Abstract
The purpose of this intrinsic case study was to examine how preservice music teachers’ participation in a 4-year lab choir setting contributed to their teacher identity construction. This lab choir represents an uncommon case of peer teaching because preservice teachers enroll in the course each semester of their undergraduate career and participate as singers for multiple semesters before taking on the teacher role, at which point they are teaching an ensemble made up largely of younger students. The eight participants in this study were choral music education majors who had been members of the lab choir since their first semester at the university. Three themes emerged from the data: culture of identity construction, evolution through coursework, and peers as future selves. Participants felt the lab choir experience contributed positively to their identity construction and skill acquisition. Implications for music teacher education are discussed.
Music teacher educators (MTEs) face many challenges in helping preservice teachers (PSTs) acquire content and pedagogical knowledge while also facilitating students’ developing teacher, or occupational, identities. To these ends, MTEs design methods courses with a variety of experiences, including peer and field teaching, wherein PSTs can practice their skills and occupy the role of teacher. Researchers have examined the role of these types of teaching experiences in PSTs’ identity development and have outlined the benefits and detriments of each (Conkling, 2003; Hourigan & Scheib, 2009; Paul, 1998; Powell, 2011, 2014, 2016).
Both peer and field teaching have unique advantages and disadvantages for PSTs’ skill and identity development. Dewey (1904) argued that “practice work” (p. 12) in peer or field settings can be useful because of the reduced or eliminated focus on issues like “class management” (p. 13). He proposed that PSTs might not yet be developmentally ready to “give equal attention” (p. 13) to management and pedagogy and therefore benefit from giving full focus to pedagogy in isolation. However, some researchers have found that undergraduates experience a higher level of anxiety in peer teaching due to fear of judgment (Butler, 2001; Paul, 1998). Scholars have also found that PSTs feel limited in their instructional ability during peer teaching. In Powell’s (2014) study, some undergraduate participants reported hesitancy in providing corrective feedback in peer teaching. Others noted fear that their peers would know if they made a mistake. Participants in Kruse’s (2015) study had similar concerns, with many comparing themselves to their peers either favorably (e.g., “I would have done better”) or unfavorably (e.g., “I wish I was like them”).
Researchers have noted that the inauthentic nature of peer teaching may be a drawback when it comes to the formation of occupational identity (Paul, 1998; Powell, 2011). Powell (2011) examined teacher concerns of PSTs and found that participants rarely expressed student-related concerns. The author posited that PSTs might not believe they can impact their colleagues’ learning, keeping them from moving toward student concerns. Scholars have sought a deeper understanding of the role peer and field teaching play in identity development (Paul, 1998; Powell, 2011, 2014, 2016). Generally, these researchers agree that peer teaching is more effective in skill development than identity construction.
In recent years, some researchers have begun to look closely at alternative options to traditional peer and field teaching models. One alternative model is peer teaching in a multi-year lab ensemble. Paul (1998) examined PSTs’ experiences in a 2-year instrumental lab ensemble. In this lab ensemble, which consisted of all students in conducting and secondary band methods, students engaged in successively longer peer teaching exercises over four semesters. The author interviewed three student teachers who had previously been involved in the lab ensemble and found that these experiences seemed to move PSTs past teacher concerns and toward student concerns. However, Paul noted that role development was limited by the inauthentic nature of peer teaching and anxiety regarding peer evaluations. Participants believed that their involvement in the lab ensemble had positively impacted their developing identities, especially in the area of professional knowledge.
Paul’s (1998) lab ensemble represented a multi-semester peer teaching experience that assisted PST participants in both skill and identity development. The present study is also in the context of a multi-semester lab ensemble. However, unlike the ensemble Paul (1998) examined, participants in this lab ensemble occupy the role of singer for multiple semesters before stepping into the role of teacher. It might be the case that this peer teaching setting could ameliorate some of the concerns scholars have raised with traditional peer teaching and give PSTs some of the benefits of field teaching without the scheduling complications of working with both a university and P-12 school schedule. The purpose of this intrinsic case study was to explore this unique case of a 4-year lab ensemble and to examine whether participation first in the singer role and then in the teacher role influenced the identity construction of preservice teachers.
