This was the line that my friend Alexander van den Eijnde wrote to me in one of our e-mail discussions on various topics in October 2001

This is what I answered to save this precious concept from being diluted too much. Hopefully, it will stimulate some other person, to use this fine teaching tool even more properly, as did gracefully Alexander

But there are some stable elements to respect: First of all it is a learning/teaching session between a highly experienced (often elderly) professional and one or more very advanced students of the same profession that have more or less exhausted both theory and skills as they can be taught/learned seperately. Than there is an audience of lesser advanced students and teachers eager to learn "by observation of the learning /teaching act as it is performed in real time".

It must be distinguished from either lecturing or case studies, even is this is done by a highly experiences professional. In a master class, the protagonist is not the teacher/ master, it is the student. He performs what he has to do (e.g. playing some violin phrases, or getting through a 'difficult' interview as e.g. a psychotherapist) or is in the middle of a longer proces on the brink between past and future activities (e.g. a with design process). The subject matter of the class needs to be a confluence of (top) knowledge and (top) skills that cannot otherwise be taught. Master classes in law cases in court or in surgery form a group apart as one cannot say as in music "let us do it again but in so-and-so way, as is possible with music playing. That brings them close to (business and law) case studies although "the performed act" shows incredibly more detailed, richer and more diversed facts then a written case (or even a video-ed one) can ever bring into the teaching /learning situation.

As the student is the protagonist, the master 'observes' and 'questions' him or her in a Socratic way: Why? How come? ... and reflects (audible and visible) upon what he/she observes. The master might give suggestions or even go as far as making a little "lecturette" about a generalisation, but particularly the latter puts the master in the protagonist role and therefore endangers the indispensable atmosphere of "a session between equals" which is the core challenge of master class as a method.

As these sessions are very intensive they are of a short duration and with one or a very few students at a time. The remaining students are sitting around and observe intensively what 'happens' to learn from it while they are waiting their turn. In general there is one 'master' although I have seen a well-tuned couple sharing their different views and experiences in one and the same session. If there are more than one student in de 'hot' session, it is possible that the master(s) point to typical aspects in performance that are only visible by immediate observation.

Space-wise, the best organisation is to place the 'hot' session in the middle and the waiting students around. Training specialists call this "fish bowling" as the group looks at the same session from another point of view, physically as well as psychologically. As in a fishbowl.

To exploit even more the uniqueness of these session for learning, often the complete session, 'hot' session plus the student waiting their turn, in a wider 'fish bowl' around which a (paying) audience can follow the sessions. The master classes in Brussels every year before the Concours Elisabeth are very famous and tickets for observing the masterclasses are nearly as scarce as for the finals.

You see ".... that the concept master class is as flexible as one wants to make it.", but several limits have to be respected for not deluting this precious concept to either lecturing or case studies both respectful and valuable concepts, that can not --and should not-- be reduced to each other.
GVE.3 december 2001