APPROVED: Scott J. Warren, Major Professor Demetria Ennis-Cole, Co-Major Professor Bill Elieson, Committee Member Cathleen Norris, Chair of the Department

of Learning Technologies Kinshuk, Dean of the College of

Information Victor Prybutok, Vice Provost of the

Toulouse Graduate School

EXTENDING THE APPRENTICESHIP THROUGH INFORMAL LEARNING ON

FACEBOOK: AN INTERPRETATIVE PHENOMENOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

OF THE LIVED EXPERIENCES OF MUSIC FACULTY

Tamara R. Meredith

Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS

May 2017

Meredith, Tamara R. Extending the Apprenticeship through Informal Learning on

Facebook: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis of the Lived Experiences of

Music Faculty. Doctor of Philosophy (Learning Technologies), May 2017, 158 pp., 8

tables, 4 figures, references, 140 titles.

Facebook studio groups/pages are commonly used by applied music faculty to

communicate with current students, recruit new students, share students' activities, and

promote faculty members' professional performances and academic endeavors.

However, the blurred lines between academic, professional performance, and social

activities in the field have led to a wide variety of approaches to Facebook use by music

faculty. This dissertation documents the first generation of music faculty social media

users and investigates the beliefs, intent, and lived experiences of music faculty who

use Facebook studio groups/pages to communicate with their students. Four music

faculty were interviewed and a semester's Facebook studio group/page data collected

for each faculty member. Interviews and Facebook data were analyzed using

Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) to identify emergent, and ultimately

super-ordinate, themes from the data. The three super-ordinate themes that emerged

were: impact of social media on studio teaching and learning, learning through

enculturation, and faculty lived experiences with Facebook studio groups/pages.

ii

Copyright 2017

by

Tamara R. Meredith

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This degree and dissertation would not have been possible without the support

and encouragement of an entire village of family, friends, and colleagues. Gratitude and

thanks go out to:

My bosses and managers, for allowing me time away whenever needed for

course meetings and research; my orchestra directors and personnel managers, who

were understanding when I was the last one in my chair for rehearsal because I was

catching as much of an online class that evening as possible; and the Girl Scout leaders

and string orchestra teachers, for never looking askance as I sat in the back of the room

reading articles and typing frantically while my daughter was in your care.

I would also like to thank my committee—Dr. Scott Warren, Dr. Bill Elieson, and

Dr. Demetria Ennis-Cole—for their feedback, support, and integrity throughout my

dissertation process, and my colleagues and cohort-mates, for their friendship and

encouragement throughout the degree program.

Finally, I thank my family—parents, Jim and Jeani Rotz, for their unwavering

support of my academic and musical education; daughter Katie, who was forced to

learn to microwave her own dinners at the age of eight and tolerate her mother’s bizarre

conversation topics about learning and technology on the ride to school every morning

for three years and counting; and my husband, Scott—words cannot express my

gratitude for your support and tolerance these past few years. You believed I would

never be content with just one doctor in the house, and you were right. Thank you for

your willingness to make sacrifices and pick up the slack at home so that this

dissertation and degree could be possible.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iv

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... vii

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ viii

Chapters

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1

Problem Statement .................................................................................... 5

Purpose of the Study ................................................................................. 6

Relevance and Value ................................................................................. 7

Conceptual Framework .............................................................................. 9

Definition of Terms ................................................................................... 11

Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations ............................................ 13

2. REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH ............................................................ 15

Apprenticeship ......................................................................................... 16

Situated Learning, Legitimate Peripheral Participation, and Communities

of Practice ................................................................................................ 19

Virtual Communities of Practice ............................................................... 20

Enculturation ............................................................................................ 22

Anticipatory Socialization ......................................................................... 24

Perceptions of Social Media as an Informal Learning Environment ......... 26

Social Media and Personal Identity ............................................... 27

Initiating/Responding to Connection Requests ..............................30

Hierarchy and Power Structure ..................................................... 31

Self-Direction Requirements to Benefit from Informal Learning .....33

Instructor Beliefs - Social Media as an Informal Learning Tool ..... 35

Challenges/Barriers to Adoption .................................................... 37

Published Studies of the Use of Facebook by Music Faculty ................... 40

Facebook as a Tool to Support a Community of Practice ............. 41

v

Using Facebook to Increase Student Engagement and Sharing ... 42

3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS ........................................................ 45

Methodology ............................................................................................ 45

Participant Selection ................................................................................ 49

Research Setting ..................................................................................... 50

Data Collection ........................................................................................ 51

Demographic Information .............................................................. 52

Semi-Structured Interviews ........................................................... 53

Facebook Studio Group/Page Data .............................................. 53

Data Analysis ........................................................................................... 54

Collaborative Data Analysis .......................................................... 54

Establishing Credibility ............................................................................. 56

Ethical Considerations ............................................................................. 59

4. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS .......................................................................... 60

Introduction .............................................................................................. 60

Findings ................................................................................................... 60

Berlioz ........................................................................................... 62

Gordeli .......................................................................................... 69

Mozart ........................................................................................... 76

Stamitz .......................................................................................... 83

Super-Ordinate Themes across Cases .................................................... 91

Impact of Social Media on Studio Teaching and Learning ............ 94

Learning through Enculturation ..................................................... 99

Lived Experiences with Facebook Studio Groups/Pages ............ 102

Results and Interpretation ...................................................................... 106

Impact of Social Media on Studio Teaching and Learning .......... 106

Learning through Enculturation ................................................... 111

Lived Experiences with Facebook Studio Groups/Pages ............ 113

vi

Summary ............................................................................................... 115

5. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................... 119

Discussion of Results............................................................................. 119

Connecting Findings to Conceptual Framework .................................... 123

Limitations of the Findings ..................................................................... 125

Recommendations for Practice .............................................................. 127

Recommendations for Future Research ................................................ 129

Summary ............................................................................................... 131

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................. 132

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 147

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. IPA Process and Research Activities Timeline................................................ 48

Table 2. Participant 1, Berlioz: Emergent Themes and Descriptors...............................63

Table 3. Participant 2, Gordeli: Emergent Themes and Descriptors.............................. 70

Table 4. Participant 3, Mozart: Emergent Themes and Descriptors .............................. 77

Table 5. Participant 4, Stamitz: Emergent Themes and Descriptors ............................. 84

Table 6. All Emergent Themes Developed from Data Analysis..................................... 92

Table 7. Super-Ordinate Themes with Associated Emergent Themes.......................... 94

Table 8. Facebook Studio Page Management Comparison......................................... 104

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. An example from Berlioz’ Facebook studio group .......................................... 68

Figure 2. An example from Gordeli’s Facebook studio group ........................................ 74

Figure 3. An example from Mozart’s Facebook studio page ......................................... 79

Figure 4. An example from Stamitz’ Facebook studio group ......................................... 89

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

The master-apprentice dyadic roles assumed by applied music faculty and their

students are well documented in educational literature addressing pedagogic styles in

conservatories and university music departments (Daniel & Parkes, 2015; Burwell,

2012; Gaunt, Creech, Long, & Hallam, 2012). The applied teacher is the focal point for

most educational direction during a student’s tenure at an institution since weekly study

usually occurs with the same teacher every semester until graduation. As with all

master-apprentice relationships, it is the eventual goal of the student (apprentice) to

become a master him/herself. In the context of applied studio music study in higher

education, this results in the eventual “mastery” of an instrument or voice by an

apprentice whose training may include performance, pedagogy, music business

concepts, self-promotion, social skills, or other practices and behaviors that are deemed

important by the master for successful enculturation into the profession.

Music students often select their schools based upon prior interaction with, or the

reputation of, a single music faculty member who is or has been a professional

performer of the highest caliber (Nerland & Hanken, 2011). The perceived authority and

professional reputation of the master is key to recruiting apprentices. Once enrolled,

music students attempt to develop their professional identities through anticipatory

socialization (Bouij, 2004) with respected faculty, peers, and others in the music

profession. It is through the apprenticeship model, paired with anticipatory socialization

efforts, that music students acquire the skills, knowledge, and professional connections

that they will use in their future lives as musicians within the professional musical

1

community. In short—music students (apprentices) work to become professionals by

seeking out faculty (masters) who will teach them the requisite skills and behaviors and

provide anticipatory socialization opportunities. Once necessary musical and social

skills and behaviors are acquired, the apprentice assumes the role of master within a

greater professional music culture, and often the cycle repeats with the new master in a

position to take on new apprentices.

Studying the master-apprentice relationship in studio-based music education has

previously been difficult as it exists in isolated, one-on-one lessons that occur behind

closed doors. Additionally, asking musicians to reflect upon their experiences as

students carries with it the challenge that these former apprentices are now masters

and view themselves as such in their current practices. However, the recent availability

and adoption of social media platforms as informal, non-academic communication and

learning environments has provided a new level of visibility into these practices and

discourses. Faculty now communicate with current and future students as well as

colleagues from other institutions in a public environment, which provides researchers a

way to document their views, beliefs, and practices. Advice and/or instruction that may

have been previously imparted in an applied lesson—one-on-one, verbally, behind a

closed door—is now shared widely via social media and archived, ostensibly for the

foreseeable future. This new opportunity to share information carries with it potential

benefits and pitfalls for both master and apprentice, and is further complicated by the

fact that the current generation of music faculty masters has no previous experience

with, nor have they received guidance on, using social media as an informal learning

2

environment. They are, in this case, first-generation masters with no previous

experience as an apprentice to guide or inform their decision-making processes.

The social media tool often selected by music faculty for communication with

their studios is Facebook. Facebook is a social media platform begun in 2006 that

allows users to share information (text, media, links to other web content, etc.) with

“friends,” a pre-approved group of other Facebook members with whom a user can

interact. Caers, De Feyter, De Couck, Stough, Vigna, and Du Bois’ (2013) review of

literature concerning Facebook noted that there are three primary uses of the Facebook

platform: a one-to-one or one-to-many interaction with an intention to increase social

capital; passive consumption of media content, especially that approved and

recommended by peers; and broadcasting, where a user posts information without a

predetermined target audience. Facebook is also known as a platform that blurs private

and public boundaries for information sharing, with visibility of content dependent upon

the privacy settings of the user (Lincoln & Robards, 2014). However, Facebook users

seeking assistance or looking for information via the platform “report higher levels of

social capital, seeing Facebook as a valuable source of information, coordination, and

communication” (p. 1048).

Two different types of Facebook tools are used for studio communication by

music faculty: groups and pages. Facebook groups are managed by one or more

administrators who determine group membership and restrictions for posting content.

Groups can be public (all posts are visible to members and non-members), closed

(posts are only visible to members, but the group and its membership are visible to the

public), or secret (posts, membership, and the existence of the group is known and

3

visible only to admitted members). All members of a Facebook group can see basic

information about the group administrator and other members, but members must be

“friends” with each other to see the other’s full profile. Admitted members can post and

comment to the group without restriction. Administrators are also able to remove

individuals from a Facebook group. A Facebook page is also managed by an

administrator, but membership/joining is not employed as a management strategy.

Instead, the administrator determines who can post and how (anyone without restriction,

moderated posts/comments only, or administrator comments/posts only) through global

settings for the Facebook page. All allowed posts to the page are publicly visible. Since

membership is not an organizing principle, administrators cannot add or remove

participants from their pages. However, they can block posts from specific individuals.

From an administrative perspective, Facebook groups require more time spent

managing membership while Facebook pages can require more time moderating

content. However, since both Facebook groups and pages are used somewhat

interchangeably as elements of the phenomenon studied here, the term “Facebook

studio groups/pages” is employed throughout this dissertation.

Educators have used Facebook directly and indirectly for communication and

educational purposes since its inception over a decade ago (Sumuer, Esfer, & Yildirim,

2014). The literature reviewed in this dissertation shows substantial inquiry into using

Facebook and other social media platforms to extend the formal learning environment of

the classroom into an informal space where students are already participating in social

discourse. However, no studies have been done that address potential impacts of

extending the traditionally one-to-one, private master-apprentice relationship into an

4

environment that is one-to-many or many-to-many in nature, with indefinitely retained

documentation of all discourses. Since Facebook is the most commonly used social

media tool at the time of this writing, this study is situated in Facebook tools and

practices currently utilized by academic music faculty and their students.

Problem Statement

Facebook studio groups/pages are commonly used by applied music faculty to

communicate with current students, recruit new students, share students’ activities, and

promote faculty members’ professional performances and academic endeavors.

However, the blurred lines between academic, professional performance, and social

activities in the field have led to a wide variety of approaches to Facebook use by music

faculty. Faculty and students may still assume the roles of master-apprentice even

when interacting in online environments, but this may not be explicitly understood by the

participants. Additionally, faculty “lived experiences” with social media may be imparted

to students as examples of professional social interactions in the music world.

The inherent nature of master-apprentice relationships in the academic music

field suggests that previous studies of social media communication practices between

or among teachers and students in higher education are not generalizable to music

schools. There are no studies that address the potential impact of expanding master-

apprentice relationships into informal learning environments via social media. Music

faculty members’ personal and professional social media interactions with students and

colleagues, made visible through Facebook applied studio groups/pages, might affect

how music students perceive the value of and expectations for use of social media in

5

the context of professional practice. However, these potential effects on student

perception have yet to be documented in academic literature.

Additionally, there have been recently published concerns related to the use of

social media and other web resources by music students who are no longer restricted to

hearing and communicating with a single master (Nerland & Hanken, 2011). This has

the potential to upset the traditional vertical authority structure of the master-apprentice

model—students are now able to “shop around” for multiple interpretations and

pedagogical approaches with a simple web search. This decentered apprenticeship

model (Nielsen & Kvale, 1997) is a recent phenomenon in the realm of higher education

music study; examining the belief systems of music faculty using Facebook studio

groups/pages is a first step toward an understanding of potential impacts on the

traditional educational model.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate the social media-related belief

systems, intended uses, and lived experiences of applied music faculty in higher

education. It provides a comprehensive view of current beliefs and practices, generates

a process for phenomenological study and analysis in this type of informal learning

environment, and identifies future topics of inquiry for social media dialogues between

or among music faculty members and students. Analyses were interpreted through the

lens of apprenticeship so that they could be more easily communicated with academic

music faculty, for whom apprenticeship is the most common and well-understood

teaching model.

6

My personal interest in designing this study stemmed from years spent as both

apprentice and master in higher education music environments. Since social media is a

recent phenomenon, the music faculty masters of this current generation are creating

their own practices without a pedagogical tradition or previous training to inform them—

an unusual method for teachers in this field. By studying this new avenue for master-

apprentice communication via Facebook studio groups/pages, I have documented the

first generation of music faculty social media masters’ beliefs, intentions, and lived

experiences as they interact with their apprentices. From this documentation and

analysis of current practices, I am providing current and future faculty with tools and

recommendations to improve the informal learning capacity of social media with their

students.

Relevance and Value

The immediate relevance of this study is that it is situated within the context of a

common daily activity for many faculty and students for which no best practices or

research studies exist. Bouij’s (2004) theory of anticipatory socialization suggests that

students seek out faculty information in multiple contexts—including social media

venues like Facebook—as part of their work toward determining who they want to be as

musicians; yet the potential impacts of this type of interaction via an informal learning

environment are new and unknown within the field of applied music study. Since

Facebook studio group/page use and management lies outside the official purview of

many institutions’ academic regulations, it is likely that effects—negative or positive—go

7

unnoticed and undocumented as part of the student’s educational experience, yet are

real and impactful as an extension of the master-apprentice relationship.

Another value of this research is the potential to provide guidance to music

faculty and administrators who wish to increase the positive impacts and use of social

media in studio-based music education. By studying the beliefs, intent, and lived

experiences of faculty members using Facebook studio groups/pages and overlaying

those intentions with actual practices, inferences can be made about learning

affordances and the effectiveness of certain types of messages and content. From

themes developed in this study, music faculty may be better able to target the

messages and uses of their Facebook studio groups/pages for recruiting, pedagogical,

liaising, or online behavior modeling practices.

Finally, this dissertation serves as a precursor to future studies that can

determine what students perceive about their masters, fellow apprentices, and other

professional colleagues from social media interaction and anticipatory socialization

practices during formal higher education in music. Now that themes from current

practices have been developed and investigated, it is possible to design and execute

future studies of student affective responses to different types of discourse and posts

that occur within Facebook studio groups/pages. Additionally, the application of

computer mediated discourse analysis (CDMA) techniques to Facebook data in these

environments can now be implemented with a better understanding of the beliefs and

intent of the faculty responsible for the Facebook groups/pages. This dissertation serves

as a foundation for uncovering and understanding first generation master-apprentice

8

relationships via social media in studio-based music education environments in higher

education.

Conceptual Framework

This study is an interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) of present-day

discourse as described by Smith, Flowers, and Larkin (2009). It is rooted in theories of

apprenticeship (Pratt, 1998; Rogoff, 1990) as well as Lave and Wenger’s (1991)

concepts of legitimate peripheral participation and communities of practice.

Apprenticeship has been the primary training and knowledge delivery method for music

education since the origin of guilds in Europe in the twelfth century. Pratt (1998) defines

modern apprenticeship as “the process of enculturating learners into a specific

community” (p. 11) and describes the master as both instructor and content in a single

unit. Rogoff (1990) expands the understanding of traditional apprenticeship to “go

beyond expert-novice dyads...focus[ing] on a system of interpersonal involvements and

arrangements in which...apprentices become more responsible participants” (p. 143).

Both theoretical descriptions of apprenticeship align with the basics of present-day

music training in higher education.

Lave and Wenger’s (1991) concept of legitimate peripheral participation is

illustrative of higher education music environments. Legitimate peripheral participation

describes the movement of a new group member (apprentice) from a position of

observation-only non-participation, through active participation, and into the role of

expert (master) within a community. This transition is an accurate description of a music

student entering a new program of study at a university or conservatory; the student

9

initially learns through observation (of both master and peers), begins to execute by

imitating what is heard/seen, and eventually moves into a position of expert within the

studio, usually after three to four years of study as part of an undergraduate degree

program.

The concept of communities of practice (CoP) (Lave & Wenger, 1991) is also

employed to address the larger community that develops through master-apprentice

relationships in higher education and professional music contexts. However, the digital,

mostly asynchronous nature of social media interactions on Facebook are best

approached as virtual communities of practice (vCoP) as discussed by Hibbert and Rich

(2006). While a CoP can connect individuals who share an interest and want to learn

more about a topic, a vCoP provides the opportunity to share and learn asynchronously,

without the need for physical co-location. The use of a Facebook page by music faculty

and students for extra-studio communication and socialization, while not directly tied to

stated learning goals, could be viewed as evolving toward the formal definition of a

vCoP.

Anticipatory socialization (Kramer, 2010; Bouij, 2004) is a key component of

understanding music student and faculty motivation for Facebook use. Students who

have decided to major in music and pursue a career as a professional musician look for

social opportunities to enhance their knowledge of and standing in the field. Bouij (2004)

found that music educators used anticipatory socialization to establish their role-

identities through routine social interaction with music teachers and peers. Facebook

studio groups/pages allow for increased social contact between faculty, students, and

other professionals in the field, which improves opportunities for anticipatory

10

socialization activities before, during, and after an apprenticeship. A Facebook studio

group/page may display many of the elements of a vCoP, but the motivation for faculty

and students to participate in the community originates with anticipatory socialization,

not identifiable learning goals.

Definition of Terms

The following key terms are used throughout the study. Operationalized definitions

are provided to clarify meaning and contextual usage.

Anticipatory Socialization – an individual’s adoption of group behaviors and

norms through social activities before group membership is granted

Apprentice – a learner who studies with a master as part of an apprenticeship

Apprenticeship – “the process of enculturating learners into a specific

community” (Pratt, 1998, p. 11); it is associated with occupation-based training, usually

involving physical skills and practice, and is governed by an agreement stipulating the

length of time and requirements/competencies that must be fulfilled before the

apprenticeship is complete.

Community of practice – any group of people with a shared interest in a topic,

profession, or craft who communicate with each other to learn and share information

about that interest.

Double hermeneutic – “...the researcher is trying to make sense of the participant

trying to make sense of what is happening to them” (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009, p.

3).

11

Enculturation – “...the process where the culture that is currently established

teaches an individual the accepted norms and values of the culture or society... It

teaches the individual their role within society as well as what is accepted behavior

within that society and lifestyle” (Kottak, 2004, p. 209).

Facebook – a social media platform begun in 2006 that allows users to share

information (text, media, links to other web content, etc.) with “friends,” a pre-approved

group of other Facebook members with whom a user can interact.

Facebook Live – a live-streaming service provided through the Facebook

platform, deployed in April 2016

Facebook studio groups/pages – virtual spaces within Facebook that are created

and maintained by music faculty; within groups, page membership includes students in

the faculty member’s studio and anyone else the faculty member allows to participate

Idiography – focuses on individual, contextualized accounts of lived experiences

Informal learning - “takes place outside the curricula provided by formal and non-

formal educational institutions and programs...learnings occur independently”

(Schugarensky, 2000, p. 2).

Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) – a qualitative research method

developed by Smith, Flowers, and Larkin (2009) that is used to examine how individuals

make sense of a given phenomenon. Inherent in IPA is the understanding that it is the

researcher’s job to document a participant’s interpretation of a phenomenon as well as

the researcher’s own perception of the participant’s interpretation.

Lived experience – participants’ experiences which contribute to their

understanding and interpretation of phenomena

12

Master – a highly-skilled practitioner who teaches his/her craft to apprentices

Phenomena – something that can be observed

Phenomenology – the study of a phenomenon through participants’ experience

with that phenomenon

Social media – “...a classification for a wide variety of popular technologies that

are open, facilitate interactivity, and encourage connectivity” (Joosten, Pasquini, &

Harness, 2013, p. 125)

Studio – a faculty member’s physical space where face-to-face, individualized

instruction occurs with students; also, the group of students who participate in that

instruction

Virtual community of practice – a community of practice in a virtual space,

without the need for physical co-location of group members

Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations

Several assumptions were made in the design and implementation of this

research study. It was assumed that a suitable number of participants would be willing

to participate in the study and that the inclusion criteria would result in a representative

sample that had relevant experience with the phenomenon being studied. It was also

assumed that the participants would answer interview questions honestly. Additionally, it

was assumed that participants used traditional apprenticeship practices in their face-to-

face studio instruction. Finally, it was assumed that the interview questions developed

and used would result in participants divulging their beliefs, intent, and lived

experiences with Facebook studio groups/pages.

13

One limitation of the study was the researcher’s inability to control the

environment where the participant was located during the interviews. The interviews

were conducted via Zoom.us (http://www.zoom.us), an online synchronous meeting

tool, so each participant selected his/her own location for the interview. Two chose to

participate from home, while two others chose to participate from their offices. Other

limitations included the small sample size (of the fourteen faculty solicited, only four

responded) and few previous research studies in this area to refer to as part of the

research design process.

A delimitation of the study was restricting participant selection to those who

managed/used publicly-visible Facebook studio groups/pages. Private or closed

Facebook groups/pages were not considered for inclusion in the study to avoid privacy

and consent issues. Another delimitation was the collection of a single semester’s data

from the Facebook studio groups/pages to examine a representative sample of

discourse from a typical temporal unit in higher education. Finally, this study was

delimited by its focus on music faculty use of Facebook studio groups/pages and their

interactions with students, and did not seek to understand or uncover the faculty

members’ broader use of social media or perceptions of value.

14

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

The purpose of this review of literature is to summarize and interpret existing

research in the fields related to this study. These include:

• Apprenticeship

• Situated learning, legitimate peripheral participation, and communities of

practice

• Virtual communities of practice

• Enculturation

• Anticipatory socialization

• Perceptions of social media as an informal learning environment

o Social media and personal identity

o Initiating/responding to connection requests

o Hierarchy and power structure

o Self-direction requirements in order to benefit from informal learning via

social media

o Instructor beliefs - value of using social media as informal learning tool

o Challenges/barriers to adoption

• Facebook use by academic music faculty and music educators

o Facebook as a tool to develop and/or support a community of practice

o Using Facebook to increase student engagement and sharing of

information/media resources

15

Apprenticeship

The field of classical music education (i.e., using Western European musical

practices) typically uses an apprenticeship educational model for instrumental and vocal

instruction in university and conservatory settings (Burwell, 2012; Burwell, 2015;

Nielsen, 2006; Nerland & Hanken, 2011; Haddon & Potter, 2014; Seaton, 1998).

Apprenticeship is often considered the oldest educational practice in human history;

Egan and Gajdamaschko (2003) refer to it as “the first, and most ancient, conception” of

education and point out that “this kind of learning has been perhaps the commonest in

human cultures across the world” (p. 2). However, the definition of apprenticeship is

less well agreed upon. Apprenticeship (or “traditional” apprenticeship), cognitive

apprenticeship, and mentoring are terms often used interchangeably by educators

discussing one-to-one learning contexts (Burwell, 2012)—however, all have distinct

characteristics and applications.

Traditional apprenticeship is associated with occupation-based training, usually

involving physical skills and practice, and is governed by an agreement stipulating the

length of time and requirements/competencies that must be fulfilled before the

apprenticeship is complete (Pratt, 1998/2016; Nielsen, 2006; Burwell, 2012). Pratt

(1998) notes that traditional apprenticeship is used to convey procedures rather than

tacit knowledge, and he addresses the use of increasingly complex cognitive schemas

to learn from, interpret, and predict outcomes of new experiences as part of an

apprenticeship. Rogoff (1995) views apprenticeship through a sociocultural lens and

includes the expectation that, “In apprenticeship, newcomers to a community of practice

advance their skill and understanding through participation with others in culturally

16

organized activities” (p. 143). These observations help define the practice as distinctly

participatory, social, and situated in real-world contexts; however, traditional

apprenticeship retains the characteristics of being governed by an agreement between

master and apprentice (in this context, a degree plan) and focused on skill and

knowledge acquisition toward achieving master status within a profession of practice.

