22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Knowledge and Knowers in Higher Music Education Curriculum
Maija Lampinen1,2, Johanna Annala2
1Uniarts Helsinki, Finland; 2Tampere University, Finland
Presenting Author: Lampinen, Maija
This study examines university teachers’ notions of knowledge and knowers in higher classical music education during a curriculum renewal process in a Finnish higher education context.
Knowledge in music has been distinguished between theory and technique already from Greek philosophers such as Aristotle (McPhail, 2022). This divide is still visible in music education. It is also claimed that higher music education has been based on the conceptions of craftsmanship and artistic skill (Moberg & Georgii-Hemming, 2019). More recently, the process of academization has raised the question of knowledge and knowledge practices in higher music education especially in the European context (Johansson & Georgii-Hemming, 2021). It is argued the traditional knowledge of music is not enough in the future society (Gaunt & Westerlund, 2021; López-Íñiguez & Bennett, 2020), the future of classical musicians is unclear and employment conditions are changing (Moberg & Georgii-Hemming, 2019). Higher music education institutions are asked to redefine their work and consider “how they engage with students in changing societies” (Gaunt & Westerlund, 2021).
Knowledge of craft in classical music is traditionally taught and learnt in master-apprentice relationship that is a hierarchical relationship between a master and student (Angelo et al., 2019; Gaunt, 2011). In this process, a student acquires some of the master’s knowledge and skills and becomes part of the musical community (Angelo et al., 2019). It is argued the tradition is based on imitation and reproduction as ideals (Georgii-Hemming et al., 2020). Consequently, the individuals involved in the learning process, both the ‘master’ and the student, hold a distinct significance in the acquisition of knowledge practices within the realm of arts. In arts education students are deeply engaged with the context where the knowledge is processed (Shay & Stayn, 2015). It is described that knowledge in the arts exists in individuals, communities, networks, bodies, objects (Orr & Shreeve, 2018) and in tools and materials (Addison, 2014; Sennett, 2008).
In this study, we approach curriculum renewal as a process where knowledge practices are negotiated in the academic community (see e.g., Annala, 2022; Bovill & Woolmer, 2019). This context enables us to explore the underlying conceptions of knowledge and knowers in the contemporary higher music education. The research questions are: What is viewed as legitimate educational knowledge in higher music education? How the relationships between knowledge and knowers are depicted?
The theoretical and methodological framework in the study is based on Karl Maton’s (2014) Legitimate Code Theory (LCT). Maton continued Bernstein’s (1996) theory of knowledge structures. It describes a way of developing and producing knowledge. In the humanities and arts, the knowledge structure is said to be horizontal. Knowledge is described as a series of parallel but strongly delimited approaches. Knowledge develops by adding a new approach alongside existing ones. However, according to McPhail (2022), knowledge in music theory is hierarchical which means the concepts must be obtained in successive order, but, on the other hand, approaches to composition and performance in music are more horizontal. Maton (2014) claims that focusing only on knowledge and the knowledge structure may simplify and overlook the strengths of some fields. Attention should also be paid to knowers and knower structure. Although knowledge structure is horizontal in the arts, knower structure is claimed to be hierarchical. Hierarchically structured knowers are organized in relation to the ideal knower. Therefore, in this study we build on the so-called Specialization code in the LCT theory (Maton 2014), which includes both knowledge and knower structures as analytical perspectives.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe context of the research is a Finnish higher arts education institution where the fields of music, performance arts and fine arts meet in three academies. There are nearly 2000 students and 81 programs (bachelor’s, master’s, doctoral) of which 52 are in the music academy.
Curriculum renewal was conducted at the university in 2020-2023 and the new curricula will be implemented in August 2024. It was the first joint curriculum process of the academies. It meant they renewed their curricula simultaneously, and they followed the same guidance approved by the university management. The first author collected data from all academies during the renewal process as part of her doctoral thesis. This presentation focuses only on music education.
Data consists of ten semi-structured interviews (n = 2 professors, n = 5 lecturers, and n = 3 program leaders) and documents (curriculum guidelines, written curricula). All interviewees were active participants in the curriculum renewal process, and they represented five programs in the music academy. The interview data was collected between June 2022 and May 2023. The interviews lasted 57–95 minutes and they included three themes: core content analysis in the program level, curriculum renewal process and students and studies on the program. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and the data were encoded using the Atlas.ti software.
