EDU690 Action Research Project-Bennett, J

8/12/2019 EDU690 Action Research Project-Bennett, J

1/42


2/42


3/42

HOW TEACHERS CAN IMPROVE BAND RETENTION AT THE SECONDARY LEVEL 3

Table of Contents

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................2

Table of Contents............................................................................................................................3

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................6

Statement of Problem..........................................................................................................6

Rationale for the Study........................................................................................................6

Research Participants..........................................................................................................7

Primary Research Questions...............................................................................................7

Hypotheses..........................................................................................................................7

Review of the Literature.................................................................................................................9

Introduction.........................................................................................................................9

Music Education.....................................................................................................9

Research in Music Education.................................................................................9

Scheduling Problems at the Secondary Level...................................................................10

Lack of Private and Group Instrumental Instruction........................................................11

Insufficient Music Program Advocacy.............................................................................12

Conclusion........................................................................................................................15

Methodology.................................................................................................................................16

Introduction.......................................................................................................................16

Statement of Problem........................................................................................................16

Primary Research Questions.............................................................................................17

Hypotheses........................................................................................................................17


4/42


Sample Selection...............................................................................................................18

Research Design................................................................................................................18

Data Collection Plan.........................................................................................................19

Interventions.....................................................................................................................19

Intervention Instrument 1......................................................................................19








Data Validity.....................................................................................................................22

Transferability.......................................................................................................22

Dependability........................................................................................................22

Confirmability.......................................................................................................23

Reliability..............................................................................................................23

Generalizability....................................................................................................23

Triangulation Matrix.............................................................................................24

Data Analysis....................................................................................................................24

Sample Population............................................................................................................25

Ethical Considerations......................................................................................................25


5/42


Action Plan.......................................................................................................................26

Research Timeline................................................................................................27

Projected Timeline................................................................................................27

Limitations........................................................................................................................27

References....................................................................................................................................29

Appendices

Appendix A: Student survey.........................................................................................................31

Appendix B: Current band member student survey......................................................................33

Appendix C: Non-band member student survey...........................................................................34

Appendix D: Field notes...............................................................................................................35

Appendix E: Student survey.........................................................................................................36

Appendix F: Student attitude scale...............................................................................................37

Appendix G: Student journal notes...............................................................................................38

Appendix H: Structured formal student interviews......................................................................39

Appendix I: Student attitude scale................................................................................................40

List of Tables

Table 1: Triangulation matrix.......................................................................................................41

Table 2: Projected Timeline for Action Research Project............................................................42


6/42


Introduction

Statement of Problem

Playing an instrument is an art and a discipline that provides positive, life-changing

experiences. According to a study published in the journal Psychology of Music, Children

exposed to a multi-year program of instrumental training displayed superior cognitive

performance in reading skills compared with their non-musically trained peers (Music

education can help children improve reading skills, 2009, p.1). This discipline of making music

is transferable to most every learning situation in and outside the academic community, yet every

year students at the secondary level struggle to continue their music education. Retention in the

high school band (keeping instrumentalist in the band program throughout their high school

career) is an issue that many music teachers deal with nationwide.

Rationale for the Study

In a study of instrumental programs Hamann and Gillespie (2004) reported a national

average retention rate (students staying in an instrumental program) of 53% of students from

their beginner program through high school. That is a total attrition rate (loss of instrumental

students in band) equaling 47% of students (Hamann & Gillespie, 2004). This is an alarming

amount of attrition for music educators because many administrators, parents, and other teachers

scrutinize ensemble enrollment numbers to assess a music programs justification and the music

teacher's competence.


7/42


Research Participants

The sample population for this study is 127 students grades 9-12. This includes 37 students

currently enrolled in band and another 90 students who have left the band program at one point

in their education. Out of the 37 students currently enrolled only 15% of them have been able to

continue throughout their high school career without conflict or interruption.

Primary Research Questions

If allotted the time (without scheduling conflicts or interruptions) would instrumental

students be more likely to continue with the band program throughout their high school

career therefore increasing band retention?

If students were offered small group or individual lessons during their band program

experience, which would extend their instrumental understanding, procedural knowledge,

and application, would they be more likely to stay with the band program throughout their

high school career decreasing instrumental program attrition?

