Improvisation and Composition in a High School Instrumental Music Curriculum

by

David Andrew Stringham

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Supervised by Professor Richard F. Grunow Department of Music Education Eastman School of Music

University of Rochester Rochester, New York 2010

ii

Dedication

To my son, Vaughan Boyd Stringham:

Although my parenting experience is limited, seeing you inside the womb, hearing your heartbeat for the first time, watching you enter the world, and beginning to help raise you have been some of the most exciting and rewarding experiences of my life. I hope this study, and my future research, will help your generation become more musical than mine. Most important, I hope you will always know that I love you, and your mom, unconditionally.

iii

Curriculum Vitae David Andrew Stringham was born in Amherst, New York on September 17, 1981. He attended the Eastman School of Music of the University of Rochester from 1999 to 2003, completing a Bachelor of Music in Music Education with Highest Distinction. Mr. Stringham continued his studies at Eastman, receiving a Master of Music in Music Education in 2007. While completing the Master of Music, Mr. Stringham taught instrumental music at Williamsville North High School in Williamsville, New York. He returned to Eastman in Fall 2007 to begin doctoral studies in Music Education. While in residence as a doctoral student, he served as a Graduate Teaching Assistant for a variety of undergraduate and graduate courses, and he taught instrumental music at Greece Apollo Middle School in Greece, New York. Mr. Stringham is a composition evaluator for the New York State School Music Association, and he presents his research at local, state, and national conferences. In Fall 2010, Mr. Stringham joined the faculty in the School of Music at James Madison University in Harrisonburg, VA, where he supervises student teachers and teaches courses in instrumental methods, woodwind techniques, and music technology.

iv

Acknowledgments This document would not have come to fruition without advice and assistance from many persons. I am grateful to my committee members: Richard Grunow, Christopher Azzara, and Robert Cole. They helped me grow as a musician, teacher, researcher, and writer, and spent hours reading, editing, and discussing content in these pages. The following faculty members in the Music Education Department at Eastman have challenged and encouraged me throughout my studies: Susan Conkling, John Fetter, Donna Brink Fox, and Ann Marie Stanley. I extend a special note of thanks to Elizabeth Bock, Department Secretary. I also wish to acknowledge the late William Fals-Stewart, who assisted in the early stages of formulating this study. I am fortunate to have encountered outstanding faculty throughout the University of Rochester. I hope to be as inspirational and helpful to my students as these individuals have been to me. I have interacted with many intelligent, curious, and kind colleagues during my doctoral work. I am particularly grateful to Gregory Harduk and David Hart for judging student performances. In addition to serving as a judge, Alden H. Snell II moderated the focus group. Maria Mastroianni transcribed the focus group session. I also express thanks to Stephen Shewan, Jo Lynn DeGolia, Wayne Moose, and Maureen Reilly at Williamsville East High School, and to Linda Cimusz and Anna Cieri at Williamsville Central School District Offices. Without their cooperation and that of their students, this study would not have been possible.

While professors, colleagues, and friends have been invaluable resources, I would not have been prepared to take advantage of them without my family. My parents, Rodney and Debra Stringham; my brothers, Stephen and Timothy Stringham; my late grandfather, Edward Hensel, Sr.; my grandmother, Lola Hagen; and my aunt, Patricia Rogers all gave time, love, patience, and financial support to facilitate my early development as a musician and a person. Rita Rider, my "third grandmother," and my aunt, Carol Stringham, have provided encouragement throughout my studies. My uncle, Edward Hensel, Jr., is an excellent role model and source of perspective from another discipline in higher education. My father-in-law and mother-in-law, Paul and Elizabeth Mroz, have also helped me throughout this degree in more ways than I can count. Most of all, I am thankful for my wife, Monica. You have supported me in every way possible during my doctoral studies. You have selflessly made many sacrifices to help me realize my goal of earning this degree. I hope that I will always show you that far beyond any piece of paper or title, you are the most valuable treasure I have in this life.

vi

Abstract Common practice instrumental music pedagogy prioritizes performance from music notation. Certainly a worthy pursuit, such an exclusive objective often neglects other essential musical behaviors, such as singing, improvising, and composing. Local, state, and national music education policymakers, as well as authorities in the profession, agree that these behaviors are important. Nevertheless, singing, improvising, and composing are rarely included in instrumental music curricula. With the intent of improving music teaching and learning in secondary instrumental music, the purpose of this mixed methods study was to describe music achievement and personal perspectives of high school students who learned to improvise and compose using a sequential music curriculum in a non-auditioned wind and percussion ensemble. In this study, curriculum emphasized development of individual musicianship and emerging behaviors for improvisation and composition (i.e., singing, movement, and playing by ear to learn melodies, bass lines, tonal patterns, rhythm patterns, and voice leading). Quantitative measures revealed relationships between music aptitude and music achievement. Three judges rated student performances. Overall, mean scores were highest for singing, followed by mean scores for playing and writing music. Stabilized music aptitude scores were predictive of performance achievement, improvisation achievement, and composite music achievement; these aptitude scores were a relatively weak predictor of composition achievement. Several statistically

vii

significant correlations emerged among musical tasks. Analysis of variance revealed significant effects for gender and instrument group. Student perspectives on improvisation and composition were examined in a focus group comprising eight students who participated in the research. Students in this focus group found the sequential nature of this curriculum helpful, and reported success in learning to improvise and compose. Students generally agreed that learning musical elements by ear was beneficial. Several participants indicated that the processes of improvising and composing are related. Recorded class meetings and fieldnotes were examined to describe teaching and learning of improvisation and composition in this setting. Based on this examination, it was evident that musicianship, understanding of music teaching and learning, interaction, making connections, and a positive learning environment are important when learning to improvise and compose. Singing, moving, performing, improvising, composing, and analyzing were ongoing elements of the curriculum. Quantitative and qualitative data presented in this study provide preliminary evidence to suggest that teaching improvisation and composition in a non-auditioned secondary wind and percussion ensemble is a practical, meaningful, and musical objective.

viii

Table of Contents Dedication Curriculum Vitae Acknowledgments Abstract Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures Chapter One Chapter Two Chapter Three Chapter Four Chapter Five Chapter Six References Appendix A Advanced Measures of Music Audiation Answer Sheet Developing Musicianship through Improvisation Unit for Amazing Grace Judges' Instructions and Rating Scales Student Improvisations and Compositions Moderator's Guide Focus Group Transcript Purpose of the Study Related Literature Method of Study Quantitative Results Qualitative Results Summary and Conclusions ii iii iv vi viii x xiii 1 11 32 49 70 96 116 137

Appendix B

138

Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F

155 210 219 220

ix

Appendix G Appendix H Appendix I Appendix J

Student Survey Documentation of EPRP Number Letter of Cooperation RSRB Exemption Letter

257 258 259 260

List of Tables Table 3.1 Comparison of Sample and National Split Halves Reliability for AMMA Interjudge Reliability for Musical Tasks Interjudge Reliability for Summary Variables Judges Mean Ratings for Musical Tasks Comparison of Sample and National Scores for AMMA Means and Standard Deviations of Musical Tasks Means and Standard Deviations of Summary Variables Summary of Linear Regression for the Relationship Between Music Aptitude and Performance Achievement Summary of Linear Regression for the Relationship Between Music Aptitude and Improvisation Achievement Summary of Linear Regression for the Relationship Between Music Aptitude and Composition Achievement Summary of Linear Regression for the Relationship Between Music Aptitude and Composite Music Achievement Correlation Coefficients for Relationships Between Vocal and Instrumental Tasks Correlation Coefficient for the Relationship Between Overall Vocal Performance and Overall Instrumental Performance 38

Table 3.2 Table 3.3 Table 3.4 Table 4.1

39 40 41 50

Table 4.2

51

Table 4.3

52

Table 4.4

53

Table 4.5

53

Table 4.6

54

Table 4.7

54

Table 4.8

55

Table 4.9

55

xi

Table 4.10

Correlation Coefficients for Relationships Among 56 Vocal Improvisation, Instrumental Improvisation, and Composition Correlation Coefficient for the Relationship Between Improvisation and Composition Means and Standard Deviations for Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Achievement by Gender 56

Table 4.11

Table 4.12

57

Table 4.13

One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effect of 58 Gender on Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Music Achievement Means and Standard Deviations for Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Achievement by Grade Level 59

Table 4.14

Table 4.15

One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effect of 60 Grade Level on Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Music Achievement Means and Standard Deviations for Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Achievement by Experience Playing a Harmonic Instrument One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effect of Experience Playing a Harmonic Instrument on Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Music Achievement Means and Standard Deviations for Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Achievement by Instrument Group 60

Table 4.16

Table 4.17

61

Table 4.18

62

xii

Table 4.19

One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effect of 63 Instrument Group on Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Music Achievement

xiii

List of Figures

Figure 5.1 Figure 5.2

The tonal pattern TI FA SO. Students sang the pattern TI RE FA with the syllables TI FA SO. Tonic Dominant Tonic voice leading in E-flat Major. Opening melody of English Folk Song Suite, Movement III.

85 85

Figure 5.3

85

Figure 5.4

87

CHAPTER ONE Purpose of the Study Introduction Common practice instrumental music pedagogy prioritizes performance from music notation. Certainly a worthy pursuit, such an exclusive objective often neglects other meaningful musical behaviors. For example, according to the National Standards for Music Education (Music Educators National Conference, 1994), students should: 1. Sing, alone and with others, a varied repertoire of music; 2. Perform on instruments, alone and with others, a varied repertoire of music; 3. Improvise melodies, variations, and accompaniments; 4. Compose and arrange music within specified guidelines; 5. Read and notate music; 6. Listen to, analyze, and describe music; 7. Evaluate music and music performances; 8. Understand relationships between music, the other arts, and disciplines outside the arts; and 9. Understand music in relation to history and culture. State policy makers call for similar objectives to be part of a comprehensive music education. In New York State, for example, students should develop skills (a) creating, performing, and participating in the arts; (b) knowing and using arts materials and resources; (c) responding to and analyzing works of art; and (d) understanding the cultural dimensions and contributions of the arts (New York State Department of Education, 2010).

Associating music notation with appropriate motor skills, and performing with characteristic tone qualitywhat Shewan (2009) describes as tonguing and blowing remain the prevalent criteria for performance achievement on a music instrument. At the same time, students are instructed to attend to rhythm, intonation, tempo, and style to prepare music for a concert. Such directions have little meaning, however, unless the student truly comprehends music being performed. Gordon (2007) refers to this ability to comprehend music as audiation. Audiation is to music what thought is to language. Note reading and executive skills are often taught in the absence of singing, moving, improvising, and composing. Context is lacking to promote development of musical vocabulary, audiation skill, and comprehension. Unfortunately, the aforementioned instruction is typical in many wind and percussion settings. Students who perform from notation in such environments often "become button-pushers to whom notation indicates only what fingers to put down rather than what sounds are desired" (Schleuter, 1997, p. 48). Many music educators agree that music is best learned through a process analogous to that by which we learn language (Gordon, 2007; Grunow, 2005; Reynolds, Long, & Valerio, 2007). The four vocabularies, language systems, or components of listening, speaking, reading, and writing seem to be important for developing comprehensive language skills (Healy, 1990; Shanahan, 2006; Smith, 1997). Gordon (2007) posits five analogous vocabularies for music: listening, performing, audiating, reading, and writing. These vocabularies include behaviors

associated with improvisation and composition, vital aspects of the music learning process that are fundamental when learning to play a music instrument with understanding. Azzara (2008) recommends the following skills for persons learning to improvise: (a) learning by ear a variety of melodic, harmonic, rhythmic, and expressive elements, (b) singing and moving, (c) learning to group musical elements meaningfully, (d) interacting, (e) making comparisons, and (f) anticipating and predicting musical events. Shewan (2002) also advocates learning repertoire by ear and participating in aural analysis to develop readiness for composition. Leaders in the profession (Azzara, 1993, 2008; Elliott, 1995; Gordon, 2007; Grunow, 2005; McPherson, 1993, 1996; Reimer, 2003, 2009) agree that improvisation and composition are integral components of a comprehensive music education. Researchers and educators have suggested that improvisation and composition are important to (a) teach and learn music, (b) develop musicianship, (c) become musically literate, and (d) assess music achievement (Azzara, 1993, 2002; Bitz, 1998; Gordon, 2007; Grunow, 2005; Liperote, 2006; McPherson, 1996; Music Educators National Conference, 1994; Shewan, 2002; Snell, 2006; Stoltzfus, 2005; Webster, 2003; Wiggins, 2003). Improvisation and composition also have historical precedent as means of musical expression in the classical tradition. Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart, for example, were skilled improvisers, composers, and performers (Azzara, 2002; Levin, 1975, 2009). Hummel recommended free improvisation in general and in every respectable form to all those for whom [music] is not merely a matter of

entertainment and practical ability, but rather principally one of inspiration and meaning in their art (Goertzen, 1996, p. 305). Still, researchers suggest that creative activity is not prevalent in school music settings (Brittin, 2005; Louk, 2002; Orman, 2002; Strand, 2006). Survey research reveals that teachers consider improvisation and composition less important in comparison with other curricular elements (Byo, 1997; Kirkland, 1996; Louk, 2002) and more difficult to teach (Bell, 2003). In spite of calls for teachers to develop these skills (National Association of Schools of Music, 2008), many teacher preparation programs inadequately prepare music educators to improvise and compose, or to teach improvisation and composition (Abrahams, 2000; Adderly, 1996; Louk, 2002). Today, improvisation is common among popular musicians, folk musicians, jazz musicians, and organists. Composition is not central to most musicians education. Instrumental music teachers often use theoretical approaches when teaching students to improvise and compose. For example, beginning jazz improvisers are encouraged to select notes from particular scales (e.g., Baker, 1995; Haerle, 1975; Levine, 1995; Nelson, 1966). Composition activities in beginning instrumental method books involve rearranging a set of notes or selecting a note to fill in blanks in musical phrases (e.g., Lautzenheiser, Lavender, Higgins, Rhodes, Menghini, & Bierschenk, 2000; Pearson, 1993; D. Sheldon, Balmages, Loest, R. Sheldon, & Collier, 2010). These activities often lack the context of singing, movement, and improvisation, and are not grounded in musical thought. Grunow (2005) questions the current penchant for pentatonic and blues-scale improvisation designed

specifically to ensure that student mistakes are minimal. Though generally well intentioned, such failsafe approaches do not allow students to fully express their musical thoughts, since mistakes are not possible (p. 188). The primary measure of reading achievement in language is not sounding out written words correctly, or in the words of Healy, barking at print (1990, p. 26). Instead, reading comprehension is demonstrated when an individual can give meaning to written language, and express understanding by thinking, speaking, and writing about what they have read (Fountas & Pinnell, 2008; Healy, 1990). Healy warns against language instruction that overemphasize[s] letters and numerals and underemphasize[s] the language and thinking skills necessary to make them meaningful (1990, p. 223). Just as language comprehension can be assessed through speaking and writing, so too can music comprehension be assessed through improvising and composing (Azzara, 2008; Grunow, 2005; Hickey, 2003; Kratus, 1994b; Reynolds, et al., 2007; Wiggins, 2003). These behaviors reveal students' "understanding of how music works (Kratus, 1994b, p. 130), what they comprehend musically (Grunow, 2005, p. 188), and their musical thinking and understanding (Wiggins, 2003, p. 141). Need for the Study Researchers have examined improvisation and composition achievement of wind and percussion students (Azzara, 1993; McPherson, 1993, 1996; McPherson,

Bailey, & Sinclair, 1997; Shewan, 2002; Snell, 2006; Stoltzfus, 2005). Through this study, I hope to contribute to this emerging body of knowledge. Setting The setting for this study was a suburban high school northeast of Buffalo, New York, the largest suburban school district in Western New York. Six elementary schools, four middle schools, and three high schools provide services to 10,513 students in kindergarten through grade twelve. Music staff includes 47 music teachers and a full-time Instructional Specialist for Fine and Performing Arts (Williamsville Central School District, 2010). Students have opportunities to enroll in multiple choirs, orchestras, bands, and jazz ensembles, in addition to courses in improvisation and music theory. The music department in this high school is recognized nationally as a model program. Students and teachers are unique, making the setting ideal for this study. Both wind and percussion teachers have more than 20 years of experience in public school music education, and they have requisite musicianship skills to teach the proposed curriculum. In the existing curriculum, students learn a musical vocabulary (i.e., melodies, bass lines, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns) by ear and by reading on a consistent basis. Teachers prioritize development of audiation skills in combination with technical facility. Every student composes an original work each year. Improvisation classes and jazz ensembles provide opportunities for students to improvise beyond rehearsals and lessons. Participants in this study were 66 students in Concert Band, a non-auditioned ensemble for students in grades nine through

twelve. In addition to forty-minute rehearsals each day, students received a fortyminute small group lesson each week. Improvisation and composition are meaningful elements of a comprehensive music education, but rarely part of students instrumental music curricula. It is unusual to find a high school instrumental program where composition, improvisation, and development of individual musicianship are prioritized along with ensemble performance. Findings that describe student improvisation and composition achievement could provide further insight for music teaching and learning, thus improving methods and techniques for instrumental music instruction. In this study, I describe (a) high school students improvisation and composition achievement, (b) student perspectives when learning to improvise and compose, and (c) relationships among various musical behaviors. To improve instrumental music instruction, it appears that (a) the music education profession would benefit from a better understanding of how improvisation and composition can contribute to a students comprehensive music education, and (b) both pre-service and in-service teachers should develop improvisation and composition skills, and teach these musical behaviors to their students. Through this study, I hope to contribute to understanding high school students improvisation and composition by describing student achievement and experiences in the context of a non-auditioned high school concert band.

Research Purpose and Questions Purpose With the intent of improving music teaching and learning in secondary instrumental music, the purpose of this mixed methods study was to describe music achievement and personal perspectives of high school students following eight weeks of learning to improvise and compose using a sequential music curriculum in a nonauditioned wind and percussion ensemble. It is rare to find an instrumental music program in which improvisation and composition are central parts of the curriculum. Perhaps more uncommon are instrumental music teachers who agree on criterion measures for determining student achievement. To my knowledge, no published norms exist for improvisation or composition achievement at the secondary level. In this study, I offer a point of departure for future research. I chose a mixed methods approach to investigate both quantitative trends from a large group of students and qualitative data from a student focus group and field observation. Quantitative measures revealed relationships between music aptitude and music achievement (i.e., singing, instrumental performance, improvising, and composing). Student perspectives on improvisation and composition were examined in a focus group of eight students who participated in the research. I recorded class meetings and took extensive fieldnotes to document teaching and learning of improvisation and composition in this particular setting.

Research Questions The following research questions guided this study: (a) What are performance, composition, and improvisation achievement levels of high school instrumental music students following eight weeks of instruction using a sequential music curriculum? (b) What are the relationships between music aptitude and (1) performance achievement, (2) improvisation achievement, (3) composition achievement, and (4) composite music achievement? (c) How do students describe singing, playing by ear, improvising, and composing experiences as part of their instrumental music instruction? (d) In this particular setting, how is improvisation and composition instruction delivered in the context of ensemble rehearsals? (e) How does qualitative data from focus group sessions and observations, together with quantitative aptitude and achievement data, help explain improvisation and composition experiences of high school instrumental music students? Definition of Terms Audiation: The ability to assimilate and comprehend in our minds music that may or may not be physically present. Audiation is to music what thought is to language (Gordon, 2007). Music achievement: A student's accomplishment in music. Music achievement was assessed in terms of improvisation, composition, and performance, using rating scales with tonal, rhythm, expressive, improvisation, and composition dimensions.

10

Improvisation achievement was assessed through singing and playing improvisations based on skills included in Developing Musicianship through Improvisation (DMTI; Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b). Composition achievement was also assessed through compositions based on skills included in DMTI. Performance achievement was assessed through singing, playing, and notating the melody and bass line to Amazing Grace. Music aptitude: A students potential to achieve in music. Music aptitude can be measured using a variety of instruments designed for different age groups (e.g., Gordon, 1965, 1979, 1982, 1988, 1995). In this study, stabilized music aptitude was measured with the Advanced Measures of Music Audiation (AMMA; Gordon, 1989a; see Appendix A). Rating scale: Rating scales in this study employed continuous and additive dimensions. In continuous dimensions (tonal and rhythm), each successive criterion assumes achievement at the previous level(s); rating criteria are interdependent. In additive dimensions (expressive, improvisation, composition), criteria are independent, and do not assume achievement at the previous level(s). Rating scales used in this study are in Appendix C.

11

CHAPTER TWO Related Literature In the following review of literature, I describe and summarize research related to variables considered in this study. The review includes seven parts: (a) music aptitude, (b) singing and vocalization in instrumental music, (c) improvisation in instrumental music, (d) composition in instrumental music, (e) relationships between gender and music achievement, (f) relationships between instrument group and music achievement, and (g) relationships between improvisation and composition. Music Aptitude Lorenz, Wundt, and Stumpf studied psychology of tone and music (Boring, 1929), serving to inspire development of many music aptitude tests (e.g., Bentley, 1966; Drake, 1954; Gaston, 1957; Kwalwasser, 1953; Kwalwasser & Dykema, 1930; Lowery, 1926; Lundin, 1949; Madison, 1942; Ortman, n.d.; Schoen, 1925; Wing, 1958). Music aptitude tests measure a students potential to achieve in music (see Definition of Terms, pp. 910). Most notable of the early tests is Seashore's Measures of Musical Talent, published first in 1919 and updated in 1960 by Seashore, Lewis, and Saetveit. These researchers had considerable influence on Gordon, the foremost researcher of music aptitude in recent decades. Developed during an eight-year period, the Musical Aptitude Profile (MAP; Gordon, 1965, 1988, 1995) was Gordons first aptitude test. MAP comprises seven subtests, with norms for students in grades four through twelve. Numerous research studies, conducted by Gordon and others

12

established the objective validity of MAP (Gordon, 1967a, 1967b, 1970; Lee, 1967; Levendusky, 1979). Today, Gordon remains the primary researcher and developer of music aptitude tests. The following tests are designed to measure developmental music aptitude of persons ages three to nine or ten: Audie (Gordon, 1989b), for three- and four-year-old children; Primary Measures of Music Audiation (PMMA; Gordon, 1979), for students in kindergarten through third grade; and Intermediate Measures of Music Audiation (IMMA; Gordon, 1982), for students in first through sixth grades. Advanced Measures of Music Audiation (AMMA; Gordon, 1989a), for students in seventh grade through college and the aforementioned MAP (1965, 1988, 1995) measure stabilized music aptitude of persons nine years of age and older. PMMA, IMMA, and AMMA are also available for computer administration (Alvey, 2006, 2007; Forsythe, 1984). Gordon's aptitude tests have served as measures in a variety of research studies cited elsewhere in this document (e.g., Azzara, 1993; Bloedel, 1996; Coveyduck, 1998; Davis, 1981; Dunlap, 1989; Liperote, 2004; MacKnight, 1975; Schleuter, 1978; Snell, 2006; Stolzfus, 2005; Webster, 1979; Zdzinski, 1992). In recent years, several researchers have investigated music aptitude. Schleuter (1974, 1977; S. Schleuter & L. Schleuter, 1978) developed an abbreviated version of MAP for use with college students. Vispoel and colleagues developed computerized-adaptive tests (CATs) and self-adapted tests (SATs) to measure music aptitude (Vispoel, 1992, 1993; Vispoel & Coffman, 1994; Vispoel, Wang, & Bleiler, 1997).

13

According to Karma (1985, 1994), music aptitude should expand beyond sound to include movement and poetry as essentially musical (1994, p. 29) segments of a music teachers work. Holahan and Saunders led a research agenda studying cognitive processing of tonal patterns (Holahan and Saunders, 1997; Holahan, Saunders, & Goldberg, 2000; Saunders & Holahan, 1993). This research has furthered the discussion; however, it has not, as yet, brought about substantial change in music aptitude measurement. Research on music aptitude reveals a rich history of test development and refinement, which has facilitated creation of several reliable and valid measures of music aptitude. While MAP (1965, 1988, 1995) is Gordon's most reliable and valid music aptitude test, the lengthy time required to administer the test3 separate class periodsoften discourages music teachers from using the test. AMMA, which can be administered in approximately 20 minutes, may be a more usable test. While previous researchers have examined AMMAs reliability and validity for college students (Gordon, 1989c, 1990, 1991), reliability for high school students (Gordon, 1989a), and reliability for middle school students (Gordon, 2004), no researchers have examined AMMA's validity for high school students. Singing and Vocalization in Instrumental Music Vocalizing Songs and Tonal Patterns with Solfge MacKnight (1975) found that fourth-grade instrumental music students who learned new pitches by singing with movable-DO solfge, and new rhythms by chanting with function-based syllables, scored significantly higher in sightreading

14

achievement and aural-visual discrimination than those who learned to associate tonal notation with fingerings on their music instrument and rhythm notation with counting. According to Grutzmacher (1987), fifth- and sixth-grade students who learned tonal patterns by ear and with notation, in a context of harmonization and vocalization, scored significantly higher on melodic sightreading achievement and aural recognition of major and minor modes. In a study with third-grade recorder students, McDonald (1987) determined that singing songs and associated patterns by rote, on a neutral syllable and then with solfge, prior to performing them from notation, led to significantly higher levels of recorder performance achievement. Lee (1996) found that vocalizing tonal patterns and solfge significantly improved articulation and phrasing achievement of fifthgrade instrumentalists. Other Vocalization Activities Bloedel (1996) studied the effect of singing rote songs and resting tones on music achievement of fifth-grade instrumental music students. Those who sang rote songs and resting tones as part of their instrumental music instruction scored significantly higher on a measure of musical expression. Structured scale singing activities significantly improved performance achievement of fifth- and sixth-grade band students in a study by Davis (1981). According to McGarry (1967), vocalizing pitch letter names before playing has no significant effect on instrumental performance achievement of junior high band students. Elliott (1974) reports that beginning instrumental students who vocalized exercises on the syllable "la" prior to

15

performance experienced a significant increase in sense of pitch when compared to those who performed without vocalizing. In a study with sixth-grade instrumental students, Coveyduck (1998) found that singing a song "using number or words if it were a song with text" (p. 58) for three minutes during each lesson had no significant effect on intonation. Similarly, Smith (1984) found that vocalizing on a neutral syllable prior to performance had no significant effect on pitch deviation of college wind players. In a study of fifth-grade instrumental students, Dunlap (1989) found that vocalizing melodies prior to instrumental performance had no significant effect on aural skills, instrumental performance, and reading skills. Schlacks (1981) studied effects of vocal and instrumental interval training on instrumental pitch accuracy. Three experimental groups received (a) instrumental interval training, (b) vocal interval training, or (c) vocal and instrumental interval training. Control group subjects received no interval training. No significant difference in instrumental pitch accuracy emerged among these groups. Bennett (1994) studied the effect of humming on intonation accuracy of 95 high school students. Subjects who participated in a four-session humming treatment, in which they hummed isolated pitches from varying registers, showed no significant difference in intonation accuracy from those who did not receive treatment. It appears that singing and vocalization activities vary in effectiveness, depending on the context in which they occur. Singing in a harmonic context (e.g., with movable-DO solfge, scale degree numbers, or resting tones) has a significant

16

effect on students (a) sightreading achievement (Grutzmacher, 1987; MacKnight, 1975), (b) aural-visual discrimination (MacKnight, 1975), (c) performance achievement (McDonald, 1987), (d) musical expression (Bloedel, 1996), and (e) articulation and phrasing (Lee, 1996). In contrast, singing and vocalization techniques devoid of harmonic context seem to have no significant effect on students (a) performance achievement (Dunlap, 1989; McGarry, 1967), (b) intonation (Bennett, 1994; Coveyduck, 1998; Schlacks, 1981; Smith, 1984), or (c) aural and music reading skills (Dunlap, 1989). Improvisation in Instrumental Music Silverman (1963) studied the feasibility of Ensemble Improvisation (p. 1) in the secondary instrumental music ensemble. Using a curriculum designed by Foss and Duffalo, a group of college students and a group of high school students were taught techniques to create group improvisations. Participants learned to improvise melody, harmony, and counterpoint, and elements that Foss called Solo (pp. 1920) and Follow-solo (pp. 1819). Several improvisations were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by the class. A panel of evaluators, consisting of university professors and public school music teachers, assessed the recordings based on the following criteria: (a) creativity, (b) heuristic function, (c) skills, (d) style, and (e) relationship to large group performance. While the five criteria were met satisfactorily, the panel suggested concurrent study of history and theory, and use of a wider variety of styles and tonalities to enhance this improvisation experience. Silverman concluded that

17

Ensemble Improvisation was beneficial to students musical skills, desire to learn about music, and behavior in other musical groups. Using Foss and Duffalos curriculum, Wilson (1971) also studied the effect of improvisation on secondary instrumental music students achievement. In comparison with a control group, students who engaged in improvisation showed greater improvement in melodic and rhythmic aural skills, as well as sight-reading. In a study of middle school students, Wig (1980) examined relationships between ability to improvise, academic achievement, performance ability, and instruction in music composition strategies. A researcher-designed measure was given as a pre-test prior to a seven-week treatment, in which students learned music composition strategies to manipulate pitch, intensity, and duration. Following the treatment, the same researcher-designed measure was given as a post-test. Wig reported significant gains in ability to improvise for sixth-graders, eighth-graders, and the combined sample. According to Wig (1980, p. 1), "neither performing ability nor academic achievement are factors related to ability to improvise music." Azzara (1993) studied effects of music aptitude and an improvisation curriculum on music achievement of fifth-grade instrumental students. Sixty-six students from two schools were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. MAP was administered to all subjects as a measure of stabilized music aptitude. Experimental group subjects received improvisation lessons as part of their instrumental music instruction. Lessons included the following: "(a) learning selected repertoire of songs by ear; (b) developing a vocabulary of tonal syllables and rhythm

18

syllables; (c) improvising with their voices and with their instruments tonic, dominant, and subdominant tonal patterns within the context of major tonality; and (d) improvising with their voices and with their instruments macrobeat, microbeat, division, elongation, and rest rhythm patterns within the context of duple meter (p. 335). Students also improvised tunes with similar tonal and rhythm content. Subjects music achievement was assessed by four judges for tonal, rhythm, and expressive performance of three etudes composed by the researcher. Results revealed no significant differences in composite MAP scores between treatment groups or between students from different school settings. Experimental group students, who received an improvisation curriculum as part of their instruction, had significantly higher composite etude performance scores than those in the control group (Azzara, 1993, p. 338). In a study of 101 trumpet and clarinet students, ages 1218, McPherson (1996) reported significant relationships between ability to improvise and ability to sightread, play by ear, play from memory, and perform rehearsed music. Improvisation skill correlated with the following self-reported experiences: (a) early exposure to music, (b) playing from memory, (c) playing by ear, (d) improvising, (e) composing, (f) singing, and (g) mentally rehearsing. McPherson also found these correlations to be stronger among older students, suggesting that relationships among these behaviors may intensify with age. Subsequent analysis revealed that ability to improvise is influenced most by ability to play by ear (McPherson, Bailey, & Sinclair, 1997).

