McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 1

QUESTIONS 

How can I ensure that each student is provided the same opportunities to succeed? 

If students are severely struggling, what tools can be provided to help in whatever way they need? 

How can I, as a teacher, challenge every student without losing the students who aren’t moving at the 

same speed? 

How can I make sure that students feel safe in my classroom? 

How can I modify my classroom to fit the needs of students with disabilities? 

How can I get support for my program from our school and community? 

How can I allow my students to choose the content of my classroom, while still maintaining what I want 

to achieve  

   
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 2

PROPOSAL 

RATIONALE: I​ believe that there are many more factors in instrumental education besides reading 

notation and playing notes. I think it is important for beginning players to hear where pitch sits on their 

horn before reading any kind of notation. This will allow beginners to think beyond the music they are 

reading and hear it before they play it. If students are succeeding on their instrument, they will be more 

inclined to continue playing. Students who are able to play by ear are more likely to continue music 

beyond school. My goal as a teacher is to instill the ideas of making music beyond my students’ time in 

my classroom. I think playing by ear is one of the best ways to help with that. 

RESEARCH QUESTION: ​In what ways can activities off of instruments (singing, playing by ear, body 

movement) help in overall musicianship in beginning instrumentalists, and how effective are they? 

   
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 3

Article 1​ ​(Whitener, 1982) 

APA Citation information​:  

Whitener, W. T. (1982) Comparison of two approaches to teaching beginning band, ​Journal of Research in 

Music Education, ​pp. 229-235. DOI: 1

​ 0.2307/3345296 

Purpose of the Study: T

​ he purpose of this study was to compare the musical success of beginning 

instrumentalists who are taught using a “comprehensive music” (analysis, composition, performance) 

method and beginning students who are taught from a purely performance method. Previous studies with 

secondary level instrumentalists show that students are more successful learning from a comprehensive 

curriculum, however Whitener shows its impact with beginning students. 

Methods and Participants: ​ 6

​ beginning band classes were involved in the study, 3 classes were the 

control group (performance method) and 3 classes were the experimental group (comprehensive 

method). Each student was given a pre-test and a post-test to show improvement. The comprehensive 

method included both short term (biweekly) goals, which focused on concepts like rhythm, timbre, and 

improvisation, and long term (semesterly/yearly) goals, which focused on performance, analysis, and 

composition. The experimental group’s materials were created by William Whitener to be added into each 

teacher’s normal class instruction. The control group’s materials came from the Belwin ​First Division Band 

Method​ (Weber, 1964), which provided aid in the development of fundamentals of wind band playing 

(tone, rhythm, etc.). The directors of these groups followed this method directly, with no other instruction. 

Key Findings: ​While the post-test show each group performed equally well in the performance section. On 

the testing of aural musical achievement in pitch, interval, meter determination, major/minor mode 

determination, and feeling of tonal center, the students in the experimental group improved more 

significantly from their pretest than students in the control group. 

McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 4

Discussion Points: T
​ hough the students in the comprehensive approach were more successful on their 

tests, it is impossible to confirm that it was a result of learning the comprehensive approach. Their 

success could have been a result of other factors that increase their abilities.  

Your Comments/Questions: ​The comprehensive method that was used in this research was never fully 

explained. While the control group was sure to use the Belwin ​First Division Band Method (​ Weber, 1964), 

the experimental group’s teaching was only described as “produced by the author.” I would have liked to 

seen what type of exercises and listening that was happening in the classroom to get a more realistic 

view on how the research worked.  

   
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 5

Article 2​ ​(Kelly, 1997) 

APA Citation information​:  

Kelly, S. N. (1997). Effects of conducting instruction on the musical performance of beginning 

band students. ​Journal of Research in Music Education ​pp. 295-305 DOI: 10.2307/3345588 

Purpose of the Study: T

​ he purpose of this study is to assess the success of rhythm, articulation, and 

phrasing performances (both individually and as a group) of beginning instrumentalists after a ten-week 

period of conducting instruction. 

Methods and Participants: 1

​ 51 students were polled from varying genders and socio-economic 

backgrounds in small rural and city schools. Participating bands and individual students were pre-tested 

using the same excerpts demonstrating rhythmic, articulation, and phrasing abilities. For 10 weeks, 

students were given 10 minute conducting lessons per class period, instructing beat patterns of 3 and 4, 

prep and cut-off gestures, as well as phrasing gestures (dynamics, articulations, etc.). Following the 

instruction, the post testing included performances of random excerpts from the Watkins-Farnum 

Performance Scale. There were no rehearsals prior to the post-test and there was minimal verbal 

instructions during the test. Random judges were selected to listen to the pre-test and post-test 

recordings and rate certain aspects (rhythm, dynamics, etc.) on a scale from 1 (lowest) and 5 (highest). 

Key Findings: ​On average, the bands that received conducting instruction improved significantly from 

pre-test to post-test, while the bands that did not generally received lower scores in their post-test 

performance than in their pre-test performance. 

Control Bands  Pre-Test Mean  Post-Test Mean 

McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 6

Rhythm  2.59  1.97 

Style  2.18  1.79 

Dynamic  1.89  1.45 

Phrasing  1.99  1.71 

General Performance  2.17  1.70 

Experimental Group  Pre-Test Mean  Post-Test Mean 

Rhythm  2.49  2.81 

Style  2.13  2.35 

Dynamic  1.69  2.04 

Phrasing  1.90  2.42 

General Performance  2.25  2.46 

​(Table from Kelly, 1997) 

Discussion Points: S
​ tudents accelerate in rhythm comprehension at a faster pace if conducting 

instruction is given throughout the course of instruction, however there is a significant difference in 

success between instructors. If this is present in the experimental groups, that might indicate that it could 

also be present in the control groups, meaning the success of one of the bands in the control group might 

have been hindered by the instructor rather than the lack of conducting instruction. Each student learns 
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 7

differently and at a different rate, meaning the data cannot be entirely truthful seeing that each band had 

a different instructor, and different students, however the trend across all of the ensembles was that 

conducting helped rhythm, articulation, dynamic, and phrasing performance. 

Your Comments/Questions: ​Why were the subjects of the study only from small programs in rural areas 

and cities? Why weren’t any larger programs a part of the study? Why was the assessment only 

performance based? If the students spent 10 week learning conducting, why weren’t they required to 

perform the conducting as well in the post-test? If I were to change the post-test, I would have the 

students play the excerpt once, then stand up and conduct the excerpt, and then play the excerpt again. 

This would show the improvement in performance as a result of the conducting, rather than anything else. 

   
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 8

Article 3​ ​(Bernhard, 2004) 

APA Citation information​:  

Bernhard, C. H. II.(2004). The effects of tonal training on the melodic ear playing and sight 

reading achievement of beginning wind instrumentalists. ​Contributions to Music Education p

​ p. 91-107.  

Purpose of the Study: T

​ he purpose of this study is to demonstrate the effects of the use of tonal training 

(use of vocalisation and solfege syllables) on beginning instrumentalists’ success in melodic ear playing 

and sight reading. Melodic ear playing and sight reading both are ways of playing unrehearsed music, 

however there is no written notation used for melodic ear playing. Thus, the use of vocalisation to 

understand pitch sensitivity will aid in the development of the skills necessary to play by ear. While 

method books tend to focus on instrumental technique development rather than tonal development, 

Bernhard allows the use of fingering along while singing through passages to connect the pitch to the 

instrument technique.  

Methods and Participants: P

​ articipants were 42 volunteer beginning band students of a suburban middle 

school that include a variety of instruments. The students were tested using a tonal aptitude test (​Musical 

Aptitude Profile) a
​ nd then randomly assigned to either an experimental group or a control group (two of 

each group). Every group received instruction from the same teacher during 45 minute class periods 

twice a week for ten weeks. Excerpts of study were chosen from typical beginning band method books. 

The experimental groups studied the excerpts using tonal training (listened to the teacher sang the 

melody on “loo,” sang the melody on “loo,” listened to the teacher sing the melody on solfege, sing on 

solfege, play the melody instrumentally by ear, play the melody instrumentally by sight.) and the control 

groups studied the excerpts using traditional training (identified the pitch letter names for the notes on 

the page, identified associated fingerings/slide positions to the notes on the page, performed the melody 

instrumentally by sight.) At the end of the 10 weeks, students and the instructor were given a post test 
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 9

including 6 written melodies containing 25 melodic patterns, groups were given 10 seconds to visually 

observe the notation, and then they performed the melodies. For the aural portion, students were to listen 

to ascending and descending melodic patterns in a diatonic key and reproduce the sound on their 

instruments, there were 48 melodic patterns for this section. Tapes of each group were reviewed by 

adjudicators and would receive points for correct pitch and rhythm. 

Key Findings: ​While findings cannot directly correlate success of playing by ear and sight reading 

notation to tonal training, the experimental groups scored higher than the control groups in every aspect 

of assessment.  

Group  MAPE Average (out of 96)  MSRAT Average (out of 100) 

Control groups  58.10  88.86 

Experimental groups  78.38  92.48 

​(Table from Bernhard 2004) 

Discussion Points: S
​ cores do not necessarily prove the aural training to aid in sight reading performance, 

but it is clear that it aided in ear playing performance. The keys groups are being assessed on only 

include Bb and Eb major, which may prohibit the results from being as extensive as they could be. There 

seemed to be a correlation of students with piano knowledge having higher aptitude test scores than 

other beginning instrumentalists.  

