British Journal of Music Education (2023), 40, 271–286

doi:10.1017/S0265051722000274

ARTICLE

‘Because I’m not musical’: A critical case study of music

education training for pre-service generalist primary
teachers in Australia
Christine Carroll1* and Joanne Harris2
1
Excelsia College, 69-71 Waterloo Rd, Macquarie Park, NSW 2113, Australia and 2Australian Catholic University, 25A Barker
Road, Strathfield, NSW 2135, Australia
*Corresponding author Email: christine.carroll@excelsia.edu.au

Abstract
The literature concerning pre-service training in music education for generalist primary or elementary
school teachers reveals a long-standing problem for teacher educators: low or poor self-efficacy concerning
the teaching of classroom music. Concurrently, a critical examination of training programmes has less
often featured, with only limited discussion of digital approaches to classroom music-making constituting
the focus of empirical research. Through a focused case study in one Australian university, 136 pre-service
teachers participated in a face-to-face module of interactive music education which culminated in a peer-
directed collaborative digital music-making project. Pre- and post-surveys were implemented with shifts in
pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy measured according to Bandura’s self-efficacy scales. Legitimation Code
Theory from the sociology of education then served as an overarching theoretical lens through which to
appraise the findings. Despite an enduring self-concept as ‘non-musicians’, the results highlight positive
shifts in self-efficacy through the utilisation of peer-directed digital music-making tasks, with implications
for teacher training programmes more broadly situated.

Keywords: pre-service teacher training; music education; web-based digital composition; self-efficacy; Legitimation Code
Theory

Introduction
Our work as teacher educators of music to pre-service primary or elementary school generalist
teachers is as important as it is challenging. Faced with large cohorts and limited time, many
of our students describe themselves as ‘unmusical’ or ‘untalented’, confessing limited musical skills
or knowledge to draw upon in their preparation to teach music. This self-appraisal is typically
coupled with fears and misconceptions about teaching music in their future classrooms. Our expe-
rience is not isolated. Research outlines that limited prior music learning opportunities (Hallam
et al., 2009), the demise of hours in tertiary teacher training (Hocking, 2009), and the presence of
specialists in schools contribute to generalists’ limiting their potential future contribution to effec-
tive classroom music instruction (Garvis et al., 2011). Yet research has also provided a strong and
enduring case for equitable access to Arts instruction including Music within school education,
which is often the sole responsibility of generalists to provide (WIGGINS & WIGGINS, 2008;
Ewing, 2010). Despite the diminished place of Music within primary school education in
Australia and elsewhere (Pascoe et al., 2005), case study examples of quality teaching exist, when
a range of tools and learning approaches including technology are utilised by generalists in line
with their interests, skills and existing competencies (de Vries, 2015). This suggests a critical
re-examination of teacher training programmes is overdue.

© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 272 Christine Carroll and Joanne Harris

Situated at an Australian university, this research sought to evaluate the effectiveness of our teacher
training practice and its impact on the formation of self-efficacy beliefs of pre-service teachers with
regard to their future contribution as facilitators of classroom music instruction. Our reading of the
literature and shared appraisal of the problem led us to employ Bandura’s (1997; 2006) self-efficacy
concepts and Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) from the sociology of education (Maton, 2014) in the
design, analysis and theorisation of research. The combination of these tools provided a new way to
examine an old problem, enabling the appraisal of data relevant to the immediate case, but with
explanatory potential to the field of music education more broadly situated (Carroll, 2019; 2021).
An action-research project consisting of a peer-directed collaborative web-based digital music-making
project (Somekh, 2011) was planned to culminate the music education module attended by 136
second-year Bachelor of Education students enrolled in a core Creative Arts Education unit.
Modules of equal length were also planned and attended in Drama, Dance and Visual Arts concur-
rently. The music component included four weeks (total 8 hours) of sequential music-making activities
using voice, body and both un-tuned and tuned percussion, followed by the two-week (4 hours) peer-
directed digital music-making project (described hence). Five additional lectures provided further
grounding in curriculum, assessment and pedagogical theory for primary-level music education.
The study utilised a pre- and post-survey according to a mixed-methods design (Cresswell, 2015) along
with our shared reflective accounts of practice to holistically appraise the results (Somekh, 2011). All
activities were designed to address K-6 Creative Arts national and state curricular objectives (Board of
Studies, 2006; Australian Curriculum, 2021). In preparation for the module, we undertook a critical
appraisal of the literature relevant to generalists’ pre-service teacher training for music in Australia and
elsewhere, which is outlined hence.

