Adjusting the environment

For the length of time that Layer 1 ran, Layer 4 ran continuously, while Layers 2 and 3 wove in and out for shorter periods of time. A point came midway through the term when I decided to schedule a break away from the FAP process. Although the Practice Maps of Layer 4 continued through weeks 8 and 10, during these two weeks pupils only made audio-visual recordings, but did not analyse them. This adjustment came at a point when I had a feeling that some pupils were in need of a small respite from the weekly reflective tasks, though no pupils showed outward signs of unease with the exception of U3, who had started to sigh or ‘roll her eyes when asked to evaluate her film’ (Journal entry week 7). Her reactions could have been the result of many factors unrelated to the study, but I had begun to wonder if a weekly video representation was too much for some pupils to cope with.

These two free weeks yielded some positive results. In the absence of FAP, I adopted the approach of questioning throughout the entire lesson on all content in the same manner that I had been doing for the small FAP portion of their lesson. Most pupils responded very reflectively for the entirety of their lesson and seemed ‘to be more verbally responsive than in the past’ (Journal entry week 8). They seemed to be carrying the analysis chair into a context free of video critiquing. A particular change was observed in the normally very quiet S2, who, in the first of these two free lessons, began asking me questions about the material being covered. It could have been that S2 and the other pupils who exhibited this behaviour were experiencing greater confidence to speak their mind, testing a new discursive approach to learning that was a result of reflecting, or felt more at ease to speak because their comments were not being recorded. Whatever the reason, this new alteration to the lesson environment had promoted a marked change in the pupils’ engagement and vocal contributions. Perhaps we both had benefited from weeks of enquiry training, so to speak, and that some pupils were now comfortable to work through a lens of enquiry as a norm.

A further change was noted in the second of these two free sessions. Though no FAP was undertaken, a film was still recorded in the final minutes for the pupil to review during a later interview. This small change in the cycle of events produced reassuring and promising results for many of the pupils, as noted in my reflective journal entry below.

Journal entry

week 10 – This week found some pupils very relaxed…maybe they felt well prepared (?), but a few said they felt under pressure. Each knew that I had heard them play better…Z5, who studies three instruments to quite a high standard, was very tired and unsatisfied with her ability to control a few technical aspects in her concerto… When I turned on the film, she transformed. She became a

performer! She seemed to let go and trust herself, and it was there…

Z5 had displayed dissatisfaction when working on bow control during her lesson and I was slightly worried that her frustration would impact the quality of her filmed performance in some way. But as the recording commenced, she completely transformed to conduct herself as a confident, engaged and relaxed performer. I could not tell if such transformations were the result of past performing history, weeks of rotating between the reflective roles and making digital recordings, or from the regular performing opportunities in the other Layers of the study. What is clear though is that from having regular opportunities to make a performance film, pupils had exercised their skills at quickly assuming and settling into the role of performer. Perhaps pupils were signalling to me that filming had become an accepted and complementary type of companion for their learning environment.

4.15 Conclusion

The first part of this chapter introduced the reader to the participants by establishing a profile for each pupil. After using a deductive and quasi-quantitative analysis approach (Marshall & Rossman, 2011) to look at the data for Layers 1 and 2, the second part of this chapter gave an overview of pupils’ engagement in these roles. Though pupils did not receive training in how to engage with the FAP, they identified and monitored issues commonly used in third level formal assessment situations (Hunter & Russ, 1996; Blom & Poole, 2004). That they had the capacity to construct their own frame of

reference may be of interest for those furthering research on the younger pupil’s ability to effectively self-evaluate (Hewitt, 2002, 2011).

Both data sets showed that pupils mentioned slightly more aural issues than visual issues. However, as the result of opportunities to engage with a visual tool as an aid for reflection, they demonstrated the ability to identify, integrate, and make use of visual observations (Daniel, 2001). Pupils displayed critical thinking skills during the FAP by giving both complimentary (favourable) and corrective (unfavourable) analysis. In both Layers pupils commented about their own films from the analyst chair in the same manner, and offered more unfavourable comments than favourable. Differences occurred when pupils assumed the role of participating peer. In this role pupils gave fewer comments generally, and provided analysis that was predominantly complimentary. Across both Layers 1 and 2, some pupils found the role of advisor more problematic than others.

The third part of this chapter presented themes that surfaced in my reflective journal as I implemented the FAP in Layers 1 and 2. By presenting small episodes, I tried to give the reader a sense of pupils rotating between the six reflective roles in real-time, and to illustrate their displays of resilience, resourcefulness and reciprocity (Claxton, 2002). It was also an attempt to relate my observations and reflections on the use of audio-visual tools, in combination with peer collaboration and an enquiry approach. My journal entries tracked the pupils’ growing sense of autonomy. Because of the FAP, pupils made their own discoveries, but they also realised new things as a result of my gentle guidance or peer collaboration. Pupils’ growing sense of agency surfaced when they manipulated the digital recording to manage their own investigations, monitored personal issues in the performances of their peers as they gave feedback, formulated questions, and assumed the role of educator to assist a peer.

Chapter 5 examines the data gathered from the Group Sessions of Layer 3, pupils’ practice mapping of Layer 4, and my own reflections on their participation in the formal performances of Layer 5.

1