Contextual and dispositional predictors of student teachers’ intended use of singing in the classroom: A national survey in Norway

Abstract

This study explores the contextual and dispositional factors influencing student teachers’ intended use of singing in their future classroom practice. Utilising a national survey of 466 final-year student teachers in Norway, we examined the impact of early experiences, teacher education, and attitudes towards singing using regression analysis. Drawing on Blömeke and Kaiser’s and Kunter et al.’s models of teacher professional competence, we investigated how contextual and dispositional factors contribute to student teachers’ self-perceived competence and motivation to incorporate singing into classroom activities. The results indicate significant differences between music-specialist (MUS) and generalist (PSE) student teachers, with MUS students reporting stronger intentions to include singing than PSE peers. Across both groups, two predictors were consistently associated with higher intentions: the personal relevance of singing during primary schooling and beliefs about the value of singing. The findings emphasise the importance of both formal and informal educational experiences in shaping the readiness of future teachers to integrate singing into their practice.

Keywords

music teacher education music teacher training quantitative research singing student teachers survey

Introduction

Singing has long held a central place in the Norwegian education system, as reflected in curricula and timetables (Balsnes, 2024). In recent decades, however, its formal presence in compulsory education has declined, with reduced emphasis in curricular documents (Balsnes et al., 2025). Still, singing remains explicitly mandated in the current national curriculum, where pupils are expected to engage in vocal performance alongside other musical activities (Ministry of Education and Research, 2020b). The core curriculum (Ministry of Education and Research, 2020a) also highlights aesthetic and cultural expression across subjects and interdisciplinary themes such as public health and life skills, positioning singing as both a music-specific and cross-curricular learning activity.

Two teacher-education pathways are central to this study: (a) generalist primary and lower-secondary programmes (GLU 1–7 and GLU 5–10), where music is not compulsory and most student teachers graduate without formal music credits, and (b) specialist routes in music, where music is a major field. In primary schools, no statutory requirement exists for music credits, so usually generalists teach the subject, while some schools employ specialists. Lower-secondary education generally requires subject-qualified teachers. Surveys show that fewer than half of Norwegian music teachers have a background in music education, with even lower proportions among those under 30 (Statistics Norway [SSB], 2019). Historically, singing has lost ground within general teacher education, shifting from a compulsory to an optional component (Jørgensen, 2001), and the transition to a 5-year master’s model has coincided with a decline in the number of music specialists (Database for Statistics on Higher Education [DBH], 2025). These developments have weakened institutional support for singing and therefore render individual dispositions and experiences especially influential.

Against this background, the present study examines which contextual and dispositional factors predict whether student teachers intend to use singing in future teaching. Adopting a life-course perspective, we analyse experiences with singing from early childhood through schooling and teacher education, along with attitudes towards singing and self-perceived competence, to identify factors shaping future classroom use.

Theoretical framework

To trace the development from early experiences to graduation as a teacher, this study draws on perspectives from teacher professionalisation theory. Existing models guided the identification of relevant research, the design of the questionnaire, and the analytical framework.

Blömeke and Kaiser (2017, p. 3; see Figure 1) conceptualise teachers’ professional competence as personally, situationally, and socially determined within a multidimensional framework. The model comprises three domains: dispositions, situation-specific skills, and performance. As our research concerned whether student teachers intend to use singing in future teaching—an aspect of performance—we focused on the dispositions and skills that underpin such behaviour. Dispositions encompass professional knowledge (acquired before and during education) and affect-motivational traits such as beliefs and attitudes. Blömeke and Kaiser (2017) argue that professional competence involves not only cognitive knowledge but also interests, motivation, values, and beliefs that transform knowledge into action. Two central affective-motivational dispositions are self-efficacy, the belief in one’s ability, and anxiety, which can inhibit action by prompting avoidance of challenging situations. They also highlight a research gap concerning these affective-motivational characteristics.

Figure 1.

Blömeke and Kaiser’s (2017, p. 3) Multi-Dimensional Conceptual Framework of Teacher Competencies (Illustration by the Authors).

To address how experiences from early life influence attitudes and self-perceived competence, we also draw on Kunter et al.’s (2013, p. 67; see Figure 2) model of the “determinants and consequences of teachers’ professional competence.”

Figure 2.

Kunter et al.’s (2013, p. 67) Model of the Determinants and Consequences of Teachers’ Professional Competence (Illustration by the Authors).

This model introduces context, defined as the educational system encompassing both the schools students attended and their teacher-education institutions. Context shapes learning opportunities, while personal characteristics—cognitive ability, motivation, personality—affect whether these opportunities are used. Through these interactions, professional competence develops and subsequently informs behaviour, here the use of singing in professional practice.

Although Kunter et al. emphasise individual dispositions, our focus extends to how contextual experiences—family, schooling, leisure, and higher education—shape attitudes and perceived singing competence. Blömeke and Kaiser (2017, p. 10; see Figure 3) further outline a social-context model describing how social, educational, and policy environments influence competence development.

Figure 3.

Blömeke and Kaiser’s (2017, p. 10, fig. 45.3) Conceptual Model of the Social Context and the Development of Professional Competencies (Illustration by the Authors.)

In this model, social, schooling, and policy contexts are crucial in shaping teacher education, teacher educators (depending on demographic and professional background, as well as beliefs), and future teachers themselves (relating to demographic background, school history, and previous competencies—acquired, for example, through extracurricular activities). Collectively, these factors influence the competencies of student teachers upon graduation (their knowledge, skills, and affective-motivational characteristics, ultimately culminating in “performance”). Blömeke and Kaiser (2017) define the social context as the various teacher education programmes students attend, the schools that employ them, their colleagues, and national policies related to the teaching profession.

Previous research

Beliefs and attitudes around music and singing

Studies show that both qualified and student teachers, regardless of musical background, generally hold positive attitudes towards singing and music (Hennessy, 2000; Thorn & Brasche, 2015; Welch & Henley, 2014; Wicks, 2014). Teachers’ attitudes strongly influence the extent and manner in which music education occurs in preschool and school settings (Battersby & Cave, 2014; Ehrlin & Tivenius, 2018; Lowe et al., 2017; Richards, 1999), making them a key focus of this study.

