547909

research-article2014
UPDXXX10.1177/8755123314547909UpdateCogdill

Article
Update

Applying Research in Motivation and

2015, Vol. 33(2) 49­–57
© 2014 National Association for
Music Education
Learning to Music Education: What Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

the Experts Say DOI: 10.1177/8755123314547909

update.sagepub.com

Susan H. Cogdill1

Abstract
Current research on motivation and learning may assist teachers in identifying strategies to help students be successful
and persevere in the music classroom. Students’ beliefs about their ability to learn, and the impact these beliefs have on
their motivation to learn music, is a large focus of the research presented here. Aspects of music make it unique from
other academic disciplines on student motivation. There are different motivational patterns exhibited at different age
levels. Being aware of these various aspects may help teachers foster positive beliefs among students about their own
music potential. This article presents a review of motivation and learning research literature and provides implications
for today’s music classrooms and teaching profession. Suggestions are provided to change perception of talent, widen
the scope of musical activities in schools, include authentic assessments, and have teachers learn how to increase
student motivation and learning in the music classroom.

Keywords
application, learning, mindset, motivation, music beliefs, strategies

Music teachers see the impact that participating in music
has on their students. However, some students are persist-
ing with music, whereas others are not. There are numer-
ous activities competing for students’ attention in today’s
school, home, and social environments. Unfortunately,
some teachers may be unaware of the complex frame-
work that shapes student motivation and learning. Woody
and McPherson (2010), for example, stated,
It seems a pity that the music education profession is so
poorly equipped with knowledge that explains more
precisely how some students become intellectually curious
and emotionally engaged in the repertoire they are studying,
in contrast to others who display neither of these attributes
during their practice. (p. 407)
To address this knowledge gap, current research on
motivation and learning will be presented with sug-
gested implications for improving music pedagogy. This
article will (a) identify current research theories and
models most applicable to music teaching and learning,
(b) consider the unique aspects of music and music
teaching that make them different from other school
subjects, (c) discuss the characteristics of children and
adolescents that may account for the different motiva-
tional patterns they display, (d) provide examples of
current practices of school music considered to be
successful models, and (e) review current practices that
can be modified to be more efficient and effective.
Review of Literature
Motivation and Learning Theories
The perception people have about themselves is called
their self-concept (Greenberg, 1970). A person’s self-con-
cept may be stronger in music than in other domains
(Vispoel, 2003). This perception is reinforced by evalua-
tions received from others, as well as by comparing one’s
self to others (Bong & Clark, 1999; Greenberg, 1970;
Lamont, 2011). Having a strong music self-concept is a
crucial component as to whether or not students will have
the motivation to persist in music. Greenberg (1970)
noted that children’s music self-concepts begin to shape
as soon as they are able to determine how well they per-
formed on a certain task. Marsh, Craven, and Debus
(1991) confirmed that self-concept originates at an early
1 
University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA
Corresponding Author:
Susan H. Cogdill, College of Saint Benedict/Saint John’s University, 37
South College Ave., St. Joseph, MN 56374, USA.
Email: scogdill@csbsju.edu
50 Update 33(2)
age and becomes more personalized as students grow
older. Young students who engage in positive music
experiences are more likely to develop positive beliefs
about themselves as musicians.
People’s beliefs about their abilities have a profound
impact on the motivation they bring to learning situa-
tions. Bandura (1995) defined self-efficacy theory as
“beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the
courses of action required to produce given attainments”
(p. 2). Stated differently, self-efficacy applies to a certain
goal and one’s ability to “perform a specific task at a cer-
tain level of competence” (Maehr, Pintrich, &
Linnenbrink, 2002, p. 357). Every educator should strive
to foster a positive self-efficacy in students so they can
experience success in certain tasks or specific education
areas (Hallam, 2009). Students who do not have a high
self-efficacy struggle with internal dialogues reminding
them of feelings of ineptness at certain tasks and abilities.
This reinforcement of self-doubt can result in a student
not trying or giving up altogether (Bandura, 1993).
Self-efficacy in the music classroom describes the
“beliefs about one’s ability to accomplish musical goals”
(Woody, 2004, p. 12). Ritchie and Williamon (2011) con-
cluded that prior music experiences and participation are
the highest predictors of music self-efficacy for learning.
Therefore, having positive music experiences at a young
age is extremely important for providing a foundation for
learning. Hallam (2009) agreed that early music experi-
ences greatly reinforce music self-concept, as students
become more aware of their abilities in comparison with
their peers and continually interpret feedback on their
musical abilities.
