TEACHING METHODOLOGY IN ELEMENTARY MUSIC AND BEGINNING
BAND: THE EFFECT ON STUDENT RHYTHMIC ACHIEVEMENT
A Dissertation
Presented to
The Faculty of the Education Department
Carson Newman University
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the
Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Education
By
Leslie M. Benson
May 2016
i
ii
Copyright page
I hereby grant permission to the Education Department, Carson-Newman University, to
reproduce this research in part or in full for professional purposes, with the understanding
that in no case will it be for financial profit to any person or institution.
Signature
Date
iii
Permission Statement
I hereby grant permission to the Education Department, Carson Newman University, to
reproduce this research in part or in full for professional purposes, with the understanding
that in no case will it be for financial profit to any person or institution.
Signature
Date
iv
Abstract
Teaching Methodologies in Elementary Music and Beginning Band: The Effect on
Student Rhythmic Achievement
Leslie M. Benson
School of Education, Carson Newman University
May 2016
Data from research suggests there is very little curricular unity or alignment between
music instruction that progresses from elementary, middle, and high school programs.
This may be the reason for the diminished rhythmic reading ability that often occurs
between elementary general music classes and beginning band classes. Consistent
practice of initial and similar concepts over a period of time allows for transfer of
learning from one grade level to the next. However, there is a dramatic difference in the
way rhythmic instruction is given in elementary music classes and beginning band
methods. A sequential presentation of rhythmic instruction, should provide a curricular
link between elementary music and beginning band. Students are often able to perform
more difficult rhythms in general music classes than are presented in most beginning
band method books. Subjects performed seven common rhythmic patterns from fifth
grade curricula. Students in this study who experienced continuous rhythmic instruction
(fifth grade students) scored significantly higher (than students (sixth grade beginning
band students) who experienced a different method of rhythmic instruction. The
recommendation is to encourage communication between elementary specialists and
instrumental specialists regarding curriculum and methods to ensure a cohesive music
education program. A more collaborative strategy would involve developing a cohesive
method and linear learning experience from general elementary music method curricula
to beginning instrumental music curricular methods.
v
Acknowledgements
A journey such as this, is not traveled alone. I would like to thank the following people
for traveling this road with me……
J. Littleton, you tirelessly listened to me and encouraged me throughout this journey. You
spent hours of your own time helping me listen to recording after recording….
K. Bagwell, your selfless service as an assistant in my classroom has been an incredible
blessing…
J. Leiser, as the third “musketeer” you served hours to listen to recordings and helped
behind the scenes…
Principal Sutton and S. Rogers assisted me in the acquisition of data…
Dr. Taylor, Dr. Price, & Dr. Buckner, you provided me with the tools I needed and
assisted me in achieving a lifelong dream…..
I thank you from the bottom of my heart!
Most importantly, I thank God, who gave me a love for music from an early age and
placed individuals in my life to cultivate my love for all things music. Whether playing,
singing, or listening I am incredibly blessed by the gift of music.
vi
Dedication
Without the support of my wonderful family this study would not have happened.
To my husband, JR, who has been the ‘Wind Beneath My Wings’ and I could never truly
express my love and devotion to him. His love and support have given me the wings to
soar toward and secure a lifelong goal.
To my mom, D. Kirst and sister, K.Vyskocil your encouragement and support kept me
going when I wanted to quit (over and over again).
To my special gifts from God, my children, Jessica, Matthew, Andrew, and Philip thank
you for putting up my continuous educational journeys.
Most importantly, I thank God who gave me a love for music from an early age and
placed individuals in my life to cultivate my love for all things music. Whether playing,
singing, or listening I am incredibly blessed for the gift of music.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. iv
Acknowledgments............................................................................................................................v
Dedication ...................................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables and Figures ...............................................................................................................x
1. Purpose and Organization ........................................................................................................1 Introduction and Background ..........................................................................................................1
Theoretical Foundation ...................................................................................................................1
Elementary Music and Beginning Band Methods ...........................................................................3
Lack of Continuity ..........................................................................................................................5
Purpose and Significance of the Study ............................................................................................6
Differences Between General Music and Beginning Band .............................................................7
Implications......................................................................................................................................7
Research Question and Null Hypothesis..........................................................................................8
Limitations and Delimitations ..........................................................................................................9
Assumptions and Definition of terms ............................................................................................10
Organization of the Document .......................................................................................................11
2. Literature Review ....................................................................................................................12
Music Learning Theories ...............................................................................................................12
The Influence of Piaget .................................................................................................................14
Behaviorism and Cognitive Constructivism Theory......................................................................15
Bruner’s Concept Theory ...............................................................................................................17
Critical Pedagogy ...........................................................................................................................18
Generative Theory and Music Learning Theory ............................................................................18
Elementary Music Education Instructional Practices ....................................................................19
Elementary Teaching Methods ......................................................................................................20
History of Movement in Music Education .....................................................................................22
Rhythm and Importance of Movement ..........................................................................................22
Movement in Elementary Music ....................................................................................................23
Movement Coupled with Multiple Modes .....................................................................................24
Studies of Movement in Education ................................................................................................25
Instrumental Teaching Methods ....................................................................................................26
Instrumental Methods of Teaching Rhythm ..................................................................................23
Comparison of Elementary and Beginning Band Methods of Rhythmic Instruction ....................27
Comparison of Rhythmic Patterns in Elementary and Beginning Band........................................30
3. Methodology .............................................................................................................................35
Research Design.............................................................................................................................35
Research Participants and Setting for the Study ............................................................................35
Data Collection Procedures ............................................................................................................36
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................................39
Ethical Issues .................................................................................................................................39
4. Results of Data..........................................................................................................................41
Inter-Rater Reliability ....................................................................................................................41
Presentation of Data .......................................................................................................................42
5. Conclusions, Implications, Recommendations ......................................................................49
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................49
viii
Research Question .........................................................................................................................50
Method of Performance .................................................................................................................52
Steady Beat ....................................................................................................................................54
Order of Rhythm Pattern Presentation ...........................................................................................54
Null Hypothesis .............................................................................................................................56
Rhythmic Pattern Difference .........................................................................................................56
Movement and Steady Beat ...........................................................................................................57
Different Methods of Rhythmic Performance ...............................................................................58
Summary ........................................................................................................................................60
Recommendations ..........................................................................................................................62
References ......................................................................................................................................64
6. Appendices ................................................................................................................................71
Appendix A Pattern Set A..............................................................................................................71
Appendix B Pattern Set B ..............................................................................................................57
Appendix C Pattern Set C ..............................................................................................................58
Appendix D Parental Consent Letter .............................................................................................60
Appendix E Student Recruitment Script ........................................................................................62
Appendix F Student Recording Script ...........................................................................................64
ix
List of Tables and Figures
Figures Figure 2.1 Rhythmic Pattern Example ......................................................................... 27
Figure 2. Pattern Set C ................................................................................................. 55
Figure 3. Word Cue Methods....................................................................................... 59
Figure 4. Number Counting System ........................................................................... 60
Tables
Table 1. Comparative Analysis of Nine Beginning Band Methods ............................. 32
Table 2. Comparative Analysis of Twelve Band Methods (1994-2010) ..................... 33
Table 3. Beginning Band Pre-test Pattern Set Mean .................................................... 42
Table 4. Beginning Band Post-test Pattern Set mean .................................................. 42
Table 5. Beginning Band Pre/Post Dependent t-test .................................................... 43
Table 6. Public School Group AB* Beginning Band Pattern Set Mean ...................... 44
Table 7. Group AA* Pattern Set Mean ........................................................................ 44
Table 8. Independent Sample t-test .............................................................................. 45
Table 9. Method of Rhythmic Performance Group AB* (Pre & Post-Test) ............... 45
Table 10. Method of Rhythmic Performance Comparison .......................................... 47
Table 11. Pattern Set Means All Subjects .................................................................... 47
Table 12. Comparison of Performance Methods ......................................................... 53
1
CHAPTER 1
Introduction and Background
Many music educators agree that listening to music often elicits a physical
response from its listeners (Reifinger, 2006). Even the youngest of children respond to
music (Ferguson, 2005). Almost every person has been swept away by music at one time
or another. Toes tap, heads nod, and fingers snap are a mere subconscious response to the
sound of certain types of music (Westervelt, 2002).
Theoretical foundation
Music education is a profession that exists within a multi-faceted discipline.
Because music learning is comprised of complex cognitive processes, there is a need for
diverse learning theories in order to research and enhance the many educational
phenomena existing within a music education classroom (Taetle and Cutietta, n.d.).
However, according to Boardman (1988), music instruction cannot be based on a specific
learning theory. Regelski (2002) also states that the theoretical principles for music
education are “ambiguous at best and controversial at worst” (p. 102). Isbell (2011)
agrees with this statement, “There is no single explanation regarding how best to teach
music” (p. 23). A brief overview of learning theories, as they apply to music education,
is provided in this section. The most common learning theories used in music will be
discussed in more detail in the next chapter.
Constructivists posit that humans are naturally active learners and “must construct
knowledge for themselves by using tools at hand to learn from their experiences” (Keast,
2009). The foundation of Constructive Learning Theory was built by the contributions of
2
philosophers, such as Vygotsky, Piaget, Dewey, and Bruner. The theoretical framework
for this study was from the works of Vygotsky. Constructivism places any learning in the
context of active engagement. Students move from experience through to the construction
of understanding. Through participation in activities, students develop or construct
individual understanding. The process of teaching music mirrors that of the language
development of children (Rinaldo & Denig, 2009).
The conceptual framework for this study was the Music Learning Theory. Edwin
Gordon developed the Music Learning Theory. Gordon’s theory, which guides instructors
to the best sequences for helping students learn music. Gordon’s theory begins with a
process he calls audiation. “Audiation is the process of hearing and comprehending music
in the mind” (Dalby, n.d.). The idea of sound before symbol is not unique to MLT.
According to this theory, audiation is the basic foundation of any music learning. Much
like the process of learning language, the methodology behind this theory is based upon
beginning a foundation through rhythmic movement, singing, and tonal/rhythmic pattern
instruction. Each instructional session builds upon previous experience and knowledge.
As students learn a “musical vocabulary” a musical language is developed and
constructed (Dalby, n.d.). The construction of methodology in musical instruction should
be based upon the building and extension of student experiences.
During the 1960’s, Jerome Bruner’s theories of conceptual learning led to
curricula that were sequenced developmentally (Taetle and Cutietta, n.d.). In Bruner’s
modes of representative learning, the usual response of students begins with an Enactive
Representation, which presents understanding through a motor response when
experiencing a new concept (Gault, 2005). Psychomotor awareness may lead to better
3
rhythmic performances (Rowher, 1998). Bruner’s Concept Theory is primarily a
developmental theory; however, the premise applies in a music education setting
(Boardman, 1988). In a music education setting, Bruner’s Concept Theory dictates that
music symbols be introduced after the student is able to demonstrate the ability to
assimilate musical sounds with iconic notation (Boardman, 1988). Bruner’s spiral
curriculum and conceptual learning has been used as an elemental method of music
instruction (Taetle and Cuttieta, n.d.). Information gathered on children’s perceptual and
performance abilities in regards to rhythmic development should be researched in applied
instrumental settings and assessed empirically (Reifinger, 2006).
Elementary Music and Beginning Band Methods
Elementary educators of general music classes have implemented methodologies
such as Orff, Dalcroze, and Kodaly as a primary step in the process of learning music
(Rowher, 1998). Dalcroze, Kodaly, and Orff methods all promote multi-sensory musical
experiences before conceptual understanding (Gault, 2005). At the most basic level,
people learn rhythm through movement (Westervelt, 2002). In the Orff process for
instance, movement is the foundational element used to develop beat and rhythm
competencies, as well as to develop rhythmic memory followed by symbolic music
notation (Mason, 2012).
Music education for primary grades in the United States has employed the use of
the sound-to-symbol approach for the last few decades (Feldman & Contzius, n.d.).
Music Learning Theory, along with other music teaching methods such as the Orff and
Kodaly methods, employs the sequence of ‘sound before sight’ (Dalby, n.d.).
4
One way elementary students learn rhythmic patterns is through the use of spoken
syllables, which act as an aural coding, or memory of the sounds before the visual picture
of iconic notation (Reifinger, 2006). Kodaly methods support the sound-to-symbol
approach by providing experience before notation, as well as singing games and
movements to build musical development. Feldman & Contzius (n.d.) propose that
students must learn rhythm by the way it feels and sounds. Visual connection comes
afterward as a symbolic representation of what the student has already experienced.
One of the major differences between elementary music and beginning band
classes is that many elementary methodologies use word cues such as the Kodaly, Orff,
Gordon, or Takidimi method of rhythmic syllables to teach rhythmic patterns. Word cues
such as “tah” for quarter notes and ti-ti” for paired eighth notes are used as a way to teach
students to recognize and feel the duration of notation as they speak and clap or move
their bodies to match the rhythm (Richardson, 2008).
A study by Santelli (2007) revealed that the majority of band method books
approach rhythmic instruction using a mathematical approach or a counting system. This
change in rhythmic method instruction can cause confusion (Santelli, 2007). This means
that students have to learn a new method of counting rhythms when it would be much
easier if the rhythms were presented in the same way as they had previously been
instructed. This method would also make the transfer of previous learning to new
learning easier due to the similarity of previous rhythm recognition. When the same
method of instruction is presented in elementary and middle school music classes,
students are able to build upon their previous knowledge and experiences (Santelli,
2007).
5
The number based counting system is the most commonly used rhythmic
instruction technique (Richardson, 2008). Varley (2005), as cited in Mason (2012),
compared thirty-seven instrumental method books and the rhythmic systems used within
the United States. The results showed that six of the methods used kinesthetic rhythmic
activities and three books used mnemonic or syllables in rhythmic instruction. Thirty
books used only a counting approach to rhythm instruction.
In a study of seven popular band method books, Collins (2013) determined that
six out of seven books used clapping exercises and only one of the seven used clapping or
foot tapping. None of the seven method books included any whole body movements or
activities to aid in learning. None of the seven methods used rote learning methods or
audiation training. Only one of the seven methods included melodies written in symbols
to accommodate students who could not yet read music notation.
Lack of Continuity
In a study by Woods (1982), a comparison of elementary and middle school band
methods reveals that there is very little to no “conceptual cohesiveness or curricular
unity” between the two areas even though there may only be one summer between the
methods. It was if students experience music from one grade level to the next as an
“isolated entity”. Since 1966, Bruner’s spiral curriculum has been used to order the
structure of teaching and learning concepts at “appropriate levels and periodically with
greater levels of complexity” (Taetle and Cutietta, n.d). The question to be asked then, is,
“shouldn’t music students’ experiences build conceptually in the cross over between
elementary general music and beginning band or chorus?” When music educators provide
music concepts in similar ways to those used in upper level general music classes, a
6
transfer of learning can occur from one grade or class to the next level. Transfer learning
is most successful when there is a consistent practice of initial and similar concepts
throughout the instruction process (Santelli, 2007).
Purpose of the study/significance of Study
Observation of music programs from elementary, middle, and high school has
revealed very little “conceptual cohesiveness or curricular unity” almost as if the music
experiences exist as “isolated entities” (Woods, 1982). This may be the reason for the
differences that exist between elementary general music classes and beginning band
classes. Just as math concepts build sequentially upon the other, music concepts do as
well. Bruner’s spiral curriculum theory allows students to encounter “gradual, increasing
presentations of concepts that build upon previous knowledge or experience (McLeod,
2008). Woods suggests that each level of music instruction should naturally develop
conceptually from elementary, middle school, to high school levels. A sequential
presentation of musical concepts should provide a link between elementary music and
beginning band, which can begin as early as fourth grade or begin as late as sixth grade.
Transfer of learning from one grade level to the next is best accomplished by the
consistent practice of initial and similar concepts over a period of time (1982).
Elementary students carry with them an elementary musical mindset as they
transition into middle school. This musical mindset is based on their previous musical
learning experiences (Conklin, 2007). A holistic musical approach across the school
levels will provide a more cohesive musical education experience.
7
Students are often able to perform more difficult rhythms in general music classes
than are presented in most beginning method books. Sixteenth note rhythm patterns
are experienced and performed by most elementary music students as early as
fourth grade. In contrast, this rhythmic pattern is generally not included in beginning
band method books until the second year of instruction. Instrumental method books that
leave more complex patterns to the next year can deprive students of the consistent
performance of patterns that increase the transfer of learning to new contexts (Byo, 1998
& Watkins, 2011). By creating connections between elementary music and instrumental
music, students are allowed to build upon previous experience without a grade level gap.
Pierce’s 1992 study found that similar rhythmic tasks resulted in an increase in the
possibility of transfer of knowledge transfer (Santelli, 2007).
Differences Between General Music and Beginning Band
Music concepts, just like math, build upon each other in a logical sequence. The
question to be asked then, is shouldn’t music students’ experiences build conceptually in
the cross over between elementary general music and beginning band or chorus? When
music educators provide music concepts in similar ways to those used in upper level
general music classes, a transfer of learning can occur from one grade or class to the next
level. Transfer learning is most successful when there is a consistent practice of initial
and similar concepts throughout the instruction process (Santelli, 2007).
Implications
A review of the literature revealed that the pedagogical practices successfully
used in elementary classes are not typically used in band or orchestra rehearsals (Dalby,
1999). There is a definite need for a connection between elementary general music and
8
beginning band instruction. Research supports that instructional methods used
successfully in elementary classes can also be successful in beginning band instruction
(Mason, 2012). Methods such as Orff, Dalcroze, Kodaly, and Music Learning Theory
found in elementary classes can be used in instrumental settings to continue the rhythmic
development of students moving from one grade level to the next (West, 2015).
Although the idea of singing and moving in instrumental classes is not new, the
concepts are not widely used even though it has been shown that these methods will
enhance music achievement (Conway, 2003). Sixth grade or older students may not be
entirely comfortable with the use of kinesthetic movements such as those used in
elementary music, these activities have the potential to aid in the development of
psychomotor awareness (Rowher, 1998). Most instrumental method books do not use
basic kinesthetic learning methods that are so readily used in general elementary music
(Rowher, 1998).
When general elementary music teachers and instrumental teachers have aligned
their curricula, the musical concepts learned in elementary class can be transferred to
instrumental learning. Consistent terminology and approaches will ensure that students
transfer learning from one level to the next (Conway, 2013).
Research Questions and Null Hypothesis
What effect does the lack of continuity between elementary general music and
beginning band curricula have on the rhythmic performance of beginning band students?
The lack of continuity between elementary and beginning band methods has no
effect on student rhythmic achievement.
9
Limitations and Delimitations
This study will be limited by the small sample size based upon the number of
students who elect to enroll in beginning band and the number of enrolled students in the
fifth grade. The number of parental permission slips returned by public school students
may also be small depending on school schedules or other factors. Previous beginning
band classes have been predominately male. Therefore, gender distribution will be a
limitation. Participants in this cross-sectional design will be similar but there may be
differences within the pre-existing groups. Participants may include transfer students
from other elementary music programs who have not used similar teaching methods or
who have had little or no musical experiences.
Delimitations include the author’s ability to analyze and understand both
general music and instrumental strategies. The author teaches both general music and
instrumental music in the school and will be able to create a rhythmic measurement based
upon the curriculum used in the elementary fifth grade level. The educator would be able
to control the method of instruction to beginning band and fifth grade students by
following the current school curriculums for each.
10
Assumptions and Definition of terms
Rhythm: The term originates in the Greek language as “rhythmos” or “flow”. As humans
listen to or perform music, he or she feels the rhythm and as a result either overtly or
covertly moves to the rhythm or “flow” of the music (Westervelt, 2002).
Orff Schulwerk : an elementary method approach to music learning that includes active
music making. Educators use imitation, exploration, literacy/composition, and
improvisation through singing, movement, various forms of speech, and performance on
instruments (Mason, 2012)
Kodaly: The Kodaly approach advocates hearing the sound before reading standard
written music notation. Singing is taught using solfege syllables (ex do, re, mi) to
represent pitches in the scale. (Geoghegan, 2006). Kodaly also uses rhythmic names to
represent the length or duration of a note or rhythmic pattern.
Music Learning Theory: students develop rhythmic and tonal vocabulary patterns
through experiences such as singing, performing, and rhythmic movement before seeing
iconic notation. MLT approaches instruction through a process known as
Whole/Part/Whole (Dalby, n.d.).
Audiation: the “musical equivalent of thinking in language” (Dalby, n.d., p. 5).
Rhythmic Achievement: the ability to perform rhythms that include half, quarter,
eighth, sixteenth notes, equivalent rests, and dotted rhythmic patterns in common time
Steady Beat: Music has basic steady pulse that can be identified as the heartbeat of the
music. The basic pulse is the underlying beat to which a listener or performer would tap
or clap in time or in conjunction with the steady pulse.
Tempo is the speed of the steady beat or pulse
11
Organization of the Document
This document begins with an introduction and background of the study. The
reason and purpose of the study, as well as the limitations and delimitations are included
within the first chapter.
The second chapter contains a literature review of music learning theories. A brief
historical context of both elementary and instrumental instruction is provided, as well as a
description of the common methodologies used in each level of music instruction. For the
purpose of this study, the focus will be on rhythmic instructional strategies in elementary
general music and beginning instrumental music classes. Elementary and instrumental
rhythmic instructional methods will be compared. A discussion of empirical studies will
be included.
Methodology and specifics of the study will be discussed in the third chapter. The
subjects will be identified and an explanation of the data that will be collected. The third
chapter will also describe the procedure to be used in the gathering of data. Data analysis
for the study can be found in Chapter 4 and the Summary in Chapter 5.
12
CHAPTER 2
Literature Review
For centuries music has been a form of expression and has served as a reflection
of a culture (Dalby, 2005). Music celebrates the good times and gives comfort during the
hard times. Music elicits a physical response from its listeners (Reifinger, 2006). Even
the youngest of children respond to music (Ferguson, 2005). Almost every person has
been swept away by music at one time or another. Toes tap, heads nod, and fingers snap
as a mere subconscious response to the sound of certain types of music (Westervelt,
2002).
Moog’s (1976) landmark study observed that six-month old infants’ first
responses to music often involved the entire body. These responses were considered as
rhythmic due to the repetitive nature of the movement (Reiginger, 2006). Prior to the turn
of the 20th century, movement in the classroom was used as a form of stress relief and a
way to improve posture (Ferguson, 2005). Music educators must understand the nature of
rhythm and how it is learned (Westervelt, 2002). The movement of young children to
music can provide insight as an outward display of an internal understanding (Ferguson,
2005). As students mature, their capacity of musical skills will stabilize and without
further training, will not continue to develop. Music education must see that crucial
rhythmic skills are developed through the use of proper musical experiences (Reifinger,
2006).
Music Learning Theories
Music education has been viewed as an integral component in the educational
experience. Many scholars believe that music education is a critical part of a child’s
13
“complete and aesthetic development” (Barry, 1992 p. 16). Before making instructional
decisions, there must first be an understanding of how students learn. In the past
educational landscape, instructional theories have been based on what Boardman
describes as a “factory model”. This “factory model” theory of learning produced
learning strategies that have been “reductionist, analytical, and linear” (1998, p. 5).
Every profession has a theory that derives from research and theoretical principles
that function as the foundation of practice. This foundation encompasses the “commonly
recognized and accepted action ideals of the profession’s ethical and other guiding
philosophical considerations” (Regelski, 2002 p. 102). Music education curriculums and
other educational subjects are informed by a “synthesis of philosophy, psychology, or
learning theory and praxis” (Abrahams, 2005, p. 7) Music educators are often faced with
multiple diverging practices, which are rarely linked. “The definition of a theoretical
framework for music education is closely related to a general philosophy of education”
(Gruhn, 2006, p 15). However, according to Boardman, music instruction cannot be
based on a specific learning theory (1998). Taetle and Cutietta suggest the importance of
“the creation of a learning theory unique to music” (n.d. p. 294). Regelski also states that
the theoretical principles for music education are “ambiguous at best and controversial at
worst” (2002, p. 102). Isbell seems to agree with this statement, “There is no single
explanation regarding how best to teach music” (2011, p. 23). Music education is a
profession that exists within a multi-faceted discipline. Because music learning is
comprised of complex cognitive processes, this creates the need for diverse learning
theories to attempt to research and enhance the many educational phenomenon existing
within a music education classroom (Taetle and Cutietta, n.d.).
14
Through social and educational transitions of the 1950’s, 1960’s, and 1970’s
general learning theories began to serve as a foundation for both educational research and
methods (Taetle and Cutietta, n.d.) Most general learning theories used in education can
also be dissected into categories that are applicable to music education classrooms.
Theories such as behaviorism, humanism, cognitivism, and constructivism overlap in
music education but differ in the definition of learning, the purpose of education, and the
roles of the teacher and student. However, all four of these theories provide music
education with a “conceptual framework for interpreting the examples of learning”. The
learning theories also offer a specific vocabulary and provide guidance for solutions to
“practical problems” (Isbell, 2011 p. 20). Due to the numerous learning theories
employed in music education, a brief overview will be presented.
The Influence of Piaget
Many learning theories are linked to the work of Swiss child psychologist, Jean
Piaget. Piaget believed that learning was more than a passive cognitive process, but
instead was an active construction of personal experiences (Cognitive, 2015). The work
of Piaget provided insight into the process of learning. Through assimilation and
accommodation, children experience new information, which is then combined with
existing knowledge. Children then re-arrange the known to add new concepts or precepts
(Boardman, 1988). Cognitive psychologist Jean Piaget has shown that thinking follows
action, so essentially there is no difference between thinking and action (Gruhn, 2006).
Piaget’s learning theory was endorsed and accepted during the 1950s through the
1970s. The theory has had monumental influence on preceding cognitive theories, which
still accept and adhere to the precepts of “assimilation and accommodation” (Cognitive,
15
2015 p 5). In a music education setting, pedagogy that employs the use of active learning
enables students to learn by doing. This practice is found in the majority of instructional
methods used in music education (Gruhn, 2006).
Hargraves (1986) and Zimmerman (1992) point to three areas of music learning
research that has been influenced by Piaget’s work. Developmental stages and symbolic
function as it relates to music learning comprise the first two areas of music learning
research. The third area of music learning research has been focused on a concept of
conservation. In this process, young children begin to understand that two properties of a
concrete object can lead to a third property (Taetle and Cutietta, n.d.). The work of
Bamberger (1991), which is based on Piaget’s Cognitive Learning theory, relates the
music learning process as one that builds progressively from one experience to the next
(Gruhn, 2006).
Behaviorism and Cognitive Constructivism Theory
There are several lines of thought in regards to how people learn. Behaviorists
claim that knowledge is obtained through passive absorption of experiences and
behaviors. Hodges and Sebald (2011) explain that behaviorism is based on the work of
Ivan Pavlov, which focuses on behaviors that are observable and ways in which the
behaviors can be changed or modified (Isbell, 2011). In this learning theory, students are
passive and demonstrate desired behaviors. In a music classroom, a teacher might
‘modify’ behavior by controlling the classroom decisions. Use of rewards by educators
often stimulate desired behaviors in their classrooms. (Isbell, 2011).
Educators and scholars who have embraced the constructive learning theory, have
been influenced by the works of Vygotsky as well as other prominent psychologists such
16
as John Dewey, Jean Piaget, and Jerome Bruner (Isbell, 2011). Cognitive constructionists
see knowledge as an active mental process in which the student builds upon previous
knowledge or experiences (Cognitive, 2015). Cognitivists tend to focus on the hidden
processes rather than observable behaviors. In this learning theory, students are viewed as
individuals who arrive in class with different ways of knowing and understanding. The
goal of the educator is to assist students in the process of understanding (Isbell, 2011).
Based on past learning experiences, a student would retrieve knowledge to increase
understanding. To cognitive constructionists, each person synthesizes current knowledge
as it relates to personal experiences based on past experiences or cultural history
(Cognitive, 2015). Cognitivism learning theory proposes that knowledge is not
transferred from one person to another, but that each individual ‘constructs’ his or her
own knowledge (Isbell, 2011).
Within Cognitivism, there exists differing beliefs in regards to the student and
educator roles. The reception method views the educator as the main focus. In this
method it is the role of the teacher to design and deliver education opportunities for
students who then become passive recipients of knowledge (Isbell, 2011).
Because Cognitive Constructivism proponents view learning as an active rather
than passive process, new knowledge must be presented through active discovery
(Cognitive, 2015 & Isbell, 2011). The role of the instruction moves from teacher-
centered to student-centered. The educator determines current knowledge and provides
opportunities for students to take existing understanding and add new information and
experiences. Students then assimilate existing knowledge and new knowledge to form a
broader scope of information (Cognitive, 2015). This discovery method, according to
17
Isbell, is the foundation or key to understanding the constructivist theories on learning
(2011).
Bruner’s Concept Theory
During the 1960’s, Jerome Bruner’s theories of conceptual learning led to
curricula that was sequenced developmentally (Taetle and Cutietta, n.d.). Bruner’s
Concept Theory is primarily a developmental theory; however, the premise applies in a
music education setting (Boardman, 1988). Following the translation of Jean Piaget’s
research into English, Bruner developed his own stages of learning, which has been
widely accepted in music as well as other subjects (Taetle and Cutietta, n.d.) The Concept
Theory is based on experience rather than age or stage as proclaimed by other child
psychologists. In Bruner’s modes of representative learning, the usual response of
students begins with an Enactive Representation, which presents understanding through a
motor response when experiencing a new concept (Gault, 2005). Music educators witness
this phenomenon in classes on a regular basis. Boardman claims that without appropriate
educational experiences, basic concepts remain under-developed or false concepts are
accepted as true (1998). Kinesthetic movements such as those used in elementary music,
these activities have the potential to aid in the development of psychomotor awareness.
Psychomotor awareness may lead to better rhythmic performances (Rowher, 1998).
In a music education setting, Bruner’s Concept Theory would dictate that music
symbols be introduced after the student is able to demonstrate the ability to assimilate
musical sounds with iconic notation (Boardman, 1988). Bruner’s spiral curriculum and
conceptual learning has been used as an elemental method of music instruction (Taetle
and Cuttieta, n.d.). Information gathered on children’s perceptual and performance
18
abilities in regards to rhythmic development should be researched in applied in
instrumental settings and assessed empirically (Reifinger, 2006).
Critical Pedagogy
Critical Pedagogy for music education derives from a philosophical framework
based on the Critical Theory as well as an educational psychology referred to as
“Experiential Learning” (Abrahams, 2005 p. 7). Critical Pedagogy can be described as a
flexible pedagogy. Music education approaches such as Orff or Kodaly use a specific
repertoire along with specific teaching procedures. This methodology/theory does not
limit the genre or the teaching sequence. Abrahams notes that Bernice McCarthy views
experiential learning as a model of learning that focuses on conceptual learning. Both the
teacher and the student engage in learning together. Students participate in activities to
construct knowledge, to act and to reflect on their experiences (2005).
Generative Theory and Music Learning Theory
The Generative Theory is based on several cumulative assumptions. The first
assumption is that a basic system as a whole is greater than the part. The second and third
assumption is that symbols and symbol systems represent views of reality and that the
general function of knowledge is generative in nature. This means than an individual can
expand his or her personal understanding beyond the part to the whole. Boardman
explains that music is based on a symbolic system and the interpretation of the symbol
system would be considered as part of the basic unit system (1998). Musical sound could
be viewed as a “symbolic representation of cognitive and emotional activity, just as
language is the symbolic representation of other forms of cognition and emotion”
19
(Boardman, 1998 p. 5). When it comes to learning theories, Boardman emphasizes that
any theory of learning must acknowledge that there is an inter-dependence between
cognition, emotion, and action (1998).
E. Gordon’s Music Learning Theory (MLT) was developed through extensive
research. This theory outlines the learning process in music. Gordon’s MLT provides a
sequential and comprehensive guide for music educators (Sangiorgio, 2006). At the heart
of this learning theory is what Gordon calls audiation. Audiation is the term for thinking
and understanding music in the mind without the presence of sound. Audiation can be
compared as the “musical equivalent” of the cognitive processes that occur during
“thinking in language” (Dalby, n.d. p. 5). Music learning consists of the learning of
patterns, relationships, and structures that compose mental representations of sound
(Sangiorgio, 2006). Gordon’s MLT is similar to the Generative theory in that Gordon’s
theory approaches music education in a process that could be described as
Whole/Part/Whole (Dalby, n.d.).
Elementary Music Education Instructional Practices
The process of learning music closely relates to the process of language
acquisition process. Children begin with a type of musical sound vocabulary, which
enables them to become familiar with melodic and rhythmic patterns found in songs, as
well as aural recognition of instrumental sounds. Music educators should approach
instruction in such a way to develop musical understanding by helping students to learn
to ‘speak’ and ‘think’ through musical experiences (Gruhn, 2006). Gruhn notes that
educators should use singing, moving, and playing instruments to build mental
20
representations. Because learning is the sequential process of developing mental
representations, music educators need to follow an effective instructional approach
(2006). There are many popular methods and instructional approaches available to
elementary music educators. Some educators choose to primarily use one method, while
others choose to blend characteristics from many methods. Three of the methods will be
briefly examined and will not contain a comprehensive report.
Elementary Teaching Methods
The Orff Schulwerk approach to learning music can be summed up in these four
words: sing, say, dance, and play. The Orff Schulwerk method for teaching and learning
music was developed by Carl Orff and Gunild Keetman. At the core of the philosophical
approach to teaching children is active music making. This approach is cognizant of the
conceptual and affective development of children (What is Orff?, n.d.). The main
emphasis of the Orff approach is to develop the awareness of an internal steady beat and
enable children to become musically independent (Long, 2013). Students engage in
creative thinking, movement, and play xylophones, which are often referred to as “Orff”
instruments (What is, n.d.). Musical independence is nurtured through experiences such
as exploration, dance and movement, composition, improvisation, and performance
(Long, 2013). In teaching melody and rhythm, “the guiding principles are that notation
and reading be built on known musical materials and that sound precede symbol” (What
is, n.d. para.1)
Educators using a Kodaly approach provide music instruction that is child
centered and in a logical and sequential process. Although the Kodaly approach is often
referred to as a method, Geoghegan suggests that it should instead be viewed as a series
21
of guidelines (2006). The Kodaly approach advocates hearing the sound before reading
standard music notation. Singing is taught using solfege syllables (for example: do, re,
mi) to represent pitches in the scale. Along with using solfege syllables, Kodaly also used
Curwen hand signs to represent each pitch name which would serve as a visual
representation of the relative position of each pitch in the scale (Geoghegan, 2006). Of
particular interest to this study is the use of rhythmic names to represent the length or
duration of a note or rhythmic pattern. For example, a quarter note in common time
would be spoken as a “ta”. Two eighth notes would be spoken as “ti-ti” and four
sixteenth notes are spoken as “ti-ka-ti-ka”.
E. Gordon’s Music Learning Theory (MLT) places great emphasis on the process
of audiation, which relates to the “musical equivalent of thinking in language” (Dalby,
n.d., p. 5). Audiation of tonal and rhythmic patterns is the main focus of MLT. Gordon’s
method of teaching music is both comprehensive and sequential. MLT, along with other
music teaching methods such as the Orff and Kodaly methods employ the sequence of
‘sound before sight’. Dalby explains that students develop rhythmic and tonal vocabulary
patterns through experiences such as singing, performing, and rhythmic movement before
seeing symbolic music notation. MLT approaches instruction through a process known as
Whole/Part/Whole. Students hear the whole song or section of music and then discover
parts of the whole through discovery.
In regards to rhythmic instruction, students must develop a sense of meter, pulse,
steady beat, and microbeat. This is accomplished through movement. MLT also uses
rhythmic syllables based on beat function. Gordon’s system is based on how rhythmic
patterns are audiated (Dalby, n.d.)
22
History of Movement in Music Education
Movement became part of the musical landscape in U.S. schools at the beginning
of the 20th century. This inclusion of movement in elementary music was influenced by
the work of Jacques Dalcroze and John Dewey. Dalcroze’s successful work with
eurhythmics training in music classes coupled with Dewey’s progressive education
model, which focused on the creative work of children ushered in a new era of movement
as a pedagogical tool (Ferguson, 2005).
Since 1994, national and state standards have advocated movement instruction as
a component of the music curriculum, which indicates the importance of movement in
music education (Westervelt, 2002). However, the suggestion of movement in music
classes met with serious obstacles just as any new methodology does when it is
introduced. Conflicts centered on the types of movement and the philosophical
differences about rhythmic understanding (Ferguson, 2005). Conservative educators of
the day such as Giddings, Earhart, Kwalwasser, and Seashure believed that rhythmic
ability was more of an inherited trait that could not be altered through instruction. More
progressive educators of the day, Gehrkins, Mursell, and Farnsworth believed that
children could develop rhythmic understanding while participating and experiencing
body movement activities. These progressive educators felt that movement should
include large muscle movements, while the conservative educators suggested the use of
small muscle movements, such as the tapping of a finger (Ferguson, 2005).
Rhythm and Importance of Movement
All around the world, music shares a common important component: rhythm
(Dalby, 2005). How exactly is rhythm defined? The term originates in the Greek
23
language as “rhythmos” or “flow”. As humans listen to or perform music, he or she feels
the rhythm and as a result either overtly or covertly moves to the rhythm or “flow” of the
music (Westervelt, 2002). The “flow” of music is often referred to as the pulse or the
beat. Most everyone can easily recognize a pulse in music, and the body responds with
some type of movement. Listening to music often results in a tap of the foot, a nod of the
head, or a snap of the fingers (Cash, 2011).
Jacques Dalcroze, creator of Eurhythmics believed that awareness of musical
rhythm only comes through experiences of movement of the entire body. Gerald Edelman
developed a neurological theory about movement and rhythm. According to this study,
Edelman claimed that a motor response is needed as music is being taught about or
learned (Westervelt, 2002).
Movement in Elementary Music. Many elementary educators of general music
classes are familiar with the movement methodologies, such as Orff, Dalcroze, and
Kodaly, and have implemented these methods as a primary step in the process of learning
music (Rowher, 1998). Most professional literature examines the use of movement with
students in preschool or primary age subjects. Studies indicate that large-motor
movements in music classrooms produce positive results. Joseph (1982) conducted a
study with kindergarten students using Dalcroze eurhythmics. Students who received this
treatment out-performed in the areas of recognition and response in regards to familiar
rhythmic patterns within unfamiliar music. These students also out-performed in the area
of improvisational activities (Ferguson, 2005). Students should be able to move and feel
both macro and micro beats within the music. Movement only to a macro beat might
24
cause some students to never learn to feel the subdivision of the beat, which is an
essential skill in rhythmic performance (Conway, 2003).
Movement Coupled with Multiple Modes. At the most basic level, people learn
rhythm through movement (Westervelt, 2005). Dalcroze, Kodaly, and Orff methods all
promote multi-sensory musical experiences before conceptual understanding (Gault,
2005). Elementary music education in the United States has employed the use of the
sound-to-symbol approach for the last few decades (Feldman & Contzius, n.d.). One way
elementary students learn rhythmic patterns is through the use of spoken syllables which
acts as an oral coding of the sounds before the visual picture of iconic notation
(Reifinger, 2006). Kodaly methods support the sound-to-symbol approach by providing
experience before notation as well as singing games and movements to build musical
development (Feldman & Contzius, n.d.).
There are several methods used by educators that encompass multiple modalities.
The Kodaly method uses the words “ta and ti-ti” to correspond with note durations. The
work of Gordon includes the use of “du and di” which represents the metrical placement
of notes. Some educators use a Word method, which employs the use of novel word
syllables to correspond with rhythmic groupings (Reifinger, 2006). Many educators
approach rhythm instruction using either a visual/oral combination or an aural/kinesthetic
combination (Persellin, 1982). Reifinger notes that the mode in which patterns are
presented affects the performance of rhythms. The use of verbal, kinesthetic, and aural
presentation is an effective way to reach all learning styles (2006). Feldman & Contzius
propose that students must learn rhythm by the way it feels and sounds. Visual
25
connection comes afterward as a symbolic representation of what the student has already
experienced (n.d.).
Studies of Movements in Education. The music education community has
embraced the importance of movement as tool in learning rhythm in recent decades.
Pioneers of movement in music such as Gordon, Orff, and Dalcroze consistently advocate
movement in relation to rhythmic learning rather than a purely intellectual process such
as mathematics (Dalby, 2005). Most professional literature examines the use of
movement with young students rather than older elementary or middle school students.
This may reflect a trend of a decrease in the use of movement as a tool as students mature
(Ferguson, 2005).
Even though movement has been proven to be a useful tool in learning strategies
for rhythm, experimental situations have shown mixed results. A study by Salzberg and
Wang (1989) noted that movement was more difficult than counting aloud (a traditional
method) for younger students (Rowher, 1998). In work with third grade elementary
students, Persellin noted that movement seemed to be a distraction to rhythmic learning
due to the fact that students concentrated more on the movement than on the music
(1982). Rowher’s study appeared to show that the use of body movement activities in
various tempi did have a positive effect on sixth-grade beginning instrumental student
performance (Rowher, 1998). Research with mixed-age groups by Groves (1969), Jersild
and Bienstock (1935) and Smoll (1974) suggest that the maturation process rather than
training has shown the best results on improvement in rhythm performance (Rowher,
1998). In another study by Crumpler (1983), first grade students receiving movement
methods showed improvement in musical performance (Ferguson, 2005).
26
INSTRUMENTAL TEACHING METHODS
In 1857, Boston’s Farm and Trade school became the first site for an instrumental
school music program. Instrumental classes were very few in number and were not
included in the school day, nor did the students receive academic credit. The early
instrumental programs lacked “standard teaching methods, instrumentation, or curricula”
(Humphrey, 1989 p. 52). Band Training Series: Reed, Brass and Drum Ensemble became
the first method book specific to band instruction. This method dates back to Louis M.
Gordon in 1926 (Watkins, 2011). In the early 1920’s, more schools began to include band
classes during the day and students began receive academic credit. Private instruction
slowly gave way to classes of instrumental instruction. Albert Mitchell, a music
supervisor in Boston, created a class method book for violin in 1912. The performance of
his violin class at the Music Supervisor’s National Conference in 1920 demonstrated the
effective nature of class instrumental instruction. Other instrument specific method books
began to be available (Humphrey, 1989).
For most beginning band classes, the method book functions as the main
curriculum (Byo, 1988). The method book is usually the main resource for the first
several years of a student’s instrumental instruction (Watkins, 2011). Instrumental
method books are accepted as a self-sufficient curriculum, which is often delivered with
little thought or evaluation (Regelski, 2002). Because of the important role of method
books, instrumental educators must be cognizant of the pedagogical and musical precepts
of the chosen method (Byo, 1988).
Instrumental Methods of Teaching Rhythm. Most instrumental classes
approach rhythm instruction from a mathematical perspective based on the ratio of note
27
durations (Dalby, 1999). A whole note (w) divides into half equals two half notes (h). A
half note divides into two-quarter notes (q q) and each basic beat divides into smaller
fractions of the whole. This way of teaching rhythm is often referred to as the rhythm
tree. Rhythmic patterns are then taught by counting each beat of the music. An example
of the number system for counting rhythms in common time would look like this:
Many instrumental educators rely on rote teaching of rhythmic patterns in an
effort to help students feel successful immediately (Richardson, 2008). If the rhythmic
pattern is one that occurs in songs that the student knows, he or she will probably be able
to play that pattern without much formal instruction. However, when that same pattern is
moved to an unfamiliar piece of music, the student often cannot play the pattern correctly
(Sale, Walton, Glennon, Cook, Klein, Mills, Stadler & Lopez, 2013). This method of rote
teaching can be used effectively, at least until the rhythms become more complicated or
occur more frequently (Richardson, 2008). The difficulty with this approach is that
understanding rhythm and meter is more than the use of a mathematical formula (Dalby,
2005).
Comparison of Elementary and Beginning Band Methods of Rhythmic Instruction
Although the idea of singing and moving in instrumental classes is not new, the
concepts are not widely used even though it has been shown that these methods will
28
enhance music achievement (Conway, 2003). Most instrumental classes have not used
basic kinesthetic learning methods that are so readily used in general elementary music
(Rowher, 1998). Dalby agrees that the pedagogical practices successfully used in
elementary classes are not typically used in band or orchestra rehearsals (1999). This may
be because instrumental instructors assume, (either correctly or incorrectly) that students
have attained a reasonable level of rhythmic ability before the age of instrumental classes
(Rowher, 1998). As students move to a rhythmic pattern, they begin to feel it. Once the
student connects the feeling experience to the written notation, he or she will be able to
recognize the pattern in unfamiliar music (Sale, Walton, Glennon, Cook, Klein, Mills,
Stadler & Lopez, 2013).
Cash suggests that feeling a strong sense of inner pulse is a prerequisite for
playing rhythmically (2011). Instrumental instructors should enable students to
internalize rhythm through movement (Dalby, 1999). There are many methods of
teaching rhythm, but even within the same method there are inconsistencies from school
to school and from teacher to teacher practice (Dalby, 2005). Instrumental students who
arrive in a band or orchestra class without an internal sense of steady beat, usually gained
by movement activities in elementary music classes, must not only learn basic music
skills, but kinesthetic skills as well (Rowher, 1998). Students who cannot perform a
steady beat would need movement instruction before activities that require the
performance of a steady beat (Conway, 2003).
In learning to play an instrument, students must learn note reading, develop aural
skills, and technique all while feeling the steady beat (Rowher, 1998). Reading music
notation and the rhythms contained within is an important part of beginning instrumental
29
classes, but students cannot learn to read and interpret the rhythm unless they have first
experienced the notation through movement (Conway, 2003).
Rhythm that is taught through audiation (or hearing the music in the mind)
requires students to interpret the beat based on how it is felt in the body. Educational
leaders such as Dalcroze, Laban, Weikart, and Gordon all emphasize the importance of
the use of movement to internalize rhythm (Dalby, 1999).
Rhythm instruction could be improved by not beginning with mathematical values
or counting. However, it is imperative to begin with experiences to enhance the student’s
physical and aural responses to music (Cash, 2011). Just because a student may have an
intellectual understanding of the arithmetic behind rhythmic values does not guarantee an
ability to perform the rhythms correctly (Dalby, 2005). Although many teachers begin
rhythmic instruction with the ratio of note values, this is counter-productive because
rhythmic audiation and mathematical concepts are very different cognitive functions
(Dalby, 2005).
Conway states that young instrumental students must move their bodies in order
to internalize sub-division of the beat. By experiencing and internalizing various
rhythmic patters, students cognitively bring meaning to written notation when it is
introduced (2003). When allowed the freedom to move to the music, the human body will
respond to the music in ways that are different from the traditional rigid rules of music
notation and theory (Dalby, 2005). Regardless of the counting system used, students must
physically feel the relationships between beat, subdivision and rhythm (Richardson,
2008).
30
A study by Rohwer (1998) showed that sixth-grade beginning band students who
used movement along with metaphysical imagery seemed to demonstrate improvement in
performance (Ferguson, 2005). Studies by Bebeau (1982) and Colley (1987) found that
rhythmic reading based on speech cues were more successful than the traditional number
based system (Santelli, 2007).
A study by Santelli (2007) investigated the rhythmic ability of fifth grade
elementary students and sixth grade students enrolled in beginning band. When sixth
grade beginning band student were allowed to choose the method of response, they did
not choose to use the rhythmic syllables (such as Kodaly or Orff) that they had learned
through out elementary music classes. Instead, the students used the number counting
system (1 & 2 & 3-e-&-a 4). Santelli attributes the use of the number system of counting
and performing rhythms due the method of instruction. Counting and clapping rhythmic
instruction was what the students had experienced in beginning band. Santelli suggests
that this method of rhythmic counting could not be easily applied to the more difficult
rhythmic patterns (2007).
Comparison of Rhythmic Patterns in Elementary and Beginning Band
An examination of several fifth grade music instruction frameworks contained
standard rhythmic patterns. Alfred’s Music Expressions and Music Play curriculums for
fifth grade listed rhythmic patterns that included whole, half, dotted half, quarter note,
two-eighth notes, sixteenth notes, syncopation and combinations of eighth
and sixteenth note patterns Alfred’s and Music Play
also included corresponding rests for whole, half, quarter and eighth notes. Both the state
of Texas and Tennessee list the same rhythmic patterns in their frameworks for fifth
31
grade students (Fine Arts:, n.d. & Music Curriculum, n.d.). The Tennessee standard for
sixth grade also included sixteenth and eighth-sixteenth note patterns (Fine Arts: n.d.).
Beginning band method books do not include the same rhythmic patterns that
most elementary method courses cover. Gage’s 1994 study revealed that of the four
method books studied there was a deficiency or deficit in “a sequence of rhythmic
instruction between the methods” (Wakins, 2011 p. 40). It is especially important to note
that the majority of beginning band methods do not use curricula that supports and builds
upon student’s previous knowledge, but instead seems to assume “that student have little
accumulated rhythmic knowledge” (Santelli, 2007 p. 76).
In 1988, Byo completed a comparative analysis of nine beginning band method
books that were published in the late 70’s to early 80’s. For the purpose of this study only
the comparison of rhythmic elements were included. Only two of the nine beginning
methods included sixteenth notes, and only one exercise out of the entire book was
devoted to this rhythmic pattern. Eight of the nine method books used the number system
for counting rhythms rather than a rhythm syllable approach such as what is used in
elementary methods. Three of the nine method books used a type of movement other than
tapping a foot. Six of the beginning methods did not use any other type of movement in
rhythm instruction. When compared to the movement activities used in elementary
methods, beginning band methods did not use the technique to enhance rhythm
instruction.
