The Music Professor Online Judith Bowman Ebook Full Chapter

The Music Professor Online Judith
Bowman
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-music-professor-online-judith-bowman/
The Music Professor Online
Judith Bowman
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197547366.001.0001
Published: 2022 Online ISBN: 9780197547403 Print ISBN: 9780197547366
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859669 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

FRONT MATTER
Copyright Page 
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197547366.002.0003 Page iv
Published: April 2022
Subject: Music Psychology
p. iv
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers
the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education
by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University
Press in the UK and certain other countries.
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.
© Oxford University Press 2022
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction
rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above.
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2021951868

ISBN 978–0–19–754737–3 (pbk.)
ISBN 978–0–19–754736–6 (hbk.)
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197547366.001.0001
135798642
Paperback printed by Marquis, Canada
Hardback printed by Bridgeport National Bindery, Inc., United States of America

Preface

This book originated from recommendations for future research in my
previous book, Online Learning in Music: Foundations, Frameworks, and
Practices (2014). Of particular interest were studies of practice to determine
what pedagogical techniques would work best for what types of online music
courses, with focus on “the techniques and strategies used by successful online
instructors, how they changed their approaches to suit the online environ-
ment, and how they determined what constitutes high-quality music learning
experiences in various types of music courses” (Bowman, 2014, pp. 219–220).
Brendan McConville and Barbara Murphy expressed the same thoughts: “We
think the next step in the study of online courses should be a more comprehen-
sive inquiry addressing specific teaching strategies, pedagogical frameworks,
and curricular approaches that are generating successful online music courses
in various sub-disciplines and degrees” (McConville & Murphy, 2017, Part II,
para. 10). A serendipitous conversation with McConville and Murphy at the
meeting of the Association for Technology in Music Instruction in 2016 led to
a panel discussion on this topic at the next year’s ATMI meeting, and the idea
gained momentum from that point.
Key to the development of the book were the contributions of the following
professors, who represent various music disciplines. In applied music: Pamela
Pike, Keith Dye, Kathleen Melago. In music theory: Barbara Murphy, Brendan
McConville, Greg McCandless, Anna Gawboy. In music history/ musi-
cology: Allison Alcorn, Dan Keast, Art Brownlow, Louis Epstein. In music
appreciation: Kim Davenport, Bethanie Hansen. In music education: William
Bauer, Jane Kuehne, Jill Reese. I’m grateful to these professors for agreeing to
be interviewed and for sharing their experiences and their advice for prospec-
tive online instructors.
Special thanks to Norman Hirschy for his initial enthusiasm for this topic
and for his continued support and expert guidance through all stages of the
development of the book.
Introduction

Since the first fully online music courses were offered in the early 2000s, on-
line instruction in music in higher education has continued to grow, with in-
dividual course offerings in bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral programs as
well as fully online graduate music degree programs. That growth has been
documented in recent surveys (Johnson & Hawley, 2017; McConville &
Murphy, 2017), showing increases in the number of classes offered and the
size of those classes. McConville and Murphy concluded, “We think the next
step in the study of online courses should be a more comprehensive inquiry
addressing specific teaching strategies, pedagogical frameworks, and curric-
ular approaches that are generating successful online music courses in various
sub-disciplines and degrees” (2017, Part II, para. 10). And I had previously
suggested a similar strategy:
now is the time to reconsider the broader musical, educational, and technolog-
ical contexts in which online education in music is implemented; to conduct qual-
itative studies of how people learn in online environments; to investigate specific
strategies for online learning in music; and to direct more attention toward devel-
opment of appropriate instructional models and practical teaching approaches.
(Bowman, 2014, p. 50)
Book Overview
This book addresses those recommended next steps. It provides a snapshot

of online music instruction in higher education in the disciplines of applied
music, music theory, music history/musicology, music appreciation, and
music education. The book is structured in three parts, like sonata form: an ex-
position that presents the main themes, a development that reveals how those
themes play out in the lived curriculum, and a recapitulation that revisits and
synthesizes the themes as worked out in individual circumstances.
The Music Professor Online. Judith Bowman, Oxford University Press. © Oxford University Press 2022.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197547366.003.0001
2 Introduction
Part I, “Exposition: The Changing Landscape,” presents the main themes.

Chapter 1, “In Person and Online: What’s the Difference?” summarizes cur-
rent reports on the status of online learning in general and in music; explores
differences between online and face-to-face instruction; reviews standards for
online teaching and learning; and describes the Community of Inquiry (CoI)

theoretical framework for online learning together with the Seven Principles
for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. Chapter 2, “Teaching
Persona: Who Are You When You Teach?” explores ways to evolve one’s ex-
isting teaching persona into an online teaching persona by focusing on
teaching presence as found in the CoI framework. Chapter 3, “Pedagogy: How
Will You Teach Music Online?” aligns the teaching roles of the CoI with the
Seven Principles, describes signature pedagogies, and explores some peda-
gogical challenges.
Part II, “Development: Perspectives from the Field,” contains five chapters
that feature profiles of music professors who are teaching online and
examples of how the main themes appear and vary within their music dis-
ciplines: Chapter 4, “Applied Music”; Chapter 5, “Music Theory”; Chapter 6,
“Music History/Musicology”; Chapter 7, “Music Appreciation”; and Chapter 8,
“Music Education.” Each chapter presents the nature of the discipline and its
signature pedagogy, the state of practice in that discipline, narratives in which
featured professors describe their online teaching, and summary lessons for
online instruction in the discipline. Instructor profiles and narratives were
developed through case study inquiry based on personal communications
in which the professors addressed topics that included personal background,
how they became interested in teaching online, online teaching techniques
they found effective and those they found less effective, challenges and how
they dealt with them, how well their students learned, how online teaching
might have influenced their face-to-face teaching, their advice to instructors
who anticipate teaching online, and any other topics they considered signifi-
cant about their work.
Part III, “Recapitulation: Expanding Your Options,” returns to the main
themes and recommends a course of action for the future. Chapter 9,
“Moving Forward, Planning What’s Next,” synthesizes the practices of cur-
rent professors and presents an action plan with ways to move toward online
teaching in music. Chapter 10, “Coda: Teaching in the Time of Pandemics
and Other Disruptions,” addresses responses to the coronavirus pandemic
and recommends building on current online experience in order to be pre-
pared for other disruptions that may impose similar restrictions on in-person
instruction.
Introduction 3
This book is for instructors who want to teach online; for those who have
been asked to teach online although they had not planned to do so; for cur-
rent online instructors who may be teaching a course in a different music dis-
cipline, for music teacher educators who want to prepare their students for
online music instruction at the K–12 level, for graduate students anticipating

college level teaching, for instructors who are already teaching online and are
interested in different approaches and fresh ideas, and for others who may be
assisting prospective online music instructors.
The aim of the book is to help music professors integrate online teaching
into their current pedagogical repertoires—to frame the path to successful on-
line teaching as the evolution of a familiar role, to showcase models and ideas
from practitioners in various music disciplines, and to provide tools to guide
their course design process. Given the continued growth of online instruc-
tion together with the sudden pivot to remote instruction, online learning will
continue to be a critical area for music in higher education.
1
In Person and Online

What’s the Difference?
Online learning has reached a tipping point in higher education. It

has grown from a peripheral project of early tech adapters or a prac-
tice of the for-profit industry into an accepted way of delivering edu-
cation that is now deeply embedded in the majority of colleges and
universities.
—Kathryn Masterson, Online Education
Online learning has reached a tipping point—or so a recent report stated. Is

that the case in the music disciplines? National reports on online education
provide mass data on online learning generally, and they are useful in terms
of overall trends, enrollments, and various administrative, instructional, and
technological issues. However, because they focus on large-scale matters, they
lack detailed information about specific academic disciplines and pedagog-
ical practices. In most of these reports, faculty views are provided by academic
leaders who may be chief academic officers, chief online officers, provosts,
deans, program directors, or chairs, and coverage of music disciplines is
not specifically included. However, there is a recent record of online music
courses and programs in music: McConville and Murphy’s national survey of
online music courses and programs (2017) provides valuable information on
online teaching and learning in the music disciplines that is not available in
any other national report.
The Music Professor Online. Judith Bowman, Oxford University Press. © Oxford University Press 2022.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197547366.003.0002
8 Exposition: The Changing Landscape
Status of Distance/Online Education
Online Education: Heading toward the Future
The survey report Online Education: Heading toward the Future, published by

the Chronicle of Higher Education (Masterson, 2017), announced that “Online
learning has reached a tipping point in higher education,” and that since its
beginnings with early adopters, it has become “an accepted way of delivering
education that is now deeply embedded in the majority of colleges and uni-
versities” (p. 4). The report, based on a 2017 survey of 1,287 higher education
administrators involved with online education, identifies factors related to the
maturing of online learning: growth in numbers of online courses offered and
in numbers of students enrolled; growing consideration of online learning as
critical to institutions’ strategic plans; increased focus on quality (e.g., Quality
Matters certification); increasingly positive faculty attitudes toward online
teaching and learning, particularly among those who try online teaching and
engage with instructional designers or participate in training workshops; a
sense that online teaching resulted in improved face-to-face teaching; and a
tendency to use instructional designers in light of the different skills needed
in online course design.
For the future, it points to the continued and growing significance of online
education. It concludes with a recommendation to develop communities of
practice “where members can exchange ideas and stories of what worked for
them teaching online and what didn’t” (p. 33). For music professors consid-
ering online teaching, this kind of information from faculty with experience
teaching online in the music disciplines would be most helpful as they plan
and design their own online courses.
Grade Increase: Tracking Distance Education in the

United States
Another report, Grade Increase: Tracking Distance Education in the United

States (Seaman et al., 2018), compiled by the Babson Survey Research
Group in partnership with the Online Learning Consortium, Pearson, and
Tyton Partners, focused on enrollments. It used information from the U.S.
Department of Education’s National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES)
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) database, with
the most recent data from fall 2016. Enrollment categories included students
In Person and Online: What’s the Difference? 9
enrolled exclusively in distance education courses, those enrolled in a mix of

distance and on-campus courses, and those enrolled in a minimum of one
distance course. The sample consisted of all active degree-granting higher
education institutions: public institutions, private for-profit institutions, and
private nonprofit institutions.

