erasmus network for music polifonia - aec report... · erasmus attendants by numbers&charts ......

ERASMUS Network for Music ‘Polifonia’

518639-LLP-1-2011-1-NL-ERASMUS-ENW

Association Européenne des Conservatoires, Académies de Musique et Musikhochschulen (AEC)

Polifonia WG 5: Recognition, Monitoring and Joint Degrees

“Conservatoire National Supérieur Musique et Danse de Lyon”

Site-Visit Report 3-4 May 2012

by Aygül Günaltay Şahinalp

Lyon Site-Visit Report - May 2012 / Aygül Günaltay Şahinalp 2

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................3

2. IMPRESSIONS&OBSERVATIONS. .................................................................................................4

2.1. In General……………………………………………………………………………………………………...…..4

2.2. In terms of Mobility…………………………………………………………………………………………..5

2.3. In terms of External Examiners………………………………………………………………………….8

2.4. In Terms of Joint Programme............................................................................... 8

3. CONCLUSION….………………………………………………….…………………………………………………...10

4. ENVOI.…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11

5. APPENDICES.……………………………………………………………………………………………………….….12

- Appendix 1. 2012-2013 Bilateral Agreements………..………………….…………………………13

- Appendix 2.Financial Documents for Erasmus Exchange Programme…………….……15

- Appendix 3. Erasmus Attendants by Numbers&Charts……………………………………..…17

- Appendix 4. Learning Agreement Samples…………………………………………………….……..22

- Appendix 5. Transcript of Records………………………………………………………………………..26

- Appendix 6. Sample Document for Certification………………………………………………….27

- Appendix 7. CoPeCo (Joint Master Programme) Documents……………………….….……29

A- Academic Organisation…………………………………………………………………………………29

B- Curriculum Overview………………………………………………………………………………..…..30

C- Pilot Project………………………………………………………………………………………………..…32

D- Indicators and Entrance Exams…………………………………………………………………….34

E- Learning outcomes ………..…………………………………………………………………………….36


1. INTRODUCTION

This report is prepared after the site-visit to Conservatoire National Supérieur Musique et Danse de

Lyon in May 2012. All the information in this report is gathered from the interviews and

conversations made with the International Relations Coordinators (IRC’s), teachers and students of

the institution on three main areas: mobility, external examining and joint programme.

The site-visit was welcomed very friendly by all academics, administrative staff and the students. The

site-visit was both fruitful and successful as all the questions were answered with great transparency

by the contributors.

The interviews consisted of a few specific questions regarding mobility, external examining and joint

programme issues. The questions that form the basis of the interviews1 were:

a- In terms of mobility;

- The size of operation (number of incoming/outgoing students in relation to size of

institution)

- Pre-requisites for outgoing students? What year of programme? Whole year/part year?

- Use of Learning Agreement – Does the mobility programme have to reflect the home

institutions programme? How rigid is the application of the Learning Agreement? How

frequent are on-going changes to the Learning Agreement?

- What is the use of ECTS? Are they always required? If ECTS are needed, how are they

recognized by the home institution? Do students have to take home institutions exams when

they return? Do students have to take a re-entrance test when they return? How are ECTS

credits recognized -by volume of study or are the examination results achieved in the host

institution recognized?

- What obstacles are encountered in facilitating outgoing mobility? Have these changed over

the years?

b- In terms of external examining;

- Are external peers used for examination of student recitals? (How often? appointment

process etc.)

- Are external peers used to participate in the evaluation of other student work which forms

part of the Bachelors, Masters, Doctoral programmes?

1 Thanks to Christopher Cane for preparing questions early before the site-visit.


- Are external peers used to evaluate the assessment procedures of your institution to ensure

they are fair?

- Are external peers used to evaluate the overall standard of student achievement in

comparison with what students should achieve in a Music Higher Education Institution within

your country?

