Autonomy-Supportive Teaching in the Large Ensemble: Positive Outcomes for Student Motivation and Teacher Satisfaction
Saved in:
| Title: | Autonomy-Supportive Teaching in the Large Ensemble: Positive Outcomes for Student Motivation and Teacher Satisfaction |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Butler, Timothy (ORCID |
| Source: | Music Educators Journal. Jun 2022 108(4):31-36. |
| Availability: | SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 6 |
| Publication Date: | 2022 |
| Intended Audience: | Teachers |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Descriptive |
| Descriptors: | Personal Autonomy, Outcomes of Education, Student Motivation, Satisfaction, Music Education, Independent Study, Competence, Teaching Methods |
| DOI: | 10.1177/00274321221107537 |
| ISSN: | 0027-4321 1945-0087 |
| Abstract: | Autonomy-supportive teaching, self-determination theory, and self-regulated learning can be effective methods for increasing student motivation in a range of classroom settings. However, music educators struggle to apply principles of student autonomy in ensemble rehearsals. Using intent-based leadership as a practical model for guiding students toward self-directed habits, I describe one approach to shape self-sufficient student musicians in the ensemble setting. By creatively harnessing students' capacity for independent learning, their musical skills and motivation for music learning can improve dramatically. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2022 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1347715 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwH5dx4rKseIFypIEaO20ahFAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDJbQtgJuHckuZnuRawIBEICBm289mA_T6U--_-NCpLqQ5US3RZ1trojTk-AiOAYn_Q8DXVQMTiz1v_Ttn6bzJlSCSHQ0KKP7mhT6UlaU__nTvzJkxniYzmPu_lOCO9xEXX-Ij5-1FOzQ8dYrmAHSKThv5gSQTTDDUnQ7KLcMn43qxpqjd9deWkXpvZy8qPY9z7Ldp3ybVlSaViD6QD-msagll1QqUmILzGdQJrCU Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0158994128;mue01jun.22;2022Sep12.05:00;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0158994128-1">Autonomy-Supportive Teaching in the Large Ensemble: Positive Outcomes for Student Motivation and Teacher Satisfaction </title> <p>Autonomy-supportive teaching, self-determination theory, and self-regulated learning can be effective methods for increasing student motivation in a range of classroom settings. However, music educators struggle to apply principles of student autonomy in ensemble rehearsals. Using intent-based leadership as a practical model for guiding students toward self-directed habits, I describe one approach to shape self-sufficient student musicians in the ensemble setting. By creatively harnessing students' capacity for independent learning, their musical skills and motivation for music learning can improve dramatically.</p> <p>Keywords: autonomy; independent learning; motivation; self-regulated learning; self-sufficient musicians</p> <p>After accepting a position as the director of a grades 5 through 12 band program in rural Ohio, I soon discovered that the students were not responding well to positive motivation orientations. Many middle and high school band students, who had been in the program for years, were unfamiliar with the basics of rhythm or music notation. Very few students expressed any concern or frustration at making little musical progress. The band members appeared to be either unable to solve or uninterested in solving rudimentary problems in the classroom, and during class time, I was constantly fetching music, repairing school-owned instruments, or managing student behavior. Each class period became a series of compromises: Which problems could be deferred? Where could progress be made? While I scrambled about, students usually spent the time talking to their neighbors. By the end of the first semester, I knew that this scattered, frenetic approach to rehearsals was not conducive to students' musical growth. It also had negative effects on my own well-being and motivation for teaching. After some reflection, I determined that the students' effort was likely the most underutilized resource in the room. If students could become more engaged, instructional time could be more efficient and effective.</p> <hd id="AN0158994128-2">A Question of Motivation</hd> <p>Psychological research on motivation supports the premise that intrinsic motivation, meaning motivation prompted by feelings of joy or satisfaction, leads to enhanced learning outcomes.1 Self-determination theory (SDT) asserts that an activity must fulfill a person's need for autonomy if they are to become intrinsically motivated.2 SDT defines autonomy as "the need to feel that one's activities or pursuits are self-endorsed and self-governed."3 Music education research on SDT has been scarce,4 but many other education contexts have used SDT to research motivation for education.5</p> <p>In music education research, students' ability to learn autonomously is typically referred to as self-regulated learning (SRL). SRL "refers to self-generated thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that are oriented to attaining goals."6 Students who self-regulate demonstrate an awareness of their own strengths