Cognitive apprenticeship is an educational approach that strives to “make

thinking visible” (Collins, Brown, & Holum, 1991, p. 1) in those disciplines that include

mostly intellectual tasks (in contrast to the physical, visible/tangible task of traditional

apprenticeship). The master-apprentice dyad is still used, but the master is responsible

for explaining rather than showing skills to be acquired—and must be able to evaluate

the apprentice’s skill acquisition through tasks that allow the student to demonstrate

his/her cognitive processes rather than a physical product or performance. Although

cognitive apprenticeship theory has been applied to higher education music settings

(Varvarigou & Durrant, 2011; Hennessy, 2000), it is more commonly applied to cognitive

subjects like music theory and music education theory than studio-based instruction.

The term mentoring is also frequently seen in literature addressing higher

education music environments (Renshaw, 2009; Haddon & Potter, 2014; Hays,

Minichiello, & Wright, 2000; Liertz & Macedon, 2007; Gaunt, Creech, Long, & Hallam,

2012). However, although many of the elements of mentoring discussed in the literature

align with traditional apprenticeship practices in university music departments and

conservatories, the mentors in these studies were often not the students’ studio

teachers and did not assume a “master” role toward the student’s musical performance

training. Renshaw’s (2009) framework for mentoring students in music conservatories in

17

the United Kingdom described a multi-year project to “foster personal growth and to

help an individual place their artistic, personal and professional development in a wider

cultural, social and educational context” (p. 63). Key elements of the framework

included incorporating professional musicians from outside the educational institution as

mentors, mentor training for those participants, and extensive reflective and reflexive

practices for students. Haddon and Potter (2014) suggested that students’ creativity

might be improved through the guidance of a mentor who was not an instrument or

voice instructor, and worried that traditional apprenticeship practices could become

goal-oriented rather than process-oriented, leaving students without contextualized

knowledge. Liertz and Macedon (2007) called for a more holistic approach to mentoring

music students, including access to “a broad range of masters” (p. 8). They contrasted

the single master-apprentice educational model of higher education music to athletics,

where numerous trainers/mentors (coach, nutritionist, psychologist, etc.) were available

for each athlete, and commented that “music performance education needs to address

performance confidence and learn from sport performance’s success in this area, using

sport psychology principles” (p. 3).

The literature’s treatment of the terms traditional apprenticeship, cognitive

apprenticeship, and mentoring make it clear that traditional apprenticeship is the model

most currently in use in music department applied instrument and voice studios today.

In this study’s methods, findings, and analysis (Chapters 3 and 4), references to

apprenticeship reflect the traditional apprenticeship context and definition.

18

Situated Learning, Legitimate Peripheral Participation, and Communities of Practice

Both Rogoff (1995) and Pratt (1998) invoked Lave and Wenger’s (1991)

concepts of situated learning, legitimate peripheral participation, and communities of

practice as critical elements of apprenticeship. Lave’s work with tailors in

apprenticeships contributed to the eventual definition of situated learning as using

authentic, real-world educational contexts that “focus [on] the relationship between

learning and the social situation in which it occurs” (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 14).

Situated learning requires the participation of learners in a community of practice (CoP),

any group of people with a shared interest in a topic, profession, or craft who

communicate with each other to learn and share information about that interest. Wenger

(1998) identifies three elements that must be considered when analyzing a CoP:

a) What it is about – its joint enterprise as understood and continually

renegotiated by its members. b) How it functions – mutual engagement that binds

members together into a social entity. c) What capability it has produced – the

shared repertoire of communal resources...that members have developed over

time (p. 73)

As participants in a CoP gain skills, knowledge, and legitimacy within the

community, they move from the periphery to the interior of the CoP to assume a more

integral role—this is defined as legitimate peripheral participation (Lave & Wenger,

1991). In the case of apprenticeships, this type of legitimate peripheral participation

describes the gradual movement of an apprentice/newcomer to master/old-timer within

a CoP (Lave, 1991; Waite & Pratt, 2015). Additionally, participation in a CoP contributes

to the development of a professional identity (Wenger, 1998; Li, Grimshaw, Nielsen,

19

Judd, Coyte, & Graham, 2009) which is embedded in master-apprentice practices,

including those used in higher education music environments.

Virtual Communities of Practice

The increase in availability of communications technologies has expanded the

potential definition of and participation in CoP. Whereas the original theory was based

upon face-to-face, synchronous meetings of a group in a single location, CoP are now

often virtual (vCoP), using both synchronous and asynchronous tools to communicate

and share information with participants across the globe (Hibbert & Rich, 2006). Herring

(2004) presents six criteria that must be visible in an online environment for it to be

considered a vCoP:

1) Active participation and a core of regular participants

2) Shared history, purpose, culture, norms and values

3) Solidarity, support, reciprocity

4) Criticism, conflict, means of conflict resolution

5) Self-awareness of group as entity distinct from other groups

6) Emergence of roles, hierarchy, governance, rituals

Some differences between a CoP and a vCoP are rooted in the structure of the

enunciative space (Smyth, 2001) where participants make meaning; the asynchronous

nature of vCoP allow for more time for reading and reflecting rather than requiring

immediate verbal responses, and the unlimited distance options support communication

from a more diverse membership (Hibbert & Rich, 2006). There have also been

disagreements about whether a vCoP could legitimately be considered to support

20

situated learning when the participants are not “situated” near each other (an original

prerequisite for a CoP) (Waite & Pratt, 2015). However, Wenger, White, Smith, and

Rowe (2005) determined that the virtual communities supported the same CoP

practices of sharing knowledge and fostering learning opportunities even when

participants were geographically separated and reliant upon technology tools to

communicate.

Recent studies have investigated the use of social media tools to support the

development and use of vCoP. Literature reviews have been published on the topic in a

variety of fields, including medical education (Rolls, Hansen, Jackson, & Elliot, 2016)

and business (Aljuwaiber, 2016). Caldwell and Heaton (2016) analyzed social media

content from five cases of vCoP in teacher education programs. Other studies focused

on a single social media tool such as Twitter (Kilgore & Robinson, 2015; Lord &

Lomicka, 2014; Choo et al., 2015; Lewis & Rush, 2013) or Facebook (Aydin, 2012;

Wong, Kwan, & Leung, 2011; Brewer & Rickels, 2014; Edwards, Darwent, & Irons,

2016; Whittaker, Howarth, & Lymn, 2014).

A very thorough description of the necessary framework for building a vCoP with

social media tools was published in 2009 by Gunawardena, Hermans, Sanchez,

Richmond, Bohley, and Tuttle. The article addresses elements of learning that must be

considered when designing a CoP that will function online. Gunawardena et al. (2009)

propose a social networking spiral that moves from the social networking tools

themselves (Facebook, blogs, RSS feeds, etc.) through six phases of experience:

context, discourse, action, reflection, reorganization, and socially mediated

metacognition. This framework has since been used by a number of researchers to

21

evaluate vCoP for learning (Tzankova, 2011; Yussiff, Ahmad, & Oxley, 2014; Lau &

Meyers, 2013).

Enculturation

Pratt (1998) defines apprenticeship as “a process of enculturation...” (p.11);

interestingly, Pratt’s (2016) updated version of the same text uses the word

“socialization” in place of “enculturation.” The reason for the change is unclear, although

recently published literature suggests that social science seems to prefer the term

“socialization” to anthropology’s “enculturation.” Additionally, Veblen (2012) points out

that Schugurensky’s (2000) description of socialization “...could also be termed tacit

learning or enculturation” (p. 250). In this study, enculturation and socialization are

understood to be interchangeable terms based upon current definitions of both that

include an individual learning the belief systems, values, and behaviors of a

group/culture through engagement with it.

Enculturation is “...the process where the culture that is currently established

teaches an individual the accepted norms and values of the culture or society... It

teaches the individual their role within society as well as what is accepted behavior

within that society and lifestyle” (Kottak, 2004, p. 209). Enculturation happens through

direct and indirect instruction, consciously and unconsciously, through social events and

interactions that include modeling, copying, and observation (Kottak, 2004). Music

education – specifically studio-based music training in higher education that is intended

to lead to a career in music – fits the definition of enculturation.

22

Published studies of enculturation and music have frequently focused on

children’s music education (Hannon & Trainor, 2007; Morrison, Demorest, Campbell,

Bartolome, & Roberts, 2013; Corrigall & Trainor, 2010) and ethnomusicological

research (Otchere, 2015; Mapana, 2011). Cawley’s (2013) dissertation on enculturation

and Irish traditional musicians describes how they learn in formal and informal

environments, and she points out that “While learning repertoire and instrumental skills

are significant parts of musical enculturation, they are only part of the process of

‘becoming’ a musician” (p. 14). Nettl’s (1992) work in ethnomusicology states that “one

can hardly comprehend a musical system without knowing how it is taught, learned and

transmitted in its own society” (p. 389). However, these studies of enculturation in the

music world have historically focused on world cultures and remain primarily in the

ethnomusicological field.

Lucy Green’s (2002) book, How Popular Musicians Learn, provides the most in-

depth coverage of enculturation in studio-based music education. For Green,

enculturation is defined as “the acquisition of musical skills and knowledge by

immersion in the everyday music and musical practices” (p. 22). She advocates for

more modeling, observation, and listening in the classical music studio, arguing that:

...an apprenticeship involving exposure to a number of different ways of

playing...is just as likely...to equip learners with the wider understanding

necessary for the development of their own, ‘individual’ expression. (Green,

2003, p. 188)

These descriptions and definitions of enculturation suggest that studio-based music

training in higher education is, in fact, an example of enculturation and that both formal

23

and informal learning is necessary for students to become successful participants in

professional musical culture.

Anticipatory Socialization

The concept of anticipatory socialization was first defined and presented by

Robert Merton (1968) as a way of describing “the acquisition of values and orientations

found in statuses and groups in which one is not yet engages but which one is likely to

enter” (p. 438-439). It is also sometimes referred to as vocational anticipatory

socialization (Putnam & Jablin, 2001) when addressing career development. Students

participate in anticipatory socialization when they select a major or profession and seek

to understand and acquire the normative behaviors necessary for success in that

role/career. A key difference between anticipatory socialization and enculturation is that

anticipatory socialization involves learning group values and behaviors before group

membership is granted; enculturation is a process of learning (or being taught) cultural

values, beliefs, and behaviors from within the culture itself.

Researchers in music education have addressed anticipatory socialization in a

variety of contexts. Bouij (2004) is often cited for his work with Swedish music teachers

and role-identity, in which he claims that anticipatory socialization is necessary “in order

to develop the skills that a particular coveted role-identity calls for” (p. 3). He also notes

that musicians/music teachers practice their role-identities throughout their schooling as

members of music programs (i.e., bands, orchestras, and choirs) and constantly

participate in anticipatory socialization activities to change and/or improve their roles

(Bouij, 2004). Daniel and Parkes (2015) and Parkes, Daniel, West, and Gaunt (2015)

24

make references to Bouij (2004) in their studies of anticipatory socialization that occurs

in music studios through master-apprentice relationships. Meisenbach and Kramer

(2014) also address anticipatory socialization with musicians but outside of the

traditional university or conservatory environment. They found that musician role-

identities persisted into community choir membership, supporting the idea that

anticipatory socialization applies to both work and leisure activities (Meisenbach &

Kramer, 2014). Gabor’s (2013) work is also rooted in anticipatory socialization and

notes that musicians experience it very early (often as children) and that it continues to

be used as a strategy for professional/career purposes long after leaving formal

education settings.

In addition to face-to-face socialization activities, anticipatory socialization can be

experienced through social media and other online tools (Sandlin & Peña, 2014; Nehls

& Smith, 2014; Lombardi & Mather, 2016). Although individuals are geographically

distant and communication may be asynchronous, norms, values, and role-identities

can be accessed and adopted by reading and participating in online conversations.

Nehls and Smith (2014) worked to alleviate transfer student integration challenges by

creating Facebook pages for incoming transfer students. Students could then

experience and participate in socialization activities before arriving at a new campus.

Anticipatory socialization through social media has also been researched in relation to

recruitment in higher education (Sanlin & Peña, 2014), with the observation that high

school students who become socialized to a university environment before physically

attending the institution will be more likely to commit to that school and persevere

through potential challenges.

25

Although anticipatory socialization through social media and vCoP may seem like

similar constructs—both involve adopting norms to become members of an online

group—the literature suggests that motivations for joining and the activities within the

groups are markedly different. Anticipatory socialization involves the acquisition of skills,

norms, and values toward an end goal of joining a professional, career-oriented group.

Once membership is granted, there is no assumption of ongoing learning or sharing of

knowledge over time within the group. A vCoP, on the other hand, exists with the

premise that membership within the community is a first step in legitimate peripheral

participation, and that there is continued learning and growth as newcomers become

old-timers.

Perceptions of Social Media as an Informal Learning Environment

Reviews of literature concerning the use of social media in higher education are

not uncommon. Guy (2012) and Tess (2013) both recently published substantial articles

reviewing the literature of the use and practices of social media in higher education

classroom environments. Helms (2014) reviewed literature that addressed hybrid and

blended learning that incorporated the use of social media. Other literature reviews

focused heavily on the use of social media as an educational tool of adult learning and

technology (Lambert, Erickson, Alhramelah, Rhoton, Lindbeck, & Sammons, 2014) or

as a marketing mechanism in higher education (Davis, Deil-Amen, Rios-Aguilar, &

Gonzalez Canche, 2011). However, no published literature review addressed the

specific case of social media used in informal learning environments with higher

education students and instructors.

26

The focus on instructors’ perceptions of value means that the literature selected

was less concerned with different types of social media activities and interactions and

more with perceived benefits and detriments of incorporating social media into informal

learning practices. Specific themes were developed from the topics reviewed and were

used to assist with the selection of analytical methodologies and construction of semi-

structured interview questions for the study. Since the advent and use of social media,

specifically the Facebook platform, is a relatively recent phenomenon, much of the

literature reviewed in this section was limited to research published since 2006.

Six broad themes were distilled from the articles reviewed for this topic: social

media and personal identity, initiating/responding to connection requests, hierarchy and

power structure, self-direction needs in order to benefit from informal learning via social

media, instructor beliefs of the value of using social media as an informal learning tool,

and challenges/barriers to adoption. Each theme is addressed in further detail below.

Social Media and Personal Identity

The most common theme in the reviewed literature was that of personal identity

when using social media as an informal learning environment. Dalton and Crosby

(2013) prefaced their discussion of social media’s impact on student learning and

psychological development by defining the term digital identity as “the composite of

images that individuals present, share, and promote for themselves in the digital

domain” (p. 1). The idea of social media as a potential stage where unique and

purposeful identities are carefully crafted is directly addressed by Karl and Peluchette

(2011) and Kimmons and Veletsianos (2014), who both referred to Goffman’s (1959)

27

pre-social-media-era theory of self-presentation. Whether directly stated in the literature

or simply inferred, the concept of presenting oneself in a manner that gains a social

benefit was a persistent topic throughout the literature reviewed. The results of

Kimmons and Veletsianos’ (2014) study included the statement that

“participants…shaped their participation in these spaces in a manner that they believed

to be acceptable to their audiences, …and…felt this expression to only represent a

small “fragment” of their complete identities” (p. 295).

This act of crafting of an identity specifically for social media, and only including

positive or selected parts of self, was perceived as a detriment to teaching and

connecting with students by Chen and Breyer (2012). These authors felt that using

social media as a tool to connect informal and formal learning required an instructor to

share completely and honestly with students, up to and including being “friends” with

students and not creating separate personal and professional online identities. They

stated, “Splitting oneself into personal, professional, and other categories diminishes the

full social potential of technologies that thrive based on a willingness to be transparent

about one’s whole self” (Chen & Breyer, 2014, p. 4). Veletsianos and Kimmons (2012)

echoed this somewhat by pointing out that the content presented by instructors through

social media when engaging with students was as important as what was not

presented—and that both action and inaction reflected on an instructor’s identity.

Challenges with selecting and defining one’s digital identity on Facebook was

addressed by Lupton (2014), Kimmons and Veletsianos (2014), and Karl and

Peluchette (2011). Lupton (2014) noted that the popular social networking site “is often

used for both personal and professional reason by academics, and thus presents a

28

particular case for negotiating the boundaries between these two identities” (p. 6).

Kimmons and Veletsianos (2014) pointed out that when using Facebook, there is an

assumption that “participants have a unitary, authentic identity…as evidenced in the use

of real-world names, the replication of real-world relationships…” but that newer users

may be using these “as testing grounds to develop identity through exploration” (p. 293).

The tensions that can be associated with developing and maintaining personal

and professional identities on social media are also well documented (Veltsianos &

Kimmons, 2014; Karl & Peluchette, 2011; Oliver & Clayes, 2014; Lupton, 2014;

Metzger, Finley, Ulbrich, & McAuley, 2010). Oliver and Clayes’ (2014) study of

information communication technologies (ICTs) adopted by instructors at Perth College

resulted in reports of concern about informality and familiarity, with one participant

commenting “As soon as I started working here I cancelled my old Facebook page, just

because there’s just stuff that I wouldn’t want students to see” (p. 41). Issues of

determining the line between personal and professional for academics prompted

Veletsianos (2013) to investigate “the self that is disentangled from academic matters”

(p. 646). Instead of cultivating separate identities, he suggested that “engagement with

and sharing about issues unrelated to the profession is a value that is celebrated [when

communicating via an academic identity]” (p. 646). Additionally, Metzger et al. (2010)

reinforced the value of instructor self-disclosure through social media by pointing out

that it “may lead to higher anticipated motivation among students, affective learning, and

a more comfortable classroom climate” (p. 2).

Other less common topics surrounding personal identity and social media

originate from Sleigh, Smith, and Laboe’s (2013) study of student perception of

29

instructor interaction with students on Facebook. Results included the observation that,

while the content an instructor posted on Facebook did not affect whether or not a

student would consider taking a class with that instructor, there were strong reactions to

the type of content posted (political, informal conversations, etc.). However, students

who found an “overly social” instructor to be less appropriate also accorded the

instructor high marks for popularity and engagement. This was partially explained by the

authors as “Students use Facebook for entertainment purposes, and this profile may

have met that goal” (Sleigh, Smith, & Laboe, 2013, p. 494). Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb,

Herman, and Witty (2010) retrieved similar results from their study of faculty and student

perceptions of Facebook use—that students believed Facebook to be a social and

entertainment tool, not an educational one. However, multiple studies (Roblyer et al.,

2010; Stefanica, 2014) showed that students were willing to consider using these tools

for informal learning purposes, especially when those tools provided a connection to

their instructors as real, authentic individuals.

Initiating/Responding to Connection Requests

A second common theme among many of the articles was that of initiating and/or

responding to requests for connection, i.e., “friending” instructors and students

(Teclehaimanot & Hickman, 2011; Karl & Peluchette, 2011; Cain & Policastri, 2011;

Cain, Scott, Tiemeier, Akers, & Metzger, 2013; Chen & Breyer, 2012; Lupton, 2014;

Metzger, Finley, Ulbrich, & McAuley, 2010). The majority of the researchers found the

perception amongst faculty that it was not appropriate for instructors to initiate

friend/connection requests, but the studies were less agreed upon appropriate

30

responses to requests from students. Karl and Peluchette’s (2011) unique approach to

determining student perceptions of propriety asked students their reactions to

hypothetical friend requests from their mothers, bosses, an unknown professor, and a

disliked professor. Results showed that students were mostly calm and/or delighted

when a request was received from employers or their mothers but became irritated and

suspicious when reacting to friend requests from professors. Self-awareness when

requesting friendship or responding to requests was also addressed within this theme,

and Veletsianos and Kimmons (2012) reported that some faculty intentionally avoided

connecting with students out of concerns for “their own positionality to the other and

how that might influence their use of the tool” (p. 5). Other institutions and researchers

approached these gray areas through training (Kimmons & Veletsianos, 2014) or

establishing ethical guidelines (Metzger et al., 2010). In general, however, the statement

by a respondent to Lupton’s (2014) study of academic use of Facebook seemed to

speak most directly to the question of whether professors believed it was okay to send a

friend request to a student: “I will accept friend requests from students, but I will not

request their Facebook friendship. That would be really weird, as if I were knocking at a

fraternity house door and asking to come to their party” (p. 23).

Hierarchy and Power Structure

The theme of initiating and responding to requests for friendship/connection

morphed into the next prevalent theme of power and hierarchy in social media.

Literature frequently addressed the potential power imbalance when instructors interact

with students via social media in informal environments (Rambe & Ng’ambi, 2014;

31

Manca & Ranieri, 2015; Karl & Peluchette, 2011; Greenhow & Lewin, 2015; Mathieson

& Leafman, 2014; Lupton, 2014; Cain & Policastri, 2011; Cain et al., 2013). While some

authors argued that the use of social media tools outside of traditional classroom

activities had the opportunity to democratize and remove hierarchical structure from

interactions between students and instructors (Manca & Ranieri, 2015; Greenhow &

Lewin, 2015; Cain et al., 2013; Cain & Policastri, 2011), Rambe (2012) and Rambe and

Ng’ambi (2014) found that traditional hierarchical structures remained embedded in

some social media interactions in their investigation of power asymmetries on

Facebook. However, Rambe (2012) and Oliver and Clayes (2014) also noted that

students were more likely to discuss and question course administration/organization

via informal social media environments regardless of perceived hierarchy and power

structure.

Cain and Policastri (2011) attempted to define specific elements that

exacerbated tension when using social media as an informal learning environment and

created the “creepy treehouse” analogy – that is, when students were required to

participate in social situations that invaded their peer space. Other researchers (Oliver &

Clayes, 2014; Cain et al., 2013; Mathieson & Leafman, 2014) shared these interests in

reducing potential student resentment and asked whether popular social media tools

should be co-opted by instructors for these types of activities simply based on the fact

that students were already using them. However, Mathieson and Leafman’s (2014)

results clearly showed that both students and instructors valued an informal learning

environment through social media over a traditional learning management system

(LMS) discussion board for fostering communication.

32

Self-Direction Requirements in Order to Benefit from Informal Learning via Social Media

Self-direction as a requirement for successful use of social media as an informal

learning environment is another well-established theme in the literature. Researchers

and instructors felt strongly that students’ intrinsic motivation was essential to

developing the educational potential of social media as an informal learning

environment (Bull et al., 2008; Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2012; Greenhow & Lewin, 2015;

Lee, 2013; Mathieson & Leafman, 2014; Warrell, 2012; Yoo & Kim, 2013). Warrell

(2012) noted that “learners must be autonomous and take responsibility for their

learning…they must be comfortable with not only being a consumer of information, but a

creator and disseminator of knowledge” (p. 365). Bull et al. (2008) suggested

capitalizing on youths’ motivation to collaborate, create, and share in informal learning

environments. Dabbagh and Kitsantas (2012) promoted their development of a

personal learning environment (PLE) pedagogical approach to improve student self-

regulation so that informal learning through social media could be successful. All

literature reviewed with this theme, however, seemed to echo the sentiment of Lee

(2013) that “effort [is] needed by both tutors and students alike to overcome the

challenge of self-directed learning – to acquire the mindset to explore and embrace new

dimensions of learning that is on demand, informal, and social” (p. 840). As Sarapin and

Morris (2015) pointed out, students and instructors alike used social media to satisfy

real-world needs and/or wants. If those needs/wants were not met, the platform would

not be used to its potential (or perhaps at all) and both students and instructors would

stop using it.

33

A strong sense of self-direction/self-regulation was often mentioned as a

prerequisite to using social media effectively as in informal learning environment in

order to effect its greatest potential value – that it could provide a successful connection

between formal and informal learning practices. This belief was a consistent theme

throughout much of the literature (Bull et al., 2008; Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2012; Junco,

2012; Greenhow & Lewin, 2015; Lee, 2013; Cain & Policastri, 2011; Cain et al., 2013;

Roblyer et al., 2010; Sarapin & Morris, 2015; Ziegler, Paulus, & Woodside, 2014; Chen

& Breyer, 2012). Ziegler et al. (2014) and Greenhow and Lewin (2015) both emphasized

the use of social media as an informal learning environment to encourage the social

construction of knowledge that could help students connect formal to informal learning.

Cain et al. (2013), Chen and Breyer (2012), and Lee (2013) each demonstrated the

value of using social media environments to promote informal learning by connecting

students to real-world experts and guest lecturers in ways that were not possible in a

traditional classroom environment. Junco (2012) pointed out that “it is important for

those working in higher education to familiarize themselves with Facebook…and to

design and support interventions that meet students where they are—in order to help

them get where they are going” (p. 170). Implicit in that directive was the idea that

providing informal learning experiences through social media would help students

develop lifelong learning skills using the tools with which they were already familiar.

Although students perceived social media as a primarily social and entertainment

avenue, informal learning activities could encourage students and instructors alike to

reconsider the potential benefits of social media as a learning tool—although, as

Roblyer et al. (2010) noted from their study results, there was “limited and tentative

34

evidence that, as of this time, students see that potential more than do the faculty who

teach and mentor them” (p. 138).

