From the early stages of colonial education to the present day, the evolution of music education in Latin American countries has been shaped by the adoption of educational models imported by dominant foreign powers. This process has repeatedly involved the implementation of models ill-suited to the specific characteristics of local students (Godoy Aguirre, 2012), largely based on the methodological traditions of European conservatoires (Carrillo & González-Moreno, 2021). Therefore, it is of utmost importance to consider the socio-cultural context before introducing foreign educational models, given the traditions, characteristics, and unique features of musical learning and transmission in Amerindian cultures. These are predominantly oral transmission cultures, in which musical knowledge is passed down through imitation and repetition, as is the case in various ancient musical traditions such as those of northern India (Farrell, 1997; Nettl & Russell, 1998) and the Amerindians (Weinberg et al., 2020; Stevenson, 2022), as well as in modern musical cultures like jazz (Carter, 1986; Berliner, 1994; Keezer, 1996; Prouty, 2004, 2006; Poulter, 2008).
It is worth noting that jazz, since its inception, has traditionally been taught and learned through oral transmission, similar to the musical cultures mentioned above. Furthermore, it is debatable whether the term «informal learning»—often positioned as the antithesis of «formal education»—is appropriate to describe learning processes based on imitation, repetition, memorisation, and listening, which prevail in oral cultures. This contrasts with formal, standardised education based on text, reading, and sheet music, as found in institutions precisely termed conservatoires (Nettl, 1995; Small, 1998). The introduction of teaching methodologies such as those used in jazz into higher music education has prompted a reassessment of traditional conservatoire teaching practices, which are rooted in reading and performance (Farrell, 1997). Educators from various settings have begun to explore new approaches aimed at connecting students’ cultural contexts with their learning, thereby generating more relevant and effective educational processes (Ramírez Martínez & Rodríguez-Quiles, 2020).
[…]
The aim was to “connect what is being studied with the reality and daily life of students” (Ramírez García & Rodríguez-Quiles, 2020, p. 18). To this end, it sought to draw upon students’ prior training—often acquired in informal contexts—and integrate it into the university’s academic environment. The objective was to link their previous training (their musical capital), the methodology of informal learning, and the academic world. In other words, the initiative aimed to avoid the scenario described by Jaffurs (2004), in which students “learn in ways we don’t teach them” (p. 190). Academia often disregards prior informal learning, treating students as blank slates. However, authors such as Folkestad (1998) argue that music teachers rarely interact with students entirely devoid of musical background. On the contrary, students typically possess rich and complex musical knowledge derived from various sources and activities outside the classroom.
Accordingly, the educational innovation project drew upon students’ musical capital and adopted a methodology emphasising listening, imitation, and repetition—common practices in informal learning and musical genres such as jazz (Carter, 1986; Williams, 1973; Berliner, 1994; Keezer, 1996; Prouty, 2004, 2006, 2011; Poulter, 2008). This is particularly important, as it revitalises traditional methods of musical teaching and learning while incorporating the socio-cultural context in which music is created. It recovers prior musical knowledge and, more importantly, reaffirms and strengthens students’ cultural and musical identities. It is essential to note that, even though the degree focused on jazz and modern music, these practices were rare. The inclusion of jazz in educational settings often led to the replacement of its methodologies with those tied to the formal study of music—exclusively based on reading, interpretation, notation, and the score as the sole means of transmitting knowledge (Javors, 2011). The consequences have been documented in numerous studies showing frequent student frustration and early dropout, not only in countries with strong oral traditions but also in many Western nations (Kavčič Pucihar et al., 2024).
Informal music learning
Since the 1990s, authors such as Lilliestam (1996), Fornäs et al. (1995), Green (2002, 2005), and Folkestad (2006) have underlined the need to study the informal processes associated with music learning, which they define as a multidimensional process that should be studied in all its contexts, and not just the institutional one. Authors such as Folkestad (2005) and Herrera, Cremades, and Lorenzo (2010) point out that, nowadays, the music teaching process is based on the study of Western classical music to the exclusion of other methodologies, which would make it possible to build “the necessary connection with the real sound environment that surrounds the students and makes up the bulk of their knowledge and experiences” (Herrera, Cremades & Lorenzo, 2010, p. 38). Green (2006) argues that introducing the various methodologies tied to informal learning would have positive effects on students, and that, although different teachers in different countries have tried to blend the classroom with students’ musical culture outside school, at present, formal music education has only changed its curriculum by adding content, and not informal learning methodologies (Green, 2005). She therefore suggests fashioning a less traditional learning context (less Eurocentric or anchored in the tradition of conservatories), which retrieves practices of learning musical genres such as jazz (or other popular or folkloric genres), in which music is approached without starting “from musical reading-writing as a sine qua non for making music” (Ramírez Moreno & Rodríguez-Quiles, 2020, p. 20). This would also craft “a more effective and meaningful learning environment in that it is generally comfortable and without the pressure to get a numerical grade” (Mok, 2017).
However, although most of these authors agree on the importance of studying informal learning, they do not all share the same definition of it, thus leading to a number of categories. As Folkestad (2006) notes, these categories are not exclusive, and in most of the various authors’ conceptions, they have areas in common. Rogers (2007) defines informal learning on the basis of where it takes place, thereby defining informal learning as any which is conducted outside schools. Meanwhile, Jorgensen (1997) defines the term on the basis of who leads and makes decisions about what and how to study, where informal learning is that which is not led or sequenced by a teacher. Finally, some authors refer to the intention of the process, either in relation to whether the student is aware that they are learning (Ziehe, 1982), or whether the activity has an educational purpose (Trilla, 2003).
Nevertheless, and anchored in the needs of this study, informal music learning will be examined by drawing on the ideas of authors such as Green (2002, 2005, 2008) and Lilliestam (1996), who derive their definition of informal learning from an analysis of its methodology. This methodology is characterised by practices in which the student selects the repertoire they wish to study and engages in a continuous process of trial and error, both individually and in groups. The student organises their study independently, or with the assistance of people close to them, such as family or friends, and builds in improvisation and composition as essential components of the learning process. Finally, it is pertinent to note the omnipresence of the use of hearing in the above processes, since, by harnessing this sense, the student can learn by imitating recordings or their peers. Thus, conscious peer direction and unconscious learning through attentive listening, imitation, and dialogue among the group’s members can be observed in a group setting (Mok, 2017). All this entails a paradigm shift from a culture based on the eye, reading, text, and score, towards the recovery of an oral culture based on hearing as the primary sense of learning music—an art and science which resides squarely in listening (Calvi, 2018).
Informal music learning and jazz: a methodological connection
The study of the development of jazz teaching reveals various connections with informal music learning. Carrillo and González Moreno (2021), citing Green (2002) and Vitale (2011), point to various processes by which popular musicians harnessed the informal learning strategies described above to learn music. They include learning “through interaction with other musicians, the use of self-taught learning methods, as well as enculturation processes” (p. 140). The authors also note the importance in these processes of “learning through hearing and imitation, collaborative work, and developing creativity” (p. 140). With respect to learning jazz, authors such as Williams (1973), Carter (1986), Murphy (1994), Berliner (1994), Prouty (2006), and Goldman (2010) take a very similar line, and when describing how musicians learned jazz, they emphasise the significance of oral learning in the early stages of the development of the musical genre, as jazz had not been codified in any other way than aurally. Listening and imitation among musicians thus became essential for the transmission and learning of the genre—something which connects at the methodological level with the previously described conceptions of informal learning from authors such as Lilliestam (1996), Folkestad (2006), and Green (2002, 2005, 2008).
Berliner (1994) differentiates between two types of learning involving auditory learning, imitation, and the presence of a community of musicians. Firstly, situations involving a musical role model: “Experts guide younger members in applying their technical knowledge by constantly rehearsing and performing with them, thereby transmitting their deep sense of responsibility for the music” (Berliner, 1994, p. 50). This musician serves as a guide or mentor for the youngest musicians who imitate them. An example of this is the informal instrument practice sessions between musicians from the same neighbourhood or participation in jam sessions, which became laboratories where they could interact and learn from the aforementioned musical role models. Secondly, situations where musicians learn by osmosis as they are involved in music activities that are part of their daily lives, such as the repertoire performed at mass, popular songs played at family gatherings, and other musical examples associated with social events. Indeed, Berliner (1994) defines the jazz community as the main educational agent in the early part of the twentieth century, thereby forging a new connection with informal learning in which the group is involved not only as an educating agent but also as a source of extrinsic motivation.
Jazz musicians learn to improvise by interacting with other musicians, following a pattern of imitation and repetition and innovation with respect to what is heard and played, in which the better trained musicians are conveyors of technical skills, knowledge, ideas, insights, beliefs, and more, which are transmitted by imitation and repetition, by contagion or osmosis to the beginner musicians. This is especially the case in jam sessions, in the collective musical improvisation session taking place in the public venues scheduling them, where the musician is exposed to interaction with other musicians, generally in an atmosphere of camaraderie and mutual support, yet also competitive, and in which a logic and dynamic of virtuous competition in improvisation skills, implicit criticism, and review of the outcome of the joint action unfolds (Calvi, 2018).
Later on, jazz as a musical genre underwent a series of changes in the way it was taught due to a process of institutionalisation that was essential for its admission into academia (Javors, 2001). Javors (2001) contends that these changes are down to the Eurocentric approach of educational institutions today, which hinders the inclusion of a musical genre with an Afro-centric aesthetic. Other authors, such as Nettl (1995), point to other problems such as the rejection of improvisation in this type of school. Consequently, jazz and its teachers had to address a process of codification of its language, which would enable them to adapt to the needs of using the notation present in universities or conservatories, and build a common theoretical foundation which they could tap to communicate (Prouty, 2011). An instance of this is the work done by musicians such as George Russell, which led to the development of scale-chord relationship theories—a tool which underpins the teaching of improvisation today. This exemplifies a process of denaturing the musical genre, in which characteristic aspects of jazz, such as certain melodic or rhythmic inflections, are left out (Ake, 2002). This process thus shifts the learning of jazz from the informal to the formal setting, thereby relinquishing the methodology described above.
In Western culture, music literacy has a very specific meaning, which is the ability to read musical notation. In this context, visual interaction with the score is considered paramount, often overshadowing auditory learning methods. Hence, notation is of immense importance in Western musical communities, overlooking the fact that many of the first musical encounters often occur through hearing and not sight. Nonetheless, music is perceived primarily in modern societies as what is written on a score, rather than what is transmitted orally or learned by imitation and repetition (Nettl, 1995).
Informal learning and its intersection with motivation and musical capital
Notwithstanding the established categories, the features of this study make it critical to unpack the potential intersections between motivation, students’ musical capital, and informal music learning. In terms of motivation, Green (2002, 2005) emphasises its significance in informal music learning processes. She argues that students who take part in informal learning show high levels of both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation is a driving force for their individual progress and is fuelled by the fact that these students feel identified with both the musical activities they engage in and also the music they play, which allows them to define themselves on a personal level (Fornäs et al., 1995; Green, 2002, 2005; Coulson, 2010; Valenzuela, 2014). Meanwhile, extrinsic motivation stems from the fact that many of these learning activities are conducted on a group basis. The group, often consisting of friends or family members, prompts the students to develop a sense of responsibility, cooperation, and commitment to music learning (Jorgensen, 1997; Green, 2002, 2005).
It is crucial to note the dynamics of peer interaction and communication in improvisational music learning processes—how affective, cognitive, and communicative bonds are established with the other person or people that allow music learning. This is especially true in music genres such as jazz, where the virtuoso competitiveness between musicians enables modes of learning by osmosis, imitation, repetition, contact, and affection in horizontal spaces such as jam sessions, chance musical encounters, etc. (Calvi, 2018). In aseptic settings such as music institutions (conservatories), where teacher-learner relationships are hierarchical and vertical, knowledge is examined and quantified, thereby blocking the learning process and removing motivation. Pleasure is a core component of any learning process, especially in music (Colwell & Richardson, 2002).
In terms of musical capital, Coulson (2010) draws on Bourdieu’s conception of capital to coin a term—musical capital—which encompasses the music experiences and knowledge that enable individuals to develop their musical identity. She says this musical capital is obtained from early ages by experimenting with music in an open, intuitive, and inclusive way, with the support of the role models involved in the process, especially when these are more experienced musicians. Herrera, Cremades, and Lorenzo (2010) point out the intersection between motivation, informal learning, and musical capital by emphasising the importance of connecting classroom experiences with the information that has shaped the student’s musical background, through the inclusion of practices related to informal learning in order to enhance their motivation for learning music.
Full text: Merino, M., & Calvi, J. C. R. (2024). The Role of Informal Learning in College Jazz Education in Ecuador: Contextualizing Students’ Musical Capital. Harmonia: Journal of Arts Research and Education, 24(2), 358-375. http://dx.doi.org/10.15294/harmonia.v24i2.16005