The purpose of this investigation was to examine a single modern band to discover how an ensemble director/facilitator implemented peer mentoring and other student-centered pedagogical approaches. Observations of an urban high school modern band were conducted over the course of five months of rehearsals with a summative performance. Participants included 12 high school students, one primary educator, and one student teacher. Qualitative data were collected through artifacts and observations as well as group, individual student, and individual teacher interviews. Data were coded and analyzed, revealing emergent themes. The facilitator encouraged students to share their knowledge, opinions, and suggestions for direction through peer mentoring. Students in the ensemble claimed there existed significant social aspects of participation and found interactions within to be a formative part of their school experience. Findings include substantial engagement in peer mentoring, social bonding through modern band, and the sharing of knowledge between students in a relaxed atmosphere in which student agency, autonomy, and democratic decision-making were key tenets. Data analysis revealed musical and social benefits with a facilitator who championed student-centered pedagogy within a relaxed environment. Modeling was found to be a key tenet of learning and communication and critique between peers were more easily understood and better received as compared to that from their facilitator. Peer mentoring opportunities seemed to be reliant upon music that was familiar to students presented in a manner that left room for subjective interpretation and reliance upon peers’ understanding. Peer mentoring was also identified as a definitive component of modern band instruction in addition to its benefit within the ensemble for students musically and socially. Pedagogical suggestions for music education include increased autonomy and student agency in all classrooms; the provision of pathways for teachers to develop facilitation and peer mentoring skills; frequent opportunities for performance; careful consideration of student proximity for peer mentoring; and finding balance between traditional and nonformal teaching methods. Other implications for the profession include implementation of facilitation in all ensembles; careful repertoire decision-making; the development of student leaders; avoiding false representations of popular music ensembles; and encouragement of socializing in modern band ensembles.

For many teenagers, learning to play guitar might only involve themselves and one or more of their peers interacting outside school. Music education research, however, does not reveal the spectrum of ways in which adolescent musicians interact to learn peer-to-peer. The purpose of this study was to examine this process: how adolescents verbally and nonverbally communicated to learn music together and without adult teachers. Two research questions in this study addressed how systems of meanings emerged in adolescent musicians’ processes of talk. The first was: How do participants learning jointly and independently communicate with a peer outside school? The second question was: How do participants assess independent learning along with their peer and joint learning outside school? The participants were six adolescent guitarists from El Paso, Texas. The final candidates included five males with Hispanic backgrounds and one Mexican-American adolescent male. Data were collected in three observations of the guitarists learning in pairs. Data were also collected in interviews, artifacts, and field notes. Discourse analysis involved review of recorded observations, field notes, and transcripts. Data were coded and parsed into categories. Multiple systems of meanings emerged in themes. Quoted material helped to explain the discourse themes. Three sets of findings included main dialectic discourse themes: together–individual, unreserved–reserved, and established–undetermined. Four identity discourses—self-learner, coach, musical artist, and friend—emerged from participants’ dialogues. Three themes indicated how participants individually assessed learning, and two themes showed how joint evaluations emerged peer-to-peer. This study and its results highlight a spectrum of ways adolescent musicians use everyday talk to learn music outside school. Findings in this study might empower music teachers to facilitate their students’ own peer dialogues. Future research can build on the foundation of findings here, which raise questions for exploring how communication outside school might compare with communication in school, how peer-to-peer music learning might be facilitated, as well as implications about why certain types of communication influence music learning.