What actions can teachers take to positively advocate for retention in a band program?

Hypotheses

Survey and interview data will show that students given a schedule without conflicts or

interruptions would have continued with a band program throughout their high school

career increasing band retention.


8/42


Interview and research data will show that students who are offered small group or

individual lessons are more likely to continue with the band program decreasing

instrumental program attrition.

Research data will show that teachers are able to positively influence student retention in

the band program through developing a multi-faceted advocacy plan that is: ongoing

throughout the year, campaigns holistically for the individual musician, and lobbies for the

band program as a whole.


9/42


10/42


This study demonstrates the importance of the instrumental music educators goal of developing

competent and confident lifelong musicians through a substantial multi-year instrumental

education within a performing group. Retention barriers factor down to 3 areas:

! Scheduling problems at the secondary level

! Lack of private & group instrumental instruction

! Insufficient music program advocacy

Scheduling Problems at the Secondary Level

The best music teacher in the world can fall victim to a poor schedule, which can

decimate a band program. The literature regarding scheduling points to one solution:

communication. Whether a high school has a block schedule or a seven-period class day there

are going to be scheduling conflicts.

The most common barrier to music performing groups is a class that is offered in only

one block or period (e.g., if Chemistry is offered to Juniors and it is offered at the same time as

band, you will lose those Juniors who need Chemistry for their career goals). When band is

scheduled against singleton AP courses, great instrumental students are forced to drop out

(Sussman, 2012). These scheduling barriers make it crucial for instrumental teachers to

understand and communicate any and all scheduling concerns with class schedulers and

administrators so that the conflicts can be avoided (Kearns, 2011). By being a proactive teacher

and polling students one can determine before hand the number of students who may face

scheduling problems. This data can help those in charge of scheduling understand the

considerations needed for the students instrumental education to continue without interruptions.

A certain amount of attrition is unavoidable, but large numbers can be kept to a minimum when


11/42


12/42


13/42


relate school music programs to college opportunities, career possibilities, employment

skills, and adult art experiences (Whaley & Jastrow, 2005, p.68).

The U.S. Senate unanimously passed House Concurrent Resolution 121 in May, 2007.

The Resolution states that music education, grounded in rigorous instruction, is an important

component of a well-rounded academic curriculum and should be available to every student in

every school.

In a face-to-face discussion with Congress, music advocates presented research revealing

statistics such as 93 percent of Americans agree that the arts are vital to providing a well-

rounded education for children, and that 96 percent of school principals agree that

participating in music education encourages and motivates students to stay in school

(NAMM, 2007, p.1).

This resolution underscores the vital need for all children to receive the many scholastic, social,

and developmental benefits that are associated with making music. Teachers of music education

must gather information like this to create a folder of advocacy to use in situations when the

music program, or individual music student's education, is in strife.

Partnerships within the state music community can harvest beneficial advocacy tools that

teachers can use. In Texas, music teachers within their State Music Educators Association

compiled a user-friendly website of advocacy materials for distribution. The website includes

invaluable resources for teachers and music advocates to use including videos, brochures,

participation data templates, and print-ready materials that are supported by current research:


14/42


In a five-year SAT (Standard Aptitude Test) score comparison study, Texas All-State

Musicians (students selected to perform in the State Music Festival through audition)

have consistently scored 22% higher than the national average and 25% higher than the

Texas average (Texas Music Educators Association, 2012, p.1).

Music educators must become proactive by continually seeking out evidence that supports their

mission of music education and partnerships can make this job easier.

Another extremely effective tool for advocacy is visibility. By sharing photos and news

worthy information with the local and school newspaper, school website, and letters to

administration and school board members regarding individual and ensemble the community at

large will be abreast of the advances made by students in the music program. Recruitment,

retention, and program support is made easier if interest and visibility of your ensemble is high

(Waggoner, 2010). Michael Stone suggests to take recruitment, retention, and advocacy on the

road by having high school ensembles perform for elementary school assemblies, a school board

meeting, or spontaneously in a town square to build advocacy through visibility (Stone, 2011).

Demonstrating the positive relationship between music education and other content areas

is another essential part of music advocacy.

In a longitudinal study of 25,000 secondary school students researchers examined the

relationships between involvement in the arts and academic success in relationships

found between involvement in instrumental music and achievement in mathematics.

Findings from this study indicate students with high involvement in instrumental music

training scored significantly better on math proficiency tests than students with no music

training. Also apparent in this study was how low socioeconomic students with high


15/42


involvement in instrumental music training scored better on math proficiency tests than

students categorized as average students. This is significant since all students in high

socioeconomic categories scored better than the students in the average category on math

proficiency tests (Catterall, Chapleau, & Iwanaga, 1999, p.8).

By disseminating research data gathered through partnerships, reporting achievements visibility,

and communicating powerful cross-content connections music educators can advocate

effectively and advantageously for their music programs.

Conclusion

Attrition rates within band programs will continue to climb unless teachers take proactive

and active measures to continually publicize, advocate, and communicate for their individual

students and music program. To counteract these attrition trends teachers need to understand and

communicate the individual needs of their students through ongoing scheduling conflicts.

Teachers must also continually campaign for time to model, support, and give direct instrumental

instruction in small group or privately, in order for instrumentalists to progress in their

instrumental procedural knowledge (Smeltz, 2012). Lastly, it's essential for teachers to partner

with other educators, policy makers, and music advocates to gather research and valid data which

supports music education and individual musicians. The communication and distribution of

these tools and techniques will help unify and present the instrumental music program to the

community at large as an important component to the academic structure of education. This, in

turn, will allot the music teacher and band program the support it needs and deserves to flourish

to it's fullest potential.


16/42


Methodology

Introduction

Playing an instrument is an art and a discipline that provides positive, life-changing

experiences. According to a study published in the journal Psychology of Music, Children

exposed to a multi-year program of instrumental training displayed superior cognitive

performance in reading skills compared with their non-musically trained peers (Music

education can help children improve reading skills, 2009, p.1). This discipline of making music

is transferable to most every learning situation in and outside the academic community, yet every

year students at the secondary level struggle to continue their music education.

Statement of Problem

Retention in the high school band (keeping instrumentalist in the band program

throughout their high school career) is an issue that many music teachers deal with nationwide.

To create a retention plan Bazan & Bayley (2009) concur it is imperative to comprehend the

reasons for attrition within the instrumental program. This study will examine reasons to which

students drop out of a band program, if instrument lessons (individual, group, or computer-

instruction) would increase retention, and address advocacy needs for the individual

instrumentalist and the group as an ensemble.


17/42


18/42


throughout the year, campaigns holistically for the individual musician, and lobbies for the

band program as a whole.

Sample Selection

The participants of this study will be 127 high school students which includes 30

Freshmen, 34 Sophomores, 23 Juniors, and 40 Seniors. There are 67 boys and 60 girls. This

population includes the current 37 students enrolled in band class and another 90 students who

have left the band program at one point in their education. Out of the 37 students currently

enrolled in band class only 15% have been able to continue with band throughout their high

school career without conflict or interruption. Student's Individual Educational Plans (IEPs)

from the Special Education Department will not be taken in consideration for this study because

of restricted teacher access. The Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) permits

educators access to IEP information based primarily on the teacher's current class enrollment.

Research Design

To address the attrition trends in band, teachers will need to understand the ongoing

scheduling and support conflicts that arise. This action research project will be designed to fully

understand the variables that attribute to attrition rate in band and will offer proactive

suggestions for teacher use to combat the loss of student musicians in a band program. This

study will be conducted during the first quarter of the 2014-2015 school year using a mixed

methods design of both qualitative and quantitative data sources (Mills, 2014).


19/42


Data Collection Plan

A triangulation matrix was used to produce a variety of data sources within this study

(Table 1). By collecting both qualitative and quantitative data, this study uses a mixed method

approach to data collection. Mills (2014) states the importance of collecting data from a variety

of sources to fully understand the effects of an intervention on student outcomes (p.79). In this

action research project quantitative data will be gathered from archival sources while qualitative

data will be assembled from student attitude scales, student surveys, student journals, teacher

field notes, and formal structured interviews. Mills (2014) explains the taxonomy of qualitative

data collection through the 'Three Es' of action research: Experiencing, Enquiring, and

Examining (p.99). In this study experience will take place through active participant field notes

and student journaling, enquiry through structured formal interviews and surveys, and

examination through the records of archival documents, journals, and field notes.