Your Comments/Questions: ​What was the researcher’s process in choosing the melodic excerpts that 

were tested on? Why was this information only pooled from a suburban middle school? Why weren’t 
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 10

schools in rural areas or cities asked to join in this study? Why was this done specifically with beginning 

band students rather than any other beginning instrumentalists? 

   
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 11

Article 4​ ​(Hasten, 2010) 

APA Citation information​:  

Hasten, W. (2010). Beginning wind instrument instruction: a comparison of aural and visual 

approaches. ​Contributions to Music Education,​ pp. 9-28.  

Purpose of the Study: T

​ he purpose of this study was to analyze the difference between beginning 

instrumentalists who were taught from a purely aural method (sound before sight) to those who were 

taught from a visual method (traditional method book). The aural based method is intended to help 

musicians connect what is going on in their ears, eyes, and fingers and enhance their overall musical 

intuition. Students should first interact with sound physically using their instruments but without notation; 

then form internalized concepts of the sounds they are making; and then later use notation to help 

demonstrate understand it. This research claims that students who do not have aural training prior to 

sight training only internalize what notes look like and how they are fingered on their instrument, rather 

than how they sound. 

Methods and Participants: S

​ ubjects of this study were pooled from 3 elementary schools in Northern 

Virginia by a volunteer basis. After taking a musical aptitude test and filling out a form about what 

musical experiences they’ve had in their lives (singing, previous instrumental experience, etc.) the 

subjects received one hour of instruction weekly for fifteen weeks. The students were divided into two 

groups randomly based on which class period worked with their schedule without prior knowledge to 

which group was learning aurally/visually. The visual group learned everything by reading down the page 

of ​Essential Elements​ with the teacher making corrections about performance/posture/etc. without 

modeling anything. The aural group learned by singing melodies, watching the teacher and imitating them 

(breathing, posture, sound, etc.). Then adding the music to the music they had already learned by ear. 
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 12

Students then were tested on a prepared piece that they had two weeks to work on, sight reading 

excerpts, and were given the music aptitude test again. 

Key Findings: ​The table below shows the results of the 2nd music aptitude test. 

Groups  Tonal Imagery Test  Musical Sensitivity  Composite Score 

(melody) Mean  Test (Balance) Mean  Mean 

Aural/modeling  50.6  49.8  50.0 

Visual  46.8  48.9  48.0 

The table below shows the correlation between the success of the aural/modeling group and the 

visual group on their performance of their prepared piece. 

  Aural/Modeling  Visual Group  Both 

Group 

Prepared piece  .554  .794  .668 

(Table from Hasten, 2010) 

Discussion Points: O
​ verall, the aural/modeling group received higher scores, however, the two groups 

didn’t have overwhelmingly different scores. From this data, it is hard to argue that the aural/modeling 

groups were more successful because the performance scores are close enough that performing at a 

different time of day could have altered the scores. It was interesting to notice that students who had 

previous musical training in the visual group scored higher on the final test than those who had no 
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 13

training (they have been reading music for longer), however, in the aural/modeling group, students with 

prior musical training did worse than the students with no training during the post test.  

Your Comments/Questions: ​What can be changed about the aural/modeling method to make it more 

successful than the results show? What kind of theory/ear training can be taught more effectively to 

create better musical understanding? 

   
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 14

Article 5​ ​(Musco, 2009) 

APA Citation information​:  

Musco, A. M. (2009). Effects of learning melodies by ear on performance skills and student 

attitudes. C
​ ontributions to Music Education, ​pp. 79-95.  

Purpose of the Study: T

​ he purpose of this study was to build upon already existing research connecting 

aural training to success in beginning instrumentalists. The three aspects of success being recorded are 

playing melodies by ear, overall attitude toward instruction, and continuation of instrumental study 

beyond the first year.  

Methods and Participants: T

​ he students participating were 7th and 8th grade wind musicians from a 

middle school in Alaska. Students had already been playing their instruments for at least one year prior to 

this study. Students were then given a musical aptitude test and were tested on their abilities to play in 

the keys of Bb, Db, and G, then randomly split into experimental and control groups. The instructors of the 

class taught 3 times a week for 20 minutes each, the experimental group learning melodies by ear in the 

keys of Bb, Db and G and the control group studied only written notation for scales, arpeggios, interval 

studies, etc. in the keys of Bb, Db and G. In the post tests, students were asked to play row row row your 

boat in the keys of Bb, Db, and G after given 30 seconds to think about what they were going to do. 

Judging was solely pitch accuracy based. Students were also asked to answer questions and reflect 

about their experiences with their instruction. 

Key Findings: ​The table below shows the improvement before and after instruction. The melodies group 

improved far better than the exercises group in the newer keys, while the improvement in the key of Bb 

was similar for both groups. 

