See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/272145161

Music teaching and learning online: Considering YouTube instructional videos

Article  in  Journal of Music Technology and Education · May 2012

DOI: 10.1386/jmte.5.1.77_1

CITATIONS READS

35 3,246

2 authors, including:

Kari Veblen
The University of Western Ontario
37 PUBLICATIONS   255 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Waldron, J. & Veblen, K. K. (2008). The medium is the message: Cyberspace, community and music learning. Journal of Music, Technology and Education 1(3). View
project

Community Music Today View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kari Veblen on 10 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 JMTE 5 (1) pp. 77–87 Intellect Limited 2012

Journal of Music, Technology & Education

Volume 5 Number 1
© 2012 Intellect Ltd Article. English language. doi: 10.1386/jmte.5.1.77_1

Nathan B. Kruse
University of North Texas

Kari K. Veblen
University of Western Ontario

Music teaching and learning

online: Considering YouTube
instructional videos

Abstract Keywords
This article is the initial foray into a long-term comprehensive collaborative investi- YouTube
gation of online music teaching and learning. We considered representative YouTube online learning
videos (N=40) from five folk/traditional music websites for pedagogical and musical instrument lessons
content. Video selection and categorization included banjo (n=10), fiddle (n=10), informal learning
guitar (n=10) and mandolin (n=10) lessons. Content analysis factors took account adult learners
of (1) video characteristics (length, teacher talktime), (2) instructor characteristics folk/traditional music
(gender, age, ethnicity), (3) musical content and (4) teaching methods. Results indi-
cated that the majority of the selected videos were geared towards beginners and that
instructors tended to be white, middle aged males. Videos also included many forms
of aural reinforcement, modelling, technique-based instruction and physiological
prompts. Opportunities for improvisation, however, were infrequent.

Introduction
Since its inception in 2005, YouTube has grown exponentially; as with other
social media, this political, social and cultural medium presents challenges
and opportunities for educators, consumers and researchers (Burgess  and

77
Nathan B. Kruse | Kari K. Veblen

Green 2009; Manghani 2007; Milliron et al. 2008; Way and Webb 2007;
Webb 2007). With the continuous increase in amateur videos posted to websites
like YouTube, there is a marked shift towards consumer access to digital technol-
ogies that sustain a ‘participatory culture’ allowing individuals to ‘actively partici-
pate in the creation and circulation of new content’ (Jenkins 2006: 290). Thus, the
individual is increasingly in control of his or her image and expression.
It can be argued (Burgess and Green 2009) that with such popular use of
media and democratization there is a potential for disruptive separation due
to content-specific tastes. Strangelove corroborated this notion:

Whether fighting unfair copyright actions, debating the purpose of

YouTube, or grappling with anti-social behavior, the YouTube commu-
nity proves highly reflexive. There is much reflection on the norms
and ideals of the community and also a constant monitoring of other
people’s behaviour.
(2010: 120–21)

Nonetheless, YouTube has become a cultural force that alters how individuals
interact with one another online and offline, and will continue to be a catalyst
for social, educational and musical change.
YouTube also has been a subject of increasing interest among research-
ers in education and psychology. Educational use has included the post-
ing of interactive syllabae and college lectures (Balcikanli 2009; Bosch 2009;
Young 2008) as well as the back-and-forth nature of online communities
and their subsequent impact on rhetorical literacy among students (Jackson
and Wallin 2009; Lin and Polnecki 2009); to how entertainment media, like
YouTube, influences society in conscious and subconscious ways, particu-
larly the ways in which popular culture either resists or reinforces the domi-
nant culture (Thompson 2007). Additionally, November (2007) purported
that teachers should embrace and promote the positive aspects of media tools
rather than dwell on their drawbacks, especially in school settings. The author
encouraged educators to impress upon students the importance of viewing
technological tools as instruments of lifelong learning, rather than as devices
that hinder the educational process.
With the purpose of presenting a pragmatic, dual-sided approach to online
learning, Kellner and Kim (2010) argued that YouTube, combined with a
transformative critical pedagogy, could help highlight the Internet’s potential
for democratization and illuminate its limitations. The authors critically evalu-
ated both the possibilities and limitations of YouTube as a form of cultural
politics, democracy and social transformation. In another study, Gorard and
Selwyn (2008) examined formal and informal learning modes among senior
adults and documented how older adults spend their time online, including
the social learning activities cyberspace affords them. Ganis (2009) warned,
however, that the term social learning is not an adequate name for describing
learning environments that merely include social media capabilities.
In music education research, Block (2009) recorded music clips to docu-
ment student learning and performances, reporting that many schools block
YouTube as a protective measure, preventing teachers from uploading videos
on the Internet. Block further suggested that schools subscribe to SchoolTube,
which is a free online service for schools that allows teachers to safely upload
and view classroom videos. Similarly, Olson (2010) investigated the efforts
involved in facilitating collaborative and interdisciplinary learning among

