Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians Implementation Plan 2012-2015 Is

qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqw ertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert

yuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopaImplementation Plan 2012-2015 sdfghjklzxcvbnmqwBernard W. Andrewsertyuiopasdf Faculty of Education ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjUniversity of Ottawa

December 21st, 2012 klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklz Report prepared for the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcv(OCDSB) bnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn

mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwe rtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjk lzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwe

Preface

Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians is a research/creation partnership project

involving the Faculty of Education at the University of Ottawa and Curriculum Services of the

Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (OCDSB). Over a three-year period, 18 new research-

based compositions will be created by professional composers in collaboration with students and

their teachers. The conceptualization, development and refinement of the compositions will be

studied by the research team.

Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians Implementation Plan 2012-2015 is

intended for those composers, teachers, research team members, and school board staff participating in the project. This report outlines the roles and responsibilities of the participants

and a three-year timetable for implementation of the project. It also includes letters of invitation

for composers and teachers, consent forms, research protocols, the commission contract, and relevant references. Details of the Making Music Project can be accessed at the following website: https://sites.google.com/site/makingmusicproject2013/.

Table of Contents

Preface …………………………………………………………………………. P. 1

Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………… P. 2

Overview of the Project ……………………………………………………….. P. 3

Project Logistics ………………………………………………………………. P. 5

Ethics Certificate ……………………………………………………………... P. 8

Letters of Invitation .………………………………………………………….. P. 9

Consent Form ……………………………………………………………….. P. 11

Research Protocols ………………………………………………………….. P. 17

Commission Contract ………………………………………………………...P. 22

References …………………………………………………………………... P. 25

Overview of the Project

In Canada, there is limited original music available for students enrolled in school music programs due to a lack of familiarity by composers of the parameters educational music, the perception by them that such music is of lesser quality than music written for professionals, the lack of commissions for school music programs, and the dominance of American and European music in schools. The purpose of this study, entitled Making Music: Composing with Young

Musicians, is to obtain an in-depth understanding of how composers can collaborate with young musicians and their teachers to create educational music. The principal question is "How can co- creation of new music by professional composers and young musicians with their teachers promote musical development?” The secondary questions and attendant research protocols are nested within the four dimensions of musical creativity specific to music composition: i)

Composing Prerequisites “How can musical ideas be conceptualized and developed in collaboration with students and teachers?” (composer record); ii) Compositional Process “What aspects of the compositions reflect student and teacher input?” (composition commentary); iii)

Product “What musical knowledge and skills are developed when students and teachers co-create music with composers in schools?” (learning report); and iv) Person “What do students and teachers learn from collaboration with professional composers? (teacher questionnaire).

Composers are one of our greatest natural resources. Unfortunately, the musical works of many contemporary Canadian composers are inaccessible to young musicians, and consequently, they have virtually no impact on their musical education. The fundamental problem is that composers in conservatories and universities learn highly developed compositional techniques playable only by professional performers for specialized audiences. Many of them do not know how to write

3 using musical language that is comprehensible to young people, and they need to learn how to compose effectively for students enrolled in school music programs and studio instruction.

The different ways that young musicians interpret sound and the varied levels of technical ability among them produce unique challenges for composers creating new music for students enrolled in elementary and secondary school music programs. These challenges cannot be resolved by conventional methods alone, that is through textbooks, score study, and listening activities, but also require problem-solving and contact with young performers. This multi-year study with 18 commissioned composers will explore the creative solutions that composers implement in generating new music in collaboration with 18 associate teachers and their students. It is based on the assertion that the development of high calibre music appropriate for young people is contingent on effective practice; that is, on successful engagement among composers, students and teachers in the creative process within school classrooms.

Participation in the Making Music Project will enable students and teachers to understand how music is created and allow them to provide direct input into the creative process: teachers will obtain new repertoire; and composers will learn how to compose educational music more effectively. The project will also develop procedural knowledge for teaching music composition across the educational spectrum. The OCDSB will have access to research expertise, input into the administration of the study, and benefit from the findings, such as knowledge of musical creativity by teachers and students, and 18 new Canadian compositions for teaching and learning purposes. The research team will have access to participants for the research, financial and in- kind support, and the opportunity to disseminate findings directly to practitioners and students.

Project Logistics

Roles, Responsibilities and Time-Lines

Composers:

• complete the consent form and contract, and submit them to Principal Investigator (PI)

• liaison with PI on a regular basis

• contact the Associate Teacher (AT) and develop a timetable upwards of 4-6 on-site visits

• conceptualize and compose a new work in collaboration with students and their teacher

• workshop and refine the new work in rehearsals with the students and their teacher

• complete the composer record online after each on-site visit to the assigned school

• attend the premiere performance if feasible

• submit a PDF of the score and parts to the PI

• complete the composition commentary online at the conclusion of the project

• provide input into the research findings

• provide invoices for payment of commission and travel in a timely manner, including

social insurance number (SIN) and date of birth (DOB)

Music Teachers:

• complete the consent form and submit to PI

• liaison with the Commissioned Composer (CC)

