714606

research-article2017
IJM0010.1177/0255761417714606International Journal ofMusic EducationBartlett and Tolmie

Article

International Journal of

What are you doing the rest of

Music Education
2018, Vol. 36(2) 197­–216
© The Author(s) 2017
your life? A profile of Jazz/ Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
Contemporary Voice DOI: 10.1177/0255761417714606
https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761417714606
journals.sagepub.com/home/ijm
graduates

Irene Bartlett
Queensland Conservatorium, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia

Diana Tolmie
Queensland Conservatorium, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia

Abstract
Over the past two decades the topic of graduate outcomes has increasingly informed the discourse
on the changing nature of universities. For conservatoires and university music departments the
global shift in audience demand away from western classical music and jazz styles (traditionally
the cornerstone tertiary music programs) to contemporary commercial music (CCM) has added
an extra dimension to the graduate outcomes discussion with respect to vocation preparation
and musicians’ portfolio careers. Few studies have tracked the career paths of music graduates
across time with none focused on jazz/contemporary singers. This report discusses the findings
from a snapshot study of Jazz/Contemporary Voice graduates (2001 to 2012) of one Australian
conservatoire. The purpose of this research was to better describe this population of graduates
in terms of employment outcomes, the dynamics of their employment activities, employment-
seeking strategies and the relevance of university coursework to their employability. Their
responses have implications for tertiary music training programs.

Keywords
career identity, employability, higher education, jazz singer, contemporary singer, music

Graduate tracking
Over the past two decades the topic of graduate outcomes has increasingly informed the discourse
on the changing nature of universities (Coetzee, 2014; Purcell, Wilton, & Elias, 2007; Tomlinson,

Corresponding author:
Irene Bartlett, Queensland Conservatorium, Griffith University, 140 Grey St, South Brisbane, Q, 4101, Brisbane,
Australia.
Email: i.bartlett@griffith.edu.au
198 International Journal of Music Education 36(2)

2007) with a growing body of research that focuses on graduates’ transition from university to
work (Bridgstock, 2011; Graduate Destinations, 2012; Perrone and Vickers, 2003). However, few
studies have reported outcomes for graduates of tertiary music programs (Bartleet et al., 2012).
Within the small body of data describing the likelihood of employment for tertiary music gradu-
ates, discussion has centered on employment in areas of orchestral, opera, and higher education
(Bennett, 2012). We could find few reports that discussed the employment activities of jazz and
contemporary commercial music (CCM) musicians generally and none that identified those who
are the focus of this report—that is, jazz/contemporary singers.
With the global audience shift away from western classical music to a preference for popular
(CCM) music, conservatoires and university music departments have been challenged to meet a
growing student demand for training in mainstream CCM styles (e.g., pop, rock, R&B, country,
jazz and all associated sub-styles). However, while there is growing proof that “one-size-fits-all”
traditional training methods cannot fully address the differences in voice management (laryngeal
set-up, resonance, breath flow and breath support) or the style specific elements and vocal effects
that define CCM styles (Bartlett, 2010, 2011; Chandler, 2014; LoVetri, 2008; “In support of con-
temporary commercial music,” 2008), it is reported that traditional conservatoire-based voice pro-
grams have continued to focus on western classical style training (Meyer & Edwards, 2014).
This was not the case at the particular Australian conservatoire that is the focus of this current
study where, to complement an existing and highly successful classical voice program, in 1996 a
jazz/contemporary voice program was established with a specific contemporary voice teaching
model. In formulating the current research project, we were interested to hear from the jazz/con-
temporary singers themselves about their work-lives and career directions post-graduation. In an
Australian study which discussed preparation of tertiary students for portfolio careers, authors
Bartleet et al. (2012) had suggested that “while most university-level music students view perform-
ing as their eventual work destination, there are comparatively few performance jobs in music.”.
We decided to test this assertion by inviting graduates of the Jazz/Contemporary Voice program
across 12 years (2001 to 2012) from this single conservatoire to respond to questions in the form
of an online survey.
The survey was designed to elicit responses to questions regarding whether graduates had
developed their careers as performers and/or if they were employed also in music-related, non-
performance-based activities or, if they had chosen a non-performance career path. Finally, we
wanted to know if they were satisfied that their music education had adequately prepared them for
work in and outside the music industry. What follows are the results of this pilot investigation.

Defining “Musician” as a work identity

To contextualize the study, dictionary definitions of “musician” are simply, “a person who writes,
sings, or plays music” (Musician, 2015); yet, “musician” as a “work identity” appears much harder
to define. In census data, musicians’ work is often categorized as being within the “Creative
Industries.” In the literature of the field, some authors apply the term “creative class” to describe
employees of the “creative industries” (Comunian, Faggian, & Li, 2009) while others use an
umbrella descriptor, “cultural industries”, to describe a broad and diverse range of creative activi-
ties including: film and video, motion pictures, television, art galleries, libraries, archives, muse-
ums, botanic gardens, performing arts venues, music and theatre, and services such as education
(Bennett, 2008).
Cunningham and Higgs (2009) highlighted the inherent difficulties of making any meaningful
interpretation of data across such a ranging and diverse field, “it is difficult to gather accurate,
authoritative and time data about sectors … it [the collection of data] is subject to unfocused
Bartlett and Tolmie 199

analysis and intervention” (2009, p. 190). Likewise, in writing on the impact of employability
skills on graduate labor market prospects in the UK, Cranmer suggested that “[measuring] employ-
ability outcomes is even more difficult than defining them” (2007, p. 173). In discussing musi-
cians’ “portfolio” careers, Australian researchers Bartleet et al. (2012) supported this view:

Estimating the scale and characteristics of the music workforce itself is problematic because national
census collections, including the Australian census, record only the main source of income for each
respondent; hence much of the activity undertaken by musicians with diversified work patterns is not
captured. (p. 33)

Australian census data does provide some descriptions of people working in the creative industries;
however, data collection tends towards canvassing the total Arts environment and consequently
lacks detail and clarity about specific component sectors. This appears to be a global problem. In a
public response to a British survey of university graduates titled “First Destinations,” a group of
prominent academics publicly questioned the value of such broad brush studies with a pointed
critique forecasted by the banner headline: “Survey a flop, say heads” (Times, 2004).