The report revealed that despite an overall downward trend in higher edu-
cation enrollment, distance student enrollments (i.e., students taking at least
one distance education course) had increased for the fourteenth straight year,
from 25.9% of all higher education enrollments in 2012 to 31.6% in 2016. The
2016 enrollments consisted of a total of 6,359,121 students, divided almost
evenly between students taking exclusively online courses and those taking a
mix of distance and on-campus courses. Of the total number of students, more
than 1 million studied at the graduate level and more than 5 million studied at
the undergraduate level. The report also noted that students enrolled in a mix
of courses could be taking their distance courses on campus and that most
students taking exclusively distance courses tended to be in the same state as
their institution (56.1%).
It included lists of the top fifty institutions by total number of students,
total number of students taking at least one distance course, total number of
students taking exclusively distance courses, and total number of students
enrolled in distance-only institutions, but it did not include information about
specific degree programs or disciplines. An author of the report noted the “re-
lentless” growth of distance enrollments during periods of ups and downs in
the economy and in higher education enrollments, and a Pearson executive
anticipated increased institutional commitment to distance learning.
CHLOE 4: Navigating the Mainstream
The Changing Landscape of Online Education (CHLOE) Project, a partner-

ship between Eduventures Research and Quality Matters, was created in 2016
to examine the structure and organization of college-level online education
in the United States, and the first report was released in 2017. The sample
consisted of chief online officers (COOs), assumed to be uniquely suited to as-
sess online learning at their two-year public institutions and four-year public
and private institutions. The number of participants has grown each year, with
367 participants contributing to the 2020 survey.
CHLOE 4, Navigating the Mainstream (Garrett et al., 2020), “presents
mounting evidence that online education is increasingly mainstream in
the fabric of U.S. colleges and universities” (p. 6). The report is extensive.
It covers multiple aspects of online learning, including enrollment trends,
course design, finances, support services, and organizational structure. As
indicated by the title of the report, online education is becoming increas-
ingly mainstream. Institutions are using a variety of approaches in adapting

their practices to support online education, and online education is likewise
adapting to institutional models. Although there was continued enrollment
growth in 2019, many schools reported stable rather than increased enroll-
ment. Fully online courses and programs continued to be more common
than blended models except at community colleges. Master’s programs were
the most commonly offered online programs, accounting for up to 35% of
online degree programs, with about 40% of master’s students studying on-
line. Faculty were the primary course developers, and instructional designers
were somewhat involved.
The report addresses learning activities in what might be considered a
typical online course. However, it notes that because direct observation
was not possible within the large sample, COOs provided that informa-
tion, and their insights on this topic were likely to vary. Nevertheless,
the findings showed that interaction with course materials (e.g., study of
materials, work on assignments) accounted for 50% of online student time;
interaction with instructors and other students (e.g., participation in dis-
cussion forums, team projects) accounted for 20% of their time; and time
spent with other staff (e.g., advisers) accounted for the remaining time. The
most common online student engagement techniques were assignments
and discussion board posts. Although online cheating continued to be a
commonly cited concern, 70% of the COOs found no difference between
their online and on-campus students; cheating was equally common or
uncommon.
Significantly, the report includes a qualification of the findings regarding
learning activities based on COOs’ opinions, which suggests that information
directly from online instructors would provide more clarity:
In summary, CHLOE 4’s examination of patterns of online student interaction

is useful but limited. The survey relies on the opinions of COOs in the absence of
more direct evidence, and despite clearer definitions it is likely that individual
respondents interpret similar arrangements differently, muddying the data. The
typical online course appears to be more materials-centric than the typical on-
campus one, but both modalities, on average and at the institutional level, warrant
additional characterization if important nuances and possibilities are to be under-
stood. (p. 53)
Moving Forward
The conclusion of Online education: Heading toward the future contains a rec-
ommendation for developing communities of practice for discussion of on-
line teaching practices and concerns, and the CHLOE 4 report points out the

limitations of its findings about student interaction due to lack of direct ob-
servation. It would be helpful for both current and prospective online music
professors to hear directly from practicing online music faculty about what
works and what does not work in their own disciplines, what pedagogical
practices they find most effective, and what recommendations they might
have for others in their disciplines who are engaged in or considering on-
line teaching. First steps in that direction are presented in this book in the
discipline-specific chapters of Part II.
Status of Online Music Instruction
What Is Online? A National Survey of Course Offerings

in Music and a Case Study in Music Theory
In line with the continued growth of online education in general, online

education in music also continues to grow, as reported in national surveys
conducted in 2013 and 2016 to identify specific music courses being taught
online. The 2013 sample consisted of members of the Association for
Technology in Music Instruction (ATMI) and the National Association of
Schools of Music (NASM). For the 2016 survey, the sample was expanded
to College Music Society (CMS) members listed as interested in online ed-
ucation and to 35 schools listed by NASM as offering distance-learning
degrees. The report of both surveys, “What Is Online? A National Survey of
Course Offerings in Music and a Case Study in Music Theory” (McConville
& Murphy, 2017), presents data on numbers of courses and programs as well
as some details regarding course size, faculty, content, delivery mode, course
materials, and instructional approach.
A comparison of the data obtained from the two surveys revealed an in-
crease in master’s and doctoral degrees, from 10 master’s and 6 doctoral
programs in 2013 to 14 master’s and 11 doctoral programs in 2016. Although
the number of respondents decreased, from 58 in 2013 to 43 in 2016, the
number of courses reported increased from 67 in 2013 to 76 in 2016. Most
of the online courses were 15-week, three-credit courses, in line with com-
parable face-to-face courses. Online courses were offered in fall, spring, and
summer, with the greatest number of courses offered during the summer.
Nearly 90% of the online courses were at the undergraduate level, and most
were lower-division courses.
There was little change from 2013 to 2016 in the courses offered. The
highest number of online courses remained in the subdisciplines of musi-

cology/music appreciation, music theory, music education, and music tech-
nology, with a greater variety of topics as indicated by course titles in 2016.
In contrast to the growth of online courses in these subdisciplines, courses in
music composition declined, and aural skills courses were no longer offered
in 2016, a decline that appears to support the idea that online learning is better
suited to knowledge-based courses than to skills-based courses.
In addition, there was a significant increase in typical class size: from fewer
than 50 students in 2013 to 75 or more in 2016. Because both classes and class
sizes increased, a question about the cause arose and was proposed as a po-
tential survey topic: whether class size increased because the class was offered
online or whether the number of classes increased due to increased class size.
Another change involved the instructors teaching the online classes, with
fewer classes taught by tenure-track and adjunct faculty and more classes
taught by non-tenure-track faculty. The authors speculated that this change
could be indicative of a general change in higher education. Some content
changes from 2013 to 2016 included small increases in online content (6.8%),
recorded lectures, and online assessments. However, there was a substantial
decrease in lecture/online meetings (15.6%) and online office hours (6%)—
another potential survey topic.
The kinds of materials used in online courses remained constant
(e.g., videos, audio examples, website links, slide presentations, and text
documents), but there was an increase in the use of social media and mobile
apps that suggests movement toward more active learning techniques. Course
development showed a significant change in 2016, with more faculty devel-
oping courses than publishers and professional authors, as in the findings of
the CHLOE 4 report. Further, online course development time increased in
tandem with the increase in faculty developers: 84.9% at a year or less, 6.6% at
one to two years, and 4.1% at two to three years, perhaps indicative of the lim-
ited time faculty may have available for development activities.
As a next step in studying online courses, the authors recommended “a
more comprehensive inquiry addressing specific teaching strategies, peda-
gogical frameworks, and curricular approaches that are generating successful
online music courses in various sub-disciplines and degrees,” and they con-
cluded, “Such a study, as well as a continued self-examination of our own on-
line offerings and blended learning course components, will ensure we are
taking the best steps towards more effective education in music” (McConville
& Murphy, 2017).
A Closer Look

Based on a random sample (40%) of NASM-accredited schools, Johnson and
Hawley (2017) found that 102 of the schools offered online classes, and they
further examined 60 programs from that sample. The findings showed ex-
ponential growth of online courses from 2007 to 2015, with music history,
music appreciation, and musicology as the most frequently offered online
courses. Graduate online music programs were briefly discussed, with music
education predominant, and audio engineering was representative of STEAM
courses due to its dual emphasis on artistic and technical aspects. (The ac-
ronym STEAM refers to science, technology, engineering, arts, and math.)
The authors acknowledged the pedagogical challenges involved, but they also
noted the opportunities for valuable learning experiences in various online
contexts: informal, formal, and STEAM. Their findings are similar to those
reported by McConville and Murphy (2017).
Littles (2014) surveyed 230 faculty from 160 randomly selected NASM-
accredited institutions and documented music faculty perceptions regarding
the suitability of specific music courses for online delivery, online music
faculty’s instructional practices, and features of online music courses. The
findings, based on a Likert scale, revealed that faculty generally considered
music appreciation, music business, music history, music research, music
theory, introduction to music education, and instrumental or choral litera-
ture somewhat suitable for online delivery, and they considered composition,
music education methods, aural skills courses, and applied lessons not suit-
able. These perceptions align with earlier views about the relative suitability
for online delivery of knowledge-based versus skills-based courses.
As an example, Phillips (2008) pointed out the successes with knowledge-
based content in online doctoral and master’s music education programs and
the challenges involved in developing musical and teaching skills. Hebert
(2007) also acknowledged the suitability of theoretical study for graduate-
level music education, but he also suggested that musical and instructional
skills could be addressed online when supported by technological advances.
Notably, most of Littles’s faculty respondents did not have prior experi-
ence teaching online, but those with online teaching experience rated the
knowledge-based courses, as well as aural skills and instrumental/choral
arranging courses, significantly more suitable for online delivery.
Commonalities and Distinctions
Research on the effectiveness of online learning has involved comparisons of

delivery media, which generally have resulted in findings of “no significant
difference” and the conclusion that learning advantages are due to instruc-

tional techniques rather than delivery media. With those findings in mind,
I move away from media comparisons and focus instead on characteristics
of face-to-face and online teaching and learning. I identify practical teaching
techniques and strategies that are effective in online courses and that lead to
high-quality learning.
“No Significant Difference” Phenomenon
Research has provided evidence that outcomes of online learning are at least as
good as those of traditional educational models. That is, the research showed
no significant differences in learning outcomes between online and face-to-
face instruction. The “no significant difference” phenomenon refers to a body
of media comparison studies that compare learning outcomes of students in
face-to-face courses with those of students in distance courses. Russell (1999)
collected and compiled a total of 355 of these kinds of studies dating back to
1928. Distance delivery modes included print materials associated with cor-
respondence courses, radio, television, and online. Examination of the studies
revealed that when course materials and methodology were held constant,
there were no significant differences in student learning outcomes between
the distance course and the face-to-face course. Because learning outcomes
in distance courses were neither better nor worse than those in face-to-face
courses, Russell named this result the “no significant difference” phenom-
enon. However, “no significant difference” does not mean unimportant; it
means that the media treatments being compared are not different and that
they have an equal impact on learning. However, the methodologies used in
these earlier studies have been criticized, as many lacked controls of course
and student variables that would influence outcomes, such as control groups
and random assignment; course materials and instructional methods; and
student preparation, motivation, and interest.
In contrast to the perceived design weaknesses of those studies, a frequently
cited and well-respected U.S. Department of Education meta-analysis of on-
line learning research (Means et al., 2010) used a rigorous screening process.
To qualify for selection, studies needed to report on learning that took place
primarily over the internet, compare online learning with face-to-face or
blended learning, report on completed research, measure learning outcomes

