A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INSTRUMENTAL
MUSIC EDUCATION AND CRITICAL THINKING IN
8TH- AND 11TH-GRADE STUDENTS
by
Ryan M. Zellner
NANCY LONGO, PhD, Faculty Mentor and Chair
WILLIAM CAMERON, PhD, Committee Member
CATHERINE MCCARTNEY, PhD, Committee Member
David Chapman, PsyD, Dean
Harold Abel School of Social and Behavioral Sciences
A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Capella University
April 2011
© Ryan M. Zellner, 2011
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the possible relationship between instrumental
music education in Grades 8 and 11 and critical thinking as assessed by the Pennsylvania
System of School Assessment. The subsets that were examined included Reading (B):
Interpretation and Analysis of Fictional and Nonfictional Text, which assesses the
academic standards 1.1, Learning to read independently, standard 1.2 Reading critically
in all content areas, standard 1.3 Reading, analyzing and interpreting literature, and
Mathematics, sections C.1 Geometry—Analyze characteristics of two and three
dimensional shapes, D.2 Algebraic concepts—Analyze mathematical situations using
numbers, symbols, words, tables and/or graphs, and E.1 Data analysis and probability—
Interpret and analyze data by formulating answers or questions (Pennsylvania
Department of Education, 2009–2010). The sample consisted of Instrumental students (N
= 50) and Noninstrumental music students (N = 50) over 2 graduated high school classes.
The results indicated that the Instrumental music sample consistently outscored the
Noninstrumental music sample when comparing the Reading B, Mathematics M.C.1,
M.D.2, and M.E.1 subsections of the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment with
significant increases noted from 8th to 11th grade.
Dedication
All the work and desire that I have today, I owe to my father, Kenneth Zellner,
who passed away during the doctoral process. For someone who never stepped foot
inside of a college classroom, you are much wiser than I will ever be and I can never
thank you enough for all the values you instilled in me.
iii
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank all the support of my family and friends, especially my wife,
Sandra; without your support and consistent encouragement I could not have finished my
doctoral journey. In addition, a special thank you to my mentor, Dr. Nancy Longo, who
has supported me through this whole process form start to finish and to the members of
my committee, Dr. William Cameron and Dr. Catherine McCartney—without your
assistance and professionalism this dissertation would not have been possible.
iv
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments
iv
List of Tables
vii
List of Figures
ix
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1
Introduction to the Problem
1
Background of the Study
5
Statement of the Problem
8
Purpose of the Study
8
Research Questions
9
Significance of the Study
10
Definition of Terms
15
Assumptions and Limitations
18
Expected Findings
20
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
22
Music and Academic Achievement
23
Music and Personality
28
Critical Thinking
32
Music Education and Intelligence
38
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
43
Purpose of the Study
43
Research Design
44
Target Population and Participant Selection
48
v
Procedures
50
Ethical Considerations
51
Instruments
52
Research Questions and Hypotheses
56
Data Analysis
57
Expected Findings
59
CHAPTER 4. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
61
Introduction
61
Description of the Stratified Sample
61
Conclusion
94
CHAPTER 5. RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
97
Introduction
97
Summary of the Results
98
Discussion of the Results
104
Limitations
105
Recommendations for Further Research
107
Conclusion
108
REFERENCES
110
vi
List of Tables
Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations (8th Grade)
65
Table 2. Test of Homogeneity of Variances (8th Grade)
67
Table 3. Between-Subjects ANOVA (8th Grade)
68
Table 4. Descriptives for 11th Grade
70
Table 5. Test of Homogeneity of Variances (11th Grade)
71
Table 6. Robust Tests of Equality of Means (11th Grade)
72
Table 7. Between-Groups ANOVA (11th Grade)
74
Table 8. Group Means and Standard Deviations (8th Grade)
76
Table 9. Independent-Samples t Test for Means of Samples (8th Grade)
76
Table 10. Means and Standard Deviations (11th Grade)
77
Table 11. Independent-Samples t Test for Means of Samples (11th Grade)
78
Table 12. Means and Standard Deviations for Combined Samples
80
Table 13. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of Within-Subjects Effects
81
Table 14. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of Within-Subjects Contrasts
82
Table 15. Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variances (Combined)
82
Table 16. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Between Subjects (Group Cumulative
Means)
83
Table 17. Skewness and Kurtosis of 8th and 11th Grades
84
Table 18. Means and Standard Deviations (Reading)
85
Table 19. Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variances (Reading)
85
Table 20. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of Between-Subjects Reading
86
Table 21. Means, Percentage Correct, and Maximum Score (Reading)
86
vii
Table 22. Means and Standard Deviations (M.C.1)
87
Table 23. Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variances (M.C.1)
88
Table 24. Means and Percentage Correct (M.C.1)
88
Table 25. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Test of Between-Subjects M.C.1
89
Table 26. Means and Standard Deviations (M.D.2)
89
Table 27. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of Within-Subjects Contrasts
(M.D.2)
90
Table 28. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of Between-Subjects M.D.2
90
Table 29. Means, Percentage Correct, and Maximum Score (M.D.2)
91
Table 30. Means and Standard Deviations (M.E.1)
92
Table 31. Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variances (M.E.1)
93
Table 32. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of Between-Subjects M.E.1
93
viii
List of Figures
Figure 1. Mean raw scores of both samples (5th, 8th, and 11th)
63
Figure 2. Percentage of correct reading answers (5th, 8th, and 11th)
64
Figure 3. Percentage of correct math answers (8th and 11th)
64
Figure 4. Percentage of correct answers for both samples (5th, 8th, and 11th)
73
Figure 5. Means of both samples 8th to 11th grade
80
ix
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Introduction to the Problem
Traditional music education trains students to perform on their instrument by
recognizing both rhythmic and tonal patterns within a structured musical experience. The
making of music seeks to go beyond notes on a page. It seeks to energize and create
musical compositions that make aural sense to the untrained listener. The instructional
design of music education is to teach the student both melodic and rhythmic patterns
through the process of active learning. This focuses the responsibility of learning on the
learner, thereby allowing the learner to engage in the processing of information in an
interactive environment where the teacher uses activities that promote student
engagement through problem-based, collaborative and cooperative learning (Prince,
2004). An example of active learning includes interactive lectures, which incorporate
activities that encourage discourse between students using demonstrations, visual aids or
peer interactions. Prince cited a study by Ruhl, Hughes, and Schloss that examined a
traditional classroom lecture of 45 minutes versus a lecture that allowed the students
three pauses of 2 minutes each to check their notes with a peer. The results indicated
increased short and long term retention in the group that allowed for the breaks. Other
examples of active learning include the use of analogies, contemplation, student groups,
1
class discussions and verbal studying. These activities must promote thoughtful
engagement and promote learning outcomes (Prince, 2004).
Interactive engagement activities have been shown to increase conceptual
understanding. Hake (1998) examined 6,000 undergraduate students in introductory
physics courses that utilized substantial interactive engagement methods. Those students
who studied under this method outscored their peers in conceptual understanding scores
by nearly two to one. The origins of active learning can be traced back to hands-on
learning theories, which are derived from master–apprenticeship models that are based on
knowledge through experience. The theory of active learning is at the very core of music
education and in becoming a musician. The student is an active and functional learner
who is contributing directly to the output of a product, much like that of an apprentice.
The first step of the musical process is to be able to master the instrument. This
mastery process was famously established in the 1920s by Suzuki, resulting in his own
pedagogical method called Talent Education. Suzuki was the son of the first and most
prolific Japanese violin maker. Suzuki credits this early exposure to music as well as his
father’s willingness to learn from others and strong moral fortitude for shaping himself as
a person and educator (Cooney, Cross, & Trunk, 1993).
The philosophy of Shinichi Suzuki’s educational method is that all students are
capable of learning music just as they are capable of learning and mastering a language.
Suzuki was mesmerized by the language acquisition of children and the capabilities that
are displayed in language versatility by the ages of 5 and 6. All learners must be nurtured
through the learning process, and it is the process that is at fault when there is a slow
learner not the individual (Cooney et al., 1993). Suzuki was convinced, however, that the
2
path to any learning begins with the creation of character, and this character is the
precursor to ability. The motivation of the learner in this method is paramount, and when
the motivation is no longer present, the activity ends.
Suzuki insisted that students learn his Talent Education method by imitating an
exact model while learning each step perfectly before advancing to the next. By the end
of the system, the student has synthesized each lesson so that the playing of the music
had become a habit. In the Suzuki method, the child masters each new composition
acquiring new skills with each piece preparing the student for the ones to follow
(American Suzuki Center, n.d.). Even within this regimented approach to education,
Suzuki believed that education should be for everyone, appeal to the child’s interest and
should in turn work to develop a total person.
The Suzuki model insists on the mastery of each skill before a new skill is added.
While this quest for perfection would seem to create monotony in adults, children work
in the environment that they are given. By their inherent nature of curiosity and their
inquisition for understanding they work toward perfection through repetition without
hesitation. Many times in contemporary education, goals are sought rather than the
development of the process of acquiring information. End results are measured as tests
and other assessments; however, as Suzuki stated, these are more a measurement of the
teacher than of the student (Cooney et al., 1993). The clear application for modern
education is the perfection of process rather than the perfection of the student. If students
have committed themselves to the process of learning and develop along this path, their
success will breed success.
3
Suzuki’s Talent Education spoke much to the development and mastery of skills
and this learning method utilizes the teacher-centered method to focus and hone the
students’ transfer of knowledge. While the students are actively engaged in the learning
process is does little to address student’s prior knowledge and incorporate discovery
learning. Teachout (2007) recognized this disparity in music education. He stated, “Music
education should be about developing such musical knowledge, skills and dispositions to
demystify music and afford all students opportunities for higher levels of independent
engagement with music” (p. 21). Traditional music education, which is based mainly on
large ensemble settings, utilizes the teacher-centered model, in which the instructor is
responsible for providing feedback. The instructor guides rehearsals with the goal of
these rehearsals being an excellent musical performance. The performance is then a
reflection of the instructor’s skill and expertise both in the field of music as well as
leadership (Teachout, 2007). However, this philosophy does little to impart the student
with problem-solving or critical thinking skills. Teachout stated that music education
should not only be about what students can do, but what they know and how they value
music. To accomplish this task, a sequenced and spiraled curriculum model must be
established in order for the active learning model to be complete.
One of these skill sets is the ability to develop critical thinking skills. The
construct is that as students have exposure to musical training their ability to think
critically increases. The ability to think critically in music allows for the performer not
only to interact within a musical composition but also to anticipate and solve problems in
action. The performance of music is a delicate balancing act between the entire melodic,
harmonic and rhythmic acts that occur at the same point in time, thus allowing for a
4
seamless composition to occur. Without active critical thinking on the part of the
performer, the music itself would not be allowed to be a serendipitous exchange between
the musicians.
Background of the Study
“Critical thinking is the use of those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the
probability of a desirable outcome. It is used to describe thinking that is purposeful,
reasoned, and goal directed” (Halpern, 1997, p. 4). In 1998, Halpern proposed a four
component model for the transfer of critical thinking skills. The first component is
attitude, which she describes as the recognition of critical thinking as a skill and then the
implementation of such by the individual. Next is that the instruction and practice of
critical thinking as a skill in that a person will recognize the benefit of the utilization of
critical thinking skills. The third component is the ability to transfer the elements of
problem and the application of them to a new contextual situation. The last component is
the use of metacognition to enhance and facilitate the process of critical thinking.
In order to apply Halpern’s model, the delineation between music listener and
performer must be recognized with the latter of which being the point of reference for
this research. Being that music is an active endeavor that involves a multisensory
experience, the application of critical thinking skills is both a complex task and
developmental process. The first component of Halpern’s model is the recognition and
implementation of critical thinking as a skill. Within a musical context, this invites the
teacher to act as a guide in order for proper interpretation, analyzation and execution in
the practice and performance application of the musical experience. Lisk (2006)
5
described music as intelligence in action and that performing in an instrumental ensemble
requires a multisensory approach combined with a perceptive decision-making process.
Making music is then a problem-solving, in-the-moment exercise. Students, however,
must be taught not only how to apply critical thinking skills but to recognize where they
become a necessary and vital component of music. Between the ages of 5–12, when the
children are developing this musical intelligence repertoire, the children are functioning
within the concrete operational period, which would allow for optimal operant
conditioning. The concrete operational period is where the child is gaining the ability to
experience and understand multiple perspectives coupled with a structured, guided and
appropriate stimuli and response behavior. Therefore, students can be taught to think
critically within a musical environment.
Moog (1984) described music as a multisensory learning experience that involves
the temporal phenomena of acoustic, motoric, and other. The last classification of other
refers to the outside conditions that may be experienced during a musical experience such
as color, temperature and pain.
This creates a crossroads in that music becomes both an individual and ensemble
task each requiring in its own specific skill set. The ensemble setting allows for the
interaction of students with others either developing or having established musical
abilities. The latter would allow for the application of Vygotsky’s zone of proximal
development theory, which occurs when people are learning from their interaction with
someone that has a more advanced ability than theirs (Sternberg, 2003).
The second step in the Halpern structural model states that the instruction and
practice of critical thinking skills are necessary for their transfer. Lisk (1996) stated that
6
the musician must have an active involvement in the musical decisions of the ensemble,
therefore allowing the individual to create meaning in the musical performance. This
active involvement needs to include both the intrapersonal and interpersonal development
of the musician in order to facilitate a consonance within the ensemble. In this scenario,
the music teacher or director becomes the vehicle behind the transfer of critical thinking
skills, through his use of guided practice on a routine and structured basis. This directly
leads to the third component of transferring this structured facilitation to new contexts. In
the setting of a music ensemble rehearsal, a new piece of music allows for a
reexamination of skill sets that previously have been previously acquired and the transfer
of said skill sets to the new context. Music because of its inherent nature of patterns and
structure allows for a combination of both applying known skills as well as the learning
of new ones.
The last component introduced by Halpern is metacognition, which is the
reflection upon one’s thinking process. This process, which is sometimes referred to as
thinking, about thinking is the evaluative stage in the critical thinking process. This
evaluation provides for an examination of one’s actions in retrospect and, therefore, the
possibility of providing alternatives or response to similar stimuli in future situations or
behaviors.
These cognitive connections between music and other skills sets have been
recognized as a contributory factor to an individual as a whole. Because of the
multisensory nature of music, the development of musical skills has been shown to have
an impact on a student both academically and personally.
7
Statement of the Problem
The research problem is to what extent does instrumental music education have an
impact critical thinking skills. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the impact of
instrumental music education on critical thinking skills of school-age students.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this research was to explore the relationship between critical
thinking and instrumental music education. “If creative thinking is just everyday problem
solving, then there should be general principles that can be applied across domains of
knowledge” (Halpern, 1996, p. 372). Problem solving can be described as the difference
between what has happened and what one wanted to happen. The solving aspect occurs
when one takes corrective action in order to meet objectives. The Global Development
Research Center (2008) outlined the following sequential steps for problem solving:
•
Problem definition
•
Problem analysis
•
Generating possible solutions
•
Analyzing the solutions
•
Selecting the best solution(s)
•
Planning the next course of action (next steps)
This research was done through analyzing testing of both instrumental music
participants and nonparticipants through the course of their school years (8th and 11th
grades). This study was able to examine the differences between students and the amount
of music exposure they have had based on the number of years. According to Breakwell,
8
Hammond, Fife-Schaw, and Smith (2006), this would constitute a longitudinal design,
whereas data are being collected from the same sample over a period of time with all data
being collected retrospectively.
Research Questions
The main research question examined the relationship between instrumental
music education instruction in Grades 8 and 11 and critical thinking skills on the
Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA; sections RB, C.1, D.2 and E.1).
PSSA Operational Definitions
•
Reading B: Interpretation and analysis of text
•
Mathematics C.1 (geometry): Analyze characteristics of two and three
dimensional shapes
•
Mathematics D.2 (algebraic concepts): Analyze mathematical situations using
numbers, symbols, words, tables and/or graphs
•
Mathematics E.1 (data analysis and probability): Interpret and analyze data by
formulating answers or questions
These selected areas not only provide the appropriate prerequisite of critical
thinking skills and demonstrate problem-solving ability but also remain consistent data
throughout the grade levels of the assessment (8th and 11th).
Research Question 1
How does the number of years (8th and 11th) that a student is involved in music
education provide any statistical difference in the development of critical thinking skills
as assessed by the PSSA (cumulative score per grade level)?
9
Research Question 2
How do the Instrumental music students’ mean scores on sections (RB, C.1, D.2
and E.1) of the PSSA assessment compare to Noninstrumental music students from 8th to
11th grade.
Research Question 3
Utilizing the means of the individual PSSA scoring (sections RB, C.1, D.2 and
E.1), what is the relationship between the following:
•
Instrumental group scores versus Noninstrumental group scores from 8th–11th
grades
Significance of the Study
The significance of this topic relates to all of music education. In the times of
cutbacks and the so-called return to the basics, music education for its own sake has
placed music on the endangered list. Bridging this gap in literature would allow music
educators to demonstrate and show the importance of music education to all students.
This study examined the development of critical thinking skills over a period of
time. The students’ scores will be available from their 8th- and 11th-grade years. This
means that the research can quantitatively demonstrate the effect of music education of a
period of time. Psychologically, it allowed for a greater understanding of how thought,
adaptation and developmental processes are acquired by an individual. It allows for the
congruent developmental processes and the ways in which they can be affected by
outside influences.
