Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [University of North Carolina]On: 08 October 2014, At: 09:23Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Music Education ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cmue20
Improvisation in the English primarymusic classroom: teachers’ perceptionsand practicesTheano Koutsoupidou aa Roehampton University , UKPublished online: 23 Jan 2007.
To cite this article: Theano Koutsoupidou (2005) Improvisation in the English primary musicclassroom: teachers’ perceptions and practices, Music Education Research, 7:3, 363-381, DOI:10.1080/14613800500324432
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14613800500324432
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Improvisation in the English primary
music classroom: teachers’ perceptions
and practices
Theano Koutsoupidou*Roehampton University, UK
This study investigated teachers’ perceptions and practices concerning musical improvisation in the
English primary classroom. A questionnaire survey was carried out with participants drawn from
primary teachers*/both generalists and specialists*/working in various regions of England. The
findings demonstrate a positive view of teachers’ perceptions and practices towards improvisation,
with 81% of the teachers using improvisation in their music teaching. Teachers use improvisation
mainly on their own initiative, whereas teachers who do not use improvisation lack personal
involvement in improvisatory activities. The most usual ways of using improvisation are as a
response to a visual, verbal or audio stimulus and as a means of showing emotions, themes, moods
and ideas. Statistical analysis revealed significant associations between some factors*/teachers’ age,
experience, professional qualifications, educational background*/and teachers’ practice regarding
the use of improvisation. Teachers are more likely to use improvisation if they are older and/or more
experienced, if they have a teaching qualification, and if their higher education included
improvisation. Descriptive analysis of the data also explored teachers’ personal observations and
beliefs regarding the effects of improvisation, and the relationship between their teaching practice
and the National Curriculum for music.
Introduction
Musical creativity in school can take place in different kinds of activities described as
listening, performing, improvisation and composition. The two latter have been the
area of interest for most studies conducted on children’s musical creativity over the
past few decades: investigating their original music making in different settings,
within different frameworks and with children using their voices, their bodies or
musical instruments. Improvisation and composition are two terms widely used in
the literature to describe children’s creative products; however, terminology often
becomes problematic due to the different ways that researchers use the terms. Young
children, in addition, are generally not experienced enough in order to distinguish
the one term from the other. As children become older, they also become more
*Centre for International Research in Music Education, Roehampton University, Southlands
College, 80 Roehampton Lane, London SW15 5SL, UK. Email: [email protected]
ISSN 1461-3808 (print)/ISSN 1469-9893 (online)/05/030363-19
# 2005 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/14613800500324432
Music Education ResearchVol. 7, No. 3, November 2005, pp. 363�/381
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
capable of making music and more aware of the kind of music they produce
(Burnard, 2000); therefore, the difference between the two forms becomes clearer.
An explanation of the distinction between the two terms is given by Hargreaves
(1999), who states that improvisation, in contrast to composition, is ‘the process of
generating new ideas in music without any censorship or editing . . . improvisation is
regarded as a spontaneous instrumental performance, while composition can involve
transcription, arrangement, and scoring’ (p. 29). Sloboda (1985) suggests that ‘the
composer rejects possible solutions until he finds one which seems to be best for his
purpose’, while ‘the improviser must accept the first solution that comes to hand’
(p. 149). The term ‘improvisation’ was adopted for this study to describe children’s
spontaneous music making using their bodies (to produce physical sounds or to
move or dance), their voices (to produce vocal non-tuned sounds or melodies) and
musical instruments (tuned and un-pitched).
A considerable number of studies have focused on developmental aspects of
children’s music learning and music making. These studies have adopted many
innovative methodological approaches using a variety of tasks and settings. Several
studies have focused on developmental characteristics of music learners when
improvising or composing on instruments (Flohr, 1985; Swanwick & Tillman, 1986;
Kratus, 1989; Reinhardt, 1990; Webster, 1990; Brophy, 2002), with their voice
(Moorhead & Pond, 1941; Davies, 1986; Sundin, 1998; Marsh, 2000) or with their
bodies (Cohen, 1980; Burnard, 1999; Young, 2003). Studies describing both
children’s compositions and improvisations are mentioned here because what is
described by some authors as ‘composition’ can often be characterised by the
qualities that are widely ascribed to ‘improvisation’. Studies examining age-related
differences in young children’s improvisations or compositions tend to agree that
children’s ability to incorporate particular musical aspects in their original musical
products increases with chronological age; as a result, their ability to rearrange their
musical ideas to create music defined as ‘composition’ increases as well.
