Dr%20Mark%20Pulman%20University%20of%20Huddersfield

1
Dr Mark PulmanUniversity of Huddersfield
Research Fora 2nd December 2008 University of
Huddersfield
Personal attributes and rehearsing in a band
University Campus Barnsley
2
Introduction
Personal attributes and rehearsing in a band

The musical context
3
What can be learned during band rehearsals?

4
Group Rehearsing
Peer learning
Popular music context
Group rehearsing
5
Peer learning

• Why
• Bother?

6
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

7
Action research

• Improvements to practice
• Pedagogy, teaching and learning

8
Research questions

• How might peer assessment activites support
  learning arising from band rehearsals?
• Which activities and processes may foster the
  development of such learning?

9
Learning and acquiring knowledge through band
rehearsing and peer learning activities

• A social constructivist paradigm

10
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

11
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?

12
Training Principles

• Rationale
• Agreement
• Transparency
• Moderation

13
Which personal attributes do students think are
important in their rehearsing?

• Most frequently formulated personal attributes
  criteria
• Group Attributes Attendance Team working
  Enthusiasm Commitment Responsibility for
  learning parts Organisation Punctuality
• Personal 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.
• CreativityTrying new ideas Inventiveness
  Creative input Contribution to ideas
• Confidence Verbal input Leadership
  skills/taking charge.Confidence
• Awareness Listening to others Willingness to
  help others Focus/concentration

14
(No Transcript)
15
Peer assessing
Personal weaknesses that you wish to improve Personal weaknesses that you wish to improve Personal weaknesses that you wish to improve Personal weaknesses that you wish to improve Personal weaknesses that you wish to improve Personal weaknesses that you wish to improve Personal weaknesses that you wish to improve Personal weaknesses that you wish to improve
1 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
16
Action research cycles

• 19 cycles (2000-2006)
• of rehearsing and performing

17
Changes/evaluation/action
Exploring the peer assessment process
Development of research questions
Rehearsing and performing
Students' responses to peer assessment
Development of understanding of peer assessment
Development of methodological framework
Revision of action research cycle and
re-application
18
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

19
Personal weaknesses

• Self selected
• Determined for each individual by the band with
  whom they have rehearsed

20
(No Transcript)
21
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 onthey know you SA

22
Interviews

• Semi-structured in-depth interviews conducted
  with sixteen band members during 2002-2006
• Adapted grounded theory was used to analyse the
  interview data

23
Interview analysis

• Four substantive categories arising from the
  coding analysis
• Self-knowledge
• Feedback
• Honesty
• Confidence

24
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

25
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 theyre not what
  the other people would
• perceive as my weaknesses -SA
• I need constructive criticism, not a stab in the
  back WK

26
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
• its tough assessing your friends OD
• I try to be honest with my friends -HA, MR
• some give friends better marksIm more
  critical with strangers OD
• personal feelings get in the way sometimes, and
  people will purposely
• mark low out of spite EJ

27
Confidence

• I suppose in the rehearsal process in the past,
  Ive always been the
• one to kind of take a back seat and kind
  of just sit and do whatever
• Im 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, Ive 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

28
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

29
A moral dimension

• Trust

Honesty
30
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

31
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
32
Strengths and weaknesses
33
Applications to other areas?

• Group work?
• Creativity?

34
End of Lecture
Contact /comments to Dr Mark Pulman Senior
Lecturer in Music Technology University Centre
Barnsley University of Huddersfield 01226
644254 m.pulman_at_hud.ac.uk