The process of learning to play an instrument is as old as music itself. Whether honing techniques at a world-class conservatory or learning a hymn at a local church, music learning involves fundamental cognitive functions that allow us to develop music skills. Compared to other disciplines, understanding the music learning process is a new task for music researchers and sociologists alike. Given this, traditional learning theories have been applied to further understand music learning. Among these theories is the theory of self-regulation led by researchers Gary McPherson and Barry Zimmerman. Zimmerman’s early research into self-regulation has laid the groundwork for much of McPherson’s and Zimmerman’s later work of self-regulation in music learning (SRML). The aim of this paper is to provide (1) an overview of SRML, (2) an analysis of three SRML studies, (3) an application of SRML in the classroom.

Overview

Self-regulation is an intricate network of developmental and environmental factors. When evaluating the role of self-regulation in music learning, there are three important factors to consider: Process, Framework and Development (McPherson & Zimmerman, 2011).

Process

Within the context of learning, self-regulation can best described as a process in which we use to control and monitor our thoughts, emotions, impulses, performances and attention to resources ((McPherson & Zimmerman, 2011, p. 131). Going further, Zimmerman suggests that self-regulation is an “open-ended cyclical process that occurs in three phrases: forethought, performance control, and self-reflection” (McPherson & Zimmerman, 2011, p. 158). The chart below shows the cyclical process of self-regulation, as it would occur in learning.

 

ì	Performance/Volitional Control Phrase   Self-Control Self instructional Imagery Attention Focusing Task Strategies   Self-Observation Metacognitive monitoring Self-recording	î
Forethought Phrase   Task Analysis Goal Setting Strategic Planning   Self Motivation Beliefs Self efficacy Outcome Expectations Intrinsic interest/valuing Goal Orientation	ç	Self-Reflection Phrase   Self-Judgment Self evaluation Casual attribution   Self-reaction Self satisfaction/affect Adaptive/defensive

 

(McPherson, Zimmerman, 2011, pg. 129)

 

 

Within the context of learning to play an instrument, forethought often occurs through short- and long-term goals set out by the learner. McPherson and Zimmerman (2011) suggests “students who set clear goals for themselves are more likely to gain pleasure and feel confident about their abilities, focus their efforts as they learn, work harder, and persist with instruction” (p. 158) As personal and/or environmental conditions may change, the self-regulated learner adapts these goals and strategies to best fit the desired outcome. As a result, self-regulation occurs as goal setting motivates students to create various learning strategies to master the goal.

Similar to motivation, self-efficacy also plays a role in ‘forethought’. McPherson and Zimmerman (2011) summarize that “self-efficacy for music performance implies…explicit judgments for possessing the skills necessary to perform in front of others” (p.159). With that, students that display high-efficacy often set higher goals and are more committed to those goals as they are more confident in their performance and learning strategies. In turn, these students maintain more intrinsic motivation rather than the extrinsic motivation seen with students of low self-efficacy.

 

Continuing on from forethought, performance/violation control can be divided into two processes: self-instruction, and self-monitoring. Self-instruction is used to monitor concentration in both practice and performance as well as provide ‘self-talk’ to help lessen performance anxieties. This process yields more efficient practice through strategies such as breaking down sections of phrase into smaller units to refine a work. Those learners without self-instruction tend to run a piece from beginning to end only thus creating a less efficient practice strategy. Finally, self-monitoring (metacognition) is used to ‘keep track’ of a performance. Research suggests that ‘too much’ self monitoring can harm performance and that students must adapt ‘less intentional’ monitoring by ways of feel (how the music should sound).

Self-reflection occurs after performance and is the final step before returning to forethought. Self-reflection can be demonstrated through self-evaluation, casual attributions, self-satisfaction/affect, or adaptively. Self-regulated learners will often compare their performances to others or a set of standards and any subsequent failures are attributed to actionable steps (effort). On the other hand, McPherson and Zimmerman note “when students attribute their failure ability rather than effort, they are more likely to give up trying to improve” (p. 161). Self-satisfaction is simply whether the learner derived satisfaction from the performance and learning process. Leaners that associate goals with evaluating their self-satisfaction are in turn motivated more so by the self-evaluation than the goal itself.

