THE ATTITUDES AND PERCEPTIONS OF PRE‐SERVICE ELEMENTARY CLASSROOM TEACHERS TOWARD TEACHING MUSIC AND THE NATIONAL STANDARDS A RESEARCH PAPER SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTERS OF MUSIC BY PATRICK HORTON DR. KEVIN GERRITY ‐ ADVISOR BALL STATE UNIVERSITY MUNCIE, INDIANA MAY 2011 1 The Attitudes and Perceptions of Pre­service Elementary Classroom Teachers Toward Teaching Music and the National Standards The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was signed into law on January 8, 2002, as a reorganization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Christ & Taylor, 2010). This legislation has given state and local governments the flexibility to set teacher standards based on research and to reform teacher education and certification (Christ & Taylor, 2010). Many difficulties have been presented by NCLB for music educators, including decreased funding, fewer teaching positions, and a reduction of instructional time (Beveridge, 2010; Center on Education Policy, 2005). While these difficulties exist, music educators are still required to be highly qualified within their discipline. Furthermore, under NCLB, the Indiana Department of Education considers highly qualified elementary classroom teachers to be highly qualified to teach elementary music (Indiana Department of Education, 2009). Traditionally, elementary education majors participated in both a music fundamentals course and a music methods course to prepare for the possibility of teaching music. At many universities, these courses have been replaced by a single combined music fundamentals and methods course as a result of an already full curriculum (Gauthier & McCrary, 1999). As a result, elementary classroom teachers deemed highly qualified under NCLB may eventually teach music with minimal formal experiences or content knowledge in the subject. It is important that instructors of music fundamentals and/or music methods courses understand elementary education major’s attitudes toward the importance of the national standards. Additionally, knowledge of students’ willingness to 2 integrate music into their future classroom as well as the perceptions of their own capability to teach the national standards is also valuable. By understanding the attitudes of these pre‐service teachers in addition to the influence of the instructors’ teaching style and classroom dynamics, instructors can focus attention on improving the perceptions of pre‐service elementary teachers and therefore improve the likelihood that they will incorporate music into their future teaching. The first purpose of this study was to ascertain the attitudes and self‐
perceptions of pre‐service elementary classroom teachers enrolled in a music methods and fundamentals course (n=68) toward teaching music and the national standards for music education. Second, this study aimed to determine the factors that positively and negatively affect the integration of music by pre‐service elementary classroom teachers. Finally, this study determined how instructor teaching style and classroom dynamics were connected to student attitudes, self‐
perceptions, and willingness to integrate music into their future teaching. Review of Literature There has been a great body of research done involving elementary classroom teachers and music. Research highlights three primary types of courses offered to pre‐service elementary teachers at universities throughout the United States. One course focuses on music fundamentals, another on teaching methods, and a final course that remains a combination of both. In a survey of 530 National Association of Schools of Music accredited universities, there was a greater 3 consensus of course purpose between instructors that taught music fundamentals courses for elementary education majors than between instructors that taught music methods or combined classes (Gauthier & McCrary, 1999). This indicates that there is less of a defined purpose for methods or combined classes and perhaps that these courses are less effective in preparing elementary educators to teach music. When comparing the perceived ability to implement the national standards of in‐service music specialists to in‐service elementary classroom teachers, the results have been significantly disproportionate. Byo (1999) surveyed in‐service elementary music specialists and fourth grade classroom teachers in Florida. On her measurement instrument, she listed each standard and the participants responded to each in seven categories: teacher's training, interest, ability, sense of responsibility, resources, assistance, and perception of available time. Byo found music specialist’s responses were considerably more positive than fourth grade classroom teachers. Other studies have looked at pre‐service elementary education majors and examined which factors help to determine which types of music activities they will likely include in their future teaching. Barry (1992) surveyed 125 pre‐service elementary teachers enrolled in a music methods course at different universities. Her results were similar to other studies (Birch, 1969) finding that regardless of how much teachers value music, they may neglect specific musical activities if they do not feel comfortable teaching those specific concepts (Barry, 1992). 4 Jeanneret (1997) conducted research with pre‐service primary teachers in two universities, one in the United States and one in Australia. Her results indicate that a music fundamentals course can significantly affect a pre‐service teacher’s confidence to teach music. She also indicates that the modes of delivery and teaching strategies may also have an impact on pre‐service teachers’ attitudes more than their musical achievement. Probst (2003) sought to determine which factors from an undergraduate music course best predicted the amount of time in‐service elementary teachers might spend teaching music in their classrooms. Activities that dealt with creativity and responding to music were the greatest predictors. This suggests that spending more time in a music fundamentals/methods class, where such activities are more prevalent, could potentially increase the amount of time classroom teachers spend on music. Kvet and Watkins (1993) surveyed 306 elementary education majors and asked them to rate the degree to which they believed positive attributes contribute to success in teaching music. Subjects’ responses were used to identify four major factors that elementary education majors associated with success or failure in teaching music: (a) understanding and organizing for individual differences in children, (b) musical ability/positive feelings for music, (c) proactive personality characteristics (effective teaching behaviors and skills), and (d) external factors affecting the teaching process. While these factors can help to better understand elementary education major’s perceptions of success in music teaching, they do not 5 indicate their attitude toward integrating music, the importance of the national standards, or their self‐perceived ability to implement the national standards. Berke and Colwell (2004a) conducted a study on pre‐service elementary education majors that included a pretest–posttest questionnaire measuring attitudes toward the integration of music into the elementary classroom. Following the course, there was a positive change in the participants’ attitudes in many areas including: musical ability, musical knowledge, recognition of the importance of standards, confidence in capability of teaching music, implementing the national standards for music education, and integration of music into the elementary curriculum. This study focused on the change in perceptions over a condensed summer course. While there is an abundance of research about pre‐service teachers and their attitudes and perceptions, there is very little research that examines the effects of the college instructor’s teaching style or classroom dynamics on attitudes and perceptions of pre‐service teachers in any discipline. Mitchell (1972) examined the effects of different instructional strategies on the attitudes and perceptions of pre‐
