Vocal tuition presents a particular pedagogical challenge in that there is no physical instrument to separate the student from the sound they produce. This has significant implications for how a student experiences feedback and assessment, as the vulnerability of singing can feel contradictory to a student who already has a strong sense of musical identity. Dweck (2006) notes that for high-achieving students, struggle in an unfamiliar domain can feel like regression rather than growth, and this value helped shape my teaching from the outset. Across a series of one-to-one vocal sessions, the aim was to build on Joe’s existing musicianship, using it as the foundation for his vocal development. This essay will explore the theory that justifies the teaching methods used throughout these sessions, with the goal of instilling confidence and improving Joe’s vocal ability.

Understanding the Student

Before any lesson can be effectively carried out, it is essential to develop a thorough understanding of the student, not just their technical abilities, but also their musical background, preferences, and relationship to the voice as an instrument. In Joe’s case, this meant recognising an experienced guitarist with a well-developed musical ear and an enthusiasm for performance but had never sung before. With this in mind, it was important to play to Joe’s strengths and existing musical identity. As a jazz musician, it was fundamental to his engagement that we remained within the genre and chose repertoire he already knew, drawing on Kodály’s principle of starting with the familiar before introducing the new (Choksy, 1999). We therefore began with ‘Autumn Leaves’.

Throughout, I was careful not to overlook Joe’s existing musicianship, ensuring that each lesson’s content was oriented towards his broader musical goals. In our initial session, we discussed these goals together, arriving at a common understanding that developing his singing would, in turn, strengthen his guitar skills. I was keen to reinforce this throughout the lessons and make it clear that these were not two separate disciplines but ones that worked together. This was achieved during sessions, repeating things such as “this will be really useful for your guitar as well.” As an already capable musician, Joe’s entry into vocal study presented specific, unique challenges. Dweck (2006) argues that students with a fixed mindset perceive failure as a sign of low ability. For someone of Joe’s experience, struggling in an unfamiliar area risks being a form of regression rather than a natural part of learning. This may have the effect of discouraging rather than motivating. This awareness shaped how I communicated with Joe from the outset. I would use jazz-specific terminology, such as ‘comping’ and ‘head’, to ensure Joe felt addressed and respected as the experienced musician he is, even in the unfamiliar context of vocal study.

In this clip, Joe and I discuss the genre he wants to work in, and I take time to acknowledge and validate his feelings of embarrassment, making clear that I understand the vulnerability involved in singing for the first time. I also establish early in the first lesson that vocal health and caring for the body are the foremost priorities. This serves two functions: technically, it demonstrates the physical demands of singing and implies that technique matters; but equally, it communicates to Joe that he is respected as an individual and that his physical well-being is something I genuinely care about. As a result, warm-ups are prioritised at the start of every session. These warm-ups, performed at the start of each lesson, have a ritualistic quality. Not only does it establish a routine that signals the beginning of focused work, but it also functions almost like a form of meditation, drawing the student into the lesson’s present moment. This kind of ritual is well supported as a feature of successful learning environments, providing the psychological consistency that leads students to focus more deeply on the task at hand (Cziksentmihalyi, 1990). The feedback I offer in this first lesson is also deliberately focused on the feel and expression of the performance rather than on technical correction. Instead of drawing attention to pitch or note accuracy, I focused on encouraging things that build confidence, such as ‘let’s give it more character. This decision is based on the understanding that Joe, having never sung before, may feel exposed and nervous (Abril, C.R., 2007) and the priority in this session is therefore to make singing feel safe and enjoyable, so that technical feedback can follow in subsequent lessons.

Using the Environment as a Pedagogical Device

The environment that the lesson is conducted in is essential in achieving effective pedagogy, one element of this being the teacher’s disposition. The tone in which the lesson is carried out functions as an environment in its own right. I therefore aimed to conduct the lessons in a genuinely positive way and, as demonstrated in the video clip, I greeted Joe warmly and asked about his well-being before addressing any lesson content. Research suggests that the quality of the relationship between student and teacher is one of the most significant factors in maintaining student engagement (Cornelius- White,2007). By building a positive relationship, Joe comes to see himself as a person before he is seen as a student. I also ask Joe about the practice he has undertaken since our last lesson. This serves several purposes: it subtly conveys that independent practice is expected and a fundamental aspect of vocal development; it signals a genuine interest in his progress beyond the lesson itself; and it allows me to shape future sessions around his response. Whilst Joe’s experience as a musician means he understands the importance of practice, the question serves as a reminder that singing has its own specific demands distinct from those of the guitar.

