This dissertation has been G2—749 microfilmed exactly as received

BURKHALTER, N. Laurence, 1920- ESTABLISHING CRITERIA FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE APPLIED MAJOR AREA OF INSTRUCTION FOR THE BACHELOR'S DEGREE IN MUSIC EDU­ CATION.

The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1961 Education, teacher training

University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan ESTABLISHING- CRITERIA FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE APPLIED

MAJOR AREA OF INSTRUCTION FOR THE BACHELOR'S

DEGREE IN MUSIC EDUCATION

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By

N. Laurence Burkhalter, L.T.C.L*, B.S.M., M.M,

The Ohio S ta te U n iv e rs ity

1961

Approved ty

A dviser Department of Education ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The writer wishes to thank Dr* William B. McBride for his counsel and encouragement during the writing of this dissertation* The writer is also indebted to Dr. Earl Anderson and Dr* Norman Phelps for their constructive assistance* Special thanks are due to Mrs* Iydla Kinzer,

Dr* William Poland, and Dr. D. Eansoo Whitney for their generous assistance with the statistical aspects of this study*

i l TABLE o r CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......

LIST OP TABLES......

C hapter I INTRODUCTION......

Statement of the Problem and Purpoee Need for the Study Procedure for Present Study Summary

I I RITISV or PUBLISHED STANDARDS AND OTHER RELATED LITERATURE

Curricular Standards Recommended by Professional Organizations State Certification Related Literature Summary

I I I PROCEDURE IN COLLECTING DATA......

The Q u estio n n aire Part I: Performing Competency Part II: Studio Teacher Responsibility Part III: Implementation Fart IT: Instructional Emphasis Information Pertaining to the Respondent Procedure in Building and Hailing Questionnaire Discussion of Population Selected for Study Limitations of the Study

IT RESULTS OF THE SURVEY: DEGREE OF IMPORTANCE OF THE CRITERIA

Proficiency Required for College Entrance Proficiency Required for Graduation Additional Performance Skills Insights Concerning Performance Pedagogical Insights Related to the Major Performance Area Summary It

Table of Contents (continued)

C hapter Page T THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STUDIO TRACKER. 79 Additional Performance Skills Insights Concerning Performance Pedagogical Ineights Related to the Major Performance Area Summary

VI IMPLEMENTATION 07 THE APPLIED MUSIC PROGRAM THROUGH CURRICULAR REtjJIREMENTS, INSTRUCTION, AND EXAMINATION . . . I l l

Preparation for College Entrance Instruction and Examination Public Performance and Recital Attendance Instruetional Emphasis Summary

VII THE INTER-RELATIONS OF CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DATA...... 1^0

Part I: Importance of C riteria and Degree of Responsibility of the Studio Teacher Additional Performance Skills Insights Concerning Performance Pedagogical Insights Related to the Major Performance Area Part II: Patterns of Agreement among Respondents of Various Job Categories Directors of Schools of Music College Teachers of Applied Music College Teachers of Music Education College Teachers of Music Education and Applied Mueic Supervisors of Music Instruction in Public Schools Part III: C riteria Ranked According to Mean Scores Summary

V III SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 170

Summary Conclusions and Recommendations

BIBLIOGRAPHY 192

APPENDIX 195 AUTOBIOGRAPHY 227 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page 1. Source of Tentative Criteria for Questionnaire ...... 34-

2. Questionnaires Mailed and Returned ...... 45

3. Dual Classification of Respondents ...... 31

4. Mean Ratings of Admission Standards by Job Classification. • 32

3* Mean Ratings of Graduation Standards by Job Classification . 33

6 * Comparison of Mean Scores on the Importance of Additional Performance Skills by Job Classification and by Performance Medium C lassification ...... 33

7 . D iffe re n c e s in Means on Item 2 Under A d d itio n a l Perform ance S k i l l s ...... 61

5. Differences in Keans on Item 4 Under Additional Performance S k i l l s ...... 62

9 . Differences in Means on Item S Under Additional Performance S k i l l s ...... 62

10. Comparison of Mean Scores on the Importance of Insights Concerning Performance by Job Classification and by Perform ance Medium C l a s s i f i c a t i o n ...... 66

11. Differences in Means of Job Classifications on Item 1 Under Insights Concerning Performance ...... 68

12. Differences in Means of Job Classifications on Item 6 Under Insights Concerning Performance ...... 69

1 3 . Differences in Means of Instrument Classifications on Item 6 Under Insights Concerning Performance ...... 69

14. Comparison of Mean Scores on the Importance of Pedagogical Insights Related to the Major Performance Area by Job Classification and by Performance Medium Classification. • 72

1 3 . Differences in Means of Instrument Classifications on Item 1 Older Pedagogical Insights ...... 7^

▼ v i

List of Tables (continued)

Table Page l6. Comparison of Mean Scores by Job and by Performance Medium Classification Indicating the Degree of Studio Teacher Besponsibility in Providing Additional Performance Skills ...... SO

17> Paired Differences in Means of Job Classifications on Item 1 Under Additional Performance S k ills ...... S3

IS. Faired Differences of Means Under Instrument Classification Groups on Item 2 Under Additional Performance Skills . . • S 3

19* Paired Differences of Mieans Under Job Classification Groups on Item 3 Under A dditional Performance S k ills * * • 84

20. Paired Differences of Means Under Job Classification Grouje on Item 7 Under Additional Performance Skills . . . S3

21. Faired Differences in Means Under Instrument Classification Groups on Item 7 Under Additional Performance Skills . . . S3

22. Paired Differences in Mean Scores Under Job Classification Groups on Item 8 Under Additional Performance Skills . . . 86

2 3 . Faired Differences in Means Under Instrument Classification Groups on Item 8 Under Additional Performance Skills . . . 87

24. Comparison of Mean Scores by Job and by Performance Medium Classification of the Bespondent Indicating the Degree of Studio Teacher Besponsibility in Providing Insights Concerning Performance...... 39

23* P a ire d D iffere n ce s in Means Under Job C la s s ific a tio n s on Item 2 Under Insights Concerning Performance ...... 91

2 6 . Paired Differences in Means Under Job Classifications on Item 4 Under Insights Concerning Performance ...... 92

2 7 . Paired Differences in Means Under Instrument Classification For Item 4 Under Insights Concerning Performance ..... 93

28. Paired Differences in Means For Job Classifications on Item 3 Under Insights Concerning Performance ...... 94

29* Paired Differences in Means Under Job Classifications for Item 6 Under Insights Concerning Performance ...... 93

3 0 . Paired Differences in Means Under Instrument Classification fo r Item 3 Under Insights Concerning Performance ..... 93 v i i List of Tables (continued.) Table Page 31* Paired Differences in MeanB Under Job Classifications for Item 7 Under Insights Concerning Performance ...... $6

32. Comparison of Ifean Scores by Job and by Performance Medium Indicating the Degree of Resptasibllity of the Studio Teacher in Providing Pedagogical Insights Belated to the Major Performance Area ...... 99

33* Paired Differences in Means of Job Classification Croups on Item 1 Under Pedagogical Insights ...... 101

3h. Paired Differences in Means of Job Classification Croups on Item 3 Under Pedfgogical Insights ...... 102

33* Paired Differences in Means of Instrument Classification Croups on Item h Under Pedagogical Insights ...... IO3

3 6 * Paired Differences in Means of Job Classification Croups on Item 3 Under Pedagogical In sig h ts ...... 10h

37* Faired Differences in Means of Instrument Classification CroupB on Item 3 Under Pedagogical Insights ...... IO5

38. Paired Differences in Means of Job Classification Croups Croups on Item 7 Under Pedagogical Insights ...... IO5

39* Paired Differences in Means of Job Classification Croups Croups on Item S Under Pedagogical Insights ...... 106 hO. Responses classified by Job on How Many Yecrs of Practical fam iliarity with the Major Performing Medium Should Be Prerequisite to Entrance to the Bachelor of Music Education Program ...... 112 hi. Responses Classified by Instrument on How Many Years of Practical Fam iliarity with the Major Performing Medium Should Be Prerequisite to Entrance to the Bachelor of Music Education Program ...... 113 h2. Responses Classified by Job on the Importance of Qxalifying Examinations to Establish Competence to Pursue Applied Study at the College L evel ...... l l h

1+3 . Responses Classified by Instrument on the Importance of Qualifying Examinations ...... 115 hh. Opinions of Respondents Classified by Job on the Amount of Credit Which Should be Given for One Hour of Studio Instruction plus Six Hours of Practice per Week ...... I l 6 v i i i

List of Tables (continued)

T able Page 45 • Opinions on the Amount of Credit with Respondents Classified by Instrument ...... 117

46. Comparison of Mean Scores on the Importance of Various Practices in Instruction and Examination, by Job C la s s if ic a tio n and by Perform ance Medium C la s s if ic a tio n . • 119

4 7 . Faired Differences in Msans of Job Classifications on Item 2 Under Instruction and Examination ...... 120

4S. Faired Differences in Means of Job Classifications on Item 4 Under Instruction and Examination ...... 121

4-9. Faired Differences in Means of Job Classifications on Item 5 Under Instruction and Examination ...... 121

50. Comparison of Mean Scores on the Importance of Recital Performance and Attendance by Job Classification and by Performance Medium C lassification ...... 125

51. Faired Differences in MeanB of Job Classifications on Item 1 Under Public Performance and Recital Attendance • • 126

52. Paired Differences in Means of Job Classifications on Item 2 Under Public Performance and Recital Attendance . . 127

53• Paired Differences in Means of Job Classifications on Item 3 Under Public Performance and Recital Attendance . . 127

54. Sums of Ranks Given by Respondents Classified by Job and by Performance Medium to Various Aspects of Applied Instruction, and TeBt Statistics for Testing Significance ...... 131

55* The Rank of Each Aspect of Additional Applied Study Based on the Sums of the Ranks Assigned by Each Classification of Respondent ...... 133

5 6 . Respondents 1 Evaluations of Admission Standards ...... 209

57* Respondents' Evaluations of Graduation Standards ...... 210 C h a p te r I

INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem and Purpose

The most widely quoted statement defining the appropriate skill in the major performance area for music educators is one which was adopted In 1952 by the Music Educators National Conference, accepted by both the National Association of Schools of Music and the Music

Teachers National Association and approved by the Committee on Studies and Standards of the American Association of Colleges of Teacher

E ducation*

Each music education student should have one * performance area in which he excels* It is i nn name nils il that the study of the major per­ formance area be continued until the student is able to demonstrate satisfactory perform­ ance ability for use in school and community *1

Whereas this statement stands little chance of being disputed, it is hardly adequate to give direction to the largest single area of in- X structiom in the training of music teachers for the public schools*

It is frequently argued, and with warranted Justification, that each college shall be responsible for its own standards of excellence in the area of performance ability* It is nevertheless the purpose of this study to attempt to establish and partially to validate criteria

1* Music Educators National Conference, Commission of Accreditation in Music Education; 1952, p. h.

1 2 with which to evaluate the major applied area of instruction for the bachelor*s degree in music education. Such criteria can best be

Identified by approaching the problem through a fourfold inquiry.

1. What are the conpetencies associated with the major perform­ ing area which are needed by graduates of a music education program?

The term competencies can be expanded to include the following subdivisions:

a. performance skill in a major area

b. insights concerning performance

c. attitudes toward performance

d. pedagogical insights related to the major performing

medium.

2. To what extent shall the studio teacher of the major applied area be responsible for providing these skills* insights* and attitudes?

3* What curricular requirements can moat effectively implement the acquisition of these conpetencies?

h. What are the relative values of the four subdivisions of skills* insights and attitudes within the major applied teaching program ?

There are further questions Implied in these four which have a direct bearing on the principal purpose of this study, but which cannot be adequately answered by means of the proposed procedure.

It is hoped that at least partial answers w ill appear in the data and that they w ill serve as the basis for further research and study.

These questions are as follows:

1 . Is there an inherent danger in training music educators 3

In performance ability too far In excess of the available outlets for this performance?

2 . Is the major performance area the best possible medium for the realization of valid, authentic musical experiences which provide the basis for stimulating a desire to make possible the realization of such aesthetic experiences in children?

3 . If the answer to the second question is in the affirmative, are there any logical lim its beyond the pressing demands of other curricular areas which can with integrity be ispotted upon the capable performer?

It is an obvious truism to state that the ultimate purpose of a study having to do with any aspect of the training program for teachers is to improve the quality of instruction in terms of stated objectives* One of the problems which has persistently disturbed the faculties of departments of education and teacher training colleges in achieving the desired quality of instruction is that of securing the fullest cooperation of teachers of subject matter* 'XhiB is no less true in the field of music where the studio teacher of applied music has often emphasized the development of the students' perform­ ance ability and musicianship to the exclusion of some inport ant facets of instruction which hare a direct bearing on the problems of the music teacher in the public schools* A farther purpose of this study already implied in the statement of the problem is to point out specific ways in which the studio teachers can identify themselves with teacher education.

In the final analysis, each college faculty will need to make its own decisions as to the articulation between the applied major area and courses commonly designated as methods in relation to the section on pedagogical insights. This study is not attempting to lay down inflexible course boundaries. One of the strengthening features of any program is the realization of interaction of thought between departments. It is hoped that this study will provide insights whereby such interaction may be stimulated.

Heed for the Study

One of the principal reasons for undertaking this study has already been mentioned. There is a need for a clearer statement by the music education profession as to the nature and the extent of the training in the major performance area for music educators. The

Hational Association of Schools of Music has clearly stated the minimum standards which should be expected of students majoring in applied music for the bachelor of music degree. The Music Educators

Hational Conference has published articles which serve as valuable guides to establishing standards, but the official statement describing the competencies essential for the teacher is the one quoted at the outset of this chapter. By these standards the individual school and community are to determine the level of achievement. The college has nothing more to do than to take the student as far as it can during the three or four years in which he studies fpplied music, and leave it to the student with the help of the placement division to find the school and community which best fits his level of achievement.

Thurber Madison writes directly to this point in his chapter on "The Heed for Hew Concepts In Music Education*"^ He refers to the polarity of "comaon sense" and "theory" hut points out that because of the inherent weakness in either point of view, both must give direction to objectives in music education* Although on the one hand theory can be verified only at the common sense level. Its in­ tegrity can only be maintained "through painstaking and constant verification with the facts of empirical experience*" la arguing for the maintaining of a proper balance of the two viewpoints in music education, Madison speaks a word of warning as he suggests that

. . .the success of music educators seemed to come largely from the uncritical and unsophisticated Judgements of the people in the communities (italics mine) and that, while this assured the music educator a steady and action-packed Job, it was not necessarily an indication that the ultimate objectives of music education had been met* In terms of this present discussion (Concepts as Common-sense Data and as Theory) it seems quite possible that such popular success of the music education program is built upon common-sense-level reactions to the overlooking of many ultimate values which only refined theoretical concepts could provide* Th* rni«iinn-«*n^e level of community response must of necessity be the basis for support, but it is the responsibility of music educators to provide themselves and ths public with theoretical supports of greater universality* 2 (Italics mine.)

The apparent wide diversity of curricular practice in teacher education colleges provides a second item of Justification for this

study* In a catalog study by this writer^ it was found that the

2* Thurber Madlsoh, "The Heed for Hew Concepts in Music Education." Basic Concepts in Music Education. Tearbook LYII, HSSE, 195g* P* H , 12*

3* Burkhalter, H. L*, "A Study of the Applied Major Requirements for the Bachelor of Music Education Degree in H. A. S. M* approved State Universities*" Unpublished paper. The Ohio State University, 1358* 6 range of semester hour requirements of major applied instruction extended from eight to twenty-four. There was also vide variation in admission requirements in relation to performance ability* One college catalog specified that a student must have attained the proficiency level of at least "grade X" upon entering* Another, obviously using a different scale, stated that entering freshmen vho were string or piano majors "must have a grade 3 proficiency 11 and graduate with-"grade 7*" S till another sisqply stated that students

"must complete grade 6" on their major instrument before graduation*

The third main point of Justification for this study is based on the lim itations of related studies* A brief description of each of five related doctoral theses at this point v ill serve to point out the necessity for further research: k 1* Edna McEachern, Bdpieation of School Music Teachers. 193*+*

This survey involved the evaluation of the then current practice in terms of ideal practice as validated by a Jury of superior educators of school music teachers; and evaluating the current practice in terms of usefulness in a teaching situation ae expressed by school music teachers in the fleld*^

In drawing up a provisional program based on the findings of her survey, McEachern included specific entrance requirements for

*+• Edna McEachern, A Survey and Evaluation of the Education of School liislc Teachers“in the United States' (lev to'rk; Bureau of Publications, Teachers 1 College, Columbia University, 1937)*

5 * Ibid., p* IIS ff* 7 performance in voice and piano as well as requirements for graduation*^

Other instrumental areas were not covered* The technical and inter­ pretive ability required to perform the piano literature suggested can be said to be somewhat higher than that required by HASH standards

; t the end of the sophomore year of the B. H* degree* The voice requirements are stated more specifically than those in the later rather general NASH standards* Comparisons in this area cannot be made accurately because of the latter fact*

2* Karl 0. Kursteiner, The Administration of Applied Music

Objectives at the College Level, 19H6*^

Whereas this author was concerned about the objectives of epplied music in general, much of the research concerned the Bachelor of Music degree* Bata based on music education programs were cited chiefly by way of comparison* The study was further lim ited to a discussion of piano, voice and violin, and the conclusions were somewhat clouded by the fact that respondents were not advised to lim it their replies to major applied students* Objectives were rated in terms of secondary applied students as well* Bata were secured from graduates of a rather small group of colleges ( 1 2 ), selected on a basis which was quite irrelevant to the needs of the present study. In his conclusions,

Kursteiner expressed serious conoern in regard to the "startling lack

6 * Ibid^» p. 5 *

7* Karl 0. Kursteiner, The Administration of Applied Music Objectives at the College Level (Ann Arbor; University of Michigan !Press, 194bj. of relationship" of the goals for bachelor of music applied majors and bachelor of music education applied students* "It is a matter of serious administrative import whether violin instruction for these two categories of students is based upon this variation in student needs*"®

3* Wilbur J. Peterson, "The Place of the Performance Area in

Training High School Music Teachers,■ 1956*^

This follow-up study was based on questionnaires sent to five hundred high schools in seventeen western states. These teachers were asked to evaluate the college education they had received in six areas

In terms of its usefulness in their teaching* The musical performance area included both major and minor applied areas as well as par­ ticipation in large and small ensembles* Of particular relation to the concern of this present study was the fact that the single greatest criticism of the major performance area, submitted by respondents as additional comments, attacked the degree of specialisation in a single performing area at the expense of wider training in minor areas*

This fact would tend to substantiate the inference in Kursteiner1s conclusion that applied music at the college level was taught in the same manner for all students, regardless of their proposed professional activities*

8. Ibid., p. 187*

9* Wilbur J. Peterson, "The Place of the Performance Area in Training High School Music Teachers," Journal of Hesearch in Mnslc Education. Vol. IT, Ho. 1 (Spring, 1956)* P« 51 9

1+. Bober t G. Petsold, "The Applied Music Skills which Prospective

Teachers of High School Instrumental Music Heed," 1950 *10

This study Is limited to the specific motor skills which contri­ bute to performance of wood wind instruments* Its primary concern, in dealing with the music education curriculum, was with the secondary applied program* The study was lim ited to those skills which could ordinarily be acquired In one year of study upon each instrument*

5* John V. Worrel, "In Evaluation of Teacher Preparation in

Music Education at the University of Kentucky through an Analysis of

Opinions of Graduates," 1957-^

This follow-up study found opinions in common with those recorded in the Peterson study which were critical of the narrow emphasis of the major applied music instruction*

6 * John Lee Carrico, "A Study of Applied Music in Pour-Tear

State Supported Colleges of Texas," 1956*^

This study is the one most closely related to the present one in subject of inquiry. There was, however, no attespt made in this study to establish or to validate criteria* The work is primarily a report­ ing of the practices pertaining to applied music in the state supported colleges in Texas. The present writer is indebted to Carrico far

10* Hubert G. Petzold, "The Applied Music Skills which Prospective Teachers of High School Instrumental Music Heed," (doctoral dissertation. University of Wisconsin, 1950)* 11* John Y. Yorrel, "An Evaluation of Teacher Preparation. . .etc." (doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, 1957)* 12. John Lee Carrico, "A Study of Applied Musio. • .etc." (doctoral dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers, 195&)* 10 suggesting a particular questioning device, namsly that calculated to measure the relative value of the various instructional stresses within the major applied field of instruction. This will he discussed in more detail in Chapter III.

Procedure for Present Study

Preliminary catalog study. This investigation was undertaken in order to obtain a preliminary view of the requirements in the major applied area for the Bachelor of Music Education degree In state supported universities approved by the N. A. S. M. Catalogs for the 1351-58 academic year were used. The study was made in partial fulfillment of the requirements of a seminar in Music in Higher

Education (Music S 5OX) a t The Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity .

Et«m1nation of related literatures. Various compilations of research studies in education and in music education were examined In search of studies related to the problem at hand. Studies having a direct bearing on the subject at hand were critically reviewed.

Publications of the Music Educators National Conference and the Music

Teachers National Association pertaining to applied music study in teacher education, and available curricular standards used in accreditation evaluation by the National Association of Schools of

Music were read and reviewed.

Securing the data. With this material for a background, a questionnaire was drawn up composed of the following four parts:

1. Performance competency and Insights related to the major performing area 11

2* Besponsibility of the studio teacher in providing these skills end insights

3* Implementing the acquisition of competencies through curricular requirements

h* Belative i^>ortance of various points of instructional em phasis •

The questionnaire with a covering letter from Dr. Henry A*

Bruinsma, Director of the School of Music at The Ohio State University* was sent to four groups of people) (l) directors of schools of music accredited by the BASM, (2) studio teachers of applied music and

( 3 ) teachers of music education in these same schools, and (h) super­ visors of public school music instruction in cities of 3 0 ,0 0 0 or over* A follov-up post card was sent to the director of the school of music of each college In which any one of the three people contacted had not responded, and to each supervisor who had not responded*

The returned questionnaires were coded and tabulated on I.B.K* cards in order to facilitate making the calculations desired*

S o su zjr

Through this study the Investigator seeks to provide guide lines

for evaluating the largest single block of instruction in the curriculum preparing music teachers for the public schools, namely, the instruction in the students' major performing medium* Vhlle some such guide lines are available in this area for Bachelor of Music degrees with

a performance major, there are only limited statements by accrediting

and other professional groups indicating acceptable performance 12 standards far the student majoring In untie education. Critics of the music education profession insist that it is, to a great extent, the responsibility of this facet of the teacher education program to raise and maintain a suitably high musical standard for music education in general. Mxsic education specialists, on the other hand, are Justifiably concerned oyer the apparent lack of correlation between the ability to perform well and the ability to teach well.

The study that follows is predicated on the assumption that it is the responsibility of the profession to establish the standards for this phase of the teacher education program* The population selected as hawing the best available insight into the problem is made up of four classes of people; (l) the directors of teacher education schools, ( 2 ) those engaged in the actual teaching of applied music in these schools, (3) those engaged more directly in the task of preparing teachers for the public schools who are designated as music education teachers in these schools, and (h) those individuals who, by their station as supervisors of public schools music in­ struction in the larger cities of the United States, may be said to have a broad understanding of the background which is essential to entering the profession. Gnly colleges accredited by the national

Association of Schools of Music were invited to participate in the study* Only supervisors in cities of f>0,000 or more (by the 195^ census) were sent questionnaires.

The problem attacked is not merely one of standards. The entire area of instruction in the major performing medium is critically explored in terms of the competencies considered essential, the 'breadth of literature to be taken up, the place of related activities such as recital performance and attendance, the methods of implementing balanced instruction, the responsibility of the studio teacher, and the relative importance of various aspects of studio instruction* Chapter II

PTEyTEW OF PUBLISHED STANDARDS AND OTHER PTE.T.ATTTTT LITERATURE

Although the recommendations of the accrediting agencies govern­ ing the major applied area for nniaic education majors appear to he exceedingly general and lacking in specific direction and content, there is a considerable amount of literature pertinent to the problem*

In view of the fact that this writer drew extensively from these sources in compiling the tentative criteria, they will be reviewed in this chapter. The sources may be categorized as follows;

1* Recommendations pertaining to teacher education curricula by the leading professional and accrediting organizations in the United

States; i.e ., Music Educators National Conference, Music Teachers

National Association, and the National Association of Schools of Music*

2* Significant related statements from the yearbooks of these and other professional organisations concerned with the education of te a c h e rs

3* Available literature in books and periodicals pertaining to the problem

4* Related doctoral theses

3 * The w riter's own thinking

It is the author's purpose in this chapter to review the first three of these, since the fourth source has already been discussed in

C h a p te r I*

14 15 C urricular Standard* He commended by Professional Organizations

One of tbs earliest significant attests to standardise the

training of Basic educators, or Basic supervisors, was Bade in 1921

by the Educational Council (later the ttosic Education Research Council)

of the Music Supervisors Rational Conference,* In the sixty hours

of music recommended by K. V. Ge hr kins and H ollis Dann, there was

no reference whatsoever to the major applied performance area other

than a requirement of eight hours of piano and four hours of voice.

It was assumed that the student beginning this coarse would already

have the facility to perform piano music of the second grade (KTHA

grading), and sing at sight music of the difficulty of a hymn or a

f o lk tu n e .

In 1929 the He search Council published a suggested four-year

course for the training of music supervisors,2 in this was a require­

ment of twelve hours of applied major instruction and eight hours of

applied minor instruction* Ho performance standards were given or any

information describing what presumably should have been learned in

those twelve hours.

The next year the Commission on Curricula of the HASH presented

1, Music Education Research Council, Bulletin Ho. lj Courses for Training of Supervisors of itaslc (Chicago, Illinois: MSEC, 1932),

2* Rational Research Council of Music Education, Bulletin Ho. 11: State C ertification of Teachers and Supervisors of Public School Music (C h icag o : MSEC, 1929)* 16 recommendations for the training of school music supervisors to the KTXl.^

In this report, Howard Hanson, the chairman of the committee, pointed

out the advantage of the recommended curriculum over the older MS KG curriculum because of the additional houre (thirty) which had been assigned to applied anisic• The increase was designated far minor applied, however, and the major applied requirements remained at twelve hours. The recommended course of study Included an interesting specification which has become, for better or for worse, a standard rule of thumb for determining the performance level of the music education major* The full requirement in the major epplied area for the bachelor of music education was to be "the completion of the require­ ments prescribed for the end of the second year” of the bachelor of music (italics mine)*

In 1936 the entire second part of the yearbook of the National

Society for the Study of Xducation was devoted to the subject of music education* This Included a curriculum recommended by John V. Beattie,

Bean of the School of Music, Northwestern University, which specified sixteen hours of instruction in the major spplied area and eight hours

In the minor areas*** His recommendations were stated to have been based on the findings of the Mdachern and Lewi ft studies already men­ tioned. In attempting to define the qualifications in music supervisors which administrators could demand, Beattie describes a "reasonable

3* MTKd, Tolume of Proceedings (I 93O), p . 8 7 . h. John V. Beattie, "The Selection and Training of Teachers," 39th Yearbook, National Society for the Study of Xducation ( 1936)* degree of musicianship" as including "considerable skill in per­ formance." The instrumentalist should further possess "performing skill on at least two instruments, one stringed and one wind, and enough fam iliarity with all instruments to give instruction to beginners." In spite of the evident increase in the number of hours for major applied study, Seattle urged a consideration of broad objectives. He stressed the importance of various types of ensemble performance, rather than exclusive emphasis on solo performance.

For pianists, he stressed the Importance of sight reading and im­ provising; for vocalists he emphasized the need for general choral practice, rather than singing solos.

In 19 U2 , at a joint meeting of a special committee of the

NASM and the Committee on Cooperation in Special Fields for the

American Association of Teachers' Colleges, a curriculum leading to the bachelor of music in school music was designed and re conn ended.

Under the section on preparation in performance is the following sta te m e n t:

The student must acquire ability to have a mature performing musical experience for the bendfit of himself, his pupils and his community. This ability will also permit him to work in­ dependently in M b field of performance.

He must also acquire musical tools necessary for stimulating musical experiences at the level of his teaching.5

A total of thirty semester hours in applied music was recommended.

ThiB includes the minor applied area and no suggested proportions are

5 . National Association of Schools of xfasic, By-Laws and Hegulations. ( 19 H5 ) , p . 2 1 . 18

{Iren. There Is a farther statement to the effect that the student's ability to "perform acceptably either as a singer or on at least one instrument of the orchestra or the piano" can only he acquired through the medium of private instruction.

There is some ambiguity in the mention of specific performance levels required for the school music degree. A parenthetical state­ ment in the section on preparation in performance in this degree refers to specific standards elsevhere In the bulletin. The only specific performance levels included anywhere in the bulletin are clearly marked as "Detailed Outline of minimum requirements in applied music for the bachelor of music d e g r e e (Italics mine.) In this section are included definite degrees of technical accomplishment corresponding to the degree of difficulty of specific compositions for three levels;

1. 2n tra n c e

2 . 2nd of second year

3 * of fourth year

There is no mention whatever as to which of these apply to the bachelor of music in school music degree*

In 1946, a revision of the 1921 course of study was made by the

Research Council of the MUTC.? Sixteen semester hours of major applied

6 . Ibid.. p. 24. 7« Hazel Ichavso Morgan (e d .), Music Education Source Book (Chicago: wore, 1947). P* 43* music were specified* With this specification vas the parenthetical

statement, "coapletlon of two-year coarse, with minimum of one hoar per week of lndividn&l instruction.*

The most complete official document available on the subject of major applied ins traction for the music education major is included

in the committee reports on 'Teachers College Curriculum" at the

19I& Hasic Educators1 Hation&l Conference* The authors of this re­ port were James L* Kars ell and BJornar Bergathon.® This source has been used extensively by this writer in drawing up the tentative criteria which appear in a subsequent chapter* Marsell and Bergathon argued

that it was erroneous to build curricula after the standards of conservatories, with courses in music pedagogy "super-added." The

aims of such schools were said to be irrelevant to the training of workers in music education. The curriculum should be a "coherent whole, focused explicitly upon the type of professional worker con­

sidered desirable."

The authors suggested five "guide lines for planning" the curriculum which are given here because of their particular pertinence

to the subject at band.

1* The training program should exemplify what the worker is e x p e c te d t o do*

2* "Above everything else, it must be an inspiring and con­ vincing personal experience* It should reveal to the student by

8* Eaxel E. Morgan (ed.), Music In American Education, Music Education Source Book Ho. 2 (Washington* klHO, 19557* P* ^$7 20

first-hand experience how aisle can function in human 11 ring, both

Individual and social. *

3* Tbs program should equip the student with "practical peda­

gogical expertnaas." This should be brought about by all the in­

struction the student receives, not nerely by the methods oourses.

U. The program should equip the student with "pedagogical

versatility."