• develop a timetable for 4 on-site visits to the classroom by the composer

• review the curricular expectations with the composer

• provide adequate rehearsal time to prepare a performance

• provide pedagogical input to the composer on developing and refining the work

• perform the new work at a school event (e.g., concert, festival, open house) with students

• record the premiere performance and submit recording to PI

• complete the learning report online after each composer on-site visit to the school

• complete the teacher questionnaire online on completion of the project

Research Team:

• design the research plan

• obtain research funds

• obtain and update the Ethics Certificate on a yearly basis (refer to Page 9)

• select commissioned composers and obtain consent forms and contracts

• contact associate teachers and obtain consent forms

• collect data from composers (composer record, composition commentary) and teachers

(learning report, teacher questionnaire)

• analyse and interpret the data

• write-up the findings

• attend on-site visits and premieres when feasible

• monitor the progress of the project

• liaise with the Arts Instructional Coaches (AIC’s) at the OCDSB on a regular basis

• provide updates on the progress of the project to the OCDSB and University of Ottawa

OCDSB Staff

• select schools and associate teachers

• liaise with PI on a regular basis

• facilitate the transfer of commission funds to the University of Ottawa for processing

• arrange meetings with the research team and teachers

Yearly Time-lines: 2012-20151

• December: selection of commissioned composers and associate teachers

• January: collection of consent forms and commissioning contracts; telephone contact

with teachers by composers to establish on-site visits

• February: 1st on-site visits to students and teachers to assess skills and obtain input;

submissions of comments in composer records and learning reports online

• March: 2nd on-site visits to rehearse drafts of compositions with students and teachers

and obtain input; comments in composer records and learning reports online

• April: 3rd on-site visits to refine new works with students and teachers and obtain input;

comments in composer records and learning reports online

• May: premieres by school ensembles at spring events (e.g., concert, festival, open house)

• June: submissions of composition commentaries and teacher questionnaires online at the

completion of the project; PDF of the scores and parts to PI

• July: printing of the scores and parts of new compositions

• September: rehearsals by UToronto Wind Symphony and Nepean All-City Jazz Band

• October: studio recording of the new works

• November: debriefing meeting with teachers to receive scores, parts and recordings

1 Please note that the Making Music Project timeline is flexible as unanticipated events may arise throughout the winter months. The goal is to co-create a new composition with students and teachers, refine the work during rehearsals, and premiere it at a school event (e.g., concert, festival, open house) in each year of the project. 7

Ethics Certificate

December 21st, 2012

[Composer’s Co-ordinates]

Dear [Composer’s Name]

You are invited to participate in a research study entitled Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians. This study is the research component of a research/creation partnership project which involves the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (OCDSB) and the University of Ottawa. The purpose of the study is to obtain an in- depth understanding of how composers can collaborate with young musicians and their teachers to create educational music.

The commission fee is $2,000.00 for a 3-minute composition. The travel fee for 4 on-site visits to your assigned school is $200.00 (4 x $50.00) for Ottawa-area composers and $400.00 (4 x $100.00) for composers outside of Eastern Ontario/Western Quebec. The on-site visits are designed to provide opportunities for you to collaborate with students and their teachers to co-create an educational work.

If you are willing to participate in this research study and accept the commission, please review and sign the attached consent form and return this document to me by regular mail by Monday, January 21st, 2013. Alternately, you may fax the consent form or scan and e-mail it to me. Subsequently, a commission contract will be sent to you with the co-ordinates of your associate teacher.

Thank you for considering this request. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Dr. B. W. Andrews, Principal Investigator (PI), Faculty of Education, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5 Bus: (613) 562-5800 ex. 4028 Fax: (613) 562-5146; E-mail: [email protected].

December 21st, 2012

[Teacher’s Co-ordinates]

Dear [Teacher’s Name]

You are invited to participate in a research study entitled Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians. This study is the research component of a research/commission partnership project with the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (OCDSB) and the University of Ottawa. The purpose of the research is to obtain an in-depth understanding of how composers can collaborate with young musicians and their teachers to create educational music.

If you are willing to participate in this research study, please review and sign the attached consent form and return this document to me by regular mail by Monday, January 21st, 2013. Alternately, you may fax the consent form or scan and e-mail it to me. Please retain a copy for your records.

Thank you for considering this request. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Dr. B. W. Andrews, Principal Investigator (PI), Faculty of Education, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5 Bus: (613) 562-5800 ex. 4028; Fax: (613) 562-5146; E-mail: [email protected]

[Composers] The purpose of the study, entitled Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians, is to obtain an in-depth understanding of how composers can collaborate with young musicians and their teachers to create educational music. The principal question is "How can co- creation of new music by professional composers and young musicians with their teachers promote musical development?” The secondary questions and attendant research protocols are nested within the four dimensions of musical creativity specific to music composition: i) Composing Prerequisites “How can musical ideas be conceptualized and developed in collaboration with students and teachers?” (composer record); ii) Compositional Process “What aspects of the compositions reflect student and teacher input?” (composition commentary); iii) Product “What musical knowledge and skills are developed when students and teachers co-create music with composers in schools?” (learning report); and iv) Person “What do students and teachers learn from collaboration with professional composers?” (teacher questionnaire).

