MENC: The National Association for Music Education

Practice Expectations and Attitudes: A Survey of College-Level Music Teachers and

Students
Author(s): Marilyn J. Kostka
Source: Journal of Research in Music Education, Vol. 50, No. 2 (Summer, 2002), pp. 145-154
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. on behalf of MENC: The National Association for
Music Education
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3345818
Accessed: 01-10-2018 12:40 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3345818?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Sage Publications, Inc., MENC: The National Association for Music Education are
collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Research in
Music Education

This content downloaded from 193.136.56.234 on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:40:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 2002, VOLUME 50, NUMBER 2, PAGES 145-154 145

Two independent groups, one consisting of college-level studio music teachers (n =

127) and the other of music majors (n = 134), completed a written survey contain-
ing 10 questions about attitudes and expectations for practicing music. The ques-
tionnaire was designed to address four major areas of interest: (1) attitudes about
specific music skills, (2) expectations concerning use of practice time, (3) expecta-
tions for routines and strategies for practicing, and (4) attitudes toward practice in
general. Results indicated that teachers expected more weekly practice time to be tak-
ing place than was actually reported by students. Additionally, most teachers
expected that students should follow a specific practice routine, but 55 % of students
indicated that they do not do so; and although nearly all teachers in the survey
stated that they discussed practice strategies with students, 67% of students reported
that practice strategies were not discussed in their studio lessons. Finally, teachers
and students had widely differing views regarding their feelings about practice in
general.

Marilyn J. Kostka, Northern Arizona University

Practice Expectations
and Attitudes:
A Survey of College-Leve
Music Teachers and
Students

Most music teachers and students would likely agree that practic
ing is not only beneficial but also necessary for learning and improv-
ing performance skills. Typically, a student attends a lesson, perform
a routine of technical exercises and repertoire, and receives feedba
from the teacher. The student may or may not be given specifi
guidelines for practicing these skills and/or repertoire, but the
expectation is that practice should take place and, furthermore,
should contribute to better performance at the student's next lesson.
Although there is a paucity of research in this area, some gener
assumptions concerning effective practice strategies have been exam-

Marilyn J. Kostka is an associate professor of music education in the School

Performing Arts, Box 6040, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011; e-m
Marilyn.Kostka@nau.edu. Copyright @ 2002 by MENC: The National Association f
Music Education.

This content downloaded from 193.136.56.234 on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:40:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
146 KOSTKA

ined. Mental practice (imagining the sounds and notation wit

physically performing) is considered by many to be an effective
to improve technical and musical skills. In an early study, Ru
Rabson (1941) reported that mental practice was superior to phys
practice and "overlearning," but later, Ross (1985) determined th
combination of mental practice and physical practice was more b
eficial than was either mental or physical practice alone. Mo
recently, Coffman (1990) compared physical practice, mental
tice, and knowledge of results (aural model) and concluded th
three modes were conducive to improvement of performance ski
but physical practice, either alone or with mental practice, was s
rior to mental practice only.
Another belief among many musicians is that increased amoun
time spent practicing contributes to better performance sk
However, some research indicates more practice time does not
essarily contribute to better performance. Puopolo (1970) deve
and tested self-instructional practice materials for fifth-grade b
ning instrumentalists and concluded that they were more effect
than merely spending time practicing. Other researchers ha
learned that certain behaviors, such as use of an aural model,
result in better performance than practice time alone (Folts,
Wagner, 1975; Zurcher, 1975; Rosenthal, 1984; Rosenthal et
1988). Madsen and Geringer (1981) reported that the use of a
traction index during practice contributed to improved perform
because it caused the students to be more on-task. In a related stu
Geringer and Kostka (1981) discerned that elementary-age p
students using self-assessment forms during practice achieved be
overall performance than did those who were merely keeping tra
of practice time.
From these investigations, it might be concluded that practicin
more effective when there is a combination of mental and ph
practice, and when the student has a specific task or focus of att
tion other than amount of time spent practicing. However, whet
most teachers and students are using this knowledge is questiona
and in at least one study, investigators have ascertained that inst
tion about "good practicing" varies widely from teacher to te
(Barry & McArthur, 1994). These researchers surveyed 94 st
teachers using a questionnaire intended to determine what ins
tions were given to students concerning practicing. Results revea
that although all the teachers said that they "always or almost alw
discussed practicing with their students, there was little agreeme
about specific procedures and instructions.
To gain more information about the latter, Geringer and Ko
(1984) compared verbal reports of college music majors with
observations and found that students tended to overestimate per
mance behavior in the practice room. Actual observations sho
that they averaged 72% of the time in actual practice, 10% in
ting ready" behaviors (e.g., opening instrument cases, hangin
coats), and 18% in off-task activities (e.g., talking to friends, eat

This content downloaded from 193.136.56.234 on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:40:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 147

The current investigation was intended as an examination of

expectations and attitudes toward practice by studio music teachers
as well as those of college-age music students. Four areas of interest
were (1) attitudes about certain music skills, (2) expectations for use
of practice time, (3) expectations for routines and strategies for prac-
ticing, and (4) attitudes about practice in general.

