Assessing Leadership Skills in the Conservatoire

1. Assessing Leadership Skills in the Conservatoire Tim Palmer Senior Lecturer in Music Education Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music & Dance

2. The Challenge The new concept of the ‘all-round’ musician who performs traditional and commissioned repertoire, who improvises freely and within collectively composed frameworks, collaborates with other artists, draws on non-European influences and embraces technology, will be relatively uncharted territory for some, particularly for those in the conservatoire sector … High standards can and should be maintained – what needs to change is the premise upon which the quality of process and product is measured (Gregory, 2005a: 21).

3. “Professional Skills” Pedagogy? Music Teaching Artistry? Entrepreneurialism? Collaboration? Leadership? Essential for transition into professional life ((Gregory, 2005b; Creech et al., 2008; Johansson, 2012; Gaunt, Creech et al., 2012). How do we assess these with validity and rigour?

4. Tensions • Student (and staff) expectations of assessment suitable to a performing career (Bennett 2007) • Traditional expectations of career opportunities with the reality of the C21 profession • Process versus product assessment (Fautley 2010)

5. Leadership (Creative Direction) • Creative vision, the communication and manipulation of musical objects in real time, listening, rehearsal and performance, alongside such transferable skills as time management and organisation. • Delegation: ‘the ability to focus decisions either by making them or by drawing them out of people you are working [with]’(Wiegold 2012) • ‘there is a subtle combination and balance of a group leader’s own authority and experience and the participant’s own imagination, creativity and routes of self-learning’(Gregory, 2005 b: 293).

6. Why Leadership? • Traditional rehearsal skills • Working in jazz & outside Western art music • Cross-media & cross-cultural projects • Education & community settings • The empowerment of the performer! • ‘Backwards, sideways & forwards’ (Weigold 2012)

7. Collaborative Composition • Skeletal or graphic notation, or aurally transmitted • Devised through improvisation, with full or part crystallisation • Conceptual parameters as agreed structural devices • Highly differentiated by outcome & strongly ‘owned’ by participants

8. Possible Criteria (a) • That we pay attention (listening & responding?) • That we give up control (using open instructions?) • That we take responsibility for ourselves (evidencing preparation & establishing authority) • That we work together (collaborating with peers?) • That we take risks (creative vision?) (Parker 2010, on the leadership of improvisation)

9. Possible Criteria (b) • Musical Knowledge • Establishing Authority • Clear Goal Setting • Ability to Respond in the Moment • Positive Ambiguity • Maintaining Creative Environment (Weigold 2012)

10. The Task • Solo promotes validity amongst student body • Expectation of performance at end also promotes validity • Notation & non-notated elements • Verbal, physical & musical communication • Describing, realising, manipulating, rehearsing • Composer, conductor and soloist • ‘collecting insights along the way about how the interactive process is affected by the logistics of the situation’ (Tornquist, 2010:75)

11. Curriculum 9 Seminars • Pitch control structures • Harmonic devices • Rhythmic devices • Notational devices • Compositional tools • Use of non-musical stimuli Two 5-week Skills-Building Projects

12. Professional Relevance (a) Skills which facilitate smooth transition into professional careers (Creech et al. 2008)

13. The Survey • 13 student returns, across four departments • 3 staff interviews (not discussed here) Quantitative and qualitative data on: initial responses to the task; task validity; reliability; time limitations; influences the task had had on subsequent development and on its relevance for future ambitions.

14. Initial Reactions Some apprehension: • I think initially I was a bit overwhelmed because it had never really been required of me to be so freely creative about anything… I was very much a “read off the paper” musician. (Q1) • Excited but a bit apprehensive about what exactly to do (Q3) • I was panicking at first because I’m not a composer or a conductor. (Q10) Awareness of new challenges: • I was also eager to try and do something different with a group of classical musicians. (Q5) • I felt that because it was a task that I had not attempted anything like before, it posed new challenges. (Q7)

15. Validity Do you consider the skills being assessed to be important for your development as a performing/improvising/leading/entrepreneurial musician?’ 46% marked ‘very much’, 46% marked ‘somewhat’, 8% ‘a little’ and 0% ‘not at all’. Generalised responses: • I feel the reasons behind the subject were spot on in what is needed for our development.(Q2) • It helps to be creative and to be individual. (Q4) • Useful to realise how nervous or unclear your instructions can be if not delivered with confidence. (Q13) Context specific responses: • To be able to express the way you want a piece to sound or come across is vital in solo and chamber music. (Q1) • The ability to perform a solo under pressure [is] important to me as singer. (Q10) • Gave an insight into running workshops and improvising – extremely useful after within [sic] a school environment! (Q3) • The areas that were being assessed were the ‘benchmarks’ in workshop teaching (Q5) • Useful if you have a group of learners who can’t all read music (Q8)

16. Reliability Did the task provide a fair and reliable assessment of these skills? 38% marked ‘very much’; 46% ‘somewhat’, 15% ‘a little and 0% ‘not at all’ A couple of rather negative comments were offered: • Wasn’t particularly fair or reliable as the assessment criteria was to [sic] broad (Q9) • It was fairly brief and one-dimensional.(Q10) These were outnumbered however, by positive comments: • We were perfectly aware of what was expected of us in our assessment thanks to the classes being well led. (Q1) • It was a very fair assessment. The leadership and musical creativity skills for the student were obvious. (Q2) • I felt my feedback was very useful and fair following my assessment. (Q3)

17. Timing • 46% of students thought it was ‘about right’, 54% thought it too short, with 0% responses for ‘much too short’ and ‘too long’. Students were asked ‘In what ways do you think the time restriction affected the quality of creative leadership being assessed?’ Time limit as impediment: • If you had also quite in depth ideas, it took longer to explain, or if someone was unclear the problems weren’t necessarily solved effectively (Q1) • You had no time to get anything wrong. Or fix situations where as in a real life scenario I think you would be able to have time and thought into how to fix problems you were given. (Q4) • There wasn’t much time to develop as a leader. Also, no time to get feedback from the group and have the chance to apply it. (Q10) Time limit as agent • I thought it was a good idea – in rehearsals we frequently have to work to deadlines. (Q7) • The timing forced the students not to be able to waffle on but get straight to the point and have a very direct, precise approach… It was perfect. (Q2) • I found that because I knew there was a time restriction I had to do more prep so I knew exactly what I wanted to say… I was more focused and realistic in my creative approach. (Q5) • The time restriction was good for thinking under pressure. (Q9)

18. Professional Applications Are you intending to use these skills in your professional life as a performing/improvising/educating/leading/entrepreneurial musician? 15% said ‘no’, 85% indicated some ways in which they intended to use the skills learnt. • Yes- the ability to lead people and be creative is crucial. And to think outside the box. (Q4) • Yes – hopefully as a leader of various orchestras. This would require strong leadership skills when taking a sectional rehearsal. (Q7) • I intend to write a piece for solo flute and accompaniment so when it comes to performing and putting the piece together, that will be handy. (Q11) • Yes, in folk music (Q12) • Perhaps in teaching settings to try and get students to be a bit more creative (Q1) • Educating – whilst teaching at schools and for introductory workshops to my instrument (Q3) • Definitely, in a workshop environment or group teaching (Q13)

19. Influences on Development • It has helped me learn how to work with other musicians. (Q2) • I felt it made me more comfortable at leading and improvising in particular which I was very wary of before. It made me realise that it’s not that scary!! (Q3) • Thinking outside the box I think comes into everyday life. (Q4) • It’s made me more confident in my ability as a musician. I always thought that because I wasn’t an amazing musician I could never teach music. But it’s shown me that I can communicate well and am good at encouraging a group to get outside their comfort zone. And because I can’t rely on my excellent musicianship, I now know I can try and think up more creative ideas, and rely on that aspect of my personality. (Q5) • I have thought carefully about how I portray my ideas – in particular looking at being concise and direct when discussing my ideas. (Q7) • It’s opened my mind somewhat to making music without a score. (Q10) • It’s given me the idea of writing music with my instrument instead of using Sibelius. (Q11)

20. Conclusion Assessment for Learning: • Initiator of a curriculum • Learning experience in itself • Test of skills & knowledge as evidenced in musical activity rather than text Music as creative rather than interpretative act A new generation of performers? For the future of the human species depends on the capacity of its members to make metaphorical transformations, to ask the question ‘what if’, to go beyond cultural replication towards cultural renewal (Swanwick,1999:109).

21. Bibliography • Bennett, D. (2007) Utopia for music performance graduates. Is it achievable, and how should it be defined? British Journal of Music Education 24(2), 179-89. • Creech, A., Papageorgi, I., Duffy, C., Morton, F., Haddon, E., Potter, J., de Bezenac, C., Whyton, T., Himonides, F. and Welch, G.  (2008) From music student to professional: the process of transition. British Journal of Music Education 25(3), 315-331. • Fautley, M. (2010) Assessment in Music Education. Oxford: Oxford University Press. • Gaunt, H., Creech, A., Long, M. and Hallam, S. (2012) Supporting conservatoire students towards professional integration: one-to-one tuition and the potential of mentoring. Music Education Research 14(1), 25-43. • Gregory, S. (2005a)Weaving creativity through the conservatoire, in The Reflective Conservatoire, edited by G. Odam and N. Bannan. Aldershot: Ashgate. • Gregory, S. (2005b) The creative music workshop: a contextual study of its origin and practice, in The Reflective Conservatoire, edited by G. Odam and N. Bannan. Aldershot: Ashgate. • Johansson, K.(2012) Experts, entrepreneurs and competence nomads: the skills paradox in higher music education Music Education Research 14(1), 45-62. • Parker, D.(2010)The improvising leader: developing leadership capacity through improvisation, in A Cultural Leadership Reader, edited by S.Kay and K.Venner. London: Cultural Leadership Program. • Swanwick, K. (1999)Teaching Music Musically. London: Routledge. • Tornquist, P.(2010) Improvisation-interaction-composition: exploring feedback-systems as a compositional model, in Researching Conservatoires: Enquiry, Innovation and the Development of Artistic Practice in Higher Music Education, by Association of European Conservatoires. Utrecht: AEC Publications. • Wiegold, P. (2012) interview by Tim Palmer. (24 April 2012).