19

Using a curriculum based on instructional materials developed by Azzara and Grunow (2006, 2010a, 2010b), Snell (2006) studied junior high instrumental music students improvisation achievement. Forty-five seventh- and eighth-grade students were administered MAP at the beginning of the study. Following instruction in a series of eight small-group lessons, each student performed two tunes by ear and an improvisation based on the melodic, harmonic, rhythmic, and expressive elements of each tune. Six participants were interviewed at the study's conclusion. Student achievement was generally higher on tunes performed by ear than on improvisations for those tunes. Snell found acceptable levels of criterion-related validity between MAP and student performances. Rating scales in Snells study also yielded acceptable interjudge reliability. Students indicated that they enjoyed learning new tunes and learning to improvise. While few students were enthusiastic about singing as part of the study, five of the six considered it beneficial to improvisation. Snell states that including improvisation in a middle school instrumental music curriculum has potential to improve instrumental music pedagogy. Bingham (2007) developed and tested an improvisation enrichment module for use in beginning instrumental music ensembles. Seventy-two sixth-grade students from two middle schools studied the curriculum in their band classes; data from 34 subjects were used in the study. Bingham's module included five tunes common to beginning instrumental literature and one jazz standard. Each tune was presented in a unit that included learning the melody, chord roots, melodic variations, arpeggios, and "sweet tones (thirds, fifths, sevenths, and ninths)" (p. 61). Styles included bossa

20

nova, folk-rock, calypso, jazz waltz, jazz swing, and soft rock. Using ten-point Likert-type scales, judges rated student pre- and post-tests of playing melodies, and post-tests of playing arpeggios and improvisations. Students experienced significant gains in melodic performance while developing skill in performing arpeggios and improvisations. Participating teachers opined that this material was useful, enjoyable, and motivating to both teachers and students. Researchers agree that improvisation instruction is beneficial to students' musical development (Azzara, 1993; Bingham, 2007; Silverman, 1963; Snell, 2006; Wilson, 1971). Improvisation instruction, delivered in an audiation-based context, seems to improve music achievement of elementary instrumental students (Azzara, 1993). Snell (2006) offers evidence that similar instruction may benefit junior high students. According to Bingham (2007), teaching improvisation in the context of instrumental rehearsals is a practical undertaking. Wig (1980) reports that neither academic achievement nor performing ability is related to improvisation achievement. McPhersons research (1993, 1996) reinforces suggestions that improvisation is related to playing by ear, playing from memory, and reading from notation. McPherson, Bailey, and Sinclair (1997) report that improvisation ability is most influenced by ability to play by ear. Composition in Instrumental Music Shewan (2002) describes a high school wind and percussion program in which every student is required to compose an original piece each year. The study is based on the premise that language develops by progressing through stages of listening,

21

speaking, reading, and writing. Music development should occur in a similar manner: If students were engaged in active listening, followed by improvisation, they would ultimately read with more comprehension, and composition would be the obvious next step in the development of a comprehensive musician (p. 1). Shewan promotes several emerging behaviors for creativity in ensemble rehearsals. Before students rehearse a composition or arrangement, they listen to melodies and bass lines, played and sung by the teacher. Next, they learn to sing and perform them by ear on instruments. Students also engage in aural analysis in rehearsals (e.g., studying form, motivic development, and orchestration). Shewan describes these techniques using examples from standard wind literature. Student composition begins with teacher-guided group composition. Shewan describes a fourteen-rehearsal sequence in which students composed a composition performed on their year-end concert. Students compose chamber works in lesson groups and progress to composing for jazz combo, jazz ensemble, wind ensemble, or orchestra. Shewan provides many examples of student work in each of these genres, while describing common problems and possible solutions. In a study of 64 fourth-grade students, Stoltzfus (2005) examined effects of audiation-based composition instruction on music achievement. Subjects in a treatment group received audiation-based composition instruction as part of their weekly lessons, while students in the control group engaged in supplemental music reading activities in place of composition instruction. Curricula for both groups were the same in all other aspects.

22

Students in the treatment group scored significantly higher than those in the control group in (a) composite singing and playing achievement, (b) singing performance for each etude, (c) playing performance for one of three etudes, and (d) playing performance for each etude for the tonal dimension. Selected students were interviewed at the conclusion of the study. Interviews revealed that students in the treatment group approached music reading as related to pattern recognition and comprehension. Stoltzfus concludes that this study provides evidence to suggest that audiation-based composition may promote music achievement (p. 103). Riley (2006), in a study of middle school instrumental students, examined effects of composition in middle school band on achievement, performance, and attitude of students. Thirty-eight subjects were randomly assigned to an experimental group (N=20) whose curriculum included composition, performance and listening, or a control group (N=18) whose curriculum included performance and listening. Using a pretest-posttest design, Riley found that students in both groups experienced statistically significant gains in music achievement and performance; however, differences between groups were not statistically significant. Since Riley does not provide raw scores, it is difficult to ascertain the practical significance of these differences. Experimental group students responded more positively to a researcherdesigned attitude survey than students in the control group. Riley suggests that since groups did not differ significantly in achievement and performance gains, excluding composition from a middle school instrumental music curriculum may not be

23

beneficial to students. Including composition also seems to improve students attitudes toward instrumental music instruction. Composition appears to be influenced strongly by a composers listening and performing vocabularies (Bolden, 2009; Bunting, 1987; Carlin, 1997; Kennedy, 1999, 2002; Stauffer, 2002). Webster (1979) found a modest but statistically significant correlation between composition and music achievement among high school students. According to Shewan (2002), a high level of aural skills and experience improvising predicts compositional ability. Students who excel in instrumental performance also tend to compose at a higher level (Berkley, 2001; Shewan, 2002). Researchers suggest that, like improvisation instruction, learning to compose is beneficial to a student's musical development (Shewan, 2002; Stoltzfus, 2005; Webster, 1979). Stoltzfus (2005) provides evidence that audiation-based composition instruction improves music achievement of elementary instrumental music students. Shewan (2002) reports that high school students experience success as composers taught with an audiation-based curriculum. Among junior high students, Riley (2006) reports no significant effect of composition instruction on music achievement; however, it should be noted that many composition activities in Rileys study take a theoretical approach, which may not involve audiation. Relationships between Gender and Music Achievement Gender and performance. In a study of 104 elementary instrumental music students, Schleuter (1978) found that music achievement was not significantly affected by gender differences. Zdzinski (1992) reports that among 113 middle

24

school wind and brass students, there were no significant differences in performance achievement based on gender. Male students, however, scored significantly higher than female students on a measure of cognitive music achievement. According to McPherson (1994), in a study of 101 middle- and high-school trumpet and clarinet students, gender had little influence on types of errors made in sightreading. In Barry's research (1992), gender did not have a significant effect on melodic accuracy, rhythmic accuracy, or musicality of seventh- through tenth-grade brass and woodwind students. Gender did, however, play a role in significant interactions in the study, leading Barry to suggest further research to better explain relationships between gender and music achievement. Gender and improvisation. Webster (1979) found a significant correlation between improvisation achievement and male gender among high school students. Hassler and Feil (1986) report that among ten- to fifteen-year-old male subjects, improvisation on a melody correlated with scores on Wings Standardized Tests of Musical Intelligence (1958). In the same study, extemporaneous improvisation correlated significantly with (a) scores on a standardized test of musical intelligence, (b) visualization ability, and (c) verbal ability. McPherson found that female subjects scored better on the researcher-designed Test of Ability to Improvise (1993), while male students engaged in improvisation more frequently; however, gender was not a predictor of improvisation ability. Wehr-Flowers (2006) reports that female students are significantly less confident, have more anxiety, and report less self-efficacy in approaching jazz improvisation. Other researchers report no significant relationship

25

between gender and improvisation ability among junior-high and high school students (Bash, 1983; Gorder, 1980; Hores, 1977), or college students (Madura, 1996). The varied findings summarized here suggest need for further research. Gender and composition. Hassler and Feil (1986) studied relationships between creative ability and a number of variables. When comparing students of male and female gender, they found no significant differences in relationships among composition ability and other variables. Beyond instrumental music, several studies report different strategies employed by male and female students, but do not report differences in achievement (e.g., Bolden, 2009; Folkestad, Lindstrm, & Hargreaves, 1997). Taken together, research findings related to gender and (a) performance, (b) improvisation, and (c) composition neither confirm nor disconfirm clear relationships. Relationships vary among populations, and with other personal variables. Clearly, further research is required to better understand relationships between gender and music achievement. Relationships between Instrument Group and Music Achievement Achievement comparisons by instrument group. In a study of college freshmen, Stecklein and Aliferis (1957) report significant differences by instrument group in a test of music achievement, measured by aural-visual discrimination skill. According to Elliott (1974), beginning brass players exhibited higher levels of music achievement than woodwind players, though the difference was not statistically significant. MacKnight (1975), in a study of 90 fourth-grade instrumental music

26

students, found no significant main effect of instrument group on music achievement. McPherson (1993) reports that middle-school-aged clarinetists scored significantly higher than trumpeters on a researcher-designed Test of Ability to Improvise. In later research, McPherson (1994) reports that among 101 middle- and high-school trumpet and clarinet students, instrument group had little effect on types of errors made while sightreading. Among college undergraduates, May (2003) found no significant differences in level of improvisation achievement based on instrument group. Piano instruction and music achievement. Elliott (1974) reports that beginning band students who received private piano instruction significantly outperformed students without piano background, particularly in a subtest that required participants to make connections between musical sounds and notation. According to May and Elliott (1980), years of piano instruction may make a significant contribution to development of aural skills in junior high school music students. Schlacks (1981) reports that there was not a significant difference in pitch accuracy for students with piano background. According to McPherson (1993), learning another instrument, particularly piano, seems to influence improvisation skill of high school trumpet and clarinet students. In a study of college undergraduates, May (2003) reports that no significant differences in improvisation scores were revealed based on piano experience. Based on this literature, music achievement may vary with instrument group (Elliott, 1974; MacKnight, 1975; McPherson, 1993, 1994; Stecklein & Aliferis, 1957) and piano background (Elliott, 1974; May & Elliott, 1980; McPherson, 1993;

27

Schlacks, 1981). Taken together, however, these studies do not reveal consistent relationships between music achievement and (a) instrument group and (b) piano background. Further research is needed to better understand these relationships. Relationships between Improvisation and Composition Four viewpoints surface in research literature regarding the relationship between music improvisation and composition. Improvisation and composition can be considered: (a) synonymous with one another in an integrated process, (b) as separate, but related processes distinguished by time, (c) with improvisation as part of the compositional process, or (d) as coexisting to varying degrees on a continuum. In early research examining childrens musical creativity, composition and improvisation were viewed as synonymous (Davies, 1986, 1992; Doig, 1941, 1942a, 1942b; Moorhead & Pond, 1941, 1942, 1944; Swanwick & Tillman, 1986). In these studies, some student works were improvisational in nature, while others were developed in a process akin to composition. Several researchers regard composition and improvisation as temporally distinct but related processes (Paynter, 2000; Reimer, 2003; Sarath, 1996; Sloboda, 1985; Webster, 2003). According to this view, improvisation occurs spontaneously and in the moment. Composition, by comparison, allows opportunity for reflection, experimentation, and revision before ideas are finalized. Other researchers have described improvising as a precursor or part of the exploratory stage of composition (Berkley, 2001; Bolden, 2009; Kennedy, 1999, 2002; Kratus, 1989, 1994a; Younker & Smith, 1996). The purposes for

28

improvisation, and the extent to which students improvised, differed with age and experience. Generally speaking, younger and less experienced composers seem to compose using a process very similar to the act of improvisation (Kratus, 1989, p. 17), while older and more experienced persons use less time for exploration or improvisation while composing. The relationship between improvisation and composition is also viewed by some on a continuum (Benson, 2003; Kaschub & Smith, 2009; Lehmann, Sloboda, & Woody, 2007). Benson suggests that while improvisation is a part of both composition and performance, it takes different forms in the two activities. Lehmann, Sloboda, and Woody (2007) acknowledge the temporal difference between the behaviors, but state, the distinction between improvisation and composition is not as clear as one would think (p. 129), particularly when considering composers of the past and present who also improvised. Kaschub and Smith (2009) suggest a continuum of musical creativity that make[s] use of the principles of music and the compositional capacities to varying degrees (p. 79). Each of the first three views presented aboveimprovisation as inseparable from composition, improvisation and composition as temporally distinct processes, and improvisation as a part of the composition processfit some musical situations, but are incompatible with others. It seems, then, that interactions between improvisation and composition are best understood as differing not as much by type as by degree. The continuum view encompasses not only situations in which one is clearly improvising or composing, but also those in which the distinction seems to

29

blur. Since such a view is so inclusive, is it worthwhile to determine different ways in which improvisation and composition might intersect? Or is there, as Kaschub and Smith (2009) suggest, no useful purpose served by deciding where improvisation ends and composition begins (p. 79)? Attempting to understand ways in which composition and improvisation intersect at various points on a continuum may be valuable, in light of research conducted by Burnard (1999, 2000a, 2000b). Twelve-year-old children experienced the two behaviors as distinct forms distinguished by bodily intention, interrelated forms, co-existing functionally in context, or as indistinguishable forms which are inseparable in context and intention (1999, p. 171; 2000b, pp. 1415). Further, Burnard reports that children did not experience improvising and composing along one single continuum but rather along several concurrent multi-dimensional continuums (2000a, p. 242). Summary This review of related literature summarized findings related to seven topics: (a) music aptitude, (b) singing and vocalization in instrumental music, (c) improvisation in instrumental music, (d) composition in instrumental music, (e) relationships between gender and music achievement, (f) relationships between instrument group and music achievement, and (g) relationships between improvisation and composition. The present study was designed to fill gaps and extend knowledge in several areas. Contributions that this study offered to the music education profession are outlined below.

30

It is clear that music aptitude testing has a rich history of instrument development and refinement. This study furthers understanding of the Advanced Measures of Music Audiation (Gordon, 1989a), by examining reliability for high school students and also objective validity for high school students, not yet examined in previous research. Since researchers suggest that singing and vocalization in instrumental music are most effective in harmonic contexts, I studied students who sing in tonal, rhythm, and stylistic contexts as part of improvisation and composition instruction. Curriculum used in this study included function-based solfge and rhythm syllables. Research findings suggest that (a) audiation-based instruction in improvisation and composition is beneficial to music achievement (Azzara, 1993; Stoltzfus, 2005), (b) improvisation is related to playing by ear, playing from memory, and reading from notation (McPherson, 1993, 1996; McPherson, Bailey, & Sinclair, 1997), and (c) students experience success when learning to improvise and compose using an audiation-based approach (Azzara, 1993; Shewan, 2002; Snell, 2006; Stoltzfus, 2005). In the current study, I investigated improvisation and composition achievement of high school students taught with a curriculum that provides opportunities for students to play by ear, play from memory, read from notation, improvise, compose, and develop audiation skill. Gender, instrument group, and piano background may have an effect on music achievement. In this study, I examined performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, and composite music achievement by gender

31

and instrument group. To extend findings related to piano background, I also examined differences in performance, improvisation, composition, and composite music achievement among students with background playing a harmonic instrument. Subjects in this study reported experience playing piano, guitar, and harmonium. Burnards findings related to relationships between improvisation and composition (1999, 2000a, 2000b) suggest that 12-year-old students have diverse experiences of, and ascribe varied meanings to, improvisation and composition. This research supports a continuum view of the relationship between these generative processes, but also raises questions for future research. For example: (a) Do ways in which children experience improvisation and composition change with age, and if so, how? and (b) Do older students beginning to improvise and compose experience these relationships in a manner similar to that of younger students? This study attempted to fill this gap by gathering qualitative interview data, as well as observations of teaching and learning, to understand ways in which high school instrumental students experience and ascribe meaning to improvisation and composition.

32

CHAPTER THREE Method of Study Research Setting and Subjects The setting for this study was a suburban high school northeast of Buffalo, New York, the largest suburban school district in Western New York. Six elementary schools, four middle schools, and three high schools provide services to 10,513 students in kindergarten through grade twelve. Music staff includes 47 music teachers and a full-time Instructional Specialist for Fine and Performing Arts (Williamsville Central School District, 2010). Students have opportunities to enroll in multiple choirs, orchestras, bands, and jazz ensembles, in addition to courses in improvisation and music theory. The music department in this high school is recognized nationally as a model program. Participants in this study were 66 students in a non-auditioned concert band, in grades 912. They met for 40 minutes each day, and each student received a 40minute group lesson every six school days. Two music educators teach this concert band. One teaches the full ensemble daily, and also teaches 15 of those students in rotating group lessons. This teacher holds a bachelors degree in music education, a masters degree in horn performance, and a doctorate in music education with an emphasis in composition. The second teacher, who holds a bachelors degree in music education and a masters degree in flute performance, is responsible for teaching group lessons to the remaining 53 students.

33

Teaching techniques common in rehearsals and lessons include singing, movement, playing by ear, aural analysis, improvisation, and performance from notation (Shewan, 2002). Instruction emphasizes development of audiation skill along with instrumental performance. All students in this program are required to submit a composition each year. Compositions are performed at school concerts and the annual Buffalo/Williamsville Poetry, Music, and Dance Celebration. Compositions are also submitted to New York States composition evaluation program. Student compositions from this school are often accepted for the New York State Young Composers Honors Concert. Research Design Using a concurrent embedded mixed methods design (Creswell, 2008, 2009; Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007; Creswell, Plano Clark, Gutmann, & Hanson, 2003), I examined and described curriculum and instructional procedures, students aptitude and achievement, and students attitudes toward and perceptions of improvisation and composition instruction in a non-auditioned wind and percussion ensemble at the secondary level. The design did not include control for all variables, randomization of individual students into groups, or manipulation of independent variables. In a concurrent embedded mixed methods design, one data set provides a supportive, secondary role in a study based primarily on the other data type (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007, p. 67). In this study, I used quantitative data to answer research questions (a) and (b), and embedded qualitative data to answer research questions (c) and (d). I answered research question (e) by considering

34

quantitative and qualitative findings together, analyzing both data sets concurrently after treatment ended. To illustrate this design, Creswell and Plano Clark (2007) suggest the following notation: QUAN(qual). In Chapter Four, consistent with the design of this study, I present quantitative results to answer two research questions: (a) What are performance, composition, and improvisation achievement levels of high school instrumental music students following eight weeks of instruction using a sequential music curriculum? and (b) What are the relationships between music aptitude and (1) performance achievement, (2) improvisation achievement, (3) composition achievement, and (4) composite music achievement? I present qualitative results in Chapter Five to answer two research questions: (c) How do students describe singing, playing by ear, improvising, and composing experiences as part of their instrumental music instruction? and (d) In this particular setting, how is improvisation and composition instruction delivered in the context of ensemble rehearsals? In Chapter Six, I consider quantitative and qualitative results to answer research question (e): How does qualitative data from focus group sessions and observations, together with quantitative aptitude and achievement data, help explain improvisation and composition experiences of high school instrumental music students? Research Subjects Review Board Per requirements of the University of Rochester, I submitted protocol for this study to the Committee on Investigations Involving Human Subjects. Protocol included documentation of my EPRP number (see Appendix H) and a letter of

35

cooperation from the participating school district (see Appendix I). An exemption letter from the Research Subjects Review Board is included in Appendix J. To obtain consent, I met with members of the Concert Band, read aloud the student assent form, and answered questions from students about the study and their participation. Sixtyeight prospective subjects received two copies of an assent form, and parent(s) or guardian(s) of each prospective subject received two copies of a permission form. Prospective subjects and their parent(s) or guardian(s) were invited to retain a copy of each form for their records. Sixty-six of the 68 students in Concert Band returned signed assent and permission forms. Only those subjects were allowed to participate in recordings and focus group interviews. I retained original copies of each form and stored them in my locked office. Pilot Study I conducted a pilot study in February 2010 to examine interjudge reliability coefficients, means, and standard deviations associated with use of rating scales designed for the study. Rating scales were piloted using data from 15 students in a non-auditioned concert band at a suburban Western New York high school with similar curricular objectives. Three judges rated vocal and instrumental performances, vocal and instrumental improvisations, and notated compositions. Interjudge reliability coefficients ranged from .736 to .744, suggesting that these rating scales were appropriate for this study. Based on this pilot study, criteria in some rating scale dimensions were modified. Use of similar rating scales in previous research (e.g., Azzara, 1993; Snell, 2006; Stoltzfus, 2005) and publications (Azzara,

36

2008; Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b), as well as discussions with dissertation committee members, affirmed that these rating scales had appropriate content and construct validity. Procedures Advanced Measures of Music Audiation (AMMA; Gordon, 1989a; see Appendix A), a measure of stabilized music aptitude, was administered at the beginning of the study. For the next eight weeks, subjects improvised and composed music, based on the model in Developing Musicianship through Improvisation (DMTI; Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b). Students learned to improvise and compose music based on Amazing Grace while preparing a published arrangement of Amazing Grace (Ticheli, 1994). Students began by singing and playing the melody and bass line. Next, tonal patterns and rhythm patterns were introduced, first with neutral syllables, then with function-based solfge and rhythm syllables. Students then improvised spontaneous musical phrases, before learning Seven Skills for Improvisation: (a) improvise rhythms using the bass line of harmonic progressions, (b) learn voice leading for harmonic progressions, (c) learn harmonic rhythm, (d) improvise rhythm patterns according to voice leading principles and harmonic progressions, (e) improvise tonal patterns to harmonic progressions, (f) improvise tonal and rhythm patterns to harmonic progressions, and (g) improvise melodies by decorating and embellishing material from previous skills (Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b).

37

In this adaptation of DMTI, students also notated the melody and bass line, and composed music corresponding to the aforementioned skills. These activities were reviewed periodically throughout the eight-week period. Instrumental teachers guided the curriculum during the entire treatment period, teaching students to (a) sing, play, and improvise melodies, bass lines, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns, (b) notate melodies, bass lines, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns, and (c) compose melodies, bass lines, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns. Data Sources, Collection, and Analysis Data Sources Music aptitude. Advanced Measures of Music Audiation (AMMA; Gordon, 1989a) was administered in a 20-minute period at the beginning of the study. The test author reports that AMMA is a reliable instrument for measuring stabilized music aptitude (Gordon, 1989c, 1990, 1991). As Gordon suggests, only composite music aptitude scores were used in data analysis (1997, p. 85). Tonal, rhythm, and composite split-halves reliability coefficients for this administration appear in Table 3.1. In this study, split-halves reliability coefficients for the composite test exceeded the generally accepted standard of .70. All coefficients were lower than those obtained in the national sample. This difference is likely due to (a) the considerably larger number of students and (b) heterogeneity of scores in the national sample.

38

Table 3.1. Comparison of Sample and National Split Halves Reliability for AMMA _________________________________________________________________ Reliability *Sample **National Tonal 0.61 0.81 Rhythm 0.55 0.82 Composite 0.78 0.84 _________________________________________________________________ *Sample N = 66 ** National N = 872 Note. Sample reliability corrected for length using Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula. Music achievement. At the end of the study, each participant performed fifteen tasks: (a) Melody Sing, (b) Melody Play, (c) Melody Write, (d) Bass Line Sing, (e) Bass Line Play, (f) Bass Line Write (g) Skill 1 Sing, (h) Skill 1 Play, (i) Skill 1 Write (j) Skill 5 Sing, (k) Skill 5 Play, (l) Skill 5 Write, (m) Skill 7 Sing, (n) Skill 7 Play, and (o) Skill 7 Write. Judges rated tasks related to the melody and bass line using three-dimension rating scales (tonal, rhythm, and expressive), and tasks from DMTI (Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b) using four-dimension rating scales (harmonic, rhythm, expressive, and improvisation/composition). To facilitate analysis, I aggregated judges' scores for rating scale dimensions, which created one score for each subject, on each of 15 musical tasks. In addition, I created six summary variables for each subject: (a) Performance Achievement, (b) Improvisation Achievement, (c) Composition Achievement, (d) Composite Music Achievement, (e) Vocal Performance, and (f) Instrumental Performance. Prior to

39

aggregating judges' scores, I established interjudge reliability using the process described below, to ensure that combining judges' ratings was appropriate. Establishing interjudge reliability. I examined interjudge reliability for each dimension of each rating scale, to ensure that judges were consistently reliable. Interjudge reliability coefficients for each musical task ranged from .70 to .97; interjudge reliability coefficients for summary variables created for analysis ranged from .91 to .97. All of these coefficients met or exceeded the generally accepted standard of .70. Interjudge reliability coefficients for each musical task used in creating summary variables appear in Table 3.2. Interjudge reliability coefficients for six summary variables created for this analysis appear in Table 3.3. Table 3.2. Interjudge Reliability for Musical Tasks _____________________________________________________________________ Variable Judge 1Judge 2 Judge 2Judge 3 Judge 1Judge 3 _____________________________________________________________________ Melody Sing .92 .92 .91 Melody Play .88 .91 .87 Melody Write .97 .93 .96 Bass Line Sing .89 .93 .88 Bass Line Play .79 .82 .81 Bass Line Write .95 .94 .95 Skill 1 Sing .85 .87 .82 Skill 1 Play .88 .86 .87 Skill 1 Write .90 .91 .92 Skill 5 Sing .84 .86 .81 Skill 5 Play .82 .74 .76 Skill 5 Write .94 .92 .92 Skill 7 Sing .81 .70 .79 Skill 7 Play .76 .73 .80 Skill 7 Write .90 .90 .93 _____________________________________________________________________

40

Table 3.3. Interjudge Reliability for Summary Variables _____________________________________________________________________ Variable Judge 1Judge 2 Judge 2Judge 3 Judge 1Judge 3 _____________________________________________________________________ Perf. Ach. .96 .97 .96 Improv. Ach. .93 .91 .92 Comp. Ach. .95 .95 .96 Composite Ach. .97 .97 .96 Vocal Performance .95 .95 .92 Inst. Performance .92 .91 .91 _____________________________________________________________________

Prior to combining judges' scores, I also conducted paired-sample T-tests to compare judges' mean ratings on each dimension of each scale. Judges mean ratings for each of the 15 tasks appear in Table 3.4. While differences in judges' mean ratings were statistically significant, they were of little practical significance overall. Given that interjudge reliability was acceptable, and judges' mean ratings were similar, it was deemed appropriate to create scores for each musical task, as well as for the summary variables. Performance achievement. Students sang, performed on their instruments, and notated the melody and bass line for Amazing Grace. A recorded rhythm section accompanied student performances (DMTI; Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b). Performance Achievement is based on the mean of judges' ratings on the following musical tasks: Melody Sing, Melody Play, Melody Write, Bass Line Sing, Bass Line Play, and Bass Line Write.

41

Table 3.4. Judges Mean Ratings for Musical Tasks _____________________________________________________________________ Variable Judge 1 Judge 2 Judge 3 _____________________________________________________________________ Melody Sing 11.47 11.08 11.42 Melody Play 9.48 10.67 9.88 Melody Write 9.38 10.08 8.58 Bass Line Sing 11.22 12.06 12.00 Bass Line Play 11.89 12.38 11.41 Bass Line Write 11.50 11.73 10.73 Skill 1 Sing 12.92 14.23 12.73 Skill 1 Play 13.12 14.29 12.15 Skill 1 Write 12.11 13.70 11.21 Skill 5 Sing 14.08 15.24 13.70 Skill 5 Play 13.65 15.09 12.88 Skill 5 Write 12.65 13.77 11.74 Skill 7 Sing 13.06 13.80 12.80 Skill 7 Play 12.70 13.56 12.82 Skill 7 Write 11.03 12.24 9.86 _____________________________________________________________________ Improvisation achievement. Participants improvised responses to three skills from DMTI, with their voices and their instruments, to demonstrate their achievement. In Skill 1, [t]he performer improvises rhythm patterns to the bass line (Azzara & Grunow, 2006, p. 11). In Skill 5, [t]he performer improvises tonal patterns to the harmonic progression using macrobeats (p. 12). In Skill 7, [t]he performer improvises by decorating and embellishing the melodic material in Skill 6 (p. 13). Improvisation Achievement is based on the mean of judges' ratings on the following musical tasks: Skill 1 Sing, Skill 1 Play, Skill 5 Sing, Skill 5 Play, Skill 7 Sing, and Skill 7 Play. Composition achievement. Participants notated the bass line and melody to Amazing Grace. They also composed responses to Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7.

42

Composition Achievement is based on the mean of judges' ratings on the following musical tasks: Skill 1 Write, Skill 5 Write, and Skill 7 Write. Composite music achievement. Composite Music Achievement is the sum of each subject's achievement on the following variables: Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, and Composition Achievement. Vocal and instrumental performance. I created two summary variables to describe students' vocal and instrumental performance. Vocal Performance is the sum of each subject's performance on the following variables: (a) Melody Sing, (b) Bass Line Sing, (c) Skill 1 Sing, (d) Skill 5 Sing, and (e) Skill 7 Sing. Instrumental Performance is the sum of each subject's performance on the following variables: (a) Melody Play, (b) Bass Line Play, (c) Skill 1 Play, (d) Skill 5 Play, and (e) Skill 7 Play. Student perspectives. To obtain student perspectives, I consulted with participating music teachers to identify students who could best describe their musical experiences in a focus group (Creswell, 2008; Krueger & Casey, 2009). From that list, I selected eight participants who represented the makeup of the ensemble (e.g., grade level, musical experience, music aptitude, gender, and instrument group). Instructional procedures. With consent of all participants, I video recorded five Concert Band rehearsals. I took extensive fieldnotes during each rehearsal and on each video recording.

43

Data Collection Music aptitude. AMMA was administered according to directions in the test manual (Gordon, 1989c). I corrected the test using scoring grids that generate tonal, rhythm, and composite raw scores, as well as values for determining split-halves reliability. Performance, improvisation, and composition achievement. Performances were recorded on a MacBook computer with an external microphone, USB audio interface, and Audacity recording software (version 1.2.5). Each student received a worksheet to notate melodies and bass lines, and to compose music with the same parameters as those for Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7. To maintain anonymity, I identified participants by number. I created a linkage file to connect these numbers with student identities. I had sole access to this file, which was stored on a passwordprotected hard drive in a locked office. Rating scales. I adapted a three-dimension rating scale from prior research (Azzara, 1993; Liperote, 2004) to assess performance achievement. This rating scale included continuous tonal and rhythm dimensions and an additive expressive dimension. A four-dimension rating scale, adapted from existing sources (Azzara, 1993, 2008; Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b; Snell, 2006) was used to assess improvisation achievement. This rating scale included continuous harmonic and rhythm dimensions, and additive expressive and improvisation dimensions. A fourdimension rating scale adapted from existing sources (Azzara, 1993, 2008; Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b; Stoltzfus, 2005) was used to assess composition

44

achievement. This rating scale included continuous harmonic and rhythm dimensions, and additive expressive and composition dimensions. Each dimension of each rating scale contained five criteria, which Walters (2010, p. 75) recommends for maximum reliability. Rating scales used in this study are in Appendix C. Instruction for judges. Three judges rated student performances for this study. Each judge is a graduate student at a university school of music in the northeastern United States. One is an experienced private piano teacher; the second has taught trumpet, jazz ensemble, and music education courses in a university setting; and the third has taught high school, middle school, and elementary school instrumental music, private piano and horn, and music education courses in a university setting. Each judge has a high level of personal musicianship, as well as an understanding of and ability to teach improvisation and composition. These judges also participated in the pilot study, in which they demonstrated satisfactory levels of interjudge reliability. To enhance the rating process, I met with judges to provide instruction and practice using rating scales. First, judges sang the melody, bass line, and voice leading for Amazing Grace. Next, judges listened to anchorsstudent performances of the melodyrepresentative of criteria of 1, 3, and 5 for tonal evaluation. I gave instructions for marking students scores on the rating scales, and judges asked questions prior to rating the tonal dimension of students vocal performances of Amazing Grace. After hearing anchors for rhythm and expressive dimensions, judges continued by rating performances on those dimensions. The same

45

procedure was repeated for the bass line of Amazing Grace, and Skill 1 from the DMTI curriculum. Short rest periods were provided between evaluations. After judges completed these evaluations, I provided audio files containing student performances for (a) instrumental performances of melodies and bass lines for Amazing Grace, (b) vocal improvisations for Amazing Grace, based on Skill 5 and Skill 7 from DMTI (Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b), and (c) instrumental improvisations for "Amazing Grace," based on Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7 from DMTI. Judges received student worksheets with notation of (a) melodies and bass lines for Amazing Grace and (b) compositions for Amazing Grace based on Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7 from DMTI. I also provided written instructions for evaluation to the judges (outlining the same procedures used for previous evaluations). Instructions are included in Appendix C. Judges completed singing, playing, and writing evaluations independently within one week. Student perspectives. An experienced researcher provided instruction to the moderator who led the focus group session in this study. The moderator video recorded the focus group session using a Kodak Zi8 video camera, and audio recorded the session on a MacBook computer with Audacity recording software (version 1.2.5). As Krueger and Casey (2009) suggest, I conducted a debriefing session with the moderator after the focus group session. Instructional procedures. I observed five full-ensemble rehearsals, recorded each using a Kodak Zi8 camera, and downloaded the files to my computer. I examined recordings and fieldnotes, to describe (a) methods and techniques, (b)

46

interactions among students, (c) interactions between students and teachers, and (d) other relevant aspects of the instructional context. Data Analysis Quantitative analysis of performance, improvisation, and composition data. To answer research questions (a) and (b), I used descriptive statistics, linear regression, and analysis of variance to examine relationships among music aptitude, music achievement (i.e., singing, performing on an instrument, improvising, and composing), and individual variables (i.e., gender, grade level, experience playing a harmonic instrument, and instrument group). I developed six sub-questions to examine these relationships: (a) What is the relationship between vocal performance and instrumental performance? (b) What is the relationship between improvisation achievement and composition achievement? (c) Does performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, or composite achievement differ significantly by gender? (d) Does performance, improvisation, composition, or composite achievement differ significantly by grade level? (e) Does performance, improvisation, composition, or composite achievement differ significantly with experience playing a harmonic instrument? and (f) Does performance, improvisation, composition, or composite achievement differ significantly by instrument group? Qualitative analysis of focus group data. I analyzed the transcript from the focus group session using procedures suggested by Krueger and Casey (2009). To produce a "systematic, verifiable, sequential, and continuous" (p. 115) analysis, I conducted a transcript-based analysis following the "Classic Approach" outlined by

47

Krueger and Casey (pp. 118122). During this process, I considered themes based on frequency, specificity, emotion, and extensiveness (Krueger & Casey, 2009). My goal was to create a report that would "clearly communicate how participants felt about the topic" (p. 126). Resulting analysis, including verbatim quotes and indepth examples (Brenner, 2006, p. 367), is included in Chapter Five. A complete transcript of the focus group session is in Appendix F. Qualitative analysis of instructional procedures. I analyzed fieldnotes from my observations, as well as notes taken on each video recording, using an analysis process suggested by Charmaz (2006). Beginning the process with coding "generates the bones of your analysis," and forms an "analytic frame from which you build the analysis." These "bones" are subsequently assembled into a working skeleton" (p. 45). Beginning with initial, open coding, I progressed to focused coding and axial coding. I present and describe emerging themes from this analysis, with excerpts from my fieldnotes, as part of the analysis in Chapter Five. Data storage and confidentiality. All recorded performances, student compositions, transcribed solos, fieldnotes, focus group transcripts, and other data files were stored in a locked office on a password-protected hard drive. Student performances were identified by number. I created a linkage file connecting these numbers with students identities. Neither teachers nor judges could identify individual students performances; no data were shared with students music teachers. Students' performance in this study did not affect their grades. I had sole access to all files.

48

Report of Findings In Chapter Four, I present quantitative data for selected statistical procedures. In Chapter Five, I present qualitative data in a narrative report describing themes that emerged from student interviews, as well as themes that emerged from recorded lessons. In Chapter Six, I combine quantitative and qualitative data in a comprehensive analysis. Limitations of the Study In this study, I examined and described student achievement in this unique teaching and learning setting. Curriculum, instructional procedures, instrumental teachers' backgrounds, students aptitude and achievement, and students perceptions of learning to improvise and compose may differ from students in other instructional contexts. Also, because of commonalities inherent in this setting (e.g., same teachers, similar grade levels, similar instructional techniques, same school and community climate), students regularly interact with one another, which may affect individual achievement.

49

CHAPTER FOUR Quantitative Results In this chapter, I present quantitative results to answer two research questions: (a) What are performance, composition, and improvisation achievement levels of high school instrumental music students following eight weeks of instruction using a sequential music curriculum? and (b) What are the relationships between music aptitude and (1) performance achievement, (2) improvisation achievement, (3) composition achievement, and (4) composite music achievement? I begin by describing data gathered for music aptitude, fifteen musical tasks, and six summary variables created for this analysis. Next, I present results of linear regression analyses to answer research question (b). Finally, I present results from analysis of variance to answer the following sub-questions developed for research question (a): What is the relationship between vocal performance and instrumental performance? What is the relationship between improvisation achievement and composition achievement? Does performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, or composite achievement differ significantly by (a) gender, (b) grade level, (c) experience playing a harmonic instrument (e.g., piano, guitar, harmonium), or (d) instrument group? I conclude the chapter with interpretations of quantitative data. Descriptive Statistics AMMA. Advanced Measures of Music Audiation (AMMA; Gordon, 1989a), a measure of stabilized music aptitude, was administered to all students at the beginning of the study. In Table 4.1, I present means and standard deviations for this

50

administration, along with national norms reported in the Manual for the Advanced Measures of Music Audiation (Gordon, 1989c). Table 4.1. Comparison of Sample and National Scores for AMMA _______________________________________________________________ Mean Standard Deviation *Sample **National *Sample **National Tonal 26.64 23.8 4.38 4.37 Rhythm 28.70 26.8 4.26 4.03 Composite 55.33 50.6 8.27 7.91 _______________________________________________________________ Note.*Sample N = 66. **National N = 872. Musical tasks. At the conclusion of the study, each subject performed fifteen musical tasks. Subjects began by singing, playing, and notating the melody and bass line for "Amazing Grace." Next, each subject improvised vocally and instrumentally and composed music based on Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7 in DMTI (Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b). Student performances were accompanied by a recorded rhythm section on DMTI CDs (Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b). Performances were recorded on a MacBook computer with an external microphone, USB audio interface, and Audacity recording software (version 1.2.5). In Table 4.2, I present means and standard deviations from judges ratings on each musical task. In addition, the table includes the theoretical mean and theoretical standard deviation for each musical task. These theoretical measures represent means and standard deviations that would be yielded by an ideal test ideally administered after ideal teaching of a perfectly-distributed representation of students, providing a theoretical benchmark against which obtained results can be compared (Walters, 2010, p. 34).

51

Table 4.2. Means and Standard Deviations of Musical Tasks _____________________________________________________________________ Variable Mean SD Theo. Mean Theo. SD _____________________________________________________________________ Melody Sing 11.32 3.16 7.50 2.50 Melody Play 10.01 3.65 7.50 2.50 Melody Write 9.34 4.19 7.50 2.50 Bass Line Sing 11.76 2.80 7.50 2.50 Bass Line Play 11.89 2.16 7.50 2.50 Bass Line Write 11.32 3.99 7.50 2.50 Skill 1 Sing 13.29 3.63 10.00 3.32 Skill 1 Play 13.19 3.82 10.00 3.32 Skill 1 Write 12.34 4.81 10.00 3.32 Skill 5 Sing 14.34 3.14 10.00 3.32 Skill 5 Play 13.87 2.82 10.00 3.32 Skill 5 Write 12.72 5.53 10.00 3.32 Skill 7 Sing 13.22 3.28 10.00 3.32 Skill 7 Play 13.03 3.25 10.00 3.32 Skill 7 Write 11.05 5.44 10.00 3.32 _____________________________________________________________________ Note. N = 66. Maximum possible scores: 15 (Melody & Bass Line tasks), 20 (Skill 1, Skill 5, & Skill 7). Summary variables. I created the following summary variables for this analysis: (a) Performance Achievement, (b) Improvisation Achievement, (c) Composition Achievement, (d) Composite Music Achievement, (e) Vocal Performance, and (f) Instrumental Performance. These variables combine judges' ratings of multiple musical tasks (see Chapter Three). Obtained mean, obtained standard deviation, theoretical mean, and theoretical standard deviation for each summary variable are presented in Table 4.3.

52

Table 4.3. Means and Standard Deviations of Summary Variables _____________________________________________________________________ Variable Mean SD Theo. Mean Theo. SD _____________________________________________________________________ Performance Ach. 65.65 13.39 45 14.99 Improvisation Ach. 80.94 17.06 60 19.99 Composition Ach. 36.11 14.49 30 9.99 Composite Ach. 182.70 37.78 135 44.99 Vocal Performance 63.94 14.26 45 14.99 Instrumental Performance 61.99 12.60 45 14.99 _____________________________________________________________________ Note. N = 66. AptitudeAchievement Relationships To examine quantitative relationships between music aptitude and (a) performance achievement, (b) improvisation achievement, (c) composition achievement, and (d) composite music achievement, I performed linear regression analyses. Prior to these analyses, I ensured that assumptions for linear regression were met. First, I inspected correlation coefficients among variables used in this analysis. Next, I examined two scatterplots for each regression analysis: (a) the independent variable plotted against the dependent variable, and (b) residual Z-scores plotted against Z-scores of the dependent variable. These examinations revealed that linear regression analysis was indeed appropriate. AMMA is a measure of stabilized music aptitude, "a measure of one's potential or capacity to learn music" (Gordon, 2007, p. 46). AMMA should predict performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, and composite music achievement. I carried out a series of four linear regression analyses to examine these relationships. Results

53

of a linear regression analysis for the relationship between music aptitude and performance achievement are presented in Table 4.4. Table 4.4. Summary of Linear Regression for the Relationship Between Music Aptitude and Performance Achievement _____________________________________________________________________ Variable B SE(B) t Sig. _____________________________________________________________________ Intercept 29.801 10.377 2.872 .006** Aptitude .648 .186 3.493 .001** ____________________________________________________________________ Note. R2= .160. ** p < .01. Next, I examined the relationship between music aptitude and improvisation achievement. Results of this linear regression analysis are presented in Table 4.5. Table 4.5. Summary of Linear Regression for the Relationship Between Music Aptitude and Improvisation Achievement _____________________________________________________________________ Variable B SE(B) t Sig. _____________________________________________________________________ Intercept 13.157 11.610 1.133 .261 Aptitude 1.225 .208 5.902 .000*** ____________________________________________________________________ Note. R2= .352. *** p <.001. I conducted a third linear regression analysis to examine the relationship between music aptitude and composition achievement. Results of this analysis are presented in Table 4.6. In a final linear regression analysis, I examined the relationship between music aptitude and composite music achievement. Results are presented in Table 4.7.

54

Table 4.6. Summary of Linear Regression for the Relationship Between Music Aptitude and Composition Achievement _____________________________________________________________________ Variable B SE(B) t Sig. _____________________________________________________________________ Intercept 25.275 12.175 2.076 .042* Aptitude .196 .218 .899 .372 ____________________________________________________________________ Note. R2= .012. * p < .05. Table 4.7. Summary of Linear Regression for the Relationship Between Music Aptitude and Composite Music Achievement _____________________________________________________________________ Variable B SE(B) t Sig. _____________________________________________________________________ Intercept 68.233 28.486 2.395 .020* Aptitude 2.069 .509 4.062 .000*** ____________________________________________________________________ Note. R2= .205. * p < .05. *** p <.001. Singing Playing Relationship To examine the quantitative relationship between singing and performing on a music instrument, I calculated the correlation coefficient between vocal performance and instrumental performance. Correlation coefficients among vocal and instrumental performances of the melody and bass line for "Amazing Grace" are presented in Table 4.8. The correlation coefficient between vocal performance on all tasks (Melody, Bass Line, Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7) and instrumental performance on all tasks is presented in Table 4.9.

55

Table 4.8. Correlation Coefficients for Relationships Between Vocal and Instrumental Tasks _____________________________________________________________________ Measure 1 2 3 4 (VM) (IM) (VBL) (IBL) _____________________________________________________________________ 1. Vocal Melody (VM) .61*** .76*** .02 2. Instrumental Melody (IM) .59*** .19 3. Vocal Bass Line (VBL) .16 4. Instrumental Bass Line (IBL) _____________________________________________________________________ Note. *** p <.001. Table 4.9. Correlation Coefficient for the Relationship Between Overall Vocal Performance and Overall Instrumental Performance _____________________________________________________________________ Measure Vocal Performance Instrumental Performance _____________________________________________________________________ Vocal Performance .55** Instrumental Performance _____________________________________________________________________ Note. ** p < .01. Improvisation Composition Relationship To examine the quantitative relationship between improvisation achievement and composition achievement, I calculated the correlation coefficient between the two variables. Correlation coefficients among individual improvisation and composition tasks are presented in Table 4.10; the correlation coefficient between composite summary variables is presented in Table 4.11.

56

Table 4.10 Correlation Coefficients for Relationships Among Vocal Improvisation, Instrumental Improvisation, and Composition _____________________________________________________________________ Measure 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 (S1S) (S1P) (S1W) (S5S) (S5P) (S5W) (S7S) (S7P) (S7W) _____________________________________________________________________ 1. Sk1S .78*** .26* .74*** .61*** .26* .75*** .74*** .24* 2. Sk1P .28* .53*** .75*** .31* .67*** .72*** .25* 3. Sk1W .04 .29* .77*** .09 .23 .73*** 4. Sk5S .45*** .06 .77*** .64*** .05 5. Sk5P .33** .55*** .69*** .25** 6. Sk5W .16 .26* .79*** 7. Sk7S .72*** .09 8. Sk7P .26* 9. Sk7W _____________________________________________________________________ Note. S=Sing, P=Play, W=Write. * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p <.001. Table 4.11 Correlation Coefficient for the Relationship Between Improvisation and Composition _____________________________________________________________________ Measure Improvisation Composition _____________________________________________________________________ Improvisation .27* Composition _____________________________________________________________________ Note. * p < .05. Comparisons Among Groups In research question (a) of this study, I ask: What are performance, composition, and improvisation achievement levels of high school instrumental music students following eight weeks of instruction using a sequential curriculum? Along with descriptive statistics for each of these musical tasks and summary variables, I examined differences in performance, composition, improvisation, and composite music achievement among groupings by (a) gender, (b) grade level, (c) experience playing a harmonic instrument, and (d) instrument group. I conducted analysis of

57

variance to determine significant differences in these groups. Prior to this analysis, I examined distributions of each dependent variable to check for normality, and conducted Levene's Test for homogeneity of variance. Based on these examinations, I deemed it appropriate to proceed with analysis. Gender To determine significant effects of gender on performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, or composite music achievement, I conducted analysis of variance. Means and standard deviations for performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, and composite music achievement are displayed by gender in Table 4.12. Table 4.12. Means and Standard Deviations for Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Achievement by Gender _____________________________________________________________________ Variable Gender Mean SD _____________________________________________________________________ Performance Achievement Male 61.67 13.82 Female 69.89 11.69 Improvisation Achievement Male Female Composition Achievement Male Female 77.59 84.50 32.85 36.11 18.08 15.40 15.22 14.49

Composite Achievement

Male 172.11 38.50 Female 193.95 34.08 _____________________________________________________________________ Note. Male N = 34, Female N = 32. I tested the null hypothesis that gender has no significant effect on performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, or

58

composite music achievement. Results of this analysis of variance appear in Table 4.13. Table 4.13. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effect of Gender on Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Music Achievement _____________________________________________________________________ Variable and source SS MS F(1, 64) p _____________________________________________________________________ Performance Achievement Between 1113.52 1113.52 6.76 .01* Within 10540.58 164.70 Improvisation Achievement Between 787.52 Within 18134.90 Composition Achievement Between Within

787.52 283.36

2.78

.10

742.12 12904.36

742.12 201.63

3.68

.06

Composite Music Achievement Between 7863.09 Within 84920.63 Note. * p < .05.

7863.09 1326.89

5.93

.02*

Grade Level Means and standard deviations for performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, and composite music achievement are displayed by grade level in Table 4.14.

59

Table 4.14. Means and Standard Deviations for Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Achievement by Grade Level _____________________________________________________________________ Variable Grade Mean SD _____________________________________________________________________ Performance Achievement 9 65.38 11.81 10 69.28 14.40 11 63.36 16.11 12 65.58 13.71 Improvisation Achievement 9 75.60 15.75 10 86.08 18.30 11 86.09 19.83 12 84.25 9.27 Composition Achievement 9 38.89 12.76 10 38.89 9.30 11 30.84 17.07 12 31.00 19.91 Composite Achievement 9 179.87 35.07 10 194.25 37.73 11 180.29 46.67 12 180.83 33.30 _____________________________________________________________________ Note. Grade 9 N=31, Grade 10 N=12, Grade 11 N=15, Grade 12 N=8. To determine significant effects of grade level on performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, or composite music achievement, I conducted analysis of variance. I tested the null hypothesis that grade level has no significant effect on performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, or composite music achievement. Results of this analysis of variance appear in Table 4.15. Experience Playing a Harmonic Instrument Means and standard deviations for performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, and composite music achievement are displayed by experience playing a harmonic instrument in Table 4.16.

60

Table 4.15. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effect of Grade Level on Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Music Achievement _____________________________________________________________________ Variable and source SS MS F(3, 62) p _____________________________________________________________________ Performance Achievement Between 239.25 79.75 .43 .73 Within 11414.84 184.11 Improvisation Achievement Between 1686.03 Within 17236.39 Composition Achievement Between Within

562.01 278.01

2.02

.12

957.46 12689.02

319.153 204.66

1.56

.21

Composite Music Achievement Between 1964.01 654.67 .45 .72 Within 90819.70 1464.83 _____________________________________________________________________ Table 4.16. Means and Standard Deviations for Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Achievement by Experience Playing a Harmonic Instrument _____________________________________________________________________ Variable Experience Mean SD _____________________________________________________________________ Performance Achievement Yes 67.53 13.90 No 64.43 13.08 Improvisation Achievement Yes No Composition Achievement Yes No 85.27 78.13 36.91 35.58 20.06 14.37 15.27 14.13

Composite Achievement

Yes 189.71 39.22 No 178.14 36.59 _____________________________________________________________________ Note. Yes N = 26, No N = 40.

61

To determine significant effects of experience playing a harmonic instrument on performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, and composite music achievement, I conducted analysis of variance. I tested the null hypothesis that experience playing a harmonic instrument has no significant effect on performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, or composite music achievement. Results of this analysis of variance appear in Table 4.17. Table 4.17. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effect of Experience Playing a Harmonic Instrument on Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Music Achievement _____________________________________________________________________ Variable and source SS MS F(1, 64) p _____________________________________________________________________ Performance Achievement Between 150.68 150.68 .84 .36 Within 11503.42 179.74 Improvisation Achievement Between 804.27 Within 18118.16 Composition Achievement Between Within

804.27 283.10

2.84

.10

27.75 13618.74

27.75 212.793

.13

.72

Composite Music Achievement Between 2107.00 2107.00 1.49 .23 Within 90676.71 1416.82 _____________________________________________________________________

62

Instrument Group Means and standard deviations for performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, and composite music achievement are displayed by instrument group in Table 4.18. Table 4.18. Means and Standard Deviations for Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Achievement by Instrument Group _____________________________________________________________________ Variable Instrument Group Mean SD _____________________________________________________________________ Performance Achievement Woodwind 70.48 10.24 Brass 61.75 13.80 Percussion 43.40 2.60 Improvisation Achievement Woodwind Brass Percussion Composition Achievement Woodwind Brass Percussion 86.57 75.46 58.93 39.32 33.75 20.33 14.96 16.44 10.79 13.90 14.15 9.08

Composite Achievement

Woodwind 196.37 31.47 Brass 170.95 35.68 Percussion 122.67 8.63 _____________________________________________________________________ Note. Woodwind N = 40, Brass N = 21, Percussion N= 5. To determine significant effects of instrument group on performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, or composite music achievement, I conducted analysis of variance. I tested the null hypothesis that instrument group has no significant effect on performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, or composite music achievement. Results of this analysis of variance appear in Table 4.19.

63

Table 4.19. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effect of Instrument Group on Performance Achievement, Improvisation Achievement, Composition Achievement, and Composite Music Achievement _____________________________________________________________________ Variable and source SS MS F(2, 63) p _____________________________________________________________________ Performance Achievement Between 3729.82 1864.91 14.826 .00*** Within 7924.28 125.78 Improvisation Achievement Between 4318.41 Within 14604.02 Composition Achievement Between Within

2159.20 231.81

9.32

.00***

1773.18 11873.30

886.59 188.47

4.70

.01*

Composite Music Achievement Between 28389.25 Within 64394.46 Note. * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p <.001.

14194.63 1022.13

13.887

.00***

Tests for Interactions I conducted comparisons among groups by (a) gender, (b) grade level, (c) experience playing a harmonic instrument, and (d) instrument group. One-way analysis of variance revealed the following significant differences: (a) by gender for performance achievement, (b) by gender for composite music achievement, (c) by instrument group for performance achievement, (d) by instrument group for improvisation achievement, (e) by instrument group for composition achievement, and (f) by instrument group for composite music achievement. To better understand these significant differences, I performed two-way analysis of variance to explore interactions that might be present.

64

Two potential interactions emerged from this analysis. I observed: (a) a statistically significant interaction between instrument group and grade level for performance achievement, and (b) a nearly statistically significant interaction between instrument group and experience playing a harmonic instrument for improvisation achievement. Examination of the data suggests that these interactions are uninterpretable and may lead to illogical conclusions, namely that (a) brass performance achievement decreases as students age, and (b) experience playing a harmonic instrument negatively influences improvisation ability of percussionists. In both cases, analysis suggests that these potential interactions likely emerged as statistically significant by chance. Interpretation Music Aptitude Music aptitude was measured at the outset of the study using AMMA (Gordon, 1989a). This administration achieved an acceptable level of split-halves reliability (0.78; corrected for length using the Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula). Reliability in this administration was slightly lower than that reported in the AMMA test manual; the difference was likely due to (a) a smaller sample size and (b) a smaller range of scores. Raw scores from this administration yielded results comparable to national norms established by the test author. Specifically, tonal, rhythm, and composite mean raw scores and standard deviations were higher than, but within one standard deviation of, norms provided in the test manual (Gordon, 1989c). These differences may have occurred for one or more of the following

65

reasons: (a) subjects in this study are not representative of the population, (b) published norms from 1989 are now outdated, or (c) published norms were not representative of the population. The third reason may be the most plausible, since Gordon states in the test manual that among high school students, "[l]ittle attention was given to proportionality and to the representative nature of the sample" (1989c, p. 38). Musical Tasks and Summary Variables Performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, and composite music achievement were measured using summary variables constructed from various musical skills. A detailed description of this process is in Chapter Three. For all fifteen musical tasks and the six summary variables, the obtained mean was higher than the theoretical mean. Obtained standard deviation was smaller than theoretical standard deviation, with the exception of four musical tasks (Bass Line Play, Skill 5 Sing, Skill 7 Sing, and Skill 7 Play) and one summary variable (Composition Achievement). Within each related group of musical tasks (i.e., singing, playing, and writing), the writing dimension consistently exhibited a smaller mean and larger degree of variability than playing or singing. Within all but one of these groups, mean scores for singing were highest, followed by those for playing, and writing. On the three bass line tasks, the mean score for playing was highest, followed by singing and writing. Interjudge reliability was acceptable for each of these tasks (.70.97).

