Running Head: APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION

Seeking an understanding of Aptitude and Musical Improvisation

Student “X”

Prof. Peter Gouzouasis

 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 2

Some
general
comments:
There
is
not
a
‘psychology
of
improvisation’
recognized


in
the
literature,
per
se.
It
would
have
been
interesting
if
you
looked
at
jazz


definitions
of
improvisation
and
how
they
relate
to
the
literature
you’ve
selected


(e.g.,
Azzara
has
a
very
strong
jazz
background
which
has
influenced
his


definition
greatly;
David
Liebman’
book,
which
is
part
sociological
part


autobiographical
and
other
classic
texts;
Jerry
Coker,
one
of
the
most
published


jazz
pedagogy
individuals,
is
also
in
line
with
Azzara’s
ideas;
there’s
also
the


spiritual
and
meditative
aspect
of
improv
that
has
been
written
about
by
Kenny


Werner).
Sloboda,
in
a
sense
takes
from
Stravinsky’s
ideas
on
improv
(see
his


various
biographies).
Personally,
Sloboda’s
overall
body
of
work
leaves
much
to


be
desired
(that’s
an
entire
lecture/discussion).
I
like
your
general
notion
that


“Improvisation
is
a
multi‐skilled
process
that
encompasses
an
equally
multi‐

dimensional
battery
of
aptitudes”
.
.
.
if
we
could
come
to
an


understanding/common
ground
on
a
definition
as
something
that
captures


aptitude
(i.e.,
something
that
is
innate)
and
skills
(i.e.,
something
that
is


learned),
and
look
at
how
aptitude
(as
manifested
in
audiation)
and
achievement


(skill
development
in
a
positive
environment)
are
both
necessary,
as
well
as
the


motivation
(attitude)
and
social
setting
(environment)
of
the
individual
(and
how


the
individual
navigates
their
experiences)
to
determine
the
embodied
(in
a

 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 3

developmental
sense
of
the
word,
see
Overton)
nature
of
this
highly
complex


music
expression
and
endeavor.
Too
bad
we
didn’t
have
a
chance
to
talk
about


this
in
a
class
with
a
bunch
of
other
folks
and
that
I
couldn’t
share
even
more


resources
with
you
on
this
topic.
Thus,
I
would
be
tempted
to
expand
and


broaden
your
vision
(from
a
perspective
informed
by
jazz,
bluegrass,
so
called


“improvisation”
that
is
taught
traditional
schools
of
music,
and
“free
improv”)
to


say
something
like,
“Improvisation
is
a
multi‐layered
cognitive
process
that


encompasses
an
equally
multi‐dimensional
battery
of
music
abilities
and
skills


that
are
nurtured
and
explored
in
a
supportive,
encouraging
environment
where


mistakes
and
miscues
are
enriching
to
the
learning
process
and
the
exploration


of
a
variety
of
music
ideas
flourish.”
For
me,
at
some
point
in
time
and
space,


one
needs
to
acknowledge
that
for
meaningful
music
making
to
be
in


consideration
in
an
improvisational
context,
one
needs
to
think
(cognate)
what


one
is
about
to
play
(intention)
before
their
voice,
fingers,
etc.
create
the


intended
sounds/music.






Well‐done
.
.
.
A+

 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 4

This paper will present a number a different perspectives on the psychology of improvisation

and focus on what skills are necessary to improvise, how these skills and thought processes are

related to aptitudes, and how aptitude tests have been used to teach improvisation study in

education.

In order to talk about improvisation, it is necessary to present a working definition that

will be used throughout this paper. Each study that I read in preparing this paper defined

improvisation slightly differently. This is understandable as improvisation denotes different

acts in each tradition of music, and even in different sub-genres of one tradition. For example,

what is considered improvisation in jazz is very different from what is considered

improvisation in free jazz. The following definitions are one’s that have been presented by the

authors cited in this paper and inform my understanding of improvisation and I will use them as

a basis for which to discuss improvisation.

