Measuring Student Growth in the Choral Ensemble –Part 2


Teacher evaluation continues to be


the focus of ongoing conversations regarding educational reform. For better or worse, data driven, high stakes testing will serve as a key component in evaluating teacher success in the classroom. Teachers of academic subjects where participation in state and national testing typically occurs will continue to be evaluated in part on their students’ test scores. However, for teachers in non-tested areas, such as music, data providing evidence of student learning are not as readily available. This may be a good thing if teachers and administrators are willing to take advantage of the opportunity to develop local assessments that reflect student learning. In a brief prepared by the Regional


Educational Laboratory Midwest, the authors identified four guiding principles to help stakeholders develop measures of teacher effectiveness for teachers in non- tested subjects (Garcia and Stephens, 2011). These principles emerged from data based on district, state and federal policy initiatives. Accordingly, successful measures of teacher effectiveness will reflect the following principles: 1) incorporate multiple measures, 2) provide evidence of student growth, 3) are rigorous and comparable, and 4) differentiate among teachers. While each of these principles is


worthy of further discussion, it is not within the scope of this column to do so. Since music is a non-tested subject it follows that information for measuring student growth will be most valuable. Therefore the purpose of this article is to explore different ways of evaluating students’ skills, knowledge, and understanding and to discuss how these ideas may be used to illustrate students’ growth over time.


Measuring Skills Much of what we do in the choral


classroom focuses on helping our singers develop specific skills. Skills involve doing, and as such are probably the easiest to measure. At a basic level either a student can do something or not while


26


at a more advanced level students might be expected to perform the same skill according to specific criteria which in turn can categorize students abilities by competency, (for example, beginning, intermediate, advanced). Typically, choral educators identify


singing and sight singing (aural skills) as primary skills every chorister should develop. Singing skills (vocal technique) can be broken down into multiple sub- sets each focusing on discrete skills that contribute to overall vocal technique. Posture, breathing, diction, tone, and intonation comprise such subsets and in turn can be broken down into yet more specific skills. In addition, performance skills, such as interpretation and other subtleties affecting overall musicianship, can still be assessed even though they are by nature more subjective; however, because of their subjectivity, qualitative rather than quantitative data may yield more meaningful results. Other important skills teachers might want students to acquire and develop include moving to music, for example being able to respond physically to specific aspects of music (beat, phrasing, and interpretive devices) or by performing choreography; creating music either by improvising, arranging, or composing; and reading and notating music. All of the skills and subsets


mentioned above can be assessed. Most assessments can be categorized as either formative or summative. The goal of formative assessments is to monitor student progress towards a specific goal or competency. These assessments are ongoing, that is they occur simultaneously as part of the instructional process; results of these assessments are used to inform instruction. The goal of summative assessments is to provide a measure of a student’s competency or knowledge after instruction is completed; results of these assessments are used to evaluate a program or teacher’s effectiveness. Depending on the purpose of the assessment a variety of tools may be used to provide necessary data.


Abby Butler If your goal were to measure a


student’s achievement at a given point in time, a summative assessment would be most appropriate. Quantitative or numerical data will work well for this type of assessment. Additive rating scales provide an overall evaluation of a specific skill or skill set based on a single score. This score is determined by adding together multiple scores from related sub-categories. For example, an additive rating scale measuring a student’s ability to sight-sing might include separate scores for accuracy of pitches, rhythm, and dynamics. Likewise, single scores for posture, breathing, diction, tone, and intonation can be added together to provide a single score evaluating vocal technique. The value of a single score is that it can be compared with scores from other students to provide information about the class as a whole as well as the individual student’s rank within the class. If instead you want to check


students’ progress over a period of time and you plan to use that information to adjust your instruction, then a formative assessment would be your best choice. In this instance use of a formative rating scale or rubric would be effective and efficient. For example, individual students’ sight-singing performances could be categorized according to pre- determined criteria (1= needs improvement, 2 = developing, 3 = proficient, 4 = exemplary). Ensure that the rating scale is reliable by determining specific guidelines for each category prior to administering the assessment. Whether you use a rating scale or a rubric depends on how the information will be used. A simple rating scale or checklist presents a global assessment of the skill being assessed. Use this if you need to gather information quickly about an individual or group. A well-written rubric can provide both quantitative and qualitative information. Use this if you want to provide meaningful feedback that students can use to guide their progress. Other tools can be developed to


measure students’ skills. Worksheets or


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  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40