and weaknesses as learners and devise their own goals and strategies for learning.7 This process typically manifests through practice, including both at-home practice and student-directed practice efforts at school. Music education scholar Peter Miksza argues that given the importance of practice for beginning and intermediate music students, students' ability to self-regulate is "crucial to the development of fundamental skills and proficiencies that may guide future music success."8 Moreover, the most self-sufficient and autonomous learners are typically the most intrinsically motivated.9 In other words, intrinsic motivation can be a prerequisite for successful SRL. Taken together, SDT and SRL form a critical feedback loop: Intrinsic motivation leads to more autonomy, which leads to more intrinsic motivation, and so on.</p> <p>The majority of music education research into SRL has focused on students' personal practice.10 Less research is available on SRL's utility in the music education classroom. As a result, it may be difficult to contextualize SRL for classroom use. In the case of my classroom, I prepared a potential approach for developing student motivation in a collaborative setting using the intent-based leadership (IBL) model. The guiding principle of IBL is that a room full of followers (i.e., students), actively at work, will always accomplish more than one engaged leader (i.e., teacher) ever could alone.11 Similarly to SDT, IBL also asserts that followers are most motivated when they are autonomous. Therefore, leaders should divest themselves of as much control over the organization as possible.12 Given that I was overwhelmed by my to-do list, using IBL to transfer some responsibility to the students was an appealing prospect.</p> <p>In the business world, IBL has proven effective because it creates an environment that fosters intrinsic motivation among followers.13 In other words, followers participate in the group because that participation instills feelings of joy or satisfaction rather than some other external reward.14 IBL followers are intrinsically motivated because they have a high degree of autonomy, and most people prefer self-sufficiency to managerial oversight.15 Both SRL and IBL attempt to create learners/followers who can work independently. However, IBL was designed to promote autonomy in a team context, whereas SRL primarily focuses on the individual. I found that IBL was more immediately applicable to a classroom setting.</p> <p>On reflection, I noticed that the current format of my rehearsals was not conducive to IBL's principle of giving control to followers. My preservice training had given me the expectation that I was to be a consummate source and distributor of musical knowledge for students. During rehearsal, I decided where to begin rehearsing, when to start and stop, what sounded good and bad, how to fix a problem, whether we had fixed the problem, and where to begin rehearsing again! It is little wonder that students felt so apathetic when they were so uninvolved in the rehearsal process.</p> <p>My "control problem" was exacerbated by the fact that I was the only band teacher in a district where private lesson coaches and other outside support were geographically and economically infeasible. Other directors may have the resources to divide the ensemble into homogeneous groups using student leaders or hired staff. While this approach may result in more efficient teaching, it may do little to support student autonomy. Although the deputized teachers may feel that they have more control, follower students may not feel any more self-directed than they would in a full ensemble rehearsal. To have someone "in charge" implies that others are not autonomous. In the interest of my IBL experiment, I was committed to creating an environment where every student engages in SRL during class time. Essentially, I planned to dedicate the majority of my rehearsal to individual student practice.</p> <p>Some teachers may be leery of the idea of telling students to "go practice" and stepping off the podium. After all, preservice teachers are prepared with many strategies for classroom "management," and the notion of a student-controlled class may feel reminiscent of Lord of the Flies. Less dramatically, teachers may fear that students will not accomplish anything during individual practice or that the musical growth made during practice time will be less than what could happen in a teacher-led rehearsal. Indeed, simply telling students to "go practice" is an oversimplification. IBL asserts that leaders give followers control based on their understanding of two pillars: organizational clarity (i.e., purpose) and technical competence (i.e., knowledge).16 Taken together, the two pillars supply the foundational knowledge required for students to be productive while they are autonomous. These pillars were easily adaptable to the context of my classroom.