Finally as McPherson and Zimmerman (2011) suggest “when self-regulated learners draw conclusions about their efforts, they make adaptive or defensive inferences that subsequently influence their future effort…” (p.162). Adaptive inferences are transferred into more effective strategies and thus leading to forethought, while defensive inferences often lead to apathy and limit musical/personal growth.

Framework   

As previously suggested, self-regulation is the “set of processes that students draw on as they promote their own learning” (McPherson & Zimmerman, p. 133). There are 6 dimensions in which these processes can be found: Motive, Method, Time, Behavior, Physical Environment, and Social. In the chart below, each dimension is broken down into (1) an ‘interrogative’ question for guiding research, (2) a socialization process for facilitating development and (3) the self-regulation process itself.

 

Dimensions of Musical Self-Regulation
Scientific Question	Physiological Dimension	Socialization Process	Self-regulation Processes
Why?	Motive	Vicarious or direct reinforcement by others	è Self-set goals, self-reinforcement and self-efficacy
How?	Method	Task strategies are modeled or guided socially	è Self-initiated covert images and verbal strategies
When?	Time	Time use is socially planned and managed	èTime use is self-planned and managed
What?	Behavior	Performance is socially monitored and evaluated	èPerformance is self-monitored and evaluated
Where?	Physical Environment	Environments are structured by others	èEnvironments are structured by self
With Whom?	Social	Help is provided by others	èHelp is sought personally

 

(McPherson & Zimmerman, 2011, pg. 134)

 

Motive or self-motivation plays a key role in a students’ ability to become both interested and persistent in learning an instrument; motive is ultimately what leads a student past various environmental and/or personal diversions. As McPherson and Zimmerman (2011) suggest, parents or guardians are a large factor in developing a child’s self-regulation; parents are responsible for helping their child cope with the formal aspects of education, and reinforcing positive learning behaviors in a consistent manner. Children without these supports often demonstrate less effective self-regulation processes.

In addition, self-motivation, self-efficacy, and self-beliefs also play a key role in students overall motive. McPherson and Zimmerman focus on goal setting and self-monitoring as a large indicator of self-regulation and in most cases there is a teacher or parent to reinforce these positive learning behaviors. The child’s self-belief in their capacity to learn (self-efficacy) and the value they place on learning (self-beliefs) help to indicate there overall level of performance. Students with low levels of self-efficacy often avoid tasks they believe they could not accomplish. Similarly, students who believe playing an instrument as a short-term commitment scored lower on performance tests than those students who believe playing an instrument as a long-term commitment.

Method refers to a student’s ability to develop task-oriented strategies both planned and spontaneously which determines their level of performance. McPherson and Zimmerman point out the difference between “practicing for yourself compared with practicing for your teacher”; those that demonstrate a higher level of performance often demonstrate a higher level of student choice in their learning. Mental strategies and self-instruction within the scope of self-regulation also play an important role in student performance. As an example, McPherson (2011) summarizes his own study that shows “mental strategies were consistently a more powerful predictor for explaining for ability to sight read, play from memory, and play by ear.” (p. 142) Metacognitive techniques also are evident in students that display higher performance levels as demonstrated through adaptive learning behaviors throughout a practice session.

Time is similar to method in that it measures how a student practices and can predict performance outcomes. Zimmerman studies have suggested that students with greater self-regulation are able to plan and manager their practice sessions more efficiently. There is also a relationship between formal and informal learning on student performance. McPherson and Zimmer cite a study (Sloboda & Davidson, 1996) that shows while high performing musicians dedicate more time to formal practice (scales, etudes, exercises, etc.), they also report more informal practice (improvising, performing non-required music). There is also research to suggest that when students are more engaged in their practice they not only practice more but they also enjoy practicing more.

