Reflections on Entire Course

This course certainly has been an eye opening experience. During the first couple of weeks, I was still of the opinion that action research was little more than basic trial and error that most teachers have done since the beginning of time. However, as we progressed through the rather lengthy process of developing a specific research project, it became clear that it is significantly more complicated than that simple formulation.

As we worked through all the various phases of developing the topic, it was enlightening to see just how much planning and forethought was required to account for all the possible factors that could influence the results of the study.  The level of detail required was sometimes overwhelming and generated a whole new level of respect for those who engage in this work on an ongoing basis.  In particular, the massive amounts of reading required to do justice to the Review of Literature section were much more than I had realized going into the process.

It was a very productive exercise to engage in the Research Scavenger Hunt.  This provided a fun means of learning how to search the various databases as well as providing a needed tutorial in the basics of APA citation protocols.  While this process was made more complicated at first by the difficulty of installing the Virtual Private Network program, once that was finally put in place it became much easier to access the wide range of journals online.

Mertler's text was quite readable and understandable.  It really helped to make some of the complex concepts of research understandable to those of us who are new to this field.  Phillips seemed to cover the subjects in more technical depth, but was also a little more difficult to understand at times.  However, the two of them together seemed to balance each other out quite well and provided a well rounded background on these sometimes challenging issues.  The final chapter of Phillips, which was the assigned reading for this week, provided a good summary of the issues involved in bridging the traditional gap between the classroom teacher and the professional researcher. 

The videos did help to emphasize the main points of Mertler's book.  As I stated in an earlier post, they particularly were helpful in the sections dealing with statistical analysis.  Those of us who are not well trained in statistics can use all the help we can get in comprehending some of those concepts.

The additional videos were a mixed bag - mostly positive but one or two caused more puzzlement than anything about what the person was trying to convey.  In particular, the one rambling dissertation about what one would say to the President was rather strange.  Others, however, were quite good.  The "presentation Zen" particularly stood out as a very useful explanation of the basics of putting together a good visual package to enhance, rather than detract from, the message being communicated.  The NAMM videos towards the end were also quite good.

Overall I see the value in having this particular course as a part of the program.  With a capstone project being a required culmination of the degree program, at least now we will have some idea of where to start as we begin to develop our possible topics and questions.  It also has helped open my eyes to the value of what researchers can discover.  I don't know that I will necessarily continue as a researcher in the long term, but it certainly has given me a new respect for those who choose to do so.

Reflections on Week 7

This has been a rather stressful week in many regards. My wife and I had our 10 and 9 year old grandchildren with us for the week. (I realize once again why you have children when you are young!) As the end of the term nears, the size and scope of the assignments seems to grow accordingly. In particular, I had a number of technical challenges trying to get the Present Me program to work. I ended up spending two hours trying unsuccessfully to get the sound to record. I adjusted settings numerous times without appreciable improvement. Also, although I had my Powerpoint slides set to reveal one bullet point at a time for a couple of bulleted lists, in the transfer to the Present Me software, it changed those to bring up all the entire slide at once. I ended up having to switch to a different computer with an attached external camera/microphone unit to be able to complete the project.

The video by the presentation Zen master was extremely informative and quite helpful. I have sat through far too many of the type of presentations he describes where the speaker places their entire outline on the screen and then proceeds to read every word to you, as if you are unable to read it for yourself. In preparing my presentation I attempted to strike the balance of having important quotes and or information listed without having every slide loaded up with unnecessary text. I also think I was able to obtain picture illustrations that enhanced the points being made without being overbearing.

Dr. Mertler's videos were a good wrap up to his overall series. They helped drive home the point about what we are trying to accomplish with educational research as well as emphasizing the importance of communicating our results to other interested parties who may benefit from the work done in our studies. I am particularly intrigued by the online community he has set up and am interested to see how that might aid in educational endeavors going forward.

The video of Dr. Hodges was absolutely fascinating to me! His description of how music permeates virtually every part of the universe is amazing and really captured my attention. He refers to evolution several times and I have no idea if he is a man of faith. However, as a man of faith myself, this reminds me of the Psalms which state that "the heavens proclaim the glory of God. Day after day they pour forth his praise." I know it is risky injecting religious beliefs into a forum such as this, but that was my honest initial reaction at hearing Dr. Hodges' description. I thoroughly enjoyed that clip.

Now we turn to to the final home stretch... the end is in sight! It has been quite an eye opening experience!

Reflections on Week 6

This was a much calmer week than the previous two, although it began with a 20 hour travel day on Monday. I finally was able to make it home late Monday night. It has taken me most of the week to get over jetlag and back on my normal sleep schedule, but I think I am finally there.

