2.2 Informal music learning
One of the approaches to music learning that has particularly attracted
the attention of researchers and practicians since the publication ofHow Popular Musicians Learn: A Way Ahead for Music Education(Green, 2002) is informal learning. Contrary to the formal
approach, which rests on a master-apprentice relationship and is centred
on music notation, informal learning takes place mainly autonomously and
between peers, and is foremost based on listening and imitation (Cope,
2002; Green, 2002). At the heart of this approach are five principles
that emerged from empirical data collected from self-taught popular
musicians (Green, 2002, 2009) : (1) informal music learning generally
implies simultaneous integration of listening, interpretation,
improvisation, and composition processes; (2) the musical work to be
learned is chosen by students themselves; (3) learning the piece and
gaining technical competence happen principally by ear, with audio
recordings; (4) this learning process happens in large part with the
help of peers and/or autonomously; thus (5) the musical ability and
understanding are assimilated holistically and idiosyncratically, and
mostly at random, according to students’ interests and the development
of their musical ability. From the first steps, then, the informal
musician learns to take charge of their own learning, to evaluate their
own capabilities and relate them to the repertoire’s level of
difficulty, and to make decisions as a group. Introducing these
principles of informal learning into a more formal context demands that
the teacher take the role of guide, and not that of keeper of knowledge.
The teacher initiates a task, and steps back to observe, diagnose,
guide, suggest, model, consider learners’ points of view, and help them
attain the objectives that they themselves have set. All these factors
contribute to developing autonomy, engagement, and intrinsic motivation
in learners. However, research on informal music learning in people
presenting a physical or cognitive disability is lacking (McHale, 2016;
Rathgeber, 2017).