Background
Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s ‘perceptions of their capability to execute the actions necessary
to achieve a desired goal’ (Gallagher, 2012, p. 314). An individual’s self-efficacy beliefs help deter-
mine how much effort s/he will expend and how long effort will be sustained in the face of obstacles
(Pajares, 1996). These self-perceptions of capability – or ‘self-efficacy beliefs’ – are recognised as a
critical force shaping a person’s choices in activity and their effort and persistence toward the
achievement of desired goals (Bandura & Cervone, 1983). As Bandura states, ‘if people believe they
have no power to produce results, they will not attempt to make things happen’ (1977, p. 3).
Garvis et al. (2011) outline the mechanisms perpetuating a poor ‘self-efficacy cycle’ for pre-service
generalist primary teachers and music instruction. Utilising Bandura’s (1997) four-fold self-efficacy
framework, limited mastery experiences (direct experience of teaching music) affected pre-service
teacher’s capacity to develop confidence and competence in teaching music. Vicarious experiences
(learning through modelling or demonstration) then often followed, if their supervising generalist
teachers, or teachers like them, did not demonstrate quality music instruction. As a consequence, lim-
ited verbal persuasion (positive feedback) resulted in insufficient emotional or psychological arousal
(identification or ownership) for their personal development to teach music. This negative self-efficacy
cycle has been the inspiration for much of the research outlined in the literature, with limited prior
music learning, insufficient hours in pre-service teacher training and the presence of specialists in
schools listed as contributing factors to this seemingly intractable problem for teacher educators.
Hallam, et al. (2009), Lowe et al. (2017) and Henley (2017) note that limited and/or negative
prior experience of school music strongly affects the formation of positive self-efficacy beliefs of
pre-service teachers. Despite valuing the music instruction offered in their pre-service training and
appreciating self-directed musical experiences in their everyday lives, prior competence in singing,
instrumental music and proficiency in reading music notation was seen by pre-service teachers as
common impediments to the development of positive self-efficacy in teaching music in
each study.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 British Journal of Music Education 273

Hocking’s (2009) national report of Australian teacher training institutions reveals why the
negative self-efficacy cycle has yet to be been broken at the tertiary level, with allocation for
K-6 curricular Music constituting an average of only 1.51% of an entire bachelor’s degree, tran-
spiring to a total of between 4 and 17 hours of training. A synthesis of handbook content and
Hocking’s survey data reveal several commonalities in approach across institutions, with singing,
playing classroom instruments and creating or composing common to the majority of pro-
grammes which feature Kodaly, Orff and Dalcroze pedagogies. Frequently, this training for
Music is delivered in conjunction with Dance, Drama, and Visual Arts instruction in integrated
formats. Although the use of music technology is mentioned in Hocking’s report, the orientation
of its use is not defined, with an average of only 0.8% (therefore 48 minutes) of time allocated.
Admittedly, Hocking’s work is not situated to appraise content changes which may have occurred
over the past decade; however, any such change should be weighed against the further demise of
face-to-face hours in many tertiary institutions.
Acknowledging these ongoing limitations, it is understandable that the solution adopted by
many primary schools in Australia is toward the appointment of specialist teachers for music,
who take on a subject-specific role due to their specialised experience and training. However,
according to Ardzejewska et al. (2010), the orientation of specialists’ contribution varies greatly,
as the possession of subject-specific qualifications may not be required by many schools. Although
many schools, particularly in the independent sector employ ‘relief from face to face’ specialists to
teach classroom (curricular) music, music ‘programmes’ in many government schools, have
become synonymous with co-curricular (user pays) ensembles only, with curricular music instruc-
tion remaining in the hands of generalist teachers. With this being the case, there has been a move-
ment toward increasing access to post-university mentoring and/or in-service music programmes
for generalists in order to close this gap (Collins, 2016). These mentoring programmes are rela-
tively new, however, with their reach dependent upon the interests and resources available to indi-
vidual schools. In the majority of cases, schools continue to outsource instruction to music
specialists, or, offer limited to no instruction at all if a sufficient case for their employment cannot
be made (Ardzejewska et al., 2010; Power & Klopper, 2011; Wiggins & Wiggins, 2008).
The work of de Vries (2015, 2017) however makes a strong case for the value of generalists’
delivery of music instruction – albeit in localised Australian contexts. Through narrative inquiry,
de Vries describes a spectrum of activity: from generalists who serve somewhat as specialists to
those who do not teach music at all. Of those that do teach music, their pedagogy aligns with their
existing skills and interests including singing, moving, playing simple classroom instruments, inte-
grating the arts with other subject learning areas, and using music technology such as Garageband
to instigate creative projects with children. Importantly, such individual classroom initiatives
require the support of school leadership and a pragmatic combination of both formal and less
formal modes of music facilitation in order to meet the individual needs of teachers and children.
These findings suggest that a generalist/specialist dichotomy, although presented in much of the
literature, may in reality constitute a spectrum of positions and practices in schools worthy of
consideration at the teacher training level.
Regardless of the spectrum of activity which characterises primary school music instruction,
the orientation of teacher training programmes for generalists has tended to reflect a narrower
range of offerings in Australian tertiary institutions. Steven-Ballenger et al. (2010) believe this
may contribute towards the development of poor self-efficacy for many generalists. The authors
note that despite the limited number of contact hours to prepare teachers to teach music and the
other arts disciplines, there are only scant recommendations for tertiary providers as to what con-
stitutes effective training. Like Hocking’s (2009) study, Steven-Ballenger et al. (2010) list live
music-making pedagogies (Orff, Dalcroze, Kodaly) as central to most pre-service training pro-
grammes, despite these requiring more established musical skills such as singing in tune, playing
in time, basic ensemble work, improvisation, conducting and so on to initiate. In summary, they
note that aside from breadth and depth of expertise, and the ability to run co-curricular ensembles,

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 274 Christine Carroll and Joanne Harris

the course expectations in many tertiary training programmes align more closely to those required
by music specialists than generalists.
These findings instigated for us a process of critical evaluation exposing over time some of the
underlying assumptions we had held as teacher educators. Despite our offering a range of participatory
modes of performance emulating children’s classroom singing and playing abilities, and a range of
listening and creative work supported by graphic and traditional notation, we had little understanding
of how to connect this learning with our students’ existent knowledge and experience of music. We
considered their varied accounts of music learning during secondary school and the frequency of state-
ments describing their ‘lack of talent’ when encouraged to participate in music-making activities dur-
ing workshops. To what extent might we be perpetuating the ‘self-efficacy’ problem through the
orientation of our teacher training? A critical appraisal of our training programme was required in
order to make room for the possibility that alternate tools and modes of learning could be encouraged.