3* The program must g en erate enthusiasm *

More speciflcally related to the problem of applied music is the

following statement: "Here (musical performance) the primary aim is

to produce not fairly good virtuosi, but persons able to use the skill

of musical performance in dealing with human, social and educational

situations*"''

Performance skills are divided into two categories: "extensive performance, * or "the ability to perform on a reasonable though

elementary level in any media;" and "intensive performance," or

"high competence in a single medium." Specific standards are then

given in order to further define "high competence*"

Xhe authors of this document were clearly expressing a double

concern: first, that high functional standards be maintained; and

second, that excessively high performance standards should not be purchased at an undue price*

The most recent cooperative effort on the part of the major

national organizations concerned with teacher education standards 21 vaa the statement dram up by the Commission on Accreditation and

Certification in Music Education of the MEEC* It was adopted hy the

KKNC in 1952, and approved hy the HASH, the KTHA, and the Committee on Studlet and Standards of the AAGIE*^ The suggested minimum require­ ment for applied music vaa 33 cent of the total hours* Spiled music in this connection was interpreted to Include (l) conducting,

( 2 ) large and eaall ensembles, ( 3 ) functional piano, (h) major per­ formance area, and ( 5 ) ninor performance area* The specified achieve­ ment for the major performance vaa the one quoted at the outaet of

Chapter I*

Inch mnaic education student should have one performance area in vhieh he excels. It is recommended that the study of the major performance area be continued until the student la able to demonstrate satisfactorily per­ formance ability for use in school and coaranity*^

In this MEIC bulletin on accreditation and certification, there follovs a list of questions regarding the sjqphasls placed on the major performance area* These questions imply the existence of some rather definite criteria uhlch are presumably used in accrediting a given college or university. She writer has been unable to find a published list of such criteria* Some of these questions form the basis for the tentative criteria to appear later on in this dissertation*

The most recent statement on applied music standards to date Is the 1939 edition of the By-Lavs and Begnlatlons of the HASH. Specific

10* "The Evaluation of Music Education: Standards for the Evaluation of the College Curriculum for the Training of the School Music Teacher," Commission oh Accreditation and C ertification in Music Education, ME5C, 1952. 1 1 . n>id*, p* 22 requirements are given for admission to the bachelor of music education curriculum. It is significant that the admission standards are the same in this area for all music degrees—£. M., B. M. S., B. S.,

A. B., B. T* A .^ The section describing the necessary achievement in major applied music is Identical vith the one appearing in the statement of the Commission on Accreditation and Certification quoted earlier. As in the I 9I15 HASH statement, there is no mention of a rooo—ended level of attainment for graduation in the case of the bachelor of music education. Such a level is clearly indicated for the bachelor of music, together with a recommended level of attainment for the second year of such a program. This second year level is stated to be the basis for graduation for the student in the bachelor of arte curriculum where less time can be devoted to the applied study.^ If this was assumed to be the graduation level of the bachelor of music education degree, there is no statement any^ share in the bulletin indicating this to be the case. In drawing up the tentative criteria for this study, this writer accepted the second year level of the S. H. degree as the graduation level for the B. M. I. d e g re e.

State Certification

It is impossible to make any valid generalisations as to shat major applied training or d illa are essential for music educators

12. Hational Association of Sohools of Itosic, ttr-Iaws and Begnlatlona (1959). P> and p. 3^.

13. Ibid.. p. 3 0 . if the inquiry is based on the standards for certification of the various states. Statements on competency are rare and very flexible as may be seen from the following examples;

Indiana: "Applied music should include enough experience in one field (voice or instrument) to enable the teacher to make a satis­ factory public appearance* New Jersey; "Jach candidate should possess superior ability in one medium. "^5

Kany states leave the subdivision of total music area recommended for preparation up to the degree-granting institution* Por those wg a sp ecific recommendation for applied music, there is a range of from six to th irty -fiv e semester hours* with a median of sixteen, 16 for the purposes of th is study, these figures have l i t t l e meaning as they probably encompass the entire fie ld of epplied music or they could conceivably represent Just the major applied field in the cases of the lower number of hours*

Related Literature It is not within the province of this study to Include an exhaustive survey of the literature in books and periodicals which pertains directly or indirectly to the subject of the major applied lh* Irving V. Volfs* State Certification for Music Teachers (lash- v ille ; Bureau of Publications, George Peabody College for Teachers, 195*0. P* 3*.

1 3 * Rii^, p. 5®*

16* Ibid*, p. 7 2k instruction for music education students* Before attempting to list tentative criteria, this vriter wanted to obtain as broad a background of opinion as was practically available without spending undue time on an enterprise which would in all probability reveal no conclusive findings beyond a further highlighting of the in itial problem en­ gendering this study. The following section is a resume of opinions of various authors which either directly or indirectly influenced the vriter In selecting the various items for the tentative criteria or devices in research procedure.

1. In the National Association of Secondary School Principals' publication, in identifying some of the special competencies of a successful music teacher, the authors make the following statement:

"A successful mnsic teacher must, first of all, know his subject and be able to take his place in the school and conmnlty as a musician.

Under specialized training, the "ability to perform In one area"

Is the only reference to the major performance area in this article.

2. William Whybrev, of the School of Music of Ithaca College, attempts to analyze how a high degree of musicianship can best be developed in public school music teachers.^ Of all the studies and activities in the training program, Whybrev cites the prospective teacher's own active performance of music as the strongest factor in

17* franc is M. .Andrews et a l.. "Music—A Vital force in Today's Secondary Bchools, Part 1." National Association of Socondary-School Principals, Vol. 1*3, Ho. 2l*5 (March, 1959). PP* ^fe-47.

18. William Whybrev, "Musicianship for Musical Standards," Mhslc 1 ducat ion Journal, 1*3; 60 (february, 1937)* 25 the process. Ha argue • that thoee aspect* of null clanship which go to make up "musical sensitivity" can he learned only through In­ telligently guided participation.

3 . Ban flail Thompson^ writes the following concerning the qualifications of a competent teacher of applied music at the college le v e l:

Tho work of such a teacher should not he the teaching of virtuosity hut rather the teaching of Music through the medium of the instrument. Hor would the teaching of a repertory of works for public performance from memory he the first duty of such a teacher. He would teach performance as a realisation of musical symbolization rather than as a display of virtuosity.^®

h. Pat tee Xvaneon, Chairman of the Music Department. San Diego 21 State College , questions the justification of the traditional double standards in applied music for public school teachers and private music teachers. The attitudes of public school teachers which comprise the basis for this article seem to show a desire for more emphasis being placed on the major instrument performance.

"There is a belated inner realisation of the important discipline, the deeper musical insight, the added musical stature, and the power of example and preoept which are inevitably associated with one who has himself experienced the achievement of fine performance."

19. Randall Thompson, College Music (Hew Tork; Macmillan Company, 1935). 20. ItId., pp. 102-103.

21* Hattie Xvanson, "Ire Our Colleges Doing the Job in Instrumental Teacher Preparation?" Music Education Journal, (February-Mar ch. 1955)* 26

5* Ronald J. Heil and Robert X. Nye state that "Some courses should be taught In which the personal musicianship of the prospective teacher is developed* In teaching children, he nay never use some of these facts and skills, but he will be a better musician and teacher for having had these courses, and w ill often use these materials indirectly • 6. William Schuman*^ gives high tribute to the Music Educators'

National Conference for the phenomenal growth of the scope of its efforts* He urges that the organization make every effort possible to improve the quality of its work through insisting that teacher training institutions give top priority to that part of the music teacher's training which actually is concerned with music as an art.

He says further:

A music teacher who is genuinely interested in music will be able to answer 'yes' to each of the following questions:

1* Do you have an interest in the art of music beyond the immediate concern of your school position, and if so, what evidence can you supply to prove this interest?

2* Are you making a continuing effort to perfect your . equipment in music either as a performer or composer?

22* Honald J. Hell and Robert I* Hye, "Two Viewpoints on Teacher Education," Educational Music Magazine. 35 (March, 1956), PP« 10-11*

23* William Schnman, "Die Responsibility of Music Education to Music,11 Music Education Journal. Vol. 42, Ho. 6 (Jhne-July, 1956). Address given sit April 17 General Session of MENC biennial meeting, St. Louis, 1956.

24. Ibid., p. IS. 27 7* Leo J» Dvorak writes that:

In teaeher-preparation there ehoold ha a halanca between training for performance hy the individual student for the sake of performance, and training for ekill In a medium of musical expression as a hack- ground to musical understanding* Actually there should ha little difference in the ultimate and. of either, for teacher preparation should raise the preparatory student to the highest mosleal techniques equal to those of any other student of music* However, the training of the teacher of music is very complex and often time is an Important qualifying element* What­ ever training is given the student must he directed toward the building of s k ills for the realization of musical meanings*2?

8* H. Grady Harlan2^ expressed a conviction that the double standard of major applied instruction is not valid. He finds that the standards for graduation set hy the Music Teachers Hatlonal Association for music education voice majors, which are comparable to those at the end of the sophomore year for the B. K* degree, are not adequate. He points out that some Texas schools require music education majors to study major applied music for all four years* He concludes: "Ye are safe in concluding that, by virtue of the competition in the field, and of the powers of the various accrediting agencies, B. K. I. candidates will find it mandatory that they match, in performance standards, the basic skills of the B* N. degree.*^

2 5 . Lao J* Dvorak, "Developing Musical Understanding in Teacher Training,* Itude (February, 1955)t P* 10*

26. H. Grady Harlan, "Current Standards for the Tolce Major in Music E d u c a tio n ," MTHA Volume o f P roceedings (19*19)*

2 7 . Ibid., p. 2 9 2* 28

9* BJornar Bergethon, Professor of Music at the University of

I 111 note, makes a critique of the curriculum approved by the HASH,

AAJCTK, MEHC, and MTHA. Bergethon laments the fact that although there

is a generous concentration of music in this curriculum, an analysis

of the content listed under "Basic Music" and "Musical Performance"

reveals the fact that the musical studies which might be included under the recommended distribution are on the freshman and sophomore

levels of attainment. He states that the mechanical adoption of this

curriculum will only "perpetuate a regrettable trend in music teacher

education;" namely, the lowering of musical standards in the profession.

Among his several recommendations are two which are pertinent to the problem at hand: (l) developing minimum standards of musicianship, and

(2) adapting and maintaining exacting musical qualifications for

admission to the program*^®

10. Marguerite Hood, past president of MEHC, in referring to the necessary competency of the music educator to be a "performer in some

area o f applied music,■ writes;

Share must be at least one area in which each music educator performs well. Perhaps his repertory is not -\s advanced as that of the major in that performance area, but what he plays or sings he should do Just as artistically as anyone else.^9

11. Gordon Xpperson of Louisiana State University makes no particular reference to music education, but to the value of performing

28. SJornar Bergethon, "Toward Improving Music Teacher I due at ion, ■ 1 donation, Tol. 7& (March, 195&)* P* 29* Marguerite V. Hood, "Teacher Training as Part of College Music Study," MA8M Bulletin (April, 1955)* P« 20* 29 anisic under any circumstances. He contends that the main purpose of musical instruction should be to develop an awareness of musical values through direct contact with the art.

Music study is a discipline which effects an evaluation: everyone to some extent follows his own path and apprehends meanings for himself, but he also comes to recognise, objectively, the sig­ nificant forms music has assumed; and he responds to the intrinsic value of great music on Its own terms. . .If anisic, studied as an art, imparts meanings of a non-verbal character, it is important to recognise this as its principal sdneative function; and the teacher must try to create con­ ditions that will favor the acquisition of such knowledge by the student

12. C. DeWitt Hardy, quoted in an article by Bdwin Hurds 11, makes the following statement: "Many educators feel that adequate appreciation can only come from participation in the art of creation itself* Therefore they encourage the students to become as much of an artist as it is in him to be, Just as a student is encouraged in the laboratory to become a practicing scientist and in student government to practice politics.

During the past thirty years, there has been an increase of four hours in the recommended number of semester hours of credit to be

30. dor don Ipperson, "University Music: Theoretical or Applied, ” American Association of tJhiversity Professors Bulletin, Tol. hh. Ho. 3 (Autumn/ pp. fclWtfi. ------

31* Bdwin 8. Bur dell, "What w ill be the Appropriate relationships between liberal and specialised skilly" Association for Higher Sdncation, Current Issues in Higher Idnoatlon. T, p* 102. 3 0 required In the major applied field for the Bachelor's degree with a major in music education. This occurred in 193&* and there does not appear to be any indication in professional standards since that time that there should be any additional credit required* Insofar as the level of attainment is concerned, there seems to be a singular avoidance of specific recommendations. Such standards do indeed exist for the Bachelor of Music degree, but they are only implied or stated indefinitely for music education degrees. The recommended level of performing ability for the music education graduate ranges anywhere from "high competence in a single medium11 to the ability to "demonstrate satisfactorily perfoxmance ability for use in school and community.1

What ie meant by high competence is described in same detail in the

Music Bdocation Source Booh No. 2, and these competencies were used extensively by this writer in the tentative criteria which are in­ cluded in the questionnaire and described in detail in Chapter 111.

Of particular concern to these authors was the fact that the teaching of the major performance area frequently has not been relevant to what the student w ill ultimately be doing. It must be an Integral part of a "coherent* program.

State certification requirements offer very little help in seek­ ing to determine what levels of performance competency should be achieved by those who are to teach music In the public schools. There is much variation by states, and the sub-division of the total music a r e a is in many cases left to the degree-granting Institution.

The Independent sources quoted in the last part of the chapter show an agreement in principle that the major performance area is 31 essential for all who are to teach music chiefly because of the necessity of esqperienclng the aesthetic coop one nt In mnslc first hand. There Is the consistent Inference that it Is in this area that the student can hast develop what is often referred to as

"musical sensitivity." Several authors, notably Ivanson and Brady, question the diversity in applied music standards of the bachelor of music and the bachelor of music education. Bergethon frankly states as his opinion that in the curriculum recommended by the

KEHC, KlfiA. e£ a l. (for music education) the musical performance level is too low* William Schuman urges that the musical standards of the music education profession be raised and argues that the place to begin is the major performing area in the teacher-training program*

In sharp contrast to the tenor of these arguments are the follow-up studies quoted In Chapter I, where one of the most frequent criticism s leveled at their training programs by graduates of many colleges was that directed toward the overemphasis of virtuoso per­ forming for the prospective music teacher. Chapter III

PBOCIDUBE IN COLLECT DIG BATA

The method decided upon for the establishing of the eriterla sought In this study was that of having a eelooted Ju react to tentative criteria concerning the field of applied music instruction.

These reactions were measured hy means of a written questionnaire, a copy of which is included in Appendix A. As stated in the previous chapter, the tentative criteria were based on the following sources of information;

1. Specific recommendations of professional and accrediting o rg a n iz a tio n s (MEHC, KZXA, BASM, AACZE) ~

2. Belated statements selected from yearbooks of professional o rg a n is a tio n s (MEYC, MTBA, VSSS)

3* Available literature in books and periodicals pertaining to the problem

U* Belated doctoral theses

5* The w r i t e r 's own th in k in g

In Table 1 each criterion stated in the questionnaire is identified as to source. In some instances, the statements were taken very nearly as direot quotations from the source. In many cases they are adaptations of original statements* A word of qualification must be included regarding the fifth source, designated as the w riter's own thinking. It would be exceedingly prestuptuous for the writer

32 33 to assume credit for a single item identified in this category* The

statements included ae being drawn from the w riter's own thinking

represent the interaction of his thought with that of many individuals

through conversation and through extensive reading on the subject*

The writer is Indeed greatly indebted to all these unidentified

sources*

The Q uestionnaire

The instrument used to collect the data for this study was

organized into four parts corresponding with the four aspects of the

inquiry stated in Chapter I*

Part I* Performance Competency. This section was designed to

identify the skills and insights or knowledge associated with the

major performance area which are needed by graduates of a music

education program who are preparing to teach in the public schools*

7or the purpose of organisation, the skills were further subdivided

as follows:

Performance competency in a major area

1* Proficiency required for college entrance

- ' 2. Proficiency required for graduation

3* Additional performance ski 11 a

Insights concerning performance

Pedagogical in sists related to the major performing area

In order to test the performance levels specified for admission

to the teacher education program which are specified by the Satioaal

Association of Schools of Music, respondents were asked to rate the Sable 1

SOURCE or TENTATIVE CRITERIA FOR QUISTIQHHAIHI

F a rt l a C r ite r ia Questionnaire (Student should hare the following) Source

1 A 1 Proficiency required for college entrance HASH By-Laws 1939, p . 30 I A 2 Proficiency required for graduation HASH By-Laws 1959, P* &7 (end of sophomore year of B.K.) I A 3 ft* A performing repertoire of at least three hour-long XKHC Source Bk. #2, p. ikl recital programs b . The ability to read with reasonable technical mas­ NlirC Source Bk. #2, p. lUl tery and ausicianly feelings a much larger portion (than the performing repertoire) of the literature for his major instrument c. The ability to memorise a piece comparable in length W riter to a standard concerto d. She ability to take a composition somewhat below the W riter upper limit of his technical ability and prepare it for creditable performance in a week's time without the aid of an instructor 0* The ability to perform both in formal concert and HEHC Source Bk. #2 for informal gatherings with poise, control and good personal repport f . The ability to demonstrate satisfactory performance MKNC, MTHA, SASX, AACU J o in t skill for use in school and community statement on accreditation, p.4 She ability to perform in large and small Eursteiner, Earl 0., Doctoral ensem bles Dissertation Table 1 (continued)

F a rt C r ite r ia Source

I A 3 h. The ability to transpose on hie major instrument Eursteiner, Earl 0., Doctoral Dissertation 1 . The ability to identify, as a listener, any dsvlar Adapted from MEHC Source tlous by another performer from correct perforsLance file* #2 an indicated by a given score in terms of pitch, rhythm, tempo and dynamics I B 1 The ability to demonstrate authoritatively the V rite r stylistic differences of each of the major periods of musical composition am exemplified in the litera­ tu re of h is major perform ing medium IBS The ability to transfer musical values realised in Adapted from Eursteiner, the major performing medium to performances which Earl 0., Doctoral Dissertation he w ill conduct in other media I B 3 The ability to build acceptable programs from the W riter l i t e r a t u r e of h is perform ing medium I B 4 The ability to make competent Judgements concerning ISSI Yearbook L7II, p. 327 the musical values in performances in his own and in other performing media I B 5 The a b i l i t y to u t i l i s e the m ajor perform ing medium Eursteiner, Earl 0., Doctoral as an aid to composing and arranging Dissertation I B 6 The ability to discriminate artistically in the se­ V T iter lection of music expropriate to the needs of school and community I B 7 The desire to continue performance activities beyond Adapted from Schuman, William the immediate requirements of a public school Address to MEVC p o s itio n Table 1 (co ntinued)

F a rt C r ite r ia Source

I C 1 In under at ending of the physical problem which are V rite r coanonly encountered by young pupils studying in his aajor performance area I C 2 A knowledge of the devices used to orercone physical V rite r problems encountered in learning to perform on his major instrument (rolce included) I c 3 A comprehensive acquaintance with the most acceptable V rite r teaching literature for younger pupils In his major performance area i c u An understanding of the place of technical studies Adapted from Carrico, John Lee in the development of performance facility Doctoral Dissertation I C 5 An elementary understanding of the psychological V rite r factors which contribute to good teacher-pupil re­ lationship in private lessons 1 c 6 An elementary understanding of the principles of VSSS Yearbook LVII, p. 191 motivation as related to the learning process I c 7 An understanding of child growth and development as Adapted from ISSE Yearbook related to the problems involved in his major per­ LYII, p. 191 forming area I C 8 The ability to evaluate pupil progress in the Adapted from VSSK Yearbook achievement of musical growth in his major perform­ LYII. p. 192 in g medium I C 9 The ability to integrate theory of music with in­ V rite r s tru c tio n in h is m ajor perform ing medium

\ Table 1 (continued.)

Pert Criteria Source

I 0 XO The ability to integrate music history and litera­ W riter ture vlth instruction in hie major performing median

I I I A I Six years of practical fam iliarity vlth a major MEHC Source Bk. #2, p. 37 perform ing medium p r io r to adm ission to the bachelor of music e doc at ion program

I I I A 2 Qualifying examinations as an entering fashman to MB1C, XASM e t a l . t J o in t s ta te ­ establish competence to pursue applied study at ment on accreditation, p. 12 the college level I I I B J One semester hoar (more or less) for one hoar of C o n on p ra c tic e studio instruction plus six hours of practioe p e r week I I I B 2 Continued instruction in the major applied perform­ MIC, HASH at ml., Joint state­ ance area throughout all four years of the under­ ment on accreditation, p. 12 graduate program although prescribed minimum standards are met earlier I I I B 3 Weekly studio class, where all students of a single W riter perform ing medium meet a t a common time w ith the instructor for the evaluation of performance

I I I B 4 A periodic Jury examination at the end of each uhlt KUTC Source Bk. f2, p. 38 o f study I I I B 3 A final Jury examination Carrico, John Lee, Doctoral Dissertation

I I I B 6 A repertoire check for all students W riter Table X (continued)

P e rt C r ite r ia Source

I I I 0 1 Presentation of a graduating recital, singly or KEPC, MASK et al», Joint state­ vlth. one or more ether students ment on accreditation, p. 12

III G 2 Performance in public recitals prior to graduation Comaon p ra c tic e

III c 3 Performance in studio recitals Common p ra c tic e

III C k Attendance at concerts and faculty recitals Common p ra c tic e

III C 5 Attendance at student recitals Common p ra c tic e

n standards for thsir Instrument on a firs-point scale which follows:

5* excellent background

k. good background

3• fair background

2. weak background

1. nnaoceptable background

Respondents were instructed to refer onljr to the standards for thsir own performing medium or medlsu These standards were not identified as XASM standards on the questionnaire, but were merely described as standards which have been "recommended as the basis for qualifying examinations to be taksn by all freshman music students*” It should be recalled here that there is no difference in the recommended admission standards in the major applied field for the bachelor of music, bachelor of music education, bachelor of arts with a music major, or bachelor of fine arts with a music major*

It must also be pointed out that the BJflft standards were not stated in full in the questionnaire, but carefully condensed in order to conserve space. Yearly all of the representative works were in­ cluded* She wording of these standards in the questionnaire was left identical to that in the KASK By-Laws (1939)*

Mention has alrsady been mads of the fact that there is no definite statement in any of the recent published standards as to the per­ formance level recommended for the bachelor of masio education degree at graduation* The level for graduation used in the questionnaire for this study is the level specified for the end of the sophomore year of the bachelor of music degres in the same 1A3K standards* The ■ elect ion of this level was made on the basis of the quotation

In Chapter II froa the 1930 Volume of Proceedings of the Music Teachers'

Hational Association.1

These standards were tested on a similar five-point scale which

is given below:

3* excellent preparation

h* good preparation

3* fair preparation

2* week p re p a ra tio n

1* unacceptable preparation

Respondents were again Instructed to refer only to their own major perform ing medium or m edia. The same m easures fo r conserving space

were utilised by carefully eliminating a few of the representative

works listed in the BASH By-Laws* She wording, however, again re­

mained Identical with that in the original version.

Bach item under Additional Performance Skills, Insights Concern­

ing Performance, and Pedagogical Insights related to the Xajor Per­

forming Medium was rated on a five-point scale to indicate its level

of Lqportaace* The scale is similar to the one used by Eursteiner

in his inquiry. It is given below:

3* highly essential

U* important

3* helpful

2* somewhat h e lp fu l

1* of no use whatever

1. HASM, Tolune of Proceedings (1930), p. 87* k l

Part II. Studio Teacher Responsibility* This section of the

questionnaire vat designed to atetrtaln the extent to vhiah the studio teacher of the major applied area should he responsible for providing the skills and insights detailed In Part I* Parts I end II vore combined in the queetiomnaire since all of the tentative or iter la vith the exception of the admission and graduation standards vers each rated from tvo different points of viev* After each item had first heen rated in terms of its importance (Part I) it vaa then rated in a different scale to measure the degree of responsibility of the studio teacher In providing each skill or understanding. The

scale is given belov:

5 - fall responsibility

4. most responsibility

3* equal responsibility vith other teachers

2. same responsibility

1. no responsibility

Part III. Implementation. The curricular requirements vhich can most effectively provide the opportunity for stridents to acquire essential performance skills vere discussed in this section* Oils part vas subdivided into three headings;

A* Preparation

3« I n s tr u c t lorn and Bxam lnatlem

0* Public Performance and Attendance at Becit&ls

Under Section A, Preparation, respondent a vere asked to select, on a multiple ehoioe question, the number of years of practical fam iliarity vith a major performing medium that should be considered as prerequisite 1*2 to admission to the bachelor of music education program* A second question asked for a rating of the importance of qualifying examin­ ations for a ll Incoming freshmen to establish competence to porsns study at the college level*

In Section B, Instruction and Examination, respondents were ashed to check the amount of credit which they considered appropriate for one hour of studio instruction plus six hours of practice per weak*

The next five items pertaining to inetruotion and examination were to be rated on a five-point scale identical with the one used under

Part I—ranging from highly essential to of no use whatever*

In Section C, Public Performance and Attendance at Seoltals, five additional items were to be rated on the same five-point scale*

Part IT* Instructional Jmphaals* The writer is Indebted to John

© Lee Carrico for the ranking device which was used in this part* In his questionnaire, Carrico presented a hypothetical situation allowing

50 per cent more lesson time* Respondents were ashed to rank four items in the order in which they should receive additional stress*

The four items were (l) technical exercises, (2) sight reading,

( 3 ) more intensive repertoire, and (U) more extensive repertoire.

In the present study* the writer allowed a hypothetical fifth year to be added to the bachelor of music education program, in which a proportionate amount of time would be allotted to the instruction

2* John Ice Carrico, *A Study of Jpplled Mnslc in Tour-Tear State- Supported Colleges of Texas,11 (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Seorge Peabody University, 1 9 5 6) , p . 113* in the major applied field* The Item* In Carrico*e comparison were modified slightly, and a fifth item added* They are as follows;

1* perfecting of limited repertoire

2* expansion of repertoire

3* technical facility

4. sight reading

3* expansion of pedagogical emphasis

Information Pertaining to the aespondent

lech respondent was asked to identify himself as belonging to

one of the four categories of people who were sent questionnaires:

1* director of a school of music

2* college studio teacher of applied music

3* college teacher of mnsio education

h. music supervisor in public schools

Sach respondent was also asked to indicate the number of years he had

served In his present capacity. The questionnaires were coded to

Identify the school or city (in the case of the supervisors) to which it was sent*

Procedure in Building and Hailing Questionnaire

After many revisions had been made in the questionnaire, a dittoed copy was sent to each of ten faculty members of the School

of Music of the Ohio State University* These individuals were asked

to suggest editorial changes which they deemed necessary* After

Incorporating as many of these suggestions as was deemed advisable, the questionnaire was discussed with all members of the vrIter's dmetoral committee and with a specialist In educational research*

The final questionnaires were sailed, together with a covering letter from Dr. Henry A. Brulnema, head of the School of Mieic at Ohio State

University, to the heads of all schools of anisic listed as fall members of the HASH in 1959^. and to all supervisors of music in cities

of ^0,000 or over according to the 1950 census.** Each of the heads of

the schools of music was sent three copies of the questionnaire with

the request that he complete one questionnaire himself, and distribute

the other two to a studio teacher of applied music and a teacher of music education on the staff. The list of supervisors was procured directly from the office of the Executive Secretary of the Huslc

Xduoatore national Conference*^ Copies of the covering letters are included in Appendix 3.

Tour months after the in itial mailing, a follow-up post card was sent to every director whose staff had not yet returned three

qiestionaires and to every supervisor who had not returned a questionnaire.

A total of SJk questionnaires was sent out according to the distribution in Table 2. The number and percentage of usable returns is else shown in this table.

3 . Membership List, latlonal Association of Schools of Music, 1959* h. U.S. Department of Commerce, Statistical Abstracts of the U.S.. 1959. p p . 18-21.

5* Correspondence, Tanette Lawler, Executive Secretary, MSEC. U5

Tattle 2

q.URSTIOUBAIRLS MAILED AKL EETUHUED

Category of Humber Humber o f Percentage of Be sp on dent Sent Usable Returns Usable Returns

Directors 20S 86 1+1.14

Applied Ifusic Teachers 208 58 3 7 -5 ,

Music Education Teachers 208 55 31+.2 . 35*6

Teachers of App. & Mus. Ed. - 35 - •

Supervisors 250 98 39-2

T o ta l Sfk 332 38.0

Discussion of the Population Selected for Study

The decision to lim it the colleges which would he asked ~to participate In this study was based on the more or less arbitrary assumption that a school which has been recognized by the principal accrediting agency in the country is more likely to be employing faculty with a professional outlook than a school which for one reason or another does not have membership. More important than whether or not a school i 8 accredited is the necessity of obtaining a balance of philosophical orientation in the population selected. It is assumed that there is likely to be a difference in the viewpoint of a college teacher of music education and a college teacher of applied music.

Such a difference would naturally exist only in larger schools where there is little or no overlapping of responsibility between these two fields. In smaller schools, the same individual may teach in both 1+6 areas. Indeed, a sufficient number of questionnaires were returned by ouch people that the writer considered it advisable to include th is group as a fift h category* It is farther assumed that a director of a school of music is sympathetic to both points of rlevx that of the music education specialist and that of the sp iled music epee 1 allot*

If this assusption is not & valid one, the error thus committed must be accepted as one of the limitations of this study* Vhere an accredit­ ed school does not offer a degree with a major in music education, It was not included in the survey*

In order partially to validate the proposed criteria a proportion of the population to be questioned was selected from the actual practitioners in the fie ld of music education* It must be assumed again that for the purposes of this study, a sampling of the opinions of public school music teachers w illy n illy would simply resu lt in confusing the issues* A group of professional music educators was sought vho, by virtue of some success in their profession, had been appointed to a supervisory capacity In a large metropolitan area in the United States* It might again be argued that such an as erupt ion is not based on fact, since in many instances such appointments are not based on the possession of a mature, balanced philosophical point of view* It can only be said In defense of this selection that one would be more likely to find a higher percentage of individuals whose professional Judgement could be accepted as being valuable, than in a random sampling of mnsic teachers, regardless of their length of service* ^7 A vord of eaqplanation should be included concerning the procuring of a list of such supervisors. Whereas the membership list of the

National Association of Schools of Music includes the names of the direc­ tors of each member school, there is no such list of supervisors of music in cities of 50,000 and over available. The writer corresponded with

Miss Tanette Lawler, Executive Secretary of the MENC in Washington, re­ questing such a list. At her request, the writer sent her a list of cities of 5^,000 inhabitants or over, and her office Btaff filled in the names of the supervisors from what information they had in their files.

It cannot be assumed that this list was completely tqp to date. Where no name was re tu rn e d fo r a given city, a questionnaire was simply mailed to the supervisor of music instruction, in care of the Board of

Education of that city. Appendix 0 contains a copy of the correspondence with Mis8 Lawler. A list of participating NASM accredited colleges, and a list of cities whose supervisors of muBlc Instruction participated in this study are included in Appendix C and 1) respectively.

Results were recorded in two ways. Responses shoving evaluations of the admission and graduation standards were classified only accord­ ing to the Job of the respondent. Mean scores were computed to indicate the evaluations of the standards by each of the five groups of re­ spondents. Because of widespread disagreement of replies within cate­ gories of respondents, further tabulations were made to indicate the percentage of each group who evaluated the admission and graduation standards at each level of the rating scale provided.

The responses in the remaining sections of the questionnaire were punched on I.B.M. cards in order to expedite the desired ks calculations. Respondents vers organized first according to Job classification, than according to their ova performance medium (pianists, vocalists, etc.) and means vere computed from the rating scores given to each item by each group from both classifications* In order to test statistically the validity of the differences in these mean scores on a particular item, an analysis of variance procedure vas need* 0m all items vhich shoved significant differences in scoring, either by respondents classified by Job or by instrument, the means vere further teeted by means of the Dumcan-Kramer Multiple Range Test,^ to indicate vhich pairs of groups shoved significant differences in their scoring. In the case of the final section on the relative value of various aspects of a major applied instruction program, the suggested aspects vere ranked in order of the mean scores given the item by each group, and also ranked in order of the mean score of the total sampling*

Limitations of the Study Ohly the major applied area of undergraduate preparation vas considered, and only as it applied to the preparation of public school teachers* Because the same questionnaire vas used for all performance fields, it vas necessary to include tentative criteria vhich in the final analysis might only apply to one or tvo of the performance fie ld s . There are lim itations inherent in the choice of a sample for

6. David B. Duncan, "Multiple Range and Multiple I Testa" Biometrics. 9al. 11 (1955). PP* H9 the study. It might be Incorrect to assume that the directors and s ta ff members of only HA8M Approved schools of music represent either the best available thinking or a reliable cross section of the thinking of the profession as a whole on the subject. Hie same might be said, for the supervisors selected for the study.

A further lim itation pertaining to the sample is due to the fact that it vas highly impractical to attempt any control of the numbers of respondents representing particular areas of performance. Con­ sequently, the returns proved to be somewhat weighted by a large percentage of pianists, particularly in the group of Applied teachers. As might be farther expected, there were very few responses from players of some types of instruments, for a major portion of the study, this latter group of respondents were classified as "strings" or "winds", rather than by sp ecific instrument. A rather serious limitation of the study resulted from the fact that the questionnaire provided no place for the respondent to clearly indicate his own performance medium. Bespondents were instructed to refer only to their own performance medium in evaluating both admission and graduation standards. The returns indicated that these instructions were ignored in a great number of instances. One hundred and twenty- six respondents, or approximately 38 per cent, evaluated the standards for more than one applied field. This necessitated the formation of a separate category in the classification by instrument to include a ll who checked more than one performance medium. This category vas designated as answering for a "mixed* group of instruments. Kany respondents, particularly directors and. supervisors, evaluated, the standards for all performance fields*

Because of the small number of responses to the standards for each Instrument in the above section, it vas iopractical to test the significance of the differences in these responses*

A final limitation is Inherent in any questionnaire forcing the respondents to confine their answers to a limited number of fixed choices* Chapter IT HESUITS OF THE SOBTXT

Degree of Importance of C riteria

A total of 332 usable questionnaire! or 38*0^ were returned. The figuree in Zable 3 indicate the total numbers of respondents in each category, classified both by job and by performing medium*

Table 3

DUAL CLASSIPICAZ1UH OP XBSPCHIBVTS

4> a 0 4» Sa 0 8 3 9 h 3 a U

0 sH § H Total

► a* O Other Directors 19 13 9 - 1 3 - hi 86 Applied Teachers 3* 10 5 - 3 3 - 3 58 Music Xd. Teachers 6 8 9 1 6 h 2 19 55 Combined Applied and Music Xd* 3 8 h 2 6 3 - 9 35 Supervisors 6 16 8 - 5 5 1 57 98 Total 68 55 35 3 21 18 3 129 332

All 332 respondents did not, however, reply to each item. Total responses used In calculating means w ill be shown for each item in subsequent tables* Because of the small number of respondents in some of the instrument c la ssific a tio n s, these were combined into the following categories: piano, voice, strings, winds, and mined* The

5 1 5 2 last category Includes all who evaluated the admission and graduation standards for more than one Instrument*

Proficiency acquired for College Xntr^v^e Table 4 shows a comparison of the means of the ratings given to the. admission standards for each applied field by each group of re­ spondents*1 The five-level rating scale used for thesa evaluations is as follows: 5* excellent background 4* good background 3* fa ir background 2 . weak background 1* unacceptable background

Table 4

MBAS RATINGS OP ADMISSION STANDARDS ST JOB CLASS IP I CAT ION

a o • •rl m • m fe •d U • Admission *»o i s j Standards o 5 1 * 1 t• hi for: | S t a f a i 5 £ ?!

Piano 183 4.10 3*90 4.05 4.00 3*97 4.00 Voice 159 3*87 3*69 3*55 3*50 3*98 3*83 V iolin 116 4.25 4.00 4.00 3*86 3*78 4.00 Violoncello 79 4.17 3*33 4.10 4. MO 3*61 3.92 Clarinet 102 4.03 3*40 3*64 3*78 3*57 3*73 Trumpet 98 4.09 3*86 3*93 3*M0 4.24 3*77

1* The data in Table 4 is presented in graph form in Chart No* 1 in Appendix T. 53 Because of an insufficient number of responses In this section, an analysis of variance procedure vas not employed to test the significance of the differences of the Mans in Xable h. A complete record of the responses to this item, shoving the percentage of respondents checking each level of the rating scale may be found in

Table 56 of Appendix I . The sean score from the total ssapling indicates that the ad­ mission standards are widely accepted as representing a "good" back­ ground* When the Mean scores of each category of respondents are compared, videspread dieagreeaent is in evidence, although the sig­ nificance of these differences has not been statistically tested* The admission standards for piano show the leaat amount of disagreement. There is general agreement that the voice standards are relatively lover than those for piano, but the naan scores of the various groups are more videly separated* The total mean score for the violin standards is the same as those for piano, but vlder separation of group means continues* Cello standards show the videat diversity of opinion* Clarinet and tnuqpet standards also shov vide disagreement

of group means* Chart No. 1 in Appendix K presents the same inform­ ation contained in Table 4, but in graph form* An examination of this chart shove that no patterns of consistency are apparent in the mean scores of the various groups of respondents* A compendium of the written comments included in the section on admission standards reveals the following seven points listed in the order of the frequency with vhich they vere included. 1. The background of a student, in terms of his training, is secondary in iajportance to his aptitude and diligence. A student should not he penalised for poor teaching prior to college entrance* (Seven)2 2* Examples of repertoire per se are meaningless without some indication of how well they are played* (four)

3* A good piano background for voice majors is of equal or greater importance than singing ability. (Tour) h. Musical examples given should be expanded to include the following} a* More Bach for piano (two) b* Specific cosipooitions for voice (two) c* Contemporary music (two)

d* Violin music of better musical value (one) 3* Admission standards should be raised. (Two)

Proficiency Bequlred for Oradnation Table 3 shows a comparison of the means of the ratings given the graduation standards for each applied field by each group of respondents*^

2* Bombers in parentheses indicate the number of times the content appeared* 3* The data in 3 wo presented in graph form in Chart No. 2 in Appendix ?• 55 The five-level rating scale used for these evaluations is as fo llo w st

5* excellent preparation 4. good preparation 3* fa ir preparation

2. weak preparation 1* unacceptable preparation

Sable 3

KEAK BATHOS OF GRADUATION STABLABDS BY JOB CLASSIFICATION

• 0 •

As in the previous section on admission standards, an analysis of variance procedure was not used to test the significance of apparent differences in mean scores. A complete record of the re­ sponses to this item, shoving the percentage of respondents 56 each le v el of the rating scale may he seen in Table 57 ln Appendix 3».

The mean scores from the entire sampling indicate that the graduation standards represent a "good" preparation. An examination of the mean scores for the various groups of respondents again reveals widespread disagreement, although the statistical significance of this disagree­ ment has not heen tested. The standards for trumpet show the widest diversity of group means. The data in Tahle 5 are presented in graph form in Chart No. 2, Appendix I. This graph again reveals the fact that there is very little consistency in the patterns of group means.

The mean scores of the directors, music education teacherB and super­ visors appear to fall fairly close to the total mean scores.

As in the section on admission requirements, the written comments are summarized helov. They are listed in the order of the frequency with which they appear. 1. Standards of performance for music education majors at the time of graduation should he raised ahove those specified in the questionnaire. More should he accomplished heyond the standards given for admission. (Twelve)1* 2. The musical examples should he expanded to included the fo llo w in g : a. Contemporary music (four) with specific suggestions in­ cluding Hindemith conpositions for wind instruments h. Brahms sonatas and Debussy 1st Rhapsody for clarinet (two) c. Specific compositions for other orchestra instruments (one) d. Violin compositions of greater musical worth (One) e. School vocal literature for piano (one)

Numbers in parentheses indicate the number of times the item appeared. f* Substitution of more practical selections for roice than "standard opera and oratoria arias" (one)

3« The suggested standards are good, but it is doubtful if they can be accomplished in a four year college course, along with completing all the other necessary requirements, (Four) Successful teaching demands much more than the ability to perform specified selections veil. (Tvo) 5« There is vide diversity in the levels of difficulty of the compositions suggested as a measurement. (Tvo) 6. The mastery of the traditional repertoire should be replaced by the development of reasonable performance s k ills on several in­ struments. (One) 7. The term "second desk players" should be eliminated in favor of " first desk." (One) 8. The inclusion of the statement "he should be able to read music" in the graduation standards is surprising. (One)

A ctional Performance Skills The five-level rating scale used to measure the iuportance of

specific additional competencies associated with performance skill is

given belowi 5* highly essential k. important

3* helpful 2 . somewhat helpful 1. of no use whatever 5« In addition to finding the mean rating on this scale for each item for the entire sanpling, a comparison of means vas nade according to (a) the Job classification of the respondents, and (b) the identification by performing medium. A comparison of these means is shown in Table 6. In order to test the significance of differences appearing in these aean scores, tvo null hypotheses vere considered: first, that the means in the classification according to Job are the same; second, that the mesna in the classifications under performing medium classification are the same. To test these hypotheses, an analysis of variance procedure vas employed, line to the large number of Items involved, the items vere conveniently grouped, and only those ques­ tionnaires in vhich every item in the group vas answered vere used in the analysis* The number of questionnaires used for each item is indicated in Table 6.** for all items except those marked vith a * or * , it may be con­ cluded that the tvo null hypotheses stated may be accepted as being true, or that there are no significant differences in the means of the subdivisions of the entire sampling, either by Job or by in­ strument classification, for those items marked with a • , the null hypotheses can be rejected at a confidence level of 95 per cent, for those items marked vith a v , the hypotheses msgr be rejected at a

99 per cent level of confidence* Wherever the means are significantly different on a particular Item, there Is statistical reason to

5. The data in Table 6, indicating the aean scores of the various Job classifications, are presented in graph fora In Chart Ho. 3. Appendix f • Tab!* 6

COMPARISON 0? m u SCCBSS OH TH1 XVQUAICI QJ ABDIIIOHAL FJRFQRKAHCI SKILLS 3T JOB CLASSIFICATION ASD BY PIRFGRKAICE HIDIUM CLASSIFICATION

m »>• • n • • 8 9 ; • • Ofl 8 •d • 4 1 m l i t 4* 3 0 e 3 £ \4U 0 e • | Competency *3 * 3 3 0 . • 0 1 S 8 'A 9 w4 t o | u 1 -H O +» a 3s! S 1 * l * j l i & P. t> w i 1. A performing repertoire of at learnt 3 hour-long recital programs 277 2.30 2.78 2.64 2.78 3.03 2.84 2.52 2.88 2.83 3.11 2.81 2. The ability to read with reasonable technical mastery & aaslclanly feeling a much larger portion of the literar ture for hie major Instrument 277 4.33 • k.zt 4.31 4.56 4.42 4.19 4.21 4.34 4.23 4.39 4.39 3* The ability to memorise a piece comparable in length to a standard concerto 277 3.22 3.1U 3.13 3.M0 3.45 3.12 3.16 3.20 3.31 3.33 3.22 4. The ability to take a com­ position somewhat below the upper limit of his technical ability and prepare it for creditable performance in a week without the aid of an instructor 277 3-91 4 3-79 4.13 4.10 4.24 3.60 3.91 3-7S 3-97 4.19 3-*3 3* The ability to perform in formal ooncert A informal < gatherings with poise, con­ trol & good personal rapport 277 4.25 16 4.27 U.U0 4.48 it .11 4.32 4.24 , 4.20 4.25 it.22 Sable 6 (continued)

Comparison of aean scores on the importance of additional performance s k ills , etc*

«»m • m PS • • * e _ *d a s 3 i *4 •d I* * od e ■rt r«e e I ' d ! a s ♦» 1 o Competency * 3 o t o e *

Whereas the F ratio was used as a hasis for rejection of the

hypothesis that all the means are alike, it does not provide any

decisions as to vhich of the differences among the means nay be con­ sidered significant, and which may not. In order to test paired differences, the Dunean-£ramer multiple range and multiple F test was employed.^ In the tables which follow, the means which are shown

to be sig n ifica n tly different In Table 6 are ranked from the lowest to the highest. Any tvo means not underscored by the same line are

significantly different, and any two means underscored by the same line are not significantly different.

Table 7

DUFEHEBCIS IB MBABS OB ISSN 2 UK LEE ADDITIONAL FXBFORittNCE SKILLS ("the ability to read vith reasonable technical mastery and muaicianly feeling a mush larger portion than the performing repertoire of the literatu re for h is major instrument.*)

Supervisors Directors Applied Applied and Music Xd* Teachers Music Id . Teachers 4.19 4.25 4.31 4.42 4.56

Zable 7 indicates that a significant difference appears only in

the mean ratings of the supervisors and of the college teachers of music education on this item.

6. Ibid 6 2

T able 8 DU1BRENCXS IN ME ASS ON ITEM 1+ UNDER ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE SKILLS ("the ability to. . .prepare a castpoeltlan for performance without the aid of an instructor.")

Supervisor* Directors Applied Music Id. Applied and Teachers Teachers Music Xd. 3.60 3*79 4.05 4.10 4.24

Table 8 indicates that the supervisors rated this item signifi­

cantly lower than any of the college teachers, but not significantly lower than the directors Wio rated it the lowest of any of the college personnel.

Table 9

DUTEHXNCES IN MEANS ON ITEM 8 UNDER ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE SKILLS ("the ability to transpose on his major instrument.")

Applied Applied and Directors Supervisors Music Xd. Teachers Music Xd. Teachers 3 .6 7 3 .8 5 3 .8 6 4 . 0b 4.28

Table 9 indicates that a significant difference appears only in

the mean rat Inge of the applied teachers and the music education

teachers on th is item. It should be noted that in no case are the differences in group mean due to the performance medium of the respondents, but in the case 63 of three items, significant differences may he attributed to the Job classification of the respondents* There would appear to be general agreement that a "performing repertoire of three hour-long recital programs" might be helpful* but not important to the music teacher*

Memorization is indicated to be of only slightly greater importance, while sight-reading skill is rated as an "important" asset by a majority of respondents. Significant difference in mean ratings on

the latter item are surprising in that supervisors as a group are the lowest in their ratings of sight-reading, whereas music education teachers are the highest*

While the means for the total sampling rate the ability to work up a new composition for performance without the aid of an instructor as "important", there are notable differences in the means of the various Job categories. College teachers in general place more im­ portance on this item than do supervisors and directors*

It is somewhat surprising that the differences in group means on the "ability to transpose on the major instrument" are due to Job classification rather than performing medium classification* Music education teachers considered this ability well above the "iqportant"

level, while applied teachers as a group rated it below the "important" mark*

ill of the remaining items in this section appear to rate an evaluation of considerable importance by all categories of respondents.

The ability to perform before an audience is rated noticeably lower,

however, than "the ability to demonstrate satisfactory skill for use

in school and community." This is an interesting fact, and would 6 4

•••a to Indicate that respondents are more willing to allow a hypo­ thetical "school and community" to dictate the performance standards of a teacher rather than the degree-granting institution which gradu­ ates him* It is also interesting that the "ability to perform in large and small ensembles" is considered by the sampling as a whole to be of greater ijqportance than to perform as a soloist* The item which received the highest rating of any in this section* and second highest of any similarly rated statement in the entire study is the "ability to identify* as a listener, any deviations by another performer from correct performance as indicated by a given score* . *"7 Although no significant differences appear in the mean scores of the different categories of respondents for these three items mentioned directly above, it may be noted that the college teachers of music education consistently rated the items of slightly greater importance than did the other groups of respondents* This is true for the entire section under the title of "additional performance skills*" There does not appear to be any other pattern for the entire section* Written comments Included in questionnaires which pertain to performance sk ill are given below* 1* One or two hours of "easily accessible" repertoire might be more acceptable from a realistic standpoint than the three hours specified in item 1* 2* Memorisation is not of eq)^l importance to all types of music students* One respondent considered this of more importance to voice

7* The item receiving the highest rating was "the ability to discrim­ inate artistically in the selfotion of music appropriate to the needs of a school and cosmmnity." (Item B 6) 6 5 major* than to hand, director*. Similar shading* would apply to item*

1*, 6, and 6 which refer to learning music Independently, demonstrating

satisfactory performance skill for school and community, and trans­ position, respectively* 3* "Some of these abilities, perhaps all, are Innate, or are difficult to develop at college age* Some of our best teachers (in the light of shat their pupils can do) have not developed them**

Insights Concerning Performance As in the preceding section, the five-level rating scale used to measure the importance of these insights concerning performance is as

follow s 1

5* highly essential U. im p o rta n t

3 . h e lp f u l

2 . somewhat helpful

1* of no use whatever A comparison of the mean* of the sampling divided into Job classification a and performing medium is shown In Table 10. Tor all items except those marked with a • or ♦ , it may be again

said that the tvo null hypotheses stated earlier (page 58) may be accepted as true, or that there are no significant differences in the means of the subdivisions of the sampling, either by Job or by in­ strument classification* Tor the items marked with a * , the null

8* The data In Table 10, indicating the mean scores of various Job classifications, are presented in graph form in Chart No. 4, Appendix T* Sable 10

CQMPARISGH 07 KEAH SCORES OS SHE DPQB2AICE 07 INSIGHTS GOHGERSISO PERJCfiHAICE BI JOB CLASSI7ICAIK* AID BY PER7QBMAIGE MEDIUM CLASS 171 CAT I OS

k»m m 1 a • a . ■c ». 0 h • I Mhif 1 ! a t Competency * 3 •rl n e 0 e II • ■ * 0 1 3 31 % ■rt u .•! as § s | « iH*< •H O •t* n s s Directors 1 * 1 n o h >• w s 11 1. She ab ility to demonstrate authoritatively the etyllstle difference* of each major period of musical composition ae exemplified In the litera­ ture of hie major Instrument 277 i*. 17 e 4.1S It. 1+0 U. i4 it. 36 3.96 it. 29 it.07 it. 09 U. 23 4.15 2* She ability to transfer musical values rsAised In the major performl^ medium to performances vhich he w ill t conduct in other media 277 h.65 1 it. 63 U. 69 it.70 it. 69 4.55 it.70 U.63 it. 69 4.72 4.60 3* The ability to build ac­ ceptable program* from the literature of his major per­ forming medium 303 it.35 4 .4 l 4.26 h. 20 it.43 it.Ul it.30 it. 56 it.h3 4.21 4.32 It* The a b ility to make com­ petent Judgements concerning the mueloal values in perfor­ mances in hie own and other performing media 303 4.71 it. 65 4.67 it. 72 it. S3 lt.76 lt.72 4.74 U.70 4.85 4.66 Table 10 (continued)

Comparison of Man scores on tha Importance of insightb conesrnlng psrforman.es, ate*

I — 3> m m S • ^ * m OR i i & H Vi * +» i : SS Or-I *ri 0 a Competency 0 ♦ • 1 0 ! •3 ¥ z S i s i 9 *4 h 1 •S IS § * 15 ■H O * 53 F! s t * I* 1 P« ► n * 5 . Tha ability to utllizs the m ajor perform ing medium aa an aid to composing and arran g in g 303 3M 3-1J8 3*59 3 .5 4 3 . u 3-52 3-68 3 .3 * 3*27 3.28 3.56

6 . Tha a b i l i t y to d iscrim in ­ ate artistically in tha se­ lection of music appropriate to the needs of a school and oommnnlty 303 4.86 e 4.83 4.96 4.74 4.33 4.91 a 4.92 4.96 4.9 6 4.74 4.80 7 . The d e sire to continue performance activities be­ yond the immediate require­ ments of a public school p o s itio n 303 4.15 4.23 4.09 4.18 4.31 4.02 4.13 3.90 4.35 4.08 4.23

* Confidance lerel of 95$ 66 hypotheses can be rejected with a confidence level of 95 per cent*

For those items narked with a * , the hypotheses may be rejected at o 99 Per cent confidence level* For these items the means may be said to be significantly different, and that there is statistical reason to conclude that the score on the item depends on the classification of the person answering the questionnaire*

In order to test which of the paired differences of the starred

items are significant, the Duncan-Kramer multiple range and multiple

F test was again enployed* In Tables 11 through 13 which follow, the means which are shown to be significantly different in Table 10 are ranked from the lowest to the highest* iny two means not underscored by the same line are significantly different, and any two means under­

scored by the same line are not significantly different*

T able 11

DIFFERENCES Of MEAL'S QF JOB CLASSIFICATIONS ON ITEM 1 UMBER INSIGHTS CONCERNING PERFORMANCE ("the ability to demonstrate authori­ tatively the stylistic differences of each of the major periods of musical cosiposition as exemplified in the literature of his performing medium.”)

Supervisors Music Ed* Directors Applied and Applied T eachers Music Ed* T eachers 3 .9 6 4*14 4-16 4 .3 6 4*40

Table 11 reveals that the applied teachers and the group who

taught both applied and music education rated this item significantly 69 higher than did the supervisors. It cannot he stated, however, that the scores of the anisic education and the directors was significantly different from either of the two extreses*

Tahle 12 DIFFERENCES IK MEANS Off JOB CLASSIFICATIONS ON ITEM 6 UNDER INSIGHTS CONCERNING PERFORMANCE ("the ability to discriminate artistically in the selection of music appropriate to the needs of a school and community.")

Hoaic Id. Directors Applied and Supervisors Applied Teachers Music Ed. Teachers 4 .7 4 4.93 4.93 4 .9 1 1^.96

Tahle 12 shove that the scores of the supervisors and thei applied teachers are significantly higher than the scares of the music education teachers. The means of the directors and teachers of applied music and music education cannot he said to differ from the means of the groups at either extreme in the order of ranking.

Table 13 DIFFERENCES IN MEANS OF INSTRUMENT CLASSIFICATIONS ON ITEM 6 ("the ability to discriminate* . •")

Vinde Mixed Piano Tolce Strings 4*74 4.90 4.92 4.96 4.96 70 Table 13 shove that wind instrument players and respondents identified with more than one performing medium rated this item

significantly lover than did pianists, vocalists and string players* It may he noted that the single item receiving the highest mean score in terms of its importance over the entire sampling is that one designating the "ability to discriminate artistically in the selection of music Appropriate to the needs of a school and comsranity*" It is not surprising, however, to find significant differences in the mean scores of the various job categories* As shown in Tahle 12, applied

teachers and anisic education teachers are at opposite ends of a list

shoving ranking order. Jpplied teachers in general would seem to champion a selectio n of music based on i t s "artistic" w r it s while presumably music education teachers vould consider other factors as

having important bearing on this selection* It should be noted further that the supervisors rate the item significantly higher than

the anisic education teachers* Tha ability to make competent Judgments regarding the performances was rated as very lip or t ant or for a ll practical purposes as "highly essential" by all categories of respondents* The same may be said for the "ability to transfer musical values realised in the major performing medium to perfonaances (to be conducted) in other media*" The ability to "build acceptable programs from the literature of (a student's) major performing medium" was consistently rated as important, although the total mean is not as high on this item as on the three already mentioned. Two items being rated approximately the same, though of somewhat 71 letter importance are itema 1 and 7* While these may be said to be "important" to the music teacher, they are not considered to be

"highly essential" by the majority of respondents in this study. The paired differences of the various Job classifications on the first item have already been mentioned.

The item receiving the lowest rating in this section is item 5, "the a b ility to u t ilis e the major performing medium as an aid to composing and arranging." While this is consistently rated as a helpful asset, respondents generally seemed to agree that this type of activity is not engaged in to the extent that it should warrant great emphasis in an undergraduate program of applied study.

Pedagogical Insights Related to the Major Performance Area The five-level rating scale used to measure the importance of these pedagogical insights is as follows:

5 . highly essential

h. important

3* helpful

2. somewhat helpful 1. of no use whatever

A comparison of the mean scores of the respondents categorised by Job classification and by performing medium Is shown in Table 1^*9

for all items except those marked with a * , it may be said that the two null hypotheses stated earlier (page 58 ) be accepted as

9* The data in Table lh, indicating the mean scores of the various Job c la s sific a tio n s, are presented in graph form in Chart So. 3 in Appendix p. Table 14

COMPARISON QT MEAH SCORES OH TEE IMPORTANCE OP PEDAGOGICAL IHSIOHTS RELAXED TO THE MAJOR FXRPQRMAKCX AREA BT JOB CLASSIPICAIICN AMD BT PEHPORMARCX MEDIUM CLASSIPICATIQV

• • *« m e * 0 p i n & „Z • c l a C8 ■*» i : h * U Competency *3 ! *4 e 0 •H 0 •d 3 8 'A ♦ • Rjn S

Conparieon of m s an score* on the Importance of pedagogical insights, etc.

• « 4* • • • & ■ >i * 5 ^ * m i f Vi * * 4 ? 1 4* i : Z l O H 0 •rl rl • 0 • *0 Competency Pi 3 1 t 0 2f £ & 9 ■rl (« 1 A 0 3 all s § 1 •H O 4* ■H to x 1 n s * i* I 03 > a 6. An elementary understand­ ing of the principles of mo­ tivation as related to the learning process 303 V 57 4.59 4.39 4.66 4.51 4.66 4.1*5 4.70 4.62 4.62 4.56 7. An understanding of child growth A development as re­ lated to the prohleas involv­ ed in his major performing area 238 V 35 u.31 4.16 4.36 4.26 4.13 *•37 4.54 4.35 4*40 8 * The ability to evaluate pupil progress la achieve­ ment of musical growth in hii major perforating medium 238 V 55 *•57 4.40 4.61 4.48 4.62 4.38 4.54 4.65 4.58 4.60 9. The ability to integrate theory of music with in­ struction in his major per­ forming medium 238 u.38 4.49 4.40 4.45 4.41 *•33 ^55 4.27 4.27 4.23 4.42 10. The ability to Integrate music history A literature with instruction in his major performing medium 238 **-23, 4.43 4.09 4.23 3.93 4.19 4.28 4.15 4.04 4.13 4.32 * Confidence lev el of 95jt* true or that there are no significant differences in the means of the

subdivisions of the sampling, either by job or by instrument claesi-

fic&tion. For the item marked with a * , the null hypotheses may be

rejected with a confidence level of 95 per cent* For this Item, the means may be said to be significantly different, and that there is

statistical reason to conclude that the score on the item depends on

the classification by performance medium of the respondent*

In order to test the significance of the paired differences on

this item, the IXinc an-Kramer multiple range and multiple F test was

employed* In Table 15 which follows, the means in the single item in

Table 14 which are shown to be significantly different are ranked from

the low est to th e h ig h e s t. Any two means not undersco red by th e same

line are significantly different, and any two means underscored by

the same line are not significantly different*

Table 15

DIFFERENCES IN MEANS OF INSTRUMENT CLASSIFICATIONS ON ITEM 1 UNDER PEDAGOGICAL INSIGHTS ("an understanding of the physical problems which are commonly encounter­ ed by young pupils studying in a par­ ticular performance medium.")

Mixed Piano Toice Strings Winds 4.61 4*72 4*82 4.86 4*92

This table reveals that those respondents who were identified with

more than one performance medium rated this Item significantly lover 75 than did all of the other categories of respondents except the pianists*

This n ay he partially accounted for hy the suggestion that all respond­ ents who identified themselTes with a particular performance medium were more aware of specific physical problems encountered hy young performers, while the respondents identifying themselTes as being qualified to speak authoritatively regarding several performing media were more apt to deal in generalities* However, it should be noted that sill categories of respondents rated this item very high in importance, and that the difference In means, although statis­ tically significant, is very slight.

In examining the mean scores for the total sampling, it becomes evident that the first items are rated the highest, and the later items seem to be considered of less and less importance* Since no 7 t e s t was employed to check the significance of the differences appearing vertically in the table, no hard and fast conclusions may he drawn*

However, it appears evident that items 7, 9, and 10, dealing with an tinder standing of growth and development, and the ability to integrate theory and music history with major applied instruction are not con­ sidered as important as the other seven items in the section* 2ven these are rated well above the "Important" level on the rating scale*

The most significant factor evident from the returns for this section of the questionnaire is the Importance attributed to the total area of pedagogical emphasis* This is further substantiated by the replies to Fart IT of the $iestlonaalre which attempts to measure the relative importance of various points of emphasis in the applied instruction program* 76

Summary

Of tha four groups of people who were sent questionnaires (Direc­

tors, Applied. Music Teachers, Music X ducat ion Teachers in NASH ac­ credited schools, and Supervisors in larger U. S. cities) all seemed equally willing to participate in the study* Approximately 3d per cent of the total number of people sent questionnaires returned them*

Responses were tabulated according to the performance medium of the

respondent as well as by his occupational classification described

abors*

Mean scores from the entire sampling indicated the admission

standards to represent a "good" background for each instrument* Mean

scores of the various groups of respondents showed rather wide dis­

agreement as to the acceptability of these admission standards*

Written comments included in the questionnaire most frequently alluded

to the belief that a student's background is of secondary Importance

to his aptitude and diligence. This position was stated by a very

small number of respondents, however*

A very similar pattern appeared in the replies evaluating the graduation standards* Overall mean scores indicated the preparation

level specified by the standards as "good." Group means showed wide

disagreement. The standards suggested in the questionnaire were the

same as the MASK standards specified for the end of the second year

of the bachelor of music program* The statement made most frequently by respondents who wrote in additional comments was that the graduation

standards for music education majors should be higher than those

specified in the questionnaire* 77 Result8 of the surre? to ascertain the importance of certain competencies associated with the major performance area showed a re­ markable degree of agreement between the various categories of re­ spondents. Through analysis of variance computations significantly different means were proven for a relatively few items. The same fact held true for the means of respondents reclassified according to their major performing medium.

Of a total of twenty-six competencies or insights comprising this section, only three received a total mean score under h.O which was the level designated in the rating soale as "important.” These were (1) a performance repertoire totaling three hour-long programs,

(2) the ability to memorise long compositions, and (3) the ability to u tilise the major performance medium in composing and arranging.

Since a rating of 5t representing "highly essential,” was the highest possible score on any item, no mean score of 3 appeared. The highest total mean score (U.86) waa given to the item which read,

"The ability to discriminate artistically in the selection of music appropriate to the needs of the school and community.” Of the eight items receiving scores above h.6, two had to do with the student's ability to make judgments concerning performances of others; two had to do with pedagogical insights; one with a knowledge of teaching literature; one with transferring musical values acquired in the major performance area to conducting; and the last with performance ability commensurate with the demands of a school or community. The section in which all of the items received total mean scores well ah ore H.O wae that covering Pedagogical Insights • It is also noteworthy that no significant differences appeared in the mean scores of the respondents as classified hy jobs on any item in this section* C h a p te r T

THE EESPC2JSLBILITY’ OF THE STUDIO TEACHER

In addition to rating each of several conpetencles in terns of its importance to the prospective music teacher, respondents in this study were asked to rate the sane items in terms of the responsibility of the studio applied teacher in helping the student acquire these sldlls, insights, and competencies. A five-level rating scale was again enployed, and is given belowt

5« fall responsibility

h* most responsibility

3* equal responsibility with other teachers

2* some responsibility

1. no responsibility

Along with finding the mean rating on this scale for the entire sampling, a comparison of means was again made according to (a) the job classification of the respondent and (b) the performance medium of the respondent. A comparison of these means is shown in Table 16 . 1

In order to test the significance of differences appearing in these mean scores, the same two null hypotheses described in Chapter IT were considered! first, that the means under the Job classification of the respondent are the same, and second, that the means in the classification according to the performing medium of the respondent

1. The data in Table 16, Indicating the mean scores of Job classifi­ cations, are presented in grsph form in Chart Ho. 6, Appendix I. 79 Table 16

COMPARISON Or (BAR SCCEES SI JOB AID BT FXRTQBMAHCX MEDIUM CLASSIFICATION IKDICAIIMO THE 3 (8 0 1 07 STUDIO TEACHER RESPOHSIBILITI IK PR 07 ID HO ADDITIONAL PXR7QRMAECX SEELS

4; a a I a a 9 1# h 9* ■rln a O S 2 m a a VI * Vi u +» i i IMibp 0 i-i 4»l*i O M a •4 Competency l ! - t 2f .9 t A i •H h 0 § 3 O •«* •H i 1 * t- CO > X3 A 2 2 n 1* 1 F n s. 1. A performing roportolro of at lout thru hour-long r e cita l programs 277 4.04 e 3 .M 3.82 4.38 4.42 3.93 3.96 3.90 4.00 4.22 4.08 2* The ability to road with reuonable technical mastery A wuslcianly feeling a mnoh larger portion of the litera­ ture for hie major Instrument 2 77 3.86 3*88 3.73 3. 9* 3.85 3.86 •e 3.86 3-46 3.77 4.17 3 . 9** 3 . The ab ility to memirise a pieeo comparable In length to a standard concerto 277 3-78 3-7^ 3.98 3.98 3-94 3.51 4.02 3.56 3*89 4.03 3.63 4* The ability to take a con- poeition somewhat below the upper limit of his technical ability and prepare it for creditable performance in a week without the aid of an instructor 277 3.75 3-76 3.82 3.78 3.94 3.59 3.77 3.59 3.83 3*97 3 .7 1 5. The a b ility to perform In formal concert A informal gatherings with poise, con­ trol A good personal rcpport 277 3.95 * U.05 4.22 3.62 3.88 3.93 4.20 4.00 4.03 3.89 3.80 Table 16 (continued)

Con$>arieon of aeon scoree indicating the degree of studio teacher responsibility, etc*

5 5 a • a i s i u H0 aS ■#»o u u Competency si o t i a 4* s i ha a ! ♦ m I 0 1 A *A a s s *4 u 1 o i3 as a s ■rt 0 +» * * * s 1 3 S P« ► u> £ I 6* She a b ility to demonstrate satisfactory performance skill for use in school and community 277 4.01 *.17 3-97 3.88 u.03 3.96 U.05 3*80 4*03 4.19 4.01 7. She ability to perform In large and sm all ensembles 277 3-51 4 3*U6 3-29 3.22 3 . » 3*82 4 3.3^ 3-15 3-V6 3.78 3.65 8* She ability to transpose on his major instrument 277 3-63 4 3^ 3.00 3-82 3.76 4.03 4 3*00 3.^9 3.66 It. 1*2 3 .7 4 9. The ability to identify ae a listener any deviations by another performer from correct performance as in­ dicated by a given score in terms of pitch, rhythm, tempo and dynamics 277 3.*«l 3*^9 3.29 3.30 3*58 3.70 3.25 3.3H 3.71* 3.61 3.54

* Confidence level of 95^ 4 Confidence level of 99? 82

are the same. To test thaee hypotheses, an analysis of variance procedure was employed*

Tor all lteme except those marked with a * or + , It may he con­

cluded that the two null hypotheses may he accepted as being true,

or that there are no significant differences in the means of the sub­

divisions of the toted sampling, either hy Job or by instrument

classification* Tor those Items marked with a * , the null hypotheses

may he rejected at a 95 P*r cent level of confidence* Tor those Items

marked with a * , the hypotheses may he rejected at a 99 per eent

confidence level* Wherever the means are significantly different on

a particular item, there Is statistical reason to conclude that the

score on the Item depends on the classification of the persons answer­

ing the questionnaire*

In order to test the paired differences of means on a particular

item, the Dancan-Kramer multiple range and multiple ? test was again

employed* In Tables 17 through 23 which follow, the means which are

shown to he significantly different in Tahle 16 are ranked from the

lowest to the highest* Any two means not underscored hy the same line

are significantly different, and any two means under sc wed hy tha same

line are not significantly different* S3 Table 17

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IS MEAIS 07 JOB CLASSIFICATIONS OS ITEM 1 USHER ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE SKILLS ("a performing repertoire of at leaat three hour-long recitals.”)