- Would you be interested in your institution contributing to a European ‘pool’ of peers,

whereby teachers from various AEC institutions could serve as peers for various AEC Higher

Music Education Institutions

The programme of the visit was as follows:

1st Day (Thursday, May 3 2012)

12.30 Meeting with Isabelle Replumaz at the Conservatory (Head of the office for international relations, professional integration and master-classes, Erasmus coordinator)

15.30 Meeting with Julia Robert (outgoing student-1 year at HE Berlin)

16.30 Meeting with Michel Tranchant (piano accompaniment teacher-several exchanges with Vilnius)

17.00 Meeting with Isaias Cunha (incoming student from Porto)

2nd Day (Friday, May 4 2012)

10.00 Meeting with Marie-Annick Champ (Assistant of international relations and master-classes) about European exchanges

12.00 Meeting and lunch with Isabelle Replumaz and Marie-Annick Champ

14.00 Meeting with Nicole Corti (Choir conducting teacher-varius exchanges: Stuttgart, Karlsruhe, Helsinki etc.)

2. IMPRESSIONS & OBSERVATIONS

2.1. In General

Conservatoire National Supérieur Musique et Danse de Lyon has about 600 students. They’re using

the 3+2 system in education (3 years Undergraduate+2 years Masters). There are 64 bilateral

agreements existing in year 2012.2

2 See Appendix 1.


The conservatory is very active in using the ERASMUS mobility. They have a total budget of 23,684 €

for ERASMUS mobility in the year 2012-2013.3 In 2011-2012 they had 90 incoming students, 44

outgoing students and 134 in total.4 They want to increase the number of outgoing students, but the

numbers of incoming students are much more (more than twice) than the outgoing students as for

the conservatory is a very preferential one for the students all around Europe and the students of the

conservatory are not so interested in outgoing even though they’re provided full information about

ERASMUS exchange by the IRC’s.

The IRC’s in Lyon are really doing a great job with dedicated efforts. They work for the good of

exchange students and teachers and they help with their accommodation, health etc. and even

sometimes they have to deal with problematic students.

The total budget for student mobility is divided in such a way that more students will benefit. They

also have other state funds that support the amount of the ERASMUS grants. They’re going to have a

maximum number of 10 teachers outgoing in 2012-2013.

2.2. In Terms of Mobility

Interviews with exchange students, teachers and administrative staff included questions about

mobility. They all shared their experiences and gave suggestions in the point of their views.

As mentioned above, the conservatory has many students incoming and less students outgoing.

Mobility is quite prevalent in instrument performance programmes and more difficult in some

specific programmes as ballet and dancing.

The application for mobility is open to all students. Full information is provided for both incoming

and outgoing students. The applications are accepted once a year. Student mobility is possible for

one or two semesters. Mobility is possible during any semester and students usually prefer the last

year of Bachelor or the first year of Master, but the timing for outgoing students should better be

discussed with their teachers.

They’re using the ECTS credits (30 ECTS per semester/60 ECTS per year) and they always require ECTS

credits for mobility. The courses taken and the ECTS credits gained are fully recognised by the

conservatory and outgoing students do not have to take any exams when they return, except the

final exams; all the final exams should be in the institution.

3 See Appendix 2.

4 See Appendix 3.


Every year they get more than 100 applications for incoming students. They accept the registrations

by post. But a system that would enable on-line registration is suggested by Isabelle. The procedure

for incoming students works as follows:

- Applications are received through a fixed schedule once a year

- Applications could include audio or better audiovisual material

- They are forwarded to the related teachers

- Teachers decide if the student will be accepted or not

- Results are enounced to the applicants

- Approval of Learning Agreement

- Incoming students are fully supported in many issues as finding accommodation, planning the schedule etc. during their mobility by IRC’s.

- After the mobility, the students receive a document of certification including the information on the courses attended and the ECTS credits gained. The grades are not always requested by institutions.

Some adversities during the application and evaluation process are:

- The late replies from institutions

- The auditions asked for by some institutions (not in the case of Lyon)

- Translation of some documents

- There’re only very few people (even one or two) appointed for the job within the institutions dealing with all the procedure and problems.

The level and the repertoire of the incoming student is one of the admission criteria and the teacher

usually takes into account the integration of the new student to the class when deciding.

Furthermore, the teachers’ workloads have a very important effect when deciding to accept

ERASMUS students. As they will have more hours teaching, they sometimes do not accept students

even if they are at good level. On the contrary, there’re some teachers who accept extra students

without being paid for it.

The conservatory is using a standard Learning Agreement model with the logo of AEC.5 The use of

Learning Agreement at the conservatory is not rigid, but rather quite flexible for incoming students.