in the same way for all conditions, and use a controlled design. Findings re-
vealed that learning outcomes in online courses were “modestly” superior
to those in face-to-face courses (p. xiv), with a small advantage for blended
instruction. The authors noted that the learning advantages were due to

differences in curriculum materials, pedagogical aspects, and learning time,
rather than the delivery medium. These findings agree with the thinking of
Richard E. Clark, often cited about learning with media: “whenever learning
occurs, some medium or mix of media must be present to deliver instruc-
tion,” and “if learning occurs as a result of exposure to any media, the learning
is caused by the instructional method embedded in the media presentation”
(1994, p. 26). The report concluded, “The meta-analysis findings do not sup-
port simply putting an existing course online, but they do support redesigning
instruction to incorporate additional learning opportunities online” (p. 51).
Critiques of the Department of Education meta-analysis have indicated
some perceived shortcomings. Jaggars and Bailey (2010) disputed the finding
of superior outcomes in online and blended courses, stating that it did not
hold in the case of fully online courses in the typical college and university
settings, as only seven of the studies were conducted with undergraduate or
graduate students in full-semester courses. In addition, they raised questions
about implications regarding access and success for students in underserved
populations. In a report of research on online learning in postsecondary ed-
ucation not included in the Department of Education meta-analysis, Lack
(2013) found insufficient evidence to support claims that online or blended
learning is significantly either more or less effective than face-to-face learning
and noted the challenges involved in conducting rigorous research involving
educational outcomes and human subjects. On the other hand, Nguyen (2015)
considered the evidence of the effectiveness of online learning compared with
face-to-face learning strong but inconclusive and advocated moving beyond
the “no significant difference” phenomenon, citing Twigg’s work on the topic
and stating, “Online learning is a story that is still being written” (p. 316).
In her report for a Pew Symposium in Learning and Technology, Twigg
(2001) described discussions of how to go beyond the “no significant differ-
ence” phenomenon. She pointed out that although online courses provided
24/7 access and offered increased flexibility to students, most courses followed
traditional academic practices. She commented, “as long as we continue to
replicate traditional approaches online—and treat all students as if they were
the same—we will once again find the ‘no significant difference’ phenomenon
vis-à-vis quality” (p. 5). In response, symposium participants, who had several
years of direct experience with online learning, explored various innovative
models that might provide better approaches to improving the quality of stu-
dent learning. Among key points related to improving the quality of online
student learning were a focus on what instructors can do with technology
that they cannot do without it, the need to engage online students in active
learning, and awareness that students learn from one another and that they

take on the teaching role more frequently in distance courses than they do in
traditional classrooms. Participants expressed interest in learning from other
participants and using relevant elements from others’ approaches in their own
institutions. They concluded that individualization was the key to moving
beyond the “no significant difference” phenomenon, specifically by individ-
ualizing student learning and standardizing faculty practice, building consist-
ency based on knowledge about quality, access, and cost.
In a further exploration of the “no significant difference” phenomenon,
Conger (2005) cited two major criticisms of media comparison studies: lack
of control of variables (acknowledged as a fairly common issue in educational
research) and lack of grounding in educational theory. On the educational
theory issue, Conger advocated asking the right questions, such as, “If the
theory is that students learn better face to face, what is it about face to face
learning that we believe leads to better outcomes? Potential answers include
levels and type of interaction, teacher attention, and social learning” (pp. 2–3).
Although Conger cited these factors as elements of face-to-face instruction,
they are also integral features of the Community of Inquiry (CoI) theoretical
framework with reference to online and blended learning, discussed later in
this chapter. Conger also cited Twigg’s (2001) recommendations for improving
the quality of online learning and concluded that the best way to move beyond
the “no significant difference” phenomenon would be to focus on develop-
ment of pedagogies that make optimum use of current technologies.
Later, Twigg remarked that she was “somewhat mystified about the con-
tinuing concern about quality assurance in online learning. . . . The charac-
teristics of a good face-to-face course are the same as those of a high-quality
online-learning course” (in Chronicle of Higher Education, 2010). She men-
tioned student and faculty support, dependable infrastructure, and effective
assessment as determinants of any high-quality learning experience, regard-
less of delivery mode.
Gains, Losses, or Differences
When we first think about online teaching and learning, we may compare it
with features of face-to-face teaching and immediately notice what’s missing,
such as the ability to observe and respond to facial expressions, gestures,

and body language; dynamic presentations of musical concepts; animated
discussions; the opportunity for students to ask questions during or after class
and receive an immediate explanation; spontaneity, including those teaching
moments that arise unexpectedly; and intangibles—the “magic” that can

happen particularly in performance-based instruction. In other words, we
may think in terms of losses or drawbacks, what we can’t do because we’re not
with our students in the same place and at the same time. However, there are
also advantages, and both advantages and disadvantages of online teaching
and learning have been documented over several years. Music researchers
have studied both individual music courses and online music education de-
gree programs and have identified advantages and disadvantages. Some
findings apply primarily to courses in specific music disciplines, while others
apply to both individual courses and fully online programs.
Advantages and Disadvantages

Among frequently mentioned advantages of online graduate programs in
music education are the flexibility and convenience offered by the online
setting. Students can remain in their teaching positions while they pursue
graduate studies, a plus for those in more remote locations. They can apply
what they are learning in their own classrooms, and they can choose their
own best times to complete assignments. They are spared a commute to and
from classes following a full day of teaching, providing more time for work
on graduate assignments, their own class preparation, and other responsi-
bilities. Students may interact with other students at a distance, both in the
United States and internationally, and they may complete their studies in a
shorter time than would be possible in a summer program or a combined ac-
ademic year/summer studies program (Bauer, 2014; Groulx & Hernly, 2010;
Koutsoupidou, 2014; Sherbon & Kish, 2005).
The effectiveness of online graduate programs as a form of professional de-
velopment is also cited fairly frequently. Based on surveys and interviews with
graduates of a distance-learning music education master’s program, Walls
(2008) reported positive changes in their teaching philosophies, teaching
practices, and personal growth. These changes were related to interaction
with faculty and peers, real-world applications of learning, and academic
quality. Similarly, based on interviews with recent graduates of another online
graduate music education program, Kos and Goodrich (2012) reported ben-
eficial relationships between online program characteristics and professional
development. Course content was associated with changes in teaching philos-
ophy, and discussion boards were associated with informal peer interaction
and sharing of pedagogical ideas that sometimes resulted in rethinking in-

structional practices. Although the coursework in this program generally met
their professional development needs, some graduates felt that they would
have benefited from courses that were not offered online (e.g., conducting,
Orff approach). The researchers concluded that some students might be less

well suited to online learning and that some courses might be better suited to
face-to-face settings.
The relative suitability of particular students for online learning and spe-
cific courses for online delivery highlights the advantages and disadvantages
of online learning, and it often influences students’ choice of courses and of
graduate programs. Because online classes may not suit everyone’s learning
preference and because there are fewer elective course options in online
programs, sometimes related to the challenges of offering skills-based courses
online, students may enroll in an online or face-to-face graduate program
based on those preferences as well as on practical considerations such as the
ability to remain in their current teaching positions (Albert, 2015; Bauer,
2014; Groulx & Hernly, 2010).
Among frequently mentioned disadvantages of online learning are
lack of in-person interaction with classmates and reduced contact with
professors, both of which sometimes result in feelings of isolation (Bigatel
et al., 2012; Groulx & Hernly, 2010; Hansen, 2020; Koutsoupidou, 2014;
Walls, 2008). One researcher noted that graduate assistantships are not
available to students in online programs, with subsequent loss of poten-
tial mentoring opportunities with supervising faculty (Groulx & Hernly,
2010). Although the lack of in-person interaction with the professor
and classmates is most noticeable in asynchronous courses, the effect
is lessened when synchronous meetings are incorporated. On the other
hand, some students value flexibility and convenience over in-person
interaction.
A limited choice of electives is also cited as a disadvantage in online grad-
uate music education programs (Bauer, 2014; Groulx & Hernly, 2010).
Performance- based courses and other electives (e.g., Orff and Kodály
approaches, conducting, applied lessons) are typically not offered due to
movement requirements as well as audio quality, time delay, video issues, and
faculty availability to teach some of these courses online.
Finally, in their study of online graduate music education programs, Groulx
and Hernly stated:
the underlying belief is that an online degree in music education is not necessarily
better or worse than a school’s traditional campus-based counterpart. Rather, it is
simply a different method of achieving a university’s goal of raising the educational

level of the community it was created to serve. (2010, pp. 60–61)
Similarities and Differences

Although it’s understandable that we initially focus on what seems to be
missing or lost when we teach online, framing online instruction in terms
of what we can’t do may prevent us from seeing what might be possible. It
would be more productive to consider similarities and differences between
face-to-face and online teaching rather than to focus on losses. Course object-
ives, learning outcomes, and content are likely to remain the same, whether
the course is offered face-to-face or online. An obvious difference between
face-to-face and online classes involves time and location, one difference with
multiple implications for content presentation and interaction. Following
are some examples of similarities and differences within knowledge-based
courses.
The course design process is the same for both face-to-face and online
courses: setting goals and objectives; creating assessments to provide evidence
that students have achieved the objectives; planning learning experiences,
teaching techniques, and course materials that align with the objectives.
Face-to-face classes meet at a specific time in a specific location and follow
a set schedule. Online classes are not bound to a specific time and location,
but they may include synchronous meetings at specific times. Like face-to-
face classes, they typically follow a set schedule, but students have the flexi-
bility to choose the most convenient time to access course content.
Content presentation in the face-to-face music classroom may include a lec-
ture, playing of musical excerpts, and spontaneous musical demonstrations,
with opportunities for student input and questions—an effective approach
when instructor and students are together at the same time and in the same
place. Online, short video presentations are more effective given student
viewing behaviors, and some presentation applications (e.g., VoiceThread)
support interactivity.
Discussions in face-to-face classes occur within the time allotted for the
class, which places certain limitations on student participation: some students
are talkative, some are more reticent, and sometimes class ends before eve-
ryone has had an opportunity to contribute. Online classes support sev-
eral discussion options. As in the face-to-face format, discussions in online
classes may be held synchronously using videoconferencing applications.
Asynchronous discussions, typically open for at least several days, provide the
opportunity for students to think about what they want to say and craft their
responses before posting to a discussion board. Time does not run out, eve-
ryone in the class must contribute, and there is a written record of the conver-
sation. Video discussion platforms (e.g., VoiceThread, Flipgrid) offer a similar
time advantage.
Both face-to-face and online classes can support active learning approaches

such as group work and project-based learning. In face-to-face classes, part of
the class meeting time can be allotted to small-group discussion culminating
in summaries by a spokesperson for each group. A similar format is easily ar-
ranged in online classes by assigning small groups to breakout rooms during
synchronous meetings. And both face-to-face and online classes can accom-
modate student projects that involve reflection, application, and writing about
course concepts, with in-person presentations in face-to-face classes and syn-
chronous or asynchronous presentations online.
When the same course is taught both face-to-face and online or a face-to-
face course has been redesigned specifically for online delivery, the course
objectives and learning outcomes will remain the same, while content pre-
sentation and interaction will differ due to the separation of instructor and
students in time and location.
Standards
Accreditation and other standards provide direction for development and

implementation of online courses. Featured in this section are the National
Association of Schools of Music (NASM) and Quality Matters (QM). NASM
publishes accreditation standards for distance learning in music. The QM pro-
gram provides standards for developing quality online and blended courses,
as well as a peer review process and certification of quality online courses.
National Association of Schools of Music (NASM)

on Distance Learning
The NASM Handbook (National Association of Schools of Music,

2021) contains accreditation standards that provide benchmarks for quality
distance programs. It lists general standards for distance education “appli-
cable to programs that are partially or entirely delivered by distance learning”
(p. 80). Programs with more than 40% of requirements fulfilled via distance
learning are designated as distance-learning programs. Notably, in line with
concerns regarding the effectiveness of online learning, two of the standards
require equivalency between on-campus courses and distance courses. Other

standards address appropriate delivery media and issues related to student
verification.
Standard III.H contains all the requirements for distance education.
Standards most closely related to instruction are as follows:

3. Standards Applications
a. Distance learning programs must meet all NASM operational and
curricular standards for programs of their type and content. This
means that the functions and competencies required by applicable
standards are met even when distance learning mechanisms pre-
dominate in the total delivery system.
...
4. Standards
...
b. Delivery Systems, Verification, and Evaluation
(1) Delivery systems must be logically matched to the purposes of
each program. Delivery systems are defined as the operational
interrelationships of such elements as program or course con-
tent, interactive technologies, teaching techniques, schedules,
patterns of interaction between teacher and student, and evalua-
tion expectations and mechanisms.
(2) The institution must have processes that establish that the stu-
dent who registers in a distance education course or program is
the same student who participates in and completes the program
and receives academic credit. Verification methods are deter-
mined by the institution and may include, but are not limited to,
secure login and password protocols, proctored examinations,
and new or other technologies and practices.
...
d. Program Consistency and Equivalency
...
(2) When an identical program, or a program with an identical title,
is offered through distance learning as well as on campus, the in-
stitution must be able to demonstrate functional equivalency in
all aspects of each program. Mechanisms must be established to
assure equal quality among delivery systems.
e. Communication with Students. Instructions to students, expectations

for achievement, and evaluation criteria must be clearly stated and
readily available to all involved in a particular distance learning pro-
gram. Students must be fully informed of means for asking questions
and otherwise communicating with instructors and students as re-

quired. (pp. 80–81)
Standard X.C.2 specifies residence requirements in distance-education

graduate programs and implies various ways to fulfill those requirements:
Residence policies are determined by the institution. Normally, a period of con-

tinuous concentrated study within the graduate community is required. Programs
based on distance learning, or with a significant distance learning component,
must fulfill the function of community by providing experiences that produce inter-
action among graduate students and faculty. (p. 129)
Quality Matters (QM)
QM is a nonprofit organization whose purpose is to improve the quality of

online education through development of quality standards, professional de-
velopment in the use of rubrics and other practices targeted toward improve-
ment of online education, and a peer review and course certification process.
Some music professors report having completed QM or QM-based training,
and others have become QM reviewers. The QM Higher Education Rubric,
Sixth Edition, a research-based course design rubric, offers detailed criteria
for the design and evaluation of online courses. It consists of eight General
Standards and forty-two Specific Review Standards to be used in the design
and evaluation of online and blended courses. Although the complete rubric
is available only with membership in QM, a non-annotated version is avail-
able in PDF format on the QM website. The General Standards are:
Course Overview and Introduction

Learning Objectives (Competencies)
Assessment and Measurement
Instructional Materials
Learning Activities and Learner Interaction
Course Technology
Learner Support
Accessibility and Usability
The following selected Specific Review Standards emphasize the alignment of

all course components:
...
Learning Objectives (Competencies)
2.1 The course learning objectives, or course/program competencies,
describe outcomes that are measurable.
...
2.4 The relationship between learning objectives or competencies and
learning activities is clearly stated.
...
Assessment and Measurement
3.1 The assessments measure the achievement of the stated learning
objectives or competencies.
...
Instructional Materials
4.1 The instructional materials contribute to the achievement of the
stated learning objectives or competencies.
4.2 The relationship between the use of instructional materials and com-
pleting learning activities is clearly explained.
...
Learning Activities and Learner Interaction
5.1 The learning activities promote the achievement of the stated learning
objectives or competencies.
5.2 Learning activities provide opportunities for interaction that support
active learning. . . . (Quality Matters, 2020)
Other Specific Review Standards refer to technologies and course tools that
support active learning. Even in the abbreviated format, these standards are
useful for anyone who is designing an online course or redesigning a face-to-
face course for online delivery.
The Seven Principles for Good Practice

in Undergraduate Education
Teaching and learning principles provide quality standards and guidelines for
practices that support and improve effective teaching and learning. The Seven

Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education (Chickering &
Gamson, 1987) were developed as a framework for evaluating good teaching.
The authors state, “These principles are not ten commandments shrunk to a
twentieth century attention span. They are intended as guidelines for faculty
members, students, and administrators—with support from state agencies
and trustees—to improve teaching and learning” (p. 4).
Although the Seven Principles were originally researched and devel-
oped as guidelines for improving undergraduate teaching and learning
in traditional courses and programs, they apply as well to graduate edu-
cation, and they hold across academic disciplines, including music. The
authors emphasize that while the individual practices are important, their
use in combination increases their overall effectiveness; that the princi-
ples work well within both professional programs and the liberal arts; and
that they work well for different types of students. Most of these princi-
ples are based on constructivist teaching practices, most notably the use
of active learning strategies, collaborative learning, and multiple learning
formats. According to the Seven Principles, good practice in undergrad-
uate education:
1. Encourages contacts between students and faculty.

2. Develops reciprocity and cooperation among students.
3. Uses active learning techniques.
4. Gives prompt feedback.
5. Emphasizes time on task.
6. Communicates high expectations.
7. Respects diverse talents and ways of learning. (Chickering & Gamson,
1987, p. 3)
As instructional technologies continued to advance and inform teaching

and learning in higher education, Chickering and Ehrmann (1996) pointed
out that to maximize the power of new technologies, they should be used in
a manner consistent with the Seven Principles. They explained, “Any given
instructional strategy can be supported by a number of contrasting technol-
ogies (old and new), just as any given technology might support different
instructional strategies. But for any given instructional strategy, some tech-
nologies are better than others” (p. 3). To illustrate their point, they described
what they considered to be among the most economical and appropriate ways
to use technologies current at that time “to advance the Seven Principles”
(p. 3). Ways to update implementation of the various principles included

asynchronous communication (e.g., email, computer conferencing) to sup-
port contact between students and faculty (Principle 1) and use of video feed-
back to assist with critique of preservice teachers (Principle 4). In concluding,
they encouraged faculty members to seek out technologies that were “inter-
active, problem oriented, relevant to real-world issues, and that evoke student
motivation” (p. 6). That advice still holds.
Since that time, other researchers have applied the Seven Principles to
online learning, with suggestions for implementation and use in instructor
evaluation. Graham et al. (2001) used the Seven Principles to evaluate four
online courses. Based on their findings, they developed a parallel set of
lessons for online instruction that might serve as a basis for further thought
and research. Palloff and Pratt (2003) expanded Graham et al.’s lessons with
additional suggestions for best practice that can be extended to online music
learning. Their collective research indicates that while content and learning
outcomes remain the same, content presentation and interaction differ; and
effective teaching, whether online or face-to-face, incorporates the Seven
Principles. Taken together, the Seven Principles, the lessons for online in-
struction, and the practical suggestions provide some useful guidelines
for online learning in music, as I have noted previously (Bowman, 2014,
pp. 182–185).
Principle 1: Good practice encourages student/faculty contact. Frequent
student-faculty contact in and out of classes is the most important factor in
student motivation and involvement.
• Lesson for online instruction: Instructors should provide clear guidelines

for interaction with students.
• Suggestions for best practice: Instructors should inform students of their
response times for email (e.g., 24 hours) and for returning assignments,
and then be sure to observe those times.
Principle 2: Good practice develops reciprocity and cooperation among

students. Learning is enhanced when it is more like a team effort. Good
learning, like good work, is collaborative and social, not competitive and
isolated.
• Lesson for online instruction: Well-designed discussion assignments facil-

itate meaningful cooperation among students.
• Suggestions for best practice: Instructors should provide focused discus-
sion questions that engage students with content, open-ended questions,
or tasks in which students demonstrate understanding and application

of knowledge. Additional discussion forums can support small-group
work on specific problem-solving tasks and collaborative projects that
involve social interaction. Instructors should post their expectations for
discussions; participation should be required and graded based on the
quality, not the length, of posts.
Principle 3: Good practice uses active learning techniques. Learning is not a

spectator sport. Students do not learn much just by sitting in classes listening
to teachers, memorizing prepackaged assignments, and spitting out answers.
They must talk about what they are learning, write about it, relate it to past
experiences, and apply it to their lives.
• Lesson for online instruction: Students should present course projects.

• Suggestions for best practice: Individual students can present projects syn-
chronously or asynchronously, and others in the course can comment on
the topic, ask questions, or raise issues related to the topic. Engagement
with authentic, real-life issues, case studies, or simulations that promote
interactive learning and convey high expectations (Principle 6) would
precede the presentations. Because not all learning in an online course
takes place online, students might also conduct research on an issue of
interest and report the findings to the group.
Principle 4: Good practice gives prompt feedback. Knowing what you know
and what you don’t know focuses learning. Students need appropriate feed-
back on performance to benefit from courses.
• Lesson for online instruction: Instructors need to provide two types of

feedback: information feedback and acknowledgment feedback.
• Suggestions for best practice: Instructors need to respond to stu-
dent questions and provide feedback on assignments in a timely
fashion. Information feedback could consist of answers to questions
or comments on assignments. Acknowledgment feedback could be an
email confirming receipt of a student assignment with an indication of
when to expect a more detailed response. Instructors can contribute
to discussion forums to point out connections among related issues or

concepts, offer clarifications, and summarize major points. They need to
maintain a balance, making their presence known but not dominating
the discussion.

Principle 5: Good practice emphasizes time on task. Time plus energy equals
learning. There is no substitute for time on task. Learning to use one’s time
well is critical for students and professionals alike.
• Lesson for online instruction: Online courses need deadlines.

• Suggestions for best practice: Online students need an optimum amount
of structure, as online courses demand more self-discipline, organi-
zation, and time management than face-to-face courses. Due dates for
discussions and assignments provide structure, as well as opportunities
to evaluate progress and make recommendations that will help students
complete the course successfully. Regularly scheduled synchronous
meetings can provide consistent contact with the instructor and other
students comparable to the structure built into on-campus face-to-face
courses.
Principle 6: Good practice communicates high expectations. Expect more,

and you will get more. High expectations are important for everyone—for the
poorly prepared, for those unwilling to exert themselves, and for the bright
and well motivated.
• Lesson for online instruction: Challenging tasks, sample cases, and praise
for quality work communicate high expectations.
• Suggestions for best practice: Instructors can communicate high
standards by designing rigorous and challenging online courses, cre-
ating challenging assignments that require analysis and synthesis of
reading materials, modeling the quality of discussion posts they expect of
students, and requiring and fostering active participation. Positive feed-
back within a discussion forum on particularly thoughtful or insightful
posts communicates high expectations, as do individual communica-
tions with students who fall behind or fail to participate.
Principle 7: Good practice respects diverse talents and ways of learning.

There are many roads to learning. People bring different talents and styles of
learning to college.
• Lesson for online instruction: Allowing students to choose project topics

incorporates diverse views into online courses.
• Suggestions for best practice: Choice in the selection of projects
highlights individual student interests and enriches the course with
multiple points of view. It is motivating because it allows students to

pursue personally meaningful topics and tasks in ways that build upon
their individual strengths. Instructors can also incorporate assignments
and learning activities that tap into the various learning modalities
(visual, auditory, kinesthetic) and learning styles (e.g., collaborative,
reflective). By using multiple media and both collaborative and indi-
vidual strategies, instructors can provide significant experiences for
all students while simultaneously challenging them to use less familiar
modalities or styles.
Community of Inquiry Theoretical Framework
Founded on a collaborative constructivist view of teaching and learning, the

Community of Inquiry (CoI) theoretical framework is “a generic and coherent
structure of a transactional educational experience whose core function is to
manage and monitor the dynamic for thinking and learning collaboratively”
(Garrison, 2017, p. 24). It is a frequently used guide for the study and prac-
tice of e-learning, defined as “the utilization of electronically mediated asyn-
chronous and synchronous communication for the purpose of thinking and
learning collaboratively” (p. 2) and consisting primarily of online and blended
learning. E-learning is not to be considered a replacement for face-to-face
learning but rather a means for integrating the strengths of both online and
face-to-face learning experiences. And some instructors teaching traditional
face-to-face classes have been incorporating time-and place-independent
elements of online learning to increase options and opportunities for their
students.
The CoI framework “represents a process of designing and delivering deep
and meaningful learning experiences through the development of three inter-
dependent elements—social presence, cognitive presence and teaching pres-
ence” (Garrison, 2017, p. 24). Each of the elements is critical to a successful
online learning experience: social presence represents engagement with
participants; cognitive presence represents engagement with content; and
teaching presence represents engagement with goals and direction. Figure 1.1
displays the relationships among these presences, and description of each of
the presences follows.
Co
Social Cognitive m
m
Presence Presence
un
ns
ica
tio
tio
lica
nM
App

ediu
Engagement Supporting
Discourse Engagement
with
m
with
Partcipants Content
EDUCATIONAL
EXPERIENCE
Setting Regulating
Climate Learning
Dis
t
te x
Engagement
cip
on
Re Goals/Direction
lin
C
eS
al
on
ta
da i
at
n
rd
s Teaching Presence duc
E
Figure 1.1 Community of Inquiry framework.

Republished with permission of Taylor and Francis Group LLC–Books, from D. R. Garrison, E-Learning
in the 21st Century: A Community of Inquiry Framework for Research and Practice, 3rd ed., 2017.
Permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center Inc.
Social Presence: Engagement with Participants
Social presence is defined as “the ability of participants to identify with a

