INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced &om the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in ^ew riter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quali^ of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing firom left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
UMI University Microfilms international A Bell & Howell Information Company 3 0 0 North Z eeb Road. Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600
Order Number 9401248
Using hypermedia to enrich the learning experience of college students in a music appreciation course
Duitman, Henry Edgar, Ph.D.
The Ohio State University, 1993
Copyright ©1993 by Duitman, Henry Edgar. All rights reserved.
UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106
USING HYPERMEDIA TO ENRICH THE LEARNING EXPERIENCE OF
COLLEGE STUDENTS IN A MUSIC APPRECIATION COURSE
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate
School of The Ohio State University
By
Henry Edgar Duitman, B.M.E., M.A.
*****
The Ohio State University
1993
Dissertation Committee: Approved by
A. Peter Costanza
Judith K. Delzell Adviser Ann Blombach School of Music Copyright by
Henry E. Duitman
1993 To my mother, Ethel Duitman and to my father, Hubert Duitman. They continue to teach me all of the important lessons. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author wishes to express sincere and deep appreciation to the following persons:
Dr. A. Peter Costanza, advisor, for his patience and wise guidance during this project and throughout my doctoral studies. Dr. Judith K. Delzell, for the inspiration she provides to all music educators who have the good fortune of studying with her. Dr. Ann Blombach, for her interest in and supervision of my music technology projects. Professor Marshall Haddock for his model of intense musical integrity. Professor Craig Kirchhoff for his model of conducting excellence. Steve Naber for his understanding and guidance on the statistical portion of this study. Dr. John Van Rys for his helpful editorial comments on the manuscript. Dr. Karen DeMol for her direct and indirect support throughout the project. My wife Lisa, my daughter Elayna, and my daughter Jennifer for their encouragement, support, and love throughout my graduate studies. They fill every day of my life with joy.
ui VITA
October 2, 1952 ...... Bom-Fond du Lac, Wisconsin
1974 ...... B.M.E., The Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida
1974-1985 ...... Instrumental Music Director, Bradenton Christian School, Bradenton, Florida
1979 ...... M.A. in Music Education, The University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida
1985-presen t ...... Associate Professor of Music, Dordt College, Sioux Center, Iowa
1986-presen t ...... Music Director and Conductor, The Sioux County Orchestra
1990-presen t...... Founder and President, MuDiSoft, a software company for music educators
1991-9 2...... Graduate Administrative Associate, School of Music, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Music Studies in Music Education: Professors A. Peter Costanza, Judith K. Delzell, Jere Forsythe
Studies in Wind Conducting and Literature: Professors Harvey Benstein, Richard Blatti, Craig Kirchhoff
Studies in String and Orchestral Conducting and Literature: Professors Robert Gillespie, Marshall Haddock
iv Studies in Music and Technology: Professors Ann Blombach, Robert Carpenter
Studies in Trumpet Performance and Brass Literature: Professor Richard Burkart TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION...... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... üi VITA ...... iv LIST OF TABLES...... ix LIST OF FIGURES...... x
CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION...... 1 Need for the Study ...... 2 Statement of the Problem ...... 4 Purpose of the Study ...... 5 Q uestions ...... 5 H ypotheses...... 6 Definitions ...... 7 Limitations ...... 10
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE...... 11 Strengths and Weaknesses of Hypermedia ...... 11 Use of Hypermedia in Education ...... 13 Use of Hypermedia in Music Education ...... 16
III. METHOD...... 20 B ackground ...... 20 Development of an Instructional Strategy Which Utilizes Hypermedia in a Music Appreciation Course ...... 22 D esign ...... 25 Subjects ...... 26 Development of Subcourse Materials ...... 27 Development of Primary Measurement Instruments ...... 30 Validation and Pilot-testing ...... 31 Equipm ent ...... 36 Procedures ...... 37
vi rV. PRESENTATION OF THE DATA...... 41
Statistical Methodology ...... 42 Random Assignment of Subjects ...... 42 Test of General Musical Knowledge ...... 44
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 50 Introduction ...... 50 Purpose of the Study ...... 51 Research Design ...... 52 Hypotheses for the Study...... 52 Methodology ...... 53 Results and Discussion ...... 55 Conclusions ...... 58 Recommendations for Further Research ...... 60 Implications ...... 61
REFERENCES...... 62
APPENDIXES A. Examiner Trial, Preface ...... 66 B. Examiner Trial, Interview Transcript ...... 69 C. Complete GEN 200 Music Subcourse Schedule ...... 94 D. GEN 200 Syllabus...... 96 E. GEN 200 Coursepack ...... 99 F. Approved Listening Project Compositions ...... 116 G. CD Listening Project Instructions ...... 118 H. CD-ROM Listening Project Instructions ...... 121 I. General CD-ROM Usage Instructions ...... 124 J, Instructions for Using The Orchestra CD-ROM...... 131 K. Instructions for Using Beer/joven.-Sympftony No. 9 CD-ROM 134 L. Instructions for Using Stravinsky: The Rite o f Spring CD-ROM 137 M. Instructions for Using Mozart: String Quartet in C Major CD-ROM 140 N. Subcourse Test 1 ...... 143 O. Subcourse Test 2 ...... 146 P. Concert Report Form ...... 150
vii Q. Pretest/Posttest Musical Example Database ...... 152 R. Pretest/Posttest ...... 154 S. Musical Attitude Survey Form ...... 162 T. Validation Letters from Experts ...... 164 U. Course Grading Data and Research D ata ...... 167
vm LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE 1. Pretest and Posttest Descriptive Statistics by Treatment Group 44
2. Significance Levels for Pretest to Posttest Gain for Each Treatm ent Group...... 45
3. Significance Levels for the Difference Between Treatment Groups on the Pretest/Posttest Gain Including Sections and Subtests 46
4. Attitude Survey and Self-Reported Listening Project Question Statistics...... 47
5. Self-Reported Use of Listening Lab by Treatment Group in Hours 49
IX LIST OF FIGURES nO U RE PAGE 1. Histograms of Pretest Scores for All Subjects Combined ...... 43 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
During the last decade, personal computers have evolved into powerful, inexpensive tools which can be used to assist adults and children in countless ways. Indeed, thousands of new software applications have been released, and many of these are powerful, user- friendly versions of basic applications such as word-processing, spreadsheet, database, painting, and drawing. Other applications, such as HyperCard by Apple Computer, now put easy-to-leam programming power into the hands of ordinary users, including students. As a result of these and other forces, the creative use of computers in education promises to be ubiquitous by the turn of the century. There is evidence, however, that the computer revolution has made very limited inroads into the actual educational strategies used in North America. To a large extent, computers have been used in some variation of the tireless tutor metaphor. In other words, teachers often use powerful computers as substitute typewriters and drill instructors, leaving them out of education’s attempt to encourage creative higher-order thinking (Borrell, 1992; Graham, 1990; Higgins, 1991). One of the most recent and powerful computer developments is hypertext, an increasingly common form of information organization and access. Essentially, hypertext allows a designer to link, and a user to access, information in an associative way. As opposed to the linear, prescriptive structure of traditional computer programs, hypertext is thought by many to hold great promise for independent learning since it allows the user to interact with information in an intuitive manner. The result of combining hypertext with more than one type of media is called hypermedia. For example, when software provides links between text, graphics, and digitally-recorded music, the user is engaged with
1 hypermedia.
Need for the Study Hypermedia is clearly becoming an important topic in educational research. Betts (1992) notes that “recent innovations in hardware and software design are making hypermedia, using multiple sources of information in digital form, a more useful tool in the classroom” (p. 1). And according to Riner (1989), "One of the major interest areas for the application of hypermedia is the development and delivery of computer assisted instruction” (p. 75). What Betts and Riner point to is that CD-ROM technology now gives all researchers a powerful new data storage tool with which they may rapidly access large amounts of information. When this information is interrelated into a hypertext web, many new possibilities and problems emerge (Jonassen, 1988). However, while hypermedia is becoming common. Park (1991) cautions, "The use of hypermedia for instruction (particularly as an instructional delivery system or authoring system) requires more theoretical research and technical development" (p. 28). A major hurdle for all research of computer-assisted learning is that students interact with computers in different ways. Students bring many uncontrolled variables to a research study. Higgins (1992) notes that "It is intrinsic to mediated instruction that the effect will not be equal for all learners” (p. 491). Moreover, Salomon and Gardner (1986) note that "when everything else is indeed held constant, save the medium, not much of an effect can be observed" (p. 14). Any study of hypermedia, therefore, must acknowledge the unique demands it places on traditional experimental research. Does independent use of hypermedia represent a new teaching tool, one which will replace traditional computer-assisted instruction, or is it simply a presentation and training tool? Questions such as these have been debated at educational technology symposia, and in journals such as Educational Technology, since the late 1980s. Research into the use of hypertext and hypermedia has been most active in the areas of library science and medical education. Since CD-ROMs can store vast quantities of digitized text and can interrelate information using hypertext, librarians have been interested 3 in this technology. For example. Brown University now uses a campus-wide hypertext tool called Intermedia. With it, students may move through on-line library resources, including complete texts of books and periodicals, all the while creating their own hypertext associational web. While they are doing research, then, these students are continually building their own unique information base. Similarly, several medical schools have pioneered educational programs which use hypermedia. Stanford University and others have built elaborate color presentations allowing students to access information about the parts of the body in an intuitive and associative way. Closely related to these programs are those which also provide actual simulations of anatomical functions. With these applications, a medical student can analyze a patient’s condition, use hypertext to explore related diagnoses, try a treatment, and observe its effects without ever touching a live patient. As much of the above suggests, most of the research about the use of hypermedia in education has centered on the design of hypermedia software. Two recognized problems of hypermedia are (1) navigational confusion, which is sometimes described as being “lost in hyperspace” and (2) cognitive overload, or being overwhelmed by vast quantities of information. Research, then, has evaluated ways of devising hypermedia programs that lessen the seriousness of these and other related problems (McNeil and Nelson, 1991; Reed, 1992; Tsai, 1989). Unfortunately, few researchers have studied the use of hypermedia as part of an extant curricular course. Lack of funding has certainly been a factor in this situation, since many high schools, colleges, and universities lack the financial resources needed to purchase expensive new equipment, especially when the exact purpose for that equipment is still uncertain. However, since CD-ROM technology is now becoming commonplace, since prices are being lowered, and since developers are designing educational CD-ROM programs of all types, educators will soon be challenged to use this technology on a daily basis in their classes. Since music can be effectively stored in digital format, music education is a natural area to study the implementing of hypermedia in the classroom. In fact, this technology 4 allows the user of a commercially-available hypermedia program to listen to, and interact with, compact disc quality music and sound, as well as to acquire related textual and graphical information about the music, all from the same source-one CD-ROM. Studies which specifically involve music and hypermedia programs include dissertations by Lee (1989), Adams (1990b), Hughes (1991), and Siguqonsson (1991). At this point in time, however, no studies have been done to evaluate the effectiveness of instructional strategies that use the commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs stored on CD-ROMs. According to Robert Winter (1989), the music authority who authored Beethoven: Symphony No. 9, one of these hypermedia programs “offers us an opportunity to abolish forever the arbitrary distinction between education and entertainment” (CD-ROM information jacket). Indeed, many educational CD-ROM titles are now listed under the heading edutainment in the product listings of software vendors. Given these developments, music teachers at all levels need to know how these inexpensive and powerful programs, the number of which seem to be proliferating, can be used in their classrooms. If a simple and effective strategy can be found by which these entertaining programs will help students listen to music more often, learn more from their listening, and enjoy the experience more, students and music teachers at all grade levels win benefit greatly.
Statement of the. Problem Commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs are difficult to define. Are they teaching machines requiring no directive or evaluative efforts on the part of the teacher? Are they resource tools which may be used for serious and orderly research? Or are they simply browsing toys with which the user may jump about at whim and satisfy his passing fancy to answer the question, “What’s behind that button?” The problem this study will address is related to this definitional quandary. The emergence of an effective teaching strategy will, in turn, better define these hypermedia programs and will, therefore, shape future instructional strategies. 5 A second significant point relates to the following fact. With HyperCard and CD- ROM driver software, any teacher can learn how to make a HyperCard stack which contains pertinent information about the selected music and which also controls the music on a corresponding audio compact disc. However, it is extremely doubtful that any single music teacher will have the time and information resources needed to make programs which compare favorably with those that are commercially-available. For this reason, research needs to be done using commercially-available CD-ROMs-those products which will certainly be used by music teachers.
Purpose of the Studv The primary purpose of this study was to define and test a viable instructional strategy, one which incorporates music-related hypermedia into a college music appreciation course curriculum. The study also sought to ascertain the attitudes of the students toward music and the use of hypermedia for studying music. A secondary purpose of this study was to compare the musical knowledge and attitudes gained by students who use hypermedia for their listening project resource with that gained by students who use the traditional listening project resources of compact disc listening and library research.
Questions A primary question to be answered by this exploratory study was, “Do students learn something from commercially-available, music-related, hypermedia programs and are their attitudes more favorable toward music after they have used these programs?” In other words, “Does it make educational sense for music appreciation teachers to use commercially-available hypermedia programs in their courses?” A second question to be answered in this study was, “How does the learning of students who use hypermedia as the only resource material for an independent listening project compare to that of students who use traditional listening and library research resources?” A closely connected question was the following: “How do the attitudes of the 6 students who use hypermedia in their listening project differ from the attitudes of those students who use traditional resources?” A defining characteristic of commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs is the intensive, non-prescriptive way in which they present information. Since this study sought to exploit this salient feature of hypermedia the question of this study ultimately became, “Do students learn about music when given the opportunity to use hypermedia in an instructional strategy designed to exploit the essential nature of the mediumT'
Hyjdtbg&eg Given the nature of these questions concerning commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs and student learning, this researcher has formulated the following hypotheses. Research Hypotheses. 1. Subjects who use a commercially-available, music-related hypermedia program as tlie sole resource for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course will score significantly higher on a posttest of general musical knowledge than they did on the pretest A similar result may also occur with the control group, which would be understandable. 2. Subjects who use a commercially-available, music-related hypermedia program as the sole resource material for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course wUl show a significantly different level of improvement on a test of general musical knowledge than those subjects who use traditional resource material for the same project in the same course. 3. Subjects who use a commercially-available, music-related hypermedia program as the sole resource material for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course will score significantly different on each item of a musical attitude survey than those subjects who use traditional resource material for the same project in the same course. It should be noted that hypotheses two and three are two-tailed, since there exists no 7 evidence that causes us to eliminate the possibility that the experimental group will show significantly less improvement than the control group. Null Hvpotheses. 1. There will be no significant difference of scores on a test of general musical knowledge between the pretest and posttest for subjects who use a commercially-available, music-related hypermedia program as the sole resource for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course. 2. There will be no significant difference on the pretest/posttest improvement scores on a test of general musical knowledge between those subjects who use a commercially- available, music-related hypermedia program as the sole resource material for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course and those subjects who use traditional resource material for the same project in the same course. 3. There will be no significant difference on any of the items of a musical attitude survey between those subjects who use a commercially-available, music-related hypermedia program as the sole resource material for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course and those subjects who use traditional resource material for the same project in the same course.
Definitions Given the technical nature of this study, the following terms need defining: Hypertext: This refers to non-sequential text that may be linked in an associative way. Hypermedia: According to Higgins’ (1992), hypermedia is defined as “a software application that links data of many different types in many different ways so that the user is free to peruse the linked information in any sequence Hypermedia is unique in that it is a tool to arrange information of all kinds so that it can be accessed in ways intuitive to the task or learner" (p. 489). Multimedia: Betts (1992) distinguishes multimedia from hypermedia on the basis of its audience. “Interactivity is the factor that distinguishes hypermedia from a multimedia presentation — Hence, a hypermedia presentation is better suited for use by individuals, 8 whereas multimedia can be used more effectively with groups” (p. 1), This definition, while not universal, will be used for the purposes of this study. Interactive video: Video displayed on a computer screen which may be controlled by the user. This video is often stored on video discs. Since video discs can also contain sound and text, problems exist with the distinction between interactive video and hypermedia. When research about interactive video is mentioned in this study, its purpose is to describe the similarity of interactive video to hypermedia. HvperCard: This software is a hypertext and hypermedia construction tool designed and copyrighted by Apple Computer. It is often described as a software erector set and is the program that runs each of the hypermedia music programs used in this study. Stacks: These are independent HyperCard units that usually deal with one major topic. Links connect information within stacks and between stacks. The word “stacks” refers to a card file metaphor. The hypermedia programs used in this study contain from two to six stacks. Buttons: These are on-screen items in HyperCard that may contain scripts which manipulate the program. Typical button scripts command navigation and the presentation of information. Fields: These are on-screen items in HyperCard designed to contain textual information. While most of the fields in commercially-available hypermedia programs are locked so that users may not revise the given information, several of the programs do have unlocked, note-taking fields. While these allow an individual to keep a log of what he/she learned, there are no adjustments made for multiple users. Therefore, this feature of the hypermedia programs was not exercised in this study. Cards: These are screens within a stack. Information contained on a card or driven by a card may be in the form of text, graphics, and digitized audio voice or music, either contained in the HyperCard stack and played by the computer’s speaker, or contained on the CD-ROM and played through the CD-ROM player’s outputs. Buttons, fields, and background “painting” may be found on any typical card. CD-ROM: This is the acronym for Compact Disc - Read Only Memory. A CD-ROM 9 can store any type of digital information, including sound, graphics, text, and computer software. CD-ROM, then, is the medium on which hypermedia programs and digitized music are stored and transported. CD-ROM plaver: This is a compact-disc player designed to be connected to a computer so that the computer may control the random-access feature of the compact disc and may port information from the CD-ROM drive to the computer’s own hard disk. Commercially-available. music-related hypermedia (CMH): These are programs that consist of HyperCard stacks and audio digital information, both of which are marketed in the form of a CD-ROM. A computer connected to a CD-ROM player ports the HyperCard stacks to the computer’s hard drive so that the user can access HyperCard information many times faster than if these stacks were still located on the CD-ROM. The audio information (which includes recordings of entire compositions) remains on the CD-ROM, which then functions as a regular audio compact disc. However, the user of the HyperCard stacks is in control of the access to all digital information, including the music on the CD-ROM. The user clicks on HyperCard buttons to control the navigation among cards as well as the playing of music. Access to the digital audio information stored on the CD-ROM can be as specific as to the nearest l/75tli of a second. Over 600 megabytes of digital information can be stored on a single CD-ROM. For the CD-ROMs used in this study, the HyperCard stacks were from one to five megabytes in size, leaving plenty of room on the disc for recordings of entire compositions. The information contained in the HyperCard stacks of a CMH deals specifically with its composition. Every attempt is made to provide the user with buttons that instantly take him/her to historical, biographical, and/or analytical information. Users are also given every possible opportunity to interact directly with the music by controlling the random- access feature of the CD-ROM. Essentially, the click of a button takes them to a particular theme, or fragment of music.
Limita,ti.9hg While it is hoped that researchers will in the future make use of the specific 10 suggestions for further research found in Chapter V, the point should be made that the subjects used in this exploratory study were limited to undergraduate enrolled in General Studies 200 during the spring semester of 1993 at Dordt College. Younger students may react in a very different way to the medium. Moreover, students who are not enrolled in a music course, those who are interacting with the medium purely for pleasure, may also react and learn in a completely different way. Therefore, the findings and implications of this study are limited to the population sample. In addition, a recognized limitation of the Dordt College General Studies 200 (GEN 200) music subcourse, the music appreciation course that provides the sample for this study, is its brevity. Due to this unchangeable factor, those recently involved in teaching the course have made a conscious decision to teach fewer aspects of music and to teach them well. For this reason little mention is made of jazz, popular music, or non-western music in the course. To this end, the CMHs chosen for the study deal almost exclusively with “classical music” in the western European tradition. The study is also limited by the quality of the the CMHs which were used. The researcher is not aware of an educational reviewing agency or journal which currently compares these offerings, although, with their rapid proliferation, this may soon become a reality. However, each of the four CD-ROMs used in this study had been recommended for their educational value by at least one expert or magazine reviewer. Nevertheless, there could likely be extreme differences in the the quality of both the content and structure of any two of these comprehensive reference tools. A further limitation is the independence of subjects. While this assumption is made, there is a possibility that roommates and other close friends could have been simultaneously enrolled in a certain music subcourse section. Their learning could be somewhat related. CHAPTER n REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
The general purpose of this study was to explore the use of hypermedia within the structure of a college music appreciation course. The literature relevant to this research may be divided into three classes: strengths and weaknesses of hypermedia, the use of hypermedia in education, and the use of hypermedia specifically in music education.
Strengths and Weaknesses of Hypermedia Research into hypermedia itself has focused on its possibilities and problems. The end result has been a call for further research to enable more fruitful applications of both hardware and software. Those involved in the design of hypermedia systems often have lofty goals for the medium. For example, Jonassen wrote in 1988 that "The goal of hypertext and hypermedia is to provide an electronic environment to facilitate knowledge exploration by the learner'’ (p. 14), and he later (1990) defined and exalted the potential of hypertext as follows: Hypertext is a flexible information technology that provides a powerful environment for designing, developing, and displaying instruction. Its theoretical foundations are consistent with contemporary instructional design and development models, albeit with a more consistent cognitive and systemic emphasis than many. Hypertext systems provide designers with a tool that can liberate their designs from the constraints of objectivism and determinism, (p. 91)
Here, Jonassen clearly makes a case for the powerful freeing potential of hypertext. Moreover, Retterer (1992) added empirical evidence to the case for hypertext when he found that reading a hypertext appeared to enhance comprehension. Finally Liu (1992) found that junior high students using hypermedia improved their science tests scores as
11 12 long as the program allowed for learning differences among students. However, most proponents of hypermedia acknowledge at least some inherent problems in the definition, design, and functionality of this new medium. According to one researcher, "Having information a click away increases the cognitive overheads for readers Hypertexts offer an intellectual partnership between the provider of information and its user. Like all partnerships there are pros and cons” (Wright, 1991, pp. 9-10). Along the same lines, Jonassen (1990) notes that “Hypertext systems are not a panacea; rather, they are a sophisticated set of tools that can help us reduce the dissonance between the declarative and procedural knowledge of our field” (p. 91). These cautionary notes balance the optimism concerning hypermedia potential. Much of the literature, then, focuses on hypermedia problems. According to Locatis, Letoumeau, and Banvard (1987), “The problems associated with developing hypermedia knowledge bases for general or expert use are not well understood, much less those arising when the programs are used for learning. Linking does not ensure learning A grammar for non-linear information representation and mechanisms for maximizing learning are urgently needed” (p. 74). Similarly, Salomon and Gardner (1986) note that "Prior learner knowledge and ability, and motivation are crucial in determining how the learner will react with the technology. This issue proves to be of particular relevance to the study of computer activities in which the learner is assumed to exercise significant control over the material" (p. 16). These authors point to the difficulties associated with matching people and technology in order to produce learning. Still others debate the educational philosophy behind the implementation of hypermedia. For example, Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson, and Coulson (1991) note problems that occur when people deny what the authors consider to be the correct constructivist philosophy of learning: The phenomena of ill-structured domains are best thought of as evincing multiple truths: Single perspectives are m i false, they areinadequate [italics theirs] In an ill-structured domain, any overly hmited version of what is 'correct* will miss too much of the complexity that must be mastered for sufficiency of rich conceptual understanding and fullness of case coverage, (p. 22) 13 Conversely, Riner (1989) actually pleads against the use of hypermedia in traditional instructional roles because of its inability to allow instructor control of learning: Hypermedia systems are designed to aid in information storage and retrieval and not to be tools to actively aid in a change in behavior which is the definition of instruction.... A critical difference between an instructional system and other information retrieval systems is that instruction by definition prescribes control over presentation for the purpose of supporting efficient learning. Hypermedia information control is almost the antithesis of instructional control, (p. 77)
Clearly, these experts disagree not just about hypermedia but also about learning itself. In summary, Tsai (1988) notes that “before hypertext can fulfill its promise, research in human sciences is needed to answer & lot of non-technical questions” (p. 12).
