1

The Importance of Connecting the Music Curriculum toAspects of the Classroom Curriculum in the Elementary School

by

Kerrie Levenduski

A Seminar Paper SubmittedIn Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

Master of Science Education

Curriculum and Instruction

at

The University of Wisconsin OshkoshOshkosh, WI 54901-8621

December 2005

First Reader: Date:Michael E. Beeth

Second Reader: Date:Pat Tyunaitis

2

ABSTRACT

Among music teachers today, there is a growing interest in connecting the music

curriculum with content area curricula (e.g., social studies, language arts, etc.). The purpose

of this study was to survey music teachers in southeastern Wisconsin to discover the variety

of music curricula used and how music teachers have adapted it for use in the music

classroom. The results of this study will contribute to a better understanding of how

curriculum connections are made or if they are not being made. By surveying music teachers

currently working in the field, it was hoped to obtain information that would help determine

if, and to what extent this curriculum connection was occurring. Additionally, if this

connection was occurring, was there a teacher perceived benefit to student learning. The

music teachers were asked which method of music instruction they used, if they used a

published music series, and what, if any, curriculum connections they currently incorporated.

Music teachers’ perceptions concerning the success of these connections were surveyed. The

information obtained may provide valid reasons to develop music curricula containing

content area connections or it may suggest that there are no valid reasons to develop or utilize

such curricula. The results and analysis of the data acquired will be useful to music teachers

planning to develop, or improve their music curriculum.

3

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Purpose of Study

This qualitative study surveyed music educator to determine how they developed

their music curriculum. This study should add relevant data to the ongoing debate over the

necessity for an integrated music curriculum from the music teacher’s perspective. The

findings from this study could lead to the development of music curriculum that includes a

new approach to integrated curricula. It should improve the understanding of why music

teachers do or do not develop music curricula that connect to other content areas. It will also

address the current controversy among music educators concerning the teaching of music for

music sake alone verses the need to support the validity of the inclusion of music education

in the public schools through connections to other content areas. It will not decide which

philosophy is right or wrong but rather it will discover what curricula are currently in use.

Additionally it will reveal the preferences of active elementary music teachers in Wisconsin

regarding integration of music curriculum with content area studies.

Problem Statement

In elementary music education, what factors influence and determine what is taught

and how it is connected to general music curriculum? By discovering what is currently taught

in general music classrooms, we will find out if there are connections to other content area

curricula. Teachers’ perceptions of the importance and need for these connections will be

helpful in determining if connections are to be included or precluded from the general music

curriculum. The goal would be to develop a general music curriculum that increases

observable, student involvement, and learning.

4

Research Questions

• Who decides what music curriculum should include and how is this decided?

• Is the curriculum based on a particular method of instruction (i.e., Kodály, Orf,Suzuki, etc.) or a published music series?

• What is the rationale for connecting the curriculum to content areas, if it isconnected?

Definition of Terms

Interdisciplinary Curricula. Any curriculum which combines two or more discipline

areas of education (i.e. music and social studies; mathematics, science or history) creating a

new and single component that provides a planned and purposeful relationship between the

selected subjects.

Connection; Correlation; Integration. In her article, Connection, Correlation, and

Integration, Snyder (2001) defines these terms.

Connection. A connection is the most popular, most used, and least meaningful wayof linking disciplines. In a connection, materials or concepts (usually materials) fromone discipline are used to help teach or reinforce a concept in another curricular area.Another way to say this is that the children are supposedly learning through music,but not learning in or about music.

Correlation. A correlation is made between two or more disciplines through sharedmaterials or activities. Two or more teachers agree to correlate by using the samematerials or addressing the same topics at the same time; however, no plan is made todevelop important ideas across disciplines to form generalizations.

Integration. In an integrated unit, a broad theme is chosen that cuts across disciplines,so each content area, or intelligence can explore the central idea in a meaningful way.The integrity of each intelligence or discipline is maintained. Application andsynthesis of ideas from one discipline to another are encouraged, leading students todevelop deeper understanding and critical thinking through the comparing andcontrasting of ideas. Examples of central ideas include topical themes, such as farmanimals or rain forests, and conceptual themes, such as structures, imagination, orproblem solving.

5

Music educators generally accept the definitions above. However, for this paper,

connection, correlation, and integration will be used interchangeably unless specifically

designated.

Curriculum Development and Design. These five curriculum bases help define the

issues involved in curriculum development. Conway (2002) used them in her “Curriculum

Writing in Music” article to encourage the curriculum writer to think about important

conceptual issues when beginning to develop any curriculum. These terms may be referred to

when discussing the analysis of data collected from the music curriculum survey and in the

literature review.

Objectives-Based Curriculum. Most teachers are familiar with an objectives-basedcurriculum model. This is a four-phase process that involves (1) developingobjectives, (2) sequencing those objectives (often referred to as “scope andsequence”), (3) designing activities to meet the objectives (lesson plans), and (4)designing evaluation tools to assure that learning takes place (tests). Although thismodel has been pervasive in curriculum theory, many scholars have criticized thisdesign, suggesting that it is too linear and that real teaching does not occur in such aclear-cut line. Good teachers often mix up the phases of this design. For example,meaningful assessment of student learning does not always occur at the end of alinear process; it can occur throughout teaching and learning. Good teachers do notfollow a restrictive sequence; rather, they adjust their teaching to the needs of aspecific context. Real classrooms are multi-dimensional, and forcing curriculum intoa linear model is a compromise. However, in many school districts, the guidelines forwriting curriculum will require an objectives-based model. Music curriculum writerswho use this design should be sure to have a healthy combination of designs to ensurethat the curriculum is meaningful to teachers.