66

Aptitude Achievement Relationships I also sought to determine the extent to which music aptitude (AMMA) was predictive of performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, and composite music achievement. I conducted linear regression analyses to answer these questions. Prior to performing regression analysis, I examined correlations among music aptitude, performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, and composite music achievement. All correlations were significant at the .05 level or better, with the exception of the relationship between music aptitude and composition achievement. Performance achievement and composite music achievement correlated most strongly; strong correlations ( > .7 ) also existed between: (a) improvisation achievement and composite music achievement, (b) composition achievement and composite music achievement, (c) performance achievement and improvisation achievement, and (d) performance achievement and composition achievement. To confirm that assumptions for linear regression were met, I inspected scatterplots of the relationship (a) between music aptitude and each dependent variable, and (b) between Z-scores of predicted values of the dependent variable and Z-scores of residuals. These inspections confirmed that proceeding with linear regression analysis was appropriate. Results from the first linear regression analysis indicate that for each onepoint increase in raw score on AMMA, performance achievement would increase by

67

.648 points. Sixteen percent of the variability in performance achievement is accounted for by music aptitude (R2 = .160). Linear regression for music aptitude and improvisation achievement indicates that for each one-point increase in raw score on AMMA, improvisation achievement would increase by 1.225 points. Interpreting the R2 value of .352 reveals that 35.2% of the variability in improvisation achievement is accounted for by music aptitude. A third linear regression analysis examined the extent to which music aptitude was predictive of composition achievement. Output indicates that for each one-point increase in raw score on AMMA, composition achievement would increase by .196 points. Further, in this model, music aptitude accounts for 1.2% of the variability in composition achievement (R2 = .012). Finally, I conducted a linear regression analysis to predict composite music achievement based on music aptitude. According to results, for each one-point increase in raw score on AMMA, composite music achievement would increase by 2.069 points. An R2 value of .205 indicates that 20.5% of the variability in composite music achievement is explained by music aptitude. Singing Playing Relationships To better understand relationships between singing and playing in this sample, I examined two correlation matrices. The first presented relationships between (a) singing the melody, (b) playing the melody, (c) singing the bass line, and (d) playing the bass line. A strong, significant correlation was observed between singing the melody and singing the bass line. Moderate, but significant correlations occurred

68

between singing and playing the melody, and between playing the melody and singing the bass line. Curiously, instrumental performance of the bass line had a weak correlation (.02 .19) with (a) singing the melody, (b) playing the melody, and (c) singing the bass line. I examined a second correlation matrix that revealed the relationship between overall vocal performance (i.e., an aggregate of melody, bass line, and improvisation tasks) and overall instrumental performance (i.e., an aggregate of melody, bass line, and improvisation tasks). A moderate (.55) and statistically significant relationship exists between vocal and instrumental performance. Improvisation Composition Relationships To understand relationships between improvisation and composition tasks in this sample, I examined two correlation matrices. The first displayed correlations among (a) vocal performance of three improvisational tasks (Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7), (b) instrumental performance of three improvisational tasks (Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7), and (c) compositions with the parameters of Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7. Strong, significant correlations occurred among (a) all three vocal improvisation tasks, (b) all three instrumental improvisation tasks, (c) all three composition tasks, (d) Skill 1 Sing and Skill 1 Play, (e) Skill 1 Sing and Skill 7 Play, and (f) Skill 7 Sing and Skill 7 Play. The second correlation matrix revealed the relationship between overall improvisation achievement (singing and playing Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7) and

69

overall composition achievement (Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7). I observed a weak (0.27) but statistically significant correlation. Comparisons of Groups I conducted one-way analysis of variance to examine mean differences in performance achievement, improvisation achievement, composition achievement, and composite music achievement, based on (a) gender, (b) grade level, (c) experience playing a harmonic instrument, and (d) instrument group. When comparing achievement by gender, female subjects outperformed male subjects on all four measures. Differences in achievement by gender were significant for performance achievement (p = .01) and composite music achievement (p = .02); the difference for composition achievement approached statistical significance (p = .06). When compared by grade level, students in Grade 10 scored highest on each of the four measures; however, differences in achievement were not statistically significant. Similarly, while students with experience playing a harmonic instrument scored higher on each of the measures, their experience did not have a statistically significant effect. One-way analysis of variance revealed significant effects of instrument group on all achievement measures. Subjects who played woodwind instruments scored highest on all achievement measures. Brass-playing subjects scored slightly lower, while percussionists' scores were substantially lower on all measures. Two-way analysis of variance revealed two potential interactions, which were uninterpretable, and seem to have appeared statistically significant by chance.

70

CHAPTER FIVE Qualitative Results In this chapter, I present qualitative results to answer research questions (c) and (d): (c) How do students describe singing, playing by ear, improvising, and composing experiences as a part of their instrumental music instruction? and (d) In this particular setting, how is improvisation and composition instruction delivered in the context of ensemble rehearsals? I begin with data pertaining to student perspectives, gathered during a focus group session. Next, I present data from observations of five Concert Band rehearsals, before concluding the chapter with interpretation of data. Student Perspectives On June 8, 2010, seven students participated in a focus group. The purpose of the focus group was to describe students' perspectives related to improvising and composing, namely: (a) students' prior experience improvising and composing, (b) their views of any relationships between improvising and composing, and (c) how they experienced learning to improvise and compose using curriculum designed for this study. Each of these students was a member of the Concert Band and participated in rehearsals throughout the study. To select students for the focus group, I approached instrumental music teachers to request a list of 1520 students, representing various grade levels and instrument groups, who would be comfortable sharing their thoughts in a focus group. From that list, I selected eight students: two from each grade level (912), four male and four female, four with aptitudes above the 50th percentile, four with aptitudes

71

below the 50th percentile, and students representative of all instrument groups (three woodwind, three brass, two percussion). The focus group met for one hour during the final week of the study. One student was absent on the day the focus group met; consequently, only seven students participated in this session. To maintain anonymity, the moderator invited each student to select a pseudonym, which also served as an initial "icebreaker." Students chose the pseudonyms Herman, Jake, Kevin, Lebron, Mustang, Tina, and Yolanda. Initial questions required simple responses intended to help participants feel comfortable. Subsequent questions explored issues in greater depth. The moderator asked follow-up questions and provided prompts as appropriate throughout the focus group session. The moderator's guide for this focus group is in Appendix E. For a complete transcript of the focus group session, see Appendix F. Following the focus group session, I met with the moderator for a debriefing session, as Krueger and Casey suggest (2009). Notes from our conversation, along with the transcript of the focus group session, provided data for analysis. I analyzed the transcript following Krueger and Casey's "Classic Approach" (2009, pp. 118 122). Prior to analysis, the moderator and one student participant reviewed the transcript. In addition, the focus group moderator examined the manuscript to ensure that analysis accurately reflected what transpired in the focus group. Maxwell (1998) refers to "member checks" as "the single most important way of ruling out the possibility of your misinterpreting the meaning of what the participants say and the

72

perspective they have on what is going on" (p. 94). Results of this analysis are presented in the following paragraphs. Improvisation Students reported limited experience with improvisation prior to this study. Jake said, "I've heard of improvisation but I haven't really done it myself." Herman seemed to view improvisation as somewhat unapproachable: "I never thought I'd be able to do improvisation. I always thought that it was really for professional people" Mustang, who had improvised previously, said, "I, I improvised on guitar before, but" The moderator invited participants who had prior experience improvising to compare their experiences in this study with improvisation they had done in the past. According to Mustang, "There were more steps to [improvisation in this study]. It wasn't just kind of like, and now just like there was like tones and stuff first, and it was just like, throughout the other ones it's just kind of like 'Oh, you're changing chords,' not improvising that chord, so it was a little more step by step." Jake expressed a similar idea: When I was improvising before and creating composition, it was basically me hitting a C and a D and an E-flat and let's see what works, but I mean with like, with our study with Dr., Mr. Stringham, it's, like, "Here's the chord tones, now try to make a little bit of this," and, like, "Here's like the big beats, and then try to do a little bit with this." So it's a lot more planned and structured, which could lead to a better result of improvisation.

73

When asked if they found it difficult to improvise, students expressed varied opinions. Jake stated, "I kind of have perfect pitch," and shared that his personal experience, which includes playing jazz piano, made improvising "kind of easier." Yolanda found it difficult to improvise in a small group, while Mustang, Herman, and Lebron indicated that improvising in a large group was challenging for them. In Lebron's words, "It's like everybody talking at the same time." Kevin thought that improvisation was difficult initially, because he was unfamiliar with solfge and does not have perfect pitch, but he learned "how you can, like, put the notes together and how to make it sound good." For Kevin, learning to improvise is a journey: "I still am not that great at improv-ing [sic] but, like, I'm like still working on it." Tina found that "in the beginning I just, like, was super confused, but then it got, like, easier and less confusing as it went on." Lebron shared a contrasting opinion, stating that improvisation was difficult for him as a percussionist: It's just tough when you're, like, the polar opposite ofJake.I only hear crash cymbals, I only hear a bass drum or I hear a snare beat. I mean for me, determining pitchesI used to play piano when I was a little younger, but, I mean, I was never that great, and, it's, it's tough to figure out, like how to improvise, like, where do you begin, or like what works, and like, you play a note and it's like, "Oh, gee, thisthis doesn't sound right"it'sit's tough, it's not easy.

74

Composition Two students gave detailed descriptions of their composing experience before this study. Jake reported that he had been composing since first grade, "writing songs for different little, um, contests." Lebron said, "[I]t's always interesting, because it, like, kind of starts on one instrument and then within the percussion section, I mean, it can be 'til, like, the xylophone and the marimba and, like, the suspended cymbal, and it's basically, like, trying to, like, bring everything together." Later, he described his prior approach to composing as, "Let's see what happens." Lebron stated that he is "still a little confused about how music is composed and like, how it's put together." While his prior composing experience had not helped him understand "the fulllike, the how and, like, why this works, and, likethelike, the background stuff throughout creating musicI feel likeI think I got it correct this time" Lebron expressed a rather lofty view of composition, suggesting that it might be beyond a typical student: I just feel like it takes, like, somebody with, like, an incredible understanding of solfge, and different musical elements, and possibly.compose and get the right notes and know, like, time signature, and theand theuh, what's thekey signature, measure signature. I mean, it's justmaybe I don't have that level? That could be another thing? I'm not at that level, but I'm sure for the people who are, this thing isnot very difficult at all, but, I mean, for the people who aren't there yetit'sit's rather tough.

75

Kevin compared his experience in this study to previous composition experience. In this high school instrumental music program, all students are required to compose a piece of music each year. Kevin stated that their annual composition assignment was "harder, 'cause I didn't really, I guess I just kind of like didn't, I just kind of, again, like, I put things together and, like, see what happens." In this study, Kevin says, "I felt like it made everything so much more easier. Like, I understood, like, tones and, like, all the chords and everything." Yolanda felt that it "just wasn't really in my comfort zone to do something that was on my own, like I would rather just read someone else's music." Several students felt challenged finding a place to begin composing. Tina said, "I never knew, like, what to, like, write." Jake stated, "starting composition, or trying to come up with a composition is kind of very hard." Similar to the difficulty that Lebron discussed, Tina, also a percussionist, reported that composing was challenging for her. She said, Since, like, I play percussion, like, I don't really get some of, likelike, thethe tones because, like, I can hear a note, like, I don't automatically know that it's, like, such-and-such a note and it's, like, in this scale and stuff. I mean, like, I know, like, how to read music and, like, I know my scales, um, so, like, I know how to do that stuff but, like, I dont like automatically, like, know, like, all the different tones and stuff. So that made it, like, somewhat difficult.

76

She expressed the opinion that students who played instruments other than percussion had developed this prior knowledge: "Like, like, everybody else had knew what it was, and, like, I, like, had to, like, learn it, like, now." MelodyBass LinePatternsSkills Connections Most students agreed that learning the melody and bass line by ear made it easier for them to improvise and compose. Herman felt that "this teaches you to kind of think outside of the paper." In Herman's section, he only hears "the low brass section sometimesand, um, I hear a little bit of flute." Learning "the actual melody and then there's the bass parts that we learnedandit kinda, like, different instruments play different parts, kinda opens your eyes topossibilities" Tina was less enthusiastic, and stated that learning these elements "helped kind of-ish." For Lebron, the melody and bass line provided a "reasonable starting point." Several students also indicated that learning tonal and rhythm patterns helped them to improvise and compose. Jake said, "...you can kinda fall back on what we kind of did earlier in the year as far as rhythms or tonal things" For Lebron, these skills were "one more thing to fall back on in your music background" Tina stated that understanding "what went with the song" was helpful. ImprovisationComposition Connections When asked if the processes of improvisation and composition were similar or different, students expressed a variety of viewpoints. Herman responded, "I guess they can go hand in handlike, you canI guess, use one to create the other." For Jake, "composition is taking improv and takingthese steps and then putting it down

77

on paperimprov is easy, but comp is just very very hard in thatrespect." Kevin expressed that while the two were related, composition was much harder. You can improvise and then, like, something will come out and it will sound, like, amazing, but when it comes to writing it down on paper, it can be so much harder. And, you know, evenyou can even forget what you just did, too. Lebron compared it to his experience improvising: "just playing this and it's just, you play it, it's real simple" In contrast, when composing, Someone hands you a blank sheet of paper and it's like, "Wellyouyou're up," and it's like, where do you start, where do you begin, where do you do this and thatand it's, a different exI don't want to say it's a, I guess it is a little tougher experience, but it's a different experience. Yolanda described the relationship this way: I think that they just go hand in hand, like, in order to improvise or compose, you have to have an understanding of what notes would go good, andand II tend to think of improvising as an on-the-spot thing, but I think itlike improvising can become composition? In Tina's view: And I think, like, um, like in, um, improvisation, like, s- like, um, sometimes, like, it's not, like, the same, it's just, like, a one-time thing, sometimes, um, it's, like, different every time depending on what you're doing. Composition, like, once you write it down, you either go back and change it or just keep it the

78

way it is. And improvisation, you just, like, do it and then it's done, or you can write it down and make it into a composition. Suggestions for Future Use Participants offered a variety of suggestions for future use of this curriculum. Several students indicated that they didn't understand the purpose for this study; one suggested that students should decide whether their teachers would implement this curriculum. Others opined that they would have liked a more detailed explanation of how various tasks fit together, and why they were being undertaken. In Kevin's words: Like, people didn't understand, like, the solfge-ing. Like, they didn't understand, likelike, in my section at least, we didn't understand what we were playingand we didn't really understand why we were doing this, like, we knew we were doing it for a doctoral study, but, like, there was really no kind of motivation behind it. So, we were just, like, really clueless and, likelike, I talked to other people in other sections and they were like, "I don't really understand what's going on either." During the focus group session, the moderator posed a follow up question: "At what point did youhave thisepiphany'Ohhhh, so this is why we're doing this'?" Herman described a moment in class when "kind of a light bulb just clicked on." For Lebron, the process made sense when they began to combine skills: "but once you finally saw, like, what itlike, the climax I guess, like, what eventually it bounced to, I think that's when I actually understarted to understand what the whole point of

79

this is." These skills started to make sense to Kevin as the spring concert approached. Mr. Smith and the students gave a brief demonstration of skills students were learning in this study prior to the band's performance of Ticheli's arrangement of "Amazing Grace." All students played the melody and bass line by ear, and demonstrated Skill 1 and Skill 5 from DMTI (Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b). Several small groups of three and four students demonstrated Skill 7. For Kevin, "When they had, like, the groups.well, before that we did, like, the chord tones and the chord roots and everything, like, on stage, like, that's when everything, like, really, like, sunk in, like, oh, I understand it now." Jake said: I guess it was building up to this all that time, but I guess we didn't know this was going to be, like, the resulting product that, you know, after this you're gonna be take awayyou're gonna take away the skills that you need, like, for improv-ing in a group or improv-ing on your instrument or something, or applying it to maybe composition, or applying it maybe tolike, developing your, um, skills in music I guess? Several students agreed that improvisation was difficult in a group setting, because the sound of all students improvising simultaneously made it difficult to hear one's own improvisations. Jake pointed out that varying levels of student ability made it difficult to "get everyone on the same page." He suggested different approaches for "different people, like, for the peoplelike, maybe percussion whoaren't really exposed to as muchlike, sounds and stuff?" Mustang's view

80

was that "improvisation is something made for, like, a person to improv"; Lebron called improvising "a personal thing." A number of students agreed that early skills in this curriculum became repetitive. In Tina's words: A lot of times a bunch of people didnt know what was going on. I think a bun[ch]like probably those that did this already, but like, um, so, like, a lot of times, like, for a couple of the different things, just, like, nobody knew what it wasso we had to go over it, like, over and over again and then [Mr. Smith] still didn't explain it 'cause I don't think, umum, Mr. Smith, I don't think, like, he knew that nobody knew what, like, what was happening, so maybe so somebody should have told him that nobody knew what was happening or, just, like, um, I mean, like, in the beginning, um, hehe should have asked, like, what everybody knew about and what they didn't know about something, so that, um, he could have, like, taught us what we didn't know already, and, like, not like gone over and over what we did know. Yolanda wondered if skills she developed in this study would transfer to other repertoire: "And if they were to throw us, like, if they were to get a different song and have us sing the chord tones, I don't think I [could]." Similarly, Kevin said, "If we changed to another song everything would be so much harder." Jake suggested "a song for each step, so we would kind of know how to use the skills in other songs." Jake also thought that "the pattern stuff" could be taught in the full ensemble

81

rehearsal, but that more advanced skills might be better suited for small-group lessons. Students were not in agreement regarding the appropriateness of these activities for a non-auditioned wind and percussion ensemble. Herman felt "like it was kind of geared more towardspeople who...actually do want to do music later in their life." Yolanda countered, "I kind of disagree with that. I think that the way they walked us through it, andthey made it go baby steps for us. They kind of showed us that anyone can do itand they made it really easy" Lebron observed that part of the success of this study might be attributed to common activities in this program's ensemble rehearsals. He said: Within our own band we do work on that stuff a lot with our concert, with our concert songs and things like that, so people catch on that pretty quickly. I don't know if he, like, I mean if you go to another school where they don't really do as much of ear tunes, or as, like, uh, improvisation, things like that, butthatthat's just, I mean, that's just something about our school that we do work on that a little harder. Summary Students in the focus group summarized their participation in this curriculum as a beneficial learning experience. Lebron described the study as "an interesting experiencesomething we really were exposed to, that opens your eyes a little bit toward music in general and its composition." In Yolanda's words: I think it was a good start and it was a foundation for improvisingit made

82

sense now to improvise on that song, so if I were to go forward with improvising, then I could do the same thing for other stuffif we don't want to go into music ever againthen, itit won't really matter, but we have the basic instruction for it. I think the fact that this was a group thing and we did do this with an entire band and we can allhave some sort of improvising now, I think was successful in that aspect. Like, I mean, it would be nice to have individual lessons and obviously we'd all be doing a lotwe'd have exactly what our needs were, but the fact that we did do this with an entire band andour entire band, we pretty much can improvise nowI think that'simpressive. Instructional Procedures Because of the unique nature of this instrumental music program, I documented methods and techniques, interactions among students, interactions among students and teachers, and other relevant aspects of this instructional context. To do so, I observed five full-ensemble rehearsals during the study. I recorded these rehearsals using a Kodak Zi8 camera, and downloaded them to my computer. During each rehearsal, I took fieldnotes. At the conclusion of the study, I reviewed each recording and took additional notes for analysis. Through the process of analyzing fieldnotes, five themes emerged: (a) musicianship, (b) understanding of the learning process, (c) interactions, (d) classroom environment, and (e) connections. Following is a description of each theme, with excerpts from my fieldnotes.

83

Musicianship A primary objective of this instrumental music program is to develop students' musicianship. Performance from notation on a wind instrument is often the primary objective of secondary instrumental music instruction. In this setting, teachers promote a broader view of musicianship by developing students' abilities to listen, sing, move, play by ear, and read and compose music with comprehension. Students' instruments are treated as extensions of their bodies; consequently, students are taught to sing in many tonalities and move their bodies in several meters, to inform their instrumental performance. Teachers constantly emphasize musical performance, both with voices and instruments. Countless reminders included: "get your feet flat," "sit up," to perform with a "nice big tone," and to "be very musical." Students were invited to move their bodies while chanting and singing. At one point, Mr. Smith said, "Get some movement in your body! Don't feel self-consciousit's when you sit like a bump on a log that you look silly!" Expectations for students to perform musically were consistent throughout rehearsals. Teachers modeled musical performance by singing and playing expressively, in tune and at consistent tempos. Students learned skills for this study during the "warm-up" at the beginning of rehearsal. Mr. Smith treated the curricular content (e.g., singing melodies, bass lines, tonal patterns, rhythm patterns) as fundamental, worth doing well.

84

Understanding of the Learning Process Mr. Smith demonstrated his understanding of how persons learn music in several ways. Specifically, he helped students to (a) encounter music aurally before being introduced to notation, (b) learn theoretical concepts in musical contexts, (c) segment large tasks into manageable parts, (d) anticipate and predict musical events, (e) group musical ideas, and (f) make comparisons among musical elements. This curriculum requires students to encounter material aurally prior to notation, a normal aspect of Mr. Smith's teaching. In both the DMTI materials and ensemble repertoire, students learned to sing and play melodies, bass lines, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns before being introduced to notation. Mr. Smith teaches theoretical concepts in musical contexts. For students in this ensemble, "deceptive cadences" or "augmented chords" are not abstract theoretical terms, they are musical experiences. While rehearsing a passage in Ticheli's "Amazing Grace," Mr. Smith noticed that a suspension was not evident in students performance. He stopped the group and asked, "What's a suspension?" It was clear that a few students had knowledge of a suspension, but none could give a clear definition. At the piano, Mr. Smith played and sang examples of suspensions, inviting students to sing with him. They returned to Ticheli's arrangement, instructed by Mr. Smith to "Raise your hand when you hear the suspension this time." Mr. Smith was also skilled in simplifying tasks into manageable parts to help students accomplish a larger goal. For example, I observed students in the ensemble trying to sing the tonal pattern TI FA SO (see Figure 5.1).

85

Figure 5.1. The tonal pattern TI FA SO. Students were singing the pitches TIREFA, with the solfge TIFASO (see Figure 5.2).

Figure 5.2. Students sang the pattern TI RE FA with the syllables TI FA SO. To help students improve their performance, Mr. Smith wrote Tonic Dominant Tonic voice leading on the board (see Figure 5.3).

Figure 5.3. Tonic Dominant Tonic voice leading in E-flat Major. I observed the following interaction: Mr. Smith: "I think it's awkward for you to just grab thatBUT, if you're coming from this (points to board)lookDOMISOMI goes tosing" Students sing: "FA." Mr. Smith: "Yeah, see how that makes sense? Start here (points to SO)go!"

86

Students sing: SO SO SO. Mr. Smith then asked the group to sing the IVI progression in parts: "Where's DO? Students sing: DO. Mr. Smith: Agree on it!...Now try that I chord. Students sing: Tonic chord (DO, MI, and SO) Mr. Smith: Good. Now change to IV(students sing DO, FA, and LA)good!go home! (students sing DO, MI, and SO) Gettin' it? Good." Helping students to audiate this intervallic relationship in the context of familiar voice leading was helpful. When students returned to singing the pattern TI FA SO (see Figure 5.1), the level of performance improved. Students in this ensemble developed their audiation skill by anticipating musical events and predicting possible outcomes. For example, while watching Mr. Smith rehearse Ticheli's arrangement of "Amazing Grace," he stopped the ensemble prior to important musical moments (e.g., cadences, modulations) and asked students to predict the next musical event. In one case, he stopped and asked, "Where's it gonna go next? Be wrong!" A number of students guessed the next chord function. Mr. Smith said, "We'll find outit's like a good movie!" Mr. Smith also provides students with opportunities to group individual notes into meaningful melodic, tonal, or rhythm patterns. It was rare for students to give their attention to a single note, as in, "Trumpets, your F in measure 12 is sharp."

87

Instead, individual notes were almost always contextualized in some manner, usually with function-based solfge or rhythm syllables. Students were invited to make musical comparisons, which improved their performance and understanding. An example of this teaching technique occurred while students rehearsed the opening of the third movement of Vaughan Williams's English Folk Song Suite (1924; see Figure 5.4).

Figure 5.4. Opening melody of English Folk Song Suite, Movement III. Mr. Smith was not satisfied with students' style of articulation or sense of ensemble. He began by inviting students to move their bodies and repeat after him as he chanted the rhythm patternfirst with a neutral syllable ("BAH"), then with function-based rhythm syllables. Once students were chanting the rhythm together in an appropriate style, he asked them to sing the passage "right," and then sing it "wrong," with less separation of notes. Students alternated between correct and incorrect renderings of this opening several times before performing it on their instruments. Interactions In rehearsals, I observed a high degree of interaction, both between students and teachers and among students. Mr. Smith often solicited students' opinions on the rehearsal process, with questions such as, "What do you think about the dynamic at 73?" "What's hard about this exercise?" or "Where's it gonna go next?" Mr. Smith frequently offered students brief discussion periods, particularly when learning a new

88

skill. Mr. Smith would say something like, "Does everyone know what's going on? Take 30 seconds to talk about it with people around you." After 30 seconds, he would ask if anyone had any questions, and proceed to rehearse. Tasks for this study were often taught through a sequence of echo/imitate discuss sing play. For example, I observed Mr. Smith teaching Skill 5 from DMTI (Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b), in which students are asked to improvise chord tones on macrobeats. CDs that supplement DMTI materials include performances of these tasks by professional musicians. Mr. Smith asked students to "listen to this singer improvise on chord tones." Next, Mr. Smith says, "What did you hear? Talk about it." Students were given approximately 90 seconds to discuss what they had heard. I observed students talking about what they heard (I saw fingers to indicate I, IV, or V chords); others were talking about something else (I overheard the words "sundried apricot" from a section near me). Mr. Smith gave students opportunity to sing this task as a group. The track from DMTI plays three times, so they are given several attempts. Mr. Smith calls out: "Now you're gonna do it on your instruments. We're in F; go ahead and practice on your own for a minute, then we'll do it." Mr. Smith accompanies students at the piano. Mr. Smith interacted with small groups of students within the ensemble. For example, in lessons I observed, percussionists were sometimes lax about participating in the warm-up portion of the lesson. Mr. Smith would involve them with statements like "You can play air mallets" (when the rest of the ensemble is singing and fingering), or "Make sure you guys are participating too, okay?"

89

Mr. Smith exhibited strong rapport with individual students. While observing a rehearsal of the third movement of Vaughan Williams's Folk Song Suite, I wrote the following in my fieldnotes: "He's picking on the trumpet player playing the solo at measure 5, but he's doing it in a really non-threatening way. There's a pretty good amount of individual attention here, but it's never meant to belittle a student. Rather, it's to make them (and in turn, the whole group) sound better" (5/11/10 fieldnotes). While individual students were challenged throughout rehearsals I observed, the challenges were always delivered in a constructive manner. Classroom Environment Though the musical standards are high in Concert Band, the atmosphere is remarkably positive and encouraging. Words of praise such as "Good job," "Fantastic," "Good for you," "Nice," and "Beautiful" were frequent. It was clear that Mr. Smith expected mistakes as part of the learning process. He reminded students repeatedly, "It's okay to be wrong," and once told them, "If you miss a change, you miss a changeit's okay." Mr. Smith made it clear to students that this was a learning process. While he was interested in the final product, he was also interested in helping students feel safe taking risks and learning in the process. Given time to work individually, Mr. Smith asked students to "Look at me when you get it. It's okay if it takes a minute [scans the room]. Thanks for your honestyI appreciate that so much." Mr. Smith also modeled risk-taking for his students by demonstrating all of the tasks he was asking them to do, with his voice and on instruments. Mr. Smith was generally a cheerful and supportive teacher. Laughter was common in

90

rehearsals I observed. At the end of a segment of rehearsal when students had learned the voice leading for "Amazing Grace," Mr. Smith solicited five volunteers to come to the front of the room to play the melody for "Amazing Grace" while the rest of the ensemble accompanied them by playing chord tones on their instruments. As the five students were making their way to the front of the room, Mr. Smith quipped, "Okay, these guys will play the melody, the rest of you play the chord tonesall we need is a campfire!" Pacing was swift in these rehearsals. While there were light moments and brief periods when students were free to talk or laugh, it was clear that making and learning about music was the primary objective. Mr. Smith senses when students are stressed or frustrated, and is able to adjust his demeanor accordingly. He connects with students by asking about events in their lives and taking informal polls about current events. He often stops in the middle of rehearsing a difficult passage to thank them for working hard and to tell students that he's proud of them. Mr. Smith brought his best to these students each day, and in turn, he expected their best. When a student was occasionally off task or being rude, he would move in close proximity to the student and refocus them with a statement such as, "Do you need something?" or "Is there something I can do for you?" While Mr. Smith didn't raise his voice or become angry with those students, he made it clear that he would not tolerate disruption of other students' learning. Students responded quickly to his demeanor.

91

Connections Mr. Smith encouraged students to make a variety of connections in lessons: between music they sing and music they play, between their body and their music instrument, between the warm-up and time spent rehearsing repertoire, and among elements of repertoire being performed. A common rehearsal sequence in this ensemble was play sing play. When Mr. Smith heard a passage that wasn't performed correctly, he would stop the ensemble and ask questions such as, "What needs to be fixed?" or "Why did we stop?" Students were challenged to connect what they sang with what they played, and to make a connection between their body and their music instrument. For example, while teaching Skill 1 from DMTI, Mr. Smith asked: "How many of you were able to match up what you play on your instrument to what you sang or what you're hearing? That's the trick! This time, sing [an improvisation] that works for you, and then try to come as close as you can to playing it on your horn." While rehearsing, Mr. Smith frequently referred to warm-ups from the beginning of class. For example, rehearsing Tichelis Amazing Grace, Mr. Smith pointed out that Ticheli used a harmonic progression for "Amazing Grace" that is different from than the one in DMTI materials. Students sang both. In addition to connecting the rehearsal to the warm-up, students have opportunity to make musical comparisons. Mr. Smith used a variety of techniques to help students connect sounds and syllables: "Okayyesterday we were trying to focus on singing the right lyric, if you

92

will, to chord tones. I'll sing a pattern on a neutral syllable; you give me the right words." Mr. Smith sang a series of familiar and unfamiliar melodic patterns and tonal patterns with the syllable "BUM" and asked students to respond with solfge (e.g., DO MI DO). Interpretation Student perspectives realized in the focus group provide a richer understanding of students' experience learning to improvise and compose than performances alone. In a one-hour focus group session, seven students, representative of the ensemble's makeup, shared experiences and opinions with a moderator. Students described their experience improvising and composing, and compared them with any prior experience. In general, students appreciated the sequential nature of this curriculum. Some felt they learned much from this experience; others might be described as less confused about improvisation and composition after encountering this curriculum. In answers to subsequent questions, students reflected on how learning the melody, bass line, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns by ear informed music they composed and improvised. They reported that these experiences gave them context and a starting point for creative pursuits. Most experienced a connection between improvising and composing. Several felt that composition was more challenging; it requires organizing and codifying ideas.

93

Participants offered interesting suggestions for future use of this curriculum. It seems important for teachers implementing creative activities to help students understand (a) why they are learning to improvise and compose, and (b) how learning to improvise and compose relates to skills and experiences they already have. Participants indicated that some skills became repetitive when continually reviewed in the band rehearsal, and it was difficult to improvise in a large ensemble setting because of the large number of participants. One student suggested teaching materials such as the melody, bass line, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns in band rehearsals, and working on improvisation skills in smaller groups. Several participants wondered how effectively these skills would transfer to other songs with different melodies, harmonic progressions, and harmonic rhythms. Students disagreed whether this type of activity is appropriate for a non-auditioned ensemble, or better suited to select musicians who may pursue music as a vocation. In summary, participants generally agreed that this was an interesting learning experience beneficial to their musicianship. Observing five rehearsals throughout the course of this study provided opportunities to examine methods and techniques, interactions among students and teachers, interactions among students, and other relevant aspects of this instructional context. Mr. Smith and Ms. Jones, instrumental music teachers in this program, both possess a high level of personal musicianship. Because I observed full band rehearsals, my comments refer specifically to Mr. Smith; however, Ms. Jones also

94

possesses these skills. Throughout these five rehearsals, Mr. Smith sang, moved his body, played piano, played horn, improvised, composed, and conducted. He modeled strong senses of tonality, meter, and style, a high level of musical expression, ability to improvise and compose, and willingness to take musical risks. Musicianship is a high priority in this program. Regardless of the activity, students are challenged to sing and play expressively, in tune, and in a consistent tempo. Singing and movement activities promote these behaviors. Mr. Smith used a variety of music teaching and learning principles, including sound-before-sight pedagogy, in a skillful manner. He encouraged students to group musical elements, anticipate and predict musical events, and make comparisons among musical elements. Mr. Smith teaches theoretical concepts in musical contexts and helps students to be successful by segmenting large tasks into smaller, more manageable ones. Teaching and learning in this setting is interactive. Students are encouraged to discuss ideas with their neighbors, though it was unclear to me how often students remained on task when given this assignment. Mr. Smith solicits input from students to guide the rehearsal process. Other common techniques in this classroom are play sing play and echo/imitate discuss sing play. Mr. Smith encourages students to make meaningful connections in instrumental music rehearsals. Connecting singing to playing, the body to the music instrument, sounds to function-based syllables, and warm-up activities to repertoire were common in this instructional setting.

95

Mr. Smith is a demanding, yet encouraging teacher. Both teacher and students smile and laugh often, but the primary objective of instruction is to make music meaningful to students. Students were engaged in the rehearsal process and generally seemed to enjoy learning.

96

CHAPTER SIX Summary and Conclusions Summary of the Study Purpose and Questions With the intent of improving music teaching and learning in secondary instrumental music, the purpose of this mixed methods study was to describe music achievement and personal perspectives of high school students following eight weeks of learning to improvise and compose using a sequential music curriculum in a nonauditioned woodwind, brass, and percussion ensemble. It is rare to find an instrumental music program in which improvisation and composition are central to the curriculum. Perhaps more uncommon are instrumental music teachers who agree on criterion measures for determining student achievement. To my knowledge, no published norms exist for improvisation or composition achievement at the secondary level. In this study, I offer a point of departure for future research. The research questions were: (a) What are performance, composition, and improvisation achievement levels of high school instrumental music students following eight weeks of instruction using a sequential music curriculum? (b) What are the relationships between music aptitude and (1) performance achievement, (2) improvisation achievement, (3) composition achievement, and (4) composite music achievement? (c) How do students describe singing, playing by ear, improvising, and composing experiences as part of their instrumental music instruction? (d) In this particular setting, how is improvisation and composition instruction delivered in the context of ensemble rehearsals? and (e) How does qualitative data from focus group

97

sessions and observations, together with quantitative aptitude and achievement data, help explain improvisation and composition experiences of high school instrumental music students? Design and Procedures I selected a concurrent embedded mixed methods design for this study (Creswell, 2008, 2009; Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007; Creswell, Plano Clark, Gutmann, & Hanson, 2003). In this design, a primary data set (quantitative in this research) is supplemented by a "supportive, secondary" data set (qualitative in this research; Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007, p. 67). Sixty-eight high school instrumental music students in a non-auditioned wind and percussion ensemble were invited to participate. One student declined to participate; a second transferred to another high school during the study. Advanced Measures of Music Audiation (AMMA; Gordon, 1989a), a measure of stabilized music aptitude, was administered to participants at the beginning of the study. For eight weeks, subjects improvised and composed music based on the model in Developing Musicianship through Improvisation (DMTI; Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b). Students learned to improvise and compose music based on "Amazing Grace" while preparing a published arrangement of Amazing Grace (Ticheli, 1994). Students began by learning the melody and bass line. Next, tonal patterns and rhythm patterns were taught, first with neutral syllables, then with function-based solfge and rhythm syllables. Before learning Seven Skills for Improvisation (DMTI), students improvised musical phrases based on "Amazing Grace."

98

Two instrumental music teachers taught the curriculum during the entire treatment period, teaching students to (a) sing, play, and improvise melodies, bass lines, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns; (b) notate melodies, bass lines, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns; and (c) compose melodies, bass lines, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns. At the end of the treatment period, students (a) sang, played, and notated the melody and bass line for "Amazing Grace," (b) sang and played improvisations corresponding to Seven Skills for Improvisation, and (c) composed music corresponding to Seven Skills for Improvisation (see Appendix B). Each student also completed a brief survey to obtain (a) gender, (b) number of years playing their current instrument(s), and (c) experience playing any other instrument(s). This survey is in Appendix G. I consulted with participating music teachers to identify 15 students who would be comfortable describing their musical experiences. From that list, I identified eight participants who fairly reflected the makeup of the ensemble (i.e., grade level, musical experience, music aptitude, gender, and instrument group). Focus group participants met with a moderator, who asked questions based on a Moderator's Guide (see Appendix E). A focus group session transcript is in Appendix F. I also video recorded one Concert Band rehearsal during each week of the study. I analyzed these recordings to describe instructional practices in this particular teaching and learning setting.

99

Using three- and four-dimension rating scales, three experienced judges evaluated student performances and compositions. Rating scales were similar or identical to those used in previous research in which investigators reported acceptable levels of interjudge reliability (Azzara, 1993; Liperote, 2005; Snell, 2006; Stoltzfus, 2005). I conducted a pilot study in February 2010 to examine interjudge reliability coefficients, means, and standard deviations associated with use of rating scales designed for the study. Results indicated that the rating scales were appropriate for use in this study. Limitations of the Study I examined and described student achievement in this unique teaching and learning setting. Curriculum, instructional procedures, instrumental teachers' backgrounds, students' aptitude and achievement, and students' perceptions of learning to improvise and compose may differ from students in other instructional contexts. Also, because of many commonalities inherent in this setting (e.g., same teachers, similar grade levels, similar instructional techniques, and same school and community climate), students regularly interact with one another, which may affect individual achievement. Analysis I calculated descriptive statistics and split-halves reliability for the administration of AMMA. I compared data from this sample with normative data in the Manual for the Advanced Measures of Music Audiation (Gordon, 1989c).

100

To combine judges' ratings of multiple musical tasks, from the fifteen musical tasks performed by each student, I created six summary variables: (a) Performance Achievement, (b) Improvisation Achievement, (c) Composition Achievement, (d) Composite Music Achievement, (e) Vocal Performance, and (f) Instrumental Performance. Chapter Three includes detailed descriptions of musical tasks included in each summary variable and the process for ensuring that creating these variables was appropriate. I conducted linear regression analysis to examine quantitative relationships between music aptitude and (a) performance achievement, (b) improvisation achievement, (c) composition achievement, and (d) composite music achievement. To examine quantitative relationships between singing and performing on a music instrument, I calculated correlation coefficients among the following: (a) singing the melody for "Amazing Grace," (b) playing the melody for "Amazing Grace," (c) singing the bass line for "Amazing Grace," and (d) playing the bass line for "Amazing Grace." Finally, I calculated the correlation coefficient between the two summary variables Vocal Performance and Instrumental Performance. To examine quantitative relationships between improvisation and composition, I calculated correlation coefficients among vocal improvisation, instrumental improvisation, and composition for three tasks from DMTI (Skill 1, Skill 5, and Skill 7). I also calculated the correlation coefficient between the two summary variables Improvisation Achievement and Composition Achievement. To test for significant differences in performance, improvisation, composition, and composite

101

music achievement among groupings by gender, grade level, experience playing a harmonic instrument, and instrument group, I conducted one-way analysis of variance. I also conducted two-way analysis of variance to test for interactions. Eight subjects were invited to participate in a focus group, led by a moderator, to obtain student perspectives on learning to improvise and compose in Concert Band. One student was absent; therefore, only seven students participated in the focus group session. The conversation was recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using procedures described by Krueger and Casey (2009). I video recorded five Concert Band rehearsals to describe the following instructional context: (a) methods and techniques, (b) interactions between students and teachers, and (c) interactions among students. I took extensive fieldnotes on each rehearsal and video recording, and I analyzed these notes using procedures recommended by Charmaz (2006). Results Tonal, rhythm, and composite music aptitude scores for this sample varied from norms published in the Manual for the Advanced Measures of Music Audiation (Gordon, 1989c). More specifically, mean scores for tonal, rhythm, and composite music aptitude were higher than those in the norm group. Standard deviations were also larger in this sample than in the norm group. Split-halves reliability for the composite test was lower than that reported in the norm group, but acceptable (.78, corrected for length using the Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula).

102

Among data gathered to measure student achievement, performance on all fifteen musical tasks, as well as the six summary variables, was higher than the theoretical mean. On all but four musical tasks (Bass Line Play, Skill 5 Sing, Skill 7 Sing, and Skill 7 Play) and one summary variable (Composition Achievement), obtained standard deviation was smaller than theoretical standard deviation. Raw scores on dimensions for composing and notating were consistently lower, and more variable, than singing or playing scores across all musical tasks. With one exception (Bass Line), mean scores for singing were highest, followed by mean scores for playing and writing. On bass line tasks, mean scores for playing were highest, followed by scores for singing and writing. Interjudge reliability was acceptable for each musical task and each summary variable (.70.97). Music aptitude, as determined by AMMA, was most predictive of improvisation achievement (R2=.352), followed by composite music achievement (R2=.205) and performance achievement (R2=.160). AMMA was a weak predictor of composition achievement (R2=.012). Correlation coefficients were (a) moderate and statistically significant between vocal performance and instrumental performance, (b) strong and statistically significant between singing the melody and singing the bass line, and (c) moderate and statistically significant between singing and playing the melody, and between playing the melody and singing the bass line. Correlations were weak between instrumental performance of the bass line and (a) singing of the melody, (b) singing of the bass line, and (c) playing of the melody.

103

Other strong and significant correlations emerged between (a) vocal improvisation tasks, (b) instrumental improvisation tasks, (c) composition tasks, (d) Skill 1 Sing and Skill 1 Play, (e) Skill 1 Sing and Skill 7 Play, and (f) Skill 7 Sing and Skill 7 Play. The correlation between improvisation achievement and composition achievement was weak, but statistically significant. Based on comparisons of mean achievement for (a) performance achievement, (b) improvisation achievement, (c) composition achievement, and (d) composite music achievement, female students outperformed male subjects. This difference was statistically significant for performance achievement and composite music achievement. While students in Grade 10 had the highest mean achievement, differences were not statistically significant. Students who also play a harmonic instrument demonstrated higher levels of mean achievement; these differences were not statistically significant. All four measures revealed significant effects of instrument group; students who played woodwind instruments scored highest, while percussionists scored lowest. Student responses in a focus group revealed that students found the sequential nature of this curriculum helpful in learning to improvise and compose. While some participants viewed these tasks as more appropriate for musicians who aspire to a career in music, general consensus was that students experienced success learning to improvise and compose. Students generally agreed that learning musical elements (i.e., melody, bass line, tonal patterns, rhythm patterns) by ear was helpful to the

104

process. Several students indicated that the processes of improvising and composing are related. Focus group participants also suggested that in future implementation of this curriculum, teachers should provide explicit rationale for teaching these behaviors, and help students understand connections between this curriculum and other musical experiences. Early skills from DMTI became repetitive to some participants; others reported that they or others around them still did not completely understand the tasks, in spite of repetition. One student suggested teaching the melody, bass line, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns in rehearsals, and focusing on improvisation and composition skills in small group lessons. Participants also expressed concern about transferability of these skills to other repertoire. My observation of instructional procedures in this study revealed that musicianship, understanding of teaching and learning, interaction, making connections, and a positive environment are important to the success of this program and to this study. Instruction prioritizes developing students' ability to listen, sing, move, play by ear, audiate, read with comprehension, notate, and compose music. Singing, moving, performing, improvising, composing, and analyzing were common student behaviors observed in this classroom. Conclusions Based on data gathered in this study, four conclusions are warranted: (a) high school students are capable of engaging in meaningful improvisation and composition in the context of a non-auditioned secondary wind and percussion ensemble; (b)

105

AMMA is an appropriate measure of stabilized music aptitude; (c) AMMA demonstrated criterion-related validity in terms of performance achievement, improvisation achievement, and composite music achievement, but not for composition achievement; and (d) rating scales used in this study (see Appendix C) are appropriate tools for measuring student music achievement. (a) High school students are capable of engaging in meaningful improvisation and composition in the context of a non-auditioned secondary wind and percussion ensemble. While not as ideal as theoretical standard deviation calculations would suggest, there was variability in student performances. This variability is similar to most human endeavors; some persons experience a greater degree of success than others. Variability revealed in quantitative data is also reflected in qualitative data from the focus group session. For some students these tasks were easy; for others these tasks were challenging. Still, students agreed that they experienced some degree of success and were prepared for more challenging experiences in the future. (b) AMMA is an appropriate measure of stabilized music aptitude. AMMA is also usable in this setting; it can be administered in less than 30 minutes. Participants in this study earned higher mean scores on AMMA than those in the national sample. This measure relies heavily on the ability to discriminate between same and different. Some students in this program have received instruction from teachers whose curricula prioritize development of audiation. Perhaps because some students in this district encounter such instruction, they may be more discriminating than other students whose instruction does not prioritize audiation. Similarly, mean student

106

scores on all musical tasks and summary variables were higher than theoretical means. Because of the curriculum, students may be better equipped to succeed on these tasks. (c) AMMA demonstrated criterion-related validity in terms of performance achievement, improvisation achievement, and composite music achievement, but not for composition achievement. AMMA's relatively weak predictive ability for composition achievement may be related to the level of student composition achievement in this study. Overall composition achievement exhibited less variability than theoretical standard deviation would suggest; moreover, student mean scores were lower for composition and notation dimensions than for singing and playing dimensions. Further, improvisation activities in this study required students to perform two specific tasks: (a) generate an idea, and (b) sing and play it on a music instrument. Composition activities in this study also required students to perform two specific tasks: (a) generate an idea, and (b) notate it. In most instrumental music settings, students have considerably more experience performing on an instrument than they do notating music. As a result of this emphasis, students may be more successful performing creative ideas than notating them. (d) Rating scales used in this study (see Appendix C) are appropriate tools for measuring student music achievement. Valid and reliable rating scales provide music teachers with multi-dimensional measures of student performance. Their use is timeconsuming, and requires identifying judges with aural, improvisation, and

107

composition skills; however, they are an ideal measure of student achievement based on musical criteria. Implications for Music Teaching and Learning Consistent with the intent of this study, the four conclusions have implications for improving music teaching and learning. Quantitative and qualitative data reveal that students experienced success improvising and composing, and they developed as musicians in the process. This finding suggests that improvisation and composition are not enrichment tasks to be reserved for advanced students, but rather, meaningful elements of a comprehensive music education. Music supervisors, principals, superintendents, school boards, and parents should insist that these behaviors occupy a central place in music curricula. A moderate, statistically significant relationship observed between vocal performance and instrumental performance provides evidence to advance the assertion that a music instrument is an extension of the human body, and should be taught as such (e.g., Grunow, Gordon, & Azzara, 2001). With one exception, students performed best vocally on all music tasks. Music aptitudes for students in this study were higher than but within one standard deviation of national norms, suggesting that singing in instrumental music instruction is not only beneficial to instrumental performance, but is an approachable task for high school students in a non-auditioned wind and percussion ensemble. Mean student scores for composition activities were lower than those for singing or playing activities. This was at first a curious finding, particularly in an

108

instrumental program where composition is a routine part of the curriculum. The results are understandable, however, considering that instrumental music students spend far more time playing their instrument than composing music. It seems reasonable, then, that students would compose at a lower level than they play or sing. Findings related to AMMA suggest that it is a reliable and valid measure for use with this population. Its usability also makes it practical for instrumental music teachers to gain information about each students music aptitude without using multiple instructional periods. Use of the AMMA, or another reliable and valid measure of stabilized music aptitude, would help music educators to better understand individual differences among their students. Similarly, reliable and valid rating scales are assessment tools that could provide basis for assigning grades based on musical criteria, far superior to the common practice of assigning grades based on attitude, attendance, or practice time. Most important, these ratings inform teachers of individual differences among students, and should be used to improve instruction. Examination of data from this study revealed additional implications for music teaching and learning. Music educators should help students develop executive skills and a sense of tonality, meter, and style. In this study, in comparison with students who play woodwind or brass instruments, percussionists achieved significantly lower scores on all measures of music achievement. Focus group participants who seemed to notice this difference in achievement made reference to percussionists having a lower skill level. Beginning percussion instruction often emphasizes battery percussion instruments (e.g., snare drum and bass drum).

109

Keyboard instruments (e.g., bells, xylophone, or marimba) are often neglected. In many programs, students who study percussion instruments are not encouraged to attend to issues of melody and harmony, which, along with rhythm and expressive elements, are important for improvising and composing meaningfully. Data gathered in this study suggest differences in achievement based on other variables: (a) gender, (b) experience performing on a harmonic instrument, and (c) grade level. While female students achieved higher mean scores than male students on all four achievement measures, differences in gender were significant for performance achievement and composite music achievement, but not for improvisation achievement and composition achievement. Students who have experience playing a harmonic instrument, and students in Grade 10, had higher mean scores than other participants. Experience playing a harmonic instrument and grade level had a non-significant effect on performance in this sample; these trends may or may not persist in other teaching and learning settings. Participants in the focus group provided several suggestions for music educators to consider in future implementation of this curriculum. Several participants were unclear about (a) the purpose of curriculum used in this research and (b) how it related to other music experiences. These comments reinforce the need for music educators to make deliberate decisions about sequential curriculum, and help students make connections between new musical content and prior experiences.

110

Participants also questioned the practicality of teaching improvisation in a large ensemble. Jake's suggestion to teach melody, bass line, tonal patterns, and rhythm patterns in rehearsal and improvisation and composition in lessons merits consideration. While teaching improvisation and composition in smaller groups would promote more individualized instruction, not every instrumental teacher has group lessons, in addition to ensemble rehearsals, as part of their instrumental music program. Teaching curriculum used in this research requires well-developed personal musicianship. A teacher must (a) perform in tune at a consistent tempo vocally and instrumentally, and (b) improvise and compose music. While these skills may not be central to many music educators' pre-service education, teachers with limited experience can develop these skills. It is critical for music supervisors, principals, and superintendents to recruit, hire, and retain teachers who demonstrate strong musicianship skills. Along with personal musicianship, several attributes of participating teachers were important to student success in this study. In the process of teaching students to improvise and compose, curriculum in this study emphasized learning to listen, sing, move, play by ear, audiate, and read music with comprehension. Teachers who wish to engage students in meaningful improvisation and composition experiences might consider using or developing curriculum that promotes these emerging behaviors as part of the learning process for improvisation and composition. Creating a positive learning environment in which students felt safe taking risks and making mistakes

111

was also critical to student achievement in improvisation and composition. While common practice music instruction often prioritizes performing notated music without errors, making mistakes while learning to sing, play by ear, improvise, and compose is unavoidable, and even desirable in the teaching and learning environment. Among significant correlations revealed in this research were: (a) a moderate and statistically significant correlation between vocal performance and instrumental performance, (b) a strong and statistically significant correlation between singing the melody and singing the bass line, and (c) moderate and statistically significant correlations between singing and playing the melody, and between playing the melody and singing the bass line. It appears that (a) singing in tonal, rhythmic, and stylistic contexts and (b) performing on a music instrument in those same contexts may be mutually beneficial. Recommendations for Future Research In this study, I examined music aptitude, music achievement, and perspectives of high school students learning to improvise and compose in the context of a nonauditioned wind and percussion ensemble. While this research may not be generalizable to other populations, future investigators might replicate and extend this work. Other possible musical settings include orchestra, choir, jazz ensemble, and general music. Students in auditioned performing ensembles may achieve, or experience learning to improvise and compose, in a manner different from students who participated in this study. Similarly, populations with different age levels (e.g., elementary, secondary, college, adult) may vary in experience and achievement.

112

Musicianship and understanding of the learning process are important components of curriculum used in this research. Future studies might examine preparation of pre-service instrumental music teachers. Do teacher preparation programs encourage development of skills required to teach improvisation and composition? Are pre-service teachers given opportunities to improvise and compose? Likewise, future investigators might consider how effectively pre-service teachers develop skills important to music instruction (e.g., singing and playing in tune, moving and performing at a consistent tempo, grouping musical content, anticipating and predicting musical events, and making comparisons). Music teachers also need to implement instruction involving creative behaviors in the context of existing ensemble settings (i.e., band, orchestra, and choir), and create engaging learning environments that attract students. How can existing curricula and programs evolve to prioritize these skills for teachers? While pre-service teacher education is necessary to change the music education profession, researchers should also examine how in-service teachers can equip themselves to teach students to improvise and compose, particularly in the context of existing performance ensembles. Since these skills have not been a part of traditional teacher preparation, researchers might examine how teachers can develop these skills later in their careers. How can existing professional development offerings, conferences, and graduate degree programs help meet this need? In this study, relationships between composition achievement and other variables were not strong. Students' perspectives gained in the focus group reinforce

113

research findings and suggestions that improvisation and composition are related. In this study, quantitative relationships between improvisation and composition were relatively weak. These findings suggest a need for further research that clarifies the improvisationcomposition relationship. As described previously, many instrumental music students have more experience performing creative ideas than notating them. This may explain the relatively low level of composition achievement for students in this study. Future research might start with beginners and track their progression longitudinally, assessing singing, playing, improvising, and composing. Questions to investigate may include: (a) What is the developmental nature of learning to sing, play, improvise, and compose? (b) Do these behaviors inform one another? and (c) At some point, do students gravitate toward some of these behaviors and not others? Unfortunately, the dearth of contexts in which this sort of instruction takes place makes such research difficult. Researchers might also examine levels of achievement in groups based on gender, instrument group, experience playing a harmonic instrument, or grade level. In this study, I examined high school students in a non-auditioned wind and percussion ensemble; future studies may expand to other populations to provide the music education profession with a better understanding of the effects of these variables on music achievement. The most consistent difference in achievement was found when students were compared based on instrument group. As mentioned previously, percussionists may

114

achieve at a lower level due their inexperience attending to issues of melody and harmony, and playing melodic instruments. Given perspectives of percussionists in the focus group, future researchers might also consider the extent to which percussionists label themselves as less skilled musicians than their counterparts. Similarly, when students were grouped by gender, female students outperformed male students on all four measures of music achievement; differences in performance achievement and composite music achievement were significant. Future researchers might replicate this study in other populations, to reveal whether these differences are consistent in other populations, and if significant differences persist, examine the reason(s) for differences in achievement. Such research may lead to findings that personality traits, elements of an individual's musical background, or students' perceptions of their potential to be creative in music may affect achievement. Consistent, but non-significant differences in achievement were observed when students were grouped by (a) grade level and (b) experience playing a harmonic instrument. In future investigations, researchers might make similar comparisons in other populations to gather more information. For example, in this study, I observed that students in Grade 10 had higher levels of mean achievement than students in other grade levels. Do students in Grade 10 work harder than those in Grades 9, 11, and 12? High-achieving students in Grade 10 may be placed in an auditioned wind and percussion ensemble in Grades 11 and 12; students who remain in the nonauditioned ensemble may achieve at a lower level than peers who are placed in a select group.

115

Future researchers might also examine the effects of learning to create one's own music on student motivation for instrumental music participation. Music participation, particularly at the secondary level, is often driven by extrinsic motives. Do motivations of students who learn to improvise and compose as part of their instruction differ from students whose instruction focuses solely on performance from notation? I am unaware of any study in the literature that examines improvisation and composition achievement of high school students taught to improvise and compose in a non-auditioned wind and percussion ensemble. Data presented here provides preliminary evidence to suggest that teaching improvisation and composition in a non-auditioned secondary wind and percussion ensemble is a practical, meaningful, and musical objective.

116

References Abrahams, F. E. (2000). Implementing the National Standards for Music Education in pre-service teacher education programs: A qualitative study of two schools (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (AAT 9965947) Adderly, C. L., III (1996). Music teacher preparation in South Carolina colleges and universities relative to the National Standards: Goals 2000 (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (AAT 9711655) Alvey, M. (2006). Primary Measures of Music Audiation [Computer software]. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Alvey, M. (2007). Intermediate Measures of Music Audiation [Computer software]. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Azzara, C. D. (1993). Audiation-based improvisation techniques and elementary instrumental students music achievement. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41(4), 328342. Azzara, C. D. (2002). Improvisation. In R. Colwell & C. Richardson (Eds.), The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning (pp. 171187). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Azzara, C. D. (2008). Improvisation and choral musicianship. In M. Holt & J. Jordan (Eds.), The school choral program: Philosophy, planning, organizing, and teaching (pp. 201239). Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc.

117

Azzara, C. D. & Grunow, R. F. (2006). Developing musicianship through improvisation: Book one/CDs. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Azzara, C. D. & Grunow, R. F. (2010a). Developing musicianship through improvisation: Book two/CDs. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Azzara, C. D. & Grunow, R. F. (2010b). Developing musicianship through improvisation: Book three/CDs. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Baker, D. N. (1995). A new and innovative system for learning to improvise. New Albany, IN: Jamey Aebersold Jazz. Barry, N. H. (1992). The effects of practice strategies, individual differences in cognitive style, and gender upon technical accuracy and musicality of student instrumental performance. Psychology of Music, 20, 112123. Bash, L. (1983). The effectiveness of three instructional methods on the acquisition of jazz improvisation skills (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (AAT 8325043) Bell, C. L. (2003). Beginning the dialogue: Teachers respond to the national standards in music. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 156, 3142. Bennett, S. J. (1994). Can simple vocalization help improve the intonation of wind players? (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (AAT 9514867) Benson, B. E. (2003). The improvisation of musical dialogue: A phenomenology of music. New York: Cambridge. Bentley, A. (1966). Measures of musical abilities. London: George A. Harrap.

118

Berkley, R. (2001). Why is teaching composing so challenging? A survey of classroom observation and teachers opinions. British Journal of Music Education, 18(2), 119138. Bingham, S. L. (2007). The development and evaluation of an improvisation module for beginning bands (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 3300713) Bitz, M. E. (1998). A description and investigation of strategies for teaching classroom music improvisation. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59(10A), 3767. Bloedel, C. D. (1996). The effects of structured singing instruction on beginning instrumental students performance achievement (Master's thesis). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 1381834) Bolden, B. (2009). Teaching composing in secondary school: A case study analysis. British Journal of Music Education, 26(2), 137152. Boring, E. G. (1929). A History of Experimental Psychology. New York: The Century Company. Brenner, M. E. (2006). Interviewing in educational research. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 357370). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Brittin, R. (2005). Preservice and experienced teachers lesson plans for beginning instrumentalists. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53(1), 2639.

119

Bunting, R. (1987). Composing music: Case studies in the teaching and learning process. British Journal of Music Education, 4, 2552. Burnard, P. (1999). Bodily intention in childrens improvisation and composition. Psychology of Music, 27, 159174. Burnard, P. (2000a). Examining experiential differences between improvisation and composition in childrens music-making. British Journal of Music Education, 17(3), 227245. Burnard, P. (2000b). How children ascribe meaning to improvisation and composition: Rethinking pedagogy in music education. Music Education Research, 2(1), 723. Byo, S. J. (1997). General education classroom teachers and music specialists perceived ability to implement the National Standards for Music Education (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (AAT 9722351) Carlin, J. (1997). Musical preferences for compositions by selected students aged 9 15 years. Bulletin for the Council of Research in Music Education, 133, 913. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage Publications, Inc. Coveyduck, S. E. (1998). Vocalization and its effect on the intonation of a beginning instrumentalist (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT MQ34934)

120

Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M., & Hanson, W. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 20940). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Davies, C. (1986). Say it till a song comes (reflections on songs invented by children 313). British Journal of Music Education, 3(3), 279293. Davies, C. (1992). Listen to my song: A study of songs invented by children aged 5 to 7 years. British Journal of Music Education, 9(1), 1948. Davis, L. M. (1981). The effects of structured singing activities and self-evaluation practice on elementary band students instrumental music performance, melodic tonal imagery, self-evaluation, and attitude (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (AAT 8128981) Doig, D. (1941). Creative Music I: Music composed for a given text. Journal of Educational Research, 35(4), 263275.

121

Doig, D. (1942a). Creative Music II: Music composed on a given subject. Journal of Educational Research, 35(5), 344355. Doig, D. (1942b). Creative Music III: Music composed to illustrate given musical problems. Journal of Educational Research, 36(3), 241253. Drake, R. (1954). Drake musical aptitude tests. Chicago: Science Research Associates. Dunlap, M. P. (1989). The effects of singing and solmization training on the musical achievement of beginning fifth-grade instrumental students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 9013890) Elliott, C. A. (1974). Effect of vocalization on the sense of pitch of beginning band class students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 22(2), 120128. Elliott, D. L. (1995). Music matters: A new philosophy of music education. New York: Oxford University Press. Folkestad, G., Lindstrm, B., & Hargreaves, D. J. (1997). Young peoples music in the digital age. Research Studies in Music Education, 9, 112. Fountas, I. C. & Pinnell, G. S. (2008). Fountas & Pinnell benchmark assessment system 2. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Forsythe, R. (1984). The development and implementation of a computerized preschool measure of musical audiation. Dissertation Abstracts International, 45, 08A. Gaston, E. T. (1957). Test of musicality. Lawrence, KS: Odell's Instrumental Service.

122

Goertzen, V. (1996). By way of introduction: Preluding by 18th- and 19th-century pianists. Journal of Musicology: A Quarterly Review of Music History, Criticism, Analysis, and Performance Practice, 14(3), 299337. Gorder, W. D. (1980). Divergent production abilities as constructs of musical creativity. Journal of Research in Music Education, 28(1), 3442. Gordon, E. E. (1965). Musical Aptitude Profile. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Gordon, E. E. (1967a). A three-year study of the Musical Aptitude Profile. Iowa City, IA; University of Iowa Press. Gordon, E. E. (1967b). Implications for the use of the musical aptitude profile with college and university freshman music students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 15(1), 3240. Gordon, E.E. (1970). First-year results of a five-year longitudinal study of the musical achievement of culturally disadvantaged students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 18(3), 195213. Gordon, E. E. (1979). Primary Measures of Music Audiation. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Gordon, E. E. (1982). Intermediate Measures of Music Audiation. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Gordon, E. E. (1988). Musical Aptitude Profile. Chicago: The Riverside Publishing Company. Gordon, E. E. (1989a). Advanced Measures of Music Audiation. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc.

123

Gordon, E. E. (1989b). Audie. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Gordon, E. E. (1989c). Manual for the Advanced Measures of Music Audiation. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Gordon, E. E. (1990). Predictive validity study of AMMA. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Gordon, E. E. (1991). Taking another look at scoring the Advanced Measures of Music Audiation: The German Study. In The Advanced Measures of Music Audiation and the Instrument Timbre Preference Test: Three research studies. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Gordon, E. E. (1995). Musical Aptitude Profile. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Gordon, E. E. (1997). Taking another look at the established procedure for scoring the Advanced Measures of Music Audiation. In B. Bolton & C. Taggart (Eds.), The GIML Monograph Series, Number 2. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Gordon, E. E. (2004). Middle-school students and the Advanced Measures of Music Audiation. In Continuing studies in music aptitude. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Gordon, E. E. (2007). Learning sequences in music: A contemporary music learning theory. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Grunow, R. F. (2005). Music learning theory: A catalyst for change in beginning instrumental music curricula. In M. Runfola & C. Taggart (Eds.), The development and practical application of Music Learning Theory (pp. 179200). Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc.

124

Grunow, R. F., Gordon, E. E., & Azzara, C. D. (2001). Jump Right In: The Instrumental Series. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Grutzmacher, P. A. (1987). The effect of tonal pattern training on the aural perception, reading recognition, and melodic sight-reading achievement of firstyear instrumental music students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 35(3), 171181. Haerle, D. (1975). Scales for jazz improvisation: A practice method for all instruments. Miami, FL: Warner Brothers Publications. Hassler, M., & Feil, A. (1986). A study of the relationship of composition/improvisation to selected personal variables: Differences in the relationship to selected variables: An experimental study. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 87, 2634. Healy, J. M. (1990). Endangered minds: Why children dont think and what we can do about it. New York: Simon and Schuster. Hickey, M. (2003). Creative thinking in the context of music composition. In M. Hickey (Ed.), Why and how to teach music composition: A new horizon for music education (pp. 3154). Reston, VA: MENC: The National Association for Music Education. Holahan, J. M. & Saunders, T. C. (1997). Childrens discrimination of tonal patterns: pattern contour, response time, and item difficulty level. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 132, 85101.

125

Holahan, J. M., Saunders, T. C., & Goldberg, M. D. (2000). Tonal cognition in pattern discrimination: Evidence from three populations. Journal of Research in Music Education, 48(2), 162177. Hores, R. G. (1977). A comparative study of visual- and aural-orientated approaches to jazz improvisation with implications for instruction (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (AAT 7818637) Karma, K. (1985). Components of auditory structuring: Towards a theory of musical aptitude. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 82, 113. Karma, K. (1994). Auditory and visual temporal structuring: How important is sound to musical thinking? Psychology of Music, 22, 2030. Kaschub, M. & Smith, J. (2009). Minds on music: Composition for creative and critical thinking. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Kennedy, M. A. (1999). Where does the music come from? A comparison casestudy of the compositional processes of a high school and a collegiate composer. British Journal of Music Education, 16(2), 157177. Kennedy, M. A. (2002). Listening to the music: Compositional processes of high school composers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50(2), 94110. Kirkland, N. J. (1996). South Carolina schools and Goals 2000: National Standards in music (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (AAT 9623096) Kratus, J. (1989). A time analysis of the compositional processes used by children ages 7 to 11. Journal of Research in Music Education, 37(1), 520.

126

Kratus, J. (1994a). Relationships among childrens music audiation and their compositional processes and products. Journal of Research in Music Education, 42(2), 115130. Kratus, J. (1994b). The ways children compose. In H. Lees (Ed.), Musical connections: Tradition and change. Proceedings of the 21st World Conference of the International Society for Music Education. ISME: Auckland. Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Kwalwasser, J. (1953). Kwalwasser Music Talent Test instruction manual. Melville, NY: Belwin Mills Publishing Corp. Kwalwasser, J. & Dykema, P. (1930). Kwalwasser-Dykema music tests. New York: Carl Fischer. Lautzenheiser, T., Lavender, P., Higgins, J., Rhodes, T. C., Menghini, C., & Bierschenk, D. (2000). Essential elements 2000. Milwaukee, WI: Hal Leonard. Lee, R. E. (1967). An investigation of the use of the musical aptitude profile with college and university freshman music students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 15(4), 278288. Lee, S. R. (1996). The effects of vocalization on achievement levels of selected performance areas found in elementary instrumental bands. Retrieved from ERIC Document Reproduction Service. (ED 418030) Lehmann, A. C., Sloboda, J. A., & Woody, R. H. (2007). Psychology for musicians: Understanding and acquiring the skills. New York: Oxford University Press.

127

Levendusky, N. A. (1979). The theoretical relationship between item difficulty and the in doubt response in music tests. Journal of Research in Music Education, 27(3), 163172. Levin, R. D. (1975). Improvisation and embellishment in Mozart piano concertos. Musical Newsletter, 5(2), 314. Levin, R. (2009). Improvising Mozart. In G. Solis & B. Nettl (Eds.), Musical improvisation: Art, education, and society (pp. 143149). Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press. Levine, M. (1995). The jazz theory book. Petaluma, CA: Sher Music. Liperote, K. A. (2004). A study of audiation-based instruction, music aptitude, and music achievement of elementary wind and percussion students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (AAT 3123215) Liperote, K. A. (2006). Audiation for beginning instrumentalists: Listen, speak, read, write. Music Educators Journal, 93(1), 4652. Louk, D. P. (2002). National standards for music education: general music teachers attitudes and practices (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (AAT 3042585) Lowery, H. (1926). Cadence and phrase tests in music. British Journal of Psychology, 17, 111118. Lundin, R. W. (1949). The development and validation of a set of musical ability tests. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 63(10), 120.

128

MacKnight, C. B. (1975). Music reading ability of beginning wind instrumentalists after melodic instruction. Journal of Research in Music Education, 23(1), 2334. Madison, T. H. (1942). Interval discrimination as a measure of musical aptitude. Archives of Psychology, 268, 124137. Madura, P. D. (1996). Relationships among vocal jazz improvisation achievement, jazz theory knowledge, imitative ability, musical experience, creativity, and gender. Journal of Research in Music Education, 44(3), 252267. Maxwell, J. A. (1998). Designing a qualitative study. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (Eds.), Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods (pp. 69100). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. May, W. V., & Elliott, C. A. (1980). Relationships among ensemble participation, private instruction, and aural skill development. Journal of Research in Music Education, 28(3), 155161. May, L. F. (2003). Factors and abilities influencing achievement in instrumental jazz improvisation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(3), 245258. McDonald, J. C. (1987). The application of Edwin Gordons empirical model of learning sequence to teaching the recorder (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 8715716)

129

McGarry, R. J. (1967). A teaching experiment to measure the extent to which vocalization contributes to the development of selected instrumental music performance skills: A comparison of the effectiveness of two teaching techniques on instrumental music performance utilizing the Watkins-Farnum Performance Scale (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 6804815) McPherson, G. E. (1993). Evaluating improvisational ability of high school instrumentalists. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 119, 1120. McPherson, G. E. (1994). Factors and abilities influencing sightreading skill in music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 42(3), 217231. McPherson, G. E. (1996). Five aspects of musical performance and their correlates. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 127, 115121. McPherson, G. E., Bailey, M., & Sinclair, K. E. (1997). Path analysis of a theoretical model to describe the relationship among five types of musical performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45(1), 103129. Moorhead, G. & Pond, D. (1941). Music of young children: Chant (Vol. 1). Santa Barbara, CA: Pillsbury Foundation for Advancement of Music Education. Moorhead, G. & Pond, D. (1942). Music of young children: General observations (Vol. 2). Santa Barbara, CA: Pillsbury Foundation for Advancement of Music Education.

130

Moorhead, G. & Pond, D. (1944). Music of young children: Musical notation (Vol. 3). Santa Barbara, CA: Pillsbury Foundation for Advancement of Music Education. Music Educators National Conference. (1994). National Standards for Arts Education. Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference. National Association of Schools of Music (2008). NASM Handbook, 20092010. Reston, VA: National Association of Schools of Music. Nelson, O. (1966). Patterns for improvisation. New Albany, IN: Jamey Aebersold Jazz. New York State Department of Education (2010). Learning standards for the arts. Retrieved April 5, 2010 from http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/ciai/arts/ artstand/home.html Orman, E. K. (2002). Comparison of the national standards for music education and elementary music specialists use of class time. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50(2), 155164. Ortman, O. (n.d.). Tests of musical talent. Baltimore: Peabody Conservatory of Music. Paynter, J. (2000). Making progress with composing. British Journal of Music Education, 17(1), 531. Pearson, B. (1993). Standard of excellence comprehensive band method. San Diego, CA: Neil A. Kjos.

131

Reimer, B. (2003). A philosophy of music education: Advancing the vision (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Reimer, B. (2009). Seeking the significance of music education: Essays and reflections. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Reynolds, A. M., Long, S., & Valerio, W. H. (2007). Language acquisition and music acquisition: Possible parallels. In K. Smithrim & R. Upitis (Eds.), Research to practice: A biennial series: Vol. 3 (p. 211227). Waterloo, ON: Canadian Music Educators Association. Riley, P. E. (2006). Including composition in middle school band: Effects on achievement, performance, and attitude. UPDATE: Applications of Research in Music Education, 25(1), 2838. Sarath, E. W. (1996). A new look at improvisation. Journal of Music Theory, 40(1), 138. Saunders, T. C. & Holahan, J. M. (1993). Computerized response procedure to assess young student reaction times of judgments of sameness and difference among paired tonal patterns. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 115, 3148. Schlacks, W. F. (1981). The effect of vocalization through an interval training program upon the pitch accuracy of high school band students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42(08A), 3492. Schleuter, S. L. (1974). Use of standardized tests of musical aptitude with university freshmen music majors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 22(4), 258269.

132

Schleuter, S. L. (1977). The development of a college version of the Musical Aptitude Profile. Psychology of Music, 5(2), 3942. Schleuter, S. L. (1978). Effects of certain lateral dominance traits, music aptitude, and sex differences with instrumental music achievement. Journal of Research in Music Education, 26(1), 2231. Schleuter, S. L. (1997). A Sound Approach To Teaching Instrumentalists (2nd ed.). New York: Schirmer Books. Schleuter, S. L. & Schleuter, L. J. (1978). A predictive study of an experimental college version of the musical aptitude profile with music achievement of nonmusic majors. Contributions to Music Education, 6, 28. Schoen, M. (1925). Tests of musical feeling and musical understanding. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 5, 3152. Seashore, C. E. (1919). Measures of Musical Talent. New York: Columbia Phonograph Company. Seashore, C. E., Lewis, D., & Saetveit, J. G. (1960). Manual of instructions and interpretations for the Seashore Measures of Musical Talent (2nd ed.). New York: The Psychological Corporation. Shanahan, T. (2006). Relations among oral language, reading, and writing development. In C.A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 171183). New York: The Guilford Press.

133

Sheldon, D. A., Balmages, B., Loest, T., Sheldon, R., & Collier, D. (2010). Measures of success: A comprehensive musicianship band method. Fort Lauderdale, FL: The FJH Music Company, Inc. Shewan, S. C. (2002). The Williamsville East Composition Project (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 3057603) Shewan, S. C. (2009). Through the eyes of a composer. From NYSSMA Music Views: Standards-based teaching and learning across the state [video recording]. Westbury, NY: New York State School Music Association. Silverman, M. L. (1963). Ensemble improvisation as a creative technique in the secondary instrumental music program (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 6204037) Sloboda, J. A. (1985). The musical mind: The cognitive psychology of music. New York: Oxford University Press. Smith, E. R. (1984). The effects of vocalization on the intonation of college wind performers (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 8427327) Smith, F. (1997). Reading without nonsense (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press. Snell, A. H., II (2006). Junior high instrumental students audiation-based improvisation (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.

134

Stauffer, S. L. (2002). Connections between the musical and life experiences of young composers and their compositions. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50(4), 301322. Stecklein, J. E. & Aliferis, J. (1957). The relationship of instrument to music achievement test scores. Journal of Research in Music Education, 5(1), 315. Stoltzfus, J. L. (2005). The effects of audiation-based composition on the music achievement of elementary wind and percussion students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 3169610) Strand, K. (2006). Survey of Indiana music teachers on using composition in the classroom. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(2), 154167. Swanwick, K. & Tillman, J. (1986). The sequence of musical development: A study of children's composition. British Journal of Music Education, 3, 305339. Ticheli, F. (1994). Amazing grace. Brooklyn, NY: Manhattan Beach Music. Vaughan Williams, R. (1924). English Folk Song Suite. New York: Boosey & Hawkes. Vispoel, W.P. (1992). Improving the measurement of tonal memory with computerized adaptive tests. Psychomusicology, 11, 2743. Vispoel, W.P. (1993). The development and evaluation of a computerized adaptive test of tonal memory. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41(2), 111136. Vispoel, W. P. & Coffman, D. D. (1994). Computerized-adaptive and self-adapted music-listening tests: Psychometric features and motivational benefits. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 25-51.

135

Vispoel, W.P., Wang, T., & Bleiler, T. (1997). Computerized adaptive and fixed-item testing of music listening skill: A comparison of efficiency, precision, and concurrent validity. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34(1), 43-63. Walters, D. (2010). A concise guide to assessing skill and knowledge: With emphasis on music achievement. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Webster, P. R. (1979). Relationship between creative behavior in music and selected variables as measured in high school students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 27(4), 227-242. Webster, P. R. (2003). What do you mean, make my music different? Encouraging revision and extensions in childrens music composition. In M. Hickey (Ed.), Why and how to teach music composition: A new horizon for music education (pp. 5568). Reston, VA: MENC: The National Association for Music Education. Wehr-Flowers, E. (2006). Differences between male and female students' confidence, anxiety, and attitude toward learning jazz improvisation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(4), 337349. Wig, J. A. (1980). The effect of instruction in music composition strategies on middle school band students' ability to improvise melodies (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 8107650)

136

Wiggins, J. (2003). A frame for understanding childrens compositional processes. In M. Hickey (Ed.), Why and how to teach music composition: A new horizon for music education (pp. 141166). Reston, VA: MENC: The National Association for Music Education. Williamsville Central School District (2010). About the district. Retrieved March 17, 2010 from http://www.williamsvillek12.org/district.cfm?subpage=63 Wilson, J. H. (1971). The effects of group improvisation on the musical growth of selected high school instrumentalists (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (AAT 7026467) Wing, H. (1958). Wing standardised tests of musical intelligence. Sheffield, England: City of Sheffield Training College. Wing, H. (1968). Tests of Musical Ability and Appreciation (2nd ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Younker, B. A. & Smith, W. (1996). Comparing and modeling musical thought processes of expert and novice composers. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 128, 2536. Zdzinski, S. F. (1992). Relationships among parental involvement, music aptitude, and musical achievement of instrumental music students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 40(2), 114125.

137

Appendix A: Advanced Measures of Music Audiation Answer Sheet

138

Appendix B: Developing Musicianship through Improvisation Unit for "Amazing Grace" (reproduced with permission of GIA Publications)

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

Appendix C: Judges' Instructions and Rating Scales INSTRUCTIONS FOR USING RATING SCALES FOR THIS STUDY You have been provided with files containing 66 student performances on five musical tasks from Developing Musicianship through Improvisation (Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b): "Skill 5," Singing; "Skill 7," Singing; Melody, Playing; Bass Line, Playing; "Skill 1," Playing; "Skill 5," Playing; and "Skill 7," Playing. Each file presents the 66 students performances in a different order. Please ensure that you are listening to the appropriate presentation of performances for each dimension (e.g., "Skill 5," Singing, Expressive). Please listen to each performance only once, and be sure to complete each dimension (e.g., tonal, rhythm, expressive, etc.) in one sitting. Please rate tasks in the following order: "Skill 5," Singing; "Skill 7," Singing; Melody, Playing; Bass Line, Playing; "Skill 1," Playing; "Skill 5," Playing; "Skill 7," Playing. For each dimension, please complete the tonal dimension, then the rhythm dimension, then the expressive dimension, and finally the improvisation dimension (if applicable). You have also been provided with a packet of students notations of: the melody and bass line for Amazing Grace, and "Skill 1," Skill 5,, and Skill 7 from Developing Musicianship through Improvisation (Azzara & Grunow, 2006, 2010a, 2010b). Please use rating scales for writing to rate these compositions, as follows: Please rate students notations of: the melody for Amazing Grace, the bass line for "Amazing Grace," Skill 5, and Skill 7. Please rate a dimension (e.g., tonal) for all students on a particular task (e.g., Skill 5) before you move to the next dimension of that task. For example, read Student #1s notation of the melody for Amazing Grace. Rate it for the tonal dimension only. Read Student #2s notation of the melody for Amazing Grace. Rate it for the tonal dimension only. Proceed in a similar manner through all student notations of Amazing Grace, rating for the tonal dimension only. Then, read Student #1s notation of the melody for Amazing Grace and rate it for the rhythm dimension only. Read Student #2s notation of the melody for Amazing Grace and rate it for the rhythm dimension only. Please rate the bass line for "Amazing Grace," "Skill 1," Skill 5, and Skill 7 in a similar manner. Please don't hesitate to contact me with any questions THANK YOU VERY MUCH!

156

Amazing Grace: Melody Sing

Tonal Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs without a sense of resting tone. performs most patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). performs most patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. performs all patterns in two functions correctly. performs patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

157

Amazing Grace: Melody Sing

Rhythm Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs without a sense of meter. performs most patterns in one function correctly (macrobeat reference); tempo may be inconsistent. performs most patterns in one function (macrobeat) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly; tempo may be inconsistent. performs all patterns in two functions correctly; tempo may be inconsistent. performs patterns in all functions correctly, with a consistent tempo.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

158

Amazing Grace: Melody Sing

Expressive Dimension (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 performs with a sense of movement. performs with a characteristic singing voice. performs with acceptable intonation. demonstrates an understanding of phrasing. performs tunefully, with a sense of song.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

159

Amazing Grace: Melody Play

Tonal Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs without a sense of resting tone. performs most patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). performs most patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. performs all patterns in two functions correctly. performs patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

160

Amazing Grace: Melody Play

Rhythm Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs without a sense of meter. performs most patterns in one function correctly (macrobeat reference); tempo may be inconsistent. performs most patterns in one function (macrobeat) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly; tempo may be inconsistent. performs all patterns in two functions correctly; tempo may be inconsistent. performs patterns in all functions correctly, with a consistent tempo.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

161

Amazing Grace: Melody Play

Expressive Dimension (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 performs with a sense of movement. performs with a characteristic singing voice. performs with acceptable intonation. demonstrates an understanding of phrasing. performs tunefully, with a sense of song.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

162

Amazing Grace: Melody Write

Tonal Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 notates without a sense of resting tone. notates most patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). notates most patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. notates all patterns in two functions correctly. notates patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

163

Amazing Grace: Melody Write

Rhythm Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 notates without a sense of meter. notates most patterns in one function correctly (macrobeat reference); other functions may be inconsistent. notates most patterns in one function (macrobeat) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly; other functions may be inconsistent. notates all patterns in two functions correctly; other functions may be inconsistent. notates patterns in all functions correctly, with a consistent tempo.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

164

Amazing Grace: Melody Write

Expressive (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 indicates an appropriate measure signature. indicates the appropriate clef. demonstrates an understanding of appropriate stem directions demonstrates understanding of notational conventions (e.g., beat spacing, articulations). demonstrates an understanding of appropriate phrasing.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

165

Amazing Grace: Bass Line Sing

Tonal Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs without a sense of resting tone. performs most patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). performs most patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. performs all patterns in two functions correctly. performs patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

166

Amazing Grace: Bass Line Sing

Rhythm Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs without a sense of meter. performs with a macrobeat reference that does not correspond to the meter; tempo is inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter; tempo is often inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter; tempo is occasionally inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter at a consistent tempo.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

167

Amazing Grace: Bass Line Sing

Expressive Dimension (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 performs with a sense of movement. performs with a characteristic singing voice. performs with acceptable intonation. demonstrates an understanding of phrasing. performs tunefully, with a sense of song.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

168

Amazing Grace: Bass Line Play

Tonal Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs without a sense of resting tone. performs most patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). performs most patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. performs all patterns in two functions correctly. performs patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

169

Amazing Grace: Bass Line Play

Rhythm Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs without a sense of meter. performs with a macrobeat reference that does not correspond to the meter; tempo is inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter; tempo is often inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter; tempo is occasionally inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter at a consistent tempo.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

170

Amazing Grace: Bass Line Play

Expressive Dimension (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 performs with a sense of movement. performs with a characteristic singing voice. performs with acceptable intonation. demonstrates an understanding of phrasing. performs tunefully, with a sense of song.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

171

Amazing Grace: Bass Line Write

Tonal Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 notates without a sense of resting tone. notates most patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). notates most patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. notates all patterns in two functions correctly. notates patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

172

Amazing Grace: Bass Line Write

Rhythm Dimension (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 notates a variety of notes without a sense of meter. notates macrobeats and other notes; often inconsistent with meter. notates macrobeats; often inconsistent with meter. notates macrobeats with a general sense of meter; occasional inconsistencies. notates macrobeats with strong sense of meter.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

173

Amazing Grace: Bass Line Write

Expressive (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 indicates an appropriate measure signature. indicates the appropriate clef. demonstrates an understanding of appropriate stem directions demonstrates understanding of notational conventions (e.g., beat spacing, articulations). demonstrates an understanding of appropriate phrasing.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

174

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Sing

Harmonic Progression (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs first and/or last notes correctly. performs all patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). performs all patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. performs all patterns in two functions correctly. performs patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

175

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Sing

Rhythm (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs individual beats without a sense of the meter. demonstrates a rhythmic feeling of the meter throughout. employs various contrasting rhythm patterns without a sense of rhythmic motivic development. begins to develop and relate rhythmic ideas in some phrases. establishes a cohesive solo rhythmically develops rhythmic motives in the context of the overall form.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

176

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Sing

Expressive (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 demonstrates a sense of musical interaction (e.g., melodic dialogue alone, or musical conversation among performers). demonstrates an understanding of dynamics. demonstrates an understanding of musical style and characteristic tone quality. demonstrates a sense of appropriate articulation. demonstrates an understanding of appropriate phrasing.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

177

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Sing

Improvisation (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 performs a variety of related ideas and reuses material in the context of the overall form (thus the performance contains elements of unity and variety). 1 demonstrates motivic development through tonal and rhythm sequences. 1 demonstrates effective use of silence. 1 demonstrates an understanding of tension and release through resolution of notes in the context of the harmonic progression. 1 embellishes notes and performs variations of themes.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

178

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Play

Harmonic Progression (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs first and/or last notes correctly. performs all patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). performs all patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. performs all patterns in two functions correctly. performs patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

179

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Play

Rhythm (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs individual beats without a sense of the meter. demonstrates a rhythmic feeling of the meter throughout. employs various contrasting rhythm patterns without a sense of rhythmic motivic development. begins to develop and relate rhythmic ideas in some phrases. establishes a cohesive solo rhythmically develops rhythmic motives in the context of the overall form.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

180

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Play

Expressive (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 demonstrates a sense of musical interaction (e.g., melodic dialogue alone, or musical conversation among performers). demonstrates an understanding of dynamics. demonstrates an understanding of musical style and characteristic tone quality. demonstrates a sense of appropriate articulation. demonstrates an understanding of appropriate phrasing.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

181

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Play

Improvisation (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 performs a variety of related ideas and reuses material in the context of the overall form (thus the performance contains elements of unity and variety). 1 demonstrates motivic development through tonal and rhythm sequences. 1 demonstrates effective use of silence. 1 demonstrates an understanding of tension and release through resolution of notes in the context of the harmonic progression. 1 embellishes notes and performs variations of themes.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66

Rating

Rating

Rating

182

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Write

Harmonic Progression (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 notates first and/or last notes correctly. notates all patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). notates all patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. notates all patterns in two functions correctly. notates patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

183

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Write

Rhythm (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 notates individual beats without a sense of the meter. demonstrates a rhythmic feeling of the meter throughout. employs various contrasting rhythm patterns without a sense of rhythmic motivic development. begins to develop and relate rhythmic ideas in some phrases. develops rhythmic motives in the context of the overall form.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

184

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Write

Expressive (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 demonstrates a sense of musical interaction (e.g., melodic dialogue alone, or musical conversation among performers). indicates an appropriate measure signature. indicates the appropriate clef. demonstrates an understanding of notational conventions (e.g., stem directions, beat spacing). demonstrates an understanding of appropriate phrasing.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

185

Amazing Grace: Skill 1 Write

Composition (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 notates a variety of related ideas and reuses material in the context of the overall form (thus the composition contains elements of unity and variety). demonstrates motivic development through tonal and rhythm sequences. demonstrates effective use of silence. demonstrates an understanding of tension and release through resolution of notes in the context of the harmonic progression. embellishes notes and composes variations of themes.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

186

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Sing

Harmonic Progression (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs first and/or last notes correctly. performs all patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). performs all patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. performs all patterns in two functions correctly. performs patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

187

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Sing

Rhythm (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs individual beats without a sense of meter. performs with a macrobeat reference that does correspond to the meter; tempo is inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter; tempo is often inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter; tempo is occasionally inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter at a consistent tempo.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

188

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Sing

Expressive (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 demonstrates a sense of musical interaction (e.g., melodic dialogue alone, or musical conversation among performers). demonstrates an understanding of dynamics. demonstrates an understanding of musical style and characteristic tone quality. demonstrates a sense of appropriate articulation. demonstrates an understanding of appropriate phrasing.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

189

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Sing

Improvisation (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 performs a variety of related ideas and reuses material in the context of the overall form (thus the performance contains elements of unity and variety). demonstrates motivic development through tonal and rhythm sequences. demonstrates effective use of silence. demonstrates an understanding of tension and release through resolution of notes in the context of the harmonic progression. embellishes notes and performs variations of themes.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

1 1 1 1

190

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Play

Harmonic Progression (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs first and/or last notes correctly. performs all patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). performs all patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. performs all patterns in two functions correctly. performs patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

191

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Play

Rhythm (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs individual beats without a sense of the meter. performs with a macrobeat reference that does correspond to the meter; tempo is inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter; tempo is often inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter; tempo is occasionally inconsistent. performs with a sense of macrobeat and sense of meter at a consistent tempo.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

192

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Play

Expressive (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 demonstrates a sense of musical interaction (e.g., melodic dialogue alone, or musical conversation among performers). demonstrates an understanding of dynamics. demonstrates an understanding of musical style and characteristic tone quality. demonstrates a sense of appropriate articulation. demonstrates an understanding of appropriate phrasing.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

193

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Play

Improvisation (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 performs a variety of related ideas and reuses material in the context of the overall form (thus the performance contains elements of unity and variety). demonstrates motivic development through tonal and rhythm sequences. demonstrates effective use of silence. demonstrates an understanding of tension and release through resolution of notes in the context of the harmonic progression. embellishes notes and performs variations of themes.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

1 1 1 1

194

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Write

Harmonic Progression (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 notates first and/or last notes correctly. notates all patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). notates all patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. notates all patterns in two functions correctly. notates patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

195

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Write

Rhythm (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 notates a variety of notes without a sense of meter. notates macrobeats and other notes; often inconsistent with meter. notates macrobeats; often inconsistent with meter. notates macrobeats with a general sense of meter; occasional inconsistencies. notates macrobeats with strong sense of meter.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

196

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Write

Expressive (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 demonstrates a sense of musical interaction (e.g., melodic dialogue alone, or musical conversation among performers). indicates an appropriate measure signature. indicates the appropriate clef. demonstrates an understanding of notational conventions (e.g., stem directions, beat spacing). demonstrates an understanding of appropriate phrasing.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

197

Amazing Grace: Skill 5 Write

Composition (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 notates a variety of related ideas and reuses material in the context of the overall form (thus the composition contains elements of unity and variety). demonstrates motivic development through tonal and rhythm sequences. demonstrates effective use of silence. demonstrates an understanding of tension and release through resolution of notes in the context of the harmonic progression. embellishes notes and composes variations of themes.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

198

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Sing

Harmonic Progression (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs first and/or last notes correctly. performs all patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). performs all patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. performs all patterns in two functions correctly. performs patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

199

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Sing

Rhythm (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 performs individual beats without a sense of the meter. 2 demonstrates a rhythmic feeling of the meter throughout. 3 employs various contrasting rhythm patterns without a sense of rhythmic motivic development. 4 begins to develop and relate rhythmic ideas in some phrases. 5 establishes a cohesive solo rhythmically develops rhythmic motives in the context of the overall form.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

200

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Sing

Expressive (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 demonstrates a sense of musical interaction (e.g., melodic dialogue alone, or musical conversation among performers). demonstrates an understanding of dynamics. demonstrates an understanding of musical style and characteristic tone quality. demonstrates a sense of appropriate articulation. demonstrates an understanding of appropriate phrasing.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

201

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Sing

Improvisation (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 performs a variety of related ideas and reuses material in the context of the overall form (thus the performance contains elements of unity and variety). demonstrates motivic development through tonal and rhythm sequences. demonstrates effective use of silence. demonstrates an understanding of tension and release through resolution of notes in the context of the harmonic progression. embellishes notes and performs variations of themes.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

Rating

Rating

Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66

Rating

202

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Play

Harmonic Progression (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs first and/or last notes correctly. performs all patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). performs all patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. performs all patterns in two functions correctly. performs patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

203

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Play

Rhythm (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 performs individual beats without a sense of the meter. demonstrates a rhythmic feeling of the meter throughout. employs various contrasting rhythm patterns without a sense of rhythmic motivic development. begins to develop and relate rhythmic ideas in some phrases. establishes a cohesive solo rhythmically develops rhythmic motives in the context of the overall form.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

204

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Play

Expressive (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 demonstrates a sense of musical interaction (e.g., melodic dialogue alone, or musical conversation among performers). demonstrates an understanding of dynamics. demonstrates an understanding of musical style and characteristic tone quality. demonstrates a sense of appropriate articulation. demonstrates an understanding of appropriate phrasing.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

205

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Play

Improvisation (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 performs a variety of related ideas and reuses material in the context of the overall form (thus the performance contains elements of unity and variety). demonstrates motivic development through tonal and rhythm sequences. demonstrates effective use of silence. demonstrates an understanding of tension and release through resolution of notes in the context of the harmonic progression. embellishes notes and performs variations of themes.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

1 1 1 1

206

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Write

Harmonic Progression (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 notates first and/or last notes correctly. notates all patterns in one function correctly (tonic reference). notates all patterns in one function (tonic) correctly and some patterns in one other function correctly. notates all patterns in two functions correctly. notates patterns in tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions correctly.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

207

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Write

Rhythm (continuous dimension, 05) The student: 1 2 3 4 5 notates individual beats without a sense of the meter. demonstrates a rhythmic feeling of the meter throughout. employs various contrasting rhythm patterns without a sense of rhythmic motivic development. begins to develop and relate rhythmic ideas in some phrases. develops rhythmic motives in the context of the overall form.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

208

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Write

Expressive (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 demonstrates a sense of musical interaction (e.g., melodic dialogue alone, or musical conversation among performers). indicates an appropriate measure signature. indicates the appropriate clef. demonstrates an understanding of notational conventions (e.g., stem directions, beat spacing). demonstrates an understanding of appropriate phrasing.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

209

Amazing Grace: Skill 7 Write

Composition (additive dimension, 05) The student: 1 1 1 1 1 notates a variety of related ideas and reuses material in the context of the overall form (thus the composition contains elements of unity and variety). demonstrates motivic development through tonal and rhythm sequences. demonstrates effective use of silence. demonstrates an understanding of tension and release through resolution of notes in the context of the harmonic progression. embellishes notes and composes variations of themes.
Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Rating Student # 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Rating Student # 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Rating

210

Appendix D: Student Improvisations and Compositions Skill 1 Sing Judges rated Skill 1 Sing using a rating scale with two continuous dimensions (harmonic progression and rhythm) and two additive dimensions (expressive and improvisation). These rating scales are found in Appendix C (pp. 176179). Judges' Mean Rating = 1

Judges' Mean Rating = 3

Judges' Mean Rating = 5

211

Skill 1 Play Judges rated Skill 1 Play using a rating scale with two continuous dimensions (harmonic progression and rhythm) and two additive dimensions (expressive and improvisation). These rating scales are found in Appendix C (pp. 180183). Judges' Mean Rating = 1

Judges' Mean Rating = 3

Judges' Mean Rating = 5

212

Skill 1 Write Judges rated Skill 1 Write using a rating scale with two continuous dimensions (harmonic progression and rhythm) and two additive dimensions (expressive and composition). These rating scales are found in Appendix C (pp. 184187).

Judges' Mean Rating = 1

Judges' Mean Rating = 3

Judges' Mean Rating = 5

213

Skill 5 Sing Judges rated Skill 5 Sing using a rating scale with two continuous dimensions (harmonic progression and rhythm) and two additive dimensions (expressive and improvisation). These rating scales are found in Appendix C (pp. 188191).

Judges' Mean Rating = 2

Judges' Mean Rating = 4

Judges' Mean Rating = 5

214

Skill 5 Play Judges rated Skill 5 Play using a rating scale with two continuous dimensions (harmonic progression and rhythm) and two additive dimensions (expressive and improvisation). These rating scales are found in Appendix C (pp. 192195).

Judges' Mean Rating = 2

Judges Mean Rating = 3

Judges' Mean Rating = 4

215

Skill 5 Write Judges rated Skill 5 Write using a rating scale with two continuous dimensions (harmonic progression and rhythm) and two additive dimensions (expressive and composition). These rating scales are found in Appendix C (pp. 196199).

Judges' Mean Rating = 2

Judges' Mean Rating = 3

Judges' Mean Rating = 4

216

Skill 7 Sing Judges rated Skill 7 Sing using a rating scale with two continuous dimensions (harmonic progression and rhythm) and two additive dimensions (expressive and improvisation). These rating scales are found in Appendix C (pp. 200203).

Judges' Mean Rating = 1

Judges' Mean Rating = 2

Judges' Mean Rating = 4

217

Skill 7 Play Judges rated Skill 7 Play using a rating scale with two continuous dimensions (harmonic progression and rhythm) and two additive dimensions (expressive and improvisation). These rating scales are found in Appendix C (pp. 204207).

Judges' Mean Rating = 1

Judges' Mean Rating = 3

Judges' Mean Rating = 4

218

Skill 7 Write Judges rated Skill 7 Write using a rating scale with two continuous dimensions (harmonic progression and rhythm) and two additive dimensions (expressive and composition). These rating scales are found in Appendix C (pp. 208211).

Judges' Mean Rating = 2

Judges' Mean Rating = 4

Judges' Mean Rating = 5

219

Appendix E: Moderators Guide 1. Tell us your name, your instrument, and how long youve been playing your instrument. 2. Have you ever improvised before this study? Can you tell us about any experience you have? 3. If youve improvised before, how was your experience during the past eight weeks similar to or different from your previous experience? 4. Have you ever composed before this study? Can you tell us about any experience you have? 5. If youve composed before, how was your experience during the past eight weeks similar to or different from your previous experience? 6. Did you find it hard to improvise? What, if anything, was challenging about it? 7. Did you find it hard to compose? What, if anything, was challenging about it? 8. Did you find that learning the melody and bass line by ear made it easier for you to improvise and compose? 9. Did you find that learning tonal patterns and rhythm patterns made it easier for you to improvise and compose? 10. Did you try to relate the music you composed to the music you improvised? How did you do this? 11. Are the processes of improvisation and composition similar or different for you? Can you explain? 12. As you know, Mr. Stringham designed the curriculum that your teacher used for this study. Do you have suggestions for either one of them about using this curriculum with other students in the future?

220

Appendix F: Focus Group Transcript Moderator: Hi, everybody, my name is Alden Snell. I'm a graduate student at Eastman and I'm helping Mr. Stringham with his dissertation. Thank you for agreeing to be part of this focus group. Your opinions and experiences are very important to Mr. Stringham's study. This session is being recorded and will be transcribed. You have a card and a marker that you've created a name. We are doing this to maintain your confidentiality. No one including Mr. Stringham, Mr. Smith, or Ms. Jones will be able to identify you after this. Okay? So that's why we're using these alternate names. The goal of this focus group is to gather a variety of opinions and response to the questions. Although you need to be respectful, you're not supposed to agree all the time. In fact, if you agree on everything, I'm going to think that there's something wrong. My goal is to let you talk, and I'll only interrupt if someone is dominating the conversation or if I need you to clarify. Does everyone understand what I just said? Okay, so the first question is just to get everybody into the transcript. I'd like you to tell me your nameyour pseudonym name, your instrument, and how long you've been playing your instrument, and we'll start with Jake. Jake: Um, my name is Jake Rogers. I've played the bassoon and I've been playing it for, well this is my first year, on this instrument. Moderator: Did you play another instrument before? Jake: Yes, I played oboe for five years. Moderator: Okay. Thank you. Kevin? Kevin: Hi, I'm Kevin, I play the trombone and I've been playing for six years. Moderator: Six years? Kevin: Yeah. Moderator: Thank you. Lebron? Lebron: Yes, uh, I'mI'm Lebron, I play percussion and I've been playing since ninth grade after refusing to sing in chorale. Moderator: Okay. Tina: I'm Tina. I play percussion as well and I've been playing since fourth grade. Moderator: Thank you.

221

Herman: Um, I'm Herman and I play, uh, I play the tuba and I've been playing for two years, but I played the flute for three years before that. Moderator: Did you say three years before the tuba? Herman: Yeah. Moderator: Okay, thank you. Yolanda? Yolanda: I'm Yolanda. I play the flute and I've been playing for nine years. Moderator: Thank you. And Mustang. Mustang: Im Mustang, and I've been playing trumpet for eight years. Moderator: Great. Thank you. Okay the next question is have you ever improvised before this study? If so, just talk a little about what improvisation you did before you did this study with Mr. Stringham. And at this point it's open...anybody can just start talking. [Herman and Jake start speaking at once] Moderator: Okay, Jake. Jake: Um, I don't think I've really improvised much before this. I mean, I've heard of improvisation, but I haven't really done it myself. Moderator: Mhmm. Okay. Herman? Herman: Um. I never thought I'd be able to do improvisation. I always thought that was really for professional people, and I, um, I only improv-ed [sic] a B-flat once. Moderator: You improv-ed [sic] a B-flat once? Herman: [laughter] Yeah, but Moderator: Okay. Yeah, okay. Anybody else? Jake: I mean, the only time I really ever created something of my own, that was with our compositions that we do, but other than that I never improvised like with a free standing or like a group. Moderator: Mhmm. Does anybody else improvise? I'm assuming that means you haven't improvised before this study, which is fine.

222

Mustang: I, I improvised on guitar before, but Moderator: Oh, okay. Great. No, that's fine. The next question is, and it's going to go first to those of you that said you had improvised before, how was the experience of this study with Mr. Stringham different from past experiences improvising? Mustang: There were more steps to it. It wasn't just kind of like, and now just like there was like tones and stuff first and it was just like, throughout the other ones it's just kind of like oh you're changing chords not improvising that chord, so it was a little more step-by-step. Moderator: More steps, uh huh? Jake: Expanding on what Mustang said, it's a little more structured per se, like when I was improvising before and creating composition it was basically me hitting a C and a D and a E-flat and let's see what works, but I mean with like with our study with Dr., Mr. Stringham, it's like here's the chord tones, now try to make a little bit of this, and like, and here's like the big beats, and then go try to do a little bit with this. So it's a lot more planned and structured, which could lead to a better result of improvisation. Moderator: Mhmm. Mhmm. Anybody else? Herman: I think it was, um, well if it's compared to actual just playing on a sheet of music, it was really much more in depth Moderator: Mhmm. Herman: I think it would help, [inaudible] to help make [inaudible] everyone else a better musician. Moderator: Okay. Great. The next question is, have you ever composed before this study or written music before? If so, talk a little bit about that. Jake: Um, yes. I've been composing since fourth grade, well actually no not fourth, first, first grade. [laughter]. Um, and, um, it was basically writing songs for different little, um, contests or like reflections which I, uh, which I did in Virginia and then when I moved up here I started actually using different, um, programs like Finale or writing them down and like, um, composing for the pastI guess, um, eight years. Moderator: Mhmm. Jake: Yeah.

223

Moderator: So can you compare what you did in Mr. Stringham's study to the experiences you had in the past? Jake: Um, well when I was, you know, doing that, sometimes it was just well let's, like he said, let's see what happens if I do this, this, and this. Um... and thisthisthis study was basically structured but I kind of found it easier for me because I've kind of workedum, with that kind of stuff as far as composing goes, so actually doing it on an instrument wasn't really that hard for me, per se, um, it was kind of like an easy transition I guess. Moderator: Great. Anybody else have experience? Lebron, you mentioned you had composed for Mr. Smith. Lebron: Yeah, um, yeah we do compose each year. We write a composition and it's interesting 'cause we're given a poem and we have to kind of create a theme or a rhythm that goes with our poem or the given topic each year. And it's always interesting 'cause it like kind of starts on one instrument and then within the percussion section I mean it can be 'til like the xylophone and the marimba and like the suspended cymbal, and it's basically like trying to like bring everything together. Whereas what we did with Dr., Mr. Stringham, I'm not quite sure which one it is yet, but, it's more structured and I feel like we could have done what we did maybe at a little higher quality, and it's maybe even faster too, but now like when you like know how to do it and the real music terminology and the whole background that you have, it's much easier. Moderator: So you, um, just to make sure I understand what you saidyou felt that Mr. Stringham's study went faster or that it could have gone...? Lebron: [interrupts] The composing that I would have done by like rather instead of trying things out, and like, putting together a big collection of things, Dr., Mr. Stringham's study might have expedited and given me a better starting point in order to try things. Moderator: And why is that? Lebron: Because, it's like more organized, it's more stepwise. Whereas, like, composing is just like let's see what happens. Moderator: Mhmm. Okay, I got ya. All right, so everybody has composed Lebron: Sorry if that was complicated. [Laughter].

224

Moderator: No, that's okay. Everybodyand it ishe'll laughit's Mr. Stringham. He'll be Dr. Stringham after all this is done. So everybody has composed though, right, for Mr. Smith in Concert Band? [numerous student comments] Moderator: Can you comment on Mr. Stringham's study, what you did for this study in terms of writing? Yolanda: Wait, but I didn't, I don't know, I just did what we did in band, like Moderator: Right, right, right, that's what I mean. Yolanda: Yeah. It was...fun. Moderator: I'm sorry, did you say fun? Yolanda: Yeah. [laughter] Moderator: I just can't hear you over whateverit's a lawn mower or something. Yolanda: Band's not really something I take seriously. Moderator: That's okay. Yolanda: It's kind of a blow off class, I guess, and I'm a senior so I really... [Laughter] Yolanda: This is like my last two days of school, and this is probably the last thing I wanted to do. Moderator: Oh. Wellwell thanks for being here. [Laughter] Moderator: I understand, it's fine. Anybody else want to talk about the composing they do with Mr. Smith? Jake: Um, Yeah. Kevin: Well, I'll take, oh I'm sorry. Moderator: That's okay, we'll, we'll get Kevin in here.

225

Kevin: Okay. Well, like, this is like my first year like doing like high school band, like last year I didn't do it, but I was playing with middle school. Um, but when Iwe had to write a composition for one of our assignments for Mr. Smith, um, I felt like it was a lot more harder, 'cause I didn't really, I guess I just kind of like didn't, I just kind of, again, like I put things together and like see what happens? Moderator: Mhmm. Kevin: But with, um, Mr. Stringham's likestudy, um, I felt like it made everything so much more easier. Moderator: Uh huh. Kevin: Like I understood like tones and like all the chords and everything. Moderator: Yeah. Great. Uh, either Tina or Mustang? [Laughter] Moderator: Yeah, go ahead. Tina: Um, like, for like the compositions like um, since like I play percussion like I don't really get some of likelike thethe tones because like I can hear a note like I don't automatically know that it's like such-and-such a note and it's like in this scale and stuff. I mean like I know like how to read music and like I know my scales, um, so like I know how to do that stuff but like I don't like automatically like, know, like, all the different tones and stuff. So that made it like somewhat difficult. And like for the composition like I just kind of put down some random notes and handed it in so that I got a good grade, so that I could get a grade on it, and then Ms. Jones helped me with it kind of. And, um, so that worked out for the composition thing. Um, and then, um, so like it made it like hard I guess. And then, um, and I just like kept doing all this stuff that it was hard'cause I didn't know what some of the stuff was and then, um, Ms. Jones, she had to keep explaining it. Moderator: Okay. Yeah. But you felt like, so you felt like you, if you had known maybe the solfge or the notes a little bit better? When you say notes are you talking about solfge tonal stuff? Tina: Well like some of the stuff I know, and likelike a lot of the stuff like I didn't know like before this? Moderator: Uh huh.

226

Tina: Likelike everybody else had knew what it was, and like, I like had to like learn it like now. Moderator: Sure, sure. Tina: [inaudible; the moderator thinks that her comment was a follow-up "reinforcing that she would have gotten it better if she had the background knowledge the wind/brass players had (Tina is a percussionist).] Moderator: Okay. Herman: I think that's the down part about being a freshman. Um, but I feel like... once it got, it took me a real long time actually to get exactly what we were doing? Moderator: Mhmm. Herman: But when I finally did, itit was kind of a light bulb just clicked on. And um, also with my composition, Ms. Jones kind of wrote mostly the whole thing. Well not the whole thing, but Moderator: You're talking about, um, justjust for my brain, you're talking about the project from Mr. Stringham's class. Or are you talking about Mr. Smith's or both? Herman: Yeah. Moderator: So Ms. Jones helped both of you with your compositions. Tina and Herman: Yeah. Moderator: Okay. Herman: I think it might have been, um, the solfge part for the Dr. Stringham, or Mr. Stringham, was um, [laughter] sorry about that. Moderator: We can just call him Stringham. [laughter]. Lebron: We'llwe'll make up a name for him too. Moderator: Yeah. [laughter]. Herman: But, um, anyway, that was umitit was, for a freshman that we, we came from playing notes, and um, I actually I think I was a little farther behind when I first started music

227

Moderator: Mhmm. Herman: Because I moved here from California. And they didn't teach us dynamics so I had, I had to learn everything a little bit Moderator: Mhmm. Herman: Cramped in so... but I finally learned how to sight read and everything and then I came here and then they're like, Oh it's, uh, here's solfgeWhat? [Laughter]. Moderator: Right, right. Herman: But, umum, I understand it a lot more now than I did Moderator: Great. Herman: because of this project. Lebron: And it's kinda weird 'cause, I mean, originally when I stepped in and played percussion I started in ninth grade and it's really 'cause I didn't want to, uh, sing in, uh, chorus, 'cause... I had no idea what she was talking about and my voice is not good. And II really started playing on memorization. So it's like, someone's telling me to crash here, this is where I crash the cymbals. I did the bass drum here, this is where I can play, but now it's kind of gotten likeI've gotten a lot better on like the sight reading now. But II'm still a little confused about how music is composed and like how it's put together? Moderator: Mhmm. Lebron: And...they've tried to teach me at their writing compositions, but like I never like quite understood like the full...like the how and like why this works and like...the...like the background stuff throughout creating music. Moderator: Mhmm. Lebron: That I feel like Mr. Stringham's study, I think I got it correct this time...um has tried to help me understand, which I appreciateit was actuallyI learned a lot. Moderator: Great... Okay? We can move onthank you. So you've sort of talked about this a little bit, but I'm going to ask, just for the record. Did you find it hard to improvise? More specifically, what did you find hard about it? 'Cause I'm assuming there was something that challenged each of you based on your comments so far?

228

Jake: Well II, I wasn't really challenged, per se, for me because...um, since...I kind of have perfect pitch, I kind of know what all the tones are so I know what works, I know what doesn't work, and I know where I can move within and without making, like, it sound wrong or anything? Moderator: Mhmm. Jake: Um...so, and then also, you know, playing jazz piano then you get all these different chords that, you know, aren't really like the traditional chords that you hear a lot, so I guess it was kind of easier because of my personal experiences, but I think that's pretty much just me because everybody here has different experiences, so Moderator: Well I should back up a second, is there, because that's great, is there anybody that did think, Oh, this is a piece of cake and this is easy? Lebron: No, it's just tough when you're like, when you're likeI'm, like, the polar opposite of, uh, er Moderator: Jake. [laughter] Lebron: Jake, here. I can't see his name tag. I only hear crash cymbals, I only Moderator: Uh huh. Lebron: hear a bass drum or I hear a snare beat. I mean for me, determining pitchesI used to play piano when I was a little younger but I mean I was never that great...andit's, it's tough to figure out, like, how to improvise, like where do you begin, or like, what works, and like, you play a note and it's like, oh gee, thisthis doesn't sound right, It's...it's tough, it's...it's not easy. Herman: I, um, I know what he means too because, umwhen you, uhI don't know, when you're little it's kind of all about, it's just a note being played, a note, and then kind of, you kind of figure out what a rhythm isbut then...you were introduced to this and therethere's more than just a rhythm, you have toactually, this teaches you to kind of think outside of the paper? Moderator: Mhmm. Herman: The notes. Which was, um, it's kind of difficult 'cause when youwhen you first start playing that's all you know how to do. Moderator: Mhmm.

229

Herman: And, um, and then when the different sections are in you only hear certain parts. Moderator: By sections, you mean the skills? Herman: Like sections, like, in the brass section II, in the bbrass section all I hear is thethe low brass section sometimes? Moderator: Mhmm, mhmm. Herman: And, um, I hear a little bit of flute, and, then probably, um Lebron: Yeah, there's only percussion in my books. Moderator: Lebron. Herman: Yeah, allall you hear is probably percussion. [laughter] Moderator: Oh, I see what you mean. So did you find that helpful to think about the other parts? Herman: Yeah. Um Moderator: Yeah, is thatam I hearing you right? II don't want to put words in your mouth but am I hearing what you're saying correctly? Herman: Yeah. Like, kinda opens up, because there's thethe actual melody and then there's the bass parts that we learned? Moderator: Mhmm, mhmm. Herman: And....it kinda, like, different instruments play different parts, kinda opens your eyes topossibilities and...things. Moderator: To what else is going on. Herman: Yeah. Tina: Um Moderator: Sure. Tinait looked like Tina was ready. Tina: Um, I used to have a hard time like, figuring out, um, which notes, likelike would be like okay to play, like, 'cause like youyou had like so many notes that you

230

could play, and I just didn't know like which ones were, like, okay and which ones weren't... Yeah, so I wasn't really sure. 'Cause like for like each, like, part...'cause like therehere were like some chords for some parts, some chords for other parts... and they had different notes and I just didn't know which notes were okay for each part. Moderator: I understand. Did you find it got easier as you went along? Tina: Yeah, like in the beginning I just like was super confused, but then it got like easier and less confusing as it went on. Moderator: Mhmm, mhmm. Yolanda: I think I just wasn't really in my comfort zone to do something that was on my own, like I would rather just read someone else's music. Moderator: Mhmm, mhmm. Lebron: I mean it's a lot easier too, it'sit's instead of justjust playing this and it's just, you play it, it's real simple, and then someone hands you a blank sheet of paper and it's like, well...youyou're up and it's like, where do you start, where do you begin, where do you do this and that, and it'sit's a... different exI don't want to say it's a, I guess it is a little tougher experience, but it's a different experience. Moderator: Yeah. Was there anything else you wanted to add, Yolanda? Itit's okay, II just Yolanda: It's like, II don't know when I got, he asked me to do like, when we had five people playing and he asked me to do it, I like couldn't do it at all Moderator: Mhmm. Yolanda: I didn't play anything. Moderator: Mhmm. Yeah. II just didn't want you to, I didn't want you to feel likeif you've said your piece well go on. Yolanda: Yeah. Moderator: Okay. Fine. I don't think I heard from Mustang orKevin. Kevin: Um Moderator: About what you found challenging about the...

231

Kevin: Oh, okay. Moderator: improv. Kevin: Well, um, in the beginning I thought it was kind of hard. 'Cause I wasn't, II didn't know the solfges either? Moderator: Mhmm. Kevin: And, um, like over time it got like a lot easier 'cause we would keep doing it more and more because it was just, like, memorization? Moderator: Mhmm. Kevin: And then when it came to improv it was just anything. You could Moderator: Mhmm. Kevin: and you know, I thought, like again, like the whole study like made it easier because it pretty much like showed how you can improv. Like it like built up like how you can like put the notes together and how to make it sound good like...I still am not that great about like at improv-ing but like I'm like still working on it? Moderator: Mhmm. Kevin: And I don't have perfect pitch like some other people but, you know, I try hard. Moderator: Mhmm, mhmm. Kevin: But I'mI'mthrough the study I pretty much learned what notes work and what don't. Moderator: Great, uh, go ahead. Jake: Uh, I'm going to add on to him because that was probably Moderator: Uh, you're adding on to Jake: Him because that was Moderator: Kevin. Okay.

232

Jake: Probably the onlybecause that was the only hard part for me was solfgebecause before coming here I never really worked with solfge a lot so, um, being exposed to that and then steadily trying to, like on top of knowing the notes to also try to associate the different solfge things with that was kind of hard for me at first. It still is sometimes 'cause like I confuse which one is which, but, um, I'm slowly, you know, getting better at that part. Moderator: Great. Okay? Mustang: II did know a little bit about this before, so maybe it's different, but like, it kind of got like so repetitive at the end, and it was just like every day with the same thing and it was just like, I kind of knew it on the first twofew times, so it's just like, and like there was, and it was at the end like, when we were actu'cause we were mixing it with like concert stuff, like, I don't know, I feel like, we spent like too much time on it just because like at the end of the concerts like, our like Mr. Smith was just like, uh, mad saying like, why aren't you guys good enough? and it's like 'cause we spent like twenty minutes a day on thething so it's like we're definitely not gonna play as well, and I don't know, II also didn't like the part where just like, a girl singing on the computer doing like, I think I saw like a lot of people were just like annoyed that they had to listen to it, but... Moderator: I justI just want to clarify a couple of things, um, just to make sure I heard you right, so the girl on the computer I assume you're referring to the tracks with the patterns like [sings] bum bum bum? Mustang: Yeah. Moderator: Thatthat's what you're talking about? [Collective laughter] Moderator: Yeah, II know those patterns [laughter]. [Many students talking and laughing at once] Tina: It's just that like I just didn't know like why we were doing it in class if we could like do it at home? Like I didn't know why we were like using class time. Yolanda: I don't think anyoneI'm sorry. [Many students talking at once] Tina: I don't think anyone would do it at home either, but like, I don't know why we were like wasting class time when we could be like working on concert music

233

Moderator: Mhmm. Tina: If we could just do it at home. Not that we would do it at home, but still. Moderator: Right. Well, II'm not here to comment or respond but II know, I understand. When you had, Mustang, the other thing I wanted to just clarify, you had said repetitive, did you feel that...the whole project was repetitive, or did you find specific parts of it repetitive? Do you know what I'm asking? Mustang: Yeahyes. I thought the specilike the foundation seemed a little too repetitive. Like people got the chord tones pretty quickly I thought, you know, like with the, there's only three notes and it just, itit went over and over again and it just got like, itit'sit was kind of something that likewe never signed up for it, and even if we didn't sign the sheets we're still going to have to do [activities in class], and it's likeI don't know, I felt like, it was like too, we never got included on the decision on if we wanted to do it or not. Moderator: II understand what you mean. Sothe patterns you felt were overkill? Mustang: Yeah. Moderator: There were a lot of patterns. What about when you got into the skills, like the skill one, the skill two, the rhythms to the bass lines, thechanging pitches on the macrobeats Mustang: Yeah. Moderator: the actual improv Mustang: Yeah. I thought the actual improv wasn'twasn't too bad, but I mean, it was, I think we only did it likelike, like a weelike a week of it Moderator: So in the grand scheme Mustang: But you still have to go through, from the beginning all the way to the top to do it, like you can only do it Lebron: And it's also different 'cause within our own band we do work on that stuff a lot with our concert, with our concert songs and things like that so people catch on to that pretty quickly. Jake: Yeah.