Use of Hvpermedia in Education In 1988 Marchionini stated, “Hypermedia systems offer education a window of opportunity to augment the traditional methods, material, and strategies of learning and teaching” (p. 12). Those who responded to this call by seeking to implement hypermedia tools into educational settings were faced with definitional problems about not only the technology, but also the very nature of education, instruction, and learning. Should education be teacher-directed or learner-directed? According to Vannevar Bush, the visionary who defined the concept of hypertext during the 1940s, the teacher's task, whether in kindergarten or graduate school, is not primarily to impart information. It is to guide the student mind in its search for knowledge-the gatiiering of information, the understanding of its implications and applications, the consequent growth of knowledge, and it is to be hoped the ultimate growth of wisdom. (Bush, 1970)
Much of the current debate follows from these statements on teaching and learning. For example, Bull and Cochran (1991) refute the idea that any computer-assisted learning should circumvent the teacher. Instead, they advocate a three-way interaction between the learner, the teacher, and the computer. Moreover, Cates (1992) states emphatically that developers of hypermedia should match and support current curricular emphases and teaching practices. Similarly, Spoehr & Shapiro (1991) note that "the allure of hypermedia for instruction lies in its ability to actively engage the student user in the acquisition of information, its ability to support multiple instructional uses, such as tutoring 14 and research, and its inherent ability to support different learning styles” (p. 1). All these writers point out that computer-assisted learning can further involve the teacher in the learning process. Other scholars continue to refme the discussion of hypermedia’s relationship to learning. Some researchers (Hrecz, 1992; Lanza & Roselli, 1991) have observed no significant differences between students’, achievement when some used a hypertext approach and others a structured approach. In some cases, however, attitudes toward learning were changed. Another researcher (Van Ormer, 1992) has suggested that using a more structured version of hypermedia was better for junior high science students, especially when the subject matter was difficult. A group of researchers (Hutchings, et al., 1992) concluded, "Raw [italics theirs] hypermedia is not able to support effective learning. Educational hypermedia must be able to support a variety of interaction/learning styles with graphical browsers, guided tours, etc." (p. 177). In studying the related area of multimedia (see the definitions of hypermedia and multimedia in Chapter 1), Stamper (1992) found that multimedia was at least as effective as the conventional curriculum in teaching higher-level cognitive skills and in encouraging positive attitudes. In a related study, Falk and Carlson (1992) have proposed a model for multimedia instructional design and use. In it, multimedia could be used as either a teaching tool or a learning tool. Moreover, for each of these tools, the interaction could be classified as (1) a didactic presentation, (2) an exploration, (3) a structured observation, (4) a simulated interaction, or (5) an assessment and instruction. (According to this model, all of the CMHs used in this study would be classified mainly as learning tools in either the exploration or structured observation form.) Still other research has connected interactive media with active learning in particular. McNeil and Nelson (1991) conducted a meta-analysis of 10 years of research about interactive video. They concluded that interactive video was found “to be an effective instructional method, at least as a supplement to regular instruction” (p. 5). Moreover, in her meta-analysis, Stafford (1990) found that active learning facilitated the learning process 15 and that retention was higher for instruction which was presented using interactive video as opposed to computer-assisted instruction. These studies all point to the fact that more research is needed before hypermedia can become an effective pedagogical tool. In his analysis of the literature. Park (1991) concludes that "The use of hypermedia for instruction (particularly as an instructional delivery system or authoring system) requires more theoretical research and technical development" (p, 28). Similarly, Heller (1990) addresses the importance of hypermedia- assisted instruction (HAI) research: We, as educators, must begin to address the use of HAI in our instructional systems in radically new ways. While we can look to research in discovery learning and incidental learning, HAI does pose new problems inherent in its nonlinear structure and presentation. Questions related to whether this type of presentation improves comprehension and recall of material, whether all learners or only those with a hyper mind can follow the conceptual model, and how the classroom teacher can harness the power of HAI remain to be answered, (pp. 437-438)
Heller here asks some key questions that must guide research into hypermedia’s potential for the classroom. In an earlier study, Sculley (1987) stated, "Students today should master the skills and tools of research as part of their basic education. To give our students this mastery, we must create a learning environment in which research and instruction are integrated....content and organization become complimentary tools that act on each other to deepen our understanding of the world around us” (p. 21). Hypermedia, these researchers suggest, may create this environment The constructivist philosophy, which appears to be the predominant view of education by those advocating the use of hypermedia, is elucidated by Apple Computer (1991) in documents describing their experimental Classrooms of Tomorrow (ACOT); Traditionally, teachers ask students questions, students offer answers and teachers explain if those answers are right or wrong. This type of teaching doesn't encourage student inquiry and it doesn't necessarily encourage students to learn the interdependencies of the various facts presented....ACOTs constructivist approach doesn't diminish the role of a teacher, however. Rather it changes the teacher's role from being primarily a lecturer who transfers knowledge to students, to that of being a mentor or coach who guides students in their construction of knowledge, (p. 1)
Hypermedia is clearly a development aligned with this constructivist approach. 16 Use of hypermedia in music education Perhaps due to its multimedia nature, music education has received attention from many who were investigating new technologies. While discussing the role that technology plays in contemporary music education, Higgins (1992) states, "It is the application of the technology, not the technology itself, that influences interest and consequently success with the technology" (p. 491). Willett and Netusil (1989) speak to the attitudinal element of music education when they write, “students tended to have positive ideas about using computers in music education — music education is an area that could benefit greatly from positive attitudes of students toward using computers" (p. 228). Indeed, the desire to harness technology and use it in the music classroom is not a new phenomenon. In the early 1970s, Placek (1972) was motivated by the educational possibilities of computer- assisted instruction and random-access audio. His resulting pneumatic contraption was similar in function to today's CD-ROM music applications. During the last two decades, many technologies have emerged and been implemented by music educators. Prominent among them are digital technologies such as tuners, metronomes, and, most importantly, MIDI instruments. However, Willman (1992) cautions that teachers who plan to implement technology into the music classroom must choose their curricular goals first, and only then choose supportive technology. The technology must be the servant of the curriculum. Studies that specifically involved music and CD-ROM hypermedia programs include dissertations by Adams (1990b), Lee (1989), Sigurjonsson (1991), and Hughes (1991). In his study, Adams developed an interactive hypermedia program used to teach the interpretive aspects of wind notation to high school wind instrumentalists. Since the program did not utilize a CD-ROM player, it was limited by computer disk space. Nevertheless, it was successful. In a study which parallels this current study, Lee (1989) developed a music listening station that utilized HyperCard stacks to give information about music and to control the playing of this music on CD-ROM. His stacks were similar to those of the CMHs. The 17 subjects in his study were drawn from a music literature class and they used the 17 hypermedia to receive information that would help them aurally recognize eight of the music selections used in the course. A significant positive effect was noted in the scores of these students compared to the rest of the class on aural recognition tests. Moreover, the researcher speculated that the subjects were able to accomplish their listening goals in a shorter amount of time. Lee hypothesized that the cause of the significant difference in his experiment was the careful design of the listening station. The emphasis of his hypermedia listening station was on student control of the environment. He theorized that similar computer-assisted instruction systems may have failed because, in them, students were controlled by the program. However, the study was different from the present study by virtue of its media (home made stacks are much less involved and include much less information than CMHs), its scope (separate audio compact discs were used for each of the eight selections), and its exclusive testing of aural recognition of compositions (what was learned about the music was not evaluated). In his study, Hughes (1991) also designed a hypermedia listening station and used it to test his hypothesis that the music literature students who used his specially-designed station would learn more than those who simply listened to music in a listening lab. The listening station he designed used HyperCard stacks containing information about several musical selections on compact discs. These CDs were controlled by the very HyperCard stacks which contained the information. Hughes also grouped students into the learning style categories of active, neutral, and passive, and then tested the attitudes and success of subjects after they used the hypermedia listening station. The study sought to determine whether students who used a computer-controlled compact disc player would develop greater skills in identifying music repertoire than students whose listening sessions consisted of simple repetitive exercises along with score study. The research hypothesis was accepted. Furthermore, the group of active learners was the only group to benefit from working with the program without cues (help and prompts), suggesting that active learners may benefit more from a non-prescriptive browsing strategy. 18 In his research, Sigurjonsson (1991) produced several detailed case studies in which students working with his HyperCard stacks were allowed to randomly and instantly access any portion of a standard audio compact disc. These same HyperCard stacks provided the users with open-ended questions about their listening experience. Data were also generated from the capture of mouse and keyboard movement, such as how many times the subject branched out to use related information. Some interesting connections with and distinctions from the present study exist in the research outlined above. For example, referring to one of the commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs to be used in this study, Adams (1990a) notes. While the method of presentation employed in the Beethoven program is new, the materials presented are traditional in scope and content. It is I&ely that such powerful technological tools as interactive audio will also spawn the development of completely new models for understanding music. What is most encouraging is that as technology improves, the potential increases for using it in ways that are truly musical in nature rather than artificial or sterile. If new technology stimulates new ways of thinking about musical meaning and its instraction, it will serve to broaden the palette of resources available to music educators, (p. 115)
Here Adams points explicitly to the potential of the present study. Conversely, while both Lee (1989) and Hughes (1991) used music literature classes for their samples, only one study was located in which the use of interactive technology in a music appreciation course was examined. While there are many similarities between music literature and music appreciation classes, students in music literature courses are often music majors or minors. Music appreciation classes usually have non-majors and the emphasis here is more on enrichment and enjoyment of music. Woodruff and Heller (1990) have suggested that the use of interactive hypermedia might be valuable for students studying for aural tests in a music appreciation course. This study was the only research found that dealt directly with the use of hypermedia in a music appreciation course. However, its hypermedia used video-disc storage and was structured much like traditional computer-assisted tests. A user could rehear a passage many times and then take and retake the test until he/she passed it The improvement was found to be significant The researchers state their belief in the potential of the medium in the following passage: 19 With some students requiring many repetitions in order to pass a test, the investigators believe that interactive opticd disc technology has great potential for the development of tutorials. For example, a CD-ROM player connected to a computer terminal could utilize the commercially available compact discs to train students to hear features contained in the musical works before they attempted to take a test. This would be of particular help to students who are unable to distinguish musical features on their own. (p. 12)
In spite of this study and the others outlined above, this researcher has found no evidence of studies done on the nature of commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs, or of their integration into a music curriculum at any level. There is a possibility that this type of research has been done by Apple Computer in their Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow project. However, all calls to Apple Computer requesting material of this nature were not returned. Similarly, messages were left at Voyager Company for Robert Winter, the author of several of the CMHs used in this study. Here, also, contact was never made and it was not possible to determine if specific research of this type has been done. This researcher thought it to be unlikely, however, that Voyager would be interested in curricular use of their products, since none of their CMHs show widespread evidence of group-use design characteristics. In summary, a review of the literature has discovered numerous studies about the unique nature of hypertext and hypermedia. Most of these have sought to answer some variation of the question, “If hypermedia is constructed in this way, what will be the effect on this type of subject?” Research about the use of hypermedia in music education has been limited to a handful of studies. Each of these utilized HyperCard stacks designed by the researcher to provide the user with textual information and to control regular compact discs. Research questions were concerned with the effectiveness of the researcher- developed hypermedia programs. The study undertaken in this research, may be the first to investigate the incorporation of commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs into an extant music appreciation course. Unlike other research, the focus of this study was not on the development and evaluation of the hypermedia itself, but rather on the development and evaluation of an instructional strategy which utilizes existing hypermedia. CHAPTER in METHOD
Bagte»Jid General Studies 200 (GEN 200) is a core curriculum course that is required for graduation from Dordt College, a private, liberal arts institution located in Sioux Center, Iowa. However, students who are majoring in music, theater, or art may take an upper- level course in one of these disciplines (other than their own) in lieu of the GEN 200 requirement. Most of the students who enroll in the course are either sophomores or juniors. The goals of the entire GEN 200 course are outlined in the general course syllabus, in the music subcourse syllabus (Appendix D), these general goals are reflected as follows: 1. Each student will master basic aural and factual knowledge about the style periods in western classical music history.
2. Each student will develop an aural and factual knowledge about the structure of music and will be able to use an appropriate vocabulary when describing music.
The focus is upon appreciation and understanding of the music of our western heritage. As a whole, GEN 200 is a semester long, three credit-hour, humanities division course that meets on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays at 10:00 AM. The course is divided into three subcourses and is team-taught by one professor from each subject area (music, art, theater). Semester enrollment ranges from 75 to 150 students. Each student is arbitrarily assigned to one of three sections, resulting in 25 to 50 students per section. The number of class periods per semester is also divided by three, resulting in 12 class periods for each subcourse section. In addition, several class periods at the beginning and end of each semester are held in a large presentation classroom with all students present. The number of these class periods varies depending on the number of days in the semester. For
20 21 these combined classes, lecture/demonstration material is chosen and team-taught with the goal of providing students with an integrated view of the arts or knowledge of a special topic. Moreover, when a subcourse section is completed, students usually return to the large classroom setting for an “informance” presented by one of the instructors. In the case of music, this informance is usually a lecture/demonstration designed to prepare students for attendance at a live concert. The goals and structure of the music subcourse of GEN 200 are outlined in its syllabus. The course is divided into an initial series of lectures and assignments about the elements of music and the making of musical sounds. In the main portion of the subcourse, music history style periods of western culture are sur/eyed. At some point in the course, a unit titled “How to listen to different types of music” is included. Primary musical examples are often repeated in each of the portions of the subcourse in an effort to maximize understanding and minimize confusion. During the last few years, the subcourse grade in music (1/3 of the total GEN 200 grade) has been determined by the following weights; tests and quizzes (50%), a report on attendance at an assigned live musical event (10%), and a listening project (40%). However, 5% of a student’s final subcourse grade has been deducted for each late assignment or unexcused absence. Throughout the subcourse, practice in music listening is considered to be essential. Each subcourse test consists of at least 40% aural identification, and the independent listening project counts for 40% of the entire subcourse grade. In the listening project portion of GEN 200, each student is required to listen repeatedly to a musical selection contained on a compact disc and write a paper about that composition. The paper must show evidence of careful listening and research. In the paper, the student is expected to evaluate the chosen composition according to the musical elements and historical periods covered in the course lectures. The quality and quantity of these references, as well as the quality and quantity of other insightful references about the music, composer, and style period determine the grade. Lengthy biographical material about the composer is discouraged in favor of comments about the music. 22 Development of an Instructional Strategy Utilizing Hypermedia in a Music Appreciation ■Cgytsg Five experts and two students examined The Orchestra, a CMH, in the initial interview stage during the summer of 1992. Each of the five adults had considerable experience teaching some aspect of arts appreciation at the high school or college level. Three of the five were music teachers (two at the college level), one was a professor of visual art, and one was a professor of theater arts. Three of the teachers had taught GEN 200, one each in music, visual art, and theater. The two students were both senior music majors at Dordt College and each had previously taken GEN 200. Each examiner was given a brief introduction to the possible research questions and was guided through the HELP card of The Orchestra (Appendix A). The examiner was then given complete freedom to interact with the program for one hour. The researcher was stationed in the adjoining room and was available for assistance at any time. Each examiner was interviewed immediately following the session. (A complete transcript of the interviews can be found in Appendix B.) When told the session was over, each examiner made an initial positive statement about the program. While few problems were noted with the use of the CMH, several examiners missed some aspects of the program during their hour-long session. However, all examiners said that they would enjoy spending more time with the hypermedia program. A problem encountered was the fact that three of the participants exited the program completely and were not able to find their way back into it. It was determined that this problem could be avoided by providing users with written instructions and by showing them how to open the file folder containing The Orchestra HyperCard stacks. It was also decided subsequently to simplify the computer’s desktop configuration. Two of the examiners finished early (each after approximately 50 minutes); each of these had exited the system prematurely. Since they were essentially finished with their examination of the program, the HyperCard program was not reopened. Interview responses can be summarized as follows. The question “How much time do you think an average non-music major college freshman would spend with this program 23 before exhausting his curiosity or becoming bored?” elicited answers ranging from “10 to 20 minutes” to “5 to 7 hours, but not at one sitting”. The three music teachers answered with the longest amounts of time. When asked a related question, “Do you think that students would work better with this program individually or in pairs?”, three examiners answered “individually”, two answered “in pairs” and two answered “it depends on the student” Regarding the positive aspects of the program, the responses could be grouped under two headings: Presentation of Information and User Control. The following positives regarding the program’s Presentation of Information were cited by the examiners: 1. It encourages greater depth in understanding the music (both listening and reading about it); it encourages listening for musical subtleties.
2. One can deal with musical terminology in context (read about and hear it simultaneously); there is no interference from teacher sounds (talking, writing on the board, scratching when finding a place on a record, etc.).
3. A teacher would have to spend a long time to collect and organize all of the related resources (audio clips, information, definitions, pictures, games, etc.) and even then the presentation wouldn’t be as effective.
The following positive aspects regarding the program’s User-Control were cited: 1. It allows “slowed-down listening” through pausing and backtracking.
2. It allows practice on any interesting or challenging aspect
However, the following aspects of the program were noted as potential problems: 1. student distraction
2. information overload
3. difficulty for the teacher getting feedback on student activity (“How did the student really spend his time in the lab?”)
4. scheduling enough computer time for an entire class
Responses to the question, “How much and what types of structure should users be given?” varied greatly. Nearly all of the examiners suggested a combination of free browsing and more structured listening time. However, they did not agree that the free browsing should be before or after the structured listening time. Examiners were also uncertain about whether free browsing should be recommended for all students or only 24 good students. Moreover, there was no general agreement on whether the structure should be information-controlled (“Find this information” or “Hear and identify this on the CD- ROM” or “Use this study guide”) or time-controlled (sign-in and sign-out in the lab). The central question of the interview was, “If you were teaching a college music appreciation course this year, how would you use this equipment and program to take best advantage of its capabilities?” All respondents suggested including introductory information that would explain the program’s structure and features to the students. Also, the responses generally advocated using the program as a supplement to regular class work. Some suggested having the students make study guides or specific assignments using The Orchestra, whereas others suggested requiring that a certain amount of time be spent using it Assessment of the student’s learning was again noted to be an inherent problem in a medium that encourages random browsing according to personal interest. The instructional strategy arrived at as the result of the interviews and review of the literature on the topic of hypermedia is one that utilizes commercially-available music- related hypermedia programs as resource material for the listening project portion of a music appreciation course. It is this strategy that was pilot-tested during the fall 1992 semester and tested during the spring 1993 semester. In response to the findings of several researchers (Cates, 1992; Jonassen, 1988; Park, 1991; Spoehr & Shapiro, 1991) and to comments from the examiners, this researcher decided to implement a strategy in which aU students would receive traditional music appreciation instruction and would be tested using traditional methods. The hypermedia, it was hypothesized, would be most useful as the only resource tool used for the listening project assignment of the music appreciation course. It was believed that this strategy would best take advantage of the non-prescriptive, intensive, interactive nature of the medium. These characteristics of the medium, it was believed, would encourage students to learn at higher cognition levels than when they are using the drill-and-practice strategies commonly employed by traditional computer-assisted instruction (Bull & Cochran, 1991; Heller, 1990). In this strategy, hypermedia was viewed as a resource and experimentation package 25 used by students for independent research. This definition, which guided the design of CD-ROM listening project, refers to unique content of a “package”-something which contains more than one “gift” and often many surprises. Regarding the definition of hypermedia, John Sculley (1987) states, "A researcher using a card catalog and reference materials traditionally had the opportunity to pursue ideas according to insight and interest. Hypermedia doesn't change that process, it merely accelerates it” (p. 22). For the purposes of this listening project, then, hypermedia would function as a research tool. As a result of this instractional strategy, a research paper was thought to be the most practical and appropriate instrument for evaluation of what was learned during the hypermedia listening project In a research paper, prompting about how to search for and structure information could be part of an instruction booklet thereby allowing the teacher to guide the student at the outset Nevertheless, writing a paper would also require a student to construct his own organization of the many diverse bits of information presented in a typical hypermedia program. This constructivist philosophy of education was advocated by many (Apple Computer, 1991; Jonassen, 1990; Spiro, et al., 1991). Because of their lack of uniformity, however, research papers can vary greatly in their content and are graded on the basis of what information is present and on how well the student demonstrates his or her understanding of that information. By contrast, a traditional objective test usually measures how much the student knows (or doesn’t know) about specific information, making it an inappropriate tool for the measurement of learning from hypermedia (Sigurjonsson, 1991).
Design The design of this exploratory study was a variation of the Pretest-Posttest Control Group design (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). The independent variable was the type of instructional strategy used in the listening project segment of the course. The experimental design was as follows:
Hypermedia Group R O X j O
Traditional Group R O O 26 The hypermedia group consisted of students randomly assigned to use a CMH for their listening project. Conversely, the traditional group consisted of all the students in GEN 200 who were not part of the hypermedia group. The following arguments were used to justify the use of this traditional group as the control group: 1. Since 12 students were randomly selected from each subcourse section to be subjects, the remainder of the class was, in a sense, also randomly selected to be members of the traditional group.
2. Since all students at Dordt College must take GEN 200, the enrollment for any one semester is a valid sample of the population. The class size is always large and no factors have been identified that would cause a certain semester to have a less valid sample of the population.
Since an entire semester separated the posttest from the pretest and since the pretest was not introduced as a pretest, the danger of a practice effect invalidating the results was minimized. The pretest/posttest was designed to be a comprehensive measure of what was learned in the music subcourse by those in the hypermedia group, as well as by those in the traditional group. While the use of this dependent variable would seem to be less direct than using the scores on the listening project itself, it was reasoned that a listening project research paper would be more difficult to grade with objective accuracy in spite of every attempt to do so, and that the student’s writing ability would be an uncontrolled variable. Also, the nature of this design was to test what students learned through the entire listening project, not simply what they reported in their paper. Most importantly, this was a validation study. It was reasoned that if students in the hypermedia group learned as effectively or more effectively than those in the traditional group, then we would be able to say that the instructional strategy tested in this study may be a valid way to utilize hypermedia in a music appreciation course.
Subjects This exploratory study was conducted on the campus of Dordt College in Sioux Center, Iowa during the spring, 1993 semester. During this semester, the instructor of GEN 200 was the researcher. 27 The number of students enrolled in GEN 200, excluding those who dropped the class, was 91. The music subcourse sections had the following number of students enrolled: A, 33; B, 29; C, 29. Twelve subjects were randomly assigned from each of the three General Studies 200 music subcourses for inclusion in the hypermedia group. Twelve were used since this would yield a sample of 36 and since the one listening lab workstation would be unable to provide enough time for more than 12 students in any one class section. Students were told that they had been randomly assigned to the hypermedia group and that only 12 were chosen because of the workstation accessibility factor mentioned above. Students were given the option to be removed from the CD-ROM group if they had a specific and valid problem with it. These numbers changed under the following circumstances. First, one member of the hypermedia group in section B requested permission to be transferred to the regular CD group. Since she was the mother of a young child and lived some distance from campus, she would be able to listen to a regular CD at home, thus avoiding the 6 to 8 hours of CD- ROM lab time. Her request was granted, resulting in a hypermedia group of 35 and a traditional group of 56. Second, during the subcourse sections five students accumulated several unexcused absences and missed several tests. These students had final percentage averages of below 40%. One of these students was in the HM group and four of them were in the traditional group. All data of these students were eliminated from the data which were analyzed. Third, one other student from the HM group missed the pretest and two other students, one from the HM group and one from the traditional group, missed the posttesL All data of these students were eliminated from the research data. The final numbers, then, used for this study were the following: Total number of students 83 Hypermedia group 32 Traditional group 51 Since the number of subjects was large and since members of the hypermedia group were selected at random, no attempt was made to gather baseline data regarding the subjects’ interest and experience with music prior to their enrollment in GEN 200. The 28 specific research questions were never discussed with any of the students in GEN 200.
Development of Subcourse Materials A revised GEN 200 course syllabus and coursepack containing class notes were developed for this study. The syllabus (Appendix D) included goals, objectives, information about grading, and a course schedule, while the coursepack (Appendix E) contained all of the course lecture notes. After being developed in September of 1992, this syllabus and the coursepack were revised during the first semester of the 1992-93 school year. Furthermore, two tests and a listening quiz were devised during the first subcourse section of the spring 1993 semester. Used throughout the semester, these evaluations were identical in each of the three sections, except for a rearranged question order. Grading procedures were also identical. The tests were closely related to tests that had been used in previous semesters of GEN 200. The tests and quiz used fill-in-the-blank and matching formats and, since all information was taken directly from coursepack and listening assignments, all the grading was objective (Appendixes N and O). The listening project assignment had been used in previous semesters of GEN 200. It was adjusted for the purposes of this study so that the two types of source material could be used. Traditionally, the listening project assignment had required a student to pick a composition of his or her choice from a list, listen to it repeatedly, do research in the libraiy, and write a paper about it For this study, the instructions for several of the previous semesters’ listening project specifications were evaluated, combined, and revised to produce an assignment of the traditional type. (See Appendixes F, G, and H.) For the hypermedia type of listening project, however, new listening strategies and instruction booklets were devised (Appendixes H, J, K, L, and M). The CD-ROM listening project strategy was similar to the traditional CD listening project strategy in that it required the student to repeatedly listen to a composition and to organize his or her facts and impressions about the music into a paper that followed a specified outline. A major difference was the fact that for those using a CD-ROM all 29 information was taken (both aurally and visually) from the CMH. Those using the regular CD were required to do independent research in the library as well as to listen to the composition. Each of the four CMHs eventually used in this study had a different way of linking and organizing information, and each of the four contained several listening modes. Listening modes were thought to be an ideal vehicle for listening repeatedly to one composition, since the student could try a different mode at each listening session. While the labels given to these modes and their contents varied considerably, each CMH had one mode that gave an overview of the composition and another mode that encouraged detailed listening through on-screen prompting while the composition was being played. Moreover, each CMH had a great deal of historical information about the composition and the composer in one mode, and each CMH had modes dealing extensively with the formal aspects of its composition. A feature of each was also a closing game section, one in which a correct answer was greeted by a “Mozart”, “Beethoven”, or “Stravinsky” shouting superlatives in his native language. While each CMH related most of its textual information directly to its composition and composer, since the amount of information was great, much of the information also dealt with general musical knowledge. For example, students using The Orchestra might see the word “English horn” and want to know more about it. Their search path could take them to information about the woodwind family, reed making, acoustics, the histoiy of musical instruments, and the history of music. In order to make this project successful, an introduction to the use of the CMH was devised, pilot-tested, and revised during the fall semester of 1992. Packets were constructed which contained the CD-ROM itself and an instruction booklet. The booklet was comprised of general instructions about the use of the computer, the HyperCard software, and the CD-ROM player, as well as specific learning strategies for using that particular CMH. These specific learning strategies were different for each title since each CMH is organized differently (Appendixes J, K, L, and M). The primary goals of the introductory information were (a) to alleviate all stress about using the hypermedia tools. 30 (b) to provide a working knowledge of what the technology will do, and (c) to provide a working knowledge of on-line help. Every attempt was made to provide the student using a CMH with a readable, concise, graphic-rich, easy-to-use, and non-threatening body of information (Appendix I). Each specific suggested learning strategy was devised after a the researcher had spent time evaluating the unique design of that hypermedia package. All began with a cautionary note about the scope of the program and then gave a listening strategy for each of six listening sessions. Instructions for the earlier sessions were more prescriptive and, by the sixth session, students were given complete freedom to explore any new area or to review an area of interest Since the one concert selected for complete class attendance is different each semester of GEN 200, the nature of the required concert report also varies by semester. During the semester of this study, the concert report specifications were given in an informance on March 17,1993 titled, “Arranging a Musical Bouquet”, The assignment required students to use the information given during the informance to plan a concert order for the April 4 home tour concert of the Dordt College Concert Band and Chamber Orchestra. They were required to attend the concert and compare their own programming ideas with the actual program order (Appendix P). Evaluation of this paper was based on the validity of their reasons for arranging their program order. Finally, the inclusion of the posttest improvement grade as part of the student’s grade was justified to the extent that the content of the posttest was similar to the basic content of the entire course as presented through lectures and in the coursepack. While students could not study the exact information on the final test, they were encouraged to reread the coursepack in preparation for the test. It was also thought that a 5% weight would cause students to take the test in a more thoughtful manner than they would when taking a test that had no relationship to their grade. The improvement score was part of their subcourse final grade, but it was not used in the analysis of data for this research (Appendix U). The various means by which students were evaluated were given the following weights: Test on the elements and making of music 20% 31 Listening quiz over the first half of the style periods only 5% Test over A the style periods 20% Listening project 40% Special arts event report (concert report) 10% Final general knowledge test (posttest improvement) 5%
These percentages are closely related to those which had been used in the music subcourse for several prior semesters.
Development of the Primarv Measurement Instruments The primary measuring instrument used in this study, the pretest/posttest, was devised, pilot-tested, and revised during the first semester of the 1992-93 school year. It was designed to measure what students learn about music during the entire GEN 200 course. Forty percent of the test questions required various forms of aural identification. The pretest was given during the second class period of the semester and the posttest was administered during the next-to-the-last class period of the semester. Each of these classes was held in the large presentation classroom with students from all three sections present As a result of the pilot-testing, a database of musical examples was devised during December 1992 (Appendix G). From this, 20 aural identification questions were added to the pretest/posttest. Like the other questions, these were constructed to measure what students might have learned about music during the semester. The content of the pretest- posttest was chosen carefully and methodically. Specific material from the coursepack which would be tested or listened to in class was not included. However, very similar material was chosen. For example, Mozart’s Symphony No. 40 was frequently used in the subcourse; for a pretest/posttest question, an excerpt from Mozart’s Symphony No. 41 was used. (Comparisons may be made between coursepack information, subcourse test questions, and pretest-posttest questions by examining Appendixes E, N, O, and R.) An attitude survey was also devised, pilot-tested, and revised during the first semester. Using a 5-point Likert scale, the survey was designed to measure the subjects’ interest in music and self-perception of their knowledge of various aspects of music as a result of the GEN 200 music subcourse. Each of the six questions required a reaction of 1 (least true) to 5 (most true) to a statement about the course. In question seven, each student 32 was asked to circle the grade he/she expected to receive in the music subcourse (Appendix S).
Validation and Pilot-testing Copies of the revised syllabus, coursepack, and pretest/posttest were submitted to a professor of music theory at Dordt College and to a string specialist in the Vancouver, British Columbia public school system. The professor of theory taught the GEN 200 subcourse during the Fall, 1992 semester and taught it several times during the past five years. The string specialist taught the subcourse both semesters of the 1991-92 school year. Content validity was established for the syllabus, coursepack, and pretest/posttest by securing the opinions of both of these teachers, experts regarding the appropriateness of materials for use in GEN 200 (Appendix T). Three music-related CD-ROMs that were initially purchased for use in this study had these titles: The Orchestra by Warner Audio Notes, which is based on Benjamin Britten’s composition A Young Person’s Guide to the Orchestra; Mozart: The Magic Flute, by Warner Audio Notes; and Beethoven: Symphony No. 9, by Voyager CD Companion. Each of these hypermedia programs provides detailed information about its composition. Each program is interactive to the extent that the user controls the audio and visual components of the information. Each of the programs can, however, run by itself in some modes once the user has started it. Relevant data about the composition is shown on the computer screen while the user listens to the composition through headphones. During the summer of 1992, five experienced arts educators and two college students examined one of the music-related hypermedia programs {The Orchestra by Warner New Media). They were then interviewed by the researcher. Each of the interviews was tape- recorded and the transcript was then typed (Appendix B). By relating the suggestions of these examiners to literature dealing with educational use of hypermedia, particularly Falk & Carlson (1992), Heller (1990), and Hughes (1991), this researcher devised a viable teaching strategy, one that utilizes interactive hypermedia as a listening project resource package. 33 During the fall semester of 1992, this strategy was pilot-tested using four GEN 200 students in the second music subcourse and again with four students in the third subcourse. Their written reactions were consulted for ideas about the construction of the introductory booklet and the final listening project assignment These students in the pilot study were instructed to use the CMH in the same way as they would use a CD and to write their listening project following the same guidelines as the CD group. This process proved to be problematic, since the project assignment instructions required at least six library references. The CMH students, therefore, failed to glean very much information from the CD-ROM since they were required to have actual quotes from library books. In evaluating this problem, this researcher decided that the listening project assignment for the hypermedia group would not include a library research requirement; indeed, this would be one of the main distinctions between the respective assignments for the two groups. All those who used the CD-ROM player during the fall semester of 1992 semester were given an evaluation form when they checked out a CMH packet in the listening lab. Seventeen evaluation forms were filled out by students. These included several lab attendants who were instructed to try out the CD-ROMs when they had time so that they would be able to answer questions from other students. With answers ranging from 1 (worst) to 5 (best), the following means were observed: Understandability of written instructions: 4.18 Understandability of program instructions: 4.18 Ease of use of the program: 4.29 Estimate of learning using the program: 4.06 Enjoyment of music after using the program: 4.29 Total time spent 64 minutes Seven of the evaluations were made on The Orchestra; seven on Beethoven: Symphony No. 9; and four on Mozart: The Magic Flute. Written comments on these evaluation forms were also extremely positive. However, of the three students using Mozart: The Magic Flute, two reported some confusion with the instructions and with the program. 34 During the pilot-testing of these CMHs, it was determined that The Magic Flute would not be used in the study. The primary reason for this rejection was the fact that The Magic Flute worked with an older version of HyperCard only and required the user to open file folders and to find a HyperCard stack each time the program was started. Even with specific instructions, this process was found to be unacceptable for use with many students, some of whom had never navigated through the hierarchical folder interface of a Macintosh computer. The Magic Flute also differed from the other CMHs used in this study by virtue of its length (three compact discs versus one for each of the other CMHs used in this study) and by the fact that it told a very involved story. It was thought that students would have difficulty retelling this story in a brief paper. After the exclusion of Mozart: The Magic Flute, two other CD-ROMs were purchased for use in this study. These were Stravinsky: The Rite of Spring, by Voyager, and Mozart: String Quartet in C Major, by Voyager. The pretest/posttest was developed during the fall semester. Every attempt was made to ask questions that were similar to the subcourse test questions but that required a thorough understanding of the course material. Memorization of the exact coursepack statements that were part of the subcourse tests would not directly help students on the posttest. The pretest/posttest and attitude survey were pilot-tested at the conclusion of music subcourse sections B and C during the Fall, 1992 semester. In the B section, 51 students took a 25-question pilot-test, with a resulting mean score of 51.3%. An item analysis using The Teacher’s Pet software, revealed numerous items that were either too easy or too hard, or where a single wrong answer was consistently chosen. These problematic questions and answers were revised and many new ones were added for the C section pilot-test. This new 25-question test produced a mean score of 43.8%. Several of the new items on this test were once again analyzed and revised in an attempt to produce a test that would correctly discriminate between levels of musical knowledge. The best 30 questions were then chosen for the actual pretest/posttest. Since a time of only 20 minutes was allocated for each of these phot-testing sessions, no aural 35 examples were included. In addition, an attitude survey consisting of six questions was given at the conclusion of each pilot-test. Using a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (least true) to 5 (most true), average responses ranged from 3.1 for the statement “As a result of this course I will be more inclined to purchase recordings of music I heard in class” to 4.1 for the statement “As a result of this course I understand the histoiy of music better.” Questions and average responses found on the first pilot attitude survey (n = 51) were as follows: 1. As a result of this course I will be more inclined to 3.4 purchase recordings of music I heard in class. 2. A sa result of this course I understand the elements of 3.5 music better. 3. The listening in this course was enjoyable. 4.0 4. The assignments in this course were enjoyable. 3.1 5. As a result of this course I understand the history of 4.1 music better. 6. All students at Dordt should learn what I learned in this 3.4 course. 7 . 1 expect to get the following grade in this music A-/B+ subcourse. Questions and average responses found on the second pilot attitude survey {n = 48) were as follows: 1. A sa result of this course I will be more inclined to 3.1 purchase recordings of music I heard in class. 2. A sa result of this course I understand the elements of 3.8 music better. 3. The listening in this course was enjoyable. 3.9 4. The assignments in this course were enjoyable. • 3.3 5. As a result of this course I understand the history of 3.9 music better. 36 6. I did better on this test because of what I learned in this 3.5 course. 7. I expect to get the following grade in this music A-/B+ subcourse. As with the pretest/posttest, the attitude survey questions were also revised and seven were selected for the attitude survey which was given with the posttest. It should be mentioned that during each phase of the pilot-testing process, the researcher received expert advice about the quality of test questions from two experts. Each has had more than five years of experience both as a performing artist and as a private music teacher.
Eoii.icro.ent Throughout the subcourse, all students used the Dordt College music listening lab to listen to recordings upon which they would be tested. The listening lab contained five stations equipped with an amplifier, turntable, and cassette tape player. Equipment brands included Luxman, Pioneer, Teac, and Marantz. For the listening project, equipment used by the hypermedia group differed from that used by the traditional group. The traditional group used two NEC CD-500 compact disc players, one Onkyo DX-130 compact disc player, Luxman amplifiers, Sony headphones, and a holding of over 250 compact disks. On the other hand, music department computer lab equipment used by the hypermedia group consisted of one Macintosh SE/30 computer with 5 megabytes of RAM and a 40 megabyte hard disk drive, an Apple CD 150 CD-ROM player, and a pair of high-quality Sony headphones. Each of the four hypermedia programs used in this study utilizes Apple Computer’s HyperCard software, version 2.1. All of the commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs (CMHs) used in this study are in the form of HyperCard stacks that also drive the CD-ROM audio. These stacks contain all of the composer and composition information used in each of their CMHs. In each case, these stacks are contained on the CD-ROM but are then ported to the 37 computer’s hard disk, since the HyperCard program runs many times faster when accessed from the hard drive rather than the CD-ROM drive. These stacks then control access to the music contained on the CD-ROM. Average seek time for the Apple CD 150 player, the one used in this study, is listed as 380 milliseconds. With the computer used for this study, a Macintosh SE/30 computer, the wait time for computer access of CD-ROM audio information was not considered to be detrimental to the learning of those experts who examined The Orchestra during the summer of 1992. Finally, the classroom used for each of the subcourse lectures was the choir room in the music building at Dordt College. This large classroom is equipped with enough desk/chairs for each student The sound system used for the numerous aural examples includes a Luxman LVl 12 amplifier, a Technics SL1500 turntable, a TEAC A-103 cassette tape player, and two large ceiling mounted Electro-Voice Sentry V speakers. Procedures The study evolved in four stages. The time frame for the complete study was from June, 1992 through May, 1993. S ia s s - l During the summer of 1992, experts examined The Orchestra CD-ROM and their reactions and suggestions were evaluated as the instructional strategy was developed. Stage 2. Pilot-testing of the hypermedia introductory materials, the computer lab usage procedures, the pretest/posttest, and the attitude survey took place during the Fall, 1992 semester with that semester’s GEN 200 students. Several students who were not in GEN 200 also tried the CMHs and filled out a questionnaire about their reaction to it and to the introductory materials. Stage 3. The actual exploratory study took place in the third stage, during the spring, 1993 semester following the schedule set forth in Appendix C. All students took a pretest during the second class period on January 18. All students were taught by the same instructor who used identical lecture material for each of the 12 subcourse class sessions. 38 according to the goals and objectives listed in the syllabus. The same coursepack (Appendix E) was used by the students in each of the three subcourse sections. All students were evaluated by means of Test 1 (Appendix N) after The Elements of Musicmie Making of Music section of the course, a Listening Quiz halfway through the History of Music section, and Test 2 (Appendix O) at the end of the History of Music section. Test 1 was worth 20%, the Listening Quiz was worth 5%, and Test 2 was worth 20% of the final subcourse grade. The fourth evaluation was based on an individual listening project assignment The grade on this project was worth 40% of the subcourse grade. For this major project those students chosen for the hypermedia group chose one of the four CMHs, used it and wrote about the music heard on it The CD-ROM, instruction booklet, and the key to the computer lab room were available from the on-duty listening lab attendant Therefore, the hours of the computer lab room were the same as those of the listening lab. While attempts were made to educate some of these attendants so that they would be able to help students solve simple problems with the computer/CD-ROM setup, the process proved to be unsuccessful and several students did come to the researcher for help. Conversely, the students in the traditional group selected a composition from a list of approved compositions (Appendix F). They then listened to this composition on an audio compact disc that was housed in the Dordt College music listening lab, did research on the composition and composer, and wrote a research paper about the composition. In spite of these different procedures, the listening project assignment for the hypermedia group was nearly identical to the assignment for the traditional group. (See Appendixes G and H to compare the CD and CD-ROM assignments.) While students in the traditional group were required to do library research, students in the hypermedia group were asked to use only the CMH to obtain information for their paper. Therefore, the hypermedia students had only the name of the CD-ROM, or perhaps a few references mentioned in the CD-ROM information, in the bibliography section of their research paper. All students had the same amount of time to complete the listening project. However, 39 there were at least three complaints in each of the subcourse sections from members of the hypermedia group that they were unable to use the one computer and CD-ROM enough, since it was being used by others. To alleviate this problem, the instructor announced added listening lab times for each subcourse section. On selected Saturday mornings, the instructor opened the lab for students who wished to work. Several hypermedia group students and a few traditional group students took advantage of this offer. Nevertheless, seven of the hypermedia group students mentioned the problem of insufficient computer access time in the Conclusions section of their research paper. The posttest (Appendix R) was given on April 28 in the large presentation classroom. Specific instructions were similar to those given before the students took the pretest. Questions were identical, although a few of the questions were reworded slightly to offset some confusion that had emerged during the pretest On the posttest the three questions that had caused confusion on the pretest were reworded so that no verbal explanation would be needed. The rewording was identical to the verbal explanation given to the entire class during the pretest. The question order, however, was switched in a few cases, to avoid the possibility that someone remembered what question was on a certain number in the pretest Just as during the pretest, the instructor waited for fifteen minutes before starting the tape recorder so that students could concentrate on the written part of the test. Since the identical tape was used for both the pretest and postlest, all silences and excerpt lengths were identical. After the tape containing the twenty aural examples was played, students were encouraged to take time to carefully finish the test and to check all of their answers. As on the pretest, all students completed the test at least five minutes before the end of the class period. Finally, the informance about the Special Arts Event concert was given on March 17 to all students in the large presentation classroom by the instructor. Students were required to attend the April 4 Dordt College Band and Chamber Orchestra Home Tour Concert and write a report on the programming aspects of the concert (Appendix P). The due date for the entire class for this report was April 30. 40 With respect to grading procedures, the following practices were observed. All objective measurements in the course (Test 1, Listening Quiz, Test 2) were graded by the researcher. All subjective measures (Listening Project, Special Arts Event Concert Report) were graded by a music teacher with fifteen years experience teaching at the college level, who holds a master’s degree in piano performance. Eveiy attempt was made to grade these papers in an objective and non-biased manner. The researcher reasoned that one experienced teacher who had time to grade all the papers would be able to make objective comparisons. Also, since this teacher was not the researcher, it was thought that there would be less chance of bias while grading hypermedia or traditional group papers. In addition, the pretest and posttest answer cards were graded by computer using Teacher’s Pet software. All data were entered into the Class Database (see Appendix U) by the researcher and the entire database was checked for accuracy by two other people. Regarding the actual course grade given to students, averages were calculated using the weights set forth in the syllabus. For any student who had missed either the pretest or the posttest, his or her grade was based on a 95% weight rather than 100%. Students missing tests were given a grade of 0% on that test Five percent was deleted from the final subcourse grade for each unexcused absence or late paper. When obtaining research data from the class database, however, care was taken to use a different final average than the students’ actual final grades. The final average for research was arrived at by eliminating the pretest-posttest improvement grade and by eliminating penalties for absences and late papers. Moreover, the data of those students who had missed either the pretest or the posttest were eliminated from the study. The researcher also reasoned that students who had a subcourse grade of lower than 40% had missed too much class for a valid assessment of their learning and consequently their data were eliminated. The final average for research was then based on a 95% weight Smgg4- During the final stage of the study, in early May, 1993, data gathered from the posttest and attitude survey were submitted to statistical analysis. CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION OF THE DATA
The specific purpose of this study was to define and test an instructional strategy that incorporates music-related hypermedia into a college music appreciation course curriculum. The general purposes of this study were to examine the nature of commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs; to propose a functional metaphor for them; and to explore the use of this metaphor in an actual music appreciation course curriculum. The study also sought to ascertain the attitudes of the students toward music and the use of hypermedia for studying music after they had used hypermedia in their music appreciation course. Finally, a secondary purpose of this study was to compare the musical knowledge and attitudes gained by students who used hypermedia for their listening project resource with that gained by students who used the traditional listening project resources of compact disc listening and library research. In this chapter these goals and purposes are related to the following analyses of data: (a) a statistical check of the randomness of the subject sample as assigned to treatment groups; (b) a statistical comparison of the hypermedia group’s pretest and posttest scores for the test of general musical knowledge; (c) a statistical comparison of the two groups’ pretest/posttest improvement scores for the test of general musical knowledge; and (d) a statistical comparison of the two groups’ item scores on a survey of musical attitudes. These statistical tests were computed using the SAS statistical analysis program for the IBM OS/MVS. Before presenting these results, however, this researcher must briefly review his hypotheses. The first research hypothesis for this study stated that subjects in the hypermedia group would make a significant improvement from pretest to posttest on a test
41 42 of general musical knowledge; that their pretest/posttest gain score would be significantly different from that of subjects in the traditional group; and that their average score on each item of a musical attitude survey would be significantly different than the scores of those in the traditional group. Secondly, the null hypotheses stated that there would be no significant difference (a) between the pretest and the posttest scores of the hypermedia group; (b) between the hypermedia group and the traditional group in their pretest/posttest gain scores; and (c) between the two groups on each item of a musical attitude survey.
Statistical Methodology In order to accept or reject the first null hypothesis, the researcher administered a paired t -test; for the second hypothesis a two-sample r-test; and for the third hypothesis both MANOVA and chi-square were used. Statistical assumptions included (1) normality, (2) independence of subjects, and, when more than one sample was used, (3) equal variances. As a check of the assumption of normality, a histogram of the pretest scores was constructed (see Figure 1).
30-
c 2 0 - o u ? 10-
26.0 36.8 47.6 58.4 69.2 80.0 Pretest Scores
Figure 1. Histogram of Pretest Scores for All Subjects Combined (n = 83) 43 This histogram showed that the shape of the data was not substantially different from that of a normal distribution. Therefore, parametric tests were used. A discussion of equal variances will be found later in this chapter. Results for all statistical computations in this research were considered significant at the < .01 level. Since several inferences were made based on the same set of data, a lower level of significance on each inference was used to control the overall significance level.
Random Assignment of Subjects The total number of subjects used in this analysis was eighty-three (n = 83), with fifty-one subjects in the traditional group and thirty-two in the hypermedia group. Even though subjects had been randomly assigned to the treatment groups at the outset of the study, a two-sample r-test was used to compare the groups based on their pretest scores. The r-test revealed a value for the / statistic of 0.946 {df= %\,p = 0.347). Therefore, there was no significant difference between the groups as measured by the pretest.
Test of General Musical Knowledge The test of general musical knowledge consisted of 50 questions and was administered twice, once as a pretest and once as a posttest. The first 30 questions were in traditional written form and the final 20 questions of the test were given aurally by tape. The entire test was multiple choice with four possible responses for each question. All answers were entered on a machine-graded answer card and were graded by a test-grading machine connected to a Tandy computer using The Teacher’s Pet software. The results are presented in Table 1. 44 Table 1 Pretest and posttest descriptive statistics by treatment group
Pretest Posttest n Min Max Mean S.D. Min Max Mean S.D.
TR 51 30 64 46.5 7.66 32 82 58.4 12.02 HM 32 26 80 48.6 12.13 42 82 60.9 11.84 All 83 26 80 47.3 9.61 32 82 59.4 11.94
TR = Traditional Method HM = Hypermedia Method
Pretest scores (in percentages) for the Hypermedia group showed a range of 26 to 80, with a mean score of 48.6 and a standard deviation of 12.13. The traditional group scores had a range of 30 to 64, with a mean score of 46.5 and a standard deviation of 7.66. Pretest scores for all subjects combined, then, showed a range of 26 to 80, with a mean score of 47.3 and a standard deviation of 9.61. On the posttest, scores (in percentages) for the hypermedia group showed a range of 42 to 82, with a mean score of 60.9 and a standard deviation of 11.84. The traditional group scores had a range of 32 to 82, a mean score of 58.4 and a standard deviation of 12.02. The posttest results for all subjects combined showed, therefore, an overall range of 32 to 82, with a mean of 59.4 and a standard deviation of 11.94. The hypermedia group showed a mean improvement of 12.4 points from pretest to posttest, while the traditional group had a mean improvement of 11.9 points. The mean improvement for all subjects combined, then, was 12.1. To test for significance of improvement within each of the two groups, paired r-tests were used (see Table 2). 45 Table 2 Significance levels for pretest to posttest gain for each treatment group
mean t d f P gain
TR 11.9 8.29 50 < 0.0001 HM 12.4 6.61 31 < 0.0001
These tests revealed a significant improvement from pretest to posttest in both groups. Specifically, the r-test on the change of scores in the traditional group showed a value for thet statistic of 8.29 {df= 50, p< 0.0001), while thet test for the change of scores in the hypermedia group revealed a statistic of 6.61 (df= 31, p < 0.0001). Since there was a significant improvement in the pretest/posttest improvement scores of the hypermedia group, the first null hypothesis (no significant difference between pretest and posttest scores of the hypermedia group) was rejected. A two-sample r-test was used to test whether there was a difference between the groups in their pretest-posttest improvement scores (see Table 3). 46 Table 3 including sections and subtests
t df P
Entire Test
All Class Sections 0.192 81 0.847 Section A Only 0.017 30 0.987 Section B Only 0.845 26 0.407 Section C Only 0.984 21 0.337
Divided Test
Subtest A (Non-Aural) 0.010 81 0.992 Subtest B (Aural) 0.391 81 0.698
Variances of the two groups were not found to be different (F ’ = 1.06, df= (31,50), p < 0.831). (As was previously mentioned, equal variances are assumed for the following tests as well.) Calculating the r-test, then, with respect to equal variances revealed a t value of 0.192 {df= 81,/> < 0.847). Therefore, the results were not found to be significant. The pretest-posttest improvement scores were also divided into two subtests (see Table 3). These were subtest A (the first thirty answers of the actual test, which were traditional multiple choice questions) and subtest B (the final twenty answers of the actual test, which were aural-recogniiion questions). The following t statistics for independent samples testing the difference between group improvement were found: on subtest A, / = 0.010 (df= Sl,p = 0.992); on subtest B, r = 0.391 (df= 81, p = 0.698). Since these differences were not significant at the chosen alpha level, no difference was shown between the two groups’ improvement scores on either the non-aural section of the test or 47 the aural-recognition section of the test. Two-sample t-tests were done within each of the three class sections to determine differences in the improvement scores between treatment groups. Once again, there was no observed significant difference. In summary, since no significant difference between the traditional group and the hypermedia group was found on any statistical analyses of the pretest-posttest improvement scores, the second null hypothesis (no statistical difference between the hypermedia group and the traditional group in their pretest/posttest gain scores) was not rejected. To determine if there was any significant difference between the two groups with respect to discrete variables (each of the attitude survey questions), MANOVA and chi- square tests of significance were used (see Table 4).
Table 4 Attitude Survey and Self-Reported Listening Project Question Statistics
Hypermedia Group Traditional Group Difference (X ^)
* Question n Mean n Mean df Value P 1. 33 3.45 50 3.38 4 4.709 0.319 2. 33 3.97 50 3.90 4 3.108 0.540 3. 33 3.91 50 3.86 3 2.006 0.571 4. 33 3.58 50 3.38 4 3.458 0.484 5. 33 3.09 50 3.10 4 0.471 0.976 6. 32 3.97 50 3.78 4 3.704 0.448 7. 33 3.69 50 3.38 4 2.804 0.591 A 8. 33 4.33 49 4.39 3 1.521 0.677
t Learning 31 4.52 43 4.19 3 5.459 0.141 t Enjoyment 32 4.22 47 4.33 3 2.926 0.403
* For information concerning the attitude survey questions, see Appendix S. A Responses to question 8 carried the following points: A = 5, B=4, C = 3, D = 2, F=l. t Self-reported Learning and enjoyment on the listening project (See Appendix H.) 48 Thechi-square test is appropriate for tests of Likert scale questions such as those on the attitude survey. However, because there were multiple responses from each individual in the attitude survey and because those responses tend to be correlated, a multivariate technique is necessary. Because there is no standard multivariate chi-square test, MANOVA was used. MANOVA produced a Wilks’ Lambda value of 0.9342, (N df= 8, D df= 72, p ~ 0.7469). The chi-square tests, with an effective sample size of 83 produced p values ranging from 0.319 to 0.976. Both chi-square and MANOVA indicated no significant difference between the two groups with respect to any of the eight attitude survey questions. Thus, the third null hypothesis (no significant difference between the two groups on each item of a musical attitude survey) was not rejected. This researcher also used chi-square tests to determine if there were any differences between the groups with respect to two of the three variables that were self-reported as part of the class listening project (see Table 4). The first of these variables was the response to the assignment “rate your learning with this entire listening project from 1 (distasteful) to 5 (learned very much),’’ and the second of these was the response to the assignment “rate your enjoyment with this entire listening project from 1 (distasteful) to 5 (enjoyed it very much).’’ Thechi-square test of the variable “Listening project self-reported learning” had an effective sample size of 74 (nine students did not respond to this question) and yielded a value of 5.459 (df=3,p = 0.141), and the chi-square test of the variable “Listening project self-reported enjoyment” yielded a value of 2.926 {df =3, p = 0.403). Therefore, a significant difference was not found between the two groups on either question. On the third self-reported variable from the listening project, the hypermedia group did report spending a significantly greater amount of time using their listening lab resources than did the traditional group (see Table 5). 49 Table 5 Self-reported use oTüstening. lab by treatment group in hours
N Low High Mean S.D.
TR 47 1.00 6.25 3.085 1.260 HM 29 2.50 9.25 5.390 1.406
t d f P<
Difference 7.4097 74 0.0001
76 students answered this question (it was not a graded portion of the project) and the following data were collected. The traditional group {n = 47) spent a minimum of 1 hour using the listening lab and a maximum of 6.25 hours with a mean of 3.085. However, the hypermedia group (n = 29) spent a minimum of 2.5 hours and a maximum of 9.25 hours with a mean of 5.390. A two-sample r-test was used and revealed a t statistic of 7.4097 (df= 74, p < 0.0001). The hypermedia group, therefore, did spend a significantly greater amount of time using the CD-ROM than did the traditional group using the CD player in the Listening Lab. This difference has implications for further study of the time factor in using hypermedia. While this difference is understandable, since the traditional group students did not report their library research time, it is also significant in that hypermedia group students spent more time directly interacting with music information. Research also needs to be done to determine how much of the CD-ROM time of use is spent listening to the music only, how much time is spent listening while reading about the music, and, finally, how much time is spent reading alone. In summary, then, the first null hypothesis was rejected but the second and third null hypotheses were not rejected. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction Does independent use of hypermedia represent a new teaching tool, one that will replace traditional computer-assisted instruction, or is it simply a presentation and training tool? Questions such as these have been debated by educators since the late 1980s. Most research about the use of hypermedia in education has centered on the design of hypermedia software. Two recognized problems of hypermedia are (1) navigational confusion, which is sometimes described as being “lost in hyperspace,” and (2) cognitive overload, or being overwhelmed by vast quantities of information. Research, then, has evaluated ways of devising hypermedia programs that lessen the seriousness of these and other related problems. Unfortunately, few researchers have studied the use of hypermedia as part of an extant curricular course. Commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs are difficult to define. Are they teaching machines requiring no directive or evaluative efforts on the part of the teacher? Are they resource tools that may be used for serious and orderly research? Or are they simply browsing toys with which the user may jump about at whim and satisfy restless fancy for diversion? The problem this study addresses is related to this definitional quandary. The emergence of an effective teaching strategy could better define these hypermedia programs and could, therefore, shape future instructional strategies. Several music educators have in fact studied a type of hypermedia where teacher- created HyperCard stacks controlling audio compact discs via a CD-ROM player were used. While some significant learning occurred in these situations, it is extremely doubtful that many individual music teachers would have the time and information resources needed
50 51 to make programs that would compare favorably with those that are commercially- available. For this reason, the current study was done using commercially-available CD- ROMs-those products which are now reasonably priced and will certainly be used by music teachers in the near future.
