View
213
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Dr Mark Pulman
University of Huddersfield
Research Fora 2nd December 2008
University of Huddersfield
Personal attributes and rehearsing in a band
University Campus Barnsley
The research focus
• Commenced 2000• Contributed to PhD Research 2001-2007 involving 170 undergraduate popular music students, 80 bands, sixteen in-depth individual interviews and
extensive peer marking data • Ongoing
Research questions
• How might peer assessment activites support learning arising from band rehearsals?
• Which activities and processes may foster the development of such learning?
Learning and acquiring knowledge through band rehearsing and peer
learning activities
A social constructivist paradigm
Some personal attributes that we may display during rehearsing
Our ‘people skills’ as musicians working in a group
Our communication with the band
Our support of the band
Our giving and receiving feedback to band members
Our self-responsibility to the band
Our help towards others and out willingness to ask for help
Our creative input into the band
Using personal attributes as peer assessment criteria
What is the nature of our personal attributes as
they are displayed in rehearsing?
Attributes that the band feel are important to them…?
Attributes that are uniquely important to each band member…?
Our personal ‘strengths’ in the rehearsal…?
Our personal ‘weaknesses’ in the rehearsal…?
Which personal attributes do students think are important in their rehearsing?
Most frequently formulated personal attributes criteriaGroup Attributes: Attendance; Team working; Enthusiasm; Commitment;
Responsibility for learning parts; Organisation; PunctualityPersonal weaknesses: Confidence; Contributing to ideas; Punctuality; Enthusiasm. Personal strengths: Responsibility for own part; Punctuality; Organized; Confidence
Personal attributes raised by students in their interviews Self-responsibility: Commitment; Responsibility; Reliability; Punctuality; Attendance.Interpersonal relationships: Tolerance towards others; Personal skills; Flexibility;
Team member; Communication with team. Creativity:Trying new ideas; Inventiveness; Creative input; Contribution to ideasConfidence: Verbal input; Leadership skills/taking charge.Confidence;Awareness: Listening to others; Willingness to help others; Focus/concentration
Peer assessing
‘Personal weaknesses’ that you wish to improve1 = poor
2 = below average
3 = neutral
ge
4 = above average
5 = excellent
Open to ideas
Blinkered
Willingness to help others
Not helping others
Enthusiasm
Lacking enthusiasm
Team member
Taking too much control
Confident
Lacking confidence
Learning
lyrics quickly
Leaving it until last minute
Listening to others
Disregarding others
Contributing to ideas
Too quiet
HA x x x x 3/5 4/5 x 3/5
OM 3/5 x x x 3/5 x x 2/5
SC 3/5 x x x x x 3/5 x
TP x 5/5 4/5 x x x x x
Changes/evaluation/action
Rehearsingand
performing
Students' responsesto peer
assessment
Exploring the peer assessment process
Development of understanding of peer assessment
Development of research questions
Development of methodological
framework
Revision of action research cycle
and re-application
Changes to the cycles
Changes to personal attributes types used as assessment criteria• Group agreed attributes
• Individual attributes (personal strengths/weaknesses formulated by themselves; personal weaknesses formulated by their band)
Changes to other processes of peer assessment
• Timing of assessment
• Assessing privately or collaboratively
• Formative or summative assessment
Personal ‘weaknesses’
• Self selected• Determined for each individual by the band with
whom they have rehearsed
‘Band-determined personal weaknesses’
• “band members should choose, because they are more honest at identifying your weaknesses” –SA
• “you have to listen and respect someone willing and brave enough to tell you your faults” –NL
• “they reveal your weaknesses and once you know these you are fine” -EJ
• “former band members who rehearsed … with you ….could choose these attributes for you, that you can work on…they know you…” –SA
Interviews
• Semi-structured in-depth interviews conducted with sixteen band members during 2002-2006
• Adapted grounded theory was used to analyse the interview data
Interview analysisFour substantive categories arising from the coding analysis
• Self-knowledge
• Feedback
• Honesty
• Confidence
Self knowledge…..
• “it made me look a lot more at myself” –YL• “subconsciously, I was always thinking about them two things I needed to improve on” –TP • “it lets people know what they think of you as well as what you think
of yourself” –OD
Feedback…..
• “an exceptional way of getting feedback” -EJ• “it enables you to understand how to improve”- EJ• “it teaches you to try harder, do better”-OD, HA, NL, HS• “I made a conscious effort to work on my attributes” –EN • “hard to work with people who cannot accept criticism” -EJ• “if criticism makes you take stock, then peer assessment is OK” –NL• “peer assessment gives you a check of what you are actually doing” -OD• “my [self-selected] weaknesses – they’re not what the other people would
perceive as my weaknesses” -SA• “I need constructive criticism, not a stab in the back” –WK
Honesty……
• “ [it is] difficult to try to influence people to be impartial if they are determined to give low marks”-EJ• “[there are] difficulties in telling the truth face-to-face, so written feedback is good” –SA, DS• “written feedback avoids confrontations” – HA, SA• “it’s tough assessing your friends” –OD• “I try to be honest with my friends” -HA, MR• “some give friends better marks…I’m more critical with strangers” –OD • “personal feelings get in the way sometimes, and people will purposely mark low out of spite” –EJ
Confidence…
• “I suppose in the rehearsal process in the past, I’ve always been the one to kind of take a back seat and kind of just sit and do whatever I’m told to do, if you know what I mean. So, because they put me in the position of, you know, deciding this, that and other, I’ve learnt to be more assertive” –DS• “It made me look a lot more at myself, and looking at their confidence like, with mine” –YL• “You definitely notice people who are confident on their instruments, put forward, put their ideas forward more than people who tend to maybe not have had as much experience of playing with people; they like to sit back a little bit” – OM
Peer assessment marking data
Free-riders and shooting stars
• Free riders consistently awarded themselves higher marks, compared with those that were awarded by their bands.
• Shooting stars tended to under-estimate themselves when self-assessing, compared with those awarded to them by their band
Knowing yourself through others
• Careful preparation• Developing trust among band members• Agreeing to the band deciding your personal weakness
attributes• Receiving feedback • Increasing awareness and knowledge about yourself in
band rehearsing
Developing a process model
Stage One Tutor assessment; rationale; training; transparency; agreement
Stage Two Group Attributes and Individual Attributes
Stage Three Group Attributes and Personal Weaknesses
Stage Four Personal Weaknesses
End of Lecture
Contact /comments to:
Dr Mark Pulman
Senior Lecturer in Music Technology
University Centre Barnsley
University of Huddersfield
01226 644254