However, it is not enough that students think of them-
selves as good musicians. Having a high music self-effi-
cacy suggests that they must also have the knowledge and
proficient skill level to perform well (Lehmann, Sloboda,
& Woody, 2007). When students have this skill and
knowledge level, they will persist when encountering
certain challenges, whereas students with a low self-effi-
cacy may resort to giving up (Maehr et al., 2002).
Key to understanding motivation to participate in
music is attribution theory, which focuses on how people
make sense of what they experience. How students
explain their successes or failures can be a key insight
into how they will interact with the task in the future
(Weiner, 1974). The answer to why a student did poorly
or performed well is the focus of attribution theory
(Maehr et al., 2002). Weiner (1985) identified that ability
and effort were the most common attributions given for
success, whereas attributes for failure were little ability
and lack of effort. Students who attribute failure to lack of
effort can choose to exert more effort in future tasks. This
gives them power of choice in their academic pursuits. If
young musicians want to increase their knowledge, they
must understand the work that is necessary to do so.
However, students who attribute failure to lack of ability,
skill, or talent (perceived stable factors) may be left with
feelings of hopelessness and vulnerability (Austin,
Renwick, & McPherson, 2006; Maehr et al., 2002). It is
problematic for music education when students assume
they lack musical skill because they are not talented
(Asmus, 1986; Lehmann et al., 2007).
For students to be motivated to participate in an
activity, they must value it and believe they will be suc-
cessful with it in their future. This expectancy–value
theory explains why many students both pursue and per-
sist in music, whereas others do not (Eccles & Wigfield,
1995; O’Neill & McPherson, 2002). This insight helps
teachers predict student participation choices and inter-
ests (Lehmann et al., 2007). Students must also truly
enjoy the music activity to continue with it (Wigfield &
Eccles, 2000). This motivational framework consists of
four parts of both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in
how much a student will (a) value being successful in a
music activity, (b) predict that it will be an enjoyable or
rewarding experience, (c) foresee that the music activity
will be valuable in meeting future results, and (d) value
the music activity so as to make that the amount of time
spent practicing and participating worthwhile (Lehmann
et al., 2007).
As young musicians develop their skills, they pass
through various stages of intrinsic and extrinsic motiva-
tion. The intrinsic motivation in self-determination the-
ory focuses on what learning conditions are necessary to
“elicit and sustain, versus subdue and diminish, this
innate propensity” to learn (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 70).
This research has identified three psychological needs for
sustaining self-motivation in learning: competence,
autonomy, and relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2000). For stu-
dents to participate in higher level music activities, they
must feel they are competent in their musical skill and
knowledge, have power over their own choices in learn-
ing and how they choose to participate in music activities,
and have the need to belong or feel connected to other
people fulfilled, thus creating a warm and inviting atmo-
sphere (Woody & McPherson, 2010).
Another perspective of intrinsic motivation looks into
greater depths of music involvement. Participating in a
particular task where a person (a) becomes completely
absorbed and loses track of time, (b) is unaware of growing
tired, and (c) does not pay attention to anything outside of
the present activity leads to flow, described by flow theory
(Csikszentmihalyi, Abuhamdeh, & Nakamura, 2005). For
flow to occur, there must be a balance between the activity
and the individual’s ability to be successful. If the music
activity is too challenging for the current musical skill, stu-
dents may “experience anxiety and diminished motivation
for learning” (Austin et al., 2006). If students’ skills are at
Cogdill 51
a higher level than the task that is asked of them, they may
feel frustrated they are not being challenged. However,
when the challenge or skills required in certain activities
match their current skill level, flow is likely to occur
(Maher et al., 2002).
Mindset
The above theories have provided a richer understanding
of human behavior related to motivation and learning
particular to music education. Although they provide
helpful understanding of the general population, they fail
to provide insight on the unique development of the indi-
vidual person (Molden & Dweck, 2006). When looking
at the individual, one must consider that all students are
unique in how they experience the world and interpret
and make sense of these experiences (Chi-yue, Hong, &
Dweck, 1997). They establish beliefs about themselves
and establish their implicit theories, which profoundly
affect how they interact with the world and with others
and behave in learning situations. “Although a single
belief about intelligence may seem like a small thing,
each of these beliefs creates a whole motivational frame-
work” (Dweck & Master, 2009, p. 123). These beliefs are
“domain-specific,” meaning that the concept of intelli-
gence for this conversation will mean one’s musical abil-
ity (Dweck, 2000, p. 175).
