The main objective of this research was to create a typology of teacher-pupil-parent interpersonal interaction in the context of learning a musical instrument. Three hundred and thirty-seven teacher-pupil-parent triads participated in the research, completing a survey measuring “control” and “responsiveness”. Factor analysis revealed a number of underlying interpersonal dimensions. A cluster analysis was carried out, using control and responsiveness factors as predictors of cluster membership. A model of six distinct interaction types was revealed and validated with in-depth interviews with teacher-pupil-parent triads representing each cluster. Clusters 1, 2 and 3 were each conceptualised as a primary dyad plus a third party, while Cluster 4 was represented as two primary dyads connected by one common member. Cluster 5 was characterized by very little communication between any two of the three individuals, while Cluster 6 was characterized by reciprocity amongst all three participants. This model of interaction types provides a framework within which teachers may interpret their own teacher-parent and teacher-pupil experience, potentially empowering teachers to alter their interaction patterns when migration from one cluster type to another is deemed to be appropriate in terms of enhancing learning or teaching outcomes.
AddisonR. (1990). Parents' views on their children's musical education in the primary school: A survey. British Journal of Music Education, 7(2), 133–41.
2.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
3.
BaumrindD. (1989). Rearing competent children. In DamonW. (ed), Child development today and tomorrow (pp. 349–78). London: Jossey-Bass.
4.
BirtchnellJ. (1993). How humans relate: A new interpersonal theory.Psychology Press, UK.
BrekelmansM. (1989). Interpersoonlijk gedrag von docenten in de klas (interpersonal teacher behaviour in the classroom). Utrecht, WCC, The Netherlands.
7.
BriggsS.CheekJ. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 54(1), 106–48.
8.
BrokawJ. P. (1982). The extent to which parental supervision and other selected factors are related to achievement of musical and technical-physical characteristics by beginning instrumental music students. Unpublished PHD, University of Michigan, USA.
9.
BronfenbrennerU. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10.
CooperP.McIntyreD. (1993). Commonality in teacher's and pupil's perceptions of effective classroom learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(3), 381–99.
11.
CramerD. (2003). Advanced quantitative data analysis.Maidenhead: Open University Press.
12.
CreechA. (2001). Play for me: An exploration into motivations, issues and outcomes related to parental involvement in their children's violin study. Unpublished MA, University of Sheffield.
13.
CreechA. (2006). Dynamics, harmony and discord: A systems analysis of teacher-pupil-parent interaction in instrumental learning. Unpublished PhD, University of London, London.
14.
CreechA. (2009). The role of the family in supporting learning. In HallamS.CrossI.ThautM. (eds), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 295–306). Oxford University Press.
15.
CreechA.HallamS. (in press). The influence of interpersonal dynamics on outcomes for violin teachers.
16.
CreechA.HallamS. (in revision). Learning a musical instrument: The influence of interpersonal interaction on outcomes for school-aged pupils.
17.
CreechA.HallamS. (in press). Interaction in instrumental learning: The influence of interpersonal dynamics on outcomes for parents. International Journal of Music Education (Practice).
18.
CretonH.WubbelsT. (1984). Discipline problems with beginning teachers. Utrecht, WCC, The Netherlands.
19.
CrozierG. (1999). Parent involvement: Who wants it?International Studies in Sociology of Education, 9(2), 111–30.
20.
DavidsonJ.BorthwickS. J. (2002). Family dynamics and family scripts: A case study of musical development. Psychology of Music, 30(1), 121–36.
21.
DavidsonJ.HoweM.SlobodaJ. (1995). The role of parents and teachers in the success and failure of instrumental learners. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 127, 40–4.
22.
DavidsonJ.ScottS. (1999). Instrumental learning with exams in mind: A case study investigating teacher, student and parent interactions before, during and after a music examination. British Journal of Music Education, 16(1), 79–95.
23.
DoanG. (1973). An investigation of the relationships between parental involvement and the performance ability of violin students. Unpublished PHD, Ohio State University, USA.
24.
DownieR. S.LoufootE. M.TelferE. (1974). Education and personal relationships.London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.
25.
DukeR. A. (1999). Teacher and student behaviour in Suzuki string lessons: Results from the international research symposium on talent education. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(4), 293–307.
26.
EverittB.LandauS.LeeseM. (2001). Cluster analysis, 4th edition.London: Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd.
27.
FisherD. L.FraserB. J.WubbelsT. (1992). Teacher communication style and school environment (Conference paper). Enshede, The Netherlands: ECER Conference.
28.
GholsonS. A. (1998). Proximal positioning: A strategy of practice in violin pedagogy. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46(4), 535–45.
29.
GrolnickW.GurlandS.DeCourceyW.JacobK. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of mother's autonomy support: An experimental investigation. Developmental Psychology, 38(1), 143–55.
30.
GustafsonR. (1986). Effects of interpersonal dynamics in the student-teacher dyads on diagnostic and remedial content of four private violin lessons. Psychology of Music, 14(2), 130–39.
31.