Research design and context

A mixed-method study was undertaken with pre- and post-survey data collected from 136 second-
year Bachelor of Education students situated at two campuses of a major Australian university
(Creswell, 2015). The 12-hour practical Music module and an additional 5 lectures were delivered
over a 6-week period by the authors who participated as teacher/researchers. Ethical consent was
obtained before the study began from the university, with students invited to participate in the
surveys via the learning management system. The unit of learning modelled a range of practical
stage-appropriate activities we had often employed in class-sized groups of around 26 pre-service
teachers. Here, we initiated activities in chanting, singing, movement, body percussion and both
un-tuned and tuned percussion for both large and small groups that were later supported by the
use of both graphic and traditional forms of music notation. Creative activities such as sound-
scapes and basic forms of rhythmic and pitched improvisation were included in all sessions.
To broaden offerings, the module included a peer-directed web-based digital music-making proj-
ect that will be outlined in detail hence. The six lectures provided more focused examination of the
national and state syllabus documents, assessment practices, means of integrating the various art
forms, as well as an outline of the literature and theoretical underpinnings of the key pedagogical
approaches employed in the module. An overview and basic instruction and demonstration using
the web-based tools featured in the module were also provided.
The module culminated in an action-research project (Somekh, 2011), where the students collabo-
rated over the final 2 weeks of the unit with peers of their choosing on a music-making task using a
choice of freely accessible web-based tools: Chrome Music Lab Song Maker (2016, https://musiclab.
chromeexperiments.com/Song-Maker/), or Bandlab (2015, https://www.bandlab.com). These tools
had been trialled in our practice during an earlier pilot study with students at the same university
and were so chosen due to their accessibility, functionality, alignment with national and state curricular
outcomes and the presence of free online instruction videos allowing flipped learning strategies (Board
of Studies, 2006; Australian Curriculum, 2021). Our use of digital technologies in pre-service teacher
training acknowledges and builds upon findings by Heyworth (2011, 2018) and utilises aspects of
project-based learning as defined by Kokotsaki et al. (2016).
The digital music-making project encouraged the students to use the concepts and skills taught
in the initial weeks of live music-making to realise a creative project of their own design appro-
priate for a Stage 3 or upper primary school class (children aged 10–12 years). In groups of three,
the pre-service teachers were asked to create a piece of music of around 60 seconds duration con-
sisting of three layers of sound including pitched and rhythmic digital sounds and an acoustic
vocal or instrumental layer. The Song Maker platform provided a way for students to visualise
pitch and rhythm through the use of colour-coded tiles supported by a basic drum machine.
This enabled the integration of live sound using mallet percussion or boomwhackers which used

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 British Journal of Music Education 275

the same colour coding system. Many students chose to arrange music they had accessed online
for boomwhackers in a range of musical styles, creating simple melodic lines and ostinato accom-
paniments. The Bandlab platform facilitated group composition with pre-set midi instruments
and loop packs including instrumental riffs in a range of popular music genres. Bandlab also pro-
vided the opportunity to record live performance elements and combine these with pre-set mate-
rials or create backing tracks from a combination of these elements to be used in conjunction with
live material presented in class. Both platforms allowed students to save and share their work
online which facilitated communication and project completion in remote locations.
The pre-survey was designed to gauge base level data of prior and current learning experiences
in music, their school music experiences, their self-concept or self-perception of musicality and
their self-appraisal of capability to initiate a range of different classroom music activities. The two
university campuses – henceforth named ‘North’, (N=42), and ‘West’, (N=94) – are located in
geographically distinct regions of a major city and typically attract students with markedly dif-
ferent ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds. A cross-campus comparison of data therefore
added to the richness of our findings, with LCT from the sociology of education providing the
overarching theoretical lens for the meta-analysis of data. An outline of the theory with reference
to this study is provided hence.

LCT
LCT from the sociology of education is a multi-dimensional tool kit (Maton, 2014), with its use in
music education providing valuable insights on an array of issues from curriculum design, to class-
room pedagogy, to studio and assessment practices, across a broad range of contexts and levels of
education (Lamont & Maton, 2008, 2010; Carroll, 2019, 2020, 2021; Richardson, 2019; Carver,
2020; McPhail & McNiell, 2019, 2020; Walton, 2020). Although LCT comprises five dimensions each
with distinct application, the Specialisation dimension proved apposite for this research investigation
as it can reveal how actors become legitimate players within a field of practice according to hidden
codes of legitimation. Unveiling the codes that determine legitimate participation provides clues as to
why some succeed and others do not, allowing insights as to how the game is played, or can be
changed, over time. Specialisation codes are determined by two key concepts: Epistemic Relations
(ERs) and Social Relations (or SR). ERs qualify an actor’s relationship to legitimate knowledge and
skills on a continuum of strengths and weaknesses (either more
, or less –) according to ‘what they
know’ and ‘what they can do’. SRs qualify an actor’s relationship to personal dispositions, qualities or
beliefs again on a continuum of strengths and weaknesses (either more
, or less –), not according to
‘what they know or can do’, but rather, according to ‘who they are’, and ‘how they see themselves’.
With reference to this study, these concepts played out both according to pre-service teachers’
(or actor’s) possession of legitimate musical knowledge and skills (or ERs either ER
, ER–) and
their existent self-concept of ‘musicality’ (or SRs either SR
, SR–). As these concepts are fre-
quently linked, simultaneous strengths and weaknesses generate four specialisation codes: a
knowledge code (ER
, SR–) when actor’s possess musical knowledge or skills but see themselves
as remaining somewhat ‘unmusical’; a knower code (ER–, SR
), where their ‘musical’ self-concept
may be stronger, but their possession of knowledge more limited; an élite code (ER
, SR
), where
actors possess both knowledge and skills, and a self-concept of ‘musicality’ and a relativist code
(ER–, SR–), where they describe themselves as being neither knowledgeable nor ‘musical’. Used in
this way, the LCT specialisation codes enabled the teasing out of a spectrum of orientations and
positions held by the pre-service teachers involved in the study and a way to appraise how these
positions might relate to the activities included in the learning module. Rather than being viewed
in dichotomous categories such as future ‘generalists’ or ‘specialists’, ‘experts’ or ‘novices’, a fuller
picture could emerge concerning their pre-existing and emerging self-concept as teachers of
music. Represented using a Cartesian plane, the four specialisation codes are depicted in Figure 1.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 276 Christine Carroll and Joanne Harris

Figure 1. LCT specialisation codes.

Note. This figure was reproduced from Maton (2014, p. 30).

As stated, the pre-survey was structured to first ascertain participants’ current and prior
engagement in music, their self-efficacy with regard to content and pedagogical knowledge
(ER) and their self-concept or identity with regard to musicality (SR). This generated initial data
aligning each of our participants to one of the four LCT Specialisation codes (Maton, 2014). We
also asked a series of questions to explore their perception of capability with regard to a range of
musical activities for primary students, through a set of ‘can-do’ statements (Bandura, 2006).
Responses required a rating on a five-point Likert scale, from ‘cannot do at all’ through ‘can
do moderately well’ to ‘can do exceptionally well’. This provided a snapshot of our participant’s
pre-existing musical identities and perceived ability against which any shifts in post-survey results
could be appraised. The post-survey reiterated the ‘can-do’ statements in order to track the extent
to which the module had shifted individual perceptions of self-efficacy within each specialisation
code group. Open-ended responses then provided the opportunity to appraise responses using the
approach developed by Corbin and Strauss (2008), generating qualitative findings through open,
axial and then thematic coding. The principles of ethical research were upheld with students pro-
viding a chosen pseudonym and number, with no identifying information required. Although
participation in the learning activities was a requirement of study, participation in research via
the provision of survey responses remained optional.

Results and discussion: Pre-survey

The pre-survey [N=136] generated responses which each aligned each participant to one of the
four specialisation codes, with additional questions used to qualify the nature of musical engage-
ment within each of the four code groups. Using our existing knowledge of pre-service teachers as
they tended to describe themselves, these were worded as follows: ‘I am quite knowledgeable about
music, but I’m not very musical’ (a knowledge code: ER
, SR–), ‘I sing or play an instrument, but
don’t read music or know much music theory’ (a knower code: ER–, SR
), ‘I sing or play an
instrument, and can read music’ (an élite code: ER
, SR
), and ‘I don’t know very much about
music, and I’m not very musical’ (a relativist code: ER–, SR–). It should be mentioned that some
variation in response could be observed within each code group, but for the purposes of reporting,
each shall be treated as a distinct entity. Drawing on our years of experience teaching the course,
we were not surprised to find that 47% of participants identified with the relativist code and only

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 British Journal of Music Education 277

I feel confident in my musical abilities

People say I am 'good at' music
Play or sing in a group
Read notation
Use technology to create music
Sing for fun
Play instruments
Listen for pleasure
Figure 2. Musical profile relativist code
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 group [N=62]: ‘I don’t know very much
about music, and I’m not very musical’
Number of participants [N=62] (ER–, SR–).

14% with an élite code. However, results for the remaining code groups revealed more nuanced
findings between these polar responses, with 17% identifying with the knowledge code statement
and 23% with the knower code statement.
A series of exploratory questions then allowed us to gauge the current musical interests, practices
and beliefs of each code group, and, their prior access to music learning both in and outside of school.
As our search of the literature had revealed that self-perception, current interests as well as pre-existing
knowledge and skills were chief factors effecting self-efficacy formation, we believed this important
foundational analysis to undertake, allowing us to contribute to the findings by Hallam et al.
(2009), Lowe et al. (2017) and others. The questions in the pre-survey enabled the construction of
both a musical profile and a learning profile for each code group as outlined hence.

The relativist code group

For those identifying with the relativist code statement [N=62], their self-perception of ‘musical-
ity’ was low; however, engagement in activities such as listening, singing for pleasure, playing
instruments, and making music with technology were listed as ways they engaged with music
in their everyday lives as depicted in Figure 2.
A learning profile was also generated from their survey data. Although a small proportion men-
tioned participating in instrumental lessons or an ensemble early on in their schooling, in almost
all cases, high school music engagement consisted of mandatory music classes only (undertaken
during Stage 4 at ages 12–14 years), rather than elective study options at either Stage 5 (15–
16 years), or Stage 6 (17–18 years) as is depicted in Figure 3.
Both musical and learning profiles corresponded with their projected pedagogical ability, with
the majority [N=51] identifying with either ‘cannot’ or ‘can a little’ statements relating to singing,
playing instruments, creating music, using notation, using technology and leading others in class-
room music activities. The only exception was teaching involving listening, where participants
[N=11] identified with the ‘moderately’, and ‘moderately well’ statement. This highlighted a ten-
sion between their engagement and value for music in everyday life particularly as listeners and
their understanding of school music as requiring more specialised skills and knowledge.

