Measuring Student Growth in the Choral Ensemble – Part I Abby Butler


Educational reform has played a major role in shaping our schools over the past few decades. Current efforts focus on teacher effectiveness and include measures of student growth as an important indicator of teacher success. It is easy to be critical of this new requirement; however, I believe this is an opportunity for us as a profession to validate what it is we do and how our students benefit in ways that administrators, colleagues, parents, and communities can understand. By providing concrete evidence of student learning over time we can legitimize and solidify music’s place as a core curricular subject.


At present, decisions about what criteria will be used to demonstrate student growth and how student achievement will be measured are of primary concern. Student achievement in core subjects such as math and language arts will most likely use pre-existing statewide tests as evidence of growth. Music, and other non-tested subjects such as art, physical education and foreign languages, will need to develop their own measures of student growth. While this is a daunting task, it may also be a blessing in disguise; locally designed measures of assessment will most likely be more meaningful. The purpose of this article is to explore some of the challenges inherent in evaluating students within the ensemble setting and provide suggestions and considerations for developing a viable assessment plan.


Creating Meaningful Assessments


Music teachers choosing to develop their own measures for student growth may want to consult experts in assessment and evaluation to ensure that data to be used are reliable and valid. In statistical terms an instrument is reliable if it produces similar results over time. An instrument is considered valid if it measures what it is supposed to measure. If an instrument is both valid and reliable, then one can be confident that the results provide an accurate measure of achievement. This is important if decisions about a teacher’s effectiveness are going to be attached to these measures.


Another consideration in developing assessment tools is what kind of data will be used to show growth. Data can be represented by numbers (quantitative data), or by words (qualitative data). Standardized tests typically use quantitative data because it is easier to analyze, report, and compare large amounts of information. Qualitative data provides more detailed information but it is usually context specific and not as useful for making inferences or generalizations across groups. Ideally a mix of quantitative and qualitative data will present a more balanced picture of student achievement and understanding than either measure alone.


When attempting to illustrate student growth it is necessary to provide a baseline of where students begin in order to compare the results with what they can do when they exit the program. In it’s simplest form, teachers would administer a pretest to entering students, followed by a posttest administered when they leave the program. The difference between test scores would indicate whether students improved.


26


So what’s the bottom line? When developing assessment instruments, it’s important to make sure they are valid and reliable, include a mix of quantitative and qualitative data, and provide pretest/posttest data that can be compared to show growth over time. Teachers who use multiple and varied assessments will most likely be able to provide a more complete picture of what their students are learning.


ndividual vs. Group Achievement


One of the challenges in assessing students in an ensemble setting derives from the fact that not only is instruction delivered within a group setting but that the product of instruction results as part of a group effort. Unlike teaching in some other subjects, part of what we do is predicated on a collaborative activity. To only use measures of individual student achievement as indicators of a choir teacher’s effectiveness would be an invalid measure. Likewise, to evaluate teacher effectiveness solely based on achievement of the group would also be invalid. To provide an accurate picture of teacher effectiveness within an ensemble setting, evidence of both individual and group growth need to be included.


Planning for Assessment


If this sounds like a lot of work, it is! While it’s easy to become overwhelmed and look for a quick fix or one-size-fits-all solution, I don’t believe it’s in our best interests as a profession to do so. Instead, consider investing time in planning assessments that connect local goals and objectives to state or national standards, reflect access to local resources, and address the needs of individual students. The following steps suggest one way of accomplishing this goal.


First, determine what you want to assess. Evaluating students’ musical skills, knowledge, and understanding will provide a well-rounded picture of student learning. Specific outcomes for each of these three areas should derive from your curriculum in terms of targeted grade level content expectations.


Next, determine the types of assessments most suitable for the outcomes to be measured and align appropriate assessments with the tasks to be evaluated. For example, a performance test using a rubric to document success would be more appropriate than a pencil and paper test for rating students’ ability to sight sing.


At this stage it will be helpful to determine how many assessments you plan to use, when they will occur and who will be assessed. Any baseline tests should be given early on in the school year. For example, if you plan to use the pretest/ posttest format to measure growth, you will need to administer the pretest at the beginning of the academic year, and the posttest at the end of the year or semester. The number of assessments and which students you assess will depend on the size of your program. If you have a large number of students in your program you may decide to formally test only students in certain grades or programs; however, this is a decision that should be made with your principal. Not all assessments need


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29