32
In a more recent study, Watkins (2011) completed a dissertation based on the
analysis of beginning band method books. The twelve method books chosen for this
study were selected based on two criteria: the most recent publications (between 1994
Table 1
Comparative analysis of nine beginning band methods
Musical Concept # of methods including the
concept
# of methods who did
not include the
concept Rhythmic Chant/Syllables
used for rhythm instruction
4
5
Counting using a number
system for rhythm instruction
8
1
Movement used in rhythmic
instruction: foot tapping
6
3
Other movements used for
rhythmic instruction
3
6
Rhythmic patterns & meters # of methods including the
pattern
# of methods who did
not included the
pattern
Compound meters such
as
1
8
Irregular Meters
2
7
Cut Time
2
7
Time signatures
9
0
6
3
8
1
2 *at least one exercise
7
33
and 2010) and the level of availability to the national consumer base. Although Watkins’s
study focused on the method books and national music standards, the focus for this study
will be the rhythmic evaluations of the twelve band methods for year one students (2011).
Eleven out of twelve did not include sixteenth notes in first year of instruction. Five out
of seven methods included singing and two out of twelve provided a sound before sight
opportunity, which has been proposed by at least three of the most influential music
teaching methodologists.
Although beginning band students do have many new tasks such as breath support
and control, tone production, and fingerings, consistent curricular alignment would
Table 2
Comparative Analysis of twelve band methods (1994-2010)
Rhythmic Content and
other elements
# of methods
included
# of methods that
did not include
Compound meters
1
Jump Right In
11
y A rests
1
Jump Right In
11
Opportunity to sing
Yamaha Advantage
Measures of Success (3 times)
Jump Right In (22 times
using Solfege syllables)
Do It! Play in Band (40 times)
Band Expressions (3 times)
5
7
Sing, Clap, & Play
Sound Innovations
1
11
Play Before Notation
Measures of Success
Do It! Play in Band
Do It! Play in Band
2
10
34
ensure that students do not lose rhythmic vocabulary by starting a completely new way of
rhythm instruction (Santelli, 2007). Pierce’s 1992 study found that similar rhythmic tasks
resulted in an increase in the possibility of transfer (Santelli, 2007). Rowher’s work with
sixth-grade beginning instrumentalists suggests that rhythmic skills should be introduced
using a basic kinesthetic experience for students in order to aid in the connection of
cognitive understanding of note length as well as the overt experiences of movement or
flow in meter (1998). Even educators who take a more standard approach of instrumental
instruction can provide the benefits of the addition of movement and singing into their
professional practice (Conway, 2003). Rowher states the most important information
gained from rhythmic study is that steady beat skills can be improved with the use of
kinesthetic or movement activities (1998).
35
CHAPTER 3
Methodology
Research Design
The study followed a cross-sectional, quantitative pre-test and post-test measure
of the rhythmic performance of sixth grade beginning band students. Students were tested
on rhythms commonly used in the elementary method books at the beginning of the sixth
grade year before band method book instruction. The same instrument was used toward
the end of the year after students experienced band method book rhythmic instruction.
The results were compared to determine gains or losses in rhythmic performance.
Research Participants and Setting for the Study
The setting for this study included a small parochial school as well as a rural sixth
grade beginning band class at a local middle school. The intact classes at the small
parochial school were the basis for convenience sampling. Demographic Information was
gathered from the school admission’s office. Total enrollment as of October, 2015 for
the parochial school was (483) pre-K through twelfth grade. Parents pay tuition and
limited financial assistance can be available for families who qualify. Students were pre-
dominantly Caucasian (eighty-seven percent). Boarding students from many countries
live on the campus. The number of Asian students (thirty-nine percent) represented the
largest international group. African-American students (.02%), students from the country
of Africa (.01%), and Hispanic/Latino/Non-Hispanic/Latino (.018%) represented the
smaller population of internationals. The smallest percent of nationalities included multi-
racial (.02%), Native American (.002), and Other (.006%).
The number of subjects in the study was dependent on the number of students
who choose to participate in band. The class size for this study began with fourteen
36
students, but one student dropped and the other was not able to participate due to multiple
absences. Four female students and nine male students comprised the in-tact study
group. Once permission was granted by school administration and IRB approval was
obtained, student testing began.
Demographic information for the rural public middle school showed enrollment
of 1077 students as of 2015. Sixty-seven percent were white, twenty-four percent were
black, and six percent of students are Hispanic. Fifty-seven percent of the students at this
school qualified for free or reduced lunch (State Report Card. (n.d.). Beginning band
students (sixth grade) from a local middle school, (n=7) were also tested toward the end
of beginning band method instruction. Two visits were made to the school in order to
recruit volunteer students to participate. A minimal number of parental permission slips
were returned due to schedule changes for standardized testing, shortened class times,
and a week long spring break. The volunteer subject group was comprised of 6 males and
1 female student.
Data Collection Procedures
Before beginning the study, students provided basic personal information such as
age, gender, and indicated if they had participated in private instruction on an instrument.
This information was used to determine if private lessons had provided a student with
more rhythmic competence. A researcher-designed instrument of seven (7) common
rhythmic patterns used in two different popular fifth grade elementary level method
books (Silver-Burdette and Alfred’s Music Expressions) was designed and analyzed by a
practicing university faculty member familiar with general music methods to validate the
measure. (Ary, Jacobs, Sorenson & Walker, 2014). Because there is no standardized
37
rhythmic testing measure, a researcher-designed rhythmic test was developed based upon
state standards, two elementary fifth grade curriculum standards, and consultation with
one retired and three practicing music educators in music education. Once the measure
was designed, a pilot study was conducted using current fifth grade students and one
rising sixth grade student. Using the Kuder-Richardson Formula 21 test for reliability, the
designed test measure rated .86. Reliability “refers to the confidence that the test score
will be the same across repeated administrations of the test” (Brogan, 2009). Test
measure reliability of .86 would be considered as “highly acceptable” (Frisbie, 1988).
Rising sixth grade students were tested using the researcher-designed rhythmic
test before instrumental method book rhythmic instruction was introduced. The students
were assigned a random number identity. The identity of the student was kept
confidential and only the researcher had access to the key. It was explained to the student
that he or she would decide how they wanted to perform the rhythms: the patterns could
be spoken, clapped, both spoken and clapped or any other the way as long as it could be
audibly recorded. Students were instructed to speak the word “skip” if they were unsure
of a specific rhythm and to speak the word “rest” if a rest was included in the pattern. It
was explained that there was no right or wrong way to perform the rhythmic patterns.
Students were assured that their performance did not affect their grade. Each participant
was given a brief moment to study the rhythm. At this point, the students were
individually recorded as they performed the pre-test. A spoken steady beat was given to
each student (1, 2, ready, go) to set a tempo and to inform the student when to begin. The
student then performed the rhythmic patterns. Students nearing the end of fifth grade
were also tested so that a comparison could be made between the rhythmic achievements
38
of current fifth graders. The fifth grade intact classes followed the same procedures as
described above. This data was compared to the scores of the beginning band students
before band method rhythmic instruction.
Two practicing music educators were taught how to score the results. The
assessors as a group scored a practice set of recordings that was not to be used in the
study. Each beat of the rhythmic pattern was counted as correct or incorrect. Two music
educators and the researcher rated the ability of the student to keep a steady beat
throughout each of the exercises by indicating Yes or No. The researcher also noted
which method the student used to perform the rhythm (count & clap, the use of rhythm
syllables, or other ways in which students respond). This enabled the researcher to
compare the results based on the chosen method of performance.
There were a total of seven rhythmic patterns. The patterns were printed as flash
cards. The flash cards were presented to three groups of students who were divided
randomly. Each group of students received the flash cards in a different order. The sets of
flash cards were labeled Set A, Set B, and Set C. The researcher created a master list that
noted the order in which the rhythms are presented in each set. This process enabled data
to be separated and analyzed to see if the order of presentation yielded differing results.
The same instrument was presented as a post-test toward the end of the school
year. The students performed the same rhythm set (A, B, or C) in both the pre-test and the
post-test. The same procedures were followed for recording student performances of the
rhythmic patterns, as well as the same system of scoring was utilized for the post-test
measure. The rhythmic test was also given to the students at a local middle school toward
39
the end of the school year as a comparison to the rhythm achievement post-test sixth
grade beginning band group.
Data Analysis
Data collected from the pre-test rhythmic measurement was scored by qualified
music educators and analyzed by the researcher. In order to ensure that the results were
not skewed by fifth grade students who had participated in private instrumental lessons,
an independent samples t-test was used to compare the mean scores of students in private
lessons and those were not. In order to determine if a transfer of learning occurred
regarding the student’s rhythmic reading and performance skills, a cross-sectional design
compared the rhythmic achievement of current fifth grade elementary music students
who received consistent instruction and sixth grade band students who experienced band
method rhythmic instruction. The mean scores as well as standard deviations between the
pre-test and post-test were analyzed based on independent samples t-test.
Ethical Issues
Permission to conduct the study was secured from university International Review
Board, school administration, and permission was obtained through the local public
school Research and Development board. The subjects were considered as minimal risk
as it is an occasion that students may experience during a normal school day. Parents
were given the choice to permit or prevent the student’s participation. Students were also
given an explanation of the study and asked if they want to participate. It was stressed to
the student that participation was voluntary, and nothing bad would happen if they chose
not to participate. Students were informed that they may stop participation in the study at
any time without consequence. They were also assured of confidentiality and that they
40
would not be graded in any way. The study was conducted during regular class time and
did not require any time outside of class. (See Appendix D & Appendix E)
Once permission was granted from the parent and the student, the student was assigned a
random number and only the researcher had access to the key. Music educators who
scored the rhythmic test only knew the participant by number.
41
Chapter 4
Results of Data Analysis
The purpose of this study was to determine if the difference in rhythmic
instruction practices between fifth grade (Group AA) and sixth grade beginning band
(Group AB) effects the rhythmic performance of students. Seven common rhythmic
patterns were performed by fifth grade students toward the end of the fifth year after a
consistent method of rhythmic instruction and sixth grade students after beginning band
method’s different rhythmic instruction. Students were also rated on the ability to
maintain a steady beat. The seven rhythmic patterns were divided into three sets, A, B,
and C each presenting the patterns in a different order.
Because there is no standardized rhythmic testing measure, a researcher designed
rhythmic test was developed based upon state standards, two elementary fifth grade
curriculum standards, and consultation with experts in music education. Once the
measure had been designed a pilot study was conducted using current fifth grade students
and one rising sixth grade student. Using the Kuder-Richardson Formula 21 test for
reliability, the designed test measure rated .86.
Inter-Rater Reliability
Two practicing music educators and the researcher individually rated each
student’s performance. Assessors attended a training session prior to rating each student
performance. A rating sheet containing the exact rhythmic patterns was designed to
match each pattern set A, B or C flashcard set the student read and performed. Each beat
of the pattern would be marked as correct or left blank if incorrect. Student responses
were marked as correct or incorrect and steady beat was marked as Yes or No. Student
recordings could be re-played as needed by assessors to ensure accurate results. A total of
42
52 possible points for each student was possible. In order to determine the inter-rater
reliability of student performances (n=12), Cohen’s Kappa formula revealed .74 rating
between two practicing music educators.
Presentation of the Data
A pre-test was given on the dependent measure to identify gains or loss in rhythmic
performance before and after band method instruction. Data was gathered from rising
sixth graders (Group AB n=12) before beginning band method. The pre-test resulted in
(M=34, SD = 6.38) out of the fifty-two possible points. The rhythmic pattern set means
are noted in the table below:
Table 3
Beginning Band Pre-test Pattern Set Mean
Group AB* Pattern Set A Pattern Set B Pattern Set C
35 30 34
Table notes. *new method of rhythmic instruction
In mid February, the students performed the same rhythm pattern set A, B, or C as
the pre-test. From mid September to mid February the students experienced a new way of
counting and performing rhythms as indicated by the beginning band method. The post-
test scores for the sixth grade beginning band (M=36, SD= 3.21). The rhythmic pattern
set means are noted in the table below.
Table 4
Beginning Band Post-test Pattern Set Mean
Group AB* Pattern Set A Pattern Set B Pattern Set C
35 37 36
43
A dependent t-test showed there was not a significant difference between pre-test and
post-test scores (t(12)=1.83, p=.42) of the beginning band students who experienced new
rhythmic instruction.
Table 5
Beginning Band Pre/Post Dependent t-test
Mean SD Stand. Error Mean t df p
Group AB* 1.83 7.69 2.22 .82 11 .42
Table Notes. SD =
Standard
Deviation
df = Degrees of
Freedom
*new method of rhythmic
instruction
Students who performed pattern set A and C scored the same mean (M=35, M=36)
respectively. Pattern set B saw the biggest increase from (M=30) to (M=37). The
dependent t-test result suggests that the beginning band students did not show significant
growth (p=.42) after several months of band method instruction in rhythmic performance.
The performance of rhythmic patterns then remained static with neither increases or
decreases.
Beginning band students from a local middle school, (n=7) were also
tested toward the end of beginning band method instruction. The public school was
visited on at least two occasions in order to recruit volunteer students to participate.
There were a minimal number of parental permission responses due to schedule changes
for standardized testing, shortened class times, and a week long spring break.
It is important to note that the beginning band students at the local middle school also
used the same beginning band method book as the pre-test/post-test group. These
students were tested in the same manner as the other groups, each subject was randomly
assigned to rhythm pattern set A, B, or C. The students were recorded and the scores
44
were assessed by the same educators. Results for these students (n=7) showed (M=20, SD
3.64). Pattern set results can be seen in the table below.
Table 6
Public School Group AB* Beginning Band Pattern Set Mean
Pattern Set A Pattern Set B Pattern Set C
35 32 34
Table notes. * New rhythmic instruction methods
Fifth grade students (Group AA) who had consistent rhythmic instruction (n=27)
were assigned to a pattern set randomly in order of performance. The scores of fifth grade
students (M=37, SD=4.84). Pattern set means can be seen below.
Table 7
Group AA*Pattern Set Means
Pattern Set A Pattern Set B Pattern Set C
35
37
40
Table notes. *Consistent method of rhythmic instruction
In order to measure the difference in performance abilities between fifth grade
students who continued to count and perform rhythms as previously presented (consistent
method), and beginning band students (new method) after a shift in band method
rhythmic instruction, an independent samples t-test compared the fifth grade scores and
all sixth grade scores, from both public and private schools. The independent samples t-
test showed a significant difference (p=.026) between students who had rhythmic
instruction in a consistent manner verses the beginning band students who had a different
method of rhythmic instruction.
45
Table 8
Independent Sample T-test
Mean SD df p
Group
AB*
35.03 3.21 19 .0 26
Group
AA**
37.48 4.84 26
Table Notes. SD = Standard Deviation df = Degrees of Freedom
*All beginning band student’s new method of rhythm instruction
**Consistent method of rhythm instruction
The steady beat was rated for each of the seven patterns as a Yes or No. Some
students were able to perform the rhythms correctly, but not within a steady beat. For
instance, Group AB pre-test scores for steady beat were two out of seven while the post-
test scores were three of seven. Mean scores for Group AB steady beat revealed that two
out of seven patterns were performed with steady beat.
The method in which students chose to perform the rhythmic patterns included
speaking only, clapping only, speaking and clapping, or some other method. Sixty-seven
percent of students in both the pre and post-tests choose to clap rhythmic patterns.
Seventeen percent performed rhythms in the speaking only and speaking and clapping
methods in both the pre and post-test.
Table 9
Method of Rhythmic Performance Group AB* (Pre & Post-Test)
Class Clapping Speaking Speaking/Clapping n
Group AB Pre-Test 67% 17% 17% 12
Mean 34.75
30.5
34
Group AB Post-Test 67%
17%
17% 12
Mean 37.14 32 32
Table notes. n=number of participants *new method of instruction
For the pre-test, sixth grade students beginning band students performed the rhythmic
patterns sixteen weeks (normally this would only be an eight-week summer break) after
46
fifth grade rhythmic instruction, which is reflected in the method of performance. Sixty-
seven percent of the subjects chose to perform the rhythms by clapping. Both speaking or
speaking and clapping were performed by seventeen percent of the subjects. The pre-test
resulted in the same percentage in each of the three categories. Considering that the sixth
grade students did not show any significant difference (p=.42) between pre and post-test
experience it stands to reason that their methods would not change. There was not a
continuation or repetition of previous rhythmic instruction methods but an absence of
familiar instruction which included both speaking and clapping of rhythms. Four students
who did speak continued to use the syllables, “ta, ti-ti”, even if the syllables were used
incorrectly.
Twenty-two percent of fifth grade subjects performed rhythms by clapping in
contrast to fifty-five percent of the 6th beginning band subjects. Forty-eight percent of
fifth graders chose to perform rhythmic patterns by speaking, while thirty-percent chose
to speak and clap the pattern. Most elementary methods utilize speaking of rhythms in
early grades and then add clapping to speaking in upper grades rhythmic instruction. Fifth
grade subjects in this study had a higher percentage of performance with either speaking
(48%) or speaking and clapping (30%). The students in fifth grade who utilized speaking
had the highest mean (M=54) in comparison to those students who only utilized clapping
(M=34).
47
Table 10
Method of Rhythmic Performance Comparison (GroupAB* and Group AA**)
Class Clapping Speaking Speaking/Clapping Clapping/other n
Group AB* 55% 15% 15% 10% 19
Mean 36.82 31.66 33.66 35
Group AA** 22% 48% 30% N/A 27
Mean 34 54 38
Table notes. n=number of participants *inconsistent rhythmic instruction ** new
rhythmic instruction
Beginning band students (Group AB) with new rhythmic instruction performed by
clapping (fifty-five percent), which reflects the method book of clapping and performing
rhythmic patterns (M=37). Both speaking and speaking/clapping represented fifteen
percent each, which is surprising since the method book uses both clapping and counting
aloud. The subjects who performed using speaking/clapping at the same time scored
higher (M=33.66) than those who only spoke (M=31.66).
The seven patterns were divided into three different sets, which presented the
rhythmic patterns in different order of progressions. Most rhythmic instruction for
elementary students begin with quarter notes and paired eighth-notes (Black, 1982). The
pattern sets did not follow a specific recommended order in order to determine if the
presentation of the patterns had an effect on the performance of the subjects. The subjects
who performed pattern set A (n=19) had the lowest overall score (M=35.11). Pattern set
B (n=16) scores were just slightly higher (M=35.38). Subjects (n=14) who had the
highest scores performed pattern set C (M=38.57).
Table 11
Pattern Set Means All Subjects
Pattern Set A Pattern Set B Pattern Set C
35.11 35.38 38.57
n= 19 16 14
48
The rhythmic presentation of patterns in set C follow more closely the recommended
progression of rhythmic patterns (Black, 1982). This suggests that the order of rhythms
may have had an effect on the performance of the rhythms. Students are most familiar
with quarter notes and rests, paired eighth-notes, and half notes and rests due to the
repetition/performance of these patterns throughout elementary music.
The null hypothesis for this study stated that the, “difference between
elementary and beginning band methods has no effect on student rhythmic achievement”.
The data gathered revealed a significant difference (p=.026) between students who had
consistent rhythmic instruction (Group AA) and beginning band students (Group AB)
who experienced a new method of rhythmic instruction. Therefore, the null hypothesis
for this study is rejected.
49
Chapter 5
Conclusions, Implications and Recommendations
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of a difference in rhythmic
instruction from consistent methods as used in elementary music education methods to
the different methods of rhythmic instruction as found in most beginning band method
books. One of the major differences between elementary music and beginning band
classes is that many elementary methodologies use word cues such as the Kodaly, Orff,
Gordon, or Takidimi method of rhythmic syllables to teach rhythmic patterns.
(Richardson, 2008). In beginning band however, the majority of band method books
approach rhythmic instruction using a mathematical approach or a counting system (Byo,
1988, Mason, 2012, Richardson, 2008, Santelli, 2007, & Dalby, 1999). This change in
rhythmic method instruction can cause confusion. Santelli suggests that if the same
method of rhythmic instruction is used and presented in elementary and middle school
music classes, students are then able to build upon their previous knowledge and
experiences (2007).
Jerome Bruner’s theories of conceptual learning led to curricula that were
sequenced developmentally. Although Bruner’s theory is primarily a developmental
theory, the premise applies in a music education setting (Boardman, 1988). Bruner’s
spiral curriculum and conceptual learning has been used as an elemental method of music
instruction (Taetle and Cuttieta, n.d.). A comparison of elementary and middle school
band methods reveals that there is very little to no “conceptual cohesiveness or curricular
unity” between the two areas even though there may only be one summer between the
methods. It was if students experienced music from one grade level to the next as an
50
“isolated entity” (Woods, 1982). When music educators provide music concepts in
similar ways to those used in upper level general music classes, a transfer of learning can
occur from one grade or class to the next level. Transfer learning is most successful when
there is a consistent practice of initial and similar concepts throughout the instruction
process (Santelli, 2007).
This premise led the to question what effect if any, would a change in rhythmic
instruction or the lack of sequenced, conceptual learning would have on the rhythmic
performance of students. Students are often able to perform more difficult rhythms in
general music classes than are presented in most beginning method books. Sixteenth note
rhythm patterns are experienced and performed by most elementary music students
as early as fourth grade. In contrast, this rhythmic pattern is generally not included in
beginning band method books until the second year of instruction. Instrumental method
books that leave more complex patterns to the next year can deprive students of the
consistent performance of patterns that increase the transfer of learning to new contexts
(Byo, 1998 & Watkins, 2011). This study was designed to measure the rhythmic
performance ability of students who receive consistent, sequenced rhythmic instruction
(5th grade) and beginning band students (6th grade) who receive new, different rhythmic
instruction. Because there is no standardized rhythmic testing measure, a researcher
designed rhythmic test was developed based upon state standards, two elementary fifth
grade curriculum standards, and consultation with experts in music education.
Research Question
What effect does the lack of continuity between elementary general music and
beginning band curricula have on the rhythmic performance of beginning band students?
51
Students were asked to perform seven basic rhythmic patterns based on state
standards and two fifth grade curriculum guides. These patterns included meters of two,
three, and four as well as quarter note and rest, paired eighth notes, single eighth notes,
half notes, dotted half notes, sixteenth notes and dotted sixteenth-eighth patterns. Rising
sixth grade subjects, who chose to participate in band (n=12) completed a pre-test using
these patterns before new rhythmic instruction method. According to Santelli, transfer
learning is most successful when there is a consistent practice of initial and similar
concepts throughout the instruction process (2007). Transfer of learning from one grade
level to the next is best accomplished by the consistent practice of initial and similar
concepts over a period of time (Woods, 1982). A reasonable expectation would be that
rising sixth graders who had experienced consistent rhythmic instruction in the previous
grade would be able to successfully perform and score higher on the rhythmic patterns. In
this study however, the scores (M=34, SD = 6.38) out of the possible fifty-two points did
not reflect a high transfer of learning.
It should be noted that due to school scheduling, beginning band students did not
begin class until mid-September. This delay might have negatively affected the results.
As noted previously by Woods (1982), Santelli (2007) and Bruner (1966), consistent
practice over a period of time leads to a transfer of learning from one grade level to the
next. Instead of the usual eight-week summer break, these students experienced an
approximate sixteen week break between rhythmic reading or performance. The subjects
did not participate in a review session.
The sixth grade subjects completed the same test measure after a new method of
rhythmic instruction from mid-September to mid-February. The scores were compared
52
using a dependent t-test. The dependent t-test showed there was not a significant
difference between pre-test and post-test scores (t(12)=1.83, p=.42). The post-test scores
on rhythmic patterns by the same subjects remained static with neither increases or
decreases. It is assumed that most educators would expect to see some growth during the
process of instruction and learning.
Method of performance
Students were encouraged to choose the method they wanted to perform the
rhythms: the patterns could be spoken, clapped, both spoken and clapped or any other the
way as long as it could be audibly recorded. Students were instructed to speak the word
“skip” if they were unsure of a specific rhythm and to speak the word “rest” if a rest was
included in the pattern. Sixty-seven percent of the subjects (Group AB) chose to perform
by clapping in both the pre/post-test. This choice of performance method could correlate
with the way clapping is added to rhythmic performance in the upper grades of
elementary rhythmic instruction. Only seventeen percent chose to speak and clap, which
would correlate to how rhythmic patterns are performed in fifth grade music. Considering
that the sixth grade students did not show any significant difference (p=.42) between pre
and post-test experience it stands to reason that their methods of performance would not
change. There was not a continuation or repetition of previous rhythmic instruction
methods but an absence of familiar instruction which included both speaking and
clapping of rhythms. Of the four students who did speak, there was a continued use of the
syllables, “ta, ti-ti”, even if the syllables were used incorrectly.