78
 Music teaching and learning online

students in the music classroom. Resources like YouTube and Skype were used
to bring professionals into the classroom, which allowed students to graphi-
cally research music concepts. Additionally, Rudolph and Frankel acknowl-
edged that online instrumental and vocal lessons, including those posted on
YouTube, could enhance musical understanding for students, ‘especially in
situations where geographical or socio-economic restrictions would make it
difficult to find a suitable instructor otherwise’ (2009: 15).
Related social media and digital technology in the secondary music class-
room were the subjects of research by Wise et al. (2011), who canvassed nine
music teachers in New Zealand secondary schools to see how these media
transformed their practice. Citing Webb and Wise, they described the para-
digm shift afforded by digital technology, namely, (1) from instructivist to
constructivist philosophies, (2) from teacher- to student-centred learning, (3)
a shift from local to global resources and (4) use of the richer and more multi-
modal information (Webb 2007: 119–20).
In other music education research, Salavuo (2006, 2008) probed the nature
and implications of online musical communities, while Waldron and Veblen
(2008) and Waldron (2011) examined the landscape of online music learning
as it related to folk/traditional music communities in cyberspace. Additionally,
Veblen and Kruse (unpublished data) discussed the nature of online learning
and the potential for designing cyber ethnographies. The researchers noted
three paramount considerations for conducting cyber ethnographies, includ-
ing understanding the characteristics of online communities, knowing the
role of the researcher and displaying ethical behaviour in online communities.
Cultivating an awareness of these precepts is crucial for maintaining research
integrity, as insider/outsider experiences can play a role in how online commu-
nity events are collected, documented, interpreted and reported. Furthermore,
online communities can be formed spontaneously, which can make their
whereabouts and objectives uncertain, especially to outsiders who may want
to conduct research. As Atay observed:

Since cyberspace and Internet technologies erase or collapse time and

space differences, cyber communities (unlike their traditional counter-
parts), can exist outside of time and space restrictions. Therefore, indi-
viduals can organize communities whenever and wherever they wish.
Clearly, this troubles the very nature of ethnographies because in cyber-
space there is not one singular physical and predetermined community
in which a researcher can be immersed to collect data.
(2009: 2)

Exploring this phenomenon, Waldron (2011) conducted a virtual ethnogra-

phy with the members of The Banjo Hangout (www.banjohangout.com), a
folk music website dedicated to the advancement of banjo playing. According
to Waldron’s participants, learning how to play Old Time and Bluegrass
music through the Internet allowed them to be part of a real community that
connected members socially to other kindred spirits. Participants also were
divided into two general categories: ‘old timers’ (Waldron 2011: 39), who were
experienced players who served as mentors for other online members, and
‘newbies’ (Waldron 2011: 39), who were novice players searching for musical
instruction and advice. Nevertheless, both groups spoke of their ‘obsession’
(Waldron 2011: 52) with banjo playing as well as the importance of creativity
and the personalization of tunes in their own unique style (Waldron 2011).