These self-beliefs, or mindsets, present two distinct
and separate views of intelligence: fixed mindset and
growth mindset. Those with a fixed mindset believe the
intelligence they have was fully formed by birth, is innate,
and is a fixed trait (Dweck, 2006). People with this
mindset believe that although people can learn new
things, the core of their intelligence cannot be changed
(Dweck, Chiu, & Hong, 1995). Children with a fixed
mindset feel compelled to protect their intelligence, at all
costs, and are focused on how smart they appear to others
(Dweck, 2000). The consequence of this mindset is that
students will avoid challenges or participating in activi-
ties in which they predict they may fail. They perceive
that if one were smart at something, then the task or learn-
ing would come easily. Having to exert effort would
announce to others that they were inadequate. Students
can be very creative in distracting peers and teachers to
avoid being viewed as inadequate (Diener & Dweck,
1978). Even more devastating for students with a fixed
mindset is they are not likely to rebound after encounter-
ing failure, for their belief that they cannot is so overpow-
ering (Dweck, 2006).
In contrast, growth mindset is the belief that intelli-
gence can be both developed and improved with effort
and specific strategies (Dweck & Leggett, 1988). Students
with this mindset view both challenges and failures as
opportunities to learn. They view easy tasks as a “waste
of their time” and prefer instead to be challenged (Dweck,
2000, p. 4). The growth mindset does not ignore the dif-
ferences in what students know nor the rate at which they
learn. Instead the focus is that each person can improve
his or her learning with the right effort and direction
(Mueller & Dweck, 1997).
Mindsets are shaped by the feedback students receive
throughout their life and specifically in their academic
training. Feedback can reinforce a fixed mindset or foster
a growth mindset (Dweck, 2007). Muller and Dweck
(1998) reported that students who received positive feed-
back on their intelligence experience a momentary sense
of pride, but this was nonlasting and began to deteriorate,
without moving the children forward in their learning.
Those students receiving praise on the effort they demon-
strated encouraged a growth mindset. Unfortunately, the
group who had been praised initially on their intelligence,
on how smart they were, adopted a fixed mindset. They
were unable to recover from a previous failure even
though they had a chance to answer questions that were
modified to ensure they would answer them successfully.
Some students even resorted to cheating rather than tak-
ing a chance at failing for a second time. Fortunately,
other studies show that students can actually increase
their motivation to learn simply by being informed about
the two mindsets, as well as about how their brain learns
(Dweck, 2007).
These theories are not meant to impose a right or
wrong view about mindset; they are meant to provide a
way of understanding how people perceive their world
and at what cost or gain (Dweck et al., 1995). Giving stu-
dents the right strategies necessary to help them move
forward will provide them with a clearer choice in creat-
ing their own success. “Children’s beliefs become the
mental baggage they bring to the achievement situation”
(Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007, p. 259).
Brain and Memory
The explosion of brain research is changing current per-
ceptions of teaching and learning. The brain was once
thought to be unchanging: The number of cells present at
birth was the same at death. Early research by Bennet,
Diamond, Krech, and Rosenzweig (1964) found instead
that the brain was capable of growing and making new
connections, a function called plasticity, when experienc-
ing an enriched environment. For the brain to adapt, it
requires that it be used efficiently, thus supporting the
capacity for lifelong learning (Blakemore & Frith, 2005).
Researchers liken the brain to any muscle in the body; it
can adapt and strengthen as one learns (National
Association of Independent Schools, n.d.). This has many
implications for music educators, such as reinforcing the
desire to be a lifelong learner of music in students, as well
52 Update 33(2)
as strengthening the perception that effort is the key
ingredient necessary in developing musical skills rather
than the notion of innate talent.
“Educators need to build an adequate structure
grounded upon the principles of education, psychology,
biology, cognitive science, neuroscience, and pedagogy
to bridge the gap from the outdated Industrial Era model
of schooling to the Information Era model” (Radin, 2009,
p. 41). Unfortunately, these exciting findings by present
researchers may not make it to the populations that could
truly benefit from the information: public school teachers
and their students. When a panel of brain theorists was
asked to describe what brain-compatible instruction
should look like in a classroom, there was agreement that
having an enriched environment was crucial. This
included (a) students and teachers who were emotionally
connected to the instruction; (b) an accessible physical
layout of the classroom and inviting atmosphere; (c) feel-
ings of low stress and threat levels; (d) opportunities for
students to experience trial and error, explore, practice,
create, and think critically; and (e) ways students would
be challenged, encouraged to problem-solve, and com-
plete their own work (Radin, 2009). In addition, knowl-
edge of the brain could assist music education and
learning for all children.
At the same time, many students with learning differences
[normal variations] or learning disabilities [atypical
variations] have not had their education needs met. If more
teachers had greater understanding of the brain, we might be
able to optimize the learning for all students. (Radin, 2009,
p. 48)
It is the goal of most teachers that students learn the
information that is presented to them, in hopes of prepar-
ing them for success in their future. Researchers have
established that for information to be committed into
long-term memory, it must first be rehearsed in one’s
working memory sufficiently to then be transferred to
long-term memory (Banikowski & Mehring, 1999).
