MUSIC INTEGRATION AS PART OF AN ARTS INTEGRATION INITIATIVE: A CLOSER LOOK AT IMPLICATIONS FOR THE MUSIC EDUCATOR by Rebecca J. Penerosa A dissertation submitted to the faculty of The University of Utah in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Music The University of Utah August 2016 Copyright © Rebecca J. Penerosa 2016 All Rights Reserved The University of Utah Graduate School STATEMENT OF DISSERTATION APPROVAL The dissertation of Rebecca J. Penerosa has been approved by the following supervisory committee members: Mark Ely , Chair March 10, 2016 Date Approved Ruth V. Brittin , Member March 10, 2016 Date Approved Darlene Caldwell , Member March 10, 2016 Date Approved Joelle L. Lien , Member March 10, 2016 Date Approved Nicole R. Robinson , Member March 10, 2016 Date Approved and by _________ Miguel Basim Chuaqui , Chair/Dean of the Department/College/School of Music and by David B. Kieda, Dean of The Graduate School. ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of arts integration reform from 12 actively teaching elementary music integration specialists. The participants were chosen from the Beverley Taylor Sorenson Arts Learning Program in Salt Lake City, Utah. They comprised the entire University of Utah cohort of music integration specialists and are among a larger group made up of dance, visual arts, and theater integration specialists. All participants received undergraduate training in music performance or music education and are now music integration specialists. The goals of this study were to (1) consider the self-reported perceptions concerning arts integration and music integration from current music integration specialists, (2) ascertain the different techniques for current practices in music-infused instruction, (3) review the possibilities in behavior differences among students between the more traditional general music classroom and the music integration classroom, and (4) determine the best practices for professional development in the field of music integration lesson planning and delivery. The Beverley Taylor Sorenson Arts Learning Program is in its eighth year of inception in the state of Utah. Having grown from 22 elementary schools in 2008 to 324 elementary schools in 2015, this statewide arts integration initiative is on its way to reaching the goal of being implemented in every Utah elementary school within the next five to ten years. This program implementation will have an impact on students, classroom teachers, and music teachers. Because this widespread growth has the potential to impact a large population and set precedence for other potential arts integration programs, an examination of perceptions, procedures, and professional development are warranted. The overall sentiment towards arts integration was that it is beneficial for students and classroom teachers. Music integration in particular was revered as more difficult to integrate than the other three art forms (dance, drama, visual arts). An overwhelming amount of responses indicated that music integration must occur naturally such as in Orff Schulwerk in order to be successful. Lessons with an academic-first approach were more likely to be “contrived” and therefore cause frustrations for the students and music teacher alike. The most naturally occurring music integration lessons included elements of social studies with regards to historical and cultural elements. The participants reported that pre-fabricated music integration lesson plans along with instruction modeling and concise resources were the most valuable assets in professional development. iv To my husband, Saumani, for your love, encouragement, and support; and for never letting me believe I could accomplish anything less. Thank you for being my best friend, from here to eternity. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................iii LIST OF FIGURES.....................................................................................................................ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................................x Chapters INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................1 Historical Trends in Music Education....................................................................1 From STEM to STEAM .......................................................................................... 3 Problem Statement: Music Education Decline..................................................... 5 Importance of Study: Music Education Reform................................................... 6 Rationale and Need for the Study........................................................................... 7 Beverley Taylor Sorenson Arts Learning Program .............................................8 Definitions............................................................................................................... 10 Limitations of the Study........................................................................................ 11 Summary.................................................................................................................. 12 REVIEW OF LITERATURE................................................................................................... 14 Introduction.............................................................................................................14 Interdisciplinary Instruction..................................................................................14 Arts Infused Instruction......................................................................................... 16 Arts Integration........................................................................................................18 A+ Program............................................................................................................. 20 The Kennedy Center...............................................................................................22 Music Integration.................................................................................................... 24 Project Zero.............................................................................................................27 Current Research.................................................................................................... 28 Implications for Music Educators........................................................................29 METHODS AND PROCEDURES......................................................................................... 33 Overview................................................................................................................. 33 Qualitative Design.................................................................................................. 34 Multiple Case Study Design..................................................................................35 Participants and Materials.....................................................................................37 BTSALP Program Overview.................................................................................38 Participant Selection...............................................................................................45 Sampling.................................................................................................................. 46 Consent and Confidentiality..................................................................................46 Data Collection........................................................................................................47 T ranscriptions..........................................................................................................49 Data Analysis...........................................................................................................50 Validity Measures................................................................................................... 50 Limitations of the Study........................................................................................ 51 RESULTS....................................................................................................................................53 Introduction of Participants...................................................................................53 Data Collection Process......................................................................................... 59 Coding......................................................................................................................59 Data Analysis...........................................................................................................60 Research Question # 1 ...................................................................................... 60 Research Question # 2 ...................................................................................... 64 Research Question # 3 ...................................................................................... 73 Research Question # 4 ...................................................................................... 76 Additional Commentary........................................................................................ 79 Discrepancies...........................................................................................................81