FINAL REFLECTION REPORT

INTRODUCTION
My objectives for the ISLP include the following skills: knowing how to construct a major scale, knowing the number of major scales that exist, being able to name a major scale based on the key signature that is given, construct the Circle of Fifths, and being able to list the number of sharps or flats in a given scale when given only its name. All of these ideas contain knowledge and information that is crucial to know when playing in a musical ensemble, and a lot of the information may or may not have been taught at the middle school level (the two classes that I worked with were 9 th grade freshman Concert Bands). Since the students are freshmen, we do not know what their knowledge base is and what skills they possess. Creating an assessment like this allows us to see what tools the students are armed with and which areas to focus on throughout the unit.

FINDINGS
The post-assessment yielded data that was both surprising and expected. Save for a few students, virtually everyone showed some sort of improvement and in most cases, this improvement was impressive. Individually speaking, there was a lot of personal growth that went on. With 38.7% of the students displaying perfect (and improved) scores on the post-test, its evident that student growth (and learning) occurred. There was a similar display of mastery the 8 th hour group as well. 8th hour enjoyed a 31% mastery rate, which is a small bit less than 6th hour. With as much personal growth that was experienced, there was a very small group of student that did not display growth on the post-test as compared to the pre-test. In 6th hour, Students 9 and 29 saw a lower score on their post-test from their pre-test. After discussing their results with them, it was evident that their loss of points occurred due to testing errors rather than the lack of knowledge. They understood what errors they made, and they were given resources to correct their mistakes and to further their learning of the concepts covered in the unit. In 8 th hour, Student 7 was the only one to score lower on the post-test than the pre-test. After a review session with him, things seemed to clear up and become understandable.

FINAL REFLECTION REPORT

Though attention has been paid to those on either side of the academic spectrum, a majority of the students landed in the middle of the pack with improved scores from the post-test. In 6th hour, 26 out of 31 students scored at least a 25 (out of a possible 30) on the post-test, and in 8th hour, 20 out of 29 students scored as high. As per my expectations, I was surprised to see the amount of growth and the high quality of the scores. What is great to see is the growth in regards to question four. Out of a possible 15 points, the average score in 6th hour was 13.47 and the average score in 8th hour was 12.15. This level of success came as a surprise, but after reviewing the method of teaching the concept (the Circle of Fifths), it does fit well. Great care was taken to link the new information of the Circle of Fifths to existing information already covered in the curriculum. By teaching it as an addition to a concept they have experience with rather than a new idea, the students really took hold to that and the data reflects their comprehension. Looking at the data, its evident that there is a gap between the two classes. With 6th hour pulling a 27.49 average and 8th hour posting a 25.4 average, its not a massive gap by any means. However, it is worth noting that despite the similarity between the two classes in terms of size and instrumentation, there is a small gap when it comes to knowledge and ability. In terms of specific outcomes, each of the four unit goals displayed positive growth from the pre-test to the post-test. Unit Goal #1, which was in line with Question 2 on both tests and Question 1 on the pre-test, demonstrated minimal growth in each class (.81 to .87 in 6th hour, and .62 to .65 in 8th hour). Unit Goal #2, which was in line with Question 3, demonstrated promising growth in each class (2.45 to 3.68 in 6th hour, and 2.31 to 3.62 in 8th hour). Unit Goal #3, which was in line with Question 4, demonstrated tremendous growth in each class (3.61 to 13.47 in 6 th hour, and 4.55 to 12.15 in 8th hour). Unit Goal #4, which was in line with Question 5, demonstrated strong growth in each class (1.16 to 2.64 in 6th hour, and 1.08 to 2.1 in 8th hour). The most outstanding growth that was observed was with Unit Goal #3, which was covered in Question 4. The concept of the Circle of Fifths was clearly unknown to the students when they began the unit, but throughout the unit they demonstrated significant understanding and posted remarkable scores on the post-test. Whats also great to see is that this success was enjoyed by each class and not just one

FINAL REFLECTION REPORT

or the other. Despite discussing the difference between the two classes above, each class demonstrated similar growth on each question on the post-test. Conclusion #1: Each class successfully displayed growth within each unit goal. This was discussed a handful of times above, but both the 6th hour and the 8th hour class demonstrated positive growth from the pre-test and the post-test. In some instances, the growth was greater due to the lack of background knowledge with the material (Unit Goal #3, Question 4). However, there was not a single unit goal that the students did grasp. Each of the four unit goals was successfully taught and understood by the students, and the scores from each ensemble reinforce this conclusion. Conclusion #2: The most successfully understood concept was the Circle of Fifths. Its difficult to teach a new concept to students that have little background knowledge going into it. As evident by the low pre-test scores on the Circle of Fifths (3.61 and 4.55 respectively for 6 th and 8th hour), very few students had a solid understanding of the information. But by building off of other information previously discussed, this concept was easily understood and applicable. Its also great to see the jump of growth in both classes with this concept. This concept is something that will assist them throughout their whole career as a musician, and nearly all of them have shown that they understand the concept. Conclusion #3: The most amount of learning occurs when you focus on those who have trouble succeeding. Each class contained a wide variety of skill levels. Some students happened to come in with all of the information, and some students came in with minimal knowledge. After seeing the data, the most effective group at bringing up the class average were those students who didnt quite succeed the first time around. Those students who were the lowest scoring on the pre-test were the ones that I spent my time teaching to. There were a handful of students who past the post-test with flying colors, but they already had all the tools that they needed to be successful. The biggest priority with this unit was bringing those who had the lowest scores up to a level with those who were experiencing some degree of success, and the graphs reinforce the success that nearly all students experienced at the end.