Conceptual Framework
In a postmodern constructivist view of identity, the self is not conceived of as a stable entity that one discovers but as a constantly evolving narrative created through internal dialogue and social interaction. In music education, McClellan (2017) proposed a social-cognitive framework for the examination of music teacher identity construction and recommended the use of qualitative methods to “observe and evaluate circumstances that influence music teacher identity construction” (p. 85). McClellan argued for a heavier emphasis on the cognitive elements of identity construction and echoed the work of other researchers in the field who have conceived of music teacher identity as unstable, constantly being reconstructed through both internal dialogue and social interactions (Ballantyne et al., 2012; Hoffman, 2012; Natale-Abramo, 2014).
In the field of psychology, Guidano (1987) conceived of the self as a “human knowing system” (p. 29) generated through comparing self to others, and Kegan (1982) labeled self-construction an “intrinsically cognitive” (p. 81) activity. Through this lens, identity construction can be seen as a learning process that is both socially situated and internally derived, and the self can be seen not as a predetermined entity but as a neural network that is constructed in the same way as any other type of knowledge. Therefore, learning theories might serve as useful vehicles to understand the construction of identity as a form of knowledge. I developed a conceptual framework that integrated a learning theory (Experiential Learning Theory [ELT], Kolb, 1984) with a socially situated identity theory (Theory of Possible Selves, Markus & Nurius, 1986).
Kolb (1984) theorized that deep learning happens through engagement in four stages: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation. Using a peer teaching environment as an example, individuals undergo a concrete experience when they observe a peer teach a lesson. In the reflective observations stage, they evaluate the effectiveness of those strategies. In abstract conceptualization, the individual would generate ideas for how they would improve the lesson. Finally, they would test their ideas through active experimentation.
In the Theory of Possible Selves, Markus and Nurius (1986) posited that individuals consider their interactions with others as they develop ideas of who they want to become. The future self can be general (e.g., “I want to be a teacher”) or specific (e.g., “I want to be the kind of teacher who . . . ”). Through their interactions, individuals can form both ideal and feared future selves. Possible Selves are important in identity construction—they represent both goalposts for future identity development and affirmation of current identity. In music education, few researchers have applied Possible Selves to the study of teacher identity. Freer and Bennett (2012) found that undergraduate and graduate students regularly recognized the influence of teachers, both former and current, as well as peers in the development of their ideal and feared Possible Selves. Hamman and colleagues (2013) argued that the framework would be highly useful in understanding teacher identity construction of preservice teachers.
For this study, I conceived of Possible Selves as the reflective observation phase of ELT. In reflective observation, Kolb (1984) theorized that individuals engage simultaneously in observation and reflection. These elements are also the key actions of Possible Selves—individuals observe and reflect on how they would like to incorporate or avoid others’ traits into their future selves. If identity construction is a psychological process akin to learning, and if transformational learning takes place through the stages outlined in ELT, then the reflective observation stage of identity construction would represent the creation of Possible Selves. Individuals would then refine those Possible Selves in the abstract conceptualization phase and try on traits and roles of possible future selves through active experimentation before adopting or rejecting what was once their possible future selves into their developing identity.
Method
The purpose of this intrinsic case study (Stake, 2008) was to examine preservice music teachers’ experience in a 4-year lab choir. In intrinsic case studies, the researcher deems the case to be unique and therefore of interest (Stake, 2008). I was interested in this case for a variety of reasons. First, students are enrolled in the lab choir every semester prior to student teaching in addition to their regular coursework. The ensemble is a registered student organization, but attendance is required to be eligible for student teaching. This unconventional set-up makes the ensemble a central component of the undergraduate experience without adding credits to the degree. Second, the group regularly performs on campus and in the community, functioning as an in-tact ensemble. Third, unlike other lab ensembles that have been examined in peer teaching settings, not every member of this lab choir takes on the teacher role. Students must complete multiple semesters of conducting coursework as well as their first three methods courses before they are eligible to teach. Fourth, the lab ensemble serves as a constant in the undergraduate career. Membership is stable, and students continue involvement with the ensemble through a variety of coursework. Finally, when students take on the teacher role, they are teaching an ensemble made up largely of first- and second-year students rather than only their immediate cohort. The case was bound by participants’ status as undergraduate choral music education majors at the same institution and membership in the lab choir during the 2019 to 2020 school year. During their undergraduate coursework, students also participate in fieldwork and peer teaching in methods courses. For the purpose of this study, I examined only their experiences in the lab choir.