More qualitative approaches were adopted in an effort to ascribe deeper meaning
to children’s thinking processes in music (Loane, 1984; Glover, 1990; Barrett, 1996;
Young, 1995), or to reveal children’s reflections about their own creative products
(Dilkes, 1998; Kanellopoulos, 1999; Burnard, 2000). Researchers tend to agree that
the best way to understand and assess a child’s original music*/either as spontaneous
singing, playing an instrument or moving*/is to adopt an open-minded approach.
Adults should evaluate children’s music without using ‘adult’ criteria by learning to
comprehend and acknowledge the different ways in which children think and create
music according to their age, their experiences and the different stimuli.
Although a great deal of research has been conducted on children’s music making,
little emphasis has been given to music teaching and learning, the place of creativity
within these processes*/improvisation in particular*/and the teacher’s role in
ensuring an environment that will foster creativity in the classroom. Music education
research is mainly based on music teaching in theory and lacks practical insights into
teaching (Pitts, 2000; Hennessy, 2001). The majority of studies on music education
have been carried out without any reference to real educational frameworks*/
364 T. Koutsoupidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
teaching strategies, lesson designs, school programmes and music curricula.
Furthermore, the music curriculum, which is considered to play a fundamental
role in the design of the music lesson, has not been sufficiently investigated. Research
on the content, the specifications and the implementation of the music curriculum is
limited, with a number of studies in progress dealing with issues of secondary
education and equivalent studies for primary schools being very limited.
Literature on the design of school curricula and in particular on the place and role
of creativity in them is not extensive and provides only a generalised view of the
school curriculum (Pitts, 2000). Most research has focused on musical creativity in a
more general sense, without making the distinction between improvisation and
composition and therefore literature lacks empirical information about the use of
improvisation in school education. Furthermore, although various studies describe
teacher’s attitudes towards the music lesson in general, there were no studies found
related to teachers’ attitudes towards improvisation in particular.
Previous research has suggested that there is lack of creativity in school music
education (Mills, 1991; Joubert, 2001). Although the value of creativity for
children’s musical learning and development is widely accepted, teachers do not
always offer children opportunities to get involved in creative activities. Regrettably,
even though all children have the potential for creativity, they often ‘lose this
natural power of imagination once they are faced with the formal structures of
schooling’ (Joubert, 2001, p. 18). There might be several reasons why music
teachers avoid using improvisation in the classroom. Among them could be the lack
of understanding of creativity among primary teachers, their own educational
background, in terms of experiencing improvisation or not, or the over-excitement
that improvisational activities may induce in young children. As Mills (1991)
suggests, ‘for several decades to come there will still be primary teachers whose
experience of children composing is second-hand. These teachers can, quite
understandably, feel some uncertainty about how to approach composing with
children’ (p. 24). The same uncertainty could be the case for improvising with
children as well.
Teachers’ approaches in the primary school might not challenge enough children’s
musical creativity. However, ‘creating and developing musical ideas*/composing
skills’ constitutes a substantial part of the National Curriculum for England (DfEE/
QCA, 1999). Composing in the National Curriculum can be interpreted in different
ways. Pratt (1995) distinguishes three different levels of composing activity:
improvisation (spontaneous music making), refinement of original ideas to a finished
state, and arrangement of existing music*/again the issue of terminology arises here.
Similarly, Mills (1991) considers ‘activities such as improvising or arranging to be
particular styles of composing*/not distinct processes’ (p. 23), raising once more the
issue of the distinction between the above processes of music making.
According to the National Curriculum for Music in England, pupils of Key
Stage 11 should be taught ‘how to create musical patterns’ and ‘how to explore,
choose and organise sounds and musical ideas’. Although improvisation is not clearly
mentioned for KS1, exploring musical ideas is the basis of improvisation and the
Improvisation in the English primary music classroom 365
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
point at which creativity begins. The place of improvisation in the curriculum
becomes more evident at KS2, where pupils should be taught ‘how to improvise,
developing rhythmic and melodic material when performing’ and ‘how to explore,
choose, combine and organise musical ideas within musical structures’ (DfEE/QCA,
1999). The QCA schemes of work, in addition, provide lesson activities and units
of work enriched with improvisation, applied to both Key Stages (DfEE/QCA,
2000).
Aims of the study
From this brief preview of the literature related to creativity, with special emphasis on
the primary music education in England, some conclusions can be drawn:
(i) research on creative music teaching in the primary school is mainly based on
theoretical and descriptive approaches and lacks information about practical issues of
music teaching and learning and about the real situation in the primary school;
(ii) improvisation as a particular form of musical creativity in the classroom, has not
been sufficiently investigated. The present study was developed to bridge the gap
between theory and practice exploring the links between what is suggested by the
music education experts and the music curriculum, and what is actually implemen-
ted in the music classroom. It aimed to investigate the status of improvisation in the
English primary education from the teachers’ perspective, and through their personal
perceptions and practices, in order to provide an up-to-date and representative view
of their attitudes towards improvisation, and a better understanding of their teaching
practice, in terms of the use of creative, improvisation-based activities, applied to
children of KS1 and KS2.
