This chapter serves to discuss a few topics, namely, general discussion of the findings, limitations of the results, implications, as well as recommendations for future research.
5.3.1 General Discussion of HOPE Findings
HOPE was developed to address the secondary research question of “How can I use the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning to inform other musicians in their practice?”. Two questions for the intervention were laid out in Chapter 5.1.2, the first being: “How effective is HOPE in enhancing the practice of musicians?” and the second being “How will HOPE impact the practice of musicians, besides the benefits proposed by the OPTIMAL theory?”. Through the data presented in Chapter 5.2, it is clear that the quantitative results answered the first question, while the qualitative results could be used to respond to the second question.
The hypothesis was that HOPE, which enhances autonomy, expectancies and external focus, will be effective in enhancing the practice experience of musicians while promoting attention, motivation and task goal focus, and reducing self-focus. Therefore, the hypothesis also can be examined through the use of the quantitative results.
Quantitative Results, First Intervention Question and Hypothesis
The quantitative data was obtained from the diary entries, pre-project survey and post-project survey, and retention test. The data from the diaries showed enhanced self-efficacy levels and usage of external focus, while showing promising improvements in attention, motivation task goal focus, and a reduction of self-focus over the 3 weeks of intervention.
The data from the pre-project survey and post-project survey similarly paints the same picture as the results shown from the diaries, but with the inclusion of autonomy, that the diaries were not able to track. Autonomy was also found to be enhanced by HOPE, as seen in the pre- and post-project surveys.
Most interestingly was the quantitative data from the retention test. Besides the numbers showing that HOPE was still effective in encouraging the use of all three elements of the toolkit, the almost similar value through the three elements was extremely surprising. This lent support to the notion that HOPE was extremely effective in inducing almost an equal enhancement of the three elements. This also gives credibility to the “holistic” element that HOPE was intended for.
Therefore, the quantitative results all point towards support for the hypothesis. The first question can therefore be answered with certainty that HOPE was effective in enhancing the practice of musicians.
Qualitative Results and Second Intervention Question
Data that were qualitative were derived from the group meeting discussions, and the open-ended questions from the post-project survey and retention test.
In the group meetings from Week 2 to Week 4, besides showing that there was a positive trajectory in the usage of the tools, there was also a common theme of enhanced practice quality, awareness, and motivation over the three weeks.
Most importantly, participants were noted to be increasingly more proactive in talking about issues pertaining to practice that were not addressed directly by HOPE but were induced by the use of HOPE and group meeting discussions. These included topics and insights such as winter depression, potential of one’s self, the approach that HOPE took, the benefits of the group meeting discussions, the dynamics between student and teacher (be it challenging or helpful), confronting fears, connection HOPE or practice had with personal life and growth, future personal directions or advice given from participant to another. Statements made by the participants about these issues can be found in Appendix J. These quotes were sorted according to chronological order, followed by the order of participant numbers within each topic.
Most notable within these insights were the huge number of quotes about the benefits of the group meeting discussions (9) and the approach HOPE took (8). The statements made by the participants about group meeting discussions were all positive. This highlights the benefits of informal learning for musicians. More importantly, these statements underscore the need for safe spaces to discuss issues pertaining to practising, and possibly performance. Here were some notable ones:
“And then when I was alone, I really closed myself and just did whatever I felt like it's safe for me. But because your approach is so relaxed, and I feel like I'm not the only one who is going to try it out this next week. It’s the whole group, so everyone will see how it goes and then we'll share our techniques. And there is no right or wrong answer.”
(Participant 10, Week 2)
“This is something that I thought was really so helpful: to have these discussions with people and to hear the experiences of others and to relate to someone, like: “Ok, so I'm not the only one that this is happening to.” That helps tremendously for me…I feel like musicians don't usually talk to each other that much about what happens in the practice sessions and the practice room. And for me, it really feels so good to be able to talk about it to realise things quicker and to hear about other people’s experiences. I think it's so useful.”
(Participant 3, Week 3)
“I thought the group meetings were really good. Everyone can talk about their practice and be honest, and I find that I'm not alone because everyone will [face some] troubles. But normally we don't talk about this, but in this workshop we talk about it, and it feels good to me knowing that I'm not alone.