Literature-Based Curriculum. Some music educators have suggested that the musicliterature chosen for a class or an ensemble is the curriculum. In general curriculumtheory, some scholars recommend a curriculum based on the project method, whichcould be compared to designing instruction around particular musical literature. Thistype of curriculum works very well for performance-based courses. However, someof the curriculum should be focused on the other designs as well.

Skills-Based Curriculum. A ‘skills base’ refers to what students will do musically.These skills should not be confused with what they might be expected to know about

6

music (‘knowledge base’). Skills include musical behaviors—singing, moving, orplaying on instruments—and musical concepts such as tonality and meter. Skills-based objectives do not include attitudes or preferences about music, but rather thestudents' abilities to sing, move, or play within a specific musical context. Assessmenttools must be designed to measure musical skills, as well as knowledge.

Knowledge-Based Curriculum. Many music curricula focus heavily on the knowledgebase (musical terms, knowledge of music theory and history, etc.). Although this is animportant part of music class, the music curriculum writer should be careful tobalance knowledge with skills.

Grade-Age-Related Curriculum. One important decision that the curriculum writermust make is how to sequence the curriculum designs discussed in the above section.Will you suggest certain objectives or benchmarks for each grade level? Do studentsbring such a variety of different experiences to the classroom that the sequence ofinstruction should be skills-based instead of grade- or age-related? What suggestionscan you make in your curriculum document to help teachers deal with individualdifferences among students in their classes?

Published Music Series. Commercially published materials based on a scope and

sequence designed for music education. These materials generally contain a teacher book,

resource materials, student books or reproducible materials, and audio recordings.

Delimitations Of The study

Only elementary and middle school, music educators were asked to participate in the

survey. Due to differences in identification of elementary and middle school, grade levels

across the districts surveyed, participants were asked to indicate all grade levels taught. This

distinction was necessary since most elementary schools assign students to one primary

contact teacher whereas, most middle schools assign students to teachers by content area.

Curriculum connections require some form of collaboration between disciplines. Access or

lack of access to content area teachers may affect the music teachers’ ability to integrate

curriculum.

7

Limitations

The time of year the survey was distributed (during preparation time for winter or

holiday programs) may have affected the number of music teachers who returned the survey.

In addition, the number of participants may have been affected by the use of email as the

main distribution and data collection method as some teachers may have been unable to

complete the survey due to the lack of technology experience.

Significance of the Study

During my twenty years of teaching experience, I have often wondered how other

music teachers decide whether to connect their music curriculum to other content areas. In

discussions with other music teachers and teacher training professors many theories,

concepts, positions, and opinions have been explored. While these discussions were

interesting and somewhat helpful, no definitive plan or rationale was discovered. There are

no set rules as to how to, or even if it is important to, develop a connected music curriculum.

Many authorities on curriculum development have written journal articles and books on the

development of music curriculum, integrated, and not integrated. For every opinion

expressed there seemed to be an equally compelling opposing opinion. Due to this lack of

universal agreement, I believe there is a need to investigate if and how teachers develop their

music curriculum and content area connections. By surveying active music teachers, I hope

to discover their perceptions as to the positive, negative, or neutral effect of connecting their

music curricula. The data collected will be used to re-evaluate my current music curriculum.

This study will benefit the participants as well as the researcher. To complete the survey the

participants will need to review or analyze their own curriculum. I hope that the data

collected will provide guidance for future curriculum development.

8

Participants will receive a copy of the final project if requested. Other music

educators may be interested in learning how and why their peers decide whether to make

music curriculum connections. This information may also intrigue elementary classroom

teachers interested in integrating music curricula with the content subjects they teach.

9

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Curriculum development has long been an area of discussion in all educational

disciplines. Historically, educators and scholars have disagreed as to a definitive definition of

curriculum. Wing (1992) discusses this issue in her chapter entitled “Curriculum and Its

Study” in the Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and Learning. She begins with the

following:

There is no “method” of curriculum discovery, any more than there is a method ofexploring the jungle or falling in love. There is just understanding something aboutjungles, love, and school curricula, and the use of a motley collection of skills,disciplines of thought and ideas to make progress in them. There is no “conceptualsystem” to guide the decision-making.

Music educators are not in agreement concerning the development of music

curricula. In speaking with music teachers, I have discovered that some schools do not even

have a written music curriculum. In those cases song lists, or published music series serve as

the curricula and instruction guides. This lack of consensus is most likely due to the variety

of music education philosophies held by music educators and taught in colleges and

universities. Therefore, there exists a variety of opinions concerning the connection,

correlation, and integrations of disciplines within the general music education curriculum.

However, most music teachers would agree that to be effective, educators must

evaluate learning styles and the needs of multi-modal, multi-level learning children. Based on

that evaluation, they develop teaching strategies to accommodate those needs. This is as far

as the agreement goes. Philosophy and opinion vary greatly concerning curriculum

connections and integration. I have found through my music instruction and contact with my

peers that some music educators agree that interdisciplinary instruction and a connected

10

curriculum can offer multi-modal and multi-level learning opportunities. Developing a

curriculum connection between the disciplines mathematics, reading, language arts, social

studies, science, and music could be beneficial to both student and teacher.

