Staff Development Through Teacher Video Self-Assessment:
A Review of the Implications of the
National Music Education Research Project
in the Flint (MI) Community Schools

James O. Froseth, Principal Investigator

The University of Michigan

Introduction

Research in education has pinpointed some factors regarding learning styles that contribute to student achievement. Each person has a learning style, and everyone has at least some preference -- the result of many influences. Certain learning style characteristics are biological, whereas others develop through experience (Restak 1979; Thies 1979). Some components of learning style include motivation, on-task persistence, structure of the learning task, and conformity (Dunn, Beaudry, & Klavaes 1989).

Dunn et al. (1989) contend that identification of learning styles as a basis for providing appropriate instruction has never been more important than now, as educators must meet the needs of increasingly diverse student populations. Several researchers (Ginsburg 1986; Shade 1982; Smith 1986; and Boykin 1979, 1986) have suggested that important contrasts exist between preferred learning styles of students in culturally diverse school environments. These contrasts may include preferences for either dominant (left) or non-dominant (right) hemisphere learning, and for either verbal or nonverbal modes of expression.

In the field of music education, early research by Gordon (1967) indicated that all racial groups have equal learning potential. Gumm (1990), in his study of interrelationships of minority status variables and student music achievement, found no significant differences concerning ethnicity. However, he called for further investigation of teacher differences in instructional strategies, and of student differences in learning styles and affective responses to instruction.

Owing to the relative lack of research in music classrooms on teaching styles and learning styles, some Michigan music researchers and music teachers set out to determine the relative effectiveness of different modes of music instruction and the nature of any relationships to music achievement and learning style preferences. This researcher-teacher collaboration involved The University of Michigan School of Music and the Flint Community Schools during the 1991-1992 school year.

Focus on Flint

The Flint Community School District is the second-largest K-12 district in Michigan, with an enrollment of more than 28,500 students. The district has three comprehensive high schools, several specialty high schools, a vocational education center, four middle schools, and thirty-three elementary schools. Demographically, the district is culturally diverse; approximately 70 percent of students are non-white and 30 percent are white.

The Fine Arts Department of the Flint Community Schools focuses on enhancing imagination, concentration, and communication by providing students with experiences in the visual and performing arts. The school music program provides meaningful musical experiences so that students may establish solid and permanent relationships with music, gain a sense of cultural heritage, and better understand other cultures through music. Music offerings include vocal and general music, exploratory music, choir, small-group instruction in instrumental music, and large instrumental ensembles.

Launching the Project

The Flint District's Strategic Plan 1989-1994 was to establish partnerships with institutions of higher learning to improve teaching and learning processes. In the interest of fulfilling this mission, Judith Ebner, a Flint music coordinator, and several music teachers agreed to participate in this teaching and learning styles project when approached by James O. Froseth, Professor of Music Education at The University of Michigan. The Yamaha Corporation of America agreed to sponsor this collaboration as part of their National Music Education Research Project, which was established to promote research on music teaching and learning.

The intent of the project was threefold: (1) to promote teacher awareness of learning style differences among students from diverse cultural environments, (2) to encourage development of more effective teaching strategies to ensure equitable opportunity for all students in music, and (3) to implement in-service programs relevant to any insights the music teachers would gain from this experience.

Five music teachers -- two vocal/general and three instrumental -- volunteered to participate in the project. Subsequently, each teacher selected a suitable class. From those consenting students in each of the five chosen classes, the teachers selected two white students and two non-white students to represent cultural diversity.

Teachers As Researchers

To look more closely at music teaching styles and possible learning style preferences, Flint music teachers were asked to monitor two dimensions of their instruction: (1) verbal or nonverbal delivery, and (2) positive or negative reinforcement. Additionally, the teachers were asked to monitor two dimensions of students' responses: (1) on-task or off-task responses to instruction, and (2) positive or negative affective responses to reinforcement.

The monitoring, by means of video cameras, occurred once a month (during the same week each month) from October 1991 through May 1992. To make videotaping as unobtrusive as possible, the teachers did it themselves. They used two cameras simultaneously -- one focused on the teacher, the other focused on the four selected students.

Teachers viewed the videotapes of their teaching and, on assessment forms developed for the project, systematically noted each instance of verbal instruction and each instance of nonverbal instruction, and each instance of positive reinforcement and each instance of negative reinforcement. Subsequently, teachers viewed the videotapes of their students and noted each instance of student on-task response to instruction and each instance of student off-task response to instruction, and each instance of student positive affective response to reinforcement and each instance of student negative affective response to reinforcement.

The teachers were trained to use the assessment forms during a one-day in-service session at the beginning of the school year. Professor James O. Froseth and University of Michigan School of Music research assistants Molly Weaver and Joan Linklater provided additional support for the teachers during two project review meetings held during the year to examine assessment procedures and discuss any problems related to the project.

University of Michigan researchers confirmed teacher assessments through independent assessments of the videotapes. With the use of stopwatches, the researchers were able to answer the following questions for each videotaped class: (1) What percentage of music teaching time was verbal? Nonverbal? (2) What percentage of student responses were on-task? Off-task? (3) What percentage of time in class was instructional? Non-instructional? A count was taken to determine: (4) How many reinforcements were positive? Negative? (5) How often was student response positive? Negative? Subsequently, they created a descriptive profile of each teacher and charted changes in categories one through five above.

In turn, descriptive information was shared with the teachers so that each might draw some conclusions about music teaching and learning in his or her classroom. Throughout the project the researchers took particular care not to impose any value judgments; at no time did they suggest to any teacher a need to change or improve anything anyone had viewed on videotape. The absence of judgment served to encourage an open dialogue between researchers and teachers.

What Did the Teachers Discover?