(Participant 5, Week 4)
“I think just the aspect of talking to people about this and reflecting once a week, once every two weeks or so … and I think that's something that even if you have group lessons with your teacher, it's usually different because group lessons are focused either on technique or performance classes, which is definitely needed as well. But this is also because you're not necessarily with people from your instrument. Yeah, it gives a bit more of this broader perspective on. “How do we work? What are we thinking about? How do we feel?” And I think that's just for me, something very nice.”
(Participant 6, Week 4)
“I just find it strange that we have all those theory lessons and all those kinds of things, but not more of these kinds of things (lessons on practising) because this is like the most important thing there is in the whole world for us.”
(Participant 7, Week 4)
“We're not going to end this because I hope we keep talking, all of us. And it's quite nice to also see different students of [a teacher] and also talk about these kinds of things. Because we are a very open group and also very nice to each other. That's nice.”
(Participant 7, Week 4)
However, there were some negative results seen in the qualitative results. Over the course of the three weeks of group meeting discussions, there was a common theme of anxiety being induced from filling up the diaries. In Week 2, 3 participants noted the diaries inducing stress or bad feelings. In the group meeting discussion of Week 3, Participant 11 broke down during the group discussion meeting and mentioned that the intervention was “overwhelming”:
“I think that's also why this project has been a little bit like overwhelming in a sense, because it's really been making me like confront how I feel about things and I think this has to do with also like my avoidance and everything and so a lot of this stuff that I'm discovering about myself feels like I'm not in control of my emotions and I'm not in control of like what I want to be doing and how I want to be progressing and my goals, like long term goals and what I want.”
(Participant 11)
The final meetings also received 4 different participants mentioning about the pressures and anxiety of filling up the form due to the time aspect.
The data from the post-project survey and retention tests found that participants found that HOPE did manage to elicit enhanced practice quality, as predicted by the OPTIMAL theory. However, not accounted for by the OPTIMAL theory, was the fact that participants found that HOPE also made them more organised, objective, mindful, and confident. This was attributed to the provision of structure and useful elements. This once again shows the integrity of the “holistic” aspect of HOPE.
The data from Q31 and Q32 of the post-project survey showed extreme success of HOPE in inducing heightened levels of the independent variables. Even though these two questions were open ended, the answers received all found common themes through the three aspects of the toolkit from HOPE. This was also corroborated by the strong showing of data in Q2, Q4, and Q6 in the retention test, showing that all participants except for one (Participant 5) were still using the three elements of the independent variables 5 weeks after the end of HOPE. More about Participant 5 will be addressed under Chapter 5.3.2.
Answers received from Q33 of the post-project survey reinforced the importance of the group meetings and more importantly, safe spaces. 8 participants found it necessary to talk about their practice or humanise their struggles.
Although Q7 of the retention test showed no participants using the original diary format, it could also be interpreted as participants exercising their autonomy and creating a diary format that worked better for them.
The notion of anxiety being induced through the filling of diaries were also seen in the post-project survey and retention test. Q29 of the post-project survey found that 5 participants found the time aspect of filling up the diaries to be challenging. Participant 11 also noted in Q34 that HOPE could be improved by making shorter forms to fill up.
Notably, a few weeks after the end of HOPE, Participant 7 went on to win an audition. Participant 6 requested if the researcher could provide “Diary (2-4)” for their private student as well.
To conclude this subchapter and to answer the second intervention question, it was found that although HOPE had induced greater organisation, objectiveness, mindfulness, and confidence in the participants, it also brought about anxiety. The anxiety was due to the time aspect of filling up the diaries or the confrontational aspect of the diaries. This led to a less than optimal quality of practice in a handful of participants. However, as shown from the qualitative and quantitative data, as a collective, participants were generally having a better practice quality.
5.3.2 Limitations
This section aims to address the caveats that might affect the data and findings presented so far.
Limitations of Intervention Design
As participants were recruited through the means of voluntary sign-ups, there was a possibility of selection bias. Participants might have a general disposition to fare better in terms of motivation and willingness to change as compared to a random selection of participants.
Circumstances During Data Collection
2 participants, Participants 1 and 11 noted the changing season and weather and the impact it had on their mental health. This might have affected the accuracy of the results.
The retention test was also applied during an inconvenient time for participants as it was right after the Christmas and new year holidays, where almost half of the participants (6) noted that there was a disruption to their practice since the end of the intervention. Therefore, results obtained by the retention test might not have been an accurate representation of participants under normal circumstances.
