Instrumental tuition is by many seen as the cornerstone of higher music education (HME) performance programmes. An increasing body of research looks into its strengths and weaknesses and calls for development in a number of ways. This study contributes to this debate by exploring the ways in which international instrumental tuition practices are different, however limited to Western classical music practices. The article reports on a qualitative interview study of 12 students with experiences from 11 countries across America, Europe and Asia. Analysis of the interview data suggests that instrumental tuition practices are different when it comes to teacher positions, lesson formats and social organisation, responsibility and student voice and subject matter foci. These differences seem to correspond to social, musical and pedagogical structures and assumptions, and they could, as a result, be seen as differences on an international, institutional and individual level. The study suggests further that instrumental tuition practices could be seen as various manifestations of and negotiations between two broad archetypes in education: a teacher-centred archetype and a student-centred archetype. Increased knowledge about the variety of instrumental tuition practices is potentially a crucial matter in the field of HME, not the least due to power issues, and the study provides an analytical framework to analyse international, institutional and individual practices.

中文翻译：

---

高等教育中器乐教学的差异：走向分析框架


器乐教学被许多人视为高等教育 （HME） 表演课程的基石。越来越多的研究机构研究了它的优点和缺点，并呼吁以多种方式发展。本研究通过探索国际器乐教学实践的不同方式，但仅限于西方古典音乐实践，为这一辩论做出了贡献。这篇文章报告了一项对来自美洲、欧洲和亚洲 11 个国家的 12 名学生的定性访谈研究。对访谈数据的分析表明，在教师职位、课程形式和社会组织、责任感以及学生的声音和主题焦点方面，工具性补习实践是不同的。这些差异似乎与社会、音乐和教育学的结构与假设相对应，因此，它们可以被视为国际、机构和个人层面的差异。该研究进一步表明，工具性补习实践可以被视为教育中两种广泛原型的各种表现形式和协商：以教师为中心的原型和以学生为中心的原型。增加对各种工具性补习实践的了解可能是 HME 领域的一个关键问题，尤其是由于权力问题，该研究提供了一个分析框架来分析国际、机构和个人实践。