Institutional Type: Music Conservatories

1. Institutional Type:Music Conservatories Kirsten Lenthe

2. Overview • Research methodology • Institution websites • Journal research – student affairs, counseling, psychology, etc. • Institutional admissions resources • U.S. News and World Reports lists 59 different institutions under the heading “unranked specialty schools: arts,” but only 9 of these are stand-alone music conservatories • Highly specialized institutional type

3. Learning Outcomes After this presentation, you should be able to: • Understand what makes a music conservatory unique • Explain the distinct physical, human aggregate, organizational, and constructed aspects of the environment of a music conservatory • Articulate the outcomes of a music conservatory

4. What is a Music Conservatory?

6. Serve a unique purpose, which drives the environment: • BerkleeCollege of Music’s 2012-13 guidebook: “musicians explore a rigorous and creative environment that challenges them to make a meaningful impact on the world” • The Julliard School’s president (1976): “We train performers … we have an obligation to the profession” • High stress environment: • Orzel (2010): “Stress and burnout are widespread in the college music student culture as it is largely accepted in the professional music world”

7. Physical Environment

9. Campus Maps and Wayfinding

10. Human Aggregate

11. Moos (1986) “people who are congruent with their environment will be more satisfied and secure” • High pressure environment with extreme levels of competition and unrealistic goals of success • High levels of burnout and stress Holland’s Artistic personality: individuals who “use words, art, music, or drama to communicate, perform, or express themselves”

12. Organizational

13. Classroom organizational environment: • Music conservatories offer a unique multi-modal classroom environment • Education focuses on preparing students to be performers • Extremely busy schedule • Partnerships • Administrative organizational environment: • Collegial: Porter (1998): “the privileged and expensive nature of a conservatoire education places an obligation on colleges to aspire to the highest standards. The culture of the institution needs to be such that these elements are nurtured and a collegial approach is one which facilitates a realisation of this goal” • Slow to change: grounded in tradition • Porter: “there exists very little literature on the structure and organization of conservatories”

14. Constructed

15. Artifacts: faculty • Shared values: • Underlying assumption not highlighted in promotional materials was a sense of superiority • Inherently elitist • Privileged

16. Outcomes

17. Purpose: to create world-class performers • Curtis Institute: mission of “making and motivating music” • The Julliard School: mission to “provide the highest caliber of artistic education for gifted musicians, dancers, and actors from around the world, so that they may achieve their fullest potential as artists, leaders, and global citizens” • Berklee’s College of Music: mission revolving around “music is a powerful catalyst for personal growth, which is central to any collegiate experience” • Purpose is to prepare students to be active members of the music and performance community

18. Strategic National Arts Alumni Project (SNAPP) research suggests music conservatories are good at preparing gifted performers but individuals are not ready to enter the marketplace (Klickstein, 2011)

19. Questions?

20. References • Berger, J.B. (2000). Organizational behavior at colleges and student outcomes: A new perspective on college impact. Review of Higher Education, 23, (2), 177-198. • Berklee (2012) resource book • Berklee (2013). Berklee College of Music. Retrieved from http://www.berklee.edu/ • Bernhard, H.C. (n.d.). A comparison of burnout between undergraduate music and non-music majors. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation Abstract). State University of New York at Fredonia, Fredonia, NY. • Boston Conservatory (2012) resource book • Boston Conservatory (2013). The Boston Conservatory. Retrieved from http://www.bostonconservatory.edu/ • Bowman, W. D. (2001). Music education and post-secondary music studies in Canada. Arts Education Policy Review, 103(2), 9-17 • Careers New Zealand (2012). Holland’s theory of career choice. Retrieved from http://www.careers.govt.nz/fileadmin/docs/career_theory_model_holland.pdf • Curtis (2013). The Curtis Institute of Music. Retrieved from http://www.curtis.edu/ • Epstein, H. (1976). Julliard: Music world’s pressure cooker. Change, 8(7), 11-13 • Hamilton, L.H. & Robson, B. (2006). Performing arts consultation: Developing expertise in this domain. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 37(3), 254-259. • Hammel, A.M. (2003). Using multi-modal techniques to motivate intuitive and non-intiuitive students. American Music Teacher, 53(2), 33-34 • Julliard School (2013). The Julliard School. Retrieved from http://www.juilliard.edu/ • Klickstein, G. (2011, April 30). Are conservatories keeping pace? [web blog]. Retrieved from http://musiciansway.com/blog/2011/04/are- conservatories-keeping-pace/ • Landes, H.A. (2008). On being a music major: A comparative study of student culture in a conservatory and a university school of music. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertation Publishing. • Moos, R. H. (1986). The human context: Environmental determinants of behavior. Malbar, FL: Kreiger. • New England Conservatory (2013). New England Conservatory. Retrieved from http://necmusic.edu/ • Orzel, H. (2010). Undergraduate music student stress and burnout. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). San Jose State University, San Jose, CA. • Porter, K. (1998). Management in the conservatoire of the future: Administering or leading? Studies in Higher Education, 23(1), p. 7-10 • Radocy, R. & Heller, G.N. (1982). Tips for coping: The music educator and stress. Music Educators Journals, 69(4), 43 • Strange, C.C, & Banning, J.H. (2001). Educating by design: Creating campus learning environments that work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.