Self-Reporting Bias
The quantitative data collected were all through self-reporting, the intervention results had a possibility of exposure to self-reporting bias as well. Furthermore, Participant 7 mentioned while filling up the post-project survey that, “the 8 I gave in the earlier survey will be a different 8 in the survey here. Here, it will be like that 'cause maybe I'm going to say “Most of the time again”. Maybe I'm even more strict, because I'm more aware of things. So this is going to be a different 8” As seen in the qualitative data from the diaries, there was a sense of increased awareness from the participants in general,
Degree of Involvement Through the Intervention Process
Participants had varying degrees of participation during the application of HOPE. This might have affected the degree of accuracy of the findings. This chapter will highlight a few participants’ degree of involvement and how it might have affected the results, given that the total number of the participants was 13. The results of each participant had a considerable effect on the final data presented in Chapter 5.2.
Participant 4
Participant 4 unfortunately had a busy schedule during the first two weeks of the intervention due to auditions and performances, this resulted in a less than ideal practice situation for most of the intervention phase. Due to the scheduling issues, Participant 4 was also not able to attend the usual group meeting discussions. At the end of Week 2, Participant 4 attended a make-up session with Participant 13. For the end of Week 3, Participant 4 attended a one-to-one online meeting with the researcher. The only time Participant 4 attended a normally scheduled group meeting was on the final group meeting discussion. The relative lack of Informal learning for Participant 4 might have affected the final results as well.
Participant 5
Although Participant 5 was present for all the group meeting discussions, and filled up all the diary entries, they were not so involved with the exploration of tools, even after encouragement and suggestions from the researcher during the group meetings. In the final meeting, Participant 5 ended up with only 1 tool in their final toolkit, a stark contrast to the rest of the group. Furthermore, in the retention test, Participant 5 was the only participant that left Q2, Q4 and Q6 blank, even though they filled in a score of 6,10 and 4 for Q1, Q3 and Q5. This brought into question about the validity of the other data that Participant 5 had supplemented thus far. Therefore, the data would have been inaccurate due to Participant 5’s lack of exploration during the intervention as well as the questionable honesty in the data collected.
Participant 11
Participant 11 dropped out in Week 4, and therefore, was not accounted for in the data of the Week 4 diaries. Hence, the weightage of answers from the other 12 participants were stronger in the collective data collected in the Week 4 diaries and might have affected its accuracy when used for comparison between the other weeks.
[Next: Chapter 5.3.3 - Implications and Recommendations]
5.3.3 Implications and Recommendations
Implications and Recommendations for Institutions
It is extremely evident that the participants generally valued and appreciated the safe space for informal learning through HOPE. Several participants also noted that such spaces and conversation about practising between students was not the norm. Although the Royal Conservatoire of The Hague does address such issues through courses and workshops that the researcher had personally partook in, it seems that more resources can be allocated for a wider variety of courses to reach out to more students.
Safe spaces are vital for musicians to explore and navigate themselves in a setting where they would not be judged for any mistakes. This is even more necessary to counteract the technical approach of the conservatoire system, which lacks the training of life skills and experience as noted by Williams (2019). She also suggested that:
“Conservatoires could shift their goals from producing technically finished performers to training expert learners and musicians who can express themselves clearly, and who are equipped to continue and steer their own development.”
(Williams, 2019)
HOPE has shown that when given the space to explore and share practice experiences on a peer-to-peer level while having the common goal of achieving better practice quality, the results permeate beyond the practice rooms. Safe spaces are what is needed to bring attention to the issues and changes needed pertaining to personal development as a musician, and most importantly, as a person. This sentiment can also be found in several statements from the participants:
“I think the way you practice also reveals a lot about your habits and your insecurities. Now that I'm trying to be conscious about these patterns and I think it has all to do with insecurities. I think musicians usually have lots of insecurities. I think each one of us has our own insecurities. But yeah, for me it's helping a lot to deal with it and at least to think there is a solution for that. The mantra and how you approach the practice session, how you really don't let these insecurities tell you what you are going to do now. You take charge and yeah so for me it's something I want.”
