This study examined the effect of audio recording and playback on middle school instrumentalists’ self-assessment. Middle school student musicians (N = 112) completed a self-assessment immediately following their individual performance of an etude. The student musicians then listened to a recording of their individual performance and completed another identical self-assessment. A third identical self-assessment occurred 2 days later, again utilizing the recorded performance as subject material. The self-assessment tool asked students to rate individual aspects of their performances on a 7-point Likert-type scale. The elements of tone, pitch, and rhythm all evidenced significant differences in self-assessment ratings from the live performance to the recorded performance 2 days later. There were also significant differences in self-assessment ratings between the live performance and recorded performance conditions for the elements of pitch and rhythm. Only tone evidenced a significant difference in self-assessment ratings from the first recorded condition to the second recorded condition. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.
AitchisonR. E. (1995). The effects of self-evaluation techniques on the musical performance, self-evaluation accuracy, motivation, and self-esteem of middle school instrumental music students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.
2.
ArnoldJ. A. (1991). Using videotape self-analysis to improve teaching during rehearsals. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 10, 10–14.
3.
ArnoldJ. A. (1995). Effects of competency-based methods of instruction and self-observation on ensemble directors’ use of sequential patterns. Journal of Research in Music Education, 43, 127–138.
4.
BergeeM. J. (1993). A comparison of faculty, peer, and self-evaluation of applied brass jury performances. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41, 19–27.
5.
BergeeM. J. (1997). Relationships among faculty, peer, and self-evaluations of applied performances. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45, 601–612.
6.
BergeeM. J.Cecconi-RobertsL. (2002). Effects of small-group peer interaction on self-evaluation of music performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50, 256–268.
7.
BigandE.McAdamsC.ForêtS. (2000). Divided attention in music. International Journal of Psychology, 35(6), 270–278.
8.
BiggsJ. B.MooreP. J. (1993). Processes of learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
9.
BlocherL. R. (1986). An analysis of college band instrumentalists’ detection of common performance errors. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.
10.
BoudD. (2005). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. New York: Routledge Falmer.
11.
ByoJ. L.SheldonD. A. (2000). The effect of singing while listening on undergraduate music majors’ ability to detect pitch and rhythm errors. Journal of Band Research, 36, 26–46.
12.
CandyP.CrebertG.O’LearyJ. (1994). Developing lifelong learners through undergraduate education. Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service.
13.
CarrollD. W. (1987). Development and evaluation of a programmed-like text with accompanying audio cassette tapes as an ancillary to elementary beginning snare drum classes. Contributions to Music Education, 14, 1–8.
14.
CavittM. E. (2003). A descriptive analysis of error correction in instrumental music rehearsals. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51, 218–230.
15.
ClearyT. J.ZimmermanB. J. (2004). Self-regulation empowerment program: A school-based program to enhance self-regulated and self-motivated cycles of student learning. Psychology in the Schools, 41(5), 537–550.
16.
CreechA.HallamS. (2011). Learning a musical instrument: The influence of interpersonal interaction on outcomes for school-aged pupils. Psychology of Music, 39(1), 102–122.
17.
CroweD. R. (1996). Effects of score study style on beginning conductors’ error-detection abilities. Journal of Research in Music Education, 44, 160–171.
18.
DanielR. (2001). Self-assessment in performance. British Journal of Music Education, 18(3), 215–226.
19.
DelzellJ. K. (1989). The effects of musical discrimination training in beginning instrumental music classes. Journal of Research in Music Education, 30, 187–200.
20.
DochyF.SegersM.SluijsmansD. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331–350.
21.
DoerksenP. F. (1999). Aural-diagnostic and prescriptive skills of preservice and expert instrumental music teachers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47, 78–88.
22.
DunningD.HeathC.SulsJ. M. (2004). Flawed self-assessment: Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(3), 69–106.
23.
DunningD.JohnsonK.EhrlingerJ.KrugerJ. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(3), 83–87.
24.
EhrlingerJ.JohnsonK.BannerM.DunningD.KrugerJ. (2008). Why the unskilled are unaware: Further explorations of (absent) self-insight among the incompetent. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105, 98–121.
25.
