Music Theory

Blended Learning Opens More Doors in Music Education


13 min read

A New Approach to Music Education: Blended Learning Opens More Doors

Many high school music departments center their daytime schedules around large performing ensembles for vocalists and instrumentalists. For years, Burr and Burton Academy enriched those offerings with traditional academic music courses such as Music Theory, History, Music Technology, and Applied Music. Those classes served as excellent enrichment, giving non-performers a chance to study music at school. Like most electives, however, enrollment numbers determined whether these courses would be offered. Scheduling clashes often prevented interested students from participating, and insufficient enrollment meant the class simply did not run. The department wondered aloud: could there be a way to resolve this problem while making music electives just as valuable as any core academic subject?

The solution, as the program’s director Neil Freebern describes it, came in the form of what they now call the Heterogeneous Blended Learning Environment. The first steps involved sharpening both instructional practice and content delivery. Teachers began placing lesson resources online and designing clearer pathways through units of study, introducing new modes of instruction long before the term “blended learning” became popular. Combining face‑to‑face teaching with digital support was novel at the time. As classroom technology grew more sophisticated, students’ preferred ways of learning shifted as well. The teacher was no longer the sole source of information; lecture‑style lessons were losing students’ attention quickly.

The department expanded its online presence for each course, adding interactive materials. Much of the class period now pivoted to independent work guided by the tools they had created. Classrooms became significantly more student‑centered, moving away from teacher‑centric methods. Technology gave students opportunities to interact with content through many different formats. Projects were designed with built‑in choices over both content and pace, allowing students to take ownership of their academic journey.

As instructors diversified how they delivered information, one thing became immediately clear: students needed help learning self‑regulation. The faculty grew more vocal about the independent nature of these courses and folded metacognitive exercises into every unit. Every assignment included reflective work before, during, and after the content study, and self‑regulation became part of the overall grade. Beyond teaching music theory or history, the goal was to help students master self‑control, critical self‑evaluation, and strategies for overcoming fear, distraction, and procrastination in pursuit of creative work. Teachers were now focused on showing students how to learn, while digital tools handled the what. As a result, retention and knowledge of content began to improve noticeably.

Encouraged by the success of blended learning, the faculty dug deeper into self‑directed learning with an aim to make each class more differentiated. They wanted students to work through content at a pace matching their individual learning style, meaning the entire class no longer had to be on the same lesson at the same time. Those who mastered a concept could move on; those who required extra time received additional help.

A one‑year pilot of this self‑directed model followed, where students accessed most content through teacher‑created online tools and progressed at their own pace. They could ask questions of peers or the instructor whenever problems arose, and the approach worked. That success led to a bold question: “Why couldn’t we offer multiple subjects simultaneously in one classroom?”

The department took a decisive step. They condensed their timetable into a single course — called Music Studio — representing any block of the school day where a student could study any musical subject the faculty offered. One student might take Theory while another worked on History. Courses were no longer prisoners of a rigid schedule.

Classrooms became Heterogeneous Blended Learning Environments. The advantages were immediate:

  • A broader range of courses can run within a single class period.
  • Scheduling conflicts no longer lock students out of classes.
  • Students advance at their own pace with clear, instructor‑set goals.
  • Those needing remedial help receive frequent one‑on‑one attention.
  • The gradual release model teaches students how to learn more effectively.
  • Project‑based learning expands creative freedom.
  • Enrollment pressures fade as a concern.
  • Students develop stronger lifelong self‑regulation skills.
  • The approach spread to subject areas like Animation and Robotics; single‑subject blended learning is becoming common elsewhere in the school.
  • The department now attracts more students as its offerings multiply.
  • Technology is put to its best educational use.
  • Interdisciplinary connections become more natural.
  • Student feedback increases substantially.
  • Assessment practices sharpen noticeably.

