Abstract
We examined music teacher perceptions regarding the impact of string programs on overall music programs in K-12 schools. Research questions included: (1) What are the perceived positive and negative program and student outcomes? (2) What are the underlying issues of music teachers’ perceptions about the positive and negative impacts of string programs? (3) How do these underlying issues compare with one another (negative and positive)? and (4) What relationships, if any, exist between fixed factors and the perceptions of the impact of string programs? Questionnaires were sent to all MENC members in two Southwestern MENC states. Data from participants (n = 308) were analyzed using principal components analyses and correlation analyses. A majority of music teachers felt that string programs were beneficial and offered opportunities for student development as well as expanded opportunities within a music program. Concerns included program focus and support, logistical issues, budget concerns, and finding qualified instructors.
In 1961, the presidents of the MENC Federated State Units and the members of the National Board of Directors of MENC convened to discuss twenty topics. The resultant report was titled, What are Music Educators Thinking and Saying? (MENC, 1961). One of the issues discussed was music education's relationship with other disciplines, specifically the role of music in the curriculum and the perception of its contribution in the school setting. One-half century later, the thoughts and concerns expressed in 1961 are the same. Music educators want to know how the public, other educators, and colleagues in music view and value their programs.
According to a Harris Poll taken in 2005, 93 percent of those polled stated that the arts were vital to providing a well-rounded education, and 54 percent indicated the importance of arts education to be a “10” on a scale of one to 10 (American Music Teacher, 2005). Over 83 percent of the individuals sampled agreed that arts education assisted in the improvement of children's attitudes toward school and helped them communicate effectively with adults and peers.
When looking at music research conducted in the early 1970s through 1990, researchers noted that support among administrators for various aspects of music instruction was positive. Administrators tended to support elementary general music programs (Stroud, 1980), the curricular goals of music programs (Liddell, 1977; Payne, 1990; Punke, 1972), and band and band competitions (Greenwood, 1991; Rogers, 1985).
In a 2005 study, Abril and Gault compared preservice and inservice elementary educators’ perceptions of elementary general music curriculum goals. Respondents were asked to indicate their perceptions, using a Likert-type scale, of items in five general areas: entertainment/recreation, expressive/creative, interdisciplinary, musical, and sociocultural. Inservice and preservice educators responded positively in all areas, although preservice teachers had higher mean scores except the musical category.
Abril and Gault (2006) then conducted a study of principals’ perceptions of elementary general music programs and reported that principals felt that music education programs were helping students achieve seven music learning outcomes and 13 broad educational goals. While principals believed students did learn to compose and create music through musical study, principals thought performing and listening skills were more effectively taught in music classes (Abril & Gault, 2006; Williams, 2007). Principals were also asked the degree to which 10 variables affected music programs. “No Child Left Behind,” budgetary concerns, standardized testing, and scheduling were found to have the most negative effect, while music teachers, parents, and students had the most positive effect on elementary music programs.
In 2008, Abril and Gault (2008) also investigated principals’ perceptions of secondary music programs. They reported that principals believed music programs were successful in enabling students to meet musical and educational learning goals. When asked the degree to which 10 variables affected music programs, principals felt students, parents, music teachers, other teachers, school boards, and educational research findings positively impacted music programs, while budget/finances and scheduling negatively affected music programs.
Researchers have explored various individuals’ perceptions of the value of music programs in general. More specifically, however, researchers have primarily focused on general music and band programs. Relatively little is known of individuals’ perceptions of the benefits of string/orchestral programs. In the report from their 2004 National Summit, the American String Teachers Association (ASTA) listed one of their 11 objectives as the development of short- and long-range professional advocacy plans to market the values/benefits of string instrument playing. Authors of various ASTA publications have promoted the values/benefits of string instrument study (ASTA, 2006, 2008; Barnes, 2003; Hamann & Gillespie, 2004; League of American Orchestras, 2008). The benefits of string program development as articulated in these publications include curricular benefits such as expanded repertoire possibilities for all music students, greater exposure to world music, and more comprehensive music curricula. Additional benefits may include pragmatic or logistic benefits such as greater community support, improved opportunities for university/college scholarships, more career opportunities, and improved performance standards, increased cost-effectiveness of school districts, and greater recognition of students and their schools. Finally, the benefits of string/orchestra programs for individual students may include enhanced aural and motor skill growth, development of leadership skills and personal character, heightened quality of life, development of social skills, and growth of expressive skills.