These connections are created for many reasons. The most recent motivation

suggested by research, as examined by Schaefer (1998), is that simultaneously utilizing

reading and music concepts and curricula can stimulate the artistic and academic

hemispheres of the brain. This increase in brain function and activity is expected to increase

learning and skills development. (Richards, 2005) While the brain research may be recent,

the concept of utilizing “multiple intelligences” proposed by Gardner in 1983 is not new. In

his article, “Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Music Educator Concerns”, Wiggins (2001)

comments that:

Interdisciplinary instruction is a recurring curricular trend that has once again becomepopular. Provoked perhaps by Howard Gardner's work on multiple intelligences orFrances Rauscher's work on what has come to be known as "The Mozart Effect,"teachers--and music teachers in particular--are being asked to integrate their teachingacross disciplines. As this approach grows in popularity, it is important to considerwhat it will mean to both educators and students engaged in these efforts.

National standards, relatively new in the field of education, I believe, should also be

considered when exploring rationale for integrating curriculum. The development of national

standards has created a type of “relationship standard” between disciplines. For instance,

Barrett (2001) writes:

The National Standards for Music Education include two versions of this idea:“Understanding relationships between music, the other arts, and disciplines outsidethe arts” (Content Standard 8) and “Understanding music in relation to history andculture” (Content Standard 9). Similar standards from other disciplines also addressmusic, such as this excerpt from the Curriculum Standards for the Social Studies thatapplies to the early grades: "Describe ways in which language, stories, folktales,music, and artistic creations serve as expressions of culture and influence behavior of

11

people living in that culture." These statements remind us that, although educationalinstitutions segment knowledge into separate packages called “subjects,” deepunderstanding often depends upon the intersections and interactions of the disciplines.

It has been my experience that budget cuts (affecting music, art, and sports programs)

have influenced integrated curriculum development. Some music teachers feel that by

including curriculum connections in their programs they can justify the validity of spending

money on continued public music education. Brophy (1994) states this opinion in Making the

Elementary Music Program Essential:

The primary aim of music education continues to be the quality teaching of qualitymusic. The defensibility of the elementary music program can, however, be greatlyimproved by music educators willing to acknowledge that their jobs are no longer justto teach music, but also to assist in teaching subjects such as math, reading, science,social studies, and English. When music specialists accept this responsibility andbegin to show that they can enrich and reinforce the learning in the generalclassroom, classroom teachers and administrators will realize that there is somethinghappening in the music room that is vital to the curriculum as a whole.

Not all music educators agree that integrating curriculum is a positive or necessary

approach to the issue of music curriculum. Ellis and Fouts (2001) approach interdisciplinary

curricula from research base ideology.

Because research on interdisciplinary curricula in general is limited, it is difficult tofind solid evidence that music instruction integrated with other content areas producesmore positive results than does a traditional approach. In spite of the testimonials ofenthusiasts, there do not appear to be well-crafted studies that support the efficacy ofintegration, no doubt due in part to the very real difficulties involved in conductingsuch research. The research efforts in this area have been rudimentary andexploratory or qualitative in nature, but this is typical of early research on manyeducational approaches where definitions, procedures, and outcomes are unclearlydefined or are still evolving. Perhaps in time, more sophisticated research willemerge. Until then, the decision to adopt an integrated approach will have to be madeon the basis of something other than clear empirical evidence.

At this point in time, we feel that the claims made in the name of interdisciplinarycurriculum are expansive and may only raise hopes beyond reasonable expectations.If a teacher decides to approach the music curriculum from an interdisciplinary

12

perspective, we recommend that he or she do so for reasons of collegiality andrealworld applications. However, if he or she is expecting that such a move will resultin higher test scores or better music performance, we can only say that the evidence istentative. The foregoing claims are at present largely unsupported, but they should notbe dismissed out of hand. Rather, they should be treated as important hypotheses forsome focused, quality research. For the music educator, a good place to begin is witha thoughtful consideration of the wins and losses, with what has to be given up andleft out in order to integrate and with what might be gained by doing so.

In discussions I have had with other music educators; I have discovered many who

believe that simply teaching music for the sake of teaching music is enough. They feel there

is no additional need to connect the music curriculum to any other discipline. Wiggins and

Wiggins (1997) clearly express this position when they state:

A well-designed music curriculum grows out of the teacher's assessment of themusical needs of his or her students. Music teachers choose music examples that aremost appropriate for teaching the concepts their students need to experience at aparticular point in the scheme of the semester. Music is selected because it has thestructural simplicity or clarity necessary to help students formulate understandings ofparticular musical ideas. These criteria might or might not be readily found in themusic of a particular historical era or in a song about a dinosaur. The criteria areobliterated when the music teacher uses a basal reader story as the basis for theselection of materials for a music lesson. In such cases, the music teacher is beingasked to compromise his or her choice of appropriate curricular materials to meet theneeds of another discipline, which results in the sacrificing of opportunities to helpstudents grow in their understanding of musical ideas.

Some music educators believe a combination of these two conflicting philosophies is

the best way to approach the integration of music curricula. Barrett (2001) describes this

method of integration in this manner:

A comprehensive music education embraces valid interdisciplinary relationships.These relationships infuse the performance, description, and creation of music withmeaningful associations to art, literature, history, cultural studies, and othercomplementary disciplines. Generalizations about music and its relationship to othersubjects are a starting point, but a more productive way of thinking about theseconnections can be achieved by studying specific musical works. The centerpiece ofthe music curriculum is a stylistically diverse, ever-changing body of musicalliterature. Teachers use these works to teach musical concepts, to develop

13

musicianship, to foster deep understanding, and to invite students to value music. Toknow a work fully, with integrity, requires teachers and students to understand themultiple dimensions of a work.

