A Curriculum for a Middle School Rhythm Reading Unit

A Curriculum for a Middle School Rhythm Reading Unit

Introduction

“Music education is important because music is a part of experiences, a part of the senses, and a part of the arts” (Eisner, 1987). The need to create a music curriculum comes from several years of experience of teaching within my school district. I recognize that there needs to be a curriculum design of a middle school music rhythm reading unit that is cross-curricular with Math. The curriculum design targets middle school learners between sixth to eight grades. This curriculum is based on research and a review of scholarly materials.

This curriculum reflects the goals of the music standards of learning found in the music standards of learning of [district]. This music curriculum has been established to better describe the scope of music education and facilitate a high degree of music instruction in the school. This curriculum includes several contents that should be implemented by Max Abbott Middle School within four key course offers, such as General Music, Vocal/Choral Music, and Guitar. The curricular for General Music cumulative and progressive in complexity from one grade to the next. In each curriculum course content is demonstrated as objectives of instructions structured into sixteen topics namely: American Idol Judge for a Day, Be A Pop/R&B Recording Artist, Beat, D string notes, Finding the Beat, First note on a Brass Instrument Producing your first note, Putting together instruments, Proper Breathing, Rhythm and Beat, Pattern Rhythm and Patterns, Rhythm Board Race, Rhythm Tree, Rhythmic Notation, and Teaching Demonstration (Tan et al., 2019). Although the topic may be separate to define the process of instruction and the musical experience at all grade levels, the aims integrate and overlap in an actual musical experience.

Each course provides a vocabulary list to enable students to use terminologies specific to particular courses to discuss and examine their musical experiences. The comprehensive objectives of instruction are the minimum goal that could be attained in music. They have rational aims and expectations of what students should be learning and what teachers are supposed to teach through the specification of clear, concise, rigorous, and measurable expectations for young people. They may be used in providing music instruction either wholly or in part. The curriculum is not restrictive, nor does is it dictate the particulars of what teachers should teach their classrooms. Teachers are allowed to choose from different strategies of instructions and assessment methods relevant for their students, including adding more than what has been provided in this curriculum for the benefit of their students.

The development of a music curriculum for Max Abbott Middle School is a crucial step in the provision of a challenging music program in the school. Students will be able to understand the response of other people, including their own through several musical experiences. It also facilitates leaner expression and development of their creativity as they advance towards full participation in the culture of music (Szabó et al., 2019). Through music instruction students will be able to acquire skills that would enable them to make informed judgments, solve problems, become critical thinkers, utilize their creativity and imagination, work among groups and be able to appreciate other cultures The new understanding acquired will assist them in applying their skills and knowledge acquired within outside classroom situations.

Student Assessment Data

In an effort to improve functions, schools are increasingly turning towards data usage for the improvement of instruction. This might be in part due to the availability of student assessment data throughout the school year. The use of assessment and other data in the information of teacher’s instructions is referred to as data-driven data-driven instruction (DDI). Through DDI, teachers examine student data for a better understanding of the learning requirements of the students and for the identification and improvement of learning instructions that address those needs.

There is limited research on the effectiveness of DDI. Overall, this research has discovered that DDI does not consistently change the actions of teachers in the classroom or improve the achievement of students. Different DDI studies analyzed various intervention techniques. The earliest research analyzed interventions that majorly focused on getting data to teachers in a usable form, with minimal emphasis on the provision of support for teacher’s use of data (Wiggins, 1998, p.7). This research contributes to a field of more recent research that examines the support of data use. These interventions provided supports to teachers and school leaders on how to analyze the data and select relevant strategies of instruction through coaching, training, or facilitating collaboration with others (Falk, 2000; National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 1995). Particularly, this research focused on examining DDI intervention that provided substantial training and support to teachers and school leaders to assist them in the effective use of data to improve their instruction and increase the achievement of a student while addressing the needs of students.