Interventions

Intervention instrument 1. Students will take an online survey (Appendix A). This

information will gauge students' willingness to continue with the band program and isolate

scheduling conflicts that have been historical variables. It will also reveal information regarding

gender, instrumentation, the year students left the band program, and other potential

commonalities that may lead to attrition in band. Bazan & Bayley (2009) agree it is important to

understand the reasons for attrition within the instrumental program and to address those issues

by creating a retention plan.


20/42


Intervention instrument 2. Students will then take an attitude scale (Appendix B & C)

based on their responses from the online survey. This will further verify the specific impact

scheduling has on attrition and retention rates in band. It is crucial for instrumental teachers to

fully understand any and all scheduling concerns so that the conflicts can be proactively avoided

(Kearns, 2011).

Intervention instrument 3. Researcher journal notes (Appendix D) will then be added

to this data. The journal notes will be based from active participant observer experiential data

collected through the observer's years of working with students scheduling conflicts in band and

notes collected during the study.

Intervention instrument 4. Next students will take an online survey (Appendix E) to

determine if students would be more likely to stay in a band program if they were offered small

group or private lessons via educator or CAI (Computer-Assisted Instruction). Studies show that

without modeling, support, and direct instrumental instruction, young students may not have the

metacognitive skills necessary for efficient practice and growth to progress in their instrumental

procedural knowledge (Smeltz, 2012).

Intervention instrument 5. Students will then take an attitude scale (Appendix F).

From this, information will be retrieved as to the likelihood that small group or private

instruction influences band retention.

Intervention instrument 6. A small group of 15 band students who are currently

enrolled in small group instruction within the school day will be a focus group with regard to the

effect of lessons on band retention. These students will be asked to use journal prompts


21/42


(Appendix G) to narrate their reactions to specific questions regarding their small group

instructional experiences and whether it effects band participation and retention intentions. Mills

(2014) points out that a focus group is a particularly useful technique when the interaction

among individuals will lead to a shared understanding of the questions being posed by the

teacher researcher (p.92).

Intervention instrument 7. A small selection of students will be asked to respond in a

structured formal interview (Appendix H). The interview will solicit student ideas to what

actions they believe teachers can take to positively advocate for the individual student

instrumentalist and the band program. Student perception of control is very important and when

combined with student control over outcomes, both students and teachers benefit (Anderman &

Anderman, 2010). From those interviews an attitude scale (Appendix I) will be composed

focusing on the percentage of students, out of the 90 students who are not currently in band, who

denoted they may be compelled to return to the band program. This scale will gauge non-band

members' likelihood of returning to a band program given certain advocacy steps which would

be rendered from the previous interviews.

Intervention instrument 8. Added to this mix of data will be artifacts collected from

the school's database. These archival sources include student population reduction and staff

population reduction. This information will open a widow of understanding towards attrition and

scheduling conflicts in regards to band.


22/42


Data Validity

Mills (2014) States, Issues of credibility, validity, and reliability in action research are

measured by the willingness of the teacher researchers (and stakeholders) to act on the results of

the action research (p.123). Keeping students in a band program and limiting attrition rates is

the goal of any instrumental teacher because of multiple reasons: the love of and belief in music

education, ensemble enrollment numbers being assessed by administration for the programs

justification or the music teacher's competence, and finally without students to play the

instruments there would not be an instrumental program in the curriculum. For these reasons,

there is no doubt the results of this study will be acted upon.

Transferability. In order to facilitate the development of descriptive and context-

relevant statements Mills (2014) believes it is essential that researchers collect detailed

descriptive data that permits comparison and makes judgement about fittingness with other

contexts possible (p.116). In order to ensure transferability on this action research project, the

researcher will present sufficient descriptions of the students and data collection methods to lend

complete understanding of the project. Given sufficient descriptions and information consumers

of this project will be able to apply the research to their own unique situation.

Dependability. According to Mills (2014) dependability refers to the stability of data

collected within an action research project (p.116). To address dependability within the context

of this project a triangulation matrix was used to overlap methods of data collection using three

different data sources for each research question posed.


23/42


Confirmability. The practice of triangulation and reflexivity are two approaches that

will be used in this action research to address the issue of neutrality. Mills (2014) suggests to

address neutrality of data collection through triangulation and reflexivity (p.116). Since the

outcomes of this study are reflective to the researcher's direct success the study's data will be

presented to other professionals within the same school in order to introduce neutral feedback to

the researcher.

Reliability. Mills (2014) states reliability is the trustworthiness of tests consistently

measuring whatever they are suppose to measure (p.119). In order to ensure reliability and

confidence within this study, the researcher has extensively examined data collection approaches.

The researcher has chosen multiple pathways in the data collection to consistently measure

aspects of the research questions establishing reliability within the action research.

Generalizability. Most of the data collected for this study is not generalizable from

one district to the next because there are too many variables between schools, districts, and

states. However; the information gathered can be used as a general guide for the audience of this

study to apply to their own site-specific situation. Mills (2014) asserts the actual goal in action

research is to understand what is happening in a site-specific school or district and not focusing

on defining truths (p.121). Hence, this action research project will focus on the relevant findings

in context to the study.


24/42


Triangulation matrix.

Table 1.

Triangulation

Data Source

Research Question 1 2 3

1. If allotted time,without

scheduling

conflicts,

would students

continue inband

throughoutHS?

Student Survey Attitude Scale (Likert) Participant Observer

2. If studentswere offered

small group or

private lessonswould this

increase band

retention?

Student Survey Attitude Scale (Likert) Focus Group:

Journals

3. What actions

can teacherstake on to

positively

advocate forretention in a

band program?

Structured Formal

Interviews

Attitude Scale (Likert) Archive Information:

Population Reduction

(Staff and Student)

Data Analysis

Mills (2014) describes data analysis as an attempt by the researcher to summarize

collected data in a dependable and accurate manner (p.132). To begin summarizing data the

initial survey information will be collected and begin to gauge students' willingness to continue


25/42


with the band program, isolate scheduling conflicts, and show trends regarding gender,

instrumentation, the year students left the band program, and other potential commonalities that

may lead to attrition in band. The attitude scales (Appendix B, C, & F) are based on responses

from the initial survey and will further verify the specific impact that scheduling and lesson time

has on attrition and retention rates in band. The journal notes from the students, researcher, and

focus group will be organized by themes and coded with the attitude scales reflecting responses

from the research questions, as suggested by Mills (2014, p.135). Finally, the database artifacts

will be recorded as they reflect relevant information within the coding system.

Sample Population

The action research will take place in a low-income school district in Bethel, Maine at the

high school level. The population of students for this study will be divided into 2 groups:

students currently in a band program form group 1, and students that have dropped out of the

band program at one point in their education form group 2. Survey instruments will be delivered

and conducted during classroom time for group 1. Survey instruments for group 2 will be

delivered and conducted via the students' homeroom block.

Ethical Considerations

Mills (2014) states, The role of ethics in action research can be considered in terms of

how each of us treat the individuals with whom we interact at our school setting (p.29). In this

action research project, the principal, students, and the researcher's professional peers will be no-

tified about the research project. The names of the students will not be used as an identifying

feature in this study. Any data, observations, questionnaires, etc. that need identifying marks


26/42


27/42


Research timeline. The action research will take place over twelve weeks during the

first semester of the 2014/2015 school year. Table 2 outlines the projected actions to be

performed in order to complete this project.

Projected timeline.

Table 2.

Projected Timeline for Action Research Project-

Dates Actions Performed

Week 1 Obtain approval from school administration

Week 2 Student survey (Appendix A)

Weeks 2-10 Analyze data weekly

Weeks 2-10 Researcher field notes (Appendix D)

Week 3 Student attitude scales (Appendices B & C)

Week 4 Student survey (Appendix E)

Weeks 5-6 Focus group's journaling (Appendix G)

Week 7 Student attitude scale (Appendices F & I)

Weeks 8-9 Student structured interviews (Appendix H)

Weeks 10-12 Organize data

Limitations

Mills (2014) asserts common flaws in an action research study includes failure to state

limitations (p.216). The researcher recognizes sample population scope limitations within the

action research since the research will take place solely with high school aged students. By

expanding the size of the study to include middle school aged students, future research may


28/42


indicate more elaborate results. Furthermore, the research is limited to a small portion of

students who either are in a band program or who left at one point in their education. Mills

(2014) states that any research worth its salt appears to generate more questions than it answers

(p.81). By augmenting the sample participants in future research, to include students who

wanted to take up an instrument but never did, may yield more conclusive results and answer

broader questions regarding retention at the secondary level band program.


