3. Methodology

This study examines the teaching approaches and strategies between piano and vocal lessons in both professional and amateur contexts. Observations during multiple lessons and interviews with various teachers across different levels formed the basis of the data collected. In order to get the best overview to answer the research question and to find what teaching strategies could inspire my own teaching, I chose for a critical reflection action research as I will observe teachers that already have an ongoing practice. However, during the research, it appeared to no be feasible to both collect all the data and then implement this data into my practice. So, initially this research was meant to be action research, as the first steps of the research do correspond with such an approach, but along the way the second step of implementing the data was not manageable. Thus, retrospectively, this study is more like a multiple-case-study. The methodology of my research fits the action research and the multiple-case-study as I will observe and reflect throughout the whole process. Furthermore, this research is qualitative research, as a big part of this research is based on observations and interviews. 

3.1 Observations

Observations play a big part in this research. So, it is best to dive a bit deeper in the art of observations. In observation, there are two main methods according to Wragg (1994), a quantitative approach, counting and recording individual countable events or a qualitative approach, trying to see deeper than the mere frequencies. For this research the latter approached will be used as this observation method fits best with the to be obtained knowledge. Only counting events, as with a quantitative approach, is not sufficient as multiple aspects of the lesson may come forward during the interviews with the teachers.

3.1.1 Qualitative methods

The most important feature of using the qualitative method, is the possibility to interview the observed subject and shed a different light on the observed lessons. Wragg (ibid.) explained that ‘by observing the events and interviewing the participants, the observer will be able to fill out an interpretation of what was happening in the classroom that would not have been apparent from event counting alone.’ (p. 10,11). In this research the interviews play an important part in the data collection, hence the choice to use this qualitative approach. The following point should be kept in mind when doing qualitative observations (ibid.) and will be considered when designing the methodology of this research:

1. 1. The purpose of the observation should be made clear.
   2. The need to reflect on the nature of quality and effectiveness.
   3. The different ways of discussing and enhancing quality.
   4. The nature of the lesson record

Wragg also warns for the difficulty of detaching oneself from the previous obtained knowledge, beliefs, and prejudices about a practice they are highly familiar with. It can have advantages to know the environment you are doing research in, but you should be aware of the thoughts that might get in the way and enter the observations with an open mind. Concluding, Wragg emphasizes the importance of body language during a lesson. Often observers might not write down the specific facial expressions or body language of a teacher or student but interpret their behavior. This aspect of observation should be handles with care, as misconception in body language can result in incorrect data.

To ensure a comprehensive approach, the data collection for this study, which examined teaching students of various levels, was divided into several steps: collecting data in my own practice, at the conservatory, and in the amateur field. In order to ensure that observations and data were not influenced by information that had not yet been addressed, it was made sure that all the interviews and observations were analyzed before going to the next step. The step-by-step data collection process was as follows.

3.2 Data Collection

In my own teaching practice, I teach 4 vocal students and 7 piano students from different age groups. I picked two singing lessons and two piano lessons from my own practice and recorded them with both video and audio. The students taught were at similar levels and approximately the same age. All lessons, lasting 30 minutes, took place on the same day. The two piano students, aged 11 and 12, had been taking lessons for three years, as had the two vocal students, aged 15 and 16. As a critical note, these students do not have the same age. Even though there might be some differences regarding the variation in age, for this step of the research, the main focus was to find the general characteristics of my own teaching. Therefore, it was unnecessary to find students of exactly the same age.  Additionally, a singing lesson with a 56-year-old beginner was recorded. These students were selected based on their lesson being fairly ordinary. For instance, none of these students were beginners, none of them have dyslexia or any disabilities that would influence the lessons.

The videos of the recorded lessons were viewed a week after the recorded moment. First all vocal lessons were watched. The interesting observations were written down. After the vocal lessons, the piano lessons were watched, and all the noticeable observations were written down. The two lists were then put next to each other and compared. Subsequently, the videos were watched again to see if any more interesting elements popped up, now that the first comparison was made. The written observations of these lessons can be found in appendix A.