79
Nathan B. Kruse | Kari K. Veblen

1. Descriptors of North Finally, Hine advocated adopting an ethnographic approach to the

American traditional,
folk or roots music
Internet, whereby issues of identity, authenticity, time and space can be
are applied to kinds examined in their own contexts: ‘Given that we now see the Internet as a
of popular music cultural context in its own right, it seems clear that we can view that context
based on or inspired
by indigenous music. as a place in which to carry out social research’ (2005: 109). There is currently
Instrumental and vocal much interest in online learning and the use of social media in music educa-
traditions coexist and tion as the mediums of connectivity increase. While such research may pose
intersect. The tunes
taught and learned unique issues for researchers, such as privacy and the legitimacy of claims,
in the 40 YouTube it offers many possibilities, including opportunities for examining insider/
videos surveyed
here, however, are
outsider collaborations, representing perceptions, documenting practice and
all representative understanding diverse processes of music teaching, music learning and ways
of a body of Anglo- of musicking (Veblen and Kruse unpublished data).
American fiddle tunes
commonly played and The current investigation continues the questions posed by Veblen and
learned orally as well Kruse (unpublished data) and Waldron (2011) with the notion of comple-
as by notation. menting rich and specific ethnographic information with the more overarching
2. http://www.youtube. deductions that can be afforded with quantitative tools. Vital considerations
com/watch?v= for music teaching and learning in any context include what is said, to whom,
cHRbD7K6KAs;
http://www. by whom and for what purposes, yet these same processes take on new
youtube.com/user/ meaning within online worlds. While Rudolph and Frankel (2009) and Olson
BanjoMeetsWorld#p/
u/3/DKVQXAAzxbE
(2010) endorsed YouTube as a viable option for accessing student lessons,
there are no known studies that address specific characteristics of folk music
3. http://www.
youtube.com/
lessons. With this in mind, a content media analysis of folk music videos was
watch?v=CbzGQy37k- conducted to identify and follow trends in online folk music education; the
c&feature=results_v purpose being to describe the overall characteristics of YouTube folk/tradi-
ideo&playnext=1
&list=PL4EA6F080 tional music instructional videos and to determine the characteristics most
1916A1DC; http:// displayed.
www.youtube.com/
watch?v=lygc31AHHiY

4. http://www. Method
youtube.com/
watch?v=pBnS4uhaXAI; For the purposes of this study, we examined instrumental tunes of the genre
http://www. or genres referred to variously as North American traditional, folk or roots
youtube.com/
watch?v=moqzhq8ut2Q
music.1 Embedded videos from five websites, The Banjo Hangout (www.
banjohangout.com),2 The Fiddle Hangout (www.fiddlehangout.com),3 The
5. http://www.
youtube.com/
Flatpicker Hangout (www.flatpickerhangout.com),4 The Mandolin Café (www.
watch?v=8a5JxjmmIrE; mandolincafe.com)5 and YouTube (www.youtube.com) were analysed for their
http://www. pedagogical and musical content. These particular websites were selected
youtube.com/
watch?v=iaeOFqslviA because they (1) maintained an extensive membership or viewing body, (2)
contained pedagogical postings and instructional video links from members,
(3) appeared as recommended links in ancillary websites, (4) emerged as the
top hits in Google searches, (5) provided an open forum for social and musi-
cal networking and (6) encompassed all styles of the folk music idiom. Video
(N=40) selection and categorization included banjo (n=10), fiddle (n=10),
guitar (n=10) and mandolin (n=10) instructional videos posted between the
years 2006 and 2010. These four instruments were chosen because they are
customarily used for this kind of music and because they are indigenous and
popular. Video selection was limited to those that included verbal instruc-
tions from teachers. Videos that simply presented the playing of a folk tune
for aural purposes only were not used in this study. However, such videos no
doubt are used to compare and learn tune variations.
Researcher-selected videos (n=28) and videos recommended by members
(n=12) of the aforementioned websites were analysed according to the follow-
ing four content factors: (1) video characteristics, (2) instructor characteristics,

