Motivation and the Adult Piano Student

Motivation is the product of the value a student places on the pursuit or task and a student's self-efficacy level (Schunk, Reference SCHUNK, Zimmerman and Schunk2012). The value of a task depends on its relevance to the student's goals, as well as the perceived benefits reaped. Two predominant benefits often sought by adult piano students are personal benefits, such as personal growth, challenge, enjoyment and dream fulfilment, and skill development, including musical and technical growth at the instrument (Cooper, Reference COOPER2001; Jutras, Reference JUTRAS2006; Taylor, Reference TAYLOR2008; Taylor, Reference TAYLOR2011; Wristen, Reference WRISTEN2006). These benefits may be interrelated, with personal benefits, such as enjoyment, being somewhat dependent on skill development (Jutras, Reference JUTRAS2006; Wristen, Reference WRISTEN2006).

Self-efficacy – the belief about one's ability to learn or perform a task effectively – is a key internal factor of motivation, as it affect's one's actions, choice of tasks, persistence, effort and ultimately their achievement as a result (Schunk, Reference SCHUNK, Zimmerman and Schunk2012). It includes a student's expectancy for success, judgement of ability, and confidence in their skills (Duncan & McKeachie, Reference DUNCAN and McKEACHIE2005). As Schunk (Reference SCHUNK, Zimmerman and Schunk2012) explains, ‘people who believe they can perform better persist longer and work harder’ (p. 127). They also experience fewer negative emotions surrounding slow progress (Kitsantas, Reiser & Doster, Reference KITSANTAS, REISER and DOSTER2004). Bugos and High (Reference BUGOS and HIGH2009) note that self-efficacy within the context of piano practice is influenced by attitude, achievement and coordination. These insights further highlight the interconnected nature of mind-sets and skill development, which ultimately also affect students’ abilities to reap their sought-after benefits (Zimmerman & Schunk, Reference ZIMMERMAN, SCHUNK, Zimmerman and Schunk2012). In relation to repertoire, self-efficacy relates to the levels of challenge a piece presents. If self-efficacy levels are low, even if a piece is aurally pleasing, motivation may be adversely affected. High self-efficacy has been noted as fundamental for those learning a musical instrument, as it relates to sustained music practice (McCormick & McPherson, Reference McCORMICK and McPHERSON2003) and use of deliberate practice strategies (Bugos & High, Reference BUGOS and HIGH2009), resulting in engaged learning at the instrument (Nielsen, Reference NIELSEN2004).

The discontinuous model of motivation serves as an appropriate model from which to understand motivation in this context as it focuses on task value and self-efficacy levels as main determinants of behaviour (Vancouver, More & Yoder, Reference VANCOUVER, MORE and YODER2008). This model is outlined in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Discontinuous model of motivation (Amin, n.d.)

From a musical perspective, MacDonald, Hargreaves and Miell (Reference MacDONALD, HARGREAVES, MIELL, Hallam, Derek and Thaut2012) argue that the expectancy-value theory is the most well-established and useful theoretical approach from which to examine motivation. This model encompasses a range of assumptions regarding the relationships between self-efficacy and value:

• • The greater the difficulty, the greater the reward;

• • The greater the reward, the greater the level of effort required to obtain that reward;

• • The greater the reward, the greater the desire to put in the effort to obtain that reward;

• • These factors have a limit; if success is felt to be unachievable, one will not try (Vancouver, More & Yoder, Reference VANCOUVER, MORE and YODER2008).

The peak of the Y axis can be viewed as aligning with Csikszentmihalyi's (Reference CSIKSZENTMIHALYI1991, Reference CSIKSZENTMIHALYI2000) concept of flow, whereby someone is completed absorbed in the task at hand. This optimal state of experience occurs when intrinsic motivation is high. As with the discontinuous model depicted above, it has been found that for adult music students, mental distractions and minimal growth potential inhibits the ability for students to achieve the flow state, or the optimal state for learning. If perceived task value is low, or if the difficulty is deemed too great, the flow state will not be entered into (Rybak, Reference RYBAK1995). It is thus important as teachers to understand how we might capitalise on and flame students’ intrinsic motivation.

Theorists (Bomia et al., Reference BOMIA, BELUZO, DEMEESTER, ELANDER, GRAHAMSON and SHELDON1997; Keller, Reference KELLER2009) offer pedagogical principles based on the assumptions built into the discontinuous model of motivation. They recommend that teachers:

• • increase students’ involvement in repertoire selection through choice and growing autonomy;

• • provide opportunities for success to build self-efficacy;

• • discuss benefits of repertoire to increase value.