Teachers need to be aware of and master strategies to
enhance long-term memory: capturing, holding, and
focusing students’ attention, connecting students emo-
tionally to the learning, making the learning meaningful
to students, helping students organize their learning, and
connecting new knowledge to students’ prior experiences
(Banikowski & Mehring, 1999). Teachers who use these
strategies can make the learning environment more pur-
poseful and efficient, likely resulting in a more engaging
and enjoyable classroom.
Bennett Reimer, a music education philosopher,
reflected on the emergence of brain research and its
implications on music education. He stated, “Because of
our growing understandings of brain dissimilarity as
related to musical role dissimilarity, we are faced with
scientific evidence of our need to rethink much of what
we do and how we do it” (Reimer, 2004, p. 16). He con-
cluded his article describing that brain research has rein-
forced a favorite adage of his, “music education is the
education of feeling” in that it affirms what musicians
and music educators have been committed to for centu-
ries (Reimer, 2004, p. 23).
New light on the brain’s amazing abilities reinforces
the notion that there are actions within students’ control if
they desire to increase their musical ability. Fields (2008)
highlights the role that myelin, a white matter that coats
axons in the brain, plays in aiding the ability of neurons
to send messages to different parts of the brain: The
thicker the myelin coating, the faster its ability to com-
municate. When one practices a musical skill, it causes
the myelin to thicken. Therefore, the more students prac-
tice, the more automatic their ability becomes to perform
a specific skill since their neurons are receiving the mes-
sage at a faster rate.
Practice
Ericsson (2006) supported this scientific conclusion of
practicing to increase musical skill. He suggested that
students must practice deliberately with a specific goal in
mind as they concentrate on a specific task. Students can-
not simply want to improve. They must design a plan as
to how they will improve by exerting specific effort.
Research identified that musicians, who at age 20 were
considered top performers in their area, all shared in com-
mon their diligence in practicing for more than 10,000
hours (Ericsson, Krampe, & Tesch-Römer, 1993). This
confirmed that it matters not how talented a student is;
instead, committing to deliberate practice is what is nec-
essary for musical skill development (Ericcson, 2006).
Because many students do not view practice as an enjoy-
able activity, teachers must understand the significance of
motivation in skill development (Woody, 2004).
Music teachers have known for quite some time that
practice is necessary to strengthen musical skill. With the
emergence of current research, educators may now
explain to their students the reason why. Teachers can
educate their students on how the brain works, which can
provide them with tools necessary if they desire to be a
skilled musician. This knowledge can help students in
becoming responsible for their own learning. Students
can now strategize toward engaging in tasks that will
strengthen their musical skill and knowledge.
Many discount the hours of practice necessary to
develop musical skills, believing instead that people are
born with musical ability. This perception of innate talent
is a viewpoint of “folk psychology” that is reinforced
within certain cultures (Sloboda, Davidson, & Howe,
Cogdill 53
1994, p. 349). McPherson and Williamon (2006)
explained the inaccuracy in the “folklore” of “giftedness”
and “talent” (p. 239). They argued that Mozart, widely
viewed as a child prodigy, benefited instead from great
support, training, experiences, and countless hours of
practice. Students who come to believe that innate ability
is required to be successful in music may not have the
motivation to persist or even begin a music journey
(Austin et al., 2006; Sloboda, Wise, & Peretz, 2005).
Unfortunately, too many students are labeled early in
their academic life as being innately talented, whereas
other children perceive this to mean they are not.
Somehow, this method of categorizing students is still
pervasive among schools, an inequality that is “discrimi-
natory” (Howe, Davidson & Sloboda, 1998, p. 407).
In reviewing this literature, several broad principals
emerged. First, the belief in innate talent may not serve the
profession of music education and, even more important,
may not serve students. This belief limits, and perhaps
even extinguishes, the music potential in students. Second,
there is greater complexity involved in teaching the whole
learner than simply the pedagogy of teaching music.
Teachers may be unaware of the impact motivation may
have on students’ abilities to learn and participate in music
activities. Each of these theories and models shine light on
the multidimensions of who each student is as a learner.
Teachers, and ultimately students, would greatly benefit by
the inclusion of these motivation and learning theories and
models in teacher training and ongoing professional devel-
opment. Third, the music educator plays a crucial role in
creating a strong motivational foundation on the fragile
balancing beam that students walk on as they engage in
music learning. Even the simple feedback a teacher gives
to a student can have life-altering consequences if a student
interprets it incorrectly and chooses to drop out of music.
Finally, students can be powerful in their own learning and
skill development. “Students are rarely instructed how to
learn,” yet everyday are met with high expectations to do
so (Kiewra, 2002, p. 71). The adage “knowledge is power”
is applicable to these principles, especially in this music
educational setting.
