Informal in formal: The relationship of informal and formal learning in popular and jazz music master workshops in conservatoires

Abstract

The present article will examine informal learning in popular and jazz music education in Finland and evaluate it as a part of formal upper secondary vocational musicians’ training, which is typically teacher directed. It is not necessarily the best model of working in popular and jazz music learning, which has traditionally benefitted from learning in informal playing situations. This article examines workshops which were implemented as joint efforts with professional musicians. The adoption of this model is proposed for realizing informal learning in the field. This kind of approach is quite new in music education, and the research on the theme is still scarce. The findings of present research show that in workshops there appears multi-level learning which develops musicianship. Music schools and institutions should recognize the potential of informal learning, and the teachers should develop learning environments which can benefit from it. The choice of music to be played, learning from playing experiences, and the evaluation of learning outcomes are to a great extent within students’ responsibilities. Carrying them out requires responsible and initiative action, problem-solving skills, communication skills, and readiness to reflect experiences.

Keywords

formal education informal learning jazz music musical expertise popular music

Introduction

The teaching of popular and jazz music has seen a significant increase in Finnish music schools and institutions over the last 25 years. The change has been remarkable, for the network of conservatoires maintained by public money covers the whole country. Conservatoires provide affordable basic education in music for children, and upper secondary vocational basic qualification in music for young adults.

Incorporating popular and jazz music into formal education has meant that music which was earlier learnt through self- or peer-learning began to be studied under the supervision of a teacher (cf. Ake, 2002; Green, 2001). Instrumental, ensemble, and theory lessons and the tests connected to them formed the core of the education, largely neglecting the earlier learning traditions typical of the genre. The study material was made up of traditional forms of European classical music education, i.e., scales, etudes, and musical pieces appropriate for the level of the student and the style of music, focusing on the development of instrumental techniques, expression, and repertoire (cf. Finnegan, 1989; Gatien, 2009; Walser, 1993).

Teacher-directed learning in conservatoires has preserved its strong status, and the teacher’s professional proficiency has primarily been defined by musical competence (skill of playing), not pedagogical competence. Teacher-directed action is now taken for granted. The focus of the culture in music institutions has been on teaching and teacher, not actually on learning and its various contents (cf. Burwell, 2012; Field, 2006; Fiske, 2012; Lebler, Burt-Perkins & Carey, 2009; Sloboda, 2001; Veblen, 2012). Until lately music pedagogy research has mainly been directed to the challenges of teaching music, emphasizing, for example, the significance of the aesthetic experience of music or functional music production (see, e.g., Elliott, 1995; Reimer, 1989; Rohwer, 2005; Swanwick, 1988). Research connected to professional musicians’ education has been mainly concerned with classroom contexts. Moreover, its focus has often been on developing teacher professionalism (see, e.g., Feldman & Contzius, 2011; Huovinen, Tenkanen, & Kuusinen, 2011; Lowe, 2012; Westerlund, 2006).

The prevailing teacher-directed practice has been, however, challenged. Lucy Green’s (2001, 2006, 2008) studies on informal learning in music can be considered important openings. Inspired by Green’s research Gatien (2009, p. 113) argues that the focus in formal jazz music teaching is more “in learning things that canonical jazz musicians seemed to know.” However, it should be “in learning things in the ways that those musicians had learned.”

The present article will deal with the issue of how informal learning, typical in popular and jazz music, can be benefited from within formal music education. Developing musicianship in popular and jazz music requires more comprehensive pedagogical viewpoints than the traditional ones (Ake, 2002; Boud, Cohen, & Sampson, 1999; Boud & Middleton, 2003; Folkestad, 2006; Sadler, 2005). Wider viewpoints will be evaluated through the following research questions:

How does informal learning enhance the development of musicianship?

In what ways can informal learning be utilized at a conservatoire?

In the first part of the present article informal learning will be the focus. It is divided, according to the level of awareness, into implicit, reactive, and deliberative learning (Eraut, 2004). Informal learning as such is particularly seen in the participation in authentic work tasks in one’s professional community (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998, 2009).

In the second part of the article the learning of popular and jazz music will be examined. The results reveal considerable informal learning: by listening and imitating; alone or in a group. Traditional formal music education has not actually provided tools for producing popular music (Green, 2001).

In the third part of the article, a workshop model for popular and jazz music in the Finnish music education framework will be presented and its added value to musicians’ education will be evaluated. The article refers to recent pedagogically argued learner-centred thinking in which a student is expected to take an active role in planning, implementing, and evaluating his/her learning. It demands from the teacher a new perspective on learning: wider than previously and regarding learning as the primary aim with teaching as its servant (Cope, 2005; Gatien, 2009; Lebler, 2007; Sadler, 2005).