80
 Music teaching and learning online

(3) musical content and (4) teaching methods. Analysis by sub-categories

included: duration of videos; frequency of teacher talk; multiple volumes of
beginning, intermediate and advanced lessons; amount of repetition; amount
of improvisation encouraged; availability of references regarding iconic
players and source materials; and references to extra-musical contexts and
self-directed techniques. Of particular interest were the sociological interac-
tions expressed online, including unspoken assumptions, gender and age.
A researcher-constructed tally grid and a stopwatch were used to identify
and calculate video accounts. The sum of each sub-category was analysed
for trends in video content and presentation style, and the integrity of the
categorizations and classifications of content items were maintained through
inter-coder reliability.

Results
Table 1 shows the composite characteristics of the YouTube videos selected
for this study, with the underlined values representing the highest frequen-
cies. With a combined duration of nearly four hours for the 40 lessons, banjo
videos were the longest, followed by mandolin, guitar and fiddle. In terms
of instructor talktime, banjo instructors were more verbal than any other
instrument category, although mandolin instructors held the highest percent-
age of talktime in relation to total video length. The majority of lessons were
geared towards beginners, followed by intermediate and advanced lessons.
Additionally, 100 per cent of the lessons were part of a larger series of instruc-
tional videos; no video stood alone as a solitary entity. In terms of filming
location, the most common backdrop was a professional studio, followed by
individuals’ homes, shops or music stores, offices, and finally, an outdoor
shed. The use of subtitles and supplementary reference materials, such as

Banjo Fiddle Guitar Mandolin Total

Duration (in minutes) 1:13:16 45:31 48:26 59:02 3:46:15

Talktime 44:29 21:56 20:59 38:16 2:05:40
Talktime 61% 48% 46% 65% 59%
Level
Beginning 6 4 6 7 57%
Intermediate 3 4 2 2 28%
Advanced 1 2 2 1 15%
Series 10 10 10 10 100%
Location
Studio 4 4 7 4 47%
Home 5 4 1 3 33%
Store/Shop 1 1 1 2 13%
Office - 1 - 1 5%
Shed - - 1 - 2%
Subtitles 3 6 9 5 58%
Reference materials 4 5 9 4 55%

Table 1: Video characteristics. (Underlined values represent the highest frequency.)

81
Nathan B. Kruse | Kari K. Veblen

Banjo Fiddle Guitar Mandolin Total (%)

Gender
Male 6 9 8 9 80
Female 4 1 2 1 20
Ethnicity W W W W 100
Age
Young 2 7 3 1 32
Middle aged 5 2 6 8 53
Senior 3 1 1 1 15

Table 2: Instructor characteristics. (Underlined values represent the highest frequency.)

websites, books and recordings, were provided on the majority of the videos,
with most of these appearing in guitar videos.
Regarding the physical attributes of the video instructors themselves, an
overwhelming majority of teachers were male. Only 20 per cent of videos
included female instructors, although banjo lessons incorporated more female
instructors than any other instrument category. Moreover, 100 per cent of
the sampled videos featured white instructors, who were predominantly
middle aged. Fiddle videos, however, included a higher number of younger
teachers. The aforementioned details displayed above in Table 2.
Table 3 shows the musical objectives identified in the videos. An over-
whelming majority (73 per cent) of content centred on technique, which
included bow holds, finger placement, posture, picking and strumming
patterns, hammers-ons and pull-offs and scale patterns. Banjo lessons
invariably focused on some form of technique, particularly finger dexterity.
Theory and melody also were addressed frequently, as the chief purpose
of the videos was to teach a folk tune. Theory included general issues such
as note names, chord progressions, key signatures and their relation to
the tune. Fiddle and mandolin videos tended to highlight melodic teach-
ing objectives, while banjo and guitar videos tended to highlight harmonic
teaching objectives. This trend might align with the fact that these instru-
ments typically are associated with being melodic or harmonic instruments,
respectively. Instructor singing was infrequent and not a common means
of modelling pitch, as only 18 per cent of the videos included instructors
who sang while playing. One banjo instructor noted, however, that playing

Banjo Fiddle Guitar Mandolin Total (%)

Technique 9 8 6 6 73
Theory 6 5 7 5 58
Melody 6 7 3 7 58
Harmony 5 2 7 4 45
Singing 2 - 2 3 18
Opportunities for
improvisation 2 - 3 - 13

Table 3: Musical content. (Underlined values represent the highest frequency.)