Musicians’ portfolio careers

Taken that measuring employability outcomes for creative arts graduates is difficult generally, we
propose that this is especially so for graduates of music programs where very little is known about
employment outcomes post-graduation. Reports in the literature of the field suggest that “portfolio
careers” have become the norm for graduates of music study programs. The Cambridge Dictionary
describes “portfolio career” as, “the fact of having several  part-time  jobs at once, rather than
one  full-time  job“ (“Portfolio career,” 2016a), while Dictionary.com describes a portfolio career
as “a tapestry of a variety of eclectic employment experiences; employment in a series of short-
contract or part-time positions” (“Portfolio career,” 2016b).
In an Australia Council for the Arts report, “What’s your other job? A census analysis of arts
employment in Australia”, researchers Cunningham, Higgs, Freebody, and Anderson (2010) sug-
gested that, “…arts employment is characterized by high levels of part-time work and the exist-
ence of many sole practitioners and business operators”; they commented further that this was
“…unlike the total workforce in which full-time work by wage-earning employees is the norm”
(Cunningham et al., 2010, p. 5). In an attempt to clarify published Australian census data, the
authors grouped respondents into three categories: “specialist,” “support,” and “embedded,” with
“performing arts” selected as a sub-category of “specialist” and, “music” as a further sub-seg-
ment. This collection of statistical data is relevant for this current article as it does nominate
“singer” as an occupation listing the median income for singers’ “full-time and part-time employ-
ment” in 2006 as $42,000, and $23,200 respectively (Cunningham et al., 2010, p. 26). However,
there was no indication of whether those identifying themselves as “singers” specified any addi-
tional involvement in other listed occupations which might have contributed to their overall
declared income; the other listed occupations were “Musicians and Related Professionals,”
“Instrumental Musician,” and “Composer.” Significantly, “singers” were represented as a homo-
geneous group with no identification of their chosen music genre or specific performing styles
(e.g., classical, choral, opera, pop, rock, R&B, country, jazz, Musical Theatre, etc.) and there was
no representation or inclusion of data on the frequency, if any, of non-performance activity (i.e.
the “day job”) within their work portfolio.
Bartleet et al. (2012) pointed to musicians’ engagement with “non-performance based work”
while noting the limitations of existing research:
200 International Journal of Music Education 36(2)

Australian musicians are increasingly described as maintaining “portfolio” careers, in which they combine
diverse employment arrangements and activities, often incorporating non-performance based work. This
career pattern is widespread but not well understood, largely because of the limitations of existing research.
(p. 1)

As a point of difference with some others in the field (for example: Bennett & Stanberg, 2006;
Phillips, 2013), Bartleet et al. (2012) suggested also that approximately one-third of the jobs within
a musician’s portfolio are embedded outside the music sector entirely. They considered employ-
ment outside the music sector to include “jobs like music production and dissemination utilising
the online realm (cf Draper, 2008), music education (cf Mills, 2004), or social work in the not-for-
profit sector (cf Bartleet, 2008)” and concluded that further research was needed to outline a
detailed and accurate picture of the working lives, career trajectories, and economic circumstances
of portfolio musicians in Australia.
We believe that clearer theorization is needed to better explain research findings in relation to
connections between tertiary trained, graduate musicians’ employment outcomes and associated
formative study. To this end we have taken a constructivist position (Shively, 2015) linking training
with more discernible graduate outcomes described by the population of Australian jazz/contem-
porary singer participants whose data are reported in this study.

Method
In considering all aspects of discussion in the literature, data were collected via an online survey
from a population of Jazz/Contemporary Voice graduates of one Australian conservatoire. The
decision to employ an “online” survey method was grounded in reports from the literature of
behavioral research (Sue & Ritter, 2007; Tuten, 2010) where discussion confirmed the ability of
the medium to access an appropriate sample of the selected population within a short time span.
Additionally, the method was highly cost effective and contact via email addresses allowed access
to graduates whose geographical location was otherwise unknown. The return rate was high,
reflecting Creswell’s (2008) view that the online method of data collection was well suited for the
collection of data to occur at “one point in time” (p.146).
Eighty-four graduates of an Australian Jazz/Contemporary Voice program were identified
from university records spanning the period 2001–2012. The group was primarily undergradu-
ate but did include some who had also continued to postgraduate study. Once potential partici-
pants were identified, their contact details were gathered through various means. In the first
instance contact addresses were identified from the university’s alumni data bank. However,
due to the breadth of the timespan (2001–2012), many of these email addresses were no longer
viable so we were tasked to establish current contact details from other sources as follows: from
the personal contact lists of the Coordinator of the Jazz/Contemporary Voice, via peer group
networks and through social media. Once identified, graduates received an “invitation to par-
ticipate” letter via email which outlined the study, explained the university ethics policy and
offered a link to the online survey document hosted by KwikSurveys, a web-based survey
software.
From the initial list of 84 graduates the online contact achieved a 55.95% response rate (n = 47).
This is considered an adequate sample size for the purposes of this pilot study (Baruch, 1999;
Nulty, 2008). Although the participant number was relatively small (n = 47) when compared to
large numbers in census reports, we subscribe to the proposition that while not all artists can be
located through associations, this is an arguably better method of information gathering than is the
broader, but less specific, census reporting (Heckathorn & Jeffri, 2001).
Bartlett and Tolmie 201