My participation will consist of the completion of two research protocols throughout the period of the study: a composer record and a composition commentary. The composer record will be completed online throughout the conceptualization and development of the new composition after each of the 4 on-site visits. It involves recounting student and teacher contributions in the co-creation of educational music. This requires approximately 60 minutes for completion (4 x 15 minutes). The composition commentary will be undertaken online upon completion of the project. It focuses on the organization of the composition and identifies student and teacher input within the score. This requires approximately 20 minutes for completion.

I understand that the contents will be used only for research purposes and that my confidentiality will be respected through the use of pseudonyms.

I am free to withdraw from the project at any time, before or during the use of an instrument protocol, refuse to participate, and refuse to answer questions without penalty. Alternately, I may choose not to complete a particular research protocol (i.e., composer record or composition commentary) for personal reasons without explanation but continue in the study. If I choose to withdraw, the data that I have submitted will be destroyed.

I understand that a synthesis of data will be provided for comment/revision before a final copy is produced. If I so choose, I may authorize the researcher to identify me in quoted passages.

I understand that the pseudonyms will be assigned to participants to protect the confidentiality of participants, and the data will be stored on a CD and maintained in a secure facility at the University of Ottawa in the principal investigator’s office for a period of 10 years. The data will be used for research purposes only.

I understand that a yearly report on the research findings will be provided to the partner organizations that are funding the commissioning of the new compositions.

If I have any questions, I may contact the principal investigator, Dr. B. W. Andrews at Tel: (613) 562-5800 ext. 4028; Fax: (613) 562-5146; E-mail: [email protected].

If I have any questions regarding the ethical conduct of this study, I may contact the Protocol Officer for Ethics in Research at the University of Ottawa, Tabaret hall, 550 Cumberland Street, Room 154, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5. Tel: (613) 562-5387; E-mail: [email protected].

I, (please print)______, agree to participate in the commissioning research study, entitled Making Music: Composing Music with Young Musicians, conducted by Professor B. W. Andrews, Principal Investigator (PI), in the Faculty of Education at the University of Ottawa.

There are 2 copies of the consent form - one retained in my files and the other sent to the Principal Investigator.

______Participant's Signature Date

______December 21st, 2012__ Researcher's Signature Date

Composer Co-ordinates

Address:

Telephone:

Fax (if available):

E-mail:

[Teachers] The purpose of the study, entitled Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians, is to obtain an in-depth understanding of how composers can collaborate with young musicians and their teachers to create educational music. The principal question is "How can co- creation of new music by professional composers and young musicians with their teachers promote musical development?” The secondary questions and attendant research protocols are nested within the four dimensions of musical creativity specific to music composition: i) Composing Prerequisites “How can musical ideas be conceptualized and developed in collaboration with students and teachers?” (composer record); ii) Compositional Process “What aspects of the compositions reflect student and teacher input?” (composition commentary); iii) Product “What musical knowledge and skills are developed when students and teachers co-create music with composers in schools?” (learning report); and iv) Person “What do students and teachers learn from collaboration with professional composers?” (teacher questionnaire).

My participation will consist of the completion of two research protocols online throughout the period of the study: a learning report and a teacher questionnaire. The learning report will be undertaken after each of the 4 composer on-site visits. It involves identifying the knowledge and skills that students develop and describing the pedagogical input that is provided to the composer on the progression of the new composition. This requires approximately 60 minutes (4 x 15 minutes) for completion. The questionnaire will be undertaken after the project is complete. It involves summarizing teacher and student learning. This requires approximately 20 minutes for completion.

I understand that the contents will be used only for research purposes and that my confidentiality will be respected through the use of pseudonyms.

I am free to withdraw from the project at any time, before or during the use of an instrument protocol, refuse to participate, and refuse to answer questions without penalty. Alternately, I may choose not to complete a particular research protocol (i.e., learning report or questionnaire) for personal reasons without explanation but continue in the study. If I choose to withdraw, the data that I have submitted will be destroyed. Withdrawal from the study will not affect my treatment by my employer.

I understand that a synthesis of the data that I submit will be provided to me for comment/revision before a final copy of the research is produced. If I so choose, I may authorize the principal investigator to identify me in quoted passages.

I understand that the pseudonyms will be assigned to participants to protect the confidentiality of participants, and the data will be stored on a CD in a secure facility at the University of Ottawa in the PI’s office for a period of 10 years. The data will be used for research purposes only.

I understand that a yearly report on the research findings will be provided to the partner organizations that are funding the commissioning of the new compositions.

If I have any questions, I may contact the principal investigator, Professor B.W. Andrews at Tel: (613) 562-5800 ext. 4028; Fax: 562-5146; E-mail: [email protected].

I, (please print)______, agree to participate in the research study, entitled Making Music: Composing New Music with Young Musicians, conducted by Professor B. W. Andrews, Principal Investigator (PI), in the Faculty of Education at the University of Ottawa.

There are 2 copies of the consent form - one retained in my files and the other sent to the Principal Investigator.