Informal learning

Informal learning means typically learning other than what takes place in formal, curriculum-based education (Livingstone, 2001). It is often connected to action whose main aim is not learning (Beckett & Hager, 2002). An illustrative example is when an employee is guiding and discussing with a colleague how to solve an acute problem which has arisen at work. In the workplace learning experiences are part of daily actions. Participation in discussions about work-related problems results, on the one hand, in learning new things and, on the other, strengthens skills learnt earlier. The meaning of informal learning is given a broader meaning when learners, without a formal framework, make an effort to learn a task which interests them (Billett, 2001; Illeris, 2011).

Learning in workplaces has often been classified as informal or incidental, which may be strengthened by the conception that learning in work situations is accidental, unorganized and valid only at the workplace concerned. In cases like this, people have not observed how learning at workplaces typically proceeds from one aim to the next just like in a school environment (Billett, 2001). Placing informal learning solely outside the school environment can lead to stereotypical thinking. Colley, Hodkinson, and Malcolm (2003) studied both informal and formal learning and described them mainly as the minimum attributes to learning which are present in all learning situations. Formal learning always contains informal elements, and informal learning can include formal elements. The attributes of formal and informal learning are connected to each other in different ways in different learning situations. From the teacher’s point of view it is essential to recognize these attributes, and understand their mutual relationship and influence on learning.

Eraut (2004) classifies the informal learning present at work into three categories according to awareness (Table 1). “Implicit learning” describes learning that is unconscious and takes place without the learner necessarily noticing his/her learning. This kind of unplanned learning is very typical of learning attained outside formal education. “Reactive learning” describes learning which is present at work but which is unplanned and does not include any particular reflection on learning. It involves reacting to issues that arise at work and modifying the approach to them. “Deliberative learning” sets clear targets and goals for the results when working. Learning happens as if it were a by-product among new cumulative work experiences in new practices connected to one’s work.

Table 1.

A typology of informal learning (Eraut 2004).

Time of stimulus	Implicit learning	Reactive learning	Deliberative learning
Past episode(s)	Implicit linkage of past memories with current experience	Brief near-spontaneous reflection on past episodes, events, experiences	Discussion and review of past actions, communications, events, experiences
Current experience	A selection from experience enters episodic memory	Noting facts, ideas, opinions, impressions; asking questions; observing effects of actions	Engagement in decision-making, problem-solving, planned informal learning
Future behaviour	Unconscious expectations	Recognition of possible future learning opportunities	Planning learning opportunities; rehearsing for future events

Acting in a work community and participating in work-community communication become noteworthy factors in the learning process. Learning takes place thus in work communities or, according to Wenger (1998, 2009), in communities of practice and is the outcome of a social process. It requires active participation in the function of the community. Participation will be gradually deepened when learning proceeds and at the same time will open ever widening chances to participate in the activities of the community. According to Wenger (1998, p. 4, 2009, p. 210) learning in communities of practice is based on four cornerstones: (1) man is a social creature when learning is tied to social situations; (2) knowledge is competence tied to an issue (e.g., singing, repairing machines, writing poems); (3) knowing is participation in order to gain knowledge; (4) meaning is the outcome of learning.

A connecting factor between these cornerstones is the theory of social learning, which primarily focuses on participation in community action. It, again, influences our actions and interpretations of our actions and ourselves. The theory connects the components describing social participation in learning: (1) community—learning as belonging (see also about participatory culture, e.g., Jenkins, 2013); (2) practices—learning as doing; (3) meaning—learning as an experience; and (4) identity—learning as enculturation (Wenger, 1998, p. 5, 2009, p. 211).

The theory of social learning is based on Lev Vygotsky’s (1978) views on the significance of social relations to human development, which happens in two spheres: as inter-mental social relations and intra-mental processes. In psychic development, also in learning, this is discerned both from the outside inwards and in individuals’ internal interactive processes.

Due to the above observations, Vygotsky (1978) developed the so-called “zone of proximal development,” which he used to refer to the distance between the actual and potential levels of development. Actual level of development refers to the things that have been learnt and understood. Potential level of development defines the level which is within the learner’s reach. Pedagogically it is important to recognize the learner’s level of development and learning potential and take steps to change the learner’s potential into actual through scaffolding.

Lave and Wenger (1991), who studied learning among apprentice tailors, noticed that practical work helps structure the knowledge and competence needed at work and increases commitment to more responsible tasks. Apprentices started by finishing ready-made garments, e.g., by pressing them, which gives the conception of a successful result. After this their duty was to prepare garments with increasing complexity according to growing skills. Aided by experiences gained in authentic work situations, the apprentices learnt the work of a tailor and also the process of making garments, and learning proceeded accordingly.

