After a number of years presenting music technology to K-12 music teachers at professional conferences and workshops, we have discovered that our audiences generally are divided into three populations: (a) teachers who are curious but inexperienced (in technology), (b) teachers who are enthusiastic and somewhat experienced, and (c) teachers who are enthusiastic and moderately experienced. We have also discovered, through informal discussions with the experienced teachers (categories b and c), that most of their work in technology is limited to class administration and management, e.g., word processing, spreadsheets, searching the World Wide Web for resources, and using e-mail for communicating with colleagues.

To our surprise, however, we found that only a few teachers are attempting to use technology as learning and teaching tools in the classroom. At first it seemed logical that, because teachers were enthusiastic about the potential of music technology (combined with their growing computer skills), they would be incorporating technology in their instruction. After further discussions with these teachers, however, we discovered the reasons they were not incorporating technology in their classrooms: (a) Their training is minimal (limited knowledge in one or two areas of music technology) and, because of this, (b) they cannot make intelligent decisions about applying technology to the variety of teaching/learning tasks in their specific music curricula. In fact many teachers seemed frustrated and were hoping these two problems would be solved in our workshops. We also learned that teachers were being asked to submit budgets and requests for the purchase of computer technology in their schools … a task they felt inadequate to undertake.

If technology is to be used effectively and to its best advantage in school music instruction, it is clear that music teachers need substantial training. They must develop adequate technology skills across the traditional music areas, and they must understand the ways that technology can be incorporated in their music classes. Because computers will continue to be a dynamic influence on all aspects of our culture (including education), it is important to discover solutions for the problems outlined above. The situation is further compounded by the rapidly decreasing price of computers, making them more accessible to schools.

Ultimately, one solution to these problems is a network of workshops (accessible to music teachers throughout the country) that teach basic computer and music technology literacy. These workshops also must deal with the application of technology in a wide range of music curricula. We are aware that some commercial and professional music organizations are working on the training aspect (i.e., offering workshops in music technology), but we are less certain that the curriculum question, "How can I use technology in my music classes?", is a central focus of these workshops. Even if the topic of technology in music curricula is included, it is our contention that it cannot be effective without prior input from the K-12 music teachers. Our discussions with these teachers have convinced us that their interests, needs, and motivations are as wide-ranging as the kinds of classes they teach. It seems that a comprehensive understanding of their concerns, needs, classes, etc., is essential to those who want to develop training sessions concerning the use of music technology in grades K-12.

One approach for gaining this understanding might be to conduct a national survey of K-12 music teachers. Similar surveys (not in music) have already been conducted in elementary and secondary general education. Kimball (1996) surveyed technology implementation practices in a sample of California schools, while both Kimball and Godett (1987) surveyed educators’ plans or goals for integrating technology into the curriculum. Harris (1997), Bianchi (1996), Becker (1994), and Bauder (1993) examined through surveys the relationship between selected factors and the integration of technology into the curriculum. Factors included grade level assignment, years of teaching, locations of computers in schools, ratios of students to computers, and extent of computer networking. Unpublished studies by Reese (1997) and Sehmann & Hayes (1996) surveyed the extent to which technology is utilized in Illinois and Kentucky, respectively.

The purpose of this project was to conduct a national survey of K-12 music teachers: a) to determine the extent of music technology being used in the K-12 music curriculum and the daily activities of music teachers and their students; and b) to collect data about music teachers, their use of computer technology, and their attitudes toward the integration of music technology into the K-12 curriculum.

To address this purpose, the following research questions were devised:

Conducting a national, random survey is an enormous task, and the researchers decided to approach it in two-stages. The first stage was a pilot survey of randomly selected K-12 music teachers in three states, while the second stage will be a random survey of K-12 music teachers from the entire nation. The present project is a report of the pilot survey of teachers in the three selected states.

To represent as closely as possible a cross-section of teachers in this pilot survey, respondents were members of the Music Educators National Conference (MENC) from the states of New York, Kansas, and Utah. These three states represent a large, medium, and small state, respectively, in terms of MENC membership. A total of 5,247 members are represented in these states: New York = 3,833 members, Kansas = 1,064, and Utah = 350. With a confidence level at 95% and a confidence interval of 10%, the following number of surveys were needed for inference (see Rea & Parker, 1997, pp. 118-121) to the total membership of each state: New York = 95, Kansas = 90, Utah = 76, a total of 261 surveys. A total of 600 surveys were mailed.

