Part III

Introduction to Part III

A wider societal perspective on artistic practice is essential for developing a considered understanding both of the subjectivity of individual musicians and how musicianship is shaped through collaboration and interaction, and, further, to identify the potential impact of musical practices in contemporary society. Music Performance in society is a core part of artistic research and practice as our work is disseminated in public with diverse audiences. Part III shares four case studies, each of which helped to inform the REACT model (see Introduction). The chapters here necessarily engage with all spheres within the model because, if students are being taught to share their work (lower sphere) and to apply their artistic research in all practice, including their learning, they must first have understood the context of their artistic world. This understanding must precede students’ exploration of their artistic voice, as it will help them to develop their own new practices, to build creative relations, and to then work across musical traditions and to grow their own innovations. The following chapters show how teaching, including the embedding of employability skills and questions of intersectionality, can facilitate students to develop their confidence, resilience, and engagement, as well as the skills to contextualise, explore, and share their artistic research through their intended art world.

The case studies in this Part offer four different teaching perspectives from different institutions, followed by Conclusions. Chapters 11 and 12, by, respectively, Sarah-Jane Gibson and Helen Julia Minors, are both examples from the UK that embed employability skills and emphasise graduate outcomes. These chapters also include discussion of issues of race, identity, intersectionality, and relationships. Both authors now work at the same institution and have developed their research into pedagogy across a decade, having taught and assessed in various countries, including India, Ireland, South Africa, Sweden, and the UK. As such, their development research applied through pedagogy here shares work that was in process and has been built over many years. As such, the longitudinal nature of the examples has helped formulate the multi-shared approach of the REACT model, which was developed following the various research activities presented in this present volume. This is a real genuine benefit to the field, as the model, to be shared with others in the sector, has been informed by international experience over many years.

The importance of terminology to inform practice is significant in managing student expectations and in sharing research to broaden and improve our collective sector practices. It is also therefore pertinent to why we have created the model, and to its future application within more institutions. As such, Odd T. Furnes’s chapter, ‘The Musical Object in Deep Learning’, Chapter 9, is crucial to defining and broadening our understanding of deep learning. Deep learning is important as it shows how there are many ways in which we as researchers and practitioners approach our work. It is pertinent that each of the Part III authors’ aims are articulated through research and applied in practice, as the hope is that these case studies may inspire similar work elsewhere. Definitions of process and reference to learning outcomes, module guides, and our institutional processes are also included to ensure there is transparency of Higher Education Institution process and practice. Readers will see that each chapter cites both institutional policy and develops to include the authentic student voice in feedback, focus groups, and so on, in order to learn from and with our students, how the pedagogy has been successful, and where developments are still needed. Each of the authors offers examples of how the co-construction of content with students ensures a student-centred approach. This is vital as the projects aim to improve graduate outcomes and students’ ability to move smoothly into the creative industries, and, by so doing, to influence societal change for the better. Chapter 10, by Randi Eidsaa and Mariam Kharatyan, specifically questions how we teach performance through a contemporary societal lens. This chapter looks at the beginning of the REACT project with case studies which are specifically part of the development nature of the funded work.

As this volume addresses the need and appetite for developing performance education in a higher education context, spanning the continent of Europe, it is important here that the voices, experiences, and case studies are diverse. To that effect, the notion of intercultural practice underpins these chapters, in exploring how connections between cultures, and exchanges across cultures are significant (see especially Chapters 11 and 12). Through questioning the intercultural aspects of this artistic research in pedagogic practice, the authors reflect on their practice, much as in Part II, to detail not only what they have done but also how the process has benefited their students, in providing new experiences and challenging students (and staff) to look beyond their own experience to that of others. In essence, questioning the interculturality of the work we co-create encourages us all, as artistic researchers, to consider the relationality and intersectionality of the process and final artwork.1

It speaks to the model’s adaptability that each of the case studies in Part III references the model to illustrate how the work, completed prior to the model, has been reflected in it. The model, therefore, is a result of a longitudinal project. It is founded on many years of pedagogic research and practice that, though it predates the network, has been brought together and consolidated through REACT.