Instructor Beliefs - Social Media as an Informal Learning Tool

Instructor use and perceptions of social media as a useful educational tool was

another prevailing theme in the literature (Lupton, 2014; Veletsianos, 2013; Jordan,

2014; Hartnett, 2015). It was generally accepted that faculty who already use and value

social media tools were more likely to integrate them into their teaching, so assessing

instructor perceptions of their own personal and professional use of social media was

relevant for this literature review. Jordan’s (2014) study of academics using academic

social networks (Mendeley, Academia.edu, and Zotero) uncovered differences in use

based upon instructor rank. Younger, lower-ranked faculty participated significantly

more than tenured, established professors and had more positive beliefs about the use

of social media in education. Interestingly, this study’s participants’ perceptions of

academic social networks focused on their value as tools for self-promotion, and not for

finding new information, learning, or developing relationships and networking. Jordan

(2014) reports that “this finding contradicts the perception that the online environment

acts as a democratizing space, suggesting instead a preservation of ‘off-line’ hierarchy”

(p. 19). However, Veletsianos (2013) and Lupton (2014) reported nearly the opposite in

their studies of instructor personal/professional use of social media. Lupton (2014)

detailed the multiple responses to her survey that commented on the value of “shar[ing]

material with diverse groups” as well as “promot[ing] a diversity of relationships… [and]

achiev[ing] horizontal connections including academics at all levels of seniority” (p. 30).

35

Veletsianos’ (2013) observations may explain part of this dichotomy in instructor

perceptions of social media. He pointed out that those instructors advocating for open,

sharing, and collaborative scholarship and teaching were often those who did not agree

with the traditional models of university scholarship and noted that “some of the digital

scholarly practices I observed could be characterized as small acts of defiance against

institutional norms, tenure and promotion practices, and the status quo” (p. 648). If this

is the case, then instructor perception of the value of social media as an educational

tool may be less a matter of familiarity and use and more a matter of institutional

tradition and beliefs. Additionally, Jordan (2014) and Veletsianos (2013) both noted that

instructors in higher education frequently used multiple social media channels (both

academic and personal) for professional purposes so it was possible that specific

platforms might be more easily perceived as valuable for education than others.

One article addressing the theme of instructor perceptions of social media as a

useful educational tool reported specific findings where informal learning using social

media was successful. Dougherty (2014) strove to “cultivate a sense of community

among 200-plus students in an Introduction to Sociology course” (p. 95) by using

Facebook as an optional informal learning opportunity. Results included higher test and

assessment scores by students who opted in to the Facebook group, and Dougherty

noted the student use of “Likes” as positive affective affirmations and support between

students involved. The use of “Likes” was also used as a gaming component (student

posts with the most “Likes” were celebrated) to engage students and promote quality

posts.

36

Challenges/barriers to Adoption

The final theme clearly apparent in the literature was that of challenges,

difficulties, and impediments to the adoption and use of social media as an informal

learning environment in higher education. Many (Veletsianos, 2013; Oliver & Clayes,

2014; Chen & Bryer, 2012; Lee, 2013; Mathieson & Leafman, 2014) asserted the need

for training (for students and instructors) before using social media as an educational

tool, specifically in the areas of ethics, security, and equitable access. Oliver and Clayes

(2014) stated that

…the most important finding from this study may be to highlight the potential

problems that institutions may face with regards to ethical and practical issues.

While students are unsurprisingly not aware of such issues, the fact that many

staff members are also unaware is revealing and perhaps institutions should be

doing more to clarify the boundaries and procedures for all. (p. 44)

Likewise, recommendations were made by other researchers for legal counsel on the

topic (Mathieson & Leafman, 2014) and the creation and implementation of institution-

wide policies to deal with issues of security and privacy (Chen & Bryer, 2012).

Ethical concerns were by far the most common challenge stated in the literature

reviewed. Oliver and Clayes (2014), Cain et al. (2013), Manca and Ranieri (2015), Chen

and Bryer (2012), Mathieson and Leafman (2014), and Lupton (2014) all voiced

concerns about equitable access to social media technologies for all students and

instructors. Chen and Bryer (2012) and Greenhow and Lewin (2015) also emphasized

the ethical dilemma faced by institutions that wanted to incorporate more social media

and cross the traditional formal/informal learning boundaries. Most pressing is the fact

37

that activities completed via social media channels cannot legally be included as part of

student grades. Since the work resides outside of a university-owned, licensed, or

managed system, it does not meet the minimum requirements of the Federal

Educational Rights and Protection Act (FERPA). Other impediments to wider use of

social media as an informal learning environment included those listed by Lupton (2014)

as contributed by study participants: social media taking up too much additional time

and becoming an obligation, questions of content quality, risks of an instructor

becoming a target for abuse or unprofessional conduct by students (or colleagues), and

issues of copyright and commercialization of content that may or may not be the

property of an institution rather than the instructor.

The most discussed theme, social media and personal identity, was clearly one

of the most researched and of primary concern for instructors interacting with students

via social media in informal learning environments. It is probably most closely linked to a

less-commonly addressed, but just as critical, topic of concern—the legal and ethical

issues involved in instructor/student interactions on social media sites. Establishing

institutional guidelines for social media interactions between instructors and students

might be the best option to address both. Guidance for instructors in creating/growing a

digital identity as defined by Hartnett (2015), as well as ethical and legal training in

topics such as FERPA compliance, also seem like necessary next steps for any

institution of higher education.

The themes of initiating/responding to connection requests and hierarchy/power

issues are also closely aligned. Although not addressed in the literature presented here,

topics of mentoring and impact of instructor activities on student perceptions of social

38

media use were suggested by authors’ varied beliefs about their roles in informal

learning environments. Studies of student perceptions of instructors’ social media

content have been undertaken, but not the potential impact of that content/activity on

student academic performance or beliefs about social media use. Investigations into the

academic effects and impact of instructor behavior on social media sites are still

needed.

Veletsianos’ (2013) note of the difference of opinion between instructors who

believed in the value of social media as a tool for open, sharing informal learning

experiences and those who were more focused on social media as a self-promotion tool

is also apt. The shift to teaching as sharing is well-supported by informal learning

practices using social media, where knowledge construction is a social practice of freely

sharing information and experiences. Future directions for expansion include

determining a tipping point for faculty that might align with uses and gratifications theory

(Sarapin & Morris, 2015). Then trainings and education for educators in social media

might be more successfully designed and targeted to address these issues before they

interfere with informal learning.

Finally, although there was consensus that self-direction and self-efficacy with

technology were necessary for successful implementations of social media as part of an

informal learning environment, there was a struggle to come to terms with issues of

accessibility and the philosophy behind co-opting popular social media tools for

educational purposes. Arguments against the latter included a “creepy treehouse” effect

where students were asked to participate in activities that were perceived to invade their

personal social media space. However, the ability of social media to create a bridge

39

between formal, classroom-based learning and informal, non-curricular might override

the potential negative impacts and should be studied further.

Published Studies of the Use of Facebook by Music Faculty

Few published studies directly addressed the use or perception of Facebook by

academic music faculty and/or music educators. Only twelve articles were uncovered

that included the term Facebook as part of a research, theoretical, or praxis-based

study in academic music or music education. Of those twelve, only eight could be

considered research-based reports on current Facebook use or perceptions by music

faculty or music educators connected to a higher education environment. Interestingly,

common themes from literature on social media use as an informal learning

environment in higher education were largely invisible in literature on music

faculty/professional music educator use of Facebook—with the exception of several

studies’ observations of the value of using social media as informal learning tool.

Two distinct themes emerged from most of the music-based articles, with the

remaining unaffiliated literature each reporting on a minor, loosely-connected use or

perception of Facebook within the academic music realm. The main themes were: using

Facebook to develop and/or support communities of practice (CoP), and faculty use of

Facebook to increase student engagement in course material/discussion outside of

regular class time. Each theme and its relevant set of literature is discussed in detail

below.

40

Facebook as a Tool to Support a Community of Practice

The use of Facebook as a platform to support musician/music educator CoP was

the most prevalent theme throughout the literature reviewed. Wenger’s (2008)

introduction to CoP was referenced frequently and was clearly identified as a driving

force for musicians/music educators to connect via social media. Specifically, four

articles addressed communities (Facebook pages) formed and used by music

educators as platforms for sharing, communicating, and connecting as part of an

informal professional development community. Palmquist’s (2015) study of orchestra

teachers’ use of Facebook focused on a specific Facebook group created in 2010

(migrated from an earlier online group hosted on the social media platform Ning,

http://www.ning.com). The quantitative study examined the origins of the page, how it

was most frequently used, and the number of different topics discussed, finding that

“Facebook groups provide a means by which music teachers may form a network for

informal learning for music teachers and communicate easily with peers across the

world” (p. 94). Similarly, Brewer and Rickels’ (2014) qualitative study of a Facebook

page for band directors led to the development of themes for content and types of

interactions through discourse analysis of the posts. The results of the study showed

that “87% of the posts in BDG [band directors group] relate directly to the profession” (p.

15) and that of the remaining posts, most were categorized Humor or Inspirational/Story

Sharing.

A phenomenological study by Pellegrino et al. (2014) presented the results of a

multi-year observation of four music education faculty who used Facebook and other

online tools to establish a supportive community during the early years of their

41

academic appointments. In this case, the authors modeled the group using tenets of a

Professional Development Community (PDC) rather than a CoP. Facebook was seen

as part of a collaborative environment that helped the participants form a “safe place” to

“[discuss] our thoughts, concerns, and insecurities” (p. 474). Lastly, Copeland’s (2011)

article encouraging choir directors to adopt social media tools including Facebook for

event promotion and communication with choir members included recommendations for

best practices but did not present any gathered data. All of these published articles

documented the use of Facebook by academic music faculty and/or professional music

educators as a tool for networking, sharing information/experiences, and developing

communities of practice as a way of engaging in informal professional development

opportunities.

Using Facebook to Increase Student Engagement and Sharing

The use of Facebook as a platform for academic music faculty to interact with

students was equally as undocumented. Of the three articles that addressed the topic,

only two reported on actual applications. Turner (2013) mentioned using Facebook as a

tool for encouraging engagement in conversation about rehearsal techniques and

repertoire with students, and Choi (2012) commented on a music professor’s

implementation of supplementary social media tools for class piano as a method to

communicate and share media with students outside of the regular classroom. Neither,

however, presented gathered data or analyses from those implementations. In both of

these examples, as well as in a publication on e-portfolios by Dunbar-Hall et al. (2015)

and recommendations for changes to music history pedagogy by Jones (2014), authors

42

substantiated their assertion that Facebook was a useful platform by pointing out that

students already use it, and therefore faculty should incorporate it into their instruction

as “students [are] attracted to and adept users of current technologies for social and

educational networking, such as Facebook…” (Dunbar-Hall, 2015, p. 143). Interestingly,

none of this literature seemed to consider the possibility of the “creepy treehouse” effect

mentioned by Cain and Policastri (2011).

The remaining literature involving academic music faculty and Facebook dealt

with unique applications and/or topics. Salavuo’s (2008) early look at the potential for

Facebook use in higher education music departments noted the possibilities for

developing CoP, active learning, and even the replacement of certain learning

management system functions where sharing of media files/types was difficult or

blocked altogether. He also noted student facility with the platform and pointed out that

when using tools such as Facebook, “students are more in control of their environment”

(p.128). Stone (2014) published the results of a quantitative study to discover the impact

of librarian use of Facebook with music faculty and students, finding that students and

professors “who are Facebook friends with the librarian were more likely to have

reference interactions than patrons who were not connected to the librarian on

Facebook” (p. 44).

Scharff’s (2015) revealing look at gender and self-promotion in the music field

mentioned Facebook use as something of a necessary evil, including a participant’s

view that “[in the] working life of a musician it’s also, it’s meant to be you sell yourself

and you promote yourself and you do this on Facebook, and I just hate all that…. I

always say why can’t I just play?” (p. 101). On a somewhat related note, Glen (2014)

43

viewed Facebook as a promotional tool for students looking for employment,

admonishing them to “clean up their social media profiles to positively impact a search”

(p. 157). However, in neither of these instances were specific guidelines,

recommendations, or best practices outlined to assist students/apprentices with the task

of positive self-representation online.

44

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This chapter discusses the processes and methods used to collect and analyze

data in this study. It also details reporting procedures for presenting the research

findings. In addition to data handling and reporting, information regarding the setting,

participants, sampling procedures, and rigor/trustworthiness is presented.

Methodology

A qualitative design was selected for this study to achieve the goal of discerning

music faculty members’ beliefs about, intended uses of, and lived experiences with

Facebook studio groups/pages. Qualitative research is conducted when a study is

exploratory and seeks to investigate the meanings ascribed to a phenomenon by a

person or group (Creswell, 2013). A constructivist paradigm, using naturalistic inquiry,

was employed. Constructivism differs from other paradigms in that the researcher does

not seek an answer to a specific question (postpositivism) or attempt to verify a

hypothesis (positivism) using predetermined theoretical constructs. Instead, a

constructivist researcher is “A co-constructor of knowledge, of understanding and

interpretation of the meaning of [others’] lived experiences” (Guba & Lincoln, 2005, p.

196).

Several principles are applied within a constructivist paradigm. It is relativist –

that is, it accepts that multiple realities are constructed (or co-constructed) by individuals

through interactions with the environment or others. Therefore, each person’s lived

experiences result in unique interpretations and views of a specific phenomenon. It is

45

also subjectivist in that the researcher plays a role in the interpretation of data and

becomes part of the generative process for developed theory. Finally, intersubjective

agreement between researcher(s) and subjects is critical for authenticity and

trustworthiness of findings.

This study used interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) within the

constructivist paradigm. IPA is a qualitative research method that is used to examine

how individuals make sense of a given phenomenon. Inherent in IPA is the

understanding that it is the researcher’s job to document a participant’s interpretation of

a phenomenon as well as the researcher’s own perception of the participant’s

interpretation. IPA uses a double hermeneutic—that is, “...the researcher is trying to

make sense of the participant trying to make sense of what is happening to them”

(Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009, p. 3). It requires the application of three theoretical

constructs throughout the study: phenomenology (the study of a phenomenon through

lived experiences), hermeneutics (interpretation of text and authors’ meanings), and

idiography (concern for individual, contextualized accounts of lived experiences).

Because IPA focuses on individual experiences as interpreted through participant and

researcher lenses, IPA research is understood to be non-generalizable. Instead, it

results in incredibly rich, detailed descriptions of experiences with phenomena that

assist with understanding a participant’s lived experiences and sense-making of a

phenomenon. Readers are then able to use their own experiences and professional

knowledge to interpret the results and apply the information as they deem relevant.

The origins of IPA are found in the phenomenological theories of Husserl and

Heidegger, who were concerned with individual perceptions, sense-making, and lived

46

experiences as ways to understanding phenomena. The concept of intersubjectivity was

central to Heidegger’s view that humans do not experience phenomena independently

in isolation—rather, there is a “shared, overlapping and relational nature of our

engagement in the world” (Smith et al., 2009, p. 17). Merleau-Ponty’s belief that all

knowledge is biased through the researcher’s perception and point of view is

incorporated into the phenomenological tenets employed by IPA.

Hermeneutic theory is also critical to IPA’s approach to textual analysis.

Schleiermacher insisted that only by understanding the author of a text could one

understand a text’s meaning, and Gadamer indicated that each reader engages in

his/her own dialogue with a text (Smith et al., 2009). These concepts are core elements

of studies using IPA—texts are usually transcribed interviews and other supplementary

materials contributed by a participant, and it is the researcher’s job to understand and

interpret the participant and his/her sense-making as much as the words within the texts

themselves. IPA also prescribes numerous readings of all texts so that multiple

dialogues between reader and study materials are experienced before themes are

developed. In this way, the analytical process in IPA is iterative and non-linear, which

leads to greater consideration of multiple interpretations and meanings—and a richer,

thicker description of perceived phenomena.

The third element of IPA is that which separates it from traditional

phenomenological study methods. Idiography is used to document specific, individual

lived experiences within a given context and is therefore not generalizable beyond that

person/people. Idiographic studies use very few participants (or even a single

participant) from a homogenous sample and seek to understand all that can be

47

discerned about participant experiences with a phenomenon in a specific context.

However, even in the instance of a small group of participants, IPA studies typically

report using a narrative style with verbatim quotes for each participant before any cross-

case or blended thematic discussion (Smith et al., 2009). Faithful interpretation and

reporting of the individual account and participant perception is a defining characteristic

of the IPA approach.

A description of the IPA process and activities undertaken during the study are

shown in Table 1 to assist with any future replication studies.

Table 1

IPA Process and Research Activities Timeline

IPA stages Activity Date

Collect data - interviews

A single interview was completed with each participant, recorded, and transcribed

Aug. 31 – Sept. 16, 2016

Collect data –supplementary

Facebook data was collected from Spring semester 2016 for each participant

Aug. 31 – Sept. 16, 2016

Reading and re-reading

Occurred iteratively during initial noting and early emergent theme development

Sept. 16 – Oct. 14, 2016

Initial noting/ coding

Interviews: In vivo coding was used to identify key terms and phrases in the participants’ own words; descriptive and conceptual noting was then applied. Facebook data: faceted classification was used to code posts and media.

Sept. 16 – Oct. 11, 2016

Developing emergent themes and member-checking

For each participant’s interview data: descriptive and conceptual notes/codes were grouped to develop and identify emergent themes. Tables of participant emergent themes were created with supporting descriptors taken from in vivo interview comments and Facebook posts/data. Each table was emailed to the corresponding participant for member-checking.

Oct. 11 – Oct. 27, 2016

Finding patterns across cases

Emergent themes from all participants were grouped to develop super-ordinate themes.

Oct. 27 – Nov. 15, 2016

Writing up Narrative descriptions of participants’ experiences and researcher reflections/observations completed

Nov. 15 – 27, 2016

48

Participant Selection

Participants in this study included four full-time music faculty members in

universities across the United States. Requirements for inclusion were tenured, tenure-

track, or full-time academic status, typical studio teaching responsibilities (one-on-one

weekly lessons), and regular use of a Facebook page to communicate with students for

purposes other than academic coursework. The sampling method was homogenous as

defined by Patton (2015) and Lewis and Ritchie (2003). This follows the

recommendation by Smith et al. (2009) that IPA samples should be

“homogenous…[and]…for whom the research question will be meaningful” (p. 49). The

sample size of four participants was deemed adequate based upon the

recommendation that “between three and six participants can be a reasonable sample

size” (Smith et al., 2009, p. 51).

To generate a list of potential participants, a search of Facebook pages/groups

was performed using the terms “[instrument name/voice type] studio” as well as

institution-specific acronyms (i.e., "UNT [instrument name/voice type]"). All orchestra

and band instruments and voice types were searched. The first five public pages/groups

associated with institutions of higher education that were returned from each search

were included in an initial list. Screening of the faculty associated with those pages was

performed by examining each individual’s departmental web page at his/her institution.

Twenty-three met the inclusion criteria, and fourteen were eventually contacted via

email and asked to participate. Those who met the criteria but were not asked to

participate were eliminated from the pool based upon recent changes in

position/location (i.e., retirement, taking a new position at a different school, etc.), lack

49

of available email address on his/her web page, or evidence that multiple faculty

members were administering/managing a single Facebook studio group/page.

Informed consent was collected from all interviewed faculty before the completion

of the demographic survey. The letter of consent informed participants of their rights

and responsibilities as part of the research study. No incentives to participate were

offered. All participants were informed that their demographic information, interview

transcripts, and data from their associated Facebook studio pages/groups would be

anonymized and any identifying content removed before analysis and/or publication.

In addition to the semi-structured interviews executed with the four participants,

publicly available Facebook data was collected and included discourses from all

contributors who interacted with a participant’s Facebook page/group during the Spring

semester of 2016, January 1st through May 30th. This extant data was collected through

open observation; that is, participants might know they have been observed but there

was no participation by the researcher (Salmons, 2015). By including Facebook

data/content from all contributors to the page (including students, alumni, other

professional musicians, etc.), the analysis and eventual theme development was richer

and more diverse in discourse/conversation topics. However, the focus of the analysis

was the participants’ (faculty members’) contributions to the pages/groups. This led to a

very realistic and authentic study of music faculty lived experiences.

Research Setting

The settings for this study were the communication channels used to conduct

semi-structured interviews (Zoom.us web conferencing application) and collect

50

demographic information (Qualtrics online survey tool) as well as the Facebook social

media platform. Salmons (2015) defined these types of technology settings as a

medium, setting, or phenomenon. Communication between the researcher and the

faculty members was direct and used technology as either a medium (to communicate

about the study with participants, send/receive consent forms, etc.) as well as a setting

(a location where research actually occurred, e.g. interviews via Zoom.us, demographic

survey, email, etc.). There was no direct communication between the researcher and

faculty or students via Facebook. Instead, that environment was used solely for data

collection and asynchronous observation of discourses/activities. It aligned with

Salmons’ definition of technology as a phenomenon, where actions and activities are

themselves the research materials. Both synchronous and asynchronous activities were

employed as part of the research and data-gathering process. Near-synchronous

(Salmons, 2015) activities such as texting or instant messaging, where conversations

and activities are enacted with the expectation of near-synchronous responses, were

not used.

Data Collection

The constructivist-centered method and analytical procedures detailed below

were selected to achieve the study’s goal of investigating the social media-related belief

systems, intended uses, and lived experiences of applied music faculty in higher

education. Data was collected through a demographic survey, semi-structured

interviews, and public Facebook studio group/page transcripts. The study employed

interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) as its methodology, which prescribed

51

multiple readings of content, development of themes from constant-comparative coding

of each participant’s data, and identification of super-ordinate themes through cross-

case analysis. The use of IPA also reflected two of the primary characteristics of

qualitative research: data was collected in settings native to the participants and

multiple sources of data were collected on the topic under investigation (Creswell,

2013).

In addition to semi-structured interview responses, Facebook studio group/page

data was used as documentation of practice as advocated by Smith et al. (2009) who

called for increased use of written documents and other supplementary objects/data in

IPA studies. This approach to data collection and analysis supported the development

of a thick, descriptive phenomenology to better understand and describe the lived

experiences under investigation. Interview responses detailed the participants’

understanding of the phenomenon of Facebook studio groups/pages while their

Facebook page data revealed the lived experiences and practices of their interactions

within the informal learning environment.

Demographic Information

General information about the study and a consent form were emailed to each

participant after the researcher received notice of his/her willingness to participate in the

study. After the consent form was signed and returned each participant was sent a link

to a survey that collected demographic information, including: position title, years in

position, Facebook page creation and management responsibilities, prior social media

training, etc. (Appendix A). Participants were asked about their familiarity and comfort

52

with the webinar tool http://www.Zoom.us to discern any potential biases or technology

issues with the tool, and asked to select a preferred interview time and date from a list

provided by the researcher. The demographic survey took an estimated ten to fifteen

minutes to complete.

Semi-Structured Interviews

Each participant was interviewed once, synchronously, over the internet via

http://www.Zoom.us due to geographical distance and time constraints. Each semi-

structured interview took no more than 30 minutes in an effort to be cognizant and

respectful of the participants’ time. Seven primary questions were asked with follow-ups

included when required for clarification of or expansion on a topic (Appendix E).

Interviews were recorded and saved to the researcher’s HIPAA and FERPA-compliant

digital storage location. Transcripts of the interviews were completed using the audio

transcription tool Pop Up Archive (http://www.PopUpArchive.com).

Facebook Studio Group/Page Data

Data collection from each participant’s Facebook studio group/page occurred

immediately after acceptance of the solicitation to participate. All content from January

1 to May 30, 2016, was transcribed (or described, in the case of media) into

spreadsheets for analysis and saved with the associated faculty member’s interview

transcripts.

53

Data Analysis

Collaborative Data Analysis

All data was coded collaboratively with three additional peer-coders. Training for

peer-coders included an introduction to the IPA process, familiarization with the topic of

inquiry and literature reviewed, and sharing of all interview and Facebook transcripts for

collaborative analysis and discussion. All codes/themes were discussed until

intersubjective agreement was reached.

Interviews were transcribed within ten days of the event. To maintain idiographic

integrity, the process of coding and theme development was completed for a

participant’s interview and companion Facebook data before the researcher and peer

coders moved on to the next participant’s data set. The interview transcript was read

and reflected upon multiple times, then initial in vivo coding was begun. Key phrases

and concepts were highlighted, then paraphrased in the right-hand margin to remain

true to the participant’s own descriptive language. This constituted the first hermeneutic,

attempting to understand the phenomenon from the perspective of the participant. A

second round of coding/commenting was employed to include descriptive and

conceptual comments about the participant’s responses and bracketed reflections by

the researcher. This constituted the second hermeneutic, the researcher’s attempt to

understand the participant’s understanding of the phenomenon. The key phrases,

paraphrased comments, and conceptual/bracketed researcher notes were entered into

a spreadsheet for ease of sorting and searching.

Facebook data was coded and categorized using attribute codes developed from

Herring’s (2007) faceted classification technique. Defining and using Facebook/social

54

media-specific attributes such as message flow and formats of shared media provided a

clear and detailed set of codes for the technological environment and media

descriptions as well as the social interactions occurring on each Facebook page. Posts

and activities by the participant were the focus of the analysis, although types and

quantity of responses to a participant’s post were considered when using Facebook

data as a supplementary documentation of a participant’s lived experience.

After initial coding and categorization was completed for a participant’s interview

data, codes/comments and bracketed observations were then clustered into groups that

supported the development of emergent themes from the data. A table of themes was

developed from the participant’s coded data, and descriptors (phrases from the

interview as well as supporting information from the Facebook data) were inserted to

provide idiographic evidence. The table of themes and descriptors was then emailed to

the participant for review as part of the member checking process.