82
 Music teaching and learning online

Banjo Fiddle Guitar Mandolin Total (%)

Modelling 10 10 10 10 100
Repetition 7 5 7 7 65
Physiological
prompts 8 4 6 6 60
Background of tune 1 2 1 3 18
Equipment 2 3 1 1 18
References to
players/icons 2 - 1 2 13

Table 4: Teaching methods. (Underlined values represent the highest frequency.)

without singing is aberrant behaviour within the folk music culture. Finally,
few videos included opportunities for improvisation. In the modest sample
size, guitar and banjo instructors were the only teachers who broached this
particular musical aspect with viewers.
In terms of teaching method, 100 per cent of the videos included some
form of aural reinforcement or modelling. The majority of teachers demon-
strated both correct and incorrect ways of playing the instrument and
provided pedagogical advice for addressing problematic passages or finger
dexterity. Rarely did teachers model with their voices. Several instructors used
repetition as the predominant tool for teaching phrases, verses and chord
progressions. In most instances, instructors initially presented melodies and
chord progressions in their entirety and at full tempo before isolating them
at slower tempi for the viewer. Physiological prompts such as hand shape,
feel and placement were common themes of instructional style. Information
related to the historical context of tunes, the use of equipment (e.g. picks,
tuning pegs, straps, bridges) and references to iconic players were included
to a far lesser degree. Teaching method details are shown above in Table 4.

Discussion
The purpose of this study was to describe the overall characteristics of YouTube
folk/traditional music instructional videos and to determine which characteris-
tics were displayed most. An overwhelming majority of instructors were white
males, who tended to be middle aged. This tends to be representative of what
is in the field as portrayed on YouTube. Out of the four instruments selected
for analysis, fiddle videos tended to include younger instructors. A possible
rationale for this trend might be due to the accessibility of the fiddle (violin)
for younger players and because of the numerous fiddle competitions through-
out the nation that include youth age brackets. The number of these fiddlers,
then, might impact the trend and frequency with which younger fiddle play-
ers post lessons on YouTube. Additionally, banjo and mandolin videos were
longer and tended to include more teacher talktime. The prevalence of verbal
instructions in banjo videos might be related to the technical difficulty often
associated with the instrument, thus requiring additional pedagogical rein-
forcement from banjo teachers. In fact, several portions of banjo talktime were
dedicated to encouraging viewers to be patient with their progress.
The videos predominately were geared towards beginners and included
technique-based musical objectives. This tendency may reflect consumers’

