Negotiating the boundaries between the formal and the informal: An experienced teacher's reflective adaptations of informal learning in a keyboard class for at-risk students

Abstract

The objective of this study is to address the important questions raised in literature on the intersections between formal and informal learning. Specifically, this will be discussed within the concept of ‘productive dissonance’ and the pedagogical tensions that arise in the effort of experienced teachers to transition from the formal to the informal. This case study discusses the issues that ensue when strict demarcations between formal and informal are perceived, and demonstrates that the former is vital to the facilitation of the latter. The blurring of formal and informal pedagogical approaches has shown that the concept of ‘critical musicality’ becomes more apparent in student learning and that engagement increases especially among at-risk students.

Community music-based structures of learning (CoMu-Based SL): Pedagogical framework for the nurturance of future-ready habits of mind

“…Through the interactions of the musicians and the students, it was demonstrated that the kinds of thinking evident in studio thinking (Hetland et al, 2013) are similar to community music teaching and learning processes. The community music in this context belongs to the traditional musics that are informal, that is, “there is a focus on learning through music-making rather than learning how to play the music” (Costes-Onishi, 2016, p. 2). Furthermore, Costes-Onishi summarizes Jorgensen (2012):Informal learning is also defined by certain conditions in where and how teaching and learning takes place, how curriculum is built and formed, and the structures of administration: (1) music in informality is construed in pervasively practical terms; (2) there is design within informality; (3) music teaching is transmitted through words and actions by a teacher whose authority is assumed on the basis of expertise; (4) learning relies on the learner’s intuition rather than what is didactically taught to them; (5) informal learning also has directed and focused attention dimensions; (6) informality’s curriculum relies on the exemplary character of the music-making of its exponents; (7) student’s interest and need-to-know drives the process of what to be learned; and (8) informality has a ‘flat’ organizational structure in which roles and responsibilities are sometimes fluid (Costes-Onishi, 2016, pp.…”

Is “Watching and Copying” the New “Listening and Copying”?

“…: see especially Chapter 7). Green was later given an opportunity to test these theories in schools (Green 2006(Green , 2008, and her pilot project quickly developed into the multinational Musical Futures programme (see for example Jeanneret 2010;Wright et al 2012;Costes-Onishi 2016;Hallam et al 2017;Moore 2019).…”

Inquiry-based learning in music: Indicators and relationships between key pedagogical practices and the quality of critical thinking

“…One relatively new approach to music learning that has gained acceptance in music education and that we find closest to IBL in music is informal learning. Informal learning is typically characterized by teacher facilitation, authentic music-making, peer-learning, and student ownership through the choice of music and instruments to learn and perform (Costes-Onishi, 2016;Jorgensen, 2012;Väkevä, 2012). Specifically, Green's (2008) concept of informal learning allows students to choose the music they want to learn (Orientation), find their own resources through materials provided in class or found elsewhere (Conceptualization), experiment and explore using instruments (Investigation), perform the finished product (Conclusion), and offer peer feedback (Discussion).…”