Chosen perspective

Collaboration in arts has been the subject of much research, especially in the past three decades. Some authors aim to describe collaborations and the possible degrees of engagement by their participants^{37; 38; 39; 40}, while other focus on their direct experiences^{41; 42; 43; 44}. I also considered some articles coming from distant domains, namely education, social sciences, and health care, which helped me develop an effective methodology.

Interestingly enough, before discovering Action Research, I was already planning to adopt it by developing the methodology and tools I chose for this research derived from my experience as a Scout Leader in Florence in the past years, as a member of C.N.G.E.I.⁴⁵.

Action Research

Action research is a methodology where two diverse mechanisms work together to enhance a final qualitative research outcome. The first one, action, is the practical impact of the project, whereas research brings understanding and reflection about what is happening. The balance between the two elements might vary depending on the needs of each research project.(Fig. 3)  

Bob Dick, in the website dedicated to action research, creates a comprehensive report of what this kind of research is and how to apply this format at best to any research. He describes a type of research that "uses a cyclic or spiral process" and consequently "converges to something more useful over time for both action and understanding"⁴⁶, specifically applied to the psychological field.

Due to the freedom, economy, and rigour granted by this approach, I think it perfectly fits my project too.

Applying action research to artistic research, specifically in the musical field, implies awareness of the importance of practice in the musical field and the essential process of elaborating what a musician does during practice. Reflecting upon hows and whys increases consciousness about technical issues and musical choices (and their close interdependence), often resulting in more convincing performances. 

The most intriguing features of action research are responsiveness and participation. Both impact the engagement of involved individuals, leading to change. 

Action research can make it very challenging to find justifications in some fields. Luckily, applied to artistic research, this methodology leaves freedom and justifies almost any chosen direction.

Although I was not informed about this methodology when I started researching collaboration, I can definitely see many analogies with the Scout educational method, which was one of the starting points of my methodology. When I casually discovered this approach, it gave me a solid foundation to build a valid methodological structure, but still, I did not follow it as a dogmatic truth. In his article, Dick highlights that the chosen method must be rigorous. I had, however, to apply the principles of action research to the methodology of this research during its application. Although this fluidity in methods might seem a paradox, the concept of "ecological validity" supports it. 

The present study displays data collection choices in the methodology chapter, and their goal "is to achieve action and research outcomes in such a way that each enriches the other"⁴⁷.

Experimental Control vs Ecological validity⁴⁸

Any methodology, especially in action research, should adapt to the context to produce a positive environment for the development of the interactions. An excessively static and rigid methodology could result in an equally stiff process, whereas an intelligently flexible methodology would have best fitted the project, especially if its changes adapt to the problems that emerge during the feedback sessions.

Methodology:

Throughout the process of collaboration, especially after the periodical feedback sessions with the composers, I had to continuously change and adapt my approach to the methodology and to the research itself as the dynamics of the collaborations had to be modified in some ways. I think this helped me discover more possible ways of collaborating, and experience what was enhancing the two processes I was involved in, and what I had to modify or implement to improve each of them. 

Tools

As previously mentioned, I had a quite clear idea of the methodology I wanted to adopt, perhaps even before having a clear idea of what I wanted to explore. My methodology took shape as I thought of how I could follow and understand some of the many processes and dynamics that are implied and intertwined in a collaboration. 

First of all, I wanted to have "objective" material I could assess after the sessions, even though it is not possible to collect objective data, I thought that an audio and video recording would be the most external perspective I could obtain without having other researchers observing the process without being directly involved. This was therefore the first tool I chose to use.

Secondly, I considered that, as both a participant and a researcher, my thoughts and feelings between, during and after the sessions would have been relevant to track the process in detail, minimising omissions due to the lack of memory. This is the reason why I kept a journal throughout the whole project, notating some checkpoints and important turns during the process, together with some thoughts or important inputs I got by interacting with other people.

Due to the intrinsically social and shared nature of the project, my impressions would have needed to be combined with and compared to the ones of the composers involved, this is why I chose to introduce periodical feedback moments. I did not want the feedback to be only a final "check" to have confirmation of wether the collaborations had been fruitful or not, because my idea was to adapt the process during its unfolding, a need for contexts in which experimental and social interactions are analysed. This has revealed to be a great choice: especially in the collaboration with Gaspar, some of the feedback sessions have been extremely useful for me to suggest and try out different possibilities and question what I was doing and how, during the research process.

The collaboration material was shared in a Google Drive folder (a different one for each collaboration) and we agreed to upload sketches, elaborate products and references we wanted to share with each other. We also tried to keep track of the content of the sessions on a shared document; it worked very well for the first couple of sessions of each collaboration (see Appendix 11 and Appendix 12).

I also collected data by conducting an interview with Gaspar and Jasper during a session of each collaboration and by accessing the conversations we had via email, Teams and WhatsApp. 

To this are added personal memories from the informal conversations I had with both the composers, but also with my Research Supervisor Bastiaan van der Waals, my main subject Teacher Thies Roorda and many other people I met during this years: composers, new music instrumentalists, members of contemporary ensembles, ... In particular, during the summer, I had the chance to meet and discuss this topic with Frank Bedrossian and his compositions students at the NewMusicWeek 2023 in Rome, Sonia Formenti and the other members of mdi ensemble, an Italian contemporary ensemble, and other instrumentalists that were attending the course.

Some of the conversations I had during that masterclass were insightful and probably impacted my ideas about the topic of this project.

In short

To keep track of the collaborative processes, I chose therefore to use all the tools I considered congruent with the aims, in order to be able to take from each of them the information needed and adapt the means to the needs of my investigation in each and every circumstance.

The chosen tools were:

• Audio and video recording
• Personal journal
• Periodical feedback
• Compositional sketches from all the participants (Gaspar, Jasper and myself)
• Shared folder on Google Drive, where we could share material and references
• Interviews with the collaborators
• Conversations through Email, Teams and WhatsApp - mostly with planning purposes
• Non-recorded informal conversations