METHOD

Two independent groups served as subjects for the inve

There were 127 studio teachers and 141 undergraduate an
ate music majors from 16 colleges and universities, includ
research universities, conservatories of music, and state a
colleges. Seven student responses were omitted from further
due to unintentional identification of self, school, or studio teacher,
leaving the student total at 134. The questionnaire, which was pre-
viewed by a panel of three students and three teachers, consisted of
two forms, one for teachers and one for students, and contained 10
questions addressing demographics, attitudes concerning music
skills, use of time during practice, practice strategies and routines,
and attitudes about practicing in general. Responses were anony-
mous, and questions on both forms were in the same order and were
identical, except for necessary changes determined by whether the
form was intended for students or teachers (see Figure 1).

RESULTS

Demographic data consisted of the major instrument and ye

studying or teaching that particular instrument or vocal part. Ta
shows the distribution of instruments for both students' and teach-
ers' responses.
According to the students' responses, the average time spent in
studying their major instrument was 8.14 years (SD= 11.57), whereas
faculty reported that they had been teaching their main instrument
for an average of 22.67 years (SD = 7.43). In Question 3, both groups
were asked to rank the relative importance of five specified music
skills, including "technique," "musicality," "sight-reading ability,"
"tone quality," and "memorization skills." Both groups considered
"musicality" most important and "memorization skills" least impor-
tant, with slight variations in ranks for the remaining skills (see Table
2).
Questions 4 and 5 solicited teachers' and students' responses
according to what skills or activities should receive the most and least
amount of time during students' practicing. Results revealed that
both students and teachers expected that the largest amount of time
should be spent on repertoire, but 31 % of teachers created combi-
nations of the skills (warm-ups with repertoire, for example), as did
20% of the students. Both groups ranked "sight-reading" as the skill
that should receive the least amount of practice time (see Table 3).

This content downloaded from 193.136.56.234 on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:40:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
148 KOSTKA

1. What is your specific instrument or vocal part?

2. How many years have you taught private lessons?

(How many years have you studied your major instrument?)

3. In general, which of the following skills do you feel are most and least
important in your students' (your) practice? Please rank them in order
from 1 (most valuable) to 5 (least valuable).

a. technique
b. musicality
c. sight-reading ability
d. tone quality
e. memorization skills

4. On what activity do you expect your students to spend most of their prac-
tice time? (On what activity do you spend most of your practice time?) (warm-
ups, technique, repertoire, sight-reading, etc.)

5. On what activity do you expect your students to spend the least amount
of time? (On what activity do you spend the least amount of time?)

6. Approximately how many hours do you expect your students to practice

per week? (Approximately how many hours do you practice per week?)

7. Do you suggest that your students have a regular plan or routine for
practicing? (Do you have a regular plan or routine for practicing?) yes_ no

8. If "yes," please briefly describe:

9. Have you discussed practice strategies with your students? (Have you dis-
cussed practice strategies with your teacher?) yes- no

10. Please circle the letter which BEST describes how you, personally, feel
about practicing:

a. Tedious but necessary

b. Relaxing
c. Challenging
d. Fulfilling

Figure 1. Questionnaire for teachers and students (student version in italics).

This content downloaded from 193.136.56.234 on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:40:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 149

Table 1

Distribution of Major Instruments as Reported by Students and Faculty

Instrument Faculty Students

Piano 17 21
Brass 22 26
Woodwinds 24 25
Strings 21 24
Percussion 5 8
Voice 34 27
Guitar 4 3

Total: 127 134

Expectations fo
opinion between
their students t
the student grou
9.93 hours per w
In Question 7, te
ular practice rou
affirmative respo
regular practice
In the next que
'"Yes" to Questio
students' practic
into the followin

(a) General Rout

whatever is neces
(b) General Rout
30 or 40 minutes
(c) Time Only ("
(d) Other or No
The number an
falling into each
Question 9 was c
ticing" were disc
positive, but, by
had discussed su
tion, respondent
which one best fi
est number of
majority of teac

This content downloaded from 193.136.56.234 on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:40:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
150 KOSTKA

Table 2
Comparison of Ranked Importance of Five Selected Music Skills

Faculty Rank Total Points Student Rank Total Points

1. Musicality 212 1. Musicality 245

2. Technique 239 2. Tone Quality 276

3. Tone Quality 248 3. Technique 293

4. Sight-reading 445 4. Sight-reading 483

5. Memorization 448 5. Memorization 602

Table 3

Responses and Percentages for Preferred Use of Practice Time

Which Skill Should Receive Most Amount of Practice Time?

