Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-2tv5m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-18T18:14:55.198Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Difference in instrumental tuition in higher music education: towards an analytical framework

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2025

Jon Helge Sætre Open the ORCID record for Jon Helge Sætre [Opens in a new window] ,
Morten Carlsen  and
Henrik Holm Open the ORCID record for Henrik Holm [Opens in a new window]
Jon Helge Sætre*
Affiliation:
Department of Music Education and Music Therapy, Norwegian Academy of Music, Oslo, Norway
Morten Carlsen
Affiliation:
Department of Strings and Harp, Norwegian Academy of Music, Oslo, Norway
Henrik Holm
Affiliation:
Department of Art, Design and Drama, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway
*
Corresponding author: Jon Helge Sætre; Email: jon.h.saetre@nmh.no
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Instrumental tuition is by many seen as the cornerstone of higher music education (HME) performance programmes. An increasing body of research looks into its strengths and weaknesses and calls for development in a number of ways. This study contributes to this debate by exploring the ways in which international instrumental tuition practices are different, however limited to Western classical music practices. The article reports on a qualitative interview study of 12 students with experiences from 11 countries across America, Europe and Asia. Analysis of the interview data suggests that instrumental tuition practices are different when it comes to teacher positions, lesson formats and social organisation, responsibility and student voice and subject matter foci. These differences seem to correspond to social, musical and pedagogical structures and assumptions, and they could, as a result, be seen as differences on an international, institutional and individual level. The study suggests further that instrumental tuition practices could be seen as various manifestations of and negotiations between two broad archetypes in education: a teacher-centred archetype and a student-centred archetype. Increased knowledge about the variety of instrumental tuition practices is potentially a crucial matter in the field of HME, not the least due to power issues, and the study provides an analytical framework to analyse international, institutional and individual practices.

Keywords

Musical instructioninstrumental tuitionhigher music educationinternational studiespowerone-to-one tuition

Information

Type
Article
Information
British Journal of Music Education , Volume 42 , Issue 3 , November 2025 , pp. 342 - 356
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

ALEXANDER, R. (2001). Culture and Pedagogy: International Comparisons in Primary Education. London: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
ALVESSON, M. (2003). Beyond neopositivists, romantics, and localists: A reflexive approach to interviews in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BJØNTEGAARD, B. J. (2015). A combination of one-to-one teaching and small group teaching in music education in Norway: A good model for teaching? British Journal of Music Education, 32(1), 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BOURDIEU, P. (1996). Symbolsk makt: Artikler i utvalg [Symbolic Power: Selected Articles] (A. Prieur, trans.). Oslo: Pax Forlag.Google Scholar
BRINKMANN, S. (2014). Unstructured and semi-structured interviewing. In Leavy, P. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
BRAUN, V. & CLARKE, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BULL, A. L. (2019). Class, Control and Classical Music. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BULL, A. L. (2021). Power Relations and Hierarchies in Higher Music Education Institutions. Leeds: White Rose Research Online.Google Scholar
BURWELL, K. (2019). Issues of dissonance in advanced studio lessons. Research Studies in Music Education, 41(1), 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BURWELL, K. (2021). Authoritative discourse in advanced studio lessons. Musicae Scientiae, 25(4), 465–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CAREY, G. M., BRIDGSTOCK, R., TAYLOR, P., MCWILLIAM, E. & GRANT, C. (2013). Characterising one-to-one conservatoire teaching: some implications of a quantitative analysis, Music Education Research, 15(3), 357–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CAREY, G. & GRANT, C. (2016). Enacting transformative pedagogy in the music studio: A case study of responsive, relational teaching. In Proceedings of the 21st International Seminar of the ISME Commission on the Education of the Professional Musician (CEPROM). Melbourne: International Journal of Music Education.Google Scholar
CARLSEN, M. (2019). Maestro or Mentor: On cultural differences in performance education. In Gies, S. & Sætre, J. H. (eds.), Becoming Musicians: Student Involvement and Teacher Collaboration in Higher Music Education. Oslo: Norges Musikkhøgskole.Google Scholar
FANGEN, K. (2010). Deltakende Observajon [Participatory Observation] (2nd ed.). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
FOUCAULT, M. (1979). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. (Sheridan, A., trans.) London: Penguin.Google Scholar
GAUNT, H. (2009). One-to-one tuition in a conservatoire: The perceptions of instrumental and vocal students. Psychology of Music, 38(2), 178–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GAUNT, H. (2011). Understanding the one-to-one relationship in instrumental/vocal tuition in higher education: Comparing student and teacher perceptions. British Journal of Music Education, 28(2), 159–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HADDON, E. (2011). Multiple teachers: Multiple gains? British Journal of Music Education, 28(01), 69–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HANKEN, I. M. (2016). Peer learning in specialist higher music education. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 15(3–4), 354–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KVALE, S. & BRINKMANN, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE.Google Scholar
LEECH-WILKINSON, D. (2016). Classical music as enforced Utopia. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 15(3–4), 325–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LUFF, P. & LEBLER, D. (2013). Striking a balance in brass pedagogy: Collaborative learning complementing one-to-one tuition in the conservatoire curriculum. In Gaunt, H. & Westerlund, H. (eds.), Collaborative Learning in Higher Music Education (pp. 173–177). Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
MASCOLO, M. F. (2009). Beyond student-centered and teacher-centered pedagogy: Teaching and learning as guided participation. Pedagogy and the Human Sciences, 1(1), 3–27.Google Scholar
MEYER, E. (2014). The Culture Map: Breaking through the Invisible Boundaries of Global Business. New York: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar
NERLAND, M. (2004). Instrumentalundervisning som kulturell praksis: En diskursorientert studie av hovedinstrumentundervisning i høyere musikkutdanning, [Instrumental tuition as cultural practice: a discourse oriented study of main instrument tuition in higher music education]. Doctoral dissertation. University of Oslo.Google Scholar
NERLAND, M. (2019). Beyond policy: Conceptualising student-centred learning environments in higher (music) education. In Gies, S. & Sætre, J. H. (eds.), Becoming Musicians: Student Involvement and Teacher Collaboration in Higher Music Education. Oslo: Norwegian Academy of Music.Google Scholar
PAPAGEORGI, I., HADDON, E., CREECH, A., MORTON, F., DE BEZENAC, C., HIMONIDES, E., POTTER, J., DUFFY, C., WHYTON, T. & WELCH, G. (2010). Institutional culture and learning I: perceptions of the learning environment and musicians’ attitudes to learning. Music Education Research, 12(2), 151–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PERKINS, R. (2013a). Hierarchies and learning in the conservatoire: Exploring what students learn through the lens of Bourdieu. Research Studies in Music Education, 35(2), 197–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PERKINS, R. (2013b). Learning cultures and the conservatoire: An ethnographically-informed case study. Music Education Research, 15(2), 196–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
QU, S. Q. & DUMAY, J. (2011). The qualitative research interview. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 8(3), 238–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SÆTRE, J. H. & ZHUKOV, K. (2021). Let’s play together: Teacher perspectives on collaborative chamber music instruction. Music Education Research, 23(5), 553–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VYGOTSKY, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
WAGNER, I. (2015). Producing Excellence: The Making of Virtuosos. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
WÖLLNER, C. & GINSBORG, J. (2011). Team teaching in the conservatoire: The views of music performance staff and students. British Journal of Music Education, 28(3), 301–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
YIN, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (4th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar