The Perceptions of Alexander Technique in UK Higher Education Music Institutions: Alexander Technique Teachers, Instrumental/Vocal Teachers, and Music Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alexander Technique (AT), despite not being originally developed for musicians, is a psychophysical educational practice promoted in many UK Higher Education (HE) music specialist institutions (i.e. music conservatoires and independent HE music institutions) and some university music departments in order to help musicians deal with playing-related challenges. While a growing body of medical and health care research investigates the effectiveness of AT in the treatment of several medical conditions, fewer studies have evaluated the efficacy of AT in relation to music performance anxiety, performance, and muscle tension. Lee (2019) explored the integration of AT in five HE music institutions in the USA, Canada and the UK from the perspective of five AT teachers; however, there is scope to extend this through investigating the perceptions of additional stakeholders: students and instrumental/vocal teachers. This thesis extends Lee’s (2019) research by investigating the perceptions of AT among AT teachers, instrumental/vocal teachers, and music students in UK HE music institutions. Qualitative data were collected through two interview studies (19 AT teachers and 11 instrumental/vocal teachers) and one survey study (133 students); these uncovered views on institutional and pedagogical aspects concerning AT. Findings demonstrate that AT is largely seen as a valuable tool for musicians; benefits extend beyond physical outcomes and include educational aspects relating to self awareness and thinking processes. A collaborative institutional environment could be necessary for AT teachers to develop their work; however, the communication of the characteristics of AT might need to be enhanced to improve further understanding of AT and, potentially, its recognition within HE and beyond. This research has implications for the role and funding of AT in UK HE music institutions, the professionalisation of AT teachers, modes of delivery of AT, and collaboration between AT teachers and instrumental/vocal teachers
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".