10
In addition, this study engaged the active learning process and its own
effectiveness. Active learning focuses the responsibility of learning on the learner by
allowing the learner to engage in the processing of information in an interactive
environment where the teacher uses activities that promote student engagement through
problem-based, collaborative and cooperative learning (Prince, 2004). McManus (2001)
stated that much of the theory of active learning is the difference between a teachercentered paradigm and a learner-centered paradigm. The teacher-centered paradigm is
much the traditional approach of higher education. The teacher passes information by
lecture to the student, who acts as an empty vessel. The learner-centered paradigm
focuses on the absorption and application of material by the students. The differences
between these two philosophies of learning are as basic as those of learning themselves.
The teacher-centered paradigm is structured on the premise that the teacher has mastered
the material and is going to pass this knowledge along to the student. Conversely, the
student-centered paradigm recognizes that the student has already accumulated
knowledge and that by processing the information dynamically, new information and
knowledge structures will be informed. Perhaps more importantly, these paradigms point
to significant differences between the relationships of instructors and students. In the
teacher-centered paradigm, the instructor is the center of learning. However, there is
limited or no interaction between student and teacher. In the learner-centered paradigm,
the relationship and interaction between teacher and student is the cornerstone of
transferring the material from information to knowledge. The teacher-centered paradigm
and learner-centered paradigm can also be referred to as the difference between passive
11
and active learning, since passive learning is mostly accomplished through verbal lectures
where the student is simply a recipient of the information (McManus, 2001).
The influence of instrumental music education on the development of the
cognitive process allows for greater understanding of the ability of instrumental music to
influence learning. Because of the availability of the students’ scores from their 8th- and
11th-grade years, the research can quantitatively demonstrate the effect of music
education of a period of time. Critical thinkers are evaluating new situations, looking for
complexity and ambiguity making connections, speculating, searching for evidence,
looking for connections between particular situation and prior knowledge and experience
(Halpern, 1996).
In addition, this research allows for a greater understanding of how thought,
adaptation and developmental processes are acquired by an individual. It also allows for
the congruent developmental processes and how they can be affected by outside
influences such as music. Schellenberg (2006) examined 6- to 11-year-old children who
each varied in amount of musical training. The baseline IQ was established by
administering the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC–III) as well as other
areas of intellectual functioning such as grades in school and standardized tests of
academic achievement. The sample was comprised of 72 boys and 75 girls (N = 147)
ages 6–11 recruited from a middle class suburb of Toronto, Canada. The predictor
variables were measured using a questionnaire that was administered to the parents about
their child’s history with private music lessons. The criterion variables consisted of
measures of intelligence, which were assessed using the WISC–III, academic ability,
which was assessed using the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (K–TEA), and
12
social adjustment, which was measured using the Parent Rating Scale of Behavioral
Assessment System for Children (BASC).
The principal analyses, consisting of correlations between the main predictor
variable and criterion variables demonstrated that music lessons were positively
correlated with both academic achievement and IQ but not social adjustment. The
outcome was that the duration of music lessons has a small but positive correlation to
measures of intelligence.
The second study examined the effects of long term music lessons on intellectual
abilities and more specifically if these had lasting effects even after the music lessons had
ended. The participants of the second study were undergraduates at a suburban Canadian
university with the range in age being between 16–25 with more than half taking private
music lessons N = 84 for an average of 7.8 years. The students were surveyed based on a
questionnaire where the students were paid to participate in the 2-hour survey. The
criterion variables in the second study consisted of intelligence and academic
achievement, which was measured using the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS–
III), and an additional subtest was Object Assemble, which was administered to measure
spatial–temporal ability (Schellenberg, 2006). The results indicated that taking music
lessons regularly was correlated positively with IQ especially in the areas of perceptual
organization and working memory.
The results of the Schellenberg (2006) study indicated that there was a positive
correlation between childhood lessons and IQ, and that the correlation would have an
impact into early adulthood. Perhaps the more important conclusion in this study is that
there is a direct causal effect between the duration of musical training and the predictor of
13
better intellectual functioning. The benefit of this study to the efforts of music education
was enhanced because the effects of music lessons on intelligence could not be
discounted by parents’ education or family income.
As a result of the previous findings, intelligence is an adaptable and modifiable
skill that can be enhanced over a period of time. This, in turn, directly relates to the
ability of instrumental music education to create cognitive links through the conceptual
development of child and adolescent mind. As presented in the Schellenberg (2006)
study, the single factor of instrumental lessons could account for the substantial
proportion of the variance of the tests. Therefore, the summation could be made that
music lessons were the determining predictor valuable that altered the test scores. Critical
thinking, just like that of intelligence, personality and academic achievement is a skill
that can be either taught or enhanced over a period of time. Therefore, instrumental music
education can have a similar longitudinal impact to a student’s critical thinking skills.
Halpern (1997) stated that critical thinking skills can be taught effectively through the
transfer of training where thinking skills can be applied to a vast array of contexts. When
people think critically, they are evaluating the outcomes of their thinking processes,
which could involve solving problems, making inferences and evaluating decisions. In
music education, critical thinking skills are applied where the paradigm shifts from
teacher-centered to student-centered learning. The musicians use these skills to evaluate
their performances in the context of technique, intonation, stylistic interpretation,
notation and ensemble (Reimer, 2002).
14
Definition of Terms
Critical thinking/problem solving. Problem-solving assessments are
administered as part of the PSSA with the testing occurring in 3rd, 5th, 8th, and 11th
grades. The PSSA uses open-ended questions to assess student’s problem-solving ability.
This assessment uses open-ended questions in both the reading and mathematics portion
of the assessment. The PSSA provides a separate score for each individual to their
respective schools.
Instrumental music education. The student will have participated in the
following grade levels and therefore demonstrate formalized experience in music
education (instrumental music lessons and band). Fifth grade will have 1 year of
instrumental music experience, 8th grade will have 4 years, and the 11th graders will
have 7 years of experience in music education.
Problem solving and critical thinking. According to Skinner (2005), the
determinant for how one thinks critically must be based and trained in operant
conditioning. Therefore, the abilities required to be a critical thinker are trainable through
a sequenced stimuli and response generative conditioning. Skinner referred to this action
of decision making as the behavior of deciding with the primary reason being to escape
from indecision (Skinner, 2005). Skinner stated that problem solving in its most basic
sense is simply satisfying a need, such as hunger. He said, “Problem-solving may be
defined as any behavior which, through the manipulation of variables, makes the
appearance of a solution more probable” (Skinner, 2005, p. 247). To any problem, there
are a multitude of responses. Some of these responses are based on past situations, and
the same response may work with this given stimuli. However, there are times when an
15
individual encounters a new situation that would require a new response. This new
response could occur by random selection and solve the problem by accident. There are
times, however, when a new response is required and it is not based on random selection.
Skinner refers to this occurrence as a trial and error performance where the organism
learns how to try. According to Skinner, the control of the stimuli is the key in individual
problem solving; therefore, the stimuli is controlling the response. The arrangement of
the stimuli response variables in a syllogistic manner becomes, by its own nature,
problem solving. One of the techniques of problem solving is the self-probe, which is the
systematic review of tentative solutions. In some cases, this self-probe is merely an act of
repetition. Skinner associated this skill of how to think with the acts of deprivation, in
that individuals control their environments in order to manipulate their ability to find
solutions.
The origin of an idea is formulated in terms of a response. However, Skinner
stated that it is actually the manipulation of variables (stimuli) that triggers the response.
Even though it may seem as if this has been triggered subconsciously or as a sudden idea,
this is as a result of encountering a similar situation that shares some of the same
properties as the current situation. A truly original idea is that which “results from
manipulations of variables which have not followed a rigid formula and in which the
ideas have other sources of strength” (Skinner, 2005, p. 254). This is where the separation
of an original idea and novel idea takes place in that a novel idea is one whose structure
does not involve an original idea. However, it does utilize past experience and a defined
behavioral process. This difference may appear to be subtle, but it becomes the basis of
an evolution of ideas. The seemingly original or groundbreaking ideas are structured
16
upon what has already occurred, and they are merely another step in the process of
thinking and invention.
Because of this identification of structure in the origin of ideas, it then becomes
possible, in educational pedagogy, to teach people to think critically through their ability
to influence the stimuli and response process. Halpern (1996) stated that critical thinking
involves using a particular set of skills that is useful within a given set of circumstances,
usually when solving a problem. This skill set can be derived from a knowledge structure
or a schema that has been obtained from a variety of sources including social,
environmental and educational factors. The result is that an individual is forming
inferences into logical patterns that provide the person with a defined evaluation
component of the thought process. The objective of all critical thinking is to obtain a
desired outcome for a given circumstance. Nondirected or automatic thinking, according
to Halpern, is a result of routine, and while it may be goal directed, it involves little to no
conscious effort.
In order to solve a set of problems, the application of critical thinking must occur
in a process that is systematic in order for learners to apply successful outcomes to the
given situations. While serendipitous moments may occur, in order for the learners to
sustain a rate of successful solutions, there must be a systematic thought process applied
as to what the potential outcomes would be—a mental trial and error that leads to a
successful conclusion.
17
Assumptions and Limitations
PSSA
The PSSA is a statistical measuring instrument that is utilized throughout the state
of Pennsylvania. Because the assessment is utilized throughout the entire state of
Pennsylvania, it is assumed to be a valid measuring instrument.
Only one school system is being analyzed throughout this study. Therefore, the
research should be replicable in all other scenarios where instrumental music education is
present within the school system, especially Grades 5, 8, and 11.
The limitations of this study are mostly based in the inexperience this researcher
has conducting studies. The procedure is extremely important to establishing and
maintaining both its internal and external validity. The validity of the state wide
assessment is maintained by the Department of Education for the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania as well as the school district through regimented testing procedures and
evaluation. The validity of the data collection will be established through a checks and
balance system as well as an alpha numeric coding system.
The PSSA is a statewide assessment that has been closely monitored by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in order to provide for an accurate coefficient alpha as
well as decision consistency with the latter demonstrating great importance when it
comes to standardized testing. Both the coefficient alpha and decision consistency
demonstrated consistency across both of the true score measures and pseudodecision
tables with scores ranging from .60 to the mid-.80s. These scores increased as the level of
the test increased with the highest scores ranging above .90.
18
The PSSA assessment demonstrated strong internal and external relationships
between the tests’ components, which were evidenced in the high correlation between
subject area strands. An independent study commissioned by the Pennsylvania Board of
Education also evidenced strong content and correlation validity when examining the
statistical relationships of the PSSA assessment including convergent and discriminant
validity with validity being increased when test scores are consistent.
•
Sampling approach and procedures (including recruitment, informing, and
consenting).
o If consent is needed, it could add additional time and complications to the
study itself.
•
Procedures for assignment to groups.
•
Continuity, anonymity and accuracy of assigning the groups are the keys to a
successful study.
•
Procedures for data collection, including determining the validity and
reliability of measures.
•
Checking and assuring the accuracy of the t test.
•
Procedures for data analysis.
Sample Limitations
•
Students who have an interest in instrumental music may already have a
stronger sense of problem solving than those who do not want to get involved.
•
Students may already be involved in instrumental music but just not in a
public school setting (i.e., private lessons). There is no direct way to access
this information.
19
•
Those students choosing music may already excel in mathematics and
reading, therefore giving them an advantage to implement critical thinking
skills.
•
Socioeconomic status may have a direct impact on those students who choose
to study an instrument; therefore, sample population limitation may be
inherent to the sample.
•
The students’ scores between the 5th-grade sample in both reading and math
already displayed significant differences in the baseline measurements. The
assumption can be made that these differences may be attributed to other
influences that include IQ and socioeconomic status (SES).
Expected Findings
The main research question examined the relationship between instrumental
music education instruction in Grades 8 and 11 and critical thinking skills on the PSSA
assessment (sections RB, C.1, D.2 and E.1). This question led to the hypothesis that there
is a correlation between critical thinking and instrumental music education. The findings
of the present study should remain consistent with that of the reviewed literature in that
there is a positive correlation between instrumental music and critical thinking.
The first research subquestion examined whether there would be correlation
between the number of years that a student was involved in instrumental music when
compared to those students who were not. The expected finding was that a student would
demonstrate an increase in PSSA scores when compared to those students who were not
involved in music.
20
The second subquestion examined the mean cumulative scores of the PSSA
subsections to demonstrate a statistical difference between the two samples. Because of
the literature that showed higher scores on standardized assessments, this study predicted
that there would be a significant statistically difference between the two sample
populations.
The third researched subquestion analyzed the statistical variance between each of
the four subsections. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) is expected to illustrate that a
student who participates in instrumental music education will outperform a student who
does not take instrumental music.
21
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The sweeping federal mandate of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2001)
has left public school systems scrambling to decrease achievement gaps and meet the
benchmarks in the areas of English and Mathematics. NCLB was enacted in 2001 and
was formed to promote and highlight the four major aspects of the educational system.
NCLB will create accountability through assessments where the federal, state, and local
governments can use the data in order to make informed judgments about their
educational system and to monitor the progress of said educational system. The data will
then be disaggregated in a manner by which areas of race, gender, economic, and
disadvantaged students can be analyzed. NCLB was created to increase the school
flexibility and to empower the school districts by giving them greater control over federal
dollars, allowing them to transfer up to 50% of federal funds without prior approval.
NCLB was designed to expand the options for disadvantaged students. Those students in
failing schools would be able to transfer to better achieving schools, increased access to
programs, and through the availability of charter school programs. An increased
emphasis on reading would be taught to these students through the availability of funds
that coincide with the President’s Reading First Program and also a focus on
strengthening teacher quality. NCLB was also created to promote immigrant and
bilingual education programs in order to increase English proficiency.
22
Over the past 10 years with the enactment of NCLB (2001), the focus of
education has been to close the achievement gap between school populations and in
doing so arts education has begun a steady decline (Rabkin & Redmond, 2006). Arts
education is considered by many to be a nonessential part of an educational curriculum
and in some minds; it should only exist for entertainment or leisure activities, therefore
providing stigmas that are hard to overcome. However, the arts have long stimulated
active learning and have been credited for creating behaviors that provide opportunities
for critical thinking and self-awareness (Hamblen, 1997).
In 1998, Eisner proposed a three-tier system in order to place into perspective the
outcomes of an arts education. The first outcome examines whether or not the subject
matter is being taught. The idea is that the teaching concept must be directly related to the
material at hand. The second tier is that the student is able to recognize and comprehend
the aesthetic experiences taking place. The final tier is the ancillary effects of the arts
education, such as promoting creative behaviors, critical thinking and self-awareness
(Hamblen, 1997). These ancillary effects have become the focus of many studies
examining the relationship between the arts and other academic areas or the arts and other
areas of development, such as IQ.
Music and Academic Achievement
There is a multitude of research available on the effect of music education on
academic achievement. Babo (2004) analyzed the relationship between students’
participation in music education and their academic performance, and the research set
controls of IQ, SES, and gender. Babo utilized a pool of 548 middle school students. Of
23
that number, a total of 93 students participated in instrumental music. Students were
selected randomly and anonymously by class lists that were generated by the guidance
counselors. Middle School 1 consisted of N = 40 selected students with 14 males and 26
females and Middle School 2 consisted of N = 53 students with 21 males and 32 females.
Eighty-five Noninstrumental students were selected in a similar manner in order to
establish a relationship between the two groups. The two groups totaled a data pool of N
= 178 middle school students.
The study indicated that there was a strong relationship between a student’s
achievement in the language arts and their participation in instrumental music education.
While the regression models clearly indicated that IQ had the strongest influence on test
scores, instrumental music education also contributed highly to the overall variance of the
mathematics total score. Further analysis, when controlling for gender and socioeconomic
status, demonstrated that instrumental music influenced both the language arts and
mathematical scores.
The influence of the IQ variable could not be discounted in standardized testing
and is an area that needs to be explored more fully to complete the integrity of the study.
An additional area that needs to be scrutinized is that the study utilized two different
middle schools and did not account for differences in instruction or teacher quality, all of
which could have an impact on the overall results and efforts of the research. The study’s
overall goal was to strengthen the case that the arts and more specifically music,
contribute to the overall academic achievement of students (Babo, 2004). The construct
that instrumental music education can have an influence on the students’ performance
ability in mathematics and language arts is demonstrated clearly in this study. However,
24
what the study does not account for is how the students were affected cognitively. The
idea that the scores were higher could simply be ancillary to the actual cause for the
increase in test scores.
While the previous study indicated that the students increased their test scores in
the language arts and when controlling for SES and gender increased their mathematical
scores, this alteration in cognitive ability seems to continue as the student ages. In
addition, the construct that instrumental music has a long lasting affect on academic
achievement is further enhanced by a study at Whitworth University. Strauch (2009)
conducted research that indicates college freshmen, who have taken band in high school,
not only have higher grade point averages (GPAs) while coming in to college, but they
maintain those higher averages throughout their college career. Strauch examined the N =
537 students of the 2007–2008 incoming freshman class at Whitworth University, of
which 103 (19.2%) had played in band through high school. The students who
participated in band not only had a higher GPA but also higher Scholastic Aptitude Test
(SAT) scores on both the verbal and math portions of the test (Olson, 2009). The increase
in SAT scores, which are administered in the students’ high school years, concurs with
the Babo (2004) study, which displayed increases in the same assessed areas.
