Offering Authentic Learning Activities in the Context of Open Resources and Real-World Goals: A Study of Self-motivated Online Music Learning

Catherine Schmidt-Jones 1
  • 1 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, , Illinois, United States of America


Many users of online open education resources (OERs) are learners seeking insights into problems encountered as they pursue their everyday interests and activities. As well as benefitting from intrinsic motivation, such authentic learning activity provides context that helps the learner absorb and integrate the meaning of the knowledge. The purpose of this study was to explore barriers that prevent some online learners from using OERs in this way. Participants had experienced difficulties using music theory OERs to pursue personal music-making goals. Provided with online tutoring through an action research methodology, they appeared to benefit particularly from five aspects of active guidance: additional motivation, connections between generalized knowledge and personal experience, relevant learning activities, focus of attention, and goal-oriented feedback. In an environment rich in open content, providing these supports, in activities oriented towards learners’ goals, may be a particularly valuable use of teaching time.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Boitshwarelo, B. (2011). Proposing an integrated research framework for connectivism: Utilising theoretical synergies. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 161-179.

  • 2. Bresler, L. (1993). The social organization of achievement: A case study of a music theory class. The Curriculum Journal, 4(1), 37-58.

  • 3. Brown, J. S., & Adler, R. P. (2008). Minds on fire: Open education, the long tail, and learning 2.0. Educause Review, 43(1), 17-32. Retrieved from

  • 4. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.

  • 5. Burnard, P. (2007). Reframing creativity and technology: Promoting pedagogic change in music education. Journal of Music, Technology and Education, 1(1), 37-55. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • 6. Cape Town Open Education Declaration (2007). Read the Declaration. Retrieved from

  • 7. Carson, S. (2006). 2005 Program evaluation findings report. MIT OpenCourseWare. Retrieved from

  • 8. Carson, S. (2009). 2009 Program Evaluation Findings Summary. MIT OpenCourseWare. Retrieved from

  • 9. Crawford, R. (2014). A multidimensional/non-linear teaching and learning model: Teaching and learning music in an authentic and holistic context. Music Education Research, 16(1), 50-69.

  • 10. Fletcher, G., Schaffhauser, D, & Levin, D. (2012). Out of Print: Reimagining the K-12 Textbook in a Digital Age. Washington, DC: State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA).

  • 11. Godin, S. (2012). Stop stealing dreams: (What is school for?). Retrieved from

  • 12. Green, L. (2002). How popular musicians learn: A way ahead for music education. Farnham, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

  • 13. Hargreaves, D. J., & Marshall, N. A. (2003). Developing identities in music education. Music Education Research, 5(3), 263-274.

  • 14. Harley, D. (2008). Why understanding the use and users of open education matters. In J. S. Brown, T. Iiyoshi, & M. S. V. Kumar (Eds.), Opening up education: The collective advancement of education through open technology, open content, and open knowledge (pp. 197-211). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

  • 15. Heron, J., & Reason, P. (2006). The practice of co-operative inquiry: Research ‘with’ rather than ‘on’ people. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research (Concise paperback ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

  • 16. Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2005). The action research dissertation: A guide for students and faculty. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

  • 17. Knowles, M., & Associates. (1984). Andragogy in Action: Applying Modern Principles of Adult Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.

  • 18. Kop, R., Fournier, H., & Mak, J. S. F. (2011). A pedagogy of abundance or a pedagogy to support human beings: Participant support on massive open online courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7), 74-93

  • 19. Lee, S. D. (2008). The gates are shut: Technical and cultural barriers to open education. In T. Iiyoshi & M.S.V. Kumar (Eds.), Opening Up Education: The Collective Advancement of Education through Open Technology, Open Content, and Open Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

  • 20. Leontiev, A. N. (1978). Activity, Consciousness, and Personality (M. J. Hall, Trans.). Retrieved from

  • 21. Lilliestam, L. (1996). On Playing by Ear. Popular Music, 15(2), 195-216.

  • 22. Lysloff, R. T. A. (2003). Musical community on the Internet: An on-line ethnography. Cultural Anthropology, 18(2), 233-263.

  • 23. McAndrew, P., dos Santos, A. I., Lane, A., Godwin, S., Okada, A., Wilson, T., Connolly, T., Ferreira, G., Buckingham Shum, S., Bretts, J., & Webb, R. (2008). OpenLearn: Research Report 2006-2008. Milton Keynes: OpenLearn, The Open University. Retrieved from

  • 24. Nardi, B. A. (1996). Activity theory and human-computer-interaction. In Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction (pp. 7-16). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

  • 25. Nettl, B. (1985). The Western impact on world music: Change, adaptation, and survival. New York, NY: Schirmer Books.

  • 26. Peters, J. M., Taylor, J. E., & Doi, M. M. (2009). Self-directed learning and action research. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 6(2), 23-39.

  • 27. Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of Action Research (concise paperback ed.) London: Sage Publications Ltd.

  • 28. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  • 29. Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2013). Podcasting for language learning through iTunes U: The learner’s view. Language Learning & Technology, 17(3), 74-93.

  • 30. Schmidt-Jones, C. (2012). An open education resource supports a diversity of inquiry-based learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(1), 1-16.

  • 31. Schmidt-Jones, C. (2016a). An online participatory action research inquiry into online inquiry-based music learning (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from

  • 32. Schmidt-Jones, C. (2016b). Barriers to self-motivated conceptual music learning: Activity theory as a framework for comparing dissimilar cases. Music Education Research, 16(2), doi:

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • 33. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman. Eds. A. R. Luria, M. Lopez-Morillas, M. Cole, & J. Wertsch, Trans.) Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

  • 34. Waldron, J. (2009). Exploring a virtual music ‘community of practice’: Informal music learning on the Internet. Journal of Music, Technology and Education, 2(2-3), 97-112. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • 35. Welch, G. F. (2007). Addressing the multifaceted nature of music education: An activity theory research perspective. Research Studies in Music Education, 28, 23-37.

  • 36. Wells, G. (2001). Action, Talk, and Text: Learning and Teaching through Inquiry. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

  • 37. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

  • 38. Woody, R. H., & Lehmann, A. C. (2010). Student Musicians’ Ear-Playing Ability as a Function of Vernacular Music Experiences. Journal of Research in Music Education, 58(2), 101-115. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation

Journal + Issues