LA FORMACIÓN EN TERAPIAS COMPLEMENTARIAS EN ENFERMERIA

The peer collaborative discussion that accompanied the FAP for each pupil’s performance film was an integral part of this intervention. I was uncertain about the degree to which pupils would openly discuss, share personal insights, or provide verbal feedback (as analyst), but it now seems significant that pupils were willing to share their reflections about their own performances in the presence of a participating-peer. Though performers tended to identify errors, they also established the reasons that corrective action was needed.

U3 – Well, it doesn’t sound, kind of as ‘whispy’, like I needed to lean on the bow a bit more, it sounds better that way.

W3 – I think I am playing quite lively, but uhm, my actions don’t suit it because I am very stiff and it’s a very lively piece.

Z5 – Like that one, that one is nice. [In] Parts of it I was confident, like I stumbled over the bowing, the off the string bowing, like it was a car traffic jam. Kind of a build up crash, it kind of stumbled and then others kind of fell over.

In contrast, the feedback given by the participating-peers was predominantly complimentary and often expressed as accepted fact. Peer feedback acknowledged actions that the performers took, what they did or did not do, or stated a general performance impression, and was generally less descriptive.

R2 – She knows it off by heart…When she goes into 3rd _{position it is really in tune.}

T2 – It’s enjoyable. I liked it.

Y5 – I like that part…just the way she plays it. It kind of like tells a story.

U3 – …the way she changed, what are they called? Sections? Like, she kind of blended them in together.

In an attempt to give greater clarity about their own performances, performers often seasoned their reasoning with words such as ‘tiny bit’, ‘quite’, ‘slightly’, ‘especially’, ‘almost’ and ‘usually’. Peer feedback tended to be embellished with only a few, but acute, degrees of things, such as ‘very’, ‘really’ or ‘always’.

R2 – She is always looking at her fingers.

V3 – The shifting is really good, and the sound is like really big.

Y5 – I think it’s like a really confident performance. And the vibrato is really good. And the bow, it’s like solid.

Looking at the data in this way was deemed important because at the outset of the study pupils claimed to be comfortable with the idea of giving feedback, either as performer or peer. Performers seemed to be as descriptive in regards to their own performance as they were in Layer 1, but perhaps the more simplistic nature of the peers’ feedback was a sign that some pupils were finding it difficult to critically reflect on the performance film of another peer. That participating-peers’ accounts tended to be simple, positive and direct statements containing words such as ‘always’ and ‘really’, could suggest many things. Perhaps this was an attempt to help boost the self-critical performing-peer, or that the participating-peer had an underdeveloped ability to recognise or describe finer details. Despite the intent, these finite words restricted further discussion.

Although all participating-peers explained their thinking, only Z5 attempted to expose and elaborate her reasoning in depth. While perhaps not always entirely successful, her repeated efforts provided evidence to suggest that Z5 seemed to be listening, observing and evaluating performances with more sophistication, or that she was more willing to exercise her verbal skills in an attempt to refine and sharpen her focus.

Z5 – But I really like that, her control over the sound that she is producing, like at the beginning and stuff, is really solid and very clean, and she doesn’t like, like that bit [as opening theme starts again] just sounds so confident. And it’s like the opening to the piece that those notes, that it is really kind of like enforcing them and you know, ‘I know what I am doing, I know this piece!’

The extent to which participating-peers agreed with the performer’s descriptive reflections is unknown, but peers did display the ability to voice an opposing view or an

alternative perspective with supportive rationale. As Claxton (2002: 37) points out, pupils gain a greater breadth and depth to learning if they develop the willingness and ability to consider the viewpoint of others, and that even if they do not agree with them in the first instance, taking time to ponder those views may lead to new ideas or hunches.

[Performer] U3 – I don’t think it has a mood.

[Peer] X4 – I think it has a mood, like it’s really peaceful, like a lullaby.

[Performer] V3 – I don’t look very confident. [Peer] W3 – I think you do.

[Performer] V3 – I look all squished

[Peer] W3 – You look nervous, but you kind of look confident on your face.

[Performer] Y5 – No, I think it all sounds the same.

[Peer] Z5 – No. I don’t agree. There is a sense of phrasing. She just needs to work on defining it a bit more…