After reviewing a significant amount of the literature on the subject of connecting

music curriculum with other content area curriculum, there appears to be no consensus

among music educators as to the need for curriculum connections. After researching the

issue, it is evident that sufficient documented studies and data are not available to

substantiate claims of positive outcome due to integrated curricula. However, there is enough

interest in the curriculum connection issue to study its perceived potential benefits, and

which connections are most beneficial.

14

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

Subjects

The survey for this study was distributed to a sample population of 112 music

teachers who have been hired by public, elementary schools in the school districts in Brown,

Calumet, Manitowoc, Sheboygan, and Winnebago Counties. Eleven teachers (10%)

completed this survey. The participants were all above the age of 21, predominantly female,

and predominantly of white European decent. The data from these surveys was analyzed and

presented in Chapter 4.

Survey Design

The survey (See Appendix B) was designed to illicit information from active music

teachers concerning the development of their existing music curriculum. The three research

questions: who decides what music curriculum is used, what is the curriculum based on and

what is the rationale for any curriculum connections, are addressed within the survey.

Six questions were asked concerning background information about the teachers’ years of

teaching experience, current teaching assignments, full or part-time status, and classroom

locations. Four questions referred to collaboration with classroom teachers, current

curriculum series in use, and teachers’ perceptions about connecting music curriculum to

classroom curriculum. Six more questions were formulated to discover the extent to which

the participants were currently making curriculum connections and the teachers' perceived

success or failure of those experiences.

Questions number one and six of the current curriculum connections section of the

survey were the only questions to include a Likert Scale (1-Easiest, 3-Moderate Challenge, 5-

15

Hardest or 1-Strongly Agree, 2-Somewhat Agree, 3-Neither Agree nor Disagree, 4-

Somewhat Disagree, 5-Strongly Disagree respectively) for participant responses. All other

responses used drop-down menus, check boxes, or open response blanks to allow participants

to indicate their comments. The participants were instructed to save and attach the completed

survey and then return it via an email reply. If paper copies of the survey were requested, the

survey was redesigned to include multiple-choice responses to replace the electronic drop-

down boxes, and space was provided for written comments.

Distribution and Collection of Survey

Elementary and middle school music teachers within the five county study area were

invited (See Appendix A) to complete the survey concerning what curricula are being used

and how they were developed. The Internet and email and the postal mail were utilized to

distribute and collect the survey. If the desired participants did not have the ability to open

the email attachment survey or return the completed survey via the Internet, I offered to mail

the surveys with a postage-paid, self-addressed, return envelope. A letter of introduction,

explanation, and consent was included with the survey. The accompanying letter clearly

informed the potential participants that by completing and returning the survey they were

giving informed consent to participate in the study.

Each participant completed and returned the distributed survey, via email or postal

mail. I was the only person interacting with participants. All data from this study will be kept

in a filing cabinet in my home for at least five years. The surveyed data was compiled,

analyzed, and graphed or charted.

16

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS

In this chapter, I will report the findings of the completed surveys (See attachment B).

All 16 questions are addressed and interpreted. The teachers’ comments are summarized

following the coverage of the data. The Curriculum Connection Survey garnered these

results.

Background Information:

1. How many years have you been teaching?

One teacher (9%) had taught for five to seven years. Two teachers (18%) had taught

for 11-15 years. Two (18%) had taught for 16-20 years. Six (55%) of the participants

had taught for more than 21 years. Participants with more years of teaching

experience were more likely to complete the survey.

2. Please, check all grades levels you are currently teaching. (Pre-K through 12th Grade)

All but one (10 out of 11 or 91%) taught at least grades three, four, and five. Seven

out of 11 participants (64 %) taught all grades kindergarten through sixth grade. All

grades Pre-K through Grade 8 were indicated on the survey. Those participants not

teaching middle school were more inclined to make curriculum connections.

3. Do you currently work part or full time?

All 11 respondents (100%) work full time. A reasonable interpretation of this data

would be that full time teachers have more access to classroom teachers and

therefore, more opportunities to contact and/or collaborate with classroom teachers.

17

4. Do you travel between rooms, buildings, schools, or districts?

Six of the 11 teachers (55%) never travel.

5. How often do you travel?

Two teachers (18%) travel 2 days per week. One teacher (9%) travels three days per

week. Two teachers (18%) travel once a day. Traveling teachers had less time to

contact the other classroom teachers.

6. Do you have your own music room?

All of the 11 participants (100%) have their own room. One (9%) teacher who

teaches elementary and middle school shares a room with the middle school choir.

One (9%) of the teachers who travels between buildings has a music room in one

building but must meet in the gym at the other building. Since all of the participants

had an established music room, it did not appear to influence the inclusion of

curriculum connections.

18

Curriculum Information:

1. Do you have the ability to contact or meet with the classroom teachers?

Of the 11 respondents, 10 (91%) have the ability to contact or meet with classroom

teachers. Even though teacher contact was available, teachers felt there was not

enough time to fully discuss and implement curriculum connections.

2. Do you collaborate with classroom teachers concerning your music programs ormusic activities based on classroom themes or units?

Six of the 11 (55%) do collaborate with the classroom teachers. Five (45%) do not

collaborate. Teachers that valued an integrated curriculum made the time to

collaborate with classroom teachers, even though they commented that their time was

limited.

3. Do you use a commercially published music series or curriculum? If yes, pleaselist which series you currently use.

Out of the 11 participants, nine (82%) used a published series. One of the teachers

(9%) used the Kodály Method of music instruction and did not use a published music

series. The most popular series (five of 11 or 45%) was Share the Music by

MacMillan. The second most used series (three of 11 or 27%) was Making Music by

Silver Burdett. The Third series listed (one of 11 or 9%) was The Music Connection

by Silver Burdett. The fourth series listed (one of 11 or 9%) was Music and You by

McGraw Hill. There was not a large variety of published music series in use in the

public school system within Southeastern Wisconsin.

19

4. Which statement best describes your thoughts on connecting music curriculum toclassroom curriculum?

0 ( 0%) I have never given it any thought2 (18%) I have considered it but I am too busy to act upon my thoughts1 ( 9%) I have no contact with classroom teachers0 ( 0%) I have never connected my curriculum but I would like to1 ( 9%) I am planning to include it in my curriculum7 (64%) I currently intentionally connect my curriculum with curriculum from other

content areas.0 ( 0%) Other thoughts I’ve had about connecting the curriculum include:

Six of the seven teachers (86%) that currently intentionally make curriculum

connections have been teaching for 20 years or more. Participants with more teaching

experience tended to consider and plan more curriculum connections.

20

Connecting the Curriculum Information:

If you connect your curriculum to other content areas:

1. Please rate the difficulty level to make a connection for each area.

Teacher Response Based on Perceived Level of Difficulty

Content Area Easy Somewhat

EasyModerateChallenge

SomewhatHard Hard

1 2 3 4 5Social Studies 9 1 1 0 0Language Arts 7 0 4 0 0Reading 7 1 3 0 0Science 0 0 6 2 3Math 3 0 5 1 2Other: Art 2 1 0 0 0Other: Phy. Ed. 0 1 0 0 0Other: History 1 0 0 0 0

Nine out of 11 teachers (82%) felt that Social Studies was the easiest subject to use to

make curriculum connections with the music curriculum. Seven of the 11 participants

(64%) felt that Language Arts and Reading were equally as easy to connect. Science

and Math were perceived to be at least moderately challenging by no less than eight

of 11 respondents (73%). Social Studies appeared to be the easiest subject to

integrate. The historical nature of song material, the fact that composers included in

the curriculum come from a variety of countries around the world, and the reality that

elementary songs tend to relate aspects of people, places, and things familiar to

children, may account for this perception.

21

2. What influences the connections you select? (Select all that apply)

Teacher Response Based on Connection InfluencesTotal Participants--11 Selection9 (82%) Ease of making the connection10 (91%) Request from classroom teacher7 (64%) The songs in your published music series1 ( 9%) Request from parents2 (18%) Directives from administration0 ( 0%) Other (Please list:)

Requests from the classroom teachers {10 of 11 (91%)}, ease in making the

connections {nine of 11 (82%)}, and access to the song material through a published music

series {seven of 11 (64%)} are the most influential motivations for making curriculum

connections.

3. Have you had unsuccessful attempts?

Nine of the 11 teachers (82%) did not have any unsuccessful attempts at connecting

the curriculum. Two of the 11 teachers (18%) did have unsuccessful attempts. The

reasons given for unsuccessful attempts included lack of contact time with classroom

teachers and the lack of planning time available. Due to the lack of time available,

planning fewer connections seemed to increase their ability to make those

connections successful.

22

4. Which connections have been most successful?

Teacher Response Based on Perceived Success RateTotal Number of Participants = 11 Content Area 7 (64%) Social Studies/History 2 (18%) Language Arts—Literature & Reading 2 (18%) Math 1 ( 9%) Physical Education 1 ( 9%) Other—Adding Instrumental Activities 1 ( 9%) Talking with Classroom Teachers

By a large margin, 64% of the respondents felt that Social Studies (Wisconsin history,

historic holidays, civil rights, slavery, and the Civil War in particular) was the content

area that had the most positive perceived success rate for making connections to the

general music curriculum. This corresponded with the teachers’ perception that Social

Studies was the easiest subject to integrate.

5. Have you seen improved student performance because of the connections?

Of the 11 participants, seven (64%) indicated they did perceive improvements, two

(18%) believed there was no improvement, and two (18%) did not give a response. A

majority of the teachers felt curriculum connections increased student interest, which

was perceived as improved student performance.

23

6. Please rate these statements. (1 = Strongly agree, 2 = Somewhat agree, 3 = Neither agreenor disagree, 4 = Somewhat disagree, 5 = Strongly disagree)

Statement 1 & 2Agree

3Neutral

4 & 5Disagree

All curriculum connections must be solely based on musiccontent skills or concepts.

4(36%)

2(18%)

5(45%)

Curriculum connections are only useful if they first considerthe musical components and then other content areaconsiderations.

4(36%)

1(9%)

6(55%)

Curriculum connections do not need to be planned.“Teachable moments” and incidental overlaps in curriculaprovide ample opportunities to make sufficient curriculumconnections.

6(55%)

2(18%)

3(27%)

Teaching music for music’s sake alone is my foremostcriteria for curriculum development.

3(27%)

3(27%)

5(45%)

Connecting the curriculum to other content areas is the bestway to keep and validate music education in the publicschools.

5(45%)

2(18%)

4(36%)

I do not have enough time to make connections to othercontent areas.