Several authors have noted the importance of string programs in the public schools. Moss (2002), for instance, found that the majority of school superintendents in southern Georgia believed that school music curricula that omit orchestra are incomplete and that the majority believed that students should have access to string instruction. However, it is not clear how the public, in particular other music teachers, view these and other articulated benefits of string/orchestral programs. As string teachers advocate for the implementation or improvement of string programs in K-12 schools, it seems vital to understand how professional music educators believe their schools, programs, and students will be influenced.
The purpose of this study was to examine music teacher perceptions regarding the impact of string programs on overall music programs in K-12 schools. Research questions included: (1) What are the perceived positive and negative program and student outcomes? (2) What are the underlying issues of music teachers’ perceptions about the positive and negative impacts of string programs? (3) How do these underlying advantages and disadvantages compare with one another? and (4) What relationships, if any, exist between fixed factors and the perceptions of the impact of string programs? The first research question was addressed using descriptive statistics. Research questions two and three were addressed using two principal component factor analyses and the comparison of each. We used a Pearson Correlation analysis to examine data relevant to research question four.
Method
Participants responded to a researcher-created questionnaire that was developed through a focus group at one university and through peer review and small pilot (N = 18) at another university. The pilot participants included preservice music teachers and music education masters students and, therefore, did not represent the main study population. This process helped improve the clarity of the questionnaire as well as refine and add items not previously considered by the researchers. We included some items in the questionnaire from previous research (i.e., ASTA, 2006, 2008; Barnes, 2003; Hamann & Gillespie, 2004; League of American Orchestras, 2008).
We sent the final String Program Questionnaire Revised (SPQR) to music educators who were members of MENC in two Southwestern MENC states during the 2007-2008 school year (N = 2193). Each MENC member received a questionnaire by mail, including a cover letter, the questionnaire, and a self-addressed and stamped return envelope. A follow-up mailing was conducted four weeks later to increase the response rate. Three hundred and eight music educators completed and returned questionnaires (n = 308, response rate = 14%, margin of error +/- 5.18). Such a poor response rate may be due to lack of interest of this topic, or due to a lack of extra time. Due to the low response rate, and prior to final data analysis, we conducted a series of t-tests and ANOVAs to ensure that no patterns of missing data existed. No significant differences were found suggesting that all groups were adequately sampled given the variables under study. All assumptions of statistical procedures were met. Future researchers could utilize findings from this study to inform additional studies that are able to collect more data and that focus on a larger regional or national representation.
Participants
Participants (N = 308) were music educators in one of two southwestern MENC states who were, on average, 43 years old, with 15 years of teaching experience. The majority of respondents (69%) was female, and held either a bachelor's degree in music education (53%) or a master's degree in music education (41%). Teachers indicated teaching in elementary (44%), middle/junior high (26%), or high school (30%). Only 10 percent of respondents reported primarily teaching orchestra, while 37 percent taught band, 21 percent taught choir, and 33 percent taught general music. The vast majority (98%) were certified to teach music in the state where they currently taught. These participants have similar demographics to music teachers based on national data.
Fifty-two percent of music educators reported working in a school that currently offered a string program during the regular school day, and only 31 percent were responsible for teaching string classes. The majority of teachers (84%) working in a school that did not have a string program indicated that they wanted a string program in their school. However, only half (50%) disclosed a willingness to teach string classes. Teachers working in a school with a string teacher reported having a very positive relationship with that educator (88%).
The majority of participants (65%) played in an orchestra at some point. Very few participants (15%) indicated having more than two courses in string techniques (performance skills). Most participants took either one (45%) or two (25%) string techniques courses. Similarly, few participants indicated taking more than two string pedagogy classes (9%), while most had taken either one (55%) or two (14%) string pedagogy classes. The number of participants who had not had the opportunity to take a string techniques class was lower (15%) than the number of individuals not able to take a string pedagogy course (23%). The majority of participants (72%) had never taken private lessons on an orchestral string instrument.
Results
Research Question 1: What are the perceived positive and negative program and student outcomes?
