Nondirective Teaching in Online Music Education

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted an unexpected shift to online education for most educators. This challenging transition was exacerbated in music education by music’s inherent performative nature and technology’s limitations for synchronous group performance.¹ Teachers had to explore innovative approaches to deliver effective music education. In this article, I chronicle one such exploration: a project based on nondirective teaching in an Adventist school in southern Mexico, conducted between January and June 2021.

The project served high schoolers (grades 10 and 11) with little or no previous music training,² varying interests and motivations regarding music learning, and unequal access to the internet.³ These factors had caused irregular student engagement in the synchronous sessions during the previous semester (August–December 2020) and, consequently, poor academic performance by a large portion of the class. This scenario impeded the lesson planning and weakened the overall quality of the educational process.

Considering the context and the various possibilities offered by online education, I opted for nondirective teaching as the primary instructional model, focusing on students’ musical development, autonomy, and motivation. All the activities for that semester revolved around a didactic strategy I named “Elijo y Aprendo” (EyA), which in English means (“I choose and learn.”) The remainder of this article describes the strategy’s theoretical and methodological foundations, structure, and implementation results.

Theoretical and Methodological Foundations

EyA combines elements of nondirective teaching and universal design for learning in an asynchronous learning system that uses the ASSURE instructional design model (see https://www.instructionaldesign.org/models/assure/). ASSURE is an approach to instructional design that takes into consideration all aspects of the learner to ensure success (see Box 1). Nondirective teaching belongs to the family of personal teaching models. Based on work by Carl Rogers and other advocates of nondirective counseling, this model places the learners at the center of the teaching process and allows them to make decisions about their own learning. Rather than controlling the learning sequence, this model seeks to nurture the learner toward independent learning. Thus, the teacher becomes a facilitator who guides the growth and development of his or her students. In its academic application, this model can help develop students’ responsibility for their learning and ensure that the subject matter relates well to students’ needs and learning styles.⁴

In this project, nondirective teaching provided the approach for structuring EyA, encouraging students to learn autonomously, at their own pace, and according to their varied interests. Students were free to choose from predesigned activities that they considered relevant to their interests and needs. To help achieve the goals of the class, I gave each student a learning contract to select, organize, and manage his or her activities. That contract allowed me to approve the students’ selections, monitor their work, and evaluate their performance.

As a complement to the learning contract, I included elements from the Universal Design for Learning⁵ related to multiple ways of presenting the content and various possibilities for action or expression for the students.⁶ At a practical level, the ASSURE instructional design model⁷ organized the construction of EyA, starting from the analysis of the students to establish appropriate objectives and provide potentially engaging activities for them.

Structure

EyA included three subject areas students could select according to their interests: music history, vocal theory, and music theory. Students could choose one, two, or all three areas, or even opt out of any category entirely. They also had some flexibility to make choices within each area. I defined these topics based on the students’ opinions⁸ and the feasibility of working on them online with the available technology. Music history provided basic principles of Western music during the Baroque, Classical, and Romantic periods. Vocal training offered conceptual foundations and practical exercises to develop students’ singing skills. Music theory introduced students to music reading and writing and included exercises for developing their aural skills.

In addition to these areas, the program incorporated a required component for all students. This component, which included studying portions of the Bible, provided a space for students to reflect and find support for their learning in this newly implemented nondirective approach. The reflections addressed the importance of keeping our word, the tools God gives us to overcome challenges (academic and beyond), and music as a divine gift, among other topics.

In their learning contracts, students selected activities (until they reached the minimum required score) and the due dates for each one. I reviewed and approved each contract to verify that it complied with the requirements. Thus, the learning contract became the road map for both student and teacher.

Several technologies coexisted in the didactic strategy: Google Classroom as the primary learning-management system; Edpuzzle⁹ to generate video lessons with immediate feedback; and the Adventist Virtual Library¹⁰ to guarantee remote access to authoritative bibliographic sources. Additionally, I created a WhatsApp group chat to allow instant communication and provide an alternative way for students with connectivity difficulties to submit their assignments.¹¹

To facilitate their transition to nondirective learning, the students received video tutorials and a written guide with answers to frequently asked. We also had two weekly synchronous tutoring hours via Google Meet, facilitating students’ in their learning. Furthermore, I assigned learning journals during the first weeks of the semester to monitor students’ adaptation to this new teaching model.

Implementation Report

To monitor the implementation of EyA and evaluate its effectiveness, I examined both teacher and student perspectives. My insights as the teacher came from observations and analyses of students’ performance and learning journals. As a complement to my criteria, the students completed a questionnaire at the end of the semester to evaluate EyA.

I want to highlight two successful outcomes of EyA implementation. First and foremost, my students’ response was positive: Motivation and performance increased compared to the previous semester. Most students demonstrated musical development, mainly in literacy and/or vocal development. In addition, the asynchronous methodology mitigated the lag in connecting for those students with connectivity problems at home since they could organize their work according to their availability of internet access without missing explanations or group activities assigned for a specific time slot. These achievements illustrate the relevance and helpfulness of the project in dealing with its unique circumstances.