I was keen to enhance was the room itself in order to yield the best results from Joe’s performance and enjoyment towards the lessons. Teaching within an institution, such as a conservatoire, has certain limitations; for example, practice rooms often have harsh, artificial lighting. Mott et al. (2012) show that this kind of lighting environment is not productive to learning, and Heschong (2002) also indicates that natural light reduces anxiety and supports concentration, whereas fluorescent lighting can feel institutional and increase physiological stress responses. Within the constraints, where possible, I would prioritise using rooms with natural lighting. The clip above demonstrates a lesson carried out in a room that has a window and therefore natural light. In future, I would aim to arrange this more consistently in advance, so that the lighting environment is accounted for as a deliberate aspect of lesson preparation.

Another environmental factor that I utilised throughout the lesson was my use of spatial dynamics. For most sessions, I remained seated at the piano, which served both practical and pedagogical purposes. Practically, being seated allowed me to play the piano to accompany Joe, as well as to establish a spatial dynamic in which Joe occupied the performer’s space and I occupied a supporting one. Gholson (1998) describes this spatial positioning as ‘proximal positioning’, highlighting that a teacher’s physical placement is rarely neutral. In the context of my lesson, my position at the piano indicated to Joe that I was ‘supporting’ whilst he was the ‘performer’. Not only does this give Joe a sense of agency, but it also means that, in moments when I stand up and alter the spatial dynamic, this is done for a very specific pedagogical purpose, which will be explored below. These factors extend beyond logistics and reflect a deliberate approach to creating the environment as pedagogy in its own right. In this way, environmental factors such as physical, spatial, and relational dynamics are considered and implemented as a pedagogical device for enhancing Joe’s development.

Building on earlier ideas that spatial dynamics are a fundamental tool within music pedagogy (Gohlson, 1989), in this next clip, rather than remaining at the piano, I stand alongside Joe to enter the ‘performance space’.

This clip demonstrates a deliberate shift in my physical positioning, by standing alongside Joe and entering the performance space that Gholson (1998) outlines. By occupying the same space as Joe, the dynamic transitions from instructional to collaborative. This shifts from a dynamic in which I would previously direct, and he would receive, to one in which we are now orientated towards a shared goal. 

This clip outlines how the exercise progresses throughout the lesson. The goal is for Joe to fully internalise the rhythms of the standard, and the method is structured accordingly. Drawing on Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (1978), I was mindful not to overwhelm Joe with too much at once and therefore introduced each stage only after the previous one had been mastered. As the lesson progresses, the exercise builds in stages:

• Stepping on beats 2 and 4
• Clapping the rhythms of the melody whilst stepping
• Clapping and stepping on beats 2 and 4
• Singing and clapping the rhythms of the melody whilst stepping on beats 2 and 4

The goal was to allow Joe to fully internalise the melodic rhythm of ‘Autumn Leaves’, and in this next clip, I can be heard quietly modelling the next stage whilst Joe is still completing the previous one. Instead of directly sharing a new instruction, this allows Joe to absorb the upcoming stage observationally before it becomes a formal exercise. This aims to reflect Bandura’s (1977) Social Learning Theory, which asserts that much of human learning occurs through observation and imitation. Additionally, the incorporation of movement draws on the principles of Dalcroze’s eurhythmics (1921), which is based on the premise that musical understanding is enhanced when it has been experienced physically rather than just intellectually. Dalcroze argued that rhythm must be internalised through the body, and that movement activates neurological pathways that reinforce learning in ways musical notation alone cannot (Jaques-Dalcroze, 1921). This exercise engages several sensory channels at once – the kinaesthetic weight of stepping the pulse in the body, clapping and singing activate the auditory, and the score keeps the visual channel present. This multi-sensory approach corresponds with Fleming and Mills’ (1992) research that learning across multiple modalities simultaneously produces stronger retention, as the brain builds a stronger representation of the material.