In total, the lab choir had 82 members. Upon completion of conducting and methods course requirements, students were eligible to engage in “teaching rotations.” In a teaching rotation, each student selected a piece from an assigned list and taught one 15-min rehearsal segment once a week for 3 weeks. During their first two rehearsal segments, they would teach for approximately 10 to 12 min and then receive peer feedback and instruction from a choral music faculty clinician (not always the organizer). Peers were invited to provide positive feedback through questions like, “What did this teacher do well?” The faculty clinician provided constructive feedback on pedagogy, gesture, or both. The final 15-min rehearsal segment was uninterrupted, and they would receive written feedback from the faculty clinician. Finally, they would conduct their piece alongside the other PSTs from their rotation in a concert.
The eight participants in this study were choral music education majors who had been members of the lab choir since their first semester at the university. To include different perspectives of this unique experience, I used purposive sampling (Patton, 2015) to select participants at varying points in the undergraduate degree as well as to represent diverse gender, racial, and ethnic backgrounds. Six participants identified as female, two as male, one as Black, three as Latinx, and four as White. Their pseudonyms were Laura (fourth year, student teaching semester), Alex (fourth year, taught twice), Brianna (third year, taught once), Mary (third year, teaching for the first time), Ezra (third year, teaching for the first time), Arianna (second year, had not taught), Rachel (second year, had not taught), and Ivy (third year, had not taught; see Table 1 in the Online Supplement for participant information).
Reflexivity
I am a White cis-female in my early 30s and was a doctoral student at the time of data collection. Prior to graduate study, I taught middle school choir in a rural public school. I occasionally observed the lab choir during my first 2 years as a doctoral student. My interest in studying the choir came from those experiences. Prior to the study, I had worked with each participant in some capacity at the university. My position as a graduate assistant, prior experience in public school teaching, and closeness to participants may have biased my views, but my prior knowledge and relationships allowed me to reach greater depth in individual interviews. Working with the ensemble and individual participants over the course of 3 years, writing reflective memos, and engaging in member checks and triangulation allowed me to access both emic and etic perspectives (Stake, 2008).
Data Collection and Analysis
The lab choir met 2 days per week for 50-min, student-led rehearsals. I observed and took field notes during every meeting of the lab choir from August 2019 through March 2020 (38 observations). I interviewed participants who had not yet taught or who were currently student teaching once each, and I asked each of them to complete a guided written reflection 1 week after their interview. For participants who were completing their first teaching cycle, I interviewed them 1 week prior to their first lesson, 1 week after their first lesson, and 1 week after the performance. I also asked them to complete a written reflection following each teaching experience and a written reflection 1 week after our last interview.
Interviews were semi-structured (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) and open-ended. I began all interviews with general questions about the experience of singing in the lab choir and of watching their peers take on the role of teacher. Additional questions were based on our conversation and my observations. Interviews lasted between 45 and 60 min for all participants. I audio-recorded and transcribed all interviews. I followed up with participants in email and informal conversations for transcription review and additional questions.
I analyzed field notes, interviews, and written reflections through inductive coding, which uses “emergent, data-driven” codes (Saldaña, 2016, p. 75). I began with a round of descriptive coding, and then grouped codes into categories. I discussed both codes and categories with an external reviewer before finalizing my code book. Then, I recoded all documents with the final code book and began theming the data (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). I sought trustworthiness through triangulation, peer debriefing, thick description, and member checks (Creswell & Poth, 2018). I gathered a variety of data sources including descriptive field notes, transcriptions of interviews, written reflections, and memos. In addition, I had informal conversations with the faculty organizer throughout data collection and analysis and invited them to read and provide comments on the themes and completed manuscript. Two music education researchers with experience in qualitative research served as external reviewers for the study design, coding process, and thematic analysis (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). I wrote field notes using thick description of context, and I checked for evidence across participants and between data sources (Stake, 2008). Participants engaged in member checking through transcript verification and informal discussions of initial findings either in their interview or via email.