The theory that the arts can influence other academic areas was examined by
Moga, Burger, Hetland, and Winner (2000), who performed a meta-analysis of the
relationship between academic achievement and arts education Moga et al. reviewed 188
reports and found three areas where causal links proved to be reliable. The first found a
medium sized causal relationship between listening and a temporary improvement in
spatial–temporal reasoning. In educational terms, these 26 reports provided little useful
25
information because it was not found why the connection exists. However, it does point
to the existence of a link between the psychological and possible neurological
connections that are created between music and the brain. This, in turn, demonstrates that
music has a cognitive affect on how the brain functions and also the ability to create
changes in the way nonmusical information is processed. The second finding, which was
based on 19 reports, demonstrated that there is a large causal relationship between
learning to play music and spatial reasoning. This effect has greater applicability in
educational scenarios because the effect was reported equally among both general and at
risk populations. It was shown that 69 out of every 100 students between the ages of 3
and 12 displayed an increase in spatial reasoning skills (Moga et al., 2000). This causal
relationship becomes a greater contributor to the way information is processed. If music
can have an impact on the cognitive process of spatial reasoning, then perhaps there are
other areas of temporal functioning that stand to benefit from participation in music.
However, depending on how material is taught and further utilized, spatial reasoning
could provide limited educational benefits to the overall curriculum. The last study,
which examined 80 reports, displayed a causal connection between drama and verbal
skills, in which the transfer of verbal skills increased in students who enacted texts
compared to those who did not enact texts. The evidence also demonstrated an increase in
the students’ ability to read new texts. The impact upon education is that students can
benefit from a direct transfer of information, allowing them to format new information
more effectively.
The connection between the arts and other academic areas is not by any means a
new topic, and it has been linked throughout the centuries. Conventional wisdom would
26
suggest that music and mathematics are interrelated subjects simply by the use of
mathematical computations in both the rhythmical and theoretical aspects of music.
Vaughn (2000) stated that if music enhances spatial–temporal reasoning, then it would
stand to reason that music would contribute to the area of mathematics that utilizes said
reasoning. Vaughn reported on three meta-analyses that examined the relationship
between music and mathematics. The first of these meta-analyses was performed using
20 correlational studies that used the SAT as their assessment. The total sample size was
N = 5,788,132 and ranged in years from 1950–1999. The results indicated that there was
a modest positive correlation between the study of music and mathematical achievement.
However, other factors could not be ruled out; therefore, causation could not be
completely affirmed. The next meta-analysis was performed using 6 experimental studies
in which the students received instruction on either instrumental or vocal training for a
period of at least 4 months. Total sample size for the experimental study was N = 357 and
the publications ranged from 1957–1999. Results appeared to be inconclusive except for
the study that included spatial–temporal reasoning, which showed a positive effect by the
interjection of music into the student’s curriculum. The last of the meta-analyses were
experimental studies that examined the use of background music to enhance
mathematical performance. The N = 1,652 participants listened to music that was
considered to be soothing, such as classical, instrumental music and Muzak, which was
contradicted with music that was considered to be distracting, such as rock and rap. The
results indicated a very weak hypothesis with the integration of background music only
having a small positive effect. Therefore, the assumption could be made that it is the
interactive and developmental properties of music that allows the cognitive process to be
27
enhanced and even transformed over a period of time. The possibility of the
transformation of other cognitive skills then becomes a distinct and viable possibility.
Music and Personality
Exposure to instrumental music, in and of itself, may not always demonstrate
academic success, but it may allude to the ability to influence other areas of an
individual’s personality. Costa-Giomi (2004) studied the effects of 3 years of piano
instruction on both academic performance and self-esteem. The research noted that the
students who studied piano showed no significant difference in academic achievement
from their peers who did not, but they did show a difference in self-esteem. This study
utilized N = 117 fourth-grade children attending a public school in Montreal, Canada.
The 63 children in the experimental group received piano instruction for 3 years and an
acoustic piano for home use. For the control group (N = 54), the students received no
formal music instruction. The students were monitored throughout their 3 years of formal
instruction in the categories of self-esteem, academic achievement, cognitive abilities,
musical abilities and motor proficiency. The students showed increases in self-esteem and
their school grades but not in the standardized testing for either mathematics or language
arts. This study demonstrates that the influence of music may go beyond that of
traditional academic areas in that the student could be gaining attributes that affect all
areas of the cognitive structures. The area of adolescent development is one that is
continuous and assists in developing one’s thought process.
Music has long been used to influence the emotional states of a human being.
Approaching the phenomenon through an inductive theory construction, group interviews
28
were conducted of N = 8 adolescents that were subsidized by follow up forms (Saarikallio
& Erkkila, 2007). All the material collected was analyzed using the constructive
grounded theory method.
The constructivist grounded theory, which was developed by Charmaz, was
described by Creswell (2007) as an approach “that includes emphasizing diverse local
worlds, multiple realities, and the complexities of particular worlds, views, and actions”
(p. 65). Charmaz focused on the relationship between researcher and participants and
pays particular attention to this interaction; therefore, the researcher’s viewpoint becomes
a critical part of the constructivist theory. Instead of playing a distant part to the research
and theory, the researcher injects viewpoints and an understandable and coherent form of
writing. While grounded theory is based in reality or, as Charmaz stated, multiple
realities, it is designed to gain a better understanding and possibly the ability to control a
given situation.
While much music consumption in adolescents is based in affective behaviors, the
understanding of the psychological functions is conceptually diverse and theoretically
unstructured (Saarikallio & Erkkila, 2007). This study was designed in order to assist in
theoretically structuring the mood regulation aspects of music. Adolescents were chosen
to be the focal point of this study because of their large consumption of music and the
importance that music plays in their lives. These teens were chosen by the use of
purposeful sampling and then separated into two age groups, 14 and 17. Each group
consisted of two boys and two girls.
In the first of two interview sessions, the teens were asked to bring along one
musical selection of personal importance. The teens were asked to discuss the meanings
29
of the recording and then completed a follow up form after each activity. The form
consisted of three parts: describe the musical situation, affective behaviors measuring
energy and pleasantness level, and reflect on the experience. The second interview
session was used to focus more deeply on mood relationships and changes (Saarikallio &
Erkkila, 2007).
Saarikallio and Erkkila (2007) used axial coding to define categories and then
establish links between the separate levels and categories. The end result was a model
that displayed the main categories, regulatory strategies, regulated elements of mood,
musical activities, and outside influences.
This study used a relatively small purposeful sampling group of eight participants
who were interviewed by groups. To increase the depth and validity of the research and
results, a larger sampling group should have been utilized as well as both group and
individual interviews. The larger sampling group could have added adolescents who have
demonstrated troubled behavior as well as students who have exhibited normal behaviors.
The data would be collected in multiple field visits, analyzed and then the process
repeated. Then the formulation of a focal point centers the study and allows for the
establishment of a given theory. Also, the adolescents were allowed to choose a recording
that had a distinct personal meaning to them. To enhance the integrity of the study, it
would have been important to include the introduction of separate pieces of music to
evoke an affective behavior. Perhaps at this point, the researchers could have exposed
themselves to the same music, written down their affective behavior, and then compared
them to the adolescents’ reactions. The researchers concluded that this is a relatively
30
unexplored phenomenon and should be examined more in depth to determine reliability
and consistency.
The questions in these studies demonstrate that music has a variety of effects on
learners such has how proper music instruction can assist in developing either academic
or social skill sets. However, students who develop these skills in a music program do so
developmentally over an extended period of time; therefore, the focus of the study needs
to be on the developmental side rather than that of the postdevelopment.
Of the previous studies referenced, there are two main areas that still need to be
examined. The first is the question of how does the arts compare to other activities, and
the second of is exploring the differences over an extended period of time. An example of
this longitudinal type of study was presented by Shropshire (2007). Students’ Preliminary
Scholastic Aptitude Test (PSAT) scores were examined for differences between students
who participated in music, athletics, and both programs. The results showed the students
who were involved in music outperformed those who participated in athletics with no
appreciable difference in those who participated in both and those who participated in
music only.
According to Arasi (2006), the extra musical benefits far outweigh the musical
influences when a person becomes an adult, meaning that the lifelong effects of music on
a person outlives the influences of the music itself. Her study qualitatively examined the
affects of a high school music program on three students and cited the benefits of lifelong
skills such as critical thinking, problem solving, and self-confidence. While the study
examined the phenomenon of ancillary musical influences, it only examined three adults’
perceptions of what skills they had developed through high school chorus. Because of the
31
qualitative nature of the study, the individuals’ perceptions were not compared or
contrasted with others who did not have the same experiences. Therefore, the
contribution of this study is primarily based from a personal perspective and in doing so,
it provides an internal light on an individual’s perspective on how he has been influenced
by music. While this in and of itself can be limiting, it also demonstrates how a person
views himself in relationship to the rest of society, and how this relationship has been
influenced by music.
Critical Thinking
Moga et al. (2000) stated that perhaps the focus should shift from the requirement
of the arts to make a transfer of skills to other subject areas such as math and science to
examining how the arts cultivate transfer. While the arts are a vitally important aspect of
culture, the notion that they contribute to other areas of the learning comes naturally
because of the inclusive nature of the arts as a whole. The integral nature of the arts
allows for the performer to become an active problem solver and, therefore, provides a
direct impact upon the overall outcome. This idea incorporates the motivational aspect of
the arts; the individual has an influence on the end result, thus evolving into a learnercentered design. This learner-centered design was referenced by psychologist David
Perkins when he stated that any subject can transfer thinking skills, but the arts are a
particular vehicle for this because of their ability to develop contextually through their
engagement, ability to sustain attention and the encouragement of rich connections (as
cited in Moga et al., 2000). This strategy for transfer is featured in the principles of
learning-centered design.
32
In 1968, Gagne suggested that instruction should take place in a hierarchical
sequence allowing the learner to benefit from a bottom-up processing method wherein the
most elemental parts are taught first. This method would be constructed by using the
parts-to-whole organizing principal allowing for the higher order skills to be taught after
the basics have been learned (Van Patten, Chao, & Reigeluth, 1986). In 1977, Gagne
identified eight internal phases that support the learning sequence process: (a) activating
motivation, (b) informing the learner of the objective, (c) directing attention, (d)
stimulating recall, (e) providing learning guidance, (f) enhancing retention, (g) promoting
the transfer of learning, and (h) eliciting performance and providing feedback.
Mawhinney, Frusciante, Aaron, and Liu (2002) identified five design principles
that should be applied to establish a learning-centered program. The first is to develop a
student knowledge base, which is developed in music by formulating small groups of
homogenous ability and instruments. This allows for the students to progress at a level
that is appropriate and developmentally sound. In this early stage of development,
students will learn the basics of their instrument, as well as musical terminology and
historical contexts. During this period the students are working on the first two steps,
remember and understanding, of the Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) revised taxonomy.
The second design principle outlined by Mawhinney et al. (2002) is to increase
student motivation. Students who begins instruments will become frustrated within the
first few months. In order to increase the motivation of the students, they should be
encouraged to practice toward goals that are challenging and appropriate. To further
encourage the efforts of the students, they should be allowed to explore new rhythms,
notes and dynamics expressions and they should begin to create their own melodic
33
structures. In order to complete the activity of exploration and creation, the students will
need to engage the third design principle of student strategic processing. During the
design stage, the students will need to access their critical and creative thinking as well as
problem-solving skills. Lisk (2006) described music as intelligence in action and that
performing in an instrumental ensemble requires a multisensory approach combined with
a perceptive decision-making process. This makes music in itself a problem-solving inthe-moment exercise. Students, however, must be taught to recognize not only how to
apply critical thinking skills but where they become a necessary and vital component of
music. Students’ work should be showcased and demonstrated both to their peers and to
their parents. Not only will this provide intrinsic motivation for the students, but it allows
the students to analyze their work and the work of others. As students demonstrate their
playing and creating ability, individual differences will occur in the students’
development. This critical fourth stage now shifts the attentional process to the
relationship between the teacher and student. The teacher’s role, at this stage, is to bridge
the developmental gap between the students with sound pedagogical technique. To assist
in bridging this gap, Turner (1999) suggested the creation of centers, such as rhythm
reading areas, so that students can work on problem areas at their own pace and achieve
musical success. These centers contribute to the discovery learning method much like
that of the Montessori method, which relies on collaborative learning and problem
solving to drive the learning process.
The fifth design principle is creating learning contexts, where the social context of
learning is controlled in order to increase student achievement. Mawhinney et al. (2002)
stated that student achievement can be increased by establishing learning based
34
environment of collaboration, cultural understanding, and technology. In instrumental
music lessons, there are a multitude of areas that can be addressed. Music in and of itself
is rich in cultural heritage and can be used to represent the cultural backgrounds of the
students. The idea of collaboration can be addressed through peer on peer assessments
where the students can utilize their analyzing, evaluating and problem-solving
techniques. Lisk (1996) described that the musician must have an active involvement in
the musical decisions of the ensemble, therefore allowing the individual to create
meaning in the musical performance. In order to assist the students in building their
knowledge base as well as developing creatively, music writing and processing programs
can be used where the students can create their own written compositions. These
compositions can then be played by other students allowing them to experience each
other’s work. Turner (1999) stated that this student-centered design allows for students to
contribute their unique musical ideas to the lesson without relying on the assessment of
the teacher. In addition, it allows the students opportunities to demonstrate their musical
knowledge and understanding (Turner, 1999).
By using the five design principles suggested by Mawhinney et al. (2002),
instrumental music education can move from a teacher-centered to a student-centered
design. The teacher is still needed to act as knowledgeable instructor guiding expectation
levels and working toward a level of mastery (Suzuki). At the same time, students should
be allowed to explore music through both their creative and critical thinking skills sets,
which stress the inherent motivation that is the quest for knowledge (Montessori).
Activities themselves must be developed that are both age and developmentally
appropriate so that the students are ensured success (Piaget). These design principles
35
coupled with a learning-centered curriculum change the paradigm of the education
system on the most basic of premises that learning is student-centered.
The learning-centered curriculum is a strategic student-oriented plan designed to
be advantageous for the students both in form of interaction and retention. Before
implementing such a curriculum, a school entity needs to take into account the following
areas: learning context, planning, assessment, and programming strategies (Hubball,
Gold, Mighty, & Britnell, 2007). Once these strategies have been implemented, the
school system needs to evaluate each stage of the students’ development processes to
ensure readiness, difficulty of subject matter and motivational strategies. In curriculum,
evolution is a self-evident and discovery process that allows for cognitive modifiability,
which in turn grants flexibility to both the students and the teachers.
Perhaps, then, the effect of an arts infused program transcends the outcome of arts
itself. These intangible lessons can then be generated into other aspects of thinking such
as critical thinking. According to Halpern (1996), critical thinkers are constantly
analyzing new situations, searching for complexity and ambiguity, then taking that
information and comparing it to prior knowledge and experience.
Halpern (1996) stated that critical thinking involves using a particular set of skills
that is useful within a given set of circumstances, usually when solving a problem. This
skill set can be derived from a knowledge structure or schemata that have been obtained
from a variety of sources including social, environmental and educational factors. The
result is that an individual is forming inferences into logical patterns that provide the
person with a defined evaluation component of the thought process. The objective of all
critical thinking is to obtain a desired outcome for a given circumstance. Nondirected or
36
automatic thinking, according to Halpern, is a result of routine, and while it may be goal
directed, it involves little to no conscious effort. Gagne (1980) believed that the initial
components of learning must be in place in order for higher order complex learning
skills, like problem solving, to take place. That traditional education is not designed to
address these complex skills; therefore, they must be taught by less traditional methods
(Derry & Murphy, 1986).
Moga et al. (2000) examined whether the arts engendered creative thinking,
which involves problem solving, inquiry, and open-ended thinking. Their meta-analyses,
the first of which was based on seven correlational studies, found that there was a modest
association between studying the arts and performance on creative measures. In three of
the studies, however, the students self-selected the arts. Therefore, it could be stated that
the creative thinkers were naturally drawn to that subject matter. The second metaanalyses focused on experimental studies that examined the arts and the effects on verbal
creativity. The effect size in this case was not significant as demonstrated by both the t
test and Stouffer’s Z. The last of the meta-analyses examined experimental studies that
focused on the effects of arts education on figural creativity. The results indicated that a
causal relationship could be established between arts education and figural creativity.
However, the same results indicate that this does not hold true for verbal or conceptual
creativity. The idea that arts can influence creative thought on any level indicates that
there is an effect on the cognitive process. The construct that creative thinking can be
enhanced directly aligns itself with the thought process of critical thinking. If it were not
for creative thinking, the critical thinking process would have no grounds on which to be
based.
37
Halpern (1997) stated that “when we think critically, we are evaluating the
outcomes of our thought processes” (p. 4). The evolution of this human thinking process
has come to be known as cognitive process instruction, and the goal is to understand how
knowledge, cognitive processes and mechanisms can improve how people think
(Halpern, 1997). Music instruction becomes but one facet in this process of instruction,
but because of its didactic nature, it allows for the cognitive responses to flow through a
multisensory experience, evoking both educational and aesthetic experiences.
Music Education and Intelligence
Music education, by itself, is not the only contributing factor to an individual’s
ability to function, form creative and constructive thoughts. Intelligence can be
generalized in terms of how one learns from experience and adapts to one’s surroundings.
Measurements of intelligence can be traced to two sources: one, psychophysical
intelligence (sensory and physical/motor skills) and two, judgmental abilities (Sternberg,
2003). Because of intelligences’ implicit meanings, the word intelligence can more aptly
be defined by its context or connotation rather than the explicit meaning of its
assessment.
Francis Galton (1822–1911) believed that intelligence was based in
psychophysical abilities. These abilities included weight discrimination, pitch
discrepancy, strength, and other sensitivities (Sternberg, 2003).
Alfred Binet (1857–1911) believed that intelligence was based in judgment and
was comprised of three different parts: discretion, adaptation, and criticism (Sternberg,
2003). Binet used this intelligence discretion to determine people who should be
38
considered mentally retarded. He later used these theories to establish mental age in
conjunction with physical age.
William Stern (1912) was the first person to develop the ability to compare
intelligence through relative means rather than by physical age. This was done through
the establishment of an intelligence quotient (IQ), which calculates the ratio between
mental and chronological age (Sternberg, 2003). The result being that when the mental
age exceeds the actual age the resulting score will be over 100 and the inverse will result
in a score below 100.
The next evolutionary development in intelligence is the focus on the structure of
intelligence and the applicability of factor analysis, which separates intelligence into
various abilities and factors. The man closely associated with factor analysis is Charles
Spearman (1863–1945). He concluded that intelligence can be separated into its various
constructs but the labeling of a “g” factor or general factor or “mental energy” was what
he felt as the most important (Sternberg, 2003).
A more contemporary viewpoint of intelligence would lie in the theory of
multiple intelligences by Gardner. His original theory included seven different areas of
intelligence: Linguistic, Logical–mathematical, Musical, Spatial, Bodily–kinesthetic,
Interpersonal, and Intrapersonal (Guignon, 2004). His latest addition to the seven
intelligences is the naturalist, or the ability to classify plants, minerals, and animals.
These eight intelligences could still be broken down into the respective psychophysical
and judgmental abilities. The importance of these intelligences lies in close alignment
with what is being viewed as important either by society or another criterion for
assessment.
39
The idea that music is an intelligence is, in and of itself, a revolution in thought
because of its mandate that it acts in symbiosis, with the rest of the being including
cognitive structures. All the evidence displayed contributes to an individual’s awareness
of the formation of the thought process and to the overall outcomes of intelligence.
Perhaps the ability of music to influence not only affects the cognitive functioning of the
individual but also personality and moods of the individuals. Reimer (2002) stated that
Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences removes the construct that music is a talent
with the connotation that some people are gifted with it and others are not, but instead,
that music manifests itself in the cognitive operation process. She stated that “music is a
way to know the world—to create and share meaning in the world—and to function
effectively in this mode of cognition, one’s musical intelligence must be developed” (p.
77).
Schellenberg (2006) examined 6- to 11-year-old children who each varied in
amount of musical training. The baseline IQ was established by administering the WISC–
III as well as assessing other areas of intellectual functioning such as grades in school and
standardized tests of academic achievement. The sample was comprised of N = 147 (72
boys and 75 girls) ages 6–11 recruited from a middle class suburb of Toronto, Canada.
The predictor variables were measured using a questionnaire that was administered to
parents about their child’s history with private music lessons. The criterion variables
consisted of measures of intelligence, which were assessed using the WISC–III, academic
ability, which was assessed using the K–TEA, and social adjustment, which was
measured using the Parent Rating Scale of BASC.
40
The principal analyses, consisting of correlations between the main predictor
variable and criterion variables, demonstrated that music lessons were positively
correlated with both academic achievement and IQ, but not social adjustment. The
outcome was that the duration of music lessons has a small but positive correlation to
measures of intelligence.
The second study examined the effects of long term music lessons on intellectual
abilities and more specifically, if these had lasting effects even after the music lessons
had ended. The participants of the second study were undergraduates at a suburban
Canadian university with the range in age being between 16 and 25. More than half had
taken private music lessons (N = 84) for an average of 7.8 years. The students were
surveyed based on a questionnaire where the students were paid to participate in the 2hour survey. The criterion variables in Study 2 consisted of intelligence and academic
achievement, which was measured using the WAIS–III, and an additional subtest was
Object Assemble was administered to measure spatial–temporal ability (Schellenberg,
2006). The results indicated that taking music lessons regularly was correlated positively
with IQ especially in the areas of perceptual organization and working memory.
The results of the Schellenberg (2006) study indicated that there was a positive
correlation between childhood lessons and IQ with this impacting lasting into early
adulthood. Perhaps the more important conclusion in this study is that there is a direct
causal effect between the duration of musical training and the predictor of better
intellectual functioning. The benefit of this study to the efforts of music education was
enhanced, because the effects of music lessons on intelligence could not be discounted by
parents’ education or family income.
41
As a result of the previous findings, intelligence is an adaptable and modifiable
skill that can be enhanced over a period of time. This, in turn, directly relates to the
ability of instrumental music education to create cognitive links through the conceptual
development of child and adolescent mind. As presented in the Schellenberg (2006)
study, the single factor of instrumental lessons could account for the substantial
proportion of the variance of the tests. Therefore, the summation could be made that
music lessons were the determining predictor valuable that altered the test scores. Critical
thinking, just like that of intelligence, personality and academic achievement is a skill
that can be either taught or enhanced over a period of time. Therefore, instrumental music
education can have a similar longitudinal impact to a student’s critical thinking skills.
Halpern (1997) stated that critical thinking skills can be taught effectively through the
transfer of training where thinking skills can be applied to a vast array of contexts. When
students think critically, they are evaluating the outcomes of their thinking processes,
which could involve solving problems, making inferences and evaluating decisions. In
music education, critical thinking skills are applied where the paradigm shifts from
teacher-centered to student-centered learning. Musicians use these skills to evaluate their
performances in the context of technique, intonation, stylistic interpretation, notation and
ensemble (Reimer, 2002).
42
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this research is to explore the correlation between critical thinking
and instrumental music education. Instrumental education traditionally uses a hierarchical
structure in order to facilitate structured and sequenced learning through vertical skills
transfer. Gagne (1980) stated that in a typical education higher functioning intellectual
skills are rarely taught and often do not benefit from direct instruction in how to exhibit
these specific cognitive processes. Instrumental music education uses problem-solving
and critical thinking skills as an inherit part of the instructional and learning method.
However, the transfer of this skill set to other subject areas must occur through a vertical
and lateral transfer of the learning process. The transfer of problem skills, in this study,
must occur from that of instrumental music education to the areas of reading and
mathematics.
This research was done through analyzing testing of both instrumental music
participants and nonparticipants of the course of their school years (8th and 11th grades).
In addition, the study analyzed group scores (math and reading) from their 5th, 8th and
11th grades. This study was able to examine the differences between students and the
amount of music exposure they have had based on the number of years of instrumental
music education. According to Breakwell et al. (2006), this would constitute a
43
longitudinal design, whereby data are being collected from the same sample over a period
of time.
The importance of this study relates directly to understanding the executive
intellectual skills that instrumental music education may assist in developing and also that
these skills are transferable to other academic areas. By bridging the gap in literature,
music educators would be able to demonstrate the importance of music education to all
students, teachers and administrators. Previous studies have covered the effect of
instrumental music on academic achievement, intelligence and personality. Conceptually,
the construct that instrumental music can influence the cognitive development process
will provide great value to and significance to the existing body of literature.
Research Design
Prebeginning
Building administrators were contacted in order to ensure cooperation and
availability of both sample size and information provided by the Pennsylvania
Department of Education (PADOE).
Initial Phase
Students for Group A, B, C will be selected based on the following criteria: grade
level (5th, 8th, 11th) and their participation in instrumental music. Students for Group A1,
B1, and C1 will be selected based on the following criteria: grade level (5th, 8th, 11th)
and nonparticipation in music. Once the stratified sample is formed, the same sample will
be continuous throughout the research. Group A (5th grade) will only be used for the
scaled score of overall math and reading assessment.
44
Final Phase
The critical thinking and problem-solving assessments are administered as part of
the PSSA with the testing occurring in 3rd, 5th, 8th and 11th grades Results were
analyzed, compared and correlated from grade to grade, years of participation in
instrumental music, and between Group B and Group C using archival data.
Instrumental music education begins in the 5th grade and given the grading years
of the PSSA, this allows for a pretest (5th) and posttest design (8th & 11th). This will
allow the research to demonstrate the scores of both Noninstrumental and Instrumental,
which will be analyzed for statistical differences between studies and later for variance.
The scores from the PSSA tests were then used to analyze the difference between
Instrumental and Noninstrumental students to determine if there any relationship between
the variables of critical thinking and instrumental music education.
Quantitative: Correlational Research Design
Correlational studies provide the first step in determining the relationship between
two variables, and therefore, they allow for the connection or lack thereof to be
determined between the criterion and predictor variables. The research question, effects
of instrumental music upon critical thinking skills, is an example of a correlational study
utilizing retrospective and archival data.
The correlation coefficient will allow for a measure of the degree or strength of
this relationship between instrumental music education and critical thinking (Howell,
2008). Further, a bivariate correlation approach will allow for the demonstration of
degree and direction of the relationship (Howell, 2008). The results from a correlation
study will be demonstrated as either a positive, negative or null hypothesis. This type of
45
study is subject to errors because of the influence of additional variables. In the case of
this research study, the variables were controlled by the use of stratified sampling within
the specified criteria. The cross-lagged panel correlation method could be used to assist in
controlling the validity of the results. This method allows the researcher to examine the
issue over different periods of time (Howell, 2008).
Utilizing a bivariate analysis, which allows for the simultaneous examination of
two variables (instrumental music education and critical thinking skills), allowed the
researcher to demonstrate whether or not a relationship exists between the dependent and
criterion variables. Once a relationship is established, the researcher was able to make a
prediction through regression of the dependent variable (critical thinking).
The two primary constructs are critical thinking (dependent variable) and
instrumental music education (independent variable). The psychological basis for
investigation is whether or not instrumental music education can affect a student’s critical
thinking skills.
Problem Solving
The PSSA uses open-ended questions to assess students’ problem-solving ability.
This assessment uses open-ended questions in both the reading and mathematics portion
of the assessment. The PSSA (PADOE, 2005) provides a separate score for the openended questions to each of the schools.
Critical Thinking Skills
Halpern (1996) stated that critical thinking involves using a particular set of skills
that is useful within a given set of circumstances, usually when solving a problem. This
skill set can be derived from a knowledge structure or schemata that has been obtained
46
from a variety of sources, including social, environmental and educational factors. The
result is that an individual is forming inferences into logical patterns that provide the
person with a defined evaluation component of the thought process. The objective of all
critical thinking is to obtain a desired outcome for a given circumstance. Nondirected or
automatic thinking, according to Halpern, is a result of routine and while it may be goal
directed, it involves little to no conscious effort.
Critical thinking allows the person to subjectively analyze objective material. In
1998, Halpern proposed a four component model for the transfer of critical thinking
skills. The first component is attitude, which she describes as the recognition of critical
thinking as a skill and then the implementation of such by the individual. Next is the
instruction and practice of critical thinking as a skill, in that a person will recognize the
benefit of the utilization of critical thinking skills. The third is the ability to transfer the
elements of problem and the application of them to a new contextual situation. The last
component is the use of metacognition to enhance and facilitate the process of critical
thinking.
Even though the PSSA uses the terminology of critical thinking skills, the
assessment scores the open-ended questions as problem-solving skills. Therefore, the
dependent variable for this research project will be critical thinking skills. According to
the definition provided in section 3.3, the attributes of critical thinking are present in
problem solving. However, problem solving can be taught and utilized in a sequential
systematic way (Halpern, 1998).
47
Instrumental Music Education
In this research design, instrumental music education is defined as a student who
has participated in formalized instrumental music instruction in either the woodwind or
brass family. Instrumental music education, in the Tunkhannock Area School District,
begins in the 5th grade.
In this research project, the student will have the following levels of experience or
background in music education: 5th grade will have 1 year of instrumental music
experience, 8th grade will have 4 years, and the 11th grade student will have 7 years of
experience in music education.
Target Population and Participant Selection
Stratified Samples
Students for Group A, B, C will be selected based on the following criteria: grade
level (5th, 8th, 11th) and their participation in instrumental music. Groups B and C will
involve the same students as group A; however, the students will now be in the 8th (B)
and 11th (C) grades. Students for Group A1, B1, and C1 will be selected based on the
following criteria: grade level (5th, 8th, 11th) and nonparticipation in music. Groups B1
and C1 will involve the same students as group A1; however, the students will now be in
the 8th (B1) and 11th (C1) grades. Once the stratified sample is formed, the same sample
will be continuous throughout the research. The critical thinking assessments are
administered as part of the PSSA with the testing occurring in 3rd, 5th, 8th, and 11th
grades. Results will be analyzed, compared and correlated from grade to grade, years of
participation in instrumental music, and between Group A and Group A1.
48
Instrumental Music Students
Students will be chosen based on their continue participation in music from 5th–
11th grade. If a student has discontinued instrumental music before the 11th grade, the
student will then not be used in the Instrumental music sample.
Noninstrumental Music Students
Students for this sample will never have participated in instrumental music
education within the school system. Leedy and Ormrod (2005) recommended that when
the population size is around 500, 50% of the population size should be sampled. Each
grade level is estimated at around 200 students, which gives a population size of about
100 students. Therefore, a population size of 100 students (50 Instrumental and 50
Noninstrumental) will be chosen. In the case that 50 Instrumental students are not
available for a particular grade, the sample will be adjusted to accommodate, for
example, using the graduating class of 2008 and 2009, thus yielding a larger sample size.
By using multiple years, the power of the study would increase as well as the validity and
integrity of the study. For a sample size of N = 50, a power analysis indicated that power
was .9565 and the critical F = 4.11. The effect size was estimated at p = .5 with the alpha
being .05.
Stratified sampling is utilized because this study is examining three separate strata
of the given student population. These three strata are as follows: 5th, 8th, and 11th
grade. This sampling method will allow this researcher to examine the three grade levels,
which in turn will allow for a direct comparison of the problem-solving and critical skill
development of these students. In addition, since this is a longitudinal study, the same
students’ development can then be examined over the three grade levels.
49
According to Howell (2008), the Type I error is defined as rejecting the null
hypothesis when it is true, and the Type II error is failing to reject the null hypothesis
when it is false. The manipulation of rejection levels can also be helpful when there are
many samples or there are several stages to a testing process. Controlling Type I and II
errors allows the researcher to control the conditions by eliminating specific errors in
order to control the variables. This will then stabilize the results of the test. For example,
in drug testing, a high rejection level may be set increasing, the Type I errors and
decreasing the Type II errors. The second stage of the testing process might have a very
low rejection level, increasing the number of Type II errors and decreasing the number of
Type I errors. However, since the researcher controlled the first stage of the process, the
results will display few Type II errors in the end research (Howell, 2008).
Procedures
Prebeginning
Building administrators will be contacted in order to insure cooperation and
availability of both sample size and information provided by the PADOE.
Sample Identification Phase
Students for Group A, B, C will be selected based on the following criteria: grade
level (5th, 8th, 11th) and their participation in instrumental music. Students for Group A1,
B1 and C1 will be selected based on the following criteria: grade level (5th, 8th, 11th) and
nonparticipation in music. Once the stratified sample is formed, the same sample will be
continuous throughout the research.
50
Initial Phase
The critical thinking and problem-solving assessments are administered as part of
the PSSA with the testing occurring in 3rd, 5th, 8th, and 11th grades.
Final Phase
Results will be analyzed, compared and correlated from grade to grade, years of
participation in instrumental music, and between Group A and Group B using archival
data.
Ethical Considerations
Right to Privacy
Permission was gained in advance from all parties and the participants’
information is kept confidential. All students are assigned numbers as part of the PSSA
assessment. These numbers will be utilized in order to protect the students’ anonymity
and the students’ identity will remain confidential. This service of confidentiality will be
provided by the school district and the researcher will remain separate from this
knowledge.
Honesty
According to Leedy and Ormrod (2005), “Researchers must report their findings
in a complete and honest fashion without misrepresenting what they have done or
intentionally misleading others about the nature of their findings” (p. 102). The research
must follow the guidelines provided by the American Psychological Association (2002)
Code of Ethics in regards to plagiarism, reporting of research, and publication credit.
51
All students take the PSSA assessment as part of their state requirement. All the
data from said assessment is collected by the state and disaggregated to the individual
school systems both as large group assessments and individual scores for students. The
students, as part of the assessment, are assigned individual numbers by the state.
Therefore, the school system can provide a list of numbers to the researcher of the target
populations. This stratified information will then be placed into SPSS in order to generate
a random sample. Once the individual students have been selected, a random number
generator will be used to assign a random number to the PSSA assigned number. This
allows for a two stage process of protection and will not allow people who have access to
the PSSA assigned number the ability to track the individual student.
In addition to this random number assignment, the researcher will be prohibited
from receiving the names of the students that correspond to the assigned PSSA number.
This will assist in removing any bias on the part of the researcher and insuring
anonymity.
Instruments
Problem-solving assessments are administered as part of the PSSA with the
testing occurring in 3rd, 5th, 8th, and 11th grades. The PSSA uses open-ended questions
to assess students’ problem-solving ability. This assessment uses open-ended questions in
both the reading and mathematics portion of the assessment.