HallamS. (1998). The predictors of achievement and dropout in instrumental tuition. Psychology of Music, 26(2), 116–32.
32.
HallamS. (2006). Music psychology in education.London: Institute of Education, University of London.
33.
HendelC. (1995). Behavioural charecteristics and instructional patterns of selected music teachers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 43(3), 182–203.
34.
HenryM. (1996). Young children, parents, and professionals: Enhancing the links in early childhood.London: Routledge.
35.
HestonM.DedrickC.RaschkeD.WhiteheadJ. (1996). Job satisfaction and stress among band directors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 44(4), 319–27.
36.
HulseboschP. (1991). Beauty in the eye of the beholder. How and why teachers involve parents. International Journal of Educational Research, 15(2), 183–200.
37.
JohnsonD. (1991). Parents, students and teachers: A three-way relationship. International Journal of Educational Research, 15(2), 171–81.
38.
JorgensenE. R. (1998). Modeling aspects of type IV music instructional triads. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 137, 43–56.
39.
KirkpatrickW. C. (1962). Relationships between the singing ability of pre-kindergarten children and their home environment. Unpublished PhD, University of Southern California.
40.
KlinedinstR. (1991). Predicting performance achievement and retention of fifth-grade instrumental students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 39(3), 225–38.
41.
LamontA. (2002). Musical identities and the school environment. In MacDonaldR.HargreavesD.MiellD. (eds), Musical identities (pp. 41–59). Oxford University Press.
42.
LearyT. (1957). Interpersonal diagnosis of personality: A functional theory and methodology for personality evaluation.New York: Ronald Press Company.
43.
MaccobyE.MartinJ. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In HetheringtonE. M.MussenP. H. (eds), Handbook of child psychology, vol. 4. Socialization, personality and social development (pp. 1–101). New York: Wiley.
44.
ManturzewskaM. (1990). A biographical study of the life-span development of professional musicians. Psychology of Music, 18(2), 112–39.
45.
O'NeillS. (1996). Factors influencing children's motivation and achievement during the first year of instrumental music tuition. Unpublished PhD, Keele University, UK.
46.
PerssonR. S. (1995). Psychosocial stressors among student musicians: A naturalistic study of the teacher-student relationship. International Journal of Arts Medicine, IV(2), 7–13.
47.
PerssonR. S. (1996). The maestro music teacher and musicians mental health (Research paper No. CG027631). Toronto, Canada: American Psychological Association.
48.
PruettK. (2003). First patrons: Parenting the musician. Paper presentend at the 21st Annual Symposium on the Medical Problems of Musicians and Dancers, Aspen, Colorado.
49.
RifeN. A.ShnekZ. M.LaubyJ. L.LapidusL. B. (2001). Children's satisfaction with private music lessons. Journal of Research in Music Education, 49(1), 21–32.
50.
SchmidtC. P. (1989). Applied music teaching behaviour as a function of selected personality variables. Journal of Research in Music Education, 37(4), 258–71.
51.
SchmidtC. P.StephansR. (1991). Locus of control and field dependence as facors in students evaluations of applied music instruction. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 73(1), 131–36.
52.
SheltonJ. (1965). The influence of home musical environment upon musical response of first grade children. Unpublished PhD, George Peabody College for Teachers, Vanderbilt University, Tennessee, USA.
53.
SlobodaJ.HoweM. (1991). Biographical precursors of musical excellence: An interview study. Psychology of Music, 19(1), 3–21.
54.
SosniakL. A., (1985). Learning to be a concept pianist. In BloomB. S. (ed), Developing talent in young people (pp. 19–67). New York: Ballantine.
55.
SteinbergL.ElmenJ.MountsN. (1989). Authoritative parenting, psychosocial maturity and academic success among adolescents. Child Development, 60(6), 1424–36.
56.
Van TartwijkJ.BrekelmansM.WubbelsT. (1998). Students' perceptions of teacher interpersonal style: The front of the classroom as the teacher's stage. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(6), 607–17.
57.
WelchG.DuffyC.PotterJ.WhytonT. (2006). Investigating musical performance (IMP): Comparative studies in advanced musical learning. Funded by the ESRC/TLRP, grant reference RES-139-25-0258: Institute of Education, University of London.
58.
WermuthR. (1971). Relationship of musical aptitude to family and student activity in music, student interest in music, socioeconomic status, and intelligence among caucasian and negro middle school students. Unpublished PhD, Ohio State University, USA.
59.
WubbelsT.CretonH.BrekelmansM.HooymayersH. (1987). The perception of the teacher-student relationship. Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch, 12, 3–16.
60.
WubbelsT.CretonH.LevyJ. (1993). The model for interpersonal teacher behaviour. In WubbelsT.LevyJ. (eds), Do you know what you look like? Interpersonal relationships in education (pp. 13–28). London: Falmer Press.
61.
ZdzinskiS. (1992). Relationships among parental involvement, music aptitude, and musical achievement of instrumental music students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 40(2), 114–25.
62.
ZdzinskiS. (1996). Parental involvement, selected student attributes and learning outcomes in instrumental music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 44(1), 34–48.