</p> <hd id="AN0158994128-3">Organizational Clarity</hd> <p>Organizational clarity refers to awareness of the team's purpose and rationale for the way the team does things; it is the "why."17 If followers understand why they should perform tasks a certain way--for reasons of safety, productivity, or anything else--they are more likely to hold to that purpose when they are autonomous.18 In the context of the music classroom, students need to know why it is important to diligently practice when given time to do so during class. Achieving organizational clarity with my students was straightforward. Our conversation went like this:</p> <p>Teacher: Do you enjoy waiting your turn to play?</p> <p>Students: No!</p> <p>Teacher: Would you rather play more often instead of getting bored and interrupting class?</p> <p>Students: Yes!</p> <p>Teacher: Let's try this instead: For the next fifteen minutes, practice on your own. You can spend less time being bored, and we can make the ensemble better!</p> <p>Students leap at the chance to regulate their own learning, if only because a normal rehearsal, where most of the band idles while the director works with a portion of the ensemble, is unappealing. At the same time, the teacher also shares their primary interest in the new strategy: When the entire class is working, the ensemble can progress more quickly. If students are unfocused during autonomous learning to the point that it no longer benefits the ensemble, the class can return to a traditional rehearsal model. It should be clear to students that their autonomy (which they value highly) is dependent on their good effort.</p> <hd id="AN0158994128-4">Technical Competence</hd> <p>Technical competence refers to the knowledge or expertise necessary to be able to execute tasks autonomously.19 In the context of a music classroom, if students are going to be productive while practicing, they must know how to practice. Reflecting on my own teaching, I found that I had not offered much instruction with regard to practice. For example, I would often find myself teaching trumpet players how to finger an F-sharp, but very rarely would I teach them how to read a fingering chart themselves. I have a personal "order of operations" for addressing pitch, rhythm, dynamics, phrasing, and other performance elements, which I use to inform my approach to each rehearsal. However, I never actually taught the procedure to students. The assumption that students will automatically transfer rehearsal techniques to individual practice is not uncommon among music educators.20 As professional musicians, we may overestimate students' ability to make this kind of knowledge transfer, especially when they attempt to handle many elements of music simultaneously without direct support from a teacher.</p> <p>Teaching students the process of learning rather than the knowledge itself is reminiscent of the adage "Give a man a fish, he eats for a day; teach a man to fish, he eats for life." Making music is arguably a more complex process. In addition, teaching autonomy is somewhat paradoxical; needing to learn from someone implies a dependence that is at odds with self-sufficiency. Many music education studies suggest that music classrooms should promote student autonomy, particularly for its positive impact on students' intrinsic motivation.21 However, most studies on motivation in the classroom consider students' autonomy to be a frame of mind; they say that students must feel as if they can improve, set their own goals, and take ownership of their musical growth.22 Notwithstanding the benefits of an autonomy-supportive mindset, teaching students to be autonomous requires more consideration.</p> <p>Imbuing students with technical competence without undermining their autonomy is the most delicate balancing act required of IBL. On one hand, students require guidance on the practicing process that is specific enough to support them without the teacher being present. On the other, instructions that are too specific become a "to-do list," where students may be able to follow the list on their own, but they will not feel that they are autonomous. My solution to this problem is a single-page handout, which I call the "Demeter Method," after the Greek goddess of cultivation (Figure 1). The Demeter Method is an expression of my own approach for practicing/rehearsing a concert band: It is easily adaptable for use with any ensemble. Several elements of the handout are designed with student autonomy in mind. First, the progressive steps (e.g., rhythms, notes, tempos) are organized into different levels. In this way, students are afforded some flexibility in their "order of operations" while practicing. Students can choose to learn fingerings before rhythms, but they should not be learning dynamics, which are in level two, before mastering the steps in level one. Second, the process is broad enough to apply to any musical work at any grade level. Over multiple years, the Demeter Method (and the associated expectation for SRL) becomes an enculturated part of students' musicianship. Third, because the process covers the span of rudimentary to highly advanced musical concepts, it supports the autonomy of students at every ability level. Although it is unlikely that beginning music students would be practicing levels two through four without support from the teacher, they can learn to work autonomously through the steps in level one. In addition, less capable students, who may normally be codependent on the teacher, and overachievers, who would be bored, can both see a path forward without the teacher's direct guidance. The precise order of steps in the Demeter Method is subjective and not immediately relevant to student autonomy. Rather, the overall structure of steps and levels is the autonomy-supportive element.</p> <p>In striking the balance between student autonomy and teacher support, what is omitted from instructions to students is perhaps just as important as what is included. Absent from the Demeter Method is any reference to checkpoints of when an element is satisfactory and students can move to the next step; individuals own that decision. The ability for students to set their own learning goals is a cornerstone of autonomy-supportive teaching and SRL. In addition, early versions of the Demeter Method included guiding questions for each step. For example, the questions for the "tempo" step might be, "At what tempo can I play this accurately? What tempo is the goal?" I quickly found that more words on the handout was equal to more control for me and less autonomy for students.</p> <hd id="AN0158994128-5">Supports for Autonomy</hd> <p>Ideally, self-regulated learners are capable of practicing effectively with little oversight or intervention. Miksza, who has devoted a large amount of study to SRL, suggests that "the process of becoming a self-regulated learner is theorized as a developmental trajectory and, as such, is thought to occur across a long period."23 Students' capacity for SRL will increase over the course of years, as their ability to be autonomous scales with maturity. However, teachers can have a positive effect on students' ability to self-regulate through use of instructional scaffolding and guided reflection.</p> <p>While teachers can tell highly autonomous learners to "go practice," developing students may benefit from scaffolded instructions that narrow the scope of a practice session. For example, teachers may direct beginner students to "Take two minutes to practice just the rhythms in measures one through four." There are a number of "guardrails" included in the directions: The teacher provides a focus (the rhythm), a short time window, and a small section of music (measures one through four). As students become more capable, guardrails should be relaxed. The teacher can supply a broader focus of pitch and rhythm and/or extend the section of music to eight or sixteen measures. Eventually, instructional scaffolds should diminish to the point that students decide how their practice time is used. With the exception of very autonomous ensembles, the teacher should continue to give time limitations for practice time that is appropriate for students' developmental maturity. Middle school students may be able to self-regulate in seven- to ten-minute intervals, whereas high school students could practice for a fifteen- to twenty-five-minute period or simply practice until the group's collective focus appears to have eroded.</p> <p>The ability to self-assess is key to SRL. Incorporating time for reflection after practice is a learned behavior, which teachers can reinforce in the classroom. Many music teachers prompt students to reflect on their performance, but only in relation to the quality of the final result--they may ask "How well did we perform accented notes here?" or "Which instruments sound the loudest at this measure?" To refine students' self-regulative skills, we must address the practicing process rather than its result. Appropriate questions include "Which part did you spend the most time practicing? What section did you struggle with the most? Which element of music (pitch, rhythm, etc.) did you struggle most to learn?" Teachers know the answer to these questions, but at the outset of autonomy training, it is more helpful to withhold. Otherwise, students may learn to consult the teacher before attempting to find the answer themselves, which is contrary to developing autonomy. Instead, teachers should frame their suggestions for effective practice as supplemental to students' own observations. As students become more proficient at individual practice, teachers can provide feedback that is more direct.</p> <p>Although IBL advocates for followers to hold as much control as possible, a modicum of classroom management is still necessary during individual practice time. Similar to the process of building technical competence, class rules for individual practice time must strike a balance between enabling autonomy and maintaining order. In my classroom, I achieved this with three simple rules:</p> <olist> <item> Practice by yourself (to minimize distractions).</item> <item> Practice what needs practicing (to avoid boredom and off-task behavior from mindless repetition).</item> <item> Practice in small chunks, two to eight measures maximum (not behavior-related).</item> </olist> <p>Of course, even students who are proficient self-regulated learners will not be on task 100 percent of the time. Research suggests that time spent "goofing around" with "irrelevant practice" may be critical to students' motivation for self-regulated instrument practice.24 SRL can be a fatiguing process.25 If the ensemble is too unfocused to be effective, teachers can always revert to a group rehearsal method for the day.