Teaching and Rehearsal Behaviors of Instrumental Music Teachers
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
TEACHING AND REHEARSAL BEHAVIORS OF INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC TEACHERS Marla Beebe A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF MUSIC August 2007 Committee: Elaine J. Colprit, Advisor Nancy Sugden © 2007 Marla Beebe All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Elaine J. Colprit, Advisor The purpose of this study was to examine teacher verbalizations in band rehearsals. Three instrumental music teachers with two ensembles of different levels of playing experience were chosen as subjects. One rehearsal of each ensemble was recorded and divided into rehearsal frames. Using SCRIBE: Simple Computer Recording Interface for Behavioral Evaluation, data were collected relative to (a) aspects of music performance rehearsed, (b) sequence of instruction, (c) use of positive and negative feedback, (d) the effect of directives on student performance, and (e) articulation of performance problems in terms of instrumental technique or musical outcome. Primary attention was given to differences in teacher and student behavior depending on an ensemble’s level of playing experience. Results indicated that teacher modeling of targeted music passages led to substantial improvement in student performance. All directors described musical problems in terms of musical outcome more often than as change in physical behavior. Directives requesting change in physical behavior led to successful student performance more often than those requesting a change in musical outcome. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my committee members, Dr. Elaine Colprit and Dr. Nancy Sugden. They encouraged me each step of the way, from helping me develop the content of the study through editing revisions. Each has helped me become a better researcher, writer, and thinker both during the thesis preparation process and as mentors outside of this context. Special thanks to the three directors who agreed to be a part of this study. They were more than willing to open their rehearsals and to allow me to analyze their teaching. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I. STATEMENT OF THE PURPOSE............................................................... 1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 1 Purpose of the Study .................................................................................................. 3 CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ....................................................................... 5 CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................... 15 Subjects...................................................................................................................... 15 Procedure ................................................................................................................... 15 CHAPTER IV. RESULTS.................................................................................................... 18 CHAPTER V. DISCUSSION............................................................................................... 34 Suggestions for Further Research .............................................................................. 41 Implications for Music Education.............................................................................. 41 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 43 APPENDIX A. TABLES...................................................................................................... 47 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 New Music Ensemble Rehearsal Frame Timeline with no Performance Trial ......... 19 2 New Music Ensemble Rehearsal Frame with One Performance Trial ...................... 20 3 New Music Ensemble Rehearsal Frame Timeline with Two Targets and Multiple Performance Trials..................................................................................................... 21 4 University Band Rehearsal Frame Timeline with Director Modeling and Multiple Performance Trials..................................................................................................... 22 5 University Band Rehearsal Frame Timeline with Director Modeling and Multiple Performance Trials..................................................................................................... 23 6 High School Band Rehearsal Frame Timeline with Modeling a Corrective Directive Early in the Frame...................................................................................... 24 7 Seventh Grade Band Rehearsal Frame Timeline with Question (Stu = Student Talk)................................................................................................... 25 8 Seventh Grade Rehearsal Frame Timeline with Cycling (S/St = Student Talk) ....... 26 9 Seventh and Eighth Grade Band Rehearsal Frame Timeline Showing Concise Instruction…... ........................................................................................................... 27 10 Beginning Band Rehearsal Frame Timeline with Modeling ..................................... 28 CHAPTER I. STATEMENT OF THE PURPOSE Introduction Many researchers have investigated what constitutes effective teaching (Cavitt, 2003; Goolsby, 1997; Hendel, 1995; Price, 1983; Yarbrough & Price, 1989). One area in which a teacher must be competent is in creating a logical sequence of instruction. Rosenshine (1976) pointed out in his review of research that general educators found direct instruction promising. In direct instruction lessons are scripted and arranged in small steps with clearly outlined goals and prescribed teacher feedback. This results in teacher-centered instruction and leaves little room for a student’s response to differ from what is expected. In a typical teaching situation a teacher must adapt the sequence of instruction to a variety of student responses. If, when reading, a student struggles to recognize certain words and consequently cannot read a selected passage, the teacher may need to deviate from a planned sequence to review these words. Music educators must make similar adaptations as well. For example, a band director may identify a section of a piece in which the trumpets are slowing the tempo. The band director initially focuses the sequence of instruction on maintaining a steady tempo. However, in the midst of this particular sequence of instruction, the band director may find that all students were not using the correct articulation in this passage. The band director might then diverge from his/her sequence to address that problem. Music researchers have studied both sequence of instruction and feedback. Yarbrough and Price (1989) connected a model of direct instruction to music rehearsals. They pared down the direct instruction outline to a cycle of teaching called a sequential pattern of instruction. This sequence has three basic components: teacher presentation of task, student response, and reinforcement (approvals and disapprovals). Price (1983) found that when a teacher did utilize a sequence of academic task presentation, directions, student performance, and feedback, greater 2 gains were made in music improvement than in other treatment groups in which teachers provided neither verbal nor nonverbal feedback. In a complete teaching cycle a teacher responds to the students after they have performed the material. Yarbrough and Price (1989) also found that when experienced teachers gave approvals and disapprovals, disapprovals were delivered at a much higher rate than approvals whereas novice teachers were decidedly more approving in their verbal feedback. Kostka (1984) also examined the delivery of teacher feedback in her study of piano teachers of all experience levels and found that in the private lesson setting, the ratio of approvals to disapprovals was nearly 1:1. Duke (1994) described teaching as comprised of “rehearsal frames” in which the teacher identifies a target and directs the student through a sequence of performance trials designed to move in incremental steps toward a performance goal (p. 84). A rehearsal frame ends when a target is finally played in its original context or when a teacher decides to move on. A target, as defined by Duke, is “the conductor’s identification of a specific musical-instructional goal” (1994, p. 86). Each directive given by a teacher guides a student through successive approximations of a target. In addition to directives, teacher verbalizations typically include information, questions, positive and negative verbal feedback, and off-task talking (Duke, 1999). Within rehearsal frames, a music teacher addresses certain areas of concern in student performance when selecting targets. Goolsby’s 1997 study comparing preservice and three career levels of teachers used these areas of concern as performance variables. They included posture, rhythm/tempo, dynamics, notes, and style. He found rhythm/tempo was addressed most frequently by all three career levels of teachers, but expert teachers also addressed tone, intonation, expression/phrasing, articulations, and guided listening to a greater degree than novices. In another study, Cavitt (2003) found intonation, articulation, and rhythm to be most frequently addressed by excellent band directors. 3 According to Saunders and Worthington (1990), succinct communication of directives results in more time for student performance. Goolsby (1996, 1999) found