e-ISSN: 2618-6586 Open Access · Peer-Reviewed JETOL on DergiPark
JETOL — Journal of Educational Technology & Online Learning
Publisher
Gürhan Durak
Publication Model
Periodical (January – May – September)
Status
Open for Submissions

Fine arts high school students' experiences on the use of Tonic, an interactive instrument practice application

Research Article

Download PDF DOI: 10.31681/jetol.1625903
Published in
Volume 8, Issue 3 (2025)
Pages
330–350
Publication Date
September 30, 2025
Submission Date
January 23, 2025
Acceptance Date
September 30, 2025
Subjects
Educational Technology and Computing

Abstract

This study explores the experiences of Anatolian Fine Arts High School music students using Tonic, a gamified interactive instrument practice application designed to enhance individual study efficiency. The research builds on the understanding that structured and engaging practice methods are crucial for developing instrumental proficiency, as individual differences and effective time management significantly impact learning outcomes. Employing a phenomenological qualitative research approach, the study collected data through semi-structured interviews with 22 students over four weeks. Findings revealed that Tonic’s features, such as personalization, planning, and interaction, significantly improved students’ motivation, study discipline, and performance. Students highlighted the motivational effects of customizable avatars and instrument-specific functionalities and the benefits of planning tools for scheduling and organizing practice sessions. Interactive features, including live broadcasting and feedback mechanisms, boosted confidence and reduced performance anxiety. However, challenges such as the language barrier and high internet dependency hindered accessibility. Suggestions for improvement include multilingual support and offline functionality. Overall, Tonic demonstrates significant potential as a supportive tool for music education by fostering regular practice habits and enhancing the learning experience. Future research could focus on broader samples and longer study durations to assess its long-term impact on performance and learning outcomes.

Keywords

  • Music Education
  • Individual Instrument Practice
  • Digital Applications
References (62)
  1. Acquilino, A., & Scavone, G. (2022). Current state and future directions of technologies for music instrument pedagogy. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 835609. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.835609
  2. Akça, Y., & Özer, G. (2012). The use of technology acceptance model in enterprise resource planning implementations. Business and Economics Research Journal, 3(2), 1–79. https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/buecrj/0086.html
  3. Akiba, M., Yang, W. (2022). Learning to read music by differences in perception of ınformation. In: 13th International Conference On Applied Human Factors And Ergonomics AHFE (2022) (pp. 9-15). The USA. https://doi.org/10.54941/ahfe1001754
  4. Albayrak, C., & Bulut, D. (2021). Güzel sanatlar lisesi viyolonsel öğrencilerinin bireysel çalgı çalışma alışkanlık düzeylerinin karşılaştırılması. Avrasya Uluslararası Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(26), 159-179. https://doi.org/10.33692/avrasyad.895640
  5. Araújo, M. V., & Hein, C. F. (2019). A survey to investigate advanced musicians’ flow disposition in individual music practice. International Journal of Music Education, 37(1), 107-117. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761418814563
  6. Barrett, C. E. (2006). What every musician needs to know about the body: Plan for ıncorporating body mapping in music construction. American String Teacher, 56(4), 34-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/000313130605600405
  7. Bornstein, M. H., Jager, J., & Putnick, D. L. (2013). Sampling in developmental science: Situations, shortcomings, solutions, and standards. Developmental Review, 33(4), 357-370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2013.08.003
  8. Büyükkayıkçı, G. E. (2004). Türkiye'deki eğitim fakülteleri güzel sanatlar eğitimi bölümleri müzik eğitimi anabilim dalları yaylı çalgı öğrencilerinin günlük bireysel çalgı çalışma yöntemleri (Yayın No. 145048) [Yüksek lisans tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi]. YÖK Ulusal Tez Merkezi. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezDetay.jsp?id=MRsoYZIa8qq8EXETdzUIIQ&no=zQNbvtjWDw7WraAK2t_cRA
  9. Chen, C. W. J. (2015). Mobile learning: Using the application Auralbook to learn aural skills. International Journal of Music Education, 33(2), 244-259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761414533308
  10. Chen, Y.P., Klaus, A.S., Liang, Y., & Zhang, C. (2018). Improving music practice with a mobile learning smartphone application. International Association for Development of the Information Society, 14. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED590371
  11. Cho, S., Baek, Y., & Choe, E. J. (2019). A strategic approach to music listening with a mobile app for high school students. International Journal of Music Education, 37(1), 132-141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761418819
  12. Creswell, J. W. & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
  13. Çiftçi, H. E., & Erim, A. (2022). Müzik öğretmeni adaylarının çalgı çalışma taktiklerinin çeşitli değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Muğla Sıtkı Koçman Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(1), 236-252. https://doi.org/10.21666/muefd.901451
  14. Darmiany, D., Istiningsih, S., Nurmawanti, I., Nurwahidah, N., & Mauldya, M. A. (2024). Student’s self-regulated learning in online class design based on reflective learning. Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan, 16(1), 440–449. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v16i1.3947
  15. Dragomir, I.-A., & Niculescu, B.-O. (2024). Mastering autonomy: The power of self-regulated learning in higher education. Knowledge-Based Organization, 30, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.2478/kbo-2024-0063
  16. Demirbatır, R., & Çeliktaş, H. (2021). Müzik teorisi ve müziksel işitme eğitimi odaklı mobil uygulamaların içerikleri bakımından değerlendirilmesi. Trakya Eğitim Dergisi, 11(3), 1717-1734. https://doi.org/10.24315/tred.803010
  17. Dodgson, J. E. (2017). About research: Qualitative methodologies. Journal of Human Lactation, 33(2), 355–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890334417698693
  18. Dönmez, E., & Kurtaslan, Z. (2022). Çalgı eğitimine yönelik zihin alışkanlıkları. İksad Yayınevi.
  19. Duolingo, (n.d.). Our brand-new music course hits all the right notes. Duolingo blog. https://blog.duolingo.com/music-course/
  20. Esen, Y., & Şenol Sakin, A. (2021). Müzik öğrencilerinin çalgı çalışma süreçlerinde pomodoro tekniği kullanımına yönelik görüşleri. ARTS: Artuklu Sanat Ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi(6), 413-446. https://doi.org/10.46372/arts.969224
  21. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
  22. Flisinger, M. & Fleming, R. (2022). Planning for success in ınstrumental music. Renzoni, K. B. & Furby, V. J. (Ed.), The first-year music majör (1. Baskı, 256). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003247487
  23. Frazier Roberts, S., & Peoples, C. (2019). The design of a gamification algorithm in a music practice application. Open Journal of Web Technologies, 6(1), 16–26. http://www.ronpub.com/ojwt
  24. Galamian, I. (1962). Principles of violin playing and teaching. Prentice Hall Inc. America.
  25. Ghoulam, K., Bouikhalene, B., Babori, A., & Falih, N. (2024). Exploring the impact of mobile devices in electronics e-learning: A case study evaluating the effectiveness of mobile learning applications in electronics and sensors. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 4(2), 1058–1072. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2024.02.001
  26. Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology: A modified Husserlian approach. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 41(2):269–276. https://doi.org/10.1163/156916210X526079
  27. Han, J.-H., & Park, Y. (2024). Exploring the components of effective self-regulated learning programs by school levels. Gyoyughag Yeon’gu (The Korean Journal of Educational Research), 62(4), 89–118. https://doi.org/10.30916/kera.62.4.89
  28. Kement, Ö. (2018). Müzik öğretmeni adaylarının bireysel çalgı dersine yönelik çalgı çalışma alışkanlıklarının incelenmesi (Yayın No. 516466) [Yüksek lisans tezi. Marmara Üniversitesi]. YÖK Açık Bilim. https://acikbilim.yok.gov.tr/handle/20.500.12812/473995
  29. Küçükosmanoğlu, H.O., Babacan, E., Babacan, M.D. & Yüksel, G. (2017). Müzik eğitimi anabilim dalı öğrencilerinin bireysel çalgı çalışma alışkanlıklarının incelenmesi (Konya ili örneği). Eğitim ve Öğretim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(1), 464- 474.
  30. Kyngäs, H., & Kaakinen, P. (2020). Deductive content analysis. In H. Kyngäs, K. Mikkonen, & M. Kääriäinen (Eds.), The application of content analysis in nursing science research (pp. 23–30). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30199-6_3
  31. Magalhães, D. S., Monteiro, J. G., Carvalho, J. A., Magalhães, W. A. M., & Monteiro, C. C. (2018). Mobile application and technology as a motivational support to the learning process of Art/Music. Revista Sítio Novo, 2(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.47236/2594-7036.2018.V2.I1.23-39P
  32. Marky, K., Weiß, A., Gedeon, J., & Günther, S. (2020). Mastering music instruments through technology in solo learning sessions. ArXiv, abs/2012.13961.
  33. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2012.13961
  34. Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522–526. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/13.6.522
  35. McKibben, W. B., Cade, R., Purgason, L. L., & Wahesh, E. (2020). How to conduct a deductive content analysis in counseling research. Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, 11(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/21501378.2020.1846992
  36. Mechta, M., Mouloudj, K., Bouarar, A., Bovsh, L., & Rasulova, A. (2024). Customers’ intentions to adopt digital health services: An extended TAM. Marketing Science & Inspirations, 19(4), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.46286/msi.2024.19.4.1
  37. Moosbrugger, C., Groß-Vogt, K., & Weger, M. (2022). Real-time button display and chord verification – an ınteractive learning app for the diatonic accordion. Proceedings of the 17th International Audio Mostly Conference, 163-170. https://doi.org/10.1145/3561212.3561218
  38. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications.
  39. Önder, C. (2009). Eğitim fakültesi müzik eğitimi öğretmenliği anabilim dalı klasik gitar öğrencilerinin çalışma alışkanlıkları [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi.
  40. Özmenteş, S. (2008). Çalgı eğitiminde öz düzenlemeli öğrenme taktikleri. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(16), 157-175.
  41. Ozmentes, S. (2012). Relationships between daily practice time, attributions and performance level in ınstrument education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3141–3145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.026
  42. Pandey, J. (2019). Deductive approach to content analysis. In M. M. Rahman (Ed.), Handbook of research on transdisciplinary knowledge generation (pp. 133–149). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5366-3.ch007
  43. Parasız, G., ve Gülüm, O. (2017). Öğrencilerin haftalık keman çalışma alışkanlıklarının incelenmesi. İdil Sanat ve Dil Dergisi, 6(31), 1045-1075. https://doi.org/10.7816/idil-06-31-11
  44. Ramayani, C., Zainuddin, S. A., Mohd Said, N. B., Samudra, A. A., Areva, D., Harini, G., Ronald, J., & Selvia, N. (2023). Application of Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in the adoption of accounting information system (AIS) among Indonesia private universities. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Emerging Issues in Economics, Development, and Sustainability (pp. 419–428). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-27296-7_38
  45. Ranbir. (2024). Educational technology ıntegration: Challenges and opportunities. Innovative Research Thoughts, 10(2), 75–79. https://doi.org/10.36676/irt.v10.i2.1406
  46. Roland. (2024, May 26). Piano partner 2 version 2.0. https://tr.roland.com/products/piano_partner_2/
  47. Shi, X., Wang, Y., & Li, J. (2022). Self-efficacy and student engagement in blended learning. Asia Pacific Education Review, 23(3), 345–359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-021-09754-6
  48. Silva, P. (2015). Davis’ technology acceptance model (TAM) (1989). In Information resources management: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 205–219). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-8156-9.ch013
  49. Şendurur, Y. (2001). Keman eğitimi dersine etkili hazırlanma süreci. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(2), 161-168.
  50. Şentürk, G., Kapçak, Ş., & Işıksungur, B.(2018). Müzik öğretmeni adaylarının bireysel çalgı çalışma alışkanlıklarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. [Investigation of music teacher candidates' individual instrument study habits in terms of various variables] YYÜ Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Journal of Van Yuzuncu Yıl Education Faculty ], 15(1), 1232-1255. https://doi.org/10.23891/efdyyu.2018.103
  51. Toda, A. M., Klock, A. C. T., Oliveira, W., Palomino, P. T., Shi, L., Bittencourt, I. G., & Cristea, A. I. (2020). Analysing gamification elements in educational environments using an existing gamification taxonomy. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.09238
  52. Trei, M. (2016). Facilitating enriched learning experience in instrumental classical music practice in the century of digitalization [Master thesis, Erasmus University]. Erasmus University Thesis Repository. https://thesis.eur.nl/pub/34620
  53. Tsang, E. P. K. (2023). A Qualitative research approach is an inevitable part of research methodology : An overview. International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research, 5(3), https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2023.v05i03.3178
  54. Upitis, R., Boese, K. & Abrami, P. C. (2021). Student experiences with a digital tool for music practice and learning. The European Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences, 20(3), 305-317. https://doi.org/10.15405/ejsbs.224
  55. Van Manen, M. (1997). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy (2nd ed.). Routledge.
  56. Vellacott, C., & Ballantyne, J. (2022). An exploration of the practice habits and experiences of professional musicians. Music Education Research, 24(3), 312–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2022.2053513
  57. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  58. Weatherly, K. I. C. H., Wright, B., & Lee, E. Y. (2024). Digital game–based learning in music education: A systematic review between 2011 and 2023. Research Studies in Music Education, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X241270819
  59. Weyde, T., Ng, K., Neubarth, K., Larkin, O., Koerselman, T., Ong, B. (2007). A systemic approach to music performance learning with multimodal technology support. In T. Bastiaens & S. Carliner (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2007--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, (pp. 6654-6663). Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  60. Willy, E. F., Newell-McLymont, E. F. (2021). Qualitative research methods: A critical analysis. Social Science Research Network, 11(2), 189–199. https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3845254
  61. Wolff, B., Mahoney, F., Lohiniva, A. L., & Corkum, M. (2019). Collecting and analyzing qualitative data. Rasmussen, S.A. & Goodman, R. A. (Ed.), The CDC Field Epidemiology Manual (213–228). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780190933692.003.0010
  62. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2

This article is published under the CC BY 4.0 license.