</p> <hd id="AN0158994128-6">Outcomes for Autonomy-Supportive Teachers</hd> <p>The initial purpose for exploring this approach was to encourage students to take more ownership of their learning. Adapting IBL for my band students required a significant investment of time, particularly in the time it took to give them the tools (i.e., technical competence) to practice effectively on their own. Eventually, my perceived ideal of an autonomous rehearsal began to take shape:</p> <p>After students arrive to class and unpack their instruments, the band completes a brief warm-up. I then instruct students, "You have the next fifteen minutes to practice. When we reconvene, we will begin at measure [X] of [repertoire]. Go!" The ensemble immediately breaks apart, with students moving to corners and practice rooms where they can work on their own. The room sounds very chaotic while every student practices a different section of music. After the allotted time, we rehearse the previously indicated section as an ensemble. Before breaking again into individual practice, I prompt students to reflect on how they can improve their practicing process.</p> <p>In the aforementioned scenario, the onus for making musical progress has shifted to students. Having discharged that duty, I found that I had more latitude to solve myriad other problems. While students practiced on their own, I provided individualized instruction and assessment to those who needed extra assistance. I was also able to handle some tasks not related to teaching, which would have previously halted a rehearsal, such as instrument triage or taking attendance. Finally, I spent more time teaching students about elements of musical expression rather than simply checking for pitch/rhythm accuracy, which increased my own satisfaction for teaching.</p> <hd id="AN0158994128-7">Outcomes for Autonomous Students</hd> <p>Students' musical ability increased immediately after I dedicated a portion of class time to individual practice. In the short term, this was likely because students spent more time actually playing their instruments than they would in a teacher-led rehearsal. After students became adept at autonomous learning by developing requisite skills of self-assessment and reflection, students' musical growth accelerated. During group rehearsals, many students demonstrated an increased willingness to assess the ensemble's performance. For example, when asked how a rehearsed section could be played better, a greater number of students volunteered suggestions pertaining to dynamics, phrasing, and other musical factors. Also, while I can make no formal correlation between autonomous learning and student retention, the rate of attrition dropped year over year after I introduced IBL. Of the students who did leave the program, a noticeably fewer number cited boredom as their reason for quitting.</p> <p>Autonomous learning also appeared to bolster skills in students that are not directly related to musical ability but are considered "life skills." As part of IBL, students were encouraged to look to sources other than the teacher for answers to common questions. Consequently, students built communication skills as they consulted each other for help with fingerings, rhythms, and so on. In addition, students demonstrated a greater aptitude for setting long-term goals. Given a set number of weeks until a concert, students developed individualized strategies and benchmarks for preparing each piece of repertoire.</p> <hd id="AN0158994128-8">Autonomous Learning</hd> <p>Studies on motivation in the music classroom suggest that student autonomy has a large effect on students' intrinsic motivation for music. The majority of articles on creating autonomy-supportive lessons provide suggestions based on a classroom model where the teacher retains the majority of control over the ensemble from the podium.26 Meanwhile, studies on students' motivation to practice suggest that students' ability to teach themselves (i.e., their ability to learn autonomously) are critical for both effective practice and long-term musical success. Many studies on music practice suggest that teachers should take an active role in building students' capacity for SRL while also framing individual practice as an activity that occurs outside of the classroom. Despite their mutual interest in student autonomy, the "motivation in the classroom" and "motivation in practice" domains remain largely exclusive of one another. Most music educators seem to lack a blueprint for incorporating highly effective and autonomous SRL as a regular classroom routine.</p> <p>Using IBL as a practical model for enabling autonomy in followers (i.e., students), I experimented with making individual student practice a feature of ensemble rehearsal time. Although the initial impetus for the experiment was to make my classroom more efficient by prompting students' self-engagement, I found that my IBL-based methodology led to a much higher rate of students' musical growth. As students' capacity of autonomous learning increased, I also noticed a complementary increase in motivation, performance ability, and my own satisfaction for teaching.