Behavior in the context of self-regulation involves a student’s metacognition, self-evaluation, and motivational orientation. Zimmerman points to his own research by suggesting “the ability to react by choosing, modifying, and adapting one’s performance based on feedback obtained when performing is therefore central to the process of self-regulation” (p. 149). Musicians are often more akin to metacognition by ways of practicing and performance. McPherson and Zimmerman suggest that metacognition is used to control and monitor performance; metacognition allows students to assess what they do and do not understand, to adapt learning strategies, and to understand the scope and sequence of their own learning process.

Similarly, self-evaluation looks at how student process how their performance. Zimmerman refers to early research to suggest that there are four criteria’s in which students evaluate themselves by; Mastery (graduated sequence of difficulties), previous performance (compared to self), normative (compare to others), and collaborative (working with others in an ensemble). When comparing mastery and normative performance, mastery demonstrated higher levels of performance and motivation. Finally, motivational orientation refers to how motivation affects student behavioral patterns. An example of this would be comparing students that are “adaptive mastery oriented” (focused on achievement despite possible failures) verse students that are “maladaptive helpless oriented” (avoids failures or often gives up and experiences negative emotions).

The physical environment dimension of self-regulation simply refers to the affects a space has on a students learning. McPherson and Zimmerman (2011) summarize previous research to show that “self-regulated leaners know that the physical environment can affect their learning and actively seek to structure and control the setting where their learning takes place” (p. 154). Technologies such as recording/listening devices or computer-based practice software also have an affect on the physical environment and in turn the student’s performance. Finally, McPherson and Zimmerman acknowledge limits in this dimension due to the fast that students often don’t have a control over their physical environment and more research is needed to be done to determine the physical environments influence on performance and self-regulation.

Finally, the social dimension of self-regulation refers to help provided by others and the help that sought by the learner. McPherson and Zimmerman (2011) suggest that “when faced with difficulties, self-regulated learners rely on and actively seek help from knowledgeable others, in addition to available resources” (p. 155). Social influences on students include parents, teachers, siblings, peers, and other resources. Parents not only offer support by reinforcing positive learning behaviors, they can also play an important role when the child plays for them as they would in a mock performance. McPherson and Zimmerman emphasize that the teacher’s role within the social context is to promote motivation within their learning environment. Additionally, the first music teacher is often the most important in developing a student’s interest in music. While the research is minimal on the influence of siblings and peers, there is some evidence to show that a sibling or peers ability to communicate at their ‘level’ (within their zone of proximal development) can influence their performance and in turn their self-regulation. Finally, when students do not have a person to go to, seeking out other resources is a key part to self-regulation. McPherson and Zimmerman (2011) suggest that “a self-regulated students musician will actively seek information and help from other sources such as recordings and books” (p. 157)

Development

The development of self-regulation, as defined through Zimmerman’s research, includes 4 stages: Observational, Emulative, Self-controlled, and Self-regulated. Unlike work by Vygotsky or Kopp this model is “not a developmental model but rather a hierarchical learning model that is based on the proposition that learners who follow the sequence will learn more effectively and in a more self-regulated way” (McPherson & Zimmerman, 2011, p. 163). Further, the development of self-regulation is social in nature and each level represents a source for which students learn.

With this, the novice leaner begins in the observational level where they receive and emulate learning strategies from a teacher or peer. A student will improve when they are given “opportunities to observe model that provide guidance, feedback and social reinforcement and respond to student’s needs to refine aspects of the skill they are attempting’s to master” (McPherson & Zimmerman, 2011, p. 164). After a learner is able to perform at ‘approximate level’ of the model, they move to the Emulative level where the student is demonstrating basic skills. From here, students will move to the ‘self-controlled’ level, in which they independently work on skills within structured conditions with available aural or internal examples to reference. Finally, within the self-regulated level, skills become automatized and can be applied to varying contexts. McPherson and Zimmerman 2011 suggest that self-regulated learning at this level “occurs when learners respond to differing personal and situational conditions by modifying learning and performing strategies and making adjustments depending on differing situations” (p. 165)

 