Uniqueness of Music From Other
Subjects
There are aspects of music (and the teaching of music)
that make it different from other school subjects. First,
music is a uniquely “human phenomenon” (Campbell &
Scott-Kassner, 2010, p. 6). “Musical capacity is a univer-
sal inherent human capacity: It is part of what it means to
be human” (Lehmann et al., 2007, p. 30). Newborn babies
have been found to exhibit very sophisticated musical
skills and aptitudes (Lehmann et al., 2007). This inherent
music quality is what makes music (and teaching of
music) profoundly different from other school subjects.
Music is a means of self-expression that is unique to its
own self.
Unfortunately, Western society has come to view
music as less important than perceived “elite core” sub-
jects in schools (Campbell & Scott-Kassner, 2010, p. 7).
This is apparent in elementary students often seeing their
general music teachers once a week, which is clearly not
enough time to build a rich music knowledge and experi-
ence base. A large percentage of schools do not expose
their students to instrumental music until late elementary
school. By this time, children’s competence beliefs about
their musical ability “may be in a state of decline before
they ever have a chance of receiving instruction” (Austin
et al., 2006, p. 223). As students approach middle school
and high school, they can choose to simply withdraw if
they do not do well in music or do not like the subject, an
action that would never be allowed in core subjects like
math (Smith, 2006). Motivating students to participate in
music activities cannot happen if there is no music class
to teach. Some schools have resorted to having music
ensembles rehearse before and after school, putting music
education “in jeopardy of being relegated to extracurricu-
lar status” when it fails (or is forced) to function as core
subjects do (Woody, 2011, para. 4). In addition, music
teachers have to actively recruit in order to motivate stu-
dents to enroll in music courses, whereas required content
classes have access to teach every child every day.
Today’s students are more likely to spend more time
watching (and being influenced by) popular television
shows like American Idol and The Voice than participat-
ing in public school music classes. The perceptions about
music and “talent” gleaned from these shows provide an
inequitable challenge for music educators to overcome
when competing with “the addictive nature of passive
entertainment” (Csikszentmihalyi et al., 2005, p. 606).
McPherson and O’Neill (2010) summarized the complex
framework influencing motivation and music participa-
tion for young people by stating,
Across all school grades, motivational constructs for a
subject are dependent on the interplay between external
factors such as the home environment, parental influences,
society and peers, and internal personal factors such as
interest, self-esteem, self-determination and personal goals
for achievement. (p. 103)
Different Motivational Patterns for
Different Ages
There are certain differences that shape motivation and
learning music among children and adolescents. Both
are influenced by their beliefs about their ability and
54 Update 33(2)
by their interest in and valuing of different subjects
(McPherson & O’Neill, 2010). However, as a child
ages these beliefs tend to change. Younger students are
more optimistic in their achievement beliefs. As they
grow older, these beliefs about their music competence
become more realistic (Wigfield et al., 1997). This
occurs as students become aware of their abilities and
begin comparing them to the abilities of their peers and
listening to feedback they receive from others (Hallam,
2009). Students will not continue with an activity if
they do not feel confident in it or they perceive that it
will not be useful in their future (Wigfield et al., 1997).
Thus, younger students are more open to their poten-
tial, whereas adolescents have begun to close them-
selves off.
Children’s self-concept about music and the value
they have for it tends to decrease as they age (Wigfield
et al., 1997). Their attribution beliefs become “differenti-
ated with increasing age” and shift from the view that an
amount of effort is required to be successful at a task to
the adolescent’s view that they must lack ability when
they do not succeed (Austin et al., 2006, p. 229). These
beliefs unfortunately often result in their dropping out of
music. However, this is not true for teenagers who con-
tinue to play into their adolescence (Hallam, 2009).
The adolescent age is a tentative motivational period
in determining whether or not students will continue with
music. Peers begin to have a great influence on students’
motivation to persist in music learning (Lehmann et al.,
2007). Adolescents tend to form peer groups based on
their music preferences: their “badge of identity” (North
& Hargreaves, 1999, p. 75). Educators should also take
into account that students are also motivated to partici-
pate in music ensembles because of many nonmusic fac-
tors such as social, academic, and family reasons
(Adderley, Kennedy, & Berz, 2003) and to be part of a
team or music family (Parker, 2009).
Children and adolescents also differ in how their bod-
ies (brain included!) grow and develop at each of these
stages, which may affect their learning. Information on
the brain shows that there is a period of time when ado-
lescents may have areas of poor cognitive performance
due to changes in the brain’s communication network
(Blakemore & Frith, 2005). This gradually improves with
age, but teachers should still be aware of this as they work
with this population. Another aspect of brain develop-
ment that affects adolescents is the brain’s need for ade-
quate sleep for it to work correctly in learning situations
(Blakemore & Frith, 2005).