A cross-case analysis of all four participants’ themes was performed to develop

super-ordinate themes that reflected participants’ over-arching understandings of the

use of Facebook as an informal learning environment. Not all themes were included, a

decision supported by IPA research methodology (Smith & Eatough, 2007). Relevant

themes were clustered under each super-ordinate theme and in vivo examples from the

participants’ data sets were selected to provide rich descriptions of faculty beliefs,

intent, and lived experiences with Facebook studio groups/pages. Researcher

interpretations of those experiences were overlaid onto participants’ descriptions and

understandings to create a complete interpretative phenomenological analysis of the

phenomenon.

55

Establishing Credibility

Qualitative researchers use criteria including dependability, credibility,

transferability, and confirmability to establish rigor and trustworthiness in their studies

(Lincoln & Guba, 1985). This contrasts with quantitative researchers’ concern for validity

and reliability, which are not applied to qualitative research since results are non-

generalizable and studies do not seek to confirm or refute a hypothesis. Dependability is

defined as “the stability of data over time and under different conditions” (Elo,

Kaariainen, Kanste, Polkki, Utriainen, & Kyngas, 2014, p. 2). Confirmability describes

the “potential for congruence between two or more independent people about the data’s

accuracy, relevance, or meaning” (Elo et al., 2014, p. 2). Credibility, often considered

the most important of the four criteria, is “the confidence that can be placed in the truth

of the research findings” (Anney, 2014, p. 276) and includes the accurate description of

participants, methodologies, and analytical processes.

In a 2014 article addressing master’s students’ confusion regarding quantitative

and qualitative research paradigms for trustworthiness, Anney identifies common

misconceptions and defines specific strategies for establishing rigor in qualitative

studies. They include:

• Prolonged engagement

• Peer examination/debriefing

• Member checking

• Transferability

• Dependability

• Triangulation

56

Each of these strategies was taken into account during the design and

implementation of this study. Engagement was prolonged through the multiple read-

throughs and examinations of interview and Facebook coded data, encouraging deeper

understanding of and increased interactivity with participant contributions. Peer

examination/debriefing was also included in the study’s design, whereby the researcher

solicited feedback and opportunities for dialogue with peers throughout the research

process. In addition to collaborative coding and working to reach intersubjective

agreement during the coding process, frequent opportunities were created to share

research findings and reports with colleagues and members of the dissertation

committee to obtain feedback and critique.

Member checking has been described as “the heart of credibility” (Anney, 2014,

p. 277) and was employed by emailing each participant a copy of the table of emergent

themes and descriptors developed from his/her interview and Facebook data. As

recommended by Ravitch and Carl (2016), participants were solicited for any suggested

modifications or clarification in order for the researcher to ensure the accuracy of her

interpretation. This process carried with it an inherent risk of rejection due to a

participant’s dislike of the themes developed—however, it also lent itself to increased

persistent observation, which “helps discover participants’ qualities and unusual

characteristics” (Anney, 2014, p. 277).

Transferability is the qualitative equivalent to quantitative research’s

generalizability. It is aided by thick, rich descriptions of participants/events and sampling

methods appropriate to the study (Anney, 2014). In this study, transferability was sought

through the copious amount of descriptive data from interviews and Facebook studio

57

groups/pages as well as the purpose-oriented sampling procedure used to study cases

with specific content/information necessary for the study. However, as with all

qualitative findings these are not provided with the hope of generalizing to a broader

population. Any transferability found is at the discretion of the reader who may interpret

and apply the findings of this study to a different case or environment.

The dependability of this study was aided by a detailed audit trail of all research

processes and activities, data collection, analysis, and storage, and all other

documents/data generated during the study. Dependability is similar to confirmability,

through which a study’s results “are not figments of the inquirer’s imagination, but are

clearly derived from the data” (Tobin & Begley, 2004, p. 392). All collected data,

timelines, and notes about processes and activities were kept in a secure location in

HIPAA-protected online data storage (Microsoft OneDrive for Business) at the

University of North Texas and printed materials were kept within a locked office.

Triangulation is the process of using multiple data sources to obtain evidence

about a topic of inquiry. One of its primary purposes is to reduce potential bias through

the examination of an issue from multiple perspectives and sources of information. The

combination of semi-structured interviews and extant online data is mentioned by

Salmons (2015) as a way for triangulation to help “generate alternative explanations for

what may appear as trends in data collected from posts and online discussions” (p.

123). This study achieved triangulation through semi-structured interviews of music

faculty, Facebook data collected from applied studio groups/pages, and the

researcher’s own reflexivity/bracketing. Triangulation through these three data collection

58

and analysis measures allowed for better understanding and identification of

connections between the multiple sources of data.

Ethical Considerations

My role as a researcher in this study was as the primary data collector,

interpreter/coder, and analyst. My participation included asking interview questions,

collecting screenshots of social media dialogues, and engaging in a second

hermeneutic level of interpretation of the data. As a professional musician, I was an

insider who was intimately familiar with the environment and expectations placed upon

music faculty in their professional lives. It is hoped that this familiarity and trust led to

honest responses in an interview setting. However, my proximity to the topic carried an

inherent risk of bias. Therefore, I composed and reflected upon a subjectivity statement,

and I employed bracketing and journaling while engaged in the study to improve the

credibility of the research outcomes.

Ethical issues involved in this study included those common to most qualitative

research traditions, including the insertion of biases into the interpretation and coding of

data and the storage of collected data with identifiable markers. I enlisted the assistance

of three other coders to compare results and come to intersubjective agreement about

the coded data and themes developed from it. All data collected and analyzed was

stored securely in HIPAA-protected online data storage and printed materials were kept

within a locked office.

59

CHAPTER 4

FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

Introduction

This chapter discusses the findings from and analysis of two sets of data:

interviews with four music faculty members, and one semester’s activity from each

faculty member’s Facebook studio group/page. Interpretative phenomenological

analysis (IPA) was used to discern the beliefs, intent, and lived experiences of the

music faculty members through their own verbalized perspectives and social media

discourses. Analysis of interview transcripts and Facebook data resulted in thick

descriptions of participant perceptions and understandings. The use of IPA facilitated

the interpretation of the data and thematic development.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the social media-related belief

systems, intended uses, and lived experiences of applied music faculty in higher

education. The unique nature of master-apprentice relationships in the academic music

field suggested that previous studies of social media communication practices between

or among teachers and students in higher education were not generalizable to music

schools. Also, few published studies directly addressed the use or perception of

Facebook by academic music faculty and/or music educators. Music faculty members’

personal and professional Facebook interactions with students and colleagues might

affect how music students perceive the value of and expectations for use of social

media in the context of professional practice, but there was no documentation of the

activities or their potential impact. Therefore, this study begins the process of

understanding the phenomenon by filling a gap in the literature and documenting first-

60

generation beliefs and practices of music faculty interacting with students via Facebook

studio groups/pages.

This chapter is organized into three sections. The first is a narrative retelling of

each participant’s lived experiences with Facebook studio groups/pages through

interview responses and Facebook data from a single semester. Interview analysis

resulted in the development of emergent themes for each participant. Posts and other

activity from each participant’s Facebook studio group/page were analyzed as evidence

of practice and used to illustrate the emergent themes. Selections from the interviews

and Facebook posts were then used to develop narratives that illustrate participants’

beliefs, intentions, and lived experiences and/or practices.

The second section of this chapter details the process of using the emergent

themes from the first to develop super-ordinate themes across all four of the cases. A

table of all emergent themes, with participants identified, was developed. During this

process, some emergent themes were redundant and discarded; others were renamed

for clarification. The remaining emergent themes were then grouped per similarities.

Three super-ordinate themes emerged from the individual emergent themes when

examined through the lens of the original topic of inquiry. They were:

• Impact of social media on atudio reaching and learning

• Learning through enculturation

• Faculty lived experiences with Facebook Studio groups/pages

The third section of this chapter contains the results and interpretations of the analysis.

Each of the super-ordinate themes and its supporting data is discussed from the

perspective of the second hermeneutic. My goal in this section is to

61

describe my sense-making of the participants making sense of the use of Facebook

studio groups/pages as informal learning environments.

Findings

The following narratives are in alphabetical order by the pseudonym assigned to

the participant. The pseudonyms are not related to the research participants’ identities.

Each narrative contains an explication of data from the participant’s interview, as well as

Facebook activity from the spring semester of 2016. These findings fulfill the dual goals

of the study; to document the beliefs, intent, and lived experiences of first-generation

music faculty using Facebook to interact with students, and to generate theory and

themes for future studies of social media use in master-apprentice educational

environments.

Berlioz

Berlioz is a full professor of music at a medium-sized institution in the north

central United States. He has taught for 37 years in his current position. Berlioz has and

uses one Facebook account for personal and professional pages. He has had a

Facebook studio group, not a page, for six years, and considers himself an

administrator of the group. The group was co-created by student(s) and faculty.

Members of the Facebook group include students and “others,” described as musicians

and non-musicians. Berlioz accesses, reads, and/or contributes to the Facebook group

daily. He stated in the demographic survey that he had not received or attended any

training for using social media in higher education. Table 2 provides a picture of the

themes and general descriptors of Berlioz.

62

Table 2

Participant 1, Berlioz: Emergent Themes and Descriptors

Theme Descriptors

Role Definition • I’m like the head cheerleader.

• Arbiter of good taste

• I’m trying to…show leadership

• Facebook: 43% (37 of 86 total) of posts/actions were byBerlioz, and included content/messages directed tostudents, alumni, and guest artists

Institutional Oversight • New picture of the entire studio but I can’t [post] until I haveall the waivers

• It’s becoming much more restricted.

• I can…be fired for posting something that’s embarrassing.

Learning with Facebook

• [Facebook] tends to be less pedagogical content

• Share…videos and those kinds of things I want them to see.

• That’s a thought…about how we can do some teaching onthis page

Celebrating Studio Success

• Current student or former student…something that they’vedone…that we want to crow about.

• Announce alums who have gotten jobs

• Showcasing the studio

• Facebook: nine posts (24%) by Berlioz were “studentshowcases” introducing new students to others in the group

• Facebook: eleven posts by Berlioz (30%) werecongratulating/celebrating accomplishments of currentstudents, alumni, and guest artists

Networking and Promotion

• Doing little vignettes on students…is very popular with notonly the students but their parents.

• People who are looking at the program, [Facebook] kind ofputs a face with that

• Facebook: five of Berlioz’ posts included or were about otherprofessionals and their guest performances at his school

• Facebook: seven of Berlioz’ posts advertised concerts

Studio Tradition • Letting…current students know about former students sothat they feel like they’re part of tradition

• Facebook: Berlioz’ request that alumni post their recentactivities resulted in fourteen individual responses and 23total posts

• Facebook: eight “reminiscent” posts were made in responseto an image of a studio instrument that current and formerstudents remembered playing

63

Berlioz uses a Facebook group with his studio because it provides an easy way

to connect with his current students, alumni, parents, and others. He views it as an

efficient tool for communication, promotion, and networking and feels that it is an

effective way to increase personal connections. His activities on the Facebook studio

group are primarily uni-directional, sharing information about students/events, giving

instruction, or offering congratulations. These actions reinforce his perceived role when

using the Facebook group as shown when he stated “I think I feel like I’m like the head

cheerleader for the program, number one, but also I feel like I’m the arbiter of good

taste and what should be up there and what shouldn’t be up there.”

The value Berlioz places on his Facebook studio group is illustrated by his

frustration with recently established institutional policies. His school now requires

waivers from all students before any images can be shared on social media, which

slows down his ability to post pictures of his studio to the group. Taking a picture of the

new school year’s studio members is a tradition for many music faculty, and sharing

those images on social media has become a common practice. However, Berlioz

understands the reasoning behind the recently implemented policy, and recognizes the

institution’s concern for student privacy, stating:

We have to be very careful about the content that unknowingly either puts a person in contact...with a certain person or their likeness or something unintentionally private. So that means as administrator I feel like I have to really think about every single posting now while before it was like “Oh, great. Throw it up there,” you know. So it’s...definitely changing. It’s becoming much more restricted.

Berlioz’ ability to perceive and adapt to changes in the higher education

environment is evident in his comments about using his Facebook studio group as an

informal learning environment. He notes that he doesn’t use it intentionally to teach, but

64

he does want it to contain valuable educational content. However, in the course of the

interview Berlioz shifted to using the word “yet” when discussing Facebook as a

teaching tool and made a connection between institutional content delivery platforms

and his Facebook studio group:

So it’s not really serving that role yet...but I am finding I’m more and more starting to share...videos and those kinds of things... You know, so that’s funny you should bring that up. That’s a thought, about how we can actually do some teaching on this page and see how it works, because...of course, as you know there’s whole other delivery systems [like] Blackboard...which are more typically used for something like that...

Although Berlioz stated that he tends to post less pedagogical information on Facebook,

his reaction to making the connection between a tool such as the Blackboard learning

management system and Facebook for delivering content suggests that this is less his

conscious decision as a teacher and more of a lack of awareness of the affordances of

Facebook as a potential content delivery system.

One of the most frequent themes from the interview and the Facebook data is

Berlioz’ desire to celebrate and showcase his studio’s students and their successes.

Facebook has provided him a venue to share biographical information—often through

humorous narratives—about his current students to former students, parents, and

others. Roughly half of his Facebook posts involved introducing current students and

celebrating performances/successes of both current and former students. Examples of

Berlioz in his “cheerleader” role include:

A simply inspiring solo recital last night. Here’s a photo of us and the --- Studio. Tom Dawg can still bring it!

A grand HUZZAH to Studio Alum [name] who has accepted a music education position in PreK-8 general music, band, and choir position at [school]. We are proud of you and so glad you are back in [city] after doing your MM at University of [state]!

65

Here’s another Studio Student Feature! [name] is a sophomore [instrument] performance major... When not playing or studying music [name] collects spit valve corks and assembles them into famous buildings.

Berlioz also stressed the importance of providing networking opportunities for his

current, former, and even prospective students. When advertising guest artist

performances or congratulating guest artists he does so in a way that makes their

Facebook contact information available to his own students through “tagging” or posting

photos “with” the artists. Berlioz is also aware of the visibility of his public Facebook

studio group, noting that:

Doing little vignettes on different students, where they’re featured, is also a very popular thing with not only the students but their parents. And surprisingly, even people who are looking at the program, it kind of puts a face with that. I’m seeing that the personal aspect of Facebook, which is one of its strengths, really is an effective tool when you let people actually get to know your students...

Although the word “recruiting” is not explicitly used by Berlioz, his recognition of

Facebook’s strength in attracting the attention of parents and potential students is a

reference to the platform’s ability to be useful as a recruiting and marketing tool.

However, it is not clear if Berlioz is consciously aware of and using this affordance of

the tool or if he has simply noticed it and considers it a fortunate byproduct of the

Facebook group.

Berlioz also uses Facebook to foster a sense of membership and enculturation

within the studio. Traditions such as studio parties at the professor’s home and use of a

particular instrument owned by the institution were mentioned on the Facebook group,

and each garnered reactions and/or comments from current students and alumni. For

example, a picture was posted featuring a specific instrument used by current and

66

former students during their study with Berlioz (Figure 1) and received the following

replies:

Is that the same [instrument] I learned on? I think it is

I remember that horn – and it’s not with a bunch of fondness, either.

I feel I missed a very important right [sic] of passage by never being playing [it]

67

Figure 1. An example from Berlioz’ Facebook studio group.

68

Berlioz also described his desire to

[Let] my current students know about former students so that they feel like they’re part of tradition already

Core principles of apprenticeship, including the development of a sense of belonging

and enculturation within a community, are embedded in Berlioz’ use of and lived

experiences with his Facebook studio group. He seems to highly value the ability of

Facebook to cultivate and grow studio traditions, as well as memory of traditions and

practices, that include both current and former students.

Gordeli

Gordeli is an associate professor of music at a medium-sized institution in the

Rocky Mountain region. She has taught for nine years in her current position. Gordeli

has and uses one Facebook account for personal and professional groups/pages. She

has had a public Facebook studio group for two years, and considers herself an

administrator of the page. The group was created by Gordeli, without student

participation or outside assistance. Members of the public Facebook group include

current and former students. Gordeli stated in the demographic survey that she

accesses, reads, and/or contributes to the public group daily. She had not received or

attended any training on using social media in higher education. Table 3 provides an

overview of the themes and general descriptors of Gordeli that emerged through the

analysis.

69

Table 3

Participant 2, Gordeli: Emergent Themes and Descriptors

Themes Descriptors

Role Definition • Perpetual teacher

• I really see my entire role...[as] this extension of myteaching

• It’s not my cheerleader space, it’s my teacher space

• [to show] the career of a musician as a whole

Student Agency/ Influence

• My students were the ones who told me to get aFacebook page

• They [students] were really the ones that showedme...things when I have a question

• [students] totally love it.

• I think it’s great because it creates community and they’rebonding

Institutional Oversight • The university...wants us to clear our Facebook pageswith them

• University just wants to make sure that they can control it

• They’re [institution] maybe a little bit behind where I am

• Common sense training...it’s just reinforcing what Ialready know

Value of Facebook • We [faculty] should be using it

• Great way of promoting my studio

• Incredible way of connecting with my colleagues in thebuilding who I don’t always see every day

• Shows that spirit of who we are as a faculty

• Facebook: 20 of 22 posts on her public page werepromotional, including student concert announcements,congratulations, pictures, and videos of studio events

Intentional Group/Page Management/Use

• I have two [studio] pages

• Public one is for alumni...promotional

• Private group that is for my studio

• When I have to communicate individually with students...Iuse email

• Facebook: on public page, 50% of posts were by Gordeliand were uni-directional for information sharing

Social Media’s Influence on Instructor Relationships with Students

• Nuts and bolts of communicating are just so wildlydifferent [past vs. present]

• It’s fed by, perhaps, social media

• Students today maybe want to have a little bit more of aconnection to you

• More casual today than it was with my teacher to me

70

Gordeli has and uses two separate Facebook studio groups. One is public, with

membership comprised of current and former students; the other is private, with only

current students as members. Only public Facebook studio group data was analyzed for

this study. However, her interview responses encompass her lived experiences and

intentions with both groups, so both public and private environments are discussed in

these findings.

Gordeli started using a Facebook group for studio communication after noting

that students were using social media tools more frequently than email. She stated:

I would write them an email...they wouldn’t see it. And they text, they Snapchat, they Facebook...It [creating a Facebook studio group] was kind of a grand experiment and it worked so well...that I never stopped using it.

Gordeli takes her teacher role very seriously and considers her Facebook groups to be

an extension of her studio, where she is a “perpetual teacher.” She strives to share her

with her students what a career in music looks like, and does this on Facebook by

sharing her own activities, as she describes:

I posted multiple times a day at the [instrument] convention when I was there in San Diego so that they could kind of follow what I was doing. So I would do recordings of stuff of take pictures of people and post it...

Gordeli also supports and values her students’ agency while maintaining her

master/teacher role. She acknowledged that it was a student request that convinced her

to join Facebook initially, that she relied on students for technical support, and she

frequently supported her observations about the affordances of Facebook with some

variant of the phrase, “Students love it.” Gordeli also demonstrated confidence in her

students’ ability to provide peer support and guidance to each other, noting that

students are not required to join the Facebook studio page or “friend” her, but:

71

If they want to by my friends I will say yes...they kind of peter in throughout the year. My little freshmen realize oh, Dr. [Gordeli], she’s friends with my sophomore friend...

In discussing student posts to the private Facebook studio group, Gordeli continues to

speak as a teacher (or in this case, administrator) but exhibits respect for the individual

actions, decisions, and relationship-building activities of students. She states:

The private page I don’t have any problems at all. The students are very respectful. They actually post quite a bit as well. Silly things, but it’s fine, I don’t mind that. Like, that they’re looking for who’s got a formal dress I can borrow for Friday night. I just think it’s great because it creates community and they’re bonding and they find a way to connect together...

Gordeli’s opinion of and concerns about institutional oversight of the use of Facebook

by faculty at her institution are blunt and convicted. She is conscious of institutional

policies governing social media tools used by faculty members, and has cleared her

public—but not private—Facebook group with the institution. She is aware of her role as

an early-adopter, even though it is not stated explicitly, and commented that:

We’re [faculty using Facebook] kind of paving the way and we’re creating the policies as we go... I think the university just wants to make sure that they can control it and they haven’t yet realized that maybe there are some things that they want to fuss with and maybe some of the things they should just let go.

Gordeli pointed out that she is concerned about student confidentiality. Therefore, she

receives verbal and/or written permission from students before posting their pictures

online. She also feels that the policies in place for traditional face-to-face interactions

can simply be interpreted and translated into online environments. The following is one

such scenario:

There are rules—university—that I would follow.... If a parent reached out [via Facebook] I would never talk to them about a student in particular, only in generic terms, so...I try to follow that.

72

Her observation that the university policies and any training are common sense and

“just reinforcing what I already know” is supported by her clear understanding of

Facebook page/group privacy policies and how she manages her multiple studio

groups. Student privacy needs are balanced with what she believes is a beneficial way

to build community within her studio. These allow her to share her experiences as an

example of what a professional career in music entails. Creating this successful informal

learning environment has made her confident that she is a better judge of the value of

Facebook for her studio than could be addressed through institutional policy.

Gordeli’s opinions about the value of Facebook as a tool for higher education are

numerous. She believes it to be useful for public relations and promotional purposes

such as offering publicly-facing messages and reminders about events, usually

internally for students and externally for the public). She also perceives it to be easy to

use and manage, and while she is aware of concerns about professionalism and

potential errors/issues with Facebook:

If we can create a...Facebook presence or social media presence that reflects...responsibility, then we’re going to be fine.... Just keep separate the personal and professional... It’s just not that hard.

Gordeli’s self-efficacy with Facebook and her lack of negative experiences have led her

to believe that all faculty can and should be using it. In addition to the communication

and student community-building affordances, she has used Facebook as a marketing

tool and sees it as a valuable way to promote her studio (see Figure 2), as well as the

entire music department.

73

Figure 2. An example from Gordeli’s Facebook Studio group.

Twenty of Gordeli’s 22 posts on her public Facebook group were promotional in

nature—most announced student recitals or concerts or congratulated students on a

completed performance. Guest artist events were also posted, often with images or

short videos created as the event was happening. However, Gordeli exhibits an

awareness of how her promotional images and posts might be interpreted by colleagues

as bragging or gloating when she comments in her interview:

I do it for, you know, reasons of promotion...it’s not about, look at how many students I have. It’s “aren’t they great? You know this is gonna [sic] be a great year."

74

One topic discussed at length in Gordeli’s interview was her perception of the

levels of formality in current teacher-student relationships versus what she recalled from

her own relationships with her teachers. She suggested that present-day student-

teacher relationships are more informal than in previous generations due to social

media use:

I think students today maybe want to have a little bit more of a connection to you. They see your personal life on Facebook. They’re seeing my life... And so there’s a blurred line today with students...and I think my teacher and her communication to me was definitely more professional and distant.

However, Gordeli also observed that some of this perceived difference in formality could

be due to the personality differences of teachers, not social media connections. She

spoke honestly about the fact that she has never thought about the differences between

how she interacts with her students versus how she and her former teachers interacted.

The researcher’s act of asking a question about differences in communication, then and

now, prompted Gordeli to respond with the following vignette:

That’s so funny...It hadn’t occurred to me to even think about this. Let’s see. She also would order all of our music for us and we would show up on the first day of school and there’d be a stack this big...and the amount of money that we owed her... [Today, I say] I want you to go to [online store] and get your music...

Later in the interview, Gordeli returns to the topic, stating:

I think I’m using your question in two different ways because I feel like there’s really the personality of how we are today as teachers and how we interact with students. And it’s fed by, perhaps, social media. And so even the nuts and bolts of communicating are just so wildly different.

Gordeli’s ability to self-reflect allows her to see the separation between the

communication tool and the communicator. This seems to have contributed to her

creation of Facebook studio groups that meet very specific needs—those of her

students, and those of her studio/music department.

75

Mozart

Mozart is an assistant professor of music at a medium-sized institution in the

Western United States and has taught for two years in his current position. Mozart has

and uses one Facebook account for both personal and professional pages. He has had

a Facebook studio page, not a group, for two years at his current institution and six

years at a previous institution, and considers himself an administrator of the page. The

current Facebook studio page was created by Mozart without student participation or

outside assistance. Followers of and participants on the Facebook page include

students and other musicians outside his studio. These include other professionals,

former students, other faculty, etc. Mozart accesses, reads, and/or contributes to the

page weekly. He stated in the demographic survey that he had not received or attended

any training for using social media in higher education. Table 4 shows the general

themes and descriptions found for Mozart.

76

Table 4

Participant 3, Mozart: Emergent Themes and Descriptors

Themes Descriptors

Role Definition • [in the studio] conversations are more casual

• [on Facebook] the role I play is very much as anadministrator

• I keep complete control over the page

• Facebook: Mozart contributed sixteen of 22 posts; twelvewere posted as “page administrator” and four were postedas himself

• Facebook: two of Mozart’s sixteen posts referenced astudent or the studio; fourteen gave guidance/instruction,most of which included links to videos/websites

Student Agency/ Influence

• [Facebook] seems to be the best way to communicatewith them because they’re constantly staring at theirphones

• I don’t have access to the student page...it’s fine that theyhave their own

• [Regarding a Facebook Live post with professionalmusicians having a “bad day”] If a student saw that that’snot good because students are quick to judge. They don’tget it, right?

• Facebook: of the six posts not contributed by Mozart,none were identifiable as student posts

Negative Impacts of Facebook/Social Media

• An unfortunate byproduct of Facebook is that I feel I haveto babysit my students a lot more.

• What I can’t stand about Facebook is...my colleaguesconstantly posting pictures...you’re honestly showing off.

• Social networking causes latent laziness

Skeptical of Facebook as Educational Tool

• It’s easy to ignore [Facebook studio posts] sometimes justbecause they have an active social agenda that they haveto get through on their phones

• [Facebook] was a really great way to get [a video] tostudents. Now that doesn’t mean students actuallyopened up the file...

Uncertain, but Curious • I haven’t been convinced of its importance...becausemaybe I don’t know how to use it

• If there’s a way to see...what are all the studios across thecountry are doing? That would be cool to see.

• I don’t babysit it. Maybe I should. To prevent some sort ofinappropriate conversations that have to do with the[institution] name, our studio name...

• Training on how to throw [studio calendar info] on myFacebook profile would be great

77

Mozart uses a Facebook studio page even though he dislikes the platform and

does not believe it is an effective way to communicate with his students. He stated that

he typically sends messages with suggested media to his students via email and posts

a verbatim message on his Facebook studio page. He maintains a clear division

between that page and his students’ Facebook group/page, to which he does not have

and does not wish to have access. Mozart does not attempt to encourage conversation

or interaction on his Facebook studio page, and uses it entirely in a uni-directional

capacity to deliver content to students:

That’s why things are set up that way...“Here’s stuff for you [students] to look at from me.” And then they’ll have their own conversation on a different page and do whatever it is that they do.

Mozart perceives himself as an administrator for the Facebook studio page and does

not allow anyone to post to it without his moderation of content. He feels that he must

filter the content he contributes to Facebook more closely than in face-to-face

conversations in his studio, and noted that “conversations are more casual” in the

studio. His posts are mostly directions or links to content that students are encouraged

to view. Typical posts include comments such as:

Listen to this podcast about dedicated practice!!!! FANTASTIC information in here... Students you “may” have heard some of this before... I disagree with their assertions on perfect pitch, but still...some good stuff here [link to podcast]

This is a great video to watch as you prepare for Freischutz this semester!!!!! [link to video]

A few posts, shown in Figure 3, are both encouraging and celebratory:

78

Figure 3. An example from Mozart’s Facebook Studio page.

Mozart also voiced concern about posting content that might be viewed as

objectionable, and his risk aversion likely contributes to the uni-directional, non-

engagement-oriented Facebook posts. He commented:

I’m just going to play it safe. I don’t want to see a university lawyer. So I mean I am very much...nothing borderline, or nothing at all inappropriate.

Student agency and influence is a key concept in Mozart’s perception of Facebook and

its potential uses. He uses Facebook because his students use it, but does not believe

that it is an improvement over traditional email communication. He also perceived the

students’ Facebook group/page as “theirs,” which suggests that they have power and

79

agency equal to his own when using the platform. He is also wary of streaming live

performances, having seen a colleague give a less-than-exemplary performance, and

noticing negative comments on the Facebook page where it was streamed:

At this festival I played at we did this huge brass piece and we were tired...one of the trumpet players put their phone up on a music stand a little further away and...Facebook Lived it.

One of the other trumpet players had a really hard time, and one of my buddies commented on it. He was like, “Whoa, he’s having a hard time.” ...

This person holds a position at a university and had a bad day. And if a student saw that that’s not good because students are quick to judge. They don’t get it, right? So...that is probably the scariest thing...that I’ll be thrown on Facebook Live without my knowledge and if I completely eat it...

The fear of embarrassment expressed by Mozart is likely also tied to lack of interest in

engaging and interacting with students in more than an instructional, one-way

communication stream.

Mozart’s dislike of Facebook as a product and platform is evident in his

statements blaming it, as well as social media in general, for student laziness and lack

of self-regulation. He sees his students’ need to be constantly reminded about events,

lesson times, and other academic topics as tied to their reliance on social media for

constant updates and an inability to maintain their own calendars/schedules:

Pre-Facebook...you were told to do [something by your teacher], you wrote it down. You show up. That’s how it is. Students don’t write things down now... Some do, they have a calendar they throw their stuff in. But I have to consistently send out formal emails [reminders]

This sentiment was also expressed with Mozart’s statement that:

Social networking causes latent laziness and Facebook...I don’t think that’s the concept. Facebook wasn’t designed to do that, but I think that’s a result of just general laziness in this culture...

80

In addition to laziness, Mozart blamed Facebook/social media for the increasing amount

of time necessary for him to babysit (i.e., send reminders, check behavior/dress/etc.,

watch for inappropriate content) his students. The common practice of music faculty

posting pictures of their studios and ensembles on Facebook is also viewed negatively

by Mozart. He sees it as bragging and showing off and there is a hint of jealousy and/or

resentment when he stated:

I do see why people do it because young people are going to look and say, ooh there’s sixteen people in their [instrument] choir and they won’t understand that eight of them probably have no idea what a scale is...

Mozart’s opinion about Facebook as a tool for learning was difficult to discern

through his skepticism about the platform in general. However, two comments directly

addressed teaching and/or learning with the tool. The first was that posting information

to the Facebook studio page might be missed and/or ignored by students because of

the nature of the “feed.” Mozart pointed out that information scrolled through

continuously through the day may result in post simply ending up lost in the large

quantity of those viewed by students throughout the day. The second observation was

that, while Facebook could provide an easy and effective way to connect students to

media content selected by the teacher:

That doesn’t mean students actually opened up the file and looked at it...We generally went over it in lessons and let them watch it using Facebook.

Mozart’s inherent skepticism about his students’ ability and willingness to do what they

are asked and self-regulate outside of a classroom or studio plays into his view that

students are lazy. Therefore, making the information available to his students with

Facebook does not guarantee that they will see it. In this case, he felt it necessary to set

81

aside additional time during students’ lessons to view the material, even though it had

been previously communicated through Facebook.

Although Mozart held a mostly negative or skeptical view of Facebook and his

own Facebook studio page, he also voiced curiosity about how he might use it to benefit

his own teaching and his studio. He followed his statement about not really seeing a use

for Facebook with “...because maybe I don’t know how to use it.” He also exhibited an

interest in streamlining his studio calendar or using Facebook for recruitment but did not

know how to begin:

Being able to disseminate a calendar...if it’s possible to make it a part of the Facebook [page], I think there is a way, but I don’t know.

If a prospective student wants to come to the [university]...Are they going to try to find you on Facebook? I just don’t know.

Mozart also wondered aloud about the possibility of asking a student to manage or

administer the Facebook studio page, but noted that, while it would be easy to assign

that task to a graduate student, there is no way to assign that task to an undergraduate.

He liked the idea of receiving training or other types of support to use Facebook

effectively, however, and reflected that:

I should be giving more thought to this...

Suggestions on how to positively use Facebook as a communication and advertising tool would be great.

Mozart also grudgingly admitted that using Facebook could be beneficial:

I hate to say it...it probably is worth pursuing something like that, because it’s free advertising and...it needs to happen.

82

Stamitz

Stamitz is a senior lecturer of music at a large institution in the southern United

States and has taught for six years in her current position. Stamitz has and uses one

Facebook account for both personal and professional pages. She has had a Facebook

studio group for four years, and considers herself an administrator of the group. The

Facebook studio group was co-created by student(s) and faculty and members of the

Facebook studio group include students and other musicians outside her studio (i.e.,

other professionals, former students, other faculty, etc.). Stamitz accesses, reads,

and/or contributes to the group daily. She stated in the demographic survey that she

had not received or attended any training for using social media in higher education. A

general depiction of Stamitz may be found in Table 5.

83

Table 5

Participant 4, Stamitz: Emergent Themes and Descriptors

Themes Descriptors

Role Definition • I just have the real me on Facebook

• My role is as a motivator

• Nice sense of humor I think is part of our Facebookinteraction

• Self-censorship

• Facebook: Stamitz contributed 44 of the 162 posts; 16 wereresponses to other members of the Facebook group

Student Agency/ Influence

• Three or four years ago...one of the students started aFacebook group for all of the studio

• [students] wanted us to have a group...less formal way ofinteracting and sharing...

• They’re really into Instagram... I tried to learn how to usethat a bit...

Developing and Maintaining Relationships

• Really like how much Facebook...allows me to stay in touchmore easily with former students

• Being able to interact with those colleagues that you knowbut not as well

• Only post things that I think that all thousand-plus peoplethat are part of my Facebook [want] to see

• We’re [instrument teachers] thinking about a lot of the samestuff... it feels like a support network

Concerns about Social Media Use in Higher Education

• Something...not good about [never] disconnecting fully

• Things used to be more fixed in organization

• Now everybody thinks, oh I can reach you in a second so ifour plans don’t work I can change them.

• Facebook: nine of Stamitz’ posts involved scheduling orrescheduling events/lessons due to illness, travel issues, orother last-minute challenges

Facebook vs. Face-to-Face Environment

• In the studio environment you wear more hats

• Routinely have to help people who need to be referred tocounseling

• Would never have a really difficult personal conversationwith somebody [through/on Facebook]

• Different roles that you wear as a [studio] teacher, maybe asa pedagogue or as a counselor or as...a taskmaster

Learning with Facebook

• Inspiring them to get more interested in what we do

• Show them a great artist or show them an article aboutpracticing

• We can post stuff like “come to studio class at 2:00” or thisgreat article

• Facebook: thirteen of Stamitz’ posts were recommendedarticles, videos, or career information

84

Stamitz is heavily involved in social media in her discipline/instrument area,

editing blogs and acting as the Facebook group/page administrator for several

nationally-oriented professional organizations. She enjoys technology and spoke at

length about her history of technology use—including using the PINE email system in

college and the first generation of Netscape Navigator. Stamitz acquired her first

Facebook account in 2007, one year after the platform became available. Her

confidence with technology and social media, as well as her sensitivity to upcoming

generations’ new and shifting tool preferences, suggests that she is an “early adopter”

who thinks critically about technology use in her field. This is demonstrated in Stamitz’

account of learning to use Instagram, in which she includes her observation of its key

difference from Facebook:

I tried to learn how to use that a bit because we made an Instagram for the [summer institute]. It was a learning experience just to see what they were interested in posting...and because that’s an image-based experience, it was really different.

Stamitz considers her primary role with the Facebook studio group to be as a

motivator for her students. She is aware that other teachers have multiple profiles for

managing their personal and professional Facebook groups/pages, but was adamant

that “my preference is to have one me on there.” There is an acknowledgement that this

requires self-censorship to avoid conflict with Facebook group members at times, but

she seemed untroubled by this. Stamitz also saw the value of humor in her role as

Facebook studio group administrator, and comments that:

Keeping people a little bit light-hearted and laughing and, you know, maybe a few funny music videos or something...makes them think, like, we’re [faculty] human too.

85

Her posts and interactions on Facebook are illustrative of a facilitator-oriented approach

rather than a teacher- or administrator-oriented approach. 36% of her interactions are

responses rather than new posts. Stamitz commented about studio events, academic

information, and career information; however, she also engages with students and

others members of the group about topics like where to purchase a music stand, and

she uses Facebook to reschedule lessons and other events when necessary.

Student agency and influence is important to Stamitz—in fact, the group she now

manages was originally created by a student in response to a desire for a place for

informal communication and sharing of information. Additionally, Stamitz noted that she

uses Facebook to get information to new students because many have Facebook

accounts long before the university creates official student email accounts for them. She

is also keenly aware of the changes that occur over time with respect to student choice

of communication tools, and makes an effort to learn new technologies to keep up. All

these elements demonstrate her respect for the role that student agency plays and the

influence that it has—and likely will have in the future—on her selection and use of

social media tools for communicating with students.

Stamitz’ deep appreciation of Facebook stems from her interest in developing

and maintaining relationships with students (current and former) and colleagues. She

comments:

I really, really like how much Facebook has allowed...me to stay in touch more easily with former students from far flung places. I’ve taught in Tennessee and Georgia, in England, In Virginia, in New Hampshire, in Texas...and I can keep those people that...I might like to hear how they’re doing... I like that I can keep them in my life a little bit...

86

She also sees Facebook as a way to maintain and/or improve relationships with

colleagues:

You go to a national conference and you can say, Oh hey, I just saw your recital...or I just saw that your daughter turned eight... It gives you a really nice way to know just enough about what people are interested in and what’s going on in their life that when you see them...you can have a nicer conversation...and just maintain a more real sense of interaction.

Stamitz demonstrated this interest in establishing positive relationships with students by

acting in a supportive, nurturing capacity at times on the Facebook studio group.

Informal, personal comments are not uncommon, such as:

[in response to a student’s post about flight troubles] Can your parents gift you minute suites? You need some rest...

[in response to a student looking for someone to record a recital] [student] might be able to? I can record with iPad for you as well.

[in response to a student solving an equipment issue] Happy practicing :-)

She also values Facebook as a “support network” for herself and fellow instrumentalists,

commenting that:

Let’s say there’s forty [instrument] teachers that I interact with pretty regularly on Facebook...We’re kind of thinking about a lot of the same stuff every day. And...if feels like a support network...You can send a message or whatever and people get it and it’s nice.

Stamitz’ willingness to self-censor and only use a single Facebook profile is made

understandable with this information. She has developed and maintained strong

personal and professional relationships by carefully cultivating an authentic online

persona.

Concerns were expressed about the “always on” nature of social media. Stamitz

worried that a lack of time or opportunity to disconnect has caused students to believe

that they require technology to find and communicate with others. She reflected that:

87

Now we think that without the Internet that we don’t know how to find anyone...or without phones or whatever...we’re much more sort of all turned on to each other all the time, and I think this is good and bad.

Stamitz explained her concern by telling a story about one of her graduate students:

I needed something from my teaching assistant and it was still summer vacation... I joked to a colleague, Oh well, I’ve trained them well, I’m sure I’ll hear back from them in under 30 minutes. And I heard from them in 12 minutes. But maybe that’s not good. You know, like, it’s summer vacation!

She also observed that plans and schedules change more frequently now than they did

when she was a student because communication is much quicker and easier. In one

exchange on the Facebook studio group, shown in Figure 4, a weather issue that

delayed her flight and impacted previously scheduled lessons was addressed through

ten posts between Stamitz and five students spanning the hours of 11:00 p.m. to 11:20

a.m. the following morning.

88

Figure 4. An example from Stamitz’ Facebook Studio group.

Four of these posts are time-stamped between 3:05 a.m. and 3:11 a.m. This

documented example of rapid schedule adjustment through nearly instantaneous

89

communication via Facebook illustrates not only the capacity of the tool to assist with

last-minute scheduling problems but the level of commitment required of a teacher to

use it effectively to meet student needs.

Stamitz described the difference between interactions with students on Facebook

and in the studio in the following manner:

Face to face...you wear more hats...There’s just different roles...as a teacher, maybe as a pedagogue or as a counselor or a little bit as a taskmaster.

She clarified her comments about being a counselor:

On Facebook I would never have a really difficult personal conversation with somebody who’s having psychological problems whereas in my studio I routinely have to help people who need to be referred to counseling.

Stamitz has a well-defined sense of her own role(s) in each environment. Student

privacy is paramount and personal issues are dealt with behind closed doors where she

is also focused on teaching and direct instruction. This likely influences her willingness

to interact in a more informal, personal, and facilitative manner on the Facebook studio

group, where she is not counseling or intentionally delivering pedagogical content.

Although Stamitz feels as though she is not teaching through her Facebook

studio group posts and saves pedagogy and instruction for the studio, her interview

responses and Facebook posts suggest that her group is used as an informal learning

environment. She provided career and field-specific resources, stating:

Most of the things I post are with the intent of...inspiring them to get more interested in what we do or learn something about what we do that they don’t already know.

The desire to connect students to professional resources and organizations in their

chosen field is manifested in several of Stamitz’ Facebook posts:

90

For all [professional society members] – we have an election coming up, to vote for these outstanding new board members. Please share and participate!

Are you working on a [instrument]-related term paper or final project? Writing some cutting edge doctoral research? Then you might be the next winner of the Dalton Research Competition of the [professional society]. [link to research competition information]

I am doing some work on our blog today, and though you might all like to know about some other [instrument] blogs out there, like [links to three blog sites].

In addition to sharing resources for educational and career purposes, Stamitz also uses

the site for general reminders about academic and studio events. Her verbal responses

to questions about Facebook lived experiences center around using the tool for

communication and relationship-building, but her actions on the Facebook group are

focused on student learning and growth in the field.

These narrative retellings of each participant’s lived experiences contributed to

the development of emergent themes that illustrate participants’ beliefs, intentions, and

lived experiences and/or practices. Sixteen emergent themes were identified across the

four participants’ narratives. Several of these themes were similar; however, since each

participant spoke from a unique perspective different terminology was often applied to

the same topic/experience. The following section details the process of developing

super-ordinate themes from the emergent themes, including grouping them by similarity,

removing redundancies, and renaming/relabeling where appropriate.

Super-Ordinate Themes across Cases

A table of all themes generated from the data of the four participants was created

(Table 6). Since IPA focuses on the idiographic, each participant’s data was analyzed

individually and without reference to others’. This led to the development of several,

91

similarly labeled, but not identical, emergent themes during the analytical process.

However, this is not deemed a negative or inhibiting aspect of the research, as IPA is

meant to be flexible and modifiable based upon the study’s goals. Regarding theme

development, Smith and Eatough (2007) anticipated this type of result and noted: “The

process is inevitably selective so that some of the themes may be dropped either

because they do not fit well with the emergent structure or because, within the emerging

analysis, they do not have a strong enough evidence base” (p. 47). Table 6 shows the

emergent themes identified in the analytical process.

Table 6

All Emergent Themes Developed from Data Analysis

Theme Participant(s)

Role Definition • All participants

Student Agency/Influence • Gordeli, Mozart, Stamitz

Institutional Oversight • Berlioz, Gordeli,

Learning with Facebook • Berlioz, Stamitz

Celebrating Studio Success • Berlioz

Networking and Promotion • Berlioz

Studio Tradition • Berlioz

Value of Facebook • Gordeli

Intentional Page Use/Management • Gordeli

Social Media’s Influence on Instructor Relationships with Students

• Gordeli

Negative Impacts of Facebook/Social Media • Mozart

Skeptical of Facebook as Educational Tool • Mozart

Uncertain, but Curious • Mozart

Developing and Maintaining Relationships • Stamitz

Concerns about Social Media Use in Higher Ed • Stamitz

Facebook vs. Face-to-Face Environments • Stamitz

When examined through the lens of the original topic of inquiry, three super-

ordinate themes emerged from the table of individual participant themes. They were:

• Impact of social media on Studio teaching and learning

92

• Learning through enculturation

• Faculty lived experiences with Facebook Studio groups/pages

The impact of social media on Studio teaching and learning theme encompasses

participant observations of, opinions about, and reaction to social media’s impact on

teaching and learning in music studio environments. Student skill acquisition through

enculturation addresses participant intent when using a Facebook Studio group/page

with students. The emergent themes clustered here reflect participant use of Facebook

to facilitate student acquisition of skills required for successful membership in the studio

as well as enculturation into the broader field/culture of professional musicianship.

Faculty lived experiences with Facebook Studio groups/pages contains emerging

themes that document participants’ practices, lived experiences, and reflective opinions

of Facebook as a tool, based upon personal knowledge and experience. Table 7 shows

the clustering of emergent themes under each super-ordinate theme.

93

Table 7

Super-Ordinate Themes with Associated Emergent Themes

Super-Ordinate Themes Emergent Themes

Impact of Social Media on Studio Teaching and Learning

• Facebook vs. Face-to-Face

• Student Agency/Influence

• Institutional Oversight

• Social Media’s Influence on Relationships

• Skepticism and Concern

Learning through Enculturation • Role Definition

• Student Agency/Influence

• Learning with Facebook

• Celebrating Studio Success

• Studio Tradition

• Networking and Promotion

Faculty Lived Experiences with Facebook Studio Groups/Pages

• Affordances of Facebook

• Negative Impacts

• Developing and Maintaining Relationships

• Networking and Promotion

• Page Management

Several emergent themes, including social media’s influence on relationships,

curiosity, skepticism and concern, and affordances of Facebook, were relabeled to

align with the broader super-ordinate themes, and two emergent themes, student

agency/influence and networking and promotion, were found in multiple super-ordinate

themes. These instances are explained in detail in the narrative below.

Impact of Social Media on Studio Teaching and Learning

Evident with all four faculty were awareness of and response to recent changes

in technology, higher education policy, and student behavior/actions. The role of social

media as a primary instigator or contributing factor was noted multiple times and by

multiple participants. The impact of social media, especially Facebook, on teaching and

learning in the music studio was interpreted as positive by some and negative by others.

94

The cluster of emergent themes within this super-ordinate theme suggests that social

media’s impact on studio teaching and learning affects more than just the members of

the Facebook page. Social media, as a phenomenon, has significantly altered how

faculty interact with their students and how they teach.

The most significant effect of social media—and specifically Facebook—on

studio teaching and learning is that the master-apprentice relationship is no longer built

solely upon the professional reputation of the master and weekly face-to-face

interactions in the studio. Gordeli pointed out that students she connects with on

Facebook can “see my life.” Faculty who make themselves available to students

through social media are no longer simply training students in a traditional

apprenticeship model where they are responsible for teaching/modeling skills and

practices. Instead, they have adopted the position of teaching/modeling through their

lives, including personal interests, family activities, beliefs, etc. This contrasts with

previous generations of music masters and apprentices who communicated primarily

through face-to-face conversations and written documents. Masters could easily select

what type of personal information to give out, if any, and to which apprentices. The use

of a tool such as Facebook might be seen as democratizing the process, allowing equal

access to faculty information and teaching for all students. However, Stamitz noted that

she finds herself self-censoring to avoid potential conflict or other issues when sharing

information on Facebook. This suggests the possibility that when masters make

themselves more visible through social media, they may actually reduce the amount of

personal insight and opinion shared, and that the lives they teach and model for

students could be less than authentic.

95

Tied closely to faculty authenticity and identity is social media’s impact on faculty

exposure to risk. As institutions develop and implement policies to cover any social

media interaction between faculty and students—whether as part of formal classroom

tasks or informal learning and social environments—faculty are forced to take on an

additional level of responsibility, and therefore risk, if they want to engage in using

social media for learning. Unlike a classroom or studio setting, however, a faculty

member has little to no control of the space or what happens within it. As the

participants in this study related, there are currently several ways this is being handled

by faculty. Gordeli basically ignores or does minimal diligence to meet the institutional

policies based on her perception that she knows more than the policy makers and a

belief that her Facebook studio groups offer little to no risk to herself or the university.

Berlioz heeds the institutional policies that minimize risk to himself and the university,

even though they frustrate him and restrict his ability to share timely information,

because he believes that his Facebook studio group provides a valuable service to his

students, even if content is delayed. Mozart is unwilling to accept any significant risk

and so restricts his Facebook studio page interaction and content sharing to minimal

levels. Even with this small sample size, it is clear that a faculty member’s comfort with

risk can significantly influence willingness to use social media for learning, regardless of

its educational potential or ability to meet student needs.

Social media’s impact on interpersonal formality in studio teaching and learning

was also present in the emergent themes. Gordeli noted that her students expect more

casual, informal relationships with her than she had with her teachers, suggesting this is

related to her students seeing her informally through social media. Master-apprentice

96

roles would be impacted if apprentices viewed their masters more as colleagues or

friends instead of the traditional authority figures. The fact that most students come to

Facebook already fluent in the platform—and sometimes more so than the faculty

member—adds another potential element of equalization between master and

apprentice. Gordeli observed that, while she is comfortable with her less formal teaching

role, her students still fear her. She wants her students to continue to view her as an

authority figure, even as relationships with her students become less rigid and formal.

This is an excellent example social media’s contribution to shifting levels of formality in

a master-apprentice environment where traditional dynamics of authority remain

desirable.

Skepticism and concern surrounding the impacts of social media on teaching and

learning are plentiful in the literature and are borne out in the participants’ comments

and observations. Only Gordeli had nothing but positive reflections on social media’s

impact on teaching and learning. Mozart’s observation that “social networking causes

latent laziness” is based upon his perception that students who use social media require

more reminders and do not record scheduled events in calendars. Berlioz and Stamitz,

on the other hand, view their Facebook studio groups as tools for providing reminders

and event information to meet student needs. This contrast in views of the same

phenomenon could be related to professional experience in that Mozart has fewer years

in his position. It may also result from their pedagogical belief system, as Berlioz and

Stamitz approach their roles on Facebook similarly—as motivators/cheerleaders—with

instructor/master roles saved for the studio.

97

Other concerns about social media impacts on studio teaching and learning were

also espoused. Stamitz expressed concern that it is too easy to quickly change lesson

times or rearrange schedules with social media tools, suggesting that it encourages a

lack of organization or preparation. She also worried that the “always connected” nature

of technology and social media prevents students from disconnecting and taking time

away during academic breaks, with the implication that disconnecting is necessary and

beneficial for learning. Mozart is annoyed by colleagues who “show off” their large

studios, without regard for the actual academic skills of the studio members. He voiced

resentment of those who use Facebook to promote their studios based upon size rather

than skillset. Mozart noted that prospective students are likely impressed by the

pictures, without regard for the academic underpinnings. This was interpreted as

concern for students who may select a university/studio based upon size rather than

quality, and receive an inferior education as a result. However, Gordeli countered this

negative view of studio pictures by clarifying that the picture of her studio posted to

Facebook is not bragging—instead, it is a way to celebrate and look forward to the

coming school year.

Social media’s impacts on studio teaching and learning detailed here show that

they can significantly affect not only a student’s quality of education, but the basic fabric

of traditional master-apprentice teaching present in most university music departments

and conservatories today. The ubiquitous nature of social media has resulted in

institutional oversight and personal role definition and re-definition by faculty who use it.

Inherent in its adoption is faculty awareness of risk, both personal and professional,

which could impact the quality and authenticity of communication and content delivery.

98

However, there is no agreement among faculty participants in this study as to what level

of risk is acceptable or at what point student learning is positively or negatively

impacted. Concerns about a lack of ability to disconnect from social media and school

were voiced, as well as mixed reactions to posting images of studios to Facebook. From

the data and themes presented in this chapter, the perceived impacts of social media on

studio teaching and learning can be interpreted as either positive and negative,

depending upon faculty members’ prior experiences and comfort with risk.

Learning through Enculturation

Two of the four participants, Berlioz and Stamitz, explicitly stated that they do not

assume the role of pedagogue when using their Facebook studio groups and Mozart

was skeptical that Facebook has any educational purpose. However, all faculty

members discussed taking specific, intentional actions that provide students the

opportunity to learn critical skills, generally through enculturation in this informal learning

environment. Faculty members may not perceive their actions as teaching—but when

viewed through the lens of apprenticeship, the recommendation of field-specific

resources and modeling of professional practice on Facebook meet traditional

expectations for master-apprentice education.

Educational content is intentionally shared on Facebook by all faculty in some

way. All four shared links to videos or other media that they had determined was

professionally relevant for their students. Stamitz and Mozart referred to posting articles

or information about practicing techniques. Fourteen of Mozart’s sixteen posts were

instructional or provided guidance for performance issues. Participants discussed these

99

materials as resources they have selected and want their students to view, which

suggests an unspoken expectation that students will learn something from those

materials. Mozart noted that when he posts videos to his Facebook studio page, he

cannot verify that students have actually viewed it. Therefore, he shares the same

content during a face-to-face lesson, which validates the educational intent of sharing

the content on Facebook. This example may partially explain why music faculty are

reluctant to state that they are teaching with their Facebook pages—although there is

clear intent to share educational content and help students build skills, they are not

aware of a way to measure student learning if or when students engage with it.

A significant opportunity for student skill acquisition through Facebook studio

groups or pages is faculty members’ modeling of professional practices and behaviors.

Gordeli attempts to show “the career of a musician as a whole” by allowing her students

to see both her personal and professional activities, thereby modeling her own

expectations and discipline norms. Berlioz focuses significant effort on connecting his

students to other professionals in the field, including alumni, which provides

documented examples of professional interactions as models for his students’ future

interactions with colleagues. Stamitz’ comments about self-censorship reflect her desire

to avoid conflict and present a positive model for discourse on her Facebook studio

group. As modeling is a standard practice for traditional apprenticeship teaching and

learning, the modeling performed via Facebook studio groups/pages can be viewed as

a simple extension of teaching practices used in the studio with face-to-face instruction.

The establishment and reinforcement of studio traditions is also part of the

enculturation that leads to learner skill acquisition. Visible documentation and

100

celebration of student and studio successes assists with student recruitment and

students’ desire for studio membership. As students participate in anticipatory

socialization activities through Facebook studio groups or pages, they acquire the skills

necessary for full participation in the studio, its traditions, and the greater musical

community. Berlioz’ request for alumni to post their professional activities and

whereabouts was done to let “current students know about former students so that they

feel like they’re part of tradition.” Gordeli commented that she wants to inspire her

students “to get them more interested in what we do,” which suggests an internalized

sense of heritage and/or community with its own norms and traditions. Three of the

faculty mentioned hosting annual studio parties, gatherings held at faculty members’

houses for all the current members of the studio. Berlioz posted pictures from a studio

party hosted at his home, further reinforcing studio tradition and making it visible.

Although teaching with Facebook studio groups or pages is not an explicit goal

for the faculty interviewed, their interview responses and Facebook posts suggest that

they participate in activities that provide learning materials and opportunities for their

students. Modeling professional practices and behaviors occurs frequently on Facebook

studio groups or pages by faculty and mirrors similar modeling practices in face-to-face

apprenticeship environments. Facebook also provides a space for students to practice

their online behaviors and communication through anticipatory socialization activities.

Finally, Facebook studio groups/pages contribute to the visibility of studio traditions,

which provides motivation for student membership and enculturation. As part of that

enculturation process, students are able to acquire professional skills and behaviors

that will aid in their future successful careers.

101

Faculty Lived Experience with Facebook Studio Groups and Pages

The third super-ordinate theme identified from participants’ responses emerged

from their commentary on their lived experiences with Facebook. Although the

homogenous sample solicited and enlisted for the study share similar academic and

career backgrounds, each faculty member voiced a distinctive view on Facebook studio

group/page management, purpose for its use, and perspective on its value in higher

education. These unique experiences and opinions are documented here to convey the

diverse practices and values currently in place for music faculty using Facebook studio

groups/pages.

Management and administration practices were discussed by each faculty

member, and several similar topics were addressed by multiple participants. Advertising

by group members was commented on by both Berlioz and Gordeli. Each noted that

when they had first created Facebook studio groups there were individuals who joined

for the sole purpose of advertising instruments or other things for sale. This surprised

both of them and resulted in decisions to restrict or remove those types of posts.

Stamitz’ Facebook studio group, on the other hand, shows commercial activity but only

within its core membership—members actively seeking instruments for purchase for

themselves or their students and getting retailer recommendations from each other.

Another page management/use topic that arose was the use of Facebook studio

group/page posts for communication with students versus traditional email methods. All

participants stated that they used both mediums for communication with current

students, and all noted that personal conversations were kept in face-to-face or

institutional email environments. Gordeli mentioned that she does not use the

102

Messenger (instant messaging) application in Facebook with her students because she

does not use Messenger frequently enough to consistently answer individual student

questions; instead, she uses email for that purpose. Mozart stated that he duplicates all

of his Facebook studio page posts in email form to his students because they get an

alert of some type through the LMS when a new email message arrives. This suggests

that faculty decisions to use Facebook versus email may influenced by the mechanics

of the tools themselves as well as the content and/or personal nature of the

communications.

Each faculty member voiced strong convictions for the reasoning used when

managing his/her Facebook group/page, including who can view the page, become a

member, and post materials. The variety of management practices has led to very

different types of membership, purposes, and intended audiences for each Facebook

studio group/page. Each of the four use a different combination of administrative

settings. Table 7 shows a comparison of the participants’ management practices.

103

Table 8

Facebook Studio Page Management Comparison

Berlioz Gordeli (public)

Gordeli (private)

Mozart Stamitz

Who can view

Public/ anyone

Public/ anyone

Current students & professor

Public/ anyone

Public/ anyone

Membership/ Followers

Current students, professor,

alumni, parents,

other professional musicians

Alumni, professor

Current students, professor

Current students, professor,

other professional musicians

Current students, alumni,

professor

Who can post

All members All members All members Professor only; any

other posts require

moderation/ permission

All members

Berlioz created and manages one Facebook studio group with membership that

includes current and former students, parents, colleagues, and other professionals in

the field. He actively promotes the interaction of current and former students toward

building a sense of tradition and noted that parents enjoyed seeing their children’s

contributions in that forum. Berlioz posts information that is directed to the Facebook

studio group members as well as about them when he introduces current students. He

also occasionally responds to others’ posts.

Gordeli maintains two separate Facebook studio groups; one is for current

students and is private, the other public and for alumni (although anyone may view

content and request membership). Her concerns about student privacy and creating a

safe space to let them develop their own community influenced her decision to split her

audiences. Gordeli states that she posts information daily to her private Facebook

104

studio group and communicates regularly with her students. She posts less frequently—

and in a uni-directional manner—to the public Facebook studio group.

Mozart’s page audience is primarily current students, although a few other

colleagues/professionals have interacted and view his page. His posts are entirely uni-

directional, and in fact, no one is allowed to post information to the Facebook studio

page without his moderation/approval. Followers of the page can respond to his posts,

however. Mozart’s page is aimed entirely at providing educational information (videos,

websites, etc.) to his studio. His students maintain their own separate Facebook group,

to which he does not have access and does not wish to access.

Stamitz manages a group that was originally co-created with students and has a

membership that includes current and former students. Her group displays a focus on

satisfying current students’ needs in real time as well as providing a link to resources

and information for those that have graduated and no longer have university resources

available to them. Stamitz uses her Facebook studio group regularly as someone who

posts new information and responds to others’ posts.

Other lived experiences related by the participants included frequent reference to

using Facebook to build and maintain relationships. Stamitz and Berlioz noted the

importance of their studio groups for keeping in touch with alumni; Gordeli also uses

Facebook in this manner, but created a separate group to continue her connection to

former students. Gordeli and Stamitz discussed using their groups to connect to

colleagues at their own institutions, and Stamitz also uses her personal Facebook page

to connect with colleagues across the country. This communicative affordance

(Hutchby, 2001; Schrock, 2015) of the Facebook platform is valued highly by all of the

105

faculty interviewed, even Mozart, who expressed interest in using Facebook to “see

what other studios around the country are doing.” This is understandable since most

applied music faculty are singular in their departments—most music departments only

have one instructor per instrument or voice, so feelings of isolation are plausible.

Beyond student/faculty interactions and relationship-building activities, individual

participants mentioned lived experiences that are wide-ranging in scope. Berlioz noted

that he discovered Facebook is a tool shared by students, parents, and other

professionals, so using it has allowed him to quickly get information to the widest

demographic audience possible. Gordeli sees her students creating their own peer-

oriented community within her private Facebook studio group, something she views as

positive. Stamitz found that Facebook provides access to a supportive network of

colleagues across the country with whom she can share frustrations. Mozart saw

potential negative implications of using Facebook Live and fears that sharing a poor

performance might impact student respect and recruiting efforts. Each of these

experiences influenced the faculty member’s perception of Facebook. This study’s

documentation of first-generation music faculty use of Facebook studio pages

illuminates the varied lived experiences and practices currently employed.

Results and Interpretations

Impact of Social Media on Studio Teaching and Learning

The faculty members who participated in this study had already acknowledged

the impact of social media on their studio teaching resulting from creating and using

Facebook studio groups/pages in response to student wants and behaviors. The

106

concerns voiced by previous researchers (Oliver & Clayes, 2014; Cain et al., 2013;

Mathieson & Leafman, 2014) about potential student resentment emanating from

instructor decisions to use social media tools that students were already using—and

thereby invading their (students’) space—were not apparent in this study. In fact,

participants’ respect for student agency was demonstrated through their reflections

about why they began using Facebook or creating a studio group/page. Gordeli was

challenged by her students to create a Facebook profile not long after the platform

emerged, and so she did.

We have a Christmas part like most flute studios do now. And my students said, “Why don’t you go on Facebook?” and I was like “Because that’s for people your age.” And they gave me an assignment...they told me that I had Christmas break to get on my own Facebook page.

Her subsequent experience with Facebook encouraged her to use it for studio

communication. Similarly, Stamitz heeded student requests to have an informal space

for sharing information and connecting with others and is now an administrator for that

Facebook studio group. Berlioz mentioned his surprise at how much his students

enjoyed sharing their own work on the Facebook group as well as the fact that parents

and other group members loved it—acknowledging that student and parent positive

response was impactful on his perception and continued use of the tool. Mozart went so

far with student agency he sought not to intrude on a pre-existing Facebook studio

group created and managed by students when he arrived at the institution. Instead, he

created a new page to avoid entering their personal virtual space.

They have their own [page]...I have yet to really infiltrate that page, because I’m debating whether or not I really need to...I’m not here to babysit them...I’m not really here to debate whether or not they should have their own...conversations.

107

In each of these cases, faculty reaction to student wants and behaviors—

recognizing student agency/influence—was the key to establishing the current set of

Facebook studio groups/pages included in this study. The “creepy treehouse” analogy

used by Cain and Policastri (2011) was avoided by participants’ willingness to respect

students’ personal space and build their own Facebook studio groups/pages, then invite

students and others to join or follow. This suggests a shift toward greater

acknowledgement and respect for student agency in social media environments by the

participants in this study as compared to those in earlier studies.

A shift from modeling skills and practices in a face-to-face studio environment to

modeling all elements of musician life/lifestyle is another sizable impact of social media

on studio teaching and learning. Previous generations of masters modeled skills,

practices, and behaviors for apprentices in the studio and in other school (i.e.,

classrooms or school ensemble rehearsals) or professional events (i.e., rehearsals and

concerts) where both master and apprentice were acting in a professional capacity.

Faculty who choose to have and use a social media profile visible to current students,

alumni, and others must be willing to accept a new role of modeling all aspects of life as

a musician – extra-musical activities, family events, and other elements of a musician’s

life that would not have been previously available to students except through face-to-

face conversations or during instructional time. The purposeful crafting of social media

identities discussed by Karl and Peluchette (2011) and Kimmons and Veletsianos

(2014) is less possible here. Students interact with their applied faculty teacher face-to-

face, weekly and for several years; an inauthentic social media presence would be

noticeable if it were different from the faculty member’s real-life persona. Chen and

108

Breyer’s (2012) observation that crafting an identity for social media only including

positive or selected parts of self would be detrimental to teaching would seem to apply

directly to this situation.

When reflecting on their own pre-social media academic communication with

students, Gordeli and Berlioz commented that their only communications with their

teachers were in face-to-face settings or through notes left on studio doors. Berlioz

remembered:

My teacher at [institution] was old school, and messages were always by phone call or face to face – no written communication or even group messages via memo... A sign on the door might be as close as it got and that was rare!

Stamitz recalled that a former teacher might leave a telephone message regarding a

lesson or rehearsal time, but otherwise all communication was only during an academic

class/meeting time or occasionally sending email.

My studio teacher communicated with primarily by making announcements in weekly studio classes...maybe sometimes sending emails... If [someone needed] to cancel a lesson or reschedule a lesson, you just made a phone call.

Making oneself visible and available, and sharing personal information about family,

travel, and the entire life of a musician is a striking contrast to only seeing and talking to

students during a single weekly lesson or in a classroom setting. Veletsianos (2013)

and Metzger et al. (2010) pointed out potential positive effects of instructor self-

disclosure and authenticity with social media profiles. Metzger et al. (2010) suggested

that this approach “may lead to higher anticipated motivation among students, affective

learning, and a more comfortable classroom climate” (p.2).

However, one of the challenges of adapting to a new communication medium

and frank social presence is the lack of training for faculty who choose to do so. It is

109

unsurprising that some faculty find themselves being criticized by colleagues or the

institution for their social media activities. Intentionally sharing one’s entire life/lifestyle

as a master within a traditional apprenticeship seems relevant and expected, and

historical accounts of apprenticeship validate this observation. However, for many

generations music faculty in higher education have used traditional apprenticeship

practices in one-on-one settings behind closed doors. This meant little interaction with

apprentices outside limited fixed hours in the studio. The cognitive shift in role-identity is

significant, and it is evident even within this small study that faculty reactions to this shift

are variable and inconsistent.

Another significant impact of social media on studio teaching and learning is the

element of perceived risk to the faculty member personally or professionally. A Kansas

faculty member’s suspension based upon his “improper use of social media” (Jaschik,

2013), an aborted hiring in Illinois related to a perceived “lack of civility” on the

candidate’s Twitter feed (Jaschik, 2015), and other impacts to faculty employment

based on social media use have been reported by the Chronicle of Higher Education.

Lupton (2014) commented on the risk of an instructor becoming a target for abuse or

unprofessional conduct by students or colleagues, but no existing academic literature

addressed faculty perception of risk due to violation of institutional rules and regulations

that govern social media use with students.

Faculty assume some level of responsibility for students and the accompanying

data in their classrooms and studios. This is contained within a controlled, physical

environment. However, faculty have been told by institutions that similar levels of

responsibility will be assigned for virtual settings where they have little to no control over

110

student behavior and data. This elevates the level of risk that faculty assume if they

choose to create and use Facebook studio groups/pages with their students.

Participants in this study reacted to institutional oversight and rules governing

responsibility when using social media with students in different ways. Mozart

expressed his concerns about posting content to his Facebook studio page that might

be considered inappropriate by the institution – his fear of legal action and/or job loss

affected him strongly enough that his engagement and activities on his Facebook studio

page are minimal and restricted.

There’s a fine line, and I’m just going to play it safe. I don’t want to see a university lawyer.

Berlioz was also aware of the risk of violating a recently instituted a policy that allows

the institution to fire employees for violating its social media regulations:

I can actually be fired for posting something that’s embarrassing to the university... I would not want to be a test case of that.

This perception of risk encourages him to follow the rules requiring social media

releases from every student before posting a picture to Facebook, even though the

delay frustrates him. Gordeli, however, acknowledged institutional oversight rules

governing social media, but ignored them.

[The university] want us to clear our Facebook pages with them which I don’t do... The university just wants to make sure that they can control it and they haven’t yet realized that maybe there are some things that they want to fuss with and...they should just let go... I think my public page is cleared but my private [page] is not.

Her personal assessment of the low risk to herself and her students is grounded in her

perception that she knows more than the institution’s rule-makers and maintains

appropriate conduct on her Facebook studio groups in the same way that she would in

111

a classroom. These examples suggest that reactions to institutional oversight are

grounded in risk appraisal, not ethical assessment of potential harm to self or students.

None of the participants expressed antipathy for the ethical justification of the rules,

guidelines, or restrictions. They were cognizant of the personal risks they were taking by

assuming responsibility for their students in an online environment and did not

challenge the reasoning behind the rules and restrictions. The faculty in this study each

chose to maintain active Facebook studio groups/pages regardless of the level/type of

institutional oversight, and appear to have evaluated the educational value of the tool’s

use in a holistic sense, including factors such as perceived risk and ease of use. It is

unknown how strongly that perceived risk may impact faculty willingness to use

Facebook studio groups/pages or the type of activities and content they decide to post.

Learning through Enculturation

Several participants stated that they were not intentionally teaching through their

Facebook studio groups/pages, but those comments reflect a narrow definition of

teaching and learning. Faculty who view teaching as direct instruction, delivered in a

studio or classroom, and formally assessed in an academic environment do not feel that

their activities on Facebook constitute teaching. However, Berlioz clearly considered the

possibility mid-interview with his think-aloud “that’s a thought...how we can teach using

this page....” Expanding the concept of teaching and learning to include enculturation as

a legitimate learning process, however, situates the Facebook studio groups/pages

securely within the definition of an informal learning environment.

112

Pratt (1998) defined the apprenticeship model of education as “the process of

enculturating learners into a specific community” (p. 11). Kottak (2004) described

enculturation as a conscious and unconscious process, employing three different

stages: direct instruction, indirect instruction (modeling/copying) that is a conscious act,

and observation or awareness of events through unconscious acts. The latter two

stages – conscious and unconscious indirect instruction and observation – nicely

encapsulate the documented faculty content and activities found on each of the

Facebook studio groups/pages. Viewed through this lens, the Facebook studio pages

are extensions of the apprenticeship, and support the enculturation process by

providing a virtual space for both direct, through resources posted by faculty for student

learning/consumption, and indirect instruction. The indirect instruction manifests through

faculty modeling of behavior and administrative decisions on the groups/pages, and

students may consciously or unconsciously learn from their engagement with or

observation of those modeled activities.

Participants’ desire to show students what they do and share the non-

academically-focused activities in their musical lives is a significant contribution to the

enculturation process. Consciously or unconsciously, students come to understand the

culture of their musical community through the representative behaviors and beliefs they

encounter in face-to-face and virtual settings with their faculty member/master.

Facebook studio groups/pages provide a free virtual space for music faculty to expand

the enculturation process and provide visible models of behavior that represent the

largely unseen extra-academic life of professional musicians. The study participants

may not consciously teach with their Facebook studio pages, but theories of

113

apprenticeship and enculturation suggest that their students both consciously and

unconsciously learn from them. This confirms the researcher’s definition of Facebook

studio groups/pages as informal learning environments.

Lived Experiences with Facebook Studio Groups/Pages

Each of the participants related unique lived experiences with a Facebook studio

group/page. Group/page management and administrative practices were diverse,

leading faculty members to interact with different audiences and tailor posted content to

their page membership or followers. This, in turn, led to different philosophies regarding

the use of Facebook studio groups/pages, which is evident in the varied data sets

collected from Spring 2016. Each page contained significantly different numbers of

posts, types of content posted, and frequency of faculty/student interaction. For that

reason, the researcher chose to illustrate the individual participant cases and the

emergent themes in the study before developing super-ordinate themes. The

homogenous population solicited and selected for this study was discovered to be

highly heterogeneous in practice.

Some similarities were discerned from participants’ discussion of lived

experiences. All four stated that they had not participated in any training for the use of

social media with students in higher education. Two—Berlioz and Mozart—expressed

an interest in receiving training and seemed to see value in learning about other uses

for Facebook as an informal learning environment, while Gordeli and Stamitz felt that

training would not provide them with anything they did not already know. A call for

faculty and student training for social media use in the areas of ethics, security, and

114

equitable access evident in previous literature (Veletsianos, 2013; Oliver & Clayes,

2014; Chen & Bryer, 2012; Lee, 2013; Mathieson & Leafman, 2014) has not yet been

heeded by many institutional leaders.

All four also acknowledged the power of Facebook to provide free and easy

access to developing and maintaining relationships with colleagues, students, and/or

alumni who are geographically distant from the physical studio. The Facebook platform

was also recognized as a tool for event promotion and marketing, providing a no-cost

way to potentially reach a larger audience than the members of the institution and local

community. However, there is disagreement about the appropriateness of marketing

one’s studio. Mozart believes that colleagues who post pictures and promotional

information about their studios are showing off, focusing on studio size and activities

rather than academic prowess. He complains:

I see my colleagues constantly posting pictures of what their studio’s doing and...their giant horn choirs... You’re honestly showing off. I don’t like that.

Gordeli’s commentary on posting information about her studio at the beginning of the

year is counter to Mozart’s view. She explicitly states that she is not bragging, but wants

to convey a sense of excitement about her studio’s potential in the upcoming year.

I do it for, you know, reasons of promotion...it’s not about, look at how many students I have. It’s “aren’t they great? You know this is gonna be a great year”

This disagreement about marketing and/or promoting one’s studio exemplifies the lack

of conformity in the lived experiences of the participants in this study.

Overall, participants’ lived experiences with their Facebook studio groups/pages

were discussed positively. None related stories of negative impacts or actions/posts that

were problematic. Three of the four participants – Berlioz, Gordeli, and Stamitz – held

115

positive opinions of the affordances of Facebook based upon their perceptions of it as

an easy-to-use, valuable tool for communication. Mozart is skeptical of the platform as

an educational or communication tool, but recognized its popularity with students. He

also freely admitted that he may not know how to use it well and gave it the benefit of

the doubt as a potentially useful tool for teaching and learning. For the four music

faculty members in this study, perceived risk or skepticism about using Facebook to

interact with their students in an informal learning environment was outweighed by their

beliefs in its potential for positive impacts within their studios.

Summary

Interpretative phenomenological analysis was used to discern the beliefs, intent,

and lived experiences of music faculty using Facebook studio groups/pages. Data was

collected in the form of semi-structured interviews with music faculty during August and

September of 2016, and all posts and activity on their associated public Facebook

studio groups/pages during the spring semester of 2016. Preliminary analysis was

performed independently on each participant’s data set; that is, idiographic integrity was

maintained by not comparing cases. Once emergent themes were developed and

descriptors identified for each participant’s data, a secondary cross-case analysis was

performed to identify super-ordinate themes that could be discerned from all four

participants’ emergent themes. These super-ordinate themes were then discussed in

detail to illustrate the current beliefs, intent, and lived experiences of the participants.

The first super-ordinate theme, impact of social media on studio teaching and

learning, can be understood to represent the beliefs of the music faculty. It describes

116

their reasons for using Facebook studio groups/pages, concerns about risk, and

addresses the challenge of moving from an educational model of apprenticeship

involving limited master-apprentice contact to one that involves faculty sharing their

entire musician lives/lifestyles with students. The emergent themes within this super-

ordinate theme were shared across multiple faculty members in this study, suggesting

that they may represent a core set of beliefs that faculty consider or reflect upon when

using—or deciding to use—Facebook studio groups/pages.

The second super-ordinate theme, learning through enculturation, is interpreted

in this study as faculty intent when actively using a Facebook studio group/page.

Although teaching and learning were not stated goals by participants, faculty intentions

voiced in interviews and visible activity on their Facebook studio groups/pages fit the

description of teaching through enculturation as described by Kottak (2004). This

situates the phenomenon of Facebook studio groups/pages firmly within the larger

apprenticeship model; the process of enculturation through Facebook is used to teach

new apprentices, consciously and unconsciously, how to become functional members of

their musical communities. Although each participant discussed his/her group/page as a

communication and/or marketing tool, intentions and activities support its identification

as an informal learning environment.

The final super-ordinate theme was faculty lived experiences with Facebook

studio groups/pages. The lived experiences of each participant were diverse and

unique. Group/page management and administration practices were not uniform, and so

audiences and content were significantly different for all faculty. However, each

participant noted the value of Facebook for building and maintaining relationships, and

117

all had experience with it as a marketing/promotional tool. The most consistent

experience noted by all participants was the ease with which one could quickly share

information with students, who were observed to be always connected to social media.

These lived experiences have shaped faculty perceptions of the value of Facebook

studio groups/pages and impacted their decisions to use this informal learning

environment with their students.

118

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Discussion of Results

The purpose of this study was to investigate the beliefs, intent, and lived

experiences of music faculty in higher education who use Facebook studio

groups/pages. This is the first step toward an ultimate goal of providing current and

future music faculty with tools and resources to improve informal learning capacity when

using Facebook. Results and interpretations from the analysis in Chapter 4 provide a

comprehensive documentation of current beliefs and practices for the four faculty who

participated in the study. Several topics believed to require further discussion were

discerned from the results and are addressed in detail below.

Risk was a key concern voiced by participants. Institutional oversight of social

media interactions between faculty and students has resulted in the creation and

adoption of rules that require faculty to assume responsibility—and therefore a level of

risk—if they choose to interact with their students through social media. Consequences

of violating those rules and responsibilities carry heavy penalties, often involving legal

action and/or job loss. Literature exists that addresses faculty awareness (or lack

thereof) of institutional rules and ethical concerns with regard to using social media in

higher education, but there is a gap in the published literature that might address how

perception of risk/risk aversion may impact teaching and learning once faculty

understand the institution’s rules and regulations. In this study, two faculty members

followed the rules, and one of those severely restricted his Facebook studio page

activity to avoid any possible perception of impropriety. The other two faculty members

119

were unconcerned, and one went so far as to actively ignore the institution’s request for

oversight/approval of her group. Further study is warranted to determine whether a

faculty member’s aversion to risk may impact willingness to enhance their instructional

methods through social media use, or if there is a tipping point at which taking on added

responsibility/risk becomes justifiable if particular outcomes are guaranteed.

The issue of sharing one’s entire musical life/lifestyle with students is also

significant. The expansion of studio-based music education from limited weekly contact

with a master to nearly continuous visibility and contact outside the physical studio has

far-reaching implications. Providing students with a glimpse of all aspects of a musical

career may assist with the transition from college to the professional workforce. It can

also allow students to determine that a particular career is desirable or undesirable

before making academic and financial commitments, and humanize the faculty member

to his/her students in a way that is not possible with limited contact and visibility.

However, such humanization carries with it the likelihood of increasing informality

between faculty and students, if only through more frequent communication. This was

noted by one participant in her interview, and evident in the Facebook data of another—

increased visibility of personal lives and frequency of communication can lead to less

formal interactions and speech. The participants in this study did not have a problem

with a move toward more informal discourse, although Mozart maintained his desire to

keep professional and friend-oriented interactions separate. However, this is a

significant change from previous generations of studio-based music teaching in higher

education and it is worth documenting this first generation of faculty who have

120

acknowledged and embraced the shift toward sharing all of themselves with students

and participating in less formal interactions.

Though unnoticed by the participants, it was evident that enculturation was a

central teaching and learning concept during this study. Although it is not routinely

discussed in studio teaching literature, the concept is situated within the core principles

of apprenticeship that are the foundation of studio-based music education. Facebook

studio groups/pages provide a virtual space for teaching through enculturation, and

provide a platform for the stages involved: direct instruction, indirect instruction (through

conscious perception) and subconscious observation/involvement. Even when activities

were not identified as “teaching” by the participants in this study, students were

provided the opportunity to learn through faculty members’ modeling of behavior and

activities. All four study participants used Facebook in this manner. Direct instruction

was provided through recommended articles and videos. Indirect instruction was

enacted by modeling behaviors and communication with colleagues in a visible forum.

Subconscious learning through observation was facilitated by faculty sharing

their own personal experiences and musical lives as exemplars of professional musical

culture. Viewing Facebook studio groups/pages from the perspective of enculturation

dynamically expands justification for their use as an educational tool, and could provide

guidance toward assessing educational value of content and activities. However, if fully

integrated as part of the apprenticeship model that originated in studio-based music

teaching, the label “informal learning environment” might have to be re-evaluated.

Approaching Facebook studio groups/pages as an extension of the studio for learning

purposes could re-situate them as part of the “formal” learning environment.

121

A final discussion point that emerged from the study is the lack of uniformity

displayed in Facebook studio group/page management and administration. One of the

features of Facebook is administrator ability to control membership, audience/visibility,

and who can post content. Every participant used a group/page where all content was

visible to the public. However, this was the only consistent element across the four

pages that were analyzed. Each Facebook studio group/page had a different

membership composition or target audience – some included other professionals and

colleagues, others targeted alumni and current students only, etc. On Mozart’s

Facebook studio page, only he—the administrator—could post new content; however,

students were allowed to comment and react to the posts. Management diversity makes

it difficult to compare groups/pages or evaluate engagement levels, a critical task if

guidance or training is to be implemented by institutions.

The diverse administrative approaches also make it difficult to determine what

type of “community” exists in a virtual space. A Facebook group with membership

comprised of current and former students, faculty members, and other professional

musicians could be (or become) a virtual community of practice (vCoP) if members

remained part of the community indefinitely and the group was used by all community

members for learning about the topic. These qualities would then satisfy the CoP

requirement for legitimate peripheral participation, where new members become old,

experienced participants and continue to participate in the community over an extended

period of time. However, not all Facebook studio groups/pages are designed to provide

this type of continuous communication over time, instead focusing on student

participation solely during his/her academic studies at that institution. In this situation,

122

the knowledge and experienced developed by members are effectively lost to the rest of

the community once the member graduates and leaves the Facebook studio

group/page.

Studies published by Palmquist (2015) and Brewer and Rickels (2014)

demonstrated how a Facebook group/page had been used to develop vCoP to support

groups of music educators and other music professionals. However, a Facebook studio

group/page with membership or target audience limited to the faculty member and

current students, where only the faculty member is allowed to post content, could not

be—or become—a virtual community of practice. According to Herring’s (2004)

definition, even if learning outcomes are embedded a vCoP still requires an “active; self-

sustaining participation; a core of regular participants” (p. 14) and assumes sharing by

all members. Various degrees of interpretation would have to be applied in the other

cases of mixed membership to determine whether being or becoming a virtual

community of practice was possible. Therefore, I believe vCoP to be an inaccurate

description of the Facebook studio groups/pages, at least as they are currently used

today.

Connecting Findings to Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework for this study was founded in theories of

apprenticeship, enculturation, communities of practice (CoP), and anticipatory

socialization. The findings from this study are strongly linked to the theory of traditional

apprenticeship, during which apprentices learn physical skills (e.g. performance

abilities) and career-oriented behaviors from a faculty member serving as a master, a

123

role held over a fixed period governed by a contract often referred to as a degree plan.

Pratt’s (1998) definition of apprenticeship as “the process of enculturating learners into

a specific community” (p.11) is an accurate portrayal of the lived experiences of music

faculty using Facebook studio groups/pages in this study. The activities on the

Facebook studio groups/pages and their purpose, as expressed by the study

participants, meet the definition of teaching and learning through enculturation even

though they do not result in physical skill acquisition. Therefore, they are directly tied to

the apprenticeship model in use with studio-based music education, even if that is not

recognized or made explicit by the faculty managing the pages.

Notably, the findings did not show evidence of the existence of communities of

practice or virtual communities of practice as defined by Lave and Wenger (1991) and

Herring (2004). In fact, in some cases participants’ administrative decisions governing

membership and who can post directly conflicts with the requirements for a virtual

community of practice. The variety of management approaches used by faculty in this

study resulted in each Facebook studio group/page having a different composition of

member types (students, alumni, faculty colleagues, etc.). However, the manner in

which faculty use the groups/pages fits well into the theory of enculturation, in which

case a Facebook studio group/page can be viewed as an additional feature of the

traditional apprenticeship model and not an independent community.

The theory of anticipatory socialization, as advanced by Bouij (2004) and echoed

in Ryan and Parkes (2015), was evident in participants’ comments about students

choosing to join the Facebook studio pages even though it is not required and has no

bearing on academic evaluation. Students are observed seeking out opportunities to

124

connect with faculty and peers in order to gain social capital, familiarity with people and

norms, and acceptance/membership within the community. While this may seem similar

to enculturation, there is a significant difference: anticipatory socialization originates

within the student as a manifestation of his/her motivation to join a community. In

contrast, enculturation is the process of learning to be a functional member of a culture

and originates from within the culture itself. Students participate in anticipatory

socialization when they join and participate in the Facebook studio groups/pages. They

experience enculturation as they learn, consciously and unconsciously, about the

culture of professional musicianship through the activities and content made available

on the Facebook studio group/page.

Limitations of the Findings

This study’s findings are a new addition to the literature in the area of first-

generation social media use by music faculty. The interpretative phenomenological

analysis (IPA) methodology employed in the study resulted in thick, rich descriptions of

lived experiences and practices for four participants on a topic that had yet to be

addressed in published literature. However, several study limitations were identified and

are addressed below.

First, although the sample size was adequate for the use of IPA as a qualitative

methodology and a homogenous sample was used, the diversity of Facebook

group/page management practices displayed by the four participants suggest that a

larger sample might assist with discerning super-ordinate themes. Second, limiting

Facebook data collection to publicly available content may have contributed to more

125

conservative data sets since participants were all aware that their groups/pages could

be viewed by anyone. Third, it was not possible to tell who was responding to

participants’ posts. Based upon the types of responses and inferences from profile

images, it seems that most activity was generated by students. However, it is possible

that alumni and other professionals were also commenting and there was no way to

differentiate.

The greatest limitation of this study was that several of the participants did not

view themselves as “teaching” when using their Facebook studio groups/pages and so

did not discuss their activities using pedagogical vocabulary. In several instances, it was

necessary for the researcher to interpret responses using personal knowledge and

experience from the music field to translate what was being said into a description of the

activity using teaching/learning terminology. The use of IPA assisted greatly with this

task as it expects this type of interpretive act by the researcher and provides a

theoretical foundation for execution and later explanation. However, embedding this

layer of interpretation into the findings challenges the reader to accept this second

hermeneutic, and without a background in studio-based music instruction readers may

be less receptive to the conclusions reached.

A final limitation of this study was the dearth of existing literature about studio-

based music instruction and social media use. Previous studies of social media

communication practices between or among teachers and students in higher education

did not address the unique nature of master-apprentice relationships. The findings of

this study demonstrated marked differences in music faculty beliefs, intent, and lived

experiences from those higher education faculty interviewed in previous studies. In this

126

study, no evidence of a true virtual community of practice was uncovered, participants

were adamant about maintaining a single profile that spanned personal and

professional presence. Also, there was no sense of faculty intrusion into student

personal space by using Facebook; indeed, several Facebook studio groups/pages

were created at the request of the students. Readers wishing to investigate this study’s

topic further will find the lack of similar literature to be challenging. However, it is hoped

that this study will provide an impetus for other researchers to pursue this topic and

remedy that issue.

Recommendations for Practice

This study was exploratory and not intended to generate practical solutions to an

identified problem. However, the findings indicate that there are several specific

challenges endured by music faculty that impact their beliefs, intent, and lived

experiences when using Facebook to communicate with their students. Therefore,

several recommendations for practice have been generated. They are intended to assist

the broader population of music faculty engaged in studio-based instruction who

currently use, or may use in the future, Facebook studio groups/pages.

The first recommendation is that music faculty receive training on social media

skills and appropriate norms for use that acknowledges the master-apprentice

relationship, helping to situate Facebook studio pages within the enculturation process

of students pursuing a career in music. This study suggests that music faculty may not

recognize that Facebook can be used in this manner, but could be receptive to the idea

if prompted to consider it. Social media training by institutions is likely to focus on issues

127

of ethics, security, and equitable access—not on educational theories for use that are

field-specific. Therefore, training should be provided to music faculty that addresses not

only institutional requirements and guidelines but the capacity of platforms such as

Facebook to act as an extension of the studio environment and enculturation process.

The second recommendation is that music departments develop their own set of

guidelines for Facebook studio group/page creation and management based upon their

institution’s rules and oversight procedures. The concern about personal and

professional risk that was evident in participants in this study might be at least partially

alleviated with the knowledge that they had followed a set of practices adopted at the

departmental level. Also, this would create more consistency in membership

management, page visibility, and posting rights. If a level of uniformity in group/page

management is reached, then instruction and training can more easily be developed

and implemented that would aid with marketing events, student recruitment and

retention, and other studio-oriented promotion topics.

The final recommendation is that exemplar Facebook studio groups/pages be

shared by professional music education organizations to encourage a discussion of

best-practices for teaching and learning. At this time, first-generation faculty using

Facebook studio groups/pages are creating policy and practice independently from one

another, without consultation or collaboration. If these types of informal learning

environments are to be better understood, managed, and use for educational purposes,

it is critical that current practices are shared to promote discussion and debate. National

and international organizations could support this goal by initiating conversations within

the field and soliciting examples from practitioners to share.

128

This study was not designed to create solutions or actionable recommendations

for teaching practice with the Facebook social media platform. The findings, though,

support several practical recommendations that could improve the lived experiences of

music faculty who use Facebook studio groups/pages. It is hoped that these

recommendations are a first step toward the researcher’s long-term goal of providing

current and future music faculty with tools and resources to improve informal learning

capacity when using Facebook.

Recommendations for Future Research

This study investigated a phenomenon that had not yet been documented and

analyzed in academic literature. While studies have been done on a few faculty

members that used it for direct, intentional instruction, the use of Facebook studio

groups/pages by music faculty is a relatively recent activity since the platform has only

been available to the public for ten years. Therefore, there are several additional

research opportunities regarding the use of Facebook and other social media tools by

music faculty who teach in studio-based music education environments.

First, it is recommended that a similar, if not identical, study be performed using

the same methodology with students as participants instead of faculty. This study was

limited to faculty lived experiences to establish “why” the Facebook studio pages were

being used in certain ways. The next step is to determine if the enculturating activities

that faculty engage in are having the desired effect on students and student learning.

IPA has proved to be an effective methodology for investigating beliefs, intent, and lived

129

experiences. A parallel study of music students who participate in Facebook studio

groups/pages would significantly enhance the results and findings of this study.

Second, a recommendation is made for a study of music faculty that discerns

instructor perception of personal and professional risk when using Facebook studio

groups/pages. The effects of risk aversion on faculty willingness to use social media

with their students or types of activities and interaction is unknown, but perceived risk

was mentioned multiple times by participants in this study. Understanding how risk

aversion impacts use would help with training and guideline development for music

faculty using or considering starting a Facebook studio group/page.

Third, now that emergent themes and super-ordinate themes have been

developed from this study, a discourse analysis of Facebook group/page data could be

implemented that addresses the types of posts and the engagement/learning they

appear to effect in students. It has been possible to execute a computer-mediated

discourse analysis (CMDA) of Facebook page data using previously established

methods and techniques. However, the faculty beliefs, intent, and lived experiences

documented here could improve how such a CMDA is tailored to the culture and

practices of music faculty and students in studio-based music education environments.

Finally, future studies should address faculty response to training efforts once

they have been implemented. Pre- and post-instruction perception of Facebook

affordances and values could be assessed through traditional quantitative studies.

Faculty, student, and general public response to targeted marketing and recruitment

efforts could be evaluated through qualitative, quantitative, and/or mixed paradigm

approaches. Once training has been developed and implemented, the possibilities for

130

iterative research designs that address teaching, learning, marketing/promotion, and

student recruitment are extensive.

Summary

This study sought to investigate the beliefs, intent, and lived experiences of

music faculty who use Facebook studio groups/pages to communicate with their

students. By studying this new avenue for master-apprentice interaction, I have

documented the first generation of music faculty social media masters and their

beliefs/intentions as they are engaging with their apprentices. Four music faculty were

interviewed and a semester’s Facebook studio group/page data collected. Interviews

and Facebook data was analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis to

identify emergent, and ultimately super-ordinate, themes from the data. Findings

included: faculty concerns about personal and professional risk; the observation that

teaching and learning are occurring through these Facebook studio groups/pages by

way of the process of enculturation, but without evidence of a virtual community of

practice forming. Also, it was noted there were a multitude of group/page management

practices developed in isolation that suggest a need for discussion/debate and training

in the field to determine best practices for using Facebook studio groups/pages as an

extension of the physical studio. A long-term goal of this research is to provide current

and future faculty with tools and recommendations to improve the informal learning

capacity of social media with their students, and this study’s documentation of first-

generation social media use by music faculty provides a solid foundation from which to

pursue that goal.

131

APPENDIX A

SUBJECTIVITY STATEMENT

132

My views of educational technology, social media, and music study

My experiences as a musician—student, teacher, performer, and scholar—

extend back to second grade and have influenced all aspects of my development as a

learner for well over 30 years. My perception of what teaching “is” was shaped by 20

years of private study in master/apprentice relationships as well as traditional classroom

environments. My “other” career in learning technology/libraries has given me nearly 15

years of experience using technology to improve learning and/or access to information

that can improve learning. While the two careers rarely cross, I have become more and

more convinced that there are aspects of learning technologies that could significantly

enhance the traditional studio, one-on-one, master/apprentice educational environments

that are still the core instructional practice in higher education music programs.

One of the technologies that has been adopted by a number of music faculty is

Facebook. I am both excited and concerned by this—excited by the use of a technology

that could be used to extend the learning environment into a 24/7 virtual space, and

concerned that the current “masters” forging new ground are not aware of the potential

educational affordances nor potential impacts of their actions on their apprentices.

These observations, experiences, and current research interest are the direct result of

my two disparate careers and I feel that I can and should use my unique position to

document current practices and beliefs toward a better understanding of how Facebook

pages can be used and improved when adopted as an informal learning environment in

higher education music studios.

What does this mean for my approach to my research?

As someone with first-hand experience of the master/apprentice roles in music

study and who also has extensive experience as an educator, I am biased by the belief

that I have a solid grasp on how an informal learning environment like Facebook

should—and should not—be used. It is challenging for me to see a professor use “their”

Facebook page in a manner that I do not believe is in the best interest of student

learning (i.e., strictly self-promotion, posting content that contains off-color or sexist

humor, etc.) and not point out what I believe to be inappropriate or weak usage of such

a tool. However, I try to be cognizant of the fact that most music faculty have had no

training or experience in social media use and take their “master” roles very seriously—

so much so that the idea of asking for help or independently seeking best-practices

information is highly unlikely. Therefore, I know that I need to be very careful to ask

questions and discuss the topic in a way that removes the possible perception that I am

somehow judging their Facebook activity (even though I am).

Additionally, I have spent years involved in teaching social media best-practices, privacy

issues, etc. and am constantly amazed to find that faculty are not only unaware of legal

issues and best practices—they simply do not believe that it applies to them or is worth

further investigation. Since my ultimate goal is to provide higher education music

departments with best-practices and guidance for maximizing the affordances of

133

Facebook/social media as an informal learning environment, I need to drop my

righteous indignation when these situations arise and focus on finding a way to

convince faculty of the benefits of using Facebook/social media in a way that best

supports student learning and growth regardless of regulations or legal concerns.

Challenge of what I think I already know

Although I believe that my current knowledge of social media affordances

combined with my awareness of music faculty studio needs is sufficient to draft best-

practices, it is possible that Facebook pages are being used by faculty in ways with

which I am unfamiliar—and may be more or less beneficial for student learning than the

examples that I have seen thus far, so I will need to keep an open mind if/when

unfamiliar uses appear. Also, when coding Facebook data I am much more likely to

interpret non-verbal or non-English posts based upon my experience as a professional

musician rather than looking at them simply as utterances on social media, so I will take

advantage of peer-coding where at least one other coder is a non-musician. Finally,

although I would prefer to think that music faculty would like to improve their studios’

learning and growth through their use of Facebook pages it is entirely possible that they

do not consider anything they do on Facebook to be educational and may not have

considered the possibility that it could/should be used as an informal learning

environment. In that case (hopefully discovered through the semi-structured interviews)

I will need to carefully consider how to share my results and with what audience.

134

APPENDIX B

RECRUITMENT LETTER

135

[Insert Date]

Dear [Recipient]:

As a graduate student in the Learning Technologies department at the University of North Texas, I am conducting research as part of the requirements for a Ph.D. degree. The purpose of my research is to study the lived experiences of music faculty members who use Facebook groups or pages to communicate with their students and I am writing to invite you to participate in my study.

If you are a full-time faculty member in a music department,18 years of age or older, hold a terminal degree in music, use a public Facebook group or page to communicate with students, and are willing to participate, you will be asked to take a short demographic survey online and participate in an interview via Skype or Zoom.us. It should take approximately 15-20 minutes for you to complete the demographic survey and 60-90 minutes for the online interview. Your name and/or other identifying information will be requested as part of your participation, but the information will remain confidential. Additionally, all identifying information in the public Facebook pages will be removed and identities in text and/or images concealed.

To participate, please contact me by replying to this email. At that time a link to the initial demographic survey will be emailed to you. A consent document will be provided as the first page you will see after you click on the survey link. The consent document contains additional information about my research. Please click on “Yes/Agree” at the end of the consent information to indicate that you have read the consent information and would like to take part in the survey.

Sincerely,

Tamara Meredith Ph.D. Student University of North Texas – Learning Technologies tamarameredith77@gmail.com 940-453-6830

136

APPENDIX C

INFORMED CONSENT NOTICE

137

Before agreeing to participate in this study, it is important that you read and

understand the following explanation of the purpose, benefits and risks of the study and

how it will be conducted.

Title of Study: Social Media Interactions between Music Faculty and Students

in Informal Learning Environments

Student Investigator: Tamara Meredith, University of North Texas (UNT), Department

of Learning Technologies.

Supervising Investigator: Scott Warren, Ph.D., Professor of Learning Technologies,

University of North Texas

Purpose: This study investigates the social media-related belief systems, intended

uses, and lived experiences of music faculty in higher education. It is a qualitative study

using semi-structured interviews with faculty and computer-mediated discourse analysis

of Facebook data to discover themes and generate theory about interactions between

music faculty and students in informal learning environments. The results will serve as a

foundation for uncovering and understanding the first generation of master/apprentice

relationships via social media in higher education applied music environments.

Study Procedures: The data collection process for the study will involve three stages:

a short online demographic survey, a live (via web-conferencing software) semi-

structured interview lasting 60-90 minutes, and collection of public Facebook posts from

the page managed by the participant. The interviews will be recorded and saved in MP4

format to facilitate note-taking and analysis, and the Facebook posts will be saved and

anonymized for later analysis.

Foreseeable Risks: No foreseeable risks are involved in this study.

Benefits to the Subjects or Others: This study is not expected to be of any direct

benefit to you, but we hope to learn more about music faculty lived experiences to

potentially generate suggested guidelines for social media interactions between music

faculty and students. This study may also serve as a foundation for future studies of

social media behaviors in master/apprentice environments.

Compensation for Participants: None.

Procedures for Maintaining Confidentiality of Research Records: Interviewees will

be assigned pseudonyms to anonymize the responses and conceal identity. Data

collected from public Facebook pages will also be anonymized before analysis, and any

138

persons recognizable in images will be blurred to conceal identities. The confidentiality

of your individual information will be maintained in any publications or presentations

regarding this study.

Questions about the Study: If you have any questions about the study, you may contact Tamara Meredith at tamarameredith77@gmail.com or Dr. Scott Warren at scott.warren@unt.edu.

Review for the Protection of Participants: This research study has been reviewed and approved by the UNT Institutional Review Board (IRB). The UNT IRB can be contacted at (940) 565-4643 with any questions regarding the rights of research subjects.

Research Participants’ Rights:

Your signature below indicates that you have read or have had read to you all of the above and that you confirm all of the following:

• Tamara Meredith has explained the study to you and answered all of yourquestions. You have been told the possible benefits and the potential risks and/ordiscomforts of the study.

• You understand that you do not have to take part in this study, and your refusalto participate or your decision to withdraw will involve no penalty or loss of rightsor benefits. The study personnel may choose to stop your participation at anytime.

• You understand why the study is being conducted and how it will be performed.

• You understand your rights as a research participant and you voluntarily consentto participate in this study.

• You have been told you will receive a copy of this form.

________________________ _________________________ ____________ Printed Name of Participant Signature of Participant Date

For the Student Investigator or Designee:

I certify that I have reviewed the contents of this form with the subject signing above. I have explained the possible benefits and the potential risks and/or discomforts of the study. It is my opinion that the participant understood the explanation.

________________________ _________________________ ____________ Signature of Student Investigator Date

139

APPENDIX D

DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY

140

Thank you for participating in this study.

Please read and accept the terms of participation below.

University of North Texas Institutional Review Board

Informed Consent Notice

Before agreeing to participate in this study, it is important that you read and

understand the following explanation of the purpose, benefits and risks of the study and

how it will be conducted.

Title of Study: Social Media Interactions between Music Faculty and Students

in Informal Learning Environments: a qualitative multi-case study

Student Investigator: Tamara Meredith, University of North Texas (UNT),

Department of Learning Technologies.

Supervising Investigator: Scott Warren, Ph.D., Professor of Learning

Technologies, University of North Texas

Purpose: This study investigates the social media-related belief systems, intended

uses, and lived experiences of music faculty in higher education. It is a qualitative study

using semi-structured interviews with faculty and computer-mediated discourse analysis

of Facebook data to discover themes and generate theory about interactions between

music faculty and students in informal learning environments. The results will serve as a

foundation for uncovering and understanding the first generation of master/apprentice

relationships via social media in higher education applied music environments.

The data collection process for the study will involve three stages: a short online

demographic survey, a live (via web-conferencing software) semi-structured interview,

and collection of Facebook posts from the public page managed by the participant. The

interviews will be recorded and saved in MP4 format to facilitate note-taking and

analysis, and the Facebook posts will be saved and anonymized for later analysis. You

have previously signed an informed consent notice indicating that you understand the

study in which you are participating. If you have questions about the study or would like

to withdraw your consent, please contact Tamara Meredith at

tamarameredith@my.unt.edu.

