Master Class Syndrome

SINGERS AND TEACHERS OF SINGING are engaged in an ongoing, mutual quest for beautiful, expressive singing performed with ease. Even though many resources are devoted to building better teachers (workshops, pedagogy degrees, and this journal), the basic truth is, the success of this venture depends less upon the valuable knowledge or rich professional experience of the teacher, and more upon the ability of the student to grasp what the teacher imparts. I have stated before that this simple fact, illuminated by recent research in cognitive science, has engendered a paradigm shift in pedagogic emphasis from how well teachers teach, to how well students learn.1 Or, as Deborah Loewenberg Ball, Dean of the University of Michigan School of Education stated in a New York Times article, "Teaching depends on what other people think, not what you [the teacher] think."2 Since this is so, the question "how" inevitably springs up in any serious discussion regarding improving the delivery system of knowledge from teacher to learner. How do teachers construct their lessons so that the student absorbs what is taught? Are there steps that learners could take in order to maximize their receptiveness to what the teacher has to offer? Before the question how can be entertained, it is necessary to consider learning itself. A perusal of the subject "learning," including a search for a simple definition, yields a complex subject in a continual state of flux. Many standard psychology texts in current circulation support a definition of learning identical or similar to this: "Learning is a process that results in a permanent change in behavior as a result of experience."3 Often these definitions include modifiers, such as "relatively permanent change," or synonyms such as "practice" for "experience." This common definition has been labeled unsatisfactory for a number of reasons, including the necessity of distinguishing "learning as a process from the behavioral results or the products of that process."4 One psychologist drily noted that "learning does not necessarily produce a change in behavior," to which any voice teacher saddled with an unresponsive student can attest.5 My preferred definition of learning is more of an explanation, from research psychologist Gary Marcus. Regardless of which species we talk about, or which aspect of mental life we investigate, the ability to learn starts with the ability to remember. An organism can learn from experience only if it can rewire its nervous system in a lasting way; there can be no learning without memory6 This elegant definition cuts to the core of a complex subject by highlighting an underlying tenet of learning theory, namely, that the learner cannot be said to have learned a thing if it cannot be repeated. Stated differently, that a thing is truly learned is evidenced by its repeatability, which is a feat of memory whether of the intellect (like a math formula) or the body (like a dance step). At the critical juncture of memory and repeatability, learning is no longer a process, but a fait accompli. LEARNING/HAVE LEARNED Regardless of whether one is situated as a teacher or a student in the learning constellation (and performance art usually requires a lifetime commitment to both), it is critical to distinguish the learning process from the learning product. The act of learning is dynamic, but its product (for example, a performance task), if truly learned, is placed in the past tense, and hence is both repeatable and observable. Further, the distinction between learning and performance must be considered. Learning is a dynamic process by which one acquires skill or knowledge, but performance refers to the manner or effectiveness with which that skill or knowledge is implemented by the doer. All of these definitions may seem quite rudimentary until considered anew in light of recent discoveries in cognitive science, and placed within the context of that paragon of voice orthodoxy: the master class. …