In the above Morten Carlsen has shared his thoughts on his string classes. As the project manager, I should now like to elaborate and comment on some of what Morten says based on the interviews I conducted with him and two of his students as well as my observations of three of the classes.

Morten uses the metaphor “in the same boat” as the title of his article. In many ways this illustrates the very core of his idea behind the classes: that teaching and learning is a communal project where everyone is expected to contribute and support each other. In the interview he expands on what he calls his ideal: “…it can be summed up in sentences such as ‘We learn better together than alone; rather with each other than against each other.’” The students I interviewed say that they feel Morten has a clear vision of the sort of arena the string classes should be. They see it as crucial that the teacher has a vision and that he communicates this vision in order for everyone to pull in the same direction. The classes are given a clear framework and a shared purpose. The success of Morten’s ambition that the students should feel they are learning together is clear from the interviews with the students. One of them says:

«I think everyone in our group has great respect for each other, that we are part of a process and want to help each other. At least I feel that there is great camaraderie. Nobody sits there and wants the others to do badly, that’s not how it is. We all know what it’s like to stand there: sometimes you’ve prepared and things might go great, but you’re there for each other in good times and in bad.»

The students point out how important it is to create a supportive atmosphere: “you lower your shoulders a little”, and it’s acceptable to play things that you haven’t perfected yet: “It’s OK to fail and try again”. This view is supported by Bandura’s research (Bandura, A., 1997: Self-efficacy. The exercise of control. New York; WH Freeman and Company) into how to experience mastery: by observing others work through their challenges and gradually improve their achievements through sustained effort, the observer begins to understand that learning is a gradual process and that the key to success is hard work. Realising that an unsatisfactory performance is caused by limited experience or inadequate effort rather than lack of “talent” can prevent despondency and encourage hard work. One of the students puts it like this: “Of course, it inspires me: ‘I can do that’, or ‘I want to learn that, too’.”

A supportive atmosphere and “lowered shoulders” do not mean that demands are not placed on the students. In his interview Morten says that

«I’m looking for the sort of temperature where one is challenged by another, while at the same time ensuring that things are not too rigid and stilted, obviously. It’s OK to fail – but not too often.»

He is clear that he wants his students to make an effort, both in terms of their playing but also with providing clear and constructive feedback to the person performing:

«It’s about trying to create an atmosphere, I think, that is open but also reflective; you shouldn’t just be able to say whatever.»

He expands on this later in the interview:

«It’s important that they learn to articulate themselves, but not necessarily in the first year. However, they need to learn to think clearly for the sake of their own practising.»

Much of the time in the lessons I observed was taken up by the students giving feedback on each other’s performances and by discussions ensuing from that feedback. This is in line with Morten’s intention of involving the students and giving them responsibility for the content of the lessons. The students I interviewed greatly appreciated this. Both had experience of string classes where only the teacher provides feedback, and they welcomed the fact that in Morten’s classes it is “more important what the students actually have to say, that we are taken seriously”. During my observations I also noted that Morten was never the first to comment on a performance; he always let the students take the floor first, and he would often limit his comments to emphasising and summing up what the students had already said. This could be one of the reasons why the students feel they are taken seriously.

In the interview the students said that they always have to be prepared to give feedback, and that this teaches them to listen proactively and critically. “Somehow you have to sit there and practise being a teacher.” The students also stress that they are mindful of Morten’s demand that they must be able to express themselves verbally. “Everything has to be crystal clear”, as one of them puts it. Otherwise they will be asked to explain what they mean, and they have to be prepared to justify their comments. If we define practice as a teaching activity in which you are your own teacher – as Jørgensen (Jørgensen, H., 2011: Undervisning i øving. En innføring for sangog instrumentallærere. Oslo: Norsk Musikforlag) does – then these demands placed on the students whereby they have to be able to listen proactively and give clear and constructive feedback will also help turn them into good teachers of themselves in the practice room.

The fact that the students see the benefits of the classes both to themselves and to others is clear from the attendance figures: practically everyone turns up every week regardless of whether or not they are performing. One student made the following observation about why she attends the string classes:

«I see it as my second weekly lesson. I give it almost as much priority. It’s part of the tuition I receive, so I attend.»

This shows that the classes can be a very important arena for the students’ learning, but they require a clear vision and a conscious strategy on the part of the teacher in order to succeed.