General Best Practice

There exists a significant amount of data relating to measures of student growth in core subjects but is less available to student growth in terms of a band, choir, orchestra, and general music. The current studies have only examined how the best practice, trends, methods, and topics that are discussed in the music education curriculum. Little research demonstrates how these methods lead to student growth and what is being said by music teachers. This research will focus on the best techniques and practices suggested by leading educational experts. This research will also conduct an overview of topics and trends in music classrooms as it applies to the approach music teachers are choosing to grow and improve their programs, including current techniques and trends being employed in band, choir, orchestra, and general music classrooms to provide students with the most appropriate environment for musical growth and development.

In public schools, course offerings are usually broke down into a core, electives, and the arts. Core classes usually consist of science, mathematics, social studies, and language arts. Electives consist of physical education, technology, health, computer, and consumer science courses. The arts are composed of vocals, instrumentals, general music including dance, theatre, and art classes. Each has to measure and evaluate the performance of every student. The effectiveness of evaluation depends on their agreement with subject-specific requirements and agreements. Students will be responsible for their work in mathematics based on standards of mathematics (Quinn et al., 2013).

Just as in other subjects such as mathematics, it is also possible to measure and evaluate the progress of music students. Band, orchestra, choral, and general music courses offer special opportunities in the measurement of student’s development in various ways, yet much attention is directed towards core subjects such as mathematics (Robinson, 2008). The use of a relevant student growth measure is crucial in taking students from their current position to where they should be after successfully completing the course. In music, teachers find it acceptable to works with students who have very limited abilities and consider them successful after their improvement regardless of the amount. In music, the rate of student development varies where others may develop more quickly compared to others. The idea is that as long as students improve at a relevant rate determined by their abilities, they will get a good grade, despite where they began or ended.

The establishment and maintenance of a highly effective learning environment for students can be made possible through teacher collaboration. Teaching and working in isolation cuts professionals off from valuable opportunities that will improve their crafts (Joyce 2004). Chong and Kong (2012) demonstrate that a collaborative learning system is crucial for the successful practice of teaching. Teachers are continually being encouraged to work within their disciplines but also in conjunction with other disciplines to make connections between standards and content for a more cohesive educational experience for the students as they transition from one subject to the next. The importance of teacher collaboration through professional learning communities (PLCs) have been examined by DuFour (2004), he argues that

The powerful collaboration that characterizes professional learning communities is a systematic process in which teachers work together to analyze and improve their classroom practice. Teachers work in teams, engaging in an ongoing cycle of questions that promote deep team learning. This process, in turn, leads to higher levels of student achievement.

Literature continues to point out that student achievement and learning is a product of the teacher’s collaboration. As much as collaboration has the intention of reinforcing teachers’ abilities and skills, they always have student outcomes in mind. According to Friend and Cook (2007), collaboration is a voluntary effort between the participants, dependent on shared responsibility for decision making and participation. It allows participants to share responsibility in student outcomes.

Good teaching involves the content, the delivery of the content, how to read, write, and talk about the content (Schmoker, 2011). Schomer argues that the failure to address this approach is one of the biggest educational problems today. Teachers must be knowledgeable of the content they teach; they must organize and appropriately deliver the content. Teachers must engage in reading, talking, and writing about the content. Although teaching may take place in isolation, these areas should be developed in professional learning communities where the practice of teaching can be developed, improved, and shared. Personal habits go unchecked in isolation; individuals do not always have the capacities to identify personal patterns that may hinder their teaching abilities.

Music-Focused Best Practice

This section bases its focus on best practices for music teachers. It looks at music teachers in terms of what they focus on as a group for the improvement of their abilities to deliver quality music instruction. There particular actions that teachers should be taking to improve their music instructional abilities but not limited to collaborative practices, teaching techniques, curriculum and planning, reflective practices, and the monitoring and evaluation of student progress.

