Music Education Research

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cmue20

Twists, turns and thrills during COVID-19: music

teaching and practice in Australia

Dawn Joseph & Lucy Lennox

To cite this article: Dawn Joseph & Lucy Lennox (2021) Twists, turns and thrills during COVID-19:
music teaching and practice in Australia, Music Education Research, 23:2, 241-255, DOI:
10.1080/14613808.2021.1906852

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2021.1906852

Published online: 30 Mar 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 170

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cmue20
MUSIC EDUCATION RESEARCH
2021, VOL. 23, NO. 2, 241–255
https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2021.1906852

Twists, turns and thrills during COVID-19: music teaching and

practice in Australia
a
Dawn Joseph and Lucy Lennoxb
a
Faculty of Arts and Education, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia; bMilgate Primary School, Doncaster East,
Australia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The global pandemic crisis has significantly affected music educators Received 20 October 2020
around the world. In Australia, higher education institutes and schools Accepted 17 March 2021
had to swiftly move from face-to-face teaching to online classes. The
KEYWORDS
authors draw on narrative reflection to show key challenges and Music education; narrative
opportunities that have affected their teaching in Melbourne. Author inquiry; online learning;
one (Dawn) works in initial teacher education programmes as a tertiary primary school; teacher
music educator, and Author two (Lucy) works as a music specialist at a education; wellbeing
primary school. In this paper, we highlight some twists, turns, and thrills
of teaching during COVID-19, focusing on two themes: changing our
practice and making connections. We argue that the digital turn has
opened opportunities to refresh, reset, and renew our ways of practice
which may resonate with other educators across educational settings.

Introduction
The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak a
global pandemic on 11 March 2020 (WHO 2020). The pandemic caused unprecedented disruption
to all aspects of life across the globe, including the education sector. This research is situated in Aus-
tralia, where the impact of COVID-19 has severely affected Australian universities, schools and the
broader education industry (Crawford et al. 2020). As in many places in the world, the Australian
education sector has had to respond to government guidelines and regulations in relation to the
outbreak of the pandemic (Pather et al. 2020). According to Scull et al. (2020, 2) ‘universities
and schools, classified as non-essential services, were closed throughout the country, albeit at
slightly different times’. Measures of homeschooling, social distancing and keeping isolated became
the new normal as all face-to-face (F2F) teaching moved online in a matter of weeks in March 2020
(Torda 2020).
Teachers (fulltime and casual/sessional) both at higher education institutes, and at schools (gov-
ernment and independent) had to move suddenly from F2F teaching to online (remote) teaching.
Allen, Rowan, and Singh (2020, 233), writing specifically about Australia, rightly point out that
many universities were already established in offering online and ‘mixed modes of course delivery’
whereas for those working at schools, ‘the move to the online space is presenting considerable hard-
ship as teachers struggle to adapt to what might well be the “new normal” for quite a period of time’.
Teachers rapidly upskilled by undertaking professional learning workshops and were mentored by
colleagues using a range of platforms (such as Kultura, Blackboard Collaborate, Zoom, Microsoft

CONTACT Dawn Joseph djoseph@deakin.edu.au Faculty of Arts and Education, Deakin University, 221 Burwood
Highway, Burwood 3125, Victoria, Australia
© 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
242 D. JOSEPH AND L. LENNOX

Teams and SeeSaw) that enabled synchronous or asynchronous teaching (Torda 2020). Some of the
programmes were not conducive to delivering synchronous teaching, and the
effectiveness of these tools in music teaching has also been further hindered by the quality of internet and built
facilities in staff and student homes, as well as the access to tools such as instruments, computers, micro-
phones, and quality headphones. (Hope 2020)

About the authors

At the time of writing this paper, we (authors) were in strict lockdown in Melbourne. We each
taught from our homes, and were only allowed out for essential work, health, care or safety reasons.
There was a one-hour allowance for shopping or exercise and no visitors were permitted into our
homes (Victorian Government 2020). Dawn (author one) is a tertiary music educator, working in
initial teacher education (ITE) programmes at a metropolitan university in Melbourne since 2001.
Lucy (author two) completed a Master of Education program in 2016 and is an early career teacher
(music specialist) working at a government primary school in metropolitan Melbourne since 2017.
In this paper, we employ a narrative approach to show how we interpreted our experience and to
tell our ‘lived story’ (Clandinin and Connelly 2000).
Through email communication, telephone conversations and Zoom meetings, we shared some
of the practical implications of music teaching during COVID-19 in our respective spaces. In this
paper, we reflect on our practice (Schön 1983) as music educators. Teaching music online presented
various challenges for instrumental teachers. Preparing and presenting ensemble work was difficult,
something that other teaching and learning areas may not have encountered (Hope 2020). We
found replicating F2F teaching online using technology a challenge. We discuss some of the changes
in our practice which offered us the opportunity to re-image and transform our teaching in our
respective settings. The research question that drove this paper is: how can we effectively teach
our students music during the pandemic, as we work from home? Drawing on some theoretical per-
spectives on situated learning theory, technology in music and wellbeing we highlight some of the
twists, turns and thrills in relation to online music teaching and learning from a new informal learn-
ing environment called home.

Theoretical perspectives
Situated learning
Humans are social beings, they learn in community, interacting and engaging with others through
shared activities as they construct knowledge that is linked to the activity, context and culture
(Aydede and Robbins 2009; Brown, Collins, and Duguid 1989). Learning is social and not isolated;
it is co-operative and fosters ways for learners to engage with others (Merrick 2020). In this way
situated learning takes place through collaboration and social interaction with others (Lave and
Wenger 1990). Hence, teachers become involved in a community of practice that is located in
time and space (Wenger 1998). Music learning in particular is socially situated; student and teacher
co-construct new knowledge and skills as a social practice. Mutual engagement is an essential com-
ponent of any practice (Wenger 1998). While situated learning environments may relate to school-
based practical learning (Dullea 2017; Kirk and Macdonald 1998), the context of the learning and
implicit knowledge is important when teaching in informal spaces (Wright and Kanellopoulos
2010). Kenny (2014, 396) found ‘shared leadership, problem solving, roles assumed, participation
and enjoyment all help to characterise the process of building a “community of musical practice”’.
Using technology as a social medium has offered educators opportunities to share teaching and
learning material; it has also offered students a space to share files, work in chat rooms and on mess-
age boards (Hinduja and Ingram 2009). All online interaction as a community of learners and prac-
titioners requires appropriate netiquette (Hines 2000; Waldron 2009). The turn in the use of
 MUSIC EDUCATION RESEARCH 243

technology during COVID-19 has allowed for ‘resources, lesson plans and technical advice’ to be
‘shared via social networks, professional organisations and through college or groups’ (Arney
2020, 2). Teaching and learning in the online space using technologies open up opportunities to
be creative ‘where communication and interaction can take both real-world and virtual forms’ (Bur-
nard 2007, 43). When preparing ITE students for future classrooms in Australia and when teaching
music at schools, music educators draw on the Victorian music curriculum to include digital tech-
nologies as a guide to teaching music (VCAA 2020a, 2020c).

