Practitioner research, understood as ‘research by practitioners’, holds promise for a future-proof music education, striving for high-quality music teaching, job satisfaction for music teachers, a reduced research-practice gap and enhanced advocacy strategies for (classroom) music. In my approach, this type of research is clearly not about scientific or practice-oriented research studies undertaken for or with practitioners (as ‘object of study’). In this presentation, I elaborate on the ‘why’ (objectives), the ‘how’ (the diverse types) and the ‘what’ (research focus and results) of practitioner research in music education, and I formulate a few ‘quality standards’ for assessing it (positioning, systematizing, communicating). I review key literature on the topic and report on my own work of the last decade co-developing ideas and concepts in practitioner research. I will also briefly refer to the ‘how’ and ‘what’ in the PR projects (at master’s and PhD level) at my own institution. This paper presents a continental European perspective on the emerging integration of practitioner research in music education.

Recent studies have shown that opportunities for young learners to participate in political and democratic life are limited, partly due to poor promotion of democratic values such as active participation, responsibility, and inclusion in educational contexts (Biesta, 2011; Gutmann, 1999). Similar limitations are also reflected in traditional models of music education, in which the acquisition of technical skills and teacher-led approaches are often prioritized over creative and exploratory practices. In this way, music tends to be viewed as a subject to be mastered rather than an art form, and passive transmission of knowledge prevails over the cultivation of active engagement and ownership of one's musical abilities (Fiske, 2012).

Responding to these challenges, this research investigated whether integrating creative activities into a musical curriculum could cultivate a sense of ownership among instrumental students, defining ownership as both a psychological state and a pedagogical process, responsibility for learning (Pierce et al., 2003; Wiley, 2009; Hickey, 2012). Using a design-based method, two case studies were conducted within the Dutch project Orkest in de Klas, and three activities were designed and tested with small groups of beginner clarinet students aged 9–11: (1) Connecting paintings’ shapes, colors, moods to clarinet playing, (2) creating and conducting rhythmic sentences through movements and gestures, (3) composing and performing short melodies using elements of orchestral repertoire.

Each activity was documented through classroom observations, followed by student reflections, teachers’ interviews, and feedback. Here, students frequently referred to their work as “my idea” or “our composition,” recognizing the absence of “right” or “wrong” answers and supporting classmates who faced difficulties with the tasks.

These findings showed enhanced engagement, confidence, social listening, and cohesion, accompanied by a clear shift from transmissive to facilitative teaching role, thus highlighting creativity as a prompt for ownership, democratic classrooms, and future democratic life attitudes.

This presentation reflects on a practitioner research project that explored how feedback from youth orchestra musicians influenced my orchestration processes. It unveils orchestration in student and amateur settings as a pedagogical act through the score. Drawing on my background in music education to frame the problem statement, I used my embeddedness, personal involvement, and ‘interestedness’ as a practitioner-researcher to generate contextually rich insights in two case studies. I demonstrate how my involvement was balanced through careful logging, reflection and reflexivity.

The methodology was inspired by participative design and aimed to create and discuss frictions in the musicians’ experiences. It balanced individual and co-constructed meaning (Belzile & Öberg, 2012). By focusing on subjective experience rather than contribution to scoring, the method fostered inclusivity and promoted a more democratic engagement with the score.

Findings revealed emergent accidental theories, unexpected responses to cues, and specific aspects of my arranging practice. Reporting and presenting findings proved complex. The research report contains a description of the participatory process and redesign, as well as an additional analysis of that report into score transformations and a broader reflection.

The project illustrates how a democratic approach can both enrich and complicate creative decision-making. While musicians could exert ‘direct’ agency only in limited ways, their feedback also provided a lense (Karlsen, 2011) that worked indirectly and in an aggregated way. I developed an explicit and conceptual understanding of my intuitive knowhow (De Baets & Nijs, 2013, 2015). I reflect on how the research process enhanced but also encumbered my orchestration practice.

Challenges included organisational complexity and my evolving insights, experiences, and personal and professional life. These reflect how flexibility and robustness are essential to educational practitioner research. Using the concepts of resonance (Tracy, 2010) and crystallisation (Ellingson, 2009), I suggest how colleagues might benefit from this contextual knowledge.