234

Lebron: I don't know if he, like, I mean if you go to another school where they don't really do as much of ear tunes, or as like Moderator: Mhmm. Lebron: Uh, improvisation, things like that, but...thatthat's just, I mean, that's just something about our school that we do work on that a little harder. Moderator: SoII've been responding to Mustang, but these are all questions for everybody. Did you find that it was repetitive to start, like in other words, you sort of always started with the patternsand you kept adding 'til finally Mustang: Yeah. Moderator: What, you said like the last week or two ? Mustang: Yeah. Moderator: You got to the improv, like the skill seven and skill six. Yolanda: I think that's something else, like he did it so many times, like the memorization? Moderator: Mhmm. Yolanda: And if they were to throw us, like if they were to get a different song and have us sing the chord tones, I don't think I don't, I mean, I'm sure there's some people that would, but Moderator: Well, it's okay, Yeah. Yolanda: No, II know people in our band could, but, for me I, it just became memorization. Moderator: Yeah. Mhmm. Jake: Um, well I could say for me because since this is my first year here, I kind of came from a background where this wasn't really done a lot soum, but even saying that I did find it a little bit repetitive, especially the patterns. I thought they would do something like, okay here's the patterns, and then here's the skills, okay now that you know how to do that then let's do this. Okay now let's add this song. Okay now let's do this song, let's do this song. Like, kind of experience, um, different areas of, like um, improvisation, not just focusing on building the foundation, because I

235

guess...'cause I don't think the foundation is probably as important as probably the actual improv. Moderator: Okay, I see what you mean. Jake: Yeah, because if people can pick it up, like, you know, this quick I don't think you should keep, you know, staying here and not moving anywhere else, where, you know Moderator: And just to makes sure we're all thinking the same way, you're talking about the foundations. Your definition of foundation would be what part of the Jake: Thethe, the patterns, because Moderator: Uh huh. Jake: um...I think we kind of all got the, II mean that maybe that's just us as a school, but we kind of all, um, got that aspect very quickly so...I'm kind of, you know, disappointed that they didn't really go anywhere else with it? Just like Moderator: Mhmm, mhmm. Jake: Um, they kind of just stuck to the... Moderator: So the rhythm and tonal patterns, you guysknew them pretty quickly, and they just kept, just kept coming and coming and coming? Herman: I also thought at the beginning, when we first started writing it, which was, we started doing DOMISO and things, and I was like, Alrightwhat? II don't really care what's going on.. But, um, then when we learned why we were doing it aand studying it more but at first I thought, I don't, I don't know why we're doing this. Moderator: So you were hoping for some sort of awe're doing DOMISOMI, some sort of an explanation before? Am I hearing you right? Herman: Yeah. I didn't, whenthe first time we did it II was, I was just confused because Moderator: Mhmm. Herman: a lot of them doing it but... confused, like

236

Moderator: Okay, yeah. And, so Jake already mentioned that he was new to Will East this yearwhoHerman is a freshman? Herman: Yes. Moderator: You two, ohoh, I'm sorry. Tina: I'm a freshman too. Moderator: Ohoh okay, okay. My question to everybody is, were you or were you not familiar with solfge before this started? I know you mentioned you weren't. Jake: I wasn't. Moderator: But for the rest of you, were you familiar with solfge before this? Yolanda: Yes. Moderator: So Mustang was, Yolanda was, this was new for Herman, but you also moved? Herman: Um, I moved like threethree years ago. Moderator: Okay, okay. Tina: Um, well, I knew what it was, and like, um, like I know how to do it, like, if they like give you like the note? Moderator: Mhmm. Tina: And maybe I wasn't listeningor maybe I just like didn't catch it, but like, I never like knew like what note we were on Moderator: Okay, yup. Tina: Like to know what else, you know, was going on. Moderator: Sure. Sure. Lebron: I mean I can like recite DOREMIFASOLATIDO and all that stuff, but like, I would have no idea about how to apply itum, which I think is a lot of what the rhythm is. And I think it was a lotI think it became a lot simpler toward the end when like we kind of, or, got a greater understanding of what this study's

237

really trying toum, test, and what it's really, like, and like how all these exercise relate to the goals of the study. I thought it made a big difference, actually. Moderator: At what point did you, and this is a question for everybody but it's a follow up to Lebron. At what point did you, did you have thisepiphany that, Oh, so this is why we're doing this! Does that question make sense? You sort of answered that already, Herman, I think. Herman: Uhum... Moderator: And it can be just roughest estimation. I don't need, On, uh, May 13th it made sense. Do you know what I mean? Just an estimation. Herman: At 2 o'clock pm, but Moderator: Yeah. [Laughter]. Herman: But, um, no Iit took me actually awhile to get it and, I went to one of the help things and Ms. Jones helped, helped us andI was just sitting there like, II have no idea what's going on in here Moderator: Mhmm. Herman: But, um, II think we were going on, doing it in class once and I thought, Oooh, okay Moderator: Mhmm. Herman: it's notes. Moderator: Sure. Herman: I think he shouldwhen he told us it's notes it'sI think he told us it was in B-flat but II didn't really associate itI don't know, with the scale I guess, II'm not sure why I didn't understand. Moderator: Sure, okay. No that's fine. Tina: Um, I'm not sure, probably likeprobably like Ms. Jones explained because like, every once in awhile like if a bunch of people didn't get it, she would just like take a group of people and go explain it to them, and I would always go on things to help. Moderator: Mhmm.

238

Tina: And she would just likelike say like what it is, and that would usually help, because like'cause like, um, like once like you know like what note, um, DO is, like the rest of them is just like in order. So like and I know that sojust up until then it just like makes sense. Moderator: Sure. Sure. Lebron: Uh, I think it started making sense when either Mr. Smith or Mr. Stringham started to explain how all these things are put together in order to create, like, an improvisation or like to create the end product essentially? Moderator: Mhmm. Lebron: I think you kind of as like, we were telling each of the inskills individually, like one building on top of another, but once you like finally saw like what itlike the climax I guess, like what eventually it bounced to, I think that's when I actually understarted to understand what the whole point of this is. Moderator: Sure. Sure. Lebron: And then you start thinking about it a little bit more and like... Moderator: Good. This is all follow up to Mustang. Thanks, Mustang. Kevin: Um... Moderator: Oh I'm sorryyes? Kevin: Um, I just want to say that, like, I kind of started realizing everything pretty much the week of the concert when, um Moderator: Which, I'm sorry, for me, that was two weeks ago? Kevin: I think so, or Moderator: Your concert wasn't Herman: It was last week. Yolanda: It was last Thursday. Moderator: It was lasit sounds like it was last Thursday.

239

Jake: Well, like Memorial Day weekend. Kevin: Yeah, pretty much. Moderator: Okay. Kevin: But like, um, I pretty much like realized it then because we were, before like we would go in band and be like, okay this is what we're going to do in the concert, like when they had like the groups...well before that we did like the chord tones and the chord roots and everything like on stage like that's when everything like really like sunk in, like, Oh, I understand it now. Moderator: Uh huh. Sure. Kevin: But II, again, I still thought it was like repetitive. 'Cause, I was, it's just like in band all we did was like play the same thing over and over again, it just wasn't until the concert when it really like sunk in. Moderator: Mhmm. Mhmm. Jake: Um, for me, II kind of agree with her, it was when, um Jake: It was when, um, I found out that I was going to be doing, like, improv in a group.. because that's when things started to make sense because I kinda knew.. like what we doing it, I didn't really know why we were doing it, and so [Public address announcement interrupts] Moderator: Is that you? Oh. [laughter]. [Public address announcement interrupts] Moderator: That's none of you? I Jake: No. Moderator: [Laughter]. See, I don't know who you are either, so you[laughter]. Lebron: No, theythey didn't call Lebron James down to the main office. Jake: Yeah. [Laughter].

240

Moderator: Okay, sorry Jake. Jake: Okay, um [Public address announcement interrupts] Moderator: Thank you. [Laughter]. Jake: Um, like I was saying, umwhat was I saying? OhthatI didn't realize it until the, well [Public address announcement interrupts] [Laughter]. Jake: I didn't re[laughter]I didn't realize what we were doing until[laughter]the beginning of the concert because, it was kind of like, I guessI guess it was building up to this all that time, but I guess we didn't know this was going to be like the resulting product that, you know, after this you're gonna be take awayyou're gonna take away the skills that you need, like, for improv-ing in a group or improv-ing on your instrument or something or applying it to maybe composition or applying it maybe tolike developing your, um, skills in music I guess? Moderator: Sure. Mhmm. Jake: Um. And maybe if that was explained maybe it would kind of, umprovide it, uh, kind of [Public address announcement interrupts] Jake: [Laughter]. Okay. Moderator: If it were explained. Jake: Yeah. Itit would have provide a kind of goal for us to, kind of look at and see beforehand so we kind of knew what we were doing from the get go so it wasn't like, like what Herman said, Oh, well what are we doing, why are we doing this? Ummokay andyou know, learning as you go on what Moderator: Sure.

241

Jake: it actually was instead of right out from saying it. Moderator: Mhmm. One of the things Jake just said is a perfect transition, so let's just sort of refocus for a second on the actual writing and composing part. So, this all started from What did you find challenging about improvising? Now I want to switch over to what was challenging about the composition part. [Public address announcement interrupts] Jake: This is more people Yolanda: Yeah, this is more than ever. Jake: More announcements than usual [laughter]. [Multiple students talking at once] Moderator: Wow. Okay. Well it figures, right? [Laughter]. Moderator: So, um, anything [Laughter]. Moderator: Any feedback on thewhat did you find hard about the composing part, the writing part of this? Jake: It was kind of finding, oh, sorry Herman: Uh, you go. Jake: Itit was kind of hard finding, like, from here where do I gobecause, I guess kind of starting composition or trying to come up with a composition is kind of very hard. I guess maybe once you get an idea you can go with it, but, it's [School Bell interrupts] Moderator: All right, is that the real bell now? Multiple Students: Yes. Moderator: So, okay, so they should stop

242

Lebron: There's one at the beginning of passing time and one at the Moderator: Alright, so thatthat should be the end of all that, okay. Kevin: Unless they want to make a special one. Jake: Yeah, uh Mustang: Stop what youre doing. [Laughter]. Yolanda: Fire drill. Herman: There's an assault of graduating seniors. [Multiple students talking]. Lebron: Fire drill comes [laughter]. Jake: Um, okay. Yeah, it wasso I guess once you get an idea maybe you can go with it, but like I it's trying to come up with it is very hard. Moderator: Mhmm. Jake: I guess I think for me, because...you know, you don't really know where you're trying to come from? Moderator: Mhmm. Sure. Yolanda: I didn't really write anything. Kevin: Yeah, I didn't write anything either. Jake: Well I didn't write anything yet, but, II'm saying in general it's kind of hard to come up with things for a composition. Moderator: Sure, sure. Yolanda: Yeah. Herman: We didn't really compose, but we did, like, thethe background and we did rhythms in the backgroundand then we had to change them up and use thethe DOMISO method, all that.

243

Moderator: Mhmm. Mhmm. Herman: And I thought that was really hard because I just...um, I did that during my last lesson and I was trying to write it and I was like, These are just notes! These are random notes! I had no idea, I Moderator: Sure, sure. Herman: I had no idea what I was doing. Lebron: I just feel like it takes like somebody with like an incredible understanding of solfge anddifferent musical elements and possiblycompose and get the right notes and know, like, time signature and the, and the, uh what's the, key signature, measure signature. I meanand it's just, maybe I don't have that level? That could be another thing? Moderator: Mhmm. Lebron: I'm not at that level, but I'm sure for the people who are this thing isnot very difficult at all, but I mean, for the people who aren't there yet Iit'sit's rather tough. Moderator: Mhmm. Mhmm. Herman: II feel like it was kind of geared more towards, someat some points it was geared more towards people who...actually do want to do music later in their life, like Moderator: Sure. Herman: I'm not one of those people, I just Moderator: Sure. Okay. Yolanda: I kind of disagree with that. I think that the way they walked us through it, and...they made it go baby steps for us. They kind of showed us that anyone can do itand they made it really easyI don'tI don't know. Moderator: Did you think it was too easy? Or do you justor you are just making the comparison?

244

Yolanda: Um. Well like I said I kind of ended up memorizing a lot of it, and like, I understood it. And at first it was something new, but if they were to throw me to a new songand have me write chord tones for it, I wouldn't be able to do it. Mustang: Yeah, like, I mean II, if they, it kind of should have been like, ifif it was for like aa Wind Ensemble band, I feel like, they wouldn't of, kind of, walk us through it so slow, it's like, you shouldyou should know the upscale, you shouldn't be likeyou should just be like, you should be able to know how to, you know like Moderator: Sure. Mustang: to kind of. Ifif I had to teach it I would probably teach it like that because of, if that'sthat's [inaudible]. Moderator: Mhmm. Mhmm. Tina: I just like, never knew likelike what to write down. I don't know why, like, I just like never knew like what to like write.. like whether we were doing like the bass notes or like, um, like a rhythm or likedifferent things like I just like didn't know what to write, band composition? Moderator: Mhmm. Mhmm...II'm actually going to keep moving just 'cause I have a couple other questions that I want to get to. We've talked a lot about the patternsthe tonal patterns, the rhythm patterns. What I'd like to ask you about is, you were asked to sing the melody and the bass line, by ear, right, you did that by ear and then you played it by ear, the melody and the bass line? So can you commentdid you find learning the melody and bass line by ear made it easier to improvise and/or compose? Jake: Yeah. Because, um, I kind of learn byear 'cause I hear a lot of things and then I go based off of that. And I guess with, likemy background I kind of got it easier because I was able to associate the different, um, sounds with notes that I knew. Moderator: Mhmm. Jake: So. Um. it was kind of, um, it was basically easy, could do it off the top of my head. Moderator: Okay. Sure. Tina: Well, um, like it didn't really help, I don't know maybe it's because I play percussion and like, um, I do know how to read music and I did used to play piano, but not every song has like xylophone or marimba or bells. Um, so like, I don't automatically like hear the sounds and the notes and everything?

245

Moderator: Mhmm. Tina: So that does make it a little bit more difficult, but like um, and so like the earthelike the ear tunes, don't come as easily as other people probably...but itit helped kind of-ish. Moderator: Okay. Lebron: It gave me a reasonable starting point so at least I can probably like hear like the tune, like in the back of my hand kind of going along with me, but...it gave me a good starting point, that's what it was. Moderator: Okay. Kevin: I thought it was easy. It helped a lot, but umI kinda agree with Mustang and Yolanda thatif we changed to another song everything would be so much harder. Like, it would, it helped with like B-flat with, or B-flat with um, Amazing Grace, but if we moved on to something else more complex, I don't think anybody would, well some people would, but other people wouldn't know what to do. Moderator: Sure. Sure. Jake: II kind of wish they kind of did a song for each stepso we would kind of know how to use the skills in other songs. Moderator: Mhmm. Jake: Like now you know this, now you can use it here or something like that. So like itso by the end I guess, even for the people who didn't really, for people like from thefrom the spectrum, like the people who didn't know everything or the people who knew everything, they would all be able to kind of grasp some kind of concept aboutwhat was going on and apply it not just to Amazing Grace 'cause I feel like that's kind of what this was and it's like Moderator: Sure. Jake: Let's just improvise to this song andand you know, what are you really going to take out of improvising for one song, II Moderator: Mhmm. Mhmm. Yup. The next question is ait's not quite a follow up to our discussion a few minutes ago but, we talked about the tonal and rhythm patterns, right? Now what I want to do is, I don't want to talk about therepetitiveness that we already talked about, but my question now isdid they help you at all in improvising

246

or composing, you know, not whether it was too much or not, but, the actual act of learning those tonal and rhythm patterns, did they help you improvise and compose? Herman: I think we probably [inaudible] if we were to try to imimprovise. Moderator: Uh huh. Herman: [Inaudible]. Moderator: So you found it helpful. Herman: Yeah, I guess. Moderator: Okay. Tina: I think it definitely helped. Because like, and like, you learn like, um, the bass notes like you learn like what notes like went with the song, and you could kind of like play around with like those notesim Moderator: Mhmm. Tina: provisation? Moderator: Mhmm. Tina: And then kind of like work down, you could like realize like what went with the song? Moderator: Mhmm. Tina: And then, um, and like what goes together and you just kind of, um, learn like with the song, um first Moderator: Mhmm. Tina: Before you actually went ahead and improvised. Moderator: Sure. II just want to acknowledge that you nodded your head at me, Yolanda. Yolanda: I think it helped. Moderator: Yeah. Okay. Mustang felt it helped. You guys

247

Lebron: It just itII thought, it just gives you, uhlike one more thing to fall back on in your music background and Moderator: Mhmm, mhmm. Lebron: I guess. Moderator: Sure. Jake: Yeah. I guess now we kind of have a base, I guess. Moderator: Yep, okay, great. Um. So we've talked a little bit about this, you've spent at least a little bit of time writing in band, right? I mean, a little bit. When you were doing that, did you relate the music you were writing to anything you had already sung, played, or improvised? Does that make sense how I worded that? Did you feel any connection between what you were writing and anything you had done previously in the study? Be it the patterns, be it the tune, be it the bass line, were you conscious of that connection when you were writing? Jake: I mean I guess because, well I mean, we're still writing now, butum...I guess I kind of associate it with like the dailyumrhythm things that we hadhad kind of done before, like, where we would look at the rhythm and then we should kind of, umplay that. I guess the only difference now is that, you know, it's completelyyou know, there's no...thing to fall back on whatsoever it's just Here, now, do this. Moderator: Sure. Jake: Um, which I guess makes it harder, but um...I guess you can kinda fall back on what we kind of did earlier in the year as far as rhythms or tonal things Moderator: Mhmm. Jake: I guess. Moderator: So those of you who haven't written yet, I'll rephrase the question: Do you think that when you do write, what you've done to this point is going to inform and help you when you write? Kevin: Yeah. Lebron: I think it gives you a better starting point 'cause now it's now at least you know the chordwhere you're looking for and if there's anything that maybe where

248

to start, and like, like start with the chord tones or the bass line, and it just gives you thethe background that you need. Moderator: Sure. Tina: I definitely think it will 'cause it's like, whatever like you already did is kind of like in your head, and so then that's what you will be writing down and that's what you'll be thinking of when you're going to write it down. Moderator: Mhmm...Sure...Okay. Next question is, are the processes of improvisation and composition or writing, are they similar or different for you? And then, if you could, explain that a little bit. So, I'm looking for the differences between improv and composition, or if you do find them similar. Herman: I guess they can go hand in hand, but I'm not really sure though. Moderator: Hand in hand? Herman: Like you canI guess use one to create the other. Lebron: I gueI guess you could sbe like composing while you improvise, I guess is like a good way of saying it? Moderator: Mhmm. Lebron: Like you might start with nothin' and then you start playin' a little somethin' and you start improvising and then either you don't like it and you try something else or you like it and you write it down. And it's III think you need one in order to have the other, I guess. Mustang: I think that improv is way easier than composition, just 'cause improv, like, I mean if you'reit matters what type of improv but if you're doing it in the voice and you're justsinging random stuff then it's just likeyou can still make it work, but when you're composing and you have to put like notes to those things and then write down what you're tryingwrite down the rhythms that you're trying to do, if not they're going to be like complex, but likea lot of like syncopations...a lot of different, well, more than just doing it by yourself in your like natural rhythm in your head and stuff. I think that could be easier like that. Moderator: Great. Thanks. Lebron: Um, just to add a little bit, I think if you do have like a circle beat you just go out and, you know, play and maybe it's like a gig or something and you're playing saxophone and you just go out and play something, and you know, I feel like you get

249

a much betteryou don't really think about it much so you play it by ear and then you get a different...umlet's say arrangement like a different what would come out, like result, and compared to like if you actually wrote something, you structured it and you memorized it... and I think you could use thethe things from Mr. Stringham's study in order to, like while you're thinking about what's being played, in order to formulate your ownimprovisation. Moderator: Sure. Sure. Yolanda: I think that they just go hand in hand, like, in order to improvise or compcompose you have to have an understanding of what notes would go good andand II tend to think of improvising as an on the spot thing, but I think itlike improvising can become composition? Like sometimeI don't know it'sI don't know likefor example, at like Woodstock, Jimi Hendrix had an ideahe improvised the, um, Star Spangled Banner but that to become a song, it's on recordings and stuffso I think it can turn it into something. Moderator: And peopleplay the national anthem like Jimi Hendrix played the national anthem on Yolanda: Yeah. Moderator: Yeah, I know what you mean. Tina: And I think like, um, like in, um, improvisation, like slike um, sometimes like it's not like the same, it's just like a one time thing, sometimes, um, it's like different every time depending on what you're doing. Composition, like once you write it down, you either go back and change it or just keep it the way it is Moderator: Sure. Tina: And improvisation, you just like do it and then it's done or you can write it down and make it into a composition. Moderator: Mhmm. I already heard from Herman, I think, didn't I? Um, I'm not sure I heard from you two guys on that one. Jake: Um Moderator: Same or different, improv and composition. Jake: UmI think composition is taking improv and takingthese steps and then putting it down on paper. And it's kind of likeyou know, being in a foreign country, likeyou canyou can hear what people are saying and maybe you can, you know,

250

be able to communicate back but, it's going to be more difficult to write it down on paper than it is to actually, you know, do whatever. Moderator: Mhmm. Jake: So...improv is easy but comp is just very very hard in thatrespect. Moderator: Sure. Kevin: Yeah, I agree with, um Moderator: Jake. Kevin: Jake and Lebron. You can improvise and then, like something will come out and it will sound like amazing, but when it comes to writing it down on paper, it can be so much harder. And you know, evenyou can even forget what you just did too, so. Moderator: Sure. Sure. Great, thanks...We're actually to the last question. And, we've talked about this, but as you know, Mr. Stringham designed this curriculum that your teacher used. Do you have suggestions for either Mr. Stringham or Mr. Smith about using this curriculum with other students in the future? So, it's, um, fine to...uh, repeat some stuff that we talked about earlier but this is a good chance to sort of summarize the whole thing, so answer that. Or if you have other suggestions that are on your mind that you didn't say earlier. I'm going to let Mustang go first 'cause you have to leave momentarily, don't you? Mustang: YeahI'd sayI'd say that, uh, if you're going to do a project on improvising, I think improvimprovisation is something made for like a person to improv, 'cause it's like without it you can't really hear it as well. But they do it as a band perspective, so I think that you need to more focus on the individual rather than the whole band instead of like a'cause like, I meanII don't know if I was the only person, but I felt like when every single person is improvising in the band, like you tried to make it sound like sweet but it was just like Yolanda: Yeah. Kevin: It was...weird. Tina: Pretty... Moderator: Soanybody canyou all.. agreed Lebron: Yeah.

251

Tina: Yeah. Moderator: Can anybody add to what Mustang said? Lebron: Improvising is like a personal thing, like now I like...Yolanda, Herman, Tina andJake, and... Moderator: Kevin. Lebron: Kevin. [Laughter]. Lebron: They alleverybody's got theeverything's their own way, and I mean, and it's got their own way of improvising andand when you just listen everybody improvisiit's like everybody talking at the same time, you have no idea what Moderator: Mhmm, mhmm. Lebron: what everybody's talking about or what they're all trying to say. Moderator: Mhmm. Lebron: Andbut if you improviseby yourself, youII feel like 'cause there's more of a meaning to it too. Moderator: Sure. Sure. Lebron: And you're also not really influenced for like what other people are playing and what sounds good and....other stranger factors thatpeople consider. Herman: Plus, you could probably also play better if you're not just listening to the person next to you Moderator: Uh huh. Herman: 'cause they might be playing something different, and like... maybe I'm playing it wrong or maybe Moderator: Itit might help or it might not help, right? Herman: Yeah.

252

Moderator: Right. II went off of that, Mustang, is there anything else you wanted to..? Mustang: Yeah, iit's just like, I mean, youI guess you could kind of do the thing with just the chord tones, but like I don't know how it was going to work with passing tones and things because you justyou have every single note in thein thelike scale Moderator: Sure. Mustang: [inaudible] so it's just, I don't know. Moderator: Sure. Thanks. Yolanda: I think although we might have said that it was really repetitive and that we would have liked tomaybe do it on a differentlike I said that I wouldnt be able to do it on a different song, I think it was a good start and it was a foundation Moderator: Uh huh. Yolanda: for improvising and...it made sense now to improvise on that song, so if I were to go forward with improvising then...I could do the same thing for other stuffso I think it was a good foundation for this, especially if like, Herman said how if we don't want to go into music ever again...thenitit won't really matter but we have the basic instruction for it. Kevin: Yeah. Moderator: So you learned something new about music Yolanda: Yeah. Moderator: doing this. Kevin: Yeah. I agree with you on that one too and with that, I thinkif like everything runs likeII really liked the study, but I think that it should have been likethere should have been more clarification. Like a bunch of people were kind of just like sitting there and they're like, Oh, what are we doing? What are we playing? And then ititthat's how we were, it kind of got repetitive. And I think if maybe we did more of like the people who were like first time solfge-ing, and even like, not to just to like point out percussion, just 'cause they don'tthey don't play notes like that and need more clarification, I think it would have been a lot easier.

253

Moderator: Uh, justuhjust talk a minute more for me, Kevin, about...so, have different activities for different? Kevin: Yeah like, kind of Moderator: Is that kind of what you're saying? Kevin: Yeah like that, and like...people didn't understand like the solfge-ing. Like they didn't understand likelike in my section at least, we didn't understand what we were playing...and we didn't really understand why we were doing this, like we knew we were doing it for a doctoral study, but like, there was really no kind of motivation behind it. Moderator: Uh huh. Kevin: Sowe were just like really clueless and likelike I talked to other people in other sections and they were like, I don't really understand what's going on either. Moderator: Sure. Sure. Kevin. So Jake: Yeah. I agree ifif there was a little more clarificationII think it might have gone, um, a little bit smoother and I kind of agree with Lebron in terms ofof um try to make it apply to the individual instead of during a group. Becausewith group there'sthere's many different people learning onlearning from many different levels so it's kind of hard to kind ofget everybody on the same page ifno one is really at thereally at the same pace as somebody else or something. And maybe if like people wanted to go further, then maybe you can do it like individually, like have them individually improvise themselves or individually compose themselves and do it kind of like a private thing, but I guess the group, itit wasit was really difficult. Maybe for the band you could do just like the pattern stuff, but for everything else, like just make it so Lebron: Even for like the group of the kids from Wind Ensemble, I Yolanda: Yeah. Lebron: Who are more of the same level Jake: Yeah. Lebron: Like see our band is like solike there are people that, this stuff is first nature. There's also people that likeI mean ininincluding myselfI

254

meanwe're not really as advanced as some of the other people, but I feel like with Wind Ensemble, um, or an upper level band you wouldn't find as big of differentiation, which I feel would help the results of Mr. Stringham's studyUm, other than that, it was an interesting experienceum, something we really are exposed toand opens your eyes a little bit toward music in general and its composition. Moderator: So, I'd like if anybody else has some stuff, II like what Jake just said aboutJake thinks that maybe some parts of this overall study maybe made more sense in the large ensemble and some of it made more sense maybe in your small group lessons or...is thatam I hearing you right, Jake? Jake: Mhmm. Moderator: Is anybody else Lebron: Yes also Moderator: wanting to add to that? Lebron: You feel like more like you're a part of the study too, like when you're working with the people conducting the study and you're in the room playing with them, Iit's just, uhthat's natural with anything, though. I mean like anytime you build closer to the person, it's Moderator: Sure. Sure. Jake: But of course with sixty people you probably can't do that. Moderator: Well, sure, Ibut.. ththese are good pointseither way, right? Tina: And like I also think that like, um, if like they went back and explained like some things more, because like a lot of times like a bunch of people didn't know what was going on. I think a bunlike probably those that did this already, but like um, so like a lot of times like for a couple of the different things, just like nobody knew what it wasso we had to go over it, like over and over again and then he still didn't explain it 'cause I don't think, umum, Mr. Smith, I don't think like he knew that nobody knew what like what was happening, so maybe so somebody should have told him that nobody knew what was happening or, just like um, I mean like in the beginning, um, hehe should have like asked like what everybody knew about and what they didn't know about or something, so that, um, he could have like taught us what we didn't know already, and like not like gone over and over what we did know. Moderator: Like a pretest kind of a thing?

255

Tina: Yeah. Lebron: Yeah. Tina: 'Cause like I know that like we did do thispretest thing, but like that didn't really like show like what we knew and what we didn't know. Moderator: Are you talking about the, aptitude test that's on a half sheet Herman: Yeah. Multiple students: Yeah. Moderator: And it was forty items that Multiple Students: Yeah. Jake: I think, building off of her, then you could take that and then you can have like different approaches to different people, like for the peoplelike maybe percussion whoaren't really exposed to as much Lebron: Thank you. [Laughter] Jake:like sounds and stuff? Like, yeah, 'cause II've been in percussion too Lebron: Yeah, I mean, we have no idea what we're doing over there Jake: II've been in percussion too sometimes and I don't even know what like some people are doing. Like take different approaches with different people so that they'reyou know, we're all on the same page instead ofI don't even know what's going on here, you know, okay, and now we're suddenly doing all these things that I don't even understandand I can't even grab the concept of, and now it's likewell, you know, what did I really, you know, get out of this? Moderator: Sure. Sure. Jake: Although it was a very good, um, kind of ice breaker in terms of, um, getting people dipping their feet into kind of imprimprov. Moderator: Right.

256

Lebron: Now to stick up for our percussion section, we actually [Laughter]. Tina: We did goodwe did really good Lebron: We did try hard, and it wasit was a fun time, but I mean, we also don't have like really like quality like people who are really into their bassoons and like know exactly what they're doing and have gone to other schools, you know, who Tina: Who are perfect. Lebron: Who are perfect. [Laughter]. So...[Laughter]uh, we understand what you're saying, we're just having fun, but Tina: We all tried really hard and did our best. Lebron: Yeah. Jake: Yeah. Lebron: Wewe try to be[Laughter]. Moderator: Yeah. Yolanda: I think the fact that this was a group thing and we did do this with an entire band and we can all... have some sort of improvising now, I think it was successful in that aspect. Moderator: Sure. Yolanda: Like, I mean, it would be nice to have individual lessons and obviously we'd all be doing a lotwe'd have exactly what our needs were, but the fact that we did do this with an entire band andour entire band, we pretty much can improvise now Moderator: Sure. Yolanda: I think that's...impressive. Moderator: Thank you, everyone. [Moderator concludes focus group session]

257

Appendix G: Student Survey

NAME: __________________________________

Circle one:

MALE

FEMALE

What instrument do you play in band?

How long have you played it?

If you play any other instruments, please list them and the length of time you have played (for example: bagpipes, 3 years):

258

Appendix H: Documentation of EPRP Number

259

Appendix I: Letter of Cooperation

260

Appendix J: RSRB Exemption Letter