Adapting Within the Sessions

Midway through the exercise, Joe says his range has become more restricted the more he sings. Rather than continuing, I pause the exercise in order to explore this. The reality is that his range has not diminished; he has likely become more self-conscious about pitch accuracy and, in trying to sing ‘correctly’, has started to constrain himself. To address this, I introduce a brief warm-up to target this insecurity: swooping sirens. Hoch M, Sandage MJ (2018) suggests that this is an effective technique for encouraging freedom across the range. It is clear that this makes Joe feel exposed and insecure so offer continuous praise throughout to communicate that what he is doing is correct, with the intention that he should also take it further. The effect is immediate, and he sings the song again, adjusting to the correct octave. This moment required a degree of flexibility that planned lesson structures cannot always accommodate. Rather than adhering completely to the exercise, I recognised that Joe’s progress in that moment depended on addressing his confidence before his technique, reflecting the understanding that in one-to-one teaching, the ability to read and respond to a student in real time is itself a fundamental pedagogical skill (Collie, R.J, & Martin, A.J., 2016). This meant I had to be flexible and adjust my teaching to elicit the best results from Joe. To maintain consistency and ensure the lesson had focus and coherence, we returned to the exercise that the lesson began with. 

Central to enabling this flexibility was being suitably prepared for the lessons. Over the weeks, I developed my understanding of how important structured preparation was, and this is reflected in how the lessons progressed from unfocused to purposeful. Appendix 2 presents a lesson plan from one of the sessions, showing how aims, exercises, and timing were organised in advance to ensure everything was covered within the time frame. 

Language, Metaphor and Learner Autonomy

An additional aspect of my pedagogical approach was to use language to both instruct and motivate Joe. Rather than issuing direct technical commands, telling Joe to sing louder or to sharpen his intonation, I reframed the instructions using metaphors. In this clip, rather than asking Joe to “sing louder”, I ask Joe to imagine himself “[being] ten feet tall”, and instead of telling him to “sharpen the notes”, I ask him to “brighten the sound”. By doing this, it refrains from directly correcting Joe, recognising that excessive negative feedback can undermine a student’s confidence and have a detrimental impact on learning (McPherson et al., 2022). When Joe’s volume does not increase, instead of repeating the same instruction, I take the action a step further and build on the first idea by asking him to “now be eleven feet tall”. By doing this, it validates the effort already being made and invites him to build on it. Secondly, using language such as ‘brighten’, ‘tall’ and ‘lift’ creates a semantic field that can extend across multiple areas. Creating this atmosphere can affect pitch and intonation, increase confidence, and create a more resonant sound. This reflects Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980) theory of conceptual metaphor, which argues that abstract concepts are embodied through physical frames of reference. In this regard, metaphor functions as a cognitive pedagogical tool, helping Joe use language to internalise his performance.

Drawing on the principles of the Colourstrings method (Szilvay and Szilvay, 1977), I was keen to implement colour annotation in my teaching. The pedagogical benefits of this approach are well supported; Hallam (2006) argues that effective music pedagogy must account for individual differences in how students process musical information, supporting a multi-sensory, engaging cognitive pathways in ways that notation alone cannot. One way in which I accounted for these individual differences was by asking Joe to assign his own colours to different dynamics; he chose red for loud and green for quiet. In this way, the annotation system was catered directly to him, ensuring it didn’t function as an imposed system. Colour functions in this way as an additional sensory layer that reinforces musical decision-making, whilst also offering a practical advantage, being that, colour is processed faster and more instinctively than text (Elliot, 2015). Furthermore, Dzulkifli and Mustafar (2013) find that colour enhances both memory encoding and retrieval, supporting the idea that the annotations Joe and I made together will function effectively over time.

Where possible, I gave Joe autonomy within the lesson. For example, asking him to count the accompaniment in at whatever tempo he chose. This aligns with self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan, 1985), which identifies autonomy as one of the core psychological needs underlying motivation, and is intended to encourage Joe to practise the piece in his own time. It also aimed to encourage Joe to engage with his own interpretation of the music, making him an active participant in his learning rather than just a recipient of instruction. Beyond this, asking Joe to count in served a more practical purpose in developing his band leadership skills. Counting in results in the Joe internalising the tempo and conveying it clearly before the accompaniment, a fundamental skill within group playing. Practising this, even in a one-to-one lesson context, will build on Joe’s leadership skills and result in increased confidence in guiding other musicians. Green (2008) emphasises the value of ‘situating learning’ within authentic musical contexts, and this small task reflects that principle. It also serves as a reminder that the purpose of our lessons is ultimately to perform and interact with others. I was deliberate in the language I used throughout the sessions, to prioritise encouraging Joe and focussing on building his confidence over immediate technical correction.

