Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The purpose of this mixed methods study was to determine the effect of formative assessment strategies on second grade students’ singing accuracy and to examine how music educators planned for and enacted these practices. Student participants (n = 63) were divided into three groups over a six-week period: (a) a partial treatment group where the teacher used data from the pretest to improve areas of singing weakness; (b) a full treatment group where the teacher used data to improve areas of weakness and engaged students in self- and peer-assessment techniques; and (c) a control group who received no formalized treatment. Linear regression analysis indicates that the “partial treatment” group had the largest gains in singing accuracy, but the case study analysis revealed that the teachers’ knowledge and values mediated their enactment of these practices as they adopted and adapted them in varied ways. The “partial treatment” teacher’s motivation and proclivity for creating new assessment practices indicates that gains in this group’s singing accuracy may have been due to teacher effects and not the strategies themselves. Implications for teacher professional development and practical considerations for embedding meaningful formative assessment in music contexts are provided.

Keywords

Formative assessment mixed methods self-assessment singing accuracy singing rubric

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allison

P. D.

(1999). Multiple regression: A primer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

Andrade

Wang

(2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students’ writing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(2) 3–13. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.2008.00118.x

Bennett

R. E.

(2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 18(1), 5–25. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2010.513678

Black

Wiliam

(1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 5, 7–74. doi:10.1080/0969595980050102

Borko

Mayfield

Marion

Flexer

Cumbo

(1997). Teachers’ developing ideas and practices about mathematics performance assessment: Successes, stumbling blocks, and implications for professional development. Teaching & Teacher Education, 13(3), 259–278. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(96)00024-8

Calderhead

(1981). Stimulated recall: A method for research on teaching. Educational Psychology, 51, 211–217. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1981.tb02474.x

Creswell

J. W.

Plano Clark

V. L.

(2010). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd edn.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Demorest

S. M.

Kelly

Pfordresher

P. Q.

(2017). Singing ability, musical self-concept, and future music participation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 64, 405–420. doi:10.1177/0022429416680096

Demorest

Nichols

Pfordresher

P. Q.

(2017). The effect of focused instruction on young children’s singing accuracy. Psychology of Music, 46, 1–12. doi: 10.1177/0305735617713120

10.

Demorest

S. M.

Pfordresher

P. Q.

(2015). Singing accuracy development from K-adult: A comparative study. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32, 293–302. doi: 10.1525/mp.2015.32.3.293

11.

Dixon

H. R.

Hawe

Parr

(2011). Enacting assessment for learning: The beliefs practice nexus. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 18, 365–379. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2010.526587

12.

Fautley

(2010). Assessment in music education. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

13.

Fautley

(2015). Music education assessment and social justice: Resisting hegemony through formative assessment. In Benedict

Schmidt

Spruce

Woodford

(Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Social Justice in Music Education (pp. 513–524). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

14.

Greene

J. C.

(2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

15.

Hargreaves

Earl

Schmidt

(2002). Perspectives on alternative assessment reform. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 69–95. doi: 10.3102/00028312039001069

16.

Hattie

Timperley

(2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. doi: 10.3102/003465430298487

17.

Hewitt

M. P.

(2001). The effects of modeling, self-evaluation, and self-listening on junior high instrumentalists’ music performance and practice attitude. Journal of Research in Music Education, 49, 307–322. doi:0.3102/003465430298487

18.

Hewitt

M. P.

(2002). Self-evaluation tendencies of junior high instrumentalists. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50, 215–226. doi: 10.2307/3345799

19.

Hewitt

M. P.

(2005). Self-evaluation accuracy among high school and middle school instrumentalists. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53, 148–161. doi: 10.1177/002242940505300205

20.

Hewitt

M. P.

(2011). The impact of self-evaluation instruction on student self-evaluation, music performance, and self-evaluation accuracy. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59, 6–20. doi:10.1177/0022429410391541

21.

Marzano

R. J.

(2006). Classroom assessment and grading that work. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

22.

National Association for Music Education. (2016). Music model cornerstone assessment: Artistic process: Performing 2nd grade general music. Retrieved from https://nafme.org/wp-content/files/2014/11/Music_MCA_Grade_2_GenMus_Performing_2016-1.pdf

23.

Nichols

B. E.

(2016). Task-based variability in children’s singing accuracy. Journal of Research in Music Education, 64, 309–321. doi: 10.1177/0022429416666054

24.

Rutkowski

Miller

M. S.

(2003). The effect of teacher feedback and modeling on first graders’ use of singing voice and developmental music aptitude. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 156, 1–10. Retrieved from http://bcrme.press.uillinois.edu/

25.

Schafer

W. D.

Swanson

Bene

Newberry

(2001). Effects of teacher knowledge of rubrics on student achievement in four content areas. Applied Measurement in Education, 14(2), 151–170. doi: 10.1207/S15324818AME1402_3

26.

Shute

(2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. doi:10.3102/0034654307313795

27.

Stake

R. E.

(1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

28.

Svec

C. L.

(2017). The effects of instruction on the singing ability of children ages 5 to 11: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Music, 46, 326–339. doi: 10.1177/0305735617709920

29.

Swaffield

(2011). Getting to the heart of authentic Assessment for Learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 18, 433–449. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2011.582838

30.

Thornton

L. C.

(2008). The effect of grade, experience, and listening condition on the melodic error detection of fifth- and sixth- grade woodwind students. UPDATE: Applications of Research in Music Education, 26(2), 4–10. doi:10.1177/8755123308317612

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.04 MB

Formative assessment practices and children’s singing accuracy: A mixed methods inquiry

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material