______Participant’s Signature Date

______December 21st, 2012 Researcher’s Signature Date

Teacher Co-ordinates

Name:

School Address:

Telephone:

Fax (if applicable):

E-mail:

Research Protocols

Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians

Composer Record

Composer: Grade:

Associate Teacher: School:

The purpose of the study, entitled Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians, is to obtain an in- depth understanding of how composers can collaborate with young musicians and their teachers to create educational music. The composer record focuses on the question: “How can musical ideas be conceptualized and developed in collaboration with students and teachers?” For each on-site visit, please comment on the students’ and teacher’s contributions into the creation of the composition. After each on-site visit, please complete the applicable section of the composer record online at http://edu.surveygizmo.com/s3/1123329/Making-Music-Composing-with-Young-Musicians- Composer-Record.

Date of first composer visit:

Student Contributions:

Teacher Contributions:

Date of second composer visit:

Student Contributions:

Teacher Contributions:

Date of third composer visit:

Student Contributions:

Teacher Contributions:

Date of fourth composer visit:

Student Contributions:

Teacher Contributions:

Thank you for your contribution to the Making Music Project.

Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians

Composition Commentary

Name: Grade:

Associate Teacher: School:

1. What is the musical form of the new work?

2. How were the musical ideas organized and developed?

3. How did student and teacher input shape the overall development of the composition? Please elaborate.

4. What specific student and teacher input assisted you to create a new educational composition? Please refer to the applicable bar numbers within the score when responding. You may also find it helpful to refer to your comments in the composer record that you completed during the conceptualization and development of the work.

Bar Numbers Description of Students’ Input Description of Teacher’s Input

Thank you for your contribution to the Making Music Project.

Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians

Learning Report

Name: Grade:

Composer: School:

The purpose of the study, entitled Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians, is to obtain an in-depth understanding of how composers can collaborate with young musicians and their teachers to create educational music. The learning report focuses on the question: “What musical knowledge and skills are developed when students and teachers co-create music with composers in schools?” For each on-site visit by the composer, please comment on these learning aspects of the project. Also, please document any pedagogical input on the acquisition of musical skills and knowledge that you provide to the composer to ensure that the music is appropriate for the students and also educationally valid. After each on-site visit by the composer, please complete the applicable section at http://edu.surveygizmo.com/s3/1123186/Making-Music-Composing- with-Young-Musicians-Learning-Report.

Date of first composer visit:

Knowledge Developed: Skills Developed: Pedagogical Input to the Composer:

Date of second composer visit:

Knowledge Developed: Skills Developed: Pedagogical Input:

Date of third composer visit:

Knowledge Developed: Skills Developed: Pedagogical Input:

Date of fourth composer visit:

Knowledge Developed: Skills Developed: Pedagogical Input:

Thank you for your participation in the Making Music Project. .

Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians

Teacher Questionnaire

Name: Grade:

Composer: School:

1. What did your students learn (i.e., knowledge, skills, values) overall from their involvement in the Making Music Project? Please elaborate. You may wish to refer to your comments in the learning report.

- Knowledge:

- Skills:

- Values:

2. Was the students’ learning congruent with the Ministry of Education’s curricular expectations for music? Please provide concrete examples of expectations from the arts guidelines.2

3. What did you personally learn from your involvement in the project?

4. Is composer involvement an effective form of teacher professional development? Please explain.

Thank you for your contribution to the Making Music Project.

2 Ontario Ministry of Education. (2009). The Ontario Curriculum Grades 1-8: The arts. Revised ed. Toronto, ON: Province of Ontario; Ontario Ministry of Education (2010). The Ontario Curriculum Grades 9-10: The arts. Revised ed. Toronto, ON: Province of Ontario; or the Ontario Ministry of Education (2009). The Ontario Curriculum Grades 11-12: The arts. Revised ed. Toronto, ON: Province of Ontario. 21

COMMISSION AGREEMENT ______

Dear:

You are invited to participate in a research-based commissioning program, entitled Making Music: Composing with Young Musicians, which is funded by the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (OCDSB) and the University of Ottawa. The purpose of this study is to obtain an in-depth understanding of how composers can collaborate with young musicians and teachers to create educational music. The principal overriding question is "How can co-creation of new music by professional composers and young musicians with their teachers promote musical development? The secondary questions are: i) How are musical ideas conceptualized and developed in collaboration with students and teachers? (composer record); ii) What aspects of the compositions reflect students and teacher input? (composition commentary); iii) What musical knowledge and skills are developed when students and teachers co-create music with composers in schools? (teacher learning report); and iv) What do students and teachers learn from collaboration with professional composers? (teacher questionnaire).

By signing this document and completing a consent form, and then returning them to Dr. B. W. Andrews, Faculty of Education, University of Ottawa, 145 Jean-Jacques Lussier, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, you signify that you are in agreement with the terms and conditions outlined, and you will be bound to the undertaking and completion of the Commission by these terms and conditions.