Stanley (2011) demonstrates the importance of Collaborative Teacher Study Groups (CTSG) for music teachers. They are structured as an independently sustained group, teacher organized, focused on reinforcing their own learning. Compared to another subject, art (music) teachers have numerous challenges when it comes to collaboration compared to other subjects. “CTSG’s are ideally suited to meet the needs of art teachers by serving as a remedy for the unique isolation these teachers endure as well as meeting their need for subject-specific professional development,” Stanley adds that meeting to discuss is not sufficient. Studies suggest that CTSGs must consider the following sic elements (a) Length and quality of commitment, (b) content area versus pedagogical knowledge, (c) teacher goals and roles, (d) ways to examine teaching practice and structure conversation, (e) teaching assignments within the group, and (f) support for classroom implementation. Time spent by teachers together will only be fruitful if they collaborate with a particular goal and outcome in their minds related to instructions.

Music-Specific Assessment

Just like any other subject, music also needs teachers to monitor and assess the progress of student learning. It is necessary to have not only an effective assessment method but also a consistent way of adapting instructions to specific to the needs of the students as it is required. Just like in other subjects, students begin their classes at different levels of understanding ability and background knowledge. Fundamentally, teachers understand the position of their students concerning the learning process, including necessary action to move to the next level of understanding. Thus process requires continued monitoring and must be able to adapt to the different needs of each student.

There exist six principles of music assessment according to Hale and Green (2009), and they include (a) beginning with the end in mind, (b) finding out what students know, (c) assessing as you instruct, (d) teaching students to self-monitor, (e) using rubrics, and (f) teacher self-assessment (pp. 27-31). These six principles have been designed experienced and inexperienced music teachers for purposes of accurately assessing the effectiveness of everyday instruction. These sic steps can be said to be an outline of an effective student assessment program. However, Hale and Green’s principles are not specific to the measurement of student progress in music education, as they equate student progress measurement in music with other subjects.

Another Scholar, Burrack (2002), examined assessment instrumental programs. Burrack posits that in most cases, teachers assess students too subjectively, relying on factors such as attendance records, variety of music, sounds of the concert, including other traditional measures. According to Burrack, these measures may not necessarily be accurate of how the student is growing or learning.

Assessing student progress in terms of attendance and technical skills is important. Still, other assessment possibilities can provide opportunities to observe students’ music learning in a broader context by focusing on higher-order thinking skills, such as problem-solving and creative thinking. Self and group assessment can serve as vehicles for enhancing musical understanding, aesthetic sensitivity, and critical-listening skills. (p. 27)

Student self-assessment and group assessment are crucial components to the relevant development in music, and such assessment should be linked to student feedback and grading and should also offer students appropriate feed feedback to assist them in acquiring perspective between where they are in regard to what they are supposed to be learning. “Strategies that personalize the music learning process, including self and group assessments, can nurture students’ self-reflective capacity and their musical self-image” (p. 32).

With regards to personalization, music education should be unique, just like the students learning the course (Hill, 2003). Factors such as race, age, socio-economic information, cognitive abilities, family structure, and the strategies used to teach introduce and assess music should be a personalized process. Hill adds to the personalization approach by suggesting the importance of the individual approach in education. Apart from a background in music, music students should benefit from the socio-economic component considerations. For an effective assessment of a student’s musical ability, teachers must know their students well and offer the most personalized approach.

Shuler (2011) differentiates the make-up of music teachers and that of other subject teachers. Shuler posits that because music teachers are involved in music components in their times, they are more connected to the content compared to math or a science teacher. Music teachers are more likely to participate in music programs when they go home as their hobbies. Moreover, being that music is an elective course, music teachers work harder to build their programs, and in most cases, they know and understand every student they are working with, they personalize the curriculum to the subject interesting and interest as most students as possible.

Members of the Team

This curriculum for Music Rhythm Reading Unit was designed through combined efforts of music educators from [municipalities within the district] to better demonstrate the scope music education in [district] and facilitate a high degree of music instruction across the district. Classroom teachers, administrators, curriculum specialists, professional musicians, and college faculty were of great aid to the music curriculum development team by reviewing and refining the drafts of the document.

Part II: Unit Foundation

Step 1: Establish the Foundation

This step sets the foundation for the whole process of planning and development. The team should be able to understand both the nationwide and statewide standards. A greater number of state’s assessments is usually based on national standards. Thus teachers need to be aware of what their students are expected to learn. These standards are the foundation for the development of a curriculum. It is crucial to always keep at hand materials such as articles and books which provide sources for the revision of the curriculum. It is important to choose texts that have evidence-based instruction strategies instead of only selecting lesson activities. The selection of materials of revise materials assists in the comprehension of the current data achievements and the existing gaps in learning and teaching practices within the district (Keene & Zimmerman, 1997). Through analysis of materials such as “Strategies That Work” by (Harvey & Goudvis, 2007), a team of PreK-12 focused on the low reading levels and low scores comprehension on both national and state tests. The team was also able to identify and understand the best comprehension strategy for a classroom. It was therefore much easier to develop a curriculum based upon the strategies usable by proficient readers.

Step 2: Data Analysis

At this point, the team needs to develop a common understanding of the needs of the district. The intention is for all members of the team to identify the strengths and weaknesses within the curriculum of the district by examining the student achievement data. The teachers will be assisted in understanding the impact of their test scores beyond their classroom setups (Mooney & Mausbach, 2008). Teachers should work in a vertical team to discuss gaps in achievement at all levels. Where more teachers are increasingly collaborating with their peers within the grade-level, it is harder for teachers to discuss learning and teaching with their workmates outside the confines of their successive grade levels (Mooney and Mausbach, 2008). When teachers have the opportunity of talking with other teachers throughout all grade levels, the team widens their knowledge of the major issues pertaining to the curriculum and begins to move from group functioning to working as a professional learning community.

Professional learning community refers to a group of teachers who get together regularly to create standards of the curriculum and collaborate on deciding the best approach of teaching these standards (DuFour, 2004). This is the exact role that should be employed by the curriculum team. Marzano (2003) posits that one major factor that influences student achievement is the curriculum development which is guaranteed and viable. This curriculum type assists instructors in the identification of a set of appropriate standards and ensure the teaching of these standards. The team for curriculum development must cooperate as part of a professional learning community for the development of a viable and guaranteed curriculum.

Within the district level, the professional learning community is established for two reasons. First, they are regarded strategies with the most potential for a sustained significant improvement of schools by educational researchers. Scholars have validated the use of professional learning communities in the establishment of a curriculum (Schmoker, 2006). Sustained student achievement is the goal of a long-term process of the district level professional learning communities. Second, a model for curriculum development for creating principles can be established by the professional learning communities. This might also include approaches that assist them in understanding how to create curriculum development teams within their schools.

According to (Mooney and Mausbach, 2008), successful and savvy curriculum leaders recognize that not everybody within the curriculum development team is informed enough to sufficiently finish all major responsibilities. It is highly unlikely to form a team where all members bring to the table sufficient instructional and curricular knowledge. Some members of the team may require more opportunities and experience to analyse on the topic from another point of view (Mooney and Mausbach, 2008). Therefore leaders will have the ability to conduct the crucial role of developing and training the writing team members. Therefore the professional development of the writing team must be founded on information concerning the meanings of data, approaches for the utilization of the most effective practice of instruction within the area of content, including gaps within the existing curriculum.

Step 3; Assessments

This step assists the curriculum development team in creating local benchmarks that will assist teachers in the identification of the level of student understanding of the ‘big ideas’ outlined within curriculums standards. The beginning of curriculum development with assessment is a common practice. Wiggins and McTighe’s (1998) proposed a backward design model that begins with the identification of desired results and is a widely recognized model for curriculum development. The backward design model assists curriculum developers in establishing study units around the main concepts within the curriculum. Units are structured to assist the student in developing an understanding of the taught topics. According to Wiggins and McTighe, it is impractical and impossible to have consistent teaching that is always targeted at deep and sophisticated understanding. They recognize that students require basic skills such as alphabet recitation and the learning of math facts. Their work is quite significant because it does not just focus on curriculum coverage but on student understanding.

The development of criteria and standards for the creation of high quality assessments is crucial before the process of writing. A lot of time should be spent on this step because most of the writing is conducted within this stage of the curriculum development (Mooney & Mausbach, 2008). These analysis will form the foundation for the resource selection of the curriculum development. According to Mooney and Mausbach (2008), it paramount that team members learn how to write effective assessments and be able to discuss such assessments within their relevance to their district and classroom practice. Writing sources might include the evaluation of samples from state assessments and modeling local curriculums within such state models; examination of supplementary materials purchased by the district as most of these might require only a few adjustments; and sharing the assessments with other schools to allows the improvement of earning and teaching across the board.

Step 4: Writing

The creation of supporting curriculum documents begins in this step. These also include the documents that can be utilized by instructors in class as implementation of the program (Mooney & Mausbach, 2008). The development of a curriculum guide is fundamental in this step.

Curriculum Guides

The curriculum map is one of the most important power tools for the creation and implementation of content. The curriculum map, provides a bigger picture which offers a clear guide for the most important concepts and assessments to be taught throughout the semester. Mooney and Mausbach (2008) state that the benefits of curriculum guide include

(a)Ensuring that every child in the district receives the same content (b)Helping teachers see curriculum connections between content areas (c) Promoting integration with teachers and specialists outside of the core content areas, such special education teachers and library media specialists; this will help these professionals align relevant concepts in their curriculum with classroom curriculum topics that occur during the year (d)Providing administrators with a vehicle to manage all of the curricular areas (e) Ensuring that the teacher’s favorite topic or unit is taught only when core curricular concepts have been mastered or not at all if it does not have relevance

The full implementation of these guides for every teacher and child will eventually raise the achievement of the students (Jacobs, 2004).

Step 5: Resource Review

Step 6: Pilot Process

Step 7: Board Approval

Step 8: Staff Development

Step 9: Implementation

References

Burrack, F. (2002). Enhanced assessment in instrumental programs. Music Educators Journal, 88(6), 27-32.

Chong, W. H., & Kong, C. A. (2012). Teacher collaborative learning and teacher self-efficacy: The case of lesson study. The Journal of Experimental Education, 80(3), 263-283.

Eisner, E. W. (1987). The Celebration of Thinking. Educational Horizons, 66, 24-29.

English, F. (2000). Deciding what to teach and test: Developing, aligning, and auditing the curriculum. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2007). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Hale, C. L., & Green, S. K. (2009). Six key principles for music assessment. Music Educators Journal, 95(4), 27-31.

Hill, W. L. (2003). Connect with students: music Educators Journal, 89(5), 8.

Jacobs, H. H. (2004). Getting results with curriculum mapping. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Mooney, N.J. and Mausbach, A.T., 2008. Align the design: A blueprint for school improvement. ASCD.

Morgan, S. (2019). An investigation of rhythm reading practices in Texas middle school choirs (Doctoral dissertation).

Shuler, S. C. (2011). Music Education for life: Building inclusive, effective twenty-first-century music programs. Music Educators Journal, 98(1), 8-13.

Standerfer, S. L. (2011). Differentiation in the music classroom. Music Educators Journal, 97(4), 43-47. doi: 10.1177/0027432111404078

Szabó, N., Janurik, M., & Józsa, K. (2019). The Effect of Music Island (Computer Program) on the Development of Musical Abilities in School Music Lessons. In EDULEARN19 Proceedings: 11th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies. International Association of Technology, Education, and Development (IATED), Valencia (Spain) (pp. 589-599).

Tan, A.G., Tsubonou, Y., Oie, M., and Mito, H., 2019. Creativity and Music Education: A State of Art Reflection. In Creativity in Music Education (pp. 3-16). Springer, Singapore.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.