Technology in music teaching

Technology has shifted the way educators work and the way they undertake their work (Armstrong
2011). Technology has offered opportunities in formal and informal learning settings to enhance
music experiences (Burnard 2007; Crawford 2017; Folkestad 2006). It is deeply embedded in the
lives of children, enhancing their musical understanding (Lum 2008). Rudolph and Frankel
(2009) identify that the use of technology allows opportunities for all students to have a chance
in music education, especially those living in low socio-economic areas who cannot afford a
music teacher/instructor. While online digital opportunities provide ‘many possibilities of music
teaching, music learning and ways of musicking’, one has to be mindful of privacy issues (Kruse
and Veblen 2012, 80).
Research has shown that ‘both teachers and learners use these [technology] tools to manage their
own learning, creating opportunities for the making, creating, receiving and producing of music’
(Burnard 2007, 38). Through a range of platforms and web-based facilities developed over time,
teachers can engage in synchronous and asynchronous teaching (Allen and Seaman 2013; Bowman
2014). Lum (2008, 115) encourages music educators to keep abreast with ‘current goings-on in the
media lives of their pupils, asking and talking to them about their favourite pop singers/songs, CDs,
cartoons, or radio programs’. This he argues enhances their interest in music and promotes per-
formance in the classroom.
Through the use of technology, social interventions and innovation are progressively becoming
part of instructional practice (Hakkarainen 2009). Using multimodal technology in the music class-
room has afforded a change and opportunity to have access to global resources where teaching and
learning has shifted from teacher to student-centred learning (Webb 2007; Wise, Greenwood, and
Davis 2011). The use of technologies such as Zoom, Skype and YouTube in the classroom has
offered students the opportunity to meet and work with professional instrumentalists, experts in
the field, and culture bearers (Brändström, Wiklund, and Lundström 2012; Joseph, Nethsinghe,
and Cabedo-Mas 2018; Kruse and Veblen 2012). In this way, both teachers and students have
the chance to augment their collaborative learning engagement and experience at low cost in
schools and at higher education institutes (Joseph, Nethsinghe, and Cabedo-Mas 2018; Olson 2010).
Whilst online digital music experiences need to include online platforms, there is still a need for
additional research on online learning in music (Bowman 2014; Gray 2017). Online learning should
take into consideration transformative critical pedagogy that includes repetition and embodied
experiences (Kellner and Kim 2010; Kruse and Veblen 2012).

Wellbeing
Wellbeing is a general concept, more broadly referred to as hedonic (happiness) and eudaimonic
(human potential and self-realisation) (Ryan and Deci 2001). Whilst it is beyond the scope of
this paper to explore wellbeing in depth, the pandemic has had considerable impact on the arts
(music). Working from home can be stressful for staff (Gautam and Sharma 2020). Research in
arts has shown that music positively contributes to health and wellbeing (MacDonald, Kreutz,
and Mitchell 2012). Wellbeing is primarily concerned with emotional, psychological and social
dimensions that contribute to positive emotions and satisfaction (Ascenso et al. 2018; Ryff and
244 D. JOSEPH AND L. LENNOX

Keyes 1995). Maintaining a sense of positive emotions, engagement, relationships and accomplish-
ments contributes to wellbeing (Seligman 2011).
In teaching and learning environments, it is the social involvement, integration, acceptance and
coherence that positively contribute to wellbeing (Keyes 1998). Social and emotional wellbeing in
education settings focus on building confidence in students, providing opportunities for them to
work with others, giving them the chance to problem solve and have autonomy, all of which fosters
good relations (Watson and Emery 2012). Research shows that being part of a community of lear-
ners helps minimise feelings of isolation and increases feelings of connectedness to others (Hart,
Stewart, and Jimerson 2011; Shackelford and Maxwell 2012).
Studies in music have shown that music interventions contribute positively to wellbeing (Clift
et al. 2010; Creech et al. 2014; Maschi, MacMillan, and Viola 2013). Connecting with others through
music and being actively involved through workshops and through an embodied practice, offers
participants a sense of wellbeing (Aked and Thompson 2011). Similarly, having a ‘healthy passion
(harmonious passion) toward music is more likely to relate to a greater sense of well-being’ (Bon-
neville-Roussy, Hruska, and Trower 2020, 100).

Methodology
This paper forms part of Dawn’s wider project Promoting relationships through sound in formal and
informal settings (2018–2022) where ethical approval was granted from the Deakin University
Human Ethics Advisory Group to undertake the project. This qualitative case study (Grossoehme
2014; Stake 1995) focuses on the ‘lived experience’ of the authors teaching music education during
the pandemic in 2020. As a qualitative method, Yin (2009) points out that educational case study
methodology allows for a limited number of individuals as the subjects of the study. In this case, the
voice of the authors provides an opportunity to be heard regarding the phenomenon under study
(Creswell and Poth 2016). Merriam (1998) notes that case studies can be particularistic, descriptive
and heuristic as they reflect on human experiences (Stake 2000). According to Denzin and Lincoln
(2000, 3) qualitative research involves case study, personal experiences and interviews as they
‘describe routine and problematic moments and meanings in individuals’ lives’.
As qualitative researchers, we were interested in understanding how we interpret our experi-
ences at our different workplaces and make meaning of them through having dialogue (Merriam
1998). As narrative researchers, we reflected on our teaching and learning experiences to under-
stand our actions and to improve our practice (Brookfield 1995; Imel 2000; Joseph and Johnson
2020; Thiel 1999). Employing narrative inquiry enables us to tell our story as ‘both phenomenon
and method’ where phenomenon is the ‘story’ and inquiry is the ‘narrative’ (Connelly and Clandi-
nin 1990, 2). Our narrative helped us create meaning around our practice as we each worked in
isolation at our respective workplaces. Narratives may be seen as a means of gaining ‘an in-
depth understanding of the situation and meaning for those involved’ Merriam (1998, 19). As
reflective practitioners, we had interactive conversations in 2020 about teaching as it forms an
important component of our professional practice (Russell 2005; Schön 1983).
Dawn stayed in contact with Lucy a recent post-graduate from the university. In 2019, Lucy read
the Plain Language Statement outlining the wider study and consented to participate in the
research. In 2020, Dawn contacted Lucy as a follow up to her study. For this paper, Dawn draws
on 2020 data regarding Lucy. Since mid-March 2020 we communicated fortnightly through tele-
phone, email and Zoom to talk through some of the experiences we had encountered, by document-
ing tacit events. We discussed the highs and lows by asking each other questions such as: What was
something exciting you did in music this week? What did you feel worked well in the planning and
what actually happened for you and the students? What was challenging in terms of ICT? How are
you coping with your workload? Do you find time to balance work and life? Dawn was keen to learn
from Lucy who was at the frontline of teaching from home and intermittently from school with
primary students. Lucy’s ideas were insightful for Dawn to forward plan with sessionals in ITE
 MUSIC EDUCATION RESEARCH 245

programmes. Through discussion we were reflective about our what, how and why of teaching. In
talking with Dawn, Lucy learnt more about reflective practice and we each learnt more about effec-
tively engaging students and the community through music.
In this paper, we draw on personal experiences, conversations, journal entries that are all inter-
connected and transcribed into a narrative. We established reliability of the descriptions and trust-
worthiness by sharing our reflections and incidents with trusted colleagues who gave feedback on
the narrative (Goings 2015; Selvitopu 2020). We used thematic analysis as an organising framework
and tool to analyse the data by writing ‘down [of] ideas and potential coding schemes’ (Braun and
Clarke 2006, 15). Being absorbed in the data meant reading and re-reading notes several times
searching for patterns and meanings before coding the data into overarching themes (see Table
1) (Braun and Wilkinson 2003).
In this paper, we ‘invite the reader to share, imaginatively, in the experiences that are rep-
resented’ (Titon 1997, 96). We draw on tacit knowledge (Bullough and Pinnegar 2001) to make
sense of the phenomenon, articulating our findings and discussion in meaningful ways (Connelly
and Clandinin 1990). We share our narrative focusing on some of the twists, turns and thrills
experienced in 2020.