</p> <hd id="AN0158994128-9">ORCID iD</hd> <p>Timothy Butler https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2249-7746</p> <ref id="AN0158994128-10"> <title>Notes</title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" type="bt">1.</bibl> <bibtext>Robert J. Vallerand, Luc G. Pelletier, Marc R. Blais, Nathalie M. Briere, Caroline Senecal, and Evelyne F. Vallieres, "The Academic Motivation Scale: A Measure of Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Amotivation in Education," Educational and Psychological Measurement 52, no. 4 (1992): 1003-17, https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164492052004025 </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" type="bt">2.</bibl> <bibtext>Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior (New York: Plenum Press, 1985). </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" type="bt">3.</bibl> <bibtext>Paul Evans, Gary McPherson, and Jane Davidson, "The Role of Psychological Needs in Ceasing Music and Music Learning Activities," Psychology of Music 41, no. 5 (2012): 603, https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735612441736. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" type="bt">4.</bibl> <bibtext>Paul Evans, "Self-Determination Theory: An Approach to Motivation in Music Education," Musicae Scientiae 19, no. 1 (2015): 65-83, https://doi.org/10.1177/1029864914568044 </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" type="bt">5.</bibl> <bibtext>Vallerand et al., "Academic Motivation Scale"; Suzanne Hidi and Judith Harackiewicz, "Motivating the Academically Unmotivated: A Critical Issue for the 21st Century," Review of Educational Research 70, no. 2 (2000): 151-79, https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070002151; Guy Roth, Avi Assor, Yaniv Kanat-Maymon, and Haya Kaplan, "Autonomous Motivation for Teaching: How Self-Determined Teaching May Lead to Self-Determined Learning," Journal of Educational Psychology 99, no. 4 (2007): 761-44, https://doi.org/10.1034/0022-0663.99.4.761; Nikos Ntoumanis and Martyn Standage, "Motivation in Physical Education Classes: A Self-Determination Theory Perspective," Theory and Research in Education 7, no. 2 (2009): 194-202, https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878509104324; </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" type="bt">6.</bibl> <bibtext>Barry Zimmerman, "Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview," Theory into Practice 41, no. 2 (2010): 64-70, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102%5F2. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" type="bt">7.</bibl> <bibtext>Ibid. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8.</bibl> <bibtext>Peter Miksza, "The Development of a Measure of Self-Regulated Practice Behavior for Beginning and Intermediate Instrumental Music Students," Journal of Research in Music Education 59, no. 4 (2011): 322, https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429411414717. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" type="bt">9.</bibl> <bibtext>Ibid. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib10" type="bt">10.</bibl> <bibtext>Ibid.; Peter Miksza, Stephanie Prichard, and Diana Sorbo, "An Observational Study of Intermediate Band Students' Self-Regulated Practice Behaviors," Journal of Research in Music Education 60, no. 3 (2012): 254-66, https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429412455201; Bret Smith, "Goal Orientation, Implicit Theory of Ability, and Collegiate Instrumental Music Practice," Psychology of Music 33, no. 1 (2005): 36-57, https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735605048013; Rafael Valenzuela, Nuria Codina, and Jose Pestana, "Self-Determination Theory Applied to Flow in Conservatoire Music Practice: The Roles of Perceived Autonomy and Competence, and Autonomous and Controlled Motivation," Psychology of Music 46, no. 1 (2017): 33-48, https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735617694502 </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib11" type="bt">11.</bibl> <bibtext>L. David Marquet, Turn the Ship Around! A True Story of Turning Followers into Leaders (New York: Penguin Group, 2012). </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib12" type="bt">12.</bibl> <bibtext>Ibid. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib13" type="bt">13.</bibl> <bibtext>Ibid. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib14" type="bt">14.</bibl> <bibtext>Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior (New York: Plenum Press, 1985). </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib15" type="bt">15.</bibl> <bibtext>Marquet, Turn the Ship Around! </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib16" type="bt">16.</bibl> <bibtext>Ibid. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib17" type="bt">17.</bibl> <bibtext>Ibid. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib18" type="bt">18.</bibl> <bibtext>Ibid. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib19" type="bt">19.</bibl> <bibtext>Ibid. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib20" type="bt">20.