Musical abilities and singing competence

Research on teachers’ and student teachers’ self-perceived musicality reveals similar findings: many feel musically limited, citing lack of confidence and low self-efficacy (Battersby & Cave, 2014; Boyack, 1999; Hennessy, 2000; Holden & Button, 2006; Pascale, 2002; Poulter & Cook, 2020; Stunell, 2010; Welch & Henley, 2014). While much of the literature highlights perceived inadequacy and the need for stronger training in both initial and continuing education (Holden & Button, 2006; Mäkinen & Juvonen, 2017), some studies suggest that insufficient formal competence leads teachers to rely mainly on singing while neglecting other areas such as instrumental work or composition (Christophersen, 2016; de Vries, 2013; Espeland et al., 2013; Nielsen & Karlsen, 2021; Sætre, 2018; Sætre et al., 2016). Singing competence correlates with frequency of classroom singing—teachers with higher competence sing more often (Balsnes et al., 2022)—yet many still report fear of singing (Balsnes et al., 2022; Wicks, 2014). Possessing formal music education does not necessarily guarantee comfort with singing (Balsnes & Jansson, 2022; Wicks, 2014). This study therefore examines attitudes and self-perceived competence rather than measured ability, aligning conceptually with Bandura’s (1977) notion of self-efficacy and self-concept research (Spychiger, 2017).

Previous musical and singing-related experiences: Family, school, and leisure activities

Early experiences shape relationships with singing (Ballantyne, 2006; Ballantyne & Zhukov, 2017; Battersby & Cave, 2014; Hash, 2010; Russell-Bowie, 2010; Welch, 2017). Such experiences influence perceived musicality and singing competence, both positively and negatively. Hash (2010) argues that these attitudes form long before teacher education and are resistant to change. Boyack (1999) identified family, teacher, and peer feedback—especially between ages 8 and 12—as key in shaping self-efficacy. Lowe et al. (2017) likewise found that positive preservice experiences enhance music-teacher self-efficacy. Family background, schooling, and extracurricular activity further affect attitudes: family participation in music predicts continued engagement (Demorest et al., 2017). Hennessy (2000) shows a complex interaction among experience, belief, and school quality, while Wicks (2014) and Ruismäki and Tereska (2008) link student teachers’ current attitudes to earlier positive or negative school experiences. Music-related hobbies also correlate with more positive attitudes towards teaching music (Hallam et al., 2009; Henley, 2017; Mäkinen et al., 2020; Mäkinen & Juvonen, 2017; Sætre et al., 2016). Thovsen Nysæther et al. (2021) show that students with musical backgrounds are more likely to choose a music specialisation, and Boyack (1999) found that prior choir experience supports success in classroom singing and instrumental teaching.

Music and singing in teacher education

Research on music in teacher education (e.g., Russell-Bowie, 2010; Wicks, 2014) reports too little emphasis on singing. Limited mastery fosters uncertainty and avoidance of teaching music (Fredriksen, 2018; Hennessy, 2017; Mäkinen & Juvonen, 2017). Recent findings confirm that student teachers receive little practical training in singing, reducing their confidence (Sirek & Sefton, 2023).

Aims and objectives

Building upon theoretical frameworks of teacher competence development and previous research, we focus on the following dimensions in our study: (1) Performance—the central question of our study revolves around whether student teachers will engage in singing activities with their pupils in their subsequent professional practice and the factors influencing this “professional behaviour.” Drawing on the models proposed by Blömeke and Kaiser (2017) and Kunter et al. (2013), the following dimensions can be specified, with a significant influence assumed: (2) the student teachers’ affective-motivational and professional knowledge dispositions, (3) professional competencies (encompassing singing-specific knowledge and skills), and (4) the (formal and nonformal) education system within which a student has grown up and pursued their studies.

Methods

Questionnaire, data collection, and analysis

We used a questionnaire to explore the current situation regarding singing in Norwegian teacher education. The questions can be categorised into five groups: (1) student characteristics: gender, age, work experience as a teacher, and programme of study; (2) students’ music-related competencies and background: music course credits, music-related family background and leisure activities, and musical competence (including singing-related competency); (3) students’ perspectives on and experience of singing in Norwegian kindergarten or school, including the relevance, frequency, appreciation, function of, and justification for singing; (4) students’ perspectives on and experience of singing in teacher education, including learning outcomes, singing in internships, the relevance of singing in teacher education, and university teachers’ and mentors’ singing-related competence; and (5) the future use or nonuse of singing in each student’s own professional practice.

To measure the students’ musical competencies, we used two factors from the Goldsmiths Musical Sophistication Index (Gold-MSI; Müllensiefen et al., 2014): singing abilities (seven items; example, “After hearing a new song two or three times, I can usually sing it by myself”) and the general musical sophistication factor (18 items; example, “I spend a lot of my free time doing music-related activities”). The Gold-MSI usually shows good to very good reliability, including in the version translated by us into Norwegian, which we have already used and psychometrically tested several times in previous studies (Knigge et al., 2021; Balsnes et al., 2022).

To measure the students’ justification and reasons for singing in schools, we used a scale developed by Knigge et al. (2021; see also Balsnes et al., 2022). The scale consists of nine items (examples: “Singing makes students love music” and “Singing increases the concentration of students”), which can be differentiated into three subscales. The overall scale and the individual subscales showed good reliability in previous studies (Balsnes et al., 2022).

To measure the students’ families’ interest in music we translated a scale with five items (examples: “My family is interested in music,” “My family considers music to be very important”) developed by Jordan (2014). The Norwegian version yielded very good reliability values in previous studies (e.g., Balsnes et al., 2022).

The remaining questions were newly developed for the present study, tested in a pretest, and checked for their psychometric quality (including distribution, reliability, etc.) as part of the statistical analysis.