4(36%)

2(18%)

5(45%)

Fifty-five percent of the participants felt that curriculum connections did not need to

consider musical components first and that “teachable moments” provided sufficient

opportunities for connections. Forty-five percent of the participants felt that music content

did not need to be the sole basis for connections, teaching music for music’s sake alone was

not their foremost criteria for curriculum development, connecting the curriculum to other

content areas was the best way to keep music education in the public schools, and that there

was enough time to make curriculum connections. Even though 45% of the teacher felt there

was enough time to make curriculum connections, they felt they did not have enough time to

collaborate with classroom teachers to make additional connections.

24

Analysis of Teacher Comments

Based on the comments the participants added to their completed surveys I was able

to glean several pertinent observations. Years of teaching experience did seem to affect the

increased amount of and desire to make curriculum connections. Most teachers commenting

agreed that collaboration was very important to the successful integration of curricula. Not

enough time to collaborate with classroom teachers greatly influenced their inability to make

additional curriculum connections. In response to the question, if the music teacher

collaborates with the classroom teachers, several teachers responded with a statement similar

to this, “No – I do if a request is made. My time is limited.”

The teachers’ comments indicated that while they currently were making curriculum

connections they were concerned about also providing all of the instruction required to meet

state music standards. Due to time limitations and restrictions, they felt that state music

standards should remain their teaching priority. Incorporating curriculum connections should

not compromise these standards. Several of the participants agreed with the hindrance of time

limitations and necessity for covering the standards based material. However, only one

commenting teacher also considered curriculum connections to be “added activities” and not

a part of the music curriculum. “Due to time restraints, I have difficulty getting in the

standards based music covered and I think this material must come first. Also, with the

performance demands, even less time is available for additional activities.”

Of the participating teachers, one did not use a published curriculum but elected to

use the Kodály Method of music instruction. (It is my understanding, from my undergraduate

training at a Silver Lake College in Manitowoc, WI, that this method is based on folk song

material and a skills content sequence. While using the Kodály Method the music teacher

25

would design any curriculum connections since they are not included in the content

sequence.) All of the published series sited incorporate suggested curriculum connections.

According to the teachers comments these connections were neither always pertinent nor

applicable to the classroom curriculum content of their schools. Most of the connections they

did make were requested by classroom teachers and/or self-designed.

The teachers also commented that while not assessed or tested, student performance

did improve. This improvement was determined by the teacher’s observation of increased

student interest. One teacher commented, “Any correlation between subjects increases

student understanding.” Another teacher stated, “I have not assessed this (improved student

performance), but usually the interest level increases.” Increased student interest was

perceived as a benefit to the student and the teacher.

These results answered the three research questions posed for this study. They

provided the basis for the conclusions and recommendations made concerning the

importance of making curriculum connections between music and other content areas.

26

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS

This chapter reviews the three research questions and answers them based on the review of

literature and the completed survey responses. The conclusions drawn from the survey data

are presented in this chapter as well.

Research Questions

• Who decides what music curriculum should include and how is this decided?

• Is the curriculum based on a particular method of instruction (i.e., Kodály, Orf,Suzuki, etc.) or a published music series?

• What is the rationale for connecting the curriculum to content areas, if it is connected?

The question, who decides what curriculum should include and how is that decided,

was not revealed directly by the teachers’ responses to the survey questions. The use of a

published series does not necessarily mean that the teachers follow the complete scope

and sequence or that they use every lesson plan suggested. Their comments did reveal

that they make their own curriculum connections and that they are trying to meet the state

music standards of instructions. The standards are not a curriculum design but the

teachers are trying to identify and address all of the standards within their curriculum.

This indicates to me that they are still developing their own curriculum based on four

main factors. These factors include a published music series or some specific music

method of instruction; the state music standards; a content derived from the song

selections; and song material selected for performances (holiday programs, special

events, etc.). Of the 11 teachers surveyed, seven (64%) are attempting to add curriculum

connections based on these four main factors.

27

The answer to the first research question is; the teachers make the final decisions

about curriculum. The teachers are influenced by the music series, state standards, content,

and song material, yet, what they actually teach is generally their own unique design. This

also answers the second research question concerning the basis for the curriculum. Indeed,

the published series or method of music instruction selected is important to the curriculum

design however, it is not the sole consideration. The additional three main factors are also

involved.

What is the rationale for making curriculum connections? This answer was revealed

in the survey by the responses to the questions and the comments the teachers gave. Student

motivation and increased interest level was the main consideration. The lack of time to

prepare and collaborate with the classroom teachers was listed as the greatest deterrent to

developing an integrated music curriculum. This lack of time also greatly influenced the

types of connections the music teachers felt they could successfully include in their music

curriculum.

From the data collected from the survey, I concluded that the teachers valued a

connected curriculum but did not have solid evidence of improved student performance.

They had difficulty justifying the time needed to make the connections even though they

believed the integration to be beneficial to their students. Some of the related literature

addressed this conflict of time verses benefit. Those teachers that were currently making

curriculum connections were quite confident that increased student interest and motivation

did have a positive affect on the students. Due to the lack of current studies addressing the

benefit of curriculum connections, the debate remains unresolved. Unless more data is

collected to support either side of the issue, teachers will have to continue to develop

28

curriculum based on their observations of their students. The teacher’s personal, elevated

interest level may have a significant impact on student learning and increased interest.

Further study of the impact of curriculum connections could assist teachers in developing a

music curriculum that is more beneficial to increased student learning.

Recommendations

Investigating classroom teacher, parent, and student opinion would also provide

important perspectives toward the issue of an integrated music curriculum. Music teachers

focus on the music curriculum and its content. We may miss important factors outside this

focus area. Other content area teachers can provide needed insight to useful information

about their curriculum. Parents and students can provide needed insight as to their

perceptions of music curriculum, and student performance.

In preparing for this study, I needed to re-evaluate my current curriculum. This

process allowed me to review the curriculum connections I developed. Some connections I

found to be outdated or no longer pertinent to current classroom instruction. I was able to

“clean-up” my curriculum and therefore was able to include new connections that had been

requested by classroom teachers. I wanted to add these connections but felt the tug of time

constraints. Now I could make the desired additions.

Balancing standards within an integrated curriculum is challenging but an important

aspect of curriculum development. The debate over teaching music for music’s sake alone, as

opposed to justifying the existence of public school music education, directly relates to this

tricky balance. The discovery of potential student benefit when connecting the curriculum

would assist teachers in determining the validity of integrating their curriculum.

29

Since the teachers’ greatest deterrent to making curriculum connections was the lack

of time to plan and collaborate, teachers must bring this to the attention of the administration.

Requesting time for planning and collaboration might be given more importance if there

were studies to support the benefit to students and to teachers, music and classroom teachers

alike. Music teachers should encourage classroom teachers to request this planning time as

well.

Music teachers that currently have an integrated curriculum perceive the connections

to be beneficial to their students. Additional studies about the use of connections could

validate the teachers’ current perceptions. These studies could also reveal that the benefit of

increased interests is enough to support making the connections. Without more investigation,

teachers will most likely continue to make curriculum connections with uncertainty and lack

of conviction. Teachers not making connections would not be motivated to attempt to

integrate their curriculum.

I encourage music teachers to involve themselves with classroom student-teachers in

regards to the possibilities of making classroom curriculum connections to the music

curriculum. We need to be involved in shaping the perceptions of future classroom teachers

as they relate to music in our schools. This involvement should not be limited to student-

teachers but it should include all classroom teachers. If we do not express the importance of

music education, who will?

Assuming that increased student interest increases student performance, and that

curriculum connections increase student interest, curriculum connections provide a positive

benefit to students. Pre-service and teacher training programs should consider the need for

utilizing curriculum connections. If teachers are taught how to make connections, they will

30

be more apt to make connections. If teachers do not know how or why they should make

curriculum connections, they are unable to take advantage of a beneficial tool.

Questions for Further Study

After reviewing and analyzing the collected data, I would revise the survey to glean

more information about why the teacher made the curriculum decisions they did make.

Specific questions about the motivation and rationale for selecting their published series

would provide useful information. A more in-depth survey to probe the specific types of

connections that music teachers currently make could provide useful information as to which

subjects provide the best connection opportunities. Was the teacher taught how to connect the

curriculum, and if so, through what venue did this occur, are questions that would offer

insight as to how to improve teacher education and how to encourage the integration of

music curricula. Questions to determine classroom teachers’, parents’, students’, and

administrators’ opinions about integrated curricula would offer helpful perspectives to the

issue of connecting the music curricula to other content areas.

Further study may never resolve the continuing conflicts among music teachers

concerning the issue of connecting the music curriculum. It will however, provide more

information to assist teachers in forming their opinions as to why a connected curriculum

may be beneficial to their students. It may also indicate which connections offer the greatest

benefit to students and to both the classroom and music teacher. A study designed to

correlate brain research, such as the Mozart Effect, with increased student interest and

improved student learning could provide the ability to document the value of an integrated

curriculum.

31

Overall, the results of this study provide pertinent information for the evaluation and

the development of an integrated music curriculum. It reveals that experienced, elementary

music teachers value curriculum connections and are willing to make the time to make them.

According to those surveyed, music teachers feel that there is not enough time to collaborate

with classroom teacher. However, they believe curriculum connections are important enough

to create them despite the time limitations. Based on these perceptions, I believe it is

reasonable to conclude that making connections between music curricula and other content

areas is an important aspect of the development of music curricula. Further study of the

benefit to students and to music and classroom teachers is appropriate and necessary.

32

REFERENCES

Brophy, J. & Allemann, J. (1996). Powerful Social Studies for Elementary Students. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Publishers.

Gardner, H. (1983). The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York, Basic Books.

Wing, L. B. (1992). Curriculum Writing in Music. New York, Schimer Books.

Barrett, J. R. (2001). Interdisciplinary Work and Musical Integrity. Music EducatorsJournal, March, Vol. 87 Issue 5, p27.

Brophy, T. (1994). Making the Elementary Music Program Essential. Music EducatorsJournal, September, Vol. 81 Issue 3, p29.

Conway, C. (2002). Curriculum Writing in Music. Music Educators Journal, May, Vol.88 Issue 6, p54.

Ellis, A. K. & Fouts, J. T. (2001). Interdisciplinary Curriculum: The Research Base.Music Educators Journal, March, Vol. 87 Issue 5, p22.

Kite, T. S. & Smucker, T. (1994). Using Program Music for Interdisciplinary Study.Music Educators Journal, March, Vol. 80 Issue 5, p27.

McClung, A. C. (2000) Extramusical skills in the Music Classroom. Music EducatorsJournal, March, Vol. 86 Issue 5, p32.

Snyder, S. (2001). Connection, Correlation, and Integration. Music Educators Journal,March, Vol. 87 Issue 5, p32.

Wiggins, R. A. (2001). Interdisciplinary Curriculum Music Educator Concerns. MusicEducators Journal, March, Vol. 87 Issue 5, p40.

