Evaluation forms were distributed to the students and mentors both during and after the project period. Findings related to the digital portfolio platforms Canvas ePortfolio, Research Catalogue, Wix and Bulb are described in a separate chapter.
About the portfolio
Many of the students found that their study programmes do not offer adequate opportunities for documenting and surveying their own work. They reported that such reviews help remind them what they have accomplished to date and enable them to set themselves new goals:
“I now had a virtual portfolio for both mentoring and self-study.”
“[The project has] made me aware of all the work I’m putting in and the work I have yet to do.”
Many of the students also said they generally did not have a clear plan for what to do next and that their studies can sometimes feel a little directionless. The work they did on their core portfolios offered structure and made them set themselves clearer goals:
“For example, since arriving at the NMH I've felt that I've been messing around a lot and done little structured work, but once I began to think and was able to list all the projects I've been part of and what I've actually done, then I realised I have in fact done a great deal and developed a lot!”
“[It’s] good because you become more reflected and conscious of what you are doing, both in terms of practising and the goals you set yourself. [It’s] easier to create a plan for how to practise in order to reach your goals when you have it in front of you. [It’s] also nice to see in front of you the things you've done as a student, in pictures, videos, text, so that you can look back at it. One negative might be that it’s sometimes just one more thing you ‘have to do’, I mean, you’re busy enough as it is, and it can feel like extra work. (But it’s a job worth doing, I think.)”
“I haven’t been practicing on it as much as I would have liked, but still it made a big impact in the way I approach my practice and professional life in general, so even if my portfolio doesn’t show it, I am applying what I have learnt and I am extremely grateful for this opportunity.”
Having to put things into words and think more deeply about what you are working on were seen as important. Other students were less enthusiastic about the impact of the project:
“I was doing this already myself.... So it’s also a question about the interest of the student on being interested in having an overview of his or her career.”
Many of the mentors noted that the content added to the portfolios by the students was too limited in scope to allow them to form a clear impression before meeting for mentoring sessions. A number of students only made brief and somewhat superficial text entries. The focus of the students’ portfolios varied greatly. Some wrote about practical issues, auditions, depping etc. Others wrote more about musical and artistic processes. Mental health was another topic chosen by some. One of the mentors suggested that the students could have been asked to provide more artistic material for the portfolio such as practice recordings. With audio and/or video, the mentor would have had more to work with, it would have been possible to demonstrate more of the actual process, and the mentor would have gained a better understanding of the student’s musical perspective and focus.
About the mentoring sessions
The feedback from the students about the mentoring sessions was exclusively positive:
“The mentoring sessions were always very rewarding. It’s not always easy to talk about these things with your main instrument teacher, and having an outsider share their thoughts and experiences with me was very welcome.”
“It was really good. [The mentor] inspired me to get to know more myself and what do I like.”
“Meeting up with the mentor was extremely inspiring and eye opening, how to approach life both personally and professionally.”
“[The session] made me feel more confident about my work, knowing that you’re not alone in feeling insecure and in not knowing whether you’re doing things correctly or incorrectly.”
“We worked on ... balance ... and other personal aspects that are reflected in my profession ... and how to improve both.”
For many, the mentoring sessions took on a different format and content to their usual main instrument lessons:
“I was able to talk about my personal thoughts around performance, especially thoughts that I’ve otherwise not talked to my main instrument teacher about. I think it was different because I look up to my teacher a lot and therefore find it difficult to talk about my insecurities for fear of disappointing them. But with my mentor there were no such associations, and that made it easier.”
“We talked about my experiences not only with [instrument] issues, but with how it is to be an artist.”
“It wasn’t necessarily different, I would say refreshing, maybe. ... It pointed out some gaps I have in my previously performed repertoire.”
Many of the mentors found that since they did not know the students from before, meeting only twice over the course of the academic year was not sufficient. Many of them said they would have liked to schedule another session fairly swiftly. One of them felt the project was a good initiative but called for “frequency and continuity”. One of the mentors spoke of how issues such as courage and self-confidence were important to one of their students, another mentioned how conversations about the future after graduation was important to one of theirs. One of these mentors had asked their student in advance what they wanted to focus on during the session. The (master) student then asked to focus on artistic identity, profile and job prospects. A bachelor student wanted to focus on choices in terms of study programmes. One mentor noted the benefit of having mentors and students from different instrument groups and said it made for a different type of encounter and different topics than traditional instrument lessons. Also cited as a positive was the fact that the students now have another person at the academy whom they can approach if they wish to. Many of the mentors found it difficult when the topic of the conversation turned to mental health and said this raised questions about ethics and boundaries.
About the group sessions
One of the students who attended the group sessions wrote that such “round table conversations where everyone presents their work and gets constructive feedback with a teacher acting as moderator” are lacking elsewhere on their study programme. Other feedback on the group conversations:
“There is a definite need for such forums where you can discuss your own ‘artistic practice’ and be forced to reflect on your own work. This is missing [elsewhere on the programme].”
“Nice to be able to share experiences and offer/receive advice to/from the others in the group!”
“This reminds me of the sort of conversations I have with friends. At the academy, however, it’s the first time I've felt that everybody’s projects are of equal value and that everyone is able to speak.”
Another student was more reserved:
“[I] didn't get all that much out of the mentoring group because nobody seemed to quite know in advance what the purpose was, and we therefore turned up relatively badly prepared.”
The mentor working with the group of students found that it was more difficult to go into detail during group conversations than in a one-to-one mentoring setting. The students in the group did not previously know each other, and they felt vulnerable when asked to open up to people they had not been able to forge a trusting relationship with. This mentor also found that a number of personal issues were raised which were difficult to talk about in much detail in a group context.
Relationship with main instrument teacher
The part of the project associated with the elective course allowed for individual support to be provided over time and for the student group to get to know each other better over time. This had a positive impact on the portfolios and reflective exercises. What worked less well, meanwhile, was the way in which main instrument teachers were asked to follow up on the portfolios of this group. None of the four main instrument teachers conducted a review after the first semester despite numerous written and verbal reminders from the project manager. The students appeared to be disappointed at this. There could be several reasons why it was not done. One is that main instrument teachers may be pressed for time. Another is that these teachers were not familiar with the digital platform hosting the portfolios (Research Catalogue). A third reason why the reviews were usually not conducted could be that this undertaking differs from what many main instrument teachers practise in their day-to-day teaching. One of the main instrument teachers did eventually complete a few reviews in the second semester, making them the only main instrument teacher to engage with the project.
Some of the students who attended personal mentoring and group sessions also lamented a lack of involvement by their main instrument teachers:
“[I] thought my main instrument teacher would be more involved and feel it's a shame that they weren’t. It now feels like something separate that I do outside my main instrument lessons.”
“[The project] clearly puts everything into perspective and it makes a strategic plan to which you can stick, but it needs to be coordinated with the main professor.”