The questionnaire was distributed via an internet platform (https://nettskjema.no) and took an average of 15 min to complete. All participants received an invitation letter with information about the project in advance and data were only collected from students who explicitly gave their consent. The ethics approval was granted by the Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research (Sikt; reference number 906836).

After data collection was completed in 2021, all data were prepared for use with statistical analysis software (SPSS 28, JASP 0.18.3). The statistical analyses conducted for this article encompass both descriptive (frequency and correlation analysis) and inferential statistical methods (t-test, analysis of variance [ANOVA], and multiple linear regression).

Sample

The study population consisted of all colleges and universities offering teacher education in Norway in the academic year 2020/2021 (N = 14 institutions, N = 11,622 students; Direktoratet for høyere utdanning og kompetanse [HK-dir], 2024). Given this population size, the required sample size was calculated to be 372 students (calculation assumptions: confidence level = 95%; margin of error = 5%). We contacted 11 of these 14 colleges and universities, which distributed our questionnaire to 972 final-year student teachers. The final sample consisted of a total of N = 466 (response rate: 47.9%) final-year students. Table 1 provides an overview of the participants’ characteristics.

Table 1.

Participant Characteristics (N = 466).

Students		n	%
Gender
Female		344	73.8
Male		122	26.2
Other		0	0
Study programme
Primary and lower secondary student teachers without any music courses (PSE)		384	82.4
Female		295	76.8
Primary and secondary student teachers with at least 30 credits in music (MUS)		82	17.6
Female		49	59.8
Professional teaching experience (in years)	M (SD)		1.17(1.69)

Study programmes and gender

We distinguished two analytically relevant groups: (1) generalist primary and lower-secondary student teachers (GLU 1–7 and GLU 5–10) without formal music credits (PSE); and (2) student teachers with at least 30 ECTS in music, including those enrolled in specialist routes where music constitutes a major field (up to 180 ECTS) (MUS). In our sample, PSE accounted for 82.4% and MUS for 17.6%.¹

Regarding gender, 73.8% of the respondents identified themselves as female and 26.2% as male. Statistics from the Norwegian Directorate for Higher Education and Skills (HK-dir, 2022) show that in 2020, 67.7% of students in Norwegian teacher education for primary and lower secondary school were female, though they make up 76.8% of our survey respondents. In the music teacher education programme, there is, however, an overrepresentation of females of 59.8%—but unfortunately, there are no national gender-specific statistics available for this group of students with at least 30 study credits in music.²

Results

Student teachers’ (future) singing-related professional behaviour: Do they plan to sing with their pupils in their future teaching profession?

In accordance with the theoretical framework underpinning this study, we were particularly interested in whether students intended to incorporate singing into their future teaching practices. Thus, we aimed to investigate the “performance” (Blömeke & Kaiser, 2017) and “professional behaviour” (Kunter et al., 2013) dimensions of the presented theoretical models. As the students were in their final year of study at the time of our research—relatively close to the start of their careers as teachers in a school—we needed to enquire about their assumptions about their future professional behaviour regarding singing. Therefore, we asked students, “Do you anticipate using singing in your own professional practice?” The response categories ranged from “very unlikely” (1) to “very likely” (5). The majority of MUS students (M = 4.54, SD = 0.88) said that it was “likely” or even “very likely” that they will use singing in the future. In contrast, PSE students (M = 3.52, SD = 1.18) assumed a significantly lower probability (Welch’s t-test: t(435) = 7.74, p < .001; effect size: d = 1.07). The standard deviations showed a considerable variance within the groups, and it was precisely this variance that we wanted to explain when we asked which factors had an influence on students’ future professional behaviour.

Identifying relevant factors: What experiences, attitudes and self-perceived competencies regarding singing do student teachers have?

In this section, we analyse the students’ experiences of singing from early childhood, leisure time, and school education, as well as from their time in teacher training. We also explore their attitudes and self-perceived competence regarding singing.

Students’ experience of singing from upbringing, leisure time, and school education

Students’ families’ interest in music

We inquired about the relevance of music in students’ families. Respondents were asked to rate several statements related to music and their family on a scale from 1 (totally disagree) to 4 (totally agree). This scale, originally developed by Jordan (2014) and translated by us into Norwegian, shows good reliability (Cronbach’s α = .91).

The analysis showed that MUS students scored highest and above the scale’s midpoint, indicating that they came from more music-interested families, while PSE students scored much lower (see Figure 4).

Figure 4.

Relevance of Music in Students’ Families (Confidence Interval = 95%).

Music-related leisure activities

Students were asked about their experiences of music-related leisure activities, such as instrumental lessons, singing lessons, conducting (choirs, bands, orchestras, etc.), participation in choirs, bands, or orchestras, and involvement in DJing or music production (detailed statistics are provided in Appendix 1). Again, MUS students stood out. They had much more experience with music-related leisure activities than the other student group. MUS students had, on average, been involved in the mentioned activities for two to four years, while among PSE students, only a few had engaged in music-related activities, primarily for approximately one year. Students choosing music, therefore, not only came from families with a strong interest in music, but had also been much more involved in leisure-time music-related activities.

Personal school experiences with singing and music

To investigate the students’ experiences with singing and music from their earlier years, they were asked to report on their own school days, first in primary school (Grades 1–7) and then in lower secondary school (Grades 8–10). They were asked about the importance of the subject of music for them personally, whether the subject was valued in their primary school, how important singing was for them personally, and whether singing was valued by their primary school. Responses were given on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 indicated not important or to a small extent, and 10 indicated very important or to a high extent. Finally, they were asked about the frequency of school music when they were pupils, with the question: “On a typical school week, how often did you sing with the class?” There were four different response options ranging from 1 (very rarely) to 4 (very often).

The results for primary schools showed that MUS students perceived music education in primary school as much more personally relevant (M = 7.94; SD = 2.53) than the PSE students (M = 5.44, SD = 2.59). They also perceived that the subject of music was more highly valued than did PSE students (details can be found in Appendix 2).