Setting the scene

At the time of writing this paper, Dawn had worked from home since Mid-March 2020. All units
(subjects) and classes (workshops) at the university in question moved to ‘online modes of delivery’.
Kultura, Blackboard Collaborate, Zoom, Microsoft Teams and Skype were used to teach and com-
municate with students and colleagues teaching within the Bachelor of Education (primary) B.ED
(primary) and the Master of Teaching (MTeach) programmes. Lucy taught from Foundation to
Year 6 online since March 2020 though schools did open for a few weeks in June before the
mid-year break. All classes were taught using a learning management platform called SeeSaw (a stu-
dent-friendly online portfolio) that allowed work to be set and stored. Zoom was used to hold ‘face-
to-face’ meetings with students, parents and staff at the school.
Moving to an online mode of teaching was not entirely new for Dawn who had prior experience
in teaching music units ‘off-campus’ at the university (Allen, Rowan, and Singh 2020). In the role of
Unit Chair, she mentored some members in the arts education team who had never taught online.
For those sessional staff (casual tutors/part-time staff), the sudden shift to the digital ‘turn’ chal-
lenged them to re-image content, assessment and delivery. Mentoring and offering support
involved staff moving away from the norm of traditional ways of teaching to those that involves
‘talking and explain[ing] so that others can watch and listen’ (Biesta 2019, 55). For Dawn, setting
up and delivering a ‘lecture’ to over 500 first-year arts education students within the B.Ed (primary)
using a webinar was a new learning curve.

Table 1. Themes.
Initial coding Emergent themes Overarching themes
Working from home Student engagement Experiences
Teaching and learning online
Building relations
Technology Challenges Pedagogical adaptations
Resources
Motivation
Wellbeing
Parents perceptions Community connections Impact
Guest speakers
Support structures
Time constraints
Wellbeing
246 D. JOSEPH AND L. LENNOX

Lucy, who had never taught online, had to rethink teaching to facilitate high levels of student
engagement. As primary music specialist, Lucy was accustomed to teaching each class for only
50 minutes F2F. Lucy changed planning activities that would have employed classroom instruments
to the unknown, unaware of what students might or might not have at their homes. Lucy suddenly
had to be flexible and open to new and creative ways of teaching using technology (Burnard 2007).

Findings and discussing

This section draws on the idea of twists, turns and thrills as we were cynical about how we would
teach music online, strongly believing that learning was an interactive social activity (Lave and
Wenger 1990). We had to think about ways to meet the aims of the music curriculum in Victoria
(see VCAA 2020a), for Lucy teaching primary school children and for Dawn preparing ITE stu-
dents for future classrooms (primary and secondary) when teaching from home. Below we discuss
our experiences in relation to three overarching themes. Some of the positive and negative experi-
ences may resonate with other music teachers, generalist primary teachers and tertiary music
educators.

Experiences
We each had different experiences, both positive and negative. Working from home for Lucy as an
early career teacher was overwhelming, feeling pushed outside of the proverbial comfort zone. She
was mindful of the lack of resources and musical instruments which students had in their homes –
this weakened her praxis. We found working from home removed the live embodied experience of
classroom practice: the spontaneity and interaction of flow in music making and responding to
music was simply not the same when teaching online.

Negative
While lessons were carefully planned to ensure students were able to participate, we each encoun-
tered some hiccups along the way. Lucy for example said her ‘Year 2 student (7–8-year-old) was
not able to walk outside alone to find some gum (eucalyptus) leaves to make a harmonica and feel
the vibrations when playing it’. The student lived in an apartment, both parents worked from
home and were unable to accompany her outside at the time of the lesson. This lesson correlated
with what students were learning about in science regarding soundwaves, vibrations and sounds
production. Lucy felt helpless in this situation, unable to physically assist. It was disappointing,
while nevertheless not being able to take responsibility for the situation. While the student was
able to join the class by watching others play, she was equally sad not to be able to play with
her peers in real time. Rather, the student had to do so on her own later in the day, and this
was not as rewarding. The experience was not satisfying for either the student or Lucy, impacting
their sense of wellbeing.
Similarly, Dawn felt disappointed that her students who were learning African music in one par-
ticular unit were unable to play on authentic African instruments (Djembe, Kpanlogo drums,
square drums [gbomba], rattles and shakers) from home. Dawn felt drumming on the table or
using a plastic bucket is simply not the same. Students experienced ‘authentic sounds of drums
by listening to sound clips and watching YouTube clips’. In the 2020 cohort, none of the students
had authentic African drums in their homes and the actual hands-on experience was not possible.
Dawn found as the semester progressed that half of the class discontinued their studies. They felt
they did not gain the embodied experience of drumming online even though they watched and
learnt from YouTube clips as they drummed on tables and buckets (Kellner and Kim 2010).
Dawn found some tertiary students struggled to make connections with others online. They felt
alienated from the on-campus social experience (TEQSA 2020). Dawn and the sessional tutors
found that while synchronous and asynchronous teaching worked well using Kultura or Zoom,
 MUSIC EDUCATION RESEARCH 247

some of the students struggled linking theory to practice in the absence of in-class activities. Pre-
paring ITE students for future classrooms and making links to pedagogical content knowledge
(PCK) and technology pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) was challenging (Archambault
and Barnett 2010; Schulman 1986). However, by offering Zoom classes did mean the off-campus
students were able to join the timetabled on-campus class. The tertiary music students became a
community of learners as they interacted with one another, Dawn, and the sessional music staff,
and students were able to share clips with each other (Aydede and Robbins 2009; Hart, Stewart,
and Jimerson 2011; Shackelford and Maxwell 2012).