Applied. Directors Supervisors Music Ed. Applied and Teachers Teachers Music Ed. 3 .8 2 3 .8 8 3 .9 3 h.38 lv.1+2

The abore tahle Indicates that the means were different for all pairs of Job categories except the mole education teachers and those who taught music education and applied music. Respondents in these two categories felt that the development of repertoire was primarily the responsibility of the studio teacher, while the directors, and more particularly the applied teachers, would give the studio teacher most but not all of the responsibility for this. The respondents least directly involved with this part of the instruction seemed to take a middle position.

Table 18

FUSED DIFFERENCES 07 KEANS UNDER INSTRUMENT CLASSIFICATION CROUPS ON ITEM 2 UNDER ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE SKILLS ("the ability to read with reasonable technical mastery a much larger portion than the performing repertoire of the literature for his major instrument.")

T oice S trin g s P ia n o Mixed Finds 3.U6 3.77 3 .8 6 3-9* lf.17 Ob item 2 described in Table 16 there was no significant difference in the oeane of the job classification groups, but when the respondents vere categorised by instrument, some differences became evident* The pianists, vocalists, and wind players appeared to agree that the studio teacher should assume "most" of the responsibility for teaching sight- reading, while the vocalists and string players agree that a some shat larger share should be assumed by others of the faculty.

Table 19

PAINED DiriXBMCZS OF MEANS UNIES JOB CLASSIFICATION CROUPS ON ITEM 9 UNISLE ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE SKILLS ("the ability to perform in both formal concert and for informal gatherings with poise, control, and good personal ra p p o rt* ")

Music Id* Applied and Supervisors Directors Applied Teachers Music Id* Teachers 3*62 3*93 U .05

This table shows that the music education teachers as a group seemed to agree that the responsibility for preparing a student for a public performance is not to be left solely to the applied teacher, but should be shared by other members of the faculty* Sable 20

PAIRED UIT7IHKNCES OF MEANS USHER JOS CLASS IFICATION GROUPS Off ITEM 7 USHER AUDIT I ORAL PERFORMANCE SKILLS ("the ability to perform in both large and email ensembles.■)

Music Ed. Applied Directors Applied and Supervisors T eachers Teachers Music Ed. 3 .2 2 3.29 3.H6 3.6h 3 .S2

Table 20 indicates that a substantial number of respondents, most of vhosi were supervisors, believed that the applied teacher should assume the greatest share of the responsibility for providing the student with the ability to perform in ensembles* On the other hand, the college teachers themselves recognize this as a shared responsi­ b ility with other faculty members assuming nearly an equal amount of this responsibility.

Table 21

PAIRED DIFflSHWGES IK MEANS USHER INSTRUMENT CLASSIFICATION GROUPS ON ITEM 7 UNDER ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE SKILLS ("the ability to perform in both large and small ensembles.11)

Tolce Piano Strings Mixed Vinds 3.15 3-31* 3*65 3.65 3-7*

Vhen the respondents w ri reclassified according to their aajor 86 performing medium, their replies again showed significant differences*

Vlnd players, and those identified with more than one instrument seemed to agree that the applied teacher should be largely responsible for this skill, whereas pianists and vocalists agreed that other staff members should share almost equally in this responsibility* String players as a group showed no significant disagreement with either g ro u p .

Table 22

PAIRED DIFIXRENCES IN MEAN SCORES UHXBB JOB CLASSIFICATION GROUPS ON ITEM 8 UNDEti ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE SKILLS ("the ability to transpose on his major instrument•")

Applied Directors Applied and Music Ed. Supervisors T eachers Music Ed. Teachers 3*00 3*45 3*76 3*82 4.03

There Is no significant difference in the means of the supervisors, music education teachers and teachers of both muBic education and applied music* The means for those groups indicate that these respond­ ents felt that the studio applied teacher should have "most of the responsibility" for teaching transposition. The applied teachers quite clearly felt that this should be shared equally with other staff members*2 The mean score of the direotors, while different from that of supervisors and music education teachers, cannot be said to be

2. It should be remembered that a large percentage of the applied teachers who make up this category were pianists* 87 different from those who taught applied mule and music education*

The score seens to indicate that they consider the applied teacher chiefly responsible for teaching transposition, although some of this should also he taught hy other staff members*

T ahle 2}

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IS MEANS UNDER INSTRUMENT CLASSIFICATION (HICUPS OS ITEM H UNDER ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE SKILLS ("the ability to transpose on his major instrument.")

Piano Voice Strings Mixed Winds 3.00 3.h9 3.66 3.7I* U.L2

When the respondent e were r e c l a s s i f i e d hy in stru m e n t, some T sry

significant differences appeared. Piano players consider the teaching

of transposition to he a task which should he shared equally hy the

applied teacher and other members of the staff* Wind players on the

other hand felt that nearly full responsibility for this shoxld he

taken hy the applied teacher. Vocalists, string players and those with

more than one performing field would give the applied teacher "most”

of the responsibility for this task*

Without »g a statistical check of a vertical comparison of

the means from the total sampling shown in Tahle l6, it might never­

theless he reasonably accurate to make the generalisation that re­

spondents felt that the studio teacher should assume "most of the

responsibility'' (qpart from the student himself) for providing for the s s acquisition of all but the last three of the items appearing In this table. Although the mean scores on these three Items are not sub­ stantially lover than the point designated, as "most responsibility 11 f o r the studio teacher, there appears to be enough difference to warrant an attempted explanation. Tor item 7» "the ability to perform in. • » ensembles,■ it is obvious that the director of the ensemble is to be assigned a good share of the responsibility. A discussion of the item on transposition has already been given following Tables 22 and 23*

Since the "studio cIssb" technique is not universally practiced, it is likely that training in critical listening, as stated in item 9» h as been largely left to chance in programs with which a large number of the respondents were faM liar.

Insights Concerning Performance

The five-level rating scale used to indicate the degree of re­ sponsibility of the studio teacher in providing the insights listed in this section is given below;

3 * full responsibility

U. most responsibility

3 . equal responsibility with other teachers

2 . some responsibility

1. no responsibility

Table 2U- shows the mean score on each item for the entire sampling, and a comparison of means for each subdivision classified (1) by Job and ( 2) by instrument .3

3 . The data in Table 2h, indicating the mean scores of Job classifications are presented in graph form in Chart Ho. J in Appendix T. Table 2k

COMPARISON Off KEAH SCORES BY JOB ABB BY FERTQRKAHCE MEDIUM CLASSI7ICATIGH 07 THE RKSPQN2SHT IHDICATIHO THE ISOEEE OV STUDIO TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY IH PROYIBIHO EJSIQHTS CCKCERHIHC PERIQBMAHCZ

*■ ■ a t» e • • • m fc • 930 i U m a O u §i V* -ri +> iral t3S st ti*ri a* Competency O ■MH rl a O • CD t e ■H1 •c Pt d* • 1! 2 9 8. .-40 H o £ «rl O <*> 1 su 3 £F t to A I* 3* |* 1 oS >■ GO i 1* The a b ility to demon­ strate authoritatively the stylistic difference* of the najor period* of ansical composition a* exemplified in the literature of hi* aajor performing MediuM 277 3*87 3.86 3.87 3.68 4.06 3-93 3*79 3.68 3*34 4.06 3.90 2* The ability to tranefer nueieal Talues realised in the aajor performing aediun to perfomance* which he w ill conduct in other aedia 277 3.30 4 3.30 3.27 2.90 3.52 3.51 3*14 3.07 3.40 3.44 3*39 3* The ability to build ac­ ceptable program* from the literature of hi* aajor per­ forming aedlum 3<>3 lf.03 U.05 4.15 3.84 4.11 4.02 3.87 4.16 4.08 4.13 4.02 4. The ability to sake com­ petent judgement* concerning the musical ralnes in per­ formance* In hi* own and other performing media 303 3.52 4 3.46 3*54 3.20 3.66 3.71 4 3*27 3.46 3.70 3.79 3.53 Table 2k (continued)

Campari6on of mean scores indicating the degree of studio teacher responsibility la providing insights concerning performance

«* a *•« • 2 33 • • * a 0 93 • i * 0 a h a • O S3 a Vt -H r* * ■*» U h U Competency O i-t O i a 1 ? 1 H • O • O •H" 1« 0 0 3 9 ES h • Q 3 •H u o f f t | l S' O 4* X 10 Safi S CO 0* >• CQ 5« The ability to utilise the major performing medium as an aid to composing and arranging 3°3 2 .S3 2.62 2.63 2.M$ 2.66 3*27 2.65 2.80 2 . 6S 2.79 2.99 6. The ability to discrimi­ nate artistically in the selection of music appro­ priate to the needs of a school and community 303 3*3« * 3 . hi 3*39 3 .lh 3*23 3.56 V 3.05 3*50 3*57 3.28 3.hS 7. The desire to continue performance a c tiv itie s be­ yond the Immediate require­ ments of a public school position 303 3.66 * 3.8h 3.70 3.30 3.66 3 . 6S 3.57 3.62 3.68 3.S2 3.68

* Confidence level of 95J&* v Confidence level of 99?* 91 Identical statistical tests were employed as those described

following Table 16. For all items except those marked with a * or 1 ,

it may be concluded that there are no significant differences in the various group means. For those items marked with a * , it may be

assumed with a 95 per cent confidence level that the differences are

significant. For those items marked with a , the same assumption may be made, but with a 99 P®r cent confidence level. Wherever the

means are significantly different on a particular item, there is

statistical reason to conclude that the score on the item depends on

the classification of the person answering the questionnaire.

The tables which follow indicate the paired differences of means

on particular items already noted to show significantly different group

ratings. These paired differences have been tested for significance

by the Duncan-Kramer test already described.

Table 25

PAIHED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS UNIER JOB CLASSIFICATION CttJ ITEM 2 UNDER INSIGHTS CONCERNING PERFORMING!! ("the ability to transfer musical values realised in the major performance medium to performances which he w ill conduct in other media.")

Music 2d. Applied Directors Supervisors Applied and Teachers Teachers Music Ed. 2.90 3-27 3.30 3.51 3.52

The above table indicates that there is no significant difference

between the mean scores on this item for (l) applied teachers and 92 directors, and ( 2 ) supervisors and thOBe college teachers teaching both

applied and music education, and that the mean scores of the former pair

Is lower than that of the latter pair* The mean score of those re**

spondents teaching only music education is significantly lover than

either of the other pairs of job categories, thereby Indicating that

they feel that the applied teacher should assume somewhat less re­

sponsibility In this area than the other groups of respondents feel

that he should assume.

The competency described in this item is closely related to baton

technique on the one hand and to overall musicianship on the other.

Obviously the teacher of conducting w ill share almost equally with the

applied music teacher in helping a student acquire the needed com­ petency* Any attespt to explain the rather strange grouping which i s

indicated in Table 25 must be considered something of a conjecture.

Table 26

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS UNDER JOB CLASSIFICATION ON ITEM k UNDER INSIGHTS CONCERNING- PERFORMANCE ("the ability to make competent Judgments concerning the musical values in per­ formances in his own and in other performing media.*)

Music E d. Directors Applied Applied and Supervisors T eachers Teachers Music Ed.

3*20 3 * 1*6 3*66 3 .7 1

The above table indicates that the teachers of music education as

a group felt that the responsibility for providing the competency 93 described should be shared in nearly equal proportions by the applied teacher and others of the faculty. The supervisors, and the other groups of college teachers, questioned felt that the applied teacher should have a greater share of the responsibility. There may be said to be a statistically significant difference in the scores of these two groups. The mean score of the directors, however, may not be said to be significantly different from the means of either of these g ro u p s.

Table 2J

PAIRED DIF EE HEROES IE MEANS UNDER INSTRUMENT CLASSIFICATION 70S ITEM k UNDER INSIGHTS CONCERNING PERFORMANCE ("the ability to make competent Judgments concerning the musical values in per­ formances in his own and in other performing media.")

Piano Voice Mixed Strings Winds 3-27 3-U6 3.53 3.70 3.79

When the respondents were reclassified according to instrument it can be observed that string and wind instrument players, together with those respondents with more than one performance medium assign sig­ nificantly more responsibility to the studio teacher for providing this competency than do the pianists. The mean score of vocalists does not differ significantly from either that of the pianists or the instrumentalists. The pianists as a group rated the degree of re­ sponsibility of the studio teacher as approximately equal with other 94 member• of the staff* Instrumentalists tended to assign somewhat more responsibility to the studio teacher*

Table 28

PAIRED DIF1EEENCES IS MASS FOR JOB CLASSIFICATIONS ON ITEM 5 UNDER INSIGHTS CONCERNING PERFORMANCE ("the ability to utilize the major per­ forming medium as an aid to composing and arranging*11)

Music Ed. Applied Applied and Directors Supervisors Teachers Teachers Music Ed. 2 .4 6 2.63 2.66 2.82 3.27

From the above table It may be seen that the supervisors rated this Item significantly higher than any other group, thereby assigning more than an equally shared responsibility to the studio teacher for providing for its acquisition. While the mean for the directors is significantly above that of the music education teachers It is not different from that of the other college teachers. The mean for the music education teachers, however, may not be considered significantly different from that of the other college teachers. All of the lowest groups in this table may be said to have assigned the studio teacher with some responsibility for providing this competency, but less than that specified on the rating scale as "equal responsibility with

other teachers.B 95 Table 2$

P AIRED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS UNDER JOB CLASSIFICATIONS FOR ITEM 6 UNDER DISIGHTS CONCERNING PERFORMANCE ( " th e a b i l i t y to discriminate artistic­ ally in the selection of music ap­ propriate to the needs of a school and community.")

Music Ed. Applied and Applied Directors Supervisors Teachers Music Ed. Teachers 3*14 3-23 3-39 3-41 3-56

From the above table it can be seen that the only significant difference in mean scores appears between the two extremes in the ranked order. Music education teachers assigned significantly less responsi­ b ility to the studio teacher for providing this competency (insight) than did the supervisors. The means of the remaining groups cannot be stated to be different from the means of either group at the ex­ tremes of the ranking order.

Table 30

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS UNDER INSTRUMENT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR ITEM 5 UNDER INSIGHTS CONCERNING PERFORMANCE ("the ability to discriminate artistic­ ally in the selection of music ex­ propriate to the needs of a school and community.11)

Mixed Plano Vinds Toice Strings 3 .0 4 3-05 3*28 3.50 3.57 96

Vixen, the respondents were reclassified according to instrument, vocalists and string players assigned significantly more responsibility to the studio teacher for the ability to discriminate artistically in the selection of music for the echool and community than did the pianists and those who had more than one performance meditsu The mean of the wind players was not significantly different from the means of either of the groups at opposite extremes of the ranking order.

Table 31

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS UNDER JOB CLASSIFICATIONS FOR ITEM 7 UMIER INSIGHTS CONCERNING PERFORMANCE (•the desire to continue performance activities beyond the immediate re­ quirements of a public school position.•)

Music Ed* Applied and Supervisors Applied Directors Teachers Music Ed. Teachers 3.30 3.36 3*6s 3 .7 0 3.S1+

The only significant differences which appear in this table are between the mean scores of the directors on the one hand and the teachers of music education and those who taught both music education and applied music on the other hand. The supervisors and applied teachers show no significant differences from the means of either of these two extremes in their scoring.

In observing the means from the total sealing it may be concluded that only two items in this section were considered to involve "most* of the responsibility of the studio teacher. These are (l) the ability 97

to demonstrate stylistic differences and ( 2 ) the ability to build acceptable programs from the literature available* No significant

differences appear between any of the categories of respondent by either classification* Group mean scores do not go below

Six items range in total mean score from 3*30 t0 3*66, and it may be concluded that while the studio teacher should assume appreciably more responsibility for providing these insights than others of the

staff, he is not generally considered to have "most* of this responsi­ bility. These are Items 2, 4, 6 and 7- Significant differences in group means do appear on these items, but in all cases except item 2

(Table 23) the lowest group mean is appreciably above 3*00 or the

level designated for "equal responsibility with other faculty."

These differences have been indicated in the tables above and might

well provide the basis for farther research* Due to the limitations

of the rating scale provided in this study, it is impractical as far

as this study is concerned to state anything beyond the fact that these

items (2, 4, 6 and 7) represent areas which should be considered more

the responsibility of the studio teacher than any one else on the

Instruction team.

One item, number jj» tb* ability to utilise the major applied

skill in composing and arranging, is rather clearly indicated to be

one item which is to a lesser degree the responsibility of the studio

teacher* All groups but one, the supervisors, rated this item below

3*00* The scores are high enough, however, to state that in the

thinking of the respondents, this item should require almost as much

of the responsibility of the studio teacher as that of the other 38

members of the faculty of the college or of the music department*

A rather interesting pattern may he observed, in items 2, *4- and

6. It will be noted that for all three of these items, the mean for

the supervisors is the highest, or even with the highest, while the

means for the music education teachers are the lowest. There does

not appear to be any great degree of consistency in the distribution

of the other categories of respondents.

Pedagogical Insights Belated to the Major Performance Area

The five-level rating scale used to indicate the degree of re­

sponsibility of the studio teacher in providing the pedagogical in­

sights listed in this section is given below;

5. full responsibility

h. most responsibility

3. equal responsibility with other teachers

2. same responsibility

1. no responsibility

Table 32 shows the mean rating on this scale for each item for the

entire sampling, and a comparison of the means of the subdivisions ii of respondents as classified by Job and by performing medium.

The same statistical tests employed earlier were used here to

test whether or not differences in mean scores for various subdivisions

of the sampling were significantly different. For all items except

those marked with a • or e » it may be concluded that there are no

h. The data in Table 32. indicating the mean scores of the various Job classifications, are presented in graph form in Chart Ho. 8, Appdndix F. Table 32

COMPARISON QT MX AN SCORES BT JOB AND BT PERXQEMANCI MEDIUM INDICATING THE DEGREE OF HESPGNSIBILITI QT THE STUDIO TEACHER IN PROVIDING PEDAGOGICAL INSIGHTS RELATED TO THE MAJOR PEETQRMANCI awe * ** ** m ■ *5* m m ■ • Of33 8 ? nIS- j 9a Au u uM ms hJ ■J M In sig h ts * 5 hM h# 40* 3 «rt0 t e Jf S'! A . ■ 0 .3 1 £HjJ «rlO *» •HA Mired m as a i « 1 nP Piano (*■ ot !» 1. An understanding of the p h y sic a l p ro h leas commonly encountered by young pupils studying in his major per* formanee area 303 4.09 • 4.21 4.17 3.78 4.00 4.16 4.03 3.94 4.27 4.23 4.09 2. A knowledge of devices used to overcome physical problems encountered in learning to perform in his major area ( inc. voice ) 303 4.24 4.26 4.24 4.04 4.26 4.35 4.18 4.28 4.46 4.31 4.17 3 . A comprehensive acquaint* ance with the most accept­ able teaching literature for younger pupils in his major performing area 303 3.81 e 3.82 3.70 3.50 3.91 4.01 3.63 3.76 4.08 3.92 3.79 4. An understanding of the place of technical studies in the development of per­ formance facility 303 4.20 4.20 4.28 3.96 4.43 4.18 • 4.20 3-98 4.49 4.33 4.15 5 . An elementary understand­ ing of psychological factors which contribute to good teacher-pupil relationship 303 3 . 5 5 I| * 3.52 3.31 3.32 3.54 3.88 3.13 3.60 3.81 3.74 3.60 Sabi* 32 (continued) Comparison of mean scores indicating the degree of responsibility in providing pedagogical insights, etc.

4» M *» a e t a 0 • « IS !« & 15H *H 1 O 4> S a a _ ■£ n 3 2s I s 1 o n p. CO a X 6 . An elementary understand­ ing of principles of motiv­ ation as related to the learning procesa 303 3*32 4 3 . 1*1 3.09 3 .O6 3*23 3*57 2-97 3.1*0 3.62 3*36 3*93 7 . An understanding of child growth and development as re­ lated to problems involved in his major performing area 238 3.10 ♦ 3.18 2.72 2.80 3 . 0U 3.52 2 * n 3*32 3.31 3*13 3*12 5. Die ability to evaluate pupil progress in achieve­ ment of musical growth in h is m ajor perform ing medium 23s 3 . 1*8 4 3.52 3.21 3.27 3*33 3*83 5*21 3.U9 3.65 3.61 3*52 9* The a b ility to in te g ra te theory of music with in­ struction in his major per­ form ing medium 238 3 . 1*0 3 . 1+1* 3.26 3.25 3.30 3.62 5.19 3*32 3*38 3.61 3.1*8 10. The a b ility to in te g ra te music history and literature with instruction in his major performing medium 238 3*29 3 . 1*6 3.16 3.11+ 3.19 3*38 5.13 3*32 3*27 3 . 1*8 3*33 * Confidence level of 95$* * Confidence level of 995&» 1 0 1

slgnifleant differenceb between the group means* For those items marked with a * , it may he assumed with a 95 Pe r c en t co n fid en ce

level that differences are significant* For those items marked with

a * , the same assumption may he made, hut with a 99 per cent con­ fidence level* Wherever the means are significantly different, there is statistical reason to conclude that the score on the item depends

on the classification of the person answering the questionnaire*

The tables which follow indicate the paired differences of means

on particular items already noted to show significantly different group ratings* Any two or more categories underlined hy the same line are not significantly different, and any categories not underlined hy the same line are significantly different*

Tahle 33

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS OF JOB CLASSIFICATION GROUPS ON ITEM 1 UNDER PEDAGOGICAL INS I GETS ("an understanding of the physical problems which are commonly encountered hy young pupils studying in his major performance area*")

Music Ed* Applied and Supervisors Applied Directors Teachers Music Ed. Teachers 3 . 7 s k.oo it. 16 it. 17 h*2 l

The tahle above indicates that the supervisors, applied teachers and directors assigned a significantly higher degree of responsibility to Ihe studio teacher for providing this insight than did the music 1 0 2 education teachers* The rating of those respondents who taught both applied music and music education cannot be said to be significantly different from that of any other group* Beepondents at the upper end of the table felt that the studio teacher should assume most of the responsibility for providing this knowledge* It is evident that there was a sufficient number of respondents who felt that the studio teacher should assume full responsibility, as to bring the mean scores in the upper three groups well above the 4*00 mark* Quite a number of music education teachers, on the other hand, indicated that they thought this task should be shared equally with other members of the staff. It is probable that many music education teachers consider this item as one which is their own responsibility to teach. It is possible, too, that they are fearful that the studio teacher, having became chiefly involved in teaching repertoire, w ill neglect to emphasize this aspect sufficiently.

Table 34

FAIRED DETEER2NCBS IN KEANS QF JOB CLASSIFICATION CROUPS ON ITEM 3 UNDER PEDAGOGICAL INSIOHTS ("a comprehensive acquaintance with the most acceptable teaching literature for younger pupils in his major performance area*")

Music Ed* Applied Directors Applied and Supervisors Teachers Teachers Music Ed* 3.5O 3.7O 3*32 3 .9 1 4.01 103 The only tvo groups which can he said to have Bcored this item differently are the anisic education teachers and the supervisors. Mean scores of the other groups ranged between these two cannot be said to be different from the mean scores of either extreme* It should be noted that here again, the music education teachers consider this to be in the realm of their own instruction to a large extent* The

supervisors, on the other hand, felt that the studio teacher should

Include Instruction in the selection of teaching materials in the

applied lesson*

Table 35

FAIHED Dira&BXHCIS IN MEANS 0? INSTRUMENT CLASSIFICATION GROUPS QN ITEM 4 UNDER PEDAGOGICAL INSIGHTS (nan understanding of the place of tech­ nical studies in the development of performance fa cility .1)

Voice Mixed Piano Winds S trin gs 3.98 4.15 4 .2 0 M 3 4.45

When the respondents were grouped according to job classification, mean scores of the various groups showed no significant differences on

item 4* Table 32 shows that when the respondents were re-grouped by

Instrument, significant differences do appear* Table 35 indicates

that the significant differences are only apparent between the two extremes when the scores are ranked in order. In this Instance, a

consid erable number o f str in g p la y ers f e l t that th is was the f u ll 10U responsibility of the studio teacher to teach the correct use of

technical studies, while on the other hand, the vocalists felt that

soxoe of th is knowledge was to he gained from other fa c u lty members*

Table 36

PAJHSD DimHSNCES IN MEANS OF JOE CLASSIFICATION GROUPS ON ITEM 3 UNDER PEDAGOGICAL INSIGHTS ("an elementary understanding of the psychological factors which contribute to good teacher-pupil relationship In the private lesson.")

Applied Music Ed. D irectors Applied and Supervisors Teachers Teachers Music Ed*

3 .3 1 3-32 3-52 3 -5 1* 3* 88

The above table indicates that the supervisors assigned a sig­

nificantly higher degree of responsibility to the studio teacher for providing an insight into the psychological factors involved in the private lesson, than did either the applied teachers, music education

teachers or directors. The scores would suggest that the supervisors

feel that the studio teacher should assume most of the responsibility

for this item. Other respondents felt that the responsibility should

be shared with others on the staff, although the applied teacher

should be more concerned with the matter than the others* 1 0 5

T a b le 3 7

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS OF INSTRUMENT CLASSIFICATION GROUPS ON ITEM 5 UNDER PEDAGOGICAL INSIGHTS ("an elementary understanding of the psychological factors which contribute to good teacher-pupil relationship in the private lesson.”)

Piano Voice Mixed Winds Strings 3.13 3.60 3.60 3.74 3.31

When the respondents were reclassified by instrument, the pianists significantly assign less responsibility to the studio teacher for providing this insight than any of the other groups. It should be recalled in comparing Table 36 and 37 that a very large percentage of the applied teachers are pianists.

Table 38

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS OF J03 CLASSIFICATION GROUPS ON ITEM 7 UNDER PEDAGOGICAL INSIGHTS ("An understanding of child growth and development as related to the problems involved in the student's major perform­ ing area*")

Applied Music Ed. Applied and Directors Supervisors Teachers Teachers Uasic Ed. 2.72 2.80 3.04 3.IS 3.52 1 0 6

On the above item, the supervisors* rating was significantly higher than all of the other groups of respondents. This would indicate that a substantial number of supervisors stated that the studio teacher should assume most of the responsibility for providing an understanding of child growth and development as related to the student's major performance area. Directors also assigned significantly higher responsibility than did the applied and the music education teachers whose mean Bcores show a consensus of opinion that the studio teacher should share this responsibility equally with other members of the staff. These same scores indicate that a fairly substantial number of applied and music education teachers checked 2 on the rating scale which designated only "some11 responsibility for the studio teacher. On this scale, "some” must be interpreted as "a little" since the next bwest rating is "no responsibility."

Table 39

PAIRED LUEEftlNCES IN MEANS OF JOB CLASSIFICATION GROUPS ON ITEM 8 UNDER PEDAGOGICAL INSIGHTS ("the ability to evaluate pupil progress in the achievement of musical growth in the student's major performing medium.")

Applied Music Ed. Applied and Directors Supervisors Teachers Teachers Music Ed. 3 .2 1 3.27 303 3.52 3.S3 107

The above table shows that here again the supervisors assigned a significantly higher degree of responsibility to the studio teacher for providing the stated insight than did the college teachers* The directors, while ranking next to the supervisors, cannot be said to have differed significantly from the other college teachers* The mean score for the supervisors group indicates a strong consensus that the studio teacher should be the one who assumes most of the responsibility for providing this ability. The same thinking is shared by a number of directors* The college teachers see other areas of the curriculum assisting appreciably in providing this insight.

In examining Table 32 as a whole, one is aware that there is a strong tendency for the supervisors and directors to assign more re­ sponsibility to the studio teacher for including a pedagogical emphasis in his teaching than do the college teachers themselves* Even on items which do not show any statistically significant differences, the directors and more particularly the supervisors have rather consistent­ ly rated the items above the other respondents* Music education teachers on the other hand rate the items low* This may be due to the fact that they are constantly seeking to incorporate the ideas de­ scribed in this section into their own teaching, and therefore consider the studio teacher's responsibilities on a par with their own. It might be suggested that the supervisors and directors, aware of the emphasis in music education courses, sire anxious that these points be incorporated more extensively into the spplled lesson, dealing with specifics in addition to the generalities which may be more prevalent in the music education courses* 1 0 6

It should he noted that all respondents share this concern to a great extent* Only on one iten (item 7) the group mean scores fall below 3*^0 which has been designated as the level where the studio teacher shares the responsibility equally with other members of the teaching staff* Even on this Item, the overall mean Is above the

3*00 level* It should be remembered In this connection that In evaluating the Importance of these Items, respondents generally rated them a ll between "important" and "highly essential,11 with a majority of the means for the total sample falling above (see Table lh in

Chapter IT).

As the first section of Fart II of the questionnaire deals primarily with specific skills related to performance, it is not surprising to note that the responsibility for promoting the acquisition of Bkills was assigned largely to the studio teacher by all categories of re**

spondents. Learning repertoire, memorisation, developing poise for public performance, sight-reading in the major performing medium are a ll considered to be areas in which the studio teacher assumes most

of the instructive responsibility. Vocalists, however, were more of

the opinion that sight-reading sk ill was to be gained through the

combined efforts of the studio teacher along with others on the staff*

Among the sk ills which were considered to be the Joint responsi­ b ility of others along with the studio teacher were ensemble perform­

ance, transposition, and critical listening* Significant differences

appeared in both classifications on the first two items* Supervisors 1 0 9 felt that ensemble playing skill was largely the responsibility of the applied teacher, while the applied teachers themselves, along with the music education teachers, thought this to be a joint responsibility*

When classified by instruments, wind players took the former position while pianists and vocalists took the latter* Supervisors end applied teachers differed again in regard to transposition, with the music education teachers siding with the supervisors in favor of assigning most of the responsibility for this skill to the applied teacherB*

Applied teachers considered this a joint responsibility. Since the applied teachers were predominantly pianists, the comparison of scores on this item by the other classification revealed the pianists in favor of teaching transposition jointly, while wind players considered this primarily the responsibility of the studio teacher*

2he second section has to do with those broader attitudes and insights commonly considered to be the ingredients of "musicianship."

It is understandable that the studio teacher will be assisted by many others on the staff in promoting the acquisition of these insights*

Scores on the items under Insights Concerning Performance were there­ fore generally lower than in the previous section. Scores were highest on such items as program building and demonstrating stylistic differ­ ences on the major instrument. Here the studio teacher was considered chiefly responsible* The remainder of the items, transferring musical values learned in the private lesson to conducting, the ability to make competent Judgments regarding others' performances, and artistic

selection of music for the school and community, were all rated between 110 the point of equally shared responsibility to most responsibility*

The desire to continue performance beyond the requirements of a teachr* ing position, though considered chiefly the responsibility of the studio teacher* vas s t i l l dependent on th e a ttitu d e s of o th er s t a f f members*

A rather consistent pattern of significant differences became apparent on several of these items* On the items dealing with trans­ ferring musical values to conducting, making competent Judgments, and the artistic selection of music for school and community, music edu­ cation teachers were the lowest in their scoring, and supervisors were highest or level with the highest* This indicates that the supervisors consider the studio teacher more responsible for concerning himself with these insights than any of the other respondents* The music education teachers are not quite ready to allow the studio teacher this much responsibility.