The study was designed to investigate whether teachers use improvisation in the
primary music classroom, and whether various personal factors (teacher’s age,
special music qualifications, special teaching qualifications, length of teaching
experience, educational background) or other conditions (children’s age, group
sizes) might affect their perceptions and practices. The kinds of improvisation
(instrumental, vocal, dance/movement; individual or group) and the ways in which
teachers use it were to be related to their music qualifications, their own experience
of improvisation at elementary or higher education and various school conditions
(available time, children’s age, group sizes). More specifically, the following
assumptions were made:
. Since improvisation in education has been promoted today at a higher level than
some years ago, younger teachers are more likely to use improvisation than older
ones.
. Music specialists use more improvisation than non-specialists, because they have
the musical knowledge and skills to do so.
. Teachers are more likely to use improvisation with small groups of children.
. Teachers are more likely to use improvisation with older children.
366 T. Koutsoupidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
. Teachers with music qualifications are more likely to use many kinds of
improvisation and in a variety of ways.
Mills (1991) has taken a positive view about the recent developments regarding
creativity, arguing that ‘this [the lack of composing at schools] is changing. The
amount of composing going on in primary and secondary schools has been increasing
for some time . . .’ (p. 24). Again there is a reference to composing here, because it is
sometimes used as the ‘umbrella’ term to include all kinds of creative music
activities. In order to provide evidence for the use of improvisation in primary
education, the survey was also of an exploratory nature and addressed the following
questions:
. What is the frequency of using improvisation in the primary classroom today?
. Why and how do teachers use or not use improvisation?
. Do personal factors (age, professional qualifications, teaching experience, educa-
tional background) play a role in using or not using improvisation and in the kinds
of improvisation that teachers use?
. Do school conditions (children’s age group, number of children in class) play a
role in using or not using improvisation and in the kinds of improvisation that
teachers use?
. What are the teachers’ attitudes towards the National Curriculum?
. What are the teachers’ opinions about the effects of improvisation, according to
their personal observations?
Method
Design and material
A self-completion questionnaire, the ‘Musical Improvisation in Primary Schools
Questionnaire’, was developed to cover aspects of teachers’ perceptions and attitudes
towards musical improvisation. The questionnaire was initially piloted with five
music teachers and then re-piloted with twelve music teachers, all of them working in
primary schools in the area of south-west London. The main study followed covering
a wider geographical area and a larger sample (67 primary teachers, both music
specialists and non-specialists).
The refined and revised questionnaire for the main study was divided into two
parts: (A) personal information and (B) attitudes towards using improvisation in the
classroom. A copy of the questionnaire can be found in the appendix. The first part
of the questionnaire included questions about teachers’ personal details (age, gender,
professional qualification, length of teaching experience), their current job (age
groups they currently teach, average group size) and their relation to improvisation
(place of improvisation*/if any*/and kinds of improvisation in their own primary
and higher education, their own practice of improvisation*/if any*/and the kinds of
improvisation they use).
Improvisation in the English primary music classroom 367
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
Questions in part B sought more in depth information about teachers’ attitudes
towards improvisation. Teachers were asked to express how important they
considered some factors for choosing to use or not to use improvisation, their level
of familiarity with the National Curriculum, and their level of agreement, based on
their personal observations, with statements related to children’s participation in the
lesson, their willingness to improvise, the development of performance skills, and
whether creative thinking in music can be taught. All ratings were assigned to Lickert
scales from 1 (not at all important) to 10 (very important), except for ratings of the
statements, where 1 and 10 were labelled ‘strongly disagree’ and ‘strongly agree’
respectively. Teachers were also asked to describe how they use improvisation in the
classroom through an open-ended question, the responses to which were later sorted
(using a coding system) into some representative categories of improvisatory
activities. A definition of musical improvisation as used in the study was provided
at the beginning of the questionnaire.2
Participants
The questionnaire was addressed to both specialists and non-specialists music
teachers, since many primary schools do not have music specialists, and general
teachers’ practice officially includes music. The sample of the respondents was
drawn from primary teachers in various regions of England and included
respondents from a mix of 14 urban and rural areas, with a response rate of 39%
(67 returned questionnaires). Gender, age, and nationality distribution were not
critical for the study and therefore not taken into consideration in the selection of the
teachers, nor for the analysis of the data. However, the survey revealed that the
profession of music teacher is dominated by women and, therefore, the sample drew
mainly on female teachers.
Questionnaires were sent to the teachers mainly by post, although a small
proportion was collected through personal contact. Ethical issues concerning the
participants’ anonymity and the confidentiality of their answers were taken into
consideration. All participants were assured that they would remain anonymous, that
no data were to be used for other than the survey’s purposes without their
permission, and that they had the right to withdraw the survey at any time.
Analysis procedures
A descriptive analysis was carried out first using the frequency data for each variable.
Some statistical tests were then used in order to test for specific relationships. A
series of two-tailed chi-square tests were calculated in order to test for significant
associations between the use of improvisation, the kinds of improvisation teachers
use and the following factors: personal factors (teachers’ age, professional qualifica-
tions, teaching experience, educational background) and school conditions (chil-
dren’s age, group sizes). Some one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were
368 T. Koutsoupidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
calculated to examine possible effects of various factors on teachers’ opinions about
using or not using improvisation, without any significant results.
Educational background, in terms of holding special teaching or music qualifica-
tions, was coded for the analysis. Professional qualifications3 were divided into two
categories: teaching qualifications and music qualifications. Teaching qualifications
included: (i) music teaching qualification (BA Music Education, PGCE Music, MA
Music Education, other programmes related to music teaching), or (ii) other
teaching qualifications (BA Education, PGCE other than music, MA Education,
other programmes related to non-music education).4 Music qualifications included:
(i) music diplomas (music theory, composition, performance, etc.), or (ii) university
degrees in music (e.g. BA Music) or other music relevant subjects.
Results
Use of improvisation in the primary school
A high percentage of the teachers (81%) reported that they use improvisation,
though only 19% of them experienced improvisation at school. However, there was
no significant association between these two factors. Among the teachers who use
improvisation, 56% use vocal improvisation, 59% use movement/dance improvisa-
tion and all of them use instrumental improvisation; 84% of them use improvisation
with children individually and 92% with children in groups. Improvisation is used by
teachers in various ways. The analysis shows that these are not influenced by any
external factors, in particular teachers’ age, experience, qualifications, higher
education, children’s age and number of children in class. The most usual ways of
using improvisation are as a response to a visual, verbal or audio stimulus (44%) and
as a means of showing emotions, themes, moods and ideas (35%). Improvisation is
also carried out as free exploration of musical instruments, under teachers’ guidance
and on pentatonic scales. It is used less frequently to extend familiar songs and
pieces, in question�answer patterns or based on jazz chord sequences given by the
teacher (the exact frequencies of the ways in which teachers use improvisation are
shown in Figure 1).
Reasons why teachers use or do not use improvisation
Teachers use improvisation mainly on their own initiative (76%). At the same time,
though, half of the teachers report that being ‘obligatory in the National Curriculum’
is an important or very important reason (rating 8�10) for using improvisation. Only
8% consider as important or very important ‘improvisation being part of a specific
method they use (Dalcroze, Kodaly, Orff, etc.)’,5 and 26% their ‘training’ (the way
they were musically trained in terms of experiencing improvisation or not). The main
reasons that prevent teachers from using improvisation are their lack of personal
experience (77%) and their lack of familiarity with improvisation (69%). The former
refers to the experience of improvisation in practical terms with the active
Improvisation in the English primary music classroom 369
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
participation of teachers in improvisatory activities; whilst the latter refers to
teachers’ familiarity with improvisation in theoretical terms. Moreover, teachers
consider an important or very important reason for not using improvisation the fact
that it reduces classroom discipline (62%) and the limited available time for the
music lesson (54%). Finally, only 8% of them argue that improvisation has no
benefits for their teaching (Figure 2).
Influences on teachers’ use of improvisation
A series of two-tailed chi-square tests were calculated in order to test for any
significant associations between the use of improvisation and various factors. The
analysis showed that four main factors that influence the use of improvisation in
teachers’ practice: age, teaching experience, professional qualifications and educa-
tional background. As shown in Figure 3, older teachers and teachers with longer
teaching experience are more likely to use improvisation than younger ones (x2�/
9.41, df�/1, pB/0.01).
Figure 4 shows that teachers who hold a teaching qualification are more likely to
use improvisation than those who do not (x2�/8.24, df�/2, pB/0.05). Teachers who
hold a music qualification are more likely to use movement/dance improvisation,
whereas teachers whose higher education included improvisation are more likely to
use improvisation in general in their own practice than those who did not experience
improvisation. However, the two latter effects did not quite reach statistical
significance.
teacher guided
12.4%
show emotions, ideas
17.5%
response to stimuli
21.6% extensions of songs
9.3%
question-answer
9.3%
jazz chords
3.1%
pentatonic scales
15.5%
free exploration
11.3%
Figure 1. Ways in which teachers use improvisation
370 T. Koutsoupidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
A second series of two-tailed chi-square tests were calculated in order to test for
any significant associations between the use of improvisation, the kinds of
improvisation used (individual or group), and the following factors: teachers’
experience of improvisation in their own primary education and school conditions
(children’s age group, number of children in class). There were no significant
associations between the above factors. Statistical analysis (one-way ANOVA) also
showed that there is no significant difference between personal factors (age and
reduces discipline
time is limited
it has no benefits
Why teachers use improvisation
because of training
from own initiativepart of method
oblicatory by NC
Why teachers do not use improvisation
I don't improvise
not familiar with it
Figure 2. Reasons why teachers use or do not use improvisation
Improvisation in the English primary music classroom 371
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
qualifications) and teachers’ statements about the reasons they use or do not use
improvisation.
Other observations. Seventy-five percent of the teachers believe that improvisation
promotes children’s participation in the lesson and 71% believe that it also promotes
the development of performance skills; 64% of them also agree or strongly agree that
creative thinking in music can be taught and only 12% of the teachers state that
children are reluctant to improvise during the lesson. Only about half of the teachers
report that they are familiar enough with the National Curriculum for music, and
even fewer, only 24%, that they follow its suggestions very often.
age of participant27-6318-26
Cou
nt
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
use of improvisation
yes
no
teaching experience 11-40 years0-10 years
Cou
nt
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
teachers' practiceyes
no
Figure 3. Association between age, experience and the use of improvisation
372 T. Koutsoupidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
Discussion
Although one study is not sufficient to draw general conclusions, the survey revealed
an encouraging picture of the use of improvisation in primary music education in
England, and showed that the gap between what is suggested by the curriculum and
what is implemented by the teachers might have been bridged. The high percentage
of teachers who use improvisation on their own initiative (76%) implies that they
understand the value of improvisation; their attitudes are not based on whether they
are obliged or not to use it, but on their personal enthusiasm. However, the high
percentage of those stating that they use improvisation because it is obligatory in the
National Curriculum (50%) could put the reliability of teachers’ responses under
question. This is besides one of the major problems when conducting questionnaire
surveys. Peoples’ responses are frequently guided by the ‘social desirability response
bias’ (Robson, 2000, p. 310).
It was interesting to examine the relationship between improvisation as reported
for teachers’ own school education, and the use of improvisation in their own
teaching practice. There seem to be two different chronological phases: the first
phase covers teachers’ primary school education, while the second phase covers their
teaching practice. A period of at least 10 years extends between the above two
phases, considering that 10 years should be the shortest possible period between the
youngest possible teacher (21-year-old) and his/her primary school education. There
was no significant association between the two factors (improvisation in teachers’
primary education and teachers’ use of improvisation in their practice) in terms of
examining possible effects of one factor on the other. However, the frequencies
(19% of the teachers experienced improvisation in their own education, while 81%
use improvisation in their practice) could suggest a positive development in primary
music education concerning the use of improvisatory activities within the music
teaching.
teaching qualificationsyesno
Cou
nt
40
30
20
10
0
use of improvisationno
yes
Figure 4. Association between teaching qualifications and the use of improvisation
Improvisation in the English primary music classroom 373
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
The extent of improvisation in teachers’ own primary education partly confirms
the widely accepted argument that most primary music teachers were typically
educated mainly as performers and the emphasis on creative music making in the
primary curriculum is a recent development. This could possibly explain why only
19% of the teachers experienced improvisation in their own school education.
However, results concerning the level of familiarity of the teachers with the National
Curriculum contradict the above assumption, suggesting that offering a well-framed
theoretical curriculum is inadequate for effective music instruction. Curriculum
designers should perhaps consider the reasons why teachers do not follow the
curriculum.
About half of the teachers reporting that they use improvisation stated that apart
from instrumental improvisation they also use improvisation in vocal work and
dance/movement. However, when they were asked to describe how they use
improvisation in the classroom, almost all of them associated the activities they use
with instrumental improvisation. This can be explained mainly in two ways. Teachers
might choose to use instrumental improvisation because of the general tendency of
music education to focus on the development of performance skills and the frequent
association of music education to learning a musical instrument; or, they might use
instrumental improvisation because they find it easier to manage and it does not
require high levels of personal involvement*/this could apply to teachers who might
not feel confident about their musical knowledge or skills. However, the analysis
showed no significance between teachers’ educational background, in terms of
holding special music qualifications, and the kinds of improvisation they use
(instrumental, vocal, movement/dance).