53
Of the fifth grade subjects who had consistent rhythmic instruction,
twenty-two percent performed rhythms by clapping in contrast to the fifty-five percent of
all 6th beginning band subjects (n=19). Forty-eight percent of fifth graders (n=27) chose
to perform rhythmic patterns by speaking, while thirty-percent chose to speak and clap
the pattern. Most elementary methods utilize speaking of rhythms in early grades and
then add clapping to speaking in upper grades rhythmic instruction. Fifth grade subjects
in this study had a higher percentage of performance with either speaking (48%) or
speaking and clapping (30%). The students in fifth grade who utilized speaking of
syllables had the highest mean (M=54) in comparison to those students who only utilized
clapping (M=34). The results correlate with many elementary methodologies which
employ the use word cues such as word cues such as “tah” for quarter notes and ti-ti” for
paired eighth notes are used as a way to teach students to recognize and feel the duration
of notation as they speak and clap or move their bodies to match the rhythm (Richardson,
2008).
Table 12 Comparison of Performance Methods
Method of Performance
Clapping only Clap & speak Speak Only Clap & other
Group AA n=20 22% 30% 48% N/A M 34 38 54 N/A
Group AB n=29 55% 15% 15% 10% M 36 33 31 35
54
Steady Beat
The rhythmic patterns were divided into seven flashcards, presented to students
one card at a time. Each pattern was scored with a Yes or No in regard to steady beat. It
was determined by the assessors that the entire pattern must be performed with a steady
beat throughout in order to be marked Yes. Some students were able to perform the
rhythms correctly, but not within a steady beat. It was noted that some students would
hesitate just enough to miss the steady beat throughout the entire pattern, but because the
student was able to accurately perform and represent the notated rhythm the rhythm was
counted as correct while the steady was indicated as No. Studies by Upitis (1983) and
Petzold (1963) have shown that as students grow older, beat or keeping time accuracy
will increase. However, individual developmental differences between students must be
considered in terms of rhythmic accuracy (Upitis, 1984).
Order of Rhythmic Pattern Presentation
The seven patterns were divided into three different sets, which presented the
rhythmic patterns in different order of progressions. Most rhythmic instruction for
elementary students begin with quarter notes and paired eighth-notes (Black, 1982). The
pattern sets did not follow a specific recommended order in order to determine if the
presentation of the patterns had an effect on the performance of the subjects. The subjects
who performed pattern set A (n=19) had the lowest overall score (M=35.11). Pattern set
B (n=16) scores were just slightly higher (M=35.38). Subjects (n=14) who had the
highest scores performed pattern set C (M=38.57). Subjects who performed pattern set C
had the highest scores. The rhythmic presentation of patterns in set C followed more
55
closely (but not exactly) the recommended progression of rhythmic patterns (Black,
1982). This suggests that the order of rhythms may have had an effect on the performance
of the rhythms. Students are most familiar with quarter notes and rests, paired eighth-
notes, and half notes and rests due to the repetition/performance of these patterns
throughout elementary music. Pattern set C can be seen below:
Figure 2. Pattern Set C
56
Null Hypothesis
The difference in rhythmic teaching between elementary and beginning band
methods has no effect on student rhythmic achievement.
Students with consistent rhythmic instructional methods (fifth grade) had a higher
mean (M=37.48, SD=4.84, n=27) than beginning band students (sixth grade) who
experienced a different rhythmic instructional method (M=35.03, SD=3.21, n=19). An
independent sample t-test showed a significant difference (p=.026) between the two
groups who had different instructional methods (t(44)=1.68, p=.026). The null hypothesis
must be rejected based on the statistical results for this study.
Rhythmic Pattern Differences
One possible reason for the significant difference could be that the majority of
beginning band methods do not use curricula that supports and builds upon student’s
previous knowledge, but instead seems to assume “that students have little accumulated
rhythmic knowledge” (Santelli, 2007 p. 76). Most beginning band method books do not
include the same rhythmic patterns that most elementary method courses cover. A 2011
comparison study by Watkins of twelve beginning band method books published between
1994 and 2010, showed that eleven of the twelve did not include sixteenth notes in the
first year of instruction. Gage’s 1994 study revealed that of the four method books
studied, there was a deficiency or deficit in “a sequence of rhythmic instruction between
the methods” (Wakins, 2011 p. 40).
An examination of several fifth grade music instruction frameworks contained
standard rhythmic patterns that included whole, half, dotted half, quarter note, two-eighth
57
notes, sixteenth notes, syncopation and combinations of eighth and sixteenth
note patterns . Fifth grade students commonly see these type of rhythms
as early as fourth grade and continue throughout grade five (Fine Arts: n.d.). Although
beginning band students do have many new tasks such as breath support and control, tone
production, and fingerings, consistent curricular alignment would ensure that students do
not lose rhythmic vocabulary by starting a completely new way of rhythm instruction
(Santelli, 2007). Continuous presentation and performance of the rhythmic patterns may
explain why Group AA had a higher score (M=37.48) than Group AB (M=35.03) who
did not review or perform some of the more difficult rhythms.
Movement and Steady Beat
The significant difference between rhythmic scores could also be linked to the
differences in way elementary general music classes and beginning classes are conducted.
General music classes often employ methodologies such as Orff, Dalcroze, and Kodaly as
an integral bridge in the process of learning music (Rowher, 1998). These methods all
promote multi-sensory musical experiences to aid in conceptual understanding (Gault,
2005). Educators who use such methodologies often have students learning rhythm
through movement (Westervelt, 2002).
In the Orff process for instance, movement is the foundational element used to
develop beat and rhythm competencies, as well as to develop rhythmic memory followed
by symbolic music notation (Mason, 2012). Most instrumental method books do not use
basic kinesthetic learning methods that are so readily used in general elementary music
(Rowher, 1998).
58
In a study of seven popular band method books, Collins (2013) determined that
six out of seven books used clapping exercises and only one of the seven used clapping or
foot tapping. None of the seven method books included any whole body movements or
activities to aid in learning. (Rowher, 1998). Reading music notation and the rhythms
contained within is an important part of beginning instrumental classes, but students
cannot learn to read and interpret the rhythm unless they have first experienced the
notation through movement (Conway, 2003). In a 1988 study by Byo, nine beginning
band methods published in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s were analyzed. Six of the
nine beginning methods did not use any type of movement in rhythmic instruction. When
compared to the movement activities used in elementary methods, beginning band
methods did not use a proven technique to enhance rhythm instruction. In a more recent
study, Watkins (2011) compared twelve of the more available beginning band methods.
Only one of the twelve included any type of movement in relation to rhythmic
instruction. Rowher states the most important information gained from rhythmic study is
that steady beat skills can be improved with the use of kinesthetic or movement activities
(1998). Steady beat scores were lower for Group AB which could be linked to the lack of
movement included in beginning band methods.
Different Methods of Rhythmic Performance
In elementary landscape of rhythmic instruction, methods can be exclusive
or are blended. One of the major differences between elementary music and beginning
band classes is that many elementary methodologies use word cues from methodologies
such as Orff, Kodaly, or Takidimi rhythmic syllables to teach rhythmic patterns. Word
cues such as “tah” for quarter notes and “ti-ti” for paired eighth notes are used as a way to
59
teach students to recognize and feel the duration of notation as they speak and clap or
move their bodies to match the rhythm (Richardson, 2008). The figure below
demonstrates a few of the many word cues that can be found in elementary methodology.
Figure 3.
Word Cue Methods
Method
Kodaly ta ti-ti ti-ka-ti-ka Tri-o-la
Gordon Du Du-de Du-ta-de-ta Du-da-di
Takadimi Ta Ta-di Ta-ka-di-mi Ta-ki-di
Orff* “Bee” “Bum-ble” “Yell-ow-jack-
et”
“blue-ber-ry”
Table notes. *Words can be substituted based on the duration of the word or song
The opposite is true for beginning band rhythmic instruction. Most instrumental classes
approach rhythm instruction from a mathematical perspective based on the ratio of note
durations (Dalby, 1999). A study by Santelli (2007) revealed that the majority of band
method books approach rhythmic instruction using a mathematical approach or a
counting system. According to Richardson, the number based counting system is the most
commonly used rhythmic instruction technique (2008). Byo’s 1988 comparison of
method books found that eight out of nine methods used the number system for counting
rhythms. This way of teaching rhythm is often referred to as the rhythm tree. The figure
below shows an example of the mathematical or numerical number counting system.
60
Subjects from Group AB (fifty-five percent) performed rhythmic patterns by clapping
which is consistent with the method book procedures. Fifteen percent of Group AB
counted the rhythms by the number system. Subjects from Group AA spoke the rhythm
syllable (forty-eight percent) which is consistent with elementary rhythmic instruction
(M=54). Another thirty-percent of the subjects from Group AA both spoke the rhythm
syllable and clapped (M=38), which is also consistent with elementary practices. Subjects
who spoke the rhythmic syllables scored the highest, followed by clapping and spoken
rhythmic syllables at the same time. This seems to suggest that the consistent repetition
of rhythmic instruction provided a solid knowledge base from which the student could
recall.
Summary
Based on the premise of Bruner’s spiral curriculum, learning concepts should be
presented at the “appropriate level and periodically with greater levels of complexity”
(Taetle and Cutietta, n.d). This led the to question, “shouldn’t music students’
experiences build conceptually in the cross over between elementary general music and
beginning band or chorus?” When there is consistent practice of initial and similar
concepts throughout the instruction process, it is more likely that a transfer of learning
will occur (Santelli, 2007).
61
In this study students who had consistent practice of initial and similar concepts,
in this case rhythmic performance, were able to score higher on the test measure.
Students who had consistent rhythmic instruction encountered “gradual, increasing
presentations of concepts” that built upon “previous knowledge or experience” (McLeod,
2008). Students who did not experience a consistent practice of similar concepts, but
were taught the some of the same rhythmic patterns in a different way, demonstrated a
loss in regards to rhythmic performance. An independent t-test showed there was a
significant difference between Group AA (who had consistent rhythmic instruction and
Group AB (who experienced a new method of rhythmic instruction (p=.026).
One of the major differences between elementary music and beginning band
classes is that many elementary methodologies use word cues such as the Kodaly, Orff,
Gordon, or Takidimi method of rhythmic syllables to teach rhythmic patterns. The
majority of band method books teach rhythm using a mathematical approach or a
counting system (See Figure 3 & 4).
This means that beginning band students (Group AB) had to learn a new method
of counting rhythms when it would be much easier if the rhythms were presented in the
same way as they had previously been instructed (Group AA). This method would also
make the transfer of previous learning to new learning easier due to the similarity of
previous rhythm recognition. When the same method of instruction is presented in
elementary and middle school music classes, students are able to build upon their
previous knowledge and experiences (Santelli, 2007).
The results of this study indicates there is a definite need for a connection
between elementary general music methods and beginning band method book instruction.
62
Research supports that the instructional methods used successfully in elementary classes
can also be successful in beginning band instruction (Mason, 2012). Methodologies
found in elementary classes can be used in instrumental settings to continue the rhythmic
development of students moving from one grade level to the next (West, 2015). When
general elementary music teachers and instrumental teachers have aligned curricula, the
musical concepts learned in elementary class can be more easily transferred to
instrumental learning. Consistent terminology and approaches will ensure that students
transfer learning from one level to the next (Conway, 2013). A holistic musical approach
across the school levels will provide a more cohesive musical education experience. By
creating connections between elementary music and instrumental music, students are
allowed to build upon previous experience without a grade level gap.
Recommendations
Due to the small sample size (n=47) it is recommended that more studies such as
this one be conducted with larger sample sizes and multiple schools. A longitudinal study
would also benefit music educational practices. Curriculum directors are encouraged to
seek ways to bridge the gap between elementary rhythmic instruction and beginning band
instruction. “Instrumental directors and elementary specialists can make the instrumental
curriculum a continuation of the general music program” (Burnsed & Fiocca, 1990).
Communication between elementary specialists and instrumental specialists regarding
curriculum and methods will ensure a cohesive music education program. Both levels of
educators should meet to collaborate based upon scope and sequence, so that they can
create continuity within the music education program. Perhaps an even better scenario
63
would be the collaboration of general elementary music method curricula developers and
beginning instrumental music curricular methods developers to create a cohesive method
of teaching elementary students who move to middle school instrumental classes. Music
educators and curriculum directors must ensure that elementary content standards are
considered as the district develops courses that build upon the transfer of knowledge from
elementary music to middle school music. Music educators must ask critical questions
regarding the difference and gap between elementary music methods and middle school
music methods.
64
References
Abrahams, F. (2005). The application of critical pedagogy to music teaching and
learning. Visions of Research in Music Education, 6. Retrieved from http://
Rider.edu/~vrme
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Sorensen, C. K., & Walker, D. A. (2014). Introduction to
research in education. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Barry, N. H. (1992). Music and education in the elementary music methods class. Journal
of Music Teacher Education, 2(1), 16-23. doi: 10.1177/105708379200200104
Benchmarking Inter-Rater Reliability Coefficients. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.agreestat.com/book3/bookexcerpts/chapter6.pdf
Black, S. (1982). The application of the Kodaly method to instrumental music education.