This same pattern is true for a larger share of the items under pedagogical insights* Supervisors, and this time directors also, con­ sistently rated the items above the other respondents* Music education te a c h e rb again tended to rate the items lower indicating the opinion that the studio teacher is very much a * team" member, although with much responsibility in these areas. Mean scores from the entire sailing indicated that the studio teacher is considered to have "most" of the responsibility for several important items; an understanding of the physical problems encountered by youngsters, a knowledge of the devices best suited to overcoming such problems, and an acquaintance with teaching literature* All of the other items were scored well above the equally shared level of responsibility in favor of the studio teacher* Chapter VI

IMPLEMENTATION OP TEE APPLIED MUSIC PROGRAM THROUGH CURRICULAR REQUIREMENTS, INSTRUCTION, AND EAAMNAIIQN

The results of Part III of the questionnaire comprise the contents

of this chapter. Respondents were asked to Indicate their thinking

regarding curricular requirements related to the major applied area,

hy the UBe of multiple choice questions and rating scales provided

in the questionnaire* The subdivisions of the chapter correspond to

the subdivisions of the questionnaire* Where feasible, analysis of

variance tests were again employed to test the significance of differ­

ences of various group means*

Preparation Prior to College Entrance

In answer to the question of how many years of practical familiar­

ity with a major performing medium should be considered as pre­

requisite to admission to the bachelor of music education program,

respondents replied by checking one of the several answers given—

below;

8 years

6 years

4 years

2 years

no Bet amount of time

11 1 1 1 2

Table UO above the percentage of respondents In eacb Job category who checked each reply* Table Ul shows iiov these same answers are dis­ tributed when the respondents are classified by instrument*

Table 1+0

HE SPOUSES CLASSIFIED BY JOB ON HOW MANY YEARS OF PRACTICAL FAMILIARITY WITH THE MAJOR PERFORMING MEDIUM SHOULD HE PREREQUISITE TO ENTRANCE TO THE BACHELOR OF MUSIC EDUCATION PROGRAM

Amount D irec­ Applied Mus. Ed* App. and Super­ of Time to r s Teachers Teachers Mas* Ed* visors Total

Per cent Per cent Per cent Per cent Per cent Per cent 8 years 1+.71 309 3.57 5.56 3.09 3 .9 0 6 years 15.29 10.17 5 .3 6 16.67 17.53 13.51 1+. years 18.82 X8. 6U 16.07 I 6.67 20.62 18*62 2 years 5*88 IO.17 3.57 l l . U 5.15 6.61 No se t time 55.29 57.63 71.^3 50.00 53.61 57.36 No. of R e p lies 85 59 36 36 97 333

I t w i l l be noted that somewhat over h a lf of the respondents did not feel that resiiness for college level work in applied music could be measured in terms of the number of years of practical familiarity with

a performing medium* In comparing the percentages of Job categories

checking "no set time*11 it should be noted that a much greater number

of music education teachers checked this reply than did respondents

from the other categories* In Table 1+1 It is apparent that few

vocalists saw reason to impose a particular amount of time of study 1 1 3 as a prerequisite to college level study in vocal techniques*

Tahle 4 l

EE SPOUSES CLASSIFIED BY INSTRUMENT CM HOT MANY YEARS OF PRACTICAL FAMILIARITY WITH iHE MAJOR PERFORMING MEDIUM SHOULD BE PREREQUISITE TO ENTRANCE TO THE BACHELOR OF MUSIC EDUCATION PROGRAM

Amount o f Time P ia n o Voice S trin g s Winds Mixed T o ta l

P e r c e n t Per cent Per cent Per cent P e r c e n t P e r c e n t 8 y e a rs 2 .8 2 - 2 .5 6 7 .3 2 5.^3 3*90 6 y e a rs 12.68 - 15.3S 14.63 18.60 13.51 4 years 22.54 13.21 25*64 14.63 17.S3 18*79 2 y e a rs 4.23 13.21 7 .6 9 7 .3 2 4.65 6 .6 1 No s e t tim e 57.75 73.5S 48.72 56.10 53.49 57.88

No. o f R e p lie s 71 53 39 41 129 333

This is understandable in view of the fact that the singing voice does not mature early enough to warrant intensive study prior to college*

In view of the fact that less than 15 per cent of the music education teachers were vocalists, it is necessary to conclude that music edu­ cation teachers, regardless of their performing medium, and vocalists, regardless of their Job classification, tend to place less importance on the amount of time a student should spend studying a major per­ formance field prior to college entrance.

Differences in replies of the other groups were relatively small*

Table 40 indicates that more supervisors favored a four Or six year period of study prior to college than any of the other categories of 1 1 4 respondents* The replies of the small group of respondents teaching both applied music and music education is more in agreement with the applied teachers than with the music education teachers on this item*

In comparing the replies of respondents reclassified by instrument* it is evident that more string players indicated preferences for a specified length of prior study than did the other instrumentalists including pianists*

Several respondents included comments pertinent to this question.

Some of the ideas most commonly stressed are as follows:

1* Piano playing ability* plus a mature voice* is more important for vocalists than formal voice study*

2. Different media require differing amounts of prior training*

3* Different individuals would require different amounts of time, depending on their talent and work habits*

Table 42

RESPONSES CLASSIFIED BY JOB Oh THE IMPORTANCE OF QUALIFYING EXAMINATIONS TO ESTABLISH COMPETENCE TO PURSUE APPLIED STUDY AT THE COLLEGE LEVEL

D irec ­ A p plied Mus. Ed* App. and Super­ B a tin g t o r s T eachers T eachers Mus. Ed. v is o r s T o ta l

H ighly P e r o e n t P e r c e n t P e r c e n t P e r c en t P e r c e n t P e r c e n t e s s e n t i a l 4 6 .2 5 50.00 60.00 4 1 .6 7 4 6 . SS 47 . s o

H e lp fu l 50.00 4 6 .0 0 >42.86 55*36 52.0S *9*37

Of no u b # 3 * 7 * 4 .0 0 3*57 2 . 7 s 1 .0 4 2 .8 3 No. o f r e p l i e s SO 50 56 36 96 31S 115 Table 1+3

RESPONSES CLASSIFIED 31 INSTRUMENT ON TEE IMPORTANCE QF qDAimiNO EXAKINATIONS

Rating Piano Voice S trin gs Winds Mixed T otal

Per cent Per cent Per cent Per cent Per cent Per cent Highly e s s e n t ia l 55-22 36. 5I+ 51.1+3 55.OO 1+5.16 1+7. SO

H elpful 1+0.30 61. 5^ 1+S.57 1+5.0 0 50.81 1+9-37 Of no use l+.i+S 1.92 1+.03 2 . S3

Ho. of r e p lie s 67 52 35 1+0 121+ 31S

As might be anticipated after noting the high percentage of music education teachers checking "no set time" on the question discussed above, this category of respondents placed high importance on qualifying examinations. Approximately half of the remainder of the respondents considered them "helpful,*1 but not "highly essential." The other half considered them "highly essential" while a few individuals considered them of no use whatever.

The replies from the vocalists in Table 1+3 seem rather strange in view of their replies on the question regarding prior time spent in study, since 7^ P®r cent of them indicated that no set amount of time should be considered as prerequisite to college entrance (see Table Hi).

Readiness would obviously need to be determined on the basis of the results of qualifying examinations.

Comments regarding this question were submitted by several re­ spondents. Some of these are stated below:

1. "Sy examination one cannot determine the line between poor 116 teaching and the ability of the student to do well under competent guidance* Most of all, one cannot predetermine a student's working capacity*" Commenting in a sim ila r r e in , another respondent su ggests that i t would be more h e lp fu l to see what a student can do in one term*

2. Qualifying examinations are important but should not be the only criteria for admission*

3* Qualifying examinations are highly essential if they are used to help the student correct deficiencies in essential areaa*

Instruction and Examination

Respondents indicated their preference for the amount of credit which should be given for one hour of studio instruction plus six hours of practice per week by checking one of three replies: (1) one semester hour; (2) less than a semester hour; (3) more than a semester hour.

A compilation of these replies may be seen in Tables 1*1* and 1+5*

Table 1*1*

QPIUIOHS OF HESPQNIE1ITS CLASSIFIED BY JOB ON THE A1I0UHT OF CREDIT WHICH SHOULD BE GIVER FOR ORE HOUR OF STUDIO IiJSTHUCTIOH PLUS SIX HOURS OF PRACTICE PER WEEK

Direc­ Applied Mus. Id* App. and Super­ Credit to rs Teachers Teachers Mas* Ed. v iso r s T otal

One sem* Per cent Per cent Per cent Per cent P er cent Per cent hour 39.53 1*0.00 33. 1*6 60.00 69.1*1 1*9. sh Less than —— one 3 . 3.53 1.92 (fore 56. 9S 60.00 61. 5U 1(0.00 27.06 1(3.21*

R ep lies 36 55 52 35 S5 313 117 Table 1+5

OPINIONS ON THE AMOUNT OP CHEDIT WITH HESPQNUENTS RECLASSIFIED BY INSTRUMENT

C re d it Piano Voice S trin g s Winds Mixed T o tal

One sem. hour 1+6.27 1+9*06 1+6.15 1+2.11 56.03 1+9.81+ Less than one 1.1+9 1.89 2 .56 - 2.59 1.92 More than one 52.24 1+9*06 51.28 57*39 1+1.38 1+8 . 21+

No. o f r e p lie s 67 53 39 38 116 313

In studying the replies from the total sampling, it seems that re­ spondents were very nearly equally divided between granting one semester hour and more than one semester. Some rather sharp differences become apparent when the replies are categorized by Job classifications. A negligible number of individuals felt that less than a semester hour of credit Bhould be granted for the work specified. Considerably more than half of the supervisors and the teachers of both music education and epplied music preferred only one hour of credit. More than half of the directors, spplied teachers and music education teachers, on the other hand, favored granting more than one hour of credit. More th an 27 per cent ( 27 * 6 ) of the respondents checking this answer in­ dicated that the amount of credit given should be two hours.

When the replies are reclassified by instrument, no significant differences seem to be apparent; therefore it may be concluded that the answers on this question depend to a great extent on the job of the 1 1 8 respondent. Since the replies of the group of respondents who taught

"both applied music and music education have rather consistently shown rather erratic distribution, most consideration should be given to the replies of the supervisors on this item.

The remainder of the items under Instruction and Examination were rated by respondents on the scale described in Chapter III and given below:

5> highly essential

4. Im portant

3* h e lp fu l

2• somewhat helpful

1. of no use whatever

Mean scores on the five remaining items are indicated in Table 46.^

Respondents are classified first by Job, then by performing medium.

An analysis of variance test was again employed to test the significance of differences of mean scores. For all items In Table 46 except those marked with a * , it may be assumed that the differences in the various mean scores are not significant. For those marked with a * , it may be assumed, with a 95 P®r cent confidence level, that the differences are significant. Wherever the means are significantly different on a particular item, there is statistical reason to conclude that the score depends upon the classification of the person answering the question.

1 . The d a ta in Table 46, indicating the mean scores of the various Job classifications, are presented in graph form in Chart Ho. 9 in Appendix F. Table 46 COMPARISON OF MEAN SCORES OR IMPORTANCE OF VARIOUS PRACTICES IN INSTRUCTION AND EXAMINATION BT JOB CLASSIFICATION AND BT PERFORMANCE MEDIUM CLASSIFICATION ■ " • *» • g§ u * 8 u 0 d m • • tJ 0 s s • •d • •d b *d M ■ 0 d 01 £2 e jq 3 0 Hr1 •U Instruction 6 Examination O H wi O ■rl t O C SP ■d Pi iH « £ 8 • Ui £ 3 How essential for the music education student are the following: 2. Continued instruction in the major applied area for 4 years of undergraduate pro­ gram although minimum stan­ dards are aet earlier! 23S 4.12 * 4-38 4.44 4.14 4.33 3.56 4.26 4.20 4.35 4.06 3-98 3* Weekly studio class where alL students of a single per­ forming medium meet with the instructor for evaluation of performance! 238 3.70 3.75 3.72 3.77 3-52 3.65 3.79 3.49 3.92 3.58 3-72 4* A periodic Jury exam at the end of each unit of studyl 23S 3.82 * 4.26 3.86 3-82 3.85 3-37 4.09 3-49 4.00 4.00 3-73 3* A final jury exam! 238 4.16 * 4.34 M 3 4.30 4-37 3.70 4.45 4.05 4.15 4.16 4.08 6* A repertoire check for all students! 23S U.OS 4-33 4.07 4.11 4.19 3.76 4.26 4.20 4.00 3-37 3-99 * Means show significant difference at the 95?> confidence level* 1 2 0

Paired differences on those i^ems showing significant differences were again tested by the use of the Duncan-Kramer tests, and the results are shown In the following tables* Any two means not under­ scored by the same line are significantly different, and any two means underscored by the same line are not significantly different*

Table 1*7

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS OF JOE CLASSIFICATIONS ON ITEM 2 UNDER INSTRUCTION AND EXAMINATION ("continued instruction in the major applied field for U years of undergraduate study although prescribed minimum requirements are met earlier.")

Supervisors Music Ed. Applied and Directors Applied Teachers Music Ed* Teachers 3 .5 6 **.ih U.33 ^*38

Table 1*7 indicates that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of any of the groups of college teachers or directors. The public school supervisors rated the Item considerably less Important than did the college people* The mean score of the supervisors In­ dicates that a majority of them considered four years of major applied

study "helpful," while a sufficiently large number of them considered it "important" so as to bring the mean to a point about midway between

"helpful" and "important." The respondents with college teaching responsibilities rated the item from "Important" to "highly essential."

It cannot be said that there are any significant differences 1 2 1 between the means of the groups of respondents reclassified by per­

forming medium, on the importance of four years of applied study*

Table 43

PAIRED DI?FBR]BICES IN MEANS OF JOB CLASSIFICATIONS as ITEM 1+ UNDER INSTRUCTION AND EXAMINATION ("aperiodic Jury examination at the end of each unit of study.")

Supervisors Music Ed. Applied and Applied Directors Teachers Music Ed. Teachers 3-37 3.S2 3 .35 3-36 4.26

Table US indicates that the mean score of the supervisors is sig­

nificantly below those of all the college teacher groups, while the mean score of the directors is significantly higher than any of the

other groups. There is no appreciable difference in the scores of

the three groups of college teachers*

Table 49

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS OF JOB CLASSIFICATIONS ON ITEM 5 UNDER INSTRUCTION AND EXAMINATION ("a final jury examination.")

Supervisors Music Ed. A pplied Directors Applied and Teachers T eachers Music Ed. 3 .7 0 4 .3 0 4.33 4*34 4*37 1 2 2

Table U9 Indicates that there 1 b a marked difference between the mean ecore of the supervisors and any of the other categories of re­

spondent* There Is a slight but significant difference between the means of the music education teachers and those who taught both mosaic education and applied music* The means of the applied teachers and

the directors cannot, however, be said to be different from one another

or from either the means of the music education teachers or those

teaching both subjects*

An analysis of the total means on each item In the section

reveals that the majority of respondents considered the items as

"important." The item receiving the highest score was Item "a

final jury examination*n Items 6 and 2 received mean scores just

slightly lower. These mean scores indicate that four years of in­

struction, a final jury exam, and a repertoire check are very valuable

aids in the preparation of music teachers, but are not "highly essen­

tial." Where significant differences do exist (items 2 and 5) the pattern is virtually the same; the supervisors rate the items ap­ preciably lower than any of the college personnel. (See Tables lf-7

and bS.) Although statistical differences do not appear in the

means of the remaining groups, the means of the music education

teachers are the next lowest in every instance. It is not likely

that this is due to chance. The remaining two items, weekly studio class and periodic jury examinations, show mean scores slightly below ^-.0, or the point designated as "important." For practical purposes, however, it may be stated that the majority of respondents considered these items 123 to be "important." From the comments included on these items, it can be suggested that one reason for the lower scores on items pertaining to studio classes and periodic jury exams was the frequency suggested for their use in the questionnaire. The idea of a studio class is very acceptable; to hold it weekly is open to question. Jury exams are necessary, but uat the end of each unit of study" may have been considered too often by respondents.

It w ill be seen in examining Tables 6 and 10, that the comparative­ ly low mean ratings given to the above items by the supervisors are consistent with their ratings on the importance of performance skill in general. Mention should be made concerning a comment which appeared in some form or o th e r w ith some frequency on q u e s tio n n a ire s b eing returned by supervisors to the effect that the importance of perform­ ing skill varies with different types of music teachers. Supervisors note that elementary school general music teachers in their systems are not generally concerned with how well they may be able to play a Beethoven sonata. College personnel, on the other hand, are faced with the problem of training "music teachers" and in many states, specialization in one or another phase of music teaching is not per­ mitted by the certification standards in effect.

It should be noted that directors rated jury examB of great importance. One might surmise that the jury exam may be looked upon by the director as having a dual capacity; first, to maintain the stand­ ards prescribed by the college for its graduates, and second, to put

on display the work of individual applied faculty. 12*1

Public Performance and. Recital Attendance

The items in this section were rated by the respondents as to their importance on the seme five-level rating scale described e a r l i e r ;

5. highly essential 1*. im p o rtan t

3 . h e lp f u l 2. o f some help

1. of no use whatever

Kean scores of various groups of respondents, classified first by Job, 2 then by performing medium, are shown in Table ^0.

Through the use of an analysis of variance test, differences in mean scores were tested for their degree of significance. Por all items in Table $0 not marked with a * , it may be assumed that no statistically significant difference exists between the various means shown. Por those marked with a * , it may be assumed, with a 95 per cent confidence level, that the differences are significant. Wherever significant differences in mean scores do occur on particular items, there is statistical reason to conclude that the scores depend upon the classification of the person answering the questionnaire.

Paired differences on those items shoving significant differences were tested by the use of the Dunean-Kramer tests. The results are shown in the following tables. Any two means not underscored by the

2. The data in Table 50, indicating the mean scores of the various Job classifications, are presented in graph form in Chart No. 10, .Appendix P. T able 50 COM*ARISON 0? KEAN SCORES ON THE IMPORTANCE Of RECITAL PERFORMANCE AND ATTENDANCE BY JOB CLASSIFICATION AND BY PERFORMANCE MEDIUM CLASSIFICATION

*» m « t* m • • 0as a • 0as a Public Performance and I* ** h m • 9 0 H *4 Recital Attendance O H asri O • p4 fef • tt ■HSP •d if ttfVi u n 0 (5 H *r( T eachers §1 4» Mixed D ire c to rs Voice £ 1 n p I5 Music I d . n P P ian o oa £ Bov essential for the music education student are the fo llo w in g : 1. Presentation of a gradu­ ating recital singly or with • one or more other studentsT 238 3*98 I4.O5 14.19 3.61 **•33 3.86 14.00 14.02 U.OI4 14.10 3 . 88 2* Performance in public re­ citals prior to graduation? 238 14.36 * U.I49 I4.56 I4.32 l4.7l4 3.97 14.62 I4.39 U.3S I4.I42 U.19 3* Performance in Btudlo * r e c ita ls ? 238 u.i*o I4.56 U.56 I4.39 14.63 14.03 14.614 14.146 !4*31 14.19 ^•33 k. Required attendance at concerts & faculty recitals? 238 14.63 14.72 14.60 I4. 5 O 14.81 u .56 ^-79 I4. 5U U.5S I4.58 U.61 5» Required attendance at student recitals? 23s 14. 1+14 14.51 I4. 5 S 14.314 14.67 14.214 I4. 6U U.l+14 14.35 I4.I48 I4. 3I4

* Means show s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e a t the 95/<» confidence le v e l. 126 same line are significantly different, and any two means underscored by th e same lin e are n o t s ig n if ic a n tly d iffe re n t*

Table 51

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS OF JOB CLASSIPICATIOHS ON ITEM 1 UNDER PUBLIC PERFORMANCE AND RECITAL ATTENDANCE ("the presentation of a graduating recital.")

Music Ed. Supervisors Directors Applied Applied and TeacherB Teachers Music Ed. 3.61 3.86 U.O5 k.is *+.33

From the somewhat complicated pattern in Table 51* It najr be de~

duced that (l) music education teachers rated the graduation recital

significantly lover than did any of the other college personnel;

(2) there are no significant differences in the means of the remaining

groups of college personnel; ( 3 ) the mean score of the etgtervleore is

not different from that of the music education teachers on the one

hand, or from the directors and applied teachers on the other, but is

significantly lower than that of the group who teach both music education

and applied music. This rather conservative statement is all that

may be safely made with any statistical validity, but it should be

noted that the position of the supervisore in relation to the college

teachers of applied music and the directors is not inconsistent with

their position on items in which statistical significant differences 127 did appear. By virtue of previous patterns, the position of the supervisors' mean scores does take on significance.

Table 52

PAIRED DIFFERENCES 11} MEANS OF JOB CLASSIFICATIONS OK ITEM 2 UNDER PUBLIC PERFORMANCE AND RECITAL ATTENDANCE (•performance in public recitals prior to graduation.")

Supervisors Music Ed. Directors Applied Applied and Teachers T eachers Music Ed* 3.97 4.32 4.49 4 .5 6 4 .7 4

The above table reveals that the rating of the supervisors on the importance of performing in public recitals prior to graduation is significantly lower than that of any of the college personnel. Although there are no statistically significant differences in the means of the college groups, the position of the music education teachers is con­ sistent with their position on Tables 4£, 49, 51 and 52, and must therefore be interpreted as significant.

Table 53

PAIRED DIFFERENCES IN MEANS OF JOB CLASSIFICATIONS ON ITEM 3 UNDER PUBLIC PERFORMANCE AND RECITAL ATTENDANCE ("performance in studio recitals.")

Supervisors Music Ed. Directors Applied Applied and Teachers Teachers Music Ed. 4.03 4.39 4.56 4.56 4.63 128

The pattern in Table 53 identical with, that in Table $2, in ­ dicating a marked difference in the mean of the supervisors from the means of the college personnel, although their means do not show statistically significant differences*

From Table 50 it is apparent that no significant differences appeared when group means were calculated from the scores of respondents reclassified by performing medium*

A closer study of the means from the total sampling on the items in T able $0 reveals that the scores are the highest and there is more agreement among groups of respondents on the two items pertaining to student at tendance at recitals* Required attendance at concerts and faculty recitals can be considered "highly essential" for all practical purposes. Attendance at student recitals should be considered

"important" on the basis of the replies, although a substantial number of the respondents considered this, too, as being "highly essential*”

On items pertaining to the students performing in public, it has already been observed that there was considerable disagreement among respondents on the degree of their importance. The means from the total sampling indicate that all three types of performances suggested are "important.” It is clear that a fairly substantial number of music education teachers and supervisors rated the gradu­ ation recital as only "helpful," while a number of applied teachers and those who taught both applied music and music education felt that it was "highly essential*"

The item showing the widest diversity of mean scores is number 1, referring to the presentation of a graduating recital* It is interesting 1 2 9 to note that college teachers of music education are represented at both extremes of the ranked means* The group of respondents who are identified with both music education and spplied music teaching have rather consistently rated performance preparation somewhat higher than other groups (see Tables 6 and 10 in Chapter IT)* Since this group was relatively small (35 respondents), generalizations as to the reason for this would be open to question*

Instructional Emphasis

Respondents were instructed to assume that a five-year curriculum

for training public school music teachers had been universally ac­ cepted* They were to assume also that, as a part of the over-all

increase in time allotment, the applied major credit requirements had been proportionally increased* They were then asked to rank five aspects of the major applied instruction (stated in the questionnaire)

in the order in which they should receive additional stress in a

five-year program, giving the most i up or t ant item the rank of 1. The

five possible points of emphasis are given below:

1. perfecting of limited repertoire

2* expansion of repertoire

3* technical facility

U. s ig h t- r e a d in g

5* expansion of pedagogical emphasis 1 3 0

Results are shown In Table 5^*^ The association among these sets of rankings is determined by the use of the Kendall coefficient of k concordance V. from the reference cited it vae determined that the critical ratio must be above 1.6h to indicate agreement at the .0 5 level of significance and 2*33 t0 indicate agreement at the .01 level of significance* The very high critical ratio figure under each classification of respondents and for the total sampling indicates the following facts:

1. Thera is a high degree of agreement of respondents within the various classifications in the manner in which these items are ranked*

2. Each classification is somewhat unique in itB ranking pattern*

3* In spite of this uniqueness, there is a high degree of agree­ ment among the respondents of the entire bampling in the manner in which these items are ranked*

It must be pointed out that in reporting the data received, those items which received tied rankings were not included. It will be ob­ served that the total number of respondents is therefore smaller for this section than for the preceding one (2 3 3 compared to 238 in

Table 50)* Also, a number of respondents assigned ranks of "one" and "five" to certain items, but did not feel that the remaining

3* It should be noted that in this table, the lowest number represents the item of greatest importance, since a different system of evalu­ ation was used than that employed for all previous items.

Maurice G. Kendall, The Advanced Theory of S tatistics, Yol. I (London: Char le s Gr if fin and Co*, 19143 /, pp. kl6 ff. T able 54

SUMS QT BANKS GIVEN BY HESPCMIENTS CLASSIFIED BY JOB AND BY PEEFQHMANCE MEDIUM TO VARIOUS ASPECTS OF APPLIED INSTRUCTION, AMD TEST STATISTICS FOR TESTING SIGNIFICANCE

• • Ti• ti■ • d Emphasis for t J a MS •a* Additional o d 1:■H • v< CO • m 0 -H> ■3 Applied Study -H h J s 4*

Supervisors 3 D ire c to rs Mixed i« P iano 1 CO > r !

61 *3 43 60 26 47 40 26 30 90 233 1. Perfecting of limit­ ed repertoire 241 159 192 250 102 136 179 99 112 368 944 2. Expansion of reper­ t o ir e 164 116 117 17 s 69 120 105 80 84 255 644 3* Technical facility 196 123 129 196 79 143 121 75 101 283 723 4. Sight-reading 174 114 112 163 31 113 l l 4 88 94 235 649 5* Expansion of peda­ gogical emphasis 140 133 95 103 59 138 81 43 59 209 535

V (coefficient of con­ cordance) •157 .073 .301 .291 .152 .136 .329 .215 .180 .184 .171 E(W) mean .016 .023 .023 .017 .033 .021 .025 .028 .033 .o n .004 rtf standard deviation .O il .016 .016 .012 .027 .015 .017 .027 .023 .008 .003

W~S ( W2 critical ratio 12.264 17.106 23.447 7.726 17.416 r 3-077 4.275 6.637 6.343 22.143 55.152 132 three iterne were sufficiently different in importance to warrant ranking. These replies were not included in the tabulation of data.

For purposes of simplification, the data appearing in Table 5^ has been restated to indicate the rank assigned to each item by each group of respondents as a whole, and by the entire sampling as a whole, The rank assigned to each item is that which is implied by the sums of the ranks assigned by a given classification of respondents.

This procedure is considered acceptable by Kendall, who points out that not only is this the method which one would intuitively select, but that it can in fact be theoretically supported. The best estimate of the "true" ranking of a number of items is provided, when the critical ratio is significant, by the order of the various sums of the ranks.^ This information is given in Table 55* It should be noted, however, that the differences of the sums of the ranks for the items now assigned to second, third, and fourth places are in some instances very small.

Several important observations may be made regarding the data in Table 5 5 .

1. The most significant fact to be noted is the extent of agree­ ment on the ranking of item 1, perfecting of "limited repertoire," and item 5 , "expansion of pedagogical emphasis." A large majority of the respondents considered "expansion of pedagogical emphasis" to be the most important aspect of applied study which should be given the

5 . Ibid., p. tel VJ1 ■P- OJ ro i-* M • • • Oi 1 *0 w 5? f 0 € 5 l i i <6 % B 1• **9 ►d aI n 1 o1 V <* O P k THE RANKSSUMS 07 ASSIGNED EACH BT HESPQUEENT CLASSIFICATIOH THE HANK 07 EACH ADDITIONAL ASPECT 07 07 STUDI APPLIED BASED ON THE • o • a o p p. § p* *i H, o o S f c I 8 M,o P a. ■s M H* •3 & w V! ►1 FH- P (Ki o a »*- P* o P* ®K p.

M 04 -FT ro VJ1 D ire c to rs

A pplied *r M OJ ro Ol T eachers Masic Ed. H* ro -P" 04 O l Teachers App. and I-* ro -P" OJ VJ1 M ieic Ed*

M -p" OJ ro VJ1 Supervisors

0 4 (-> -p" ro VJ1 P iano

t-> OJ • p ' ro O l Toice

t “* ro 04 O l S trin g s

M OJ ■p" ro Ol Winds

H* ro •p* OJ O l Mixed

OJ Ol T o tal -P" ro Sampling 13^ most stress, should, the time and credit allotment for major applied study be Increased. A similar large majority felt that the "perfect­ ing of limited repertoire" should constitute the least important point of emphasis for additional study.

2. The only group of respondents under Job classification who failed to rank the "expansion of pedagogical emphasis" as the most important is that of the college teachers of applied music. This may be explained by the fact thc.t a high per cent of the applied teachers participating in this study were pianists. Since there is at the present time little piano instruction given in the public schools, pedagogy would be of little use to the public school teacher. This argument is substantiated by the rank given for this item in the second half of the table. Taken as a classification by themselves, the pianists ranked sight-reading and expansion of repertoire above expansion of pedagogical emphasis.

3 . Judging by the sums of all the ranks, expansion of repertoire and sight-reading may be considered to be deserving of equal emphasis.

Prom these sums it may be argued that both of these two items are worthy of more emphasis than simply concentrating on the acquisition of more technical facility.

It. The ranking patterns of the various Job groups of respondents are indicative of different values placed on these several competencies by people with different kinds of professional responsibilities. The high critical ratio index indicates a marked agreement of respondents within the subdivisions. These differing points of view are discussed below . 135 &• Directors, applied teachers and supervisors ranked ex­ pansion of repertoire second, favoring a broad base of musical experience, while for music education teachers the functional skill of sight-reading was slightly more important.

b. Technical facility was ranked fourth by directors, music education teachers, those teaching both music education and applied music, and supervisors. For all practical purposes the sums of the ranks given by the supervisors indicate a tie between technical facility and sight-reading.

5# Soae similar variations in ranking patterns appear when the respondents are reclassified by performing medium.

a. Expansion of repertoire was ranked second by pianists, vocalists, and wind players.

b. Sight-reading was again given four different ranks by four different groups.

c. Technical facility was ranked fo u rth by a l l c a te g o r ie s e x ce p t Btring players who rank it second.

For the purposes of this present study, the ranking of the several items by the entire sampling will be considered as the most significant finding. The very high critical ratio index indicates widespread agreement among the respondents. In this final ranking, pedagogical emphasis is clearly first, with sight-reading and expansion of repertoire nearly tied for second. As was pointed out by several respondents in written comments, it is difficult to emphasize one of these items without emphasizing the other. Technical facility falls 136 to fourth place, and the perfecting of limited repertoire is by wide­ spread agreement in fifth place*

Included below are comments of respondents relative to the fore­ going section on instructional emphasis* These are listed in the order of frequency of appearance* The number after the statement indicates the number of times which that idea, or a very sim ilar one, ap p ea re d .

1*Since these items are all essential, they cannot be ranked in terms of relative importance* Emphasis on one to the exclusion of others is not good* (Seven)

2. Other items in addition to the five suggested ought also to be Included in such a question. The following were specified;

a* proficiency in two or three additional performance areas

b* functional keyboard proficiency

c* ensemble experience (Three)

3* The proper emphasis would need to be determined on the basis of individual needs* (Two)

h* Some of these overlap, so that Improvement in one will result in improvement in another* (Two)

One of the comments cited above was part of a larger statement which dealt with the study as a whole* It is quoted below*

"(The items in Part 17) cannot be rated in terms of relative importance* All are essential to a properly balanced course of study.