Radocy and Boyle (2003) provide a great over-view of psychological literature

regarding improvisation. Radocy and Boyle highlight “Apel’s (1944, p. 351) nearly 60-year-

old definition of improvisation as “the art of performing music as an immediate reproduction of

simultaneous mental processes, that is, without the aid of manuscript, sketches, or memory””

(Radocy & Boyle, 2003, p. 287) as a good starting point for understanding contemporary music

psychologists focus on improvisation. They note that “Performance expertise does not ensure

expertise as an improviser, but expertise as an improviser requires expertise as a performer.”

(Radocy & Boyle, 2003, p. 287)

 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 5

Azzara, in his definition of improvisation states that spontaneous performance, “is the

meaningful manipulation of tonal and rhythm music content created in ongoing musical

thought. Successful improvisation is dependent on the recognition of relationships among tonal,

rhythmic, and expressive elements, that is, the assimilation of the syntactic features of the

music. A person must create organized musical meaning in his or her thought processes in

order to be able to manipulate the structures of music into an organized, spontaneous,

meaningful performance.” (Azzara, 1993, p. 330)

Sloboda defines improvisation as, “the special case where the composer is also the

performer, producing a novel musical statement without premeditation in a public context.”

(Sloboda, 1985, p. 103) but goes on to clarify that “A so-called improvisation may, in fact, be a

carefully planned and rehearsed performance; although there is nothing about the performance

as such that would all us to know this… social and commercial pressures of the concert

platform do not encourage the risk-taking that improvisation inevitably involves. (Sloboda,

1985, p. 149) Sloboda’s definition differs from the others because he acknowledges the

sociological aspects of performing live for audiences and the pressures on professional

musicians to make a living. For more writing on this matter, I found Tia DeNora’s (2000)

book, Music in Everyday Life to be an interesting and thorough examination of the relations of

production in the music industry.

Improvisation and MAP

To understand what an aptitude for improvisation is, it is important to think about what

processes are integral to act of improvisating. Azzara (1993) cites Gordon’s definition of

audiation as being necessary for the meaningful manipulation and production of spontaneous
 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 6

performance, as he terms improvisation. Kratus offers six different capabilities that one must

possess in order to improvise at an expert level:

• “The skill to hear musical patterns inwardly as they are about to be played

(audiation);

• The knowledge that music is structured in such a way as to allow others to

understand it (product orientation);

• The skill to manipulate an instrument or the voice to match the

performer’s musical intentions fluidly;

• Knowledge of strategies for structuring an improvisation and the

flexibility to change strategies, if necessary;

• Knowledge of stylistic conventions for improvising in a given style; and

• The skill to transcend stylistic conventions to develop a personal style.”

(Kratus, 1991, p. 38)

In order to assess what skills student’s already possess, and to help them to develop the skills

that Kratus cites as being integral to success in improvising it is important to understand what

their aptitude for these skills are. Gordon, who developed the Musical Aptitude Profile (MAP)

(a battery of aptitude tests), explains, “Musical aptitude tests not only offer a promising method

for evaluating students’ musical aptitudes but, more pertinently, provide a description of

musical aptitude.” (Gordon, 1968, p. 11) That is, the results from his aptitude test can provide

information about the student’s potential abilities, rather than their achievement in these areas.

This is important because,

“students infer musical meaning from musical sound by being able to remember,

organize, and conceptualize what they perceive, [thus] the general purpose of
 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 7

music education should be to teach students to understand the music they hear.

The overall objective of music education, then, must be to consider students’

individual musical needs and abilities, concomitant to identifying and establishing

specific behavioral objectives. The purpose and objectives of music education are

best effected through an understanding of how students learn music and by

adhering to teaching principles that interact with and enhance musical learning

process.” (Gordon, 1971, p. 63)

To examine if and how improvisation enhances musical achievement in elementary students,

Azzara conducted a study wherein fifth grade students where administered the MAP (Gordon,

1988) to “investigate the effects of different levels of music aptitude on the music reading

performance achievement of fifth-grade instrumental music students who received

improvisation study as a part of instrumental music instruction.” (Azzara, 1993, p. 331) From

the results of this study, he found that improvisation study improved the student’s performances

(they where more accurate when reading from notation). He states that improvisation helps

students to better understand harmonic progression, physical performance of tonal and rhythms

patterns, and to better attend to the expressive elements of music in instrumental performances

from notation.

Gordon suggests, “the aesthetic expressive-interpretive dimension is the unifying

element of musical aptitude.” (Gordon, 1968, p. 28) and “…there is reason to believe that the

aesthetic expressive-interpretive dimension of aptitude is important to creative and

improvisational achievement. This is particularly evidenced by the inclusion of melodic taste,

tonal movement, harmonic preference, and melodic and rhythmic balance subtests in test

batteries. However, this does not necessarily preclude the doubt that most, if not all, of these
 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 8

measures might be somewhat reflective of culturally conditioned musical achievement.”

(Gordon, 1968, p. 29) Important here is that aptitude, in fact a wide variety of aptitudes, affect

how a child learns.

Another study on improvisation that employed MAP with elementary students, by

Kannellopoulus, suggests that aptitude does influence achievement, but that children’s

conceptions and practice styles also greatly impact their achievement through group-based

meaning-making processes. Kanellopoulos’ acted as an informal interviewer, empathetic

receiver of music, and co-player in this ethnographic study. Kannellopoulos suggests that three

analytic concepts emerged as means for capturing the children’s understanding and practice of

improvisation: Objectification, Thoughtfulness, and Shared Intentionality (Kanellopoulos,

1999). Throughout the paper, the children’s words are included as illustrative examples from

which teases out the analytic concepts cited above. In this process much emphasis was placed

on meaning-making through group discussions with the children, that is, their own creation of

an understanding about what it is to improvise and how they do it.

Gordon’s work supports Kanellopoulos’s approach: “Interest in learning music,

especially as a predictor of musical success, has been almost totally ignored by music

psychologists. However, if we accept as criteria of interest in music the degree to which one 1)

likes to practice on an instrument, 2) participates in extracurricular music activities, and 3)

avails himself of musical instruction during summer months, we find that the correlation

between each one of these variables with MAP scores is systematically higher than that found

between MAP scores and socio-economic status (31). (Gordon, 1968, p. 33) and further, “From

the little evidence we have, we can only assume that one’s interest in music does affect his

success in music.” (Gordon, 1968, p. 33) As an educator then, fostering an interest and love
 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 9

for music in student’s is incredibly important in guiding them through musical achievement and

understanding a student’s MAP, along with sociological approaches can provide teachers with

guides to teach their students. As Kannellopuolos’ findings demonstrate, allowing students to

develop their own musical understanding through meaning-making group discussions and

private reflection helps them to achieve musically and also provides a rich well of cues for

educators to pick up on in order to support student’s in their learning especially around

improvisation and composition.

Improvisation and Composition

Improvisation and composition are often compared or used interchangeably because they are

both generative processes, but in order to examine improvisational aptitude, it is important to

distinguish between them. Indeed, the differences between improvisation and composition can

illuminate what skills are unique to improvising. Sloboda distinguishes between composition

and improvisation by examining the constraints of immediacy and fluency that are present only

in improvisation.

“… What distinguishes improvisation from composition is primarily the pre-

existence of a large set of formal constraints, which comprise a ‘blueprint’ or

‘skeleton’ for the improvisation. The improviser can, therefore, dispense with

much of the composer’s habitual decision-making concerning structure and

direction. He uses a model which is, in most cases, externally supplied by the

culture, and which he embellishes and ‘fills in’ in various ways.” (Sloboda, 1985,

p. 139)

Sloboda’s focus is on jazz improvisation, but much of what he says can be applied to any type

of improvisation. In his examination of some approaches to improvising he states that

 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 10

improvisation is the ability to embellish externally supplied (by the specific culture) musical

models (i.e. form, style). To further expand this argument, he cites Minsky’s (1977) usage of

the term ‘frame’ to describe cognitive structures that help to achieve aesthetic impact (by using

and embellishing frames (stereotypes) in creative ways). These observations suggest that an

aptitude for improvisation would relate to tonal and rhythmic memory and the ability to

internalize stylistic idiosyncrasies and embellish them in a creative way. He states that “In both

cases [composition and improvisation] the originator must have a repertoire of patters and

things to do with them that he can call up a will; but in the case of improvisation the crucial

factor is the speed at which the stream of invention can be sustained, and the availability of

things to do which do not overtax the available resources.” (Sloboda, 1985, p. 149) Sloboda

maintains that speed, or fluency, is the key difference between improvisation and composition.