Although it was initially hypothesised that younger teachers would be more likely
to use improvisation than older ones, the youngest age group (ages 18�26) proved,
on the contrary, to use the least improvisation. Greater experience, which is mostly
related directly to age, was also associated with more extensive use of improvisation.
All these results suggest that a very important factor that makes teachers use
improvisation is their personal and professional maturity. With time, teachers’ self-
confidence about their teaching ability increases and, at the same time, their teaching
knowledge (regarding different teaching tools and methods) increases because of
experience. It can be assumed that teachers with longer experience have a higher
ability to choose the right teaching methods and tools, since with experience they
have gained knowledge of which aspects of teaching are the best according to the
aims of each lesson. This could imply that, by choosing to use improvisation, they are
aware of its benefits and positive outcomes. Teachers with less experience, on the
other hand, possibly lack the confidence to use improvisation in their lessons. This
could occur due to their reluctance to take ‘risks’ by using activities that might affect
classroom discipline*/the latter was reported as an important factor for 62% of the
teachers who do not use improvisation.
Another factor that may well affect teachers’ attitudes in relation to their
chronological age is whether they tend to conform. Older teachers may feel freer
to use any activities they want in the classroom, while younger teachers usually
374 T. Koutsoupidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
appear more thoughtful about the requirements of the school and each lesson
because they have not yet developed their own teaching strategies and methods. By
trying to implement lesson plans that conform to all requirements and given that the
music lesson in the primary school takes place only once a week, there is possibly no
time left for improvisatory activities. This argument is supported by teachers’
responses regarding the reasons why they do not use improvisation, since 54% of
them report that there is not enough available teaching time.
Teachers’ educational background, in terms of holding special music qualifica-
tions, surprisingly proved to play no role in their attitudes towards the use of
improvisation in their teaching. However, it was expected that teachers with music
qualifications would be more likely to use improvisation as a result of their advanced
level of musical knowledge, which would give them more confidence. The content of
teacher’s university education, on the other hand, was related to their own practice,
with teachers whose higher education included improvisation being more likely to
use improvisation in their own practice. This complements the finding that one of the
main reasons teachers do not use improvisation is their lack of personal involvement
into improvisatory activities.
Responses about teachers’ observations regarding the effects of improvisation
indicated that the majority of them believe that improvisation promotes children’s
participation in the lesson. Children are not reluctant to improvise and their
performance skills are improved when improvisation is used. About two-thirds of the
teachers also agreed or strongly agreed that creative thinking in music can be taught.
These findings suggest that improvisation, according to the teachers, is indeed
beneficial for children’s musical response in the classroom and for their musical
development.
In conclusion, the analysis of the data led to the identification of two types of
teacher in the primary music classroom, with regard to their different attitudes and
practices towards musical improvisation:
Teachers who use improvisation:
. Tend to be older;
. Tend to have longer teaching experience;
. Usually hold a teaching qualification;
. Experienced improvisation in their own higher education;
. Are more likely to use movement/dance improvisation if they hold a music
qualification;
. Use improvisation mostly on their own initiative;
. Believe that improvisation has positive effects on children’s musical and creative
development.
Teachers who do not use improvisation:
. Tend to be younger;
. Tend to have short teaching experience;
. Have no specialist music teaching qualifications;
Improvisation in the English primary music classroom 375
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
. Did not experience improvisation in their own higher education;
. Do not use improvisation mostly because they are not familiar with it;
. Believe that improvisation has positive effects on children’s musical and creative
development.
The survey revealed that music education in the English primary school is moving
towards a more creative approach than previous research tends to suggest. Primary
teachers place more emphasis on improvisation today than some years ago and,
whether they use improvisation or not, they comprehend and acknowledge its value
for children’s musical development. However, the results of this survey have
generated further questions regarding the factors that may or may not affect
teachers’ practices and the role of the music curriculum in the formation of teachers’
attitudes towards improvisation. Further research on this topic could examine why
music qualifications proved to be no benefit for teachers’ practice in relation to
improvisation, and why the National Curriculum does not have the influence that it
is supposed to have on teachers’ construction of the music lesson. More in depth
investigations of teachers’ perceptions and practices could be conducted through
interviews with primary teachers or through observations of their music lessons; this
would contribute to a better understanding of their attitudes towards improvisation
and, therefore, to a more effective primary music education.
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful to Professor David J. Hargreaves, Dr Susan Young and
Dr Nigel Marshall for their supervision during the project and for their comments on
earlier drafts of this article, and would also like to thank all the teachers who took
part.
