Susan Chan, Washington State University
Today there is a profusion of computer-assisted
instruction in nearly all fields and disciplines, and a substantial
amount of research has been conducted in this area. The many
advantages (Stevens, 1991; Hoffmann, 1991) and some disadvantages of
computer-assisted instruction have been identified and documented.
Much research has been done in computer-assisted music instruction,
especially in music theory. However, authors such as Rees and
Michelis (1990) pointed out that instrumental pedagogy in a
computer-assisted learning situation had received little treatment in
the literature.
Among the articles published in the area of
computer-assisted piano or keyboard instruction, a large majority
concern the use of software programs in private piano studios and
benefits experienced in those studios. (Litterst, 1987-88; Holland,
1984; Kunitz, 1984; Young, 1990.) While many of these articles are
informative and interesting, they are mostly of the non-scholarly
type. There is a pressing need for more academically-oriented studies
to be done on the use of computer-assisted keyboard instruction,
especially on the university or college level. Renfrow (199 1)
indicated that he was unable to find a single article about the use
of computer and keyboard technology in keyboard teaching at the
university level.
While technological equipment being used needs to
be examined and evaluated from time to time to ensure good quality,
one must not neglect the importance in the computer-assisted learning
environment of contextual conditions such as student and instructor
attitudes (Lymenstull, 1991), learner traits (Higgins, 1992) as well
as curriculum design. Effective examination of such conditions is
greatly helpful and can lead to improvement of systems and possible
breakthroughs in undertaking new directions. The study of attitudes
is important, and it is helpful to study the contributing factors to
such attitudes. These factors may include background information such
as age, sex, computer background, and musical background. Through
this type of study, one can determine the best learning environment
for each group of students.
The humanistic issue of computer-assisted
instruction is an interesting and significant one. There has long
been the criticism of technology as being cold and inhuman. There is
also the fear of technology robbing humans of their jobs, values and
creativity (Faber, 1988). How will the role of the teacher change
(Hoffmann, 199 1)? Is the human teacher going to survive in this
competition with computers? Who will ultimately win the contest?
The purpose of the present study was to examine
instructor and student attitudes towards computerized keyboard
teaching on the university level, the relationship between various
factors and such attitudes, and the effectiveness of the computer in
teaching specific musical concepts and skills. These factors include
the students' age, sex, computer background, musical background, and
self-perceived cognitive styles. Nine research questions were
developed:
Method
Subjects for the present study consisted of
undergraduate students who were enrolled in the various sections of
the course "Computers and Keyboards in Music" in a large midwestern
university. In this course, a working knowledge of several software
programs was emphasized, where students were to complete a project
with each of the following software programs: Cakewalk (a sequencing
program), Band-In-A-Box (a music arranging program), Music Printer
Plus (a music notation program), and Piano Works (an elementary piano
instruction program). Thirty-five students and 2 instructors took
part in the study.
Questionnaires containing multiple-choice
questions were used and interviews containing open-ended questions
were conducted. More precisely, a pretest questionnaire was given to
the students at the beginning of the course. It consisted of 34
questions in the following categories: age, sex, computer background,
musical background, attitudes towards the computer as a working tool
and a teaching tool, and self-perceived cognitive styles. At the end
of the course, the students filled out a posttest questionnaire that
contained 26 questions. The same pretest questions that concerned
attitudes towards the computer as a working tool and a teaching tool
were asked in the posttest questionnaire so that a comparison could
be made between pretest and posttest responses to these same
questions. In addition, questions on the students' opinions towards
further music studies and on evaluation of the computer as a teacher
of specific musical concepts and skills were also included. The
7-point Likert-type scale was used in the responses for many of the
questions.
Telephone interviews were conducted with 5
randomly-chosen students at the end of the course. These students
were asked questions concerning their opinions about the pros and
cons of computerized keyboard teaching. They were also asked if they
enjoyed working with the computer in the class, if their
understanding and interest in music had increased, and if they
thought that a human teacher was necessary in the classroom. The 2
instructors were interviewed. Questions that were asked concerned
their reactions to the issues of communication with students, pros
and cons of using the computer in the class, and their role as
teachers in the class.
