Frøydis Ree Wekre’s horn model for group tuition

Professor Frøydis Ree Wekre at the Norwegian Academy of Music has 50 years’ experience as a horn teacher. She has been exploring the combination of one-toone tuition and group tuition since 2009. She has chosen a model for her students whereby each bachelor or master student is allocated 45 minutes of one-to-one tuition per week instead of 60–75 minutes. The minutes «saved» are spent on weekly group lessons for the horn students with three students and one teacher in each group. The students also attend horn classes and woodwind/brass masterclasses in larger groups. Thus, the weekly teaching model for horn students looks like this:

The teacher adopts a variety of approaches in the different lessons. In the one-to- one lessons she acts as the «master», offering advice and suggesting different perspectives on dealing with challenges. In the small group sessions the three students and one teacher are equal members of the group. In principle this means that every member has the same «status» within the group. In the horn classes and joint woodwind and brass lessons the teacher once again assumes the master teacher role but will often invite input from the students. A small number of students actively perform during these lessons. Each student may perform once or twice during a semester.

The tuition taking place in small groups is closely linked to the one-to-one horn lessons. During a 60-minute group lesson each student is given 20 minutes. The students decide for themselves how to spend their allotted time. All three students in the group are expected to perform every week, i.e. in each group lesson. The teacher employs one of two models to put together the groups:

1. Group members are at the same stage in their studies.

2. Group members are at different stages in their studies.

The make-up of the group is usually determined by looking at what is appropriate and beneficial for each student based on ability, social relationships, objectives for their studies etc. The teacher is of the opinion that the make-up of the groups is key to their success. This view is backed by research showing that the degree of success is not necessarily down to whether the students are at the same level but rather that they work well together (Johnson & Johnson, 1999). Heterogeneous groups are the preferred configuration amongst many researchers (Fischer, 2006).

In order to create a good atmosphere and a positive attitude towards the group setting, the teacher has drawn up a few rules that the groups are asked to observe during the year:

1 Each group member should give one supportive, positive comment and one supportive, constructive comment to the performing student.

2 All group members should be on the same «level» during the session.

3 The teacher should always be the last person to comment.

4 The group lesson should have different content and structure to one-to-one instrumental lessons.

Group members are expected to support each other and help each other become better performers.

Composition of the group

The horn group that I observed three times during the 2012 spring semester was made up of students at different levels and from different years. The group consisted of one Norwegian first-year bachelor student, one Russian and one Norwegian fourth-year bachelor student, and the teacher.

The three students I observed had received tuition on their principal instruments for 8–14 years before enrolling at the Norwegian Academy of Music. Their backgrounds at the time of enrolling were widely different, but all of them were satisfied with their former teachers.

The Norwegian first-year student received his basic training within the Municipal Arts and Music School system. The Municipal Arts and Music School system provided group tuition, one-to-one tuition and additional Saturday tuition. He was very satisfied with both the teachers and the organisation of the tuition.

The Norwegian fourth-year student had received nine years of horn tuition from a jazz saxophone tutor before being taught by a specialist horn teacher. However, the student did not perceive the lack of a horn teacher as a problem, since she also received occasional lessons from a horn teacher at the Norwegian Academy of Music in that same period. She also found the positive interaction between teacher and pupil at that time just as important as the tuition she received from the specialist horn teacher. On the other hand, she now appreciates that some of the challenges she is facing as a student could have been avoided had she received more specialised horn tuition in her early years.

The Russian fourth-year student came from a system with strict rules and demands. He found his teacher to be authoritarian. During this period the student learnt to concentrate on what the teacher felt was important in order to become a good performer. The student did not have a problem relating to critical remarks from others because he fully trusted the teacher’s opinion. The student found his basic training particularly important in terms of being able to make independent decisions at a later stage. What he missed in his basic training was more focus on what was good and a more conscious approach to building self-confidence. He felt it is important to be critical, but not too critical. All musicians need to feel safe on stage, and that sense of security needs to evolve gradually.

The horn teacher paid much attention to the physical positioning of the students and teacher in the room during each group lesson. In her view the positioning gave an indication of the roles of the different group members during the lesson.

The positioning of the students and teacher was intended to show that they were all equal members of the group.