Notes on contributor
Theano Koutsoupidou is a musicologist and a music teacher. She holds a degree in
Music Studies from the University of Athens, Greece, and a Piano Diploma.
She is currently a doctoral student at the Centre for International Research in
Music Education of the Roehampton University, investigating the role of
improvisation in the development of children’s creative thinking in music. She
has presented her work at several European and international conferences. Her
research interests include the child’s musical development, musical creativity,
and music education in the early years and in the primary school.
Notes
1. The National Curriculum in England applies to pupils of compulsory school age and it is
organised on the basis of four key stages (KS): KS-1 (ages 5�7), KS-2 (ages 7�11), KS-3
(ages 11�14) and KS-4 (ages 14�16).
376 T. Koutsoupidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
2. Improvisation was defined as ‘spontaneous music-making using the body (to produce
physical sounds or to move/dance), the voice (to produce vocal non-tuned sounds or
melodies), or musical instruments (tuned and non-tuned)’.
3. Qualifications that can be obtained by Higher Education Institutes in England (among
others): BA (Bachelor of Arts), BSc (Batchelor of Science), PGCE (Post-Graduate
Certificate), MA (Master of Arts), MSc (Master of Science), MPhil (Master of Philosophy),
PhD (Doctor of Philosophy).
4. Qualifications related to teaching a musical instrument were not included here because of
the different pedagogical skills that are required in terms of the teaching context, the
educational setting, the number of pupils, and the teachers’ aims and objectives.
5. The music education methods of Dalcroze, Kodaly and Orff have been fundamental for the
development of music education in Europe. They developed methods that focused on the
use of improvisation through movement, voice and musical instruments respectively.
Although these methods are not totally adopted within the Music Curriculum, aspects of
them have influenced the curriculum as well as many teachers’ practices, concerning
specially the use of improvisation. There are opportunities in the UK for teachers to receive
special training in the Dalcroze, Kodaly and Orff methods; therefore, it was assumed that
these teachers might be more likely to use improvisation in their teaching.
References
Barrett, M. (1996) Children’s aesthetic decision-making: an analysis of children’s musical
discourse as composers, International Society for Music Education, 28, 37�62.
Brophy, T. S. (2002) The melodic improvisations of children aged 6�12: a developmental
perspective, Music Education Research, 4(1), 74�91.
Burnard, P. (1999) Bodily intention in children’s improvisation and composition, Psychology of
Music, 27(2), 159�174.
Burnard, P. (2000) Examining experiential differences between improvisation and composition in
children’s music making, British Journal of Music Education, 17(3), 227�245.
Cohen, V. (1980) The emergence of musical gestures in kindergarten children. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana.
Davies, C. (1986) Say it till a song comes: reflections on songs invented by children 3�13, British
Journal of Music Education, 3(3), 279�293.
Department for Education and Employment and Qualifications and Curriculum Authority
(DFEE/QCA) (1999) Music: The National Curriculum for England (London, HMSO).
Department for Education and Employment and Qualifications and Curriculum Authority
(DFEE/QCA) (2000) Music: a scheme of work for Key Stages 1 and 2 (London, HMSO).
Dilkes, H. (1998) The Octopus Project*/‘‘I was making bing and bong’’: children’s conceptions of
their own musical improvisations, Australian Journal of Early Childhood Education, 23(2),
13�18.
Flohr, J. (1985) Young children’s improvisations: emerging creative thought, The Creative Child and
Adult Quarterly, 10(2), 79�85.
Glover, J. (1990) Understanding children’s musical understanding, British Journal of Music
Education, 7(3), 257�62.
Hargreaves (1999) Developing musical creativity in the social world, Bulletin of the Council for
Research in Music Education, 142, 22�34.
Hennessy, S. (2001) Research and development in music education, in: C. Philpott & C.
Plummeridge (Eds) Issues in music teaching (London, Routledge Falmer).
Joubert, M. M. (2001) The art of creative teaching: NACCCE and beyond, in: A. Craft, B. Jeffrey
& M. Leibling (Eds) Creativity in education (London, Continuum).
Improvisation in the English primary music classroom 377
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
Kanellopoulos, P. (1999) Children’s conception and practice of musical improvisation, Psychology
of Music, 27, 175�91.
Kratus, J. (1989) A time analysis of the compositional processes used by children aged 7 to 11,
Journal of Research in Music Education, 37, 15�20.
Loane, B. (1984) Thinking about children’s compositions, British Journal of Music Education, 1(3),
205�231.
Marsh, K. (2000) The composers in the playground, paper presented at the Creativity Special
Research Interest Group session, Music Educators National Conference , Washington DC, 8�11
March.
Mills, J. (1991) Music in the primary school (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).