Findings
Culture of Identity Construction
Participants believed the organizational culture of the lab ensemble—including its structure, purpose, values, and group member interactions—engendered an encouraging environment wherein they could engage in identity construction. The faculty organizer described their approach to the culture of the ensemble as building “community, being kind, supporting others, and learning (new rep, skills for teaching, collegiality)” (email). Although they did not intentionally set out with an eye toward identity construction, the combination of skill development and safety resulted in an environment participants perceived as a place for purposeful identity construction.
Every participant commented on the safety and support they felt in the ensemble, and indicated the safe culture created an environment that allowed them to focus on their developing sense of teacher self. Those who had taught the lab choir noted that the supportive culture allowed them to feel safe taking risks in their teaching. Those who were earlier in their coursework and had not yet taught consistently stated that they were less nervous about teaching in this ensemble than in other peer- or field-teaching experiences because of the safe environment. For example, second-year Rachel commented in her interview that she “hadn’t conducted yet” but thought she would “feel less anxiety” because she knew “that people weren’t going to say something bad about” her when she conducted in the future.
Participants stated that they understood from their first semester that the purpose of the ensemble was different from other choirs they sang in—they believed the goal of this ensemble was to develop teaching skills, knowledge, and identity. Participants noted that structural elements such as using music from the state’s prescribed music list (PML) and performing at the end of each teaching rotation served as reminders that the aim of the ensemble was to prepare them for the role of teacher. For example, one participant said, [the faculty] instilling this policy of us having music off the PML really brought the educational aspect into [lab choir] in terms of understanding you are going to be a teacher one day. You are not just up here to polish your gesture. (Laura, fourth year, first interview)
These continual reminders of purpose allowed the lab choir to serve as a concrete experience in students’ learning cycle.
Structurally, students’ participation in the ensemble as a singer for several years prior to stepping on the podium made the experience feel more authentic than a typical peer teaching scenario. Several participants mentioned that the integration of students from various cohorts allowed PSTs in the teacher role to feel like they could make actual changes in the ensemble sound or ability level. Alex (fourth year) felt that teaching in the lab choir was more like field teaching than peer teaching because it was mostly made up of “a lot of younger students . . . a lot of fresh out of high school students, and maybe they don’t sight read as well or they don’t have as much experience” (second interview).
Throughout their time in the ensemble, students were invited to give positive feedback to PSTs in the teacher role and to answer questions or participate in exercises from the clinicians. These practices encouraged students to engage in the reflective observation and abstract conceptualization, shifting their mindset from singer to preservice teacher. This process involved all students in their first through final semester and reinforced the ensemble’s purpose as a learning environment to improve teaching skills. Participants noted the value of these practices in encouraging students to begin thinking about pedagogy in their first semester.
When providing constructive feedback, the faculty clinicians would often invite the ensemble to be involved in some way, such as answering questions about pedagogy, conducting along with an exercise, or providing additional feedback to the teacher-conductor after they tried a new technique. By involving the whole ensemble in discussions of pedagogy, the faculty clinician encouraged students to engage in reflective observation about teaching rather than merely participating as singers. Inviting students to answer questions and provide feedback early and often empowered them to begin thinking like teachers and articulating those thoughts: There are times I’m thinking, “Oh, this is a question that, if I was a freshman, I wouldn’t be able to answer.” But we have freshmen who are coming into the program, and they’re being encouraged to answer these questions, and sometimes they’re getting there. They don’t have the vocabulary, but [the faculty clinician] is still encouraging them to be actively thinking about teaching. It encourages us to think “Sure, I’m the choir member, but I’m going to have to do this at some point, so I should start thinking about pedagogy.” And so I started thinking about that all the time. “Okay, I’m seeing this, how is this working? What could make it better?” (Brianna, third year, first interview)
Participants contrasted these structural elements with more traditional styles of peer teaching. For Laura (fourth year), peer teaching in methods classes felt “like you are doing a presentation, like a PowerPoint presentation.” But in the lab choir, she felt the experience was more authentic which allowed her to “find my teacher self” (first interview). Throughout her interviews and reflections, Laura attributed many aspects of the lab choir to this feeling of authenticity, including a focus on repertoire, leading a performance, not being graded, and teaching younger students. Currently, in her student teaching semester, she felt that her experience in the lab choir helped ease her transition to clinical teaching. In her reflection, she wrote that “becoming that teacher among your peers, I think that’s an extra challenge. If you can become your teacher self in front of people who have seen you at parties and bars, you will have no problem student teaching.”
Evolution Through Coursework
Many participants discussed how their experience in the lab choir changed as they encountered new concepts in their courses. In their first year, they felt able to identify effective and ineffective instruction from peers, but they lacked the knowledge or vocabulary to explicitly describe what they were experiencing. Over time, they developed the ability to evaluate the teaching they were observing more accurately and, through abstract conceptualization, posit how they might improve the efficacy of instruction.
Looking back on her experience in lab choir, Brianna (third year) stated, “I was always able to pick up what worked and what didn’t when I was younger, but as I started to go through more classes and get more comfortable with teaching, I started to understand why it wasn’t working.” She posited that, in some ways, being able to observe and evaluate peer instruction was more helpful in her growth than being the one teaching. She found that reflective observation and abstract conceptualization were sometimes impossible for her while teaching because she would “get a big adrenaline rush, and there are times when things aren’t working but I just can’t slow down and see why.” However, when participating in the choir as a singer, she found that “it’s really easy to see if they had just done this, maybe it would have worked a little bit better” (second interview).
The continuity of lab choir also helped participants view their coursework as more immediately relevant. When participants encountered new skills or concepts in their coursework, they viewed them not as abstract things they might implement in the future—they could engage with them immediately in lab choir. For example, Mary (third year) was thrilled to encounter the idea of using colored pencils in score study from her conducting class and immediately connected the idea with its relevance in improving instructional pace. She said, “I could totally implement this in [lab choir] and that was revolutionary for me” (second interview).
Mary also described the lab choir as a low-stakes environment where she could learn to “be flexible” with her new knowledge. Having a place to apply new skills and concepts where her work was not graded helped her feel free to experiment with her teaching in a way that she could not in methods courses. She described the lab choir as a safe space to engage in abstract conceptualization and active experimentation: I feel like [lab choir] is a good place to exercise my knowledge versus if I just had all these teaching classes but no way to exercise that material, I probably wouldn’t have been as organized and as proficient. When you learn something, you know it, but understanding it is different than being able to be flexible with that information. (Mary, third year, first interview)
For Mary and other participants, not being graded in the lab choir increased both safety and the feeling of authenticity while teaching. The lack of grades allowed participants to shift from performance to learning goals during their teaching, which in turn allowed them to engage more deeply with their knowledge and build a sense of teacher self. When discussing the active experimentation phase in lab choir, Mary said, I have those ideas and back-up plans but I feel like [lab choir] is a good way to try things out where it’s not being graded. I think that takes a lot of pressure off. Conducting poorly one day won’t impact whether you graduate or not. (First interview)
Participants experienced a heightened awareness of concepts they encountered in their coursework when they were teaching or observing peers. The lab choir was both a place to try out new concepts and to modify existing beliefs. For example, several participants sang with a choral ensemble directed by a faculty member who placed a heavy emphasis on the use of inclusive language during instruction. As more PSTs began to work to intentionally use inclusive language in their lab ensemble teaching, the concept became highlighted for PSTs in both the teacher and student roles. Ivy (third year) described it as “almost like you’ve been hit by something” as the concept takes hold. She went on to say, “You think, ‘I’m not used to that and everybody is trying to do it now.’ Maybe there is more mindfulness about it and when it doesn’t happen, you think, ‘Okay, well that’s different’” (first interview).
For some participants, certain elements of the lab choir were a source of frustration early in their undergraduate experience—primarily the additional time and financial requirements for a non-credited class. For example, Brianna (third year) said, “Because of when [the lab choir] is scheduled, there are days when you’re just tired and ready to go home and think, ‘No, I’ve got to stay and go to [lab choir]’ even when you don’t want to.” However, over time, “as I started to realize how much I was getting out of [lab choir] it became easier to really want to be part of it” (third interview). Other participants echoed these sentiments and shared that their deep connection with the purpose of the ensemble, spurred on by their developing sense of teacher self, outweighed any initial concerns or frustrations.
Peers as Future Selves
When participants talked about forming their future selves, they all noted that past teachers, current university faculty, and teachers they observed in the field often felt like unattainable ideals. For these participants, it seemed that the teachers they had in the past or were currently observing were too far removed from their current experience to be relevant in their growth. However, in the lab choir participants watched other PSTs who were close to them in age and experience take on the role of teacher. Therefore, peers served as more immediate and powerful future selves due to proximity in age and life experience.
Arianna (second year) said that before college she “didn’t really know what I was going to be like as a teacher.” She went on to say, “I didn’t even know what people my age looked like as teachers, and when I saw that in [lab choir] it took a huge weight off my shoulders” (first interview). Participants noted that the experience of watching peers on the podium became even more powerful to their identity construction the longer they were in the ensemble. As first-year students, they often did not have close relationships with the PSTs on the podium, but by their third year, they were watching people with whom they had close friendships transition to the role of teacher. Ezra (third year) found it powerful to watch these peers transform into teachers: “You are just so proud of them for how far they have come and you see them up on the podium and you think, ‘Yes, you are absolutely ready to teach’” (first interview).
Rachel (second year) entered her teacher education program with an ideal self based on her high school experiences. She wanted her future classroom to be a place that focused on technical perfection and saw her teacher identity to be one of musically proficient “dictators” leading to an excellent product. In a music education course, she encountered the ideas of democratic classroom practices, considering the whole child, and valuing process over product. Intrigued, she began watching in the lab choir for teachers who embodied components of this new possible self. Through this reflective observation prompted by her coursework, she realized that “you don’t have to be the most technically accurate teacher to make people happy and make music together” (reflection). Entering abstract conceptualization, she began to reconstruct her ideal self: There are sometimes when there is a conductor where I don’t necessarily think that their gesture is the best, but you can tell that they care about everyone. And that feels better when you are singing for them because you know they care about you and are making music with you compared to somebody just being a dictator and telling you what to do. Instances like that have opened my eyes to be more personable with people and to care more about their backgrounds rather than only how we perform as an ensemble. My identity has definitely changed to be more people oriented rather than work oriented. (First interview)
Without the lab choir, Rachel might not have seen and experienced these practices for many semesters after she had encountered the coursework and perhaps would have dismissed the ideas that did not align with her ideal self. But, through the lab choir, she was able to engage with the ideas more deeply and incorporate them into her developing sense of teacher self.
Participants also sought out examples of peers who aligned with their ideal selves and peers who seemed to overcome teaching traits they associated with their feared selves. Mary (third year) spoke frequently of her ideal self as calm and collected and her feared self as frazzled and nervous. She regularly mentioned peers who had overcome nerves as inspirational in her own preparation to be on the podium. In one anecdote, she talked about a preservice teacher she related to because “he was really nervous and shaky when he was up there and he’s like, ‘I’m shaking, don’t mind me, just keep going.’” She identified deeply with his emotions and saw his actions as a solution she could adopt: That’s me, that’s what I want to do. I might be nervous, but I need to acknowledge it and just keep going. Being able to see that made me feel a lot better because I thought “We struggle with the same things so if he can do it, I can do it. I’ll be fine.” (Second interview)
Participants also identified peers who exhibited traits that aligned with or became incorporated into their feared selves. In a choral environment where they were focused on pedagogy rather than performance, they thought more deeply about the teaching strategies teacher-conductors were using and how those strategies made them feel as ensemble members. For example, Brianna (third year) discussed her frustration with teachers who did not acknowledge their mistakes. Although she had experienced it as an ensemble member before, it was seeing a peer act that way in the lab ensemble that solidified it as a component of her feared self: [The conductor] wasn’t willing to look inward and see what’s happening on [their] end. [They] think that it’s the ensemble that’s failing to do what [they’re] asking, instead of thinking, “Well, maybe something about the way I’m showing is causing a lot of confusion in the choir.” For me as an ensemble member, that’s the most frustrating thing. I think that we can own when we mess up. (Second interview)
Some participants found that their experience in the lab choir shifted as they approached the time when they would transition into the teacher role. Ivy (third year) wrote, “I think the closer that I get to actually being on the podium, the more I envision myself on the podium.” In the semester or weeks leading up to their first rotation, they began to observe their peers with more criticality, considering what techniques or traits they might want to incorporate into their own future self. As Ezra (third year) was approaching his first rotation, he felt the impending teaching shifted his view of himself and of his colleagues in the ensemble: I think I started realizing that we were all teachers, just not professionally hired yet, the same semester I realized that I’m going to have to be conducting in here. I had always given feedback but just sort of as “You are a student, we are all students here. We are all friends. We are all peers.” Last semester when I realized I was going to be conducting it sort of hit me. That was the moment I realized, “Wow, we are all teachers here already. Even if some of us don’t even finish our major or degree plan, in this very moment, we are all teachers here.” (Third interview)
Discussion
This 4-year lab choir provided a safe culture in which PSTs could build their teaching skills and construct their emerging sense of teacher self. The word participants used most frequently to describe the ensemble culture was “safe.” This finding stands in contrast to prior examinations which have found PSTs experience a higher level of anxiety in peer teaching than they do in field teaching (Butler, 2001; Paul, 1998). The standard practice of students in the ensemble providing positive feedback boosted the confidence of PSTs stepping into the teaching role. Some students had experienced peer teaching in other settings where their peers had offered corrective feedback, and they felt more self-conscious in those environments. Although this practice led to a feeling of safety, it might also discourage a critical approach to pedagogy. MTEs might consider ways to guide constructive peer feedback without reducing feelings of safety.
Participants also felt safe in the lab choir because it was not graded. The lack of a grade in the lab choir emboldened participants to try new strategies and dispositions, which in turn helped them build their pedagogical skills and construct their teacher identity. When structuring peer teaching experiences, MTEs might consider implementing similar structures (i.e., positive peer interactions, reduce/eliminate grades) to increase psychological safety for PSTs.
One aspect of the lab choir that was particularly pertinent in fostering identity construction was the continuity of involvement across 4 years. When PSTs encounter concepts and skills in coursework, it is not likely to influence their developing identity because it is out of context. The learning stays largely in the input domains of Kolb’s (1984) learning cycle. Through the lab choir, participants were able to engage with the content in new contexts, moving through the abstract conceptualization and active experimentation phases and thereby engaging in deep learning that led to identity construction.
Given the benefits in participants’ development, MTEs might explore ways to incorporate elements of the lab choir in their own context. Instituting a 4-year lab ensemble might prove difficult for many MTEs due to constraints with scheduling and faculty load. Also, the requirement to purchase music and the obligation to attend multiple weekly rehearsals without receiving course credit could cause strain for some students. When implementing a lab ensemble that meets outside of the methods course time or across cohorts, MTEs might consider providing music or course credit for participation. Most music education degrees require ensemble participation. Allowing students to fulfill some of those requirements in a lab setting could be advantageous to preservice teachers.
In the absence of a multi-year lab choir, MTEs might consider other ways to encourage PSTs to engage with the skills and concepts they encounter in methods courses in other contexts. For example, MTEs could provide PSTs with guided reflections to evaluate the concepts they are learning about in methods courses during their ensemble rehearsals, other classes, or observations. PSTs could also engage in abstract conceptualization by writing about ways they would incorporate their current learning into future contexts.
One of the most salient factors in identity construction for participants was watching their peers take on the role of teacher. Because of their personal relationships and proximity in age and experience, seeing peers inhabit the role of teacher made their own transition feel more possible. For students who had not yet taught, they were able to watch upper-level students take on the role of teacher, giving them models for future selves that were more immediately relevant to them than teachers who were far removed by age and experience (Markus & Nurius, 1986). For students who had taught, the teaching experiences felt more authentic than traditional peer teaching scenarios and allowed them to enact their developing future self through active experimentation (Kolb, 1984). Powell’s (2014) participants did not feel they could effect change in their peers’ learning and therefore stayed focused on teacher concerns in their peer teaching. For the participants in the present study, teaching singers who were slightly younger than them increased the authenticity of the experience and of the teacher role they were occupying.
Unfortunately, this belief often surfaced through deficit speech as participants spoke about their younger colleagues. This type of language was especially surprising given the heavy emphasis both the faculty organizer and participants placed on feelings of safety and belonging. It is possible that participants enter their undergraduate degree with a deficit model of education in mind and the way they speak about students could indicate that they have maintained those assumptions. If participants are approaching other colleagues from a deficit model, it seems highly likely they are carrying those assumptions into their work with P-12 students as well. MTEs might consider asking PSTs to write or talk about their perceptions of their students in field-teaching or cross-cohort teaching scenarios to watch for language that implies a deficit model of education and create opportunities for PSTs to critically examine those beliefs.
If students had only one experience in the lab choir (singer or teacher), they likely would not reap the same benefits in identity and skill development. The combined experiences of first watching others take on the role and then teaching peers who are removed by 1 or 2 years amplified the benefits. In the absence of a multi-year lab ensemble, creating cross-cohort collaborative opportunities for PSTs might provide some of the benefits that these participants experienced from observing peers take on the role of teacher. Some options to facilitate this type of collaboration might include inviting students from a senior-level methods course to teach students in an introduction to music education course or hosting single-day special events where upper-level students teach an ensemble made of first- and second-year students.
There were many factors to which participants attributed the feeling of increased authenticity they experienced compared to other peer teaching settings, chief of which were the use of music from the PML and preparation for a performance. These structural elements benefited students by increasing a feeling of authenticity but might also encourage replication rather than criticality. Participants regularly conflated the ideas of rehearsing/conducting and teaching, and although they reported being willing to take risks, the strategies they used in teaching demonstrations largely remained in the realm of traditional, product-focused rehearsal techniques. The hurdle of creating opportunities for innovation in settings that feel authentic might be especially challenging for MTEs to overcome as PSTs come into the undergraduate degree with a preconceived notion of what choral music education is, and that idea is largely focused on traditional rehearsing-to-performance models. Therefore, when MTEs try to introduce ideas that lie outside this norm, PSTs might perceive them as inauthentic and therefore find it challenging to incorporate them into their growing teacher identity.
Scholars in music education have suggested a shift toward student-centered pedagogy and democratic practices in secondary music education (Williams, 2011). Author (in press) further called for a shift in music teacher education away from replicative practices and toward generative forms of methods courses with the aim of allowing PSTs to experiment with innovative pedagogical practices and integrate such practices into their teacher identity. If PSTs are to enact non-traditional strategies in the classroom, they must first have a space to experiment with and integrate the new strategies and dispositions into their teacher identity. This innovative structure of non-graded peer teaching across cohorts and over multiple semesters of coursework, if married with criticality, could represent one possible path toward a more generative model of music teacher education.
Supplemental Material
sj-docx-1-jmt-10.1177_10570837231216716 – Supplemental material for “We Are All Teachers Here”: Identity Construction in a 4-Year Lab Choir
Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-jmt-10.1177_10570837231216716 for “We Are All Teachers Here”: Identity Construction in a 4-Year Lab Choir by Kari Adams in Journal of Music Teacher Education
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Supplemental Material
Supplemental material for this article is available online.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