(Participant 10, Week 3)
“There's so much that goes beyond [practising] that which crosses into the territory of mental health, how you feel about your day, how you feel before going into the practice room, how you feel about yourself as a musician and that can really change the way that you focus, the way that you practice … your confidence [and] your motivation”
(Participant 11, Week 4)
Notably, the researcher was fortunate to be able to take the course on “Quality Practice” as the teacher, Susan Williams was agreeable to accept the researcher. This course was deemed available to students that were in their Bachelor level, and any other students would have to seek permission from the teacher herself before being able to informally join the lesson. In another course that the researcher wanted to take, “Yoga for Musicians”, the same scenario occurred. Although the researcher was able to join the course for his preparatory year and first year of master studies, there were not enough available resources during the second year and priority was given to bachelor students. This was by no means the fault of the teacher as she was being overloaded with students.
Institutions have to remove barriers for lessons that allow for the personal development of their students beyond the score and practice room. On the flipside, theory, aural training, music history, and instrumental lessons are compulsory in almost every conservatory. HOPE has brought many insights to the benefits of sharing and learning about practising and personal growth. Therefore, this research would like to pose this question to the stakeholders and planners of music education whose training of future generations of musicians are in their hands:
“Where do lessons that address practising, performing, as well as personal development of other life skills stand in the hierarchy of music education planning?”
Implications and Recommendations for Teachers
The need for safe spaces can be seen in the teaching studios of music educators as well. Teachers play a big part in moulding the musical and personal development of the student. Two contrasting statements from two participant highlights the difference the approach of a teacher could make:
“I realised it makes a huge difference for me because my teacher, she talks a lot about this kind of having the mental image of what you want to do musically. For me sometimes it’s so much pressure and then with this week you just said you just try out the techniques, see what works for you and for me was really the step that I needed to really lose my fear of doing it and just do it because I didn't felt the pressure that I need to do this right.”
(Participant 10, Week 2)
“[M]y teacher always says in my lessons like “Go for it” like that's [their] thing, like that's [their] mantra or something, but [they are] always telling me like “Go for it, go for it.” In the beginning I was so uncomfortable with that like just having permission to go for it, you know, so so afraid. But now it's something that I actively do because [they have] said it to me so many times.”
(Participant 11, Week 2)
Autonomy, enhanced expectancies, and external focus have proven to be essential and vital for the learning of music, as shown by the OPTIMAL theory, HOPE and other studies previously done. Such literature has shown undeniable and irrefutable quantitative and qualitative facts. With the ever-growing information out there on enhancing the way music education is prescribed, the researcher hopes that teachers continuously seek out better methods in pedagogy, and to be informed in their approach.
Implications and Recommendations for Musicians
If there was anything that musicians could take away from the researcher’s experience or what HOPE has shown, it is that everyone has struggles. It is so easy to brush it under the rug, but your demons will manifest in the practice room and on stage. There is so much value in coming to terms with them and learning to deal with them head on. Reach out for as many resources as possible. With grit, you will emerge as a stronger musician and person.
Resources within the conservatory lie beyond lessons or workshops. There is a relatively untapped and yet valuable source of help - our peers. This research has shown (through the researcher’s experience and HOPE) that there is so much value in reaching out to your colleagues, and they are most likely facing the same problems as you do. All it takes is a conversation to start the ball rolling and things can only get better from there.
Most importantly, some of us will assume the roles of music educators and inherit the power and responsibility of educating future musicians. It is so crucial that we not only carry on the good traditions from the past but have the strength to enact change wherever it’s needed. As aptly put by Participant 10:
“We are the next generation of teachers. So we can really change something, anything.”
(Participant 10, Week 3)
5.3.4 Recommendations for Future Research
HOPE was carried out on a considerably small population size of 13. It would be interesting to carry out a modified version of HOPE with improvements made, specifically to address the anxiety-inducing aspects of it, on a larger group of participants. Besides pursuing a nomothetic (research on a large-population) study, an idiographic (research focusing on individuals over a substantial period) methodology should be pursued as well. Kenny (2011) proposed the use of both types of studies to prevent the “blunt[ness]” of “theory and treatments”.
It would also be worth formulating other methods of holistic approaches to address practising and to investigate the impacts it would bring to musicians. As Williams (2019) had mentioned, her study (and this study as well) is one of the infinite ways to explore learning and practising and there is a “real need” to explore other approaches.