Positive
Despite these setbacks, working from home opened doors for the ‘more reserved student’ and for
the ‘rather shy student’ to share and perform in class. Lucy had an influx of students wanting to
share videos and recordings of themselves music making and singing. In three years at the school,
Lucy had ‘never heard so many Year 6 boys sing during online learning’. This was a positive
experience. Lucy’s’ Year 6 students wrote their own lyrics to known songs by reflecting on
their time in lockdown. One 12-year-old set his lyrics to the tune of ‘Imagine’ by John Lennon
and his 8-year-old brother sang the words with the older brother accompanying him on the
piano performing a ‘Coronavirus song’. Their mother said, ‘it was really nice to see them both
working on the song together’. Lucy felt proud of the students sharing their work with their
families at home. The learning experience fostered a sense of connectedness between family
and even the extent of the wider community when the ‘Coronavirus song’ was showcased on
the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) News (Schubert 2020). This positive outcome
stressed the importance of music education for school children during the pandemic. In addition,
Lucy ran a ‘talent show’ across the school where 400 students submitted ‘short audition tapes’
online and 21 acts were selected. The wider school community (200 +) attended the online
show using Zoom (Olson 2010). The feedback from parents and students was satisfying with audi-
ence members using the ‘clapping’ emoji and the ‘smiley face’ to express a sense of happiness
(Ryan and Deci 2001; Ryff and Keyes 1995).
Both authors experienced seeing family or pets ‘pop’ into the online lesson which sometimes
proved a novel break, as well as an interruption. In the case of Lucy, parents said that they did
not really understand what classroom music fully entailed until they had participated with their
children at home. We found uploading instructional videos ahead of the class helped our students
when teaching online. The tertiary students were able to revise and refresh what was taught by refer-
ring to the pre-recorded videos and the Zoom recordings. This helped some students who missed
the class, and informed the assignment tasks. Dawn found the interactive Zoom music workshops
effective as students were able to ask questions in real time. Lucy found her students used the chat
space to ask questions and email.

Pedagogical adaptations
We found preparing in-class activities for online teaching very time-consuming. We had to adapt
their pedagogy due to a lack of resources in student homes coupled with technical glitches. One way
to help students was to pre-record material and provide instructional videos. In this way We felt
students could learn ahead of time or revise after the lesson, for example the words of a song,
the Kodály hand signs for the song, or the movement or body percussion for the song. By recording
the class, Dawn’s students were able to re-watch sections which they found useful as it helped them
understand the practical theory nexus. Using ICT broadens TPCK skills and understandings (Arch-
ambault and Barnett 2010). Whilst we included technology as a medium of instruction, we focused
on achieving music learning outcomes.
Using new technology was a steep learning curve given the sudden move to online teaching due
to the lockdown. At the university level, specialist music students were familiar with many music
248 D. JOSEPH AND L. LENNOX

software tools whereas Dawn had to become au fait with new technologies (for example, Soundtrap
and using Kahoot) which was stressful at times. Ways had to be found in suggesting how sounds
could be made or found in her students’ homes when creating compositions (soundscapes).
Some of the sounds used in her teaching activities when composing soundscapes or teaching the
elements of music included instruments found at home, bucket drumming, body percussion, creat-
ing water xylophones out of glasses, as well as kitchen and/or household sounds. When creating
group compositions, the students worked in breakout groups online, they used a range of sounds
found in their homes (conventional instruments and unconventional sounds such as eggbeaters,
hairdryers, tabletops, balloons, etc.). They also explored the elements of music through creating
digital clips which they shared with others (Hinduja and Ingram 2009). In this way, Dawnaddressed
two overarching principles of the Victorian music curriculum ‘making and responding’ to music
(VCAA 2020b).
Teaching online meant adapting teaching materials and assessment tasks which translated into
positive experiences for us and our students. Lucy felt she was compelled to learn about different
digital music making platforms in a short space of time, within a week of becoming expert at
using the GarageBand iPad application and finding a collection of virtual instrument websites
for students to use (including virtual Boomwhackers, xylophones, keyboards and even some
world music instruments such as the Erhu). This was something that positively impacted on
Lucy’s professional learning, finding the students learning as fast as their teacher, easily managing
to navigate and use these digital music making tools in the lessons. Lucy felt she was able to con-
tinue to support the students in their collaborative music making experiences using technology, giv-
ing them weekly activities that were manageable and do-able from home. Using social media was
not new for school-going students (Lum 2008). Lucy found her students did better when they were
thanked for trying and for contributing ‘online’ through comments and chats. The students felt
valued, and confident to ‘give it a go’. While also admitting to struggling to maintain student
engagement, Lucy devised ways to motivate her students, inspiring them by adding bitmoji’s and
thumbs up and smiley faces emoji’s (online stickers).
Working online meant Dawn’s students had opportunities to work with culture bearers, instru-
mentalists, and experts in the field of music, music education, and music therapy, interstate and
internationally (Brändström, Wiklund, and Lundström 2012; Joseph, Nethsinghe, and Cabedo-
Mas 2020; Kruse and Veblen 2012). Whilst inviting guest speakers was time-consuming for
Dawn to organise, all speakers offered their professional time pro bono. Sharing about ways to
teach, to assess and where to find useful resources was beneficial for all concerned. Students said
they ‘learnt about new and different ways to teach’ and the ‘experiences of the guest speaker helped
link the theory to practice’. Building networks online in real time Dawn found students valued. It
generated informative discussion with each speaker. This aspect was fulfilling and enriching, it posi-
tively contributing to their emotional and social wellbeing (Ascenso et al. 2018; Seligman 2011). As
future teachers it is important for students to understand the importance of being part of a com-
munity of practice (Lave and Wenger 1990; Wenger 1998). Students realised the value of building
relationships with other musicians, teachers and professional organisations and how this can have
an influence on their future teaching.

Impact
We had the opportunity to re-image and transform our teaching so our students could reach their
learning goals at school, and ITE students were able to achieve the unit learning outcomes and
graduate learning outcomes. We found staying connected with our students positively contributed
to their sense of wellbeing during lockdown. We each found by that looking ‘bright eyed and bushy
tailed’ motivated and encouraged our students to engage with the activities. Whilst we were phys-
ically apart from our students, we were virtually connected together in one space. We felt there were
both positive and negative impacts arising from our experience.
 MUSIC EDUCATION RESEARCH 249

Positive
Teaching online during 2020 due to COVID-19 meant music reached many homes which would
not normally be the case. Learning from home was intriguing to family members, it meant they
were interested in what was taught at school and at the university. In the case of Lucy, parents’ inter-
est heightened. They paid attention and were involved in their children’s learning during lockdown.
Through technology, Lucy will continue to share student work with parents as a way to engage them
and promote the importance of music teaching in primary school.
Lucy found creating a positive healthy environment during choir rehearsal-time for uplifting
students’ spirits. By running the Junior and Senior Choir online the students felt they learnt new
repertoire which positively contributed to their sense of wellbeing, making them feel happy, giving
them a sense of accomplishment. Dawn ran three Saturday ‘catch up social’ Zoom sessions with her
students during semester one and two. After the first meeting, students requested more ‘catch up
sessions’ as they felt a strong sense of connection and belonging to the group ‘outside of class
time’ which positively contributed to their musical identity.
We each found using technology a positive experience as we had the opportunity to deliver syn-
chronous and asynchronous teaching. Providing our students with instructional videos minimised
them asking unnecessary questions and maximised time for music ‘making and responding’ to
music (VCAA 2020b). When teaching Year 5 & 6 prior to the lockdown Lucy spent much time giv-
ing whole class instruction as to how to practise parts. However, by providing instructional videos
for instrumental sections her students were able to learn their parts easily. We will continue to use
instructional videos and YouTube clips as a way to show and tell (Biesta 2019). For Dawn, providing
instruction videos and pre-recoding work increased students’ ability to prepare lessons when going
out on placement or when teaching from home during lockdown and post lockdown. Exploring
some of the software during lockdown built ITE students’ confidence and competency skills.
Once back in the classroom during the last school term, Lucy found instead of sharing music or
handing out tasks via sheets of paper, her Year 3–6 students used iPads, and Quick Response
(QR) codes to share videos and documents. In this way, they could save and share with their parents
as it showcased students musicking (Kruse and Veblen 2012).
Integrating digital technologies into the music classroom during lockdown created exciting
opportunities and access to music making for students. Interacting and engaging with guest speak-
ers in the case of Dawn’s students linked theory to practice and to the curriculum, keeping the
momentum going during the lockdown (Aydede and Robbins 2009; Brown, Collins, and Duguid
1989, VCAAa). It has fostered inclusive connections that incorporate many cultures and genres,
for example teaching about multicultural music, instrumental pedagogy, or children with special
needs (VCAA 2020a, 2020b, 2020c). Lucy found that students’ parents took an interest and were
involved in their children’s learning during lockdown. She felt inspired to continue sharing student
work with parents as a way to engage them and promote the importance of music teaching in the
primary school. The broader implication of this may mean more parents might encourage children
to learn an instrument and join an ensemble as they recognise the myriad benefits. Dawn likewise
encouraged the ITE students to respond to the call for the 2021 National Music Curriculum Review
as their students’ experience will provide valuable feedback to policy makers as early career prac-
titioners. This feedback may also inform university programme directors regarding flexible deliv-
ery, ICT applications, assessment tools, academic interactions and challenges in relation to
transitioning to flexible modes of delivery.