For singing and its personal relevance and appreciation at school, the same pattern repeated (see Appendix 2): singing in primary school was more relevant for MUS students, and they perceived that singing was more highly valued than the PSE students did. Curiously, MUS students stood out even when they attended the same primary schools as the other students, and even though the frequency of singing was not higher in the schools these students attended—both student groups reported the frequency of singing as somewhere between rare and often). Hence, already in primary school, MUS students experienced singing and music as more personally relevant.

Moving to the same questions related to lower secondary school, most numbers dropped with a few exceptions (see Appendix 2): both singing and the subject of music were perceived by the students as less valued in lower secondary school. The personal relevance of singing and the subject of music also decreased, especially for PSE students. The only numbers that remained more or less consistent were the personal relevance of singing and the subject of music for MUS students. Students in all groups agreed on singing frequency: singing was very rarely done in lower secondary school across all students’ schools.

Study experiences and related learning outcomes

The role and relevance of singing in teacher education

Students were asked, “How significant a role has singing or singing-related topics played in your education as a whole?” Here, they were asked to indicate their experience on a scale from 1 to 7 (1 = no role, 7 = very significant role). Furthermore, they were asked, “How relevant do you think singing or singing-related topics have been in your education as a whole?” (1 = not relevant, 7 = very relevant).

MUS students scored the highest on these questions (M = 4.9 and 4.3; SD = 1.75 and 1.78), while PSE students were at the lower end of the scale (M = 2.1 and 1.6; SD = .80 and 1.34).

Singing during school placements

Students were asked if they had observed singing-related activities during school placements (1 = never, 6 = several times daily). In addition, they were asked if they themselves had used singing during their teaching (1 = never, 6 = several times daily).

MUS students observed (M = 3.8; SD = 1,08) and used (M = 4.3; SD = 1,02) singing “often” in classes, while PSE students observed (M = 2.7; SD = 1,12) and used (M = 2.2; SD = 1,31) singing only “rarely” and “very rarely.”

Learning outcomes in studies

We asked students about their singing-related learning outcomes (α = .94). They were asked to mark the following statements on a five-point scale from “strongly disagree” (1) to “agree” (5): I feel that the study programme “has made me more confident in my own singing and voice,” “has made me more confident in leading singing with children / young people,” “has given me an understanding of singing with children / young people,” “has given me insight into singing repertoire for children / young people,” “has given me knowledge about how to initiate and organise singing in kindergarten or school,” “has given me knowledge about how to use song as a didactic method.”

MUS students generally agreed with these statements (M_scale = 3.87; SD_scale = .91) while PSE students somewhat disagreed with the statements (M_scale = 1.93; SD_scale = .92).

Attitudes

The relevance of singing in Norwegian schools and kindergartens. Students were asked to indicate how important they perceived singing to be in Norwegian schools today and how important they believed it should be, on a scale from 1 (completely unimportant) to 7 (very important). These questions aimed to elucidate students’ attitudes towards singing.

Interestingly, both student groups believed that singing should be more important than they perceived it to be in today’s kindergartens and schools—MUS students scored several scale points higher (M = 6.2 compared to M = 4.0), and PSE students also agreed that singing should be more important (M = 5.0 compared to M = 3.9).

The singing-related beliefs of student teachers

Students were asked about their singing-related beliefs on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (fully agree) (α = .843). The three subscales covered beliefs regarding the intrinsic value of singing, the transfer value of singing, and the belief that singing is important because of its musical learning outcomes and curricular relevance. Both student groups believed more in the transfer value than the intrinsic value (see Appendix 3). Also, both groups believed that musical learning outcomes and curriculum were by far the least important reasons for singing with pupils. Overall, MUS students had stronger beliefs (3.5 ⩽ M ⩽ 4.5) across all subscales than the PSE students (2.9 ⩽ M ⩽ 4.1).

Musical competence

To gain insight into students’ perceptions of their own musical competence, the Gold-MSI (Müllensiefen et al., 2014) was employed. We measured the Gold-MSI’s “singing abilities” dimension and the “general musical sophistication factor” on a scale from 1 to 7 (α_singing = .914, α_general = .814).

General musical competence

In terms of general self-perceived musical competence (Gold-MSI’s general factor; α = .84), MUS students scored relatively highly (M = 5.5). However, it was surprising that PSE students (M = 3.5) scored significantly below the average self-perception in the population compared to norm data from Müllensiefen et al. (2014).³

Singing competence

Seven statements in the survey were related to singing abilities (Gold-MSI’s singing abilities factor; α = .87). Again, MUS students scored the highest, with a mean score of 5.7 (SD = 1.1), while PSE students (M = 4.0; SD = 1.2) rated their singing abilities significantly lower.⁴ However, it is worth noting that the numbers for both groups regarding singing competence were slightly higher than those for self-perceived general musical competence.

Which factors predict student teachers’ use of singing in their future practice?

We conducted multiple linear regression analyses (Miksza & Elpus, 2018, pp. 142–152) to identify the factors that predicted student teachers’ use of singing in their future practice as a teacher. Student teachers’ answers to the “future use of singing” question were the dependent variable, while all potentially relevant factors served as the independent variables and were grouped on the basis of the dimensions of the theoretical framework (see Table 2). We ran the analyses for the PES and MUS students separately to create two regression models, because the results presented previously already indicated strong differences between the two student groups. Accordingly, a different structure and strength of the influencing factors could also be assumed, which would not become visible in a joint analysis in which both student groups were included simultaneously.

Table 2.

Independent Variables Used in the Regression Analyses and Their Relation to the Theoretical Framework.