Developmental Levels of Regulatory Skill
Level of Development	Description	Social Influences	Self Influences
Observational	Vicarious induction of a skill from a proficient model	Models Verbal description
Emulative	Imitative performances of a general pattern or style of a models skills worth social assistance	Social guidance Feedback
Self-controlled	Independent display of the models skill under structured conditions		Internal standards Self-reinforcements
Self-regulated	Adaptive use of skill across changing personal and environmental conditions		Self-regulatory Processes Self-efficacy

 

(McPherson, Zimmerman, 2011, pg. 140)

 

Analysis

McPherson is one of the leading researching in the field of self-regulation in music learning. McPherson has adapted previous research of self-regulation in the field of general education and applied it to music. Given this, research of self-regulation in the context of music learning prior to McPherson is greatly limited. The following studies were conducted between 1999 and 2019 and represent a glimpse into the span of McPhersons work.

A longitudinal study of self-regulation in children’s musical practice

The purpose of this study was to examine “common trends and individual differences in children’s practice according to six dimensions of self-regulation” (p. 169). Using taped practice sessions, McPherson and Renwick coded the behaviors of 7 beginner instrumentalists over a 3-year period. Of the 7 participants, 5 had previous musical experiences (3 non-continued and 2-continued) and all were within the ages of 7 and 9.

Results of the study were categorized into the 6 dimensions of self-regulation; Motive, Method, Time, Performance Outcomes (Behavior), Physical Environment, and Social Factors. The table below divides the observations and teacher recommendations made by McPherson and Renwick in the 6 dimensions of self-regulation.

 

	Observation	Implication
Motive	-Students that demonstrated intrinsic motivation/values improved faster -Self-selected repertoire led to a “higher level of cognitive engagement”	-Students that are intrinsically motived are more likely to demonstrated self-regulatory behaviors
Method	-Nearly all students only read the music straight through once. -Other strategies were used less than 2 percent of the time	-Takes many years for young musicians to develop varying practice strategies to self-regulation their own progress
Time	-The amount of time playing the instrument during practice increased from year 1 to year 2 – Only the time limit was enforced, not the use (efficiency) of that time. -Distractions and frustrations were reduced between year 1 and 3, while rest increased.	-Seemingly subtle practice habits (including distractions) as a beginner has a great effect on students ability to self regulate
Performance Outcome	-Students were generally unable to identify and correct pitch errors while performing. -Students with no musical experience struggled to coordinate reading and instrument manipulation. Attention to notation greatly inhibited tempo and overall musicality. -Successful beginners were negatively affected by demands of the ensemble. -Rhythm was given very little attention in year 1	-Teachers should encourage and practice various techniques to encourage reflection and to help students identify error. -Balance skill with challenge in regards to motivation (flow theory) -Rhythmic practice needs additional supervision.
Physical Environment	-Students chose different rooms (often without family or distraction) to practice. -Students spent practice time coping with distractions	-Physical environment influences the rate at which students learn.
Social Factors	-In year 1, one or both parents were in the room while the students practiced 65% of the time. By year 3, it was only 23 percent. – A majority of parents spent the time activity listening.	-Self-regulated learners will seek information from others

 

 

Based on their overall findings, McPherson and Renwick (2001) suggest that “a majority of our learners possessed the will to learn their instruments, but not necessarily the level of skill required to ensure efficient and effective practice” (p. 184) They point to the students lack of knowledge around how to practice as compared to their knowledge, as pushed by their teachers, on what to practice. McPherson and Renwick not only call for teachers to model effective practice strategies but to also encourage and demonstrate proper monitoring and reflection techniques. A combination of effective practice strategies with monitoring skills will allow students to employ self-regulatory practices.

Applying self-regulated learning microanalysis to study musicians’ practice

The purpose of this study was to develop a detailed and context driven understanding of self-regulated learning through a microanalysis protocol of instrumental practice. Shifting from pervious research that focused on solely behavior, this study led by McPherson focuses on the behaviors, cognition, and affect. Using the microanalysis protocol, researching asked for two selected undergraduate instrumental students to “describe their actions and then reflect critically on the strategies they choose to improve their playing in-situ” (McPherson, et al, 2019, p. 19). Using the three stages of self-regulation (forethought, performance, self-reflection) the participants were asked questions and their behaviors were analyzed. The figure below shows how each phase was evaluated, the subsequent observation of both students, and the implications made by the authors.

	Microanalysis technique	Observations
Forethought	Identify technical, musical, and personal goals   Rate goals by fixed vs. unfixed and clear vs. unclear.   Assess self-efficiency on a scale of 0 – 100   Identify performance expectation Assess Interest on scale of 0 – 100   Goal orientations reported as related to mastery and performance goals	Strategic planning   (A&B) poorly self-regulated and reactive learning styles tied to vague goals   Outcome Expectancies and Goal Orientation   (A) Aimed for high scores (B) Low to moderate expectations   Valuing practice   (A) Intrinsic motivation rated higher than (B) (A) Saw herself as a “constantly improving musician” (A) Internalized and self-determined goals (B) Self-endorsement practice goals not related to incremental improvements
Performance	Compare practice session with a previous “excellent” practice session.   Comment on environment, quality of focus, strategies used, degree of help used.   Asked if help was sought after first session.   Metacognitive monitoring using taped practice session	Environmental structuring   (A) Chose a location that was aesthetically pleasing (B) Chose a small room with upright piano.   Self Control   (A) Self control – targeted, stimulation, mindful, focused, attentive, consistent and attention focus (B) Tedious, frustrating, surface level focus, non-consistent   Task Strategies   (A & B) reactive, indiscriminate, mostly teacher directed.   Help Seeking   (A) Sought more outside recordings   Metacognitive monitoring   (A) Planned, on-task and challenging, solution focused, contextualized. (B) Unplanned, habitual with limited solving in response to problems, non-specific, off-task.
Self-reflection	Was the session productive and fulfilling?   Influenced by self or environment   How they felt about the next practice session	Self-Evaluation   (A) Scored higher for productivity and goal fulfillment. Rated work ethic and effort for effectiveness (B) Credited achievement to the teacher (external) (B) Motivated by her own ‘Ineffectiveness’

 

 

This study is unique in that it offers a close look into two students, of contrasting performance levels, self-regulated learning strategies. Student (A) demonstrated ‘high-order contextualized strategies’ while student (B) less self-regulated goal setting and ‘reactive and habitual strategy use’. Based on these findings, McPherson (2019) suggests that teachers can help optimize practice by “devising strategies for encouraging them t set more specific gals and identify ways of planning and motivating themselves…[and] implement richer self-reflective assessments that could serve as a stimulus for more efficient and goal directed practice sessions” (pg. 30)

Motivational and self-regulated learning components of musical practice

The purpose of this study was to “explore ways in which self-regulatory and motivational components of learning might interact with the quantity and content of a musician’s instrumental practice” (McPherson & McCormick, 1999, p. 99). McPherson and McCormick distributed questionnaires to pianists ages 9 – 18 before examinations to measure their self-regulation strategies the month prior. The questionnaire consisted of 17 items of ‘self-regulatory learning and motivational components of music learning’ in which students were asked to respond using a Likert scale. The 17 items included scales measuring cognitive strategy use (rehearsing, elaboration, and organization), self-regulation (effort management), intrinsic value (interest in learning), anxiety/confidence, and frequency of different types of practicing (informal/creative, repertoire, and technical work).

Based on the regression analysis “the best predictors of average weekly practice were the amount of technical work the subjects reported undertaking during their daily practice and the level of anxiety they felt immediately before entering their performance examination” (1999, p.102). Given this, McPherson and McCormick found that students who report more practice leading up to the examination where more likely to practice technical work (warm-ups, scales/arpeggios, studies/etudes, and sight-reading) and also more likely to feel anxious about their examination. Additionally it was found that students who report high levels of informal/creative activities and repertoire/technical work were more cognitively engaged in practice and expressed for intrinsic interest in learning their instrument. The use of cognitive strategies among these students also students that they are more inclined to practice ‘in their mind’ while making ongoing judgments of their successes or failures as it relates to their effort. Finally, the finding in this study conducted in the early stages of self-regulatory learning in music are largely supported by prior research but as noted by McPherson and McCormick more researched is needed to be done to “be in position to determine the extent to which these skills are conscious and controllable and therefore teachable”. This idea will explored in the following section of application, as to what this meaning for best teaching practices and students learning.