RvHp.osg.Qfthg.StPdy The specific purpose of this study was to define and test a viable instructional strategy, one that incorporates music-related hypermedia into a college music appreciation course curriculum. A secondary purpose of this study was to compare the musical knowledge and attitudes gained by students who use hypermedia for their listening project resource with that gained by students who use the traditional listening project resources of compact disc listening and library research. The general purpose of this study, then, was to examine the nature of commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs; to propose a functional metaphor for them; and to explore the use of this metaphor in an actual music appreciation course curriculum. Several questions were to be answered by this exploratory study. First, “Does it make educational sense for music appreciation teachers to use commercially-available hypermedia programs in their courses?” Moreover, “Do students learn something from commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs and are their attitudes more favorable toward music after they have used these programs?” Second, “How does the learning of students who use hypermedia as the only resource material for an independent listening project compare to that of students who use traditional listening and library research resources?” Third, “How do the attitudes of the students who use hypermedia in their listening project differ from the attitudes of those students who use traditional resources?” Since a characteristic of commercially-available, music-related hypermedia programs is the intensive, non-piescriptive nature of their information, the primary question to be answered from this research, then, was, “Do students learn about music when given the opportunity to use hypermedia in an instructional strategy designed to exploit the essential nature of the medium?’ 52 Research Design This experiment’s design was a variation of the Pretest-Posttest Control Group design. The independent variable was the type of instructional strategy used in the listening project segment of the course. The hypermedia group consisted of students randomly assigned to use a CMH for their listening project Conversely, the traditional group consisted of all the students in GEN 200 who were not part of the hypermedia group. In particular, the pretest/posttest was designed to be a comprehensive measure of what was generally learned in the music subcourse by those in the hypermedia group, as well as by those in the traditional group.
Hypotheses for the Study The Research Hypotheses. 1. Subjects who used a commercially-available, music-related hypermedia program as the sole resource for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course would score significantly higher on a posttest of general musical knowledge than they did on the pretest. 2. Subjects who used a commercially-available, music-related hypermedia program as the sole resource material for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course would show a significantly different level of improvement on a test of general musical knowledge than those subjects who used traditional resource material for the same project in the same course. 3. Subjects who used a commercially-available, music-related hypermedia program as the sole resource material for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course would score significantly different on each item of a musical attitude survey than those subjects who used traditional resource material for the same project portion in the same course. TheNullHypotheses. 1. There would be no significant difference of scores on a test of general musical knowledge between the pretest and posttest for subjects who used a commercially- 53 available, music-related hypermedia program as the sole resource for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course. 2. There would be no significant difference on the pretest/posttest improvement scores on a test of general musical knowledge between those subjects who used a commercially- available, music-related hypermedia program as the sole resource material for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course and those subjects who used traditional resource material for the same project in the same course. 3. There would be no significant difference on any of the items of a musical attitude survey between those subjects who used a commercially-available, music-related hypermedia program as the sole resource material for the listening project portion of their music appreciation course and those subjects who used traditional resource material for the same project in the same course.
Mgihod-ology The subjects for this study were students in General Studies 200 at Dordt College in Sioux Center, Iowa, specifically, those students enrolled in GEN 200 for the spring semester, 1993 (/i = 91). During the time of the treatment, several students failed to complete all the requirements of the research, leaving eighty-three subjects involved in the study (n = 83). The following procedures were followed during the course of the experiment; 1. An instructional strategy that used commercially-available, music-related hypermedia was developed. This strategy imitated most of the existing curriculum, differing only in the resource material used for the listening project The development of this strategy began with the examination of a CMH by five teachers and two students. The information gleaned from their interviews generated many of the specific aspects of the final strategy, as well as instruction packets to be used with the CMHs. This developing strategy was then pilot-tested and again revised according to the reactions of students. 2. Course materials were developed and prepared for use by the subjects. The GEN 200 syllabus and coursepack were revised to accommodate and integrate the new 54 instructional strategy. A new listening project assignment was devised to include the hypermedia instructional strategy, and subcourse testing materials were also made uniform for each of the three sections. 3. The primary measurement instruments were developed. A written pretest/posttest, measuring mastery of general musical knowledge, and an attitude survey were constructed and pilot-tested. The resulting test of general musical knowledge consisted of fifty multiple-choice questions, twenty of these requiring aural recognition. The attitude survey consisted of eight questions with a five-point Likert scale for responses. 4. The syllabus, coursepack, and pretest/posttest were validated for content by two experts who were former teachers of the same music subcourse of GEN 200. 5. Subjects in each of the three subcourse sections were randomly assigned to one of two groups, either the hypermedia group or the traditional group. 6. Subjects were given the pretest 7. Every subject in all of the subcourse sections received the same coursepack and the same lectures. They all took the same tests and completed the same assignments. However, subjects assigned to the hypermedia group used one of the CMHs as their only resource for the completion of their listening projects. Conversely, subjects assigned to the traditional group listened to an ordinary audio compact disc and made use of the main library for other resource material in order to complete their project. 8. Subjects were given the posttest. 9. The pretest/posttest and the musical attitude survey, as well as all of the subcourse tests and assignments, were evaluated, and these data were entered into a database. All pertinent data were then subjected to statistical analysis.
Results and Discussion The purpose of this study was to develop and to investigate the use of an instructional strategy that incorporates hypermedia into an extant music appreciation curriculum at the college level. Both quantitative and qualitative results are discussed below. 55 Quantitative results. Statistical analysis showed that the hypermedia group made a significant improvement on the posttest compared to the pretest, as did the traditional group. The mean improvement made by the hypermedia group, though not significant, was slightly higher than the mean improvement score of the traditional group. Nevertheless, both groups increased their scores substantially (a class improvement average of 12 points). No significant differences were found between the groups on their pretest/posttest improvement score; several two-tailed t tests were used to compare the groups’ results. Since the pretest/posttest was a test of general knowledge and since all students received the same class lectures, coursepack, and assignments, any difference could have been attributed to the different resource material used for the listening project However, since the listening project was 40% of the subcourse grade and each subcourse was 33% of the GEN 200 course, the listening project counted for only 13% of a student’s final GEN 200 grade. Moreover, each project lasted only two weeks out of the fifteen week semester. This researcher must acknowledge, therefore, that his hypothesis that the treatment would have a significant effect on each subject’s general musical knowledge may have been too ambitious. In addition, no significant statistical differences were found between the groups on any of the attitude survey questions or on the listening project self-reported learning or enjoyment questions. However, on virtually all of these measures, the hypermedia group scored slightly higher than the traditional group. The largest difference, while not significant, was on the listening project self-reported learning question. In response to the question “Rate your learning on this entire project from 1 to 5,” the hypermedia group average was 4.52 to the traditional group’s 4.19. It may be interesting to note that all of the subjects in the hypermedia group responded to this ungraded question while only 86% of the traditional group subjects responded. A serendipital finding did show that the hypermedia group spent significantly more time using the listening lab for their listening project than did the traditional group (an average of 5.4 hours to 3.1 hours). This result is significant but understandable. Since 56 the hypermedia group was instructed to use only the listening lab resources (their CMH) and the traditional group needed to use the main library for research, the traditional group’s composer and composition research time was not included in their listening log. Nevertheless, students in the hypermedia group spent more time directly interacting with music, certainly one of the goals of any music appreciation course. We can also see that their enjoyment level on the project was self-reported to be essentially the same as the traditional group’s level (4.22 to 4.32). Another measure of their enjoyment on the listening project (question 4 of the attitude survey) produced a hypermedia group average of 3.58 and a traditional group average of 3.38. Therefore, it appears that the hypermedia group spent a significantly greater amount of time listening to music without lessening their enjoyment of the assignment. ■Qualitative results. When using a new technology with students, verbal comments from them abound. While the researcher is certainly not an unbiased observer, he will now make an attempt to fairly summarize these numerous reactions to using the commercially-available, music- related hypermedia programs in GEN 200. Most of the initial comments from students concerned the use of the technology itself. Of the several problems noted, the most common was the inability to “find” the CD-ROM on the computer. This confusion happened whenever a student started the computer before the CD-ROM player. While the instruction “If the CD-ROM player is not on, start it first and then restart the computer” was clearly stated in the instruction packet and on the CD- ROM player itself, students still missed it. Another problem occurred when one student inadvertently changed the name of the hard disk. This mistake changed all of the search paths on the computer and the computer was unable to “find” the correct HyperCard stacks. The major problem noted in the verbal comments of the students, however, was the lack of computer availability. The listening lab’s computer room had only one computer and one CD-ROM player. Many students complained that whenever they came to use the workstation another student was already there. Written comments also point to the problem with computer availability: seven of the hypermedia students mentioned it in the 57 Conclusions section of their research paper. Logistical problems aside, it is fair to say that the written reactions to the treatment were overwhelmingly positive. In fact, the only negative comments were those dealing with the availability factor and statements such as, “I got frustrated the first time I went down there. I had never used an Apple computer or used a mouse. Obviously I learned....” Some of these positive comments follow. Each are taken from the ungraded Conclusions section of the listening project research paper. The instructions for this section were simply to react to the project All of the comments about the CD-ROM were unsolicited. 1.1 thought the CD-ROM system was very helpful in my research and understanding of the work. The system allowed me to enjoy and appreciate the music faster than without the system.
2 . 1 think that it helped me to look at music as being much more complicated than I ever imagined.
3 . 1 liked learning about music off of the CD-ROM program. Using the computer was very nice.
4 . 1 really enjoyed my time down in the CD-ROM room. My hour or so down there would be “my” time to enjoy music.
5. I’ve really enjoyed working with the CD-ROM. It very effectively ties together the music with its technical mechanics, setting, history, and uniqueness. A normal CD cannot bring a listener up close to the music in its entirety-it can only play the music. This learning project has taught me a lot-more than I would ever have ordinarily gathered alone. It’s the difference between hearing fine music and really understanding its significance. I also like the versatility of the program where I can play back any given section of the symphony.
6. The notes that read with the music were a great help in explaining where we were in the piece and what was going on musically. I loved that aspect!
7 . 1 thought the CD-ROM was a great way to leam-everything was very handy and very easy to use....I do prefer it to the standard way of writing a report. Mixing the music and needed information was very useful.
Perhaps the greatest endorsement of hypermedia in GEN 200 was the fact that, at the beginning of the final subcourse section of GEN 200, several students asked the instructor if they could be taken out of the traditional group and put into the hypermedia group because they heard that the CD-ROM was “more fun.” 58 Reactions from the expert examiners who previewed The Orchestra during the summer of 1992 were similarly positive. While they noted many of the problems inherent with the medium (Appendix B), they also enthusiastically endorsed the product for use by GEN 200 students. A few representative comments follow; 1. This has all the advantages in that what needs to be said is right there on the screen while the music is going on. So a lot of information about the music can be presented while the music is ongoing, (laughter) Sometimes in music we try to master terms, and on another occasion try to connect them to music. Here it’s all a package deal.
2. Another advantage is that you can repeat things over and over. Don’t know how to pronounce scherzol Push it again and again. Or practicing learning the sounds of the instruments. You can listen to them again and again.
The five teachers and two students had positive comments about the product itself and yet realized that there may be some problems using the product in a traditional classroom. Many of their suggestions were integrated into the development of the instructional strategy tested in this study.
Conclusions From these comments and statistics, the qualitative and quantitative data, a number of of at least tentative conclusions are possible. Based on the quantitative results of this study, it appears that college music appreciation students will increase their general knowledge about music when using hypermedia as resource material for a listening project Subjects in the hypermedia group had a significant gain from pretest to posttest and it is likely that some of this may be attributed to the largest and weightiest assignment in the course-the listening project. From this study, however, it cannot be concluded that students using hypermedia as their sole resource for a listening project learn more about music than do those using a traditional listening lab and library for their research. Moreover, we cannot say with statistical certainty that students enjoyed the hypermedia experience more or rated it higher as a learning experience. However, all qualitative data would seem to indicate an extremely positive effect of the treatment Nevertheless, we can conclude that when using hypermedia, time is a critical factor in 59 the instructional equation. If learning is to take place, students must have several hours to access these comprehensive hypermedia programs. Students in the hypermedia group not only spent a significantly greater number of hours using the CMHs, but they also complained more about not having enough time. This serendipital finding is interesting, since it seems to suggest that students need and want to spend more time with a hypermedia resource. Hughes (1991), on the contrary, has suggested that a justification for the use of hypermedia in music instruction may be the fact that students can learn more about music in less time. If both assertions are true, the potential of hypermedia-assisted music instruction may be very great, indeed. Regarding problems with the use of the technology itself, we can conclude that a “shell”, such asAt Ease from Apple Computer, may be necessary if a CD-ROM system is to be used by several people. This product would stop users from opening other folders or “remodeling” the computer desktop in any way. Moreover, a computer lab using hypermedia should keep the CD-ROM players and computers on at all times so that users will not have to restart the computer to “find” the CD-ROM player. Other than the technological stumbling blocks easily remedied by these two suggestions, no problems were discovered, leading us to conclude that the use of commercially-available, music- related hypermedia programs as resource and experimentation packages for individual research seems to be a workable instructional strategy in a music appreciation course. In addition, while it is difficult to evaluate the learning that takes place when students use hypermedia, this challenge alone should not be a cause for its exclusion from the music curriculum. Indeed, most music educators would admit that any objective evaluation of learning in a music appreciation course can suggest only one facet of the appreciation and understanding of music. Like music and music learning, hypermedia and learning using hypermedia would be difficult to define, categorize, and manipulate in a curriculum heavy on behavioral objectives. Perhaps, like music itself, hypermedia needs to be accepted, to some extent, solely on the basis of enjoyment. It is not a bad thing when students enjoy an experience in which they spend a lot of time listening to music, manipulating music, and reading about music, even if we cannot control exactly what they learn or quantify the 60 actual learning that takes place. An instructional strategy such as that used in this study, then, would appear to have merit in that it (a) fits neatly into an extant music appreciation curriculum, (b) allows students to use hypermedia in a way that exploits the unique capabilities of the medium, (c) requires the accountability of a research paper, (d) seems to encourage students to spend more time interacting directly with music. From this study, however, no indication was given that teachers should replace course lectures or tests with hypermedia browsing sessions. While motivated students could certainly learn from any resource as rich in information as the CMHs, this study does not justify or validate the use of hypermedia in an instructional strategy which includes no student accountability. At any point, teachers are cautioned to avoid using hypermedia as a replacement for all traditional music appreciation instruction for all students. No evidence was found in the literature or from the findings of this study to justify such an approach.
Recommendations for Further Research Based on the data, the reactions of the participants, and the preceding discussion, the following recommendations for further research are offered; 1. Refinement and replication of this study with more hours of computer lab workstation (computer and CD-ROM player) availability.
2. Refinement and replication of this study categorizing students by learning style and by musical background.
3. Refinement and replication of this study with an investigation of the actual time spent by students using hypermedia versus those using traditional resources.
4. Replication of this study at the high-school and junior high-school levels.
5. Replication of this study in a college music literature or music history class.
6. Administration of a more specific attitude questionnaire both before and after the listening project to measure any attitudinal changes as a result of the treatment.
7. Adaptation of this study to any of several other fields that have commercially- available, subject-specific hypermedia programs. Some of these include history, art, and literature.
8. Doing a followup study to this one, using an attitude questionnaire to measure any long-term attitudinal differences between the hypermedia group and the 61 traditional group.
9. Enlarge the sample to include other colleges so that some inferences could be made to a larger population.
10. Devise a booklet which contains all of the music-related information included in one of the CMHs. One group of students could then read this information and listen to a compact disc of the recording while the other group could use the hypermedia. An objective measure could then be used to determine any differences in the quality and quantity of what was learned.
Implications An area of music education which could certainly benefit from hypermedia is instrumental pedagogy. The content of a typical college pedagogy course includes written information about each instrument, fingering charts, written musical examples, expert aural and visual modeling of correct and incorrect playing, and pictures of correct holding and cleaning procedures. Moreover, all of this information must be a readily accessible reference tool for the student when he/she is a practicing teacher. Obviously, the very characteristics of hypermedia which make it difficult to define also would make it an ideal platform for the development of instmmental music pedagogy CD-ROMs. Since the use of CD-ROM technology has grown exponentially during the last year alone, the need for careful assessment of instructional strategies which integrate hypermedia into music curricula is even more imperative today than it was at the outset of this research. Studies, such as those suggested above, are needed so that music teachers may learn how to integrate this promising technology into music curricula in a felicitous manner. REFERENCES
Adams, S. M. (1990a). The development of a computer-based interactive multi-media program for teaching interpretive aspects of wind instrument notation (Doctoral dissertation. University of Southern California, 1989). Dissertation Abstracts International, 5 0 , 1841A.
Adams, S. M. (1990b). Interactive audio as a resource for music courseware development. The Quarterly, 7,(1 & 2), 112-115.
Apple Computer, Inc. (1991). Apple classrooms o f tomorrow: Philosophy and structure and what's happening where. Cupertino, CA: Apple Computer, Inc. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 340 349).
Atkinson, W. (1987-88). T/yperCard [computer program]. Cupertino, CA; Apple Computer, Inc.
Betts, F. M. (1992, June). Help: Hypermedia enhanced lesson planning. America OnLine [Computer bulletin board].
Borrell, J. (1992, September). America's shame: How we've abandoned our children's future. Macworld, pp. 25-30.
Bos, J. (1992). Teacher’s Pet, version 5.0 [computer program]. Sioux Center, lA: Dordt College.
Bull, G., & Cochran, P. (1991, April). Learner-based tools. The Computing Teacher, pp. 50-55.
Bush, V. (1970). Pieces of the action. New York: William Morrow.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand Mcnally College Publishing Company.
Cates, W. M. (1992). Fifteen principles for designing more effective instructional hypermedia/multimedia products. Educational Technology, 32,(12), 5-11.
Falk, D. R. & Carlson, H. L. (1992). Learning to teach with multimedia. Technological Horizons in Education Journal, 20,(2), 96-101.
Graham, E. (1990, February 9). High-tech training. The Wall Street Journal, pp. R16- R18.
62 63 Heller, R. (1990). The role of hypermedia: a look at the research issues. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 22(Summer), 431-441.
Higgins, W. (1992). Technology. In Handbook o f research on music teaching and learning (pp. 480-497). New York: Schirmer.
Hrecz, R. A. (1992). A study of the impact of interactive video disc and role playing strategies on student learning and attitudes about substance abuse as taught by preservice teachers (Doctoral dissertation. University of Iowa, 1991). Dissertation Abstracts International, 5 2 , 2511A (University Microfilms No. 91-36,932).
Hughes, T. E. (1991). A hypermedia listening station for the college music literature class (Doctoral dissertation. The University of Arizona, 1991). Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 838A (University Microfilms No. 91-24,153).
Hutchings, G.A., Hall, W., Briggs, J., Hammond, N. V., Kibby, M.R., McKnight, C., & Riley, D. (1992). Authoring and evaluation of hypermedia for education. Computers in Education, 78,(1-3), 171-177.
Jonassen, D. H. (1988). Designing structured hypertext and structuring access to hypertext.Educational Technology, 28,(11), 13-16.
Jonassen (1990). Hypertext as instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(1), 83-92.
Lanza, A., & Roselli, T. (1991). Effects of the hypertextual approach versus the structured approach on students' achievement. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 18,(2), 48-50.
Lee, Y. B. (1989). Effects of learning style and instructional cues on achievement and learning interactivity in a hypermedia instructional system (Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, 1989). Dissertation Abstracts International, 51, 484A (University Microfilms No.90-08,652).
Liu, M. (1992). The effect of hypermedia-based learner-controlled instruction on atomic structures learning achievement at the junior high school level (Doctoral dissertation. West Virginia University, 1992). Dissertation Abstracts International, 5 3 , 1134A (University Microfilms No. 92-25,317).
Locatis, C., Letoumeau, G., & Banvard, R. (1987). Hypermedia and instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(4), 65-77.
Marchionini, G. (1998). Hypermedia and Learning: Freedom and Chaos. Educational Technology, 28,(11), 9-11.
McNeil, B. J. & Nelson, K. R. (1991). Meta-analysis of interactive video instruction: a 10 year review of achievement effects. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, ISLl), 1- 6.
Park, O. C. (1991). Hypermedia: Functional features and research issues. Educational technology, 31,(8), 24-31. 64 Placek, R. W. (1972). Design and trial of a computer-assisted lesson in rhythm (Doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1972). Dissertation Abstracts International, 34,2A. (University Microfilms No. 73-17,362)
Retterer, O. J. (1992). Learning from a hypertext; The effect of reading interactive text containing non-sequential, associative linkages on comprehension (Doctoral dissertation. University of Akron, 1991). Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 3585A (University Microfilms No. 92-00,771).
Riner, R. (1989). The limitations of hypermedia for instruction. Texas Instruments incorporated. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 325 091).
Salomon, G , & Gardner, H. (1986). The computer as educator: Lessons from television research. Educational Researcher, 75,(1), 13-19.
Sculley, J. (1987). The relationship between business and higher education: a perspective on the twenty-first century. EDUCOM Bulletin, 25,(1), 20-24.
Siguijonsson, J. H. (1991). Interaction of college students with twentieth-century music in a computer environment (Doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, 1991). Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, %3iA (University Microfilms No. 91-24,488).
Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1991). Knowledge representation, content specification, and the development of skill in situation-specific knowledge assembly: Some constructivist issues as they relate to cognitive flexibility theory and hypertext. Educational Technology, 57,(9), 22-25.
Spoehr, K. T., & Shapiro, A. (1991). Learning from hypermedia: making sense of a multiply-linked database (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 333 864).
Stafford, J. Y. (1990). Effects of active learning with computer-assisted or interactive video instruction (Doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1990). Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 517A (University Microfilms No. 91-18, 937).
Stamper, J. B. (1992). The effects of the use of multimedia on the higher-level thinking skills of seventh-^de students (Doctoral dissertation. East Texas State University, 1991). Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 4303A (University Microfilms No. 92-14, 351).
Tsai, C. (1988). Hypertext: technology, applications, and research issues. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 77(1), 3-14.
Tsai, C. (1989). The effects of cognitive load of learning and prior achievement in the hjpertext environment (Doctoral dissertation. The Florida State University, 1989). Dissertation Abstracts International, 5 0 , 670A (University Microfilms No. 89-15, 768). 65 VanOrmer.D. (1992). The effect of hypermedia-based learner-controlled instruction on atomic structures learning achievement at the junior high school level (Doctoral dissertation, Florida Institute of Technology, 1992). Dissertation Abstracts International, 5 3, 458A (University Microfilms No. 92-19,854).
Warner New Media. (1989). The Magic Flute [CD-ROM, HyperCard program]. Burbank, CA: Warner New Mettia (No. KXlOl).
Warner New Media. (1991). The Orchestra [CD-ROM, HyperCard program]. Burbank, CA: Warner New Media (No. 10004).
Willett, B. E., & Netusil, A. J. (1989). Music computer drill and learning styles at the fourth-grade level. Journal o f Research in Music Education, 37,(3), 219-229.
Willman, F. (1992, November). New solutions to curricular problems. Music Educators Journal, pp. 33-35, 68.
Winter, R., (1989). Beethoven: Symphony No. 9 [CD-ROM, HyperCard program]. Santa Monica, CA: Voyager CD Companion ^ o . LS7A).
Winter, R., (1991). Mozart: String Quartet in C Major “The Dissonanf’ [CD-ROM, HyperCard program]. Santa Monica, CA: Voyager CD Companion (No. LS28).
Winter, R., (1992). Stravinsky: The Rite o f Spring [CD-ROM, HyperCard program]. Santa Monica, CA: Voyager CD Companion (No. LS12).
Woodruff, E., & Heeler, P. (1990). A study of the use of interactive videodisc technology to present aural tests to college music appreciation students. Nashville: 1990 National Educational Computing Conference Proceedings (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 329 232).
Wright, P. (1991). Cognitive overheads and prostheses: some issues in evaluating hypertexts. InProceedings o f the Third ACM Conference on Hypertext (pp. 1-12). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. APPENDIX A EXAMINER TRIAL. PREFACE
66 67 [This script was read before each examiner tried the hypermedia.] Thank you for agreeing to be part of this study titled, An exploratory study o f an instructional strategy which utilizes hypermedia to teach an orchestra unit in a college music appreciation class. The Orchestra is a HyperCard-controlled audio compact disc. This means that the user clicks on buttons in a graphic format on the computer screen to regulate the flow of information. This information is a combination of CD - sound, text, graphics, and musical notation. While much emphasis has been placed on the development of these richhypermedia learning environments, actual pedagogical strategies which would benefit from them have yet to be verified. As an experienced teacher [student] in arts education, your opinion is very important at the initial stage of this study. In a moment, I will start the program for you. After a short briefing about the program, which will include information about on-line help, you may explore the program on your own for 1 hour. There are no “right or wrong” ways to move through the information. You may go as slow or as fast as you wish. If you desire to quit before 1 hour is up, let me know. After your exploration of the program is finished I will ask you several questions about your impressions of the program. The interview should take approximately 15 minutes and will be tape-recorded. Any questions?
[go to the PROGRAM MAP card and stop the music] The Orchestra is an interactive approach for listening to Benjamin Britten’s Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra. There are four basic listening channels, signified by the numbers 1-4 at the top of most screens. You may follow only one of these or move between them. As you listen, pertinent information is given to you. In addition, you may branch out to obtain information about any area that interests you by clicking on buttons or on bold-faced words. 68 Clicking on the ? button will take you to the HELP card at any time. Here it is...[move to the HELP card]. Take a few minutes to look at it now. On this help card you may click on any boxed button to find out what it would do if you were in the actual program. For example, clicking on the rectangular icon in the lower right of any screen tells you that it will return you to the PROGRAM MAP card, the one we just left. Take your time on this help card and let me know when you are ready to begin the actual program, [Interviewer steps aside and waits until the examiner is ready to continue. Then goes back to the PROGRAM MAP.] We are now back at the PROGRAM MAP. I will begin The Orchestra using listening channel 1. Have fun! APPENDIX B EXAMINER TRIAL, INTERVIEW TRANSCIPT
69 70 Interviewer = I Examiner = E Examiner 1 I: How many years have you been an arts educator? El: 26 years I: Has your teaching been at the elementary, secondary, or college level? El: College I: Have you taught classes in music or arts appreciation? El: Yes I: The following are questions about your experience with The Orchestra CD-ROM. Please answer candidly, honestly, and as specifically as possible. After 1 hour with the program, how would you describe your reactions to it? El: It was extremely exciting and very interesting. There was information on the program, not only for beginners, but for musicians as well. It was a lot of fun to go in the direction of your own interest and to choose where you wanted to go next. I: Did you feel that the amount of introductory information which I gave you was sufficient? El: Yes. Although the first introductory card was a little confusing because I kept expecting it to actually do something. Once I figured out that it was really like a demo, then it was very clear. I: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most confusing, how would you rate your sense of confusion with the program? Can you elaborate on what caused the most confusion? El: One I: What percentage of the entire program do you think you explored? El: Oh, bits and pieces of all of it. I did go into everything, but not thoroughly. I would say approximately 30 %. I: What was the longest time, approximately, that you listened and viewed the information without branching out into another area or subtopic? 71 E l: At the very beginning I listened for a long stretch-perhaps 5 minutes, before I began to explore the other areas. It would be hard to say what amount of time I spent on any section because the entire hour flew by so quickly. I: Which of the following did you explore? Answer “Yes” or “No” to each. - Channel 1, Exploring the Music - Channel 2, Theme and Variations - Channel 3, Music Guide - Channel 4, Notebook - Reference Guide - Backstage - The Instruments - The Families of the Orchestra - Europe Before the Walkman -The Conductor - Orchestration Lab - The Arcade
El: [She responded “Yes” to all the questions. About the Orchestration Lab, “That I did quite a bit, and I think it would be highly interesting to students.” About the Arcade, “Oh, definitely!” (laughter)] I: The following are questions which deal with instructional strategies for utilizing this CD-ROM as supplemental material in a music appreciation class. As a teacher, what would you see as the main advantage of using this program? E l: It’s extremely entertaining as well as informative and also the student can decide what they wish to leam. Because they have a feeling of control over what they are doing, it’s more motivating to the student. I: What do you think would be the main disadvantage? El: Well, I assume that some students would do nothing but play the arcade the entire time, but even then they would still be learning. I: What could students leam by using this CD-ROM as a supplemental part of their music appreciation class? El: Oh, there’s a lot of material in this program. A lot. 1 learned something and I’ve been in music for years. I; In general, do you think that students would work better with this program individually or in pairs? Why? 72 El: I think individually. Unless two students knew each other well and had similar interests, there may be some confusion over who gets to decide where to go in the program. However, I can see cases where a small group (2-3) students who got along well together could have a great time doing this as a team. I: How much and what types of structure should they be given? For example, should students be given a certain amount of time they must spend with the program, certain information they must find, a guide of which modes to follow and what to look up, or should they be given complete freedom to browse at will? El: I think complete freedom to browse at will would be wonderful. Maybe later if you were testing for one certain area that you wanted everyone to know, you could indicate to the students that they should make sure they’ve covered that one certain area. I; How much time do you think the average non-music major college freshman would spend with this program before exhausting his curiosity or becoming bored? El: Well, I wasn’t bored after 1 hour. I think a person could work on this for 5-7 hours without becoming bored (but not at one sitting!) I: If you were teaching a college music appreciation course this year, how would you use this equipment and program to take best advantage of its capabilities? El: Umnun. It would depend on the situation. If there were enough computers for the entire class to work, it could be done in the classroom. Most likely it would have to be an outside assignment where they would go to the lab and work on their own. It could be used in several ways. Perhaps it could be used as a supplement to concepts being talked about in class. Or it could be used as an independent study unit. I: Thank you very much I
Examiner 2 73 I: How many years have you been an arts educator [student]? E2: Umpteenmillion. (laughter) Thirty. I: Has your teaching been at the elementary, secondary, or college level? E2: It has been at all those levels, but for the most years at the college level. I: Have you taught classes in music or arts appreciation [not used with students]? E2: Yes. In fact that is a major part of my job right now. And since it’s up again this fall. I’m quite excited about learning about this program right at this point in time. I: The following are questions about your experience with The Orchestra CD-ROM. Please answer candidly, honestly, and as specifically as possible. After 1 hour with the program, how would you describe your reactions to it? E2: I was really excited. I was a little disappointed when there was a knock on the door and you said “the hour is up.” No more—oh shoot, (laughter) I was having a really good time seeing so many possibilities for — for learning through it, for having a good time at leaming-and I was immediately connecting it with my own teaching. So often in class I want to call students’ attention to certain things while the music is playing —like “that’s the clarinet” or “that’s staccato” or “here’s the theme.” But I don’t want to TALK because that divides their attention. It sets up sound in conflict with the music. Even when I write on the board, that’s little clicking noises. Or I might write things on the board ahead of time and point But here in this program, this is EXACTLY what I want to do in class. This has all the advantage in that what needs to be said is right there on the screen while the music is going on. So a lot of information about the music can be presented WHILE the music is ongoing, (laughter) Sometimes in music we try to master terms, and on another occasion try to connect them to music. Here it’s all a package deal. Can we do this on the big screen? I: That’s a good thought. Did you feel that the amount of introductoiy information which I gave you was sufficient? E2: In order to get me to get the program working? Yes. I: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most confusing, how would you rate your 74 sense of confusion with the program? Can you elaborate on what caused the most confusion? E2: Oh, one. Well, one time I managed to get confused about how to get to another place, and I managed to exit the entire program. I: What percentage of the entire program do you think you explored? E2: Oh, um -- that’s hard to answer because I don’t know what I didn’t get into. But I got into all the first layers, in other words, that whole first page (except for reference and backstage). I at least opened each of those first layers. And then inside I opened all the sub-layers. I: What was the longest time, approximately, that you listened and viewed the information without branching out into another area or subtopic? E2: The first time I listened pretty much to the whole thing all the way through and during that time, I was mostly listening and clicking on all the highlighted words. Then when I got into the percussion section, I started fast forwarding until I got to the fugue and then I listened to that straight through. I: Which of the following did you explore? Answer “yes” or “no” to each. [Items the same as for the previous examiner.] E2: [She responded “Yes” to all but the Reference Guide.] I: The following are questions which deal with instructional strategies for utilizing this CD-ROM as supplemental material in a music appreciation class. As a teacher, what would you see as the main advantage of using this program? E2: I think a very great advantage would be that, that which needs to be explained about the music can be in print form on the screen while the student is hearing it And if there is something that needs to be explained, the music STOPS if the person pushes the button to leam more. And that pause can last a long time, and then it gets back to the music again. I: Yes, it’s a long way from dropping needles trying to find out where you were. B2: Oh yeah. Another advantage is that you can repeat things over and over. Don’t know how to pronounce “scherzo?” Push it again and again. Or practicing 75 learning the sounds of the instruments? You can listen to them again and again. Not only in the [pause] catalog of instruments (I forget the exact term) but also that little workshop where you can play “Greensleeves” with any two instruments. You could really spend a lot of time in there and gain a lot of skill. I mean identification skills, aural skills. I: What do you think would be the main disadvantage? E2: Ummmm. I’m so excited about it at first that it’s hard to think. I: Well, we can come back to this question because some of these other questions might help you to think about this. E2: Well, it is individual work. Anybody who leams better in a group might not find this as accessible, but the compensation for that would be to listen to it with 2 or 3 gathered around. I: What could students leam by using this CD-ROM as a supplemental part of their music appreciation class? E2: I think they could leam a lot of terminology, and hear it in context. It wouldn’t be just terms, like memorizing articulation terms like “pizzicato” and “staccato” but they’d hear it. First of all, discreetly and with explanation, but then in context of the whole piece and so that teaming would be more ALIVE, I think, than what sometimes happens in class--”Leam these ten dynamic terms”—and there’s no dynamism about it at all. I: What about the area of motivation? Do you think it’s a motivating way to team? Do you think a student who is on the fringes of liking classical music, or hasn’t heard that much of it, do you think this would be helpful in that situation? E2: Well, I would think so in that you could play with it - and probably find, in all those buttons to push, something that is intriguing. And then there’d be so many ways to get that student HOOKED. They might enjoy the instruments or they might enjoy just all the gadgetry, or the 4 ways of tracking with it. They might flip around a lot but then they might get hooked by one of those, and that would be the advantage over just listening to the music. It’s “playing” music, in a way. 76 I: That’s right, and for those who don’t have the ability to be in a band or an orchestra or something like that, they’re actually controlling it a little bit. E2: That’s right. Yeah. I: In general, do you think that students would work better with this program individually or in pairs? Why? E2: Well that depends on the student. I think there are some students who would get annoyed working with somebody else — they want to do the whole thing themselves-they want to flip the buttons. There are some students who could do this alone and be absorbed for HOURS with it. Other students might be shy or hesitant or not as motivated and they might have fun doing it with a partner and then they could talk as well. I: How much and what types of structure should they be given? For example, should students be given a certain amount of time they must spend with the program, certain information they must find, a guide of which modes to follow and what to look up, or should they be given complete freedom to browse at will? E2: Oh, wow. Those might all be good approaches and what comes to mind first is - how will I know that they did what they were supposed to do? If the assignment is to spend one hour, how will I know that they did it? Or suppose my goal is that they can identify aurally the sound of the different instruments, some kind of quiz would determine that. And I suppose they could be sent to this program with an assignment that says, “there’s a lot of information in here. You can get all you want, but especially focus on this—whatever it is.” I: What about complete freedom to browse at will? What do you think would happen with the average student? E2: Depends on the student, and if they gave it a fair try, if they were not pressured they might get hooked by it and spend much more than an hour, or come back. They might have such a good time. If they’re under pressure they might say, “Well, that’s really nice and I might like to do that someday, but right now I don’t have time.” 77 I: How much time do you think the average non-music major college freshman would spend with this program before exhausting his curiosity or becoming bored? E2; Could go a lot longer than an hour before they’d become exhausted or bored. I: If you were teaching a college music appreciation course this year, how would you use this equipment and program to take best advantage of its capabilities? E2: That’s the tough question. Ummm ~ one thing that comes to mind is that in my class I always try to introduce them to the elements of music — what is tone color? What are dynamics? And this is a program that they could practice on. I would like to make this an assignment then, after those two sessions. Now go down and PRACTICE on this until you feel that you can at least do it in the program. There should be some sort of reporting or testing at the end so we see what they did. I’m wondering if it’s going to be the best for the motivated learner — the person who gets in here by whatever impetus - if it was an assignment, or we dragged them in, or they were curious, or they had to get theii' hour in or something, but they got into this and got hooked, and they just stuck with it and learned and learned and learned. I: Do you have any closing comments? E2: Well, I think it’s just so much FUN. And I would like to know how to use it more in teaching. It does things that I would love to do in class. I: Thank you very much!
Examiner 3 I: How many years have you been an arts educator? E3; 9 years on the college level, and 12 on the junior high level. I: Have you taught classes in music or arts appreciation? E3: Y es, in theatre appreciation. I: The following are questions about your experience with The Orchestra CD-ROM. Please answer candidly, honestly, and as specifically as possible. After 1 hour 78 with the program, how would you describe your reactions to it? E3; I enjoyed working with it. There were a few things that I couldn’t figure out how to do. When I got to a thing called “branching” I believe, I got no response. I just got another card that didn’t open up for me. Otherwise, I really enjoyed it because I think what it made me do was listen to structure that I’d probably never heard before and listen to sounds that I wouldn’t have heard if I had just listened to a recording. And then I found the little buttons to divert from the major recording to look at other things. A great way to avoid daydreaming. I: Did you feel that the amount of introductory information which I gave you was sufficient? E3: It was plenty for me. I wondered however, if students who weren’t used to Macintosh computers would understand the significance of a highlighted piece or of a close-window sign? And there were a few things that took me a few seconds to find, like figuring out that the arrow worked for lots of things. I: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most confusing, how would you rate your sense of confusion with the program? Can you elaborate on what caused the most confusion? E3: I would say one. It was very easy for me to follow. I: What percentage of the entire program do you think you explored? E3: I would say probably 90 %. I spent very little time in the glossary, just enough to see what kind of stuff was in it. I listened to the little clips of the orchestral pieces that were on there. I: What was the longest time, approximately, that you listened and viewed the information without branching out into another area or subtopic? E3: Maybe 1 minute, (laughter) I also found that I went back and forth when I discovered that the little slider worked. That was really nice. Even though I didn’t listen to the piece straight through, I probably heard more of the piece than if I had just listened to it straight through. Because I started listening to sections and then I could backtrack and listen for certain elements. 79 I: Which of the following did you explore? Answer “yes” or “no” to each. [Items the same as for the previous examiner.] E3: [He responded “Yes” to all the questions but Backstage, Families of the Orchestra, and The Arcade. About channel 2, “That was the nicest part I thought.” About the Notebook, “I even typed something in there.” (laughter) About the Arcade, (laughter) “I thought I’d gone to everything I wanted to do.”] I: The following are questions which deal with instructional strategies for utilizing this CD-ROM as supplemental material in a music appreciation class. As a teacher, what would you see as the main advantage of using this progi am? E3: I think the biggest advantage was that it slowed down my listening. The other thing I really appreciate is all the notes — now the orchestra is doing this, now the orchestra is doing that, and I thought — hey, it would be fun to go to a live orchestra where there was a big screen that did this for me. (laughter) Really ! ! It was a new layer of listening to me. I: What do you think would be the main disadvantage? E3: The disadvantage, which I think could be overcome, is that there are so many things that you don’t know that you really have to leam. But I think with a little bit of guidance and saying this is what you should know by studying this, that would be taken care of. I: What could students leam by using this CD-ROM as a supplemental part of their music appreciation class? E3: To me the biggest thing was leaming to listen to all the little subtleties that were going on, and the script really helped with that. Another thing is to leam musical structure, because you can go back and forth, and repeat things. A third thing was orchestra color and so forth. I: In general, do you think that students would work better with this program individually or in pairs? Why? E3: I think individually, and that was the question I had while I was listening to this. Whether you are going to have enough machine time for the whole class. If there 80 were pairs there would be a question of ownership. The advantage is that anytime your mind wanders to a new area, the machine wanders with you. But if you have two people, one person might be apt to daydream while the other uses the program. I: How much and what types of structure should they be given? For example, should students be given a certain amount of time they must spend with the program, certain infoimation they must find, a guide of which modes to follow and what to look up, or should they be given complete freedom to browse at will? E3: I suppose the ideal is browsing at will but 1 don’t think that would really work in a music appreciation class. I thought of that while I was working with it. 1 thought that maybe just giving a time limit may be difficult to police. But I think you really need to say, “This is what you ought to leam from this. These are the things that you ought to look for.” I think maybe you need a two step thing. One, to just wander through it and see if there’s anybody with any problems. Because if you’re told to find certain information, and then you have trouble with the machine, you could become very frustrated. It has to be a leisurely pace for the student to leam — he can’t feel frustrated by time pressure. I; How much time do you think the average non-music major college freshman would spend with this program before exhausting his curiosity or becoming bored? E3: How long was I on this? [Interviewer: 50 minutes.] I had time to do what I wanted to do, although I could still come back and do it again to bmsh up on it and not be bored. I: If you were teaching a college music appreciation course this year, how would you use this equipment and program to take best advantage of its capabilities? E3: To me it was valuable enough not to simply make it an option. I think I would require it, because I really leamed to hear, and I listen to a lot of classical music. A lot of things that I wouldn’t normally hear, I really had to listen hard to hear some of the sounds that were there, and sometimes 1 had to backtrack and hear 81 them again. I thought playing with some of the things, like there was a game of the weird sounds and can you guess what instrument is making that sound-I thought that was a fun game. And the orchestration lab was GREAT. It gives an appreciation for making choices with what works and what doesn’t work and also what kind of color you get from the instrumentation. I: Do you have any closing comments? E3: I thought it was fun. It was an inviting program. I: Thank you very much!
Examiner 4 I: How many years have you been a student? E4: I’m a senior at Dordt college. I; What is your major? E4: Elementary education major, music minor. I: Have you taught classes in music or arts appreciation? E4: No. I: The following are questions about your experience with The Orchestra CD-ROM. Please answer candidly, honestly, and as specifically as possible. After 1 hour with the program, how would you describe your reactions to it? E4: Hmm. It’s a GREAT program. I had lots of fun playing with it and it was very informative. I thought all of the four programs were very informative. I: Did you feel that the amount of introductory information which I gave you was sufficient? E4: No, not really, but the way that I work I have to fiddle around with it on my own anyway before I figure it out. Maybe the little things on the side could be explained better because I didn’t even figure out those till way at the end. I: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most confusing, how would you rate your sense of confusion with the program? Can you elaborate on what caused the most confusion? 82 E4: At the beginning or at the end? [Laughter] Well, two. I: What was the longest time, approximately, that you listened and viewed the information without branching out into another area or subtopic? E4; About 20 minutes. Well, as long as the first song was. I: Which of the following did you explore? Answer “yes” or “no” to each. [Items the same as for the previous examiner.] E4: [She responded “Yes” to all but channel 3, Notebook, The Orchestra, Conducting, and The Arcade. To the Orchestra, “I don’t think so.” To Backstage, “I started that.” To the Arcade, “I didn’t even see that.”] I: The following are questions which deal with instructional strategies for utilizing this CD-ROM as supplemental material in a music appreciation class. As a teacher, what would you see as the main advantage of using this program? E4: You’d be able to hear the different sounds of the instruments, not just showing the students the pictures of the instruments or being told what the instruments are. I: What do you think would be the main disadvantage? E4: It goes kind of fast, so if you were trying to pick out a certain instrument you could have a hard time. I’m familiar with the instruments, but someone who didn’t know the different instruments might have a much harder time. For example, hearing the tympani on the bottom-that’s really hard to hear if you’re not used to listening for that type of thing I: What could students leam by using this CD-ROM as a supplemental part of their music appreciation class? E4: They could leam lots of stuff. It would definitely help with leaming the sounds of the instruments and it might really tum them on to classical music. I: The thought has always been that if a person can interact with things and control them himself, they might be tumed on to the music more than if they are just passively listening. E4: I agree with that. 83 I: In general, do you think that students would work better with this program individually or in pairs? Why? E4: I think they’d get more out of it individually. But they’d probably want to work in pairs. Like maybe have them do it as a pair to figure out the program, but then have them do it individually. I think they’d leam more. I: How much and what types of structure should they be given? For example, should students be given a certain amount of time they must spend with the program, certain information they must find, a guide of which modes to follow and what to look up, or should they be given complete freedom to browse at will? E4: They should be told to look up certain information. It does depend on the student. I: How much time do you think the average non-music major college freshman would spend with this program before exhausting his curiosity or becoming bored? E4; A non-music major? As in, not interested in music at all ? Probably they could listen to it one time through. I: If you were teaching a college music appreciation course this year, how would you use this equipment and program to take best advantage of its capabilities? E4: I’d take them to the computer lab and show them how the program works. Then I would have them come in later on their own to work on it. Have a sign-up sheet. Then I would tell them certain information to find and test them on it. I would test for knowing the sounds of the instruments and for items like knowing where the fugue starts, etc. I: Thank you very much!
Examiner 5 I: What is your grade in school? E5: I’m going to be a senior. I: What is your major? 84 E5: I’m preparing for elementary education. I: What has been your teaching experience? E5: Have taught some in the elementary school. I: The following are questions about your experience with The Orchestra CD-ROM. Please answer candidly, honestly, and as specifically as possible. After 1 hour with the program, how would you describe your reactions to it? E5: I think it’s outstanding. It’s a great program. It has definite possibilities, not just in the classroom but also a lot of possibilities just personally too. It’s really neat. I; Did you feel that the amount of introductory information which I gave you was sufficient? E5: Yes. I: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most confusing, how would you rate your sense of confusion with the program? Can you elaborate on what caused the most confusion? E5: One, well maybe a two because of the one thing in the left comer. I knew to hit that because I’ve worked with this before, not in this program though. But if I wouldn’t have known that already, I wouldn’t have known what to do. That’s the only thing. Because it doesn’t look like a box but it actually is. I: What percentage of the entire program do you think you explored? E5: I’m probably wrong, but I would say 80 - 85%. I; What was the longest time, approximately, that you listened and viewed the information without branching out into another area or subtopic? E5: I listened to the first 8 1/2 minutes of the piece before I did anything. I: Which of the following did you explore? Answer “yes” or “no” to each. [Items the same as for the previous examiner.] E5: [He responded “Yes” to all but the Reference Guide and Backstage.) To the Orchestration Lab, “That was a neat one.”] I: The following are questions which deal with instructional strategies for utilizing this CD-ROM as supplemental material in a music appreciation class. As a 85 teacher, what would you see as the main advantage of using this program? E5: It uses something that the kids are becoming more and more familiar with every year. Like the kids that are 18 this year know more about computers than the kids who were 18 last year just because of the increased computer use in grade schools and high schools. And I think that when you use a computer in a college classroom, the students are more adept at picking up what is going on and they are more excited about it because they know about the possibilities—a lot of them do. That’s what I think a big advantage would be. And also I love how you can start and stop it and not have to wony about a record player or a tape and then can start exactly where it was before. And the running commentary is really helpful. I: What do you think would be the main disadvantage? E5: There’s not a lot of critical thinking. It’s all pretty spoon-fed. There are other ways that a teacher can take what is in this program and expand it into their own kind of critical thinking section. I mean after using this program I don’t think the brain is going to be tired. It needs to go to the next level to be used in a college level course. I: What could students leam by using this CD-ROM as a supplemental part of their music appreciation class? E5: They could leam a beautiful piece of music and leam it well, and many different terms. I clicked on a couple just to see how precise their definitions would be and they are very short and very compact-very understandable. They used musical terms and defined them in terms that a non-music major would understand. I: There are several other CD ROMS now available, including Beethoven’s 9th and Stravinsky Rite o f Spring. Do you think that ones that focus on a single larger composition more intensively would be better for non-music majors? E5: The Orchestra would be better — the others might be too overwhelming at first. But I think it also depends on the piece. I remember studying Beethoven’s 9th from Music Lit and Music History - that is a very involved piece. The Rite of Spring is also a very involved piece and very complex BUT it has I think more 86 possibilities in the classroom than the Beethoven does because of the timbre of the different instruments and the solo lines. So it depends on the piece too. I: In general, do you think that students would work better with this program individually or in pairs? Why? E5: I think in pairs because when you branch off into something else, the other person can respond with ideas too (like “I’ve heard that before”) the marimaba or the xylophone or something like that and that person would be prone to ask questions of the other student. I think that the interaction between the kids can intensify their learning as the orchestra not just being all these professional people in black up in front but actually the orchestra is used in everyday life. At the college level I’d ask them to find a partner. At the high school level, I think I would assign partners. I: How much and what types of structure should they be given? For example, should students be given a certain amount of time they must spend with the program, certain information they must find, a guide of which modes to follow and what to look up, or should they be given complete freedom to browse at will? E5: I think of this as more of a cognitive experience than a motivational experience, even though it would be an INCREDIBLE motivational factor, with the graphics etc. On a color monitor this would be really stunning. I: Would this be more motivating than say sending a student down to the lab with instructions to listen to this piece on a CD? E5: Oh, YES, YES. About a time limit or a time frame — it totally depends on the mood you are in and the experience of the day, because of detasseling com today I couldn’t spend more time with this today because I was really tired. But with a guy in college I don’t think spending an hour on this would be out of the question at all " 45 minutes to an hour. You could arrange that kind of structure with a key that they have to sign in and sign out. They could write down what they did— like write down a musical term that they looked up the definition of. Or write down for example, in the orchestra lab, why you couldn’t put the oboe on the 87 accompaniment and write the reason. What did you do in the orchestra lab that the computer said “Whoops - you can’t do that.” And you know I did that, without even thinking that, unless you build a 10 foot oboe, it’s not going to be low enough for the accompaniment. You could turn papers like that in, and then you would get feedback on how the program is working for your students. I: How much time do you think the average non-music major college freshman would spend with this program before exhausting his curiosity or becoming bored? ES: An average student ? If you’re with a friend I would bet just over an hour. But they might come back again if they didn’t get all the way through. I: If you were teaching a college music appreciation course this year, how would you use this equipment and program to take best advantage of its capabilities? E5: In one of my classes they had this thing that you could plug into the computer and put it on an overhead and blow it up on a big projection screen so that THIS could be seen on the projection screen. I think that would be really useful in introducing the program and just playing maybe the first two minutes of the piece and just show them how to do the different steps, clicking on a term in bold-face for example. I: Show the whole class at once ? E5: Exactly. And then shut it off at a prime point that makes them WANT to go on and see what happens next. I think that would be an introduction activity. After that you could have a sign-up time with partners. I: Do you have any closing comments? E5: I had no idea this kind of stuff was out there. It’s marvelous. I: Thank you very much!
Examiner 6 I: How many years have you been an arts educator? 88 E6: Nine. I: Has your teaching been at the elementary, secondary, or college level? E6: All three. I: Have you taught classes in music or arts appreciation? E6: On the elementary level. I: The following are questions about your experience with The Orchestra CD-ROM. Please answer candidly, honestly, and as specifically as possible. After 1 hour with the program, how would you describe your reactions to it? E6: I think it’s really valuable to help students listen very actively. It’s so easy for them to sit back - especially high school age students - they just don’t know what to listen for. Or what’s going on. They just sit back and listen to it as background music. I: Did you feel that the amount of introductory information which I gave you was sufficient? E6: Yes, it is. I: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most confusing, how would you rate your sense of confusion with the program? Can you elaborate on what caused the most confusion? E6: Probably a “two”. Well, not confusion so much but there were just so many different things that you could go to — you could go back and forth and check everything out. If I were teaching it, I would probably tell a student to stick with a certain part of the program, like the fugue part. Really I shouldn’t say it was confusing at all. I: What percentage of the entire program do you think you explored? E6: Mmmm, 20 or 30 %. I: What was the longest time, approximately, that you listened and viewed the information without branching out into another area or subtopic? E6: [Inaudible] 10 minutes? I: Which of the following did you explore? Answer “yes” or “no” to each. [Items 89 the same as for the previous examiner.] E6. [She responded “Yes” to all. To Channel 4, Notebook, “But there was nothing in the notebook.”] I: What do you think would be the main disadvantage? E6: That only one student could use it at a time, and they would need the time to use it. In a classroom situation you would need to have several computers going at once and maybe have some students looking over someone’s shoulder. So many of our students don’t have lab time on a computer at the high school level. I: What could students leam by using this CD-ROM as a supplemental part of their music appreciation class? E6: Oh, so much. I think it’s a good combination of cognitive learning and also very motivating at the same time. I like it that it’s not just a book that you’re sitting back and reading. I think that helps them to realize how much there is in music -- how lich music is, which a lot of students don’t understand at all. The more you know about music the more exciting it is. This helps them to understand more, so that it becomes more exciting to them. I: In general, do you think that students would work better with this program individually or in pairs? Why? E6: Individually. Because I teach high school students - (laughter) they’d play the arcade games. I: How much and what types of structure should they be given? For example, should students be given a certain amount of time they must spend with the program, certain information they must find, a guide of which modes to follow and what to look up, or should they be given complete freedom to browse at will? E6; Well that would depend on what your goals were for that student and what kind of student you were dealing with too. If this were in an accelerated classroom or students who just wanted to branch out, they could be allowed to just browse. But if this were for a general music class, and they needed to show some results or take a test at the end, then just assign several sections. I’d rather see a student 90 just get excited about it and be able to explore it on their own. It might be more of a drag if you had to just find the right answer or something like that. I: How much time do you think the average non-music major college freshman would spend with this program before exhausting his curiosity or becoming bored? E6: Average college freshman? Non-music major? What’s average? That’s another question. I have no idea. I’m just going to say an hour and a half. I: If you were teaching a college music appreciation course this year, how would you use this equipment and program to take best advantage of its capabilities? E6: Well, there’s more than one way that you could use this. One way would be as a supplement to the course. To get excited. [Interviewer: Would you require it?] If I were doing it, I would require everyone to spend a certain amount of time doing it in the lab, and I think I would just let them do what they wanted with it, let them choose their category and write something about it. I think for the first year, I would just want to know what they’re getting from it, and let them tell me what kinds of things they were learning. And then I would know what this would be able to teach, and what would be realistic to expect from the students. I remember when I was in high school taking a music appreciation class, and I was really into music, but still having a hard time identifying all of the different instruments as they were playing, especially when the texture was thick. Here, it just pops up on the screen for you. I: Thank you very much !
Examiner 7 I: How many years have you been an arts educator? E7: About 25. I: Has your teaching been at the elementary, secondary, or college level? E7: AU 3 levels. I: Have you taught classes in music or arts appreciation? 91 E7: Yes. I: The following are questions about your experience with The Orchestra CD-ROM. Please answer candidly, honestly, and as specifically as possible. After 1 hour with the program, how would you describe your reactions to it? E7: Well, it’s really just a catalog of all the information that you could find in a book. One advantage that it has over a book is that you can also hear what’s going on. I; Did you feel that the amount of introductory information which I gave you was sufficient? E7; Yes, that was fine. I: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most confusing, how would you rate your sense of confusion with the program? Can you elaborate on what caused the most confusion? E7: Well, I wasn’t confused with it. I found it easy to find my way around. I: What percentage of the entire program do you think you explored? E7: Well, just about all of it, because I looked into each one of the categories, and I listened to just about the whole piece. I: What was the longest time, approximately, that you listened and viewed the information without branching out into another area or subtopic? E7: With the music I listened 3 or 4 minutes - that would be the longest. I: Which of the following did you explore? Answer “yes” or “no” to each. [Items the same as for the previous examiner.] E7: She responded “Yes” to all questions. To Channel 3, “A short amount of time on that.” To Channel 4, “Is that something I could have typed something in? That’s what I wondered.” To Europe Before the Walkman, “Looked at about 4 of those.”] I: The following are questions which deal with instructional strategies for utilizing this CD-ROM as supplemental material in a music appreciation class. As a teacher, what would you see as the main advantage of using this program? E7: For one thing, the fact that it’s on a computer would make it of interest to some 92 students. I see it as - it’s like going to the encyclopedia and looking up information. I think you should give students a guide as to what they should find. Once you get going though, it’s interesting just to explore it all the way through. I: What do you think would be the main disadvantage? E7: The same thing that is true for all these things on a computer - it’s just one person doing it — I suppose you could have 2 people doing it. I think in pairs would be better so that you could talk about what you are doing. I: What could students leam by using this CD-ROM as a supplemental part of their music appreciation class? E7 : It would really free up a lot of time on the part of the teacher - not having to get all the musical examples ready. The one that I thought was the neatest - 1 really liked listening to the music where it describes exactly what’s happening - what instruments are coming on. I think that was really good. I liked it. I: How much and what types of structure should they be given? For example, should students be given a certain amount of time they must spend with the program, certain information they must find, a guide of which modes to follow and what to look up, or should they be given complete freedom to browse at will? E7: Well, I would think that most students would operate best with a specific guide— and from there some students may like to explore on their own. I: How much time do you think the average non-music major college freshman would spend with this program before exhausting his curiosity or becoming bored? E7; All the way from 3 minutes to 1 hour. The average student — I don’t know. I would say at least 10 - 20 minutes I: If you were teaching a college music appreciation course this year, how would you use this equipment and program to take best advantage of its capabilities? E7: I would make out a study guide or worksheet, which the students would take on their own time to a lab. You’d probably have to have an instructor there to show 93 them how to use the program. Or perhaps the instructions could be written on the study guide. You could probably do that several different times, each time going after different information. The Orchestra Lab, was good-- following what they did there, I think it would be fun if you had instruments in the classroom to try out some of the different combinations. Do their own composing and try different instrumental combinations. I: Do you have any closing comments? E7: There are a lot of interesting things on the history of the orchestra and the development of the different instruments. APPENDIX C COMPLETE GEN 200 MUSIC SUBCOURSE SCHEDULE
94 95 January 13 Massed Meeting THEATER January 15 Massed Meeting ART January 18 Massed Music MUSIC January 20 A January 22 A January 25 A January 27 A January 29 A February 1 A February 3 A February 5 A February 8 A February 10 A February 12 A February 15 A February 17 Theater Informance February 19 B February 22 B February 24 B February 26 B March 1 B March 3 B March 5 B March 8 B March 10 B March 12 B March 15 B March 17 B SPRING BREAK March 31 Art Informance April 2 C April 5 C April 7 c April 9 c April 12 c April 14 c April 16 c April 19 c April 21 c April 23 c April 26 c April 28 c April 30 Massed Music APPENDIX D GEN 200 SYLLABUS
96 97 GEN 200, Music Subcourse Spring, 1993 Syllabus
Instructor: H. Duitman, Music Building, rm 112 X6204 Class meeting time: Monday, Wednesday, Friday at 10 AM in the Choir Room I. Introduction The Music segment of the Arts 200 course at Dordt College is designed to give each student an introduction to the music of western civilization, centering on the actual experiencing of the music. To this end, approximately half of the assigmnents and evaluation items involve music listening.
Students should be familiar with the procedures and hours of the Music Department Listening Lab. This lab is located on the lower floor of the Music Building. While the facilities are adequate for average use, there are problems when everyone in Arts 200 waits until the night before the test to use the facility. PLAN AHEAD and DO NOT PROCRASTINATE!
A very important aspect of the music segment is a live concert experience. You are required to attend 1 concert, the band and orchestra concert on April 4. Information about how to listen to this concert and how to write the Special Arts Event report was given to all students during the music informance on March 17. n . Goals The goals of the entire GEN 200 course are outlined on the general course outline. Translated into the music segment, these goals are: A. Each student will master basic aural and factual knowledge about the style periods in western classical music history.
B . Each student will develop their aural and factual knowledge about the stmcture of music and will be able to use an appropriate vocabulary when describing music. m. Objectives A. Each student will score a passing grade on a test about the elements and the making of music. This will include questions of a factual and an aural nature requiring definitions and descriptions.
B . Each student will score a passing grade on a a test and a quiz about the style periods which are covered in the lectures and assignments. These evaluations will measure the student's understanding of style period chronology, style characteristics, principal composers and compositions in each of the major periods, as well as aural identification of several representative compositions. rV. Evaluation in the music subcourse Test on the elements and making of music 20% Listening Quiz over the first hatf of the style periods only 5% Test over all the style periods 20% Listening project 40% Special Arts Event report 10% Final general knowledge test 5% 98 UNEXCUSED ABSENCE: automatic deduction of 5% from subcourse final grade LATE ASSIGNMENT: automatic deduction of 5% from that paper's grade
V. Methods of instruction Methods of instruction include: Lecture Use of recorded musical examples Use of CD-ROM computer-controlled information Individual projects Individual listening assignments in the listening lab.
VI. Schedule for Unit C January 13 Massed Meeting Introduction January 15 Massed Meeting Music Evaluation Mar 17 Mon in C160 Listening proiect due at class time MarSl B Elements Apr 2 B Elements April 4 Sun, 2:30 SAE event: Band/orch concert, attendance required Apr 5 B The Making of Music Apr? B TEST i/explain listening project Apr 9 B Middle Ages Apr 12 B Renaissance Apr 14 B Baroque Apr 16 B Listening Quiz/Types of listening Apr 19 B Classical Apr 21 B Romantic Apr 23 B Twentieth Century Apr 26 B TESTE
April 28 WedinC160 FINAL TEST, LISTENING PROJECT DUE April 30 Fri in C160 SAE Concert report due at class time APPENDIX E GEN200COURSEPACK
99 100
THE ELEMENTS OF MUSIC (Vocabulary)
The elements of music are the building blocks, the clay used by the composer to fashion music out of these raw materials: sound, silence, and time. Composers make use of all of the elements but, in any one piece, some may be used only a little or not at all.
A. Rhythm - the most basic element. How sound and silence moves through time. Rhythm has three components:
1. Beat - pulse, you feel it. may be heavy may be definite may be light, barely felt may be steady or unsteady
2. Tempo - rate of speed the beat moves through time. Italian terms are common and are not precise. They may also indicate mood. Beethoven was the first major composer to use a mechanical means of tempo indication with a device from his friend, Maezel. Italian Metronome prestissimo very, very fast MM = 200-208 presto very fastMM = 168-200 allegro fast, cheerful MM =120-168 vivace vivacious allegretto moderately fast moderato moderate MM =108-120 andantino moderately slow andante slowish but moving along MM = 76-108 adagio slow MM = 66-76 larghetto slowish, but moving along MM = 60-66 largo broadly MM = 40-60 lento slow grave gravely
Some terms for modifying the tempo: molto very poco a little piu more meno less rubato varying the steadiness of the beat for expression. (See Romantic period) (chart taken fiom Sadie, 1990, p. 16)
3. Meter - groupings of the beat into 2,3 or 4 called duple, triple, and quadruple. This gives the rhythm repetition and closure. Meter may be simple or compound or mixed. Some music, such as early church chant, has no regular meter since it takes its repetition and closure directly from the text. Think of some examples of songs in these meters: Duple - Triple - 101 Quadruple - Compound duple -
B . Melody - combination of pitch (highness or lowness of the sound - frequency.) with rhythm into a single line of music. Melody can be related to line in painting. The distance between two pitches is called an interval. Scales are made up of several successive intervals. Diatonic scales may be maior or minor and transverse one octave using combinations of whole and half step intervals. A chromatic scale uses only half-steps. A lyrical (song-like) melody uses narrow intervals and may be called conjuct A melody which skips around and uses wide intervals and is called disjunct Phrase- is a section of a melody. This gives the melody repetition and closure. The ending of a phrase is cadence. Cadences may also be heard in the harmony. Phrases: may be short or long may be symetical (4,8,16,32 beats) or irregular (3,5,7 beats) in length may have antecedents and consequents
C. Harmony- a succession of chords. Harmony assumes the simultaneous sounding of 2 or more pitches. Western harmonic practice usually includes the concept of tonality, the gravitation of a piece to one tone possible because of tiie use of scales which have whole and half steps. This can be heard in the harmonic cadences of most music. In tonality, most chords fulfill one of these two functions: consonance, a feeling of relaxation or resolution in the harmony dissonance, a feeling of tension or forward movement in the harmony However, the consensus on which chords are relaxed or which are tense has changed considerably during the last 300 years.
D. Texture - relationship of the horizontal and vertical aspects of melody and harmony 1. Monophonic - a single voice of music 2. Polyphonic - two or more melodic lines playing simultaneously 3. Homophonie - a melody with accompaniment (chordal background)
E. Genre - category of music, the way to categorize between works (coroUary in literature would be short story, novel, poem, etc.). Common genre include: concerto, mass, oratorio, the opera, symphony, tone poem, art song.
F. Form - the architecture of the work, within a work or a movement of a work. Common forms include: binary and ternary - rondo - sonata- theme and variations - fugue -
G . Dynamics - the loudness or softness of a sound (amplitude). Common markings include: ff fortissimo very loud / forte loud m f mezzo forte moderately loud mp mezzo piano moderately soft p piano quiet 102
PP pianissimo very quiet Some terms for modifying the dynamics: cresc. crescendo growing louder dim diminuendo diminishing, getting quieter sfz sforzando forced, accented (chart thken from Sadie, 1990, p. 29)
H. Timbre - the tone color which describes each instrument's unique sound, a fingerprint of the sound. The sound of a clarinet will be different from that of the trumpet even though they are plaj^g the same pitch at the same dynamic because of the overtones of the harmonic series.
I. Instrumentation or Voicing - the way different combinations of instruments or voices are used in music. There are four families in the orchestra: strings, woodwinds, brass and percussion. Each family has its own composite timbre. There are also four parts in a normal chorus: soprano, alto, tenor, bass.
THE MAKING OF MUSICAL SOUNDS
A. Strings - the largest family of the modem symphony orchestra. 1. Bowed instruments - Early ones were called viols and had frets. - Early bows were convex as opposed to modem concave bows. Early instraments had a very different sound which determined the Baroque style. - All bowed instmments may also be plucked (pizzicato). The modem bowed instruments are: Violin: orchestras have 2 serrate violin parts Viola: slightly larger than violin, plays five notes lower Cello: stands on the floor, plays an octave lower than viola Double bass: one octave lower than the cello 2. Plucked instruments -Guitar may be plucked or strummed with fingers or plectra. -Harp an ancient instmment still in use today. Adds color to orchestral string sound, -Lute the most popular 16th century instmment used for solo music and accompanying songs. 3. Keyboard instruments - harpsichord sound is similar to a harp or guitar since a depressed key activates the mechanical plucking of a string. A central solo and accompanying instmment in the baroque orchestra, -piano invented after the harpsichord. Provides "key control" so that the performer may produce "graduated dynamics"
B. Woodwinds - the most colorful family since tones are produced in a variety of ways: 1. by blowing directly into or across an opening in the instmment 103 - recorder an early instrument which is easy to play. - flute the artistic progeny of the recorder - piccolo half the length and, therefore, and octave higher than the flute 2. by blowing air to cause a single reed of cane to vibrate - clarinet came into the orchestra later than most other woodwinds - bass clarinet an octave lower - saxophone invented most recently, used mostly in jazz, bands, and by presidential candidates 3. by blowing air to cause two reeds of cane to vibrate, hence double reeÆnstruments - oboe produces a soimd rich in overtones - English horn a longer oboe of a slightly different shape, plays 5 tones lower - bassoon the primary bass instrument of the woodwind fan^y - contra bassoon one octave lower than bassoon (The pipe organ is a keyboard instrument which has the timbrai properties closest to die woodwind family.)
C. Brass - the sound is produced outside of the instrument by vibration of lips. The timbre is affected most by the shape of the instruments flair, more cylindrical is more brilliant, more conical is mellower. 1. Early brass instruments did not use valves. To play a different set of pitches they changed crooks. The modem bugle is an example. 2. The modem trumpet has valves and is used in many settings. The comet is often used in bands. 3 . The French horn is the most conical brass instrument and therefore its mellow sound allows it to be a part of the woodwind quintet 4. The trombone uses a moveable slide rather than valves. 5. The euphonium, sometimes called baritone, looks like a baby tuba. It plays in the same range as the trombone, but has a mellower sound. 6. The tuba is the bass voice of the brass family
D. Percussion - are sounded by being stmck or shaken. While they are the most ancient, other than the timpani, they are very recent additions to the orchestra. 1. Tuned percussion include ^ the mallet instruments such as xylophone, marimba, chimes, and orchestra bells, as well as the timpani which may be tuned by tightening and loosening the tension on the head. This is regulated by a pedal. 2. Untuned percussion sound only an indefinite pitch. Common instraments are the bass dram, snare dram, crash and suspended cymbals, and gong.
E. Electronic Instruments - include many keyboard and non-keyboard instraments. The sounds may be sampled meaning that they are actually constructed from a slice of accoustic instrument timbre.
F. The human voice - the instrument which most often immitated by other instraments. Modern voices are charcterized in the following way, from high to low: coloratura very high, very agile female voice soprano mezzo-soprano contralto (or alto) lowest female voice 104
countertenor highest male voice, similar to "falsetto voice" tenor opera tenors are futher classified as being "heroic" or "lyric" baritone bass lowest male voice
G . Common ensembles - music is usually made "in concert" with other musicians Orchestra may include all foiur instrumental families Concert band doesn't generally include string instruments Choirs voices alone {a capella) or accompanied by instruments Chamber ensembles a few of the most common are: string quartet, woodwind, quintet, brass quintet 105
HISTORICAL STYLE PERIOD OUTLINE
I. Medieval Period A.D. 1 - 1450 A.D. A. SACRED MUSIC 1. Church was the center of educated life, books and manuscripts 2. All written music was church music, kept in monastaries 3. Called Plainsonp. plainchant. gregorian chant
LT anonymous Agnus Dei Gregorian chant
4. Primacy of the Word a. beauty of the melody was secondaiy b. a characteristic of western music is that music is set to match text, not vice-versa, primacy of the text
5. Reciting Psalm was the earliest chant, sing an example, a. Syllabic, close to recitation b. Melismatic, got composers in trouble
6. Pope Gregory orgaitized the chants throughout Christendom
7. Monophonic chant gradually evolved into organum. one stationary voice soundmg like a drone and simply contrary movement of melodies above it Perotin of the Notre Dame school was a leading composer of organum.
LT Perotin Viderunt omnes organum
B. SECULAR MUSIC (IŒCREATIONAL) 1. Little music was written down 2. Roving musicians in France were called troubadors. in Germany, minnisingers 3. Secular music was not as progressive, had more repetition and was more danceable, a comparison generally true throughout history.
LT Ventadour Be M’an Perdut Troubador secular song 106 n. RENAISSANCE 1450-1600 A. SACRED 1. Catholic a. was more developed, complex, artistic b. immitarive polyphony was discovered by Josquin c. new genre: mass, motet
LT Josquin Ave Maria immitative sacred polyphony
2, Protestant Reformation contributions (more to worship than to music) a. music sung by worshipers b. texts in vernacular c. known tunes used in repetitive stanzas d. new genre: psalms and chorales
Calvin's practices a. texts only from the book of Psalms b. no choirs or organs, emphasis on the congregation c. composer from Geneva, Louis Bourgeons
Luther's practices a. sacred poetry allowed - became chorales (hymns) b. these chorales were also given polyphonic treatment by professional composers using choirs and organs c. composers - Wdter and Nicolai
B . SECULAR (RECREATIONAL) All ages have sacred and secular music by text, may today be called art music and popular music.
1. Word painting was used for both sacred and secular
LT Weelkes As Vesta Was from English madrigal Latmos Hill Descending
As Vesta was from Latmos hiU descending She spied a maiden Queen the same ascending. Attended on by all the shepherds' swain; To whom Diana's darlings came running down amain First two by two, then three by three together Leaving their Goddess all alone, hasted thither. And mingling with the shepherds of her train; With mirthful tunes her presence did entertain. Then sang the shepherds and nymphs of Diana: Long live fair Oriana! 107 2. Texture tended toward a homophonie, simpler style 3. Rhythm tended toward strong, metrical for dancing 4. Instruments were used much, little in the church 5. Melody had shorter and more repetitive phrases than Catholic or Lutheran Church music
LT anonymous Pavanne and Galliard instrumental dances
6. new genre: madrigal
C MOST IMPORTANT RENAISSANCE COMPOSERS Josquin Catholic, Italian Palestrina Catholic, Italian Victoria Catholic, Spanish William Byrd Catholic and Protestant, England 108 III. BAROQUE 1600-1750 A. BEST-KNOWN COMPOSERS Johann Sebastian Bach northern Europe George Frederick Handel northern Europe Vivaldi southern Europe
B . CHARACTERISTICS OF BAROQUE MUSIC
LT Vivaldi Spring from The Four Seasons
1. Rhythm often has a relentless,driving beat, perpetual motion 2. Melody is often a continuous spinning out, does not have regular phrase lengths. 3. Texture is often polyphonic. However, Southern European music was more homophonie. 4. Composers loved to write for the new violins. 5. Dynamics were terraced, like on the harpsichord 6. An important form was the fugue a. an elaborate round b. grew out of the immitative polyphony of the Renaissance
LT Bach Little Fugue in G Minor
7. Another important form was the concerto grosso: a small group of soloists who are part of the larger group
C.NEW GENRE 1. opera: staged, choral, orchestral, usually in Italian 2. oratorio: unstaged religious opera, Handel developed it 3. cantata: church music around a chorale theme, Bach wrote many
LT Bach Cantata Number 140, "Wachet Auf', (Sleepers Wake) 109
TYPES OF LISTENING
I. OVERVIEW The type of the music must determine how you listen to it for maximum understanding.
A. MUSIC WITH TEXT 1. Since western music is characterized by the rational, this equals primacy of the text 2. Good music must fit the text 3. We listen for melody, harmony, texture according to text purpose 4. A good performance is also essential
B. PROGRAM MUSIC 1. Began in tiie Romantic Period 2. Sometimes called "refential" because it refers to something outside of itself 3. Idea that music can help you visualize some extra musical event or place, like The Seasons, The Planets, Grand Canyon Suite 4. How do you know? a. no text b. tide c. program notes
C. ABSOLUTE MUSIC 1. Music without words or extra musical program just music 2. Title usually represents tire genre or form, e.g. Sonata in Bb, Sympnony US, Piano Concerto in E minor
II. MUSIC WITH TEXT, EXAMPLES The Messiah, by G.F. Handel (selections) Recitative made long narratives possible. It has no repetition, and is syllabic. Two types of recitative are accompanying and non-accompanying.
[Listen to the relationship of text and music and answer the following:]
There Were Shepherds znd Glory to God representation of numbers: melody range: dynamic: rhythm:
All We Like Sheep word painting: mood: tempo: harmony: texture:
III. PROGRAM MUSIC, EXAMPLES Mars from The Planets by Holst (astrologically Mars was the "Bringer of War") 110 ihythm; meten tempo: instnunentation: harmony: dynamics:
Other excellent examples of program music include: The Grand Canyon Suite by Grofe and Rodeo and Billy the Kid by Copland
IV. ABSOLUTE MUSIC A. Is the heart of artistic music, the essence of music, both the most subjective and the most objective type.
B .It is the direct result of artists asking "What if?" questions. 1. Finite human creativity is limited to molding or varying the God given musical materials 2. Theme and variation form gives us a good example of how artists mold musical materials even if this is somewhat an example of program music
American Salute by Morton Gould is program music, but, nevertheless, gives us a good example of how composers use the elements to craft absolute music.
Some of the ways that Gould moulds the tune. When Johnny Comes Marching Home 1. motif fragmentation 2. augmentation 3. diminution 4. ornamentation 5. rhythmic variation - syncopation 6. instrumentation - different timbres in melody and accompaniment Ill IV. VIENNESE CLASSICAL 1750-1830 The name "Classical" can cause confusion. A. COMPOSERS (each lived in Vienna for at least part of his life) Haydn Mozart CAmadRii.O Beethoven Schubert
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MUSIC
LT Mozart Symphony Number 40, movement 1 allegro
1. melody predictable, question-answer,equal length phrases 2. rhythm steady beat but not so driven as Baroque, some ritard 3. dynamics gradiiated. like on the piano 4. texture more homophonie 5. form Sonata form-die most durable Theme and Variations form
LT Mozart Piano Concerto Number 23, movement 2
Rondo form
LT Haydn Symphony Number 88, movement 4
6. style restraint, balance, elegance 7. instrumentation the "classical symphony instrumentation" developed
C. NEW GENRE 1. svmphony a four movement work for full orchestra, often 2 or 3 movements are in sonata form, Haydn was the "father of the symphony" 2. concerto one soloist with full orchestra 112 V. ROMANTIC 1830-WWI
A. COMPOSERS Chopin. Liszt Berlioz. Wagner. Tchaikovsky. Brahms [Beethoven and Schubert!
B .GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ROMANTIC SPIRIT 1. key word is very, loss of the classical mean. very passionate, emotional, big, small, long, short, spectacular virtuosity 2. the age was interested in the grotesque
C. MUSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ROMANTIC PERIOD a. rhythm great tempo changes within a piece, rubato often very heavy or very light beat often presto or largo b. dynamics huge range from pppp to ffff often one climax, no denouemont c. timbre new instruments were sax, english hom, trombones, piccolo, percussion instruments besides timpani, and tuba, piano was a favorite, orchestras became huge d. form began by expanding the development section of sonata form, then more emphasis on freedom of the imagination from the constrictions of classical form ie. program music D. NEW GENRE piano miniatures
LT Chopin Fantasie Impromptu
tone poems
LT Berlioz March to the Scaffold from "Symphonie Fantastique"
hed - a German art song. Lieder have the following characteristics: -usually set to fine poetry and more musically difficult than a folk song -solo voice with piano accompaniment -Schubert is the master composer, wrote over 600
LT Schubert The Erl King
Wer reitet so spat durch Nacht imd Wind? Who rides so late through the night and the wind? Es ist der Voter mit seinem Kind; It is the father with his child. Er hat den Knaben wohl in dem Arm, He holds the boy in his arm. Erfasst ihn sicher, er halt ihn warm. Grasps him securely, keeps him warm.
"Mein Sohn, was girgst du so bang dein Gesicht?" "My son, why do you hide your face so anxiously?" "Siehst, Voter, du den ErUconig rUcht? "Father, do you see the Elfking? 113
Den ErlenkSrtig mit Kron und Schweif?" The Elfking with his crown and tail?" "Mein Sohn, es ist ein Nebelstreif." "My son, it is only a streak of mist."
"Du iiebes Kind, komm, geh mit mir! "Darling child, come away with me!" Gar schône Spiek spkl ich mit dir; I will play fine games with you. Manch bunte Blumen sind an dem Strand, Many gay flowers grow by the shore; Meine Mutter hat manch gulden Gewand." My mother has many golden robes." "Mein Voter, mein Voter, und hôrest du nicht. "Father, father, do you not hear Was Erlenkonig mir kise versprkht?" What the Elfking softly promises me?" "Sei ruhig, bkive ruhig, mein Kind: "Be calm, my child, be calm - In diirren Blattem sauselt der Wind." The sind is rustling in the dry leaves."
"Willst, feiner Knabe, du mit mir gehn? "You beautiful boy, will you come with me? Meine Tocherter solkn dkh warten schon; My daughters will wait upon you. Meine Tochter fUhren den ndchtlichen Reihn My daughters lead the nightly round. Und wkgen und taraen und singen dich ein." They will rock you, dance to you, sing you to sleep!"
"Mein Voter, mein Voter, und skhst du nicht dort "Father, father, do you not see Drlkonighs Tochter am dustern Ort?" The Elfking's daughters there, in that dark place?" "Mein Sohn, mein Sohn, ich seh es genau: "My son, my son, I see it clearly: Es scheinen d k alten Weiden so grau." It is the gray gleam of the old willow trees."
"Ich kibe dich, mich reizt deine schône Gestalt; "I love you, your beauty allures me. Und bist du nicht willig, so brauch ich Gewalt." And if you do not come willingly, I shall use force." "Mein Voter, mein Voter, jetzt fasst er mich an! "Father, father, now he is seizing me! Erlkonig hat mir ein Leid's getan!" The Elfking has hurt me!"
Dem Voter grauset's, er reitet geschwind, Fear grips the father, he rides swiftly. Er haltin den Armen das achzende Kind, Holding the moaning child in his arms; Erreicht den Hof mit MUh und Not; With effort and toil he reaches the house - In seinen Armen das Kind war tot. The child in his arms was dead. 114 VI. TWENTIETH CENTURY 1920 to present
A. PERSPECTIVE 1. difficult to see the forest while we are in it. 2. we will consider only mainstream composers - the opposite of avant garde
B. COMPOSERS Debussy. Stravinsky. Copland. Schoenberg. Gershwin. Bernstein
C. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY 1. Began with a short period in Paris called Impressionism.
LT Debussy LaMer, mvt. 2
2. Loss of the ideal of beauty 3. Distrust of the conventions of the past 4. Desire on the part of artists to accurately portray realistic problems of society.
Stravinsky The Rite o f Spring
D. MUSICAL GHARACIERISTICS 1. style eclectic (can be neo-classical, neo-baroque neo-anything)
LT Stravinsky Symphony o f Psalms
2. harmony toward accepted dissonance, atonalitv (not based on the diatonic scale) and serialism 3. melody often jagged, extreme range, fiagmented (pointilistic) 4. rhythm jazz influenced all musicwith svncopation
LT Bernstein Candide
5. timbre added non-traditional uses of instruments and electronics 115 REFERENCES
Gillespie, J. (1969). The Musical Experience. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc. [and accompanying recordings] Kerman, S. (1980). Listen (3rd ed.). New York: Worth Publishers, Inc. [and accompanying recordings] Sadie, S. (1990). Bri^Guide to Music (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. APPENDIX F APPROVED LISTENING PROJECT COMPOSITIONS
116 117 GEN 200 LISTENING PROJECT CHOICES SIGNUP CDs NO MORE THAN 2 PEOPLE ON ANY ONE CD. Initialize your selection. CD Com poser Composition 87 Bach Magnificat 9 Bach Mass in B Minor 187 Bartok Concerto for Orchestra 12 Beethoven Symphony No. 1 20 Beethoven Symphony No. 3 55 Bizet Carmen, Suite 1 or 2 73 Brahms Academic Festival Overture 54 Brahms German Requiem 73 Brahms Symphony No. 1 78 Copland Rodeo 78 Copland Billy the Kid 13 Debussy LaMer 61 Dukas Sorcerer's Apprentice reserve Gershwin An American in Paris 38 Handel Royal Fireworks 127 Mahler Symphony No. 4 128 Mendelssohn Violin Concerto reserve Moussorgsky Pictures at an Exhibition 4 Mozart Symphony No. 41 82 Mozart Requiem 99 Respighi Church Windows 101 Saint-Saëns The Organ Symphony 195 Schubert TheTrout Quartet, 23 Shostakovich Symphony No. 5 112 Stravinsky Firebird Suite 164 Stravinsky Petrushka 47 Tchaikovsky Symphony No. 5 168 Vaughan Williams Serenade to Music 19 Vivaldi (on reserve) Gloria in D 188 Vivaldi The Seasons CD-ROMs NO MORE THAN 4 PEOPLE ON ANY ONE CD-ROM. The Orchestra _ Beethoven’s 9th _ Rite o f Spring _ Mozart String Quartet ______APPENDIX G CD LISTENING PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS
118 119 LISTENING PROJECT: CD
The purpose of this project is an intimate and sustained encounter, an in-depth acquaintance, with a musical composition that has been known over time to reward repeated listening. In the words of Joseph Bassin, this is to be an "encounter, enabled by focused, alert, aggressive listening, in which the student consciously pursues the piece." The report asks you to combine knowledge gained in this course with the knowledge gained from your own reflective listening and research.
Procedure 1. Select one of the Listening Choices CDs and sign up for it in the Listening Lab. (No more than 2 people will be allowed to sign up for any one CD.)
2. Listen to the composition on at least 5 separate occasions. Fill out a Listening Log after each listening session.
3. Do related research on the piece and the composer between listening sessions. Sources may include: • the CD jacket itself
• Baker’s Biograhical Dictionaiy of Music and Musicians A copy is in the Listening Lab and another in the main library reference section.
’ New Grove Dictionary of Music in the main library reference section
• other sources selected from the bibliography at the end of the composer article in one of the two reference books above.
• other books in the reference section of the main library
4. Write the paper. It is due, with the Listening Log, in class on Wednesday, April 28.
Paper Mechanics [To gain full credit for your work, follow these instructions exactly.] - must be at least 3 pages long, double-spaced, typed with good ribbon - complete sentences required - all direct quotations must be credited and the source noted in the bibliography - all work must be your own - each of the 6 headings must be clearly noted in the paper Paner Evaluation - 100 points possible (see below) - grammar, punctuation, and writing style must be at college level. Unacceptable papers will be returned for reworking before they will be graded. The grade may then be lowered because of tardiness. - points will be given based on: • how thoroughly you discuss each of the areas of the paper • how well you support what you say with specific musical detail • how well you relate what you learned from your listening to what you learned from your class notes and independent research Structure of the Paper [Include the following 6 headings and answer the questions in each section.] 120 I. Introduction {10 points} - Name of composition (italicize or underline), composer, composer dates? - Type of music, genre, style period? II. Biographical Information {20 points) - Relate this composition to the composer's life and other compositions. Was this composition significant or unique in any way?
III. Style and Elements {40 points} - Compare the style characteristics of this piece with the style characteristics common in the period of the composition. Since this will require some extra detail, you may wish to confine this section to one movement or part of your composition. Refer to at least 5 of the elements we have studied in this class. rv .Listening to This Selection {20 points) - After repeated listenings, and consideration of the type of music, genre, and style period of this selection, how would you encourage other listeners to approach this composition? What should they listen for?
V. Conclusion - subjective {0 points) - How did your reaction to tiie piece change over the course of the listenings. Rate your learning with this entire listening project from 1 (distasteful) to 5 (enjoyed it very much). Rate your enjoyment with this entire listening project from 1 (distasteful) to 5 (enjoyed it very much).
VI. Bibliography and Discography {5 points ) - Include complete information on all sources used and the CD recording.
Listening Log is to be attached. It does not have to be typed. {5 points) APPENDIX H CD-ROM LISTENING PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS
121 122 LISTENING PROJECT: CD-ROM
The purpose of this project is an intimate and sustained encounter, an in-depth acquaintance, with a musical composition that has been known over time to reward repeated listening. In the words of Joseph Bassin, this is to be an "encounter, enabled by focused, alert, aggressive listening, in which the student consciously pursues the piece." The report asks you to combine knowledge gained in this course with the knowledge gained from your own reflective listening and research.
Your use of the CD-ROM means that, like the rest of the GEN 200 students, you will be listening to a composition and will be writing a paper about it. Unlike them, you will glean all of your information from the computer screen and will not do outside research.
Procedure 1. Select one of the four CD-ROMs and sign up for it in class. (No more than 4 people will be allowed to sign up for any one CD-ROM.)
2. Goto the Listening Lab and check out the CD-ROM and M25 key. Read the instruction booklet carefullv and follow the 6 part suggested learning strategy for your piece.
3. Write the paper. It is due, with the Listening Log, in class on Wednesday, April 28.
Paper Mechanics [To gain full credit for your work, follow these instructions exactly.1 - must be at least 3 pages long, double-spaced, typed with good ribbon - complete sentences required - all direct quotations must be credited and the source noted in the bibliography - all work must be your own - each of the 6 headings must be clearly noted in the paper Paper Evaluation - 100 points possible (see below) - grammar, punctuation, and writing style must be at college level. Unacceptable papers will be returned for reworking before they will be graded. The ^ d e may then be lowered because of tardiness. - points will be given based on: • how thoroughly you discuss each of the areas of the paper • how well you support what you say with specific musical detail • how well you relate what you learned from your listening to what you learned from your class notes and independent research
Structure of the Paper [Include the following 6 headings and answer the questions in each section.] I. Introduction {10 points) - Name of composition (italicize or underline), composer, composer dates? - Type of music, genre, style period?
II. Biographical Information (20 points} - Relate this composition to the composer's life and other compositions. Was this composition significant or unique in any way? 123 III. Style and Elements {40 points} - Compare the style characteristics of this piece with the style characteristics common in the period of the composition. Since this will require some extra detail, you may wish to confine this section to one movement or part of your composition. Refer to at least 5 of the elements we have studied in this class. IV. Listening to TTiis Selection (20 points} - After repeated listenings, and consideration of the type of music, genre, and style period of this selection, how would you encourage other listeners to approach this composition? What should they listen for?
V. Conclusion - subjective {0 points) - How did your reaction to the piece change over the course of the listenings. Rate your learning with this entire listening project from 1 (distasteful) to 5 (enjoyed it very much). Rate your enjoyment with this entire listening project from 1 (distasteful) to 5 (enjoyed it very much).
VI. Bibliography and Discography ( 5 points) - Include information about any sources mentioned in the CD-ROM information which you used for your paper and include the name of the orchestra, etc.
Listening Log is to be attached. It does not have to be typed. {5 points ) APPENDIX I GENERAL CD-ROM USAGE INSTRUCTIONS
124 125
Dordt College Music Listening Lab: Using Music-Related CD-ROMs
Dordt music-related, interactive CD-ROMs encourage the listener to learn about music in a very exciting way. Like any other compact disc, these discs contain digitized music which reproduces, for the listener, concert-hall-like sound.
Unlike other CDs, music CD-ROMs also contain a wealth of information about the music, information which is displayed on the computer screen. This information is linked to the CD so that, by pushing and clicking buttons with the computer's mouse, you, the listener, may control what you look at and listen to.
Please follow the instructions in this booklet very carefully. The first part of the booklet provides you with general use information which is the same for all of Dordt's CD-ROMs. The second part provides you with a suggested strategy for using your particular CD-ROM.
If you have any questions do not hesitate to ask the Listening Lab attendant or Professor Duitman.
Have fun! 126
STEP ONE; Getting set
• Check out the CD-ROM of your choice and the room 25 key from the Listening Lab attendant.
• Go into room 25.
• Make sure the black power strip is turned on.
• Turn on the CD-ROM player (rear left).
• Insert the CD-ROM into the CD-ROM caddy by: 1. Gripping the caddy with two hands and open the cover by pressing both comers. 2. Gently placing the CD-ROM into the caddy. 3. Closing the caddy by squeezing both comers shut.
• Plug the headphones into the front of the CD-ROM player. The volume adjustment is also on the front. 127
STEP TWO: Computer setup
IF THE COMPUTER IS ON THEN: 1. If an application is opened, select Quit from the File menu. If asked, Save idl work.
2. Close folders by clicking the close box in the upper left hand comer until you have arrived at the ^ d e r and it looks like this:
" é File Edit Uleui Speclel .nrvvwvvwnrvin.nfvvvvvvvvvvvi-vvwn.^'vinfvvjrtnrvvvvvvvvvvvvvvi'i:.nivvxnfVVvvvTn.nrvi.nnrvvvvv%*vnr»v%nfV\'W«fvwnrvvvvvvvvMfVvvwrtrtOfi.*vvv
.■vvvvvvvvvvvvn.*vvvnrvvwvv%nr%nfvvvvvyvvvvvvvvvvvvv%’vvvwrwvvinrvvvvvvv
wS
3. Select Restart from the Special menu. [Now the computer will be able to find the CD-ROM player address.]
IE_THE COMPUTER IS NOT ON: Simply turn it on using the switch on the rear left. 128
STEP THREE: Opening the application
’ Insert the caddy (metal end firsti into the player. Wait a few seconds and the following screen will appear (with the name of your CD-ROM); ^ é Flla Edit Ulaui Spatial ______''
—OPEN THIS
DO NOT OPENnPPNI THISTHIS! I
m m
' Open the Music Department hard disk icon by double-clicking on it. [DO NOT open the CD-ROM icon. This program runs better off the hard drive.]
Double-click on the HyperCard folder icon to open it.
'' é nia Edit Uleui Special '*
I m u ilt dapartm ant ITIUfM K,«40Kt)«Wl 2.T23K (VtMII OQ^rttmNMir C3onw.r.ifcr QutnnjMhWfr Qo.H»ii>r«Mir QO.Hiir.lfcr n » M n r r.lfcr QOnWiunr.Ifcr nOfaaiM frtyuM Q or.M M . r.lfcr QMBIPrtiraiM Qafcfrw.1. r.lfcr QMuHi TkMry Prtfranf QVfclwf. r.lfcr Qv«r< artwitVn rra^KM QMiarwoirvoiBt
Double-click on the HyperCard icon itself to open the application. [It is unnecessary to open the CD-ROM folders.] 129
STEP FOUR: Using your CD-ROM
> The HyperCard home card appears. Simply click (single click from now on) on the name of your CD-ROM to open the HyperCard stacks which control your CD-ROM.
home
HyperCard Home
C D -7( p ^ is
Beethoven's 9th Mozart's Dissonant Quartet
Stravinsky 's Rite of Spring The Orchestra
QUIT HYPERCARD Ü Go Back to Previous Stack
©1990 Apple Computer, Inc. All Rights Reserved [jl
From here on, follow the instructions which relate directly to your CD-ROM.
When you are finished using your CD-ROM, refer to STEP FIVE on the last page. 130
STEP FIVE: Quitting
' Click on the Quit or Exit buttons until you exit the application HyperCard.
Close folders by clicking the close box in the upper left hand comer until you have arrived back at the finder.
' Drag (select, hold down mouse and move) vour CD-ROM icon into the trash to eject it. [DO NOT use the eject button on the CD-ROM player. This is for emergencies only.]
Carefully take the CD-ROM out of the caddy.
Turn off the CD-ROM player.
Return the headphones to the shelf.
Unless you have other instructions from the Listening Lab attendant, leave the gomp.titçr.on.
Return the CD-ROM package and the M25 key to the Listening Lab. APPENDIX! INSTRUCTIONS FOR USING THE ORCHESTRA CD-ROM
131 132
Learning from The Orchestrai A Suggested Strategy
HELE From the PROGRAM MAP, click on the ?Help button and go to both About the Program Map and General Help to learn about the program. It is very important for this program that you understand what each button does before going into the program itself.
CAUTION Do not attempt to learn everything onThe Orchestra CD-ROM. With the audio, it represents 300 megabites of information. Try to allow at least an hour per listening session so that you can follow your interests in an unhurried manner. Do not spend vour time copying information directlv from the screen. Spend your time listening and learning from the presentation. Then, write your paper based on what you can easily recall. For example, if you have 10 hours to spend on the project, try this approach: Listen and leam from the CD-ROM for S hour- long sessions, write for 2 hours, redo the CD-ROM for 2 more sessions to check your facts, then revise and edit your paper for a final hour. Most of all, be sure to have fun listening to the aspects of this piece which interest you most.
HRST LISTENING SESSION Step 1: After learning how to use the buttons (see HELP above) from the PROGRAM MAP go to the first listening mode Exploring the Music to get a detailed, real-time commentary on Benjamin Britten's Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra. The entire piece is about 20 minutes long. Simply read the information as you listen for specific things without taking any side excursions.
Step 2: Go back to the PROGRAM MAP by clicking on the series of rectangles in the lower right. Go to the same listening mode Exploring the Music again. However on this trip, make many side trips to related information by clicking on any bold print words.
SECOND LISTENING SESSION Step 1: From the PROGRAM MAP go to listening mode 2, Theme and Variations. Simply read the information as you listen for specific things without taking any side excursions.
Step 2: Do to tlie same listening mode again. However on this trip, make hiany ' side trips to related information by clicking on any bold print words. 133
IHIRD LISTENIMCLSESSIQM Step 1: Begin with the Music Guide mode. In this mode you can click on any section of the composition and go directly to it. Test yourself and see if you can hear the different instruments.
Step 2: From the PROGRAM MAP click onThe Orchestra rectangle and try your hand at each of the popup menu areas. Be sure to spend some time with the Orchestration Lab.
FOURTH LISTENING SESSION: Step 1: From the PROGRAM MAP click onTAe Instruments rectangle and see if you have missed anything here.
Step 2: From the PROGRAM MAP click onEurope Before the Walkman rectangle and leam a thumbnail sketch of music history. Simply click on any of the pictures on the path.
HFTHLISTENIMGSESSION: Try your hand at theArcade. (Have you avoided it thus far?) Have fun!
SIXTHLISTENING SESSION: Review or listen to new material as you desire. APPENDIX K INSTRUCTIONS FOR USING BEETHOVEN: SYMPHONY NO. 9 CD-ROM
134 135
Learning from Beethoven: Symphony No. 9: A Suggested Strategy
HELE , ^ „ As you begin using these HyperCard stacks, it may be helpful to click on the ? button. W%en it is selected, a popup balloon help system is in place. Click it again to deselect. Click on buttons to navigate to different cards. In general, bold print words may also take you to that information. If you hold down the small ^ you will see a popup menu.
CAUHSM Do not attempt to leam everything onNinth Symphony CD-ROM. With the audio, it represents 660 megabites of information. Try to allow at least an hour per listening session so that you can follow your interests in an unhurried manner. Do not spend vour time copving information directlv from the screen. Spend your time listening and learning from the presentation. Then, write your paper based on what you can easily recall. For example, if you have 10 hours to spend on the project, try this approach: Listen and leam from the CD-ROM for 5 hour- long sessions, write for 2 hours, redo the CD-ROM for 2 more sessions to check your facts, then revise and edit your paper for a final hour. Most of all, be sure to have fun listening to the aspects of this piece which interest you most.
HRS.T USTENl[Ng.SESaQM From the INDEX, go first to A Close Reading. Then simply listen to the music of the first movement as you leam from the information which comes onto your screen. Do not take any sidetrips on this initial joumey through the symphony. Listen to at least one of the other movements as well. TTie fourth movement is known for including the Ode to Joy theme.
SECOND U STEMmC.SESSlQN From the INDEX, go to A Close Reading again. Choose your favorite movement and listen to it again. This time, however, click on the extra buttons which will take you to realated information. Also, use the glossary menu to find out more about any word which is new to you.
IHIRPXISTENIN.aS£SS.m From the INDEX, go to The Art of Listening. Now view and listen to the 103 cards, click on extra information buttons and making as many glossary sidetrips as you wish. ' ' ' 136
FOURTH USTENING SESSION From the INDEX, go to either Beethoven's World (124 cards) or go back to The Art of Listening if you feel that there is more you would like to learn there.
HETHXISIENIMa^ESS m Try theThe Beethoven Game (Have you avoided it thus far?). Have fun.
SIXIH.LIS1 EM1NG SESSION Review or listen to new material as you desire. APPENDIX L INSTRUCTIONS FOR USING STRAVINSKY: THE RITE OF SPRING CD-ROM
137 138
L earning fromThe Rite of Spring: A Suggested Strategy h e l e As you begin using these HypeiCard stacks, it may be helpful to click on the 7 button. When it is selected, a popup balloon help system is in place. Click it again to deselect. Click on buttons to navigate to different cards. In general, bold print words may also take you to that information. If you hold down the small Jk. you will see a popup menu.
CAUJLQN Do not attempt to learn everything onThe Rite of Spring CD-ROM. With the audio, it represents 660 megabites of information. Try to allow at least an hour per listening session so that you can follow your interestb. in an unhurried manner. Do not spend vour time copying infoimation_directlv.frQmJhc scteen. Spend your time listening and learning from the presentation. Then, write your paper based on what you can easily recall. For example, if you have 10 hours to spend on the project, try this approach: Listen and learn from the CD-ROM for 5 hour- long sessions, write for 2 hours, redo the CD-ROM for 2 more sessions to check your facts, then revise and edit your paper for a final hour. Most of all, be sure to have fun listening to the aspects of this piece which interest you most.
HRSXUSIEMIMQ SESSION Step 1: From the INDEX, go first to A Close Reading. Then simply listen to the music of the first part as you learn from the information which comes onto your screen. Listen to at least three of the movements from the first part. (e.g. click on The Sage to go to that movement.) Do not go to a detailed reading at this time.
Step 2: Do the same thing with part n . Be sure to listen to the Sacrificial Dance.
SECQND-LISTENIN.Q.SESSIQN From the INDEX, go to Rite Listening. Study up on the piece by going through the 157 cards of visual and audio information. This will help you in future listening sessions. Don't forget to listen to instruments of the orchestra.
THIRD LISTENING SESSION Reuse A Close Reading focusing on the two or three movements which' interest you most. This time, click on the extra navigation buttons (including the music notes in the upper left) to get a more detailed view of each passage. 139
FOURTH LISTENING SESSION From the INDEX, go to Stravinsky's World. Learn more about the composer here by going through the 134 cards of visual and audio information.
FIFTH LISTENING SESSION Try theRite Game (Have you avoided it thus far?). Have Am.
SIXTH LISTENING SESSION Review or listen to new material as you desire. APPENDIX M INSTRUCTIONS FOR USING MOZART: STRING QUARTET IN C MAJOR CD-ROM
140 141
Learning from Mozart: The Dissonant Quartet: A Suggested Strategy
HELE As you begin using these HypeiCard stacks, it may be helpful to click on the ? button. When it is selected, a popup balloon help system is in place. Click it again to deselect. Click on buttons to navigate to different cards. In general, bold print words may also take you to that information. If you hold down the small A . you will see a popup menu.
■CAUnOM Do not attempt to learn everything onThe Dissonant Quartet CD-ROM. With the audio, it represents 660 megabites of information. Try to allow at least an hour per listening session so that you can follow your interests in an unhurried manner. Do not spend your time copying information directly from the screen. Spend your time listening and learning from the presentation. Then, write your paper based on what you can easily recall. For example, if you have 10 hours to spend on the project, try this approach; Listen and learn from the CD-ROM for 5 hour- long sessions, write for 2 hours, redo the CD-ROM for 2 more sessions to check your facts, then revise and edit your paper for a final hour. Most of all, be sure to have fun listening to the aspects of this piece which interest you most.
FIRSXLISTENJUG-SESSÎOH From the INDEX, go first to A Close Reading. Then simply listen to the music of the quartet as you learn from the information which comes onto your screen. Listen to at least three of the four movements with the Play Through button selected.
SECOND LISTENING SESSION From the INDEX, go to A Close Reading again. Choose your favorite movement and listen to it again. This time, however, click the to select it. Now all of the glossary words are underlined. Click on each one that is new to you and you will get an audio or text explanation of it.
IHIRP..LISTENm.GJSESSIQN From the INDEX, go to The Instruments. Click the to underline glossary words again. Now view and listen to the 45 cards as well as any glossary sidetrips. If you have time left, go back to the INDEX and try Mozart’s World to get an historical viewpoint. ' ' ' 142
FQURTHXISTENIMG.SESSIQN From the INDEX, go to Quartet Listening. Click the to underline glossary words again. Now view and listen to the 64 cards as well as any glossary sidetrips.
F IF n i LISTENING SESSION Try theThe Mozart Game (Have you avoided it thus far?). Have fun.
Review or listen to new material as you desire. APPENDIX N SUBCOURSE TEST 1
143 144 GEN 200 Music Subcourse Name. Test 1 id #
Matching (Elements') ■■ choose the BEST match from Column B. You will not use all of Column B answers. A B. ___ beat A varying the steadiness of the beat ___ rubato B concerto and opera ___ chromatic C fast ___ tempo D scale using only half steps ___ overtones E distance between 2 pitches ___ dynamics F two or more melodic lines sounding simultaneously ___ forms G you feel it, pulse ___ phrase H rate of speed of the music ___ adagio I a single voice of music ___ meter J a melody with chordal accompaniment ___ homophonie K amplitude ___ genre L sonata and rondo ___ interval M the ending of a phrase ___ polyphonic N frequencies which make up a sound's unique tone color ___ cadence 0 major and minor scales ___ compound P grouping of the beats Q a section of the melody R slow S a meter in which the beat is divided into 3 subdivisions
As you listen, circle the best description for the musical element, one for each line below. Mozart, Symphony No. 40, mvt. 1 meter: duple triple quadruple mixed beat: heavy definite light, barely felt tempo: adagio moderato vivace allegro phrases: short long symetrical irregular 145 Mozart, Piano Concerto mvt. 2 meter: duple triple quadruple mixed beat: heavy definite light, barely felt tempo: adagio moderato vivace allegro
Column B answers.
A B ___ concave A the shape of the baroque bow ___ euphonium B early brass instruments used these ___ trombone C a guitar-hke string instrument of the 16th century ___ harpsichord D the only modem brass instrument without valves ___ clarinet E looks like a baby tuba ___ crooks F uses a single reed ___ double bass G on this keyboard instrument the performer has "key control" ___ gong H the lowest pitched string instrument ___ oboe I a keyboard instrument that plucks the strings ___ timpani J the shape of the modem bow ___ viola K pitched between violin and cello ___ lute L a tuned percussion instmment with a keyboard ___ piano M a dmm with definite pitch ___ piccolo N highest pitched double reed instrument ___ bassoon 0 half the length of the flute P the primary bass double reed Q indefinite pitch
Name the instrument or familv of the orchestra which vou hear in each example. 1. 6. ______2 . 7.
3. 8. 4. 9. 5. 10. APPENDIX O SUBCOURSE TEST 2
146 147 GEN 200 Music Subcourse April 26, 1993 Name______Test n ID # ______
Style Period Matching. Select the musical stvle period which best matches each statement. M = Medieval Ren = Renaissance B = Baroque VC = Viennese Classical Rom = Romantic TC = Twentieth Century
1. Liszt, Wagner, and Brahms were a few of the most famous composers.
J 2 . Victoria and Palestrina were two important composers.
_3. Monophonic chant gradually evolved into organum.
_4. The orchestra of about 40 members included pairs of wind instruments.
_5. The writing of symphonies and concertos flourished, partially because of the durability of sonata form.
_ 6 . The fugue was fully developed and often played by organists.
_ 7 . A ballet which portrayed the brutality of primitives incited a riot at its first performance.
_ 8 . Jazz was an influential American export.
_ 9 . Program music developed and a famous tone-poem is about a fantastic opium- induced dream.
_10. Josquin began using points of immitation in his sacred music.
_11. The piano replaced the ha^sichord and became the first keyboard instrument to offer graduated dynamics.
_12. Music often had a relentless, driving beat, sometimes with perpetual motion in the rhythm.
_13. All written music was church music, housed in monasteries.
_14. John Calvin and Martin Luther followed different ideas about appropriate church music.
_15. Introspection and virtuosity were blended in the piano miniature.
_16. Beethoven and Schubert are considered important composers in each of these periods. [2 answers]
_17. It began with a short period in Paris called Impressionism. 148 .18. Dynamics were often terraced, like on the harpsichord.
Fill in the blank: 1. According to our class notes the Twentieth Century Style Period began in ______and ended in ______. 2. According to our class notes the Romantic Period began in and ended in _ 3. According to our class notes the Viennese Classical Period began in ______and ended in ______. 4. means that the beauty of the melody is subservient to the meaning of the text 5. During the reformation, Luthem hymns were called ______. 6. The earliest type of chant was taken from the Biblical book o f ______. 7. During the Medieval Period roving musicians in France were called ______. 8. The greatest composer of fugues was ______. 9. In the Baroque period, ______and ______were genre that were dramatic and designed for the stage. The , on the other hand, was a genre in which compositions were designed for use in a church service. 10. organized the chants throughout Christendom and has a type of music named after him.
11. A Al A^ A^ is a charting of which musical form?______.
12. A genre which began m the Baroque period and has a small group of soloists as part of the entire larger group is called ______. In the Viennese Classical period one soloist was put in front of the orchestra. This is called a ______. 13. In The Erl King the piano represents the sounds of the ______i 14. The word which best describes the style of Twentieth Century music is. 15. Schubert wrote over 600 of these German art songs called ______149 Circle the correct period and fill in the blanks for each selection, using the choices below. Not all choices need to be used: PERIOD COMPOSER TITLE 1. VC R TC ______
2. VC R TC ______
3. VC R TC
4. VC R TC
5. VC R TC
6. VC R TC
7. VC R TC
COMPOSERS: Berlioz, Bernstein, Chopin, Debussy, Haydn, Mozart, Schubert, Stravinsky, iTl LES: Overture to Candide, The Erl King, Fantasie Impromptu, La Mer, March to the Scc^old from "Symphonie Fantastique", Piano Concerto No. 23 mvt 2, Symphony No. 88 mvt. 4, Symphony No. 40 mvt 1, Symphony of Psalms APPENDIX p CONCERT REPORT FORM
150 151
The Concert Program: Arranging a Musical Bouquet I. A flowery metaphor A. Selecting seeds B . Nurturing the plants C. Creating the bouquet 1. 2 . 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8 . 9. 10, 11. II. Your assignment: A. Before the concert: 1. Pick and arrange a musical bouquet using the worksheet on the reverse side 2. Write down your concert program and a rationale for your selections and arrangement as the first part of your paper. Label it MY PROGRAM. B. During the concert: 1. Listen intently and write down my choices using the same worksheet 2. Jot down any notes about the program C. After the concert: 1. Compare my program with yours and write down what you think the reasons are for my choices as the second part of your paper. Label it ACTUAL PROGRAM. 2. Write briefly about your perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of the actual program. Label it CONCLUSIONS. Your paper should be 2 to 3 pages long. Attach this sheet. Due April 30! APPENDIX Q PRETEST/POSTTEST MUSICAL EXAMPLE DATABASE
152 Pretest/Posttest Aural Examples
S5t A nsw er C om ooser Title Media _ Track Seoment Taoe 31 minor g minor two octave live 0 32 pentatonic middle octave live 10 33 Romantic requiem Brahms Gennan Requiem, mvt 4 CD 54 4 0:00 - 0:35 16 34 symphony orchestra Prokovief Lieutenant Kiji, troika my CD 10 0:00 - 0:30 30 35 triple Bizet L'Ariesienne Suite II, mvt 3 CD 55 16 0:00 - 0:35 46 36 cello Britten Young Person's Guide my CD 28 0:05 - 0:35 61 37 Classical Mozart Symphony 41, mvt 3 CD 4 7 0:00 - 0:30 76 38 Renaissance madrigal Bennet Thyrsis, Why Sleepest Thoi my tec side 2 0:00 - 0:30 91 39 5 Pachelbel Fuge CD 66 4 0:00 - 0:40 110 40 polyphonic Bach Prelude and Fugue (Wedge) CD 86 4 7:00 to 7:45 128 41 strings Bizet Carmen, Danse Boheme CD 55 10 0:00 - 0:35 147 42 coloratura Handel Let the Bright Seraphim CD 102 11 4:00 - 4:30 162 43 duple Baglay National Emblem March CD 175 5 0:00 - 0:30 179 44 none of the above Berio Sequenza V for Trombone CD 106 11 0:37 - 1:04 190 45 vivace Rutter Gloria, mvt 1 CD 93 1 0:50 to 1:35 201 46 flute melody, French horn and strings Brahms Symphony No. 4. mvt 4 CD 76 4 4:00 - 4:35 218 47 French horns Wagner Flying Dutchman Overture CD 170 1 5:03 - 5:25 231 48 lyrical Smetana The Moldau CD 56 1 1:02 - 1:35 241 49 trumpet and English horn Copland Quiet City CD 147 17 1:32 - 2:05 253 50 Handel Handel Suite in G major, Gigue 1 CD 167 16 0:00 - 0:30 265 APPENDIX R PRETEST/POSTTEST
154 155
GEN 200 Music Subcourse Name April 28, 1993 Final Test - General Evaluation of Musical Knowledge ID# __
This test is designed to evaluate your general knowledge of music as a result of your GEN 200 music subcourse. Please answer the following questions to the best of your ability.
Thank you. Professor Duitman
^M ultiple Choice - choose the BEST answer and enter it on the answer card using a #2_ mn&iL 1. Plainsong is: a) four-part hymn singing in the Catholic church b) another name for Gregorian chant c) Luûieran church music without organ accompaniment d) none of the above
2. What is melody? a) any pitches played on a musical instrument b) a rhythmic succession of tones c) organized pitch and timbre d) none of the above
3. In which of the following groups is every term directly related to rhvthm? a) pulse, allegro, timbre b) notation, melody, beat c) meter, pulse, tempo d) none of the above
4. Which is a false statement about the evolution of the orchestra? a) the earliest orchestras relied on a keyboard instrument b) the conductor was used more in the earliest orchestras than today c) piccolos and trombones were added after flutes and trumpets d) in the last 200 years it has grown substantially in the total number of players and in the number of different instruments used
5. An interval is: a) the distance between two pitches b) the simultaneous sounding of two or more pitches c) usually major d) all of the above
6. The pitch A is: a) used for tuning an orchestra b) 440 cycles per second in the octave above middle C c) both a and b d) neither a nor b. 156 c) any non-major scale d) a scale made up of only half-steps
8. What is music? a) any sound played on a musical instrument b) any sound which can be legitimately notated c) organized sounds d) none of the above
9. Which of the following groups of instruments are closely related in timbre? a) trumpet, clarinet, trombone b) violin, haip, piano c) oboe, bassoon, French horn d) timpani, saxophone, flute
10. Which of the following should not be considered an element of music? a) timbre b) rhythm c) texture d) scales
11. Sonata form was an important innovation by Haydn because: a) it allowed composers to write compositions which had more unity and variety b) it allowed composers to write longer movements c) it allowed composers to use 2 or more themes of contrasting nature in one movement d) all of the above
12. Which of the following is not true about brass instruments? a) they all have vdves b) they all produce a tone when someone buzzes into the mouthpiece c) they are all made of metal d) the main brass instruments used in today's symphony orchesna are the trumpet French hom, trombone, and tuba
13. Which is a false statement about percussion instruments: a) their sound is made by striking together two objects or some other friction b) they only have an indefinite pitch c) the bass drum, xylophone, and maracas are percussion instruments d) a good sense of rhythm is needed to play them well.
14. In which group are both terms related to texture? a) form, melody b) strings, harmony c) polyphony, monophonic d) none of the above
15. Which is not a characteristic of music of the Middle Ages? a) the most artistic music was music of the church b) composers of secular compositions rarely used instruments c) the rhythm of church music was largely determined by the text d) much music consisted of only a single line of music 157 16. Which is not a general characteristic of Baroque music? a) a rhythmic exuberance b) expert use of polyphony c) many symphonies were constructed using sonata-allegro form d) frequent use of stringed instruments and pipe organ
17. What was a musical result of the Protestant Reformation? a) a new emphasis on musical simplicity in the Catholic church b) a new emphasis on congregational singing c) extensive use of chorales by Lutheran composers d) all of the above
18. Which of the following is least appropriate for use in a church service? a) oratorio b) cantata c) chorale prelude d) mass
19. Which of the following groups of composers is not made up of contemporaries? a) Tchaikovsky, Palestrina, Chopin b) Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven c) Stravinsky, Copland, Bernstein d) Bach, Vivaldi, Handel
20. Which is a false statement about the difference between the music of Bach and that of Handel? a) Handel wrote more cantatas than Bach b) Handel's music is less complex c) Bach wrote more music for use in church d) Handel's music has more Italian influence
21. Which of the following musical forms generally does not include vocal music? a) oratorio b) overture c) passion d) motet
22. Impressionism followed which style period? a) Romantic b) Baroque c) Classical d) Renaissance
23. Which group of composers is listed in the correct chronological order? a) Bach, Mozart, Wagner, Stravinsky b) Mozart, Bach, Stravinsky, Wagner c) Bach, Wagner, Mozart, Stravinsky d) Wagner, Bach, Mozart, Stravinsky
24. Which composer lived during the Romantic period? a) Vivaldi b) Brahms 158 c) Copland d) none of the above
25. What genre is Schubert usually associated with? a) operas b)fugues c) art songs d) all of the above
26. Which of the following is a product of twentieth century composers? a) minimalism b) atonality c) serialism d) all of the above
27. Which is a true statement about the difference between Mozart and Beethoven? a) Beethoven's music uses classical forms while Mozart's does not. b) Mozart's music is more emotional than Beethoven's. c) Mozart had fewer hardships in his life. d) Mozart wrote more symphonies than Beethoven.
28. Which is a true statement about the romantic period of music? a) Composers often abandoned old forms. b) There was both a new intimacy and a new sense of bombast in much music. c) Composers emphasized timbre more than in previous periods. d) all of the above.
29. Which instrument was dropped from the orchestra during the classical period? a) timpani b) guitar c) harpsichord d) none of the above
30. What genre is Chopin usually associated with? a) symphonies b) piano miniatures c) concertos d) all of the above n . Aural Examples Multiple Choice - choose the best answer and enter it on the answer card. 31. What is the quality of this chord? a) consonant b) dissonant c) major d) minor
32. WOiat type of scale is this? a) chromatic b) pentatonic c) major d) minor 159 33. This choral work is from which period?
a) Medieval b) Baroque c) Romantic d) Twentieth Century
34. This example is played by a
a) concert band b) symphony orchestra c) string quartet d.) woodwind quintet.
35. The meter of this music is?
a) duple b) triple c) quadruple d) none of the above
36. Which section of the orchestra plays the melody in this selection?
a) viola b) violin c) cello d) clarinet
37. This music was composed in which historical period?
a) Baroque b) Classical c) Romantic d) none of the above
38. This is an example of a:
a) Renaissance madrigal b) Baroque opera c) Romantic art song d) none of the above
39. This brass fugue is played by how many players?
a)3 b)4 c)5 d)8
40. The texture of this music is?
a) homophonie 160 b) polyphonie c) counterpoint d) dissonant
41. Which family of the orchestra is accompanying the solo instruments?
a) woodwinds b) brass c) strings d) percussion
42. This soloist's voice classification is:
a) alto b) mezzo soprano c) castxatti tenor d) coloratura
43. The meter of this music is?
a) duple b) triple c) quadruple d) none of the above
44. This music was composed in which historical period?
a) Baroque b) Classical c) Romantic d) none of the above
45. The tempo of this music is?
a) andante b) largo c) vivace d) ritardando
46. What is heard in this selection?
a) flute melody, French hom and strings harmony b) French hom and flute melody, strings harmony c) flute melody, trombone and French hom harmony d) strings melody, flute and French hom countermelody
47. Which brass instmments are featured?
a) tmmpets b) trombones c) French homs d)tubas 161
48. This melody could be characterized as being:
a) marcato b) staccato c) lyrical d) adagio
49. Which two instruments play the melody in this selection?
a) trumpet and clarinet b) trumpet and French horn c) oboe and French horn d) trumpet and English horn
50. This music was probably composed by:
a) Handel b) Beethoven c) Brahms d) Debussy APPENDIX S MUSICAL ATTITUDE SURVEY FORM
162 163 Name id#
Please answer the following carefully. The data collected from this survey will not be used in the calculation of your GEN 200 grade. in . Attitude Survey - Respond bv circling a single number from the 1 - 5 scale:
leas true most true
1. As a result of this course I will be more inclined to 2 3 4 5 listen to recordings of music I heard in class.
2. As a result of this course, I understand the elements 2 3 4 5 of music better than I did before.
3. As a result of this course, I understand the history of 2 3 4 5 music better than I did before.
4. The listening project in this course was enjoyable. 2 3 4 5
5. The other assignments in this course were enjoyable. 2 3 4 5
6. I did better on today's test than on the January 18 pretest 2 3 4 5 because of what I learned in the music subcourse.
7. All students at Dordt should learn what I learned in this course.
Grade I expect to get in the music subcourse: B APPENDIX T VALIDATION LETTERS FROM EXPERTS
164 165
Dordt COil@Q0 498 Fourth Avenue, NE ^ Sioux Center, Iowa 51250-1697 Telephone 712 722-3771 Department of Music 3iiC
January 11,1993.
Henry Duitman Dordt College Sioux Center, Iowa 51250 Dear Henry: Thank you for sharing with me your pre-test, syllabus, and course pack for the Music segrnent of Gen 200: Introduction to the Arts. The goals and substance of the course as outlined in the syllabus are consistent not only with die College's stated aims for the course but also with the goals of the Music Department and of the team actually teaching this course. As someone who has taught the course several dmes in the past, I find die syllabus and course pack extremely clear and focused and the music selections wisely chosen. The Music Learning Evaluation is most appropriate and well-tailored to the course goals and content 1 would judge it to be a valid and effective means of evaluating the musical knowledge of the students as they enter the course and of that gained by students through taking the course. Best wishes to you as you teach the course, which, judged by the materials you shared with me, promises to b: an outstanding educational experience in music far the students of Dordt College.
Ay.
' a A m / ' A.DeMol(ph.D. Professor of Music Chair, Music Department 166
Peter C. Van Ooyen 8655 llth Ave. Bumahy, British Columbia V3N 2P9
January 6,1993
Henry Duitman Dordt College Sioux Center, Iowa
Dear Henry,
I have read your syllabus and evaluation instrument for General Arts 200, Music Subcourse. I find that the syllabus content is consistent with past practice and is valid for the students. In addition, having taught the subcourse for six sessions I find that your test succinctly reflects the overall content of the course as outlined in the objectives established. I consider it a valid instrument to measure the musical knowledge expected of the students.
Sincerely,
Peter C. Van Ooyen APPENDIX U COURSE GRADING DATA AND RESEARCH DATA
167 168
GEN 200 - MUSIC FINAL GRADES
HM Section Test 1 QWZ Test II Prelect SAE PPImerove Neeatlves GRADE V A 90 100 92 91 100 90 92 A 88 67 70 99 95 100 89 C 58 100 37 89 90 80 1 68 B 85 93 72 95 100 90 89 V C 68 100 63 94 100 95 1 79 A 95 74 68 95 95 95 89 B 87 96 65 97 100 100 89 B 83 85 80 94 100 85 89 C 98 100 95 100 100 100 99 B 92 100 93 100 100 95 97 B 93 100 67 94 100 100 90 V B 75 100 73 95 100 100 88 0 87 70 80 92 95 100 93 V B 83 100 87 100 100 100 94 B 87 96 68 96 100 90 89 A 92 74 57 96 100 85 86 A 92 100 65 93 100 95 88 V B 88 93 80 92 100 75 89 V B 68 93 67 90 100 100 83 B 72 4 0 C 82 100 85 100 95 100 93 V B 78 100 90 90 100 95 89 C 92 100 88 100 100 100 96 B 93 100 72 100 100 90 93 V 0 88 100 82 100 100 100 94 A 88 100 82 96 100 95 92 V 0 87 85 92 98 100 100 94 V A 95 100 83 100 100 100 1 91 B 90 78 65 85 100 85 92 A 91 100 95 99 100 95 97 A 86 100 87 94 100 100 92 A 85 100 73 91 100 70 87 A 73 96 72 100 100 100 89 V B 93 100 78 95 100 100 92 0 93 100 78 95 100 90 92 V A 98 100 90 97 95 100 96 < A 89 78 97 100 100 85 95 V 0 97 100 88 97 100 100 96 V 0 88 93 81 100 100 100 93 A 94 100 87 100 100 100 96 V 0 77 48 67 98 90 85 1 79 V 0 78 52 33 85 4 9 A 89 100 77 100 100 95 93 B 97 100 92 100 100 100 1 93 A 91 100 72 100 100 85 92 0 97 100 78 100 100 100 95 C 88 74 93 100 100 100 95 169
GEN 200 - MUSIC FINAL GRADES
HM ..SsfillQn. Test 1 Quiz Test II Prelect SAG PPImorove Neaatlves GRADE B 95 100 88 96 100 85 94 V c 77 48 69 100 90 2 66 0 93 100 97 100 100 95 98 V A 68 56 68 85 100 95 79 V B 82 59 68 83 90 70 2 69 V A 89 89 55 86 100 78 A 70 59 55 97 95 90 2 71 V A 80 52 72 94 100 95 85 B 87 96 72 96 100 75 89 C 11 0 A 74 100 88 97 100 95 91 0 77 93 70 95 100 85 86 0 87 7 0 A 86 70 82 95 100 90 90 A 80 96 73 98 100 100 1 85 V B 92 89 75 88 100 95 88 A 85 100 78 90 100 85 88 A 99 89 95 100 100 100 98 0 93 100 83 100 100 100 95 V 0 85 100 45 91 95 90 2 71 B 90 100 97 97 100 100 96 V B 95 100 98 100 100 100 99 B 95 100 82 96 100 95 94 V 0 83 100 65 96 95 83 B 92 100 70 100 100 100 92 V B 97 100 95 100 100 90 98 V B 87 100 95 97 100 95 95 B 88 100 70 100 90 80 90 ll A 71 100 70 90 95 85 83 V A 78 37 48 95 100 85 79 0 80 93 83 95 100 100 90 B 87 96 62 99 100 100 89 A 79 100 82 100 95 80 91 V A 94 100 80 100 100 95 95 V 0 98 100 90 100 100 100 98 A 69 81 63 82 100 75 77 0 88 100 88 100 100 100 95 B 65 100 60 96 100 100 1 78 V A 95 96 55 97 100 90 88 C 90 100 88 100 100 95 0 82 48 50 100 1 29 V A 81 81 82 94 100 80 88 V C 87 74 60 95 100 100 86 A 82 89 60 98 100 95 87 MU Sael Final Aw PRETEST POSTTEST DIEE PnW Q PraAQ PoalWQ PodAQ LPHoura LPLairn LPEnlev A3 1 A3 2 A3 3 A3 4 AS S A3 8 A3 7 A3 a VA 02.421 46 52 6 47 45 57 45 6 5 5 3 4 4 5 3 4 5 5 A 88.474 40 64 24 37 45 60 70 • 3.2 4 3 4 4 3 2 3 5 4 3 c 72.211 34 32 -2 40 25 33 30 2.1 1 4 4 1 1 1 1 3 B 88.474 54 62 8 57 50 67 55 4.2 3 2 4 3 3 4 3 4 V c 82.047 34 44 10 37 30 57 25 3.5 5 3 3 3 3 2 2 4 3 3 A 88.211 50 60 10 40 65 60 60 6 4 2 4 5 2 3 4 4 3 a 88.421 30 52 22 23 40 53 50 2.2 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 a 88.895 46 SO 4 53 35 63 30 2.6 5 5 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 4 c 98.526 50 74 24 50 50 83 60 3.1 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 a 96.842 64 76 12 53 80 70 85 3.2 3 5 5 2 3 3 1 2 2 5 a 89.053 36 56 20 33 40 60 50 1.6 4 5 2 5 4 3 4 4 4 5 V a 86.947 26 SO 24 30 20 60 35 3.8 5 4 5 2 2 3 2 3 3 5 c 87.579 36 62 26 30 45 63 60 2.4 4 3 2 5 5 2 2 5 4 4 V a 93.684 32 56 24 33 30 70 35 6.3 5 5 5 5 4 5 4 5 5 5 a 88.632 56 64 8 50 65 57 75 3 4 5 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 A 86.211 54 52 2 47 65 43 65 3.25 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 A 88.000 48 60 12 47 50 60 60 3.2 4 4 2 3 3 4 3 3 1 4 V a 89.526 60 54 6 63 55 60 45 5.1 4 4 2 4 4 3 3 5 4 4 V a 81.737 38 58 20 40 35 60 55 4 3 3 5 3 2 2 5 2 4 c 92.526 48 76 28 50 45 83 65 3.8 5 5 4 5 5 5 4 3 4 5 V a 89.053 60 72 12 63 55 73 70 2.8 4 4 5 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 c 95.789 42 78 36 37 SO 90 60 3.25 4 4 3 5 4 4 3 5 4 5 a 92.632 42 48 6 50 30 53 40 3 4 5 3 4 4 5 3 4 3 5 V c 93.684 60 76 16 57 65 77 75 5.75 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 A 92.000 44 58 14 40 50 63 50 1.1 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 5 V c 93.947 46 62 16 SO 40 77 40 5.4 5 5 4 4 5 5 4 4 4 5 VA 95.368 58 78 20 57 60 83 70 4.75 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 a 83.053 44 46 2 50 35 57 30 3 4 4 3 2 1 2 4 A 96.632 62 74 12 SO 80 73 75 5.5 5 S 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 A 91.789 46 64 18 43 50 77 45 4 4 4 5 4 3 3 5 4 5 A 87.368 48 36 -12 50 45 37 35 4 4 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 4 A 88.211 54 72 18 60 45 77 65 3.4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 V a 91.789 42 64 22 30 60 57 75 5 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 c 91.769 SO 58 8 50 50 67 45 3.75 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 3 4 4 VA 95.684 48 74 26 43 55 73 75 5 S 5 4 4 4 4 3 4 5 5 V A 95.695 80 82 2 77 85 83 80 4.75 5 5 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 5 V c 95.579 34 62 28 33 35 70 50 9.25 5 5 4 5 3 4 2 5 5 5 V c 03.105 48 64 16 40 60 77 45 6 4 4 3 5 4 4 3 5 3 5 A 96.000 56 76 20 63 45 73 80 2.5 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 •J c 63579 46 48 2 53 35 57 35 4.75 5 4 2 4 5 4 3 4 4 4 A 92.842 48 60 12 47 50 70 45 2.2 4 4 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 3 3 4 a 97.684 44 62 18 50 35 70 50 6 3 3 3 3 5 o UU Hmr.t Pinal A u PRETEST POSTTEST DEE E nW Q Pr*AQ PostWQ PoatAQ LPHoura LPLearn LPEnlov A3 1 AS 2 A3.3 AS 4 AS 5 AS 8 AS 7 A3 9 A 82.211 52 56 4 53 50 53 60 2 3 2 4 3 3 3 3 2 4 c 94.737 58 82 24 53 65 87 75 3.9 4 5 4 2 3 3 3 4 1 4 c 94.632 56 76 20 63 45 83 65 2.8 5 4 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 B 94.737 42 42 0 40 45 53 25 4.2 4 5 4 5 4 3 3 4 3 5 V c 75.368 52 58 6 57 45 63 50 6 5 4 3 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 c 97.895 48 62 14 40 60 57 70 2.1 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 V A 77.895 32 46 14 30 35 57 30 2.5 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 VB 79.105 62 48 -14 67 55 S3 40 4 3 3 3 1 1 4 1 2 A 80.263 46 52 6 33 65 47 60 2.5 4 5 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 4 V A 84.842 44 54 10 33 60 50 60 4.5 5 3 3 3 4 1 4 3 4 4 B 89.474 46 40 •6 43 SO 43 35 2.4 4 3 5 4 2 3 5 3 5 A 90.737 44 56 12 37 55 67 40 3 5 5 4 5 5 4 4 5 4 5 C 86.368 50 50 0 57 40 57 40 1.5 5 5 1 4 4 4 2 5 1 4 A 89.579 SO 58 8 57 40 67 45 2.75 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 A 89.053 34 50 16 33 35 SO 50 2 4 4 3 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 VB 87.421 54 64 10 57 SO 63 65 4 5 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 A 88.000 38 42 4 30 50 47 35 1 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 A 98.158 48 68 20 43 55 60 80 6.1 4 5 C 94.947 48 66 18 40 60 70 60 2.3 4 4 3 3 3 2 3 5 4 5 V C 80.947 36 42 6 40 30 37 50 7.5 4 4 3 4 5 1 1 3 1 4 B 96.000 44 66 22 33 60 60 75 2.1 5 4 4 5 4 3 3 4 4 5 V B 98.526 32 66 34 37 25 77 50 4.2 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 5 B 93.474 62 72 10 57 70 63 85 2.8 a 5 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 5 B 92.000 52 68 16 53 50 70 65 2.5 4 5 5 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 B 98.316 62 76 14 67 55 87 60 6.2 4 3 3 4 2 4 4 5 V B 94.947 44 56 12 40 SO 50 65 5.2 5 5 3 4 4 4 2 4 3 5 B 90.105 50 48 -2 50 SO 60 30 3 4 5 4 4 4 2 3 3 5 V A 82.842 50 54 4 50 50 60 45 5 4 4 2 4 4 2 2 3 4 4 VA 79.000 44 46 2 SO 35 SO 40 5 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 3 3 4 C 89.737 40 60 20 33 50 70 45 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 B 88.632 38 54 16 37 40 53 55 4.1 4 5 5 4 4 5 4 3 4 4 A 91.263 44 40 -4 43 45 37 45 6.25 3 4 5 3 3 4 3 3 4 5 V A 94.526 64 78 14 60 70 73 85 5.5 S 5 S 4 5 5 3 3 5 5 V C 97.474 64 80 16 47 90 77 85 7.8 5 5 4 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 A 77.105 46 36 -10 40 55 50 15 3.5 4 3 4 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 C 94.947 36 58 22 37 35 60 55 3.75 4 4 3 5 5 3 3 4 3 4 B 82.526 38 56 18 37 40 47 70 2.5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 V A 88.000 50 58 8 47 55 53 65 6 5 4 3 3 2 4 3 3 2 4 V A 88.684 56 52 -4 43 75 37 75 5.5 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 V C 85.368 50 76 26 37 70 70 85 6.75 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 A 86.368 36 SO 14 37 35 57 40 1.8 5 5 3 4 4 3 2 3 0