The PSSA provides individual student scores for each of the subsets listed as
follows.
52
•
Reading B: Interpretation and analysis of text
•
Mathematics C.1 (geometry): Analyze characteristics of two and three
dimensional shapes
•
Mathematics D.2 (algebraic concepts): Analyze mathematical situations using
numbers, symbols, words, tables and/or graphs
•
Mathematics E.1 (data analysis and probability): Interpret and analyze data by
formulating answers or questions
These selected areas not only provide the appropriate prerequisite of critical
thinking skills and demonstrate problem-solving ability, but they also remain consistent
data throughout the grade levels of the assessment (3rd, 5th, 8th, and 11th).
Problem Solving and Critical Thinking
According to Skinner (2005), the determinant for how one thinks critically must
be based and trained in operant conditioning. Therefore, the abilities required to be a
critical thinker are trainable through a sequenced stimuli and response generative
conditioning. Skinner referred to this action of decision making as the behavior of
deciding, with the primary reason being to escape from indecision. Skinner stated that
problem solving in its most basic sense is simply satisfying a need, such as hunger. He
said, “Problem-solving may be defined as any behavior which, through the manipulation
of variables, makes the appearance of a solution more probable” (p. 247). To any
problem, there are a multitude of responses. Some of these responses are based on past
situations, when the same response may work with this given stimuli. However, there are
times when an individual encounters a new situation that would require a new response.
This new response could occur by random selection and solve the problem by accident.
53
There are times, however, when a new response is required and it is not based on random
selection. Skinner referred to this occurrence as a trial and error performance where the
organism learns how to try. According to Skinner, the control of the stimuli is the key in
individual problem solving; therefore, the stimuli is controlling the response. The
arrangement of the stimuli response variables in a syllogistic manner becomes, by its own
nature, problem solving. One of the techniques of problem solving is the self-probe,
which is the systematic review of tentative solutions. In some cases, this self-probe is
merely an act of repetition. Skinner associated this skill of how to think with the acts of
deprivation, in that individuals control their environments in order to manipulate their
ability to find a solution.
The origin of an idea is formulated in terms of a response; however, Skinner
stated that it is actually the manipulation of variables (stimuli) that triggers the response.
Even though it may seem as if this has been triggered subconsciously or as a sudden idea,
this is as a result of encountering a similar situation that shares some of the same
properties as the current situation. A truly original idea is that which “results from
manipulations of variables which have not followed a rigid formula and in which the
ideas have other sources of strength” (Skinner, 2005, p. 254). This is where the separation
of an original idea and novel idea takes place, in that a novel idea is one whose structure
does not involve an original idea; however, it does utilize past experience and a defined
behavioral process. This difference may appear to be subtle. However, it becomes the
basis of an evolution of ideas. Seemingly original or groundbreaking ideas are structured
upon what has already occurred and are merely another step in the process of thinking
and invention. Because of this identification of structure in the origin of ideas, it then
54
becomes possible, in educational pedagogy, to teach people to think critically through
their ability to influence the stimuli and response process. Halpern (1996) stated that
critical thinking involves using a particular set of skills that is useful within a given set of
circumstances, usually when solving a problem. This skill set can be derived from a
knowledge structure or schemata that has been obtained from a variety of sources,
including social, environmental and educational factors. The result is that an individual is
forming inferences into logical patterns that provide the person with a defined evaluation
component of the thought process. The objective of all critical thinking is to obtain a
desired outcome for a given circumstance. Nondirected or automatic thinking, according
to Halpern, is a result of routine and while it may be goal directed it involves little to no
conscious effort.
Operational Definition: Instrumental Music Education
The student will have participated in the following grade levels and therefore
demonstrate formalized experience in music education (instrumental music lessons and
band). Fifth grade will have 1 year of instrumental music experience, 8th grade will have
4 years, and the 11th grade student will have 7 years of experience in music education.
Instrumental music education begins in the 5th grade, and given the grading years
of the PSSA, this allows for a pretest (5th) and posttest design (8th and 11th). This will
allow the research to demonstrate the scores of both Noninstrumental and Instrumental,
which will be analyzed for statistical differences between studies and later for variance.
55
Research Questions and Hypotheses
Main Research Question
To what extent does instrumental music education instruction in Grades 8–11
have an impact on critical thinking skills on the PSSA assessment (sections RB, C.1, D.2
and E.1)?
HA: Instrumental music education has a positive impact on critical thinking skills.
H0: Music education has no impact on critical thinking skills.
Subquestions
Research Question 1: How does the number of years (8th and 11th) that a student
is involved in music education provide any statistical difference in the development of
critical thinking skills as assessed by the PSSA (cumulative score per grade level)?
•
Analysis and comparison of the Instrumental and Noninstrumental sample is
completed at 8th grade and then the same for 11th grade.
HA1: There will be a positive correlation between those students who have
participated in music education and critical thinking skills. The students’ critical thinking
skills will increase with the number of years of participation.
H01: There will be no change in the students’ critical thinking skills.
Research Question 2: How do the Instrumental music students’ mean scores on
sections (RB, C.1, D.2 and E.1) of the PSSA assessment compare to Noninstrumental
music students from 8th to 11th grade?
•
Correlation coefficient will be utilized to examine the variance between grade
levels (8th to 11th) for both samples. A comparison of the sum of means of
from the individual subset of critical thinking scores (RB, MC1, MD2, ME1)
56
from the 8th- and 11th-grade sample populations. The means from all four
subset scores will be added and then compared between samples.
HA2: There will be a positive statistical difference between Instrumental and
Noninstrumental music students at all three grade levels.
H02: There will be no statistical difference between Instrumental and
Noninstrumental music students.
Research Question 3: Utilizing the means of the individual PSSA scoring
(sections RB, C.1, D.2 and E.1), what is the relationship between the following:
•
Instrumental group scores versus Noninstrumental group scores from 8th–11th
grades
This will demonstrate change over a period of time in each of the subset test
scores.
HA3: There will be a positive statistical difference between grade level and
Instrumental and Noninstrumental music group scores.
H03: There will be no statistical difference between grade level and group scores.
Data Analysis
Main Research Question
To what extent does instrumental music education instruction in Grades 8–11
have an impact on critical thinking skills on the PSSA assessment (sections RB, C.1, D.2
and E.1)?
57
Statistical Analysis: One-Way ANOVA
Howell (2008) defined an ANOVA as a statistical technique for testing for
differences between the means of several groups. Because of the utilization of only one
independent variable, the one-way ANOVA would be used to analyze the statistical
difference between the means of the groups.
Subquestions
Research Question 1: How does the number of years (8th and 11th) that a student
is involved in music education provide any statistical difference in the development of
critical thinking skills as assessed by the PSSA (cumulative score per grade level)?
•
Analysis and comparison of the Instrumental and Noninstrumental sample at
8th grade and then the same for 11th grade.
Statistical Analysis: Independent-Samples t Test
Independent-samples t test will be used to compare the sum of means from the
individual subset scores (RB, MC1, MD2, ME1) from the 8th- and 11th-grade sample
populations. The means from all four subset scores will be added and then compared
between samples.
Research Question 2: How do the Instrumental music students’ scores compare to
Noninstrumental music students at all three grade levels?
•
Correlation coefficient will be utilized to examine the variance between grade
levels (8th to 11th) for the samples.
58
Statistical Analysis: One-Way ANOVA
Because of the utilization of only one independent variable, the one-way ANOVA
would be used to analyze the statistical difference between the means of the groups
(Howell, 2008).
Research Question 3: Utilizing the PSSA scoring (sections RB, C.1, D.2 and E.1),
what is the relationship between the following:
•
Instrumental group scores versus Noninstrumental group scores
•
Grade level and group scores
o This will demonstrate change over a period of time in each of the subset
test scores.
Statistical Analysis: Repeated Measures ANOVA
According to Howell (2008), a repeated measures design is where the participant
receives all levels of the independent variables. The repeated-measures ANOVA would
allow for the same subject to be followed throughout the study, which allows for a
statistical analysis of their progress over a period of time.
Expected Findings
The main research question examined the relationship between instrumental
music education instruction in Grades 8 and 11 and critical thinking skills on the PSSA
assessment (sections RB, C.1, D.2 and E.1). This question led to the hypothesis that there
is a correlation between critical thinking and instrumental music education. The findings
of the present study should remain consistent with that of the reviewed literature in that
there is a positive correlation between instrumental music and critical thinking. A
59
significant statistical difference is expected between the Noninstrumental and
Instrumental sample in regards to the subsections of Reading and Mathematics.
The first research subquestion examined if there would be correlation between the
number of years that a student was involved in instrumental music when compared to
those students who were not. The students who participated in an additional 3 years of
instrumental music should demonstrate a significant statistical difference when compared
to the sample that did not participate in instrumental music.
The second subquestion examined the mean cumulative scores of the PSSA
subsections to demonstrate a statistical difference between the two samples. Because of
the literature that showed higher scores on standardized assessments, this study predicted
that there would be a significant statistical difference between the two sample
populations. The third researched subquestion analyzed the statistically variance between
each of the four subsections. The ANOVA is expected to illustrate that a student who
participates in instrumental music education will outperform a student who does not take
instrumental music.
60
CHAPTER 4. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Introduction
This research study seeks to examine the relationship between instrumental music
education and critical thinking skills in Grades 8 and 11 as assessed by the Pennsylvania
System of School Assessment. The subsets that were examined included Reading (B):
Interpretation and Analysis of Fictional and Nonfictional Text, which assesses the
academic standards 1.1 Learning to read independently, 1.2 Reading critically in all
content areas and 1.3 Reading, analyzing and interpreting literature (PADOE, 2009–
2010). In mathematics, sections C.1: Geometry—Analyze characteristics of two and three
dimensional shapes, D.2 Algebraic concepts—Analyze mathematical situations using
numbers, symbols, words, tables and/or graphs and E.1 Data analysis and probability—
Interpret and analyze data by formulating answers or questions.
Description of the Stratified Sample
The researcher identified the potential sample based on the students’ participation
in instrumental music in Grades 5–11 or their nonparticipation in music. The participant
must have retained residency in the school district allowing them to take part in the PSSA
assessment as well as to participate in the instrumental music program. Once this
potential sample was determined, a representative from the school district selected the
61
sample and then mailed the consent forms to students who were over 18 years of age and
permission forms to the parents of students who were under 18. The forms were
completed and mailed back to a third party prohibiting the researcher from knowing who
received forms. In addition this allowed the researcher, as well as the school, to remain
neutral in the selection process. The sample forms were then returned to the researcher.
The research examined a sample of (N = 100) students (50 Noninstrumental music
students and 50 music students) from two graduated classes of a high school. There were
28 males and 22 females in each of the participant groups. By using multiple years, the
power of the study would increase as well as the validity and integrity of the study. For a
sample size of 50, a power analysis indicated that power was .9565 and the critical F =
4.11. The effect size was estimated at .5 with p = .05.
Stratified sampling was utilized because this study examined three separate strata
of the given student population. These three strata were as follows: 5th, 8th, and 11th
grade. This sampling method allowed the researcher to examine the three grade levels,
thus allowing for a direct comparison of the problem solving and critical skill
development of these students. Since this is a longitudinal study, the same students’
development was examined over the three grade levels.
The 5th-, 8th-, and 11th-grade reading and math mean raw scores for the given
samples are indicated in Figure 1. Series 1 is representative of the Noninstrumental group
and Series 2 is representative of the Instrumental group. As show in Figure 1, the
Noninstrumental sample remains consistently below the Instrumental music sample in
both the reading and math categories in all three grade levels. The math raw scores are
higher than that of reading in both samples in all three measured grade levels.
62
Figure 1. Mean raw scores of both samples (5th, 8th, and 11th).
Figure 2 represents the percentage of total correct scores for reading and Figure 3
represents percentage total correct scores for reading with both samples being measured
at all three grade levels. When evaluating the percentage correct, both samples indicated
higher reading scores than math in all three years with the Instrumental music sample
consistently achieving a higher percentage correct. The highest scores for both samples
were achieved in 8th grade with the Noninstrumental sample scoring a 79.89% correct in
reading and 68.48% correct in math while the Instrumental sample scored an 86.85% in
reading and 81.70% in math.
Research Questions
The main research question examined the relationship between instrumental
music education instruction in Grades 8 and 11 and critical thinking skills on the PSSA
assessment (sections RB, C.1, D.2 and E.1).
63
Figure 2. Percentage of correct reading answers (5th, 8th, and 11th).
Figure 3. Percentage of correct math answers (8th and 11th).
Interpretation of Descriptives
The (NI) is representative of the Noninstrumental sample while the (I) is
representative of the Instrumental sample. N = 50 in each group and is comprised of
students from two graduated high school classes.
64
Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations (8th Grade)
Subsection
M
SD
R8.B
Noninstrumental
Instrumental
17.24
19.16
3.952
2.965
M8.C.1—Geometry
Noninstrumental
Instrumental
4.02
4.56
1.813
1.728
M8.D.2—Algebra
Noninstrumental
Instrumental
7.14
8.98
2.634
1.348
M8.E.1—Data Analysis Noninstrumental
Instrumental
2.98
3.28
.845
.757
R8.B—8th-grade reading. The means of both the Noninstrumental (M = 17.24)
and Instrumental sample (M = 19.16) indicated that not only is the score of the
Instrumental sample higher but there is less of an SD = 2.965 when compared to the
Noninstrumental sample (SD = 3.952). This is reinforced when the minimum and
maximum scores are taken into account of both samples indicating that the scores for the
Instrumental sample are more tightly grouped than that of the Noninstrumental sample.
The tighter grouping of scores demonstrates that the Instrumental sample is scoring
collectively higher than that of the Noninstrumental sample.
M.8.C.1. 8th-grade mathematics C.1: geometry. The 8th-grade Mathematics
C.1 descriptives indicate a difference between Noninstrumental and Instrumental means
of .54 and the SD = 1.813, 1.728, respectively. This limited variance could be due to the
small number of questions assessed.
65
M.8.D.2. 8th-grade mathematics D.2 Algebraic concepts. The differences
between the mean of the Noninstrumental group (M = 7.14) and the Instrumental group
(M = 8.98) and standard deviation indicates a closer scoring of the Instrumental sample
than that of the Noninstrumental sample.
M.8.E.1. 8th-grade mathematics E.1 Data analysis and probability. As
indicated with the previous tests, the difference between the means of the
Noninstrumental group and Instrumental group remains significant with the
Noninstrumental sample scoring M = 2.98 and the Instrumental sample scoring M = 3.28.
In Levene’s test of homogeneity of variances, the null hypothesis is that the
variances between groups are relatively equal. Since, as indicated in Table 2, the sig.
value is p > .05. Here, all of the variances are more than the significance, which is p <.05,
the assumption of equal variances appears. Therefore, in the cases of R8.B, M8.C.1 and
M8.E.1, equal variances can be assumed and in the case of M8.D.2 equal variances
cannot be assumed. The subsets that were examined included Reading (B): Interpretation
and Analysis of Fictional and Nonfictional Text, which assesses the academic standards
1.1 Learning to read independently, 1.2 Reading critically in all content areas and 1.3
Reading, analyzing and interpreting literature (PADOE, 2009–2010). In mathematics,
those examined section were C.1: Geometry—Analyze characteristics of two and three
dimensional shapes, D.2 Algebraic concepts—Analyze mathematical situations using
numbers, symbols, words, tables and/or graphs and E.1 Data analysis and probability—
Interpret and analyze data by formulating answers or questions.
66
Table 2. Test of Homogeneity of
Variances (8th Grade)
Subsection Levene statistic
R8.B
p
3.195
.077
M8.C.1
.018
.894
M8.D.2
20.083
.000
M8.E.1
.017
.895
One-Way ANOVA Results
The statistical analysis that was to compare these sections was a one-way
ANOVA. Howell (2008) defined an ANOVA as a statistical technique for testing for
differences between the means of several groups. Because of the examination of only one
independent variable, the one-way ANOVA was used to analyze the statistical difference
between the means of the 8th-grade Instrumental and Noninstrumental groups and then
the 11th-grade Instrumental and Noninstrumental groups.
The data in Table 3 represent the results of the one-way ANOVA, which was used
to examine the means between the two 8th-grade samples.
Reading: R8.B: 8th grade. The ANOVA in Table 3 indicates the Mean Square
Between (MSB) as 92.160 and the Mean Square Within (MSW) groups as 1195.840.
When the MSB is divided by the MSW, the result is the F(1, 98) = 7.553, which has a p =
.007. Because the F > 1, the null hypothesis can be rejected and the independent variable
does have an effect on the dependent variable. The degrees of freedom (1) is determined
67
by the formula of N (total number of observations) – 1 and indicates the number of
degrees between the two sources of variations (Howell, 2008). In the case of Reading
(8th-grade section B), there is enough of difference between the two groups to indicate
that the Instrumental group has outperformed the Noninstrumental group in 8th grade in
terms of the 8th-grade reading assessment.
Table 3. Between-Subjects ANOVA (8th Grade)
Subsection
df
MS
F
p
R8.B
1
92.160
7.553
.007
M8.C.1
1
7.290
2.325
.131
M8.D.2
1
84.640
19.335
.000
M8.E.1
1
2.250
3.497
.064
Mathematics: M.8.C.1. This section of geometry assesses the ability to analyze
characteristics of two and three dimensional shapes. The ANOVA indicates the MSB as
7.290 and the MSW groups as 307.300. The result is the F(1, 98) = 2.325 p =.131. The F
> 1; however, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected because p is > .05.
Mathematics: M.8.D.2. The third test used the one-way ANOVA to examine the
8th-grade Mathematics section D.2 Algebraic concepts—Analyze mathematical
situations using numbers, symbols, words, tables and/or graphs. The F(1,98) = 19.335, p
= .000 indicating that there is a large difference in the scores between these two samples,
68
This indicates that there is a strong difference between these two groups in their ability to
analyze mathematical situations.
Mathematics: M.8.E.1. The last section examined as part of this test segment
was the 8th-grade Mathematics section E.1 Data analysis and probability—Interpret and
analyze data by formulating answers or questions. As indicated with the previous tests,
the difference between the means of the Noninstrumental group and Instrumental group
remains significant with the F(1, 98) = 3.497, p = .064. Even though the null hypothesis
cannot be rejected in this subsection, the F statistic and significance warrants further
investigation.
The results of the one-way ANOVA indicated that the students in the Instrumental
group outperformed those in the Noninstrumental group in both Reading B and M.D.2.
However, subsections M.C.1 and M.E.1 have proven not to be statistically different.
After 3 years of musical instruction from 5th to 8th grade, the differences in Reading B
and Mathematics M.D.2 subsections that analyze critical thinking are readily apparent.
Interpretation of Descriptives (11th Grade)
Table 4 is representative of the 11th-grade sample, which is the same sample as
used in the 8th-grade one-way ANOVA.
R.11.B. The descriptives indicate a higher mean (M = –20.98) in the Instrumental
sample than in the Noninstrumental sample (M = 17.30). In the Instrumental sample, the
minimum score of 12 and maximum of 33 display higher values than that of the
Noninstrumental sample, which is represented with a minimum score of 5 and a
maximum of 28. This indicates that the both the lower scoring and higher scoring
69
students of the Instrumental sample are outscoring those students of the Noninstrumental
sample.
Table 4. Descriptives (11th Grade)
Subsection
M
SD
Min.
Max.
Noninstrumental
Instrumental
17.30
20.98
5.956
5.427
5
12
28
33
M11.C.1 Noninstrumental
Instrumental
4.84
5.90
1.910
1.644
1
2
9
9
M11.D.2 Noninstrumental
Instrumental
8.76
11.04
2.952
2.321
3
5
14
14
M11.E.1 Noninstrumental
Instrumental
1.36
1.70
.631
.505
0
0
2
2
R11.B
M11.C.1. The second test examined was the 11th-grade mathematics section C.1.
The means indicate a difference of 1.06 between the Noninstrumental and Instrumental
sample. The maximum score in this test is that of 9 and the minimum that was scored was
a 1.
M11.D.2. The third section examined was the 11th-grade mathematics section
D.2. The means display a significant difference of M = 8.76 for the Noninstrumental
sample and M = 11.04 for the Instrumental sample. In this section, both samples indicated
a maximum score of 14.
70
M.11.E.1. The last section examined was the 11th-grade mathematics section E.1.
This section demonstrates a small variance between the means; however, there were only
two questions in this section representing a minimum of zero and a maximum of two.
The descriptives are very similar to that of the 8th grade in that the minimum
scores of the Instrumental sample remained consistently higher than those of the
Noninstrumental sample, with the maximum scores either remaining the same or higher
in the Reading category for the Instrumental grouping.
Table 5. Test of Homogeneity of
Variances (11th Grade)
Subsection Levene statistic
p
R11.B
0.517
0.474
M11.C.1
2.244
0.137
M11.D.2
3.958
0.049
M11.E.1
6.175
0.015
The Levene statistic indicates that neither R11.B nor M11.C.1 rejects the null
hypothesis. In this case, the means did not differ enough in order to reject the null
hypothesis. However, when the Brown–Forsythe and the Welch test (Table 6) was also
run, the null hypothesis could rejected in all cases. The Brown–Forsythe test utilizes the
median rather than the mean of the sample, and the differences between the two samples
71
can be compared, accounting for variances between the groups adding an additional
measure of assurance for the rejection of the null hypothesis.
Table 6. Robust Tests of Equality of Means
(11th Grade)
Subsection
F
p
R11.B
Welch
Brown–Forsythe
10.429
10.429
.002
.002
M11.C.1
Welch
Brown–Forsythe
8.845
8.845
.004
.004
M11.D.2
Welch
Brown–Forsythe
18.430
18.430
.000
.000
M11.E.1
Welch
Brown–Forsythe
8.845
8.845
.004
.004
Figure 4 lists the percentages of the subset questions that each sample answered
correctly. The difference between the two samples, with the Instrumental sample
remaining the highest, maintains an average of 9.8% in 8th grade and 14.05% in 11th
grade. This indicates that not only did the Instrumental music sample outscore the
Noninstrumental in both 8th and 11th grades, but they also increased that score by 11th
grade.
72
Figure 4. Percentage of correct answers for both samples (5th, 8th, and 11th).
One-Way ANOVA Results
The data in Table 7 represent the results of the one-way ANOVA, which was
utilized to test the means between the two 11th-grade samples when there is only one
independent variable.
Reading: R11.B: 11th grade. The ANOVA in Table 7 indicates the MSB =
338.560 and the MSW = 3181.480. When the MSB is divided by the MSW, the result is
the F(1, 98) = 10.429, p = .002, which indicates a statistically significant difference
between the two groups for the reading subsection.
73
Table 7. Between-Groups ANOVA (11th Grade)
Subsection
SS
df
MS
F
p
338.560
1
338.560
10.429
.002
M11.C.1
28.090
1
28.090
8.845
.004
M11.D.2
129.960
1
129.960
18.430
.000
M11.E.1
2.890
1
2.890
8.845
.004
R11.B
Mathematics: M.11.C.1. This section of geometry assesses the ability to analyze
characteristics of two and three dimensional shapes. The ANOVA indicates the MSB =
28.090 and the MSW = 311.220. The result is the F(1, 98) = 8.845, p = .004. This test
also indicates a significant difference between the Instrumental and Noninstrumental
sample, which demonstrates that the students who participated in Instrumental music
strongly outperformed those students in the Noninstrumental group. This is significant,
because this was one of the two subsets, whereas in 8th grade the null hypothesis could
not be rejected and displayed a nonsignificant difference.
Mathematics: M.11.D.2. The 11th-grade Mathematics section D.2 is used to
assess algebraic concepts and analyze mathematical situations using numbers, symbols,
words, tables and/or graphs. The F(1, 98) = 18.430, p = .000, indicating that there is a
large difference in the scores between these two samples.
Mathematics: M.11.E.1. The last section examined as part of this test segment
was the 11th-grade Mathematics E.1 assess data analysis and probability by being able to
74
interpret and analyze data by formulating answers or questions. As indicated with the
previous tests, the difference between the means of the Noninstrumental group and
Instrumental group remains significant with the F(1, 98) = 8.845, p = .004. This rejects
the null hypothesis that could not be done in the 8th-grade test making this an area of
improvement for the 11th-grade Instrumental music students. Statistically, this means that
the performance of the Instrumental group has increased from 8th grade to 11th grade
validating that the students are experiencing the effects of the prolonged exposure to
instrumental music education.
The results of the one-way ANOVA indicate significant increases in the three
subsections of Reading (RB), Mathematics (C.1) and Mathematics (E.1). In subsection
Mathematics (D.2), there was a significant difference indicated between the two groups
in both 8th grade and again in 11th grade. However, the F(1, 98) = 19.335 for 8th grade
and F(1, 98) = 18.430 for 11th grade, which indicates a slight decrease in the F value.
The relationship between instrumental music education and critical thinking skills as
assessed by the PSSA subsections (RB, MC1, MD2 and ME1) was shown to be
significant in R8B and M8D2 and then again in all four subsections in 11th grade. Of
note is that in 3 out of the 4 subsections analyzed, the Instrumental music sample
displayed significant increases over that of the Noninstrumental music sample when
comparing 8th to 11th grade.
Research Question 1
How does the number of years (8th and 11th) that a student is involved in music
education provide any statistical difference in the development of critical thinking skills
as assessed by the PSSA (cumulative score per grade level)?
75
The means of all four subset scores for 8th grade have been combined in Table 8
and the result indicates that the totals for the Noninstrumental group (M = 31.38) and the
Instrumental (M = 35.98) demonstrate a variance of 4.6.
Table 8. Group Means and Standard
Deviations (8th Grade; N = 50)
Group
M
SD
Noninstrumental
31.38
7.453
Instrumental
35.98
4.922
As represented in Table 9, the Levene’s test for equality of variances (p = .005)
demonstrates that the two samples do differ significantly from each other. Therefore,
equal variances cannot be assumed, and the groups, while equal in sample size are
statistically different from one another.
Table 9. Independent-Samples t Test for Means of Samples (8th Grade)
Levene’s test
Equal
variances not
assumed
F
p
8.080
.005
95%
confidence
interval
t test
t
df
p
MD
SE
–3.642 84.909 .000 –4.600 1.263
76
Lower Upper
–7.111 –2.089
An independent-samples t test (Table 10) was used to compare the sum of means
of the individual subset scores (RB, MC1, MD2, ME1) for the 8th- and 11th-grade
sample populations. The means from all four subset scores were added and then
compared between samples.
Table 10. Means and Standard
Deviations (11th Grade; N = 50)
Group
M
SD
Noninstrumental
32.26
9.998
Instrumental
39.62
8.408
An independent-samples t test was used statistically to assess whether or not two
groups are different from each by the comparison of means. In this scenario, the means of
both the Instrumental and Noninstrumental group are compared. The t statistic, as listed
in Table 9, when equal variances are not assumed, is t(84.90) = –3.642, with the twotailed test at p = .000 and the mean difference of –4.600. The t statistic is calculated by
taking the sample Noninstrumental mean (M = 31.38) minus the sample Instrumental
mean (M = 35.98) divided by the standard error difference (1.263). The result of t(84.90)
= –3.642 determines that the difference between the sample mean and the hypothesized
mean is statistically significant. In this scenario, both the lower and upper confidence
levels indicate the same values. The confidence interval level between two means in this
independent-samples t test is based on the 95% level, but it can also be used to represent
77
other values such as 90 or 99%. The lower level limit is a (CI = –7.111) and the upper
level limit is (CI = –2.089), which indicates a relatively small value range. The small
confidence level is indicative of the relatively small difference between the means of the
sample. In this test, the samples provide a point of comparison to the 11th-grade means t
test, therefore allowing for the differences between the samples to be analyzed and
providing data for group comparison.
The independent-samples t test was used again to analyze the total of the means of
the subset scores of the 11th-grade students. As indicated in Table 10, the
Noninstrumental group M = 32.26 and the Instrumental group M = 39.62, with the
variance of 7.36 between the two samples.
In Table 11 the Levene’s test for the equality of variances indicated a
nonsignificance of p = .166, which is > .05. The null is not rejected, meaning that equal
variances can be assumed, and therefore, assumption has been met, which could not be
done in the 8th-grade sample.
Table 11. Independent-Samples t Test for Means of Samples (11th Grade)
Levene’s test
Equal
variances
assumed
95% confidence
interval
t test
F
p
t
df
p
MD
SE
1.948
.166
–3.984
98
.000
–7.360
1.847
78
Lower
Upper
–11.026 –3.694
The confidence level lower is (CI = –11.027) and the upper level is (CI = –.3693),
which is larger than that of the 8th-grade sample. The results indicated that t(98) = –
3.984, p = .000, which means that the two samples are statistically different. The
Instrumental music sample indicates a higher mean than that of the Noninstrumental
music sample, with the difference increasing from 4.6 in 8th grade to 7.36 in 11th grade.
Therefore, in terms of the research question, the students who were exposed to an
additional 3 years of instrumental music education showed an increase of cumulative
scores on the PSSA assessment in 11th grade.
Research Question 2
How do the Instrumental music students’ mean scores on sections (RB, C.1, D.2
and E.1) of the PSSA assessment compare to Noninstrumental music students from 8th to
11th grade?
The correlation coefficient was utilized to examine the variance between 8th and
11th-grade levels for both samples. Because of the utilization of only one independent
variable, the repeated-measures ANOVA was used to analyze the statistical difference
between the means of the groups (Howell, 2008).
In Table 12, the cumulative subset score means (RB, MC1, MD2 and ME1) of
Noninstrumental and Instrumental groups are displayed in the descriptive statistics,
indicating the variance between the two groups as well as the increase in variance from
8th grade (4.6) and 11th grade (7.36). In Figure 5, both samples that estimated marginal
means are represented in 8th grade and then again in 11th grade, displaying the increase
for the Instrumental music sample. This result indicates that the three additional years of
79
instrumental music education related to the increasing mean cumulative score on the
analyzed subsections of the PSSA assessment.
Table 12. Means and Standard Deviations for
Combined Samples
Grade
Group
M
SD
Noninstrumental
Instrumental
31.38
35.98
7.453
4.922
Combined 11 Noninstrumental
32.26
9.998
39.62
8.408
Combined 8
Instrumental
Figure 5. Means of both samples (8th to 11th grade).
80
Sphericity refers to the equality of variances between different levels in a
repeated-measures ANOVA. In Table 13, the measurements such as the Greenhouse–
Geisser, Huynh–Feldt and lower bound assist in the corrections of the sphericity
measurement (Howell, 2008). Since the significance level on all four tests is > .05, the
null hypothesis can be rejected. Therefore, sphericity remains intact, and assumption is
met.
Table 13. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of Within-Subjects Effects
Source
Groups
df
MS
F
p
np2
Sphericity assumed
1
255.380
15.369
.000
.136
Greenhouse–Geisser
1
255.380
15.369
.000
.136
Huynh–Feldt
1
255.380
15.369
.000
.136
98
16.616
Error (Groups) Sphericity assumed
In Table 14, the tests of within-subjects contrasts display an F(1, 98) = 5.731, p =
.019 and a np2 = .055, displaying that there is a strong difference between the two sample
means. In Table 15, the combined 8th-grade score indicated a p = .005, whereas equal
variances cannot be assumed. However, in the combined 11th-grade score, equal
variances can be assumed and the assumption has been met.
81
Table 14. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of WithinSubjects Contrasts
Source
Groups
1
Error (Groups)
F
p
np 2
5.731
.019
.136
df
98
(16.616)
Table 15. Levene’s Test of Equality
of Error Variances (Combined)
Grade
F
df
p
Combined 8
8.080
1
.005
Combined 11
1.948
1
.166
In Table 16, the tests of between-subjects effects indicated the F(1, 98) = 16.466,
p = .000. Therefore, there was a significant different between the two groups, which
indicates a significant statistical difference between the two samples. The difference is
further displayed in Figures 6 and 7, where the grouping of the sample for the
Instrumental music indicates both higher scores and higher frequencies for the combined
scores in 8th and 11th grades when the Instrumental sample is compared to the
Noninstrumental sample.
82
Table 16. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Between Subjects (Group
Cumulative Means)
df
Group
1
Error
98
a
F
p
np2
Observed powera
16.466
.000
.144
.980
(108.589)
Computed using alpha = .05
Repeated-measures ANOVA. The results of this repeated-measures ANOVA
(Table 16) indicate that the Instrumental sample has showed statistical increases over that
of the Noninstrumental sample when the means of sections (RB, MC1, MD2, and ME1)
are added and compared. The results of this test indicate that the students who
participated in instrumental music education are likely to have increased test scores on
the PSSA when compared to students who did not participate in instrumental music
education.
Research Question 3
Utilizing the means of the individual PSSA scoring (sections RB, C.1, D.2, and
E.1), what is the relationship between the following:
•
Instrumental group scores versus Noninstrumental group scores from 8th–11th
grades
The skewness of the Instrumental sample, as represented in Table 17, displays a
shift from .396 in 8th grade to –.026 in 11th grade. This indicates a shift in the scores of
the sample size when the mean and median remain the same. The Noninstrumental
83
sample indicates a skewness in the 8th grade of .110 and 11th grade .167, which is
indicative of the distribution shifting to the right of being asymmetrical. The negative
kurtosis, which indicates a smaller peak around the mean, decreases in both samples.
However, the decrease is greater in that of the Instrumental sample from –.446 to –1.187
when compared to that of the Noninstrumental sample –.757 to –1.109. These
descriptives indicate a shift in the paradigm from 8th to 11th grade in displaying higher
overall results in the Instrumental group scores.
Table 17. Skewness and Kurtosis of 8th and 11th
Grades (N = 50)
Group
Skewness
Kurtosis
Noninstrumental
8th
11th
0.11
0.167
–0.757
–1.109
Instrumental
8th
11th
0.396
–0.026
–0.446
–1.187
The descriptive statistics in Table 18 indicate that the Noninstrumental sample has
a M = 17.24 for Reading B (8th grade) and the Instrumental sample has a M = 19.16. For
11th grade, Noninstrumental sample displays a score of M = 17.30 and the Instrumental
sample M = 20.98. Levene’s test is a test for assumption of equality of variances. This
indicates that the p = .077 in 8th grade and then p = .474 in 11th grade indicating that the
null hypothesis cannot be rejected. Therefore, variances are equal and assumption is met.
84
Table 18. Means and Standard Deviations (Reading)
Group
M
SD
RB8
Noninstrumental
Instrumental
17.24
19.16
3.952
2.965
RB11
Noninstrumental
17.30
5.956
Instrumental
20.98
5.427
Table 19. Levene’s Test of
Equality of Error Variances
(Reading)
Group
F
p
RB8
3.195
.077
RB11
.517
.474
Interpretation of the repeated-measures ANOVA (Table 20) for the Reading B
assessment indicates that there is a significant difference between the two variances from
8th to 11th grade from the Noninstrumental sample to the Instrumental sample. The tests
of between-subjects effects indicates F(1, 98) = 10.885, p = .001 and the np2 = .100.
This information is further supported in Table 21 of the Reading B means, which
displays the difference between the two sample groups. The percentage of variance from
8th–11th grade for the Noninstrumental sample is (–13.89) and for the Instrumental
sample is (–10.11). While the mean has increased for both samples, this is a direct result
85
of the increase in the number of questions assessed from a total of 26 (8th grade) to 33
(11th grade). The Instrumental sample decreased less from 73.69% to 63.58%, in
percentage correct from 8th grade to 11th grade, than the Noninstrumental sample from
66.31 to 52.42.
Table 20. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of Between-Subjects Reading
df
Group
1
Error
98
a
F
p
np2
Observed powera
10.885
.001
.100
.904
(36.012)
Computed using alpha = .05
Table 21. Means, Percentage Correct, and Maximum
Score (Reading)
Reading
M
% correct
Max. score
Noninstrumental
8th grade
11th grade
17.24
17.3
66.31
52.42
26
33
Instrumental
8th grade
11th grade
19.16
20.98
73.69
63.58
26
33
The second repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted on Math section C.1. The
descriptive statistics, in Table 22, indicate an increased mean for both groups from 8th
86
grade to 11th grade, with the Instrumental sample displaying a larger increase of 1.06
compared to that of the Noninstrumental sample of .54. This is a statistically strong
indicator that the Instrumental sample out performed the Noninstrumental sample.
Table 22. Means and Standard Deviations
(M.C.1)
Group
M
SD
Noninstrumental
Instrumental
4.02
4.56
1.813
1.728
MC.1.11 Noninstrumental
4.84
1.910
5.90
1.644
MC.1.8
Instrumental
Levene’s test of equality, Table 23, does not reject the null hypothesis in that the
p > .05, meaning that equal variances can be assumed However, it does indicate a
significant difference between the two testing years from p = .894 (8th grade) to p = .137
(11th grade). Levene’s test utilizes the mean and because of the limited number of
questions, the difference between the standard deviations are limited and have not met
assumption. However, the statistical differences noted are still worthy of examining due
to the differences in significance between the 8th- and 11th-grade samples.
Because of the small number of questions in this category, the percentage of
questions correct (Table 24) becomes an area of clarity in that the difference between the
samples demonstrates a decrease in the Noninstrumental sample of 3.65% to an increase
in the Instrumental sample of .42%. While the Noninstrumental sample decreased, the
87
Instrumental sample increased in percentage of questions correct. In Table 25, the tests of
between-subjects effects indicates F(1, 98) = 6.627, p =.012 and np2 = .063 with an
observed power of .722. These results indicate that there is a limited statistically
significant difference between the two samples.
Table 23. Levene’s Test of
Equality of Error Variances
(M.C.1)
Group
F
P
MC.1.8
.018
.894
MC.1.11
2.244
.137
Table 24. Means and Percentage Correct (M.C.1)
M.C.1
M
% correct
Noninstrumental
8th grade
11th grade
4.02
4.84
57.43
53.78
Instrumental
8th grade
11th grade
4.56
5.9
65.14
65.56
Max. score
88
Table 25. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Test of Between-Subjects M.C.1
df
Group
1
Error
98
a
F
p
np2
Observed powera
6.627
.012
.063
.722
(4.829)
Computed using alpha = .05
The third section examined was the Mathematics section D.2. The descriptive
statistics in Table 26 indicate that the standard deviation increased in both samples.
However, this increase is most evident in the Instrumental sample when comparing the
8th grade (1.348) to the 11th grade (2.321). The standard deviation indicates that the
relative number correct in each sample is now statistically closer grouped when
comparing 8th- to 11th-grade samples. This could indicate that the difference between the
groups has narrowed between the two samples.
Table 26. Means and Standard Deviations
(M.D.2)
Group
M
SD
Noninstrumental
Instrumental
7.14
8.98
2.634
1.348
MD.2.11 Noninstrumental
8.76
2.952
11.04
2.321
MD.2.8
Instrumental
89
The tests of within-subjects contrasts, in Table 27, indicate the F(1, 98) = .940, p
= .335, showing no statistically significant difference within the two samples. There is a
statistical difference between the means of the two samples; however, there is not a
significant difference between the variance of the two samples.
Table 27. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of Within-Subjects Contrasts
(M.D.2)
df
Group
1
Error
98
a
F
p
np2
Observed powera
.940
.335
.010
.160
(2.574)
Computed using alpha = .05
The tests of between-subjects effects, in Table 28, indicate F(1, 98) = 23.963, p =
.000, np2 = .196, which demonstrates that there is a strong difference between the two
groups.
Table 28. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of Between-Subjects M.D.2
df
Group
1
Error
98
a
F
p
np2
Observed powera
23.963
.000
.196
.998
(8.854)
Computed using alpha = .05
90
As indicated in Table 29, the numerical difference between the two samples
increased when comparing 8th to 11th grade, which is primarily because of the increased
maximum score from 11 to 14, in 8th and 11th grade, respectively. This demonstrates
that the even though the Instrumental sample outperformed the Noninstrumental sample
in this category, there was no statistical difference between the samples.
Table 29. Means, Percentage Correct, and Maximum
Score (M.D.2)
M.D.2
Noninstrumental
8th grade
11th grade
Instrumental
8th grade
11th grade
% correct
Max. score
7.14
8.76
64.91
62.57
11
14
8.98
11.04
81.64
78.86
11
14
M
The Mathematics section E.1 (Table 30) deals with data analysis and probability,
and in the last section, that was examined using the repeated-measures ANOVA. The
standard deviation, as listed in Table 30, is of interest in this test because of the variance
between both samples. The Noninstrumental sample demonstrates a decrease from SD =
.845 to SD = .631, which is a difference of .214. The Instrumental sample demonstrates a
decrease from SD = .757 to SD = .505, which is a difference of .250. Because of the small
number of questions in each section 8th and 11th, 4 and 2, respectively, this is a
91
significant difference, indicating that there is a strong increase in the Instrumental sample
from 8th grade to 11th grade.
Table 30. Means and Standard Deviations
(M.E.1)
Group
M
SD
Noninstrumental
Instrumental
2.98
3.28
.845
.757
ME.1.11 Noninstrumental
1.36
.631
1.70
.505
ME.1.8
Instrumental
In Table 31, Levene’s test of equality of error variances indicates that equal
variances can be assumed for 8th grade; however, it cannot for 11th grade. This is also
reflected by the smaller standard deviation in the 8th-grade sample when compared to the
11th grade. Therefore, for 8th grade the assumptions are met, but they are not met for
11th grade. This could be a result of the small number of questions that were asked as
part of the assessment.
In Table 32, the test between subjects has an F(1, 98) = 9.819, p = .002, np2 = .091
indicating a statistically significant difference between the variances of the two groups.
The differences in the percentage correct between the two samples indicate a decrease in
the Noninstrumental sample from 74.5% to 68%, which is a decrease of 6.5% and the
Instrumental sample indicates an increase from 82% to 85%, which is an increase of 3%.
This indicates that as the Noninstrumental music sample decreased from M8.E.1 to
92
M11.E1, the Instrumental music sample increased its average score, indicating a
numerical shift in the sample populations.
Table 31. Levene’s Test of
Equality of Error Variances
(M.E.1)
Group
F
P
ME.1.8
.017
.895
ME.1.11
6.175
.015
Table 32. Repeated-Measures ANOVA Tests of Between-Subjects M.E.1
df
Group
1
Error
98
a
F
p
np2
Observed powera
9.819
.002
.091
.873
(.521)
Computed using alpha = .05
The last research question set out to examine the relationship between the 8th – to
11th-grade Noninstrumental and Instrumental sample. All of the repeated-measures
ANOVA indicated that the Instrumental sample displayed statistically significant
differences in all four areas, with strongest subsections being M.D.2 and Reading B.
93
Conclusion
The main research question examined the relationship between instrumental
music education instruction in Grades 8–11 and critical thinking skills on the PSSA
assessment (sections RB, C.1, D.2 and E.1). The subsets that were examined included
Reading (B): Interpretation and Analysis of Fictional and Nonfictional Text, which
assesses the academic standards 1.1 Learning to read independently, 1.2 Reading
critically in all content areas and 1.3 Reading, analyzing and interpreting literature
(PADOE, 2009–2010). In mathematics, sections C.1: Geometry—Analyze characteristics
of two and three dimensional shapes, D.2 Algebraic concepts—Analyze mathematical
situations using numbers, symbols, words, tables and/or graphs and E.1 Data analysis and
probability—Interpret and analyze data by formulating answers or questions.
While the Noninstrumental sample scores were always lower than that of the
Instrumental sample, the results of the one-way ANOVA indicated significant differences
in the 8th-grade subsections of Reading B and M.D.2. The null hypothesis could not be
rejected in M8.C.1 as well as M8.E.1. However, in 11th grade, the results of the one-way
ANOVA rejected the null hypothesis in all four subsections and a significant increases
were noted in subsections MC.1 in 8th grade F(1, 98) = 2.325 to 11th grade F(1, 98) =
8.845 and M.E.1 in 8th grade F(1, 98) = 3.497 to 11th grade F(1, 98) = 8.845.
Research Question 1
How do the number of years (8th and 11th) that a student is involved in music
education provide any statistical difference in the development of critical thinking skills
as assessed by the PSSA (cumulative score per grade level)? The independent-samples t
test indicated a significant difference between samples and between grade levels. In 8th
94
grade, the Noninstrumental sample had a combined M = 31.38 and the Instrumental
sample had a combined M = 35.98, which is a difference of 4.6. In 11th grade, the
Noninstrumental sample had a combined score of M = 32.26 and the Instrumental sample
had a combined score of M = 39.62, which is a difference of 7.36. This increase indicates
that not only did the Instrumental sample out score those in the Noninstrumental sample,
there scores increased over that 3-year period.
Research Question 2
How do the Instrumental music students’ mean scores on sections (RB, C.1, D.2
and E.1) of the PSSA assessment compare to Noninstrumental music students’ mean
scores from 8th to 11th grade? The Noninstrumental sample demonstrated an increase
from 31.38 in 8th grade to 32.26 in 11th grade, which is an increase of .88. The
Instrumental sample demonstrated an increase from 35.98 in 8th grade to 39.62 in 11th
grade, which is an increase of 3.64. The results of the repeated-measures ANOVA
enforced the analysis of the descriptive statistics in that the tests of between-subjects
effects the F(1, 98) = 16.466, p = .000, with an observed power of .980 with p = .05. The
Instrumental sample increased its score at four times the rate of the Noninstrumental
sample indicating a significant ability to comprehend the material being assessed and this
ability increased from 8th grade to 11th grade.
Research Question 3
Utilizing the means of the individual PSSA scoring (sections RB, C.1, D.2, and
E.1), what is the relationship between the following:
•
Instrumental group scores versus Noninstrumental group scores from 8th–11th
grades
95
The subsets that were examined included Reading (B): Interpretation and
Analysis of Fictional and Nonfictional Text, which assesses the academic standards 1.1
Learning to read independently, 1.2 Reading critically in all content areas and 1.3
Reading, analyzing and interpreting literature (PADOE, 2009–2010). In mathematics, it
assesses sections C.1: Geometry—Analyze characteristics of two and three dimensional
shapes, D.2 Algebraic concepts—Analyze mathematical situations using numbers,
symbols, words, tables and/or graphs and E.1 Data analysis and probability—Interpret
and analyze data by formulating answers or questions.
The repeated-measures ANOVA indicated that variances in the subsections RB,
MC.1 and ME.1 were significant with the last two demonstrating increases in both MC.1
and ME.1. There was a variance in percentage of M.D.2 in the Noninstrumental sample
of 2.78 compared to the Instrumental sample at 2.34. Even though the Instrumental
sample percentage and mean scores were higher, the variance was not significant
between the two samples. Therefore, the Instrumental music students demonstrated
increases in Reading (RB) and Math scores (MC.1 and ME.1), utilizing the
characteristics of two and three dimensional shapes as well and interpreting and
analyzing data when compared to the Noninstrumental sample over the course of 8th to
11th grade.
The Instrumental music sample consistently outscored the Noninstrumental music
sample when comparing the Reading B, Mathematics M.C.1. and M.E.1 subsections of
the PSSA assessment. The only section that did not display a significant statistical
difference was M.D.2, which assesses the students’ ability to analyze mathematical
situations using numbers, symbols, words, tables, and/or figures.
96
CHAPTER 5. RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
This study sought to identify whether or not there is a relationship between
critical thinking skills and instrumental music education as measured by the PSSA in
Grades 8–11. The research examined the results of specific subsections of the reading and
math PSSA assessment, which were selected based on their incorporation of critical
thinking assessments. The subsets that were examined included Reading (B):
Interpretation and Analysis of Fictional and Nonfictional Text, which assesses the
academic standards 1.1 Learning to read independently, 1.2 Reading critically in all
content areas and 1.3 Reading, analyzing and interpreting literature (PADOE, 2009–
2010). It also included Mathematics sections C.1: Geometry—Analyze characteristics of
two and three dimensional shapes, D.2 Algebraic concepts—Analyze mathematical
situations using numbers, symbols, words, tables and/or graphs and E.1 Data analysis and
probability—Interpret and analyze data by formulating answers or questions.
The goal of this study was to explore the possible relationship between
instrumental music education and critical thinking as assessed by the PSSA. In
instrumental music, the student is the center of an active learning paradigm, meaning that
the student is expected to actively participate and engage critical thinking sills. In this
particular school system, the Instrumental student sample had begun instrumental lessons
97
in the 5th grade with participation continuing through 11th grade. The sample was
assessed in 8th grade and again in 11th grade.
Summary of the Results
The main research question examined the relationship between instrumental
music education instruction in Grades 8 and 11 and critical thinking skills on the PSSA
assessment (sections RB, C.1, D.2 and E.1)? While the Noninstrumental sample scores
were always lower than that of Instrumental sample, significant statistical differences
were noted in the 8th-grade subsections of Reading B and M.D.2. Reading (B):
Interpretation and Analysis of Fictional and Nonfictional Text, which assesses the
academic standards 1.1 Learning to read independently, 1.2 Reading critically in all
content areas and 1.3 Reading, analyzing and interpreting literature and Mathematics
D.2., and the Algebraic concepts—Analyze mathematical situations using numbers,
symbols, words, tables and/or graphs. The one-way ANOVA, 8th grade, subsections
Reading B. and M.D.2 indicated a significant difference between the Instrumental sample
and Noninstrumental sample. In 11th grade, the remaining two subsections that had not
shown a significant statistical difference in 8th grade now displayed significant
differences in 11th grade, and these were Mathematics C.1: Geometry—Analyze
characteristics of two and three dimensional shapes and Mathematics E.1 Data analysis
and probability—Interpret and analyze data by formulating answers or questions.
This increase in scoring between the Noninstrumental and Instrumental sample,
from 8th to 11th grade, correlates with the research at Whitworth University. Strauch
(2009) conducted a study that indicates college freshmen, who have taken band in high
98
school, not only have higher GPAs while coming in to college, but they maintain those
higher averages throughout their college career. Strauch examined the 537 students of the
2007–2008 incoming freshman class at Whitworth University, of which 103 (19.2%) had
played in band through high school. The students who participated in band, at the high
school level, not only had a higher GPA coming into college but also higher SAT scores
on both the verbal and math portions of the test (Olson, 2009). The results of the research
question posed by this study indicated that not only were students able to maintain their
8th-grade scores in 11th grade, but they were able to outperform their classmates in each of
the four subsections.
Schellenberg (2006) examined 6- to 11-year-old children who each varied in
amount of musical training. The baseline IQ was established by administering the WISC–
III as well as other areas of intellectual functioning such as grades in school and
standardized tests of academic achievement. The sample was comprised of N = 147 (72
boys and 75 girls) ages 6–11 recruited from a middle class suburb of Toronto, Canada.
The predictor variables were measured using a questionnaire that was administered to
parents about their child’s history with private music lessons. The criterion variables
consisted of measures of intelligence, which was assessed using the WISC–III, academic
ability, which was assessed using the K–TEA, and social adjustment, which was
measured using the Parent Rating Scale of BASC. The principal analyses consisted of
correlations between the main predictor variable and criterion variables, which
demonstrated that music lessons were positively correlated with both academic
achievement and IQ, but not social adjustment. The results indicated that the duration of
music lessons had a small but positive correlation to measures of intelligence as
99
measured by academic achievement (Schellenberg, 2006). This current study reinforces
the finding that music can affect intelligence over a period of time, which is directly
associative to the ability of instrumental music education to impact test scores that
quantitatively measure the depth of knowledge (DOK) in specific content areas. In this
study, students were exposed to 3 years of instrumental music education, which includes
both group lessons as well as large group rehearsals.
The differences between the two samples in the Reading B, Mathematics Sections
M.C.1 (Geometry) and M.D.2 (Algebraic Concepts) are of particular interest in this
research question, because they displayed increased differences between the two samples.
The Mathematics sections both deal with symbols. The possibility exists that because
music is an art based in symbols, the students have simply become practiced at their use.
Additionally, students are experiencing increased development in their ability to process
information that is conceptually abstract; therefore, the possibility exists that music can
assist with that formation of the ability to process abstract information. In addition, C.1
analyzes the ability of students to interpret differences between two and three
dimensional shapes that could be related to the active learning process and the compare
and contrast methods that are utilized in instrumental music rehearsals.
Research Question 1
How does the number of years (8th and 11th) that a student is involved in music
education provide any statistical difference in the development of critical thinking skills
as assessed by the PSSA (cumulative score per grade level)? The comparison of the sum
of means of the subset scores indicated a difference between samples and between grade
levels. In 8th grade, the difference between the means of the Noninstrumental and the
100
Instrumental sample was 4.6. In 11th grade, the difference between means of The
Noninstrumental sample and The Instrumental sample was significant indicating that the
students who were involved in music education for three additional years outscored their
Noninstrumental music counterparts, which is an indicator that the students in the
Instrumental sample are increasing their cumulative scores at a higher rate than that of the
Noninstrumental sample. The theory that the arts can influence other academic areas was
examined by Moga et al. (2000), who performed a meta-analysis of the relationship
between academic achievement and arts education. Moga et al. reviewed 188 reports and
found three areas where causal links proved to be reliable, one of which was based on 19
reports, demonstrating that there is a large causal relationship between learning to play
music and spatial reasoning. This effect has greater applicability in educational scenarios,
because the effect was reported equally among both general and at risk populations. It
was shown that 69 out of every 100 students who participated in instrumental music
between the ages of 3 and 12 displayed an increase in spatial reasoning skills (Moga et
al., 2000). These findings are related directly to this current study’s findings, whereas the
students’ scores showed an increase in spatial reasoning skills in the subsection M.C.1—
Geometry (two- and three-dimensional shapes). Therefore, after an additional 3 years of
exposure to music education, from 8th to 11th grade, students’ scores indicated rapid
gains in the M.C.1. subsection.
Research Question 2
How do the Instrumental music students’ mean scores on sections (RB, C.1, D.2
and E.1) of the PSSA compare to Noninstrumental music students from 8th to 11th
grade? The Noninstrumental sample demonstrated an increase in 8th grade of .88, and the
101
Instrumental sample demonstrated an increase in 11th grade of 3.64. The combined
means of these subset scores allows for a concise look at the differences between the two
groups. At this juncture in the research, it is evident that the scores have increased;
however, the variance and amount of increase in differences is the keystone to this study.
The results of the repeated measures ANOVA indicated that the Instrumental music
sample scores increased at four times the rate of the Noninstrumental music sample from
8th to 11th grade.
Schellenberg (2006) examined the effects of long term music lessons on
intellectual abilities and, more specifically, if these had lasting effects even after the
music lessons had ended. The participants of this study were undergraduates at a
suburban Canadian university with the range in age being 16–25. More than half had
been taking private music lessons (N = 84) for an average of 7.8 years. The students were
surveyed based on a questionnaire where the students were paid to participate in the 2hour survey. The criterion variables in this study consisted of intelligence and academic
achievement, which was measured using the WAIS–III. An additional subtest, object
assemble was administered to measure spatial–temporal ability (Schellenberg, 2006). The
results indicated that taking music lessons regularly was correlated positively with IQ,
especially in the areas of perceptual organization and working memory. Therefore, if
instrumental music lessons can be correlated positively with perceptual organization and
working memory, students might see an increase in scores of the equivalent Mathematics
and Reading portions of the subsets of the PSSA examination because of the use of
working memory.
102
The Instrumental Music students, at this point in time, could be benefiting from
their original higher PSSA, self-esteem, and direct instruction. Johnson and Memmott
(2006) noted that students in both high quality and deficient music programs had higher
standardized test scores than those that participated in no instrumental music programs,
although students in high quality music programs outscored those in deficient music
programs.
Research Question 3
Utilizing the means of the individual PSSA scoring (sections RB, C.1, D.2, and
E.1), what is the relationship between the following:
The variances in the subsections RB, MC.1, M.D.2 and ME.1 were significant
with M.D.2 Algebraic Concepts and the Reading B Section showing the greatest increase
in score variance. The students’ increases in standardized test subsections were congruent
with those of Shropshire (2007), who examined the students’ PSAT scores for differences
between students who participated in music, athletics, and both programs. The results
showed that the students who were involved in music outperformed those who
participated in athletics with no appreciable difference for those who participated in both
and those who participated in music only.
This score variance between the Noninstrumental and Instrumental samples could
be as a result of several environmental, social, and even developmental influences, which
are limitations of this current study. Research that has accounted for these factors through
regression models still indicates that IQ has the strongest influence on standardized test
scores. Babo (2004) analyzed the relationship between a students’ participation in music
education and their academic performance. He set controls of IQ, SES, and gender. The
103
study indicated that there was a strong relationship between students’ achievements in the
language arts and their participation in instrumental music education. While the
regression models clearly indicated that IQ has the strongest influence on test scores,
instrumental music education also contributed highly to the overall variance of the
mathematics total score. Further analysis, when controlling for gender and socioeconomic
status, demonstrated that instrumental music influenced both language arts and
mathematical scores (Babo, 2004). The study by Babo indicated, just as this research, that
instrumental music has an impact on both language and mathematics.
By examining the developmental process of critical thinking, this longitudinal,
quantitative, correlational study sought to examine the relationship between instrumental
music education and critical thinking as an adaptive and fluid learning dynamic. The
importance of this study relays that instrumental music can be related to the cognitive
process in a positive and contributory method demonstrating that active learning is an
effective method to develop critical thinking skills.
Discussion of the Results
The construct of what this study measured can assist in explaining that
instrumental music asserts itself in developing the person through its active learning style
and through ability to allow people progress through the learning process. The PSSA
Technical Report states that critical thinking and problem solving is a process and not
content. Therefore, the assumption can be made that this process is applicable in specific
testing areas. These areas are identified by the technical report as open-ended questions,
which are rated by their DOK.
104
The subsections of the test were then selected based on their level of DOK as well
as their identification as areas that would require critical thinking or problem solving as a
process through open-ended or multiple choice questions. This research validates other
research that is already in existence by demonstrating that instrumental music can relates
to a person’s cognitive development over a period of time. These results were those
expected by the researcher given the experience and background of the researcher.
Limitations
Because the sample was only collected from one school, the ability to generalize
results over a larger population may be limited due to the ability of the sample to be
influenced and affected by the limitations of population. These influences are, but not
limited to, the ability of an individual teacher to have an impact on the cognitive
processes of the student in either positive or negative outcomes. Those students choosing
music may already excel in mathematics and reading; therefore, this gives them an
advantage to implement critical thinking skills. Socioeconomic status may have a direct
impact on those students who choose to study an instrument. Therefore, the sample
population limitation may be inherent to the sample. This population limitation could be
directly related to the cost of an instrument, because a specific socioeconomic group may
not be able to afford the purchase of an instrument. Fitzpatrick (2006) noted that even
Instrumental music students with low SES outperformed higher SES Noninstrumental
music students in all subject areas by 9th grade as assessed by the Ohio Proficiency Test.
However, in this study, there was no account given to SES factors of either sample
because the cost of either purchase or rental of an instrument may limit those that choose
105
to participate in instrumental music. Students who have an interest in instrumental music
may already have a stronger sense of problem solving than those who do not want to get
involved in music.
The PSSA is a statewide assessment that is continually monitored for external and
internal validity; however, students place their own importance on these exams. Those
students who work to achieve and do so through intrinsic motivation would outscore
those students who are not motivated. With the assumption being that sample size would
have negated the issue, this study did not attempt to control, the influence of motivation
on students’ test scores. The possibility remains that students who seek music might also
be beneficiaries of higher levels of self-esteem and self-efficacy, which are developed
through performance opportunities, leading toward a greater internal drive than those
students who have not.
In addition, the individual subsection information was not available for 5th grade.
However, the overall scores for Math and Reading were available. The difference in the
baseline scores of the 5th grade sample may be attributed to other variables such as IQ
and SES, which were not accounted for in the study. To account for this in future studies,
the addition years of score availability might prove itself to be quite valuable in order to
establish levels of variance as well given several more years to the longitudinal nature of
this study. The ability to establish a baseline score in 5th grade would allow a researcher
to track progress over 6 years with data being collected in 5th, 8th, and 11th grade. This
additional dataset could prove to be a valuable tool for later analysis both in terms of
generic PSSA categories of math and reading and the specific subsets that were measured
in this study.
106
Recommendations for Further Research
There are several factors that may be considered for future study in order to
include or exclude critical thinking as a true correlational variable in this research. The
students because of their increased musical training might have developed stronger math
and reading skills across the board and this study has simply focused on particular
subsections rather than the larger picture of academic achievement. The subsets were
chosen based on their ability to measure the critical thinking process as indicated by the
DOK rating assigned by the PSSA in their technical analysis as well as the focus on both
analysis and open-ended questions.
Additional grade levels. Examining the 5th-grade scores in relationship to the
8th grade and then the 11th grade would assist in developing a pattern of cognitive
development as well as mitigating the influence of an individual teacher.
Sample. The study should be expanded to other school districts in order to
eliminate environmental factors such as individual teachers, socioeconomic status, and
race. This would give additional credence to the construct that instrumental music has
influenced these outcomes rather than other influential factors.
Including additional schools would be beneficial to broaden the ability of the
research to be quantified across instrumental music without being limited to one
particular regional area.
Gender would also have been interesting to include in the results, which in turn
would have required a larger sample size. The reason of interest in this case would have
been to demonstrate whether or not critical thinking skills develop differently over the
course of time in regards to gender.
107
Conclusion
The theory that music affects people is by far not new. However, efforts to study
its effects on cognitive development is in the advent stage as analysis of long term
cognitive developmental differences. This study sought to find a correlation between
critical thinking and instrumental music education. The results showed that the students
in the Instrumental music sample outperformed a randomized sample of their peers on
subsections Reading B and Mathematics C.1, D.2 and E.1. These subsections of the
PSSA assessment were chosen based on their existence in both 8th and 11th grades, the
commitment to use open-ended questions and their strength on their DOK rating. The
results from these subsections may not be unique. However, the study revealed that this
body of students who studied instrumental music in Grades 5–11 developed cognitive
growth to outscore their classmates on the same assessments and at a faster pace with
increased indicators in M.C.1: Geometry—Analyze characteristics of two and three
dimensional shapes and M.E.1: Data analysis and probability—Interpret and analyze data
by formulating answers or questions. Students are influenced through their participation
in music to outperform their Noninstrumental music peers. The analysis provided gives
credence to school systems and music programs in their support of instrumental music
education in that not only these students may achieve at a higher level than their
Noninstrumental music counterparts. Prior research has demonstrated that music can be
related to increased scores in language arts and mathematics, and this current study serves
as an extension of that work by examining the relationship between instrumental music
education and critical thinking skills by using PSSA subsections in both reading and
mathematics. At a time when school district and states struggle to balance budgets, this
108
information could prove to be a critical and deciding factor in the overall importance of
music education to a student’s success.
109
REFERENCES
American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists & code
of conduct. Retrieved from http://www.psychology.iastate.edu/faculty/dvogel
/Ethics.htm
American Suzuki Center. (n.d.). Bird’s eye view of the Suzuki talent education method.
Retrieved from http://www.uwsp.edu/cofac/suzuki/SuzukiMethod.htm
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston,
MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Arasi, M. (2006). Adult reflections on a high school choral music program: Perceptions
of meaning and lifelong influence. Doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University,
Atlanta.
Babo, G. D. (2004). The relationship between instrumental music participation and
standardized assessment achievement of middle school students. Research Studies
in Education, 22(1), 14–27.
Breakwell, G. M., Hammond, S., Fife-Schaw, C., & Smith, J. (Eds.). (2006). Research
methods in psychology (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cooney, W., Cross, C., & Trunk, B. (1993). From Plato to Piaget: The greatest
educational theorists from across the centuries and around the world. Lanham,
MD: University Press of America.
Costa-Giomi, E. (2004). Effects of three years of piano instruction on children’s
academic achievement, school performance and self-esteem. Psychology of
Music, 32(2), 139–152.
Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Derry, S. J., & Murphy, D. A. (1986). Designing systems that train learning ability: From
theory to practice. Review of Educational Research, 56, 1–39.
Eisner, E. (1998). Does experience in the arts boost academic achievement? Art
Education, 51(1), 7–15.
110
Fitzpatrick, K. (2006). The effect of instrumental music participation and socioeconomic
status on Ohio fourth-, sixth-, and ninth-grade proficiency test performance.
Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(1), 73–84.
Gagne, R. M. (1968). Learning hierarchies. Educational Psychologist, 6, 3–6.
Gagne, R. M. (1977). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction. New York,
NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Gagne, R. M. (1980). Learnable aspects of problem solving. Educational Psychologist,
15, 84–92.
Global Development Research Center. (2008). The problem solving process. Retrieved
from http://www.gdrc.org/decision/problem-solve.html
Guignon, A. (2004). Multiple intelligences: A theory for everyone. Education World.
Retrieved from http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/curr054.shtml
Hake, R. (1998). Interactive engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand
student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physic courses. American
Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74.
Halpern, D. F. (1996). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Halpern, D. F. (1997). Critical thinking across the curriculum: A brief edition of thought
and knowledge. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains:
Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American
Psychologist, 53(4), 449–455.
Hamblen, K. A. (1997). Theories and research that support art instruction for
instrumental outcomes. Arts Education Policy Review, 98(3), 27.
Howell, D. C. (2008). Fundamental statistics for the behavioral sciences (6th ed.).
Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Hubball, H., Gold, N., Mighty, J., & Britnell, J. (2007, Winter). Supporting the
implementation of externally generated learning outcomes and learning-centered
curriculum development: An integrated framework. New Directions for Teaching
and Learning, 112, 93–105.
111
Johnson, C., & Memmott, J. (2006). Examination of relationships between participation
in school music programs of differing quality and standardized test results.
Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(4), 293–307.
Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2005). Practical research: Planning and design. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Lisk, E. (1996). The creative director: Intangibles of music performance. Galesville, MD:
Meredith.
Lisk, E. (2006). The creative director: Conductor, teacher, leader. Galesville, MD:
Meredith.
Mawhinney, H., Frusciante, A., Aaron, P., & Liu, Y. (2002). Design principles for
learning-centered schools: Building effective strategies for addressing the
achievement gap. Retrieved from http://www.education.umd.edu/EDPA/papers
/mawhinney.pdf
McManus, D. (2001). The two paradigms of education and the peer review of teaching.
NAGT Journal of Geoscience Education, 49(6), 423–434.
Moga, E., Burger, K., Hetland, L., & Winner, E. (2000). Does studying the arts engender
creative thinking? Evidence for near but not far transfer. Journal of Aesthetic
Education, 34(3–4), 91–104.
Moog, H. (1984). Specific aspects of musical learning: A contribution towards a learning
theory of music. Psychology of Music, 12(2), 106–118.
Olson, C. (2009). Music and academic success go together at Whitworth. Teaching
Music, 16(6), 20.
Pennsylvania Department of Education. (2005). Pennsylvania system of school
assessment. Retrieved from http://www.pde.state.p.us/a_and_t/lib/a_and_t/2005
-06MathematicsAssessmentHandbook.pdf
Pennsylvania Department of Education. (2009–2010). Pennsylvania system of school
assessment. Retrieved from http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/gateway
/PTARGS_0_123031_890907_0_0_18/PSSA_Assessment_Handbook_2009
-2010.pdf
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of
Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.
Rabkin, N., & Redmond, R. (2006). The arts make a difference. Educational Leadership,
63(5), 60–64.
112
Reimer, B. (2002). A philosophy of music education: Advancing the vision (3rd ed.).
Boston, MA: Prentice Hall.
Saarikallio, S., & Erkkila, J. (2007). The role of music in adolescents’ mood regulation.
Psychology of Music, 35(1), 88–109.
Schellenberg, E. G. (2006). The long-term positive associations between music lessons
and IQ. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 457–468.
Shropshire, W. (2007). Differences in student academic achievement between students
who participate in music programs and students who participate in athletic
programs. Retrieved from Dissertations & Theses @ Capella University.
(Publication No. AAT 3291461)
Skinner, B. F. (2005). Science and human behavior. Cambridge, MA: B. F. Skinner
Foundation.
Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Cognitive psychology (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Thomson.
Strauch, R. (2009). Music and academic success go together at Whitworth. Teaching
Music, 16(6), 20.
Teachout, D. J. (2007). Understanding the ties that bind and the possibilities for change.
Arts Education Policy Review, 108(6), 19.
Turner, M. (1999). Child-centered learning and music programs. Music Educators
Journal, 86(1), 30–33, 51.
Van Patten, J., Chao, C. I., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1986). A review of strategies for
sequencing and synthesizing instruction. Review of Educational Research, 56(4),
437–471.
Vaughn, K. (2000). Music and mathematics: Modest support for the oft-claimed
relationship. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34, 149–166.
113