It should be noted, however, that excessive positive reinforcement carries its own risks. Baumeister et al. (1990) demonstrated that whilst positive feedback improved performance on effort-based tasks, it could simultaneously impair performance on skilled tasks, suggesting that excessive and unfocussed praise, may give a student an inflated sense of their ability and limit an accurate picture of their progress. Nevertheless, the overall impact of these strategies across the session is evident, and Joe’s confidence clearly improves from the start to the end of our lessons.

Across these sessions, the overarching aim was to create the conditions for Joe to develop as a singer without that coming at the expense of his confidence or his identity as a musician. This meant I was focused on factors that extend beyond vocal technique, including the physical environment, the relational dynamic, the language used, and the structure of the lessons themselves. This reflective essay demonstrates that teaching demands, preparation, as well as the ability to depart from this, to specifically cater the sessions to the needs of the student. In Joe’s case, it was essential to create a space in which singing felt manageable and safe before it was expected to ‘sound good’, reflecting Abril’s (2007) feelings that emotional safety is a requirement for musical engagement. There are areas I would aim to develop in future teacher practice. The use of natural lighting, whilst prioritised where possible, was not always consistent, and in future I would aim to prepare this more successfully in advance. Balancing positive reinforcement alongside honest feedback is one I would continue to develop, conscious that Baumeister’s (1990) theory suggests that praise without focus can inhibit a student’s sense of their progress. Ultimately, Joe’s progress across these sessions reflects not just his improved ability but the collective effect of a considered pedagogical environment. 

Bibliography

Abril, C.R. (2007) ‘I have a voice but I just can’t sing: a narrative investigation of singing and social anxiety’, Music Education Research, 9(1), pp. 1–15.

Bandura, A. (1977) Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Baumeister, R.F., Hutton, D.G. and Cairns, K.J. (1990) ‘Negative effects of praise on skilled performance’, Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 11(2), pp. 131–148.

Choksy, L. (1999) The Kodály Method I: Comprehensive Music Education. 3rd edn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Collie, R.J. and Martin, A.J. (2016) ‘Adaptability: An important capacity for effective teachers’, Educational Practice and Theory, 38(1), pp. 27–39.

Cornelius-White, J. (2007) ‘Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are effective: A meta-analysis’, Review of Educational Research, 77(1), pp. 113–143.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990) Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper & Row.

Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1985) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum.

Dweck, C.S. (2006) Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Random House.

Dzulkifli, M.A. and Mustafar, M.F. (2013) ‘The influence of colour on memory performance: A review’, Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences, 20(2), pp. 3–9.

Elliot, A.J. (2015) ‘Color and psychological functioning: a review of theoretical and empirical work’, Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 368.

Fleming, N.D. and Mills, C. (1992) ‘Not another inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection’, To Improve the Academy, 11(1), pp. 137–155.

Gholson, S.A. (1998) ‘Proximal positioning: Teacher-student spatial relations in violin pedagogy’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 46(4), pp. 535–545.

Green, L. (2008) Music, Informal Learning and the School: A New Classroom Pedagogy. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Hallam, S. (2006) Music Psychology in Education. London: Institute of Education, University of London.

Heschong, L. (2002) ‘Daylighting and human performance’, ASHRAE Journal, 44(6), pp. 65–67.

Hoch, M. and Sandage, M.J. (2018) ‘Exercise science principles and the vocal warm-up: Implications for singing voice pedagogy’, Journal of Voice, 32(1), pp. 79–84.

Jaques-Dalcroze, E. (1921) Rhythm, Music and Education. London: Dalcroze Society.

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

McPherson, G.E., Davidson, J.W. and Faulkner, R. (2022) Music in Our Lives: Rethinking Musical Ability, Development and Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mott, M.S., Robinson, D.H., Walden, A., Burnette, J. and Rutherford, A.S. (2012) ‘Illuminating the effects of dynamic lighting on student learning’, SAGE Open, 2(2), pp. 1–9.

Szilvay, G. and Szilvay, C. (1977) Colourstrings: Violin ABC. Helsinki: Fennica Gehrman.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Appendix

1)

2)