Negative
Teaching online remained continued for Dawn throughout 2020 whereas schools had time to
return to the classroom in the last few months before Christmas. Dawn found planning for classes’
time-consuming and coordinating guest speakers was equally not easy. We both found an increase
in the number of emails we received from students and staff, particularly Dawn who works in higher
education. This took a toll on our sense of wellbeing. Dawn did not set clear boundaries for work
250 D. JOSEPH AND L. LENNOX

hours when working from home, feeling the need to always respond to students and staff, in par-
ticular to colleagues, she did not want students to provide negative feedback at the end of the seme-
ster about the online experience.
One of the setbacks of teaching online we found was trying to respond to the students in the chat
space at the same time whilst teaching. This was not always sustainable. Lucy’s students asked ques-
tions through voice notes, and the live element of responding to questions and providing them with
instant feedback stilted her students’ learning. After a few weeks of online classes, Dawn resorted to
offering question time after teaching small sections of teaching. This was more sustainable as it did
not disturb the flow of the lesson. It was less distracting as the students were reading the ‘chat’ while
also trying to focus on the presenter teaching. In addition, Dawn found it was not possible to offer
feedback on draft assignments: rather, common concerns were answered by posting a note in the
discussion space or global emails were sent to students which proved worthwhile, though labour
intensive. Lucy provided personalised detailed feedback online which was equally time-consuming.
We both found reading students’ body language difficult ‘online’. We felt it was not possible to
ascertain if students always understood what was taught which was compounded by the loss of
internet connectivity at times. Therefore, we provided ‘teacher notes’ for students to access in
our different situations. Preparing pre-recording teaching videos, handouts and digital resources
was stressful and onerous (Gautam and Sharma 2020).

Lessons learnt moving forward

Listening intentionally to what students want to learn may mean adjusting modes of music practice
and pedagogies that accommodate new technology. Lucy found once schools reopened in the fourth
term that students reported they had enjoyed using music composition websites such as Chrome
Music Lab, Groove Pizza, Incredibox and Beepbox. Students’ technology skills had improved
during lockdown using QR codes, google suite and screen recording. Lucy found using QR
codes to different music compositions were great incentives for students to complete work during
class time. It proved useful for those that completed work early as they could independently access a
task card and follow instructions to create a short composition. This fun dimension to learning fos-
tered music creativity and composition. Dawn on the other hand will recommence teaching ITE
students at the start of March 2021 for a few practical classes on-campus. Dependent on govern-
ment regulations Dawn will engage in synchronous and asynchronous teaching using Chrome
Music Lab, Soundtrap and Kahoot and will explore new programmes.
Lucy found using the online platform SeeSaw helpful when assessing or collecting data. It pro-
vided the chance to review student work and allowed for inserting a quick ‘heart’ reaction to student
work. As a motivating tool it helped foster student engagement. For more authentic feedback, voice
recordings and written comments are useful for students and parents alike. Dawn found it necessary
to rethink and revise assessment tasks. Restructuring and refining rubrics, though time-consuming,
require appropriate planning and resourcing which are not always readily available. Dawn had to
undertake professional learning to ‘get up to speed’ with new initiatives regarding online teaching
and assessing. While this was advantageous for the teaching, it also proved time-consuming when
assisting colleagues and sessionals with their planning for online delivery. All of this contributes to
more workload and added stress (Phillips and Cain 2020).
We each found working online during lockdown took its toll on our sense of wellbeing. There-
fore, maintaining a healthy work–life balance is necessary. Dawn suffered burnout, working
extended hours during weeknights and over weekends. Hence it is important to set reasonable
and realistic expectations for students whether teaching online or F2F. Dawn noticed that online
teaching and learning did not suit all students; not all students participated in the online space
which was disappointing. Using digital tools such as Padlet and Mentimetre may help trigger active
synchronous and asynchronous engagement in future. Dawn will continue to use the online discus-
sion space and will send out weekly motivational emails to the ITE students and sessional staff.
 MUSIC EDUCATION RESEARCH 251

Conclusion
In this paper, we asked the question of how we could effectively teach our different students
(Lucy, at a primary school and Dawn, in ITE) during the pandemic as we worked from home.
In answering this question, we employed narrative inquiry through reflection to discuss some
twists, turns and thrills we experienced in relation to changing our practice whilst making con-
nections to the curriculum, to students and to a wider community using technology during lock-
down. This paper offers two voices; while this is a limitation in itself, lessons learnt may improve
the experience and expectation for all concerned as some of the findings may resonate with other
music educators.
Teaching music in schools is not only about achieving outcomes set out in the music curriculum
and about attaining high grades, but also about building resilience, developing good social skills,
knowing how to set goals and working collaboratively with others. If we have done so, then we
have achieved success in 2020 (Waters 2011). Striking the right balance was not always easy as
we each had to make situated judgements about what was educationally best for our students (Biesta
2017). Teaching from home meant providing concrete examples using synchronous and asynchro-
nous teaching for students to be knowledge producers and contributors to the learning environ-
ment (Peters et al. 2020). In the case of Dawn, preparing future teachers meant making the
lessons work in a social context that fostered the notion of students working collaboratively with
others using technology (Biesta 2017). In the case of Lucy, nurturing the potential of learners
was essential, making judgements as a novice teacher in relation to what worked or did not
work (Biesta 2017). In addition, the teaching had a spill-over effect on parents and the wider com-
munity. Teaching music during lockdown for both authors went beyond content: it also enhanced
students and staff social, emotional and health wellbeing (Clift et al. 2010; Creech et al. 2014;
Maschi, MacMillan, and Viola 2013).
The sudden shift to online teaching was intensely stressful for Lucy as novice teacher, challen-
ging to maintain student engagement and motivation. However, she felt the support of parents
when working from home was helpful. Dawn had to regularly motivate and encourage the students
to be independent learners as adults, to self-regulate and self-assess (Merrick 2020). The digital turn
meant being able to enhance the weekly workshop time by connecting the students to a broad com-
munity of practitioners (Wenger 1998). Working closely with the university digital support team to
update resources, assessment tasks and rubrics once classes went ‘online’ was exceedingly time-con-
suming. In addition, mentoring sessional staff in this area was equally time-consuming though ITE
students were ‘tech-savvy’ (Peters et al. 2020). In Dawn’s experience teaching wholly online, making
educational judgements, modelling ‘what to teach’ and ‘how to teach’ may prepare ITE graduates to
‘teach from home’ in 2021 as they make their own educational decisions (Biesta 2017). UNESCO
(2020, 15) found ‘teachers around the globe were largely unprepared to support continuity of learn-
ing and adapt to new teaching methodologies’, additional support is necessary (Burke 2020).
As we continue to adjust to a sense of ‘COVID normal’ in 2021 and beyond, as authors we call for
music educators to be ‘less subject driven’. Rather, they should purposefully connect, communicate
and collaborate across curriculum areas that traverse, diverse communities and geographical set-
tings using technology. In addition, we deliberately need to inject hope into our students’ lives
as they work from home or online. Thanking students for their efforts and for contributing
makes them feel valued and motivates them to do better. Positive emotions in our experience chan-
ged the way we taught and the way our students explored, experienced and engaged with music
(Ascenso et al. 2018; Ryff and Keyes 1995; Seligman 2011).
Finally, we recommend:

. teachers and academics undertake ongoing professional development/learning in areas of learn-

ing management systems, curricula design and music technology, keeping in mind quality, fair-
ness and equity (Peters et al. 2020).
252 D. JOSEPH AND L. LENNOX

. professional learning organisations and academics in ITE programmes work collaboratively to

develop new ways to teach and assess using digital technologies in a COVID normal world.
. the continued sharing of music between home and school using technology
. the use of video instruction as a way to enhance and complement classroom instruction
. blended modes of delivery to improve student engagement
. an increased use of technologies to enhance student capabilities as they navigate the rapidly
changing digital world
. undertaking compliance training in relation to directing students to COVID safety, cybersecur-
ity, and information privacy awareness.

This paper adds to the wider body of research that is emerging in relation to changes to the field
of practice in music education because of the pandemic. A longitudinal study is needed to measure
the impact of some of these changes in relation to music teaching and learning in schools and
within ITE programmes. A future study could measure graduate teacher’s changes to their teaching
practice. As many staff may have found it challenging to cope with work and balance their lives, a
future study into the wellbeing of music teachers and tertiary music educators during COVID-19
times is needed. In addition, a future study could survey the different support structures schools and
higher education institutes offer in relation to improving ways of working and reimagining the
future. The digital turn during the pandemic has opened up new opportunities for educators across
all educational settings to refresh, reset and renew ways of shaping curriculum, training and
practice.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes on contributors
Dawn Joseph is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Arts and Education at Deakin University (Melbourne, Aus-
tralia). She teaches in undergraduate and post graduate programs in the School of Education. She serves on inter-
national and national editorial boards of refereed journals. Her national and international program of research
and scholarship includes teacher education, music education, community music, African music, cultural diversity,
and ageing and well-being in the Arts. Dawn has been twice Chair of the Australian Society for Music Education
(Victorian Chapter) and has served on the National Committee of this peak association. She currently serves as a
committee member on the Australian and New Zealand Association for Research in Music Education.
Lucy Lennox studied classical guitar in Inverloch and Melbourne (Australia). She accomplished her Bachelor of
Music at Monash University in 2013. Between 2015 and 2016 she completed the Master of Teaching program at Dea-
kin University specialising in Double Music Methods (Primary and Secondary school teaching). Lucy is music
specialist at Milgate Primary School in Melbourne. She is responsible for all class music, and ensemble work.
Since 2017, Lucy served as a committee member of the Australian Society for Music Education (Victorian Chapter).
She is currently Deputy Chair of this organisation.

ORCID
Dawn Joseph http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6320-900X

References
Aked, J., and S. Thompson. 2011. “Five Ways to Wellbeing: New Applications, New Ways of Thinking.” https://b.
3cdn.net/nefoundation/d80eba95560c09605d_uzm6b1n6a.pdf.
Allen, A., L. Rowan, and P. Singh. 2020. “Teaching and Teacher Education in the Time of COVID-19, Asia-Pacific.”
Journal of Teacher Education 48 (3): 233–236. doi:10.1080/1359866X.2020.1752051.
Allen, I. E., and J. Seaman. 2013. Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States.
Newburyport, MA: Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group.
 MUSIC EDUCATION RESEARCH 253