Moorhead, G. E. & Pond, D. (1941) Music of young children: Pillsbury foundation studies (Santa
Barbara, CA, Pillsbury Foundation for Advancement of Music Education).
Pitts, S. (2000) Reasons to teach music: establishing a place in the contemporary curriculum,
British Journal of Music Education, 17(1), 33�42.
Pratt, G. (1995) Performing; composing; listening and appraising, in: G. Pratt & J. Stephens (Eds)
Teaching music in the National Curriculum (Oxford, Heinemann).
Reinhardt, D. (1990) Preschool children’s use of rhythm in improvisation, Contributions to Music
Education, 17, 7�19.
Robson, C. (2002) Real world research (Oxford, Blackwell Press).
Sloboda, J. (1985) The musical mind (Oxford, Oxford University Press).
Sundin, B. (1998) Musical creativity in the first six years, in: B. Sundin, G. McPherson & G.
Folkestad (Eds) Children composing (Malmo, Lund University).
Swanwick, K. & Tillman, J. (1986) The sequence of musical development: a study of children’s
composition, British Journal of Music Education, 3, 305�39.
Webster, P. (1990) Creativity as creative thinking, Music Educators Journal, 76(9), 22�28.
Young, S. (1995) Listening to the music of early childhood, British Journal of Music Education,
12(1), 51�58.
Young, S. (2003) Time�space structuring in spontaneous play on educational percussion
instruments among three-and four-year-olds, British Journal of Music Education, 1, 45�59.
378 T. Koutsoupidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
Appendix A: Questionnaire
Part A: Personal information
1. Please indicate your age group.
a. 18�26 I b. 27�40 I c. 41�50 I d. 51�60
2. Please indicate your gender.
a. Male I b. Female I
3. Which of the following professional qualifications do you have?
a. Music diploma I Subject ..................
b. Undergraduate degree (BA, BSc) I Subject ..................
c. Postgraduate Diploma (PGCE) I Subject ..................
d. MA/MPhil/PhD I Subject ..................
e. Other I Please give details .............
4. For how long have you been teaching music?
a. 0�10 years I b. 11�20 years I c. 21�30 years I d. 31�40 years I
5. What age groups are you teaching at the primary school you work?
a. KS-1 I KS-2 I Year/s
6. How many children do the classes consist of?
a. 10�20 I b. 21�30 I c. more than 30 I
7.1. Did your own music education at school include improvisation?
a. Yes I b. No I
7.2. Did your own music education at university include improvisation?
a. Yes I b. No I
8. If yes, what kind of improvisation did it include? Please tick all that apply.
8.1. 8.2.
a. Vocal I a. Individual I
b. Instrumental I b. Group I
c. Movement/dance I
d. Other (please specify) .....................
Improvisation in the English primary music classroom 379
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
9. Do you use improvisation in the classroom?
a. Yes I If yes go to question 10 and 11.
b. No I If not go to question 12.
10. What kinds of improvisation do you use? Please tick all that apply.
10.1. 10.2.
a. Vocal I a. Individual I
b. Instrumental I b. Group I
c. Movement/dance I
d. Other (please specify) .......................
Part B: Attitudes towards improvisation in the classroom
11. How important do you consider the following factors in the use of
improvisation in your lessons?
(1: not at all important, 10: very important)
a. It is obligatory to use improvisation within the National Curriculum.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
b. Because is part of a specific music education method I use (e.g. Dalcroze, Kodaly,
Orff, etc.).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
c. I use improvisation because of my own initiative.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
d. I use improvisation because of my training.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
12. How important do you consider the following factors in not using
improvisation? (same as above)
a. I am not familiar with improvisation.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
b. I don’t improvise myself.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
c. I don’t believe improvisation has any benefits for my teaching.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
380 T. Koutsoupidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
d. The time available for the music lesson is too limited.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
e. Improvisation can reduce classroom discipline.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
13.1. How familiar are you with the content of the National Curriculum in
music?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Not at all Very
13.2. If you have given a positive answer (6�10), please indicate the level to
which you follow the suggestions of the National Curriculum for the design
of your lesson?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Never Often Always
14. Do you believe that creative thinking in music can be taught?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No No opinion Yes
15. Please briefly describe how you use improvisation in the classroom.
16. Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the
following statements.
(1: strongly disagree, 5: no opinion, 10: strongly agree)
a. Improvisation promotes children’s participation in the lesson.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
b. Improvisation promotes the development of performance skills.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
c. Children seem reluctant to improvise during the lesson.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Improvisation in the English primary music classroom 381
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
orth
Car
olin
a] a
t 09:
23 0
8 O
ctob
er 2
014