</bibl> <bibtext>Brian Weidner, "The Transfer of Group Practice Strategy Instruction to Beginning Instrumentalists' Individual Practice," Psychology of Music 49, no. 4 (2020): 958-71, https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735620911713. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib21" type="bt">21.</bibl> <bibtext>Ellen Criss, "Dance All Night: Motivation in Music Education," Music Educators Journal 97, no. 3 (2011): 61-66, https://doi.org/10.1177/0027432110393022; Paul Evans, Gary McPherson, and Jane Davidson, "The Role of Psychological Needs in Ceasing Music and Music Learning Activities," Psychology of Music 41, no. 5 (2012): 600-19, https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735612441736; Olivia Tucker, "Mastery Goals and Intrinsic Motivation in Instrumental Ensembles," Music Educators Journal 106, no. 4 (2020): 30-35, https://doi.org/10.1177/0027432120901767. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib22" type="bt">22.</bibl> <bibtext>Tucker, "Mastery Goals." </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib23" type="bt">23.</bibl> <bibtext>Miksza et al., "An Observational Study," 256. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib24" type="bt">24.</bibl> <bibtext>Ibid.," 262. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib25" type="bt">25.</bibl> <bibtext>Miksza, "An Observational Study." </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib26" type="bt">26.</bibl> <bibtext>Tucker, "Mastery Goals"; Criss, "Dance All Night." </bibtext> </blist> </ref> <p>Photo of Timothy Butler by Brian Bushong</p> <p>FIGURE 1 The Demeter Method</p> <aug> <p>By Timothy Butler</p> <p></p> <p>Timothy Butler is a graduate student in music education at Bowling Green State University in Bowling Green, Ohio. He can be contacted at tpbutler.658@gmail.com.</p> </aug> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1347715 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Autonomy-Supportive Teaching in the Large Ensemble: Positive Outcomes for Student Motivation and Teacher Satisfaction – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Butler%2C+Timothy%22">Butler, Timothy</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2249-7746">0000-0002-2249-7746</externalLink>) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Music+Educators+Journal%22"><i>Music Educators Journal</i></searchLink>. Jun 2022 108(4):31-36. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 6 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2022 – Name: Audience Label: Intended Audience Group: Audnce Data: Teachers – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Personal+Autonomy%22">Personal Autonomy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Outcomes+of+Education%22">Outcomes of Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Motivation%22">Student Motivation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Satisfaction%22">Satisfaction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Music+Education%22">Music Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Independent+Study%22">Independent Study</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Competence%22">Competence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1177/00274321221107537 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0027-4321<br />1945-0087 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Autonomy-supportive teaching, self-determination theory, and self-regulated learning can be effective methods for increasing student motivation in a range of classroom settings. However, music educators struggle to apply principles of student autonomy in ensemble rehearsals. Using intent-based leadership as a practical model for guiding students toward self-directed habits, I describe one approach to shape self-sufficient student musicians in the ensemble setting. By creatively harnessing students' capacity for independent learning, their musical skills and motivation for music learning can improve dramatically. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2022 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1347715 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1347715 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1177/00274321221107537 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 6 StartPage: 31 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Personal Autonomy Type: general – SubjectFull: Outcomes of Education Type: general – SubjectFull: Student Motivation Type: general – SubjectFull: Satisfaction Type: general – SubjectFull: Music Education Type: general – SubjectFull: Independent Study Type: general – SubjectFull: Competence Type: general – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Autonomy-Supportive Teaching in the Large Ensemble: Positive Outcomes for Student Motivation and Teacher Satisfaction Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Butler, Timothy IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 06 Type: published Y: 2022 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0027-4321 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 1945-0087 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 108 – Type: issue Value: 4 Titles: – TitleFull: Music Educators Journal Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