Data from the questionnaires were collected and
then analyzed with the aid of the SPSS computer program. The
distribution of the responses of each question was calculated,
variables were correlated, and t-tests were conducted. The results
were tabulated, analyzed, evaluated, and presented.
Results and Discussion
The following section attempts to answer each of the nine research
questions in order.
At the beginning of the course, the students
generally possessed a rather positive attitude towards the computer
as a friendly working and teaching tool. As far as the humanistic
issue was concerned, many of the students thought that the computer
was actually not as effective as a human teacher. They also believed
that using the computer as a teacher in the classroom was not too
dehumanizing but that there should actually be a human teacher in the
classroom. In addition, they tended to think that the computer did
not make learning more difficult but that it actually made a course
more interesting.
The effect of instruction on student attitudes was
revealed in three sources by analyzing the students' response to the
following: (a) several identical questions in the pretest and
posttest questionnaires, (b) several other questions, and (c) a few
questions through interview.
The students' responses in the interviews
corresponded quite well with those in the posttest questionnaire. The
instruction had a very positive effect on student attitudes towards
the computer as a working and teaching tool. At the end of the
course, the students agreed more strongly that the computer was a
friendly, effective, and fun working tool. They were also more
convinced that the computer was an effective primary teaching tool.
They believed that their understanding and interest in music had
increased after experiencing the computerized instruction. They also
felt that it was necessary to have a human teacher in the classroom.
Moreover, they were more convinced that the use of the computer made
learning easier and more interesting. Some drawbacks of the
computerized instruction were also expressed: (a) the computer's
inability to teach effectively by itself in the absence of a human
teacher, and (b) the extra skills required from the students, such as
typing skills and mastery of the technology.
As far as instructor attitudes were concerned, the
instructors were totally dedicated to using the computer in their
classes and they believed with total conviction in the strengths and
potential of computerized keyboard teaching. They discussed the many
advantages of computerized keyboard teaching: (a) students could
progress at their own pace, (b) the structure of the class was
altered to work more effectively, (c) communication with students was
more effective, (d) the students enjoyed learning with the computer,
(e) the use of synthesizers eliminated any tuning expenses, and (f)
the computer functioned as a tool and a kind of learning environment
support. Some drawbacks of the system were also pointed out:
(a) some students had problems in learning how to
operate the system, (b) the sounds generated by the system were not
as pleasing as pure acoustic sounds, and (c) the students had to gain
modest computer skills.
Age was found to have direct influence on student
attitudes. The results appear to confirm the common belief that
younger people are more receptive to new technology such as the
computer, and that older people, while being less receptive, pay more
attention to the human aspects of technology. At the end of the
course, the younger students found the computer more friendly as a
working tool and that they found it more enjoyable to work at the
computer. The older students, on the other hand, tended to think at
the beginning of the course that the computer was more effective than
the human teacher. At the end of the course, however, they thought
that using the computer as a teacher in the classroom was too
dehumanizing.
There is a significant correlation between sex and
computer attitudes (p < .05). As shown in the pretest analysis,
male students believed more strongly than female students that the
computer was an effective working tool. This supports the common
belief that men hold a more positive attitude than women towards the
computer as being effective. There is no such correlation in the
posttest, however.
In the area of computer background and student
attitudes, there are significant correlations between the following:
(a) computer experience and the belief that the computer is a
friendly working tool (p < .05), (b) computer experience and the
belief that it is not so necessary to have a human teacher in the
classroom (p < .05), and (c) owning a computer at home and the
belief that the computer is an effective working tool (p < .05).
Those students who had more computer experience believed more
strongly that the computer was a friendly working tool and were
inclined to think that it was not necessary to have a human teacher
in the classroom. Furthermore, those who owned a computer at home
agreed more strongly that the computer was an effective working tool.
Thus, familiarity with the computer leads to an increase of comfort
with using the computer and an increase in the belief that the
computer was superior to the human teacher as far as pedagogical
capabilities were concerned.
There is an interesting and significant
correlation between students who played by reading music at the
beginning of the course and the belief at the end of the course that
it was necessary to have a human teacher in the classroom (p <
.05). This group of students felt at the end of the course that a
human teacher was not so necessary. On the other hand, those students
who did not play by reading music at the beginning of the course felt
at the end of the course that, after all, a human teacher was
necessary. These observations suggest that experience with a human
teacher is very important in the process of learning to read music
and that the human teacher is better than the computer in teaching
music reading; in other words, the results imply that the computer is
not as desirable as the human teacher in teaching music reading.