Adopting the heterogeneous blended learning model allowed the music department to offer courses spanning:

  • Music Theory
  • Music Composition
  • Song Writing – Lyrics and Form
  • Film Scoring
  • Applied Instrumental Music
  • Applied Vocal Music
  • Advanced Applied Music
  • Evolution of Music History
  • 20th‑Century Music History and Beyond
  • Electronic Music
  • Audio Production
  • Digital DJ
  • Advanced Topics in Electronic Music
  • Jazz Workshop
  • Capturing Sound for Film / Foley — in development

By offering any course during any block, the department sidestepped enrollment pitfalls while giving students valuable, lifelong educational skills. As Freebern puts it, the ride has been fascinating. A year into the program, a student asked about composing music for film. Freebern had only minimal experience. Instead of discouraging the idea, teacher and student researched the subject together and sketched an outline for a curriculum. They spent the summer hunting down resources to flesh out that outline, crafting each unit. Come fall, the student dove into the coursework using tools Freebern had built. He could oversee the course structure, design projects that turned theory into practice, and work as a research partner whenever the student’s questions outran what was known. In that setting, the teacher became a “professional learning coach.” The classroom that term also contained students studying Audio Production, Digital DJ, and Music Theory. The film‑scoring course was a success; the student’s projects proved excellent. When another student showed the same passion the following year, the curriculum was already ready for use.

Through these experiences, the department learned that the fate of any new course hinges on the strength of its digital content. The curriculum must engage students through videos, interactive trainers, articles, research projects, teacher presentations, peer instruction, formative quizzes, and reflective practice captured in an ePortfolio. The overall aim is to teach students self‑regulation in service of mastering material that fuels their creativity. Achieving this requires modeling best practice and honoring learning as its own reward.

In the earliest versions of these courses, students were unfamiliar with independence. They would often say “just tell me what to do,” wanting to check items off a list. Faculty realized they needed fresh ways to inspire students to manage their own learning. They redesigned the flow so that students receive increasing autonomy gradually. Early units are heavily modeled and written out, focusing on process: how a student learns and manipulates new content. Unit concepts are sequenced logically to build a clear path. That path is exactly what the name implies — a route meant to be followed but not the only possible one. Students are pushed to look beyond the assignments, and deeper research is encouraged at every stage.

Every update to the curriculum intentionally addresses student motivation by building in self‑regulation assignments at appropriate moments. The team works to make the purpose behind each task obvious, give students authentic ways to show mastery, and allow genuine autonomy in how they learn. These three factors — purpose, demonstration of mastery, and autonomy — are central to motivation in this structure, one meant to cultivate lifelong learners.

And of course no single environment works for everyone. The team regularly fields questions about reluctant learners or keeping everyone on task. Their experience shows that if content is well‑prepared and units well‑designed, trouble is rare. There is always something to do during class period. For the minority of students who struggle to manage their time or get stalled on topics and fall behind, intervention is necessary. Those students are usually identified within the first two weeks of class.

For students who find independent learning difficult, the department developed a “Guided Learning Plan.” The plan uses a simple form requiring the student to decide what learning tasks can realistically be finished in a single class period. Teacher and student look over the content, agree on a manageable goal for the day, then check back at the end of the period to what was accomplished and set the direction for next time. Over several sessions the instructor learns how to reshape each specific student’s learning habits and coach better study strategies. This targeted help teaches self‑regulation, and typically the student soon transfers back into the self‑directed model. So far, nearly all students who have required this step have responded well.

The Instructor’s Evolving Role in the Heterogeneous Blended Learning Classroom

Blended learning changes the instructor’s role considerably. All course materials must be crafted ahead of time in a way that allows students to absorb content without ongoing teacher guidance. Students need the freedom to advance at their own pace, untethered from the lock‑step synchronous methods of traditional instruction. Content itself should be presented through many different modalities to reach everyone and keep attention alive.

Teachers stepping into a blended classroom for the first time quickly notice they are no longer the center of the room. Once routines and expectations are established, students go their own way, moving ahead in line with their own learning preferences and depth of curiosity. The instructor becomes what Freebern describes as the “professional learner,” an expert in the art of learning. Other educators call this the “guide on the side” model. The instructor’s first job is monitoring and supporting how learning happens:

  • Do students read the materials?
  • Are they taking notes when necessary?
  • Are they organizing their learning portfolios clearly?
  • Do they research beyond the assigned boundaries?
  • Do they share their work for feedback?
  • Do they ask thoughtful questions only after exhausting other options?
  • How do they break down a problem while looking for solutions?
  • Do they set small achievable goals for each class period?
  • Do they need a guided learning plan?

In a heterogeneous blended environment, the teacher must switch viewpoints effortlessly, fielding questions from any subject at any point. If the same kind of question keeps surfacing, that is a signal that the unit’s content may need revision to fix a gap. In the meantime, targeted small‑group discussions are a good remedy. Freebern recommends running small‑group presentations at the start of school when nearly everyone is still comparing notes on roughly the same material. As time passes and the faster students pull ahead, group work becomes harder to orchestrate — but it also becomes less necessary as everyone becomes more skilled at independent problem‑solving.

When the class systems are running cleanly, students typically walk into the room and start studying without the teacher saying a word. The instructor may occasionally push students to share work with classmates and feel comfortable asking one another questions.

The aim is for every student to use every “resource” available and gain maximum responsibility for their own learning. A well‑functioning classroom looks like a vibrant hub of curiosity and creative exploration, as smooth as a well‑oiled machine. At this point the teacher’s tasks shift again:

  • Assessing student work posted to their ePortfolios (a time‑intensive process).
  • Holding face‑to‑face conferences to boost the quality of student efforts.
  • Setting up guided learning plans for those falling behind or unfocused.
  • Serving as a research assistant when students ask questions beyond the predetermined scope.
  • Identifying shared elements across students’ work and encouraging peer feedback anytime it strengthens learning.
  • Sitting beside an individual throughout a lesson chunk when a concept feels overwhelming.
  • Designing “schedules” or daily plans for slower‑paced students to keep up with unit deadlines.

The instructor in a heterogeneous blended learning class never has downtime. As Freebern puts it, “If the instructor is not needed, then assessment of student work should be occurring.” Evaluating ePortfolios during class makes it easy to offer in‑depth, personal feedback on the spot. Relationships deepen during these moments, and that sense of community is essential, even something as trivial as gathering the whole room every so often to hear student work aloud — no matter how different the subjects in the room may be — sparks peer connections and reduces any isolation the format could create.

The Necessary Digital Infrastructure

Building a thriving heterogeneous blended learning environment requires reliable systems for three functions: sharing course material, storing student output, and collecting and assessing that work. A clear picture emerges of the different tools and how they connect inside the department:

  • Learning Management Tool: the place where students receive content and hand in assignments for grading.
  • Content Delivery Tool: although content can be presented through the Learning Management System, Freebern advocates maintaining a separate tool like a wiki, iBook, website – anything gives the teacher full editorial control.
  • Student ePortfolio: the space where each student archives all coursework, including notes, video files, projects, and more.

Final Observations

Establishing a blended learning framework has been a worthwhile journey for the creative arts department. The work began by changing one course: testing the new delivery and collection systems, surveying the students, adjusting the tool set, and revising the design. After assessing those results, the department took the next plunge, going heterogeneous and running multiple courses at once in the same classroom.

Almost immediately, the atmosphere in the room changed dramatically. Students remained constantly engaged by their work, and for a short time instructors felt less connected to the class — but this feeling evaporated quickly. Instead, relationships deepened. Teachers knew each student’s specific needs better than ever before. Faculty finally had precious time to address precise questions and help at the point of learning. Introverts grew more comfortable speaking up, and student productivity began winning approval. Under‑achievers were instantly visible; structured help was ready to pull them back on course.

The quality and depth of student work clearly improved, with many individuals charging far past the path that the curriculum planned for them. The teaching team learned to watch carefully how each student learns and manages time — and learning outcomes reflect this attention to the learning process. All along, the department has encouraged students to investigate topics that teachers once could never imagine offering in a high school music program. “Building blended courses is a huge time investment but completely worth the end result.”

Neil Freebern shares the department process and resources as a way to find colleagues building similar systems. Licensed under a surface level acknowledgment of sharing can be found by the teaching public. The collective intention – he states at the design page – is to reach out to spread practice backward evolution of building patterns before closing with a forward offer – visitors may freely visit the public portal for more detail process: freebernmusic.com.