Participants indicated their level of agreement (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree) with a series of possible benefits for music programs and students. The greatest participant observed program benefits included the opportunity to offer a more comprehensive music curriculum, greater course offerings, and an expansion of the possible repertoire and overall participation in music. Few regarded pecuniary issues, such as budgets or fundraising, as well as participation in the participants’ own program (see Table 1), to be as important.
Mean Agreement Rating for Possible Program Benefits
The greatest student benefits participants observed included participation in musical experiences, enhanced self-esteem, and increased expressive development. Fewer rated the student benefits of travel opportunities, relaxation, and understanding other cultures as highly as other benefits (see Table 2).
Mean Agreement Ratings for Possible Student Benefits
Similarly, participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree) with a series of possible negative program outcomes or potential obstacles created by string programs on music programs and students. Although music teachers generally disagreed with the majority of possible negative program outcomes (no mean exceeds 2.76), the highest rated possible negative outcomes focused on logistical issues rather than instructional outcomes such as a lack of qualified string teachers available to teach the classes, instrument cost, lack of adequate facilities, and a lack of calendar space (see Table 3).
Mean Agreement Ratings for Negative Program Outcomes
Finally, participants indicated the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with a series of possible negative student outcomes. Again, participants generally disagreed with the possible negative student outcomes and focused on logistical issues rather than instructional outcomes. Only two outcomes had a mean of higher than two: lack of trained teachers to work with students, and student scheduling issues (see Table 4).
Mean Agreement Ratings for Negative Student Outcomes
Participants responded to a final item in which they reported if they felt string programs were beneficial or detrimental to music programs in general. An overwhelming 98% believed that string programs were beneficial to music programs. Only seven participants indicated that string programs were detrimental.
Research Question 2: What are the underlying issues of music teachers’ perceptions about the positive and negative impacts of string programs?
We conducted a principal components factor analysis to explore the fundamental issues that underlie teachers’ perceptions of the positive and negative outcomes of string programs, as well as to reduce data for further analysis. Due to the exploratory nature of this analysis, we employed a principal component factor analysis. Principal component factor analysis is an attempt to find factors that account for all common and unique variance in any given set of variables (Gorsuch, 1983). In order to find the least correlated factors, we used an orthogonal Varimax rotation method with Kaiser Normalization. This rotation required seven iterations to converge. Only components with an eigenvalue of 1 or greater were utilized in the analysis.
The factor analysis produced three components. The first rotated component accounted for 59.4% of the variance with an eigenvalue of 20.2. The eigenvalues of the following two components were 1.77 and 1.55 accounting for an additional 9.7% of the total variance. These eigenvalues suggest that although these components were weaker than the first component, music teacher perception of the benefits of string programs is not unidimensional. Sampling adequacy was established using the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure (.97). The assumption of sphericity was also met as evidenced in the Bartlett Test of Sphericity (χ2 = 9730.17, p = <.001).
The rotated component matrix is clear and interpretable (see Table 5). Factor I represents student development benefits (SDB), Factor II represents expanded experiences (EE), and Factor III represents logistical and support issues (LSI). The reliability for each of these factors, as assessed using Cronbach's alpha, were high (SBD = .97, EE = .94, LSI = .91).
Rotated Component Matrix: Benefits
We also conducted an additional factor analysis on participant responses to possible negative outcomes in order to explore similarities or differences in the underlying positive and negative perceptions of the impact of string programs. Again, we utilized principal component factor analysis with Varimax rotation and Kaiser Normalization. This rotation required ten iterations to converge. Only components with an eigenvalue of 1 or greater were considered in the analysis.
This factor analysis produced four components. The first rotated component accounted for 52.3% of the variance with an eigenvalue of 15.4. The eigenvalues of the following three components were 2.60, 1.22, and 1.00, accounting for an additional 16.6% of the total variance. These eigenvalues suggest music teacher perceptions of the possible negative outcomes of string programs are not unidimensional. Sampling adequacy was established using the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure (.95). The assumption of sphericity was also met as evidenced in the Bartlett Test of Sphericity (χ2 = 7218.98, p = <.001).
The rotated component matrix is clear and interpretable (see Table 6). Factor I represents program focus and support (PFS), Factor II represents Logistical Issues (LI), Factor III represents Pecuniary Issues (PI), and Factor IV represents Qualified Instructors (QI). The reliability for each of these factors, as assessed using Cronbach's alpha, were high (PFS = .94, LI = .90, PI = .88, QI = .90).
Rotated Component Matrix: Possible Negative Outcomes
Note: Bold items signify items that loaded on each component. Factor loadings under .30 are suppressed. PFS = Program Focus & Support, LI = Logistical Issues, PI = Pecuniary Issues, QI = Qualified Instructor.
Research Question 3: How do these underlying issues compare with one another (negative and positive)?
Although the underlying perceived benefits and negative outcomes are somewhat similar (e.g. logistical issues and program focus and support), it seems that the possible negative outcomes are slightly more nuanced with more concern focusing on program pecuniary issues (e.g. budget and fundraising) as well as on finding highly qualified string teachers to teach courses.
Research Question 4: What relationships, if any, exist between fixed factors and the perceptions of the impact of string programs?
We conducted a Pearson Product Moment Correlation to see if any individual difference variables (teaching level, teaching genre, age, teaching experience, degree level, certification, orchestra playing experience, number of string techniques courses, number of string pedagogy courses, or private lessons on a string instrument) related to the underlying perceived benefits or negative outcomes of string programs. Three factors were significantly related to possible benefit factors (α = .05). Participants who had performed in an orchestra (r = .12) and who had taken more string techniques courses (r = .14) were more likely to believe that programs would benefit in logistical and support issues (LSI). Although these relationships were significant, the magnitudes of these correlations are meager, indicating relatively little practical significance.
An additional four factors were significantly related to possible negative outcome factors (α = .05). Female participants were more likely to believe logistical issues (LI) were possible negative outcomes of a string program (r = .13). Music teachers with orchestra playing experiences (r = -.12), as well as more experiences with string techniques courses (r = -.12), were less likely to feel that logistical issues (LI) were possible negative outcomes. Moreover, participants who had more experiences with string techniques courses were less likely to report a concern about finding qualified instructors to teach the courses. Only one variable was significantly related to possible negative outcome factors. Participants who took private lessons on an orchestral string instrument were also less likely to be concerned with finding qualified instructors to teach string classes (r = -.19). Again, the relatively weak relationships between the fixed factors and outcome factors do not argue for practical significance.
Discussion
When addressing the first research question “What are the perceived possible positive and negative program and student outcomes?” it was found that music teachers positively supported the vast majority of items pertaining to program and student outcomes. Of 15 program benefits items, 11 of the items received a mean rating above 3.0, indicating agreement. Items thought to have been benefits of string programs were: a more comprehensive music curriculum, more musical course offerings, expanded repertoire, greater overall participation, increased overall performance standard, jobs for string teachers, greater community visibility, collaborations with other ensembles, earlier skill development, great community support, and increased parental involvement.
When reviewing the music teachers’ mean ratings of the 19 items under the heading of student benefits, only one item was found with ratings lower than 3.0. The benefits to students participating in string programs were perceived as follows: more possible musical experiences, increased participation in music, greater commitment and self-discipline, development of student character, self-esteem, and student expression, further exposure to fine arts classes, development of social skills, enhanced motivation to participate, practice, and succeed, growth of leadership skills, expansion of expressive performance skills, dexterity development, exposure to masterworks, amplified opportunities for college scholarships and collaborations with other musicians/ensembles, improved understanding of different cultures, and relaxation and stress release.
Items acknowledged by music teachers as string program benefits in this study were similar to those cited as string program benefits by the American String Teachers Association (2006, 2008), Barnes (2003), Hamann and Gillespie (2004), and the League of American Orchestras (2008). Based on these findings it would appear that string programs do tend to support expanded repertoire possibilities for students in all ensembles, comprehensive music curriculums for schools, greater community support for music programs, enhanced aural and motor skill growth, development of leadership skills and personal character, improved opportunities for university/college scholarships, more career opportunities, heightened quality of life, greater exposure to world music, development of social skills, growth of expressive skills, improved of performance standards, increased cost-effectiveness of school districts, and greater recognition of students and their schools.