Sloboda notes the difficulty in examining the psychological processes involved in

improvisation because it is an in vivo performance (Sloboda, 1985, p. 149), but he suggests that

because the improviser has no opportunity to go back and “cover his tracks”, it may reveal

more psychological interest than does a score. He suggests that detailed and controlled studies

of improvisation should be undertaken to examine the improvisers’ own experience of

improvising and more experimental studies that would examine repeated chord sequences and

different melodic variations in improvisation. (Sloboda, 1985, p. 149-150)

Burnard conducted an ethnographic study he interviewed children about their musical

background using Critical Incident Charting (Denicolo and Pope 1990) to focus on

phenomenological issues using triangulation to examine “(i) what constitutes the dimension

along which children move between improvisation and composing, and (ii) how do children’s

reflections of their lived experience provide insight into the intention which directs their
 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 11

processes of music making.” (Burnard, 2000, p. 8) In his discussions with the children, he

found that the children had a diversity of understandings of both the relationship between

improvisation and composition, and that they where all able to talk about these processes

irrespective of their musical backgrounds and training. Some thought that improvisation and

composition where ends in themselves and differently orientated activities, others thought that

improvisation and composition were interrelated and that improvisation was used in

composition, and still others thought that improvisation and composition where

indistinguishable and inseparable in intention. The differences here where accounted for by the

children’s different approaches to composing and their attitudes about both improvising and

composing.

What Type of Learning is it then?

Gordon outlines Gagne’s eight different types of learning which encompass both Gestalt and

association theory. He cites that in most school settings, the first four types of learning are

emphasized (Signal Learning, Stimulus-Response, Learning, Chaining, Verbal Association)

and that “As a result students develop perceptual understanding about music predominantly by

rote and rarely engage in conceptual pursuits.” (Gordon, 1971, p. 59) Gordon proposes that it

is equally important to emphasize the later four stages in Gagne’s model (Multiple-

Discrimination Learning, Concept Learning, Principle Learning, Problem Solving) because

these stages encourage students to infer meaning from musical sound and to develop their own

understandings by being creative.

Gordon argues, citing Woodruff and Piaget, that the four final stages proposed by

Gagne focus on the creation of new or unique ideas. This suggests that improvisation would

fall under these last four stages of learning, that it is related to all three aptitudes that he cites
 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 12

(tonal, rhythmic, and aesthetic expressive-interpretive – especially the last one) and that it

should, indeed be a part of school curriculum because it brings together all of these types and

ways of learning and has the potential to synthesize musical understanding, “…there is reason

to believe that the aesthetic expressive-interpretive dimension of aptitude is important to

creative and improvisational achievement. (Gordon, 1968, p. 29) Azzara suggests the

same,“[t]eaching students to improvise promotes their acquisition of higher-order music

thinking skills. Asking students to improvise as a part of instrumental music instruction would

reasonably increase a student’s ability to manipulate mentally the structures of music with

purpose and meaning.” (Azzura, 1993, p. 330) As mentioned above, Sloboda observes that an

aptitude in improvisation would relate to tonal and rhythmic memory and the ability to

internalize stylistic idiosyncrasies and embellish them in a creative way. Both of these writers

suggest that improvisation is a synthesis of many different musical skills and that an aptitude

for improvisation may be the ability to internalize these skills and fluently draw upon them as

needed.

