A number of challenges and questions arise when transplanting ideas around R&D-based education to the field of art and music. Music education involves wildly different performance and composition traditions. There are numerous ideas, intentions and objectives, and the practices are learnt and developed in a variety of ways. For a R&D-based education in music performance to work, it must be of relevance to the student’s musicianship and to the musical work life the student will make.
When switching between the perspectives of different musical traditions – such as composition, folk music, jazz, free improv, electronic music, early music, church music, contemporary music performance, classical performance, pop etc. – there will be different interpretations of what the AR characteristics represents, such as «experimentation» and «contextualisation», as well as the intentions behind these activities. Innovation, experimentation and challenging existing practices are key to some genres, while others, especially those where tradition is strong, will not see these as being quite as relevant. Many tradition-bearers will probably also acknowledge that traditional performance does indeed involve exploration and experimentation with timbres, forms and techniques in order to delve deeper into the material and develop their performance. Being a performer in a tradition implies a sense of loyalty and acceptance of certain «rules» belonging to that tradition. «Challenging established practices» will not be the main objective of a tradition-bearer. The characteristics of AR must be viewed through the lens that is relevant to the respective traditions and practices.
At the same time, when speaking to students both in a learning context and in connection with CEMPE projects, it is clear to us that many of them want questions around the role of the performer to be addressed at an earlier stage of their training, including questions about opportunities and how to interpret their role within the tradition and when encountering other traditions and genres. We believe that learning about different approaches to such questions and training in problematizing and reflecting on connections in performance practice is strengthening regardless of genre and tradition.
The focus on reflection in artistic research is partly about verbalisation, such as awareness and discussion. Yet it is not necessarily the case that reflection in an AR context must involve words and writing. Much of the reflection in music performance takes place through bodily experiences. The very essence of AR is that we should promote and develop the knowledge that is unique to our particular fields. It is therefore also essential that the basis in AR, by placing greater emphasis on reflection and exploration, is happening in tight proximity to the performative and creative work of the students – in their main instrument lessons, forums, ensemble courses, project weeks etc.
What might AR-based music education look like in practice? We have a few suggestions. Firstly, all bachelor students should be given a basic introduction to what artistic research entails. This can be done in a variety of ways depending on the institution in question, but it should be mandatory. The students should be shown examples of different AR projects and of AR taking place at their institution. We would recommend that those who design and teach these plans have active experience from AR, such as PhD training. Elsewhere on the study programme the students should also be introduced to their own teachers’ artistic research, and effective points of contact between the institution’s artistic research fellows and the bachelor and master students should be created.
Students can also join in the discussions and evaluations around AR projects by having artistic researchers present and discuss their works with them in forums, or by discussing relevant AR issues to their genre in classes, under the supervision of the main instrument teacher.
The teaching of aesthetic and ethical topics and problems particularly relating to performance and composition is important to allow the students to develop the ability to contextualise their own practice. This could involve teaching philosophical discourse around Werktreue and the role of the composer in a classical context, to mention but one example from the wide tapestry of associated references in music. But it is only when this knowledge is directly linked to the students’ own performance practice – to the «here and now» questions that arise in the performance setting – that it can support reflection within their own practice. It would be beneficial if teachers of performance subjects and complementary subjects were to enable these correlations through co-operation and active bridge-building between subjects.
Investigative and reflective abilities and experiences are learning outcomes closely linked to performance teaching such as main instrument lessons, classes and projects. One example of this would be when a main instrument teacher guides their student in experimenting and trying things out on a sub-project. Perhaps the main instrument teacher challenges the student to try a completely different work method, or to change intentions and goals. Another example could be when students and teachers investigate, experiment and reflect together in an ensemble process. Artistic research fellows and students could meet and try out their artistic work on a common topic for each other, for instance in forum or project weeks. Alternatively, the study programme could involve dedicated reflection classes where the students meet regularly to share and discuss processes, ideas and questions with each other under supervision. To encourage the students to reflect on connections in their practice, it may help if the students get to familiarize themselves with working methods and mindsets from different genres – one could envisage project weeks which see the students «visit» other genres, or that reflection classes are organized across different disciplines.