The students’ responses also revealed a variety of challenges. The main difficulty had to do with comfort level with EyA. First, learning to work from a nondirected model was challenging for most of them. Despite the support resources and the teacher’s accompaniment, many students needed much of the semester to adapt to making decisions about their learning. This situation resonates with Grow’s observations about mismatches between the instructor’s teaching style and the degree of student self-direction.¹² In this case, many students faced a new teaching model that did not correspond to their capacity for self-direction, so it took them longer to acquire the skills to learn in this model.

It is also essential to understand that this methodology does not necessarily appeal to all students. According to Anderson, Boud, and Sampson, teachers must ensure students are fully oriented to the new approaches. For those who prefer more traditional assignments, are uncomfortable with technology, or have yet to achieve the levels of maturity required to work independently, nondirective learning might pose a challenge. Contracts, while helpful, do not ensure that all learners will be motivated to succeed.¹³

Another factor that slowed adaptation was that this was the only subject where students worked asynchronously. After more than a semester of working in synchronous sessions, the idea of not having to connect to “the lesson” seemed strange to some. The combined use of multiple technologies also hindered students. Switching from one platform to another and learning to work with Edpuzzle (which was new to most) delayed adaptation and undermined their motivation. In this context, one of the students who best adapted to the nondirected work suggested that an app to manage EyA in a more intuitive and gamified way (including more game-like components such as badges, scores, or tasks) would be helpful for future use.

It is also noteworthy to mention how demanding the management of EyA was for me as a teacher since instructional design and implementation occurred almost simultaneously. Because the project was implemented to address an immediate problem, there was not enough time to design and test all or most activities before implementing the strategies. Consequently, the design and adaptation of the materials overlapped with the supervision of the students, resulting in delays in posting assignments and reviewing work, extended workdays, and symptoms of burnout.¹⁴

Student perceptions were gauged using a teacher-designed end-of-semester survey. The questionnaire was sent to all 43 enrolled students, and 31 responded, a 72 percent response. Using a Likert scale, the questionnaire assessed their motivation, autonomy in learning, the perceived helpfulness of EyA, and the degree to which they had adapted to the didactic strategy.

The results (see Table 1) are consistent with the teacher’s observation of how EyA helped students develop their autonomy as learners (Items 6, 7, and 8) and how well the strategy addressed their interests (Items 1 and 4). The survey also revealed the respondents’ challenges in adapting to the nondirective approach (Item 2). Even among those students who acknowledged an improvement in their autonomy, some did not fully master the EyA way of working.

Table 2 compares the rating the students who responded to the survey gave to EyA (from 1 to 10) and the teaching model they would like to have. In general, favorable ratings dominated, and the students expressed a desire to continue with EyA. Comparing both aspects shows that nearly half of the participants (45.16 percent) gave a rating equal to or higher than 8 and said they would like to continue with the nondirective model, compared to 16.1 percent who said they preferred to return to traditional teaching.

Conclusion

In this experiment, nondirective teaching in an online modality proved effective for the musical development of students with little or no previous training. It contributed to learner autonomy and facilitated attention to diversity, provided that students were trained to self-manage their learning. A further implementation of EyA, where instructional design and implementation occur successively in a more intuitive and playful technological setting, could facilitate instruction and more fully show the strategy’s potential.

As Adventist educators, we can help our students become thinkers and not mere reflectors of others’ thoughts¹⁵ through nondirective teaching. While they will need our support and mentoring, this methodology may allow them to exercise their judgment and develop responsibility for their learning. At the same time, this methodology contributes to the integral development¹⁶ of the learner because it is not only concerned with acquiring knowledge but also prioritizes the emotional needs of each student. These reasons illustrate the value of nondirective teaching within the framework of the Adventist educational philosophy.

This project, born in response to the challenges of the pandemic, may inspire teachers to explore new teaching methods. Such exploration is necessary to develop the adaptability needed to meet education’s present and future challenges.¹⁷ EyA’s structure applies to other areas of knowledge as well and can be adapted to hybrid or face-to-face teaching. In a world where educational challenges are growing, we must remain willing to contextualize our practice to what is required, given the circumstances.

Note: This article is adapted from a presentation delivered at the 5th Inter-American Division Research Conference, held in Alajuela, Costa Rica, in March 2023. The would like to express his sincere gratitude to Dr. Gudiel Roblero, Director of Research and Graduate Studies at Linda Vista University, for his support with the statistical analysis featured in this study. 

This article has been peer reviewed.

Rodney James Frómeta Bring

Rodney James Frómeta Bring, MA, iis currently serving as the Director of the Music Academy at Linda Vista University in Chiapas, Mexico. He holds a Bachelor of Music in Choral Conducting and Musicology (University of the Arts, Cuba) and a Master's degree in Educational Administration and Supervision (Antillean Adventist University, Puerto Rico). With over 15 years of experience in Cuba and Mexico, Mr. Frómeta Bring has taught music across general education, music schools, universities, and community programs, working with learners from childhood to adulthood. A trained musician, he also actively engages in music ministry as a pianist, conductor, and composer.