These students can select their programmes of study themselves and IRC’s help them choosing the

5 See Appendix 4.


courses as well. Another suggestion from Isabelle Replumaz6 is “to use the documents of learning and

bilateral agreements as AEC documents.”

ERASMUS grants for students are limited, with 18 students and 160 € for each student for 2012-

2013. That’s not enough, but as they have other grants, outgoing students then will have more than

300-350 € per month during mobility. The cost of living ranges in different countries and even cities.

Isabelle suggests that “to know about the grants for each country could help deciding who will need

less or more money.”

During the interviews, both the incoming and outgoing students designated that “language is an

important issue for mobility. In many of the institutions, the courses are in their own language and

language is a prerequisite for application that reduces the number of mobility”.

Isaias Cunha, who is an incoming student from Porto, says that he is very happy to be in Lyon and he

wants to stay for his further education. He didn’t have any problem with the language but thinks that

“for many students language is like a barrier standing in front of mobility and an important obstacle

to overcome.”

Julia Robert, who stayed in Berlin for a year as an outgoing student, didn’t have problem with

language as she knew German, but she totally agrees with Isaias. Her point of view of the grants is

that even if she didn’t have any difficulty with the grants, she believes that “grants should be given by

taking into account the country which the students will go and the minimum amount of money s/he

will need there.”

Another important issue is the grants for mobility. In Lyon, it’s declared that they had no problem

with outgoing teachers and the amount of the grants for teacher mobility is sufficient (700 € for

each). They have many international teachers for teaching in the schedule and they have many

incoming teachers for nearly more than 60 master-classes per year. Nevertheless, in Isabelle’s words

“teachers’ mobility is still not so exactly implemented as for the mobility is usually for only two or

three days.”

The teachers interviewed with were very experienced and have great excitement in mobility. Michel

Tranchant, who is a piano accompaniment teacher and had several exchanges with Vilnius, explained

that “the teacher mobility is very important for students as well as teachers. Mobility gives the

6 The Head of the Office for International Relations, Professional Integration and Master-classes Erasmus Coordinator


teachers the opportunity to learn about the level of education in different institutions, to explore new

cultures and music traditions, to meet and teach new students.”

Nicole Corti, who is a choir conducting teacher and had exchanges with various institutions in

Germany, Italy and Helsinki declares that it’s a priority for her to provide and widen the mobility

within Europe and believes that “the cultural exchange programme assembles Europe. Both the

student and the teacher exchange provide the institutions further development and advancement.

Sharing practises is of great importance for improving quality. Mobility is important for diversity of

students and teachers within the institutions. The mobility begins in the mind of people and even

without ERASMUS people have contact and they travel. Strong bonds could be associated between

the institutions and countries by music and culture.”

She thinks that “Choir conducting is special in mobility as for the students the teacher trains will reach

to other hundreds of students.” She is against having prejudgements about students’ level: “They

come with new ideas and create innovation.” She also suggests “It would be great if the teachers

would do mobility at least with some of their students.”

2.3. In terms of External Examiners

As having external examiners is a new approach in music education, there were not enough

comments on the subject of having external examiners during the interviews. Nevermore, the

conservatory has the opportunity to pay for and have external teachers for examinations, but not

examiners. They have their accreditation and assessments by national legislations and having

external examiners is not a well known and common subject among the teachers in Lyon.

2.4. In Terms of Joint Programme

Conservatoire National Supérieur Musique et Danse de Lyon is developing a two year European joint

master study programme in performance and composition “Masters in Contemporary Performance

and Composition: CoPeCo”. The programme will have a study load of 120 credits (ECTS) leading to a

Degree of Master in Music.

CoPeCo is being developed as a three-year LLP Erasmus Curriculum Development project. The study

program aims to enable and encourage intensive cooperation and interaction between the students

and the departments within institutions and between partner academies in Tallinn, Stockholm,

Hamburg and Lyon.


They are in the second year and at the end of the first phase of the programme development

process. They will pilot the programme before the first admissions in 2013. The Pilot Project will take

place on December 2012. This project would involve students and teachers from abroad plus

students and pedagogical staff from Lyon. An expert committee of representatives from EU and AEC

as well as various independent representatives will also be invited to attend and report. Further

information on the programme can be found on the website of CoPeCo.7

The information on the programme during the development process is given by Isabelle. She told

some of the difficulties they had in developing the joint programme and some obstacles they tried to

overcome.