service elementary classroom teachers on teaching science. The three groups included: (1) a group instructed in an open learning environment; (2) a group instructed in a formal lecture‐discussion approach; and (3) a control group that received no specified treatment. Data analysis revealed no significant difference between the teaching strategies. However, there were significant differences shown between perceptions of the teachers and science understanding. The researcher 6 suggests that teachers trained in an open learning environment responded positively to experimentalism, open mindedness, teacher‐pupil relationships and interest in science. Because little research examines the influence of the instructor, future research is needed to determine how the instructor’s teaching style may affect the attitudes and perceptions of pre‐service elementary teachers. Method Conceptual Framework This explanatory mixed methods study utilized a concurrent research design with an embedded qualitative component. The quantitative component was a posttest design while the qualitative component focused primarily on the process being studied. The sequence of data collection occurred in different stages throughout the course of this study. Qualitative data were collected from classroom observations during the final weeks of the semester and from participant interviews directly after finals week. The primary quantitative component was administered during the last week of classes between the observations and the interviews. Despite the varying stages of data collection, all data were analyzed after both the quantitative and qualitative data were completely collected. Priority was given to the quantitative component because it explored and described the primary focus of the study: the attitudes and perceptions of pre‐
service elementary classroom teachers toward music. The qualitative data was used to explain parts of the phenomenon that could not be quantified. Both the data from 7 the qualitative component and data from the quantitative component were mixed because it provided a richer understanding of the attitudes being studied. Quantitative Methods This study utilized a questionnaire based on a measurement instrument created by Berke and Colwell (2004b) and included subject interviews in addition to classroom observations. Revisions were made to the questionnaire by reducing the number of times “national standards” and related terminology appeared in the questionnaire and by rephrasing items to be accessible to participants less familiar with musical terminology. The questionnaire was submitted to four experts in the field for validation. Each validating judge was asked to determine if each item was clear and able to discriminate between those who had positive attitudes and those who had negative attitudes. Judges were also asked to offer suggestions for improving each item and the overall questionnaire. The items on the questionnaire were grouped into two categories: attitude and perception. The attitude portion consisted of 16 Likert‐type items, on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree), which focused on the participants’ attitudes toward integrating music into the general curriculum and the importance of the national standards in music education. For additional details regarding the questionnaire see Appendix A. Three sections of a music fundamentals course for elementary education and special education majors at a midwestern university were chosen to complete the 8 questionnaire as a convenient sample. Near the end of the semester, the questionnaire was completed at the beginning of class in an effort to ensure the respondents full focus and thoughtfulness. An attitudinal score was generated from the participants’ responses to this section and was a summation of the 16 items in the attitude portion. The perception portion consisted of 9 Likert‐type items, on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree), which focused on the participant’s self‐perceptions of their ability to teach the national standards. A perception score was generated from the responses of the participants to this portion and was a summation of the subject’s responses to the nine items on the perception portion. Rubrics were created to classify the frequency distribution of the participants’ attitudes and perceptions. The differences between the minimum and maximum possible scores were divided into six equal sections and labeled with the descriptions used on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). These rubrics are illustrated in Figures 1 and 2. The attitudinal and the perception portion of the questionnaire were analyzed for reliability using the Cronbach alpha. The attitudinal portion had a reliability of .91 while the perception portion had a reliability of .91. Figure 1: Attitudinal Score Rubric Very Negative Attitude
16-28
Negative Attitude
29-41
Somewhat Negative Attitude
42-55
Somewhat Positive Attitude
56-69
Positive Attitude
70-82
Very Positive Attitude
83-96
9 Figure 2: Perceptions Score Rubric Very Incapable
9-16
Incapable
17-23
Somewhat Incapable
24-31
Somewhat Capable
32-39
Capable
40-46
Very Capable
47-54
Qualitative Methods The researcher observed each of the three sections of the music fundamentals course three times to document classroom dynamics. Of the three observations in each class, two took place while the instructor was teaching the entire lesson and one took place while the instructor was acting as a facilitator during student presentations. Observations were scheduled during the last four weeks of the semester at the convenience of the researcher and the course instructors. Each observation lasted the entire duration of one class. For more specific details regarding the observations, please see Appendix B. Two open response items were included on the questionnaire that addressed experiences that affected willingness or confidence to integrate music (see Appendix A). The student responses to these items were coded and analyzed for major themes. Following the end of the semester, the researcher interviewed each instructor and one randomly chosen student from each section to gather information on classroom dynamics. The interviews took place outside of class time at the convenience of the subjects during finals week or directly after. For more 10 details regarding the interviews, please see the interview protocols in Appendices C and D. All subjects will remain anonymous throughout the study. Triangulation was established by utilizing the data collected from the interviews with the instructors, the interviews with the randomly selected students, and the observations conducted by the researcher. Pseudonyms have been assigned to each of the participants to ensure their anonymity. Profiles Instructor 1 – Jackie Jackie has extensive experience in vocal music and, in addition to this course, teaches music full‐time at a local elementary school. She has experience as a music educator and as an elementary classroom teacher both her native country of Canada as well as the United States. Jackie has taught this music fundamentals course for approximately four years and understands that the purpose of this course is to teach the students to better understand music. She believes in a predetermined sequence for implementing the curriculum and centers what she will teach on five elements of music: expression, melody, harmony, rhythm, and form (expression usually coming first). Jackie strongly believes in modeling musical behaviors during this course and finds the national standards to be an excellent resource for young teachers to help sequence and record what they are teaching. She believes music is a hands‐on activity and incorporates musical or movement activities into every lesson. Jackie hopes that even if a pre‐service teacher does not feel comfortable singing or playing 11 an instrument, they will find there are many ways to integrate music into their teaching. Instructor 2 – Brenda Brenda has an extensive background in vocal and general music at a variety of levels. She has worked in pre‐schools, religious schools, and with children with special needs. She is currently a board‐certified music therapist working with varied age groups and levels. She has taught this course for almost three semesters and understands that the purpose of the course is to improve the musical skills of these students. Additionally, she believes it is important to let the pre‐service teachers know music is a valuable way to connect with students because of the way the brain is activated during musical activities, because music can aid memorization, and because many students are just simply musical learners. Brenda describes her teaching style as including a constructivist approach because she feels students are then able to assess themselves. She feels the standards provide affirmation for music teachers as well as a reminder of what is important and expresses feeling overwhelmed by the small amount of time to include a great deal of content at any level of music teaching. Instructor 3 – Rose Rose’s teaching experience includes elementary general music and beginning band. She has experience with the trombone and primarily studied the 12 piano in college. In addition to teaching this course, she is a children’s music director at a local church. While she has observed the format of this course change over the years, Rose has been teaching it in some variation for about 15 years. She understands that the purpose of the course is not to make her students future music teachers, but instead to make them more literate in music no matter their ability because they are then more likely to integrate it in their elementary classroom. When describing her teaching style she emphasizing that she avoids lecturing. She prefers to do a lot of modeling – including model projects and model teaching methods. She has a very organized approach to each lesson. While Rose acknowledges that much of the curriculum is predetermined, she also determines what supplemental material she will include if she thinks her students will use it in the future. Her views of the national standards are positive and she tells her students it is good to know music education was one of the first disciples to acquire them. Student 1 – Anna Anna was a student in Jackie’s class. During the semester this study was undertaken, she was a sophomore and was majoring in deaf education. She describes her upbringing as “very musical” and notes that everyone in her family sang and took piano lessons. She played clarinet throughout middle school and sang in multiple school choirs throughout middle school and high school. Additionally, she occasionally sings with various church groups. 13 Student 2 – Carrie Carrie is a sophomore majoring in elementary education. She was a student in Brenda’s class. She recalls performing in musical programs during elementary school, but acknowledges her music experiences are limited to her time singing with her middle school choir. Student 3 – Melanie Melanie was a student in Rose’s class and was senior majoring in elementary education with a reading concentration. She was put in voice lessons by her parents when she was “very young”, but recalls that it did not work because she “couldn’t hum.” Since then, she sang in various choirs throughout middle school and high school. Melanie also participated in show choir as well as choir competitions during high school. The Researcher The researcher is a full‐time graduate assistant working toward a master’s degree in music education. He has an undergraduate degree in music education and five years of experience teaching middle school and high school band. A major portion of his assistantship work included observing and assessing student teachers. During his time as a graduate assistant he has also become involved with several arts organizations that work with students with special needs. 14 Results Quantitative Results The data collected from the questionnaire were analyzed in regard to demographic information, attitudinal score, perception score, and individual items. The mean for the attitudinal score was 79.84 with a standard deviation of 9.14. This placed the mean attitudinal score as “positive.” Table 1 illustrates the frequency distribution of attitudinal scores. Table 1: Frequency Distribution of Scores for Attitudinal Scores Description
Score
Frequency
Cumulative %
Very Negative Attitude
16-28
0
0
Negative Attitude
29-41
0
0
Somewhat Negative Attitude
42-55
1
1.5
Somewhat Positive Attitude
56-69
7
11.8
Positive Attitude
70-82
31
57.4
Very Positive Attitude
83-96
29
100
The mean for the perceptions score was 39.56 with a standard deviation of 8.52. The mean perception score was placed in the category of “capable.” Table 2 illustrates the frequency distribution of perception scores. 15 Table 2: Frequency Distribution of Scores for Perception Score Description
Score
Frequency
Cumulative %
Very Incapable
9-16
1
1.5
Incapable
17-23
1
2.9
Somewhat Incapable
24-31
11
19.1
Somewhat Capable
32-39
16
42.6
Capable
40-46
29
85.3
Very Capable
47-54
10
100
A Pearson Product Moment Correlation was run between demographic information and both the attitudinal score and the perception score. According to the Basic Statistical Concepts of Bartz (1999), a moderate correlation was revealed between participant’s perception score and their participation in a school‐affiliated ensemble (r = .489). A low correlation (Bartz, 1999) exists between participant’s perception score and participation in non‐school‐affiliated ensembles (r = .347). Tables 3 and 4 illustrate these relationships. Table 3: Relationship between Perception Score and Performance with a School‐
Affiliated Ensemble Have you performed with
a school-affiliated musical
ensemble (K-12 and/or
college)?
Perception Score
Perception Score
Pearson Correlation
1.000
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Have you performed with a school- Pearson Correlation
affiliated musical ensemble (K-12 Sig. (2-tailed)
and/or college)?
N
p < .01
.489
.000
68.000
68
.489
1.000
.000
68
68.000
16 Table 4: Relationship between Perception Score and Performance with a Non‐
School‐Affiliated Ensemble Have you performed with
a non-school-affiliated
musical ensemble (K-12
and/or college)?
Perception Score
Perception Score
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Have you performed with a nonPearson Correlation
school-affiliated musical ensemble Sig. (2-tailed)
(K-12 and/or college)?
N
1.000
.347
.004
68.000
68
.347
1.000
.004
68
68.000
p < .01 Relationships were revealed between attitudinal score and participant’s previous performance experiences. A low correlation (Bartz, 1999) exists between participant’s attitude scores and participation in non‐school‐affiliated ensembles (r = .326). A low correlation (Bartz, 1999) also exists between participant’s attitude scores and participation in school‐affiliated ensembles (r = .257). These relationships are illustrated in Tables 5 and 6. Table 5: Relationship between Attitude Score and Performance with a Non‐School‐
Affiliated Ensemble Have you performed with
a non-school-affiliated
musical ensemble (K-12
and/or college)?
Attitude Score
Attitude Score
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Have you performed with a nonPearson Correlation
school-affiliated musical ensemble Sig. (2-tailed)
(K-12 and/or college)?
N
p < .01
1.000
.326
.007
68.000
68
.326
1.000
.007
68
68.000
17 Table 6: Relationship between Attitude Score and Performance with a School‐
Affiliated Ensemble Have you performed with
a school-affiliated musical
ensemble (K-12 and/or
college)?
Attitude Score
Attitude Score
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Have you performed with a school- Pearson Correlation
affiliated musical ensemble (K-12 Sig. (2-tailed)
and/or college)?
N
1.000
.257
.034
68.000
68
.257
1.000
.034
68
68.000
p < .05 There was no relationship evident between participant’s attitude score and previous participation on private lesson, however a low correlation (Bartz, 1999) was found between participant’s perception score and previous experience with private lessons (r = .275). This relationship is illustrated in Table 7. Table 7: Relationship between Perception Score and Private Lessons
Did you take any type of
private lessons as a
child?
Perception Score
Perception Score
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Did you take any type of private
lessons as a child?
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
1.000
.275
.023
68.000
68
.275
1.000
.023
68
68.000
p < .05 There were no noteworthy correlations found between perception scores and year in school or college major. Similarly, there were no noteworthy correlations found between attitude scores and year in school or college major. The item within the attitude portion of the questionnaire with the highest frequency of 18 very positive responses was attitudes‐item 1. This item had a median of 6 as well as a mode of 6. Table 8 illustrates the frequency distribution of responses to attitudes‐
item 1. Table 8: Frequency Distribution of Scores for Attitudes‐Item 1: Music is an important subject for elementary students. Description
Value
Frequency
Cumulative %
Very Negative Attitude
1
0
0
Negative Attitude
2
0
0
Somewhat Negative Attitude
3
0
4.4
Somewhat Positive Attitude
4
7
10.3
Positive Attitude
5
22
42.6
Very Positive Attitude
6
39
100
Within the attitude portion of the questionnaire, the item with the lowest frequency of very positive responses was the attitudes‐item 5. This item had a median of 4 as well as a mode of 4. Table 9 illustrates the frequency distribution of responses to attitudes‐item 5. Table 9: Frequency Distribution of Scores for Attitudes‐Item 5: I believe it is important for elementary students to compose and arrange music. Description
Value
Frequency
Cumulative %
Very Negative Attitude
1
1
1.5
Negative Attitude
2
4
7.4
Somewhat Negative Attitude
3
14
27.9
Somewhat Positive Attitude
4
32
75.0
Positive Attitude
5
12
92.6
Very Positive Attitude
6
5
100.0
19 With in the perception portion of the questionnaire, there were many items that had similar frequencies of capable or very capable; however, the item with the highest frequency of very incapable responses was perception‐item 4. This item had a median of 4 as well as a mode of 4. Table 10 illustrates the frequency distribution of responses to perception‐item 4. Table 10: Frequency Distribution of Scores for Perception‐Item 4: I am capable of teaching my students to compose and arrange music. Description
Value
Frequency
Cumulative %
Very Incapable
1
6
8.8
Incapable
2
9
22.1
Somewhat Incapable
3
11
38.2
Somewhat Capable
4
25
75.0
Capable
5
12
92.6
Very Capable
6
5
100.0
A one‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) determined that no relationship existed between class section and perception score as well as class section and attitudinal score. Qualitative Results The interviews with the instructors, the interviews with the pre‐service teachers, the open‐response items on the questionnaire, and the classroom observations were analyzed and common themes were extracted. Throughout each description, the teachers of each section will be described as instructors and the pre‐
service teachers will be described as students. 20 Many parts of the course were identified as having a positive influence. Responses included everything from the specific assigned projects to the modifications described for students with special needs. Most specifically, all groups addressed musical and movement activities. One student responded with the following on the questionnaire: I feel that being creative in the course with different songs, song games, and instruments has helped me to further my decision of integrating music in my classroom. Carrie added an additional example that supports this theme: One time we were focusing on theme and variation. For our activity we had one set of movements for the theme and we had another set of movements that was the variation on the theme. And then we kept going and we would listen to the song. And we would all have the different parts. A group of us had the theme, a group of us was variation A, and a group of us was variation B. So that specific activity stuck in my head as something I could use. All three instructors described the hands‐on activities they used as an important part of helping their students to understand the fundamentals of music and how to integrate it into the classroom. Jackie said the following about including activities: Music is sort of a hands‐on thing. You can’t teach music with a piece of paper. So every lesson needs to include hands‐on activities. Brenda described the following about her perspective on the inclusion of activities in the music classroom: It’s kind of a music therapy thing because the “doing” part is important. It’s