Survey design
The chosen method of data collection was a self report survey; that is, a predominantly quantitative
(closed-ended and/or multiple-choice/response) questionnaire. An open-ended “other” option was
offered on non-demographic questions to capture the lived experiences of the participants. All
questions were newly designed for this study (see Appendix A). The cross-sectional survey topics
included: demographic information, tertiary education background and current and previous
employment activity (post-graduation) including duration of any career interruptions. Other ques-
tions were framed to elicit information regarding post-graduation skill maintenance and develop-
ment, the nature of employment, employment-seeking strategies, paid and non-paid industry
activity, and participation in non-music employment. Participants’ employment data and their
reflections at the conclusion of the survey informed the qualitative inquiry. With “the intent of
generalizing from a sample to a population” (Babbie in Creswell, 2008, p. 12), the survey method
contributed to the pragmatic worldview approach of this study (Cherryholmes, 1992; Murphy,
1990; Patton, 1990; Rorty, 1990).

Results
Response rates to the 35 questions in the survey ranged from 85%–100% engagement by the 47
participants. Three participants were distinct in their failure to contribute to some questions, but
their responses have been included for those questions in which they did participate as they con-
tribute to the broad profile of responses from the jazz/contemporary singers in this sample.
The gender ratio of participants was 85% female and 15% male. This sample was reflective of
the gender representation of the particular jazz/contemporary voice program across the years
2001–2012 where female students predominated (the small number of enrolled male students
ranging from zero to a maximum of two in any given year). The majority of participants (42.55%)
were aged between 25–29 years. Across the sample (N = 47) the youngest participant was 23
years of age and the oldest 50 years of age. In terms of locality (at the time of participation) 8%
of participants were living overseas, 11% were living in Australian regional areas, and 81% were
living in Australian metropolitan areas. Of the metropolitan group, 89.47% were resident in
Brisbane; the remaining 10.53% were resident in either Melbourne or Sydney. The large number
of graduates located in metropolitan areas was not unexpected. From our emic knowledge and
from reports in the literature, it is understood that larger population centers provide more perfor-
mance opportunities, access to established networks (Berliner, 2009; Dempsey, 2008; MacLeod,
1993), and easier access to supplementary, non-performance based work—i.e., a “day job”
(Florida, Mellander, & Stolarick, 2010).
Thirty-seven participants (N = 47) reported their undergraduate (UG) music education as com-
pleted at one Brisbane-based tertiary institution (University A); five reported enrolment at two
other Brisbane-based institutions (University group B); one nominated an interstate tertiary institu-
tion (University C); another nominated an international tertiary institution (University D). Two
participants did not respond to the question and one postgraduate claimed not to hold an UG music
degree (see Table 1).
Interestingly, within the entire participant sample (N = 47), 21 graduates (44.68%) from bach-
elor programs had undertaken further postgraduate study. The majority of this group (n = 18)
reported completion of postgraduate studies (Table 2) in either Vocal Performance or Vocal
Pedagogy, while two had completed Education degrees and one a Master of Music Therapy. The
seven participants who had completed undergraduate music degrees (between 1993 and 2012)
from tertiary institutions “other than” University A were included in the sample as they were
202 International Journal of Music Education 36(2)

Table 1.  Participant undergraduate education.

Amount (n =) Institution Undergraduate degree Major

33 University A BMus 28 × Vocal Performance
1 × Classical Piano
3 × Performance and Vocal
Pedagogy
1 × Other
3 University A BMus Studies 1 × Performance and Vocal
Pedagogy
1 × Vocal Pedagogy and
Conducting
1 × “Other” (not specified)
1 University A BMus Studies (Honours) 1 x Vocal Pedagogy
3 University group B BMus 2 × Voice Performance
1 × Acoustic Environment
Composition
2 University group B BArts 1 × Music
1 × Drama
1 University C BArts Sociology
1 University D BPerf Arts Music Theatre
1 No undergraduate degree  
2 Did not respond  
Total = 47  
(100%)

Table 2.  Participants’ first postgraduate education experience.

Amount (n = 21) Institution Postgraduate degree title Type

4 University A Grad Dip of Music Studies Performance/Pedagogy
4 University A Grad Cert of Music Studies Performance/Pedagogy
1 University group B Grad Dip Ed Education
1 University group B Grad Dip L&T Education
10 University A Master of Music Studies Performance/Pedagogy
1 University group B Music Therapy Music Therapy
Total = 21 (44.68% of the  
total 47 participants)

identified as having completed a postgraduate program in Jazz/Contemporary Voice at University

A. Four of this group (n=7) had completed a Graduate Diploma of Music Studies, and three others
a Master of Music Studies. Five participants (N = 47) had completed a second postgraduate degree;
two of these were music focused and three were in education (see Table 3).

Graduates’ performance work

Forty participants responded to the item, Please select the type of performance that you are involved
in. Their responses revealed a wide variety of music-related work with many offering multiple
responses to a list of possible performance identities (Table 4).
Bartlett and Tolmie 203

Table 3.  Participants’ second postgraduate education experience.

Amount (n = 5) Institution Postgraduate degree name Type

1 University A Grad Cert Music Studies Performance/Pedagogy
2 University group B Grad Cert Language Education
(Adult Learning)
1 University group B Grad Dip Ed Education
1 University A Master of Music Studies Performance/Pedagogy
Total = 5 (10.64% of the  
total 47 participants)

Table 4.  Performance identity of survey participants.

