Music

## Contents

* 1 Promoting Music Education using ICTs
* 2 Problem
* 3 Role of ICTs
* 4 Obstacles
* 5 Works cited

## Promoting Music Education using ICTs[edit | edit source]

Keith Pender, Memorial University of Newfoundland

## Problem[edit | edit source]

In thinly populated areas, accessing quality music education is sometimes a problem due to the absence of instrumentalists for face-to-face teaching and learning (Brändström, Wiklund, & Lundström, 2012). In geographically distant locations, rural schools may not have a musician available for the instruction of instrumental performance, such as the case was with a school located in Northern Canada that had no music teacher living in the community (Murphy, 2005). This limited access to professional instrumentalists disadvantages children from having equal opportunities for quality music education, as found by Riley (2009), where most students in the study had no formal music instruction at their school. The accessibility to music education maybe addressed through generalist teachers, however as Gall and Breeze (2007) found, generalist teachers felt they were not sufficiently prepared to teach music classes.

The obstacles of balancing instructional time with teaching and learning of prescribed content and curriculum outcomes in instrumental performance settings are sometimes hindered due to learning music notation (Chan, Jones, Scanlon, & Joiner, 2006). Learning music notation may be due to students missing practical musical knowledge in compulsory music classes or difficulties with transferring music to symbols (Crawford, 2009). After completing a survey of an introductory to music course at a public university, post-secondary students noted variances of success in reading music notation (Horspool & Yang, 2010). This problem may be because, as Vratulis and Morton (2011) stated, “notation offers few opportunities for increasing musical understanding through the examination of the sociocultural contexts of music” (p. 401).

## Role of ICTs[edit | edit source]

ICTs enables music education to be more accessible for participants by providing students with tools essential for learning in music classroom activities (Chan et al., 2006). Pitts and Kwami (2002) found that students with limited musical knowledge were successful in generating ideas through ICTs. Completing a musical activity with ICTs allows for students to work independently, permitting the teacher to move freely through the classroom to assist students (Byrne & MacDonald, 2002). Other findings of ICTs in music education enabled technologies to be used for expressing music symbols in innovative ways (Crawford, 2009), generating sounds quickly with computer software (Savage, 2005), learning to play the piano though built-in assistive guides (Chan et al., 2006), creating background tracks for improvising and composing pieces (Byrne & MacDonald, 2002), and investigating music traditions from around the world through resources on the Internet (Wise, Greenwood, & Davis, 2011).

Other advantages to use of ICTs included opportunities for students to work interactively with recording technologies and receive feedback during compositional or performance exercises (Savage, 2005), the ability to see and hear the musical product (Gall & Breeze, 2007), viewing authentic examples of performances on YouTube (Wise et al., 2011), creating musical compositions with software (Vratulis & Morton, 2011), and improvement in reading music, pitch recognition, and rhythmic skills through the use of ICTs (Ho, 2004b). Ho (2004a) found that use of ICTs allowed students to feel confident in applying their knowledge of music related activities.

Use of ICTs affords new opportunities for learning music education in online environments (Brändström, Wiklund, & Lundström, 2012). Using podcasts allows students access to recordings, lecture material and resources (Keast, 2009). Seddon and Biasutti (2009) found that participants were able to play an improvised blues scale by ear after watching demonstrations of a podcast. Tam (2012) noted that podcasts were effective tools when they are used with follow up questions, assessment, or extension activities. Bugos, Nelson, and Dixon (2009) stated, “students receiving the podcast episodes reported feeling more competent” (p. 42). Other advantages of ICTs in online contexts included online forums and social media for communicating, uploading files and receiving feedback (Lebler, 2012), and publishing content to the Internet (Coutinho & Mota, 2011).

The use of video conferencing provided students with the opportunities of learning music through distance learning (Brändström et al, 2012). In tutor sessions, participants felt the setting had a natural feel, similar to face-to-face instruction (Kruse, Harlos, Callahan, & Herring, 2013). Orman and Whitaker (2010) reported that distance music lessons involved uninterrupted student performance followed by synchronous instructor feedback. In rural and urban classrooms, Murphy (2005) noted that participants benefited from accessing professional musicians as well as the opportunities afforded through cultural connections.

## Obstacles[edit | edit source]

Access to professional development in technology training was an obstacle in implementing ICTs in music education (Savage, 2010). Crawford (2009) reported that professional development seminars in technology are helpful, however practicing skills learned in training sessions needs to be done on a regular basis in order to improve technological pedagogical content knowledge. Implementing ICTs will also involve music educators being responsible for finding time for exploring and becoming familiar with various technologies (Southcott & Crawford, 2011).

Access to technical support was an issue in implementing ICTs in music education (Gall & Breeze, 2007). Murphy (2005) noted that having a lead individual hired to address complications “played an essential role in managing the complexity of the technology” (p. 535).

Problems relating to delays in audio and video were experienced during a piano lesson via Skype (Kruse et al., 2013). Although the participants had technical problems, the two individuals managed to resolve the problem by first muting the program periodically to reduce delay, and secondly investing additional monies into various combinations of software and hardware (Kruse et al., 2013). Orman and Whitaker (2010) also noted additional problems with eye contact and limited field of view during synchronous video lessons. Implications regarding video conferencing may improve over time as software companies and developers improve the design and capabilities of their products (Kruse et al., 2013). According to Riley (2009), the author feels that “the positive results of bringing music education to students in remote or disadvantaged locations far outweigh any problems with logistics” (p. 374).

## Works cited[edit | edit source]

Alberich-Artal, E., and Sangra, A. (2011). Virtual virtuosos: A case study in learning music in virtual learning environments in Spain. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning,  2011(1), 1-9. Retrieved September 8, 2013 from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2012/Alberich-Artal_Sangra.htm.

Brändström, S., Wiklund, C., and Lundström, E. (2012). Developing distance music education in arctic Scandinavia: Electric guitar teaching and master classes. Music Education Research, 14(4), 448-456. DOI: 10.1080/14613808.2012.703173.

Bugos, J., Nelson, J., and Dixon, M. (2009). Podcasting: A method of enhancing course perceptions and performance in music appreciation. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 6(1), Retrieved September 14, 2013 from http://itdl.org/journal/jan_09/article04.htm.

Byrne, C., and MacDonald, R. (2002). The use of information & communication technology (ICT) in the Scottish music curriculum: A focus group investigation of themes and issues. Music  Education Research, 4(2), 263–273. DOI: 10.1080/1461380022000011957.

Chan, L., Jones, A., Scanlon, E., and Joiner, R. (2006). The use of ICT to support the development of practical musical skills through acquiring keyboard skills: a classroom based study. Computers & Education, 46(4), 391-406. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2004.08.007.

Coutinho, C., and Mota, P. (2011). Web 2.0 technologies in music education in Portugal: Using podcasts for learning. Computers in the Schools, 28(1), 56-74. DOI: 10.1080/07380569.2011.552043.

Crawford, R. (2009). Secondary school music education: A case study in adapting to ICT resource limitations. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(4), 471-488. Retrieved September 9, 2013 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet25/crawford.html.

Gall, M., and Breeze, N. (2007). The sub‐culture of music and ICT in the classroom. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 16(1), 41-56. DOI: 10.1080/14759390601168015.

Ho, W. (2007). Students experiences with and preferences for using information technology in music learning in Shanghai’s secondary schools. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 699-714. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00643.x.

Ho, W. (2004a). Attitudes toward information technology in music learning among Hong Kong Chinese boys and girls. British Journal of Music Education, 21(2), 143-161. DOI: 10.1017/S0265051704005662.

Ho, W. (2004b). Use of information technology and music learning in the search for quality education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 57–67. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467- 8535.2004.00368.x.

Horspool, A., and Yang, S. (2010). A comparison of university student perceptions and success learning music online and face-to-face. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 17-29. Retrieve September 14, 2013 from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no1/horspool_0310.pdf.

Keast, D. (2009). A constructivist application for online learning in music. Research and Issues in Music Education, 7(1). Retrieved September 9, 2013 from http://www.stthomas.edu/rimeonline/vol7/keast.htm.

Kruse, N., Harlos, S., Callahan, R., and Herring M. (2013). Skype music lessons in the academy: Intersections of music education, applied music and technology. Journal of Music, Technology and  Education, 6(1), 43-60. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/jmte.6.1.43_1.

Lebler, D. (2012). Technology and students' musicking: Enhancing the learning experience. Theory into Practice, 51(3), 204-211. DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2012.690302.

Murphy, E. (2005). Issues in the adoption of broadband-enabled learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 525-536. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00490.x.

Orman, E., and Whitaker, J. (2010). Time usage during face-to-face and synchronous distance music lessons. American Journal of Distance Education, 24(2), 93-103. DOI: 10.1080/08923641003666854.

Pitts, A., and Kwami, R. (2002). Raising students’ performance in music composition through the use of information and communications technology (ICT): A survey of secondary schools in England. British Journal of Music Education, 19(1), 61-71. DOI: 10.1017/S0265051702000141

Riley, P. (2009). Video-conferenced music teaching: Challenges and progress. Music Education Research, 11(3), 365-375. DOI: 10.1080/14613800903151580.

Savage, J. (2010). A survey of ICT usage across English secondary schools. Music Education Research, 12(1), 89-104. DOI: 10.1080/14613800903568288.

Savage, J. (2005). Working towards a theory for music technologies in the classroom: How pupils engage with and organize sounds with new technologies. British Journal of Music Education,  22(2), 167-180. DOI: 10.1017/S0265051705006133.

Seddon, F., and Biasutti, M. (2009). Evaluating a music e-learning resource: The participants’ perspective. Computers & Education, 53(3), 541-549. Retrieved September 8, 2013 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.011.

Southcott, J., and Crawford, R. (2011). The intersections of curriculum development: Music, ICT, and Australian music education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(1), 122- 136\. Retrieved September 14, 2013 from http://ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet27/southcott.pdf.

Tam, C. (2012). The effectiveness of educational podcasts for teaching music and visual arts in higher education. Research in Learning Technology, 20(1), 1-13. DOI: 10.3402/rlt.v20i0.14919.

Wise, S., Greenwood, J., and Davis, N. (2011). Teachers’ use of digital technology in secondary music education: Illustrations of changing classrooms. British Journal of Music Education, 28(2), 117-134. DOI: 10.1017/S0265051711000039.

Vratulis, V., & Morton, C. (2011). A case study exploring the use of Garageband™ and an electronic bulletin board in preservice music education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher  Education, 11(4), 398-419. Retrieved October 3, 2013 from http://www.citejournal.org/vol11/iss4/general/article1.cfm.