These recommendations align with transformative pedagogy (Carey et al., Reference CAREY, BRIDGSTOCK, TAYLOR, McWILLIAM and GRANT2013; Carey & Grant, Reference CAREY and GRANT2016), which also emphasises the need for a teacher to collaborate with the student in every aspect of their learning. It acknowledges the student as a whole, including their histories, frames of reference, mindsets, goals and values. It is advised that teachers are empathetic, build rapport with their students, and provide an environment in which they feel safe to participate freely without fear of judgement (Jarvis, Reference JARVIS2010). Rather than simply assigning repertoire for students to learn based on the teacher's perceptions of students’ needs and skillsets, transformative pedagogy requires a teacher to spend more time learning about their students’ goals and musical tastes.

While piano pedagogues also encourage teachers to align repertoire with adult students’ musical tastes, interests and goals (Cooper, Reference COOPER2001; Jutras, Reference JUTRAS2006; Uszler & Upitis, Reference USZLER, UPITIS, Uszler, Gordon and Smith2000; Wristen, Reference WRISTEN2006), many piano teachers feel ill-prepared to accommodate the self-defined and specific goals of individual adult students, and feel frustrated at the need for flexible learning plans (Bowles, Reference BOWLES2010). This study, thus, aims to uncover potential strategies to overcome this frustration and how they might unfold within the context of one-to-one piano lessons. The methodology and research design is offered below, before turning to a discussion of the experiences and learning outcomes obtained from the study.

Research Design

This study was part of a larger research project that aimed to better facilitate all aspects of adult learning at the piano, through understanding repertoire selection, lesson interactions and home practice (Coutts, Reference COUTTS2016). The aim of this specific study was to discover how to engage students with their learning through the selection of motivating and relevant repertoire. Given the prior discussion on motivation, relevance for this purpose is multifaceted. It not only relates to goals and musical tastes, which are easily made explicit, but also depends on a student's internal processes and perceptions, such as self-efficacy and the importance an individual places on certain benefits and values (Keller, Reference KELLER2009; Vancouver et al., Reference VANCOUVER, MORE and YODER2008; Weiner, Reference WEINER2010). It thus extends beyond aligning content learned with a student's tastes and goals, to include maximising the perceived value of materials learned and balancing this with students’ perceptions of their ability to succeed at tasks.

Participants

The participant pool for this study included the adult piano students within my piano studio. As I was affiliated with Griffith University, Australia, I followed standard procedures of their Human Ethics Committee and received approval prior to commencing this study. While the student-teacher power relationship was something to be mindful of (Lankshear & Knobel, Reference LANKSHEAR and KNOBEL2004), this was addressed through an open and respectful research design that focussed on evening the power relationship through transformative strategies. Of the 12 adults invited, six chose to participate. Four of these students who represent a range of scenarios and challenges in relation to engagement with repertoire have been chosen for this discussion. Table 1 offers details of each student's demographics, musical level, musical tastes and musical aspirations. Student identities are protected through the use of pseudonyms.

Table 1.

Student Participant Background

*Australian Music Examination Board

As evidenced in this table, student participants have a variety of musical tastes and aspirations, which is representative of a standard private piano studio. There are two notable similarities, however. Firstly, they each wished to work towards advanced repertoire or a high level of competency at the piano. Secondly, their aspirations for the future of their playing aligned with their current musical tastes. This strengthens the argument for honouring adults’ specific musical tastes and goals (Bowles, Reference BOWLES2010; Wristen, Reference WRISTEN2006) when selecting repertoire.

Context: My original pedagogical framework for repertoire selection

Prior to this study, I thought it was a teacher's job to ensure all students, regardless of age, were exposed to, and learned, a broad spectrum of musical styles. I believed that this resulted in a well-rounded music education. What I found, however, was that my adult students would inevitably practise the pieces they liked and were aurally familiar with, and would make excuses for not practising the pieces that sounded less familiar. While I chose to abandon this quest to foster diverse musical tastes at the outset of this study, there were other pedagogical decisions in relation to repertoire selection that I felt was important to maintain. Questions I asked myself included:

• • Is the piece at an appropriate difficulty level?

• • Does the piece provide opportunities to consolidate prior knowledge and skills as needed?

• • Does the piece build on prior knowledge and skills and provide opportunities for scaffolding?

These objectives rely on my perceptions of students’ needs rather than theirs. Finding repertoire that adhered to these pedagogical principles, while also matching students’ goals and perceived needs, was challenging. The adaptations that I learned to make, as well as the insights into student motivation and needs are discussed below.

Relevance determined by external goals

Prior to the study, Derek expressed the desire to sit exams. As this is an external goal with a predetermined framework, the appropriateness of the materials to his goals was unquestioned. Repertoire selection simply involved presenting Derek with a couple of pieces that I felt were appropriate for the musical concepts we were exploring at the time, and asking him to choose the one he preferred. Derek was happy to be led and did not display a preference for those I presented him with. The main challenge we faced was Derek's expectation to learn his pieces quickly and with little effort.

When Derek first started lessons three months prior to the study, he completed pieces quickly and received several small pieces each week. This was in part because I was discovering his capabilities, and also because I felt that this was conducive to offering opportunities for success that could build confidence and thus fuel motivation (Taylor & Hallam, Reference TAYLOR and HALLAM2008). Unfortunately, this inadvertently gave him a false sense of security. Unbeknown to me, Derek had started lessons expecting playing to be easy, and his early experiences had strengthened this perception. While I took his early successes as an opportunity to provide greater challenges and for him to be ready to start preparing for his first exam, he saw challenge as a sign of weakness and was taken aback at how difficult he found it (Dweck, Reference DWECK2007). As Bohlin et al. (Reference BOHLIN, MILHEIM and VIECHNICKI1993) suggest, requirements for success need to be clear to the student, along with relevance to the student's goals and the benefits of pieces learned. As such, we had discussions around his readiness for exam preparation, and the time frames to be expected for learning these more challenging pieces. I continued to offer smaller supplementary pieces that could help to reinforce concepts, but Derek neglected these in favour of the exam pieces, highlighting that those that appeared more relevant to his goals were more enticing, despite their comparative difficulty (Vancouver et al., Reference VANCOUVER, MORE and YODER2008).

While an external framework made repertoire selection straightforward for Derek, this external structure did not exist for other students. This created the opportunity for them to be more involved in the process of sourcing and selecting repertoire. While some pedagogues claim that selecting repertoire is one of the most important tasks a teacher has (McAllister, Reference McALLISTER2008; Uszler & Upitis, Reference USZLER, UPITIS, Uszler, Gordon and Smith2000), others posit that allowing students to choose their own repertoire would provide added motivation to practice (Lehmann et al., Reference LEHMANN, SLOBODA and WOODY2007) and contribute to their sense of self-fulfilment (Taylor & Hallam, Reference TAYLOR and HALLAM2008). Increasing student autonomy, however, presented a challenge; ensuring repertoire was pedagogically appropriate for their current ability level.

Creating our own framework

Many adult students’ musical tastes tend to lean towards music that is much more sophisticated than their current skills and experience, and this was evident with my students. As a learner's perceived and actual needs may not be congruent (Keller, Reference KELLER2009), it is important for the teacher to consider the difficulty level of repertoire learned in order to avoid frustration and adversely affecting the learner's confidence (Jutras, Reference JUTRAS2006). The optimum level of challenge – not too easy to invoke boredom, nor too hard to create anxiety, and requiring effort to master – can help to increase self-efficacy as students overcome challenges just beyond their current skill level (Maehr et al., Reference MAEHR, PINTRICH, LINNENBRINK, Colwell and Richardson2002). For this reason, teachers cannot simply leave choice of repertoire to students; support, guidance and discussions are required. How this unfolded with Cathryn and Anne depended on their unique perceptions of their learning and abilities.

Collaboration and relying on a student's prior knowledge

Prior to this study I used the fact that Graham was a novice to choose pieces that I was familiar with. I remember thinking, Surely any music is good for him to learn the foundations of technique and reading? Graham obligingly agreed with my decisions, acknowledging that they were all helping to develop his reading and playing skills. As time went on, however, my repertoire choices started to play on my mind as Graham frequently told me about the music he loved so much. I thought to myself, I wish I knew how to find repertoire he would actually enjoy. I don't know anything about teaching jazz.

As Graham's ability increased over our first two years together, we moved from adult method books and books with which I was familiar to popular pieces from books with dubious (to me) titles such as Easy Piano – 50 Best Songs of All Time. While he was at least learning pieces that he was familiar with and enjoyed, my unease continued to grow. This book isn't pedagogically sound. Where is this leading? I'm not sure I'm up to this. I attempted to expand my knowledge of available jazz repertoire, introducing pieces from modern jazz composers that were part of the AMEB syllabus. Graham was happy to learn whatever I gave him, but commented that they were far from the styles that he loved so dearly.

In Graham's initial interview, I became aware that he owns a wealth of music books full of the songs he loves. Graham brought some of his home library to his first lesson of the study as a springboard for creating a plan. These books were arranged for piano, voice, and guitar and were too advanced for Graham's current ability. One of the challenges I faced was that there are not necessarily method books or pedagogically sound repertoire books that meet the specific tastes of each adult student. This was the case for Graham's love of the stride and walking bass arrangements of jazz standards. In order to fully commit to sharing Graham's desired path with him, I realised this meant manipulating the materials we had for our needs.

As well as advanced arrangements, Graham also had folders full of lead sheets. I wondered whether creating our own arrangements would be a feasible way forward. At this point Graham already had a fundamental understanding of chords and the compositional techniques used in these pieces, and so we could use his knowledge in this area to our advantage. This did, however, lead to some challenges.