The knowledge code group

For the students identifying with the knowledge code statement [N=23], many similarities could
be noted to the relativist code group, with the exception that personal interest in music and
engagement in everyday music-making activities were proportionally higher, especially for singing
(N=21) as is outlined in Figure 4.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 278 Christine Carroll and Joanne Harris

School Ensembles (band/choir etc)

Private Lessons

Stage 6: Elective Music

Stage 5: Elective Music

Stage 4: Mandatory Music

Self-taught

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Number of participants [N=62]

Figure 3. Learning profile relativist code (ER–, SR–) [N=62]. ‘I don’t know very much about music, and I’m not very musical’
(ER–, SR–).

I feel confident in my musical abilities

People say I am 'good at' music

Play or sing in a group

Read notation

Use technology to create music

Sing for fun

Play in struments

Listen for pleasure

0 5 10 15 20 25
Number of participants [N=23]

Figure 4. Musical profile knowledge code [N=23]: ‘I am quite knowledgeable about music, but I’m not very musical’ (ER
, SR–).

A higher rate of prior engagement with music learning was also noted for this group, although
again, high school study was mainly limited to the mandatory Stage 4 course as is outlined in
Figure 5.
Increased interest in, and value for music, as well as confidence in singing also affected their
projected confidence to teach music, with most participants in the knowledge code group aligning
their ability to ‘moderately’ or ‘somewhat confident’ statements, with listening listed as an area in
which they felt moderate to high levels of confidence [N=15]. Like those in the relativist code
group who described music at primary school as ‘fun and engaging’, the knowledge code group
equally described high school music as either ‘too theoretical’, ‘not relevant’ or ‘just for talented
people’. This sat in stark contrast with further analysis of qualitative responses showing the major-
ity believed music to be ‘very valuable’ to student learning.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 British Journal of Music Education 279

School Ensemble

Private Lessons

Stage 6: Elective Music

Stage 5: Elective Music

Stage 4: Mandatory Music

Self-taught

0 5 10 15 20 25
Number of participants [N=23]

Figure 5. Learning profile knowledge code [N=23]: ‘I am quite knowledgeable about music, but I’m not very musical’ (ER
, SR–).

I feel confident in my musical abilities

People say I am 'good at' music

Play or sing in a group

Read notation

Use technology to create music

Sing for fun

Play instruments

Listen for pleasure

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Number of Participants [N=32]

Figure 6. Musical profile knower code [N=32]: ‘I sing or play an instrument, but don’t read music or know much music
theory’ (ER–, SR
).

The knower code group

For those that aligned with the knower code statement [N=32], the pre-survey data revealed
markedly higher rates of engagement in music-making activities including playing instruments
[N=14], singing [N=26] and using technology [N=15], but a lower proportion of participants
with formal training and music literacy skills as is outlined in Figure 6.
Increased self-confidence and active participation in self-directed or informal music-making was
more frequent for knower code participants, with 20 of the 32 participants listing ‘self-teaching’,
along with private tuition, and participation in school music ensembles in their learning profile
as is depicted in Figure 7.
A heightened self-perception of ‘musicality’ corresponded with their increased self-efficacy
towards teaching music, with mean responses aligning to ‘can a little’ statements for singing, play-
ing and using technology.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 280 Christine Carroll and Joanne Harris

School Ensemble

Private Lessons

Stage 6: Elective Music

Stage 5: Elective Music

Stage 4: Mandatory Music

Self-taught

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Number of Participants [N=32]

Figure 7. Learning profile knower code [N=32]: ‘I sing or play an instrument, but don’t read music or know much music
theory’ (ER–, SR
).

I feel confident in my musical abilities

People say I am 'good at' music

Play or sing in a group

Read notation

Use technology to create music

Sing for fun

Play instruments

Listen for pleasure

0 5 10 15 20
Number of participants [N=19]

Figure 8. Musical profile élite code (ER
, SR
) [N=19]: ‘I sing or play an instrument, and can read music’.

The Élite code group

The final group of participants aligned with the élite code statement [N=19], with high levels of
prior engagement in both formal and informal music-making corresponding with a stronger
foundational knowledge set and a salient self-concept of musicality as is depicted in Figure 8.
Élite code participants also reported the highest levels of engagement in school music pro-
grammes, although surprisingly less than half had studied elective music subjects throughout high
school as is captured in Figure 9.
Although those in the élite code group reported significantly higher mean scores for projected
pedagogical self-efficacy, with mean ‘can-do’ scores of ‘moderately well’, for singing, playing
instruments and using notation (performance-centric musicianship) [N=17], comparatively

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 British Journal of Music Education 281

School Ensemble

Private Lessons

Stage 6: Elective Music

Stage 5: Elective Music

Stage 4: Mandatory Music

Self-taught

0 5 10 15 20
Number of participants [N=19]

Figure 9. Learning profile élite code (ER
, SR
) [N=19]: ‘I sing or play an instrument, and can read music’.

50
45
Number of participants

40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Figure 10. Comparison by code orientation at campus ‘North’ (N=42: higher SES) and campus ‘West’ (N=96: lower SES).

lower mean scores for self-efficacy were reported by them for tasks involving leading class ensem-
bles and creating music.

Cross-campus comparison
When data from campus North [N=42] and campus West [N=94] were compared, a much bigger
picture emerged with regard to the relationship between prior learning, pre-existing self-efficacy
towards teaching music, and rates of socio-economic advantage. Students enrolled in campus
North – a region typically representing a higher socio-economic status – showed a fairly even
spread across each of the four code groups and hence a proportionally higher rate [23%] in
the élite code category. This contrasted starkly with those enrolled at campus West – a lower
socio-economic region – where only 9% aligned to an élite code. At campus West, a much higher
number of participants identified with the relativist and knower code statements, as can be seen in
Figure 10.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 282 Christine Carroll and Joanne Harris

While the relativist code group remained by far the largest number of candidates at both cam-
puses (47%), rates of those identifying with knower code and hence self-teaching or active partici-
pation in music through informal learning represented not only the second largest group over all
(23%) but also an even larger proportion (25%) at campus West. From this, we deduced that pre-
service teachers who train and then seek work in more socio-economically disadvantaged and
ethnically diverse settings might benefit from activities aligned to their prior and existing musical
interests and skills and pedagogies which utilise aural-based or informal rather than traditional
notation-based modes of music-making. With this in mind, the findings from the post-survey will
be reported next.

Results and discuss: Post-survey

The post-survey [N=126] was designed to gauge both potential shifts in the self-efficacy of pre-
service teachers and to ascertain the success of the module activities which had included the peer-
directed project using web-based digital tools. Again, participants were asked which activities they
were most ‘likely to try’ in their future classrooms. By pairing their pseudonyms between pre- and
post-surveys, we were able to examine shifts in projected self-efficacy, as well as examining quali-
tative responses or ‘reasons why’ these changes may have occurred. Overall, the cohort reported a
significant strengthening in ER
: ‘I improved my knowledge and skills’: 51%; and in SR
: ‘I am
more musical than I first thought’ (41%), which we viewed as a positive finding.
We then asked the cohort to rate the activities they were ‘likely to try’ in their future teaching on
a Likert scale of 1 – 5, with a score of 1 indicating they ‘definitely will not try’ through to 5 indi-
cating they ‘definitely will try’. The activities included moving games and body percussion, tuned
percussion, un-tuned percussion, boomwhackers, improvising, using different kinds of notation
(both graphic and basic traditional forms), singing, listening and discussing, integrating music
with other key learning areas (KLAs), creating soundscapes and using the digital music-making
platforms Song Maker and Bandlab. This provided a way of appraising student experience during
the unit and potential measures of transfer and application into classrooms. In line with findings
by Garvis et al. (2011), these activities were hence those most likely to promote mastery experi-
ences while on practicum or at a later date and hence potentially affect the formation of positive
self-efficacy beliefs. The results as aligned to each code group are provided in Figure 11.
Consistently, high mean scores of 4-4.5 were recorded for both élite and knower code groups
(those with a stronger self-perception of ‘musicality’ or SR
), with more variation in mean scores
noted for those in the larger knowledge and relativist code groups (conversely those with a weaker
self-perception of ‘musicality’ or SR–). This highlighted that self-perceptions of ‘musicality’
remained the chief factor determining choice in future classroom activities, with corresponding
lower mean scores noted for more traditional performance-based tasks including tuned percus-
sion, improvising and singing for the knowledge and relativist code groups. Conversely, activities
using movement and body percussion, boomwhackers, listening and discussion, and integrating
music with other KLA’s were those that recorded more consistent mean scores across the cohort.
Results from the choice of digital tasks require explanation, as there was considerable variation
across the cohort and between campuses in the number of students choosing between the two
web-based platforms. Overall, more students chose to use Song Maker, with a positive mean score
of 3.98 for ‘likely to try’ for students in the relativist code group viewed as a very positive finding.
As results from the collaborative digital music-making project were of particular interest to us,
the post-survey included specific questions to allow us to critically evaluate the future application
of these tools in our teacher training programme with regard to self-efficacy formation. Results
showed that the use of technology had provided an inclusive platform for learning in pre-service
teaching. Figure 12 reveals the mean scores relating to the use of these digital tools and peer-
directed learning.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 British Journal of Music Education 283

4.5

4
Mean response rate 'likely to try' 0-5

3.5

2.5

1.5

0.5

élite code 14% knower code 23% knowledge code 17% relativist code 47%

Figure 11. Module activities pre-service teachers were ‘likely to try’ in their future teaching.

Figure 12. Evaluation of web-based digital music-making project by Specialisation code.

As captured in Figure 12, results related to the use of the digital tools revealed positive shifts in
self-efficacy in terms of learning (ER), musicality (SR) and confidence (ER and SR combined)
across all code groups, with the majority of students finding the activity enjoyable and beneficial

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 284 Christine Carroll and Joanne Harris

to their future teaching. We viewed the lower scores for pre-existing skills positively, as the crea-
tive task had attempted to build new skills and therefore did not advantage the élite or knower code
groups with more established musical skills and self-perceptions of ‘musicality’. The analysis of
qualitative data confirmed these findings with the most numerous responses reporting the project
had been ‘fun’ and ‘engaging’. The appraisal of peer-directed learning is captured in the following
student statement:

I felt that this unit showed me that music in the classroom can be explored in a variety of
ways. In particular, the more ‘informal’ activities I felt had the most potential when imple-
mented in the classroom. Removing formal processes made the activities fun and enjoyable.

The shift in pedagogical focus allowing peer learning, experimentation and risk-taking partic-
ularly during the web-based digital music weeks highlighted that student access to mastery expe-
riences had positively affected self-efficacy formation as follows: ‘This was a good assessment as it
allowed us to make music in another way. I feel like it allowed us to take risks as we could use
computerised instruments and loops. It was also more collaborative. However, if it would have
been terrifying if it was an individual performance task’.
We were able to appraise the future value of peer learning and collaboration as the students
presented their projects for assessment in the final tutorial, with some mentioning that the ped-
agogical shift from ‘director’ to ‘facilitator’ of music-making was achievable for teachers who still
saw themselves as ‘unmusical’ or ‘untalented’. One participant responded: ‘I would use technology
because it was helpful and easier as a non-talented musician’ – a self-assessment we continued to
challenge, but remained regardless of the quality of many of the creative projects which emerged at
the conclusion of the study. These comments resonated for us with a statement by Tobias (2017)
about the power of technology to provide more inclusive access to music education. He states:
‘Music education’s tendency toward cultural reproduction of existing paradigms of music and
musical engagement often limits the potential of technology to support and mediate a broad range
of ways people can be musical’ (p. 292).

Conclusion
This case study has examined pedagogical practice for music education within a single teacher
training programme for pre-service generalist primary teachers. The results from the pre-survey
highlight how access to both musical content and skills (ER) and possession of an existent self-
concept of musicality (SR) are key in determining the projected future self-efficacy of pre-service
teachers. Prior and current engagement with music is closely linked to self-efficacy formation, and
that once formed, a pre-existent self-concept of one’s ‘musicality’ (SR) is the strongest determinant
as to which activities teachers are likely to engage within their future classrooms. Those with a
lower self-concept of ‘musicality’ (SR) were those least likely to engage in traditional
performance-centric tasks in their future classrooms – and hence had the most to gain from activ-
ities aligned to alternate constructs of ‘musicality’ utilising technology and peer-directed learning.
Further research which focuses on the transfer of these skills into generalists’ classroom prac-
tice is needed to ascertain if these findings have made an enduring impact on the music education
opportunities offered to children. It is unfortunate that further funding and time were not avail-
able to us to undertake this research ourselves; however, the results did provide us with insights
valuable to our training programme. Particularly, the post-survey showed which activities could
instigate uptake in later classroom practice and by whom in terms of LCT code orientation. This
was significant considering the contrasting socio-economic backgrounds of students at the differ-
ent campuses and their varying alignment to the contrasting LCT codes. Although we chose to
maintain the use of live music-making activities in later iterations in order to provide a breadth of

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 British Journal of Music Education 285

experience, the pre-service teachers with more limited prior music learning opportunities and/or a
developed self-concept of musicality were those who could benefit most from training facilitating
active music participation and creation with technology. This was taken into consideration in
planning for future cohorts, including those at a further five campuses situated nationally.
The power for technology to facilitate creative music-making activities integrating listening,
composing and both live and digital performance skills offers a practical solution to enduring
problems of inequity of access in school music education. Although by no means a ‘fix all’
nor a complete package, the use of technology should be considered in teacher training as having
the power to impact children particularly in schools where limited resources for music exist and
where teachers with specialist training in music are absent. The use of technology has the potential
to improve the capacity of generalists to offer quality music education experiences in classrooms,
potentially enabling a broader spectrum of music learning activities for primary school children in
the future.
Acknowledgements. The authors would like to thank Australian Catholic University for the award of a Teaching
Development Grant that helped to fund this study.

References
ARDZEJEWSKA, K., MCMAUGH, A. & COUTTS, P. (2010). Delivering the primary curriculum: The use of subject spe-
cialist and generalist teachers in NSW. Issues in Educational Research, 20(3), 203–219. http://www.iier.org.au/iier20/
ardzejewska.pdf
AUSTRALIAN CURRICULUM, ASSESSMENT AND REPORTING AUTHORITY (2021). The arts curriculum (Music).
https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/the-arts/
BANDLAB TECHNOLOGIES (2015). Bandlab. [web-based computer software]. https://www.bandlab.com
BANDURA, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
BANDURA, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Freeman.
BANDURA, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In T. Urdan & F. Pajares (eds.), Self-efficacy Beliefs in
Adolescents (pp. 307–337). Charlotte, North Carolina: Information Age Publishing.
BANDURA, A. & CERVONE, D. (1983). Self-evaluative and self-efficacy mechanisms governing the motivational effects of
goal systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(5), 1017–1028.
BOARD OF STUDIES (2006). Creative arts K-6 syllabus. http://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-10/
learning-areas/creative-arts/creative-arts-k-6-syllabus
CARROLL, C. (2019). ‘Illiterate’ musicians: An historic review of provision for student popular musicians in Australian senior
secondary classrooms. British Journal of Music Education, 36(2), 155–171. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051719000196
CARROLL, C. (2020). Seeing the invisible: Theorising connections between informal and formal musical knowledge. Research
Studies in Music Education, 42(1), 37–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X18824641
CARROLL, C. (2021). A field divided: How Legitimation Code Theory reveals problems impacting the growth of school
music education. In R. Wright, G. Johansen, P. Kanellopoulos, & P. Schmidt (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook to the
Sociology of Music Education (pp. 196–208). UK: Routledge.
CARVER, A. (2020). African music, knowledge, and curriculum: Applying Bernsteinian and Legitimation Code Theory to
South African music curricula. [Doctoral Thesis, University of the Witwatersrand].
COLLINS, A. (2016). Generalist pre-service teacher education, self-efficacy and arts education: An impossible expectation?
International Journal of Education & the Arts, 17(26). http://www.ijea.org/
CORBIN, J. & STRAUSS, A. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded
Theory. Sage.
CRESSWELL, J. W. (2015). A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research. Sage.
DE VRIES, P. (2015). Music without a music specialist: A primary school story. International Journal of Music Education,
33(2), 210–221. DOI: 10.1177/0255761413515818
DE VRIES, P. (2015). Music without a music specialist: A primary school story. International Journal of Music Education,
33(2), 210–221. https//doi.org.10.1177/0255761413515818
DE VRIES, P. (2017). Self-efficacy and music teaching: Five narratives. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 18(4).
http://www.ijea.org/
EWING, R. (2010). The Arts and Australian Education: Realizing Potential. Australian Council for Educational Research
(ACER). http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=aer
GALLAGHER, M. (2012). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachandran (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Human Behaviour (2nd ed., pp. 314–
320). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Academic Press/Elsevier.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 286 Christine Carroll and Joanne Harris