  Pretest Mean  Posttest Mean 

McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 15

Melodies Group     

Bb Concert  68.36  79.60 

Db Concert  41.47  66.67 

G Concert  36.05  61.20 

Exercises Group     

Bb Concert  66.67  73.77 

Db Concert  35.80  41.01 

G Concert  44.49  51.59 

In the free response questions, students were split in half on whether they liked the instruction. 

While those who enjoyed it thought that it helped them internalize the music, those who didn’t 

enjoy it didn’t enjoy practicing, or not being able to sit with their friends. Most students did not 

understand why they were doing these exercises if they could already just read the notes on the 

page. 

Discussion Points: W
​ hile the researcher is aware that there are certain aspects of the study that were not 

tested, like whether these skills learned will be retained over time, they chose to focus only on a few 

aspects to really target what she is trying to find out. The researcher also mentions how they did not 

coordinate student involvement in the rehearsals, which might indicate why some of them did not enjoy 

the experience as much as others did. The schedule of the curriculum was very fast paced, it was not 

designed for anyone who was not able to keep up with what was going on. A majority of students 

believed that there was no use to playing by ear, and that using notation was the easier way to do the 
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 16

same task, showing that students who start off learning with notation, will not understand the value of 

playing by ear. 

Your Comments/Questions: ​I really enjoyed how this article uses feedback from students on how they 

perceived the study, it allowed the researcher to see inside the students’ minds and see beyond just the 

numbers that came out as a result. I wonder how the study would be different if the visual learners were 

still learning the same melodies that the melody students were learning, but written out. Things might not 

change at all, but maybe melodic phrasing could aid in the learning of new keys. 

   
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 17

Article 6​ ​(Musco, 2010) 

APA Citation information​:  

Musco, A. M. (2010). Playing by ear: is expert opinion supported by research? ​Bulletin of the 

Council for Research in Music Education ​pp. 49-64.  

Purpose of the Study: T

​ he purpose of this study is to analyze previous research from reputable sources 

on the topic of playing by ear. While most studies are hard to analyze purely playing by ear because they 

involve a mixture of playing by ear, modeling, as well as learning by rote. This research looks at 

descriptive and experimental research from well known research studies involving playing by ear: What 

play-by-ear skills do musicians manifest and do those skills develop over time? Are skills in playing by ear 

related to other musical skills or variables? What are the apparent effects of including play-by-ear 

activities in instrumental music instruction? 

Methods and Participants: M

​ usco analyzed the methods of previous studies (McPherson, (2005), Gerber 

(1992), and Delzell, Rowher, and Ballard, (1999)) involving playing by ear to pick out any correlations in 

method, participants, and results. Participants involved in the study include the previous researchers and 

their participants, as well as the directors of this research that provide commentary and discussion on the 

previous studies. 

Key Findings: ​Many experts advise playing by ear, however in most school band and orchestra classes 

there is not a large focus on playing by ear. Research suggests that while some students develop aural 

skills at home during unsupervised practice, and some practice along with instruction, playing by ear 

most likely develops naturally over time as the student gets more involved on their instrument. Research 

has shown a relationship between playing by ear and reading notation, however different studies show 

there is no correlation to playing by ear helping in notation reading. 

McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 18

Discussion Points: T
​ he discussion is divided into categories of questioning: Stereotypes and 

misconceptions, worry and conflict, traditions and challenges, skills and knowledge, and Pedagogy. In 

these categories, the researcher questions various aspects of playing by ear that are sought out to be 

magical pedagogical tools that will instantly make beginners better musicians. The overall theme of the 

argument on what works the best in the classroom, is whether to use an only aural based approach 

without any visual stimuli, or to use only notation without any learning by ear. Many educators 

recommend bridging the gap to include both methods of instruction to reach as many students as 

possible. 

Your Comments/Questions: ​I liked how this study analyzed many of the works that I had already been 

reading, pointing out flaws, and asking questions about the validity of the research 

   
McHUGH INQUIRY PROJECT 19

Themes in the Literature​: 

● Theme 1: Groups of beginning instrumentalists that were taught using an aural approach did not 

show an overwhelming success in performance based testing over students who were taught 

using a written approach. 

○ (Hasten, 2010) 

○ (Bernhard, 2004) 

● Theme 2: Students who learned from an aural based approach found more success in identifying 

musical ideas such as composition and analysis. 

○ (Whitener, 1982) 

○ (Bernhard, 2004) 

● Theme 3: Students who engaged in bodily movement that does not include playing their 

instrument (such as singing or conducting), had more of an awareness for overall musicianship 

such as phrasing. 

○ (Kelly, 1997) 

○ (Whitener, 1982) 

● Theme 4: Research was conducted in response to previous research on the topic of aural based 

learning, and provided additional elements of question. 

○ (Bernhard, 2004) 

○ (Musco, 2010)