Theoretical framework dimensions	Independent variables
1. Students’ personal characteristics and background	GenderFamily’s interest in music
2. Students’ affective-motivational dispositions	Attitude towards singing in kindergartens/schoolsSinging-related beliefsIntrinsic valueTransfer valueLearning outcomes/curriculum
3. Professional competencies (encompassing singing-specific knowledge and skills)	Gold-MSI generalGold-MSI singingSinging-related learning outcomes (related to higher education courses)
4. Formal and informal education systems	4.1 Informal music education:Music-related leisure activities
	4.2 Formal education:Singing in primary school (Grades 1–7)Singing in lower secondary school (Grades 8–10)
	4.3 Higher education:Courses in music (= amount of study credits)Extend and relevance of singing-related coursesCompetence university teachersCompetence practice mentors

We first conducted a regression analysis for each of the theoretical dimensions and the corresponding variables (see Table 2). We used standard criteria to decide which variables to exclude from a model (e.g., Bühner & Ziegler, 2009, p. 638). Applying these criteria, we had to exclude several variables, which meant that they had no specific influence over and above the remaining variables. The remaining variables were then included in a further regression analysis so that the influence of variables from all dimensions could be analysed simultaneously. All statistical parameters were inspected again and variables without significant influence were excluded, resulting in a final regression model for each of the two student groups (Tables 3 and 4).

Table 3.

Multiple Linear Regression Model for PSE Student Teachers’ Singing in Their Future Practice.

Model		Unstandardised	SE	Standardised	t	p
H₀	(Intercept)	3.742	0.067		55.580	<.001
H₁	(Intercept)	−0.046	0.388		−0.118	.906
	2. Attitude: desired relevance of singing in schools (a)	0.147	0.055	0.177	2.674	.008
	2. Singing-related beliefs: transfer value of singing (b)	0.341	0.114	0.189	3.007	.003
	4.1 Music leisure activities (mean score, years) (c)	0.240	0.101	0.126	2.376	.018
	4.2 Singing in primary school (1–7): personal relevance (d)	0.056	0.022	0.148	2.514	.013
	4.3 Higher education: relevance of singing-related courses (e)	0.136	0.039	0.192	3.525	<.001
	4.3 Higher education: singing-related learning outcomes (f)	0.155	0.058	0.137	2.695	.008
	4.3 Higher education: school placement mentor’s competency (g)	0.109	0.038	0.151	2.870	.004

R²_adj = .416, p < .001.

Table 4.

Multiple Linear Regression Model for MUS Student Teachers’ Singing in Their Future Practice.

Model		Unstandardised	SE	Standardised	t	p
H₀	(Intercept)	4.600	0.097		47.523	<.001
H₁	(Intercept)	1.752	0.682		2.570	.012
	2. Singing-related beliefs: intrinsic value of singing (a)	0.357	0.154	0.236	2.321	.023
	4.2 Singing in primary school (1–7): personal relevance (b)	0.123	0.035	0.377	3.557	<.001
	4.3 Higher education: extent of singing-related courses (c)	0.092	0.049	0.194	1.885	.050

R²_adj = .285, p < .001.

Table 3 shows that a high proportion (41.6%) of the variance in the frequency of PSE student teachers’ future singing practice could be explained by the regression model. Seven variables (a–g, all from Dimensions 2 and 4) had a significant impact on the student teachers’ future frequency of singing in school: in Dimension 2, an important factor was (a) the students’ singing-related attitude—whether they believed singing should be important in Norwegian schools. An even more important factor in this dimension was (b) the students’ singing-related beliefs: the more a student believed that the value of singing lay primarily in its transfer effects on other areas (e.g., language learning), the more likely it was that they would sing with their pupils in the future. In Dimension 4, it was interesting to note that several areas of education had a significant influence. Both formal and informal places of education were represented, as well as different life phases of formal education. Specifically, this meant that how intensively students engaged with (c) music in their free time (informal activities such as singing in a choir or learning an instrument) had an influence. However, what the student reported about (d) the time when they attended primary school was also important. The more relevant singing was for the student at that time, the more likely the student was to use singing in their professional practice. The remaining variables of Dimension 4 all belonged to the area of higher education: this had a positive influence if the students (e) perceived singing as relevant within their studies, as well as if the students (f) recognised an increase in singing-related competencies as a result of their studies. The last variable was linked to the students’ school placements during their studies: (g) the greater the perceived singing competence of a teaching mentor in a placement school, the higher the probability that the students would later sing with their pupils themselves.

Finally, some variables of Dimensions 1 and 3 were not included in the final regression model, namely gender, family interest in music, and self-reported musical competence (Gold-MSI). Although significant correlations were found for all of these variables when only one dimension was considered, when the variables of the other dimensions were controlled for at the same time, other factors appeared to be statistically more important.

Table 4 shows the final regression model for the MUS teachers. Again, the analysis yielded a significant regression model that explained a high portion (28.5%) of the variance in the frequency of MUS student teachers’ future singing practice. For MUS students, only three variables had a significant impact on their future singing practice in schools. In Dimension 2, singing-related beliefs were again relevant—this time, however, we found a strong correlation with a different subscale: the more students attributed an intrinsic value to singing (e.g., singing is important because children enjoy it), the more likely they were to sing with their pupils later on. Regarding the relevance of students’ own time as primary school pupils, we found the same result as in the PES regression analyses: the more relevant singing was for the student at that time, the more likely the student was to use singing in their professional practice. Finally, their own study programme was relevant also to MUS students; this time, however, it is was the extent to which courses with singing content were offered within the study programme that was decisive.

Discussion

Our survey showed that MUS students were far more inclined than PSE students to include singing in their future teaching. Considerable variation also existed within both groups, prompting further analysis of which contextual and dispositional factors predicted these differences.

For PSE students, several predictors emerged. Consistent with prior research (e.g., Hennessy, 2000; Lowe et al., 2017; Richards, 1999; Thorn & Brasche, 2015; Welch & Henley, 2014; Wicks, 2014), attitudes proved central: beliefs about the relevance of singing in schools and its transfer value for learning strongly influenced intentions to sing. Informal education also mattered. Participation in choirs (Boyack, 1999), instrumental learning, or other music-related hobbies (Hallam et al., 2009; Henley, 2017; Lowe et al., 2017; Mäkinen et al., 2020; Mäkinen & Juvonen, 2017; Sætre et al., 2016) predicted greater intention, supporting Mäkinen and Juvonen’s (2017) argument that declining arts provision increases the importance of musical leisure. Formal experiences were likewise significant: the perceived relevance of singing during primary education and of singing-related courses in higher education predicted future use.