There are significant correlations between traits
of field sensitivity and the following: (a) the belief that it is
necessary to have a human teacher in the classroom both at the
beginning of the course (p < .05) and at the end of the course (p
< .05), and (b) the belief that the computer has increased the
students' interest in music at the end of the course (p < .0 1).
Those students who showed traits of being field-sensitive felt a
stronger need for a human teacher in the classroom while those who
showed traits of being field-insensitive felt all right with the
absence of a human teacher in the classroom. Since this applied to
both pretest and posttest situations, the instruction that took place
in this course did not change the feelings of the students. It might
seem that a human teacher would work better than the computer with
the students who showed traits of being field-sensitive. However,
because these students also felt strongly that the computer had
increased their interest in music at the end of the course, the use
of the computer was highly effective in this regard. It seems,
therefore, that the best setting for students who showed traits of
being field-sensitive is one that combines computerized keyboard
instruction with human instruction.
The effectiveness of the
computer used in this class in teaching various musical concepts and
skills ranges in descending order as follows: (a) arrangement of
pieces/tunes, (b) instrumentation and orchestration, (c) music
analysis, (d) interpretation of pieces, (e) rhythm, (f) practice
methods, (g) note reading, (h) memorization, (i) aural skills,
h)
transposition, (k) sight reading, (1)
fingering, and (in) technique of playing.
The findings of the present research contain the
following implications for music education: (a) the growing use of
computerized keyboard instruction is the natural path to take, (b)
computerized keyboard instruction should be used with discretion to
maximize its effectiveness on different types of students, and (c)
"human" teachers can rest assured of their irreplaceable and
important role in music education.
Further studies can be recommended. While the
present study examined the correlation of student background with
attitudes, further studies dealing with achievement could be
conducted. For instance, the correlation of student attitudes and
their achievement in the class could be studied, as well as the
correlation of student background and achievement. Another worthwhile
study would be to compare the achievement of students who have been
exposed to computerized keyboard instruction with that of students
who have only been exposed to instruction in a traditional class
piano setting, where both classes have the same teaching goals and
student levels. (These kinds of studies have been performed in
non-music fields such as writing, nursing, ecology, and
pharmacology.) Furthermore, a more extensive study could be conducted
to examine the correlation between cognitive styles and attitudes
towards computerized keyboard teaching. Such areas are new and
relatively unexplored.
References
Faber, R. (1988, June-July). Computer application in music.
American Music Teacher, 37, 22-23, 54.
Higgins, W. (1992). Technology. In Richard Colwell (Ed)., Handbook of Research on Music Teaching And Learning: A Project of The Music Educators National Conference. New York: Schirmer Books.
Hoffmann, J. A. (199 1). Computer-Aided collaborative music instruction. Harvard Education Review, 61 (3), 270-278.
Holland, S. (1984, December). Synthesizers: A primer for teachers. Clavier, 23, 43-46.
Kunitz, S. L. (1984, December). I like my computer because Clavier, 23, 42-43.
Litterst, G. (1987-1988, Winter). An introduction to computer technology for the classical pianist. Piano Quarterly, 140, 28-31.
Lymenstull, T. J. (1991). Keyboard teaching and new technology. In M. Uszler, S. Gordon, & E. Mach (Eds.), The well-tempered keyboard teacher. New York: Schirmer Books-
Rees, F. J., & Michelis, R. M. (1991, Fall). Identifying musical performance behavior in instrumentalists using computer-based sound spectrum analysis. Council for Research in Music Education Bulletin, 110, 50-66.
Renfrow, K. D. (1991). The development and evaluation of objectives for educating graduate piano pedagogy students to use computer and keyboard technology. Doctoral dissertation, University of Oklahoma.
Stevens, R. S. (1991). The best of both worlds: An eclectic approach to the use of computer technology in music education. International Journal of Music Education, 17, 24-36.
Young, B. G. (1990). The use of computer and keyboard technology in selected independent piano studios. doctoral dissertation, University of Oklahoma.