You must sign a form devised to meet our human subject requirements by selecting

the appropriate button below. Essentially, this document states that you understand

that: (1) all information will be held confidential, (2) your participation is voluntary and

141

you may stop at any time if you feel uncomfortable, and (3) we do not intend to inflict

any harm.

Thank you for agreeing to participate.

I have read the above consent form and agree to participate in this study. (1)

I do not agree to participate in this study (2)

Thank you for your participation in this study. You have been identified as a

music faculty member who uses a Facebook page to communicate with students (your

"studio"). This study seeks to investigate the social media-related belief systems,

intended uses, and lived experiences of music faculty who use Facebook as an informal

learning environment with their studios. The first stage of this study involves a short

survey to collect basic demographic information. After the survey has been submitted,

you will be contacted to schedule a live interview via a web-conferencing tool. The

demographic survey begins on the next page. If you have questions during or after the

survey, please feel free to contact:

Tamara Meredith

tamarameredith@my.unt.edu

940-453-6830 (m)

Q1 Participant Name

Q2 Participant Institution/University

Q4 Participant Position/Title

Q3 Number of Years at Institution

Q5 Participant Educational Background/Degrees

142

Q6 Are you an Administrator on your studio's Facebook page?

Yes (1)

No (2)

I don't know (3)

Q7 How long have you used a Facebook page with your studio?

Q8 How do you access your studio's Facebook page?

I login with a personal/professional Facebook account (I have and use one

Facebook account). (1)

I login with a different "work" Facebook account (I have multiple Facebook accounts

and use them for different purposes). (2)

I use both personal and "work" Facebook accounts. (I have multiple Facebook

accounts but use them interchangeably/whichever is most convenient). (3)

I don't know/I'm not sure. (4)

Q9 How often do you read/check your studio Facebook page?

Daily (1)

Weekly (2)

Less than once each week (3)

Q10 Who created the Facebook page you are currently using with your studio?

Me (1)

Student (2)

Another faculty member (3)

The page was co-created by student(s) and faculty (4)

Q11 Who are the members of your Facebook studio page?

Myself and my current students (1)

Myself, current, and former students (2)

Myself, my students, and other musicians outside my studio (i.e., other

professionals, former students, other faculty, etc.) (3)

Myself, my students, and "others" (includes musicians and non-musicians) (4)

143

Q12 Does your institution have policies or guidelines for social media use in higher

education?

Yes (1)

No (2)

I don't know (3)

Q13 Have you ever received or attended any training for using social media in

educational environments?

Yes (1)

No (2)

Q14 The live interview for this study will be conducted using Zoom.us, a web-

conferencing tool that can be used on Mac, PC, and/or mobile devices. You will be

emailed a link to the meeting 48 hours prior to the scheduled conference. Zoom.us

requires the installation of a small piece of software (PC/Mac) or an app (iOS/Android).

You will be prompted to download the required software/app when the meeting link is

clicked.

Please let us know which of the following applies:

I have used Zoom.us and have the required software/app. (1)

I have NOT used Zoom.us but will be able to install the required software/app on my

own computer or device. (2)

I have NOT used Zoom.us and may need assistance/support to get the required

software/app on my computer or device. (3)

Thank you for completing this survey. You will be contacted to schedule a live interview

via Zoom.us in the very near future!

Cheers,

Tamara Meredith

tamarameredith@unt.edu

940-453-6830 (m)

144

APPENDIX E

SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

145

These questions were asked during each of the four interviews to discover music faculty

members’ lived experiences with Facebook pages when used as informal learning

environments with students.

1) Tell me why you chose to use a Facebook page for communication for your

studio.

a. Follow-up: Can you give me some specific examples of how you’ve used

your Facebook page to meet your studio’s needs?

b. Follow-up: How does communicating with your studio via Facebook differfrom traditional academic communication channels such as universityemail, websites, or phone calls?

2) Tell me about any instances, if there have been, of your Facebook page being

used differently than you’d originally planned?

3) What are your thoughts about privacy and student/professor relationships via

Facebook pages?

a. Follow-up: Have you had any concerns about privacy or personal content

posted on your studio’s Facebook page?

b. Follow-up: Can you give me a specific example?

4) Tell me about differences, if any, between how you communicate with your studio

via Facebook and how your studio professor communicated with you when you

were a student in a similar environment.

a. Follow-up: Can you tell me about any positive or negative effects of those

differences?

5) Tell me about how you perceive your role when you post content to your studio’s

Facebook page.

a. Follow-up: Do you feel your role as “instructor” is different when using the

Facebook page versus face-to-face studio instruction?

b. Follow-up: Can you give me any specific examples of how you have

experienced this?

6) Can you tell me about any training or guidance you may have received about

communicating with students via social media?

a. Follow-up: What are your thoughts on responsibility when social media is

used in higher education settings?

7) Is there anything else you’d like to tell me about the use of Facebook (or social

media in general) as part of your role as music faculty in higher education?

146

REFERENCES

Aljuwaiber, A. (2016). Communities of practice as an initiative for knowledge sharing in business organisations: a literature review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(4), 731-748.

Anney, V. N. (2014). Ensuring the quality of the findings of qualitative research: looking at Trustworthiness Criteria. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 5(2), 272-281.

Aydin, S. (2012). A review of research on Facebook as an educational

environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(6), 1093-

1106.

Bouij, C. (2004). Two theoretical perspectives on the socialization of music teachers. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 3(3), 1-14.

Brewer, W. D., & Rickels, D. A. (2014). A content analysis of social media interactions in

the Facebook Band Directors Group. Bulletin of the Council for Research in

Music Education, (201), 7-22.

Bull, G., Thompson, A., Searson, M., Garofalo, J., Park, J., Young, C., & Lee, J. (2008).

Connecting informal and formal learning experiences in the age of participatory

media. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2), 100-

107.

Burwell, K. (2012). Studio-based instrumental learning. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd..

Burwell, K. (2015). Dissonance in the studio: An exploration of tensions within the apprenticeship setting in higher education music. International Journal of Music Education, 34(4), 499-512.

Caers, R., De Feyter, T., De Couck, M., Stough, T., Vigna, C., & Du Bois, C. (2013). Facebook: A literature review. New Media & Society, 15(6), 982-1002.

Cain, J., & Policastri, A. (2011). Using Facebook as an informal learning

environment. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 75(10).

Cain, J., Scott, D. R., Tiemeier, A. M., Akers, P., & Metzger, A. H. (2013). Social media

use by pharmacy faculty: student friending, e-professionalism, and professional

use. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 5(1), 2-8.

147

Caldwell, H., & Heaton, R. (2016). The interdisciplinary use of blogs and online

communities in teacher education. The International Journal of Information and

Learning Technology, 33(3), 142-158.

Cawley, J. (2013). The musical enculturation of Irish traditional musicians: An

ethnographic study of learning processes. Ph.D. Dissertation, University College

Cork.

Chen, B., & Bryer, T. (2012). Investigating instructional strategies for using social media

in formal and informal learning. The International Review of Research in Open

and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 87-104.

Choi, E. (2012). Fusion: Amalgamation of technology and music in class piano. MTNA

e-Journal, 4(2), 27-28.

Choo, E. K., Ranney, M. L., Chan, T. M., Trueger, N. S., Walsh, A. E., Tegtmeyer, K., ...

& Carroll, C. L. (2015). Twitter as a tool for communication and knowledge

exchange in academic medicine: a guide for skeptics and novices. Medical

teacher, 37(5), 411-416.

Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking

visible. American Educator, 15(3), 6-11.

Copeland, P. L. (2011). Digital natives and immigrant choral directors: Catching up and

reaching out. The Choral Journal, 51(8), 26-35.

Corrigall, K. A., & Trainor, L. J. (2010). Musical enculturation in preschool children: Acquisition of key and harmonic knowledge. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 28(2), 195-200.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.

Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media,

and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal

learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 3-8.

Dalton, J. C., & Crosby, P. C. (2013). Digital identity: How social media are influencing

student learning and development in college. Journal of College and

Character, 14(1), 1-4.

Daniel, R. J., & Parkes, K. A. (2015). Assessment and critical feedback in the master-

apprentice relationship: rethinking approaches to the learning of a music

148

instrument. In Assessment in music education: From policy to practice (pp. 107- 124). Springer International Publishing.

Davis, C., Deil-Amen, R., Rios-Aguilar, C., & Gonzalez Canche, M. (2011). Social media

and higher education: A review of the literature and research directions. A report published by the University of Arizona and Claremont Graduate University.

Dunbar-Hall, P., Rowley, J., Brooks, W., Cotton, H., & Lill, A. (2015). E-Portfolios in

Music and other Performing Arts Education: History through a Critique of

Literature. Journal of Historical Research in Music Education,36(2), 139.

Dougherty, K. D., & Andercheck, B. (2014). Using Facebook to engage learners in a

large introductory course. Teaching Sociology, 42(2), 95-104.

Edwards, M., Darwent, D., & Irons, C. (2016). That blasted facebook page: supporting

trainee-teachers professional learning through social media. ACM SIGCAS

Computers and Society, 45(3), 420-426.

Egan, K., & Gajdamaschko, N. (2003). Some cognitive tools of literacy. Vygotsky’s

educational theory in cultural context (pp. 83-98).

Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2014).

Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. Sage Open, 4(1),

2158244014522633.

Gabor, E. (2013). “Tuning” the body of the classical musician: An embodied approach to

vocational anticipatory socialization. Qualitative Research in Organizations and

Management: An International Journal, 8(3), 206-223.

Gaunt, H., Creech, A., Long, M., & Hallam, S. (2012). Supporting conservatoire students towards professional integration: one-to-one tuition and the potential of mentoring. Music Education Research, 14(1), 25-43.

Glen, N. (2014). Where do I go from here? Developing a senior capstone course for

music education majors. Contributions to Music Education, 40, 147.

Goffman, E. (1959). The moral career of the mental patient. Psychiatry, 22(2), 123-142.

Green, L. (2002). How popular musicians learn: A way ahead for music education.

Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.

149

Greenhow, C., & Lewin, C. (2015). Social media and education: Reconceptualizing the

boundaries of formal and informal learning. Learning, Media and Technology,

(ahead-of-print), 1-25.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3, 191-215.

Gunawardena, C. N., Hermans, M. B., Sanchez, D., Richmond, C., Bohley, M., & Tuttle,

R. (2009). A theoretical framework for building online communities of practice

with social networking tools. Educational Media International, 46(1), 3-16.

Guy, R. (2012). The use of social media for academic practice: A review of

literature. Kentucky Journal of Higher Education Policy and Practice, 1(2), 7.

Haddon, E., & Potter, J. (2014). Creativity and the Institutional Mindset. Advanced

Musical Performance: Investigations in Higher Education Learning, 129-41.

Hannon, E. E., & Trainor, L. J. (2007). Music acquisition: effects of enculturation and

formal training on development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(11), 466-472.

Hartnett, J. L., Rosielle, L. J., & Lindley, L. D. (2015). Crowdsourcing your major: Using

Facebook to encourage faculty-student interaction and student

engagement. Essays from E-xcellence in Teaching Volume XIV, 35.

Hays, T., Minichiello, V., & Wright, P. (2000). Mentorship: The meaning of the

relationship for musicians. Research Studies in Music Education, 15(1), 3-14.

Helms, S. A. (2014). Blended/hybrid courses: A review of the literature and

recommendations for instructional designers and educators. Interactive Learning

Environments, 22(6), 804-810.

Hennessy, S. (2000). Overcoming the red-feeling: The development of confidence to

teach music in primary school amongst student teachers. British Journal of Music

Education, 17(02), 183-196.

Herring, S. C. (2004). Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to

researching online behavior In Designing for virtual communities in the service of

learning. New York: Cambridge University Press, 338-376.

Herring, S. C. (2007). A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated

discourse. Language@internet, 4(1), 1-37.

150

Hibbert, K., & Rich, S. (2006). Virtual communities of practice. In The international

handbook of virtual learning environments (pp. 563-579). Springer Netherlands.

Hutchby I (2001) Conversation and Technology: From the Telephone to the Internet.

Cambridge, UK: Polity.

Jaschik, S. (2013, December 19). Kansas regents adopt policy on when social media

use get faculty fired [Blog post]. Retrieved from

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/12/19/kansas-regents-adopt-policy-

when-social-media-use-can-get-faculty-fired

Jaschik, S. (2015, January 2). U. of Illinois faculty panel issues mixed report on aborted

hiring of Steven Salaita [Blog post]. Retrieved from

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/01/02/u-illinois-faculty-panel-issues-

mixed-report-aborted-hiring-steven-salaita

Jones, J. E. (2014). Teaching music history at the Chinese University of Hong Kong:

Course content, textbooks, and online tools. Journal of Music History

Pedagogy, 4(2), 337-39.

Joosten, T., Pasquini, L., & Harness, L. (2013). Guiding social media at our institutions.

Planning for Higher Education, 41(2), 125.

Jordan, K. (2014). Academics and their online networks: Exploring the role of academic

social networking sites. First Monday, 19(11).

Junco, R. (2012). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in

Facebook activities, and student engagement. Computers & Education, 58(1),

162-171.

Karl, K. A., & Peluchette, J. V. (2011). “Friending” professors, parents and bosses: A

Facebook connection conundrum. Journal of Education for Business,86(4), 214-

222.

Kilgore, W., & Robinson, H. A. (2015). Learning communities: Practice and theory of

leveraging social media for learning. Springer. [unpublished]

Kimmons, R., & Veletsianos, G. (2014). The fragmented educator 2.0: Social

networking sites, acceptable identity fragments, and the identity constellation.

Computers & Education, 72, 292-301.

Kramer, M. W. (2010). Organizational socialization: Joining and leaving

organizations (Vol. 6). Polity.

151

Kottak, C. P. (2004). Window on humanity. Urban Anthropology, 11, 11.

Lambert, C., Erickson, L., Alhramelah, A., Rhoton, D., Lindbeck, R., & Sammons, D.

(2014). Technology and adult students in higher education: A review of the

literature. Issues and Trends in Educational Technology, 2(1).

Lau, S., & Meyers, W. (2013). An exploratory study of personal reflection and

collaboration skills using online collaborative tool in project-based learning.

In 24th Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS)(pp. 1-11). RMIT

University.

Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. Perspectives on Socially

Shared Cognition, 2, 63-82.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.

Cambridge University Press.

Lee, B. (2013). Social media as a non-formal learning platform. Procedia-Social and

Behavioral Sciences, 103, 837-843.

Lewis, B., & Rush, D. (2013). Experience of developing Twitter-based communities of practice in higher education. Research in Learning Technology, 21.

Lewis, J., & Ritchie, J. (2003). Generalising from qualitative research. Qualitative Research Practice: A guide for social science students and researchers, 263-286.

Li, L. C., Grimshaw, J. M., Nielsen, C., Judd, M., Coyte, P. C., & Graham, I. D. (2009).

Evolution of Wenger's concept of community of practice. Implementation

Science, 4(1), 1.

Liertz, C., & Macedon, M. (2007). New Frameworks for Tertiary Music Education–A

Holistic Approach for Many Pyramids of Excellence. In Australasian Piano

Pedagogy Conference. Retrieved from http://www.appca.com.au.

Lincoln, S., & Robards, B. (2014). 10 years of Facebook. New Media & Society, 16(7), 1047-1050.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 75). Sage.

Lincoln, Y. S., Lynham, S. A., & Guba, E. G. (2011). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4, 97-128.

152

Lombardi, K. M., & Mather, P. C. (2016). Understanding anticipatory socialization for

new student affairs professionals. College Student Affairs Journal, 34(1), 85-97.

Lord, G., & Lomicka, L. (2014). Twitter as a tool to promote community among language

teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 22(2), 187-212.

Lupton, D. (2014). ‘Feeling Better Connected’: Academics’ use of social media.

Canberra: News & Media Research Centre, University of Canberra.

Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2015). Implications of social network sites for teaching and

learning. Where we are and where we want to go. Education and Information

Technologies, 1-18.

Mapana, K. (2011). The musical enculturation and education of Wagogo children.

British Journal of Music Education, 28(3), 339-351.

Mathieson, K., & Leafman, J. S. (2014). Comparison of student and instructor

perceptions of social presence. Journal of Educators Online, 11(2).

Meisenbach, R. J., & Kramer, M. W. (2014). Exploring nested identities: Voluntary

membership, social category identity, and identification in a community

choir. Management Communication Quarterly, 28(2), 187-213.

Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. Simon and Schuster.

Metzger, A. H., Finley, K. N., Ulbrich, T. R., & McAuley, J. W. (2010). Pharmacy faculty

members' perspectives on the student/faculty relationship in online social

networks. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 74(10).

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Focusing and bounding the collection of data: Further design issues. Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.), 40-50.

Morrison, S. J., Demorest, S. M., Campbell, P. S., Bartolome, S. J., & Roberts, J. C.

(2013). Effect of intensive instruction on elementary students’ memory for

culturally unfamiliar music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 60(4), 363-

374.

Nehls, K., & Smith, B. D. (2014). The role of Facebook in fostering transfer student

integration. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 51(4), 392-406.

153

Nerland, M., & Hanken, I. M. (2011). Apprenticeship in transition? New configurations of

teacher-student relationships in higher music education. Musik och

kunnskapsbildning. En festskrift till Bengt Olsson, 129-136.

Nettl, B. (1992). Recent directions in ethnomusicology. Ethnomusicology: An

Introduction, 375-399.

Nielsen, K. (2006). Apprenticeship at the academy of music. International Journal of

Education & the Arts, 7(4), 1-15.

Nielsen, K., & Kvale, S. (1997). Current issues of apprenticeship. Nordisk Pedagogik.

Oliver, P. G., & Clayes, E. (2014). Issues of Using Information Communication

Technologies in Higher Education. In Proceedings of the European Conference

on Social Media, ACPI, University of Brighton, UK (pp. 349-358).

Otchere, E. D. (2015). Music teaching and the process of enculturation: A cultural

dilemma. British Journal of Music Education, 32(03), 291-297.

Palmquist, J. E., & Barnes, G. V. (2015). Participation in the school orchestra and string

teachers Facebook v2 group: An online community of practice. International

Journal of Community Music, 8(1), 93-103.

Parkes, K. A., Daniel, R., West, T., & Gaunt, H. (2015). Applied music studio teachers in higher education: exploring the impact of identification and talent on career satisfaction. International Journal of Music Education, 33(3), 372-385.

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.

Pellegrino, K., Sweet, B., Kastner, J. D., Russell, H. A., & Reese, J. (2014). Becoming

music teacher educators: Learning from and with each other in a professional

development community. International Journal of Music Education, 32(4), 462-

477.

Pratt, D. D. (1998). Five perspectives on teaching in adult and higher education. Krieger

Publishing Co., Melbourne, FL.

Pratt, D. D. (2016). Five perspectives on teaching: Mapping a plurality of the good.

Krieger Publishing Co., Melbourne, FL.

Putnam, L. L., & Jablin, F. M. (Eds.). (2001). The new handbook of organizational

communication: Advances in theory, research and methods. Sage Publications.

154

Rambe, P. (2012). Critical discourse analysis of collaborative engagement in Facebook

postings. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(2), 295-314.

Rambe, P., & Ng'ambi, D. (2014). Learning with and from Facebook: Uncovering power

asymmetries in educational interactions. Australasian Journal of Educational

Technology, 30(3).

Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual,

theoretical, and methodological. SAGE Publications.

Renshaw, P. (2009). Lifelong learning for musicians: The place of mentoring. Lectorate

Lifelong Learning in Music & the Arts.

Roblyer, M., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on

Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses

and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher

Education, 13(3), 134-140.

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. Oxford University Press.

Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In J.V. Wertsch, P. del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139-164). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Reprinted (2008) in K. Hall & P. Murphy (Eds.), Pedagogy and practice: Culture and identities. London: Sage.

Rolls, K., Hansen, M., Jackson, D., & Elliott, D. (2016). How health care professionals use social media to create virtual communities: an integrative review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18(6): e166.

Ryan, D., & Parkes, K. (2015). The apprentice to master journey: Exploring tertiary music instrument teachers' reflections on their experiences as learner. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 4(3), 52-63.

Salavuo, M. (2008). Social media as an opportunity for pedagogical change in music

education. Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 1(2-3), 121-136.

Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). Sage.

Salmons, J. E. (2015). Doing qualitative research online. Sage.

Sandlin, J. K., & Peña, E. V. (2014). Building Authenticity in Social Media Tools to

Recruit Postsecondary Students. Innovative Higher Education, 39(4), 333-346.

155

Sarapin, S. H., & Morris, P. L. (2015). Faculty and Facebook friending: Instructor–

student online social communication from the professor's perspective. The

Internet and Higher Education, 27, 14-23.

Scharff, C. (2015). Blowing your own trumpet: exploring the gendered dynamics of self‐promotion in the classical music profession. The Sociological Review, 63(S1),

97-112.

Schrock, A. R. (2015). Communicative affordances of mobile media: Portability,

availability, locatability, and multimediality. International Journal of

Communication 9(0): 1229–1246.

Schugurensky, D. (2000). The Forms of Informal Learning: Towards a conceptualization

of the field. NALL Working Paper No. 19, Centre for the Study of Education and

Work, Department of Sociology and Equity Studies in Education, Ontario Institute

for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto, Toronto.

Seaton, D. (1998). Music and American higher education. Reston, VA: National

Association of Schools of Music.

Sleigh, M. J., Smith, A. W., & Laboe, J. (2013). Professors' Facebook content affects

students' perceptions and expectations. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social

Networking, 16(7), 489-496.

Smith, J. A. & Eatough, V. (2007). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In Lyons,

E. & Coyle, A. Analysing qualitative data in psychology (pp. 35-50): SAGE

Publications, Ltd.

Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Osborn, M. (1997). Interpretative phenomenological analysis

and the psychology of health and illness. Material discourses of health and

illness, 68-91.

Smyth, J. (2001). Chapter 12: Finding the "Enunciative Space". Counterpoints, 138,

155-166.

Stefanica, S. (2014). The impact of Facebook on university-students relationships.

Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 2(3), 492.

Stone, S. (2014). Breaking the ice: Facebook friending and reference

interactions. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 54(1), 44.

156

Sumuer, E., Esfer, S., & Yildirim, S. (2014). Teachers’ Facebook use: their use habits, intensity, self-disclosure, privacy settings, and activities on Facebook. Educational Studies, 40(5), 537-553.

Teclehaimanot, B., & Hickman, T. (2011). Student-teacher interaction on Facebook:

What students find appropriate. TechTrends, 55(3), 19-30.

Tess, P. A. (2013). The role of social media in higher education classes - A literature

review. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(5), A60-A68.

Tobin, G. A., & Begley, C. M. (2004). Methodological rigour within a qualitative framework. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 48(4), 388-396.

Turner, C. J. (2013). Another Perspective. Music Educators Journal, 68.

Tzankova, V. K. (2011). Turkish liminal sexualities: A case study of social

transformations beyond the ‘real’and the ‘virtual’ (Doctoral dissertation,

Communication, Art & Technology: School of Interactive Arts and Technology).

Varvarigou, M., & Durrant, C. (2011). Theoretical perspectives on the education of

choral conductors: A suggested framework. British Journal of Music

Education, 28(03), 325-338.

Veblen, K. K. (2012). Adult music learning in formal, nonformal, and informal contexts.

The Oxford handbook of music education, 2, 243-256.

Veletsianos, G. (2013). Open practices and identity: Evidence from researchers and

educators' social media participation. British Journal of Educational

Technology, 44(4), 639-651.

Veletsianos, G., & Kimmons, R. (2012). Scholars and faculty members' lived

experiences in online social networks. The Internet and Higher Education, 16,

43-50.

Waite, S. & Pratt, N. (2015) Situated learning (Learning in Situ). In: J. D. Wright (editor-

in-chief), International Encyclopaedia for the Social and Behavioural Sciences

(2nd edition) Vol 22. Oxford: Elsevier. p5012.

Warrell, J. (2012). Social Networking Sites: Online Spaces for Informal and Incidental

Learning. Wilfrid Laurier University and the University of Waterloo in Waterloo,

Ontario 28 May to 30 May 2012. 361.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity.

Cambridge University Press.

157

Wenger, E. (2008). Communities of practice: a brief introduction. 2006. Available from:

http://www.ewenger.com/theory/communities_of_practice_intro.htm.

Wenger, E., White, N., Smith, J., & Rowe, K. (2005). Technologies for

communities. CEFRIO Book.

Whittaker, A. L., Howarth, G. S., & Lymn, K. A. (2014). Evaluation of Facebook© to

create an online learning community in an undergraduate animal science

class. Educational Media International, 51(2), 135-145.

Wong, K., Kwan, R., & Leung, K. (2011, August). An exploration of using Facebook to build a virtual community of practice. In International Conference on Hybrid Learning (pp. 316-324). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Yoo, S. J., & Kim, S. (2013). How and why college students use Web 2.0 applications:

the role of social media in formal and informal learning. International Journal of

Web Based Communities, 9(2), 174-187.

Yussiff, A. S., Ahmad, W. F. W., & Oxley, A. (2014, June). Conceptual framework for

effective E-collaboration and didactic enhancement. In Computer and Information

Sciences (ICCOINS), 2014 International Conference on (pp. 1-6). IEEE.

Ziegler, M. F., Paulus, T, & Woodside, M. (2014). Understanding informal group

learning in online communities through discourse analysis. Adult Education

Quarterly, 64(1), 60-78.

158