Participation in the 2012-2013 Making Music Project requires that you:

1. Produce a completed musical composition for winds (i.e., concert band, stage band, or instrumental class) with an expected total duration of three minutes minimum in one or more movements. 2. Produce the above mentioned composition at the level of difficulty of the assigned school ensemble or class of the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board; that is, somewhere within easy (1-2) or medium (3-4) levels as per the attached Music Complexity Chart (MC²). 22

3. Collaborate willingly with an assigned music educator and his or her students employed by the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board in realization and completion of the Commission by undertaking four on-site visits to assess the musical skills of the ensemble or class, co- creating a musical work with the students and their teachers, and refining the piece in collaboration with them. Collaboration in music creation involves including student and teacher input within the composition; for example, suggestions about the nature of the piece, its duration, instrumentation, number of movements, stylistic considerations, and pedagogical dimensions. 4. The schedule of the four on-site visits will be mutually agreed upon with the assigned teacher and will depend on the rehearsal schedule of the school ensemble or class. 5. Complete a research consent form and two research protocols: a composer record online after each of the four on-site visits at throughout the co-creating of the composition with the students; and a composition commentary online at the completion of the new work. The website addresses for the two protocols are: http://edu.surveygizmo.com/s3/1123329/Making-Music-Composing-with-Young-Musicians- Composer-Record; and http://edu.surveygizmo.com/s3/1123225/Making-Music-Composing-with-Young-Musicians- Composition-Commentary. 6. Deliver to the assigned educator a draft hard copy of the score and parts for rehearsal purposes in April 2013 to allow for sufficient rehearsal time for the students to prepare for a premiere performance at a spring event (e.g., concert, open house, festival). 7. Deliver to the principal investigator an electronic copy (in PDF format) of the final revised version of the score and parts (print-ready) with the composition review prior to or on June 30th, 2013.

Furthermore, under the terms of the Commission agreement, you:

1. Retain your all rights to the commissioned music composition. 2. Consent to the deposit of the commissioned composition into the collection of the University of Ottawa Library. 3. Consent to the reproduction of the score and performing parts of the commissioned composition for each of the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board schools participating in the commissioning project in a given year. 4. Consent that the commissioning party has the right of premiere performance and, in the case of publication, the funding parties’ names (Ottawa-Carleton District School Board and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council), premiering ensemble, and names of the conductor and principal investigator will appear within the score and parts. 5. Consent that your new composition may be work-shopped and performed by a high school or university ensemble for conference participants (e.g., music teachers and administrators, students, etc.) at an upcoming Ontario Music Educators Association Conference (dates, times and ensembles to be established). 6. Consent that your new educational composition may be included in a CD sampler containing a recording, research findings, and requisite information for purchasing your music from a publisher, your website, or the Canadian Music Centre, which will be distributed to music teachers across Canada by the Canadian Music Educators Association.

Finally, under the terms of the Commission, you:

1. Will receive compensation for your work in undertaking and completing the Commission The agreed fee will be $2,000.00 CDN (two thousand dollars in Canadian monetary funds) including HST for the commission of an educational composition co-created with music students and their teachers, and $200.00 CDN (two hundred dollars) including HST for Ottawa-area composers and $400.00 CDN (four hundred dollars) including HST for composers outside Eastern Ontario for travel expenses for the four on-site visits to . 2. The commission fees are payable in two instalments: one instalment of 50% (fifty percent) of the commission fee in the amount of $1,000.00 (one thousand dollars) including HST upon receipt of the signed agreement and consent form, and after the first on-site visit; and a second instalment of 50% (fifty percent) of the commission fee in the amount of $1,000.00 (one thousand dollars) including HST upon receipt of the final revised version of the score and parts (print-ready) with the composer record and composition commentary to the principal investigator upon completion of the project. The two commission instalments will be paid by cheque from the University of Ottawa upon receiving invoices from you to the principal investigator. Compensation for the travel expenses are payable in one instalment of $200.00 (three hundred dollars) including HST for Ottawa-area composers or $400.00 (four hundred dollars) including HST for composers outside of Eastern Ontario/Western Quebec upon completion of the fourth on-site visit to the assigned school. Travel funds will be paid by cheque from the University of Ottawa upon receiving an invoice from you to the principal investigator. 3. Please note that all invoices must include HST as the University of Ottawa regards the commission fee as an honorarium and not a salary. Further, a social insurance numbers (SIN) and date of birth (DOB) are required on all invoices for the disbursement of public funds by the University.

Dated the______of ______, 2013

______Composer

______Dr. B. W. Andrews Faculty of Education University of Ottawa 145 Jean-Jacques Lussier Ottawa, ON K2G 3R4 Tel: 613-562-5800 ex. 4028 Fax: 613-562-5146

Project References

1. Adorno, T. W. (1980). Music and the new music. Telos, 43, 124-138. 2. Amabile, T. M., & Tighe, E. (1993). Questions of creativity. In J. Brockman (Ed.), Creativity (pp. 7-27). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. 3. Andrews, B. W. (1995). Re-designing the curriculum of arts teacher education: A collaborative approach. Canadian Journal of Research in Music Education, 36(7), 33-39. 4. Andrews, B. W. (1997). Assessing the effectiveness of a collaborative approach to program delivery in arts teacher education. McGill Journal of Education, 32(2), 163-176. 5. Andrews, B. W. (1999). Side by side: Evaluating a partnership program in arts teacher education. International Electronic Journal of Leadership in Learning, 3(16) www.ucalgary.ca/~iejll/, 13 pp. 6. Andrews, B. W. (2002). Governance and accountability: The effectiveness of teacher provided in-service in a university setting. International Electronic Journal of Leadership in Learning 6(8) www.ucalgary.ca/~iejll/, 11 pp. 7. Andrews, B. W. (2004a). Curriculum renewal through policy development in arts education. Research Studies in Music Education, 23, 76-93. 8. Andrews, B. W. (2004b). Conceptualizing new music for young musicians. In L. Bartel (Ed.), Questioning the music education paradigm (pp. 146-160). Research to Practice series, Vol. 2. Toronto, ON: Canadian Music Educators Association. 9. Andrews, B. W. (2004c). Composing music in the classroom: The missing link in music instruction. The Recorder, 46(3), 12-19. 10. Andrews, B. W. (2004d). How composers compose: In search of the questions. Research and Issues in Music Education, 2(1) www.stthomas.edu/rimeonline, 18 pp. 11. Andrews, B. W. (2005). Bridge over troubled waters: Policy development for Canadian music in the curriculum. Music Education Research 7(1), 101-118. 12. Andrews, B. W. (2006a). How composers compose new music for young musicians: Refining the process. In M. Mans & B. H. Leung (Eds.), Music in schools for all children: From research to effective practice (pp. 185-193). Proceedings of the 14th Music in Schools and Teacher Education Commission (MISTEC), International Society for Music Education. Granada, Spain: University of Granada Press. 13. Andrews, B. W. (2006b). Re-play: Re-assessing the effectiveness of an arts education partnership. International Review of Education, 55(2), 443-459. 14. Andrews, B. W. (2007). Composing new music for young musicians: Emerging questions. The Recorder, 50(1), 16-21. 15. Andrews, B.W. (2008a). Integrated Inquiry: Transforming multiple research perspectives. In S. Kouritzin, N. Piquemal, & R. Norman (Eds.), Qualitative research: Challenging the orthodoxies (pp. 169-181). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum. 16. Andrews, B. W. (2008b). The Odyssey Project: Fostering teacher learning in the arts. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 9(11), www.ijea.org/V9n11/, 20 pp. 17. Andrews, B. W. (2009). Secrets of the Pied Piper: Composing music for young musicians. Research Perspectives in Music Education, 13, 6-14. 18. Andrews, B. W. (2010). Seeking harmony: Teachers’ perspectives on learning to teach in and through the arts. Encounters on Education, 11, 81-98.

19. Andrews, B. W. (2011a). The Music Complexity Chart (MC²): Identifying the characteristics of levels of difficulty in educational music. In M. Kennedy & B. Bolden, Widening the boundaries of music education. Victoria, BC: University of Victoria Press. 20. Andrews, B. W. (2011b). New Sounds of Learning: Composing educational music for strings. Manuscript submitted for publication. 21. Andrews, B. W. (2011c). New Sounds of Learning: Composing educational music for winds. Manuscript submitted for publication. 22. Andrews, B. W. (2011d). The Good, Bad and Ugly: Identifying effective partnership practices in arts education. International Journal of Social Science and the Humanities, 1(13), 38-46. 23. Andrews, B.W. & Carruthers, G. (2004). Needle in a haystack: Canadian music in post- secondary curricula. In P. M. Shand (Ed.), Music education entering the 21st century (pp. 75- 83). Proceedings of the 13th Music in Schools and Teacher Education Commission, International Society for Music Education Bi-Annual Conference, Malmo, Sweden. Nedlands, Western Australia: International Society for Music Education. 24. Arts Education Partnership. (2000). Learning partnerships: Improving learning in schools with arts partners in the community. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership. 25. Arts Education Partnership. (2001). Strengthening state-level arts education partnerships. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership. 26. Arts Education Partnership. (2002). National Forum on partnerships: Improving teaching of the arts. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership. 27. ARTS, Inc. and Performing Tree (2000). Profiles of national models of arts and school connections. Los Angeles, CA: ARTS, Inc. 28. Bartel, L. R., Dolloff, L. A., & Shand, P. M. (1999). Canadian content in school music curricula: A research update. Canadian Journal of Research in Music Education, 40(4), 13- 20. 29. Barwin, G. (1998). Composers in electronic residence. Canadian Music Educator, 40(1), 23- 25. 30. Bennett, S. (1976). The process of creation: Interviews with eight composers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 24(1), 3-13. 31. Bolden, B. (2004). Students composing: Examining the experience. Canadian Music Educator, 45(4), 20-27. 32. Burnaford, G. E., Aprill, A., & Weiss, C. (Eds.). (2001). Arts integration and meaningful learning. Chicago, IL: Erlbaum. 33. Burnard, P., & Younker, B. A. (2008). Investigating children’s musical interactions within the activities systems of group composing and arranging: An application of Engestrom’s Activity Theory. International Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(1), 60-74. 34. Burton, J., Horowitz, R., & Abeles, H. (1999). Learning in and through the arts. In E. Fiske (Ed.), President’s committee on the arts and the humanities. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership. 35. Carruthers, G. A. (2000). A status report on music education in Canada. In S. T. Maloney (Ed.), Musicanada 2000: A celebration of Canadian composers. Toronto, ON: CMC. 36. Canadian Music Centre. (1992). ComPoster music education package. Toronto, ON: CMC. 37. Catterall, J., & Waldorf, L. (1999). Chicago arts partnerships in education: Summary evaluation. Chicago, IL: Chicago Arts Partnership in Education.

38. Cherryhomes, C. H. (1992). Notes on pragmatism and scientific realism. Educational Researcher, 14, 13-17. 39. Colgrass, M. (2004). Composers and children: A new creative force? Music Educators Journal, 9(1), 19-23. 40. Colley, B. (2008). Partnerships and local K-12 arts education policy development: Significant beginnings. Arts Education Policy Review, 109(5), 9-18. 41. Creswell, J. W. (2011). Designing and researching mixed method approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 42. Davidson, L., & Scripp, L. (1988). Young children's musical representations: Windows on music cognition. In J.A. Sloboda (Ed.), Generative processes in music: The psychology of performance, improvisation and composition (pp. 195-230). Oxford, UK: Clarendon. 43. Delzell, J., Gonzales, R., & Sivill, J. (2009). A partnership tackling the challenge of assessing individuals during music ensemble rehearsals. In Poetter, T. S., & Eagle, J. F. (Eds.), The art and science of partnership: Catalytic cases of school, university and community renewal (pp. 91-104). Lanham, MD: University Press of America. 44. Denizen, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1998). Strategies of qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 45. Doherty, P., & Harland, J. (2001). Partnerships for Creativity: An evaluation of implementation. Slough, UK: National Foundation for Educational Research. 46. Freund, D. (2011). Guiding young composers. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 19(1), 67-79. 47. Frisius, R. (1981). Musikpädagogische Forschung. Karlsruhe, Germany. 48. Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham and Gandhi. New York, NY: Basic Books. 49. Gillies, M. G. (1990). Bartok as pedagogue. Studies in Music, 24, 64-86. 50. Hall, P. D. (1998). The relationship between types of rap and memory in African American children. Journal of Black Studies, 26(6), 802-814. 51. Green, J. H., Reiger, C. J., Maras, M., Jones, K. M., Marconi, M., & Perline, R. (2009). Triumph and tribulations of a community-university partnership in expanded school mental health. In Poetter, T. S., & Eagle, J. F. (Eds.), The art and science of partnership: Catalytic cases of school, university and community renewal (pp. 123-144). Lanham, MD: University Press of America. 52. Gurney, P. J., & Andrews, B. W. (1998). Building bridges: A case study of policy development in teacher education. In A. Richardson (Ed.), International multiculturalism: Preparing together for the twenty-first century (pp. 50-59). Edmonton, AB: Kanata Learning Press. 53. Harland, J., Lord, P., Stott, A., Kinder, K., Lamont, E., & Ashworth, M. (2005). The arts- education interface: A mutual learning triangle? Slough, UK: National Foundation for Educational Research. 54. Hatrik, J. (2002). Priestor medzi komposiciou a hudobnou vychovou. [The space between composition and music education.] Slovenská hudba: Revue pre hudobnứ kultứ, 28(2), 189- 199. 55. Hoover, A., & Stanley, K. Exploiting functional relationships in music composition. Connection Science, 1(2/3), 227-251.