GARVIS, S., TWIGG, D. & PENDERGAST, D. (2011). Breaking the negative cycle: The formation of self-efficacy beliefs in
the arts. A focus on professional experience in pre-service teacher education. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood,
36(2), 36–41.
GOOGLE CREATIVE LAB. (2016). Chrome Music Lab Song Maker. [web-based computer software]. https://musiclab.
chromeexperiments.com/Song-Maker/
HALLAM, S., BURNARD, P., ROBERTSON, A., SALEH, C., DAVIES, V., ROJERS, L. & KOKATSAKI, D. (2009).
Trainee primary-school teachers’ perceptions of their effectiveness in teaching music. Music Education Research, 11(2)
221–241. doi: 10.1080/14613800902924508
HENLEY, J. (2017). How musical are primary generalist student teachers? Music Education Research, 19(4), 470–484. DOI:
10.1080/14613808.2016.1204278
HEYWORTH, J. (2011). Jumping through 'loops': A reflective study on preparing generalist pre-service teachers to teach
music, Issues in Educational Research, 21(1), 42–64.
HEYWORTH, J. (2018). A study on the impact of a music looping technology intervention upon pre-service generalist teacher’s
self-efficacy to teach music in primary schools. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Edith Cowan University.
HOCKING, R. (2009). National audit of music discipline and music education mandatory content within pre-service generalist
primary teacher education courses: a report. Commissioned by the Commonwealth Department of Education Employment
and Workplace Relations, Canberra. http://musicinaustralia.org.au/images/9/9b/Hocking_preservice_2009.pdf
KOKOTSAKI, D., MENZIES, V., & WIGGINS, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the literature. Improving
schools, 19(3), 267–277. doi: 10.1177/1365480216659733
LAMONT, A., & MATON, K. (2008). Choosing music: Exploratory studies into the low uptake of music GCSE. British
Journal of Music Education, 25(3), 267–282. DOI: 10.1017/S0265051708008103
LAMONT, A., & MATON, K. (2010). Unpopular music: Beliefs and behaviours towards music in education. In R. Wright
(Ed.), Sociology and Music Education (pp. 63–80). Basingstoke, UK: Ashgate.
LOWE, G., LUMMIS, G. & MORRIS, J. (2017). Pre-service primary teachers’ experiences and self- efficacy to teach music:
Are they ready? Issues in Educational Research, 27(2), 213–328.
MATON, K. (2014). Knowledge and Knowers: Towards a Realist Sociology of Education. UK: Routledge.
MCNEILL, J., & MCPHAIL, G. (2020). One Direction: strategic challenges for twenty-first century secondary school music.
Music Education Research, 22(4), 432–446. DOI: 10.1080/14613808.2020.1796952
MCPHAIL, G., & MCNEILL, J. (2019). One direction: a future for secondary school music education?. Music Education
Research, 21(4), 359–370. DOI: 10.1080/14613808.2019.1605345
PAJARES, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 545–578.
PASCOE, R., LEONG, S., MACCALLUM, J., MACKINLAY, E., MARSH, K., SMITH, B., CHURCH, T., & WINTERTON,
A. (2005). National review of school music education: Augmenting the Diminished. https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.
au/id/eprint/9459/1/music_review_reportFINAL.pdf
POWER, B., & KLOPPER, C. (2011). The classroom practice of creative arts education in NSW primary schools:
A descriptive account. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 12(11), n11. http://www.ijea.org/v12n11/v12n11.pdf
RICHARDSON, S. (2019). Teaching jazz: A study of beliefs and pedagogy using Legitimation Code Theory. [Unpublished
Doctoral Thesis] The University of Sydney. https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/22066
SOMEKH, B. (2011). Action Research: A Methodology for Change and Development. Open University Press.
STEVENS–BALLENGER, J., JEANNERET, N. & FORREST, D. (2010). Pre-service primary music: Where to begin?
Victorian Journal of Music Education, 1, 36–41.
TOBIAS, E. S. (2017). Re-situating technology in music education. In S. A. Ruthmann & R. Mantie (Eds.), The Oxford
Handbook of Technology and Music Education (pp. 291–308). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
WALTON, J. (2020). Making the grade: Theorising musical performance assessment. [Doctoral Thesis: Griffith University
Queensland Conservatorium]. Griffith Research Online. https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au/handle/10072/393977
WIGGINS, R., & WIGGINS, J. (2008). Primary music education in the absence of specialists. International Journal of
Education & the Arts, 9, 1–26.

Cite this article: Carroll C and Harris J (2023). ‘Because I’m not musical’: A critical case study of music education training for
pre-service generalist primary teachers in Australia. British Journal of Music Education 40, 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0265051722000274

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051722000274 Published online by Cambridge University Press