The informal learning described above especially contains so-called tacit knowledge. It mediates the kind of knowledge that is based on experience and is not necessarily conscious or expressible by words. Tacit knowledge is construed through assuming mental models created while participating in action. Human knowledge is created and widened in social interaction that takes place just between tacit and conscious knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

Informal learning in popular and jazz music

In music education research results have recently shown features of informal learning and effectiveness concerning the learning of music. The results are due to the conception that music is also learnt to a great extent informally. Cox (2002, p. 697) calls for widening the definition of music education so that “attention should be paid to the actual teaching and learning of music; and that music education is a broad area encompassing both formal and informal settings.”

In the research reports dealing with informal learning the theme has been approached both generally in music education (e.g., Davis & Blair, 2011; Folkestad, 2006; Veblen, 2012) and specifically in learning certain styles of music, e.g., folk music and popular music, which has traditionally taken place outside formal music education (e.g., Cope, 2002, 2005; Green, 2001; Jaffurs, 2004; Westerlund, 2006). In the development of students’ musical knowledge and skills, their interactive work and activities which cherish creativity are essential. Green (2001) lists examples: group improvisation, players’ joint jamming as well as arranging and composing music.

Green’s research (2001) explained the practices of music learning by British popular musicians and tried to find out how formal music education could benefit from it. The starting point of popular musicians’ informal learning is working with a music style in which the learner feels it like his/her own, when learning occurs both consciously and unconsciously. The main issues according to the learner can be divided into personal and team learning. (1) In personal learning music is listened to consciously and attentively, and efforts are made to imitate the playing heard. Some people use textbooks, too, in studying their instruments, but the written material seems to be secondary in relation to what is heard. (2) Team learning is based on working in a band in which learners learn from each other during music-making, but also in informal discussions connected to the issue. Interaction with the musicians both those at the same level and with more experienced musicians is important. By participating in the working of the band actively, new ideas, knowledge and skills will be shared, and they strengthen both the student’s instrumental and band know-how (cf. Boud & Middleton, 2003; Eraut, 2004; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998, 2009).

Green (2006, 2008) classifies informal learning according to five characteristics whose differences from traditional formal music education are described in Table 2.

Table 2.

Informal and formal learning characteristics in music (Green, 2006, 2008).

Characteristic	Informal learning characteristics in popular music	Traditional formal learning characteristics in a conservatoire
Musical choice	Learning begins with music chosen by the learners themselves	Teachers usually choose music with the intent to introduce learners to areas with which they are not already familiar
Repertoire- and skill-acquisition	The main method of repertoire- and skill-acquisition involves the copying of recordings by ear	The main method of repertoire- and skill-acquisition involves notated or other written or verbal instructions and exercises
Form of learning	Peer and/or self-directed learning constitute an important part of informal learning processes	Adult supervision and guidance from an expert with superior skills and knowledge
Learning contents	Learning typically involves the integration of listening, performing, improvising, and composing processes, with an emphasis on personal creativity	Separation of skills and an emphasis on reproduction
Musical assimilation	Musical skills and knowledge are likely to be assimilated in “haphazard, idiosyncratic and holistic ways” with whole pieces of music, not exercises	Pupils follow a progression from simple to complex, which often involves a curriculum, syllabus, graded exam, and specially composed pieces or exercises

It has been characteristic of different types of music and their fusions, including popular music, to learn through musical enculturation. When communicating with others and with more experienced musicians learning takes place through discussions, listening, observing, and imitating. The tradition is observable, e.g., in folk music and jazz music jam sessions which have been splendid occasions for young, developing musicians to be inspired and learn something new from more experienced musicians (Cope, 2002, 2005; Green, 2008; Gridley, 2003).

Similar features are found in the results of research into jazz musicians’ learning. They are connected by the contextuality of learning, wide social interaction, belonging to social networks, and stressing the aural learning (Berliner, 1994; Laughlin, 2001; Louth, 2006; Watson, 2008). Informal learning is described to appear as, for example, the exchange of knowledge in informal jamming among musicians (Berliner, 1994).

Gatien (2009, p. 95) suggests in his research that in the formalization process of jazz music education the starting point “has been focused more on ‘what’ has been transmitted than ‘how’ that transmission has occurred” in jazz schools, which has meant that “the traditional ways of transmitting this music have been changed, compromised, or subverted to formal methods of instruction that fit more comfortably in the formal habitat, or are more efficient in the context of classroom or group settings.”

In the implementation of music education a wide approach to the informal way of conveying music traditions typical of jazz music should be given attention. Consequently, from the viewpoint of formal education, central questions are: in which situations and how is jazz music learnt? (Gatien 2009, p. 114).

A remarkable part of the factors connected to the interpretation of jazz music can be adopted by participating in ensemble music-making with more experienced musicians. This kind of action refers to apprenticeship education in which collaboration between the apprentice and master gives also rise to the adoption of tacit knowledge. In the development of music skills the interaction with an experienced musician is significant. Music-making situations create aural images for the student. The images will act as the starting point for imitating and realizing personal artistic solutions. The musician thus guides the student through his/her playing towards the musically relevant performance. The student will take more and more responsibility, according to the increase in his/her skills, for being a soloist and accompanist. This is how the process towards the membership of the music community will proceed (Gatien 2009; Hallam, 2001; cf. Lave & Wenger 1991, pp. 29–32; also Grow 1991).

Consequently, the learner’s authentic experiences and understanding of their meanings have a great significance in learning. Bereiter and Scardamalia (1993) recommend the utilization of just those learning environments and practices in which the expertise and skills will be used. It is, however, challenging, for conservatoire students do not necessarily have possibilities for musical interaction with experienced pop and jazz music professionals as in the earlier reported case of the tailor’s apprentices.

Data and analysis—the idea of popular and jazz music master workshops

In Finland conservatoires belong to the school institutions that are funded by state money. They provide basic education in music mainly for children. They also provide upper secondary level vocational qualifications in music (3 years’ full-time study with 180 credits). The workshops which will be described in this article were arranged in the field of vocational education. One of the developmental foci of vocational education is collaboration between educational institutions and work life, on-the-job learning. In the field of music it means the preparation of the material to be played, practicing instrumental and ensemble work and performances as well as the arrangements connected to them (Finnish National Board of Education [FNBE], 2010).

The aim of this research is to examine how informal learning can be promoted and utilized in on-the-job learning of music students at the conservatoire (second research question). It was found that during the years 2003–2011 altogether 11 popular and jazz music workshops were carried out for 62 students. The basic idea in the realization of the workshops was to involve a professional musician in working, practicing, and performing with the students according to the music transmission tradition of popular and jazz music (Gatien, 2009). The workshop work proceeded according to Figure 1.

Figure 1.

The steps in setting up the workshops.

The first part of my research material consists of students’ written plans concerning their personal participation in workshop planning and their learning goals at the beginning of the workshop project. The students wrote answers to given questions or tasks, such as “Tell about your participation in the planning of the workshop”; “Describe the theme of the workshop, e.g., the style of music”; “What do you want to learn in the course of workshop work?” The shared aims of the workshop project were agreed in cooperative discussions between the participants before they wrote the plans.

The second part is made up of written reflections on the workshop experiences collected at the end of the project, when the students described their experiences in the workshops, again answering open questions, for instance: “Describe collaboration with a professional musician”; “What did you learn in the workshop?”; “What could you have done in another way?”

All the material was dealt with anonymously so that the answer and its writer could not be connected. The students were reminded about the significance of the verbalized aims and feedback to their reflective practices in learning, as well as about the possible use of their writing in the project reports both for developing education and in this research.

The research material was dealt with through the content analysis method (Krippendorff, 2004). The material was transcribed first, after which the expressions were classified deductively into the categories of factors promoting learning and those hindering learning according to a meta-research (see Jokinen, Lähteenmäki & Nokelainen, 2009) of on-the-job learning. The categories were: (a) a student’s involvement in planning and definition of the aims during the on-the-job learning period; (b) a positive vocational experience gained in on-the-job learning; (c) learning through social interaction, and, on the other hand, the reverse: (d) the student was not involved in planning and defining the aims; (e) the vocational experience did not meet the learning goals; (f) interaction was limited and/or incomplete.

After this the analysis was deepened and the material was examined in the light of research reports concerning informal learning according to Eraut (2004) and Green (2006, 2008). The first task was to detect possible evidence of informal learning among students’ experiences and examine them thereafter according to Eraut’s categorization from the perspective of the development of musicianship (first research question).

The second task was to continue the analysis by counting how many statements describing informal learning were present in the material in relation to the statements describing formal learning (Burns & Grove, 2009).

The third task was to examine workshop activities in relation to Green’s research findings and compare them to formal conservatoire education.

Results and discussion

The results suggest that the music workshop fulfils the criterion of a community of practice and yields learning accordingly, which can be regarded as the first important finding. Participation in workshops is two-dimensional: it is about participating in workshop activities, but from a wider point of view the student is also simultaneously engaging in the music community, in both of which the learning experiences are acquired by doing. It was central in workshop activities to realize the shared aims of producing music and carrying out a successful performance (see Wenger, 1998; cf. Folkestad, 2006). The students mention the words “education” or “teaching” only in 3.2 % of answers, with the guidance from a professional musician in 22.6 % of the answers. The students describe workshop activities above all (74.2%) as a vocational experience where workshop cooperation with a professional musician supports informal learning.

[The workshop] told a lot about a musician’s everyday life, and the practical experience taught how fast a performance repertoire can be put together, what pre-preparations must be done. (A60)

We played a lot and tried different alternatives. (A38)

We could discuss different [musical] solutions with the professional musician, so we had a chance to influence on how our playing sounded. (A37)

When a true professional is present, you can feel your own relation to jazz deepen. (A3)

Students’ understanding was constructed by reflecting on the meanings of the experiences acquired in workshop. Members shared their knowledge and supported each other in social interaction—in negotiations of meaning (see Wenger, 1998, 2009)—when developing their competence.

Secondly, features of informal learning can be observed in the students’ experiences according to Eraut’s (2004) classification: implicitly, reactively, and deliberatively. Implicit learning was observable in the key competences of lifelong learning, which are, according to the European framework, for example, learning to learn (the material code “LL”), a sense of initiative and entrepreneurship (SIE), and social and civic competences (SCC) (European Parliament, 2006).

Concerning the learning to learn competence, the descriptions of the students stress the significance of the workshop experience in adopting the content: how music is learnt, how much work learning requires and what meanings intensive, concentrated work and the reflective analysis of personal performance have in learning. None of the factors mentioned above belonged particularly to the learning aims of the workshop work, but are important in developing the competence of a musician. The issues were learnt through experience unconsciously, but written reflection brought the experiences into consciousness and gave meanings to them (cf. Green 2009, p. 125).

When “new” things are dealt with in practice (in the workshop) immediately, they will be learnt much faster. And at once in music. The level of playing skill is raised remarkably in a workshop of even a few days. (LL, A2)

[In workshops] [o]ne realizes the amount of training that is needed and that even the professionals have to train. (LL, A11)

In a workshop you will primarily get experiences of field work; when you have five days’ time to make a functional entity together with strange people, you have only to do so. You will become better acquainted with the core of the issue, when you have intensive training 6 hours per day. (LL, A13)

We watched a video of the performance later on and at least in it I noticed things to be developed in my performance and singing. (LL, A59)

The students found good practices in preparing for performances and noticed how important it is to devote to long-term training in front of a seemingly difficult task. Their experiences refer to understanding the meaning of an initiative and entrepreneurial action (code SIE) on one hand, and also to understanding the significance of the players’ mutual interaction (code SCC) on the other (cf. Gatien 2009, pp. 113–114).

In the beginning I was dubious of my ability to perform the large vocal ranges and also the stylistically different songs. Still I went through the challenges to victory, and it felt really fine. I learnt again to believe in my abilities throughout the workshop and in fact that concentration and practice ensured the successful result. (LL and SIE, A23)

The workshop was hard, but at the same time profitable and instructive. It gave a boost to my vocal studies and belief in my own abilities. (LL and SIE, A60)

When my own parts are well under control before the ensemble practice, everything is easier. The artistry in music can be brought out. (SIE, A55)

The [workshop’s] atmosphere was really relaxed, which helped working and the adoption of tunes. The pieces were really jamming/improvisation based, so we used a lot of time to find the right mood and the same wavelength. (SCC, A43)

The above quotations represent how students share the common repertoire in workshop (e.g., discourses, concepts, artefacts). In addition they are required to commit to and take reciprocal responsibility, which both connects and motivates them to work in a joint enterprise. Participation in a workshop does not merely change the individual’s action, but also affects the way he/she understands him-/herself, his/her belonging and action in relation to the music community (Wenger 1998, 2009). The membership supports the development of the individual’s identity.

In accordance with Eraut’s (2004) classification reactive learning appeared above all in realizing new things in a playing situation. Students noticed, for instance, that surprising changes could take place or what meaning his/her instrument had in the overall sound of the band and what was the impact of playing together with professional musicians (see Jaffurs, 2004).

You always have to be attentive in the gig and follow what happens around you and what the soloist does. The things agreed on can be changed. (RL, A62)

A piano is a good instrument in an orchestra to strengthen other parts, as it has a strong attack. Although it is not highly audible, its effect is considerable. (RL, A20)

[A professional musician] was able [in the workshop] to loosen playing from schematic approaches and made my motivation towards music greater than ever. (RL, A9)

Deliberative learning appeared in relation to the personal learning goals stated in the written plans. Attaining the goals was evaluated by the students after the workshop. The student had set conscious goals, but what was learnt could differ from them greatly. The offering of the workshop seems to have surprised them.

Goal: (I want to learn) Social interaction with professionals, familiarization with the world of sounds and generally what it is like to work with professional musicians.

Self-assessment: [I learnt] a lot of things connected to the attitude and the way to work. … Working with XX [name of the musician] was easy, effortless and nice. He knew how to motivate with his attitude and it was reflected by the great atmosphere throughout the workshop … the music was examined from both technical and “mental” viewpoints which was a splendid way of internalizing the material to be played. (A41)

Goal: Practicing this type [modern jazz] of repertoire is very instructive even as such. On a gig you always learn something. … I wish that a visiting supervisor will bring new visions and ideas to my playing.

Self-assessment: [I learnt] a more relaxed attitude to music, courage, dynamic proceeding, audacity, surrendering and the control of performance anxiety through concentration. (A36)

The research material revealed that workshop activities correspond well to the real work of a musician, and the skills gained from it are applicable to the work life of a musician. In addition to the skills needed in the field of music the students learnt cooperation, taking responsibility and initiative in an informal way, and they experienced an increase in their self-confidence as young musicians.

The third finding of the study is that in relation to the research reports of Green (e.g., 2008) there are correspondences in all five characteristics of informal learning in the workshops (Table 3). (1) Musical choice—students participate in choosing the music to be played; (2) Repertoire- and skill-acquisition—students familiarize themselves with the music to be played and practice their contributions to accompaniment and solo-parts by ear; (3) Form of learning—students practice their personal parts autonomously and band playing in a team, both among themselves and with a professional musician; (4) Learning contents—in workshops the aim is creative working and a good feel with music; (5) Musical assimilation—competence in music is gained in authentic musical environments playing whole songs. The difference between workshops and traditional conservatoire work can be noticed in the students’ active and responsible roles in planning and carrying out their learning experiences.

Table 3.

Informal and formal learning Green (2001, 2006, 2008): Workshops—Formal conservatoire work.

Characteristic	Informal learning characteristics in popular music (Green, 2006, 2008)	Informal learning characteristics in conservatoire popular and jazz master workshops	Formal learning characteristics in conservatoire popular and jazz master workshops	Traditional formal learning characteristics in conservatoire (Green, 2006, 2008)
Musical choice	Learning begins with music chosen by the learners themselves	Learning begins with music chosen collaboratively by the learners, teacher and the master musician	Part of the workshop starting process is to set the individual and conscious learning goals for the workshop	Teachers usually choose music with the intention of introducing learners to areas with which they are not already familiar
Repertoire- and skill-acquisition	The main method of repertoire- and skill-acquisition involves the copying of recordings by ear	One part of the repertoire- and skill-acquisition is copying recorded versions of the pieces to be played	Notated material is used to support and strengthen learning	The main method of repertoire- and skill-acquisition involves notated or other written or verbal instructions and exercises.
Form of learning	Peer and/or self-directed learning constitute an important part of informal learning processes	Self- and group directed learning and evaluation is part of the workshop processes	Teachers’ and master musicians’ learner-centered guidance is part of the conscious learning process	Adult supervision and guidance from an expert with superior skills and knowledge
Learning contents	Learning typically involves the integration of listening, performing, improvising, and composing processes, with an emphasis on personal creativity	Learning typically involves the integration of listening, performing, improvising, and composing processes. The special focus on creativity and good feel in music and in workshop activities	The essential part in the learning is the musical interaction with students and the master musician in a playing occasions, but also in unofficial conversations	Separation of skills and an emphasis on reproduction
Musical assimilation	Musical skills and knowledge are likely to be assimilated in “haphazard, idiosyncratic and holistic ways” with whole pieces of music, not exercises	Musical skills and knowledge are to be assimilated in actual music playing environments (rehearsals, gigs, concerts)	The workshop is a versatile learning environment which combines target-oriented and tutored learning and informal learning	Pupils follow a progression from simple to complex, which often involves a curriculum, syllabus, graded exam, and specially composed pieces or exercises

Conclusions—informal in formal

This article has concentrated on the fact that attention should be given to informal learning in the formal education of popular and jazz musicians in order to promote the development of musicianship as relevantly as possible.

The objectives of a professional musician’s education, especially in popular and jazz music, cannot be achieved only by teaching in a teacher-directed way. Music education has to be seen in a wider context, which takes informal learning into account more consciously. Based on my research material it is notable how important it is to build learning environments which center on making music, not teaching it (Folkestad, 2006). From the pedagogical viewpoint it appears that: (1) the learner’s initiative and taking responsibility are emphasized; (2) learners act in work environments typical of the field of music; (3) their action is construed around problem solving and interaction; (4) the role of a visiting professional musician has developed from that of a knowledge-transmitting master and the demonstrator of “right” performances to that of a fellow musician (Vygotsky, 1978; also Wells, 1999). Figure 2 describes the pedagogical dimensions of workshop activities and their contents.

Figure 2.

The pedagogical dimensions of workshop activities.

According to studies there are things to be developed in on-the-job learning and work-life collaboration with vocational studies (Purma, 2012). My research provides indications of the potential of workshop activities as an intensive implementation method for on-the-job learning. In the experiences gained in workshop activities the student’s reflections on his/her action, development in multiform and multilevel tasks, challenges to critical reflection, deepening his/her learning and collaboration are all united (cf. Guile & Griffiths, 2001; Zimmerman, Bonner & Kovach, 1996). A student is given a chance to realize the solutions connected to music-making him-/herself, instead of always trying to influence learning by teaching (cf. Davis & Blair, 2011).

The challenge of a music teacher is to consider his/her work partly from a new viewpoint. The change from a traditional transmitter of knowledge and skills to the designer of new learning environments supporting a student’s informal learning and to the supervisor of learning is an essential part in developing teachers’ pedagogical competence in music schools. It is significant to develop a student’s learning strategies aiming at deepening learning and knowing. From traditional classroom studies action is moved also to authentic or simulated work-life projects in which it is central to be able to apply music skills and benefit from them. From a student’s point of view the work-life oriented way of action makes studying more meaningful and interesting.

Students’ workshop experiences conform to the theory of social learning (Wenger, 1998, 2009). Workshop activity is the base for the student to gradually deepen his/her participation in the community of practice in music (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Cooperation with a professional musician builds very concretely the student’s conception of a musician’s work and the required knowledge and skills. To participate in the workshop action as the professional’s fellow worker, the student assimilates the expert’s tacit knowledge and working culture, and gradually becomes a member of a music community (see Wenger, 1998, 2009; Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995). Success factors of the workshop process are (a) shared understanding of the contents and goals gained through joint planning; (b) reciprocal and committed working; and (c) the conception of one’s own learning achieved through the workshop action.

The findings show the potential of the workshop model in learning popular and jazz music. The action model is flexible and alterable to respond to different needs and new learning goals. As learning environments, workshops follow the times and serve the students’ learning needs comprehensively. In music education a pedagogical conception, wider than a teacher-directed working, is needed concerning the ways music is learnt outside formal education and how informal learning could be benefited from in the institutions of music education.

References

Ake

(2002). Jazz cultures. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Beckett

Hager

(2002). Life, work and learning: Practice in postmodernity. London: Routledge.

Bereiter

Scardamalia

(1993). Surpassing us: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago: Open Court.

Berliner

(1994). Thinking in jazz: The infinite art of improvisation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Billett

(2001). Learning in the workplace: Strategies for effective practice. Crows Nest, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

Boreham

(2002). Work process knowledge in technological and organizational development. In Boreham

Samurcay

Fisher

(Eds.), Work process knowledge (pp. 1–14). London: Routledge.

Boud

Cohen

Sampson

(1999). Peer learning and assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 24(4), 413–426.

Boud

Middleton

(2003). Learning from others at work: Communities of practice and informal learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(5), 194–202.

Burns

Grove

S. K.

(2009). The practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (6th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Saunders Elsevier.

10.

Burwell

(2012). Apprenticeship in music: A contextual study for instrumental teaching and learning. International Journal of Music Education, 31(3), 276–291.

11.

Colley

Hodkinson

Malcolm

(2003). Informality and formality in learning. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre.

12.

Cope

(2002). Informal learning of musical instruments: The importance of social context. Music Education Research, 4(1), 93–104.

13.

Cope

(2005). Adult learning in traditional music. British Journal of Music Education, 22(2), 125–140.

14.

Cox

(2002). Transforming research in music education history. In Colwell

Richardson

(Eds.), The new handbook of research in music teaching and learning (pp. 695–706). New York: Oxford University Press.

15.

Davis

Blair

(2011). Popular music in American teacher education: A glimpse into a secondary methods course. International Journal of Music Education, 29(2), 124–140.

16.

Elliott

D. J.

(1995). Music matters: A new philosophy of music education. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.

17.

Eraut

(2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 247–273.

18.

European Parliament. (2006). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 Dec 2006 on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning (2006/962/EC). Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006H0962:EN:NOT

19.

Feldman

Contzius

(2011). Instrumental music education. New York: Routledge.

20.

Field

(2006). Lifelong learning and the new educational order. London: Trentham Books.

21.

Finnegan

(1989). The hidden musicians: Music making in an English town. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

22.

Fiske

(2012). Engaging student ownership of musical ideas. In Bowman

W. D.

Frega

(Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy in Music Education (pp. 307–327). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

23.

FNBE. (2010). Vocational qualification in music. Helsinki: FNBE. Retrieved from www.oph.fi/download/140430_vocational_qualification_in_music_2010.pdf

24.

Folkestad

(2006). Formal and informal learning situations or practices vs formal and informal ways of learning. British Journal of Music Education, 23(2), 135–145.

25.

Gatien

(2009). Categories and music transmission. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 8 (2), 94–119.

26.

Green

(2001). How popular musicians learn: A way ahead for music education. Aldershot: Ashgate.

27.

Green

(2006). Popular music education in and for itself, and for “other” music: Current research in the classroom. International Journal of Music Education, 24(2), 101–118.

28.

Green

(2008). Music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom pedagogy. Aldershot: Ashgate.

29.

Green

(2009). Response to special issue of Action, Criticism and Theory for Music Education concerning “Music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom pedagogy.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 8(2), 120–132.

30.

Gridley

(2003). Jazz Styles: History and Analysis (8th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

31.

Grow

G. O.

(1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3), 125–149.

32.

Guile

Griffiths

(2001). Learning through work experience. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 114–131.

33.

Hallam

(2001). The development of expertise in young musicians: Strategy use, knowledge acquisition and individual diversity. Music Education Research, 3(1), 7–23.

34.

Huovinen

Tenkanen

Kuusinen

V-P.

(2011). Dramaturgical and music-theoretical approaches to improvisation pedagogy. International Journal of Music Education, 29(1), 82–100.

35.

Illeris

(2011). The fundamentals of workplace learning: Understanding how people learn in working life. London: Routledge.

36.

Jaffurs

S. E.

(2004). The impact of informal music learning practices in the classroom, or how I learned how to teach from a garage band. International Journal of Music Education, 22(3), 189–200.

37.

Jenkins

(2013). Textual poachers: Television fans and participatory culture (Updated 20th anniversary ed.). New York: Routledge.

38.

Jokinen

Lähteenmäki

Nokelainen

(2009). Työssäoppimisen lumo [The magic of the on-the-job learning]. Hämeenlinna: HAMK.

39.

Krippendorff

(2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. London: Sage Publications.

40.

Laughlin

J. E.

(2001). The use of notated and aural exercises as pedagogical procedures intended to develop harmonic accuracy among beginning jazz improvisers. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of North Texas, USA. Retrieved from http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc2886/

41.

Lave

Wenger

(1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

42.

Lebler

(2007). Student-as-master? Reflections on a learning innovation in popular music pedagogy. International Journal of Music Education, 25(3), 205–221.

43.

Lebler

Burt-Perkins

Carey

(2009). What the students bring: Examining the attributes of commencing conservatoire students. International Journal of Music Education, 27(3), 232–249.

44.

Livingstone

D. W.

(2001). Adults’ informal learning: Definitions, findings, gaps and future research. Wall Working Paper No. 21. Retrieved from https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/2735/2/21adultsinformallearning.pdf February 2013

45.

Louth

J. P.

(2006). Lifelong learning and the informally trained jazz artist. International Journal of Community Music, 14(1):9–24. Retrieved from http://www.intellectbooks.co.uk/MediaManager/Archive/IJCM/Volume%20D/08%20Louth.pdf

46.

Lowe

(2012). Lessons for teachers: What lower secondary school students tell us about learning a musical instrument. International Journal of Music Education, 30(3), 227–243.

47.

Nonaka

Takeuchi

(1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

48.

Purma

(2012). Musiikkialan perustutkinnon v. 2005–2010 suorittaneiden sijoittuminen työelämään ja jatko-opintoihin. [How those who had completed their vocational upper secondary qualifications in music during the years 2005–2010 were later positioned in working life and postgraduate studies]. Helsinki: The Conservatoire Association of Finland.

49.

Reimer

(1989). A philosophy of music education (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

50.

Rohwer

(2005). Teaching the adult beginning instrumentalist: Ideas from practitioners. International Journal of Music Education, 23(1), 37–47.

51.

Sadler

D. R.

(2005). Interpretations of criteria-based assessment and grading in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), 175–194.

52.

Sloboda

(2001). Emotion, functionality and the everyday experience of music: Where does music education fit? Music Education Research, 3(2), 54–67.

53.

Swanwick

(1988). Music, mind, and education. London: Routledge.

54.

Veblen

K. K.

(2012). Adult music learning in formal, nonformal, and informal contexts. In McPherson

G. E.

Welch

G. F.

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 2; pp. 243–256). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

55.

Vygotsky

L. S.

(1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

56.

Walser

(1993). Out of notes: Signification, interpretation, and the problem of Miles Davis. The Musical Quarterly, 77(2), 343–365.

57.

Watson

K. E.

(2008). The effect of aural versus notated instructional materials on achievement and self-efficacy in jazz improvisation. Ann Arbor, MI: ProQuest Information and Learning Company.

58.

Wells

(1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

59.

Wenger

(1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

60.

Wenger

(2009). A social theory of learning. In Illeris

(Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning: learning theorists in their own words (pp. 209–218). London: Routledge.

61.

Westerlund

(2006). Garage rock bands: A future model for developing musical expertise? International Journal of Music Education, 24(2), 119–125.

62.

Zimmerman

Bonner

Kovach

(1996). Developing self-regulated learners: Beyond achievement to self-efficacy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.