When assessing responses to possible negative outcomes of string programs, no items in either the negative program or student outcomes categories were rated higher that 2.76. The low rating was an indication that most music teachers did not feel a strong affirmation of negative benefits with string program outcomes. The highest negative outcomes ratings for programs were a lack of qualified string teachers available to teach the classes, instrument cost, lack of adequate facilities, and a lack of calendar space, all of which focus more on logistical issues than on instructional outcomes. Under negative student outcomes, only two items had a mean higher than 2.0. Those items were lack of trained teachers to work with students and student scheduling issues. Based on these findings, it appears that music teachers tend to agree that there are few negative student or curricular outcomes associated with string programs. This finding was additionally confirmed based on the results of a question that asked music teachers if they felt string programs were beneficial or detrimental to music programs overall. Subjects could indicate that either string programs were beneficial or detrimental. Ninety-eight percent, or 301 of the music teachers, believed that string programs were beneficial to music programs, while only seven participants indicated that string programs were detrimental.
To investigate the second research question, “What are the underlying issues of music teachers’ perceptions about the positive and negative impacts of string programs?” two principal components analyses were computed. When assessing underlying issues contributing to positive benefits of string programs, almost 70% of the variance contributing to the solution was accounted for in the analysis. By far the largest contributor was student development benefits, accounting for almost 60% of the total variance. Items under this factor included student skill development in: leadership, motor skills, social skills, self-concept, self-esteem, and expression, and so forth. The two other factors that contributed approximately another 10% of the variance to the total solution were items that related to expanded experiences and logistical and support issues. These included items pertaining to expanded musical, repertoire, ensemble, and curricular offerings (Factor 2), and increased budget, community, parental, and administrative support, enrollment, and so forth (Factor 3).
When assessing underlying issues contributing to possible negative outcomes of string programs, again almost 70% of the variance contributing to the solution was accounted for in the analysis. The largest contributor in this analysis was program focus and support, accounting for over 52% of the total variance. Items under this factor included decreased student participation in other programs, motivation, and development of expressive performance skills, parental and community support, focus, and so forth. Three other factors, Logistical Issues, Pecuniary Issues, and Qualified Instructors contributed almost 17% of the variance to the solution and were items that related to scheduling, calendar, and performance facilities issues, as well as program costs, and lack of trained personal to provide string instruction.
The underlying perceived benefits and negative outcomes of string programs appear to be somewhat similar, however, it could be argued that the positive outcomes are slightly more instruction oriented, with a focus on student growth and development. Negative outcomes are focused on budgetary, funding and fundraising issues, as well as concerns of finding qualified string teachers.
Research questions three and four dealt with the relationships of fixed factors and the perceptions of the impact of string programs, and the comparison of underlying issues with one another. While correlations were found to be significant, they were low and deemed to have little practical significance. It can therefore be concluded that there are no meaningful relationships between fixed factors and the perceptions of the impact of string programs, nor the comparison of underlying issues with one another.
Summary
Although any generalizations should be avoided due to the low response rate and population of only two states, clearly, there appears to be strong support for string programs among music teachers. The benefits of string programs as promoted by various authors and organizations seem to be validated by the findings in this study. String programs, at least as perceived by music teachers, do offer expanded opportunities for student musical, social, and intrapersonal growth as well as enhanced interaction and programmatic development among all music/arts programs, potentially leading to increased community, parental, and administration support for music and arts programs.
Abril and Gault (2006, 2008) and Williams (2007) found that principals believed music programs were successful in enabling the realization of musical and educational learning goals and assisting in the development of student skill sets in such areas as composing, performance, and critical listening. Other researchers (Greenwood, 1991; Liddell, 1977; Payne, 1990; Punke, 1972; Rogers, 1985; Stroud, 1980) have found that administrators tend to support elementary general music programs, bands, and band competitions. While there seems to be general support for music programs among administrators, additional research is necessary to help clarify and determine the perceptions of principals regarding the value and benefits of string programs specifically. The perceptions of students and parents, as well as those of classroom teachers, could provide information leading to the development of effective strategies for the marketing and eventual creation of new string programs in school districts across the United States that do not now have programs. The value/benefit of string programs as assessed by music teachers is very strong and positive. It would seem important that should this perception prevail among all segments of the population, students, parents, administrators, and so forth, that a course of action be implemented to provide string instruction in all schools in America.