Performance identity (multiple response) Participants

Band/gig vocalist 30
Recording vocalist/artist 14
Concert & touring vocalist/artist 8
Choral/vocal ensemble music performance 8
Community musical theatre performer 7
Session recording studio vocalist 6
Other 5
Professional music theatre performer 3
Professional jingles singer 1
Professional voice over artist 0

When comparing older to younger graduates, the data represented no differences in employ-
ment activity. Given the focus on jazz/contemporary performance study in their undergraduate
training, it was not unexpected that most participants described their performance identity as Band/
gig vocalist (Table 4). However, the high-ranking (n = 14) self-identification as Recording vocalist/
artist was surprising. Further research is needed to investigate singers’ perceptions of what it is to
be a recording artist.
In response to a question regarding their Performance styles, participants’ revealed engagement
with a wide variety of styles, with many offering multiple responses to the proffered list. Most were
engaged in performance of Jazz (62%), Classic pop (47%), Soul (38%), Top 40 pop (36%), and
R’n’B (36%) (see Table 5).
The multiple responses were not unexpected as both anecdotal commentary and research reports
in the literature (Bartlett, 2011; LoVetri, 2008) point to an audience demand for gig singers to per-
form across a wide range of styles in order to maintain a viable career in the CCM industry.

Jazz/Contemporary Voice graduate employment profiles

Under Australian industrial law, a full-time employed person will be paid to work, on average, 38
hours each week. Working conditions guarantee four weeks per annum paid holiday leave, sick leave,
and superannuation payments as components of the salary package. Casual, sessional, or part-time
contracts can be either verbal or written agreements where an employer engages a worker for a limited
or specified period. Employees are paid an hourly rate with no entitlements other than a reduced super-
annuation payment and employment can be terminated with little notice. In response to the question,
204 International Journal of Music Education 36(2)

Table 5.  Performance styles (multiple response).

Music style performed Response rate Percentage of cohort

Jazz 29 62
Classic pop 22 47
Soul 18 38
Top 40 pop 17 36
R’n’B 17 36
Folk 12 26
Rock 12 26
Musical theatre 12 26
Other 10 21
Funk 9 19
Motown 7 15
Gospel 7 15
Choral 7 15
Tribute bands 3 6
Electronic 1 2

Table 6.  Current employment status of participants.

Employment status Response Percentage

Casual or sessional 25 53.19
Part-time 11 23.40
Full-time 10 21.28
Unemployed 0 0.00
No response 1 2.13
Total 47 100

What is your current employment status, the majority of participants (77%) categorized themselves as
“casual,” “sessional,” or “part-time” employed. These descriptors indicate that participants were not in
permanent “full-time” employment at the time that they had completed the survey.
None of the participants stated that they were “unemployed” (Table 6).
Given their undergraduate and postgraduate music education, we sought to ascertain their rea-
soning around their diverse employment: If you are currently working in the music performance,
music education, singing teaching or arts industry, what is your reason for pursuing this type of
career? From a list of possible stimuli (concerning their sense of employment capability, diverse
employment opportunities, potential financial earnings, employment lifestyle, contribution to the
industry or society), 63% of this group (n = 41) chose, Doing what I love and feel passionate about.
Seven percent (n = 3) suggested it was a combination of the above list.
A subsequent question concerned the duration of participants’ music-related employment in
hours, Please select the estimated number of hours you participate in music related activity, paid
or unpaid work (see Table 7) with 53% of the participants in this group describing their employ-
ment as “Casual or sessional”. Interestingly, three participants declared themselves full-time yet
reported work of only one to 10 hours per week.
Although the age range per category is broad overall, the median age is consistently young (see
Table 7) with 30 participants aged between 23 to 29 years (N = 47). This is not unexpected given
Bartlett and Tolmie 205

Table 7.  Employment profile.

Self assessed levels N/A 30–40 20–30 15–20 10–15 1–10 Total
of employment (n = 3) hours/week hours/week hours/week hours/week hours/week N = 47
(n = 11) (n = 13) (n = 5) (n = 9) (n = 6)
Full-time 5 1 1 (non- 0 3 (3 non- 10
(22.72% of 44) music) music)
Part-time 2 5 0 3 (1 non- 1 11
(25% of 44) music)
Casual or sessional 4 7 (1 non- 4 (2 non- 6 (3 non- 2 (1 non- 23
(52.27% of 44) music) music) music) music)
% of total (47) 6.38 23.40 27.66 10.64 19.15 12.77 100%
% of 44 25 29.55 11.36 20.45 13.64 100%
Age range (years) 24–50 23–34 23–27 24–46 25–37  
Mean age (years) 31.63 27.31 23.8 32.4 30.5  
Median age (years) 26 23/34 23 24 25/37  

Table 8.  Hours of music industry employment (weekly).

Hours per week Participant pesponse Percentage of participants

0 hours 0 0.00
1–10 hours 6 12.77
10–15 hours 9 19.15
15–20 hours 5 10.64
20–30 hours 13 27.66
30–40 hours 11 23.40
No response 3 6.38
Total 47 100

that, within the target population, the majority of participants were graduates from a cohort of
undergraduate degree students. The mean age does not represent any particular pattern; this could
be attributed to the adequate, yet relatively small sample.
Thirty-five participants (N = 47) regarded themselves as “music industry performance active”
with zero to nine concurrent music identities contributing to their portfolio of work. Over half
(51%) of the participants were actively employed in the field of music performance citing either
20–30 hours (27.66%) or 30–40 hours (23.40%) of work per week (see Table 8).

Non-performance music work

We were interested to know to what extent graduates’ performance work was supplemented by
non-music related “day jobs.” The raw data revealed a diversity of such employment including:
retail, administration, teaching, hospitality, and legal work. However, most participants (77%)
reported their other than performance work as “music teacher” (see Table 9) with one-to-one stu-
dio teaching as the most common teaching environment.
This group reported concurrent participation in up to four teaching jobs (see Table 10) with
private voice teacher occurring in a number of environments.
Thirty percent of participants (n = 14) responded to specific questions concerning engagement
in arts administration work, reporting one to three concurrent administration roles. Highest response
in this group was for choral director (see Table 11).
206 International Journal of Music Education 36(2)

Table 9.  Teaching or music/performing arts health industry engagement.

Teacher and/or music Response Percentage

performing arts health?
Yes 36 76.60
No 8 17.02
No response 3 6.38
Total 47 100

Table 10.  Specific teaching career engagement.

Type of teaching (multiple response) Response

Studio—private voice teacher 25
School—private voice teacher 17
Other 7
Tertiary—private voice teacher one-to-one 6
School—private music theory teacher 5
Tertiary—voice lecturer 3
Music therapy 2
Tertiary—music lecturer 1
School—classroom music teacher 1

Table 11.  Arts administration roles of jazz/contemporary vocal musicians.

Music production/arts management identity Multiple response

Choral director 10
Music/art administration 6
Musical director 5
Music management 2
Record label management 1
Venue administration 1
Live sound production 0
Studio sound production 0
Venue management 0
Record producer 0

Unpaid music engagement

From a formatted list, participants were asked to estimate the number of hours of unpaid
involvement in music per week (see Table 12). Eleven participants responded to this question
(N = 47) indicating their unpaid work was focused in community-based choir and music thea-
tre performance (these figures were similar to the responses for “administration roles”
encountered in Table 11). Nine additional participants described their work in the category
“other,” categorizing their unpaid work in a range of activities including “church band,”
“administration,” “composition,” “practice,” “recording,” “rehearsal,” and “lack of income
from originals band.”
Bartlett and Tolmie 207

Table 12.  Unpaid music engagement.

Category 0 hours 1–3 hours 3–5 hours 5–10 hours 10–15 hours 15+ hours
Community choir 8 8 3 0 0 0
Community musical Theatre 10 1 0 3 2 2
Helping at local schools 11 0 0 0 0 0
Internships 13 0 0 0 0 0
Music/singing volunteer 9 6 0 1 0 0
Other 3 0 0 0 0 0

Summary of findings
Participants’ data revealed an engagement in a broad portfolio of work soon after graduation. Three
out of four remained engaged with performance at some level—an excellent outcome for a popula-
tion of music graduates from a single Australian university. That stated, we are aware that partici-
pants in our sample (N = 47) might represent those satisfied musicians who were willing to report
their successes post-graduation; a broader study with a larger pool of participants recruited from a
range of music schools may suggest otherwise.
Across the sample, 75% (n = 35) regarded themselves as “music industry performance active”
with zero to nine concurrent music identities contributing to their portfolio of work. While 28%
reported high levels of employment post-graduation and described themselves as “full-time”
employed, it is noted that this was not necessarily in full-time music-based performance employ-
ment. For the majority, their performance-related employment was mostly casual or sessional with
non-performance and/or non-music related work completing their portfolio of work. For example,
multiple response rates to the list of Teaching Types (see Table 10) indicate a complex portfolio of
“part-time/casual” employment for this particular population of performance study graduates.
These findings coalesce with reports of musicians’ portfolio careers found in the literature (Bartleet
et al., 2012; Bennett, 2012; Cunningham et al., 2010) and point to a lack of linear careers for those
graduates (of tertiary music programs) who aspire to have performance as their primary focus.
The study revealed a concentration of participants in a metropolitan area (Fig. 1) up to 12 years
post-graduation. This phenomenon is most probably due to strong music-based networks formed
by participants during the years of their undergraduate studies. From our extensive professional
performance backgrounds, we can report that musicians’ employment opportunities (in both per-
formance and non-performance environments) often present through pre-formed peer networks,
word of mouth recommendations, and familiarity with a local environment that could be described
as “vibrant and sustainable arts and cultural” (Arts Queensland, 2016). Our findings coalesce with
reports in the literature (Berliner, 2009; Dempsey, 2008; Florida et al., 2010; MacLeod, 1993).
As noted earlier, there was a higher than expected response rate to the category of Recording
artist (see Table 4). This result could be reflective of self-categorization by six participants as ses-
sional/recording studio vocalist and one as professional jingles singer (Question 12 of the survey).
It may also reflect participants’ increased accessibility to technology for online dissemination of
self-designed video and audio recordings. However, our emic knowledge of the field leads us to
suspect that the singer participants who responded may have attributed Recording vocalist/artist to
include their recording of demos (digital recordings uploaded to their websites to secure gig work
and/or hardcopy CD recordings for promotional sale at gig performances). The much lower
response to the Concert & touring vocalist/artist category lends support to this opinion as it could
be expected that a Recording vocalist/artist would need to engage in promotional touring activities
208 International Journal of Music Education 36(2)

to launch and/or sustain a professional career. We suggest that more in-depth research is needed to
investigate this area of performance identity.