Faculty Rank Percent Student Rank Percent

1. Repertoire .50 1. Repertoire .48

2. Combinations/Other .31 2. Technique .26
3. Technique .17 3. Combinations/Other .20
4. Tone Quality .02 4. Warm-ups .07
5. Warm-ups .02 5. Tone Quality .00

Which Skill Should Receive Least Amount of Practice T

Faculty Rank Percent Student Rank Percent

1. Sight-reading .44 1. Sight-reading .56

2. Other * .21 2. Technique .22
3. Technique .20 3. Other * .11
4. Memorization .15 4. Memorization .10
5. Repertoire .00 5. Repertoire .00

* Included a variety of comments, such as "entertaining them

"listening to tapes," etc.

descriptor of their personal practice time; an

selected "tedious but necessary" the same de
only 6% of teachers (see Table 5).

DISCUSSION

This survey was intended to assess expectations and att

college-level studio music teachers and college-age studen
practicing. A brief, anonymous survey instrument, consisti
questions, was used to obtain data for both groups. Teachers

This content downloaded from 193.136.56.234 on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:40:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 151

Table 4

Comparison of Expectations for Students' Practice Routine

Description of Practice Routine Group n %

General Routine Only Teachers 53 .42

Students 22 .16

General Routine plus Time Teachers 62 .49

Students 50 .37

Time Only Teachers 8 .06

Students 10 .07

Other Teachers 2 .02

Students 5 .04

No Response/Other Teachers 2 .02

Students 47 .35

dents tended to agree on the re

ranking "Musicality" as most im
ther group referred to it later
and preference for activities in l
toire during practice time would
expected to occur along with t
However, how and when "Music
investigated in the future.

Table 5
Comparison of Responses Concerning Attitudes toward Practicing

Teachers Students

Terms n Percent n Percent

Tedious but Necessary 7 .06 24 .18

Challenging 20 .16 51 .38

Relaxing 13 .10 8 .06

Fulfilling 76 .60 30 .22

Other/No Response 11 .09 21 .16

This content downloaded from 193.136.56.234 on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:40:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
152 KOSTKA

It was somewhat surprising to find that both students and teachers

in this survey rated "Sight-reading" as relatively unimportant, since
previous surveys have found it to be ranked much higher (Kostk
1997; Lowder, 1983). Furthermore, one might expect that having th
ability to learn new music without assistance from a teacher or audi
recording would be of paramount concern for most, if not all, youn
musicians who might soon be on their own in the professional world
Students and teachers tended to agree on the skills and activiti
that were most and least important to practice. Preparation for per
formances and juries often requires many weeks or months of inten
sive work prior to the presentation. Thus, the rating of "Repertoire
as first was not unexpected.
Because memorization skills were ranked fifth by both teacher
and students, the questions arise as to whether most teachers expect
memorization from student performances and if so, whether strate
gies for successful memorization are included in lessons. Althoug
Questions 3 through 5 dealt with general attitudes and ideas abo
music skills, Questions 6 through 9 were concerned with more sp
cific behaviors involved in teaching music lessons. The survey showe
that teachers expect approximately one-third more time in week
practice than that reported by students; and although the vast majo
ity of teachers indicated that they expect students to have and use a
regular plan or routine for practicing, the student responses in this
survey showed that fewer than half actually do so.
Although one might question the value of simply repeating a s
routine to improve music skills, it seems that many teachers and st
dents do not discuss the establishment of a practice plan, nor do the
evaluate whether such a plan is effectively meeting the needs of the
student. Similarly, all the teachers said that specific practice strategie
are discussed in their lessons, but the students reported that 41% of
them had not discussed practice strategies with their teachers.
Because teachers and students were not matched in this study, it
difficult to make generalizations, but it could be that some teachers
may be modeling skills and giving feedback to their students during
lessons, assuming that appropriate follow-up will take place durin
practice. However, this may not be the case, and further investigation
of this important question might include evaluation of lesson con
tent, comparisons of students' perceptions with those of their te
cher, and an assessment of what and how practice strategies are bein
taught.
The last question revealed some interesting differences of opinion
according to how students and teachers in this survey felt about prac-
ticing. The majority of teachers viewed their practicing as "Fulfilling"
and "Challenging," but only about half the students selected those
terms. At the same time, twice as many students as teachers reported
that practice was "Tedious but Necessary" and the fewest number of
subjects in both groups viewed practice time as "Relaxing."
Implications from these results should be taken with caution.
Because the groups were independent, no comparative statistical