29/42


30/42


Music education can help children improve reading skills. (2009, March). SAGE Publications/

Psychology of Music. Retrieved from:

www.sciencedaily.com/release/2009/03/090316075843.htm

NAMM (2007, May 18). U.S. Senate Passes Resolution Supporting Music Education as Part of

a Complete Education for Children | NAMM.org. Retrieved from

http://www.namm.org/news/press-releases/us-senate-passes-resolution

Rudolph, T. E. (2004). Instructional software (computer-assisted instruction). In Teaching music

with technology(pp. 115-150). Chicago, IL: GIA Publications.

Smeltz, H. (2012). Reframing Student Practice to Facilitate Lifelong, Joyful Musicianship.

Music Educators Journal, 99(2), 51-55.

Stewart, J. L. (2005). Factors related to students' decisions to continue in band. Contributions to

Music Education, 32(1), 59-74. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/222372661?accountid=12756

Stone, M. (2011, December). Take recruiting on the road. The Instrumentalist, 66(5), 30, 32, 53.

Sussman, E. (2012). Recruiting & retention: Meeting the community's needs. School Band

and Orchestra, 15, 10-15. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1018567932?accountid=12756

Texas Music Educators Association (2012).Five-Year SAT Score Comparison. Retrieved from

http://www.tmea.org/assets/pdf/All-State_SAT_Comparison.pdf

Waggoner, D. (2010, July). Small schools small ensembles. The Instrumentalist, 64(12), 32-34.

Whaley, G., & Jastrow, W. (2005). Preserving your musicians. In The music director's cookbook:

Creative recipes for a successful program(pp. 66-68). Galesville, MD: Meredith Music.


31/42


32/42


4c. Did the lessons help you want to stay in Band(circle one)? YES NO

Comments:

5. Have you had a schedule conflict that made you leave the Band program (circle one)? YES

NO

If YES on 5: 5a. What was the conflict:

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

5b. Would you have stayed in Band if this conflict didn't exist? YES NO

Comments:

5c. If you were offered more direct instruction (lessons) do you think you would

have stayed in Band regardless of the scheduling conflict(circle one)? YES NO

Comments:


33/42


34/42


Appendix C Survey & Attitude Scale for Student Who Left Band

1. When you were in Band describes your feeling about playing in the Band? (Check one)

_____ I loved Band.

_____Band was fun but not my favorite.

_____It was alright, but I had no idea what I was doing and needed more instruction.

_____It was alright, but I'm glad I left.

_____I hated Band.

2. What best describes your experience with scheduling when you WERE in Band? (Check one)

_____ I never had any trouble scheduling Band.

_____I had to make choices between classes to fit Band in.

_____I've had to leave Band for !a year because I needed to take a *singleton class.

_____I just couldn't fit it in anymore and never got back into Band.

_____I missed out on my free time to fit Band into my schedule.

*singleton class: there is only one block offering for a specific class

3. Would you have stayed in Band if you had received Private lessons in school? (Circle one)

Yes Maybe No

4. Would you have stayed in Band if someone would have advocated to keep you in Band?

Yes Maybe No

5. If anything got in the way of scheduling Band for you in the past please explain what that was:

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________


35/42


Appendix D Researcher's Field Notes

Type of schedule: (Block & # of Periods ) ______________________________

Scheduling problems encountered:

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________



_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________



_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________



_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Trends in notes?

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________


36/42


Appendix E Student Survey

1. Would you stay OR Would you have stayed in Band IF you were offered small group lessons

during the school day? (Circle One)

Yes Maybe No

2.Would you stay OR Would you have stayed in Band IF you were offered small group lessons

after the school day had ended? (Circle One)

Yes Maybe No

3. Would you stay OR Would you have stayed in Band IF you were offered private lessons

during the school day? (Circle One)

Yes Maybe No

4.2.Would you stay OR Would you have stayed in Band IF you were offered private lessons after

the school day had ended? (Circle One)

Yes Maybe No

5. Would you stay OR Would you have stayed in Band IF you were offered computer-assisted

instrumental instruction at your 24-hour disposal? (Circle One)

Yes Maybe No


37/42


Appendix F Band Student Attitude Scale (LIKERT)Adapted from Mills (2014)

Respond to the following items by drawing a circle around the response that most closely reflects

your opinion:

strongly agree(SA), agree(A), undecided(U), disagree(D) or strongly disagree (SD)

1. It would be easier to continue in Band throughout my high school career if I had Private (one-

on-one) lessons with a music teacher within the school day.