The mailing resulted in 222 returns, short of the 261 returns needed for inference to the three states. Because of the Christmas holidays, follow-up mailings were not possible. Additional surveys will be sent to each state to increase the return rates. In the meantime, results cited below should be inferred with caution to the total populations of each state.

In response to the question, "What type of music class(es) are you teaching?" the respondents indicated that the most frequent type of class was band (including other wind ensembles) with 107 responses, followed by chorus (including other choral ensembles) with 77 responses, general music (65 responses), elementary music (53 responses), orchestra (35 responses), music theory (23 responses), class piano (15 responses), music appreciation (13 responses), and class guitar (9 responses). There were 38 "other" responses; the majority (18) were music lessons, that is, private or small group instrumental or voice lessons given during or after school hours.

Ages of respondents ranged from 21 years to over 60, with the median in the range of 41-50 years (76, or 34.2% of the total). Most respondents completed a masters degree (118, 53.2%); 90 (40.5%) have a bachelors degree. Almost half of the teachers (110, 49.5%) have been teaching for 15 years or longer; 131 (59%) have held their current position for up to 10 years, and the remaining 112 have held their current position for over 10 years. There was no significant difference in males and females regarding age, education, and number of years they have taught.

"Experience" was defined in the survey as "both the number of computer applications you use and the extent to which you can comfortably use most of the features in those applications." Fifty respondents (22.9%) claimed to be considerably experienced in computing; 110 (50.5%) claimed to be moderately experienced; 50 (22.9%) claimed to have a little experience in computing; and only 8 (3.7%) claimed no experience. Experience was compared with gender, and a significant difference was found, c ² (218, df = 3) = 16.338, p < .0005. Male music teachers claimed to have more computer experience than the female music teachers; i.e., the percentage of male teachers claiming to have "considerable experience was three times higher than the percentage of female teachers claiming this same level of technological familiarity (34.3% vs 12.4%).

Nearly all respondents (203, 92.3%) indicated that they use computers at home or school in their individual work. Of this number, 112 (55.2%) use computers for music applications and also for applications related to music (i.e., word processing, databases, etc.). Another 86 (42.4%) use computers only for music-related applications, and only 5 (2.5%) use computers only for music applications.

The majority of respondents (114, 56.2%) use only one type of computer at school or at home. Seventy-six (66.7%) of these are PC machines (486 and higher), and the remainder (38, 33.3%) are Apple (mostly Macs and Power Macs). Another 61 (31.6%) use two types of computers: 29 (47.5%) use an Apple and a PC, 21 (34.4%) use two different Apple machines, and 11 (18%) use two different PC machines. The remaining respondents (24, 12.1%) use three or more different machines: combinations of Apples and PCs.

There were 176 responses to the question, "What are the music features available to you on the computer or computers you use in your individual work at home or at school?" Respondents were given seven options, and they could indicate their music features by marking one or more of these options. Forty-two (23.9%) respondents indicated that five, six, or all seven of these music features (sound card, MIDI keyboard with built-in synthesizer, keyboard controller, speakers, headset, microphone, and "other") are available to them for their individual work at home or at school. Thirty-one (17.6%) use four of these features, 38 (21.6%) indicated three of the features, 35 (19.9%) use two, and 30 (17.0%) use only one feature. By far, the most commonly marked music features were (a) sound card & speakers (17, 9.7%) and (b) sound card & headphone in combination with one or more of the remaining four music features (82, 46.6%). The remaining responses (77, 43.8%) were varied, ranging from a sound card only to a combination of all music features except the sound card!

Sixty-one (28.6%) of these teachers utilize computer technology in student work. The remaining 152 (72.4%) do not and were asked the following questions: "Do you have access to computers at school for yourself and/or your music students?" "Would you like to be able to use music technology with your students?" "Would you be willing to learn music technology and use it with your students?" An overwhelming majority of those who do not presently use computer technology with students have access to computers at school (72.4%), would like to use music technology with their students (88.8%), and are willing to learn to do so (91.4%).

The results reported in the following paragraphs are from the 61 teachers who said they are involved in student work. The six most frequent use of computers by these respondents–both during class and outside of class time–were:

Questions asking about numbers of computers, their locations, configuration of computers, and types and use of software yielded the following results: