Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T15:05:35.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Role of Metacognitive Strategies in Learning Music: A Multiple Case Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2016

Barbara Colombo  and
Alessandro Antonietti
Barbara Colombo
Affiliation:
163 S. Willard St., Burlington, VT [email protected]
Alessandro Antonietti
Affiliation:
Largo Gemelli 1, 20123 Milano, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The positive role of metacognition in music learning and practice is well assessed, but the role of musicians’ metacognitive skills in such a context is not yet clear. Teachers often state that they apply a metacognitive approach during their lessons, but students fail to acknowledge it and report that they become metacognitive learners thanks to their own practice. In this multiple case observational study the spontaneous metacognitive behaviour of a teacher during four piano lessons with expert and novice students was analysed. Data supported the notion that teachers use metacognitive strategies during their teaching practice, but students are not aware of this because a metacognitive focus on strategies, as well as a strong emphasis on monitoring, appears to be lacking. Teachers are also able to differentiate their teaching behaviour between expert and novice students. Students’ age, however, affects teachers’ behaviour more deeply than expertise. Implications for music education are discussed, highlighting the main issues that can be derived from the results and how they can be effectively used to enhance professional development and improve practice in music education.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Music Education , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 95 - 113
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ANTONIETTI, A., COCOMAZZI, D. & IANNELLO, P. (2009) Looking at the audience improves music appreciation. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 33, 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ANTONIETTI, A., COLOMBO, B. & LOZOTSEV, Y. (2008) Undergraduates’ metacognitive knowledge about the psychological effects of different kinds of computer-supported instructional tools. Computers in Human Behaviour, 24, 2172–2198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ANTONIETTI, A., IGNAZI, S. & PEREGO, P. (2000) Metacognitive knowledge about problem-solving methods. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
BATHGATE, M., SIMS-KNIGHT, J. & SCHUNN, C. (2012) Thoughts on thinking: Engaging novice music students in metacognition. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 403–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BERNARDI, N. F., SCHORIES, A., JABUSH, A. C., COLOMBO, B. & ALTENMUELLER, E. (2013) Mental practice in music memorization: An ecological-empirical study. Music Perception, 30, 275–290 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BROWN, A. L. (1997) Transforming schools into communities of thinking and learning about serious matters. American Psychologist, 52, 399–413.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
BURWEL, K. & SHIPTON, M. (2013) Strategic approaches to practice: An action research project. British Journal of Music Education, 30, 329–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
COLOMBO, B., IANNELLO, P. & ANTONIETTI, A. (2010) Metacognitive knowledge of decision-making: An explorative study. In Efklides, A. & Misailidi, P. (Eds.), Trends and Prospects in Metacognitive Research (pp. 445–472). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CREECH, A. (2012) Interpersonal behaviour in one-to-one instrumental lessons: An observational analysis. British Journal of Music Education, 29, 387–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FLAVELL, J. H. (1971) First discussant's comments: What is memory development the development of? Human Development, 14, 272–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FOGARTY, R. (1994) How to teach for metacognition. Palatine, IL: IRI/Skylight Publishing.Google Scholar
GARNER, R. (1988) Verbal-report data on cognitive and metacognitive strategies. In Weinstein, C. E., Goetz, E. T. & Alexander, P. A. (Eds.), Learning and Study Strategies: Issues in Assessment, Instruction and Evaluation (pp. 63–76). San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HALLAM, S. (2001) The development of metacognition in musicians: Implications for education. British Journal Of Music Education, 18, 27–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HALLAM, S. (2006) Music Psychology in Education. London: Institute of Education, University of London.Google Scholar
HERTZOG, C. (1992) Improving memory: The possible roles of metamemory. In Herrmann, D., Weingartner, H., Searleman, A. & McEvoy, C. (Eds.) Memory Improvement: Implications for Memory Theory (pp. 61–78), New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IISKALA, T., VAURAS, M. & LEHTINEN, E. (2004) Socially shared metacognition in peer-learning? Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 1, 147–178.Google Scholar
KUHN, D. (2000) Metacognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 178–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROSENSHINE, B., FROEHLICH, H. & FAKHOURI, I. (2002) Systematic instruction. In Colwell, R. & Richardson, C. (Eds.), The New Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and Learning (pp. 299–314). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
TOBIAS, S. & EVERSON, H. T. (2002) Knowing what you know and what you don’t: Further research on metacognitive knowledge monitoring. College Board Research Report No. 2002–3. College Entrance Examination Board, New York.Google Scholar
THORPE, K. J. & SATTERLY, D. J. H. (1990) The development and inter-relationship of metacognitive components among primary school children. Educational Psychology, 10, 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VEENMAN, M. V. J. (2005) The assessment of metacognitive skills: What can be learned from multi-method designs. In Artelt, C. & Moschner, B. (Eds.), Lernstrategien und Metakognition: Implikationen für Forschung und Praxis (pp. 77–99). Berlin: Waxmann.Google Scholar
VEENMAN, M. V. J. & SPAANS, M. A. (2005) Relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills: Age and task differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 159–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WHITEBREAD, D., COLTMAN, P., PASTERNAK, D., SANGSTER, C., GRAU, V., BINGHAM, S. & DEMETRIOU, D. (2009) The development of two observational tools for assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning in young children. Metacognition and Learning, 4, 63–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WINNE, P. H. & PERRY, N. E. (2000) Measuring self-regulated learning. In Pintrich, P., Boekaerts, M. & Zeidner, M. (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 531–566). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Colombo and Antonietti supplementary material

Appendix

Download Colombo and Antonietti supplementary material(File)
File 902.7 KB