Retrieved from
http://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1440&context=honor
s-theses
Boardman, E. (1988). The generative theory of musical learning: Parts 1, 2, & 3. General
Music Today, 2(1-3), Retrieved from http://www-
usr.rider.edu/~vrme/v11n1/vision/Boardman Generative Theory.pdf
Brogan, R. (2009, December). Reliability. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/reliability/
Burnsed, V., & Fiocca, P. (1990). Bringing General Music Techniques to the
Instrumental Class. Music Educators Journal, 76(6), 45. Retrieved from
www.jstor.org.library.acaweb.org/stable/3400967.
Byo, J. (1988). Beginning band instruction: A comparative analysis of selected class
65
method books. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 7(1), 19-
23. doi:10.1177/875512338800700106
Cash, Carla Davis. "The Music is in the Rhythm." Clavier Companion. no. March/April
(2011): 52. www.claviercompanion.com
Cognitive Constructivism. (2015). Retrieved from http://gsi.berkeley.edu/gsi-guide-
Collins, L. A. (2013). A teacher resource guide for beginning band in an urban school
setting centered on adapting the standard of excellence comprehensive band
method according to brain-based method of education. (Unpublished master's
thesis). Retrieved from
http://www.lvc.edu/library/documents/theses/Collins_MME_2013.pdf
Conklin, Hillary. "Methods and the Middle: Elementary and Secondary Preservice
Teacher's Views on Their Preparation for Teaching Middle School." Research in
Middle Level Education Online. (2007): 1-16.
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ801110.pdf
Conway, C. M. (2003). Good rhythm and intonation from day one in beginning
instrumental music. Music Educator's Journal, 89(5), 26-31. doi:
10.2307/3399916
Dalby, B. (1999). Teaching audiation in instrumental classes. Music Educator's Journal,
85(6), doi: 10.2307/3399517
Dalby, B. (2005). Toward an effective pedagogy for teaching rhythm: Gordon and
beyond. Music Educator's Journal, 92(1), 54. doi:10.2307/3400228
Dalby, B. (n.d.). The gordon institute for music learning. Retrieved from
http://giml.org/docs/AboutMLT.pdf
66
Davis, C. D. (2011, March/April). The music is in the rhythm. Clavier Companion, 3(2),
52-53. www.claviercompanion.com
Feldman, E., & Contzius, A. (nd). Instrumental education: Teaching with the musical and
practical in harmony.
http://www.chromaticartists.com/uploads/3/1/2/4/3124452/methods_of_music_ed
-ucation.pdf
Ferguson, L. (2005). The role of movement in elementary education: A literature review.
Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 23(2), 23-33.
doi: 10.1177/87551233050230020104
Fine Arts: Dance, Music, Theatre, Visual Art. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://tn.gov/education/article/arts-education
Frisbie, D. A. (1988). Reliability of scores from teacher-made tests. Educational
Measurement: Issues and Practice Educational Measure: Issues Practice, 7(1), 25-
35. Retrieved from www.ncme.org.
Gault, B. (2005). Music learning through all the channels: Combining aural, visual,
and kinesthetic strategies to develop musical understanding. General Music
Today, 19(1), 7-9. doi:10.1177/10483713050190010103
Geoghegan, L. (2006). Why musicianship training according to the principles of zoltan
kodaly. Retrieved from
http://www.britishkodalyacademy.org/public_downloads/why_kodalyLG2006.pdf
Gruhn, W. (2006). Music learning in schools: Perspectives of a new foundation for music
teaching and learning. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 5(2), 1-
27. Retrieved from http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/Gruhn5_2.pdf
67
Hoffman, R., Pelto, W., & White, J. (1996). Takadimi: A beat-oriented system of
rhythm pedagogy. Journal of Music Theory Pedagogy, 10, 7-30. Retrieved from
http://www.takadimi.net/documents/TakadimiArticle.pdf
Humphreys, J. (1989). An overview of american public school bands and orchestras
before world war II. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education,
101(Summer), 50-60. Retrieved from http://0-
www.jstor.org.library.acaweb.org/stable/40318374
Isbell, D. (2012). Learning theories: Insights for music educators. General Music Today,
25(2), 19-23. doi: 10.1177/1048371311425684
Keast, D. (2009). A constructivist application for online learning in music education.
Research and issues in music education, 17(1), Retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ894765.pdf
Mason, N. F. (2012). The effect of orff schulwerk instruction on rhythmic achievement
in beginning band. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Available from Pro Quest.
(1506961102). Retrieved from Document
URLhttp://search.proquest.com/docview/1506961102
McLeod, S. (2008). Bruner - Learning theory in education. Retrieved from
http://www.simplypsychology.org/bruner.html
Music Curriculum Framework. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.tmea.org/assets/pdf/educator_toolkit/8_1_Music_Frameworks.pdf
Long, A. (2013). Involve me: Using the orff approach within the elementary classroom.
68
Retrieved from
http://thekeep.eiu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=lib_awards_201
3_docs
Persellin, D. C. (1992). Responses to rhythm patterns when presented to children
through auditory, visual, and kinesthetic modalities. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 1992(40), 306-315. doi: 10.2307/3345838
Regelski, T. (2002). On "methodolatry" and music teaching as critical and reflective
praxis. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 10(2), 102-123. Retrieved from
http://0-www.jstor.org.library.acaweb.org/stable/40327184
Reifinger, J. L. (2006). Skill development in rhythm perception and performance: A
review of literature. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 25(1),
15-27. doi:10.1177/87551233060250010103
Richardson, C. (2008, Spring). Teaching students to be rhythmically independent.
Canadian Music Educator, 49(3), 41-43. cmea.ca
Rinaldo, V., & Denig, S. (2009). A constructivist approach to learning music: What
role, if any, does active engagement play in the learning process?. Retrieved from
http://www.jpacte.org/uploads/9/0/0/6/9006355/2009-1-rinaldo_denig.pdf
Rohwer, D. (1998). Effect of movement instruction on steady beat perception,
synchronization, and performance. Journal of Research in Music Education,
46(3), 414-424. doi: 10.2307/3345553
Sale, C., Walton, S. R., Glennon, A., Cook, J., Klein, J., Mills, R. M., Stadler, J. &
Lopez, Z., Johnson, J., Kramer, R. (2013, May/June). How do you teach
the dotted-quarter eighth note rhythm?. Clavier Companion, 5(3), 34-38.
69
www.claviercompanion.com
Sangiorgio, A. M. (2006, July ). Models of an orff approach integrating edwin gordon's
music learning theory. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/4134458/Models_of_an_Orff_approach_integrating_E
dwin_Gordons_Music_Learning_Theory
Santelli, C. (2007). An examination of students’ ability to transfer rhythmic concepts
taught in elementary general music classes to middle school beginning band
instruction. (Electronic Thesis or Dissertation). Retrieved from
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1208991892
State Report Card. (n.d.). Retrieved from State Report Card-Tn.gov
Welcome to GreatSchools. (n.d.). Retrieved February 20, 2016, from
http://www.greatschools.org/
Taetle, L., & Cutietta, R. (n.d.). Learning theories as roots of current musical practice
and research. Retrieved from
http://www.posgrado.unam.mx/musica/lecturas/educacion/Learning theories.pdf
Upitis, R. (1984, June). Children's understanding of rhythm: The relationship between
development and musical training [Scholarly project]. Retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED250071.pdf
Wakins, Kie (2011). An analysis of select beginning band method books and the level to
which they address the national standards for music education (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). The Ohio State University
West, C. (2015). Developing internal musicianship in beginning band by teaching the
"big 5". Music Educators Journal, 101(3), 101-106. doi:
70
10.1177/0027432114565392
Westervelt, T. (2002, Spring). Beginning continuous fluid motion in the music
classroom. General Music Today, 15(3), 13-19.
doi:10.1177/104837130201500305
What is orff schulwerk? (n.d.). Retrieved from http://aosa.org/about/what-is-orff-
schulwerk/
Woods, D. (1982). A model for curriculum construction in music, the
american/icelandic
project. Music Educators Journal, 68(9), 42-44. Retrieved from http://0-
www.jstor.org.library.acaweb.org/stable/339
71
Appendix A
Pattern Set A
72
Appendix B
Pattern Set B
73
Appendix C
Pattern Set C
74
Appendix D
Parental Consent Letter
Research Participation Invitation
Study Title: Teaching Methodologies in Elementary Music and Beginning Band: The Affect on Student Rhythmic AchievementTeaching Methodologies in Elementary Music and Beginning Band: The Affect on Student Rhythmic Achievement
Dear Parent or Guardian,
My name is Mrs. Leslie Benson. I am doctoral candidate in the Education
Department of Carson Newman University. I am conducting a research study as part of
the requirements for my degree in Education, and I would like to invite your band student
to participate.
I am collecting information on how students in fifth grade and sixth grade beginning band
students learn to read and perform rhythms. If you decide to allow your student to participate, he or
she will be asked to read and perform seven (7) basic rhythm patterns. This would take place during
band class, not before or after school. It should only take about seven (7) to ten (10) minutes to
complete and it will be a one-time occurrence. This process would be similar to the normal stresses
of a classroom testing situation, except it will not affect student grades. Student responses will be
digitally recorded. In this study, student identity will be protected by replacing a student’s name
with a random number and only I will know who is on the recording. Educators who help score the
digital recordings for accuracy will only be given the student number and will not know the identity
of the student.
Students do not have to participate, and it will not affect their grades. If your
student decides to participate, it could help music teachers learn more about how students
learn rhythms. Students can change their minds and decide to stop at any time. The
75
student will not get any treats or prizes for participating. It will just be something that the
student will do one time.
I will be happy to answer any questions you may have about the study. If you
have any questions you can always e-mail me at [email protected] or leave me a
message at 865-363-4344 and I will return your call. Please sign the Parental Permission
Form and send the form to your child’ band teacher.
With Best Regards,
Mrs. Leslie Benson, Doctoral Candidate
Carson Newman University
76
Parental Permission Form
Study Title: Teaching Methodologies in Elementary Music and Beginning Band:
The Affect on Student Rhythmic Achievement
Researcher: Mrs. Leslie M. Benson, Doctoral Candidate
Carson Newman University
________________________________________________________________________
__________________
I have read the information contained in this letter about the above titled study, which
describes what my child will be asked to do if (s)he wants to participate in the study; and,
Yes – I give permission for my child to participate in the study
-OR-
No – I do not give permission for my child to participate in the study
________________________________ ____________
Parent/Guardian Signature Date
________________________________ ____________
Child’s Name Age
77
Appendix E
Student Recruitment Script
Dissertation Subject Recruit Script
Hi, I’m Mrs. Benson a teacher at a school nearby. I am collecting information on how
students in fifth grade and sixth grade beginning band students learn and perform
rhythms. In a few weeks I am hoping that some students will volunteer to read and
perform some basic rhythms. This would take place during your band class, not
before or after school.
I will show you a total of 7 (seven) rhythm flash cards one at a time. I will ask you to
count, clap, or speak the rhythm. You will choose how you want to perform the
rhythms. You will be recorded and then someone will listen to it and tell me which
rhythms you can read. Your name will be replaced with a number, so no one will
know who is on the recording.
You don’t have to participate, and nothing bad will happen to you if don’t. If you
decide to participate, it could help music teachers learn more about how students
learn rhythms. You can ask questions before you decide to participate, and your
parents will have to say it’s ok. I have a special form for you to take home to your
parents. It will explain my study and it will ask them to sign it. Please return this
form back to your band teacher.
78
You can leave the study at any time. If you decide to stop participating in the study,
nothing bad will happen. You will not get any treats or prizes for participating. It
will just be something that you do one time and then you will be finished. If you
have any questions you can ask me now, or you can always e-mail me.
Thank you,
Mrs. L. M. Benson
Doctoral Candidate
Carson Newman University
I can be contacted in this way:
79
Appendix F
Student Recording Script
Dissertation Student Recording Script
I am going to show you seven (7) rhythms patterns, one at a time. I will begin the
recording with an IPad and say the number of the rhythm pattern. When I say,
“ready, go” you can begin to read and perform the rhythm pattern. You can decide
how you want to perform the rhythm. For example, you can speak the rhythm out
loud or clap and count the rhythm. If there is a rhythm that you don’t know, it’s ok.
Just keep going and give it a try. You can say skip if there is a rhythm you do not
know and then continue on to the next rhythm you do know. It helps if you can
“rest” if there is one in the pattern. Can you see the rhythm? Do you have any
questions before we begin?