Archambault, L. M., and J. H. Barnett. 2010. “Revisiting Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Exploring
the TPACK Framework.” Computers & Education 55 (4): 1656–1662. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.009.
Armstrong, V. 2011. Technology and the Gendering of Music Education. Surrey: Ashgate.
Arney, S. 2020. “Chairperson’s Report.” ASME Bulletin 29 (3): 1–9.
Ascenso, S., R. Perkins, L. Atkins, D. Fancourt, and A. Williamon. 2018. “Promoting Well-Being Through Group
Drumming with Mental Health Service Users and Their Carers.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies on
Health and Well-Being 13 (1): 1484219. doi:10.1080/17482631.2018.1484219.
Aydede, M., and P. Robbins. 2009. The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition. New York, NY: Cambridge
University Press.
Biesta, G. 2017. The Rediscovery of Teaching. London: Routledge.
Biesta, G. 2019. “Teaching for the Possibility of Being Taught: World-Centred Education in an Age of Learning.”
English E-Journal of the Philosophy of Education 4 (1): 55–69. http://pesj.sakura.ne.jp/english/vol_04_1-88.
pdf#page=53.
Bonneville-Roussy, A., E. Hruska, and H. Trower. 2020. “Teaching Music to Support Students: How Autonomy-
Supportive Music Teachers Increase Students’ Well-Being.” Journal of Research in Music Education 68 (1): 97–
119. doi:10.1177/0022429419897611.
Bowman, J. 2014. Online Learning in Music: Foundations, Frameworks, and Practices. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Brändström, S., C. Wiklund, and E. Lundström. 2012. “Developing Distance Music Education in Arctic Scandinavia:
Electric Guitar Teaching and Master Classes.” Music Education Research 14 (4): 448–456. doi:10.1080/14613808.
2012.703173.
Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke. 2006. “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology.” Qualitative Research in
Psychology 3 (2): 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Braun, V., and S. Wilkinson. 2003. “Liability or Asset? Women Talk about the Vagina.” Psychology of Women Section
Review 5 (2): 28–42. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Yvette- Morey/publication/34023152_Counter-hairge-
monies_hair_as_a_site_of_black_identity_struggle_in_post-apartheid_South_Africa/links/
57af116708ae15c76cb7f53c/Counter-hair-gemonies-hair-as-a-site-of-black-identity-struggle-in-postapartheid-
South-Africa.pdf#page=30
Brookfield, S. 1995. Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brown, J. S., A. Collins, and S. Duguid. 1989. “Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning.” Educational
Researcher 18 (1): 32–42. doi:10.3102/0013189X018001032.
Bullough, Robert V, and Stefinee Pinnegar. 2001. “Guidelines for Quality in Autobiographical Forms of Self-study
Research.” Educational Researcher 30 (3): 13–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X030003013.
Burke, K. 2020. “‘How Can the Creative Arts Possibly be Taught Online?’ Perspectives and Experiences of Online
Educators in Australian Higher Education.” Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 2020: 1–15. doi:10.1080/
1359866X.2020.1777531 .
Burnard, Pamela. 2007. “Reframing Creativity and Technology: Promoting Pedagogic Change in Music Education.”
Journal of Music, Technology & Education 1 (1): 37–55. doi:10.1386/jmte.1.1.37_1.
Clandinin, D. J., and F. M. Connelly. 2000. Narrative Inquiry: Experience and Story in Qualitative Research.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Clift, S., G. Hancox, I. Morrison, B. Hess, G. Kreutz, and D. Stewart. 2010. “Choral Singing and Psychological
Wellbeing: Quantitative and Qualitative Findings from English Choirs in a Cross-National Survey.” Journal of
Applied Arts and Health 1 (1): 19–34. doi:10.1386/jaah.1.1.19/1.
Connelly, F. M., and D. J. Clandinin. 1990. “Stories of Experience and Narrative Inquiry.” Educational Researcher 19
(5): 2–14. doi:10.3102/0013189X019005002.
Crawford, R. 2017. “Rethinking Teaching and Learning Pedagogy for Education in the Twenty-First Century:
Blended Learning in Music Education.” Music Education Research 19 (2): 195–213. doi:10.1080/14613808.2016.
1202223.
Crawford, J., K. Butler-Henderson, J. Rudolph, B. Malkawi, M. Glowatz, R. Burton, P. Magni, and S. Lam. 2020.
“COVID-19: 20 Countries’ Higher Education Intra-Period Digital Pedagogy Responses.” Journal of Applied
Learning & Teaching 3 (1): 1–20. doi:10.37074/jalt.2020.3.1.7.
Creech, A., S. Hallam, M. Varvarigou, H. Gaunt, H. McQueen, and A. Pincas. 2014. “The Role of Musical Possible
Selves in Supporting Subjective Well-Being in Later Life.” Music Education Research 16 (1): 32–49. doi:10.1080/
14613808.2013.788143.
Creswell, J. W., and C. N. Poth. 2016. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches..
Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage.
Denzin, N., and Y. Lincoln. 2000. Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
Dullea, R. 2017. “Engagement, Participation, and Situated Learning in a Children’s Opera Chorus Program.” Journal
of Research in Music Education 65 (1): 72–94. doi:10.1177/0022429417695751.
Folkestad, G. 2006. “Formal and Informal Learning Situations or Practices vs. Formal and Informal Ways of
Learning.” British Journal of Music Education 23 (2): 135–146. doi:10.1017/S0265051706006887.
254 D. JOSEPH AND L. LENNOX

Gautam, R., and M. Sharma. 2020. “2019 Covid Pandemic: A Disruptive and Stressful Atmosphere for Indian
Academic Fraternity.” Brain, Behaviour and Immunity 88 (8): 948–949. doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.025.
Goings, R. B. 2015. “The Lion Tells His Side of the (Counter) Story: A Black Male Educator’s Autoethnographic
Account.” Journal of African American Males in Education 6 (1): 91–105.
Gray, L. F. 2017. “Online Learning in Music: Foundations, Frameworks, and Practices.” Music Education Research 19
(2): 226–228. doi:10.1080/14613808.2016.1146775.
Grossoehme, D. H. 2014. “Overview of Qualitative Research.” Journal of Health Care Chaplaincy 20 (3): 109–122.
doi:10.1080/08854726.2014.925660.
Hakkarainen, K. 2009. “A Knowledge-Practice Perspective on Technology-Mediated Learning.” International Journal
of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 4 (2): 213–231. doi:10.1007/s11412-009-9064-x.
Hart, S. R., K. Stewart, and S. R. Jimerson. 2011. “The Student Engagement in Schools Questionnaire (SESQ) and the
Teacher Engagement Report Form-new (TERF-N): Examining the Preliminary Evidence.” Contemporary School
Psychology 15 (1): 67–79. doi:10.1007/BF03340964.
Hinduja, S., and J. R. Ingram. 2009. “Social Learning Theory and Music Piracy: The Differential Role of Online and
Offline Peer Influences.” Criminal Justice Studies 22 (4): 405–420. doi:10.1080/14786010903358125.
Hines, C. 2000. Virtual Ethnography. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hope, C. 2020. “Australian Tertiary Music Teaching During COVID 19. A White Paper Addressing Music-Specific
Issues.” https://musictrust.com.au/loudmouth/australian-tertiary-music-teaching-during-covid-19-a-white-
paper-addressing-music-specific-issues/.
Imel, S. 2000. “Change: Connections to Adult Learning and Education.” ERIC Digest 221: 1–7. https://files.eric.ed.-
gov/fulltext/ED446252.pdf.
Joseph, D., and R. Johnson. 2020. “Intercultural Practicum: Perceptual Learning Through Video in the Pandemic
Context.” New Zealand Journal of Teacher’s Work 17 (1&2): 56–72. doi:10.24135/teacherswork.v17i1and2.309.
Joseph, D., R. Nethsinghe, and A. Cabedo-Mas. 2018. “Creating Multicultural Music Opportunities in Teacher
Education: Sharing Diversity Through Songs.” Australian Journal of Teacher Education 43 (5): 31–47. doi:10.
14221/ajte.2018v43n5.3.
Joseph, D., R. Nethsinghe, and A. Cabedo-Mas. 2020. “‘We Learnt Lots in a Short Time’: Cultural Exchange Across
Three Universities Through Songs from Different Lands.” International Journal of Music Education 38 (2): 177–
193. doi:10.1177/0255761419880027.
Kellner, D., and G. Kim. 2010. “YouTube, Critical Pedagogy, and Media Activism.” Review of Education, Pedagogy &
Cultural Studies 32 (1): 3–36. doi:10.1080/10714410903482658.
Kenny, A. 2014. “Practice Through Partnership: Examining the Theoretical Framework and Development of a
‘Community of Musical Practice’.” International Journal of Music Education 32 (4): 396–408. doi:10.1177/
0255761413515802.
Keyes, C. L. M. 1998. “Social Well-being.” Social Psychology Quarterly 61 (2): 121–140. doi:10.2307/2787065
Kirk, D., and D. Macdonald. 1998. “Situated Learning in Physical Education.” Journal of Teaching in Physical
Education 17 (3): 376–387. doi:10.1123/jtpe.17.3.376.
Kruse, N. B., and K. K. Veblen. 2012. “Music Teaching and Learning Online: Considering YouTube Instructional
Videos.” Journal of Music, Technology and Education 5 (1): 77–87. doi:10.1386/jmte.5.1.77_1.
Lave, J., and E. Wenger. 1990. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Lum, C. H. 2008. “Home Musical Environment of Children in Singapore: On Globalization, Technology, and Media.”
Journal of Research in Music Education 56 (2): 101–117. doi:10.1177/0022429408317517.
MacDonald, R., G. Kreutz, and L. Mitchell. 2012. Music, Health, & Wellbeing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Maschi, T., T. MacMillan, and D. Viola. 2013. “Group Drumming and Well-Being: A Promising Self-Care Strategy
for Social Workers.” Arts & Health 5 (2): 142–151. doi:10.1080/17533015.2012.748081.
Merriam, S. B. 1998. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merrick, B. 2020. “Changing Mindset, Perceptions, Learning, and Tradition: An ‘Adaptive Teaching Framework’ for
Teaching Music Online.” International Journal on Innovations in Online Education 4 (2), https://
onlineinnovationsjournal.com/download/0adeed9b5d34eeae.pdf.
Olson, C. A. 2010. “Making the Tech Connection.” Teaching Music 17 (5): 30–35.
Pather, N., P. Blyth, J. A. Chapman, M. R. Dayal, N. A. Flack, Q. A. Fogg, R. A. Green, et al. 2020. “Forced Disruption
of Anatomy Education in Australia and New Zealand: An Acute Response to the Covid-19 Pandemic.” Anatomical
Sciences Education 13 (3): 284–300. doi:10.1002/ase.1968.
Peters, M. A., F. Rizvi, G. McCulloch, P. Gibbs, R. Gorur, H. Hong, Y. Hwang, et al. 2020. “Reimagining the New
Pedagogical Possibilities for Universities Post-Covid-19: An EPAT Collective Project.” Educational Philosophy
and Theory, 1–44. doi:10.1080/00131857.2020.1777655.
Phillips, L., and M. Cain. 2020. “‘Exhausted Beyond Measure’: what Teachers are Saying about COVID-19 and the
Disruption to Education.” https://theconversation.com/exhausted-beyond-measure-what-teachers-are-saying-
about-covid-19-and-the-disruption-toeducation- 143601
Rudolph, T., and J. Frankel. 2009. YouTube in Music Education. New York: Hal Leonard Books.
 MUSIC EDUCATION RESEARCH 255

Russell, T. 2005. “Can Reflective Practice Be Taught?” Reflective Practice 6 (2): 199–204. doi:10.1080/
14623940500105833.
Ryan, R. M., and E. L. Deci. 2001. “On Happiness and Human Potentials: A Review of Research on Hedonic and
Eudaimonic Well-Being.” Annual Review of Psychology 52 (1): 141–166. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141.
Ryff, C. D., and C. L. M. Keyes. 1995. “The Structure of Psychological Well-Being Revisited.” Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 69 (4): 719–727. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.407.1311&rep=
rep1&type=pdf.
Schön, D. A. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York, NY: Basic Books Inc.
Schubert, S. 17 September 2020. “John Lennon’s Image Gets a Pandemic Rewrite by Melbourne Brothers Keen to Lift
a City’s Spirit”, ABC News. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-17/melbourne-brothers-imagine-john-lennon-
coronavirus-pandemic/12675004?utm_medium=social&utm_content=sf237891042&utm_campaign=fb_abc_news
&utm_source=m.facebook.com&sf237891042=1&fbclid=IwAR1AtnGi8O8BX3IDpwfMI3B4QGq6PPXVKm7mM2
M9rRfV6fwNar4tp8rMR2k.
Schulman, L. S. 1986. “Those who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching.” Educational Researcher 15 (2): 4–
14. doi:10.3102/0013189X015002004.
Scull, Janet, Michael Phillips, Umesh Sharma, and Kathryn Garnier. 2020. “Innovations in Teacher Education at the
Time of COVID19: an Australian Perspective.” Journal of Education for Teaching 46 (4): 497–506. doi:10.1080/
02607476.2020.1802701.
Seligman, M. 2011. Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being. New York: Free Press.
Selvitopu, A. 2020. “Exploring the Lived Social and Academic Experiences of Foreign Born Students: A
Phenomenological Perspective.” Journal of International Studies 10 (3): 590–612. doi:10.32674/jis.v10i3.1171.
Shackelford, J. L., and M. Maxwell. 2012. “Sense of Community in Graduate Online Education: Contribution of
Learner to Learner Interaction.” The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 13 (4):
228–249. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v13i4.1339.
Stake, R. E. 1995. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stake, R. E. 2000. “Qualitative Case Studies.” In Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by N. K. Denzin and Y.
S. Lincoln, 443–466. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tertiary Education Quality and Standard Agency (TEQSA). 2020. Foundations for Good Practice: The Student Experience
of Online Learning in Australian Higher Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic”. https://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/
default/files/student-experience-of-online-learning-in-australian-he-during-covid-19.pdf?v=1606442611v.
Thiel, T. 1999. “Reflections on Critical Incidents.” Prospect 14 (1): 44–52.
Titon, J. T. 1997. “Knowing Fieldwork.” In Shadows in the Field: New Perspectives for Fieldwork in Ethnomusicology,
edited by G. F. Barz and T. J. Cooley, 87–100. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Torda, A. 2020. “How COVID-19 has Pushed us Into a Medical Education Revolution.” Internal Medicine Journal 50
(1): 1150–1153. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7405330/.
UNESCO. 2020. “Policy Brief: Education During COVID-19 and Beyond”. https://www.un.org/development/desa/
dspd/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/08/sg_policy_brief_covid-19_and_education_august_2020.pdf.
Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA). 2020a. Music: Rationale and Aims. https://
victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/the-arts/music/introduction/rationale-and-aims.
Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA). 2020b. Learning in Music. https://victoriancurriculum.
vcaa.vic.edu.au/the-arts/music/introduction/learning-in-music.
Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA). 2020c. Technologies. https://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.
edu.au/technologies/introduction/about-the-technologies.
Victorian Government. 2020. “Coronavirus (COVID-19) Restrictions Victoria”. https://www.vic.gov.au/
coronavirus-covid-19-restrictions-victoria.
Waldron, J. 2009. “Exploring a Virtual Music Community of Practice: Informal Music Learning on the Internet.”
Journal of Music, Technology and Education 2 (2–3): 97–112.
Waters, L. 2011. “A Review of School-Based Positive Psychology Interventions.” The Educational and Developmental
Psychologist 28 (2): 75–90.
Watson, D., and C. Emery. 2012. Children’s Social and Emotional Wellbeing in Schools: A Critical Perspective. Bristol:
Policy Press.
Webb, M. 2007. “Music Analysis Down the (You)Tube? Exploring the Potentials of Cross-Media Listening for the
Music Classroom.” British Journal of Music Education 24 (2): 147–164.
Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Doing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wise, S., J. Greenwood, and N. Davis. 2011. “Teachers’ Use of Digital Technology in Music Education: Illustrations of
Changing Classrooms.” British Journal of Music Education 28 (2): 117–134.
World Health Organization (WHO). 2020. “Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Pandemic.” https://www.euro.who.
int/en/health-topics/health-emergencies/coronavirus-covid-19.
Wright, R., and P. Kanellopoulos. 2010. “Informal Music Learning, Improvisation and Teacher Education.” British
Journal of Music Education 27 (1): 71–87. doi:10.1017/S0265051709990210.
Yin, R. K. 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.