One of the most compelling issues that was revealed through self-assessment was the amount of non-instructional time spent during each class. On average, non-instructional time -- that which could not be classified as either verbal or nonverbal instruction -- for each teacher ranged from 53 percent to 65 percent. In all cases, the teachers spent an average of more than half of each videotaped class in non-instructional activity -- waiting for students to settle down, giving directions, organizing chairs and stands, passing out music, and tuning instruments.

In addition, an average of more than half of the reinforcements were negative. When the teachers did use positive reinforcement, it was often indiscriminate. They sometimes used words such as "Good," "Excellent," or "Okay" after each student response -- much like a reflex action. Then, teachers and students would continue with the next item on the lesson plan. On nearly all occasions of positive reinforcement, the students were not really sure that their most recent effort was as musically successful as the reinforcement seemed to indicate, and they frequently were skeptical about the quality of their own musical responses.

Initially, teachers had great difficulty classifying on-task student response to instruction and affective response to reinforcement. Visible evidence of positive or negative student emotion was scarce. Most of the time students exhibited blank facial expressions and disengaged body language, perhaps owing to the preponderance of non-instructional activity, use of indiscriminate reinforcement, and employment of passive (verbal) assessment of music learning.

What Conclusions Did the Teachers Draw from the Data They Generated?

Once the teachers began to develop a "big picture" -- after a few months of self-assessment -- they began to express a need to alter or abandon some of their teaching strategies in favor of those that might be more effective and efficient. During their meetings with the University of Michigan researchers, the teachers would follow their statements of concern with questions such as "Well, what would you do to test them on that skill?" What followed were often spontaneous demonstrations of nonverbal alternatives to verbal teaching techniques and performance-based alternatives to passive (verbal) student assessment. In-service sessions became arenas in which the teachers not only shared vulnerabilities, difficulties, and worries, but also celebrated new insights.

With these new insights, they began to bridge the gaps that existed in their music classes between their instructional thoughts and non-instructional actions. It was not long before teachers began to exhibit a broader range of instructional behaviors. In each classroom the predominance of verbal modes and scarcity of nonverbal modes of music teaching began to shift. Consequently, student behaviors began to shift from off-task to on-task.

Reinforcement became less indiscriminate and more meaningful. Teachers virtually eliminated negative reinforcement in their teaching by the end of the year. Collectively, they accomplished a dramatic shift -- from 54 percent negative reinforcement in October 1991 to 94 percent positive reinforcement in May 1992. Moreover, analyses of the videotapes revealed no discernible music learning preference according to student race or ethnicity. Students of all represented racial and ethnic groups responded more musically and positively to nonverbal modes of music instruction and positive reinforcement.

All participating Flint teachers exhibited preference for and growth in the use of nonverbal music teaching techniques. For example, teacher modeling proved to be a most effective technique for engaging students and for providing visible evidence of successful music achievement and positive affective response. The most frequent self-criticism by teachers was "I talk too much."

Initially, teacher assessment of student music learning was almost exclusively in a question-and-answer format: "How do you finger f-sharp?" "What is the name of that note?" "How many beats does a whole note get?" "What note did you miss?" What does that marking over the last note in the second measure mean?" As a broader range of instructional behaviors appeared, the need for more effective assessment of student learning emerged as a critical issue.

The Flint teachers not only concluded that continued training in teaching and assessment techniques was necessary, but volunteered to undertake an intensive one-week in-service workshop and to continue the research through the 1992-1993 school year.

This collaboration between The University of Michigan and the Flint Community Schools has enabled teachers to approach their experiences in a formal way -- with rigor and purpose. Moreover, the value of the teachers' own interpretations of their work has transcended that of traditional external interpretations. They have given their close attention to particular elements of teaching and learning -- aspects of context, pedagogy, and content. Through self-assessment, the teachers became more aware -- sometimes painfully more aware -- of the realities of their classrooms. Increased awareness, in turn, caused each of them to change. First they changed their views of themselves and their students. The stark -- and sometimes harsh -- realities of the videotape were undeniable. Subsequently, attitudes changed, then values changed, and, without exception, teaching behaviors changed. To date, the participants have raised more questions than they have answered, and the questions they have raised will, no doubt, lead them to seek active answers.

Looking Ahead

Professor Froseth and Ms. Ebner are hopeful that continuation of this project will involve refinement of a self-assessment and interpretation format that music teachers can administer independently after an introductory in-service. The researchers and teachers alike feel that such a procedure has considerable potential for staff development.

In addition, the researchers intend to pursue several related avenues of inquiry that are relevant to a broader context of teaching. These include investigation of the extent to which self-initiated teacher gathering of descriptive data in the classroom facilitates improved instructional practice, and investigation of the effects of teacher reflective practice -- attempts to enhance self-awareness through a cycle of thought and action based on their professional experience over time.

To date little assistance has been available to help teachers observe, think through, and grapple with the consequences of their own behavior in the classroom. However, Flint teachers not only have come to better understand their own teaching, but also have drawn attention to the power and utility of teacher-generated data in educational research. Clearly teacher self-assessment, through directed observation, is a powerful tool for staff development. It also provides administrators with a non-invasive and non-threatening alternative to traditional forms of teacher assessment.

The partnership of The University of Michigan and the Flint Community Schools has stimulated profound changes for teachers and researchers alike in their thoughts about teaching. By volunteering to join a community of inquirers, the teachers in this study have seized an opportunity to alter their perspectives of teaching and have accepted the responsibility to elevate the status of their work within the profession. They are compelling examples of the power of collaboration; they have renewed their interest, increased their confidence, and assumed more effective instructional leadership in their classrooms. The researchers have been inspired, energized, and invigorated by their efforts to foster insightful discussion of and meaningful action in the teaching and learning arena.

References