Application

Self-regulation is a fundamental tool not only for student learning but also socio-emotional development. As current trends move towards explicitly addressing socio-emotional learning in the classroom, self-regulation has become a focus in areas spanning from state policies down to classroom instruction. The following is an example of how self-regulation is used in the music classroom through the lens of social-emotional development.

Background

Inequities occur throughout our educational, governmental, and societal systems and have resulted in many students and their families (often black and brown) lacking essential supports and services. These far reaching inequities have disproportionately affected the students I serve within the City of Chicago. As a teacher, I am challenged to not only provide a quality education but also to provide the care and support that my students and their family’s need. As an advocate for positive youth development and trauma responsive practices, it is my stance that while students may lack resources or experienced high levels of childhood trauma, it does not disqualify their potential for growth. With that, my intentions are to promote self-regulation by utilizing research based strategies.

It should be noted that the development of SRML, as evident from before, has a limited understanding. Zimmerman himself acknowledges that his ‘hierarchical learning model’ is not comparative to the development theories of Vygotsky or Kopp. Zimmerman and McPherson have both implicitly and explicitly noted that their recommendations for teachers are solely based on the SRML techniques observed by high-performing students that, within its self, can be problematic as the observations are limited and anecdotal in nature. With that, the strategies I incorporate within the classroom are to be understood as promoting rather than developing SRML.

Based on the available literature, the framework for SRML stands out as the most comprehensive model for understanding and in turn application. With that, I selected three dimensions of SRML (Method, Behavior, and Motive) to relate to student instruction. My aim is to combine my existing classroom practices with research to formulate effective strategies that serve my student needs.

The classroom that I will be addressing is High School General Music. This class is a hybrid of sorts in that students compose for and perform with various instruments. Instruments are introduced to students for the purpose of exploring basic techniques, musicality, and performance as well a tool for composition. Given that SLMR learning focuses on instrumental practice, the following applications will solely focused on instrument units within the general music classroom with the aim to extend to students general cognitive and socio-emotional development.

 

Enrollment	214
Racial/Ethnic Diversity	49.1% Black, 39.3% Hispanic, 10.3% White, 0.9% Asian 0.5% Two or more races
Low Income Students	95%
Students with IEPs	33%
English Learners	14.5%
Homeless	26.2%

 

Method

Units for guitar, piano, and hand/bucket drumming are designed to introduce basic technique and musicality for students at the beginner and novice level. Research suggests that beginner’s method for practicing is running through the entire piece. However, developing task-oriented strategies is fundamental to becoming a self-regulated learner. As a student practices their instrument they must also be able to adapt their strategies to address the areas in need of improvement. Instead of breaking down sections or extracting rhythm or melodic phrases to hone, beginners will repeat a piece until their desired outcome. This method is not only the least efficient for students it also limits the student’s growth and may lead to further frustration and loss of motivation.

As a teacher, my role is to demonstrate how to practice by modeling effective practice strategies. One method for modeling is done by breaking down a song into smaller exercises for students to practice with the goal being that students will later apply these strategies on their own. Students will effectively learn to scaffold their own learning by approaching a piece of music using different strategies. Developing these habits through consistent and repeated guided practices is key for students to apply to other music.

Within my classroom, the focus for developing practice methods is the process. The process of music making is prioritized over performance and students are encouraged to explore this process through play and experimentation. Offering task strategies is a way to encourage structure when needed and to offer new ways of problem solving with the ultimate aim at transferring these skills to a student’s social-emotional development. Demonstrating to a student that they are capable of approaching a situation with more than one pathway is to develop a student’s ability to more effectively regulate their thoughts, feelings, and emotions.