The readings this week were helpful to clarify the details of quantitative research. Not being a trained statistician, the terminology and procedures of detailed analysis of data present a significant challenge. Both Phillips and Mertler provided good detailed explanations of the main measures of central tendency that we were to use. It also helped that Dr. Brophy also covered some of these same concepts in the Summer A class which I had previously completed. Being a non-statistician, it is extremely helpful to have this explained multiple times from different perspectives. The video clips also provided another helpful repetition. I think I may finally be starting to understand it.

All of this background made the data analysis assignment much easier to complete. Dr. Brophy had also given us a similar assignment dealing with mean, median, mode and standard deviation. However, we did not cover correlation in his assignments, so that was another learning experience. I have often heard the phrase "correlation does not equal causation" and now I feel I have a much better handle on that distinction.

In working on the procedures segment, I did learn a few important things that will better inform my final project proposal. For one, I realized that limiting the participants to just my local school district would probably be too narrow a focus to obtain enough responses, since there are only 11 middle schools in the district. I also learned several important things about using Survey Monkey. I initially used it due to time constraints, but then came to realize that the convenience factor for potential participants would probably increase the overall response rate. However, in using the free version I was limited to only using 10 questions. That allowed me my multiple choice options, but did not allow me to include the open ended Question 11 or to add the questions for demographic information. This really limits the possibilities of determining any possible correlations. In going forward I will need to upgrade to the first paid level which will allow me an unlimited number of questions.

This is all helpful information as we turn toward the home stretch of the last two weeks!

Reflections on Week 5

This week was extremely long but good. We had a great time of music teaching in France with concluding concerts on Saturday in the town of Anduze in the south. That made for a very long day with one concert in the town square in the afternoon and another in the town cathedral in the evening. Both went well, but by the time we loaded up and made the return trip to the camp, we arrived back after midnight. Then it was a two day process to get home - with a one night stopover in Paris and then two flights and a drive home from Tampa to cap a 20 hour travel day.

 I was able to watch all the videos for the week. They did give a very good idea of what a literature review is - as well as what it is not. I must say that I found the video with Patricia Campbell to be somewhat strange. I gather she is trying to emphasize the importance of the arts, but I found it somewhat rambling and a bit difficult to follow the main point. By contrast, Dr. Mertler's video about the proper framing of questions helped move further down the process of putting together a good research proposal. It also served to complement and summarize the main point of the assigned chapter in his book.

Phillips helped to reiterate some basic information about data collection methodology. While the scientific method is generally known by many from previous science classes, it is good to see how it is to be specifically applied to design of research plans. Many of the specific terms had been covered in other contexts (particularly in previous readings in Mertler) but it was helpful to have them explained again from a slightly different perspective. For those of us who don't work with statistics on a regular basis, such explanations of terms bear repeating more than once!

Now that I am back home from my globetrotting travels, I am hopeful that I will be better able to keep up with deadlines in the weeks to come.

Reflections on Week 4

This has been a very unusual week. I am writing this from the mountains of southern France - specifically near the town of Chamborigaud. I have been here since Friday along with 7 others from Florida to teach at a Salvation Army music camp here. This is the first time in 15 years that the France Salvation Army has been able to put together a camp such as this and my friends and I were requested to come and assist with the teaching responsibilities. We are teaching everything from band classes (3 levels), chorus and various electives. I am also writing some quick "on the spot" arrangements as needed for some of the ensembles.

In the mean time I am also working to try to get my required work done for this class. I apologize for some of this being late, but I have to squeeze it in where I can. (We also had issues with our wireless router yesterday, but of course being Sunday, they couldn't get anyone in to fix it.)

I did manage to watch all the videos with the exception of the one concerning Dr. Woody's work. Try as I might I just could not get that to load sufficiently for me to be able to watch it. The other videos were quite helpful in better understanding what a literature review is - and just as importantly - what it isn't. It really helped me begin to crystallize in my mind what the nature of the assignment will be as I get going with it later today.

The group case study for the discussion group was very interesting to me. As one who has worked for a number of years in a public secondary school situation, I still find it very hard to believe that not one of those 4 teachers felt that role ambiguity was an issue. As I stated in my discussion post, I would think that must be due to having a larger staff and the ability to divide things between team members more efficiently. In two different school situations I have been the entire music department and I can attest to role ambiguity being a significant factor in those type of situations.

The readings in Phillips this week helped to clarify some of the issues and procedures that make up qualitative research. In particular, the brief explanations for each of the characteristics of research (Phillips, p.83-84)gave good nutshell type descriptions of what each of these mean and how they should be taken into consideration. The division of modes of inquiry into the two main categories of interpretive studies and critical theory are instructive. I must say that have long had difficulty personally with much of what is passed off in the name of critical theory. It has been my experience that too much of this type of work results from an individual getting on their own personal hobby horse and trying to beat everyone else into submission. As the text states "most critical theorists regard objectivity in social sciences as no more than a polite fiction". (p.86) If objectivity is not even seen as a desirable trait, it is hard for me to see how the reported results can be weighted much more than just personal opinion.

However, the included case study provides a most interesting perspective. The outstanding success of many young Asians has been noted for quite some time. This study begins to provide a small window into some of the cultural influences and pressures that have had a hand in the development of so many fine musicians from similar backgrounds.

Once again Mertler has been helpful in moving further along that path towards a workable research project. What stood out to me was his emphasis on designing research questions in such a way as to provide data that clearly responds to the question raised. In addition, I had never really had correlation coefficients explained to me before and I thought his explanation was very understandable. I have always heard the saying that "correlation is not necessarily causation" and now it begins to make more sense.

By then moving into the explanation of group comparison designs, he helps fill in that gap to move on to how one actually does establish reasonable evidence of causation. I do also appreciate the emphasis on ethical behavior in this process. Human beings are not lab animals and each should be treated with the respect and dignity they deserve. Adequate disclosure of what the participant will be exposed to and the obtaining of informed consent are simple standards of ethical respect. Sadly, in the day in which we live, it is necessary to spell this out in black and white to try to prevent abuses.

Reflections on Week 3

The Research Scavenger Hunt assignment was an interesting (and creative) way to learn how to use the various research and library databases. It was made more complicated by the difficulty in downloading and installing the VPN software. Until that was finally resolved (Friday afternoon for me) it was possible to access the university library, but it was difficult to access some of the specific databases. The system kept asking for subscriber sign in information which I did not have available. Once I was able to complete the VPN installation, things proceeded much more smoothly.

It was eye opening to begin to realize just how much material is out there. In some cases, the initial search would produce more than 10,000 results. Even when I adjusted the search terms to be more specific, it often still resulted in a very long list to go through. I suppose that as I learn more about the specific topic I choose I hopefully with also learn more effective ways to narrow down the search parameters.

The discussions this week were very interesting. As one begins to see how others are starting to narrow the focus of their topics it begins to make me realize how much work I still need to do in that area. Both of my possibilities are still rather broad and that does cause me some concern. While I feel strongly about the dementia and music issue, I fear that, unless I can drastically narrow it down, it may prove to be too much for me to handle on my own with my current resources. I am starting to think that, if I do pursue this, it may have to be as some sort of meta study of the various research projects of those with more of a medical background. I have noticed that there has been quite a bit of brain research on music and its effects in recent years. While not specifically related to my topic, I was interested to see this article a couple days ago: Why music makes our brain sing?

I do recall seeing more discussions along these lines recently and would like to see where that trail may lead. I also remember an elderly gentleman I knew years ago who was a tremendous singer. He had a debilitating stroke on his right side. He could no longer walk and could barely speak without difficulty. However, when he would start to sing, he was just as good as ever. When several of us questioned how that was possible, the explanation given by his doctor was that music resided in a different part of the brain than speech or motor control. This was my first brief exposure to the intricacies of brain research. It causes me to wonder if the musical skills of my father-in-law might be somehow wired into a different part of his brain than the common ordinary things that he struggles with so much now. He can't remember whether or not he had lunch today but he still can play some of his cornet solos from years ago completely from memory without missing a beat.

Overall this process has been quite enlightening. It makes me realize that well designed research requires a lot more planning and forethought than I had previously understood.

Reflections on Week 2

First, I did manage to get my copy of Phillips’ book this week and catch up on the reading.  This was particularly helpful in covering the components of the typical research article.  Phillips does explain these in some detail, which was helpful in completing the Research article review assignment.  The sections on “The Quality of the Presentation” and “The Trust Factor” also outline important considerations in those vital areas. 

I also thought that the first chapter will prove useful in locating relevant research literature with its listing of the number of websites that compile and list research studies and doctoral dissertations. 

In watching the videos, I was particularly struck by the young cellist in Dr. Duke’s video.  His very personal explanation of what he thinks “The Swan” is communicating is matched by the look of absolute pleasure on his face as he plays.  The follow up comment that this joy of expression is too often what is lost in the course of developing skill, in music or anything else.  If the student doesn’t internalize what is being presented, the teacher has not succeeded.  If it doesn’t go out of the classroom and get applied in some fashion, it has little value.  I also appreciated his emphasis on resisting the temptation to solve students’ problems for them rather than allowing them to solve them for themselves.  I also love the concept of creating “strategic confusion” in the minds of students to force them to learn to think for themselves.

I also enjoyed Dr. Mertler’s emphasis on self-examination as a major part of the reconnaissance process.  If we are not able to examine our own biases and tendencies, it becomes very difficult to accurately assess the problems in a situation and to come up with likely ways to correct them.  It also, though, helps point out the importance of gaining information from different perspectives to help overcome our own limitations and biases.  What we may not catch or understand may be caught and brought to our attention by someone else.

Mertler’s stages for action research outline (1. Planning; 2. Acting; 3. Developing; 4. Reflecting) makes a lot of sense to me. I relate to them in terms of how good teachers have always operated: Identify a problem – Come up with possible solutions – Try out the solutions – Analyze results to see what works/what doesn’t – Make adjustments based on that analysis – Repeat the process.  In fact, Phillips describes this as “trial and error discovery.”   

While I understand Mertler’s reasons for breaking those four basic steps down into the eventual 9 sub-steps, in some ways it makes things a bit more complicated.  The process will not always follow neatly in that same order.  At times it will prove necessary to repeat steps or rearrange the order as the various cycles develop over time.  In the example I gave from my early teaching experience, it could be said that I ran several cycles of the first two steps before ever moving on to the 3^rd and 4^th steps, yet the overall process was successful as evidenced by the steady improvement of the ensemble in this area over the course of a three year period.

Reflections on Week 1

This has been a crazy, busy week.  I spent it at a weeklong Salvation Army music camp in Keystone Heights, FL (near Starke) teaching 2nd year brass band classes, theory and a class in Beginning Brass Arranging.  Sandwiched in between those teaching responsibilities, I did my best to keep up with the work for this class. (Fortunately, there was good internet access at the camp to make that possible.)  We finished up the camp with our final concert and awards program Saturday morning and returned home to Naples by late Saturday night.

I was able to watch all the videos and read the Misconceptions about Scientific Research in Music Education pdf.  As I stated in my related discussion post, it helped to answer quite a number of the reservations I had previously held concerning "taking the mystery out of music".  Also, though, I still do have some lingering reservations about the possibility of some sort of a "Heisenberg uncertainty principle" effect - that the mere act of intense observation actually changes the behavior being observed.

In watching the videos, I was particularly struck by the second speaker Dr. Thompson.  Her short presentation helped me to realize that what we talking about here is not some esoteric study being conducted by mysterious men in lab coats in some ivory tower.  Rather, it is something that good teachers already do instinctively, if informally.  As I have taught in many different contexts over a 30+ year career, I have often found that the first time through any new class is the hardest.  You have ideas about what to try, but you don't know for sure if those ideas will actually work until you try them out.

I experienced a bit of that this past week with the Brass Arranging class I taught.  Although I have personally done brass arranging for nearly 25 years as a personal hobby, this is the first time I have actually taught a class to help students begin to learn how to do it themselves.  The first day was a bit rocky as I found myself talking way too much - trying to explain way too much information too quickly.  In reflecting on that after that first day was over, I realized that I had tried to dump too large of a chunk of information on them in one day.  I also had failed to allow them enough time to actually start working on writing music - the ostensible purpose of the class.  On the second day, I started by apologizing for trying to dump "25 years of lessons learned" on them in 25 minutes.  I then covered a much smaller chunk of information and gave them the rest of the time to actually start putting that bit into practice.  If I understand the concept correctly, this is an example of informal "action research."

When I was able to return home and found that my copy of Mertler's book had arrived, I was able to complete the reading from his first chapter and find that he was making much the same point.  I particularly appreciated how his introduction made the point by contrasting common mental images of "research" with a more practical understanding of what action research really is.  We have hopefully all been exposed to the scientific method in other contexts, but I had not really thought of how it might apply to music teaching.  We just have to learn how to more intelligently and systematically apply it to our own teaching.

Mertler's detailed explanations of the various possible approaches (inductive vs. deductive; experimental vs. non-experimental) is quite helpful to clarify the different possibilities.  The outlining of various research models also helps to begin the thought process for us as we try to start developing ideas for possible projects for this class.

Unfortunately, although my copy of Phillips' book has been ordered, it has not yet arrived.  Hopefully it will arrive in tomorrow's mail and I can quickly catch up on the assigned readings in it.