83
Nathan B. Kruse | Kari K. Veblen

needs in online learning, in that individuals who seek instrumental instruction

typically might be beginners who are searching for basic fundamental music
skills. While more experienced players might join offline, community-based
folk groups for refining musical skills, less experienced players might prefer
self-directed, introductory instruction online, at least in the beginning. As
Waldron and Veblen (2008) and Waldron (2011) discovered, both online and
offline learning can exist simultaneously in the lives of many folk musicians.
Furthermore, improvisation was an under-represented teaching aspect among
the sampled videos. Considering that the majority of the lessons were marketed
for beginners, this finding may be logical, since improvisation often necessi-
tates a player’s relative understanding of an instrument. Modelling, repetition
and physiological prompts, however, were hallmarks of teaching style within
every instrument category. Finally, compared with other instrument catego-
ries, guitar videos included an abundance of supplementary resource material
for viewers, and banjo instructors provided rich philosophies regarding the
mindset for approaching banjo playing. The latter projected these sentiments
with a genuine, nurturing spirit, entrusting the viewer to carry on the authen-
tic tradition of banjo playing.
While the results of this study provided a cursory understanding of
YouTube folk music instructional videos and the factors that influence music
learning within online communities, it is important to interpret these results
with caution. This study did not incorporate videos from other instrumental
or vocal folk categories, and it did not include videos from outside the United
States. Additionally, in order to maintain a manageable scope for the current
study, video selection was limited to only 40 YouTube videos. YouTube (2010)
currently boasts approximately 141,000,000 videos in its ever-fluctuating
library of uploaded material. Therefore, generalizations derived from these
results might not be representative of a broader sample of YouTube videos.
A larger examination of formats, teachers and teaching strategies on YouTube
will no doubt result in a more comprehensive and complete picture of online
music learning in our modern world.
Because YouTube videos are only one – albeit popular and accessible –
mean within the larger issue of learning in online communities, it is impor-
tant for music educators to consider how various influences effect the lives
of online learners. This leads to additional questions: what values do folk
musicians place on offline versus online music settings, and how does this
impact the responsibility they take for their own learning? How can musi-
cal self-awareness be fortified within the confines of YouTube videos? How
do the creators of instructional videos view their responsibility in educating
others whom they may never see? What facets of online learning should be
replicated and embraced by school music instructors, and how might music
educators negotiate insider/outsider activities with their students?
Recommendations for further research include (1) examining other musical
genres within our ever-expanding online landscape, (2) considering the teach-
ing attributes that speak most to online learners, (3) studying the self-directed
techniques that online learners develop in order to supplement online learn-
ing and (4) investigating how instructors approach teaching improvisation in
videos and how online learners acquire these skills.
As Perez argued (cited in Hakkarainen 2009: 214), ‘technological and
social innovations are interdependent’ (2002). If so, then technology alone
cannot dictate the nature and innovative uses of implementation, but rather
technology coevolves and catalyses institutional practices (Hakkarainen 2009;

84
 Music teaching and learning online

Tuomi 2002). It appears from this research that music educators can gain
insights and gradually incorporate useful and innovational techniques to reach
and engage students within and beyond classroom walls by reflecting on the
myriad ways in which learners can access information online.

References
Atay, A. (2009), ‘Identities in motion: Cyberspace and diasporic queer male
bodies in the context of globalization’, Ph.D. dissertation, Champaign: The
University of Illinois.
Balcikanli, C. (2009), ‘Long live, YouTube: L2 stories about YouTube in
language learning’, in A. Shafaci and M. Nejati (eds), Annals of Language
and Learning; Proceedings of the 2009 International Online Language
Conference, Boca Raton: Universal Publishers, pp. 91–97, http://books.
google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=x0fHku4djycC&oi=fnd&pg=PA91&dq=B
alcikanli+Long+Live,+YouTube&ots=UbZKplY1dG&sig=2kOono5Ui3EY
OMFVRthkPlL13Tg#v=onepage&q=Balcikanli%20Long%20Live%2C%20
YouTube&f=false. Accessed 15 September 2011.
Banjo Hangout (2010), ‘Banjo Hangout’, www.banjohangout.com. Accessed
5 June 2010.
Block, D. G. (2009), ‘School music advocates go straight to video: Online
services like SchoolTube offer far-reaching possibilities’, Teaching Music,
17: 1, p. 14.
Bosch, T. E. (2009), ‘Using online social networking for teaching and lear-
ning: Facebook usage at the University of Capetown’, Communication,
35: 2, pp. 185–200.
Burgess, J. and Green, J. (2009), YouTube, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fiddle Hangout (2010), ‘Fiddle Hangout’, www.fiddlehangout.com. Accessed
9 June 2010.
Flatpicker Hangout (2010), ‘Flatpicker Hangout’, www.flatpickerhangout.com.
Accessed 11 June 2010.
Ganis, F. (2009), ‘“Social learning” buzz masks deeper dimensions: Mitigating
the confusion surrounding “social learning”’, http://www.gilfuseducation-
group.com. Accessed 21 May 2010.
Gorard, S. and Selwyn, N. (2008), ‘The myth of the silver surfer’, Adult
Learning, 19: 5, pp. 28–30.
Hakkarainen, K. (2009), ‘A knowledge-practice perspective on technology-
mediated learning’, Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4: 2,
pp. 213–31.
Hine, C. M. (2005), Virtual Ethnography, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Jackson, B. and Wallin, J. (2009), ‘Rediscovering the “back-and-forthness” of
rhetoric in the age of YouTube’, College Composition and Communication,
61: 2, pp. 374–96.
Jenkins, H. (2006), Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide,
New York: New York University Press.
Kellner, D. and Kim, G. (2010), ‘YouTube, critical pedagogy, and media acti-
vism’, Review of Education, Pedagogy & Cultural Studies, 32: 1, pp. 3–36.
Lin, C. and Polnecki, S. (2009), ‘From media consumption to media produc-
tion: Applications of YouTube™ in an eighth-grade video documentary
project’, Journal of Visual Literacy, 28: 1, pp. 92–97.
Mandolin Café (2010), ‘Mandolin Café’, www.mandolincafe.com. Accessed
21 May 2010.

85
Nathan B. Kruse | Kari K. Veblen

Manghani, S. (2007), ‘MyResearch.com: Speculations on bridging research

and teaching in the arts’, Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education,
6: 2, pp. 85–98.
Milliron, M., Plinske, K. and Noonan-Terry, C. (2008), ‘Building for a new
generation of learning: Conversations to catalyze our construction’,
Planning for Higher Education, 37: 1, pp. 7–14.
November, A. (2007), ‘Banning student “containers”: Education is digging
in its heels against students’ personal tools’, Technology and Learning,
27: 11, p. 24.
Olson, C. A. (2010), ‘Making the tech connection’, Teaching Music, 17: 5,
pp. 30–35.
Perez, C. (2002), Technological Revolution and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of
Bubbles and Golden Age, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Rudolph, T. and Frankel, J. (2009), YouTube in Music Education, New York: Hal
Leonard Books.
Salavuo, M. (2006), ‘Open and informal online communities as forums of
collaborative musical activities and learning’, British Journal of Music
Education, 23: 3, pp. 253–71.
—— (2008), ‘Social media as an opportunity for pedagogical change
in music education’, Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 1: 2,
pp. 121–36.
Strangelove, M. (2010), Watching YouTube: Extraordinary Videos by Ordinary
People, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Thompson, P. M. (2007), ‘The influence of popular culture and entertain-
ment media on adult education’, New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education, 2007: 115, pp. 83–90, www.interscience.wiley.com. Accessed
20 September 2011.
Tuomi, I. (2002), Networks of Innovation: Change and Meaning in the Age of the
Internet, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Veblen, K. K. and Kruse, N. B. (unpublished data), ‘Ethics in cyberspace:
Looking in on music teaching in a space of public domain’.
Waldron, J. (2011), ‘Locating narratives in postmodern spaces: A cyber
ethnographic field study of informal music learning in online commu-
nity’, Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 10: 2, pp. 31–60,
http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/Waldron10_2.pdf. Accessed
15 December 2011.
Waldron, J. and Veblen, K. K. (2008), ‘The medium is the message: Cyberspace,
community and music learning’, Journal of Music, Technology & Education,
1: 2 and 3, pp. 99–111, http://www.intellectbooks.co.uk/journalissues.
php?issn=17527066&v=1&i=2. Accessed 20 September 2011.
Way, J. and Webb, C. (2007), ‘A framework for analysing ICT adoption in
Australian primary schools’, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,
23: 4, pp. 559–82.
Webb, M. (2007), ‘Music analysis down the (You)Tube? Exploring the poten-
tials of cross-media listening for the music classroom’, British Journal of
Music Education, 24: 2, pp. 147–64.
Wise, S., Greenwood, J. and Davis, N. (2011), ‘Teachers’ use of digital tech-
nology in music education: Illustrations of changing classrooms’, British
Journal of Music Education, 28: 2, pp. 117–34.
Young, J. R. (2008), ‘YouTube professors: Scholars as online video stars’,
Chronicle of Higher Education, 54: 20, p. 19.
YouTube (2010), ‘YouTube’, www.youtube.com. Accessed 11 June 2010.

86
 Music teaching and learning online

Suggested citation
Kruse, N. B. and Veblen, K. K. (2012), ‘Music teaching and learning online:
Considering YouTube instructional videos’, Journal of Music, Technology &
Education 5: 1, pp. 77–87, doi: 10.1386/jmte.5.1.77_1

Contributor details
Nathan B. Kruse, Assistant Professor of Music Education and Coordinator
of the Master’s Programme at the University of North Texas, specializes in
instrumental music education, qualitative research methods and sociology of
music. His research focuses on adult music education, ethnographic traditions
of community music and school–university partnerships.
Contact: College of Music, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle
#311367, Denton, TX 76203-5017, USA.
E-mail: Nathan.Kruse@unt.edu

Kari K. Veblen serves as Assistant Dean of Research for the Don Wright
Faculty of Music at the University of Western Ontario. She teaches courses in
foundations of music education, elementary music methodology and research.
Kari’s interests bridge music, education, ethnomusicology and the arts. She is
currently investigating community music networks, structures and individuals
worldwide. Veblen co-edits the International Journal of Community Music with
Lee Higgins (Boston University).
Contact: Don Wright Faculty of Music, University of Western Ontario, Talbot
College, London, ON, Canada, N6A 3K7.
E-mail: kveblen@uwo.ca

Nathan B. Kruse and Kari K. Veblen have asserted their right under the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as the author of
this work in the format that was submitted to Intellect Ltd.

87

=\algjk
<geafa[Kqegf\k
Mfan]jkalqg^Hgjlkegml`
\geafa[&kqegf\k8hgjl&Y[&mc
?]gj_]:mjjgok
Mfan]jkalqg^Hgjlkegml`
_]gj_]&Zmjjgok8hgjl&Y[&mc
afl]dd][lbgmjfYdk
Klm\a]kaf
Emka[YdL`]Ylj]
AKKF)/-(%+)-1tGfdaf]AKKF)/-(%+)./
+akkm]kh]jngdme]tNgdme]/$*()*
9aekYf\K[gh]
Klm\a]kafEmka[YdL`]Ylj]hjgna\]kY^gjmelg\]ZYl]Yoa\]jYf_]g^
l]plkl`YlYjla[mdYl]l`]emka[Ydoal`l`]l`]Ylja[Yd&L`akbgmjfYdZjaf_k
lg_]l`]jYnYja]lqg^[jala[YdYhhjgY[`]klg[gfljaZml]lg\ak[mkkagf
YZgmldan]h]j^gjeYf[]$l`]\]n]dghe]flYf\^gjeg^emka[Ydl`]Ylj]
Yf\alknYdm]YkY[mdlmjYdhjg\m[lafl`]gjqYf\hjY[la[]&@]j]qgmoadd
^af\Yo]Ydl`g^ojalaf_]f[gehYkkaf_]n]jql`af_^jgegh]jYlgl`]
^adeemka[Ydlghghna\]g&
;Ydd^gjHYh]jk
KELafnal]k[gfljaZmlgjk^jgel`]Y[Y\]ea[^a]d\Yf\hjY[lalagf]jk
^jgel`]af\mkljqlg\ak[mkklgha[kkm[`Yk`gol`]^mkagfg^ogj\kYf\
emka[ogjckoal`afemka[Ydl`]Ylj]$`gol`]Yjl']fl]jlYafe]fl\ana\]
[YfZ]f]_glaYl]\]^^][lan]dq$Yf\`go_dgZYdarYlagfYf\[geeg\a^a[Y%
lagf`Yn]Y^^][l]\emka[Ydl`]Ylj]&
ooo&afl]dd][lZggck&[ge
Copyright of Journal of Music, Technology & Education is the property of Intellect Ltd. and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

View publication stats