56. Hung, Y. C. (1998). An exploration of the musical composition background/experience, process, and pedagogy of selected composers in Taiwan. Ph.D. thesis, Teachers College, Columbia University. [Dissertation Abstracts International 59061960] 57. Ingram, D., & Reidel, E. (2003). What does arts integration do for students? Minneapolis, MN: Centre for Applied Research and Educational Improvement, University of Minnesota. 58. Irwin, R. L., & Kindler, A. M. (Eds.). (1997). Beyond the school: Community and institutional partnerships in art education. Reston, VA: National Arts Education. 59. Kim, K. (1995). Studien zum musikpädagogischen Werk Paul Hindemiths. [Studies on Paul Hindemth’s work as a teacher.] Ph.D. dissertation, Ludwig-Maximillians-U., München, Germany. 60. Kratus, J. (1989). A time analysis of the compositional processes used by children ages 7 to 11. Journal of Research in Music Education, 37(1), 5-20. 61. Krumhansl, C. L. (1991). Music psychology: Tonal structures in perception and memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 277-303. 62. Lerdahl, F. (1988). Cognitive constraints on compositional systems. In J.A. Sloboda (Ed.), Generative processes in music: The psychology of performance, improvisation and composition (pp. 231-259). Oxford, UK: Clarendon. 63. Lin, C., & Hsing, W. C. (2009). Culture-led urban regeneration and community mobilization: The case of the Taipei Bao-an Temple area, Taiwan. Urban Studies, 46(7), 1317-1342. 64. MacInnis, P. (1991). Guidelist of Canadian solo free bass accordion music suitable for student performers. Toronto, ON: Canadian Music Centre. 65. Meiners, J., Schiller, W., & Orchard, J. (2004). Children and the arts: Developing educational partnerships between pre-school, school and tertiary sectors. Journal of In- service Education 30(3), 463-474. 66. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 67. Murray, B. (2001). Revisioning visions: Narrative case studies of classroom teachers’ changing views of drama. Youth Theatre Journal, 15, 95-104. 68. Naples, L. (2001). Kentucky institutes for the arts in education: Evaluation report. Belmont, CA: LMN Evaluations. 69. Newsome, W. S., & Burke, A. (2009). Grandparents raising grandchildren: Establishing a school/university partnership to address issues and challenges. In Poetter, T. S., & Eagle, J. F. (Eds.), The art and science of partnership: Catalytic cases of school, university and community renewal (pp. 79-90). Lanham, MD: University Press of America. 70. Patteson, A. (2002). Amazing grace and powerful medicine: A case study of an elementary teacher and the arts. Canadian Journal of Education, 27(2/3), 269-289. 71. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 72. Paynter, J. (1982). Music in the secondary school curriculum. London, UK: Cambridge University Press. 73. Phillips, R. J., & Pierson, A. J. (1997). Cognitive loads and the empowering effect of music composition software. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 13(2), 74-94. 74. Poetter, T. S., & Eagle, J. F. (Eds.). (2009). Introduction. In The art and science of partnership: Catalytic cases of school, university and community renewal. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

75. Reicher, M. (2000). What is it to compose a musical work? Internationale Zeitschrift für Analytische Philosophie, 58-59, 203-221. 76. Robazza, C., Maculuso, C., & d'Urson, V. (1994). Emotional reactions to music by gender, age and expertise. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79(2), 939-944. 77. Ross, M. (1995). What’s wrong with school music? British Journal of Music Education, 15(3), 255-262. 78. Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1985). Numbers and words: Combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation study. Evaluation Review, 9(5), 627- 643. 79. Schafer, R. M. (1977). The tuning of the world. Toronto, ON: McClelland & Stewart. 80. Seidel, S., & Eppel, M. (2001). Arts survive: A study of sustainability in arts education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Project Zero. 81. Shand, P. M. (1993). A guide to published Canadian violin music suitable for student performers. Toronto, ON: Canadian Music Centre. 82. Shand, P. M., & Bartel, L. R. (1998). Canadian content in music curriculum: Policy and practice. In B. A. Roberts (Ed.), Connect, combine, communicate (pp. 89-107). Sydney, NS: University College of Cape Breton. 83. Sloboda, J. A. (Ed.) (1988). Generative processes in music: The psychology of performance, improvisation and composition. Oxford, UK: Clarendon. 84. Smithrim, K., & Upitis, R. (2001). Strong poets: Teacher education and the arts. Journal of Professional Studies, 9(1), 19-29. 85. Smithrim, K., & Upitis, R. (2005). Learning through the arts: Lessons of engagement. Canadian Journal of Education, 289(1&2), 109-127. 86. Stake, R. (1998). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 86-109). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 87. Stubley, E. (1990). A guide to solo French horn music by Canadian composers. Toronto, ON: Canadian Music Centre. 88. Upitis, R. (2005). Experiences of artists and artist-teachers involved in teacher professional development programs. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 6(8), http://www.ijea.org/. 89. Upitis, R., Smithrim, K., & Soren, B. (1999). When teachers become musicians and artists: Teacher transformation and professional development. Music Education Research, 1(1), 23- 35. 90. Viera de Carvalho, M. (1999). New music between search for identity and autopoiesis: Or, the tragedy of listening. Theory, Culture and Society, 16(4), 127-135. 91. Walker, R. (1997). Visual metaphors as music notation for sung vowel spectra in different cultures. Journal of Music Research, 26(4), 315-345. 92. Wahlstrom, K. (2003). Images of arts infusion in elementary schools. Report prepared for the Minneapolis Public Schools. Minneapolis, MN: Minneapolis Public School Board. 93. Walter, C. (1994). A guide to unpublished Canadian jazz ensemble music suitable for student performers. Toronto, ON: Canadian Music Centre. 94. Ward-Steinman, P. (2006). The development of an after-school music program for at-risk children: Student preferences and pre-service teacher reflections. International Journal of Music Education, 24(1), 85-96.

95. Wilkinson, J. (2000). Literacy, education and arts partnership: A community-system programme integrating the arts across the curriculum. Research in Drama Education, 5(2), 175-197. 96. Williams, E. (2001). Obsolescence and renewal: Musical heritage, electronic technology, education and the future. International Journal of Music Education, 37, 13-31. 97. Woodman, R. W., & Schoenfeldt, L. F. (1989). Individual differences in creativity: An interactionist perspective. In J.A. Glover, R.R. Ronning, & C.R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 77-91). New York, NY: Plenum Press.