Kratus examines at which point each skill is developed through improvisation study and

proposes a model that details different levels of improvisation from novice to expert. He states

that expert and beginner improvisers share: intentional movement to produces sounds in time,

the understanding that all the final product cannot be revised, they have the freedom to choose

what to play, often within musical constraints. (Kratus, 1991, p. 36) He does distinguish

between beginner and expert improvisers, stating that experts must possess (and be beyond the

exploration phase of learning an instrument): audiation; knowledge that to be meaningful to

others, music must be structured in some way (product-orientation); proficiency on an

instrument (technical fluidity); knowledge of structure and flexibility to change strategies of

 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 13

structuring music (structural improvisation); knowledge of stylistic conventions (stylistic

improvisation); the skill to transcend stylistic conventions to develop a personal style (personal

improvisation).

In his approach to teaching music improvisation, Kratus identifies seven stages of

learning in improvisation and notes that though one may regress to an earlier stage, one cannot

skip a stage or jump ahead. The seven stages are: the exploration phase (developing an

understanding of the relationship between their actions on an instrument and the sounds

created), process-oriented improvisation (patterns emerging that signify the development of

short-term memory, intentionality, and an increased proficiency on an instrument), product-

oriented improvisation (conscious effect to produce sounds is co-coordinated with the shared

qualities of music in society), fluid improvisation (fluid technique is present and can be called

on at will to build an interesting and fluid improvisation), structural improvisation (referencing

and working within idiomatic structures and demonstrating an awareness of form in

improvisation), stylistic improvisation (a personal voice is developed within an idiom),

personal improvisation (a new, unknown style emerges).

Improvisation as a synthesis of musical understanding

Pressing’s work on improvisation rests on the tenet that it is shaped by constraints on human

information processing and action. (Pressing, 1998, p. 51) He argues that expert improvers use

certain tools that result from deliberate practice to improvise including

“real-time sensory perceptual coding, optimal attention allocation, event

interpretation, decision-making, prediction (of the actions of others), memory

storage and recall, error correction, and movement control, and further, [the

improviser] must integrate these processes into an optimally seamless set of

 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 14

musical statements that reflect both a personal perspective on musical

organization and a capacity to affect listeners. Both speed and capacity constraints

apply” (Pressing, 1998, p. 51)

To aid in these processes, Pressing argues that improvisers use referents, which are a set of

cognitive, perceptual and emotional structures that guide the production of music. These

referents are stylistic idiosyncrasies or as Sloboda cites, frames.

Pressing states in his theory of the improvisational generation of musical behaviour, that

musical structures in motor, musical, and acoustic aspects can be broken up into three kinds of

arrays: features, objects, and processes. He goes further in this paper to state that

creativity is not individual-centered and creator-focused, but collectively based and socially

inspired.” (Pressing, 1998, p. 57)

Kiehn, in his article Creative thinking: Music improvisational skills development among

elementary school students, asks pertinent questions regarding improvisation skills and their

relationship to aptitude, age and sex. His approach is largely influenced by Webster’s (1988;

1990) theory of creative thinking in music which is a unique type of thinking termed divergent

thinking (finding many possible answers to a particular problem or open-ended task through

originality, musical extensiveness and flexibility), and suggests that extensiveness and fluency

are key elements in improvisation. (Kiehn, 2007, p. 1) Kiehn cites’ Brophy’s 1999 study of

age-related differences in the musical improvisations of children age 6 through 12 as a jumping

board to compare the music improvisational skills of students in grades two, four, and six using

the Vaughan Test of Musical Creativity (1971). The central research questions addressed are:

1. “Can music improvisational skills be reliably measured?

 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 15

2. Are there significant grade level differences for scores on a test of music

improvisational skills?

3. Are there significant gender differences for scores on a test of music improvisational

skills?” (Kiehn, 2007, p. 3)

The analysis of the study was also informed by Kratus’ improvisational skill developmental

model and found that the results support Brophy and Kratus’ model but that they need to be

tested further, that the results support Brophy’s findings of a dynamic growth stage between

ages 6-9, and that there is no significant gender differences in improvisational skill. He

suggests that children with an aptitude in extensiveness or fluency (what he deems, creative)

“…may generate a number of ideas when asked to create a sound story with their voice or other

instrument. During this particular open-ended improvisation activity, ideas interact with other

elemental concepts such as the student’s ability to create melodies, rhythms, or develop a

phrase through the use of various dynamic and pitch levels.” (Kiehn, 2007, p. 1) He defines the

creative thinking process as appearing to be, “…driven by a product intention (goal or vision of

the individual) observable in music improvisation, composition, and analysis activities.”

