Dual lesson planning, which refers to the simultaneous consideration of subject-specific content and areas of individual development, is a fundamental concept in special educational lesson planning (Heimlich & Kahlert, 2012; Jöhnck, 2024; Jöhnck & Baumann, 2023; Urban & Leidig, 2017). Various planning aids for dual lesson planning have been developed (e.g., Wember, 2013; Heimlich & Kahlert, 2012; Sasse & Schulzeck, 2021). In music education, Laufer (2019) introduced a matrix that provides insights into music-related learning opportunities for students with intellectual disabilities. Lutz (2018, p. 38) utilizes a didactic reflection instrument focused on the musical potential of areas of individual development. The instrument of inclusive didactic networks extends beyond the contributions of Lutz and Laufer in its application within inclusive pedagogy. On one hand, inclusive didactic networks allow for a precise analysis of all life and areas of individual development concerning students' learning opportunities. On the other hand, this instrument can be applied across disciplines. Nevertheless, this instrument has not yet been referenced in music educational literature (cf. Eberhard, Hirte & Höfer, 2017; Eberhard & Höfer, 2016; Kurzius-Beuster, 2015; Laufer & Vogel, 2022; Lutz, 2020), while extensive contributions are available for other subject didactics (Ferreira González, 2019; Heimlich & Kahlert, 2012; Henrichwark & Kuckuck, 2019; Kahlert, 2015; Rank & Scholz, 2017; Wölki-Paschvoss, 2018).

This contribution presents various approaches to dual lesson planning from a music pedagogical perspective and elaborates on the instrument of inclusive didactic networks based on a case study. In analyzing areas of individual development, this contribution relies on the systematization by Flott-Tönjes et al. (2017) as well as an analysis focusing on subject-specific perspectives derived from the music curriculum (MfSB, 2021).

The concept of dual lesson planning, grounded in inclusive didactic networks, assists both students and teachers in conducting an inclusive didactic analysis of music lesson topics.

Recognising diversity is a fundamental democratic skill (Council of Europe 2018), and valuing difference is a prerequisite for successful inclusive learning situations.

Adaptive teaching concepts and the differentiation of learning processes have proven to be effective methodological tools for successful inclusive teaching (Göllner/Niessen 2016). Nevertheless, there are no systematic studies on how music teachers fulfil the task of individual support through differentiation. Our two qualitative studies aim to fill this gap:

The completed part of our study was focused on the teachers' perspective. We examined the differentiating approaches of teachers in training by analyzing their impulses (written and oral) based on their lesson plans and through interviews conducted after the lessons using qualitative content analysis (Kuckartz/Rädiker 2024).

The results show that teachers use the entire range of possible forms of differentiation as found in theoretical models (Letzel 2021; Schilling-Sandvoß 2022). The question of whether differentiation should be made transparent to pupils or not, i.e., whether difference should be addressed or de-emphasized (Budde 2017), also proved to be an important factor in teachers' decisions.

In our current study, we are now focusing on the perspective of pupils. Through video analyses in specific teaching situations and subsequent interviews, we want to find out: How do students perceive the roles assigned to them in heterogeneous learning processes and how do they reflect on them? How do students experience differentiation processes in music lessons? How do they evaluate it when learners are supported differently through different requirements or tasks?

In our presentation, we would like to present the results of both studies to date and discuss our conclusions and interpretations and their relevance for inclusive music education.

Background

Music practices such as Drake Music Scotland (DMS) and National Open Youth Orchestra (UK) offer inclusive approaches to music-making. Their practices seem to be characterized by a blend of conventional and technology-based music instruments, the use of varying types of music notations, and collaborative composing (Gall et al., 2018; Sound Connection, 2022). Composers – who might be used to composing individually and autonomously - may need to work in a different way with these inclusive music ensembles or orchestra’s.

Aim

We wanted to understand: (1) What attitude, knowledge, and skills do composers need to compose collaboratively with an inclusive music ensemble that includes music technology? (2) What education do students in higher music education need to develop as composers in inclusive music practices?

Method

We set up a qualitative survey study (Bremmer & Schuijer, 2024). The participants of the 4-day project Collaborative Composing with Inclusive Ensembles at the Amsterdam Conservatoire under supervision of DMS were interviewed or completed an online questionnaire. Participants were students, professional composers and Disabled musicians. We conducted a cross-case, thematic analysis of the data.

Findings and conclusion

First research question: Findings show that composers need to develop attitudes, knowledge and skills in the social and musical domains. In the social domain, they need to work from a sense of equity, to develop an understanding of inclusion and draw on pedagogical skills. In the musical domain, composers need to develop an open attitude toward collaborative composing, a broad understanding of the concept of music, and develop digital sound production skills. This then, can bring about a shift from composing for instruments to composing with people. Second research question: Findings exemplified that students felt that conservatoires should prepare them for working with inclusive ensembles by providing them with co-creative working strategies and knowledge on music technology.