SA A U D SD

2. It would be easier to continue in Band throughout my high school career if I had Private (one-

on-one) lessons with a music teacher outside of the school day.

SA A U D SD

3. It would be easier to continue in Band throughout my high school career if I had Small Group

(same or like instrumentation) lessons with a music teacher within the school day.

SA A U D SD

4. It would be easier to continue in Band throughout my high school career if I had Small Group

(same or like instrumentation) lessons with a music teacher outside of the school day.

SA A U D SD

5. It would be easier to continue in Band throughout my high school career if I had computer-

assisted instrumental instruction at my 24-hour disposal.

SA A U D SD


38/42


Appendix G Focus Group's Journal

Name: ______________________________ Instrument: ______________________________

Do you feel that having this in-school lesson block opportunity has increased your willingness to

continue with the Band class? Why do you believe this?

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

Do you feel that having this in-school lesson block opportunity has increased your abilities to

contribute in the Band class? Why do you feel this way?

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

Do you feel that having this in-school lesson block opportunity should be open to all instrument-

al students from grades 4-12 or just in the high school setting? Why do you think this?

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

Do you feel that having this in-school lesson block opportunity would have encouraged more

students to stick with the Band program? Why do you believe this?

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________


39/42


Appendix H Structured Student Interview

Name: _________________________ Instrument: ______________ Grade: ______________

1. Have you ever had any trouble fitting Band into your schedule?

RESPONSE:

2. What got in the way of fitting Band into your schedule?

RESPONSE:

3. How did you respond to knowing this? Did you talk with your music teacher? Did you

talk with the scheduling department? Did you talk with your parents?

RESPONSE:

4. Did any adult advocate for you when Band was not in your preliminary schedule?

RESPONSE:

5. How did the adult advocate for you in this instance?

RESPONSE:

6. How would you like adults to advocate for you and your schedule?

RESPONSE:

7. What ways can you think of that schools could do differently in order for you to keep

Band in your schedule throughout your educational career at this school?

RESPONSE:

8. How can the music teacher advocate for the individual instrumental students?

RESPONSE:

9. What do you think the music teacher should do to advocate for the entire Band program?

RESPONSE:


40/42


Appendix I Non-Band Members Attitude Scale (LIKERT)Adapted from Mills (2014)

Respond to the following items by drawing a circle around the response that most closely reflects

your opinion:

strongly agree(SA), agree(A), undecided(U), disagree(D) or strongly disagree (SD)

1. I would have continued in Band if I had Private (one-on-one) lessons with a music teacher

within the school day.

SA A U D SD

2. I would have continued in Band if I had Private (one-on-one) lessons with a music teacher

outside of the school day.

SA A U D SD

3. I would have continued in Band if I had Small Group (same or like instrumentation) lessons

with a music teacher within the school day.

SA A U D SD

4. I would have continued in Band if I had Small Group (same or like instrumentation) lessons

with a music teacher outside of the school day.

SA A U D SD

5. I would have continued in Band if I had computer-assisted instrumental instruction at my 24-

hour disposal.

SA A U D SD


41/42


42/42


Table 2.

Projected Timeline for Action Research Project-

Dates Actions Performed

Week 1 Obtain approval from school administration

Week 2 Student survey (Appendix A)

Weeks 2-10 Analyze data weekly

Weeks 2-10 Researcher field notes (Appendix D)

Week 3 Student attitude scales (Appendices B & C)

Week 4 Student survey (Appendix E)

Weeks 5-6 Focus group's journaling (Appendix G)

Week 7 Student attitude scale (Appendices F & I)

Weeks 8-9 Student structured interviews (Appendix H)

Weeks 10-12 Organize data

EDU690 Action Research Project-Bennett, J

Documents

Transcript of EDU690 Action Research Project-Bennett, J