Performance and conversation between students and teacher took up most of the time. Specific advice given directly by the teacher took up little time – an average of 8 minutes during a 60-minute lesson.

The students chose what to perform, and the repertoire included audition repertoire, repertoire focusing mostly on technical challenges, solo repertoire that had been covered in more detail in the one-to-one lessons etc. The atmosphere during the lessons was informal and relaxed, and comments and feedback had a positive and constructive focus. All the students recorded their own performances. There was good communication between group members.

The interviews with each student identified converging views in terms of how the students had experienced the combination of one-to-one and group sessions as a permanent element in their principal instrument tuition. All the students were approving of the way the tuition was organised. They were all in favour of taking 15 minutes from one-to-one lessons in order to arrange small group lessons. They were also appreciative of being asked to comment on their fellow students’ performances. This way they gained experience of giving verbal feedback. It was particularly reassuring for the students that the teacher would moderate any input that was irrelevant or did not make sense. All the students also highlighted the positive aspect of being able to perform in, and for, different groups. One student said:

«There is a psychological aspect to there being other people than the teacher in the lesson. You feel different, and it’s a good feeling. You learn a lot in a group. In the group lessons you almost don’t think of Frøydis as a teacher, but as part of the group. You learn to teach yourself. Everyone has to comment: positive, good and constructive comments, not negative.»

Another student liked the fact that he, a first-year student, was asked to have an opinion on the performances of fourth-year students. He also appreciated the challenge of having to prepare for several performance situations every week and the demands he chose to place on himself:

«You don’t take things you don’t know into a group lesson.»

The third student noted that it may be slightly excessive with a one-to-one lesson, group lesson and class lesson in a single week. She felt that it was not always necessary with a full one-to-one lesson with the teacher every week, since there were so many other different weekly fora. This view was also shared by the other students. It appeared that the tuition structure made the students conscious of their own needs for different types of tuition.

The students also stressed the importance of making conscious choices with regard to repertoire and presentation during group lessons. They felt it was important to plan these choices, both in terms of expected outcomes for themselves and outcomes for their fellow students. This form of autonomy in relation to their own choices was greatly appreciated by all the students in the group.

According to the three horn students, participants in such groups must focus on what is good, stay positive, be alert, be open, show respect for each other, and be careful in their choice of words when giving feedback.

The horn teacher has been exploring this form of tuition for only a few years, and is, because of her good experiences, surprised that she did not try it earlier. She says the following about the idea behind the tuition structure:

«You do not learn from just one teacher. You learn from so many different sources, and finally you learn from yourself. The students are able to train themselves to define, in a positive way, areas of improvement for their peers, and this better enables them to apply the same thinking to themselves.»

The teacher also emphasises how this method helps introduce the students to a broader repertoire. She feels that the students should act as helpers for each other, not critics. She draws parallels with sports:

«In sport, you train together but end up as competitors.»

The horn teacher hopes that the students are able to take inspiration from each other. She stresses how «weaker» students in particular benefit from this form of tuition. She finds that these students get a boost when working with «better» students.

She also points to a few challenges associated with this form of tuition, most of them relating to organisation. Additional permanent, formal lessons have to be scheduled in the students’ already busy timetables. The horn teacher stresses that it is important that the group lessons take place at the same time every week rather than being scheduled as they go along. With a fixed weekly slot, the students can take charge and hold the lesson even if the teacher is away.

The teacher has experienced few problems with students being unable to adjust to their group. Reorganisation has been necessary only a few times. The groups have to work socially. Many of the teacher’s students have been appointed to prestigious positions in leading orchestras over the years. The teacher believes that the students have become tougher, more secure, and better at tackling challenges in performance situations with their fellow students and that their audition successes are partly down to the way the tuition is organised.

For this tuition model to work, everyone involved must approach the group situation with a positive attitude, and feedback must be constructive. Respect for the students’ opinions is key to succeeding with this tuition model. The teacher must acknowledge that the students may have good ideas that the teacher has not thought about. Everyone in the group must also show an interest in the progress of the others. At the same time the students must feel that they benefit personally from spending 40 minutes of a one-hour lesson on their fellow students. They must believe that they will find inspiration by being proactive in the group setting. The teacher has to create such a climate.