This content downloaded from 193.136.56.234 on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:40:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 153

analyses were made between their responses. Instead, the data are
intended to give a summary of the opinions of two separate groups
of subjects. In addition, the data included verbal responses only, and
previous research (Geringer & Kostka, 1984) has shown that signifi-
cant differences might be found in verbal reports versus actual prac-
tice time. Nevertheless, the results seem to point to a number of dis-
crepancies concerning what is expected and what may actually be
taking place during practice time. While both groups tended to
agree on the perceived importance of certain skills and abilities,
expectations of time and practice strategies differed between stu-
dents and teachers. Previous research has found that students bene-
fit from using aural models and/or attending to specific tasks duri
practice, yet there was little reference to these behaviors, eithe
students or teachers, in the present survey.
This study might be viewed as an initial presentation of what cou
be valuable information concerning student and teacher assessm
of quality practice time. However, it is hoped that further, in-dept
research will build on the current information, and help to def
what makes the difference between "good" and "bad" practicing
students could structure practicing for optimum learning and effe
tive self-assessment, then perhaps the result would be more plea
able experiences, extending throughout the rest of their lives.

REFERENCES

Barry, N. H., & McArthur, V. (1994). Teaching practice strategi

music studio: A survey of applied music teachers. Psychology of M
44-55.

Coffman, D. (1990). Effects of mental practice, physical practice, and know

edge of results on piano performance. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 38, 187-196.

Folts, M. L. (1973). The relative effect of two procedures as followed by flu

clarinet, and trumpet students while practicing, on the development
tone quality and on selected performance skills: An experiment in st
dent use of sound-recorded practice material. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 32, 4484A.

Geringer, J., & Kostka, M. (1981). The effect of self-assessed practice guides
piano student performance. Paper presented at the Texas Music Education
Association, San Antonio, Texas.

Geringer, J., & Kostka, M. (1984). An analysis of practice room behavior of

college music students. Contributions to Music Education, 11, 24-27.

Kostka, M. (1997). Effects of self-assessment and successive approximations

on "knowing" and "valuing" selected keyboard skills. Journal of Research in
Music Education, 45, 273-281.

Lowder, J. (1983). Evaluation of keyboard skills required in college class

piano programs. Contributions to Music Education, 10, 33-38.

This content downloaded from 193.136.56.234 on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:40:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
154 KOSTKA

Madsen, C. K., & Geringer, J. (1981). The effect of a distraction ind

improving practice attentiveness and musical performance. Bulletin of
Council for Research in Music Education, no. 17, 46-52.

Puopolo, V. (1970). The development and experimental application of

instructional practice materials for beginning instrumentalists. Dissert
Abstracts International, 31, 4207A.

Rosenthal, R. (1984). The relative effects of guided model, model on

guide only, and practice only treatments on the accuracy of adva
instrumentalists' musical performance. Journal of Research in Music E
tion, 32, 265-273.

Rosenthal, R., Wilson, M., Evans, M., & Greenwalt, L. (1988). Effects of d
ferent practice conditions on advanced instrumentalists' perform
accuracy. Journal of Research in Music Education, 36, 250-257.

Ross, S. (1985). The effectiveness of mental practice in improving the p

formance of college trombonists. Journal of Research in Music Educatio
221-230.

Rubin-Rabson, G. (1941). Studies in the psychology of memorizing pian

music: A comparison of two forms of mental rehearsal and keyboard over-
learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 32, 593-602.

Wagner, M. (1975). The effect of a practice report on practice time and musi-
cal performance. In C. Madsen, R. Greer, & C. H. Madsen, Jr. (Eds.)
Research in music behavior. New York: Teachers College Press, 125-130.

Zurcher, W. (1975). The effect of model-supportive practice on beginnin

brass instrumentalists. In C. K. Madsen, R. D. Greer, & C. H. Madsen, Jr.
(Eds.), Research in music behavior. New York: Teachers College Press,
131-138.

Submitted October 1, 2001; accepted March 26, 2002.

This content downloaded from 193.136.56.234 on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:40:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms