space
provides a way for re-searching foundational aspects of what it means to create music,
with important consequences for personal development and for building an open attitude
towards children’s musical potential. Such a musical practice creates a very particular
mindset which, we argue, is especially valuable from an educational perspective. For it
does not distinguish between levels of ability but between levels of commitment. Drawing
on the work of Jacques Rancière (2004a, 2004b), Saladin argues that ‘Free improvisation
does not pre-exist, but is only a practice. So it cannot take count of the people coming
into it, or to say this more explicitly in the terms of Jacques Rancière, it cannot mark out
a clear and definitive boundary between those who can take part in it and those who
cannot. This does not mean that it can be some sort of pure openness, but rather, that its
empty space supposes an indefinite plurality’ (Saladin, 2009, p. 148). Enabling prospective
music teachers to pursue both through practice and reflection the question of how to create
musical contexts that address these issues seems to be an invaluable and much-needed
project.

Notes

1 This is a fully coauthored article. Earlier drafts were presented at the Training Music Teachers:
Research in Psychology of Music and Music Education, conference Universita degli Studi di
Padova – Dipartimento di Scienze dell’Educazione (Padova, 5–6/11/2007), and at the 2nd Reflective
Conservatoire conference, Guildhall School of Music & Drama (London, 28–2/3–3 2009). We would
like to thank the participants in those conferences for their many useful comments. We would also like
to warmly thank the participants of this study, as well as the reviewers of the BJME for their constructive
criticisms.

84
 Informal music learning, improvisation and teacher education

2 For detailed discussion of Green’s work in the Musical Futures Hertfordshire Project see Green
(2008a).
3 There has been a growing interest in the role of free improvisation and collaborative composition
in higher education, as evidenced from a conference recently organised by the University of
Surrey on ‘Collaborative Processes in Music Making: Pedagogy and Practice’ (see http://www.
palatine.ac.uk/events/view/1577/) – for important documentation of such approaches, their rationale
and theoretical justification, see Ford, 1995; Walduck, 2005).
4 As you will see in what follows the notion of autonomy as used here has a very different meaning from
the way it is used by mainly liberal philosophers of education as an advancement towards independent
rationality (e.g. Levinson, 1999; Reich, 2002) (for critiques of the liberal conception of autonomy as an
exercise of rational thinking and free choice see Marshall, 1996; Lankshear, 1982; Fitzsimons, 2002;
Devine & Irwin, 2006; Olssen, 2006).
5 For an analysis of the uses of the notion of creativity in education and a critique of the political
neutrality of psychological versions of creativity, see Peters (2009).

References

ABRAHAMS, F. (2005) ‘Critical pedagogy for music education: A best practice to prepare future music
educators’, Visions of Research in Music Education, 6, 1–8, retrieved April 17, 2009 from: http://www-
usr.rider.edu/∼vrme/
ALLSUP, R. E. (2008) ‘Creating an educational framework for popular music in public schools: Anticipating
the second-wave’, Visions of Research in Music Education (Special Edition – Beyond Lucy Green:
Operationalizing Theories of Informal Music Learning), 12, 1–12. Retrieved 24 January 2009 from:
http://www-usr.rider.edu/∼vrme/
ALLSUP, R. E. (1997) ‘Activating self-transformation through improvisation in instrumental music teaching’,
Philosophy of Music Education Review, 5 (2), 80–85.
APPLE, M. W. (2005) ‘Making critical pedagogy strategic – on doing critical educational work in conservative
times’, in I. Gur Ze’ev (Ed.), Critical Theory and Critical Pedagogy Today: Toward a New Critical
Language in Education. Haifa: University of Haifa Press.
BAILEY, J. & DOUBLEDAY, V. (1990) ‘Patterns of musical enculturation in Afghanistan’, in F. R. Wilson &
F. L. Roehmann (Eds.), Music and Child Development: Proceedings of the 1987 Denver Conference
(pp. 88–99). Missouri: MMB Music.
BENEDICT, C. (2007) ‘On the narrative of challenged assumptions’, Research Studies in Music Education,
29, 29–38.
BIESTA, G. (2007) ‘Why ‘what works’ won’t work: evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit of
educational research’, Educational Theory, 57 (1), 1–22.
BIESTA, G. & OSBERG, D. (2007) ‘Beyond re/presentation: A case for updating the epistemology of
schooling’,Interchange, 38 (1), 15–29.
BROWN, S. J., COLLINS, A. & DUGUID, P. (1989) ‘Situated cognition and the culture of learning’,
Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 32–42.
CASTORIADIS, C. (1991) ‘Power politics autonomy’, in D. A. Curtis (Ed. & Trans.), Cornelius Castoriadis –
Philosophy, Politics, Autonomy: Essays in Political Philosophy (pp. 143–174). New York: Oxford
University Press.
CASTORIADIS, C. (1997) ‘Phusis and Autonomy’, in D. A. Curtis (Ed. & Trans.), Cornelius Castoriadis –
World in Fragments (pp. 331–341). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
CASTORIADIS, C. (2007) ‘Psyche and education’, in W. Hamacher (Ed.), H. Arnold (Trans.), Cornelius
Castoriadis – Figures of the Thinkable (pp. 165–187). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

85
Ruth Wright and Panagiotis Kanellopoulos

CLANDININ J. D. (Ed.) (2007) Handbook of Narrative Inquiry: Mapping a Methodology. London:

Sage.
COLLEY, H., HODKINSON, P. & MALCOLM, J. (2003) Informality and Formality in Learning. Report to
the Learning and Skills Research Centre from the Lifelong Learning Institute at the University of Leeds.
London: Learning and Skills Development Agency.
DEVINE, N. & IRWIN, R. (2006) ‘Autonomy, agency and education: He tangata, he tangata, he tangata’, in
P. Smeyers & M. A. Peters (Eds.), Postfoundationalist Themes in the Philosophy of Education: Festschrift
for James D. Marshall (pp. 11–24). Oxford: Blackwell.
ERAUT, M. (2000) ‘Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work’, British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 70 (1), 113–136.
FITZSIMONS, P. (2002) ‘Neoliberalism and education: the autonomous chooser’, Radical Pedagogy, 4.
Retrieved 2 August 2009 from: http://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/content/issue4_2/04_fitzsimons.html
FOLKESTAD, G. (2006) ‘Formal and informal learning situations or practices vs. formal and informal ways
of learning’, British Journal of Music Education, 23 (2), 135–145.
FORD, C. C. (1995) ‘Free collective improvisation in higher education’, British Journal of Music Education,
12 (2), 103–112.
FREIRE, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1993 edn). New York: Continuum.
GEORGII-HEMMING, E. (2007) ‘Hermeneutic knowledge: Dialogue between experiences’, Research
Studies in Music Education, 29, 13–28.
GIROUX, H. (1983a) Theory and Resistance in Education: A Pedagogy for the Opposition. South Hadley,
MA: Bergin and Garvey.
GIROUX, H. (1983b) ‘Rationality, reproduction, and resistance: toward a critical theory of schooling’, in S.
McNall (Ed.), Current Perspectives in Social Theory (pp. 85–118). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
GIROUX, H. (1985) ‘Teachers as intellectuals’, Social Education, 49 (15), 376–379.
GIROUX, H. (1988a) ‘Literacy and the pedagogy of political empowerment’, Educational Theory, 38 (1),
61–75.
GIROUX, H. (1988b) ‘Schrag speaks: Spinning the wheel of misfortune’, Educational Theory, 38 (1), 145–
146.
GIROUX, H. (1988c) ‘Hope and radical education’, Journal of Education, 170 (2), 91–101.
GIROUX, H. A. (1997) Pedagogy and the Politics of Hope: Theory, Culture, and Schooling. Oxford: Westview.
GIROUX, H. & MCLAREN, P. (1994) Between Borders: Pedagogy and Politics in Cultural Studies. New York:
Routledge.
GREEN, L. (2002) How Popular Musicians Learn: A Way Ahead for Music Education. London: Ashgate.
GREEN, L. (2008a). Music, Informal Learning and the School: A New Classroom Pedagogy. London:
Ashgate.
GREEN, L. (2008b). Response to panel: Beyond Lucy Green: Operationalizing theories of informal music
learning panel presentation. Visions of Research in Music Education (Special Edition – Beyond Lucy
Green: Operationalizing Theories of Informal Music Learning), 12, 1–9. Retrieved 24 January 2009
from: http://www-usr.rider.edu/∼vrme/
GREENE, M. (1995) Releasing the Imagination: Essays on Education, the Arts, and Social Change. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
HABERMAS, J. (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume One: Reason and the Rationalization
of Society. Boston: Beacon Press.
HANKS, W. F. (1991) ‘Introduction’, in J. Lave & E. Wenger, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral
Participation (pp. 13–24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LANKSHEAR, C. (1982) Freedom and Education: Towards a Non-Rational Philosophy of Education.
Auckland: Milton Brookes.
LAVE, J. & WENGER, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

86
 Informal music learning, improvisation and teacher education

LEVINSON, M. (1999) The Demands of Liberal Education. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
MARCUSE, H. (1991) One-Dimensional Man (2nd edn). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
MARSHALL, J. D. (1996) Michel Foucault: Personal Autonomy and Education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
MCCARTHY, M. (2007) ‘Narrative inquiry as a way of knowing in music education’, Studies in Music
Education, 29, 3–12.
MCLAREN, P. (2006) Life in Schools: An Introduction to Critical Pedagogy in the Foundations of Education
(5th edn). New Jersey: Allyn & Bacon.
NACHMANOVITCH, S. (1990) Free Play: Improvisation in Life and Art. New York: J. P. Tarcher.
NETTL, B. (2007) ‘Interlude: An ethnomusicological perspective’, in L. Bresler (Ed.), International Handbook
of Research in Arts Education (pp. 829–834). Dordrecht: Springer.
OLSSEN, M. (2006) ‘Foucault, educational research and the issue of autonomy’, in P. Smeyers & M. A. Peters
(Eds.), Postfoundationalist Themes in the Philosophy of Education: Festchrift for James D. Marshall
(pp. 57–79). Oxford: Blackwell.
PAYNTER, J. (1992) Sound and Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
PETERS, M. A. (2009) ‘Education, creativity and the economy of passions: new forms of educational
capitalism’, Thesis Eleven, 96, 40–63.
PONGRATZ, L. (2005) Critical theory and pedagogy: Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer’s
contemporary significance for a critical pedagogy. In G. E. Fischman, P. McLaren, H. Sünker & C.
Lankshear (Eds.), Critical Theories, Radical Pedagogies, and Global Conflicts (pp. 154–163). Lanham:
Rowman & Littlefield.
PRÉVOST, E. (1995) No Sound is Innocent: AMM and The Practice of Self-Invention. Meta-Musical
Narratives. Essays. Essex: Copula.
RANCIÈRE, J. (2004a) The Politics of Aesthetics (trans. G. Rockhill). New York: Continuum.
RANCIÈRE, J. (2004b) Malaise dans l’esthétique. Paris: Galilée.
REICH, R. (2002) Bridging Liberalism and Multiculturalism in American Education. Chicago: Chicago
University Press.
RICE, T. (1985) ‘Music learnt but not taught: The Bulgarian case’, in D. P. McAllester (project director),
Becoming Human through Music (pp. 115–122). Reston: MENC.
SALADIN, M. (2009) Points of resistance and criticism in free improvisation: remarks on a musical
practice and some economic transformations. In Noise and Capitalism (pp. 133–149). Kritika
(this book is intended as a non-copyrighted material and is available at: http://www.arteleku.net/
audiolab/noise_capitalism.pdf)
SEFTON-GREEN, J. & SOEP, E. (2007) ‘Creative media cultures: Making and learning beyond the school’,
in L. Bresler (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in Arts Education (pp. 835–854). Dordrecht:
Springer.
STAKE, R. E. (1995) The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
VAN MANEN, M. (1990) Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy.
Ontario: Althouse.
WALDUCK, J. (2005) ‘Collaborative arts practice and identity: The role of leadership’, in G. Odam & N.
Bannan (Eds.), The Reflective Conservatoire (pp. 301–331). London: Ashgate.
WOLCOTT, H. F. (1995) The Art of Fieldwork. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.

87