music, the should be “doing.” The researcher also witness a great number of musical and movement activities in each lesson he observed. For example, one of Brenda’s activities required students to move fast or slow in response to tempo changes of the piece being played for 21 them. Students responded with appropriate movements as well as a great deal of smiles and laughs. Students emphasized that they found it to be very beneficial when the instructor explained how each activity or concept could be integrated into a general classroom. One student responded with the following on the questionnaire: I love that after every musical activity we would think of ways to integrate it into the general classroom. Each instructor also described this theme. Jackie utilized an organized approach that gave specific examples of music integration: I give the students my lesson plan for the day. ‘This is what I’m teaching you today. These are the objectives’ (and they match up with MENC standards). ‘These are the strategies we’re using and this is the main element we’re using.’ It was also observed in Rose’s class that students were engaged in an activity focused on modifications for students with special needs. A specific song was presented to the class and students were prompted for suggestions for dealing with students with a variety of special needs. A brief discussion followed that involved a variety of strategies for helping special learners. All three interviewed students described that they viewed their instructors as mentors and would go to them for advice on integrating music into their future teaching. Carrie responded with the following: I would definitely view her as a mentor just because she seemed to know quite about how you would be able to apply the techniques in a room even though you weren’t a music teacher. She stressed that point time and time again that she understood we were not music teachers and she knew that’s not what we came to school to do, but this is what we could do to help improve [music integration]. 22 Anna (deaf education major) also revealed the following thoughts on her instructor, Jackie, as a mentor: Sure, I would go to her for advice, if I ever had a hearing class. During her interview Rose remarked: Past students have contacted me for help with music lessons they are doing for other classes. She has also worked with former students for a program that connects kids with college mentors. Additionally, the researcher observed a conversation between Brenda and two of her students discussing their participation in a program she coordinates for students with special needs. A majority of the students felt that learning about musical concepts and notation was beneficial. One response from the questionnaire is as follows: Before this class, music was a foreign language. Learning to simply read music gave me enormous amounts of confidence. Rose’s response to addressing music literacy involves both reading and writing music. [Music] reading is addressed with recorders, but also in notating rhythms for the poem project. They take a very simple poem from a list I give them and put the beat above the stress points in each line. Then they write the rhythm under each line and compose an ostinato. They seem to enjoy it. Additionally, the researcher observed a lesson where students learned a song that incorporated syncopation. A handout containing the sheet music for the song was passed out and the students visually and aurally analyzed the rhythm in the melody. Connections were made between rhythm in music and rhythm in poetry. Students appeared to be grasping the concept and enjoyed singing the new song. 23 There were two activities that had proportionately positive and negative responses. Activities involving singing and playing the recorder elicited a variety of responses. Some positive response from the questionnaire included: Having to learn how to play the recorder again will be a big help. It is an easy instrument that most kids can play and hopefully they will find enjoyment in learning to play it. We have so much fun in this class with the singing and playing recorders. Melanie’s response also promoted a positive outlook on the integration of singing into the classroom: I want to incorporate singing because I like to sing and it helps with memory. . . . Yea, I feel pretty capable to teach it. The researcher observed a few lessons where the students appeared to be enjoying the singing activity presented to them. In one of Brenda’s lessons the students used a popular Christmas carol as a part of an activity exploring rhythmic and harmonic ostinati. While the ostinati were new and unfamiliar, all the students sang. There were a few negative responses to singing and playing the recorder as well. Many students simply listed the recorder as a negative experience. This was also supported by Brenda’s comments on the use of the recorder: I teach the recorder. Blaaah. I understand the recorder and I kind of feel like it’s the ‘pre‐band’ instrument. It’s just unfortunate that the tone is so horrid. But it’s accessible and that’s a good thing! During one of Rose’s lessons, the researcher observed a similar reaction from the students. As the instructor asked students to get out their recorders a few audible groans were heard. 24 Students that commented negatively in regards to singing were generally very detailed: Singing ‐ I’m not good at it. I probably would have completely written off this whole course if singing would have been the main focus. Jackie also acknowledges that her students may have a negative attitude toward singing in the following response: Yes, [singing is] important and I need to do more in the way of teaching them to sing properly. . . . I just don’t feel that they are comfortable singing with me. I can do the singing, so I go ahead and do it. But what I should really do is teach the song and get out of the way ‐ they have to make the sound. While the researcher did observe a few lessons where the students sang freely with every instructor, the instructors did the majority of the singing in each class. It is worth noting that despite the negative responses to these specific activities, some students could still see their importance. This following is taken from the open‐
response items on the questionnaire: Playing the recorder gave me a headache most of the time, but I wouldn’t really classify that as a negative because the skills it teaches are so positive. One noteworthy negative response came from deaf education majors. This response could not be validated through triangulation, but was unique enough to report. Anna, as a deaf education major, felt this course was not applicable to her future career. Another student wrote the following statement as a negative reaction to the course in the open response section of the questionnaire: Being that I will teach children that cannot hear, the strategies shown in class for music integration did not apply to me. Also, with my extensive music experience, I felt this class should have a “test out” option for musical knowledge. 25 When discussing the classroom dynamics within each of the three classes, there were a few similarities that had consistently positive responses. Each instructor developed a good rapport with her students. Every instructor taught with a high level of energy and skillfully moved around the classroom. While each instructor had a different sense of humor, all three instructors were able to get their students to laugh or smile throughout the observed lessons. All of these were most obvious during classroom observations conducted by the researcher. The following responses are from the questionnaire references a positive classroom dynamic or connection between students and instructors. I like how [Rose] made music seem fun; and also how excited and passionate she is about music. [Jackie] taught me fun and different ways to approach a certain subject or lesson with music, therefore enabling me to use these methods in other subjects The way that [Brenda] integrated music into the course made it a fun course – there really weren’t any negatives Each interviewed student also had positive comments regarding their connections to their instructors. Anna responded with the following regarding Jackie: She did a good job of connecting with every level of student. She even made it interesting for students with experience. Carrie indicated the following in regards to the classroom environment created by Brenda: It was very free spirited . . . there were no stressful situations. She definitely made accommodations to you if you needed help. Melanie expressed the following about Rose: 26 She was always happy, you never know if she was having a bad day. She was easy to get a hold of outside of class. She was very respectful of our time. She knew we had other classes Finally, there were a number of responses that were very general in nature and cited the entire class as beneficial. I can’t say one experience in particular. I can say I am now more willing to involve music into my lesson plans even if they are not plans for music class. Music doesn’t always have to be serious, let it be fun! The instructors echoed this overall positive attitude. Rose indicated the following: I’ve had a good experience. I really like the course. I think that is obvious since I have been teaching it for about 15 years! Brenda indicated positive feedback about the course: I think it is a great opportunity to spread the value of music to people outside of the music area. I think it’s valuable to see and read the reflections of the students when they say, “Wow, I didn’t realize…” or “I never thought about that…” . . . I think it’s a great opportunity for students to see how musical they are. These positive responses were also corroborated through the observations recorded by the researcher. This is supported by consistently full classrooms, students regularly asking questions, and the attentive smiles of the students in each class. Discussion Overall, the initial findings of the questionnaire are similar to the findings of another study (Berke & Colwell, 2004a). More positive attitudes toward teaching music exist in pre‐service elementary teachers that have had a greater amount of formal music experiences. Similar to the findings of Barry (1992), it is not surprising 27 that possessing a higher level of familiarity with specific content might lead to higher levels of integration into classroom instruction. For teacher educators, this can only point to the importance of positive and frequent musical experiences in the undergraduate curriculum. While squeezing more requirements into an already full course of study may seem unreasonable, it also may be necessary if teachers with an elementary license are also to be viewed as highly qualified to teach music (Indiana Department of Education, 2009). It is not surprising that despite an overall “very positive” attitude toward music integration, composition activities seem to be viewed more unfavorably than any other standard. Similarly, a study that investigated the awareness of and attitudes toward the voluntary national standards for music education among high school instrumental and choral music directors in Missouri found that standard 4 (composing/arranging), along with standard 3 (improvising) received the least amount of attention (Wilson, 2003). While a greater amount of musical experiences may contribute to greater positive attitudes and feelings of increased capability toward teaching music, the curriculum itself offered many positive aspects. These included the specific projects as well as the musical and movement activities. The overwhelmingly positive responses to these factors may suggest importance of a well‐designed curriculum in teacher education. Interestingly, singing and playing the recorder were both viewed as having positive as well as negative effects on the attitudes and perceptions of the 28 participants. Because these positive and negative comments were present among students in all three sections, no connection can be made to a specific instructor’s teaching style or classroom dynamic. These varied responses cannot be attributed to the curriculum either, as the curriculum is the same each section. This suggests that personal preference could be a factor. Therefore positive responses may simply come from students who enjoy singing and playing the recorder and negative responses would then come from students who do not enjoy those activities. It may also be a possibility that students with previous negative experiences in music or students with lower musical aptitude or achievement levels would not enjoy performing activities (singing, playing the recorder) and therefore have negative attitudes. While these performing activities may not be enjoyable for every student, it is unlikely that they will be removed from the curriculum due to their inherent value. There were many similarities between the instructors of the music fundamentals course. All three instructors included modeling and hands‐on activities as a part of their lessons. Every instructor taught with a high level of energy, used humor, and skillfully moved around the classroom. Each instructor also seemed to agree that the purposes of the course were to improve the musical abilities of the students, to show why music integration is important, and how it could be done. While these similarities may indicate that positive student attitudes and perceptions can be connected to quality teaching as demonstrated by the three 29 observed instructors, negative responses can therefore reinforce the importance of individual preferences and/or insecurities. While there were many similarities between the three instructors, there were also many differences. One general difference is the amount of time each instructor has taught this course. Other differences are more specific. For example, Jackie places an emphasis on the national standards and helping her students to write lesson objectives. She bases what she teaches off her view of an appropriate sequence of musical elements (expression, melody, harmony, rhythm, and form). Brenda creates a constructivist classroom environment that is viewed as “free spirited” and “comfortable”. While she bases what she teaches on the pre‐
determined curriculum, she appears frustrated by the fact she is force to leave out musical pieces, genres, and/or content due to time restrictions. Rose utilizes very structured plans and teaches each lesson with a very organized approach. She bases her curriculum choices on what she thinks her students will most likely use in their future teaching. The varied description of each teacher would seemingly be connected to varied responses between class sections, however a one‐way ANOVA revealed no relationship between class section and neither perception nor attitudinal score. Therefore, it is surprising that no relationships exist. One of the more interesting responses from the interviewed students was from Anna. Despite her extensive musical background, she felt that music would have no place in her future teaching as a deaf educator. While music educators 30 believe all students have the right to a quality music education, perhaps an education in music should be optional for deaf students. Anna also revealed that she would go to her instructor in the future for advice if she had a “hearing class”. Perhaps Anna perceived Jackie’s influence to be only on music in the hearing world, despite the portion of the course that addressed modifications for children with special needs. Because music may have a place in deaf culture and because the influence of the instructor does appear to be positive, perhaps those music educators instructing deaf education majors should create projects specifically directed toward recognizing the musical similarities and differences between the hearing and deaf culture. Conclusions When comparing the qualitative data to the quantitative data, the quantitative results are both supported and discounted by the common themes extracted from the observations, interviews, and open‐response items. Yes, quality teaching and an expertly administered, highly effective curriculum contribute to overall positive attitudes and perceptions of teaching music. However, the varied descriptions of each instructor would ostensibly point to varied responses from each class section, but does not. Therefore the absence of any relationship between class section and either attitudinal score or perception score is not supported by the qualitative data. 31 While teaching style and classroom dynamics did not seem to play a role in the attitudes and perceptions of these pre‐service elementary educators, perhaps this study could be replicated with instructors that use a greater variety of teaching styles or pedagogy. Because the qualitative data both supported and refuted the quantitative results, more exploration is needed into teaching style and classroom dynamics in music teacher education courses. The many positive responses from students in the music fundamentals course indicate the successes of engaging instructors who utilize modeling, hands‐
on activities, humor, and in teacher education courses. The successes of a curriculum that includes performing activities, projects that include music integration, attention to modifications for students with special needs, and group discussions should also be acknowledged and promoted in teacher education courses. There appears to be a need to increase the self‐perceived musical ability of pre‐service elementary teachers. Without self‐confidence in music, future elementary classroom teachers will likely not integrate it into their classrooms. While it may not be possible to reach pre‐service teachers at every level of musical ability or experience, it would appear that when more confidence to teach music can be instilled in pre‐service teachers, they will leave the class with more positive attitudes and perceptions. Music should be included in every child’s education, whether in the music classroom, the general classroom, or any other setting. By helping all teachers to become familiar with the benefits and joys of making music, 32 we can better ensure that all students will have positive musical experiences in all levels of education. 33 References Barry, N. H. (1992). Music and education in the elementary music methods class. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 2(1), 16‐23. Bartz, A. E. (1999). Basic Statistical Concepts. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice‐Hall, page 184. Berke, M. K., & Colwell, C. M. (2004a). Integration of music in the elementary curriculum: Perceptions of preservice elementary education majors. Update: Applications of research in music education, 23(1), 22‐33. Berke, M. K., & Colwell, C. M. (2004b). Integration of music in the elementary curriculum: Perceptions of preservice elementary education majors. Unpublished instrument. Used with permission. Beveridge, T. (2010). No Child Left Behind and fine arts classes. Arts Education Policy Review. 111, 4‐7. Birch, W. (1969). Factors related to differences in classroom teachers' attitude toward music. Dissertation Abstracts International 30, 1743A. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms 69‐19, 360. Byo, S. J. (1999). Classroom teachers' and music specialists' perceived ability to implement the national standards for music education. Journal of Research in Music Education. 47(2), 111‐123. Center on Education Policy. (2005). From the capital to the classroom: Year 3 of the No Child Left Behind Act. Compendium of Major NCLB Studies Funding, Costs & Capacity. Retrieved from http://www.cep‐dc.org/index.cfm?fuseaction= Page. 34 view Page& pageId=558&parentID=481 Christ, T. J. & Taylor, E. L. (2010). No Child Left Behind. In Encyclopedia of Cross­
Cultural School Psychology (pp. 680‐682). New York: Springer Verlag. Consortium of Nation Arts Education Associations. (1994). National standards for arts education: What every young American should know and be able to do in the arts. Reston, Va: MENC. Conway, C. (2008). The Implementation of the national standards in music education: Capturing the spirit of the standards. Music Educators Journal, 94(4), 34‐39. Darrow, A‐A. (1993). The role of music in deaf culture: Implications for music educators. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41(2), 93‐110. Darrow, A. A., & Starmer, G. J. (1986). The effect of vocal training on the intonation and rate of hearing impaired children's speech: A pilot study. Journal of Music Therapy, 23, 194‐201. Gauthier, D., & McCrary, J. (1999). Music courses for elementary education majors: An investigation of course content and purpose. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(2), 124‐134. Indiana Department of Education. (2009). Documenting teachers’ HQT status ‐ guidance document. Retrieved from http://www.doe.in.gov/hqt/pdf/ DocumentingTeachersHQTStatus.pdf Jeanneret, N. (1997). Model for developing preservice primary teachers' confidence to teach music. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 133, 37‐
35 34.
Kvet, E. J., & Watkins, R. C. (1993). Success attributes in teaching music as perceived by elementary education majors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41(1), 70‐80. Mitchell, Charles William. (1972). An investigation of the effects of three different instructional strategies of teaching science methods on selected attitudes and perceptions of prospective elementary school teachers and science skills and knowledge of their respective children. (Doctoral dissertation, West Virginia University). Available from University Microfilms. (Accession Number: ED086468) Probst, T. G. (2003). The Relationship between the undergraduate music methods class curriculum and the use of music in the classrooms of in‐service elementary teachers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(4), 316‐329. Richards, C. (1999). Early childhood preservice teachers’ confidence in singing. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 9, 6–17. Wilson, C. (2003). The National standards for music education: Awareness of, and attitudes toward, by secondary music educators in Missouri. Missouri journal of research in music education, (40), 16. 36 Appendix A 37 38 39 Appendix B 40 41 42 Appendix C Attitudes Toward Teaching Music Interview Protocol
Student Interview Protocol: 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
What is your year in school and your major? Describe your experiences in music. Describe your overall experience in MUSED 265. Describe the classroom atmosphere during a typical MUSED 265 class. How does this compare to other education classes you have been in? Describe the disposition of your instructor. How do you view your instructor? Do you view your MUSED 265 instructor as a role model? a mentor? Would you ask your instructor for advice about teaching? About teaching music? Do you know the national standards of music education? How do you view the standards? Positive? Negative? What role do you feel the following activities play in your future classroom? a. Do you feel singing is important to integrate into your future teaching? Why or why not? How capable do you feel to teach this? b. Do you feel playing instruments is important to integrate into your future teaching? Why or why not? How capable do you feel to teach this? c. Do you feel improvising is an important to integrate into your future teaching? Why or why not? How capable do you feel to teach this? d. Do you feel composing and arranging are important to integrate into your future teaching? Why or why not? How capable do you feel to teach this? e. Do you feel reading and notating music are important to integrate into your future teaching? Why or why not? How capable do you feel to teach this? f. Do you feel listening to, analyzing, and describing music are important to integrate into your future teaching? Why or why not? How capable do you feel to teach this? g. Do you feel evaluating musical performances is important to integrate into your future teaching? Why or why not? How capable do you feel to teach this? h. Do you feel understanding the relationship between music, the arts, and other disciplines is important to integrate into your future teaching? Why or why not? How capable do you feel to teach this? i. Do you feel understanding the relationship between music, history, and cultures is important to integrate into your future teaching? Why or why not? How capable do you feel to teach this? Which experiences did you find most helpful to prepare you to incorporate music into your elementary classroom? Which experiences did you find least helpful to prepare you to incorporate music into your elementary classroom? Which experiences did you enjoy the most from the class? Which experiences from the class were the least enjoyable? Is there anything else you would like to share about your experiences in mused 265? 43 Appendix D Attitudes Toward Teaching Music Interview Protocol
Instructor Interview Protocol: 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Tell me a little about your musical background and interests. Briefly describe your previous teaching experiences. How long have you been teaching this course? What do you view as the purpose of this course? Describe the type of teaching style or philosophy you employ when teaching this course. How do you decide what to teach (in this course)? Overall, how do you view the national standards in music education? Positive? Negative? What role do you feel the following play in this class? a. Do you address singing in MUSED 265? Do you feel singing is an important part of MUSED 265? Why or why not? b. Do you address playing instruments in MUSED 265? Do you feel playing instruments is an important part of MUSED 265? Why or why not? c. Do you address improvisation in MUSED 265? Do you feel improvising is an important part of MUSED 265? Why or why not? d. Do you address composing and arranging in MUSED 265? Do you feel composing and arranging are important parts of MUSED 265? Why or why not? e. Do you address reading and notating music in MUSED 265? Do you feel reading and notating music are important parts of MUSED 265? Why or why not? f. Do you address listening to, analyzing, and describing music in MUSED 265? Do you feel listening to, analyzing, and describing music are important parts of MUSED 265? Why or why not? g. Do you address evaluating musical performances in MUSED 265? Do you feel evaluating musical performances is an important part of MUSED 265? Why or why not? h. Do you address understanding the relationships between music, the arts, and other disciplines in MUSED 265? Do you feel understanding the relationship between music, the arts, and other discipline is an important part of MUSED 265? Why or why not? i. Do you address understanding the relationship between music, history, and culture in MUSED 265? Do you feel understanding the relationships between music, history, and culture is an important part of MUSED 265? Why or why not? Describe the atmosphere during a typical class for the __________ section of MUSED 265. Are there parts of this course you enjoy teaching more than others? Less? Are there parts of this course you find more difficult to teach? Describe your overall experience with MUSED 265. Is there anything else you would like to share about your experiences with mused 265?