EllisM. C. (1989). The effect of concurrent music reading and performance on the ability to detect tempo change. Journal of Research in Music Education, 37, 288–297.
26.
EvaK. W.CunningtonJ. P. W.ReiterH. I.KeaneD. R.NormanG. R. (2004). How can I know what I don’t know? Poor self assessment in a well-defined domain. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 9, 211–224.
27.
FalchikovN.BoudD. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 59(4), 395–430.
28.
FalchikovN.GoldfinchJ. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287–322.
29.
FitzgeraldJ. T.WhiteC. B.GruppenL. D. (2003). A longitudinal study of self-assessment accuracy. Medical Education, 37, 645–649.
30.
ForsytheJ. L.WoodsJ. R. (1983). The effects of conducting on the error detection ability of undergraduate and graduate instrumental conductors. Contributions to Music Education, 10(1), 27–32.
31.
FrancisL. J. (1978). Attitude and longitude: A study in measurement. Character Potential: A Record of Research, 8(3), 119–129.
32.
FurmanC. E. (1987). Behavior checklists and videotapes versus standard instructor feedback in the development of a music teaching competency. In MadsenC. K.PrickettC. A. (Eds.), Applications of research in music behavior (pp. 73–98). Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama Press.
33.
GavinR. B. (2011). Creating magic through recording in ensemble rehearsals. Florida Music Director, 65(3), 8–11.
34.
GeringerJ. M.MadsenC. K. (1998). Musicians’ ratings of good versus bad vocal and string performances. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46, 522–534.
35.
GoolsbyT. W. (1999). Assessment in instrumental music. Music Educators Journal, 86(2), 31–35, 50.
36.
GreenJ. A.AzevedoR. (2007). A theoretical review of Winne and Hadwin’s model of self-regulated learning: New perspectives and directions. Review of Educational Research, 77(3), 334–372.
37.
GroulxT. J. (2013). The influence of tonal and atonal contexts on error detection accuracy. Journal of Research in Music Education, 61, 233–243.
38.
HallamS. (2001). The development of metacognition in musicians: Implications for education. British Journal of Music Education, 18(1), 27–39.
39.
HallamS. (2006). Music psychology in education. London: Institute of Education, University of London.
40.
HewittM. 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(4), 307–322.
41.
HewittM. P. (2002). Self-evaluation tendencies of junior high instrumentalists. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50, 215–226.
42.
HewittM. P. (2005). Self-evaluation accuracy among high school and middle school instrumentalists. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53, 148–161.
43.
HoorensV. (1993). Self-enhancement and superiority biases in social comparison. European Review of Social Psychology, 4(1), 113–139.
44.
JohnstonH. (1993). The use of video self-assessment, peer assessment, and instructor feedback in evaluating conducting skills in music student teachers. British Journal of Music Education, 10, 57–63.
45.
JusticeD. O.MarienauC. (1988). Self-assessment: Essential skills for adult learners. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 35, 49–62.
46.
KlenowskiV. (1995). Student self-evaluation processes in student-centered teaching and learning contexts of Australia and England. Assessment in Education, 2(2), 145–163.
47.
KostkaM. J. (1997). Effects of self-assessment and successive approximations on “knowing” and “valuing” selected keyboard skills. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45, 273–281.
48.
KrugerJ.DunningD. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence leads to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134.
49.
KrugerJ.GilovichT. (2004). Actions, intention, and self-assessment: The road to self-enhancement is paved with good intentions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(3), 328–339.
LewM. D. NAlwisW. A. M.SchmidtH. G. (2010). Accuracy of students’ self-assessment and their beliefs about its utility. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 135–156.
52.
LopezR.KossakS. (2007). Effects of recurring use of self-assessment in university courses. International Journal of Learning, 14, 203–216.
53.
LoyensS. M. M.MagdaJ.RikersR. M. J. P. (2008). Self-directed learning in problem-based learning and its relationships with self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 411–427.
54.
MadsenC. K.StandleyJ. M.ByoJ. L.CassidyJ. W. (1992). Assessment of effective teaching by instrumental music student teachers and experts. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 10, 20–24.
55.
McDonaldB.BoudD. (2003). The impact of self-assessment on achievement: The effects of self-assessment training on performance in external examinations. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 10(2), 209–220.
56.
McPhersonG. E.RenwickJ. M. (2011). Self-regulation and mastery of musical skills. In ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. H. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 234–248). New York: Routledge.
57.
McPhersonG. E.ZimmermanB. J. (2002). Self-regulation of musical learning: A social cognitive perspective. In ColwellR.RichardsonC. (Eds.), The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning (pp. 327–347). New York: Oxford University Press.
58.
MikszaP. (2012). The development of a measure of self-regulated practice behavior for beginning and intermediate instrumental music students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59, 321–338.
59.
MikszaP. (2013). The effect of self-regulation instruction on the performance achievement, musical self-efficacy, and practicing of advanced wind players. Psychology of Music, 43, 219–243.
60.
MontemayorM.RossE. A. (2009). Effects of recorded models on novice teachers’ rehearsal verbalizations, evaluations, and conducting. Journal of Research in Music Education, 57, 236–251.
61.
NapolesJ. (2012). The effect of lip synching on musicians’ ability to detect errors in a choral score. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 191, 81–92.
62.
NapolesJ.BowersJ. (2010). Differential effects of instructor feedback vs. self-observation analysis on music education majors’ increase of specific reinforcement in choral rehearsals. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 183, 39–48.
63.
ParisS. G.ParisA. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89–101.
64.
PriestT. (2006). Self-evaluation, creativity, and musical achievement. Psychology of Music, 34(1), 47–61.
65.
ReppB. H. (1996). The art of inaccuracy: Why pianists’ errors are difficult to hear. Music Perception, 14(2), 161–184.
66.
RobinsonC. R. (1993). Singers’ self-assessment of choral performance: Next-day recollections versus concert tape evaluation. Southeastern Journal of Music Education, 4, 224–233.
67.
RossJ. A. (2006). The reliability, validity, and utility of self-assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 11(10), 1–13.
68.
SeddonF. A.O’NeillS. A. (2006). How does formal instrumental music tuition (FIMT) impact on self- and teacher-evaluations of adolescents’ computer-based compositions?Psychology of Music, 34, 27–45.
69.
SheldonD. A. (2004). Effects of multiple listenings on error-detection acuity in multi-voice, multi-timbral music examples. Journal of Research in Music Education, 52, 102–115.
70.
ShepardL. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14.
71.
SlobodaJ.EdworthyJ. (1981). Attending to two melodies at once: The effect of key relatedness. Psychology of Music, 9, 39–43.
72.
SpearmanC. E. (1999). How will societal and technological changes affect the teaching of music? In MadsenC. K. (Ed.), Vision 2020: The Housewright symposium on the future of music education. Retrieved from: http://musiced.nafme.org/files/2012/06/HowWillSocietaland.pdf
73.
StuartM. (1977). The use of simulation and videotape recordings to increase error detection skills. Dialogue in Instrumental Music Education, 1, 48–54.
74.
StuartM. (1979). The use of videotape recordings to increase teacher trainees’ error detection skills. Journal of Research in Music Education, 27, 14–19.
75.
ThorntonL. C. (2004). The effect of listening condition of melodic error detection by novice woodwind students. Contributions to Music Education, 31, 11–22.
76.
ThorntonL. 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, 4–10.
77.
TryonA. C. (2006). Elementary students’ recognition and analysis of their own singing voices from digital recordings. Unpublished master’s thesis, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX.
78.
US Department of Education. (2010). Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology. Alexandria, VA: Education Publications Center.
79.
Van LaerhovenH.Van der Zaag-LoonenH. J.DerkxB. H. F. (2004). A comparison of Likert scale and visual analogue scales as response options in children’s questionnaires. Acta Paediatrica, 93(6), 830–835.
80.
WaggonerD. T. (2011). Effects of listening conditions, error types, and ensemble textures on error detection skills. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59, 56–71.
81.
YarbroughC. (1987). The relationship of behavioral self-assessment to the achievement of basic conducting skills. Journal of Research in Music Education, 35, 183–189.
82.
ZimmermanB. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In BoekaertsM.PintrichP. R.ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