Importance of one over the other would have to be determined by the relative strengths and weaknesses of the individual student* 137 "In fact, I see this as a basic weakness of this surrey. AH of the factors are 'highly essential,1 and must all be included* The essential factor is that the student must learn to perform* Only from the experience of performing can a teacher share in the musical ideas that come from performing* • • These factors which you list are both results of and contributing factors to good musical experience and ideas* They do not vary in importance—only in the amount of time necessary to give the student an understanding of and the 'know-how* required to use them.11

Over half of the respondents Indicated their belief that readi­ ness for college level applied study should not be measured in terms of a specified number of years of experience with the major applied instrument* Of those who did specify a desirable length of pre-college study, a substantial number were string players* On the other hand, only about 25 per cent of the vooalists felt that a definite amount of pre-college study was a valid criterion with which to measure readiness for college entrance*

Qualifying examinations were favored for this purpose, but the

sampling was equally divided on the degree of their importance* Half considered them merely helpful, while the other half considered them

to be highly essential* Music education teachers were most frequent­

ly represented in the latter group*

Respondents were equally divided on the question of granting credit in applied music* For one hour of studio instruction plus six 133 hours of practice per week, half the respondents favored granting one semester hour of credit, while the other half favored granting more than one hour’B credit. Approximately seventy per cent of the super­ visors favored granting only an hour’s credit.

Four years of instruction in the major applied field was indicated to be of considerable importance by the college personnel in the sampling. Supervisors rated this as helpful. As an instructive device, the studio class may well have been considered to be an im­ portant aid to the studio teacher. The comparatively low score on this item suggests that the frequency for its use which was specified in the questionnaire may be open to question. The same may perhaps be said of the periodic Jury examination. The final Jury examination and the repertoire check, however, were generally recognised as being important. Supervisors consistently rated these devices lower than did the other groups of respondents.

The importance of the graduating recital by music education majors was somewhat controversial. Music education teachers and supervisors were inclined to rate it of I osb importance than did applied teachers and directors. The mean score for the graduation recitals indicated it to be important. Scores were somewhat higher on the importance of appearances in public student recitals and studio recitals. Supervisors again rated these items lower than did the college teachers.

The section involving the projected use of additional time for major applied study showed clearly that further instruction should emphasize the gaining of understanding in how to teach music in the 139 medium of the student's major performing field* A final ranking, based on the sums of all ranks arranged the five items as follows;

1* expansion of pedagogical emphasis

2. expansion of repertoire t i e 3* s ig h t-re a d in g J

It* technical facility

5* perfecting of limited repertoire

All groups but one ranked the highest and the lowest items as they appear above* This group was made up principally of pianists, who obviously saw little need for emphasizing pedagogy, when the public school teacher w ill not be likely to teach piano as a part of his school Job. Each group had a unique pattern for ranking the three items inside the extremes* Chapter Til

THE IKTEH-BSLATIGHS OF CERTAIN ASPECTS 07 THE DATA

It is the purpose of the investigator to rearrange in this chapter some o f th e d a ta p re v io u s ly d is c u s s e d in o rd e r to b rin g out some o f the implications which might have been somewhat obscured by the statistical analysis employed. In Chapter IT the criteria which were proposed in the questionnaire were discussed in terms of their im­ portance in the educating of the prospective music teacher. In Chapter

T, certain of these same criteria were discussed from the point of view of the degree of responsibility which the studio teacher of applied music should assume in developing the competencies suggested in the proposed criteria. Tbs w riter's purpose in the first part of this chapter is to review each of these same criteria in turn, and to ob­ serve both Its importance and the degree of studio teacher responsibility in developing it. This observation of both facets of a single item at one time is intended to bring each item into sharper focus in terms of its implications for improved teaching.

In the second part of the chapter, the data from the entire study is reviewed in order to discover any overall patterns in the replies of each group of respondents as classified by Job. Generalizations as to differences in the ratings of the several groups of respondents have been avoided because of a frequent absence of statistically proven

lUO 1 4 1 differences of any significance. When consistent patterns of differences appear, these m et he taken Into account, although no statistically significant differences appear on Individual items*

In the third part of the chapter, those criteria which were scored u s in g th e 5 to 1 rating scale are ranked according to the mean scores of the entire sampling. Only the mean scores showing importance are shown in this section, and not those indicating the degree of studio teacher responsibility*

P a r t I

Importance of C riteria and Degree of Responsibility

of the Studio Teacher

Additional Performance Skills^

In summarising the replies on the items which were scored both from the standpoint of their importance, and the degree of the studio teacher's responsibility in providing them, both aspects are considered for each item in the order in which it appeared in the questionnaire instead of separately as reported in Chapters IT and 7. Xach criterion is repeated in the following pages.

1* "The student should have a performing repertoire of three, hour-long recital programs."

No significant differences appeared in the group means of either

Job or instrument classification on the importance of this skill* The

1. The data discuesed in the following section are presented in greph form in Charts No. 3 811 ^ 6 in Appendix P. ikz total mean indicated that the majority of respondents considered this

"helpful." The mean of 2.SO would, indicate that the majority of re­ spondents considered the rating of "somewhat helpful" as appropriate to this requirement.

While a majority of the respondents indicated that "most of the responsibility" for building repertoire should be taken by the studio teacher, there were significant differences in the group means by job classification on this item. Music education teachers and those teaching both music education and applied music indicated a higher degree of responsibility for the studio teacher than did any of the other groups of respondents. Applied teachers themselves gave this item the lowest score given to it by any group.

2. "The student should have the ability to read with reasonable technical mastery and musiclanly feeling a much larger portion (than the performing repertoire) of the literature for hiB major instrument."

Music education teachers rated the importance of this item sig­ nificantly higher than did the supervisors. The total mean score was somewhat above the level for "important.*

The total mean score indicating the degree of studio responsibility for this item was slightly below the level of "most responsibility."

There were no significant differences in the means of the job classi­ fications, but wind instrument players indicated significantly more studio teacher responsibility than did the voice or string teachers.

Piano players tended to agree with wind players.

J. "The ability to memorize a piece conqparable in length to a standard concerto." l i g There were no significant differences in the responses of various groups indicating the importance of this item* The total mean vas somewhat above the level indicated for "helpful."

Ho significant differences appeared in the group means indicating the degree of studio teacher responsibility on this item. The total mean score vas slightly below the level indicating "most responsibility" for the studio teacher*

h. "The student should have the ability to take a composition somewhat below the upper lim it of his technical ability and prepare it for creditable performance in a week without the aid of an instructor."

Supervisors rated this item significantly less important than did any of the groups of college teachers. The total mean placed it slightly below the level designated as "important."

The total mean indicating the degree of studio teacher responsi­ b ility placed this item somewhat below the level of "most responsibility."

Ho significant differences appeared in the means of any of the groups by either classification.

5* "The student should have the ability to perform in formal concert and Informal gatherings with poise, control and good personal r a p p o r t ."

All group means showed this item to be above the level of "im­ portant." A total mean of U.25 indicates that a fair number of re­ spondents considered this to be "highly essential*"

Significant differences in means appeared In the job classification groups on the degree of studio teacher responsibility which should be involved. Music education teachers assigned less responsibility H+4

(veil below "most responsibility”) to the studio teacher then did the other groups* The total mean showed a level of "most responsibility.”

6. "The student should have the ability to demonstrate satis** factory performance skill for use in school and community.”

The total mean of 4.64 for this item may be interpreted as

"highly essential” since it is above the mid point between the two ratings. Although statistically significant differences in group means do not exist, the supervisors1 mean score was the lowest at 4.51* It should be noted that this mean is considerably higher than that of the previous item.

Ho significant differences are apparent in the group means in­ dicating the degree of responsibility of the studio teacher for this item. The overall mean indicates a level of "most responsibility.”

7. "The student should have the ability to perform in both large and small ensembles.”

This skill vas considered to be "highly essential” by a majority of the respondents although the overall mean was only just above the mid point between the two ratings ("important” and "highly essential”).

Ho significant differences in group means appeared.

Differences do appear, however, in the means of the scares in­ dicating the degree of studio teacher responsibility. Under Job classifications, the supervisors considered this item primarily the responsibility of the studio teacher ("most responsibility”), while the applied teachers themselves and the music education teachers felt that the responsibility should be shared equally with others of the faculty. Under instrument classification, wind players assigned 1*J5

"most responsibility" to the studio teacher while voice and piano teachers felt that it should involve equal responsibility with other f a c u lty ,

8. "The student should have the ability to transpose on his major instrument."

She total mean for this item indicates that respondents ae a whole considered this skill an "inportant" asset. Music education

teachers considered it significantly more Important than did the applied teachers. It is surprising that there are no significant differences in the mean scores of the groups reclassified by per­

formance medium on the importance of the ability to transpose.

Significant differences appear under both classifications on the

degree of studio teacher responsibility for teaching transposing skill.

Supervisors and music education teachers assigned "most responsi­ bility" to the studio teacher, while the applied teachers felt that it

should be shared equally with others on the staff. Under instrument classification, wind players clearly considered this the responsibility of the studio teacher, while pianists indicated that it should be

shared equally with others on the staff. The total mean of 3*65 may be accepted as designating "most responsibility" to the studio teachers.

9* "The student should have the ability to identify, as a

listener, any deviations by another ymrformer from correct performance

as indicated by a given score in terms of pitch, rhythm, tempo and

dynam ics."

No significant differences exist in the means of various groups under either category for this item. The total mean indicates that Iks this ability was considered to be "highly essential11 for the pro­ spective music teacher*

No significant differences exist in the means of various groups measuring the degree of studio teacher responsibility for providing this skill. The total mean of 3*^9 pieces It midpoint between "eqnal responsibility with other teachers" and "most responsibility" for the studio teacher.

Insights Concerning Performance^

1. "The student should have the ability to demonstrate authori­ tatively the stylistic differences of each major period of musical composition as exemplified in the literature of hie major instrument."

Although the supervisors rated this as "important,■ their score was significantly lower than that of the applied teachers, and those teaching both applied music and music education. In no case vas the sub-group mean high enough to warrant describing the item as "highly essential." The total mean vas h.17, or slightly above

"important." No differences were apparent when the respondents were classified by performing media.

The total mean score for this item, rated as to the degree of studio responsibility, vas slightly under the point designated as

"most responsibility." No significant differences were apparent in the mean scores of any group in either classification.

2* The data discussed in the following section are presented in graph form in Charts No. h and 7 in Appendix J. 1*7 2* "She student should have the ability to transfer musical values realized in the major performing medium to performances which he will later conduct in other media*"

This skill was rather universally accepted as being "highly essential*" Differences became apparent in attempting to ascertain the degree of studio teacher responsibility which should be involved in teaching it* Supervisors and college teachers responsible for both music education and applied music assigned a significantly higher degree of responsibility to the studio teacher than did any other groups. Music education teachers scored the item significantly lower than did any other group, giving the studio teacher "equal responsi­ bility" with others on the staff* The total mean was somewhat above this point, but not enough to qualify for the next level on the scale* lio s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s were apparent among perform ing medium groups, either on the importance of the item or the amount of responsibility which should be assumed by the atudio teacher.

3* "The student should have the ability to build acceptable programs from the literature of his major performihg medium."

All categories of respondents rated this ability well above the

"important" mark, and yet the total mean does not warrant considering the ability as "highly essential."

All groups indicated that the studio teacher should assume "most responsibility" for developing this skill* Individual group means fell very near the total mean in this scoring*

h. "The student should have the ability to make competent Iks judgments concerning the musical values In performances In his ovn and other performing media."

A high degree of Importance was assigned to this skill by all respondents* indicating that it should be considered as "highly essential" for the prospective music teacher.

Music education teachers assigned a much lower degree of re­ sponsibility to the studio teacher for teaching critical listening than did the supervisors, applied teachers and the teachers of music education and applied music. The overall mean may be said to indicate that the studio teacher ahould accept "most" of this responsibility.

Differences were apparent in means of instrument groups and showed that pianists assigned less responsibility to the studio teacher than did other instrumentalists.

5« "The student should have the ability to utilize the major per­ forming medium as an aid to composing and arranging."

The total mean on the importance of this skill was midway between

"helpful" and "important." No significant differences in group mean scores were apparent.

Supervisors assigned a significantly higher degree of responsibility to the studio teacher for teaching this skill than did any other group of respondents. Their mean score would indicate that the studio teacher should have slightly more than an equally shared degree of responsi­ bility. All other group means showed a score less than the point designating equally shared responsibility. Music education teachers1 scores were significantly lower than any other group. 1U9

6* "The student should have the ability to discriminate artis­ tically in the selection of music appropriate to the needs of a school and community*"

This item showed the highest importance rating of any item in the study* While group means were all within a margin which could be designated as "highly essential, " significant differences appeared between the very high means of the applied teachers and supervisors, and the lowest mean of tie music education teachers* Under the per­ forming medium classification, wind players rated the item less im­ portant than did other categories of respondents*

While individual group means under job classification were all substantially 3*00 (equal responsibility), supervisors assigned a significantly higher degree of responsibility to the studio teacher than did the music education teacher* String players and vocalists assigned more responsibility to the studio teacher than did pianists and th o se having more th an one perform in g medium*

7* "The student should have the desire to continue performance activities beyond the immediate requirements of a public school p o s itio n * *

The total mean score placed this item slightly above "important11 on the first scale, with no significant differences appearing in group means under either classification* Significant differences occur in the mean scores which measure studio teacher responsibility. The mean of the directors was slightly under U.OQ, indicating their belief that the Btudio teacher should have most of the responsibility for developing this attitude* Music education teachers, on the other hand, rated this 150

3.3°. Indicating that the responsibility should he shared with other faculty. One would have to Infer that music education teachers felt that others on the faculty should promote the continuance of per­ form ance*

Pedagogical Insights Belated to the Major Performance Area^

1. "The student should have an understanding of the physical problems commonly encountered by young pupils studying in his major performance area.”

This insight was considered to be "highly essential" by a majority of respondents. Ho significant differences in group means appear under

Job classification, but under Instrument classification, those re­ spondents who had more than one performance medium rated the Item significantly less ls^ortant than did the vocalists, string and wind players.

Judging from the total mean, the studio teacher should assume

"most" of the responsibility for developing this insight. Tbs score of the music education teachers was significantly lower on this item than that of the supervisors, applied teacherB and directors, indicating their opinion that other faculty should have a larger share in develop­ ing this insight.

8. "The student should have a knowledge of the devices used to overcome physical problems encountered in learning to perform on his major instrument."

3* She data discussed in the following section are presented in graph form in Charts Ho. 5 and 8 In Appendix J. 151

The total mean Indicated, that a majority of respondents considered this Insight as "highly essential." No significant differences appear between the various groups under either classification.

The data indicated that the studio teacher should assume "most" of the responsibility for developing this insight. No significant differences appear between various groups on this rating.

3* "The student should have a comprehensive acquaintance with the most acceptable teaching literature for younger pupils in his major performance area."

Again the total mean indicates that a majority of respondents considered this insight "highly essential." No appreciable differences appear between the means of the various groups of respondents.

Although the total mean score showing the degree of studio teacher responsibility indicates a majority of opinion in favor of the studio teacher assuming "most" of the responsibility for developing this insight, supervisors assigned a significantly higher degree of re­ sponsibility to the studio teacher than did the college music education teachers* Means of the other groups were not significantly different from the means of either of the groups at the extremes of the ranking order*

h* "The student should have an understanding of the place of technical studies in the development of performance facility."

The total mean score, although not as high as that for the three previous items, nevertheless indicates that a majority of respondents considered this item as "highly essential." Very little actual difference appears between the various group means* 152 She data Indicated that the studio teacher should assume "most"

of the responsibility for developing this insight. Vocalists, however,

assigned significantly less responsibility to the studio teacher than

did string players.

5* "The student should have an elementary understanding of the psychological factors which contribute to a good teacher-pupil re­

lationship.11

Mo significant differences occur between the various group means

on the importance of this item, and it too may be considered to be

"highly essential" for the prospective teacher.

Marked differences do appear in the various means indicating the

degree of studio teacher responsibility in developing this understand­

ing. Supervisors assigned him a significantly higher degree of re­

sponsibility than did the college directors, teachers of applied music, and teachers of music education. Under the other classifi­ cation, pianists assigned the studio teacher much less responsibility

(equally shared with other faculty) than any of the other groups who

felt that he should have moet of this responsibility. The total mean

is midway between "equal responsibility with other teachers" and

"most responsibility."

6. "The student should have an elementary understanding of the principles of motivation as related to the learning process."

This understanding was considered to be "highly essential" by a

majority of respondents. The data indicated that the studio teacher

should share equally with other teachers in developing this under- 153 standing. No significant differences appear in the means of the various groups under either classification or for either question.

7* "The student should have an understanding of child growth and development as related to the problems involved in the major performance area.”

Although a number of respondents considered this to be "highly essential," the total mean must be interpreted as designating it to be "important." Group means do not differ appreciably.

The means of applied teachers and music education teachers in­ dicating studio teacher responsibility are slightly below the point designating "eq^ial responsibility with other teachers." Supervisors assigned a much higher degree of responsibility to the studio teacher

(3 * 5 2 ). The mean for the directors was significantly below that of the supervisors, and significantly above that of the college teachers.

The total mean assigned the studio teacher "equal responsibility" with other teachers.

8. "The student should have the ability to evaluate pupil progress in the achievement of musical growth in his major performing medium."

The total mean on the importance of this item shows that it was considered "highly essential" by a majority of respondents.

Supervisors again assigned a significantly higher degree of re­ sponsibility to the studio teacher for developing this ability than did any of the college teachers. The highest group mean is slightly below the point indicating "most responsibility" and the lowest is Just above "equal responsibility." The total mean is midway between these two points*

9* "The student should have the ability to Integrate theory of music with instruction in his major performing medium."

The total mean for this item indicates that it is "important" for the prospective music teacher, and the total mean indicating the degree of studio responsibility assigns the studio teacher approxi­ mately "equal responsibility" with other teachers for its development*

10* "The student should have the ability to integrate music history and literature with instruction in hie major performing medium* "

Mean scores indicated that this item was also considered "im­ portant" and that the studio teacher should Bhare equally in the responsibility of developii^ it* Both scores on this item were some­ what lower than the scores on the previous item.

In general, more of the items under Pedagogical Insights were thought to be "highly essential* than those under the headings relating to performance skills and insights. Furthermore, there was much more diversity of opinion as to how much this emphasis was to be included in the private studio lesson* Supervisors tended to assign more responsibility to the studio teacher than did the other groups of respondents* Music education teachers on the other hand rated the items lower than other gro-qps. This pattern suggests that supervisors favored a strong pedagogical emphasis In the applied lesson* Music education teachers seemed to favor this emphasis, but were not willing to give up too much of what they might consider their prerogative to teach * 1 5 5 Part II

Patterns of Agreement among Respondents

of Various Job Categories

The data indicated that there was not as much, disagreement between the categories of respondents relative to the tent at ire criteria as had been expected* Significant differences in the mean scores of the several groups of respondents have been discussed in connection with the particular items where they existed* In the following section of this chapter, each category of respondent in the classification by jobs is discussed, and consistencies or inconsistencies in the patterns of their replies are described. In some instances, the replies of a particular group show significant patterns in their relationships to the replies of the other groups* In many instances, h no pattern is in evidence*

Directors of Schools of Music

The mean scores of the directors fell close to the total mean score more frequently than did the mean scores of any other group.

This might well be expected since the heads of music departments are more frequently called upon to reconcile the differing views of various departments*

Directors tended to give higher ratings to the admission standards than did the other groups* Their ratings of the graduation standards h* The data discussed in this past of the chapter are presented in graph form in Charts No* 1—10 in Appendix T* 1 5 6 were dose to the total mean rating. In the sections relating to the importance of performance skills and performance insights, the mean scores of the directors were consistently near the total mean score*

No pattern is in evidence in the section showing the importance of pedagogical insights, hut the mean scores of the directors are not significantly different from thoee of any other group.

In rating the degree of studio teacher responsibility in providing the various competencies, insights and attitudes necessary to the student, the directors* mean scores indicated a position close to the total mean on all but two items, where their mean score was the highest of any group. The first of these items referred to the student's desire to continue his performance activity beyond the requirements of a school position, and the second referred to the student*s under­ standing of the physical problems encountered in learning the in­ stru m en t.

The mean scores for the directors on the value of the instruction­ al devices and examinations which were suggested in the questionnaire tended to be at the higher edge of the total group of scores, while their rating of the importance of recital performance and attendance vas again very close to the total mean*

lTTha replies of the directors in the section on instructional emphasis is again consistent with the pattern already noted, in that the rank order of the sums of the ranks given to the five items by the directors is identical with the rank order of the sums of the ranks given to these items by the entire sampling* 157

College Teacher b of Applied Music

The applied teachers' ratings of the admission standards for piano, voice, violin and trumpet were close to the overall mean* However, the applied teachers rated the standards for 'cello and clarinet lower than

did the other groups* In the case of the graduation standards, all hut the standards for violin and trumpet were rated fairly close to

the overall mean* These received lower ratings from the applied

teachers than from any other group*

Ho pattern of any significance was in evidence when the applied

teachers' mean scores on the Importance of performance shills were

compared with the mean scores of other groups.

Under Insights Concerning Performance, and Pedagogical Insights,

the mean scores of the applied teachers again remained fairly close

to the overall mean in rating the importance of the items* In the

latter section, the mean scores of the applied teachers dropped below

all the other mean scores on the last four items* These four items

were (l) an understanding of the principles of motivation, (2) an understanding of child growth and development, ( 3 ) the ability to

evaluate pupil progress, and (h) the ability to Integrate music history

and literature with applied instruction.

Although no significant pattern appeared in the first two of the

three sections dealing with the degree of studio responsibility, a

clear pattern emerged in the section designed to define the extent of

the studio teacher's responsibility in providing pedagogical insights*

The applied teachers' mean scores were relatively low for six out of

the ten items* An interesting fact in this connection is that their 158 scores were very close to those of the music education teachers, while the scores of the supervisors were consistently high* The applied teachers and the music education teachers seem to agree that most of the pedcgoglcal insights described are the Joint responsibility of the applied teacher and others on the staff. Supervisors, on the other hand, favored assigning more of this responsibility to the studio teacher.

In the part of the study concerning the implementation of the applied program through credit allowances, amount of Instruction, Jury examinations and studio classes, the applied teachers 1 mean scores were above the overall mean, but not differing significantly from the mean scores of the other college teachers. Applied teachers, along with the group of respondents who taught both applied music and music education, consistently rated recital performance higher than did all other groups.

In the section on Instructional emphasis, the applied teachers were the only group whose sums of ranks did not place the expansion of pedagogical emphasis in first place. Thle item was ranked fourth, with sight-reading ranking in first place. This was due in part to the fact that a large number of applied teachers were pianists, and therefore not greatly concerned about how to teach piano in the public sc h o o ls.

College Teachers of ttielc Education

Consistent relationships between music education teachers and the remaining groups of respondents are not apparent in the ratings of the 159 admission and graduation standards. The mean scores of the music

education teachers were slightly higher than the total mean for most

of the items in the section on the importance of particular performance

skills* Their mean scores were the highest of any group on the item

concerning sight-reading ability, and the ability to demonstrate

satisfactory performance skill for use in school and community. In

nearly every item in this section on performance skills, their scores

were above those of the directors, applied teachers and supervisors.

The other items in this section refer to memorisation, learning new music independently, performing in public, performing in small ensembles,

transposing, and critical listening. Although the margin of difference

is not statistically significant, the number of Instances in which the

music education teachers maintained the higher mean scores must be

recognised as some indication of the relative importance which they

place on these aspects of performance.

The pattern is changed Bllghtly in the section referring to the

importance of insights concerning performance. Here the mean scores

for the mnsic education teachers were slightly lower than the total

mean scores in all but two instances where it was again higher. There

is no recognizable pattern of relationship to the mean scores of the

other groups of respondents.

The mean scores of the music education teachers were a little

above, or nearly identical with, the total mean scores in the section

measuring the importance of pedagogical insights.

In that part of the study concerning the responsibility of the

studio teacher, no clear pattern of relationship in mean scores is 1 6 0 apparent until the section referring to insights coneerning performance.

The mean scores of the music education teachers were below the mean scores of every other group on each Item. The differences were sig­ nificant in a sufficient number of instances that the entire pattern must be considered unique. Virtually the same pattern exists in the section on studio teacher responsibility in providing pedagogical insights, but in this section, the mean scores of the applied teachers drop down and become practically identical with those of the music education teachers.

Music education teachers consistently rated the items referring to recital performance lower than did the other college teacherB.

College Teachers of Music Education and Applied Music

The mean scores of this group were rather inconsistent and erratic. In the admission and graduation standards, their mean scores showed the widest fluctuation of any group. Their scoring throughout the entire study indicated a somewhat consistent leaning toward high performance standards. In the sections concerning the studio teacher's responsibility, their mean scores were very close to the overall mean.

The mean scores of this group were the highest of any group in the section concerned with the inportance of recital performance and attendance. The sums of their ranks in the part dealing with in­ structional emphasis placed the items in the Bame identical pattern with those of the music education teachers. l 6 l

Supervisors of Music Instruction In Public Schools

The mean scores of the supervisors indicated a consistent pattern in rating performance activities in a relatively lower position on the scale of Importance than was shown by the scores of the other g r o u p s *

ThiB wan particularly true for the group of competencies under the heading of Additional Performance Skills* and also for the entire part of the study covering the curricular requirements related to per­ formance*

In most of the above instances the margins of difference were not wide. The consistency with which the patterns appeared makes it necessary to conclude that the supervisors placed a relatively lower degree of Importance on all aspects of major applied performance in the teacher education program than did any of the other groups of respondents*

The supervisors• scores on the sections designed to measure the degree of studio teacher reiponsibility in developing the suggested insights concerning performance and the suggested pedagogical insights were consistently higher than the mean scores of the other groups*

The supervisors indicated that the studio teacher should assume relatively more responsibility in developing these insights than was assigned to him by the college personnel* 162

Part III

C riteria Banked. According to Mean Score a

Only those Items are included in this part of the chapter which were rated on the five-level scale of importance provided in the questionnaire. The items are ranked in order of importance, b e g in n in g with the most important. The rank of each item is determined by the mean score of all the replies from the entire sampling. No adjustment

is made on any item because of differences in the mean scores of the various categories of respondents. Since the ranking order crosses

the organizational sections defined in the questionnaire, the headings

are eliminated. (The wording of individual items is changed in some

instances where necessitated by the removal from its original context.)

The mean Bcore for each item is included following each item.

No statistical test was made of the significance of differences

of mean scores for each item, using the mean from the total saspllng.

It cannot therefore be assumed that the order of ranking represents

a completely accurate measure of the relative ijqaortance of each item.

It cannot be assumed, for example, that any item is more liqportant

than the one next below it in the ranking order. The ranked list of

criteria does provide an index of the relative importance of groups

of criteria.

A rbitrarily using the midpoint between the numerical levels

(I1. 5O, 3 . 5O, etc.) as the line which separates one levd.of importance 163 from another, the first fourteen criteria may be considered as highly essential in the preparation of the public school music teacher:

The stu d e n t should

1. Have the ability to discriminate artistically in the selection of music appropriate to the needs of a school and community. U .86

2. Have the ability to identify, as a listener, any de­ viations by another performer from correct performance as in­ dicated by a given score in terms of pitch, rhythm, tempo and dynamics* ^*77

3* Have an understanding of the physical problems which are commonly encountered by young pupils studying in his major performance area* h* 7 *+

h* Have a knowledge of the devices used to overcome physical problems encountered in learning to perform on his major instrument* ^*73

5* Have the ability to make competent judgments con­ cerning the musical values in performances in his own and other performing media* ^*71

6* Have a comprehensive acquaintance with the most ac­ ceptable teaching literature for younger pupils in his major performance area. b-. 6&

7* Have the ability to demonstrate satisfactory per­ formance skill for use in school and community* U .65 16U

S. Have the ability to transfer musical values realized

in the major performing medium to performances which he w ill conduct in other media. U .65

9* Be required to attend concert# and faculty recitals. ^.63

10. Have elementary understanding of the psychological

factors which contribute to good teacher-pupil relationship

in the private lesson. ^*59

11. Have an elementary understanding of the principles

of motivation as related to the learning process. ^*57

12. Have an understanding of the place of technical

studies in the development of performance facility. ^-57

13. Have the ability to evaluate pupil progress in the

achievement of musical growth in his major performing medium. ^*55

14. Have the ability to perform in both large and small ensembles. 1+.R1

It should be observed that all but three of the fourteen criteria

shown by the data to be "highly essential" represent competencies which

relate to the problems of teaching, rather than to the problems of performing.

The criteria from number 15 to number 33 be considered as

important in the preparation of the public school music teacher.

The student should

13. Be required to attend student recitals. 4.4U

16. Perform in studio recitals. U.40

17 . Have the ability to integrate theory of music with

Instruction in his major performing medium. 4.38 165 IS. Perform in public recital prior to graduating. ^.36

19. Have an understanding of child growth, and develop­ ment as related to the problems involved in his major per­ forming area. 4.35 20. Have the ability to read with reasonable technical mastery and muslcianly feeling a much larger portion of the

literature for his major instrument than is Included in his performing repertoire* ^ 3 3 21. Have the ability to build acceptable programs from

the literature of his major performing medium. M 3 22. Have the ability to perform both in formal concert

and for informal gatherings with poise, control and good personal rapport. 1+.25

23. Have the ability to integrate music history and

literature with Instruction in his major performing medium. 4.23

2U. Have the ability to demonstrate authoritatively

the Btylistic differences of each of the major periods of musical composition as exemplified in the literature of his major performing medium. U.17

29« Have a final Jury examination. >*.16

26. Have the desire to continue performance activities

beyond the immediate requirements of a public school position. 4 .1 5

27* Have continued in s tr u c tio n in the m ajor a p p lie d performance area throughout all four years of the undergradu­

a te program although p re s c rib e d minimum stan d ard s are met

e a r l i e r . k.12 166

28. Have a repertoire check* h.08

29* Present a graduating recital, singly or with one or more other students. 3*93

30. Have the ability to transpose on his major instrument. 3-95 31* Hare the ability to take a composition somewhat below the upper lim it of his technical ability, and prepare it for creditable performance in a week's time without the aid of an instructor. 3*91

32. Have a periodic Jury examination at the end of each unit of study. 3*32

33* Attend a weekly studio class, where all students of a single performing medium meet at a common time with the instructor for the evaluation of performance. 3*70

The l a s t th re e c r i t e r i a may be c o n sid e re d as being h e lp f u l i n th e preparation of the public school music teacher.

The stu d e n t should

3h. Have the ability to utilize the major performing medium as an aid to composing and arranging. 3**43

35. Have the ability to memorize a piece comparable in length to a standard concerto. 3.22

36. Have a performing repertoire of at least three, hour-long recital programs. 2.80

The twelve items which fall at the lower end of the ranked list of criteria rather consistently represent the specific techniques of the students' own performing ability, or the curricular requirements which either promote or measure these techniques. 1 6 7

In the first part of the chapter, the criteria contained in the first tvo parts of the questionnaire and rated from two points of view were reviewed. Each item was considered from the standpoint of its importance, and the extent of responsibility which should be assumed by the studio teacher in developing the competencies or insights described in the items.

The second part of the chapter was designed to give an overview of the larger patterns created by the replies covering the entire study by each of the groups of respondents in the classification by Jobs.

This overview revealed that although there was more agreement between the categories of respondents than had been expected, there were certain discernable patterns of difference which were significant.

Directors, as a group, tended to rate most of the items at levels very close to the total mean score. Applied teachers1 mean scores were also near the total mean in many instances, but dropped below on items referring to the studio teacher's responsibility in providing the

Btudent with pedagogical insights. Applied teachers places sight- reading in first place in ranking the five items of instructional esphasis, while all other groups placed the expansion of pedagogical emphasis in first place. Music education teachers rated many of the performance skills and pedagogical Insights above the total mean.