(Keihn, 2007, p. 1) Since aptitudes and ability in divergent thinking are key to success in

improvising, Kiehn suggests that the implications of this study for music education is that

improvisation responses (i.e. learning) need to be given time and that teachers don’t currently

give or have time to give to this and that more research-based training in improvisation

pedagogy and planning for in-service teachers needs to be provided (Kiehn, 2007, p. 8).

Burnard supports this suggestion and proposes that teaching improvisation and composition

should incorporate an examination of student’s past and present assumptions about what it is to

engage in these practices, time for individual and group reflection about how and what they
 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 16

improvise and compose, giving students a wide variety of instruments to work with, lots of

time for them to work out their musical thoughts, and clear distinction between appraisal and

interpretation of their work. His findings suggest that ““…by giving children the opportunity

to articulate their understandings we enhance learning.” (Burnard, 2000, p. 22)

Reflections

Kratus states “Improvisation is not simply an in intuitive musical behavior, nor is it only an

activity reserved for the most proficient musicians. It is both, and improvisation can and should

be a meaningful part of every student’s music education from preschool through adulthood.”

(Kratus, 1991, p. 40) I emphatically agree with Kratus’ statement and believe that with the

evidence presented in this paper, studying improvisation at all ages and levels of musical

achievement can help students to better understand music. It can help student’s to embody

music in a way that goes beyond wrote learning because of the multi-dimensional

psychological processes that are play out in improvisation. Improvisation is a multi-skilled

process that encompasses an equally multi-dimensional battery of aptitudes and if it is to be

tested accurately for the purposes of teaching improvisation, evidence suggests that interpreting

the results would be complicated. With the demands on teachers to teach to the curriculum,

because improvisation is so difficult to define, it takes creativity and perseverance to

incorporate improvisation into teaching. The cases cited in this paper emphasize the synthesis

of musical skills that improvisation study encourages and as expressed by many of the authors

cited in this paper, it is especially important for music educators to have the time to allow

students time to explore and to develop their ideas without judgment.

References
 APTITUDE AND IMPROVISATION 17

Azzara, C. D. (1993) Audiation-based improvisation techniques and elementary instrumental

students’ music achievement. Journal of Research in Music Education, Vol. 41, No. 4,
328-342

Burnard, P. (2000) How children ascribe meaning to improvisation and composition: rethinking
pedagogy in music education. Music Education Research, Vol. 2, No. 1, 7-23

DeNora, T. (2000) Music in everyday life. The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge:
Cambridge, UK

Gordon, E. (1968) How Children Learn When They Learn Music. University of Iowa: Iowa
City, IA.

Gordon, E. (1971) The psychology of music teaching. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey.

Gordon, E. E. (1988). Musical Aptitude Profile. Riverside Publishing: Chicago. (Originally

published 1965)

Kanellopoulos, P. A. (1999) Children’s Conception and Practice of Musical Improvisation.

Psychology of Music 1999; 27, 175-191

Kiehn, M. T. (2007) Creative thinking: Music improvisational skills development among

elementary school students. Journal of Education and Human Development. Volume 1,
Issue 2

Kratus, J. (1991) Growing with improvisation. Music Educators Journal, Vol. 78, No. 4, 35-40

Kratus, J. (1995) A developmental approach to teaching music improvisation. International

Journal of Music Education 1995; 26, 27-38

Pressing, J. (1998) Psychological constraints on improvisational expertise and communication.

In Nettl, B. and Russel, M (Eds.) (1998). The course of performance: Studies on the
world of musical improvisation. (pp. 47-67) The University of Chicago Press, USA

Radocy, R. E. and Boyle , J. D. (2003) Psychological foundations of musical behavior. Fourth

Edition. Chales C. Thomas Publisher. Ltd. Springlield, Illinois.

Sloboda, J. A. (1985) The musical mind: The cognitive psychology of music. Oxford University
Press, New York.