Furthermore, the competency of mentors during school placements significantly affected students likelihood to engage in singing activities with their pupils, indicating the influence of mentorship on professional readiness. For PSE students, music and singing are not compulsory elements of school placement, whereas for MUS students they are, with mentors responsible for teaching music. As noted earlier, many primary school music teachers lack formal music education, and singing competence is not required to serve as a mentor. This is unfortunate in light of our findings indicating that the mentor’s perceived singing competence shapes students’ future use of singing.

In contrast, the regression analyses for MUS students highlighted different aspects. The intrinsic value of singing, reflecting a belief in the enjoyment and engagement that singing brings to children, was a strong predictor. The personal relevance of singing during their primary school years again surfaced as a significant factor, similar to the PSE model, underscoring the lasting impact of early educational experiences. In addition, the extent of singing-related courses offered in their study programmes was a notable predictor, emphasising the importance of formal education structures in shaping professional intentions.

Both models highlight the combined role of formal and informal educational experiences in shaping intentions to integrate singing into teaching. Although beliefs are important for both groups, their nature differs: PSE students emphasise singing’s transfer value, while MUS students focus on intrinsic enjoyment. PSE students are further affected by mentorship, whereas MUS students respond most to curricular opportunities within their programmes.

Theoretical implications

The results of the regression analyses can be discussed in the context of the theoretical models (Blömeke & Kaiser, 2017; Kunter et al., 2013) outlined in Figures 1 –3, which emphasise the interplay between contextual and dispositional factors and professional behaviour.

The theoretical models suggest that personal dispositions, which include professional knowledge and affective-motivational characteristics, are foundational in the development of professional competencies. The significant role of beliefs about the value of singing found in both PSE and MUS student groups aligns with these theoretical expectations. For PSE students, the transfer value of singing highlights the motivational aspect whereby singing is seen as a tool to enhance broader educational goals. For MUS students, intrinsic values associated with singing underscore the affective component, emphasising personal and student enjoyment, which directly impacts their motivation to incorporate singing into their teaching.

According to Blömeke and Kaiser’s (2017) framework, situational-specific skills are developed through interactions with the educational environment and are crucial for the translation of knowledge and dispositions into observable professional behaviours. The findings that MUS students’ intentions are influenced by the extent of singing-related courses offered in their programmes underscore the importance of structured educational experiences that enhance these situational-specific skills. In contrast, PSE students benefit from the influence of mentorship during placements, which aligns with the model’s emphasis on the role of educational and social context in skill development.

The models propose that professional behaviour—the actual implementation of professional competencies in practice—is the culmination of the interplay between dispositions, contextual factors, and situational-specific skills. The regression models’ identification of early educational experiences, educational structure, and broader educational and attitudinal factors as predictors of future singing behaviour illustrate how these foundational elements can forecast the practical application of singing in teaching contexts.

The distinct predictors for PSE and MUS students highlight how different pathways in teacher education (music-specialist vs general) cultivate unique sets of dispositions and skills, leading to variations in behaviour outcomes. This differentiation is particularly relevant for teacher education programmes, suggesting that curricula might need to be adapted to foster the specific dispositions and skills that encourage the use of singing in the classroom.

Limitations

Our study extensively utilised regression models to interpret the influence of various factors on student teachers’ intentions to use singing in their teaching practices. However, these models explain only a limited portion of the variance, indicating the presence of other significant, unmeasured factors that may impact outcomes. Notably, our approach did not encompass all dimensions and facets suggested by the theoretical frameworks, such as self-regulation skills and motivation, which were not directly measured.

Some constructs also require more precise operationalisation. Future studies should measure skills and knowledge through dedicated competence tests rather than relying solely on self-reports such as the Gold-MSI. Professional behaviour would ideally be observed directly or captured soon after graduation to verify whether teachers actually integrate singing into practice.

The cross-sectional design further limits causal inference. Our findings describe associations at a single point rather than developmental change. Longitudinal research could trace how intentions evolve into classroom behaviour and how professional experience modifies these intentions over time. Such designs would test the developmental trajectories proposed by existing competence models and deepen understanding of the factors shaping teachers’ use of singing.

Footnotes

Appendix

Author contributions

Jens Knigge: Conceptualisation; Data curation; Formal analysis; Investigation; Methodology; Software; Visualisation; Writing—original draft; Writing—review & editing.

Anne Haugland Balsnes: Funding acquisition; Investigation; Project administration; Resources; Writing—review & editing.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by Agder University’s “R&D funding in teacher education 2020” grant.

Ethical approval and informed consent statements

All participants received an invitation letter with information about the project in advance and data were only collected from students who explicitly gave their consent. The ethics approval was done by the Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research (Sikt; reference number 906836).

ORCID iDs

Jens Knigge

Anne Haugland Balsnes

Data availability statement

The data set associated with the article is available on request from the corresponding author.

Notes

Author biographies

Jens Knigge (Dr. phil.) is Professor of Music Education at Nord University (Faculty of Education and Arts, Campus Levanger, Norway) and Visiting Professor at the Norwegian Academy of Music (Oslo, Norway). He has served on the board of the German Association for Research in Music Education (AMPF) and as co-editor of the Bulletin of Empirical Music Education Research (b:em) and the Handbuch Musikpädagogik (Waxmann). He is currently the principal investigator of the Horizon Europe project dialoguing@rts. His research interests include music teacher education, musical competence development, and psychological aspects of musical teaching and learning.

Anne Haugland Balsnes (PhD) is Professor of Music and Vice Dean for Research and Artistic Development at the University of Agder (Norway). Her research focuses on singing in diverse contexts, including choral settings, education, and health. She has published widely on these topics in journals and edited volumes. In addition to her academic work, she is active as a choral conductor for several choirs.