The most obvious pattern in the scores of the music education teachers was the consistency with which they assigned relatively less responsi­ b ility to the studio teacher for developing insights concerning per­ formance and pedagogical insights than did the other groups of 168 respondents* Supervisors, on the other hand, rather consistently assigned mure responsibility to the studio teacher in teaching the pedagogical aspects of a performing medium. Supervisors consistently rated the curricular activities and requirements which related to major applied performance in a position of less importance than did any of the other groups* The group of respondents who taught both applied music and music education placed high importance on performance with some consistency, although their ratings tended to be rather erratic*

No larger patterns of any great significance appeared in the mean scores of the respondents when they were reclassified by performing medium* The sampling was too small in some categories to provide significant data*

In the third part of the chapter, all of the items in the question­ naire which had neen rated in terms of importance were rearranged in order of their importance as indicated by the mean score cooputed from the replies of the entire sampling. Those having mean scores of over

U-.^O were considered to be highly essential in the preparation of the public school music teacher* fourteen items were included under this grouping* Nineteen items, whose mean scores ranged from 4-.U4 to 3 .70, were designated as being Lag)ortant, and the remaining three items whose mean scores ranged from 3 **WS t0 2.80 were considered to be helpful in the preparation of the public school music teacher*

When all of the items were thus ranked, a highly significant fact became apparent. The items receiving the highest scores were primarily those representing consistencies which relate to the problems of 169 teaching. The items receiving the lowest scores, although some of these were in the level designated as "important," were those items which represent the specific techniques of the student's own per­ forming ability, or the curricular requirements which either promote or measure these techniques* Chapter Till

SUM.ARY AND COBCLOSIONS

A&mlsalon Standards

The mean scores from the total sampling seem to Indicate that the standards for admission, as cited In the questionnaire, represent a very acceptable background of preparation for college entrance. The mean scores ranged from 3*73 t0 ^*00 for the various instruments

Indicating a "good background" In the terms provided by the question­ naire. A study of the mean scores of the various job categories, however, reveals that there is very little unanimity in the replies of the respondents. (See Chart No. 1, Appendix T, and Table 56.

Appendix X.)

graduation Standards

Mean scores from the total sampling again indicated that the graduation standards included in the questionnaire seemed to be generally satisfactory to the respondents. The mean scores of the various groups of respondents again revealed that there was disagree­ ment over these standards, notably those for trumpet* (See Chart No. 2,

Appendix 7, and Table 57. Appendix X.) There was disagreement not only between groups of respondents, but within these groups as veil.

1 7 0 1 7 1 The Importance of Performance Competencies and Related Insight ■

Bepliee indicating the importance of competencies and insights associated with the major performance area showed a remarkable degree of agreement between the several groups of respondents* This was true both when the respondents were classified by Job and by instrument.

Analysis of variance tests showed that statistically significant differences in mean scores existed only on a very few items in this part of the study. The highest degree of unanimity appeared in the evaluations of the importance of pedagogical insights.

Of a total of twenty-six competencies or insights comprising this part of the study, only three received total mean ratings under h.00 which was designated in the rating scale as “important."

The Degree of Studio Teacher Bespoasibillty in Developing Performance Competencies and Belated Insights

Host of the responsibility for promoting the acquisition of specific skills was assigned to the studio teacher by the majority of respondents in all categories. Exceptions occur in connection with such items as ensemble playing, and transposing, where other members of the staff are obviously more involved.

Scores were lower on insights which may be said to be a part of the larger competency commonly referred to as "musicianship." In developing these areas, the studio teacher was considered to have considerable responsibility, but a great deal more than others on the staff. This was also true in the case of pedagogical insights. 1 7 2

An Interesting pattern of differences appeared In this latter section

in that both the applied teachers and the music education teachers

consistently assigned less responsibility to the applied teacher for

the development of pedagogical insights than did any of the other groups of respondents. Supervisors Just as consistently assigned

relatively more responsibility to the studio teacher.

No diecernable patterns vere apparent in the scores of the

various groups of respondents when they were reclassified according

to their major performing medium.

Implementation of the Applied Music Program through Curricular Requirements, Instruction and Examination

Preparation

Over half of the respondents indicated that readiness for admission

to the bachelor of music education program should not be measured in

terms of length of study of a major performing area. Music education

teachers, in particular, checked the reply "no set time" in preference

to specified numbers of years of practical fam iliarity with the in­

strument. Ttfhen the respondents were reclassified by instrument, it

was observed that vocalists led the other groups in the frequency in

which they checked this same reply. Under instrument classification, more string playerB indicated preferences for a specified length of prior study than did the other groups.

Qualifying examinations vere considered to be "highly essential"

by approximately half of the total sampling. The remaining half con­

sidered them "helpful." As might be expected, sixty per cent of the 173 aaeic education teachers considered qualifying examinations to be

"highly essential.1

Instruction and Examination

Respondents were equally divided as to whether one semester hour, or more than one semester hour should he granted for one hour of studio instruction plus six hours of practice per week. College teachers in general (including directors) favored granting more than one semester hoar's credit. Nearly three fourths of the supervisors, on the other hand, thought that only one hour or less than one hour's credit should be granted for this amount of work. This would indicate their concern that the hours required for graduation should not become so weighted with hours of credit for major applied Instruction as to necessitate the sacrificing of certain of the broader requirements essential to the preparation of the well-rounded music educator.

College personnel considered four years of major applied study

"important* whereas supervisors rated this item midway between "helpful" and "important." This further substantiated the statement made above regarding balance of curricular requirements.

The total mean score indicating the importance of the weekly s tu d io c la s s , where a l l stu d e n ts o f a sin g le perform ing medium meet together with the instructor for the evaluation of performance, was somewhat below the "important" level.

Periodic Jury examinations, a final Jury examination, and a repertoire check for all students were all Judged to be "important" as indicated by the total mean scores. Supervisors consistently rated 171* these items lower in importance than did any of the other groups.

Ho appreciable differences were apparent in the group means of the respondents when they were classified by instrument.

Public Performance and Attendance at Becitals

Mean scores of various job categories revealed a significant pattern on the importance of the graduating recital for music education majors. Applied teachers, teachers of both music education and applied music, and directors all rated the recital as isportant or higher* The music education teachers' mean, however, though high enough to warrant a designation of "important" was significantly below the means of the other college personnel, and the supervisors' mean was slightly under the total mean.

Performance in public recital prior to graduation was rated con­ siderably more important than the graduation recital by all groups* and performance in studio recitals was rated slightly higher still*

Supervisors scored the lowest means on both of these latter two items.

Required attendance at concerts and faculty recitals was rather uniformly rated as "highly essential," while attendance at student recitals received a rating well above the "important" mark*

Instructional Emphasis

In ranking the five suggested aspects of additional major applied study as might be afforded by a hypothetical fifth year, the respondents a ho wed a remarkable degree of agreement* All job groups with the exception of the applied teachers (a large percentage of whom were pianists) ranked "the cap anal on of pedagogical emphasis" as first.

The applied teachers (and the pianists in the reclassification by instrument) ranked sight-reading first, probably because of the small amount of piano teaching which is actually required of the public school teacher as part of his job. All groups ranked the "perfecting of limited repertoire" as fifth. The patterns of ranking for the remain­ ing items varied somewhat for each group of respondents. Some favored

"sight-reading" as second, while others favored "expansion of repertoire

The resulting order of the sums of all ranks placed these two items at a tied position for second place. Jourth place was rather consistent ly given to "technical facility."

Inter-Eel at ions of Certain Aspects of the Data

Patterns in Qroup Means

Certain discernible patterns of consistency were apparent when all the mean scores of each group of respondents (as classified by job) were compared with all the mean scores of the other groups.

Directors, as a group, tended to rate most of the items very close to the total mean score. Applied teachers' mean scores were also near the total mean in many instances, but dropped relatively lower on the items referring to the studio teacher's responsibility in providing pedagogical insights. Music education teachers' mean scores were also low on these items of responsibility, but high in the sections on the importance of performance skills and pedagogical insights. Supervisors rated pedagogical insights higher than did the other groups. They also rated the studio teacher's responsibility for developing them higher 176 than did the other groups* The scores of the respondents teaching

In both applied and music education areas vere rather erratic, but tended to rate performance activities high in importance*

C riteria Hanked According to Mean Scores

When all of the tentative criteria, which could be rated on the five-level scale measuring their importance, vere ranked in the order of their mean scores based on the entire sampling, a highly significant fact became apparent. The iteme receiving the highest scores vere primarily those representing competencies which relate to the problems of teaching. The majority of the items receiving the lowest scores vere those representing specific techniques of the student's own per­ forming ability*

Conclusions and Becosaiendations

Proficiency Esquired for College Entrance

In view of the extent of disagreement among groups of respondents in their evaluations of the admission standards recommended by the

National Association of Schools of Music, it must be concluded that these admission standards do not provide a sufficiently reliable estimate of the level of proficiency required for admission as to

Justify their universal acceptance* It is therefore recommended that:

1* The present standards of proficiency for college entrance be reconstructed by & group of qualified individuals, vho are specialists in teaching in each of the performing media; 177 2* In revising the standards* particular attention be given to

the standards for violoncello, clarinet and trumpet, as these represent

areas of widest disagreement in the present study;

3* In revising the standards, actual examples of vocal literature he included which

a* are of a level of musical and aesthetic worth commensurate

with the examples cited for the various instruments;

b* contain technical problems of interval ship, range, diction

and phrasing which would demonstrate some degree of facility

in the use of the voice;

1*. She resulting revised standards be tested by as many schools

of music as are willing to cooperate in an evaluation of such standards;

3* The tested standards be evaluated by a similar population as

that selected for this study*

Proficiency Required for Graduation

A lack of agreement among different categories of respondents on

the acceptability of the standards of proficiency for graduation also points to the need for a careful revision of these standards* The

limitation of this study in relation to the lack of a sufficient number

of specialists in the teaching of each of the performing media also applied in this connection* Yhen the graduation standards suggested in

the questionnaire of this study are examined in the light of the fourteen criteria found to be "highly essential" in this study (see page 163,

P a r t 3 , of Chapter Til), they do not in fact represent a satisfactory

index of the competencies associated with the major area of performance 1 7 8

vhich are the most Important for the music education major as revealed,

by this study. It Is therefore recommended that:

1. The standards of proficiency for graduation be reconstructed

by a similar group of individuals as described in reference to the

admission standards;

2. The reconstruction of standards of proficiency for graduation

relate to the criteria found to be highly essential in this study to

the extent that the broader competencies which are unique for the music

education major be included in addition to a revised list of appropriate

literature;

3* In such reconstructed standards, special attention be given to

the suggested literature for trumpet;

h. The resulting standards for graduation be tested and evaluated

in a manner similar to that suggested above for standards for admission.

C riteria Bec«»nsnded as Issentlal in Maintenance of a ranctlonal Program of Instruction in the Major Applied Area

The recommendation for the acceptance of the criteria included in

the following section is based on the data obtained in this study. Those criteria which received high scores in terms of their importance are

restated without revision and are indicated with an asterisk (*).

Where revisions in the original criteria are necessitated by the

findings of the study, these revisions are discussed following the

statement of the new criteria. In the discussion pertaining to the

criteria, mention is made of the degree of responsibility, as revealed 1 7 9 by the data, which should be accepted by the studio teacher in providing the insights and competencies contained in the criteria.

Additional Performance Skills

1. The student should have the ability to perform in formal con* cert and informal gatherings with poise, control and good personal rajpport. The standards of excellence for such public performance should be determined by the faculty of the college, and shall be commensurate with demands of the commnnitles in which the student w ill be likely to te a c h .

It is Impossible to state a single criterion which specifies exactly how well a student should perform in public; therefore in order to state a more satisfactory criterion, two of the original cri­ teria hare been combined into one. The two tentative criteria dealing directly with the level of a student's public solo performance ability are (l) "the student should have the ability to perform in formal con­ cert and Informal gatherings with poise, control and good personal rapport," and ( 2) "the student should have the ability to demonstrate satisfactory performance skill for use in school and community." Both received high ratings, since neither presents anything sufficiently concrete to warrant widespread differences of opinion. The performer's level of proficiency would be considered adequate, depending, in the first instance, upon the people who made up his audience, and in the second instance upon the musical background of the community in question. In the final analysis, the acceptable level for the student w ill need to be determined by the degree-granting Institution involved, ISO bat with careful consideration of all that is implied in the criterion which refers to community and school needs. The "community* must he interpreted to include people of extremely divergent standards of mnslcal taste. To state that the student must be able to demonstrate satisfactory performance skill for use in the school and community is to state a criterion which is certainly "highly essential," but is no measure of a student's excellence. It must be left to the institution graduating him to set the standards by providing a discerning audience, for which the student will be required to "perform in concert, or in­ formal gathering." The responsibility for developing this competency is primarily the responsibility of the studio teadher.

2. The student should have the ability to identify as a listener, any deviations by another performer from correct performance as In­ dicated by a given score in terms of pitch, rhythm, tempo and dynamics. •

3* The student should have the ability to perform in large and small ensembles. •

The data indicated that criteria numbers 2 and 3 represent

"highly essential skills" which should be taught by the studio teacher as well as by other members of the faculty.

h. The student should have a performing repertoire of ap­ proximately TWO hour-long recital programs.

The above criterion has been revised to the extent of substitut­ ing "two hour-long programs" for "three hour-long programs." The revised criterion is considered more realistic in view of the low mean score given to the original version. It is obvious from the 181 data that this should fall within the area of "most responsibility" for the studio teacher.

5. The student should be able to take a composition somewhat below the upper limits of his technical ability and prepare it for a creditable performance in a week without the aid of an instructor. *

6. The student should have the ability to read with reasonable technical mastery and muslcianly feeling a large portion of the literature for his performing medium not included in his performing repertoire.

In the original version of the above criterion, the amount of

literature was indicated &6 "a much larger portion of the literature

for his major instrument" in relation to the "three hour-long recital programs" specified In another criterion. It is further recommended

that in additional studies to validate criteria, this item should be made more specific by including accompaniments for pianists and ensemble literature for the instrumentalists and vocalists. The re­

sponsibility for developing this skill will be shared by several different members of a school of music staff.

7 . Students who are pianists and wind instrument players should have the ability to transpose on their major Instrument.

The data indicated that transposition on a particular instrument

is a skill which is functional for only certain typeB of instrumental­

ists. Wind players are frequently called upon to transpose. Pianists

should develop the skill because of its functional value in teaching general music in the public schools. The studio teacher should assume

most of the responsibility for developing this skill. 132

3* The student should have the ability to memorise a composition or a program of fifteen to thirty minutes in duration*

The data Indicated that the ability to memorize could be considered as a "helpful" asset to the music teacher. The criterion above has been modified by eliminating the phrase "comparable in length to a standard concerto" since the vocalist vill more frequently have to deal with a number of shorter songs, rather than a Bingle large work.

The studio teacher should assume most of the responsibility for developing this skill.

Insights Concerning Performance

1. The student should be able to discriminate artistically in the selection of music appropriate to the needs of a school and

She above criterion demands a brief discussion at this point.

Although the total mean score on this item indicating its importance was the highest of any in the entire study, there was some difference of opinion between groups of respondents concerning its importance*

Applied teachers and supervisors rated it very high, while music education teachers, although giving it very great importance, were significantly lower in their rating than the aforementioned groups, presumably for the reason that they may conceive of situations where music should be selected on other than artistic measures of excellence.

Whereas it might be allowed that the expedient selection of music for c e r ta in s itu a tio n s may be based on Immediate ap p eal, or some unique functional basis, the music which should form the "growing diet" 183 should be based on artistic criteria* This author supports the position put forth by Broudy that the music teacher should be the

"connoisseur'1 in musical taste, and as such, he is absolutely justi­

fied in conditioning the learner by exposing him to what is considered

in s till higher echelons of "connoisseur ship * as "good" music until

the leurner is himself ready to form his tastes on the basis of

experience and knowledge*^

Since the above highly essential criterion is sufficiently broad

as to encompass disciplines and areas outside of the major applied

field, the responsibility for developing this insight must be shared by many, if not all, of the members of the college faculty* On the basis of the data in this study, the studio teacher should assume

an equal share of this responsibility with the other members of the

staff* This must be recognised as a team effort*

2* The stu d e n t should have th e a b i l i t y to make com petent

Judgments concerning the musical values in performances in his own

and other performing media* *

3* The student should have the ability to transfer musical value8 realised in the major performing medium to performances which

he w ill conduct In other media. *

Criteria 2 and 3 must also be considered to be "highly essential*

and should involve the responsibilities of the studio teacher to­

gether with others on the staff.

1 . Harry S. Broudy, A R ealistic Philosophy of Music Education (HSSK Yearbook, Vol. LVII, Part I, 195* 1 84

4. The student should hare the ability to demonstrate authori­

tatively the stylistic differences of each major period of nmaloal composition as exemplified in the literature of his major instrument. *

Criterion number 4 Is of aomevhat less importance than either of

the first three criteria. Its importance becomes more questionable when the student's performing medium is the tuba or saxophone* Most

of the responsibility for developing this musical insight should be

assumed by the studio teacher* In certain performance areas, this

will undoubtedly necessitate the use of transcriptions.

5. The student should have the ability to build acceptable programs from the literature of his major performing medium* *

The data indicated that this competency should be considered

important* The data further indicated that most of the responsibility

for i t 8 development should be accepted by the studio teacher.

6* The student should have the desire to continue performance

activities beyond the immediate requirements of a public school position* *

This was considered as important for the music educator by the

respondents in this study* Of equal Importance is that the data in

this study indicated that the attitude was to be encouraged by faculty

members other than the applied teachers.

7* The student should have the ability to utilize the major

performing medium as an aid to composing and arranging. *

The data indicated that this ability may be considered helpful

to the prospective teacher, and that he will gain it through the

shared responsibility of several staff members. 1S5

Pedagogical Insights Related to the Major Performance Area

One of the most significant findings of this study is the great

Importance which respondents place on the pedagogical aspects which

should he included in applied studio teaching. This may well be considered to he a radical departure from the traditional conservatory

approach of several years ago. These findings make it manifestly

clear that the studio teacher is under professional obligation to consider himself a part of the teacher-training team.

1. The student should have an understanding of the physical problems commonly encountered hy young pupils studying in his major performance area. *

2. The student should have a knowledge of the devices used to

overcome physical problems encountered in learning to perform in his

major performance area. •

3. The student should have a comprehensive acquaintance with the

most acceptable teaching literature for younger pupils in hiB major

performing area. *

U. The student should have an understanding of the place of

t e c h n i c a l studies in the development of performance facility. •

The data indicated that the four criteria listed above should be

considered as "highly essential" in the preparation of the music

teacher. The studio teacher should assume most of the responsibility

for developing these insights.

5. The student should have an elementary understanding of the psy­

chological factors which contribute to good teacher-pupll relationship. * 186

6. The student should have an elementary under*tending of the principles of motivation as related to the learning process* *

C riteria numbers 5 and 6 are no lees Important, but a somewhat greater amount of the knowledge represented will be gained outside the studio lesson. The studio teacher should nevertheless consider these items as worthy of considerable emphasis as a part of the studio lesson. The word "elamentary" is used intentionally in these two criteria for obvious reasons. In the first place, it is doubtful that the average undergraduate con gain little more than an elementary knowledge of psychology or the principles of motivation even from those courses specifically designed to teach this. In the second place, the average college teacher of applied music is hardly in a position himself to go into much detail in this little-understood realm of educational theory. In the third place, the teaching time allotted to studio instruction will not permit of any lengthy ex­ ploration of such areas. Much of this kind of insight must necessarily be learned from the example of the good studio teacher. The student should be expected, however, to exercise considerable self-analysis in attempting to answer such questions as "what factors in the music learning situation make the student want to acquire more fluent use of the medium of communication—namely, musical performance?"

7 . The student should have an understanding of child growth and development as related to the problems involved in the major per­ forming area. *

S. The student should have the ability to evaluate pupil progress in the achievement of musical growth in the major performing medium. * 1S7

9* The student should have the ability to Integrate theory of music with instruction In the major performing aed±ua« *

10. The student should have the ability to integrate music history and literature with Instruction In the major performing medium. *

C riteria numbers 7t S* 9 a^d. 10 are of somewhat lesser Importance than those previously mentioned, but are nevertheless a very necessary part of the music teacher's basic knowledge and skill, and most be gained through the combined efforts of the studio teacher and other faculty members.

Beeonunendations Concerning the Implementation of the Applied Music Program through Curricular Require­ ments, Instruction, and Examination

1. Whereas it might seem advisable to specify a minimum length

of time of prior study as prerequisite to college entrance for certain

instruments, particularly strings, the qualifying examination would

appear to be the more acceptable means of determining a student's

readiness for college level applied study. (Qualifying examinations, however, have certain obvious limitations in that they may fail to reveal the student's basic potential and only show the results of

inferior instruction. They should not therefore be the only criterion by which a decision is reached as to whether a student should or

should not be admitted to a college music program. Having reached

this decision by means of the audition along with whatever testing program is normally used by a particular college, it is recommended

that the audition should then be the means of establishing the level at

which the student should begin his applied instruction in college. 2* The question of how much credit to grant for a specified number of hours of instruction and practice cannot be decided on the basis of any single criterion. Shis is bound to be Influenced by such

outside factors as state certification laws, and the general professional education requirements of the college apart from the de­ partment or school of music* A review of the findings of this present

study points up the significant differences of opinion concerning

this point. College teachers tend to favor more credit while the

actual representatives of the profession in the field favor granting

lees credit for the same amount of work. It is recommended that

additional research be undertaken to provide the basis for more

standardization of practice*

3* The question of whether to insist on three or four years of

major applied study also remains unanswered* College teachers again

would seem to consider this important, where sb public school super­

visors were for the most part content to evaluate the extra year as

helpful. The implication that other aspects of the teacher training program of a "highly essential" nature should not be curtailed by

those things which are less important is again to be reckoned with*

It is recommended that this item be studied further in connection with

continued inquiry into the advisability of a five-year program for

the bachelor's degree in music education.

U. The studio class, studio recital, or departmental recital

was not found to be considered highly essential in this study, for

reasons explained earlier. It nevertheless continues to provide

great potential as a highly functional and efficient activity* Its 183 use will vary greatly with the size of the college or school of music*

Zf the frequency recommended in the questionnaire of thie study had

"been stated as "once a month," or "once every six weeks," it is this w riter's opinion that the iaportan.ee rating would have increased appreciably* Die benefits provided by the studio recital may be briefly enumerated here;

a* Students will be permitted to perform in public more

frequently* b* Performing students as well as those who are not per­

forming w ill benefit by immediate verbal evaluation of their

e ff o r ts *

c* Son-performing students will be in an excellent position

to improve their abilities in critical listening*

It is therefore recommended that the possibilities afforded by the studio class be further explored*

3* The data received pertaining to the use of Jury examinations indicate that the final Jury examination should be recommended as important. The datfi do not warrant making any further recommendation beyond stating that the question of the frequency of periodic Jury examinations should be studied by each college in terms of its related policies*

6. It is recommended that the requirement of the graduating recital for music education majors be studied further.

The total mean score on the importance of the graduation recital indicates that it may be considered "Important" in the preparation of 190

the music teacher. Since the level of inportaace assigned, to it by music education teachers and supervisors was significantly lover

than that assigned by the other groups, it most be concluded that the

question deserves additional research*

7* It is recommended that music education students perform in

public recitals prior to graduation*

Differences of group means on the importance of this item,

although present, do not warrant the recommendation of any departure

from current practice.

8* It is recommended that the practice of requiring music

education majors to attend concerts, faculty recitals and the recitals

of other students be continued, as it represents an inportant aspect

of the training program*

Instructional Baphasis

The ranking pattern assigned to the five suggested aspects of

major applied study in a hypothetical fifth year program highlights

what may be one of the most significant findings of this study. In

order to make the applied area of instruction more functional, it is

therefore recommended that the college studio teacher of applied music

must become personally more involved in preparing the music education

major to meet the problems which he will encounter in actual teaching*

He may no longer assume that this is the function of the more pro­

fessionally oriented music education courses, and that his responsi­

b ility lies only in the realm of developing "musicianship.11 The

high importance placed on the "expansion of pedagogical emphasis"

J J 191 in this final section substantiates what has a l r e a d y been found in the earlier section describing the studio teacher's responsibilities in the area of developing pedagogical insights and understanding, and in the section where all of the criteria from the entire study are ranked in the order of their importance*

It is recommended that the criteria established in this study be further tested by having them evaluated by a sampling of experienced music education practitioners who are engaged in the teaching of music in the public schools* Since the supervisors of music in­

struction were the only representatives of public school teachers

in this Btudy, it would seem advisable to test the criteria against

the experience of more individuals who are directly involved with the

actual teaching of music* A second reason for this recommendation grows out of the speculation that a sampling of supervisors of music

instruction in cities of 50*000 or over might represent an older group

of people who had graduated from college when the conservatory em­ phasis in the teacher education field was much stronger than it is

at the present time. If this is true, the reaction of these in­

dividuals might well have been colored by their recollection of the program of the college which they completed* For this reason, the

opinions of more recent graduated might well present a different point of view than that of the practitioners selected for this study* BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andrews, Francis M. e t a l. "Music—A Vital Force in Today* s Secondary Schools, Part lT^ National Association of Secondary School Principals. Vol. 43™ No"." 245 (March, 1959)* PP* 46-47.

Beattie, John V. "The Selection and Training of Teachers." 35th Year­ hook, National Society for the Study of Education, 1936.

Bergathon, Bjornar. "Toward Improving Music Teacher Education." Education. Vol. 76 (March, I95O). p. 431.

Broudy, Harry S. "A Realistic Philosophy of Music Education." Basic Concepts in Music Education,LY11 Yearbook, National Society for the Study of Education, 195^ *

Bur dell, Edwin S. "What Will Be the Appropriate Relationship between Liberal and Specialized Skill?" Current Issues in Higher Education. Association for Higher Education, National Education Association, Washington, 1957*

Burkhalter, N. Laurence. "A Study of the Applied Major Requirements for the Bachelor of Music Education Degree in N. A. S. M. Approved State Universities." (Unpublished paper, The Ohio State University, 195#)

Carrico, John Lee. "A Study of A pplied Music in Four-Year S ta te Supported Colleges of Texas." (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers, 1956)

Correspondence, Vannette Lawler, Executive Secretary, Music Educators National Conference.

Courses for the Training of Supervisors of Music. Music Education Research Council, Bulletin No. 1. Music Supervisors National Conference, Chicago, 111., 1932.

Duncan, David B. "M ultiple Range and M ultiple F. Tests." Biometrics, Vol. II (1955). PP. 1-42.

Dvorak, Leo J. "Developing Musical Understanding in Teacher Training." E tude, V ol. 73* February 1955* P* 10«

Epperson, Gordon. "University Music: Theoretical or Applied." American Association of University Professors Bulletin, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Autumn, 195&).

1 9 2 193 "The Evaluation of Music Education; Standards for the Evaluation of the College Curriculum for the Training of the School 36islc Teacher." Commission on Accreditation and Certification in Music Education, Music Educators National Conference, 1952.

Evanson, Fattie. "Are Our Colleges Doing the Job in Instrumental Teacher Preparation?" Music Educators Journal, Vol. hi, Do. h, February-March, 1955*

Harlan, H. 3-rady. "Current Standards fo r the Voice Major in Music Education." Volume of Proceedings, Music Teachers National Association, 19*19 •

Hood, Marguerite V. "Teacher Training as Part of C ollege Music Study." Hational Association of Schools of Music Bulletin, April, 1955*

Kursteiner, Karl 0. The Administration of Applied Music Objectives at the College Level. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press,

Madison, Thurber H. "The Heed for Hew Concepts in Music Education." Basic Concepts in Music Education, Yearbook LVII, National Society for the Study of Education, 195&*

McEachern, Edna. A Survey and Evaluation of School Music Teachers in the United States. Hew York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers' College, Columbia University, 1937*

Membership L ist, National Association of Schools of Music, 1959*

Morgan, Hazel Nohavec, ed. Music Education Source Book. Music Educators N ational Conference, Chicago, 19^7*

. Music in American Education, Music Education Source Book No. 2. Washington: Music Educators National Conference, 1955; pp. 137 ff- National Association of Schools of Music. By-Laws and Regulations, 19^5; p* 2** Neil, Ronald J. and Nye, Robert E. "Two Viewpoints on Teacher Education." Educational Music Magazine, Vol. 35 (March, 1956).

Neumeyer, Carl M* ed. By-Laws and Regulations. National Association of Schools of Music, 1959*

Peterson, Wilbur J. "The Place of the Performance Area in Training High School Music Teachers." Journal of Research in Education. Yol. IV, No. 1 (Spring, 1956). 19**

Petzold, Robert 0. "She Applied Music Skills which Prospective Teachers of High School Instrumental Music Need." (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1950-)

Schuman, W illiam . "The R esp o n sib ility of Music Education to Music." Music Educators Journal. Tol. Us, No. 6 (June-July, 1956).

State Certification of Teachers and Supervisors of Public School Music. National Research Council of Music Education, Bulletin No. 11. Music Supervisors1 National Conference, Chicago, 111., 1929*

Statistical Abstracts of the U. S.. 1959. U. S. Department of Commerce.

Thompson, Randall. College Music. New York: Macmillan Company, 1935-

Whybrev, William. "Musicianship for Musical Standards." Music Educators Journal. Tol. 1*3 (Fbbruary, 1957)*

Wolfe, Irving W. State Certification for Music Teachers. Nashville; Bureau of Publications, George Peabody College for Teachers, 195**.

Worrel, John W. "An Evaluation of Teacher Preparation in Music Education at the University of Kentucky through an Analysis of Opinions of Graduates.* (Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois, 1957*) AyPSXLIX A

THE qWESTIONNAlHE

195 THE QjQISTIQlftlAlBJt

196 A STUDY DESIGNED TO ESTABLISH CRITERIA FOR THE EVALUATION OF APPLIED MUSIC INSTRUCTION

Return to: N. Laurence Burkhalter School of Music 1699 N. College Road Ohio State University Columbus 10, Ohio

INFORMATION PERTAINING TO RESPONDENT

I. Your present teaching responsibility: (Check in appropriate places). 1. Director of school of m u s i c . ______2. College studio teacher of applied music. ______3. College teacher of music education. ______4. Music supervisor, public schools. ______

11. Length of teaching experience. 1. If in college, state only the years you have taught in college (including current year). ______2. If in public school supervising, state only the years spent in that capacity (including current year). ___

III. Do you wish a summary of the conclusions of this study? Yes ______No

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this questionnaire is to collect data which may be used in establishing criteria for the evaluation of the MAJOR APPLIED AREA cf instruction for a Bachelor's degree. This questionnaire islimited to the consideration of only those degree programs which are prescribed for PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS OF MUSIC FOR THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS. The four parts of the questionnaire are described below.

PART I. PERFORMANCE COMPETENCY This section is designed to identify the skills and insights or knowledge associated with the mojor performance ar*a which are needed by graduates of a music education program who are preparing to teach in the public schools. These skills are subdivided as follows: A. Performance Competency in a Major Area 1. proficiency required for college entrance 2. proficiency required for graduation from a teacher education program 3. additional performance skills B. Insights Concerning Performance C. Pedagogical Insights Related to the Major Performing Medium PART II. STUDIO TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY This section is designed to ascertain the extent in which the STUDIO TEACHER of the major applied area should be responsible for providing the skills and insights detailed in part I. Parts I and II are therefore combined in the question­ naire, since beginning with item A-3, the same questions are answered from two different points of view. PART III. IMPLEMENTATION The CURRICULAR REQUIREMENTS which can most effectively provide the opportunity foi students to acquire essen­ tial performance skills are discussed in this section. PART IV. INSTRUCTIONAL EMPHASIS This section is designed to establish the relative importance of the several items under performance competency in terms of instructional emphasis. PARTS I AND II PERFORMANCE COMPETENCY and STUDIO TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY

A. Performance Competency In a Major Area

1. Proficiancy required far callage entrance In the small type section below, minimum standards of proficiency to be required for college entrance are suggest­ ed for various applied fields. These standards have been recommended as the basis for qualifying examinations to be taken by all freshman music students. Referring only to the standards for your own performing medlum(a) [piano, voice, etc.], circle the number at the right corresponding to the descriptive phrase below which most nearly approximates your evaluation of these standards. 5—excellent background; 4~good background; 3-fair background; 2-weak background; 1-unacceptable background.

Use additional space for comments.

PIANO — Tha student should hovo studied composition* corresponding in difficulty to tho following: 5 4 3 2 1 HAYDN, SONATA NO. II, G MAJOR, NO. 20 (SCHIRMER) MOZART, SONATA C MAJOR NO. 3, F MAJOR NO. 13 (SCHIRMER) BEETHOVEN, SONATA OP. 49, NO. 1; OP. 14, NOS. I & 2

VOICE - Tho student should b* obi* to sing "STANDARD SONGS AND THE SIMPLER CLASSICS." 5 4 3 2 1 Ho should b# oblo to road music.