They applied for a three-year LLP Erasmus Curriculum Development project and got EU funding for

developing the programme. The application process takes time and the funding seems to be not

enough to cover all the expenses when developing a joint programme; as Isabelle says “EU gives only

funding but nothing then, the institutions need more support to develop joint programmes.”

Correspondingly, for quality assurance she suggests that “Quality assurance and assessment systems

range from a country to another, there could be a European system that would be accepted by each

country.” Also she told that they had “difficulties in issues as registration and fees, according to the

different rules and regulations in different countries and this is also one of the problems needs to be

solved.”

Another important issue is the student mobility in joint programmes. Mobility is sine qua non and an

integral part of joint programmes. But according to Isabelle, they are not able to use the Erasmus

grants for student mobility in the joint programme and she notes that “To encourage the joint

programme mobility, a solution should be found for adapting the ERASMUS system for the mobility of

joint programme students.”

In spite of all the problems foreseen above, they are very excited about the programme and are

looking forward for the pilot which will take place in December 2012.

7 www.copeco.net/


3. CONCLUSION

Some important points are listed below as the main outcomes of the site-visit:

In terms of mobility

Mobility is important for:

o strong bonds between countries, institution and people

o cultural exchange and diversity

o sharing practices and experiences

o bringing new ideas and innovation

o transparency between programmes and institutions

Constraints regarding mobility:

o Deficient grants

o Language

o Translation of some documents

o Unexpected attitudes and behavioural disorders of exchange students

o Late replies from the institutes

o Auditions asked in addition to recordings

o Integration of the student to the class

o Level differences between the classes

o Timing of exchange

o Teachers exchange still for no longer than a week

o More teaching hours for teachers who accept exchange students in their classes

o Rejected students because of teachers’ workload

Suggestions:

- Teacher exchange with students

- Information on the grants for each country

- On-line registration

- Using the documents of learning and bilateral agreements as AEC documents


In terms of external examiners

Lack of knowledge of what external examiners are for is an issue to be surpassed. Due to the

prejudgements and some national rules and regulations, it seems to take more time than it’s

expected. To disseminate the idea of using external examiners for better quality and assessment

reasons in higher music education, the subject would be discussed widespread at international

conferences and congresses and good examples could be shared with institutions.

In terms of Joint Programmes

There are existing problems and difficulties in implementing or preparing for a joint programme:

- Application process

- Logistic problems

- Registration/fees

- Administrative problems

- Different rules and regulations in different countries

- Different QA and Assessment systems in different countries

- The absence of a European Diploma

- More support needed to develop joint programmes by the institutions

- The mobility of joint programme students is not available

Finding a solution for adapting the ERASMUS system for the mobility of joint programme students is inevitable.

As the last word, what Isabelle Replumaz emphasizes is very important:

“Something must be done to disseminate mobility through out the institutions and for that teachers

and students should be well informed about the system, what’s going on in other countries and

institutions. We must leave prejudgements and be more open to other opportunities.”

4. ENVOI

I want to extend my thanks for the time and attention given by the representatives of Conservatoire

National Supérieur Musique et Danse de Lyon; the academics, the administrative staff and the


students. I extend special thanks to Isabelle Replumaz, the Head of the Office for International

Relations, Professional Integration and Master-classes Erasmus Coordinator and Marie-Annick

Champ, the Assistant of International Relations and Master-classes, for both their helpful efforts and

great hospitality during the visit and for sharing all the experience they have and providing the

related documents. Finally I thank to Hannah Hebert for her careful attention to all my logistical

arrangements.

5.APPENDICES


Appendix 1. 2012-2013 Bilateral Agreements


Appendix 2. Financial Documents for Erasmus Exchange Programme


Appendix 3. Erasmus Attendants by Numbers&Charts


Appendix 4. Learning Agreement Samples


Appendix 5. Transcript of Records


Appendix 6. Sample Document for Certification


Appendix 7. CoPeCo (Joint Master Programme) Documents

A- Academic Organisation


B- Curriculum Overview


C- Pilot Project

CoPeCo Pilot Project CNSMD Lyon

December 2012

Frame and Content:

Drawn up on the model of an artistic and pedagogical residence, this project should involve

maximum 6 students and 3 teachers from abroad plus students and pedagogical staff from Lyon.An

expert committee (EU, AEC and various independent representatives) will also be invited to attend

and report.

According to the CoPeCo matters (multimedia, improvisation, cooperation and creation), the pilot

week will be articulated around two main events:

- « Downtown Concerto », an instrumental and multimedia workshop enhancing collaboration

between students offered by Michele Tadini.

- The planned invitation at the CNSMD of Luca Francesconi and Garth Knox for master-classes and

conferences around the problematic of relations between composers, performers and new medias.

In addition to thesehighlights, this residence will be punctuated by different courses and workshops:

- Instrumental improvisation workshops (H.C.Caget, J.M.Foltz)

- Dance sets, initiation to movement (proposition A.Martin)

- Theoretical classes, (E.Ducreux, R.Pascal + guests)

- Master-classes for chamber music (J.Geoffroy, F.Boffard + guests)

- Fundamental pedagogy, transmission (V. Louis/ T Kerikmae)

- Cultural activities (Visits, Concerts)

********

Schedule proposition:

One full week: December 2012 - 12th to 19th

- Wednesday12th

Presentation (Open to all teachers, students, experts, partners…)

• Downtown Concerto (M.Tadini)

Unexpected Sound Library – Concept and studio recording

Meeting n°1 of the teaching staff


- Thursday 13th


Sonic Sightseeing downtown (2 group with Zoom recorder or similar)

• NN waiting for propositions from Tallinn/Hamburg/Stockholm

- Friday 14th


MAX TOOL session / Playing the city – Analysis of Interactions

Instrumental improvisation workshop I (HC.Caget, JM. Foltz)

• NN idem

- Saturday 15th

• Downtown Concerto Happening (M.Tadini)

• Instrumental improvisation workshop II (HC.Caget, JM. Foltz)

• Dance set I – Initiation to Movement (A.Martin)

• Free stage for public presentation proposed by participants

- Sunday 16th

Free time

Dance set II – Initiation to Movement (A.Martin)

Cultural activities

- Monday 17th

Analysis of the 21st Century (E.Ducreux, L.Antignani)

Theoretical classes, research (R. Pascal)

Chamber music course (J. Geoffroy) / pedagogy (V. Louis)

Meeting n°2 of the teaching staff

- Tuesday 18th

• Master class / Conference Garth Knox / Luca Francesconi

• NN idem

• NN idem

• General assembly of participantsincluding partners representatives

Time for feedback of the teaching staff, expert committee and participants in general


D- Indicators and Entrance Exams


E- Learning outcomes of CoPeCo

LEARNING OUTCOMES

(Discussed and so far decided during work shop, Tallinn meeting 2012-03-27)

Knowledge and understanding

On completion of the programme, the student shall:

• demonstrate knowledge and understanding in the field of forward-looking music creation and

performance, including involvement in current trends within contemporary musical life as well as in-

depth knowledge regarding artistic processes in general and his/her own working methods in

particular,

• demonstrate familiarity with methods and processes for dealing with complex phenomena, issues

and situations in the field of music creation and performance, and

• demonstrate knowledge and understanding of new media, its cultural contextualization in general

and relation to the field of music specifically.

Skills and abilities


• demonstrate an ability to create and execute his/her own artistic ideas with a developed personal

expression; to identify, formulate and solve artistic and creative problems independently as well as

plan and undertake advanced artistic tasks using appropriate methods within predetermined time

frames, and thereby contribute to the artistic development and to evaluate this work,

• demonstrate an ability both nationally and internationally to clearly present and discuss his/her

work and artistic issues in speech, writing or in other ways and in dialogue with musical life and

society in general,

• demonstrate an ability to work closely and cross-disciplinarily with musicians as well as with

practicians within other art forms,

• demonstrate capacity to work within an international framework, to exhibit initiative,

responsibility, leadership and collaborative abilities, and

• demonstrate the skills and knowledge required to independently participate in and to work within

musical life and other related fields of activities.


Judgement and approach


• demonstrate an ability to make critical assessments in the field of music creation and performance

with regards to relevant artistic, social and ethical issues,

• demonstrate ability to participate actively in society and demonstrate tolerance and respect

towards diversity of attitudes and values

• demonstrate understanding of the possibilities and limitations regarding music, and its role in

society, and

• demonstrate an ability to identify the need for additional knowledge and to take responsibility for

his/her ongoing learning.