Maton’s (2014) specialization code was applied as an analytical tool. In the analysis, we aimed to distinguish between epistemic relations (ER) to knowledge structures and social relations (SR) to knower structures. These relations may be more strongly or weakly bounded and controlled. Two continua, epistemic relations (ER±) and social relations (SR±), generate specialization codes. They reveal if the legitimacy in the field is based on specialized knowledge or knower attributes.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe results and conclusions are preliminary since the analysis is still in process. However, the results and conclusions are expected to be ready by the summer 2024. Seemingly the academization of higher music education and the generic working life demands challenge the traditional knowledge structures that appear hierarchical.
ReferencesAddison, N. (2014). Doubting Learning Outcomes in Higher Education Contexts: From Performativity towards Emergence and Negotiation. The international journal of art & design education, 33(3), 313-325. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12063
Angelo, E., Varkøy, Ø. and Georgii-Hemming, E. (2019). Notions of Mandate, Knowledge and Research in Norwegian Classical Music Performance Studies. Journal for Research in Arts and Sports Education, 3(1), 78-100. https://doi.org/10.23865/jased.v3.1284
Annala, J. (2022). Disciplinary knowledge practices and powerful knowledge: a study on knowledge and curriculum structures in regions. Teaching in Higher Education. 27(8), 1084-1102. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2022.2114340
Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: theory, research, critique. Taylor & Francis.
Bovill, C. & Woolmer, C. (2019). How conceptualisations of curriculum in higher education influence student-staff co-creation in and of the curriculum. Higher Education 78, 407–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0349-8
Gaunt, H. (2011). Understanding the one-to-one relationship in instrumental/vocal tuition in Higher Education: comparing student and teacher perceptions. British Journal of Music Education, 28(2), 159-179.
Georgii-Hemming, E.; Johansson, K. & Moberg, N. (2020). Reflection in higher music education: what, why, wherefore? Music Education Research, 22:3, 245-256, https://doi-org.libproxy.tuni.fi/10.1080/14613808.2020.1766006
López-Íñiguez, G. & Bennett, D. (2020). A lifespan perspective on multi-professional musicians: does music education prepare classical musicians for their careers? Music Education Research, 22:1, 1-14, https://doi-org.libproxy.tuni.fi/10.1080/14613808.2019.1703925
Johansson, K., & Georgii-Hemming, E. (2021). Processes of academisation in higher music education: the case of Sweden. British Journal of Music Education, 38(2), 173–186. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051720000339
McPhail, G. (2022). A discipline in search of episteme. pp. 48-62. In Graham McPhail (2022). Knowledge and Music Education: A social realist account. Routledge.
Maton, K. (2014). Knowledge and knowers: towards a realist sociology of education. Routledge.
Moberg, N. & Georgii-Hemming, E. (2019). Musicianship – Discursive constructions of autonomy and independence within music performance programs. In S. Gies and H. Sætre (eds.), Becoming Musicians – Student Involvement and Teacher Collaboration in Higher Music Education (pp. 67–88). The Norwegian Academy of Music.
Sennett, R. (2008). The craftsman. Yale University Press.
Orr, S. a., & Shreeve, A. (2017). Art and design pedagogy in higher education: Knowledge, values and ambiguity in the creative curriculum. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315415130
Westerlund, H., & Gaunt, H. (2021). Expanding professionalism in music and higher music education: A changing game. Routledge.
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Investigating Learning Gains of Generic Skills among Finnish and American Higher Education Students
Doris Zahner1, Kari Nissinen2, Heidi Hyytinen3, Jani Ursin2, Kaisa Silvennoinen2
1Council for Aid to Education, United States of America; 2University of Jyväskylä, Finland; 3University of Eastern Finland, Finland
Presenting Author: Hyytinen, Heidi;
Ursin, Jani
Perspective(s) or theoretical framework
Research on generic skills has been taking on increased importance in higher education over the last decade (Tuononen et al., 2022; Van Damme & Zahner, 2022). Generic skills refer to universal expert skills applied across different disciplines and contexts of jobs (Tuononen et al., 2022). These skills together with domain-specific knowledge enable students to draw on their field-specific knowledge in a variety of situations (Ursin et al., 2021). There is no one definitive list of generic skills; instead, this is a unifying term under which sets of skills belong. While remarkable variation in concepts and operationalization of generic skills have been found (Braun et al., 2012; El Soufi & See, 2019; Tuononen et al., 2022), researchers have acknowledged the importance of learning generic skills in the context of higher education. For example, there is evidence that generic skills are related to adjustment and adaptation to higher education (Kleemola et al., 2022; Van der Zanden et al., 2019) and progress in studies and study success (Tuononen & Parpala, 2021). Additionally, earlier research has suggested that a student’s background—both educational and socioeconomic—has a strong influence on the level of generic skills (Arum & Roksa, 2011; Kleemola et al., 2022; Ursin et al., 2021).
Since generic skills research is mainly conducted using self-assessments, the research field has stressed the need for more performance-based research (Tuononen et al., 2022). Performance-based assessment aims to evoke authentic performance, covering aspects of generic skills through situations that resemble the real world (Hyytinen et al., 2023; Van Damme & Zahner, 2022). Previous research on performance-based assessment has shown that test-taking effort and engagement have a substantial impact on test performance (Hyytinen et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2016).
Objectives
Generic skills of higher education students have been assessed through the CLA+ (Collegiate Learning Assessment) in a number of countries, including the United States (where it is used extensively) and Finland. CLA+ is a performance-based assessment of generic skills such as critical thinking and written communication, directed particularly to higher education students. The assessment is accompanied by a survey of students’ demographic background, attitudes, and fields of studies.
Comparisons of the assessment results of entering and exiting higher education students in Finland and the US have shown that while students from both countries exhibited learning gains in generic skills (i.e., there was a significant difference in the overall gain of these skills between entering and exiting students), this overall gain was clearly larger among the American students (Ursin et al., 2021). The purpose of this study is to further investigate a reason behind this finding. We consider variables measuring students’ effort and engagement in the CLA+ as well as sociodemographic variables such as students’ gender and parental level of education, and whether students’ primary home language is the same as the instructional language of the institution.
This research attempts to answer two questions:
- In what way are the overall gains in generic skills between the entering and exiting students different in the two countries?
- Are there background variables that can explain the possible difference in gain between the two countries?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedMeasures
The CLA+ is a 90-minute performance-based assessment of critical-thinking and written-communication skills comprising a 60-minute performance task (PT) and a 30-minute set of 25 selected-response questions (SRQs). The PT measures performance in three areas: Analysis and Problem Solving (making a logical decision and supporting it by analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing the appropriate information); Writing Effectiveness (constructing an organized and cohesive essay with support for positions); and Writing Mechanics (demonstrating command of Standard Written English). The SRQ section is aligned to the same construct as the analysis and problem-solving subscore of the PT. Ten items measure Data Literacy (e.g., making an inference); ten measure Critical Reading and Evaluation (e.g., identifying assumptions); and five measure Critiquing Arguments (e.g., detecting logical fallacies). Both the PT and SRQ sections are document based. The supporting documents include a range of information sources, such as letters, memos, photographs, charts, and newspaper articles. After completing the CLA+, the students answer a questionnaire pertaining to their background.
Sample
Since the participating Finnish institutions were all research universities, a subset of only competitive (Schmitt, 2009) higher education institutions were selected for this study in the United States. For this study, approximately 51,000 students across 185 institutions of higher education in the United States were included in the analyses.
Similar to the US, 18 participating higher education institutions from Finland tested entering first-year students in the fall semester and exiting third-year students in the spring semester. The Finnish sample consisted of 2,384 students (1,524 entering and 860 exiting students) from the 2019–2020 academic year. Two translated and adapted versions of the CLA+, one in Finnish and the other in Finland Swedish, were used for the Finnish students.
Data sources
The data presented in the results section are from 29,187 entering and 22,109 exiting American students, and 1,524 entering and 860 exiting Finnish students. All analyses were performed on the scaled and equated CLA+ Total score, which is a composite of the PT and SRQ subscores.
The data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and two-level regression models. In calculating standard errors and, consequently, significance tests, the clustering of students within institutions was considered by introducing a random institution effect in the models, to avoid overly liberal inference. Measured with intra-cluster correlation (ICC), the homogeneity of students within an institution was considerable: the value of ICC estimate was 0.17 in the Finnish data and 0.23 in the American data.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
Conclusions and Discussion
This study investigated entering and exiting higher education students’ performance on the CLA+ in Finland and the United States. Overall, exiting students significantly outperformed entering students, but the overall learning gains were greater for the American students, despite entering Finnish students having a higher average score than their American counterparts. The literature suggests that effort and engagement might be factors that influence performance (e.g., Hyytinen et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2016). However, we found that test-taking effort and engagement did not explain the observed differences in learning gains. Other demographic variables such as gender, primary home language, and parental level of education also did not explain the observed difference. One possible explanation is that the exiting students in the United States are fourth-year students as opposed to third-year students in Finland (Ursin et al., 2021). This could have been further investigated by comparing third-year students to each other. However, one of the limitations of this comparative study is that the model for assessing student learning gains at almost all participating higher education institutions is to compare entering and exiting students, so we do not have a dataset containing any third-year students in the United States.
The results of this study are puzzling because individually within country, the variables we investigated such as effort and engagement and the other demographics were predictive and explain the variance in CLA+ performance. However, none can explain why the American students had a larger average difference on CLA+ between entering and exiting students than the Finnish students. A second study, which includes a longitudinal component, is forthcoming. Future studies should assess students in the United States in their third year of studies as well as collect additional common demographic variables.
ReferencesArum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011). Academically adrift: Limited learning on college campuses. University of Chicago Press.
Braun, E., Woodley, A., Richardson, J. T. E., & Leidner, B. (2012). Self-rated competences questionnaires from a design perspective. Educational Research Review, 7(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.11.005
El Soufi, N., & See, B. H. (2019). Does explicit teaching of critical thinking improve critical thinking skills of English language learners in higher education? A critical review of causal evidence. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 60, 140–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.12.006
Hyytinen, H., Nissinen, K., Kleemola, K., Ursin, J., & Toom, A. (2023). How do self-regulation and effort in test-taking contribute to undergraduate students’ critical thinking performance? Studies in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2227207
Kleemola, K., Hyytinen, H., & Toom, A. (2022). Critical thinking and writing in transition to higher education in Finland: Do prior academic performance and socioeconomic background matter? European Journal of Higher Education, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2022.2075417
Liu, O. L., Mao, L., Frankel, L., & Xu., J. (2016). Assessing critical thinking in higher education: The HEIghtenTM approach and preliminary validity evidence. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(5), 677–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1168358
Schmitt, C. M. (2009). Documentation for the restricted-use NCES-Barron's Admissions Competitiveness Index data files: 1972, 1982, 1992, 2004, and 2008. National Center for Education Statistics, Institute for Education Sciences, US Department of Education.
Tuononen, T., Hyytinen, H., Kleemola, K., Hailikari, T., Männikkö, I., & Toom, A. (2022). Systematic review of learning generic skills in higher education—Enhancing and impeding factors. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.885917
Tuononen, T., & Parpala, A. (2021). The role of academic competences and learning processes in predicting Bachelor’s and Master’s thesis grades. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101001
Ursin, J. (2020). Assessment in higher education (Finland). In J. Kauko & J. W. James (Eds.), Bloomsbury Education and Childhood Studies. Bloomsbury Academic.
Ursin, J., Hyytinen, H., & Silvennoinen, K. (Eds.). (2021). Assessment of undergraduate students’ generic skills in Finland: Findings of the Kappas! Project (Report No. 2021: 31). Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture.
Van Damme, D., & Zahner, D. (Eds.). (2022). Does higher education teach students to think critically. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/cc9fa6aa-en
Van der Zanden, P., Denessen, E., Cillessen, A., & Meijer, P. (2019). Patterns of success: First-year student success in multiple domains. Studies in Higher Education, 44(11), 2081–2095. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1493097
|