These foregoing steps were chosen to create an overview of expected outcomes and establish the necessary perspectives. A key aim of this research is to enhance teaching practices. By beginning with observation, it was possible to analyze which topics were interesting for further investigation. These first observations also provided the initial measurement for later comparison. It was crucial during these initial observations to maintain objectivity, without being influenced by previous knowledge or thinking. To achieve this, detailed notes were taken while watching the videos, recording all observable aspects and not only the ones that seemed interesting at that time. By using this unstructured observation method, a lot of data was registered for comparison with other lessons later on.

Following these initial observations, the interesting differences and similarities between the observed singing and piano lessons were identified. The list created from this served as the basis for the next step in the observation process. From this list, an observations sheet was made, to be used in later observations. However, because this sheet would not capture the completeness of a lesson, it was later decided not to use it. Yet, the observation sheet can be found in appendix B.

3.2.1 The Teachers

Drawing on the expertise of piano and voice teaching professionals was crucial for this study. Therefore, the next step in data collection was to approach conservatory teachers specializing in piano and voice, with a focus on teaching voice and piano pedagogy. We assumed that conservatory teachers would possess the expertise necessary to be considered field experts. To ensure this, we sought teachers who also teach methodology and pedagogy. The primary goal of collecting information from these teachers was to compile a list of subject-specific characteristics for each instrument. This allowed us to create an overview of the most important and interesting differences and similarities between teaching a piano lesson and teaching a singing lesson.

To ensure a comprehensive overview, two voice teachers and two piano teachers who met the specified criteria were selected. All four teachers have considerable experience working at the conservatory and specialize in teaching voice or piano. Moreover, they are actively involved in teaching methodology and pedagogy courses at the conservatory. When contacting these teachers, they were briefed about the research and the study's principles. All four teachers agreed to participate in the study by allowing observations and conducting interviews. All students that were observed, differed in age and skill level. When the teachers were approached, they were asked to think about which student could be interesting to observe. The selection of the students relied on the expertise of the teachers.

Teacher Information:

• • Teacher 1 (Piano) (from now on referred to as teacher CP1): Works at the conservatory for 8 years and studied CNSM in Paris with pedagogical courses as addition.
  • Teacher 2 (Piano) (from now on referred to as teacher CP2): Works at the conservatory for 24 years and studied classical piano and the music pedagogy and music education master.
  • Teacher 3 (Vocal) (from now on referred to as teacher CV1): Works at the conservatory for 3 years and studied classical singing bachelor and opera master
  • Teacher 4 (Vocal) (from now on referred to as teacher CV2): Works at the conservatory for 20 years and studied jazz vocals bachelor and master.

Each teacher was observed in at least one lesson, and an interview lasting at least 25 minutes was conducted. Multiple lessons were observed from Teacher 1 and Teacher 3.

To ensure that the range of gathered information was as wide as possible during observation, it was not predetermined which aspects would be observed. Later on, the information obtained from this unstructured observation method, was analyzed using the data gathered in the first step of the research. This method was chosen because it was still not clear which aspect would produce interesting results. The written observations can be found in appendix C.

3.3 Interview Questions

However, for the interview, predetermined questions were based on the data collected in the first step of the study and the already found literature. The questions were not always asked in the same order to maintain the natural flow of the interview.

1. 1. What is the typical lesson structure?
   2. How do you select the repertoire?
   3. What instructional strategies do you use?
   4. How do you provide feedback?
   5. How do you assess progress?
   6. What is the teacher's physical position during lessons?
   7. What are the specific characteristics of your teaching field?

Afterwards, question 5 appeared to not have been asked to all four teachers, so it had to be disregarded.

These interviews were conducted at the same day as the observed lessons and took place after the observations. All the interviews were recorded and later transcribed and analyzed. During the interviews, all the conclusions drawn by the answers were presented to the interviewees to make sure that the conclusions were correct. The transcriptions of these interviews can be found in appendix D, E, F and G.

When asking questions and conducting interviews, it's crucial to bear in mind that these teachers have been teaching according to their own beliefs for many years. Like all teachers, they teach in a way that they believe is the best. To ensure that this personal teaching approach would not influence the interview answers, as we are seeking subject-specific characteristics rather than teacher-specific ones, each teacher was asked to differentiate between personal considerations and characteristics inherent to the subject, regardless of the teacher. For some teachers this was quite a struggle, so during the interview there was a constant reminder for the interviewees to make sure that their answers were focused on the right information.

Since these teachers are highly developed in the field of didactics and pedagogy, it can be assumed that the teachers are able to take this thought into account when answering the questions.

Teacher 1 not only offers regular piano lessons but also conducts 'duo lessons' where both pianists and singers attend to learn to play together. One of these duo lessons was observed, together with the other lessons that day. Important to address is that in these lessons, the main focus is on the pianist, and the singer is there to let him learn. Nonetheless, this duo lesson was an interesting dynamic to observe. Because of these lessons, teacher 1 had a bit more insight and experience and was interviewed a second time. In this second interview, the teacher was given preliminary findings in the research and these findings were discussed. The transcription of this discussion can be found in appendix H.

3.3.1 More Teachers

One aim of the research is to enhance my personal teaching practices. As these practices mainly involve working with amateurs, it's essential to bridge the gap between the professional and amateur realms. Thus, the next data collection step involved examining two teachers who specialize in teaching amateurs. Both teachers have studied their main instrument and pursued additional educational master's or bachelor's degrees. To ensure comparability of the acquired material, lessons were approached with the same level of objectivity, and identical questions were asked during the interviews.

Teacher Information:

• • Teacher 5 (Vocal) (From now on referred to as teacher AV): Teaches for 8 years and studied music theater in Arnhem. 
  • Teacher 6 (Piano) (From now on referred to as teacher AP): Teaches for 6 years and studied classical piano in South-Africa
    
    

From both teachers, two lessons were observed, followed by an interview. The written observations can be found in appendix I, the transcription of the interview can be found in appendix J and K.

It was important to look at teachers who teach amateurs to compare whether the same subject-specific characteristics are apparent. In addition, this target group is interesting because it is closer to the daily practice of the research. 

3.4 Data Analysis

From the outset of the study, data analysis was divided into several steps, with thematic analysis used in almost all stages. In the initial phase, when examining personal practice, the topics of interest were not yet clear. Therefore, the data was analyzed broadly, with any emerging specifics noted. These specifics could include both similarities between lessons and differences between instruments. To ensure an equal analysis of all lessons, observations were made first before analysis. This prevented the observations from being influenced by the data already analyzed. The data was analyzed using the following steps:

• • Familiarization
  • Coding
  • Generating themes
  • Reviewing themes
  • Defining and naming themes
  • Writing up

The method described above allowed for an examination of interesting lesson components from both personal and theoretical perspectives. The decision was made not to focus on the difference in the use of technique between the instruments. While the difference in the use of hands and the use of vocal cords during the lesson was significant, it was also obvious and therefore less pertinent to the study.

This process of data collection and data analysis resulted in a clear understanding of the differences and similarities between the vocal and piano lessons. A list was compiled of subject specific teaching strategies and similarities and differences. This list was then used in subsequent observations to compare whether the data matched or differed. The written list can be found in appendix L.

3.5 Justification
The decision was made to start with broad data collection and gradually narrow it down during the study. This approach aimed to avoid overlooking any interesting lesson components initially. Moreover, starting broadly allowed for a comprehensive overview of what might be interesting and what might not. Once a list of interesting lesson characteristics was selected, it remained unchanged to ensure consistent observations unaffected by the circumstances of the lesson. The interviews were conducted using recurring questions, with some room for personal interpretation to ensure that any teachers' own input could also be included.

3.6 Ethical Consideration

As this study includes data from children and adolescents under the age of 18, verbal or written parental consent was obtained in advance from each student. All teachers checked whether students and/or parents would be okay with the observation. Additionally, it was decided to keep the data confidential. Names have not been and will not be disclosed. The names of the teachers who participated in the study are also not provided, as there is no added value in mentioning them. Noting their experience and positions is sufficient.