References

Ballantyne

(2006). Reconceptualising preservice teacher education courses for music education: The importance of pedagogical content knowledge and skills and professional content knowledge and skills. Research Studies in Music Education, 26(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X060260010101

Ballantyne

Zhukov

(2017). A good news story: Early-career music teachers’ accounts of their “flourishing” professional identities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 68, 241–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.08.009

Balsnes

A. H.

(2024). Singing for singing’s sake? Community singing in Norwegian schools. In Norton

Morgan-Ellis

E. M.

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of community singing (pp. 295–314). https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197612460.013.16

Balsnes

A. H.

Danbolt

Hagen

L. A.

Haukenes

Knigge

Bergesen Schei

(2022). ‘Det finnes en sang for alt!’ – Ansattes begrunnelser for sang i barnehage og skole – en empirisk studie [“There Is a Song for Everything!” Employees’ Justifications for Singing in Kindergarten and School: An Empirical Study]. In Strøm

R. V.

Balsnes

A. H.

Eiksund

Ø. J.

(Eds.), Samsang gjennom livsløpet (pp. 29–65). Cappelen Damm Akademisk. https://doi.org/10.23865/noasp.162.ch2

Balsnes

A. H.

Jansson

(2022). ‘Jeg kan ikke bli musikklærer hvis jeg ikke kan synge foran klassen min’: Korsang i lærerutdanningen og utvikling av individuell sangtrygghet. In Strøm

R. V.

Balsnes

A. H.

Eiksund

Ø. J.

(Eds.), Samsang gjennom livsløpet (pp. 199–228). Cappelen Damm Akademisk. https://doi.org/10.23865/noasp.162.ch7

Balsnes

A. H.

Knigge

Strøm

R. V.

(2025). Lærerstudenters erfaringer, kompetanser, holdninger og legitimeringsargumenter knyttet til sang [Student Teachers’ Experiences, Competences, Attitudes, and Legitimising Arguments Related to Singing]. In Elle

Ø.

Warem

Ø.

Thorstensen

J. S.

Hovde

S. S.

(Eds.), Musikkfagets kompleksitet og bredde – nye praksiser i et sammensatt samfunn (pp. 123–157). Cappelen Damm Akademisk. https://doi.org/10.23865/cdf.240.ch5

Bandura

(1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

Battersby

S. L.

Cave

(2014). Preservice classroom teachers’ preconceived attitudes, confidence, beliefs, and self-efficacy: Toward integrating music in the primary curriculum. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 32(2), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755123314521033

Blömeke

Kaiser

(2017). Understanding the development of teachers’ professional competencies as personally, situationally and socially determined. In Clandinin

D. J.

Husu

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 783–802). Sage.

10.

Boyack

(1999). Singing self-efficacy: The critical years. In Barrett

McPherson

Smith

(Eds.), Children and music: Developmental perspectives, Proceedings of the 2nd Asia-Pacific Symposium on Music Education Research (pp. 88–92). University of Tasmania.

11.

Bühner

Ziegler

(2009). Statistik für Psychologen und Sozialwissenschaftler [Statistics for Psychologists and Social Scientists]. Pearson Studium.

12.

Christophersen

(2016). Kunstfaga i grunnskulen i Hordaland—Tilstand og utfordringar i 2016 [The Arts Subjects in Compulsory School in Hordaland: Status and Challenges in 2016] (AUD-rapport nr. 03-17).

13.

Database for Statistics on Higher Education. (2025). Valgfag for uteksaminerte på lærerutdanninger [Elective Subjects for Graduates of Teacher Education Programmes]. https://dbh.hkdir.no/tall-og-statistikk/statistikk-meny/studenter/statistikk-side/8.1/param?visningId=264&visKode=false&admdebug=false&columns=arstall&hier=fordypningskode%219%21instkode&formel=1033%218%211034%218%211144&index=1&sti=&param=arstall%3D2024

14.

Demorest

S. M.

Kelley

Pfordresher

P. Q.

(2017). Singing ability, musical self-concept, and future music participation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 64(4), 405–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429416680096

15.

de Vries

. (2013). Generalist teachers’ self-efficacy in primary school music teaching. Music Education Research, 15(4), 375–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2013.829427

16.

Ehrlin

Tivenius

(2018). Music in preschool class: A quantitative study of factors that determine the extent of music in daily work in Swedish preschool classes. International Journal of Music Education, 36(1), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761417689920

17.

Espeland

Arnesen

T. E.

Grønsdal

I. A.

Holthe

Sømoe

Wergedahl

Aadland

(2013). Skolefagsundersøkelsen 2011. Praktiske og estetiske fag på barnesteget i norsk grunnskole [The School Subject Survey 2011: Practical and Aesthetic Subjects at the Primary Level in Norwegian Compulsory School]. http://hdl.handle.net/11250/152148

18.

Fredriksen

(2018). Leaving the music classroom: A study of attrition from music teaching in Norwegian compulsory school [Doctoral thesis]. Norwegian Academy of Music.

19.

Hallam

Burnard

Robertson

Saleh

Davies

Rogers

Kokatsaki

(2009). Trainee primary-school teachers’ perceptions of their effectiveness in teaching music. Music Education Research, 11(2), 221–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613800902924508

20.

Hash

P. M.

(2010). Preservice classroom teachers’ attitudes toward music in the primary curriculum. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 19(2), 6–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083709345632

21.

Henley

(2017). How musical are primary generalist student teachers? Music Education Research, 19(4), 470–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2016.1204278

22.

Hennessy

(2000). Overcoming the red-feeling: The development of confidence to teach music in primary school amongst student teachers. British Journal of Music Education, 17(2), 183–196. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051700000243

23.

Hennessy

(2017). Approaches to increasing the competence and confidence of student teachers to teach music in primary schools. Education, 45(6), 689–700. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2017.1347130

24.

Direktoratet for høyere utdanning og kompetanse. (2024). Database for statistikk om høyere utdanning [Database for Statistics on Higher Education]. https://dbh.hkdir.no/tall-og-statistikk/statistikk-meny/studenter

25.

Holden

Button

(2006). The teaching of music in the primary school by the non-music specialist. British Journal of Music Education, 23(1), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051705006728

26.

