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).