group or course of study, communicate purposefully in a trusting environ-
ment, and develop personal and affective relationships progressively by way
of projecting their individual personalities” (Garrison, 2017, p. 42). In other
words, the primary identification is with an academic group in which per-
sonal relationships can develop in a natural way. Early concerns related to
social presence focused on the absence of visual and audio cues in asynchro-
nous communication (e.g., body language and vocal intonation) and how that
might affect the way communications are interpreted. However, results of re-
search on the CoI framework have shown that students can make connections
in text-based communications by using greetings, encouragement, and per-
sonal narratives. Results have also revealed that although text-based commu-
nication has social limitations, it also offers advantages not available in the
face-to-face classroom, such as reflection and a permanent written record of
a discussion. In an academic context, social presence does not consist merely
of social engagement; it creates an environment in which participants can feel
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Now, mother,” continued Sir John, “the wife I should like is one
whose heart, whose inmost nature, should be at once open to my
view, unwarped and undisguised by the customs and fashions of the
world.”
“Upon my word, John, you are more than usually eloquent this
morning,” said Lady Gowan, laughing. “But pray now, do tell me,
John, shortly and unequivocally, what is the drift of this long,
flowery, and very sensible speech of yours? for that there is a drift in
it I can clearly perceive. You are aiming at something which you do
not like to plump upon me at once.”
Sir John looked a good deal confused on finding that his mother’s
shrewdness had detected a latent purpose in his remarks, and
endeavoured to evade the acknowledgment of that purpose, until he
should have her opinion of the observations he had made; and in this
he succeeded. Having pressed her on this point—
“Well, my son,” replied Lady Gowan, “if you think that you cannot
find a woman in a station of life corresponding to your own that will
suit your taste, look for her in any other you please; and, when
found, take her. Consult your own happiness, John, and in doing so
you will consult mine. I will not object to your marrying whomsoever
you please. All that I bargain for is, that she be a perfectly virtuous
woman, and of irreproachable character; and I don’t think this is
being unreasonable. But do now, John, tell me at once,” she added,
in a graver tone, and taking her son solemnly by the hand, “have you
fixed your affections on a woman of humble birth and station? I
rather suspect this is the case.”
“I have then, mother,” replied Sir John, returning his mother’s
expressive and affectionate pressure of the hand; “the daughter of a
humble yeoman, a woman who——” But we will spare the reader the
infliction of the high-flown encomiums of all sorts which Sir John
lavished on the object of his affections. Suffice it to say, that they
included every quality of both mind and person which go to the
adornment of the female sex.
When he had concluded, Lady Gowan, who made the necessary
abatements from the panegyric her son had passed on the lady of his
choice, said that, with regard to his attachment, she could indeed
have wished it had fallen on one somewhat nearer his own station in
life, but that, nevertheless, she had no objection whatever to accept
of Miss Harrison as a daughter-in-law, since she was his choice.
“Nay,” she added, smiling, “if she only possesses one-tenth—ay, one-
tenth, John—of the good qualities with which you have endowed her,
I must say you are a singularly fortunate man to have fallen in with
such a treasure. But, John, allow me to say that, old woman as I am, I
think that I could very easily show you that your prejudices, vulgar
prejudices I must call them, against the higher classes of society, are
unreasonable, unjust, and, I would add, illiberal, and therefore
wholly unworthy of you. Does the elegance, the refinement, the
accomplishments, the propriety of manner and delicacy of
sentiment, to be met with in these circles, go for nothing with you?
Does——”
“My dear mother,” here burst in Sir John, “if you please, we will
not argue the point; for, in truth, I do not feel disposed just now to
argue about anything. I presume I am to understand, my ever kind
and indulgent parent, that I have your full consent to marry Miss
Harrison—that is, of course, if Miss Harrison will marry me?”
“Fully and freely, my child,” said the old lady, now flinging her
arms around her son’s neck, while a tear glistened in her eye; “and
may God bless your union, and make it happy!”
Sir John with no less emotion returned the embrace of his
affectionate parent, and, in the most grateful language he could
command, thanked her for her ready compliance with his wishes.
On the day following that on which the preceding conversation
between Sir John Gowan and his mother took place, the inmates of
Todshaws were surprised at the appearance of a splendid equipage
driving up towards the house.
“Wha in a’ the world’s this?” said Jeanie to her father, as they both
stood at the door, looking at the glittering vehicle, as it flashed in the
sun and rolled on towards them. “Some travellers that hae mistaen
their road.”
“Very likely,” replied her father; “yet I canna understand what kind
o’ a mistake it could be that should bring them to such an out-o’-the-
way place as this. It’s no a regular carriage road—that they micht hae
seen; an’ if they hae gane wrang, they’ll find some difficulty in getting
richt again. But here they are, sae we’ll sune ken a’ about it.”
As Mr Harrison said this, the carriage, now at the distance of only
some twenty or thirty yards from the house, stopped; a gentleman
stepped out, and advanced smiling towards Mr Harrison and his
daughter. They looked surprised, nay confounded; for they could not
at all comprehend who their visitor was.
“How do you do, Mr Harrison?” exclaimed the latter, stretching
out his hand to the person he addressed; “and how do you do, Miss
Harrison?” he said, taking Jeanie next by the hand.
In the stranger’s tones and manner the acute perceptions of Miss
Harrison recognised something she had heard and seen before, and
the recognition greatly perplexed her; nor was this perplexity
lessened by the discovery which she also made, that the countenance
of the stranger recalled one which she had seen on some former
occasion. In short, the person now before her she thought presented
a most extraordinary likeness to the fiddler—only that he had no
fiddle, that he was infinitely better dressed, and that his pockets were
not sticking out with lumps of cheese and cold beef. That they were
the same person, however, she never dreamed for a moment.
In his daughter’s perplexity on account of the resemblances
alluded to, Mr Harrison did not participate, as, having paid little or
no attention to the personal appearance of the fiddler, he detected
none of them; and it was thus that he replied to the stranger’s
courtesies with a gravity and coolness which contrasted strangely
with the evident embarrassment and confusion of his daughter,
although she herself did not well know how this accidental
resemblance, as she deemed it, should have had such an effect upon
her.
Immediately after the interchange of the commonplace civilities
above mentioned had passed between the stranger and Mr Harrison
and his daughter—
“Mr Harrison,” he said, “may I have a private word with you?”
“Certainly, sir,” replied the former. And he led the way into a little
back parlour.
“Excuse us for a few minutes, Miss Harrison,” said the stranger,
with a smile, ere he followed, and bowing gallantly to her as he
spoke.
On entering the parlour, Mr Harrison requested the stranger to
take a seat, and placing himself in another, he awaited the
communication of his visitor.
“Mr Harrison,” now began the latter, “in the first place, it may be
proper to inform you that I am Sir John Gowan of Castle Gowan.”
“Oh!” said Mr Harrison, rising from his seat, approaching Sir
John, and extending his hand towards him; “I am very happy indeed
to see Sir John Gowan. I never had the pleasure of seeing you before,
sir; but I have heard much of you, and not to your discredit, I assure
you, Sir John.”
“Well, that is some satisfaction, at any rate, Mr Harrison,” replied
the baronet, laughing. “I am glad that my character, since it happens
to be a good one, has been before me. It may be of service to me. But
to proceed to business. You will hardly recognise in me, my friend, I
daresay,” continued Sir John, “a certain fiddler who played to you at
a certain wedding lately, and to whose music you and your family
danced on the green in front of your own house the other night.”
Mr Harrison’s first reply to this extraordinary observation was a
broad stare of amazement and utter non-comprehension. But after a
few minutes’ pause thus employed, “No, certainly not, sir,” he said,
still greatly perplexed and amazed. “But I do not understand you.
What is it you mean, Sir John?”
“Why,” replied the latter, laughing, “I mean very distinctly that I
was the musician on both of the occasions alluded to. The
personification of such a character has been one of my favourite
frolics; and however foolish it may be considered, I trust it will at
least be allowed to have been a harmless one.”
“Well, this is most extraordinary,” replied Mr Harrison, in great
astonishment. “Can it be possible? Is it really true, Sir John, or are ye
jesting?”
“Not a bit of that, I assure you, sir. I am in sober earnest. But all
this,” continued Sir John, “is but a prelude to the business I came
upon. To be short, then, Mr Harrison: I saw and particularly marked
your daughter on the two occasions alluded to, and the result, in few
words, is, that I have conceived a very strong attachment to her. Her
beauty, her cheerfulness, her good temper, and simplicity, have won
my heart, and I have now come to offer her my hand.”
“Why, Sir John, this—this,” stammered out the astonished farmer,
“is more extraordinary still. You do my daughter and myself great
honour, Sir John—great honour, indeed.”
“Not a word of that,” replied the knight, “not a word of that, Mr
Harrison. My motives are selfish. I am studying my own happiness,
and therefore am not entitled to any acknowledgments of that kind.
You, I hope, sir, have no objection to accept of me as a son-in-law;
and I trust your daughter will have no very serious ones either. Her
affections, I hope, are not preengaged?”
“Not that I know of, Sir John,” replied Mr Harrison; “indeed, I may
venture to say positively that they are not. The girl has never yet, that
I am aware of, thought of a husband—at least, not more than young
women usually do; and as to my having any objections, Sir John, so
far from that, I feel, I assure you, extremely grateful for such a
singular mark of your favour and condescension as that you have just
mentioned.”
“And you anticipate no very formidable ones on the part of your
daughter?”
“Certainly not, Sir John; it is impossible there should.”
“Will you, then, my dear sir,” added Sir John, “be kind enough to
go to Miss Harrison and break this matter to her, and I will wait your
return?”
With this request the farmer instantly complied; and having found
his daughter, opened to her at once the extraordinary commission
with which he was charged. We would fain describe, but find
ourselves wholly incompetent to the task, the effect which Mr
Harrison’s communication had upon his daughter, and on the other
female members of the family, to all of whom it was also soon
known. There was screaming, shouting, laughing, crying, fear, joy,
terror, and amazement, all blended together in one tremendous
medley, and so loud that it reached the ears of Sir John himself, who,
guessing the cause of it, laughed very heartily at the strange uproar.
“But, oh! the cauld beef an’ the cheese that I crammed into his
pockets, father,” exclaimed Jeanie, running about the room in great
agitation. “He’ll never forgie me that—never, never,” she said, in
great distress of mind. “To fill a knight’s pockets wi’ dauds o’ beef
and cheese! Oh! goodness, goodness! I canna marry him. I canna see
him after that. It’s impossible, father—impossible, impossible!”
“If that be a’ your objections, Jeanie,” replied her father, smiling,
“we’ll soon get the better o’t. I’ll undertake to procure ye Sir John’s
forgiveness for the cauld beef and cheese—that’s if ye think it
necessary to ask a man’s pardon for filling his pockets wi’ most
unexceptionable provender. I wish every honest man’s pouches war
as weel lined, lassie, as Sir John’s was that nicht.” Saying this, Mr
Harrison returned to Sir John, and informed him of the result of his
mission, which was—but this he had rather made out than been told,
for Jeanie could not be brought to give any rational answer at all—
that his addresses would not, he believed, be disagreeable to his
daughter, “which,” he added, “is, I suppose, all that you desire in the
meantime, Sir John.”
“Nothing more, nothing more, Mr Harrison; she that’s not worth
wooing’s not worth winning. I only desired your consent to my
addresses, and a regular and honourable introduction to your
daughter. The rest belongs to me. I will now fight my own battle,
since you have cleared the way, and only desire that you may wish
me success.”
“That I do with all my heart,” replied the farmer; “and, if I can lend
you a hand, I will do it with right good will.”
“Thank you, Mr Harrison, thank you,” replied Sir John; “and now,
my dear sir,” he continued, “since you have so kindly assisted me
thus far, will you be good enough to help me just one step farther?
Will you now introduce me in my new character to your daughter?
Hitherto she has known me only,” he said, smiling as he spoke, “as
an itinerant fiddler, and I long to meet her on a more serious footing
—and on one,” he added, again laughing, “I hope, a trifle more
respectable.”
“That I’ll very willingly do, Sir John,” replied Mr Harrison, smiling
in his turn; “but I must tell you plainly, that I have some doubts of
being able to prevail on Jane to meet you at this particular moment.
She has one most serious objection to seeing you.”
“Indeed!” replied Sir John, with an earnestness that betokened
some alarm. “Pray, what is that objection?”
“Why, sir,” rejoined the latter, “allow me to reply to that question
by asking you another. Have you any recollection of carrying away
out of my house, on the last night you were here, a pocketful of
cheese and cold beef?”
“Oh! perfectly, perfectly,” said Sir John, laughing, yet somewhat
perplexed. “Miss Harrison was kind enough to furnish me with the
very liberal supply of the articles you allude to; cramming them into
my pocket with her own fair hands.”
“Just so,” replied Mr Harrison, now laughing in his turn. “Well,
then, to tell you a truth, Sir John, Jane is so dreadfully ashamed of
that circumstance, that she positively will not face you.”
“Oh ho! is that the affair?” exclaimed the delighted baronet. “Why,
then, if she won’t come to us, we’ll go to her; so lead the way, Mr
Harrison, if you please.” Mr Harrison did lead the way, and Jane was
caught.
Beyond this point our story need not be prolonged, as here all its
interest ceases. We have only now to add, then, that the winning
manners, gentle dispositions, and very elegant person of Sir John
Gowan, very soon completed the conquest he aimed at; and Jeanie
Harrison, in due time, became Lady Gowan.
PEAT-CASTING TIME.
By Thomas Gillespie.
In the olden times, there were certain fixed occasions when labour
and frolic went hand in hand—when professional duty and
kindhearted glee mutually kissed each other. The “rockin’”
mentioned by Burns—
On Fasten e’en we had a rockin’—
I still see in the dim and hazy distance of the past. It is only under the
refractive medium of vigorous recollection that I can again bring up
to view (as the Witch of Endor did Samuel) those images that have
been reposing, “’midst the wreck of things that were,” for more than
fifty years. Yet my early boyhood was familiar with these social senile
and juvenile festivities. There still sits Janet Smith, in her toy-mutch
and check-apron, projecting at intervals the well-filled spindle into
the distance. Beside her is Isabel Kirk, elongating and twirling the yet
unwound thread. Nanny Nivison occupies a creepy on the further
side of the fire (making the third Fate!), with her shears. Around, and
on bedsides, are seated Lizzy Gibson, with her favoured lad; Tam
Kirkpatrick, with his jo Jean on his knee; Rob Paton the stirk-herd;
and your humble servant. And “now the crack gaes round, and who
so wilful as to put it by?” The story of past times; the report of recent
love-matches and miscarriages; the gleeful song, bursting unbid
from the young heart, swelling forth in beauty and in brightness like
the waters from the rock of Meribah; the occasional female
remonstrance against certain welcome impertinences, in shape of,
“Come now, Tam—nane o’ yer nonsense.” “Will! I say, be peaceable,
and behave yersel afore folk. ’Od, ye’ll squeeze the very breath out o’
a body.”
Till, in a social glass o’ strunt,
They parted off careering
On sic a night.
I’ve heard a lilting at our ewe-milking.
How few of the present generation have ever heard of this “lilting,”
except in song. It is the gayest and sunniest season of the year. The
young lambs, in their sportive whiteness, are coursing it, and
bleating it, responsive to their dams, on the hill above. The old ewes
on the plain are marching—
The labour much of man and dog—
to the pen or fold. The response to the clear-toned bleat of their

woolly progeny is given, anon and anon, in a short, broken, low bass.
It is the raven conversing with the jackdaw! All is bustle, excitement,
and badinage.
“Weer up that ewe, Jenny, lass. Wha kens but her woo may yet be a
blanket for you and ye ken wha to sleep in!”
“Haud yer tongue, Tammie, and gang hame to yer books and yer
schoolin. Troth, it will be twa days ere the craws dirty your kirk
riggin!”
Wouf, wouf, wouf!—hee, hee, hee!—hoch, hoch, hoch!—there in
they go, and in they are, their horny heads wedged over each other,
and a trio of stout, well-made damsels, with petticoats tied up “à la
breeches,” tugging away at their well-filled dugs.
“Troth, Jenny, that ewe will waur ye; ’od, I think ye hae gotten
haud o’ the auld tup himsel. He’s as powerfu, let me tell ye, as auld
Francie, wham ye kissed sae snug last nicht ayont the peat-mou.”
“Troth, at weel, Tam, ye’re a fearfu liar. They wad be fonder than I
am o’ cock birds wha wad gie tippence for the stite o’ a howlet.”
“Howlet here, howlet there, Jenny, ye ken weel his auld brass will
buy you a new pan.”
At this crisis the crack becomes general and inaudible from its
universality, mixed as it is with the bleating of ewes, the barking of
dogs, together with the singing of herd-laddies and of your humble
servant.
Harvest is a blithe time! May all the charms of “Sycorax, toads,
beetles, bats, light on him” who shall first invent a reaping-machine!
The best of all reaping-machines is “the human arm divine,” whether
brawny or muscular, or soft and rounded. The old woman of sixty
sits all year long at her domestic occupations—you would deem her
incapable of any out-door exertions; but, at the sound of the harvest-
horn, she renews her youth, and sallies forth into the harvest-field,
with hook over shoulder, and a heart buoyant with the spirit of the
season, to take her place and drive her rig with the youngest there.
The half-grown boy and girl of fourteen are mingled up in duty and
in frolic, in jest and jibe, and jeer and laugh, with the stoutest and the
most matured. Mothers and daughters, husbands and wives, and,
above and beyond all, “lads and lasses, lovers gay!” mix and mingle
in one united band, for honest labour and exquisite enjoyment; and
when at last the joyous kirn is won—when the maiden of straw is
borne aloft and in triumph, to adorn for twelve months the wall of
the farmer’s ben—when the rich and cooling curds-and-cream have
been ramhorn-spooned into as many mouths as there are persons in
the “toun”—then comes the mighty and long-anticipated festival, the
roasted ox, the stewed sheep, the big pot enriched with the cheering
and elevating draught, the punch dealt about in ladles and in jugs,
the inspiring fiddle, the maddening reel, and the Highland fling.
We cannot but remember such things were,
And were most dear to us!
Hay harvest, too, had its soft and delicate tints, resembling those
of the grain harvest. As the upper rainbow curves and glows with
fainter colouring around the interior and the brighter, so did the hay
harvest of yore anticipate and prefigure, as it were, the other. The
hay tedded to the sun; the barefooted lass, her locks floating in the
breeze, her cheeks redolent of youth, and her eyes of joy, scattering
or collecting, carting or ricking, the sweetly-scented meadow
produce, under a June sun and a blue sky!
Oh, to feel as I have felt,
Or be what I have been!—
the favoured lover, namely, of that youthful purity, now in its
fourteenth summer—myself as pure and all unthinking of aught but
affection the most intense, and feelings the most soft and
unaccountable.
Ah, little did thy mother think,
That day she cradled thee,
What lands thou hadst to travel in,
What death thou hadst to dee!
Poor Jeanie Johnston! I have seen her, only a few weeks ago, during
the sittings of the General Assembly, sunk in poverty, emaciated by
disease, the wife of an old soldier, himself disabled from work,
tenanting a dark hovel in Pipe’s Close, Castlehill of Edinburgh.
In the upper district of Dumfriesshire—the land of my birth, and of
all those early associations which cling to me as the mistletoe to the
oak, and which are equally hallowed with that druidical excrescence
—there are no coals, but a superabundance of moss; consequently
peat-fires are very generally still, and were, at the time of which I
speak, universally, made use of; and a peat-fire, on a cold, frosty
night of winter, when every star is glinting and goggling through the
blue, or when the tempest raves, and
There’s no a star in a’ the cary,
is by no means to be despised. To be sure, it is short-lived—but then

it kindles soon; it does not, it is true, entertain us with fantastic and
playful jets of flame—but then its light is full, united, and steady; the
heat which it sends out on all sides is superior to that of coals. Wood
is sullen and sulky, whether in its log or faggot form. It eats away
into itself, in a cancer ignition. But the blazing peat—
The bleezing ingle, and the clean hearth-stane—
is the very soul of cheerfulness and comfort. But then peats must be
prepared. They do not grow in hedges, nor vegetate in meadows.
They must be cut from the black and consolidated moss; and a
peculiarly-constructed spade, with a sharp edge and crooked ear,
must be made use of for that purpose; and into the field of operation
must be brought, at casting-time, the spademen, with their spades;
and the barrowmen, and women, boys, and girls, with their barrows;
and the breakfast sowans, with their creamy milk, cut and crossed
into circles and squares; and the dinner stew, with its sappy potatoes
and gusty-onioned mutton fragments; and the rest at noon, with its
active sports and feats of agility; and, in particular, with its jumps
from the moss-brow into the soft, marshy substance beneath—and
thereby hangs my tale, which shall be as short and simple as
possible.
One of the loveliest visions of my boyhood is Nancy Morrison. She
was a year or so older than me; but we went and returned from
school together. She was the only daughter of a poor widow woman,
who supported herself in a romantic glen on the skirts of the
Queensberry Hills, by bleaching or whitening webs. In those days,
the alkalies and acids had not yet superseded the slower progress of
whitening green linen by soap-boiling, trampling, and alternate
drying in the sun, and wetting with pure running water. Many is the
time and oft that Nanny and I have wielded the watering-pan, in this
fairy, sunny glen, all day long. Whilst the humble-bee boomed past
us, the mavis occupied the thorn-tree, and the mother of Nanny
employed herself in some more laborious department of the same
process, Nanny and I have set us down on the greensward—in tenaci
gramine—played at chucks, “head him and cross him,” or some such
amusement. At school, Nanny had ever a faithful defender and
avenger in me; and I have even purloined apples and gooseberries
from the castle garden—and all for the love I bore “to my Nanny, oh!”
I know not that any one has rightly described a first love. It is not
the love of man and woman, though that be fervent and terrible; it is
not the love of mere boy and girlhood, though that be disinterested
and engrossing; but it is the love of the period of life which unites the
two. “Is there a man whose blood is warm within him” who does not
recollect it? Is there a woman who has passed through the novitiate
of fifteen, who has not still a distinct impression of the feeling of
which I speak? It is not sexual, and yet it can only exist betwixt the
sexes. It is the sweetest delusion under which the soul of a created
being can pass. It is modest, timid, retiring, bashful; yet, in absence
of the adored—in seclusion, in meditation, and in dreams—it is bold,
resolute, and determined. There is no plan, no design, no right
conception of cause; yet the effect is sure and the bliss perfect. Oh,
for one hour—one little hour—from the thousands which I have
idled, sported, dreamed away in the company of my darling school-
companion, Nancy!
Will Mather was about two years older than Nancy—a fine youth,
attending the same school, and evidently an admirer of Nancy. Mine
was the love of comparative boyhood; but his was a passion gradually
ripening (as the charms of Nancy budded into womanhood) into a
manly and matrimonial feeling. I loved the girl merely as such—his
eye, his heart, his whole soul were in his future bride. Marriage in no
shape ever entered into my computations; but his eager look and
heaving bosom bespoke the definite purpose—the anticipated
felicity. I don’t know exactly why, but I was never jealous of Will
Mather. We were companions; and he was high-souled and
generous, and stood my friend in many perilous quarrels. I knew that
my pathway in life was to be afar from that in which Nancy and Will
were likely to walk; and I felt in my heart that, dear as this beautiful
rosebud was to me, I was not man enough—I was not peasant
enough to wear it in my bosom. Had Nancy on any occasion turned
round to be kissed by me, I would have fled over muir and dale to
avoid her presence; and yet I had often a great desire to obtain that
favour. Once, indeed, and only once, did I obtain, or rather steal it.
She was sitting beside a bird’s nest, the young ones of which she was
feeding and cherishing—for the parent birds, by the rapacity of a cat,
had recently perished. As the little bills were expanding to receive
their food, her countenance beamed with pity and benevolence. I
never saw even her so lovely; so, in a moment, I had her round the
neck, and clung to her lips with the tenacity of a creature drowning.
But, feeling at once the awkwardness of my position, I took to my
heels, becoming immediately invisible amidst the surrounding
brushwood.
Such was Will Mather, and such was Nancy Morrison, at the
period of which I am speaking. We must now advance about two or
three years in our chronology, and find Will possessed of a piece of
information which bore materially on his future fortunes. Will was
an illegitimate child. His mother had kept the secret so well that he
did not know his father, though he had frequently urged her to reveal
to him privately all that she knew of his parentage. In conversing,
too, with Nancy, his now affianced bride, he had expressed similar
wishes; whilst she, with a becoming and feminine modesty, had
urged him not to press an aged parent on so delicate a point. At last
the old woman was taken seriously ill, and, on her death-bed and at
midnight, revealed to her son the secret of his birth. He was the son
of a proprietor in the parish, and a much-respected man. The youth,
so soon as he had closed his mother’s eyes, hurried off, amidst the
darkness, to the abode of his father, and, entering by a window, was
in his father’s bed-chamber and over his body ere he was fully awake.
“John Scott!” said the son, in a firm and terrible tone, grasping his
parent meantime convulsively round the neck, “John Scott of
Auchincleuch, I am thy son!”
The conscience-stricken culprit, being taken by surprise, and
almost imagining this a supernatural intimation from Heaven,
exclaimed, in trembling accents:
“But who are you that makes this averment?”
“I am thy son, father—oh, I am thy son!”
Will could say no more; for his heart was full, and his tears
dropped hot and heavy on a father’s face.
“Yes,” replied the parent, after a convulsive solemn sob—(O
Heaven! thou art just!)—“yes, thou art indeed my son—my long-
denied and ill-used boy—whom the fear of the world’s scorn has
tempted me, against all the yearnings of my better nature, to use so
unjustly. But come to my bosom—to a father’s bosom now, for I
know that voice too well to distrust thee.”
In a few months after this interesting disclosure, John Scott was
numbered with his fathers, and Will Scott (no longer Mather)
became Laird of Auchincleuch.
Poor Nancy was at first somewhat distressed at this discovery,
which put her betrothed in a position to expect a higher or genteeler
match. But there was no cause of alarm. Will was true to the
backbone, and would as soon have burned his Bible as have
sacrificed his future bride. After much pressing for an early day on
the part of the lover, it was agreed, at last, that the marriage should
take place at “Peatcasting Time,” and that Nancy should, for the last
time, assist at the casting of her mother’s peats.
I wish I could stop here, or at least proceed to give you an account
of the happy nuptials of Will Scott and Nancy Morrison, the
handsomest couple in the parish of Closeburn. But it may not be!
These eyes, which are still filled (though it is forty-eight years since)
with tears, and this pen, which trembles as I proceed, must attest and
record the catastrophe.
Nancy, the beautiful bride, and I (for I was now on the point of
leaving school for college) agreed to have a jump for the last time
(often had we jumped before) from a suitable moss-brow.
“My frolicsome days will sune be ower,” she cried, laughing; “the
Gudewife of Auchincleuch will hae something else to do than jump
frae the moss-brow; and, while my name is Nancy Morrison, I’ll hail
the dules, or jump wi’ the best o’ my auld playmates.”
“Weel dune, Nancy!” cried I; “you are now to be the wife o’ the
Laird o’ Auchincleuch, when your jumping days will be at an end;
and I am soon to be sent to college, where the only jump I may get
may be from the top of a pile of old black-letter folios—no half sae
gude a point of advantage as the moss-brow.”
“There’s the Laird o’ Auchincleuch coming,” cried Peggy Chalmers,
one of the peat-casters, who was standing aside, along with several
others. “He’s nae langer the daft Will Mather, wha liked a jump as
weel as the blithest swankie o’ the barnyard. Siller maks sair
changes; and yet, wha wad exchange the Will Scott of Auchincleuch,
your rich bridegroom, Nancy, for the Will Mather, your auld lover?
Dinna tempt Providence, my hinny! The laird winna like to see his
bride jumpin frae knowe to knowe like a daft giglet, within a week o’
her marriage.”
“Tout!” cried Nancy, bursting out into a loud laugh; “see, he’s awa
round by the Craw Plantin, and winna see us—and whar’s the harm if
he did? Come now, Tammie, just ae spring and the last, and I’ll wad
ye my kame against your cravat, that I beat ye by the length o’ my
marriage slipper.”
“Weel dune, Nancy!” cried several of the peat-casters, who, leaning
on their spades, stood and looked at us with pleasure and
approbation.
The Laird had, as Nancy said, crossed over by what was called the
Craw Plantin, and was now out of sight. To make the affair more
ludicrous (for we were all bent on fun), Nancy took out, from among
her high-built locks of auburn hair, her comb—a present from her
lover—and impledged it in the hands of Billy Watson, along with my
cravat, which I had taken off, and handed to the umpire.
“Here is a better moss-brow,” cried one, at a distance.
And so to be sure it was, for it was much higher than the one we
had fixed upon, and the landing-place was soft and elastic. Our
practice was, always to jump together, so that the points of the toes
could be measured when both the competitors’ feet were still fixed in
the moss. We mounted the mossbrow. I was in high spirits, and
Nancy could scarcely contain herself for pure, boisterous, laughing
glee. I went off, but the mad girl could not follow, for she was still
holding her sides, and laughing immoderately. I asked her what she
laughed at. She could not tell. She was under the influence of one of
those extraordinary cachinations that sometimes convulse our
diaphragms, without our being able to tell why, and certainly without
our being able to put a stop to them. Her face was flushed, and the
fire of her glee shone bright in her eye. I took my position again.
“Now!” cried I; and away we flew, and stuck deeply in the soft and
spongy moss.
I stood with my feet in the ground, that the umpire might come
and mark the distance. A loud scream broke on my ear. I looked
round, and, dreadful sight! I saw Nancy lying extended on the
ground, with the blood pouring out at her mouth in a large stream!
She had burst a blood-vessel. The fit of laughing which preceded her
effort to leap had, in all likelihood, distended her delicate veins, and
predisposed her to the unhappy result.
The loud scream had attracted the notice of the bridegroom, who
came running from the back of the Craw Plantin. The sight appalled
and stupefied him. He cried for explanation, and ran forward to his
dead or dying bride, in wild confusion. Several voices essayed an
explanation, but none were intelligible. I was as unable as the rest to
satisfy the unhappy man; but, though we could not speak intelligibly,
we could act, and several of us lifted her up. This step sealed her fate.
The change in her position produced another stream of blood. She
opened her eyes once, and fixed them for a moment on Will Scott.
She then closed them, and for ever.
I saw poor Nancy carried home. Will Scott, who upheld her head,
fainted before he proceeded twenty yards, and I was obliged to take
his place. I was almost as unfit for the task as himself; for I
reproached myself as the cause of her death. I have lived long. Will
the image of that procession ever pass from my mind? The blood-
stained moss-ground, the bleeding body, the trailing clothes, the
unbound locks, are all before me. I can proceed no further. Would
that I could stop the current of my thoughts as easily as that of this
feathered chronicler of sorrow! But—
There is a silent sorrow here,
A grief I’ll ne’er impart;
It breathes no sigh, it sheds no tear,
But it consumes my heart.
I have taken up my pen to add, that Will Mather still remains a

bachelor, and that on every visit I make to Dumfriesshire, I take my
dinner, solus cum solo, at Auchincleuch, and that many tears are
annually shed, over a snug bottle, for poor Nancy.
AN ADVENTURE WITH THE PRESS-GANG.
How goes the press? was, as usual, our first and most anxious
inquiry when the pilot boat came alongside to the westward of Lundy
Island. The brief but emphatic reply was, “As hot as blazes.” Knowing
therefore what we had to expect, the second mate and I, and one or
two others, applied to the captain to set us ashore at Ilfracomb, but
he would not listen to us. A double-reefed topsail breeze was blowing
from the westward, and a vigorous flood-tide was setting up channel,
enabling us to pass over the ground about fifteen knots. Such
advantages the captain was no way disposed to forego, so that there
was nothing for us but to trust to Providence and our stow holes. The
breeze flagged towards sunset, and it was not until an hour after
dusk that we dropped anchor in Kingroad.
As soon as the ship was brought up, I stepped in the main rigging
to lend a hand to furl the topsail, but had not reached the top, when I
heard the cabin boy calling out in an Irish whisper, “Bobstay, down,
down, the press-boat is alongside.” I was on deck in a twinkling, and
was springing to the after scuttle, when I found myself seized
violently by the arm. I trembled. It was the same boy that had called
me down. “They are already in the mizen chains,” said he; “to the
fore scuttle, or you are a gone man.”
Down the fore peak I went with the rapidity of lightning, and down
jumped three of the gang after me with little less velocity.
“Oho, my tight little fellow,” said one of them, thrusting his cutlass
down a crevice over my head; “I see you; out you must come, or here
goes an inch or two of cold steel into your bread-bag.”
I knew well that I was beyond his reach, and took care to let him
have all the talk to himself. They rummaged about all over the hold,
thrusting their cutlasses down every chink they could perceive, but
no one could they find give a single squeak. In about half an hour I
heard the well-known voice of the cabin boy calling me on deck. On
reaching the deck, I found that the gang had carried off three of our
hands, and had expressed their determination to renew their search
next day. Of course my grand object was to get ashore without delay.
The moment we anchored, the captain had gone off to Bristol to
announce his arrival to his owners; and as the mate and I were not
on good terms, he refused to allow me the use of the ship’s boat.
None of the watermen whose boats we hailed would come alongside,
because if they had been found assisting the crew of merchant vessels
to escape the press, they themselves would have been subjected to its
grasp. About midnight, however, one waterman came alongside, with
whom the love of money overcame the fear of danger, and he agreed
to pull the second mate, boatswain, and myself ashore, for half a
guinea each. I had brought from the West Indies a small venture in
sugar, a cask of which, about a hundredweight, I took into the boat
with me, to clear present expenses.
Shortly after we had shoved off, we found ourselves chased by a
long boat, which the waterman knew, by the sound of the oars, to be
the guard-boat. How we did pull! But it seemed in vain; we found it
would be impossible to reach the landing-place, so we pulled for the
nearest point of land. The moment the boat touched the ground, I
took the cask of sugar on my shoulder, and expecting solid ground
under the boat’s bows, jumped ashore. Instead of solid ground, I
found myself above the knees in mud. The guard-boat was within a
hundred yards of the shore, and what was to be done! All that a man
has will he give for his liberty, so away went the cask of sugar. Thus
lightened, I soon scrambled out, when the three of us scampered off
as fast as it was possible for feet to carry us. What became of the
waterman, or his boat, or my cask of sugar, we never knew; nor did
we think of stopping to breathe or look round us, till we reached the
town of Peel, where by a blazing fire and over a dish of beef-steaks,
and a few tankards of brown stout, we soon forgot our dangers and
our fears.
Our residence here, as far as liberty was concerned, was pretty
nearly on a par with prison residence. The second mate and I lodged
together, and during daylight we never durst show our faces, except,
perhaps, between four and six in the morning, when we sometimes
took a ramble in a neighbouring burying-ground, to read epitaphs;
and this, from the love of the English to poetical ones, was equivalent
to the loan of a volume of poetry. But Time’s pinions seemed in our
eyes loaded with lead, and we were often inclined to sing with the
plaintive swain,
Ah! no, soft and slow
The time it winna pass,
The shadow of the trysting thorn,
Is tether’d on the grass.
And had it not been for the kindly attentions of our landlord’s two
handsome daughters, to whose eyebrows we indited stanzas, I know
not how we would have got the time killed.
Snug as we thought ourselves, the press-gang had by some means
or other been put on the scent, and one day very nearly pounced on
us. So cautious had they been in their visit, that their approach was
not perceived until they were actually in the kitchen. Fortunately we
were at this time in an upper room, and one of the daughters rightly
judging of the purpose of their visit, flew upstairs to warn us of our
danger, and point out a place of safety. This place was above the
ceiling, and the only access to it was through a hole in the wall a little
way up the vent. It was constructed as a secure place to lodge a little
brandy or geneva, that sometimes found its way to the house,
without having been polluted with the exciseman’s rod. It was
excellently adapted to our purpose, and the entrance to it was
speedily pointed out by our pretty little guardian angel. Up the vent
we sprung like a brace of chimney sweeps, and had scarcely reached
our place of concealment, when the gang rushed upstairs, burst open
the door, and began to rummage every corner of the room. The bed
was turned out, the presses all minutely examined, and even the vent
itself underwent a scrutiny, but no seamen could be found.
“Tell us, my young lady, whereabout you have stowed away them
there fellows, for we knows they are in the house?”
“What fellows?” said the dear little girl, with a composure which
we thought it impossible for her to assume so soon after her violent
trepidation.
“Why, them there fellows as came ashore from one of the West
Indiamen t’other day; we knows they are here, and are determined to
have ’em.”

The Music Professor Online Judith Bowman Ebook Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Music Professor Online Judith Bowman Ebook Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Music Professor Online Judith

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859669 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Subject: Music Psychology

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers

the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education

by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University

Press in the UK and certain other countries.

Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press

198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.

© Oxford University Press 2022

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in

a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the

prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted

by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction

rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the

You must not circulate this work in any other form

and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2021951868

ISBN 978–0–19–754736–6 (hbk.)

Paperback printed by Marquis, Canada

Hardback printed by Bridgeport National Bindery, Inc., United States of America

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859669 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859805 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859844 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

This book addresses those recommended next steps. It provides a snapshot

Part I, “Exposition: The Changing Landscape,” presents the main themes.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859844 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859844 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Online learning has reached a tipping point in higher education. It

Online learning has reached a tipping point—​or so a recent report stated. Is

Status of Distance/​Online Education

Online Education: Heading toward the Future

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Grade Increase: Tracking Distance Education in the

Another report, Grade Increase: Tracking Distance Education in the United

enrolled exclusively in distance education courses, those enrolled in a mix of

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

CHLOE 4: Navigating the Mainstream

The Changing Landscape of Online Education (CHLOE) Project, a partner-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

In summary, CHLOE 4’s examination of patterns of online student interaction

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Status of Online Music Instruction

What Is Online? A National Survey of Course Offerings

In line with the continued growth of online education in general, online

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Commonalities and Distinctions

Research on the effectiveness of online learning has involved comparisons of

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

“No Significant Difference” Phenomenon

blended learning, report on completed research, measure learning outcomes

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Gains, Losses, or Differences

such as the ability to observe and respond to facial expressions, gestures,

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

Advantages and Disadvantages

and sharing of pedagogical ideas that sometimes resulted in rethinking in-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/book/41472/chapter/352859961 by University of Southampton user on 21 July 2022

simply a different method of achieving a university’s goal of raising the educational

Similarities and Differences

Online learning has reached a tipping point—or so a recent report stated. Is

Status of Distance/Online Education

require equivalency between on-campus courses and distance courses. Other

Standard X.C.2 specifies residence requirements in distance-education

• Lesson for online instruction: Well-designed discussion assignments facil-