FINAL REFLECTION REPORT

In terms of my instructional methods, I felt that using direct instruction, recording equipment as a tool for self-evaluation, and PowerPoint were three methods that really worked with my students. There was a good variety of instruction between the three of them and they suited the needs of the assignment and the students. For example, when I used the PowerPoint, it was used to serve as a visual representation of the topics that were being covered. All of the information was available at a glance during the lesson. Another really effective method was the use of recording equipment throughout the rehearsal. This software provided the opportunity to record the music during the rehearsal and play back immediately. This process proved invaluable to the students because they were able to listen to their performance and self-evaluate how they did. It was very cool to see a rehearsal guided by student feedback. One method that was somewhat unsuccessful was the use of iPads during individual quizzing. While the use of the iPads was a great way to get individual feedback, there were some technical glitches that got in the way of learning. Some students spent more time trying to get their iPads to work than working on the activity. While I feel that this was ineffective for my unit, the iPads have a lot of potential for the future if the tech glitches become ironed out. For the post test, all of the questions stayed the same except for one. The question that was initially on the pre-test discussed the construction of a major scale in half and whole steps (question one). After a discussion with my co-op, it was decided that the concept was not relevant to their studies and not integral to the curriculum at St. Charles North. Despite a difference in beliefs and ideals, the question was changed to a more relevant question about the order of sharp and flats (BEADGCF). The point total was the same as the previous question, so there was no fluctuation in that regard. However, there was one question that changed in the total number of points possible. Question four was initially worth fifteen points on the pre-test, but after another discussion with my co-op it was decided that the concept would be streamlined even further and require only one answer for the sections that had two possible answers. This change dropped the total amount of points to twentyseven from thirty, and as a result the total scores on the post-test data reflect both the actual score on a scale of twenty-seven points and the projected score on a scale of thirty. The curved score was utilized to create the graphs as to better compare the two sets of data. The concepts addressed stayed the same for the questions on the post-test, but some of the examples were changed to see if the students were able to master the concept and not if they could remember

FINAL REFLECTION REPORT

what they did right (or wrong) on the pre-test. This is particularly the case with question number five, in which different questions were asked within the same concept. The rest of the questions were the same that were asked on the pre-test. This was done as to keep the tests as similar as possible to maximize the quality and relevancy of the data. Going through the results of the pre-assessment, I was not at all surprised to see that there were large achievement gaps between the students. Ive discussed with my co-ops about the various feeder schools that feed into their program and the strengths and weaknesses that are carried from those programs into St. Charles North. As evident by the student by student comparison charts, there were a handful of students that came in with all the necessary knowledge to score highly on the pre-test. In 6th hour, Student 29 scored the highest with a 29 (out of 30 possible points), while Student 15 scored a 26 and Student 18 scored a 25. In 8th hour, even more high achievers were present, with Student 1 scoring a perfect 30 and Students 2 & 6 scoring 28s. Although those particular students have shown that they have a solid foundation with the knowledge, many other students have lots of room to grow. Many of the scores fell in the lower teens and high single digit scores, as evident by the graph. There were even some students who came in with minimal knowledge of the information, scoring as low as zero out of thirty (Student 5, Student 26). Despite the knowledge that most of the students would have failed the exam if it was scored for points, Im confident through my lessons I will be able to lessen the gap between the low achievers and the high achievers. Its interesting to note the differences between the two different classes, however slight they may be. 6th Hour had an average of 12.806, while 8th hour averaged 12.069. These scores are fairly similar, showing that there is a lot of knowledge to be built and that there is plenty of room to grow. Its also interesting to note that although 8th hour had some of the highest scores compared to the 6th hour class; it also had some of the lowest scores as well. Those low scores are the ones to focus on bring on up, because turning a 0 into an 18 can make a huge impact on the overall average in the class. My objective will be to focus my instruction on those students who have less of a knowledge base than those with higher scores - the graphs and scores show that they need my instruction most. The question by question analysis also provided some helpful information. Between the two classes, the breakdown was fairly similar on the success of each question. 6th hour had the edge on Question 1

FINAL REFLECTION REPORT

(4.806 compared to 3.512) and Question 2 (0.806 compared to 0.62), while 8 th hour had a stronger showing on Question 4 (4.555 compared to 3.61). Question 3 and 5 had very similar scores, with 6 th hour having a minimal edge on each question. The most strikingly obvious aspect of the graph is the margin of error on Question 4 there was roughly a nine point difference between the full points and the received points! Most of the instruction that was used was direct instruction. Through my teachings, I made it a point to bring up various student volunteers, question a variety of students, and incorporate student participation to make the experience as involving as possible. In addition to my instruction, I did incorporate a variety of additional instructional methods and materials. I created a visual presentation (PowerPoint) to use in conjunction with my instruction of identifying key signatures. We had a few quizzes throughout the process, so the students got feedback in regards to areas such as key signatures and the order of sharps/flats before they were asked to take the post-test. I also incorporated technology while using the iPad set during one lesson. I created an exercise that the students were able to access and interact with, providing me individual feedback from each student. Looking back on my unit, I feel that I could have utilized a few more techniques other than direct instruction but overall my instruction proved effective for the students.