In the music field specifically, writers offer mixed opinions on the usefulness or otherwise of the competitive structure. Austin (1990, p.46-7) makes the point that such systems are not necessarily the best way of promoting the achievement we seem so eager for: ‘Competitive goal structures tend to promote egoistic motivation whereby children focus on social-comparison information and disregard instructional feedback addressing the actual quality of their effort or performance’. Austin obviously agrees with Kohn about the detrimental effect of competition in general and claims that ‘a large body of research in general education indicates that competition may have a detrimental impact on students’ cognitive and emotional development’. Austin has done significant research on competitions in music and finds:
…studies indicate that relationships do exist between contest participation or competition success and measures of music achievement, self-concept, motivation, and attitude. The ex
relationship between competitions and music-related outcomes is a causal one (1991, p.142).
On the other hand he discusses other studies that show that competition against standards does not affect outcomes and cites a range of research that suggest non-competitors may perform at equal standards, if not better than, competing peers.
Nancy Thomas (1992, p.431), similarly, discusses both positive and negative aspects of competition:
…anyone who has experienced the stress of competing must sometimes question the wisdom, let alone efficacy, of the competition mystique…yet it has been proposed…that while competitions may have some negative influence, most of the effect is positive.
This view accords with the types of reactions discussed by O’Neill and Sloboda (1997) where children respond to failure with ‘helpless’ or ‘mastery’ behaviour. Helpless children evaluate achievement situations in terms of ‘performance goals’ where the aim is to display their competence and avoid failure and negative judgment of their performance. In contrast, mastery- oriented children tend to choose ‘learning goals’ which emphasise the need to increase their competence. Exams and competitions, as O’Neill and Sloboda point out, are ‘achievement related performance goals’. Yet they do not argue for the removal of these goals entirely since avoiding failure ‘may be actually increasing the vulnerability of some children to helpless behaviour patterns’ (p.31).
Other writers are less forgiving. Clinch (1990) believes that competition contributes to actual physical damage in young musicians. Writers such as Sloboda (1999), Handford and Watson (2003), Leonhard (1999) and Hosler (2002) all believe that competition either contributes to the dropout rate or the exclusion rate of young students. These writers do not necessarily cite research studies to support their views and it may well be the conflicting nature of studies in the area, or the difficulty in proving causal relationships that contribute to the ‘identity crisis’ noted by Austin
amongst music educators who are struggling ‘to reach a professional consensus on the role of competition in the school Music Education Program’ (1990, p.45).
Writers like Covell show examples of the ‘identity crises’ mentioned by Austin: ‘Young Australians understand very well, as their elders have done, the idea of music as a sporting activity...and other contests permit us to treat music as if it is a tennis match or a long distance run’. (1977, p.9) Covell continues, more disturbingly: ‘I do not think this is unhealthy. But there is no doubt that it has its limitations’. In Covell’s view, it is not ‘unhealthy’ to regard music like a long distance run even though the method and reliability of the judging of music does not compare to the reliability of finding a winner for the run.
Even while discussing the rights and wrongs of exams and competitions, there is often still an emphasis on the need for achievement. Austin, above, while questioning the value of competitions, suggests that the important thing is for students to ‘address the actual quality of their effort or performance’. Achievement still has a place in his approach. At the same time, competitions and exams are examples of extrinsic motivation systems. As we have already seen, it is considered important that extrinsic motivation to play converts to intrinsic motivation if the playing is to continue: how does this happen in our examination and competition focussed musical paradigm?
Given that there is a relationship between performance and judgement in the music education paradigm, it is not surprising to find some writers focussing on the related problem of musical isolation as a feature of musical life in general, not just in the practice room. Ironically, musical isolation is promoted at both ends of the spectrum by the current paradigm. Ruth Wright (1998, p.75) remarks: ‘Music has always been a thing to be made and enjoyed with others. It was not originally the province of only a few but a source of enjoyment and fulfilment to all whatever their ability’. The few at the top have to spend countless hours alone in order to maintain their position at the top – alone. The goal is exclusiveness. Too many people in the club and it is no longer an exclusive club. Cope (2002, pp.102-3) concurs: ‘Exclusiveness is a … logical outcome of FIT
[formal instrumental tuition] if it is based on selection and on constructions of musical ability as fixed and measurable (Warnick, 1985)’. Indeed ‘exclusiveness’ is a logical outcome of FIT even if we adopt a less selective approach, since the level of selectivity does not appear to affect the judgemental, competitive paradigm one iota. We must play alone because we must be judged according to our progress up the mountain and the creation of the few at the top disenfranchises those below, both in terms of motivation and opportunities, to continue.
Clinch’s comment, above, regarding the pitting of students against each other raises another point. Most musicians may play solo on occasion but much of their working life will involve playing with others in orchestral or chamber groups, or accompanying others. If one spends most of one’s formative musical years playing alone, how does the empathy and skill to play effectively with others develop? How does one learn to, and indeed yearn to, play ‘as a team’?