Jordan

A. K.

(2014). Empirische Validierung eines Kompetenzmodells für das Fach Musik: Teilkompetenz “Musik wahrnehmen und kontextualisieren.” [Empirical Validation of a Competence Model for the Subject Music: Sub-competence “Perceiving and Contextualising Music”]. Waxmann.

27.

Jørgensen

(2001). Sang og musikk i grunnskole og lærerutdanning 1945–2000 [Singing and Music in Compulsory School and Teacher Education, 1945–2000]. Studia Musicologica Norvegica, 27, 103–131.

28.

Knigge

Danbolt

Hagen

L. A.

Haukenes

(2021). The current status of singing in kindergartens in Norway: An exploratory study. Nordic Research in Music Education, 2(2), 74–99. https://doi.org/10.23865/nrme.v2.2905

29.

Kunter

Kleickmann

Klusmann

Richter

(2013). The development of teachers’ professional competence. In Kunter

Baumert

Blum

Klusmann

Krauss

Neubrand

(Eds.), Cognitive activation in the mathematics classroom and professional competence of teachers (pp. 73–85). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5149-5_4

30.

Lowe

G. M.

Lummis

G. W.

Morris

J. E.

(2017). Pre-service primary teachers’ experiences and self-efficacy to teach music: Are they ready? Issues in Educational Research, 27(2), 314–329. https://www.iier.org.au/iier27/lowe.pdf

31.

Mäkinen

Eronen

Juvonen

(2020). Does curriculum change have impact on students? A comparative research of teacher students’ willingness to teach music. The Changing Face of Music and Art Education, 10, 21–40.

32.

Mäkinen

Juvonen

(2017). Can I survive this? Future class teachers’ expectations, hopes and fears towards music teaching. Problems in Music Pedagogy, 16(1), 49.

33.

Miksza

Elpus

(2018). Design and analyses for quantitative research in music education. Cambridge University Press.

34.

Ministry of Education and Research. (2020a). Core curriculum. https://www.udir.no/lk20/overordnet-del/?lang=eng

35.

Ministry of Education and Research. (2020b). Curriculum for music. https://data.udir.no/kl06/v201906/laereplaner-lk20/MUS01-02.pdf?lang=eng

36.

Müllensiefen

Gingras

Musil

Stewart

(2014). The musicality of non-musicians: An index for assessing musical sophistication in the general population. PLOS ONE, 9(2), e89642. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089642

37.

Nielsen

S. G.

Karlsen

(2021). Grunnskolelærere i musikk og deres kompetanse: Hvordan er situasjonen i norsk kontekst? [Primary School Teachers in Music and Their Competence: What Is the Situation in the Norwegian Context?]. Nordic Research in Music Education, 2(2), 100–125. https://doi.org/10.23865/nrme.v2.2840

38.

Pascale

L. M.

(2002). Dispelling the myth of the non-singer: Changing the ways singing is perceived, implemented and nurtured in the classroom [Doctoral thesis]. Lesley University.

39.

Poulter

Cook

(2020). Teaching music in the early years in schools in challenging circumstances: Developing student teacher competence and confidence through cycles of enactment. Educational Action Research, 30, 192–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2020.1765185

40.

Richards

(1999). Early childhood preservice teachers’ confidence in singing. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 9(1), 6–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/105708379900900103

41.

Ruismäki

Tereska

(2008). Student assessment of music learning experiences from kindergarten to university. British Journal of Music Education, 25(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026505170700770X

42.

Russell-Bowie

(2010). A ten year follow-up investigation of preservice generalist primary teachers’ background and confidence in teaching music. Australian Journal of Music Education, 2, 76–86.

43.

Sætre

J. H.

(2018). Why school music teachers teach the way they do: A search for statistical regularities. Music Education Research, 20(5), 546–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2018.1433149

44.

Sætre

J. H.

Neby

T. B.

Ophus

(2016). Musikkfaget i norsk grunnskole: Læreres kompetanse og valg av undervisningsinnhold i musikk [The Music Subject in Norwegian Compulsory School: Teachers’ Competence and Choice of Teaching Content in Music]. Acta Didactica Norge, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.2876

45.

Sirek

Sefton

T. G.

(2023). Becoming the music teacher: Stories of generalist teaching and teacher education in music. International Journal of Music Education, 42(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/02557614231163266

46.

Spychiger

(2017). Musical self-concept as a mediating psychological structure. From musical experience to musical identity. In Hargreaves

D. J.

MacDonald

Miell

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of musical identity (pp. 267–287). Oxford University Press.

47.

Statistics Norway. (2019). Ansatte i barnehage og skole [Employees in Kindergartens and Schools]. https://www.ssb.no/utdanning/barnehager/statistikk/ansatte-i-barnehage-og-skole

48.

Stunell

(2010). Not musical? Identity perceptions of generalist primary school teachers in relation to classroom music teaching in England. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 9(2), 79–107.

49.

Thorn

Brasche

(2015). Musical experience and confidence of pre-service primary teachers. Australian Journal of Music Education, 2, 191–203.

50.

Thovsen Nysæther

Christophersen

Sætre

J. H

. (2021). Who are the music student teachers in Norwegian generalist teacher education? A cross-sectional survey. Nordic Research in Music Education, 2(2), 28–57. https://doi.org/10.23865/nrme.v2.2988

51.

Welch

G. F.

(2017). Singer identities and educational environments. In MacDonald

Hargreaves

D. J.

Miell

(Eds.), Oxford handbook of musical identities (pp. 543–565). Oxford University Press.

52.

Welch

G. F.

Henley

(2014). Addressing the challenges of teaching music by generalist primary school teachers. Revista Da ABEMs, 22(32), 12–38. http://www.abemeducacaomusical.com.br/revistas/revistaabem/index.php/revistaabem/article/view/459

53.

Wicks

(2014). Voices of learning: Exploring music teacher knowledge, skills and development in secondary school singing [Doctoral thesis]. Sydney Conservatorium of Music, The University of Sydney.