Discussion
While some researchers suggest that graduate employment in the arts possesses value beyond the
economic (Pinheiro & Dowd, 2009), others clearly believe that the unpredictable nature of the
performing arts industry and resultant financial instability, maneuvers many musicians toward
portfolio careers (Cunningham et al., 2010; Florida et al., 2010). Given the findings of this current
study and the prevailing views in the literature that portfolio careers have become the norm rather
than the exception, we propose that through the inclusion of associated, work-integrated learning
courses students might be better prepared to meet the challenges of the modern music industry; that
is, the diversity of work within a music-based portfolio career. While we are aware that some ter-
tiary institutions have responded to this need in the form of vocation preparation strands, the time
and budget constraints faced by many may be limiting coursework to a primarily theoretical
activity.
Through analysis of the collected data we have been able to build a general profile of Jazz/
Contemporary Voice graduates from one Australian university that might be of some relevance to
similar programs in and beyond the Australian context. The profile is as follows: A female singer
equipped with performance and/or pedagogy tertiary training residing in a metropolitan location
close to tertiary education networks leading a peripatetic teaching career while remaining passion-
ately engaged in music performance through band/gig activities. Unpaid music activity is centered
on community choir and music theatre involvement, where developed arts administration skills are
transferrable and used in both paid/unpaid work environments.
While at first glance “non-music” paid employment appears unrelated to music education, it
could be argued that the skills acquired through tertiary training equip graduate singers with the
organization and planning capabilities required to manage such work within their portfolio careers.
Additionally, transferable skills such as clear communication and group management/engagement
could be beneficial in the most common work environments undertaken by musicians (e.g., teach-
ing, hospitality, retail, and administration). This is another aspect of the current research that might
be further investigated with a larger population via interviews and life-story analysis.

Conclusion
Although no degree program entry data were collected, from a constructivist viewpoint the ongo-
ing music performance activities of this group of singing voice graduates (in some cases, many
years’ post-graduation) suggests that their tertiary music training equipped, enabled, and/or encour-
aged a career engagement with music performance in some form.
The constructivist explanation presents one viable interpretation of the connection between
graduate outcomes (i.e., employment in the music industry) and training. As previously suggested,
a broader research project is needed to fully investigate graduate outcomes for tertiary trained jazz/
contemporary singers; however, we believe that the data reported in this pilot study are more
detailed around this specific group of Australian jazz/contemporary voice graduates from one uni-
versity than any found in existing census reports or in the literature of the field to date.

Funding
This research received funding from the Queensland Conservatorium Research Centre
Bartlett and Tolmie 209

References
Arts Queensland. (2016). Arts Queensland:About-us. Retrieved from http://www.arts.qld.gov.au/about-us
Bartleet, B. L. (2008). Sound links: exploring the social, cultural and educational dynamics of musical com-
munities in Australia. International Journal of Community Music, 1(3), 333–354.
Bartleet, B.-L., Bennett, D., Bridgstock, R., Draper, P., Harrison, S., & Schippers, H. (2012). Preparing for
portfolio careers in Australian music: setting a research agenda. Australian Journal of Music Education,
1, 32–41.
Bartlett, I. (2010). One size doesn’t fit all: tailored training for contemporary commercial singers. In S.
Harrison (Ed.), Perspectives on teaching singing: Australian vocal pedagogues sing their voices
(pp. 227–243). Bowen Hills, Australia: Australian Academic Press.
Bartlett, I. (2011). Sing out loud, sing out long: a profile of professional contemporary singers in the Australian
context (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). LAP Lambert, Saarbrücken, Germany
Baruch, Y. (1999). Response rates in academic studies: a comparative analysis. Human Relations, 52(4),
421–434.
Bennett, D. (2008). A gendered study of the working patterns of classical musicians: implications for practice.
International Journal of Music Education, 26(1), 89–100. doi:10.1177/0255761407085925
Bennett, D. (Ed.). (2012). Life in the real world: how to make music graduates employable. Champaigne,
Illinois: Common Ground.
Bennett, D., & Stanberg, A. (2006). Musicians as teachers: developing a positive view through col-
laborative learning partnerships. International Journal of Music Education, 24(3), 219–230.
doi:10.1177/0255761406069646
Berliner, P. F. (2009). Thinking in jazz: The infinite art of improvisation. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Bridgstock, R. (2011, Winter). Making it creatively: building sustainable careers in the arts and creative
industries. Australian Career Practitioner Magazine, 22, 11–13.
Chandler, K. (2014). Teaching popular music styles. In S. Harrison & J. O’Bryan (Eds.), Teaching singing in
the 21st century (pp. 35–52). Dordrecht: Springer.
Cherryholmes, C. H. (1992). Notes on pragmatism and scientific realism. Educational researcher, 21(6),
13–17.
Coetzee, M. (2014). Measuring student graduateness: reliability and construct validity of the graduate skills
and attributes scale. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(5), 887–902.
Comunian, R., Faggian, A., & Li, Q. C. (2009). Unrewarded careers in the creative class: the strange case of
bohemian graduates. Regional Science, 89(2), 389–411.
Cranmer, S. (2007). Enhancing graduate employability: best intentions and mixed outcomes. Studies in
Higher Education, 31(2), 169–184.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cunningham, S., & Higgs, P. (2009). Measuring creative employment: implications for innovation policy.
Innovation: management, policy and practice, 11(2), 190–200.
Cunningham, S., Higgs, P., Freebody, S., & Anderson, P. (2010). What’s your other job? A census analysis
of arts employment in Australia. Sydney: Australia Council.
Dempsey, N. P. (2008). Hook-ups and train wrecks: contextual parameters and the coordination of jazz inter-
actions. Symbolic interaction, 31(1), 57–75.
Draper, P. (2008). Music two-point-zero: Music, technology and digital independence. Journal of Music
Technology and Education, 1(2), 137–152
Florida, R., Mellander, C., & Stolarick, K. (2010). Music scenes to music clusters: the economic geography
of music in the US, 1970–2000. Environment and planning, 42(4), 785.
Graduate Destinations 2012: The report of the Graduate Destination Survey. (2012). Parkville: Graduate
Careers Council of Australia.
Heckathorn, D. D., & Jeffri, J. (2001). Finding the beat: using respondent-driven sampling to study jazz musi-
cians. Poetics, 28, 307–329.
210 International Journal of Music Education 36(2)

In support of contemporary commercial music (non classical) voice pedagogy—The American Academy of
the Teachers of Singing. (2008). Journal of Voice, 65(1), 7–10.
LoVetri, J. (2008). Contemporary commercial music. Journal of Voice, 22(3), 260–262.
MacLeod, B. A. (1993). Club date musicians: playing the New York party circuit. Urbana, IL: University of
Illinois Press.
Meyer, D., & Edwards, M. (2014). The future of collegiate voice pedagogy: SWOT analysis of current prac-
tice and implications for the next generation. Journal of Singing, 70(4), 437–444.
Mills, J. (2004). Working in music: Becoming a performer-teacher. Music Education Research, 6(3), 245-261.
Murphy, J. P. (1990). Pragmatism: from Peirce to Davidson. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Musician. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com
Nulty, D. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be done?
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 301–314.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Perrone, L., & Vickers, M. H. (2003). Life after graduation as a “very uncomfortable world”: an Australian
case study. Education+Training, 45(2), 69–78.
Phillips, S. L. (2013). Beyond sound: the college and career guide in music technology. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Pinheiro, D. L., & Dowd, T. J. (2009). All that jazz: the success of jazz musicians in three metropolitan areas.
Poetics, 37(5–6), 490–506.
Portfolio career. (2016a). In Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved from http://dictionary.cambridge.org/diction-
ary/english/portfolio-career?q=portfolio+careers
Portfolio career. (2016b). Retrieved from http://Dictionary.com
Purcell, K., Wilton, N., & Elias, P. (2007). Hard lessons for lifelong learners? Age and experience in the
graduate labour market. Higher Education Quarterly, 61(1), 57–82.
Rorty, R. (1990). Pragmatism as anti-representationalism. In J. P. Murphy (Ed.), Pragmatism: from Pierce to
Davidson. (pp. 1–6). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Shively, J. (2015). Constructivism in music education. Arts Education Policy Review, 116(3), 128–136. doi:
10.1080/10632913.2015.1011815
Sue, V., & Ritter, L. (2007). Conducting online surveys. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Times. (2004, 17 December). Survey a flop, say heads. Times Higher Education Supplement. Retrieved from
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/survey-a-flop-say-heads/193084.article
Tomlinson, M. (2007). Graduate employability and student attitudes and orientations to the labour market.
Journal of Education and Work, 20(4), 285–304.
Tuten, T. L. (2010). Conducting online surveys. In S. D. Gosling & J. A. Johnson (Eds.), Advanced methods
for conducting online behavioral research (pp. 179–192). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.

Appendix A: Survey tool

1. What is your date of birth?

2. Please select your gender?

3. Please list your current residential location?

4. Which undergraduate degree did you complete at the Queensland Conservatorium Griffith
University? Please note: If you did not graduate from an undergraduate program at the QCGU
please CONTINUE answering this survey, there are relative questions to your study pathway.

-   Bachelor of Music
-   Bachelor of Music (Honours)
Bartlett and Tolmie 211

-   Bachelor of Music Studies

-   Bachelor of Music Studies (Honours)
-   None - I did not complete an undergraduate degree at the Queensland Conservatorium
Griffith University

5. What was your major in your undergraduate course at the Queensland Conservatorium
Griffith University?

-  Performance
-  Performance and Vocal Pedagogy
-  Vocal Pedagogy
-  Vocal Pedagogy and Conducting
-  Musicology
-  Composition
-  Other
-  None–I did not complete my undergraduate degree at the Queensland Conservatorium
Griffith University

6. What year did you graduate from your undergraduate course at the Queensland
Conservatorium Griffith University? [Comment box followed.]

7. If you did not complete your undergraduate degree at the Queensland Conservatorium
Griffith University, please provide the following details of your completed undergraduate
degree.

8. Have you since graduated from a postgraduate degree program? If so, please provide the
following details of your completed postgraduate study. [Comment box followed.]

9. What is your current employment status?

-  Unemployed
-  Casual or sessional
-  Part-time
-  Full-time

10. Please select the estimated number of hours you participate in music related activity, paid
or unpaid work:

-  0 hours
-  1–10 hours
-  10-15 hours
-  15–20 hours
-  20–30 hours
-  30–40 hours

11. Does your occupation fit within the Australian or international music performance indus-
try? (Yes/No)
212 International Journal of Music Education 36(2)

12. If you responded with yes to Question 11, please select the type of performance you are involved
in (multiple select): If you responded with No to Question 13, move onto Question 16.

-  Recording vocalist/artist
-  Concert and touring vocalist/artist
-  Professional musical theatre performer
-  Band/gig vocalist
-  Sessional recording studio vocalist
-  Professional jingles singer
-  Professional voice over artist
-  Choral/vocal music ensemble performer
-  Community musical theatre performer
-  Other (please specify)

13. What style(s) of music are you currently performing/singing? (multiple select)

-  Classic Pop
-  Top 40 Pop
-  Folk
-  Rock
-  R’n’B
-  Soul
-  Funk
-  Electronic
-  Dance/House
-  Jazz
-  Motown
-  Tribute bands
-  Musical Theatre
-  Gospel
-  Choral
-  Other (please specify)

14. Does your non-performance work fit within the music production or the arts management
sector? (Yes/No)

15. If you responded with yes to Question 14, please select the type of production or adminis-
tration work you are involved in (multiple select): If you responded with No to Question
16, move onto Question 18.

-  Musical Director
-  Choral Director
-  Music/Art Administration
-  Live Sound Production
-  Music Management
-  Venue Management
-  Record Producer
-  Record Label Management
-  Other (please specify)
Bartlett and Tolmie 213

16. Does your occupation work within the teaching sector or music/performing arts health
industry? (Yes/No)

17. If you responded with yes to Question 16, please select the type of teaching or performing
arts health work you are involved in (multiple select): If you responded with No to Question
18, move onto Question 20.

-  Tertiary: Private Voice Teacher

-  Tertiary: Pedagogy Lecturer
-  Tertiary: Voice Lecturer
-  Tertiary: Music Lecturer
-  School: Private Voice Teacher
-  Studio: Private Voice Teacher
-  School: Private Music Theory Teacher
-  School: Classroom Music Teacher
-  Head of Performing Arts (School)
-  Head of Voice (Tertiary)
-  Music Therapy
-  Voice Therapy
-  Other (Please specify)

18. If you are currently working in the music performance, music education, singing teaching
or arts industry, what is your reason for pursuing this type of career?

-  Talent/aptitude in the area of music and singing

-  Doing what I love and feel passionate about pursuing as a career
-  Many job opportunities in the arts industry
-  Financial reasons (e.g., potential for significant earnings)
-  Lifestyle reasons (e.g., maintaining a work-life balance)
-  I want to contribute to the creative discipline of music
-  I want to contribute to society via the creative discipline of music
-  Other (Please specify)

19. In addition to your performance work, do you have a day job that is not music related? (Yes/
No/If yes please state the type or work)

20. If you are no longer involved in the music performance, music education, singing teaching
or arts industry, do you have a reason for not pursuing this career?

-  Too hard
-  Not financially viable
-  Lost interest in music and/or singing
-  Do not have the ambition or drive to continue in the industry
-  Family
-  None of the above, I still work in the music industry

21. In the last 12 months, what (if any) singing or music related formal education or training have
you undertaken outside a university (eg., masterclasses, short courses, private lessons)?
214 International Journal of Music Education 36(2)

22. How many music industry events have you attended in the past:

-  Year
-  Two years
-  Five years
-  Ten years

23. Please select what type of music industry event(s) you have attended (multiple select):

-  Networking nights
-  Music industry conference
-  Pedagogy conference
-  Music Teacher’s conference
-  Singing Teacher’s conference
-  Other (please specify)

24. Please list your last five occupations from your most recent occupation: OCCUPATION 1:

-  Studio or School: Private voice teacher

-  Gigging/band vocalist
-  Vocalist—professional
-  Vocalist—semi-professional
-  Tertiary—private voice teacher
-  Tertiary—voice lecturer
-  Classroom Music teacher
-  Choral Director
-  Professional Musical Theatre Performer
-  Sessional Recording Studio Vocalist
-  Professional Jingles Singer
-  Professional Voice Over Artist
-  Head of Performing Arts (School)
-  Musical Director
-  Other

25. OCCUPATION 2:

-  Studio or School: Private voice teacher

-  Gigging/band vocalist
-  Vocalist—professional
-  Vocalist—semi-professional
-  Tertiary—private voice teacher
-  Tertiary—voice lecturer
-  Classroom Music teacher
-  Choral Director
-  Professional Musical Theatre Performer
-  Sessional Recording Studio Vocalist
-  Professional Jingles Singer
-  Professional Voice Over Artist
Bartlett and Tolmie 215

-   Head of Performing Arts (School)

-   Musical Director
-   Other

26. OCCUPATION 3:

-  Studio or School: Private voice teacher

-  Gigging/band vocalist
-  Vocalist—professional
-  Vocalist—semi-professional
-  Tertiary—private voice teacher
-  Tertiary—voice lecturer
-  Classroom Music teacher
-  Choral Director
-  Professional Musical Theatre Performer
-  Sessional Recording Studio Vocalist
-  Professional Jingles Singer
-  Professional Voice Over Artist
-  Head of Performing Arts (School)
-  Musical Director
-  Other

27. OCCUPATION 4:

-  Studio or School: Private voice teacher

-  Gigging/band vocalist
-  Vocalist—professional
-  Vocalist—semi-professional
-  Tertiary—private voice teacher
-  Tertiary—voice lecturer
-  Classroom Music teacher
-  Choral Director
-  Professional Musical Theatre Performer
-  Sessional Recording Studio Vocalist
-  Professional Jingles Singer
-  Professional Voice Over Artist
-  Head of Performing Arts (School)
-  Musical Director
-  Other

28. OCCUPATION 5:

-  Studio or School: Private voice teacher

-  Gigging/band vocalist
-  Vocalist—professional
-  Vocalist—semi-professional
-  Tertiary—private voice teacher
-  Tertiary—voice lecturer
216 International Journal of Music Education 36(2)

-  Classroom Music teacher

-  Choral Director
-  Professional Musical Theatre Performer
-  Sessional Recording Studio Vocalist
-  Professional Jingles Singer
-  Professional Voice Over Artist
-  Head of Performing Arts (School)
-  Musical Director
-  Other

29. Since graduating from your singing degree, have you spent time out of the workforce? If
you have selected no, please move onto question 33. (Yes/No)

30. How long were you out of the music workforce during the most recent occasion?

31. What strategies have you used to find work in the music industry (multiple select)?

-  Phone call
-  Networking within your circle of musician contacts
-  Networking within your circle of colleagues
-  Online job search websites
-  Arts/music industry websites—job advertisements
-  Newspaper classifieds
-  Local advertisement boards
-  Other (please specify)

32. Approximately how much unpaid music work are you involved in per week? (0 hours/1 to
3 hours/3 to 5 hours/5 to 10 hours/10 to 15 hours/15+ hours/ Other (please specify))

-  Community Choir
-  Community Musical Theatre
-  Helping at Local Schools
-  Internships
-  Volunteer work that is music/singing related
-  Other

33. Do you feel that your voice degree prepared you well for working in the music and per-
forming arts industry? (Yes/No)

34. I am satisfied with the success I have achieved in my career since graduating from the
Queensland Conservatorium Griffith University. (Agree/Disagree)

35. Please provide any further information or feedback about your time studying jazz and/or
contemporary voice at the Queensland Conservatorium Griffith University.