Beginning and intermediate piano students’ experiences participating in evaluative performances

Abstract

Evaluative performances, such as conservatory examinations and competitions, frequently play a significant role in piano instruction in many parts of the world. Many students participate in these performances as a result of the perception that a program of instruction that is focused on standardized curriculum and evaluation practices will be of higher quality and will result in higher levels of student motivation. This study employs grounded theory methodology and narrative inquiry to better understand the experiences of beginning and intermediate piano students. The findings consist of characteristics of positive experiences with evaluative performances as well as factors that contribute to the quality of students’ experiences. Students who had positive experiences with evaluative performances reported positive emotional responses, perceptions of meaningful music learning, and strengthened musical identity. In order for students to have positive experiences with evaluative performances, their understandings, values, goals, and characteristics as a performer needed to align with the demands of the evaluation. In addition, positive experiences with evaluative performances required the presence of supportive relationships with parents and teachers. This article concludes with pedagogical implications.

Keywords

Conservatory examinations evaluative musical contexts piano study student engagement

Introduction

Evaluative performances are a fixture of piano study in many parts of the world. Examination boards serve hundreds of thousands of examination candidates each year (Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music, 2013; Royal Conservatory of Music, 2012). In addition, many students are involved in competitions and festivals run by community groups or music teachers’ associations as a means of receiving feedback from an adjudicator and of having their performances rated or ranked against those of their peers. For the purposes of this study, an evaluative performance is defined as a musical event which exists for the purpose of providing opportunity for students to receive a mark, rank, or other kind of feedback from an expert adjudicator as an indication of their competence as performers.

While evaluative performances are often regarded as a necessary part of piano study (Babin, 2005; Davidson & Scutt, 1999; Tye, 2004), it is far from certain that participating in these assessments is uniformly beneficial for students. The graded levels are used by students, teachers and parents as a benchmark for student progress and achievement (Davidson & Scutt, 1999). The standardized curriculum and assumption of linear progression of learning are problematic when applied to students whose learning follows highly individual paths. Evaluative performances are also thought to motivate students to practice more than they would if they were not working towards a performance goal (Tye, 2004). While an impending evaluation can certainly provide a short-term incentive, this kind of “carrot and stick” approach does not often result in meaningful long-term engagement in learning (Kellaghan, Madaus, & Raczek, 1997). Evaluative performances can provide excellent preparation for students who are intending to pursue careers in music, but their utility is questionable in the case of the majority of children who end up in other fields of work (Cooper, 2001). In the latter cases, piano lessons would be more profitably aimed at preparing students for musical activities that can be pursued in leisure time and that have social relevance (Zenker, 2004).

The existing research related to evaluative performances brings to our attention some important issues, including potential benefits and drawbacks of participation and the role of adjudication in student learning. Examinations can play a positive role in learning when the evaluation is treated as a learning experience rather than as an end in itself (Davidson & Scutt, 1999); however, excessive preoccupation with results (Tye, 2004) or competition (Miller, 1994) can be problematic. Because the result of an examination or competition is often regarded as being very important to the participant (and by extension, to his or her parents and teacher), the adjudicator or examiner is afforded a very high level of authority (Brotons, 1993; Maroon, 2003). The elevated position given to adjudicators’ ratings is questionable when the various non-musical factors that frequently influence the reliability of adjudicators’ assessments (Bergee, 2007; Wapnick, Mazza, & Darrow, 2000) are considered.

While existing research has illuminated several important aspects of student participation in evaluative performances, a concise theoretical framework for understanding how students experience their involvement in competitions and examinations is still lacking. The purpose of this study is to provide a framework for understanding students’ experiences that can be used to reflect on the factors that influence the quality of these experiences. In order to gain a better understanding of how participating in evaluative performances influences various aspects of student learning and engagement, this study investigates the following questions:

How do beginning and intermediate piano students experience the process of participating in evaluative performances?

What are the defining features of a positive experience with an evaluative performance?

What conditions facilitate high levels of engagement in music learning through participation in evaluative performances?