Current Models of Success
There are current practices of school music teaching or
instruction that are successful models of motivation and
learning. The professional conduct of teachers demon-
strates one such practice. Many teachers are conscious of
reflecting on their teaching pedagogy and developing strat-
egies to continually improve. They value staff develop-
ment opportunities and are lifelong learners. Many teachers
understand that as students and society change, they too
must adapt to these changing needs. They provide a safe,
welcoming, and engaging learning environment. Investing
their time and energy to know students’ backgrounds helps
teachers connect with their students, demonstrating to stu-
dents that the teachers value them. These processes also
help teachers understand the different learning needs of
their students. In addition, teachers choose music literature
and activities that are ability and interest appropriate to fos-
ter motivation and engage learning.
Educators are encouraged to provide enrichment activ-
ities for students who have mastered the current lesson to
enhance their creativity, as well as apply their learning.
Music teachers have been consistent in creating these
opportunities in various ways such as having students
compose, perform original or others’ compositions, work
on solo and ensemble literature, form vernacular music
groups, and present to their class an aspect of personal
music interest. These additional activities have been well-
known methods of motivating students in the past.
Music teachers are a credit to their profession as they
give their time, both before and after school, to work with
individuals to assist them in playing or learning content.
This provides one-on-one or small group differentiated
instruction that can be organized around the specific
needs of the learners. Also, music students use many of
their modalities each day in the music room, which con-
nects their learning in kinesthetic, auditory, and visual
ways that improve long-term memory.
In Need of Maintenance
Although these successful practices do exist in today’s
music classrooms, the lack of knowledge that teachers
have about current motivation and learning theories may
have large unintended consequences for students. As
music educators continue their way through the
Information Age, it might be time to adapt current prac-
tices. Students may benefit from teacher reinforcement
fostering beliefs that they can learn and be musical, as
well as appropriate motivation and learning tools to be
successful. The following are suggestions to upgrading
current practices in order to increase student motivation
and learning in music.
Reinforce Effort
Teachers should provide an alternative to the notion of
innate talent as a prerequisite to becoming a musician and
Cogdill 55
reinforce this with students. Teachers are encouraged to
provide student feedback related to student persistence and
effort demonstrated. A growth mindset on musical ability
should also be fostered in music classrooms. Because
music is inherently human, the opportunity for all people
to participate and enjoy music throughout their lifetime
should be emphasized throughout the school culture.
Broaden Scope of Music in Schools
Students who do not participate in school music are
actively involved with music outside of school, especially
in how much music they listen to. The traditional class-
room, ensembles, and literature may not be the most
effective way to connect with this current generation,
especially when students can easily access anything of
music interest on their phone or computer. Music ensem-
bles, particularly in secondary schools, can be limiting if
they motivate only certain types of students with specific
music interests. Instead, the profession could serve a
larger population of students by offering other classes to
learn about and experience music, such as creative music-
ing, science of music, songwriting, sound mixing, music
as therapy, and bluegrass technique. The profession can
better motivate students to engage in music activities if
those experiences are meaningful and perceived to bene-
fit them in their future.
In addition, the perception of who should participate
in music as a result of auditioned music ensembles may
perpetuate the belief that music exists only for the top
students. How students interpret not making these ensem-
bles should be a concern among the profession.
Assess Music Beliefs
Nowhere in the national standards is the assessment of
student beliefs on learning encouraged. Because beliefs
play such a pivotal role in predicting a child’s academic
success and provide great insight into their experience as
a learner, the music education profession would benefit
from adopting this intervention. Once students make the
judgment that they cannot with music, a teacher may
never have another opportunity to reach them. This limit-
ing belief robs them of a lifetime of music enjoyment.
Fostering a growth mindset about music ability, particu-
larly in the younger grades, would help students have the
motivation necessary to persist in music learning.
Engage in Meaningful Assessments
The fourth suggestion for improvement encourages
teachers to provide meaningful and authentic assessments
in order to inform students of where they are and what
strategies they need to improve. In some cases, students
are only graded on their attendance. Not only does this
cheapen the argument that music should be a core disci-
pline but it also does not help students interpret any of
their prior effort. Many choral students graduate high
school learning only 16 music selections on their indi-
vidual part, never receiving specific feedback that could
have motivated them to practice or seek new learning.
Assessment that is accurate and meaningful can provide
many motivational benefits to students.
Shifting from current methods of assessing musical
skill and understanding is necessary to improve student
learning (Dweck, 2000). Today’s educators are greatly
focused on the end results of education, and appropriately
so. Although measuring student progress at the end of a
particular task or learning is important, students might
benefit from greater focus at the beginning of skill devel-
opment. Greater attention to providing early, positive
music experiences that provides the foundation for stu-
dent learning could be a proactive strategy in order to
improve assessment.
Know Your Individual Learners
Teachers will benefit by knowing the academic needs of
their individual students. Each student learns differently
and is motivated to participate in music for a variety of
reasons. Teachers who explore these differences will be
able identify the appropriate strategies to help students
be successful in the music classroom. Research that
focused on motivating high school choir students identi-
fied that having a teacher who paid attention to the “per-
sonal and musical development of their students”
created a welcoming and encouraging environment
(Stamer, 1999, p. 26). The other top aspects included
providing feedback, interesting repertoire, and achiev-
able challenges.
If the profession believes in music for every student,
then it must be ready to take in all factors that shape the
learner. Perhaps more focus could be placed on the
learner when learning music, an element that should be a
large component of music teacher-training programs
everywhere. Only with this awareness of these greater
dimensions of students can teachers truly successfully
motivate students to persist and engage in music activi-
ties throughout their lifetime.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
56 Update 33(2)
References
Adderley, C., Kennedy, M., & Berz, W. (2003). “A home away
from home”: The world of the high school music classroom.
Journal of Research in Music Education, 51, 190–205.
Asmus, E. P. (1986). Student beliefs about the causes of suc-
cess and failure in music: A study of achievement moti-
vation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 34,
262–278.
Austin, J., Renwick, J., & McPherson, G. (2006). Developing
motivation. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musi-
cian: A handbook of musical development (pp. 213–239).
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive devel-
opment and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28,
117–148.
Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies.
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Banikowski, A. K., & Mehring, T. A. (1999). Strategies to
enhance memory based on brain-research. Focus on
Exceptional Children, 32(2), 1–16.
Bennet, E. L., Diamond, M. C., Krech, D., & Rosenzweig, M.
R. (1964). Chemical and anatomical plasticity of brain.
Science, 146, 610–619.
Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007).
Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across
an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an inter-
vention. Child Development, 78, 246–263.
Blakemore, S. J., & Frith, U. (2000). The implications of recent
developments in neuroscience for research on teaching
and learning. London, England: Institute of Cognitive
Neuroscience. Retrieved from http://www.tlrp.org/pub/
acadpub/Blakemore2000.pdf
Blakemore, S. J., & Frith, U. (2005). The learning brain:
Lessons for education: A précis. Developmental Science,
8, 459–471.
Bong, M., & Clark, R. E. (1999). Comparison between self-
concept and self-efficacy in academic motivation research.
Educational Psychologist, 34, 139–153.
Campbell, P. S., & Scott-Kassner, C. (2010). Music in child-
hood: From preschool through the elementary grades.
Boston, MA: Schirmer CENGAGE Learning.
Chi-yue, C., Hong, Y., & Dweck, C. S. (1997). Lay disposition
and implicit theories of personality. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 73, 19–30.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Abuhamdeh, S., & Nakamura, J. (2005).
Flow. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of
competence and motivation (pp. 598–608). New York, NY:
Guilford.
Diener, C. I., & Dweck, C. S. (1978). An analysis of learned
helplessness: Continuous changes in performance, strategy
and achievement cognitions following failure. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 451–262.
Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation,
personality, and development. New York, NY: Psychology
Press.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success.
New York, NY: Random House.
Dweck, C. S. (2007). The perils and promises of praise.
Educational Leadership, 65(2), 34–39.
Dweck, C. S., Chiu, C., & Hong, Y. (1995). Implicit theories
and their role in judgments and reactions: A world from
two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 267–285.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive
approach to motivation and personality. Psychological
Review, 95, 256–273.
Dweck, C. S., & Master, A. (2009). Self-theories and motiva-
tion: Students’ beliefs about intelligence. In K. R. Wentzel
& A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school
(pp. 123–140). New York, NY: Routledge.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor:
The structure of adolescents’ achievement task values
and expectancy-related beliefs. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 21, 215–225.
Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience and delib-
erate practice on the development of superior expert perfor-
mance. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. Feltovich, & R.
R. Hoffman (Eds.). Cambridge handbook of expertise and
expert performance (pp. 685–706). Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. H., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993).
The role of deliberate practice in acquisition of expert per-
formance. Psychological Review, 102, 211–245.
Fields, R. (2008). White matter. Scientific American, 298(3),
54–61.
Greenberg, M. (1970). Musical achievement and the self-
concept. Journal of Research in Music Education, 18,
57–64.
Hallam, S. (2009). Motivation to learn. In S. Hallam, I. Cross,
& M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psy-
chology (pp. 285–294). New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Howe, J. A., Davidson, J. W., & Sloboda, J. A. (1998). Innate
talents: Reality or myth? Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
21, 399–407.
Kiewra, K. A. (2002). How classroom teachers can help stu-
dents learn and teach them how to learn. Theory Into
Practice, 41, 71–80.
Lamont, A. (2011). The beat goes on: Music education, iden-
tity and lifelong learning. Music Education Research, 13,
369–388.
Lehmann, A. C., Sloboda, J. A., & Woody, R. H. (2007).
Psychology for musicians: Understanding and acquiring
the skills. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Maehr, M., Pintrich, P., & Linnenbrink, E. (2002). Motivation
and achievement. In R. Colwell & C. Richardson (Eds.),
The new handbook of research on music teaching and
learning (pp. 348–371). New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Marsh, H. W., Craven, R. G., & Debus, R. (1991). Self-
concepts of young children 5-8 years of age: Measurement
and multidimensional structure. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 83, 377–392.
McPherson, G. E., & O’Neill, S. A. (2010). Students’ motiva-
tion to study music as compared to other school subjects: A
comparison of eight countries. Research Studies in Music
Education, 32, 101–137.
McPherson, G. E., & Williamon, A. (2006). Giftedness and tal-
ent. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.), The child as musician: A
Cogdill 57
handbook of musical development (pp. 239–256). Oxford,
England: Oxford University Press.
Molden, D. C., & Dweck, C. S. (2006). Finding “meaning” in
psychology: A lay theories approach to self-regulation,
social perception, and social development. American
Psychologist, 61, 192–203.
Mueller, C. M., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Intelligence praise
can undermine motivation and performance. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 33–52.
National Association of Independent Schools. (n.d.). You can
grow your intelligence. Retrieved from http://www.nais.
org/Magazines-Newsletters/ISMagazine/Pages/You-Can-
Grow-Your-Intelligence.aspx
North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (1999). Music and adolescent
identity. Music Education Research, 1, 75–92.
O’Neill, S. A., & McPherson, G. E. (2002). Motivation. In R.
Parncutt & G. McPherson (Eds.), The science and psychol-
ogy of music performance (pp. 83–98). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Parker, E. A. C. (2009). Understanding the process of social
identity development in adolescent high school choral sing-
ers: A grounded theory (Doctoral dissertation). University
of Nebraska–Lincoln.
Radin, J. (2009). Brain-compatible teaching and learning:
Implications for teacher education. Education Horizons,
88, 40–50.
Reimer, B. (2004). New brain research on emotion and feeling:
Dramatic implications for music education. Arts Education
Policy Review, 106, 8–24.
Ritchie, L., & Williamon, A. (2011). Primary school children’s
self-efficacy for music learning. Journal of Research in
Music Education, 59, 146–161.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and
the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development,
and well-being. The American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
Sloboda, J. A., Davidson, J. W., & Howe, M. J. A. (1994). Is
everyone musical? The Psychologist, 7, 349–354.
Sloboda, J. A., Wise, K. J., & Peretz, I. (2008). Establishing
an empirical profile of self-defined “tone deafness”:
Perception, singing performance and self-assessment.
Musicae Scientiae, 12(1), 3–26.
Smith, J. (2006). Every child a singer: Techniques for assist-
ing developing singers. Music Educators Journal, 93(2),
28–34.
Stamer, R. (1999). Motivation in the choral rehearsal. Music
Educator’s Journal, 85(5), 26–29.
Vispoel, W. P. (2003). Measuring and understanding self-per-
ceptions of musical ability. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven,
& D. M McInerney (Eds.), International advances in self
research (pp. 151–179). Greenwich, CT: Information
Age.
Weiner, B. (1974). Achievement motivation and attribution
theory. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attribution theory of motivation and emo-
tion. American Psychological Association, 92, 548–573.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory
of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 25, 68–81. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Yoon, K. S., Harold, R. D., Arbreton,
A. J. A., Freedman-Doan, C., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (1997).
Change in children’s competence beliefs and subjective
task values across the elementary school years: A 3-year
study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 451–459.
Woody, R. H. (2004). The motivations of exceptional musi-
cians. Music Education Journal, 90(3), 17–21.
Woody, R. H. (2011, November 28). The unique contribu-
tion of music education is . . . [Web log post]. Retrieved
from http://beingmusicalbeinghuman.com/2011/11/28/the-
unique-contribution-of-music-education-is/
Woody, R. H., & McPherson, G. E. (2010). Emotion and moti-
vation in the lives of performers. In P. N. Juslin (Ed.),
Handbook of music and emotion: Theory, research, appli-
cations (pp. 401–424). New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.