Wiggins, J. & Wiggins, R. (1997). Integrating Through Conceptual Connections. MusicEducators Journal, January, Vol. 83 Issue 4, p38.

Richards, M. E. (2005). Left Vs. Right Brain Modes. www.educationthroughmusic.com/brain.htm.

Shafer, A. (1998). Research Shows Correlation Between Music and Language Mechanisms. Presentation of the Society for Neuroscience in Los Angeles. As reported by The National Association for Music Education, November. www.menc.org/information/advocate/brain.html.

33

APPENDIX A

Dear Music Teacher,My name is Kerrie Levenduski. I teach general music in Sheboygan Falls, WI. I am conducting asurvey about music curriculum as a part of the completion of my Masters in Curriculum andInstruction through the University of Oshkosh. I hope you will have time to participate in this (online)survey which should take approximately 10 minutes to complete. If you are willing to participate,please fill out the survey and return it to me by November 8, 2005. If you are interested in the results,I would be happy to send an overview of my findings to you.

If you are unable to participate, I would greatly appreciate a simple, “no” in the subject line, reply.No other message or explanation is necessary.

If you are able to participate, please read the following information before completing the survey. Theproject title is The Importance of Connection a Music Curriculum to Aspects of the classroomCurriculum in the Elementary School.

1. Please respond before Tuesday, November 8, 2005.2. All surveys will be anonymous. No names will appear on any of the surveys. All

survey responses will be separated from the email header attached to an emailmessage.

3. The surveys will remain confidential. I will be the only person with access to thesurvey raw data.

4. Due to the nature of the Internet, complete anonymity and confidentiality cannot beguaranteed. All reasonable efforts will be made to ensure privacy and security ofresponse information.

5. To receive the results of this survey, please add “Results Request” to the emailsubject line.

6. BY COMPLETING AND RETURNING THIS SURVEY, YOU ARE GIVINGINFORMED CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS STUDY.

Survey items include multiple-choice, fill in boxes, or yes/no responses.Most items on the survey allow for comments. Please feel free to be asdetailed or as basic as you deem necessary. To open the survey, double clickon the attachment. To complete the survey, click on the corresponding box toselect a drop down menu option, to mark the box with an X, or to type inyour response or comment. You will need to "save" the survey, when prompted,to close it and then return the survey as a reply email.

Please feel free to forward this email (survey and introduction/consent) to any music teacher (inWisconsin) you think might be willing to complete the survey and participate in the study.

Thank you for taking the time to complete and return this survey.

Kerrie Levenduski--Music Teacher Grades 1-4Sheboygan Falls Elementary SchoolOne Alfred Miley AvenueSheboygan Falls, WI 53085(920) 467-7820 levenduski@sheyboyganfalls.k12.wi.us

34

APPENDIX B

Curriculum Connection Survey

Background Information: (Click on boxes for drop down menu/to select box/to access comment boxes)

1. How many years have you been teaching? Click for number of years2. Please check all grade levels you are currently teaching.

PreK K 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th

10th 11th 12th 3. Do you currently work part or full time? Click for options4. Do you travel between rooms, buildings, schools, or districts?

Click for options5. How often do you travel?

Click for options6. Do you have your own music room?

Yes No Please comment if necessary:

Curriculum Information:

1. Do you have the ability to contact or meet with the classroom teachers?Yes No Please explain:

2. Do you collaborate with classroom teachers concerning your music programs ormusic activities based on classroom themes or units?Yes No Please explain:

3. Do you use a commercially published music series or curriculum? If yes, pleaselist which series you currently use.Yes No Title: Publisher:

4. Which statement best describes your thoughts on connecting music curriculum toclassroom curriculum?

I have never given it any thought I have considered it but I am too busy to act upon my thoughts

I have no contact with classroom teachersI have never connected my curriculum but I would like toI am planning to include it in my curriculumI currently intentionally connect my curriculum with curriculum from

other content areas.Other thoughts I’ve had about connecting the curriculum include:

35

Connecting the Curriculum Information:

If you connect your curriculum to other content areas:

1. Please rate the difficulty level to make a connection for each area.(One = Easiest, Three = Moderate Challenge, Five = Hardest)A. Social Studies Please rate level of difficultyB. Language Arts __C. Reading __D. Science __E. Math __F. Other (Please list and rank: )

2. 3. What influences the connection you select? (Select all that apply)

Ease of making the connection. Request from classroom teacher. The songs in your published music series. Request from parents. Directives from administration. Other (Please list: )

3. Have you had unsuccessful attempts? Yes No If yes, please explain:

4. Which connections have been most successful?Please explain:

5. Have you seen improved student performance because of the connections?Yes No Please explain if yes or no:

6. Please rate these statements. (1 = Strongly agree, 2 = Somewhat agree, 3 = Neither agree nor disagree, 4 = Somewhat disagree, 5 = Strongly disagree)

__ All curriculum connections must be solely based on music content skills or concepts. __ Curriculum connections are only useful if they first consider the musical

components and then other content area considerations. __ Curriculum connections do not need to be planned. “Teachable moments” and incidental overlaps in curricula provide ample opportunities to make sufficient curriculum connections. __ Teaching music for music’s sake alone is my foremost criteria for curriculum development. __ Connecting the curriculum to other content areas is the best way to keep

and validate music education in the public schools. __ I do not have enough time to make connections to other content areas.

(Please save your answers and submit your survey reply. Thank you.)