Study design

This study was conducted using qualitative research methods, integrating grounded theory methodology (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) and narrative inquiry (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000) as a means to explain a complex phenomenon and to give prominence to participants’ lived experiences. Grounded theory is the systematic investigation of a process that is not easily understood using existing theoretical understanding (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). In this approach, the researcher begins with a fairly general question, which is then narrowed through the data collection and analysis stages of the research. Data can be collected through a variety of means, such as interviews, observations, and surveys to generate a rich description of a phenomenon. Data are then analyzed through a system of coding, which helps the researcher identify important themes. Once the themes have been identified, the researcher then looks for relationships between the themes in order to generate a theory that explains the process under examination. The theory can then be explained through text and represented by a visual diagram. Narrative inquiry focuses on the experiences of the participant and the meaning that he or she derives from those experiences. Using this methodology allowed a focus on students’ own perspectives on what made specific pivotal moments in their musical educations significant.

In the interest of recruiting excellent participants (Morse, 2007, p. 230), participants in this study were selected to represent various perspectives on evaluative performances and various degrees of being stakeholders in the music learning process. There were a total of 25 participants in this study: five current piano students (all female, ranging in age from 11 to 14 years), five parents/guardians (one parent or guardian for each of the current piano students), 12 former students (two male, 10 female, ranging in age from 13 years to mid-thirties), and three piano teachers (all female, with teaching experience ranging from 15 to 30 years). The current students were in the process of preparing for a local competition or a conservatory examination at the time of data collection. The former students had previously participated in such events, but were no longer participating and, in most cases, were no longer engaged in formal piano study. All participants were living in Ontario, Canada at the time of data collection, but some of the former students had completed evaluative performances in other parts of the world. Because the purpose of this study is to examine the role of evaluative performances in the education of students who do not necessarily pursue careers in music, beginning and intermediate level students (up to approximately RCM Grade 8 or ABRSM Grade 6) were chosen over advanced-level students.

In this article, participants are identified by their role (for example, CS2 to refer to current student #2, or FS3 to refer to former student #3). While less personal than using pseudonyms, this means of identifying participants allows for the greatest clarity in establishing the particular contribution of an individual participant. Participants were recruited via email, either directly or through their teacher (in the case of the current student group). This study was approved by the Office of Research Ethics at the University of Toronto. All participants (and parents/guardians, where applicable) signed informed consent forms prior to participation.

Data collection from the current students consisted of three semi-structured interviews and five video-recorded lesson observations. The first two interviews and all of the observations took place in the weeks immediately preceding the performance. The final interview took place shortly after the performance. The lesson observations provided real-life illustrations of some of the ideas the participants discussed in their interviews and of the relationship between the teacher and students. The timing of the interviews and observations allowed the participants to share their perspectives as they were going through the experience of preparing for and performing in a festival or examination. Data collection from other participants (parents, teachers, and former students) consisted of one semi-structured interview each. Transcripts were returned to all participants for member checking before the analysis commenced. Interview transcripts and field notes from the video recording were analyzed using constant comparative analysis techniques (Charmaz, 2003). The data were coded for themes until saturation was reached.

Participant voices

The following section highlights some of the participants’ voices as they describe their experiences with evaluative performances. The quotations are illustrative of important themes that emerged in the analysis of data from all of the participants. The participant voices are divided into three sections: students’ positive experiences, students’ negative experiences, and teacher and parent perspectives. These accounts address the first research question related to students’ experiences.

Students’ positive experiences with evaluative performances

The drawing shown in Figure 1 was made by a current student (CS4) following her performance in a local competition. All current student participants were asked to draw a picture of the most memorable aspect of their festival or examination experience following the performance. The pictures then served to spark conversation about the experience in the final interview. The student described how her picture showed all of the students at the performance enjoying the opportunity to share a musical experience. Of all the current students, this student had the most positive overall impression of her evaluative performance. In her interviews during the preparation period leading up to the competition, she expressed a desire to place in the top three performers, showing evidence of performance approach goals (Dweck, 1986). She was even more excited to have an opportunity to perform in front of an audience and to hear other students play, indicating that she placed greater value on mastery goals. Previous research has shown a combination of performance approach and mastery goals to be adaptive for learning (Austin, Renwick, & McPherson, 2006).

Figure 1.

Student’s depiction of a positive experience with an evaluative performance, CS4, female, age 11, elementary-level pianist.

The excitement of performing for an audience and getting positive feedback from an adjudicator was shared by one of the former students:

One year I won the gold medal, which was great, I was really excited about that … I thought at that point I might even consider music as a career, because I was doing really well, and my teacher thought I was doing really well. (FS3)

In the case of this student, a satisfying experience at a competition was not only enjoyable in its own right, but was also a source of inspiration for future musical goals. The affirmation from the adjudicator resulted in a boost in confidence that allowed her to think about the possibility of future achievements. At this stage in her learning, this student expected to succeed and placed a high value on her musical goals, making her highly motivated to work hard at her piano studies (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000).

Achievement played a role in several students’ positive experiences with evaluative performances. For example, one of the current students (CS2) described the impact of positive feedback from adjudicators and examiners on her perception of herself as a musician:

I just started doing festivals last year and same with exams, because I’m not really a competitive person, but [my teacher] has always encouraged me to try, just to get some good feedback and stuff. So she got me into my first festival and my first exam, and we did really well, so I did 2 exams in one year last year. So I got really good marks on those ones. I sort of felt confident and proud that I’m such a good piano player and stuff. (CS2)

This student had originally been hesitant to attempt an evaluative performance, as she was concerned that she would not be successful. The feedback that she received from the adjudicator served to increase her self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977). Her early successes overcame her initial reluctance and she eagerly pursued other opportunities to perform in the hopes that she would achieve similar results. While the original suggestion to participate in an evaluative performance came from the teacher, it is important to note this student’s choice of words. She was “encouraged” to participate, but not forced. The choice afforded this student, the strong results she achieved, and the support she received from her parents and teacher ensured that her piano studies met all of the psychological needs identified by Ryan and Deci as necessary for intrinsic motivation (2000).

Students’ negative experiences with evaluative performances

In contrast to the experiences recounted in the previous section, the following participant accounts illustrate some of the potentially adverse aspects of performing in competitions and examinations. One former student (FS5) described her frustration at being forced to participate in performances that she found extremely stressful:

There was nothing really that I didn’t like about my lessons apart from the festivals and exams that I was told I had to do … [Re: performance anxiety] Always—before, during, after the event. I was a pretty reserved kid, so I didn’t enjoy the stage whatsoever, not even at age 4. I’m sure that it had an effect on my performance—i.e. I’d go into it [a performance] with the sole end goal of getting it done, with total lack of regard of how I was going to do it. I resented having to do it, so I didn’t care how I did it, rather that I just did it. (FS5)

This student was highly musical and eventually studied music at the postsecondary level. However, she suffered from debilitating performance anxiety from her earliest performances. Her parents and teachers continued to insist that she participate in evaluative performances in spite of her reluctance. For this student, the actual performance was a significant source of stress; just as challenging was the sense that her parents and teacher seemed to value her achievement more than her wellbeing.

Another former student described her involvement in evaluative performances as restricting her musical development.

No I don’t think there was ever time for [learning music outside the exam curriculum], just because we would spend the majority of the year preparing for those 3 pieces and then the scales as well, and then the aural part of the exam … And then there were theory exams as well so … We would always be prepping for some kind of exam. (FS4)

For this student, the required repertoire and exercises were less than inspiring. However, because her teacher and parents viewed examinations as an essential part of piano study, she was left with little time to explore other musical interests. Her experience reflects concerns expressed by educational researchers that high stakes testing can have a negative effect on curriculum content (Kohn, 2000). At the time of the interview, this participant’s child was a student of the researcher, and the participant had specifically requested a program of study for her child that was not focused on preparation for examinations.

A final account from FS3, who had previously described her musical career goals, provides a dramatic example of the long-ranging impact of a negative experience with an evaluative performance:

And so the exam was the biggest horror story of my life up to that point. I basically, looking back on it, had a … full-blown panic attack … I absolutely froze. I felt like I was going to be sick to my stomach. I remember the sight reading piece of music—I couldn’t see the sheet music because it was like I could only see red, it was like blood in front of my eyes. I froze, I couldn’t play my piece very well, I couldn’t play the study very well, I made tons of mistakes … I could barely breathe … And I walked out of there and said ‘I am never touching the piano again.’ … It was always that monumental failure … My career plans, and hopes and dreams, everything changed after that day. (FS3)

As part of her endeavor to pursue her musical studies more seriously, this student decided to take her first conservatory examination. A combination of inexperience and insufficient support from a new teacher led to a disastrous performance. This previously high-achieving student had her musical self-concept shattered by the experience of failure in a performance that she perceived to be both extremely important at the time and also indicative of her musical potential. She stopped taking lessons and abandoned all aspirations relating to a musical career. At the time of her interview (approximately 20 years after the examination in question), this participant still experienced high levels of anxiety at the thought of playing the piano for anyone except her closest family members, demonstrating the far-reaching effects of her negative evaluation experience.

Teacher and parent perspectives

All of the teachers and parents interviewed for this study held positive views of evaluative performances under certain conditions; however, none of the participants in these groups endorsed evaluative performances as being universally beneficial. Perceived advantages of participation related to the development of both musical and life skills. Perceived disadvantages related to the maintenance of student interest in lessons and the struggle of balancing the significant demands of evaluative performances with students’ other commitments.

Several adult participants discussed the role of evaluative performances in providing structure and focus to students’ lessons. One teacher described her approach to evaluative performances in this way: “I strongly encourage festivals and exams. I find when students don’t have those goals … we don’t progress as much and there’s a sense of drifting and it kind of gets on my nerves” (T1). This connection between exams and increased student effort and discipline was also reflected in the views of one parent who, when describing her child’s current lack of exam preparation in lessons, said “it’s a lot of money for just fun stuff if you’re not really going to take it to heart and practice” (P1). This parent felt that her child, who had taken a break from exam preparation after changing teachers, was not demonstrating the same level of commitment that she had previously shown. Another parent described how her child would “sit down and … focus more” (P4) when there was a deadline. In each of these cases, preparation for evaluative performances increased students’ focus and discipline and likely led to increased achievement. These findings are consistent with those of Davidson and Scutt (1999), who found that many teachers used evaluative performances to structure students’ learning.

In addition to helping students refine their musical skills, participation in evaluative performances also provided opportunities for personal growth. Several participants expressed appreciation for the opportunity afforded to students to hear other students perform when participating in festivals. One parent described his child’s festival experience as “an eye-opener” (P4), as hearing a much younger, more advanced student perform made his child consider how much time and energy she was willing to invest in her own studies. Another parent (P2) described how hearing another competitor play the same piece allowed her daughter to reflect on the diversity of artistic interpretation. This experience “[took] the edge off” (P2) the daughter’s perfectionist tendencies. Increased “comfort” performing (P5) and the ability to “get back on the horse” (T1) after a disappointing performance were also cited as advantages of participation in evaluative performances.

Participation in evaluative performances led to increased motivation to learn the piano for some students. However, the teacher and parent participants also recognized that the program of study outlined by examining bodies was not always the best fit for individual students’ interests and needs. Two of the teachers (T2 and T3) stated that they have very few students who participate in examinations, instead preferring to register their students in festivals which require preparation of only one or two pieces of music instead of a more extensive exam program. One parent described how her children tended to forget their exam music shortly after the performance because “it wasn’t music that they particularly cared about” (P1), thus calling into question whether all of the time and energy invested in learning the exam repertoire had been worthwhile.

Defining a positive experience with an evaluative performance

The findings of this study are divided into two main areas, addressing the final two research questions: the definition of a positive experience with an evaluative performance and the conditions that facilitate a positive experience. Positive experiences with evaluative performances had three main characteristics: they resulted in positive emotional outcomes (Cameron & Carlisle, 2004), they encouraged the pursuit of personally meaningful music learning (Zenker, 2004), and they fostered a strong sense of musical identity in the student (Hargreaves, Miell, & MacDonald, 2002). Positive experiences with evaluative performances are important because they contribute to students’ sense of self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977) and self-determination (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Self-efficacy (or the confidence that one can succeed in future tasks) has been shown to be the strongest predictor of achievement in future evaluative performances (McCormick & McPherson, 2003). Self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000) posits that individuals are highly motivated to engage in activities which meet their needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Students whose psychological needs are met through music study will be more likely to want to continue engaging in musical pursuits.

Grounded theory

The above model explains the conditions of a positive experience with evaluative performances (see Figure 2). The model shows all of the elements that must work together for a student to have a positive experience. The absence of even one of these conditions (as described in the section addressing students’ negative experiences) can tarnish the whole experience and can lead to a generalized negative view of piano lessons. As a result, there is no one model of a negative experience, but rather many different ways in which an experience with an evaluative performance can go awry. The perspectives of parents and teachers support the characteristics of students and the importance of supportive adults described in the model.

Figure 2.

Conditions of a positive experience with an evaluative performance.

The core phenomenon, indicated by the circle in the center of Figure 2, is the student’s participation in an evaluative performance, including the preparation process, the actual performance, and the receipt and interpretation of the adjudicator’s feedback. The other components of the diagram indicate the causal and contextual categories that influence the quality of the student’s experience with the process of participating in an evaluative performance.

The arrow on the left-hand side of the diagram represents a causal condition for participation in evaluative performances and indicates the intrinsic motivation to learn music that serves as the initial impetus for music study in students who have positive experiences with festivals and examinations.

Surrounding the core category are several contextual conditions, each of which influence the way in which the student experiences the phenomenon of the evaluative performance. The first layer outside of the core phenomenon is the engagement–success cycle. Students who are highly engaged have generally experienced success in previous performances. Their success contributes to their increased engagement, while their high levels of engagement in learning motivate them to pursue activities that will likely result in future successes. The next circle represents students’ characteristics as performers. The students who had positive experiences with exams and competitions were confident performers and described finding enjoyment and satisfaction in playing for other people. While these students experienced some performance anxiety, it served to facilitate greater focus rather than detracting from the performance. The outer layer of the circle represents understandings, values, and goals. Students who had positive experiences with evaluative performances held adaptive attributions (Legette, 1998; Weiner, 1986), expected to succeed (McCormick & McPherson, 2003), valued the potential outcomes of participation in evaluative performances (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000), and held both mastery and performance approach goals (Lacaille, Koestner, & Gaudreau, 2007). Finally, students who had positive experiences with evaluative performances undertook the process of preparation, performance, and reflection within the context of supportive relationships with important adults (Cameron & Carlisle, 2004; Creech, 2010).

When all of the conditions described above work together to contribute to a positive experience with evaluative performances, students experience high levels of self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977) and self-determination (Ryan & Deci, 2000), leading to increased intrinsic motivation to learn music.

Discussion: Implications for teaching and learning

This research can inspire teachers to reflect on how their own musical backgrounds have shaped their views of quality music education and to consider a variety of ways to encourage the musical development of their students (Tye, 2004). Parents and students can also benefit from reflecting on the reasons for which a particular student is participating in piano lessons, and specifically in evaluative performances. Reflection after each evaluative performance is a valuable tool to ensure the greatest possible learning outcomes, as students consider their experiences and the potential role of future evaluative performances.

The findings of this study challenge teachers, students, and parents to adopt an expansive view of worthwhile music learning. Some students’ personal musical goals align closely with the skills that are developed through extensive involvement in festivals and examinations; other students’ ambitions lie in musical exploration outside of the realm of examination syllabi.

In addition to providing opportunities to question the broader role of evaluative performances in student learning, this research also provides some indicators that teachers can use when considering the benefits and risks of having a particular student participate in an evaluative performance. Careful consideration of the student’s motivational characteristics, learning style, comfort level as a performer, and musical preferences will help teachers make appropriate recommendations regarding participation in evaluative performances. Once a student has committed to an evaluative performance, teachers can help facilitate positive outcomes by encouraging adaptive motivational orientations (for example, emphasizing effort attributions [Weiner, 1986] and mastery goals [Dweck, 1986]), ensuring that students are well prepared and have the best possible chance of success, helping students develop strategies to deal with performance anxiety, and making connections between the required material and other musical pursuits that are of particular interest to the student.

Finally, this research underscores the importance of the relational context in which students learn. Regardless of whether or not a student participates in evaluative performances, he or she is entitled to a safe and supportive relationship with both parents and teachers. It is never worthwhile to jeopardize a child’s well-being for the sake of achievement (Bartel & Cameron, 2004).

Conclusion

Children take piano lessons for many reasons. The most powerful motivation for music study is reflected in the words of one of the former student participants in this study: “I just think it’s [music is] like drinking water; it’s a necessity for life. Being able to play an instrument is just the most satisfying thing. I love it” (FS3). Decisions about whether a student should participate in evaluative performances should take into consideration the ultimate goals of the student’s music education. Many personal and relational factors must be taken into consideration when a student is exploring the possibility of participating in a festival or examination. Students whose understandings, values, and goals align with the requirements for the evaluation, who are confident performers, and who have supportive parents and teachers are more likely to find satisfaction in participating in festivals and exams. Regardless of whether students’ learning includes participation in evaluative performances, a responsive program of study will foster the kind of attitude evidenced in the above quote from FS3, who was unable to imagine life without active music-making.

Footnotes

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References

Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music. (2013). Motivating music achievement: Welcome to ABRSM. Retrieved from http://www.abrsm.org/resources/abrsmIntro04.pdf

Austin

Renwick

McPherson

G. E.

(2006). Developing motivation. In McPherson

G. E.

(Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of musical development (pp. 213–238). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Babin

(2005). Music conservatories in Canada and the piano examination system for the preparatory student: A historical survey and comparative analysis (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Bandura

(1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.

Bartel

Cameron

(2004). From dilemmas to experience: Shaping the conditions of learning. In Bartel

(Ed.), Questioning the music education paradigm (pp. 39–61). Waterloo, Ontario: Canadian Music Educators’ Association.

Bergee

(2007). Performer, rater, occasion, and sequence as sources of variability in music performance assessment. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55(4), 344–358.

Brotons

(1993). Effects of performing conditions on music performance anxiety and performance quality (Unpublished PhD thesis). University of Oregon, USA.

Cameron

Carlisle

(2004). What kind of social climate do we create in our music classrooms? In Bartel

(Ed.), Questioning the music education paradigm (pp. 21–38). Waterloo, Ontario: Canadian Music Educators’ Association.

Charmaz

(2003). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In Denzin

N. K.

Lincoln

Y. S.

(Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 249–291). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

10.

Clandinin

D. J.

Connelly

F. M.

(2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

11.

Cooper

(2001). Adults’ perceptions of piano study: Achievements and experiences. Journal of Research in Music Education, 49(2), 156–168.

12.

Creech

(2010). Learning to play an instrument: The case for parental support. Music Education Research, 12(1), 13–32.

13.

Davidson

Scutt

(1999). Instrumental teaching with exams in mind: A case study investigating teacher, student and parent interactions before, during and after a music examination. British Journal of Music Education, 16(1), 79–95.

14.

Dweck

C. S.

(1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040– 1048.

15.

Hargreaves

D. J.

Miell

MacDonald

R. A. R.

(2002). What are musical identities and why are they important? In MacDonald

Hargreaves

Miell

(Eds.), Musical identities (pp. 1–20). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

16.

Kellaghan

Madaus

G. F.

Raczek

(1997). The use of external examinations to improve student motivation. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

17.

Kohn

(2000). The case against standardized testing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

18.

Lacaille

Koestner

Gaudreau

(2007). On the value of intrinsic rather than traditional achievement goals: A short-term prospective study. International Journal of Music Education, 25(3), 245–257.

19.

Legette

(1998). Causal beliefs of public school students about success and failure in music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46(1), 102–111.

20.

Maroon

M. T.

(2003). Potential contributors to performance anxiety among middle school students performing at solo and ensemble contests (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Kent State University, USA.

21.

McCormick

McPherson

(2003). The role of self-efficacy in a musical performance examination: An exploratory structural equation analysis. Psychology of Music, 31(1), 37–51.

22.

Miller

R. E.

(1994). A dysfunctional culture: Competition in music. Music Educators’ Journal, 81(3), 29–33.

23.

Morse

J. M.

(2007). Sampling in grounded theory. In Bryant

Charmaz

(Eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory (pp. 229–244). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

24.

Royal Conservatory of Music. (2012). Background and history. Retrieved from http://examinations.rcmusic.ca/background-and-history

25.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

26.

Strauss

Corbin

(1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

27.

Tye

J. K.-C.

(2004). A survey of the current status and practices of piano teachers in Penang, Malaysia: Preparation for the practical piano examinations of the Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music, London (Unpublished DMA dissertation). University of South Carolina, Columbia, USA.

28.

Wapnick

Mazza

Darrow

(2000). Effects of performer attractiveness, stage behavior, and dress on evaluation of children’s piano performances. Journal of Research in Music Education, 48(4), 323–335.

29.

Weiner

(1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.

30.

Wigfield

Eccles

(2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81.

31.

Zenker

(2004). Music as a lifelong pursuit: Educating for a musical life. In Bartel

(Ed.), Questioning the music education paradigm (pp. 121–135). Waterloo, Ontario: Canadian Music Educators’ Association.