Behavior

In order for a student to know which method to use they must first be able to identify what they need to improve. Developing self-regulation means utilizing self-monitoring and self-evaluative skills throughout the learning process. As a fundamental step to developing these skills, metacognitive strategies encourage students to become more independent thinkers and problem solvers.

Metacognition addresses students ‘thinking about thinking’. As McPherson and Zimmerman suggested, this involves a student understanding what they do and do not know and their understanding of their capacity to self-regulate their learning (2011, pg. 149). Within the classroom, this translates to encouraging students to communicate their understanding of the music along with the process for learning it. As an example, within my classroom students are encouraged describe how the music should sound using descriptive adjectives and how might they achieve this sound. In addition, students are encouraged to take an inventory of their strengths and weakness and assess the strategies they can use to address those weaknesses through goal setting and guided reflection. These two exercises can be done simply by promoting students verbally as they practice or more formally through journals and metacognitive logs. Both methods are used on a consistent basis to encourage student’s development of self-regulation.

Again, the goal is ultimately for students to apply these metacognitive skills to their own social-emotional development. Metacognition encourages students to identify their emotions and better manage the subsequent feelings. The music they practice in this case represents the emotions; am external stimuli that they often don’t have control of. By identifying these emotions and reactions or mental associations to those emotions (feelings) students can more effectively predict and regulate their feelings. Internally, students can re-associate, adjust, and predict their feeling, giving them greater control of their behaviors. This would be an example of students selecting different strategies (Motive) for addressing their various needs (Behavior), which is the process I encourage students practice within and outside the classroom.

Motive

Whether intrinsic or extrinsic, motive offers an incentive for students to engage in the process of music making. Four main predictors of student motivation, as related to SRML, are parental support, self-motivation, self-beliefs, and self-efficacy. Focusing on the later, a child’s self-belief in their capacity to learn (self-efficacy) helps to indicate their overall level of performance. By promoting self-efficacy within the classroom students are encouraged to become self-regulated learners.

McPherson’s longitudinal study’s showed that students that chose their own repertoire demonstrated a higher level of cognitive engagement. In other words, student choice fostered intrinsic motivation, which resulted in students engaging more deeply in musical practice. A student’s belief in their capacity to learn or self-efficacy is developed, in part, by encouraging ownership through student interests and choice. Within my classroom, self-efficacy is encouraged through engaging students in the planning, implementation, and assessment of each unit or lesson. Students are often prompted with various materials, methods, and assessments to select from within a given unit or lesson. For example, when students are learning a new song on the guitar they may first choose from a list of songs that meet certain parameters. Next, students are encouraged to use a variety of methods such as using a recording or practicing with a partner. And finally, students choose to perform or record a performance with or without an aid (student, recording, or teacher). In total, choices that are given throughout the music learning process promote students to develop the intrinsic motivation to not only complete a project but to engage deeply in the process. As a result, students that are more deeply engaged are more likely to utilize self-regulating techniques and strategies.

Finally, self-efficacy is a vital component to student’s social-emotional development. Students within my classroom that have experienced various childhood traumas benefit greatly from the development or redevelop of confidence and control in their life. While students may be able to identify their emotions (behavior) and utilize various tools to manage those behaviors (method), students must develop trust in their capacity to engage in the process (motive). Practicing student choice in the classroom gives students the confidence that they can develop and meet their own goals through the use of intrinsic motivation and self-selected methods.

References

 

Gary E. McPherson & James M. Renwick (2001) A Longitudinal Study of Self-regulation in Children’s Musical Practice, Music Education Research, 3:2, 169-18.

McPherson, G. E., Osborne, M. S., Evans, P., & Miksza, P. (2019). Applying self-regulated learning microanalysis to study musicians’ practice. Psychology of Music, 47(1), 18–32.

McPherson, G. E., Zimmerman, B. J. (2011). Self-regulation of musical learning: A social cognitive perspective on developing performance skills. In Colwell, R., Webster, P. (Eds.), MENC handbook of research on music learning, volume 2: Applications (pp. 130–175). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

McPherson, G., & McCormick, J. (1999). Motivational and Self-Regulated Learning Components of Musical Practice. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, (141), 98-102.