VIOLIN — Tho student should b* obi* to perform pieces of the difficulty of the following: 5 4 3 2 1 DE BERIOT, CONCERTI NOS. 7 & 9 TARTINI, SONATA G MINOR KREUTZER ETUDES, 1 - 32

VIOLONCELLO - The student should be able to play pieces of the same difficulty as the following: 5 4 3 2 1 CORELLI, SONATE IN D MINOR GOLTERMAN, CONCERTO IN B MINOR (FIRST MOVEMENT)

CLARINET - The student should have the ability to perform material such as it contained in: 5 4 3 2 1 LANGENUS, CLARINET METHOD, PART I

TRUMPET — The student should have the ability to perform materiol such at it contained in: 5 4 3 2 1 WILLIAMS, METHOD, PART II and such pieces as: BALAY, PETITE PIECE CONTERTANTE

Comments: 2. Proficiency roqul rod for graduation The following standards have been prescribed as the level of proficiency to be attained by MUSIC EDUCATION MAJORS at the time of graduation. Referring only to the standards for your own major performingmodlumft), [piano, voice, e tc .], circle the num* ber at right corresponding to the descriptive phrase below which most nearly approximates your evaluation of these standards. ' 1

5—excellent preparation; 4-good preparation; 3-fair preparation; 2-weak preparation; 1 — unacceptable preparation.

Use additional space for comments.

PIANO — Student! should be obi* to perform world of the difficulty of fhote litte d . S 4 3 2 1 BACH, THREE PART INVENTIONS BEETHOVEN, SONATAS, O P. 2, NOS. 1 4 2; OP. 10, NOS. 1 OR 2; OP. 20 SCHUBERT, IMPROMPTU IN B ELAT CHOPIN, POLONAISE IN C SHARP MINOR; NOCTURNE, O P. 9, NO. 2, E MINOR; OP. 55, NO. 1 SCHUMANN, FANTASIESTEUCKE

VOICE - The ttu d e n t thould be oble to ting "STANDARD SONGS AND THE SIMPLER CLASSICS." 5 4 3 2 1 He thould bo ablo to road m utic. EARLY ITALIAN CLASSICS THE LESS EXACTING OE THE STANDARD OPERA AND ORATORIC ARIAS.

VIOLIN - Tho ttudont thould bo oblo to perform placet of tho difficulty of tho following: 5 4 3 2 1 VIOTTI, CONCERTO NO. 22 SPOHR, CONCERTO NO. 2 BACH, EASIER SONATAS FOR VIOLIN AND PIANO

VIOLONCELLO — Tho ttudont thould bo oblo to play plocot of tho tame difficulty a t tho following; 5 4 3 2 1 SAINT-SAENS, CONCERTO BACH, EASIER MOVEMENTS FROM UNACCOMPANIED SUITES SAMMARTINI, SONATA IN G MAJOR

CLARINET — Tho ttudont thould have tho ability to perform material tuch at It contained in: 5 4 3 2 1 SPOHR, CONCERTO NO. 1 WEBER, CONCERTO NO. 1, GRAND DUO CONCERTANTE SAINT-SAENS, SONATA

TRUMPET — Tho ttudont thould have the ability to perform material tuch ot it contained in: 5 4 3 2 1 ARBAN METHOD GATTI METHOD, PART II BALAY, PIECE DE CONCOURS ROPARTZ, ANDANTE AND ALLEGRO

OTHER ORCHESTRAL INSTRUMENTS — Student! thould hove acquired tuffldent technique to fill 5 4 3 2 1 talitfoctorlly a tocond doth petition In tymphonic worht of letter difficulty

Comments; Additional parformanca skills on major instrwmont

The following statements should be rated on ooch of the two separate scales (X) and (Y).

On scale (X), each statement should be rated in terms of Its IMPORTANCE In preparation for public school music teaching.

5-highly essential; 4 - important; 3—helpful; 2-somewhat helpful; 1—of no use whatever. [Circle appropriate number on scale (X)]

On scale (Y>, the same items should be rated in terms of the RESPONSIBILITY of the studio teacher in providing these skills or insights.

5-full responsibility; 4-most responsibility; 3-equal responsibility with other teachers; 2-some responsibility; 1-no responsibility. [Circle appropriate number on scale (Y)l

(Y) (X) RE PONSIBILITY IMPORTANCE The student should have: OF S.T.

a. a performing repertoire of at least three, 5 4 3 2 5 3 2 hour-long recital programs

b. the ability to read with reasonable technical 5 4 3 2 5 3 2 mastery and musicianly feeling a much larger portion (than the performing repertoire) of the literature for his major instrument

c. the ability to memorize a piece comparable 5 4 3 2 5 3 2 in length to a standard concerto

d. the ability to take a composition somewhat 5 4 3 2 5 3 2 below the upper limit of his technical ability, and prepare it for creditable performance in a week's time without the aid of an instructor e. the ability to perform both in formal concert and for informal gatherings with poise, control and good personal rapport f. the ability to dem onstrate satisfactory per­ formance skill for use in school and com­ munity g. the ability to perform in both large and small 2 en sem bles

h. the ability to transpose on his major instru­ 5 4 3 5 3 2 ment i. the ability to identify, as a listener, any 5 4 3 5 3 2 dev iatio n s by another performer from cor­ rect performance as indicated by a given score in terms of pitch, rhythm, tempo and dynam ics B. Intlghtt Concerning PoHormonc* (X)

C. Pedagogical Insight* Ralatad to tho Major Parformanca Araa The student should have: 1. an understanding of the physical problems 3 2 5 4 3 2 which are commonly encountered by young pupils studying in his major performance area 2. a knowledge of the devices used to over­ 3 2 5 4 3 2 come physical problems encountered in learning to perform on his major instrument (voice included) 3. a comprehensive acquaintance with the most 3 2 5 4 3 2 acceptable teaching literature for younger pupils in his major performance area 4. an understanding of the place of technical 3 2 5 4 3 2 studies in the development of performance facility 5. an elementary understanding of the psycho­ 3 2 5 4 3 2 logical factors which contribute to good teacher-pupil relationship in the private lesso n .

6. an elementary understanding of the princi­ 3 2 5 4 3 2 ples of motivation as related to the learning p ro c ess

- 5 - (Pedagogical Insights — continued) (X) (Y) IMPORTANCE RESPONSIBILITY OF S. T .

7. an understanding of child growth and develop­ 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 ment as related to the problems involved in his major performing area 8. the ability to evaluate pupil progress in the 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 achievement of musical growth in his major performing medium 9. the ability to integrate theory of music with 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 instruction in his major performing medium 10. the ability to integrate music history and 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 literature with instruction in his major performing medium

PA RT I I I IMPLEMENTATION

A. PREPARATION 1. How many years of practical familiarity with a major performing medium should be considered as prerequisite to adm sion to the bachelor of music education program?

B y e a r s______6 y e a r s______4 y e a r s______2 y e a r s______no set amount of time ______2. How essential are qualifying examinations for all incoming freshmen to establish competence to pursue applied stud the college level?

highly essential______; h e lp fu l______; of no use whatever ______B. INSTRUCTION AND EXAMINATION 1. How much credit should be granted for one hour of studio instruction plus six hours of practice per week?

one semester hour ______; less than a semester hour______

more than a semester hour ______

How essential for the music education student are the following:

Rate each statement in terms of their importance: 5- highly essential; 4—important; 3—helpful; 2-somewhat hel| ful; 1—of no use whatever.

2. continued instruction in the major applied performance area throughout all four years 5 3 2 of the undergraduate program althuugh prescribed minimum standards are met earlier? 3. weekly studio class, where all stuaents of a single performing medium meet at a 5 3 2 common time with the instructor for the evaluation of performance? 4. a periodic jury examination at the end of each unit of study? 5 3 2

5. a final jury examination? 5 3 2 6. a repertoire check for all students? 5 3 2 C. PUBLIC PERFORMANCE AND ATTENDANCE AT RECITALS How essential for the music education student are the following:

Rate each statement in teims of their importance: 5—highly essential; 4—important; 3—helpful; 2-somewhat helpful; 1—of no use whatever.

1. presentation of a graduating recital, singly or with one or more other students? 5 3 2

2. performance in public recitals prior to graduating? 5 3 2

3. performance in studio recitals? 5 3 2

4. required attendance at concerts and faculty recitals? 5 3 2

5. required attendance at student recitals? 5 3 2

PART IV INSTRUCTIONAL EMPHASIS

In order to ascertain the relative value of various aspects of the major applied instruction program, a hypothetical situa­ tion will be considered. Assume that a five-year curriculum for training public school music teachers has been universally accepted. Assume also that, as a part of the over-all increase in time allotment, the applied major area credit requirements have been proportionately increased. Rank the following aspects of the major applied instruction in the order in which they should receive additional stress in a five year program, giving the most important the lank of 1.

1. Perfecting of limited repertoire 1. 2. Expansion of repertoire 2. 3. T echnical facility 3. 4. Sight reading 4. 5. Expansion of pedagogicalem phasis S. APPEND DC 3

COVERING LETTEBS ACCOMPAMTING ^UESTIGNNAIBI

197 THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY •CMOOL O f MUSIC MOKTJi COLLIOI KOAD 198 COLUMBUS 10, OHIO HKNSV A. SSUINSUA. D k ttlc t

March 30, I960

Dear Oolleague:

Me at the Ohio State University have been concerned for some time about the area of instruction In teacher education which represents the greatest single b|ock of the students' time, namely, the major applied field. We trust that you share this concern and agree that the problems involved in this important segment in the training of music teachers for the public schools are complex enough to warrant some thorough research.

Mr. Laurence Burkhalter, who is a member of our Music Education staff and violist in the University Faculty String Quartet, has undertaken a research project which we believe to be of considerable significance at this time. He is attempting to establish valid criteria with which to evaluate the program of instruction in the major performance area for students majoring in music education.

The Instrument enclosed Is being used to obtain the opinions of four groups of people: Administrators of Schools or Departments of Music which are full members of NASM; college teachers of music education in NASM approved Institutions; studio teachers of applied music in NASM approved schools; and supervisors of music in c ities of 30,000 and above.

We would like to invite your assistance in this research project by I) per­ sonally filling out one of the three questionnaires enclosed, 2) having a sec­ ond questionnaire filied out by an experienced member of your music education department, and 3 ) having the third questionnaire filled out by an experienced member of your applied music staff. Once this research project is completed, we plan to share the resulting information with all cooperating schools and individuals. We look forward to receiving your help and support.

Sincerely yours

Henry A. Bruinsma Director

HAB:yo e n d . APPLIED AND MUSIC EDUCATION STAFF

THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY • C M O O L 0 9 M U U C ll»» HOITH COLLBOK lO iD 199 COLUMBUS 10, OHIO HEN BY A. BBUINSUA. O rttttr

March 30 , I960

Dear Col league:

The research project for which we are asking your assistance is designed to probe rather deeply Into questions which you yourself have no doubt raised nany times. Since teacher training colleges are constantly being challenged from many sides to provide both breadth and depth In their programs, we feel that the profession as a whole needs to take a closer look at that area which constitutes the largest single block of the prospective music educator's undergraduate instruction, namely, the major performance area.

We want to enlist your help in this research project because it is essential for the teachers at the college level to establish the standards necessary for professional competence. We are asking you to complete the enclosed question­ naire. Mr. Laurence Burkhalter, who is the author of the questionnaire. Is a member of our Music Education staff and of the University Faculty String Quar­ tet. Once this research project is completed, we plan to share the resulting Information with all cooperating schools and Individuals. We look forward to receiving your help and support.

Sincerely yours.

Henry A. Bruinsma Di rector

HAB:yo e n d . SUPERVISOR

THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY s c h o o l o r m u s i c 200 COLUMBUS 10, OHIO HENRY A. BSUINSHA, D in n er

March 30, I960

Dear Colleague:

One of the problems which has long baffled Schools of Music Involved In tra in ­ ing music teachers for the public schools is the lack of understanding by all members of the teaching staff directly involved In the program as to what should be required of the students In their major performance area. Oolleges are under constant pressure from performing musicians to maintain high standards of musicianship. Those musicians who have been active in working with children In our public schools are, on the other hand, insisting that our programs be functional.

The instrument enclosed with this letter Is part of a research project which we at the Ohio State University School of Music have undertaken in order to pro­ vide valid criteria for evaluating the major applied program of Instruction for music education majors. It is essential that such a study sample the opinions of those engaged in directly training prospective teachers. It is just as essential that it obtain the opinions of men and women who have achieved prominence In the field of teaching music in the public schools. We want to invite you to assist us in what we consider to be a very essential study.

Mr. Burkhalter, the author of the questionnaire, is a member of our Music Educa­ tion staff and of the University Faculty String Quartet. Once this research project Is completed, we plan to share the resulting information with all co­ operating schools and individuals. We look forward to receiving your help and support.

Sincerely yours

Henry A. Bruinsma 0 i rector

HAB:yo APPENDIX C

N. A. S. H. SCHOOLS FAHTICIPAIING U THE STUDY

201 APPENDIX C

N. A. S. M. SCHOOLS PAHIICIPAIING IN THE STUUT

(Tu.ll Member in January 1959)

Alabama College Detroit Institute of Musical Arts

Alverno College East Carolina College

American Conservatory Eastman School of Music

Appalachian State Teachers College Evansville College

Arkansas State College Tlora McDonald College

Augustana College Tort Hays Kansas State College

Baldwin-Wallace Conservatory Turman University

Bowling Green State University Georgia State College for Wooten Bradley University Hardin-Simmons University Capitol University Heidelberg College Carnegie Institute of Technology Hendrix College Central College Illinois Western University Central Missouri State College Indiana University Cleveland Institute of Music Iowa State Teachers College Coker College Ithaca College Cincinnati College-Conservatory Jacksonville University College of Wooster Jordan College Conservatory of Music of Kansas City Kansas State Teachers College, Converse College Emporia

Cornell College Kansas State College

Denison University Knox College

DaPaul University Lebanon Talley College

DePauw U n iv e rs ity Lewis and Clark College

202 2 0 3

Limestone College Otterhein College

Lindenwood College Queens College

Linfield College Richmond Professional Institute of the College of William Louisiana State University and Mary

Marymount College Roosevelt University

Maryville College Rosary College

Maryvood College St. Louis Institute of Music

Meredith College St. Mary College of Xavier, Kansas Michigan State University Seton H ill College M ississippi Southern College Sherwood Music School Montana State University Southeastern Louisiana College Morningslde College Southwestern Louisiana Mt. Saint Scholastica College Institute, Lafayette

Mt. Union College Southwestern University, Georgetown, Texas Mundelein College State College of Washington Murray State College State University of South Muskingum College Dakota

North Central College, Stetson University Naperville, 111, State Teachers College of North Texas State College Preedonia, New Tork

North last Missouri State Teachers Texas Christian University C ollege University of Arliona Oherlin Conservatory University of Arkansas Ohio University University of Chattanooga Ohio Wesleyan University University of Colorado Oklahoma College for Women University of Denver Oklahoma State University aou

University of Iowa Western Maryland College

University of Kansas Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo University of Louisville Whitman College University of Miami Winthrop College University of Michigan

University of Minnesota at Minneapolis

University of Minnesota at Duluth

University of Nebraska

U n iv e rs ity o f Sew Mexico

University of North Carolina

University of Oregon

University of Badlands

University of Southern California

University of Tulsa

University of Utah

University of Wichita

U n iv e rs ity of Wyoming

Virginia State College

Viterbo College

Wartburg College

Webster College

Wesleyan School of Tine Arts, Macon, G eorgia

West Virginia University APPENDIX D

CITIES OF 50,000 POPULATION (H LAROER

2 0 5 APPENDIX D

CITIES OF 50,000 POPULATION OS LANCER WHOSE SUPERVISORS OP MUSIC INSTRUCTION PARTICIPATED IN THE STUDY1

Akron, Ohio Decatur, Illinois

Alexandria, Virginia Detroit, Michigan

Allentown, Pennsylvania Duluth, Minnesota

Ashville, North Carolina Erie, Pennsylvania

Aurora, Illinois Evanston, Illinois

Austin, Texas Evansville, Indiana

Baltimore, Maryland P o rt Wayne, In d ian a

Beaumont, Texas Port Worth, Texas

Binghamton, New York Calves ton, Texas

Buffalo, New York Cary, Indiana

Burhank, California Grand Rapids, Michigan

Canton, Ohio Greensboro, North Carolina

Cedar Rapids, Iowa Hamilton, Ohio

Charleston, Vest Virginia Holyoke, Massachusetts

Chattanooga, Tennessee Indianapolis, Indiana

Cleveland, Ohio Jackson, Michigan

Clifton, New Jersey Jackson, Mississippi

Columbus, Ohio Johnstown, Pennsylvania

Corpus C hristi, Texas K&lamaxoo, Michigan

Dallas, Texas Kansas City, Kansas

Davenport, Iowa Lakewood, Ohio

Dayton, Ohio Lancaster, Pennsylvania

1* U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, Statistical Abstracts o f th e U. S .. 1959. PP» 18-21. 206 Lexington, Kentucky Richmond, Virginia

Lima, Ohio Rockford, Illinois

Lincoln, Nebraska Sacramento, California

L ittle Nock, Arkansas Saginaw, Michigan

Lorain, Ohio St* Joseph, Missouri St. Louis, Missouri Loulsvi lie , Kentucky St. Paul, Minnesota Lubbock, Texas Salt Lake City, Utah Malden, Massachusetts San Angelo, Texas Manchester, New Hampshire San Bernardino, California McKeesport, Pennsylvania San Jose, California Miami, 7lorIda Scranton, Pennsylvania Milwaukee, Wisconsin Shreveport, Louisiana Mobile, Alabama Sioux City, Iowa Montgomery, Alabama Sioux Falls, South Dakota Muncie, Indiana South Bend, Indiana

New Bedford, Massachusetts Spokane, Washington

New Orleans, Louisiana Stockton, California

Niagara, New York Syracuse, New fork

Norfolk, Virginia Union City, New Jersey

Oakland, California Waterloo, Iowa

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Wichita, Kansas

Passaic, New Jersey Wlllkes-Barre, Pennsylvania

Portland, Oregon Wilmington, Delaware

Providence, Hhode Island Worcester, Massachusetts

Pueblo, Colorado Yonkers, New York

Racine, Wisconsin Youngstown, Ohio APPENDIX £

TABLES SHOVING- DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES ON

ADMISSION AND GRADUATION STANDARDS

a o s 209

T able 56

EE SPOH IE NTS' EVALUATIONS OP ADMISSION STANDARDS

• • 08 B •d • i l 1 " ■H Instrum ent 0 g • « * 3 3 1 -H <3 e (ft ® 0 ■*3 0 d co 1 * e M _ D irec to rs S s 1 T otal p* 3 16 9 6 3 17 51 27 .O Plano 4 31 22 12 5 27 97 51.0 4.00 3 10 8 3 1 10 32 17.0 2 - 1 1 1 3 6 3 .2 1 - 1 - - 1 2 1-7 5 11 1 1+ 2 18 36 22.6 Voice 4 22 9 3 28 70 44.0 3*83 3 11 3 4 6 19 **3 27 .O 2 3 1 5 1 10 6.3 1 5 15 2 7 1 10 3O.2 V io lin 4 20 1+ 8 1+ 20 56 48.3 4.00 3 5 2 3 2 6 18 15*5 2 -- 2 - 2 4 3-^ 1 - - - - 3 3 2 .6 5 11 - 5 2 7 25 31.6 Violon-cello 1+ 14 2 2 3 12 33 41.8 3.92 3 4 - 2 - 7 13 16.5 2 1 1 1 - 3 6 7 .6 1 - - - •» 2 2 2 .5 3 9 1 6 3 6 25 24.5 C la rin e t 4 12 2 4 3 17 38 37-3 3.73 3 8 - U 1 15 28 27.5 2 - 2 1 2 3 8 7 .8 1 - - 2 - 1 3 3*0 5 10 1 5 — 4 20 20.4 Trumpet 4 15 5 6 2 16 44 44.9 3-T7 3 7 - 2 3 14 26 28.9 2 - 1 2 - 4 7 7*1 1 - - — — 1 1 1.0 210 Table 57

RESPONDENTS * EVALUATIONS OF GRADUATION STANDARDS

• • *d & 4 2 <0 t i a 0 Instrum ent 3 a " a © f s | I D irecto rs T otal

r f Per cent

5 17 14 8 1 22 62 34.? P lano 4 32 16 11 6 28 93 51.S 4.14 3 5 6 1 1 5 18 9.9 2 - 2 1 - 2 5 2.8 1 1 - 1 1 3 1-7 5 12 2 6 4 20 44 28.2 Voice 1+ 19 6 10 7 31 73 46.8 3.96 3 9 2 & 1 11 29 18.6 2 2 1 - 2 9 5.8 1 1 - - - - 1 .6 9 3 6 1 15 34 36.2 V io lin IS 2 9 2 18 30 31.2 3.90 3 8 l 3 3 4 19 20.2 2 2 l 2 1 3 9 9 .6 1 - - - — 2 2 2 .1 5 8 1 5 2 8 24 32.9 Violon-cello 12 l 3 2 14 32 43.8 3.99 3 6 l - 1 3 11 15.1 2 1 - 1 - 2 If 5.5 1 - - — - 2- 2 2-7 5 9 l 5 5 13 33 34.0 C la rin e t 4 15 3 10 5 18 51 52.6 4.15 3 2 - - - 7 9 9.3 2 1 - 1 - 1 3 3-1 1 - - -— 1 1 1.0 5 6 - 5 3 7 21 24.1 Trumpet 4 17 1 6 3 19 46 52.9 3.90 3 3 3 1 - 5 12 13.8 2 1 1 1 - 3 6 6.9 1 * -— - 2 2 2.3 Other 5 8 1 9 2 7 27 27.3 O rc h estra l U 13 2 6 3 18 42 42.4 Instruments 3 5 1 2 3 14 25 25.3 3 .8 9 2 1 --- 1 2 2 .0 1 1 - - 1 3 3 .0 ..... APPENDIX 7

CHAfiTS SH0VI1JG OEAPHIC PRESEWTAI'IQK OF DATA

211 Ofcart l o . 1

MUX &ATIXQS o r IXMISSIGB 8 ZAKDARS0 BT JOB GL&88UIGAZZQV

i 5

5 .0 •9 .8 •7 .6 •5 A /e •3 0 \ * I •2 / » .1 ^ 1

\ r i •9 K w f ; .8 / / - / / '>-s \y / •7 »\'// \ .6 V. V \ * * m •5 \ / \ 1 -3 .2 .1 3 .0 *9 t •8 b D irecto rs — ------Applied Seaehere ------Mule U m lloa baohtrt — - ---- . . Combined liM hirt ------.... Scperrleore Chart Vo* 2

101V V A IIV 0 8 o r OBlSOASIOl STtVTUBPB VI JOB OLIVSITICISIGV

s 3 *

h.o

- DLraotori ___ — Jgppllad baohcri ______Mna&o U b m U ob faaohars — ______Coahiaad laaohara _____ Voparrlson 2lU Chart Ho. 3 SHE IMPQRXASC1 GF ABDIZIGHAL FXHTOHKAHCK SKILLS

I i

/ r

D iractora Significantly dlffarant ______Appliad Zaaehars at 95^ eonf&danea laval ______Mnalo Education Zaaohara Significantly dlffarant ______Coabinad Zaaohara at 99J( oonfldanoa laral ______Saparriaara 215 Chart Ho. k THE IMFQBSA1C1 QT HEIGHTS CtXCXHIUfG PMfOBMAHCl

4*

O o 5 .0

5 ___

3.0 ___ . Ur eat ora * Sigalfloantlj different — — — — Jpplled Taaehara at 953^ oonfldaaoa leral —------Maalo Education Taaehara 4 Significantly different . . . Gontlned Taaehara at 99$ eonfidenee level ...... Saparriaara 5*o k.Q .8 .2 A •5 • 1 •9 •3 .6 .1 .8 •9

1 i —— _-. . , Physical prohlaaa to If as 31 mZ 4*4* . 1 : pplad taaehara d lia p ip ee deto. Taaehara Bdeeatloa. eele N irectors D obsd taaehara Coabised Supervisors r B DfKAC 0 FJHUOOGICAL DffGKCAVClZBB 07 IKSIGflTS » 4 * 0 i J 1 * © a

a a m

a«vi 1 *3 « H 0 &*

w *-s V " _ ^ y C hart l o . . o l hart C m — ^ — \

X * 4 4 « H o 9 f ^ \ k s V \ v V V ' 5 \

------\ N ■d / k & ✓ t A !* It

t i l r | 3 W % V \ 93 .9 4*« ?! ro £ Chart Vo. 6 217 SHE TMflRCT or STUDIO n u i m HMPGHSEBILITr nr PBOTiDiira a d d it io ja l pkrtqrmance s k il l s

H

i m a o **•rt 2 A a o M o ■ a l 4» 3 S B I s o d u S 5 H & ■H C IS 3 ■h a oI* a O Pt £ S 3 a + a \

- Oiraotara * Significantly dlffarant ______ippliad. Taaehara at 95^ confidence level ______Mnaio Idncation Taaehara a Sigaifloaatly dlffarant • ______- . Ooabinad. Taaehara a t 99)1 confidenca laT al ______Soparrlaora Chart Vo* 7 218 TVS n a m or STUDIO T1 ACHVR MSPCMIBHJTr IV PVOTIDIVO IV8IQBT8 COVQIBVIVO PXBYQRMAVCV

DLvoetora * Significantlj dlffarant — ------ippllad Taaohara at 95)t ooafldaaea level Hoilo Idnoatlon Taaehara * Significantly dlffarant Ooablnad Taaehara at $ 9Jt oonfidanoa level Snparrlaora Chart ~Io. 8 THE ] « « « QT STUDIO ro a n m BISPQHSIBILITr II PBCVIDIIG PHUOOOIClL USIOHZ8 8 • u l *! • • *• A3§ eoa •** « 4 5 ! ' • 5 3 8 i t i t w i s f • O ¥ <•» t w 0 II

35 In tegrate 5 : 04 O X a& H A hlatonr a 4a 4a 4 }------A \ *3 / .2 I •1 //

/ > r / ' f W.0 \ \ % * n \ ' A s \ \ \w .3 V 1 * \ \ i \ A .8 / / ' \ ✓ N

------• > * \ \ \ \ ✓ \\\ « •7 ’ \ \ f • \ ✓ \ / X .6 \ / * x / • • ^ \ ^ » • f j 1 ✓ L.______X. •5 \\1 / « \ V, ! •3 < . J 1 .2 \X V \ //>,* / ' ' ^ .1 N /// 3-0 \ X' // •9 V .8 \\ .7 s r ______Director* * dlfferaat ______Jroliad Taaehara at 950 oonfidanoa level • ______Kaaie Idneatlaa Taaehara • — . — - . Coabinad ltaohara •* Slf& lficantlj dlffarant ______Sqpeniaore at 99Jt oonfldanea level Chart l o . 9 220 THE XMFORXAIGE QT TABIOCS FHACTICXS I I IM3ERUGTIC* AND HAHIBATICB

9 5 I 3 e o 0 I * I ♦» a 1 M t4 0* I

s ^ -

t A V \ / f/ t \ # ^ ' ^ */■ ..V » / * \ / • « N ✓ > «

U r ie t o r i * Significantly dlffarant Applied Taaehara a t 99 ^ oonfidanoa leral Mosle M ooatioa Taaehara a 8 l£nlfleaatl7 d iffe r e n t Caahlaad Taaehara 990 oonfidanoa latal taperrlaora wOradnating recital

Prior recital tqppearancea ° f s ? -

j « Studio r e c ita l

faculty recitals

p IB p CD Attendance at student recitals APPENDIX a

CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING LIST OF SUPERVISORS

OF MUSIC INSTRUCTION IN CITIES OF 50,000

AND T^RQKR

222 223

August 2 7 , 1 9 5 9

III ss Yanette Lawler MENC 1 201 Sixteenth St., N.W. W ashington 6, D. C.

Sear Hiee Lawler;

I am writing to ask you for some assistance in a research project. This project has to do with the establishing of criteria with which to evaluate the applied major requirements for music education graduates. One group of people whose opinions I should like to tabulate is composed of supervisors of music in large cities.

Ur. William Hinton, my associate in the Music Education department here at Ohio State, has shown me the list of supervisors in cities of 100,000 or more which he obtained from your office. Is there a similar, mare recent list of supervisors covering a larger bracket of smaller cities of ^0,000 and over? If there is not, I have access to the list in Hr. Hinton's possession and I will need only your advice to this effect. If there is, I would be most sq>preclatlve if you could send me such a list. I will be more tha happy to pay for any expenses involved. It is my hope to get a somewhat wider sampling of opinion than is available through the list referred to above. Furthermore, I believe that I am correct in assuming that I would stand a better chance of obtaining responses from supervisors in smaller cities than from the top one hundred who are no doubt harried by innumerable ques­ tionnaires I

Tery sincerely yours,

H. Laurence Burkhalter Music Education Department

NLB;smd MUSIC EDUCATORS NATIONAL COKPEHEKCE 1201 Sixteenth Street Eorthweet W ashington 6, D. C*

September 29, 1959

Mr. N. Laurence Burkh alter Music Education Department The Ohio State University School of Music 1899 Horth College Road Columbus 10, Ohio

Dear Mr. Burkhalter;

You received an acknowledgment to your letter of August 27 when I was away from th e o f f ic e . . . .

We would he very glad to go through our files for you* If you will send us a list of the cities of 50,000 and over for which you would like to have the names of Directors of Music Education, we shall do the hest we can for you* Of course, we know the Directors of Music Education in many of these cities and can im- medlatly give the names to you* Perheqps you will not want to have a great number of cities of 50,000 and over* It may be only a sampling which would be most effective for your use*

Rest assured that we shall be delighted to be of help to you*

C o rd ially ,

(Signed) Tanett Lawler

Executive Secretary 2 2 5

MUSIC EDUCATORS NATIONAL CONKSHENCE 1201 Sixteenth Street Northweet W ashington 6, D. C.

October 29, 1959

Mr. Laurence Burk;halter Music Education Department Ohio State University Columbus 10, Ohio

Dear Mr. Burkhalter:

We shall get busy on the list you sent us. Tou are correct in your assumption that we shall probably not be able to sent you a name for each one of the cities Inasmuch as in some cases, there Is a spilt situation whereby there Is a supervisor of vocal music and a supervisor of instrumental music* Then, of course, our list does not designate who is the actual director of music# The information we shall give you will be drawn largely from the personal knowledge of members of the staff. However, this is based on rather long experience and I think we can come up with some names for you*

As soon as this list is complete, we shall Bend i t to you*

C o rd ially ,

(Signed) Tannett Lawler

Executive Secretary 226

MUSIC EDUCATORS NATIONAL COl^FERENCE 1201 Sixteenth Street Northwest Washington 6, D. C.

November 5» 1959

Mr. N. Laurence B u rk h a lter Music Education Department Ohio State University Columbus 10, Ohio

Dear Hr. Burkhalter:

We are enclosing the list of supervisors in cities of 50,000 population. As you know, In many of these cities, there is no single person designated as the supervisor of music. In some cases, we have indicated the division between instrumental and vocal responsibilities. In other cases, there is no supervisor of music education listed in our records or in the reference books available here.

In each case, we would suggest that you address your inquiry to the Supervisor of Music in care of the Board of Education.

If we may be of further service to you, please do not hesitate to write to this office.

C o rd ia lly ,

(Signed) Carolyn Walls

(Mrs.) Carolyn Walls For the Conference AUTOBIOGRAPHY

I, H. Laurence Burkhalter, was born in Landour, Mussoorie,

United Provinces, India, on June JO, 1920. I received my secondary^ school education in Woodstock School, Mussoorie, India, and completed the work for the Licentiate degree from the Trinity College of Music,

London, in 1939 while still in India. I received the Bachelor of

School Music degree from Bluffton College, Bluffton, Ohio, in 19^7*

and the Master of Music degree from Northwestern University in 19^9*

In October, 1955* I was appointed Instructor in the School of Jftisic at Ohio State University, where I taught in the Ifiislc Education

Department. I held this position for six years while completing

the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree.