Presented at The Seventh International Symposium on Assessment in Music Education in March 2019.
Abstract
Music teacher assessment, evaluation, and effectiveness have been topics of concern for music educators, yet few studies have synthesized the complexities found within the collective experiences. Furthermore, while Bernard, Cote, Potter, and Sturdevant (2018) presented on separating the strands of assessment and evaluation, and the National Association for Music Education released position statements on assessment (n.d.) and evaluation (2012), perceptions of evaluation and assessment remain ambiguous.
Similar issues of ambiguity can be found in teacher perceptions of effectiveness. Biasutti and Concina (2018) examined the impact of assessment on in-service music teachers’ self-efficacy. Hennessy (2017) took a similar approach, but instead examined student teacher confidence in relation to assessment. Upon examination of 205 student teachers, Baumgartner and Councill (2017) found that in addition to student behavior, assessment and evaluation were the most frequently discussed topics in the student teacher seminars they examined. Additionally, several studies in music education have criticized the high-stakes assessment practices of edTPA in the past two years (Koziel, 2018; Olson & Rao, 2017; Petchauer, Bowe, & Wilson, 2018 Parker & Draves, 2017; Vaughan-Marra & Marra, 2017).
While in-service teachers have also expressed disdain for high-stakes assessment (Prichard, 2018; Robinson, 2017; Schmidt, 2017), the inconsistencies in how music teachers are assessed across the country have made it difficult to offer a unified response to evaluation and assessment practices. For example, while some states require measures of student growth for teacher evaluations, others do not (Education Commission of the States, 2018). Additionally, school districts around the country use a plethora of different evaluation tools (Fisher, Frey, & Hite, 2016). Meanwhile, at the university level, some states require students to pass a standardized test such as the Praxis Core Academic Skills for Educators, some require students to pass a teacher performance assessment such as the edTPA, some require both, and some require neither (May, Willie, Worthen, & Pehrson, 2017).
Furthermore, the variability in assessment practices between pre-service teachers and in-service teachers has stifled opportunities for collaboration between these two groups. However, while Koziel (2018) reported many problems with edTPA, she found that some evaluation models in Tennessee like the Tennessee Fine Arts Portfolio Model may serve as a bridge of collaboration between pre-service and in-service teachers:
The overlap of the requirements for these two portfolio assessments was seen as an opportunity for the cooperating teachers to develop an understanding of the edTPA, giving them more confidence in assisting the teacher candidate assigned to them. (p. 100)
The Tennessee Fine Arts Portfolio may therefore serve as a connecting point for pre-service music teachers and in-service music teachers to collectively consider music teacher perceptions of assessment, evaluation, and effectiveness.
Over the last year, I examined music teacher perceptions of assessment practices in Tennessee. Beginning with a phenomenological study, I found themes pertaining to administration, feedback, music making, and scores. From there, I conducted an analysis of standards usage (N = 5628) among fine arts teachers in Tennessee and found significant differences between the fine arts subjects taught and the standards domain submissions (p < .001). I found that the “perform” standards were used twice as often as any other music standard. However, upon examination of the counties in Tennessee that submitted artifacts, I found a majority-Black rural county where perform was used less than the state average, and domains such as create and connect were used more. Therefore, using the lens of critical race theory, I conducted a narrative study with an award-winning Black female band director within that county. In her narrative, she spoke about consistent interactions between collaboration, knowledge, and racism within Tennessee, including examples of inequitable assessment practices.
While these studies examined music teacher evaluation in Tennessee from different methodological perspectives, I found several consistencies among the studies that helped to inform my most recent study of evaluation practices in Tennessee. The purpose of this study was to examine music teacher (K-12 public school) perceptions of evaluation from the perspective of those who have used portfolio-based evaluation in Tennessee. Research questions included: 1) What are the perceptions of evaluation for music teachers in Tennessee who have the used the Tennessee Fine Arts Portfolio Measures? 2) To what extent do differences in music teacher perceptions of the Tennessee Fine Arts Portfolio Measures exist among a range of backgrounds? Connections to previous research, results, and implications were discussed.
References
Baumgartner, C. M., & Councill, K. H. (2017). Music student teaching seminars: An examination of current practices across the United States. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 35(2), 62-69.
Bernard, C., Cote, H., Potter, D., & Sturdevant, R. (2018, March 23). Discourse & feedback in music teacher evaluation, part 2. Presented at the National Association for Music Education Music Research and Teacher Education Conference, Atlanta, GA.
Biasutti, M., & Concina, E. (2018). The effective music teacher: The influence of personal, social, and cognitive dimensions on music teacher self-efficacy. Musicae Scientiae, 22(2), 264-279.
Education Commission of the States. (2018). Policy Snapshot. Retrieved from https://www.ecs.org/wp-content/uploads/Teacher_Evaluations.pdf
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Hite, S. A. (2016). Intentional and targeted teaching: A framework for teacher growth and leadership. ASCD.
Hennessy, S. (2017). Approaches to increasing the competence and confidence of student teachers to teach music in primary schools. Education 3-13, 45(6), 689-700.
Koziel, E. B. (2018). Are We Lovin’ It?: The edTPA and the McDonaldization of Music Teacher Training (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 10788085)
May, B. N., Willie, K., Worthen, C., & Pehrson, A. (2017). An analysis of state music education certification and licensure practices in the United States. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 27(1), 65-88.
National Association for Music Education. (2012). Teacher evaluation (position statement). National Association for Music Education. Retrieved August 29, 2018, from https://nafme.org/about/position-statements/teacher-evaluation-position-statement/
National Association for Music Education. (n.d.). Assessment in music education (position statement). National Association for Music Education. Retrieved August 29, 2018, from https://nafme.org/about/position-statements/assessment-in-music-education-position-statement/
Olson, J. D., & Rao, A. B. (2017). Adopting the edTPA as a high-stakes assessment: Resistance, advocacy, and reflection in Illinois. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 29(4), 377-402.
Parker, E. C., & Draves, T. J. (2017). A narrative of two preservice music teachers with visual impairment. Journal of Research in Music Education, 64(4), 385-404.
Petchauer, E., Bowe, A. G., & Wilson, J. (2018). Winter is coming: Forecasting the impact of edTPA on black teachers and teachers of color. The Urban Review, 50(2), 323-343.
Prichard, S. (2018). A profile of high-stakes assessment practices in music teacher education. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 27(3), 198-209.
Robinson, M. (2017). Music teachers’ perceptions of high stakes teacher evaluation. Arts Education Policy Review, 1-12. doi:10.1080/10632913.2017.1373380
Schmidt, P. (2017). Why policy matters. In P. Schmidt & R. Colwell (Eds.), Policy and the political life of music education (pp. 11-36). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Svec, C. L. (2018). The effects of instruction on the singing ability of children ages 5 to 11: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Music, 46(3), 326-339.
Vaughan-Marra, J. C., & Marra, C. M. (2017). Teaching music in the flat world: Reflections on the work of Darling-Hammond and Rothman. Arts Education Policy Review, 118(2), 123-132.