LNL Research (or How DAA year 5's beat JC 11's &12's)

If you're interested, go have a listen to My Choir Kids Rehearsing for a music festival.  Bear in mind this is a lunchtime group (not a class) and they met for 9 lunchtimes (approx. 2 1/2  hours total in-school work) before this rehearsal was filmed. 

Following this story is my 3-Year Study on Elementary School Music Achievement at DAA.  But first I must tell you about how a rapidly cobbled together, non-auditioned Dubai American Academy 5th grade Choir beat the 11/12th Grade 'Senior Choir' of Jumierah College in a competition.  JC's group was well-established, and had recently returned to Dubai from winning a Choir Competition in Bahrain.  And they had an almost 2 month head start on the music.  We, on the other hand, while singing every day in class, didn't have an Elementary School Choir, and would have a total of 7 school days to prepare.  

Here's how it happened: 

(**Be aware, the choir in the video link above is not the choir I'm discussing; the group above is another choir from my current school: Horizon School, Dubai.  I wish I had audio or video of the DAA group, but I don't.  Regardless, I'm proud of both groups. More to the point of this article, I used identical MLT-based methods with each group.  Frankly, I know nothing about teaching choirs.  Never sung in one, never had any training in choral methods or voice. **) 

I was at my desk when an urgent message popped in regarding a choir competition coming up in just under a month.  I looked over the materials and could see it was a high school/junior high type competition, and that we were required by our superintendent to have DAA represented.  After replying to the Superintendent that I'll make sure it happens, I forwarded the materials to our outstanding High School choir director Amy with a note to email me back if there's anything else I can do to help.  And then I forgot about it.

Problem solved.   Only, not so much.

Wednesday two weeks later the SP sent me another message asking how preparations were getting on for the competition, and I replied that I didn't know, but I'd email Amy and get back to him.

When his immediate reply appeared in my window, I knew it couldn't be good news.  I clicked on it.  It said:   "No. I sent it to you because your choir needs to do it; Amy's off on bereavement leave and has been for weeks already."

Now my SP was a respected, versatile, educated guy.  Except musically.  So after running immediately up to his office to tell him we didn't specifically HAVE a choir in the Elementary, and that the materials were for upper school kids, he firmly reminded me that DAA would be represented at this competition, and that I told him I'd make it happen.  

So, having recently administered the Level 1 Listening portion of the Iowa Tests of Music Literacy to all 5th graders, as a normal assessment, I grabbed the top 40 scores, and called those kids to a lunchtime meeting.  

I didn't sugar-coat it:  "You're the new DAA choir!  And we're going to a competition in 10 days!"  One boy--new to DAA--balked, saying "I play the flute.  I'm not a singer.  I don't want to audition."   

"Neither is anyone else in this room, officially 'a singer', and there won't be any auditions.  You guys are it!" I said.  "But how do you know if we can sing?"  He continued.  "I don't.  But I absolutely know you're the best listeners, according to those tests you took.  That's why I want you.  Y'all have great ears."
(He ended up staying in the group and was one of the leaders of a wonderfully punchy counter-melody towards the end of the song.)  

So, long story short, my partner-in-crime at that time at DAA, the impossibly delightful Amber Naramore and I, in 6 rehearsals of 30 minutes (they were all during lunch) got the kids ready.  And they won the thing.  Fair and square.  JC placed second. 14 schools. 10 High Schools, 3 Middle Schools, and one Elementary School, us.  

Many of the choirs had excellent intonation and diction; ours did too.  But as the composer of the competition song (Fab Sioul is his name) told us, we won it because no other school captured the style of his music so well.  

In my head and heart I truly feel proud of the work the kids did, but the truth is, Dr. Edwin E. Gordon's work won that competition for us.  

Our implementation of MLT had made the school much more musical over the past 2 years.  Dr. Gordon's ITML tests allowed me to 'audition' kids, by peering into their heads, without them ever making a sound.  

And our rehearsal methods?  Totally extrapolated from Gordon's work:  Lots of listening and moving only in that first rehearsal.  Later we would echo tonal patterns before, after and between resting tones.  We did this in Eb Aeolian using i, iv, VII & VI and also practiced modulating to the relative Major (Gb) using I & V chords  This got their ears into to the harmonic structure of the tune BEFORE we started to practice the melody.  In this way, they sang in tune from the start of melodic rehearsal on the 3rd of 6 days.   

Also during those first 2 days, we worked on movement and chanting in Duple using M/m, D/E, Rest, Tie & Upbeat patterns (the song was very interesting rhythmically!!) to get their sense of rhythm locked in to the types of patterns the tune contained.  

We used tonal solfege to do harmonic work (sans rhythm) to prep them for keeping the divisi's in tune, etc.  You know what we didn't do much of?  Run throughs.  They simply didn't need to be drilled on the song.  And I'm quite sure had we done it the traditional way, the results wouldn't have been quite so rewarding.  

Thanks Ed, you rock!

Now, you may be tempted to stop reading here, as what follows is more dry and academic.  I hope you won't.  The information that follows will give you some insight into why you should buy the ITML's for your school as well.  

Best wishes, Ron

A 3-Year Study on Elementary School Music Achievement at DAA

(Sept. 2006 to June 2009), as measured by the Iowa Tests of Music Literacy—Level 1.

By Ron Malanga, GEMS LNL & ES Music—DAA

This report was presented to the GEMS Executive Council and disseminated throughout the GEMS network of schools as part of the research required for my role as the Learning Network Leader for Music.

Upon arriving at Dubai American Academy in August of 2006, I was concerned with the level of musicianship displayed by otherwise high performing students.  Certainly there were instances of excellence, but overall the 4th and 5th grade students sounded to me as if they had the musical skills of 1st and 2nd grade students.

While I was confident that teaching according to the precepts of Music Learning Theory would improve the situation, some type of objective measurement of the current achievement standards was needed to validate my subjective judgments.

Data from the September 2006 administration of the Iowa Tests of Music Literacy-Level One (ITML) confirmed my observations *. DAA averages in September of 2006 as compared to the US norms, ranged from the 16th %-ile in Rhythm Reading to only as high as the 55th %-ile in Tonal Listening.  See September 2006 results below. [PR=the Percentile Rank. The percentile rank is a nationally (standardized) norm which provides for useful comparison.]

SEPTEMBER 2006 ITML AVERAGES

• GR. 5:  Tonal Listening PR=55th, Tonal Reading PR=21 
• GR. 5:  Rhythm Listening PR=20, Rhythm Reading PR=25

• GR. 4:  Tonal listening PR=46, Tonal Reading PR=15
• GR. 4:  Rhythm Listening PR=20, Rhythm Reading PR=16

Listening comprehension is the chief prerequisite for reading comprehension. This idea, and the results above meant that my teaching needed focus on raising the standard of tonal & rhythmic listening skill**.  At the end of the school year, students were retested on these skills. The scores had risen to as high as the 76th%-ile in Tonal Listening, and as high as the 90th-%ile in Rhythm Listening. See June 2007 below. (N.T. = Not Tested)

JUNE 2007 ITML AVERAGES

• GR. 5:  Tonal Listening PR=76, Tonal Reading --N.T. 
• GR. 5:  Rhythm Listening PR=81, Rhythm Reading PR=71

• GR. 4:  Tonal Listening PR=67, Tonal Reading --N.T. 
• GR. 4:  Rhythm listening PR=90, Rhythm reading PR=72

Listening results were much improved at DAA by the end of the first year (and they sang better as a result). By and large students now had the readiness to learn to read with comprehension. But, as intake at DAA was high in September 2007, there were many new students who lacked the listening skills to effectively deal with reading. So I decided my instruction during the first 2/3rds of the year would continue to focus on improving listening skills; thus delaying the introduction of Tonal & Rhythmic Reading until near the end of the year.

After following that approach during the 2007-2008 academic year DAA students took the ITML's once again. Scores rose to as high as the 83rd percentile in Tonal Listening, and as high as the 98th percentile in Rhythm Listening.  Interestingly, in spite of a dearth of instruction, reading results were strong  in Rhythm (89th percentile), and respectable in Tone (60th percentile)***. See May 2008 results below.

MAY 2008 ITML AVERAGES

• GR. 5:  Tonal Listening PR=83, Tonal Reading PR=60 
• GR. 5:  Rhythm Listening PR=98, Rhythm Reading PR=89

• GR. 4:  Tonal Listening PR=78, Tonal Reading PR=49 
• GR. 4:  Rhythm Listening PR=98, Rhythm Reading PR=89

After two years of teaching in this new manner, DAA students were becoming as high-performing musically as they already were linguistically and mathematically.  We had caught up to our academic peers.

In December 2008 I was informed that the Learning Network Leader program, from which this study commenced, was no longer being funded by GEMS. With the cancellation of the LNL program, I was forced to confront the possibility that studies such as this were no longer viewed as providing valuable information GEMS-wide.

While I continue to hope that objective achievement data is valued by GEMS, I personally find it irreplaceable for informing my yearly planning and for judging curricular merit.  Accordingly I decided to (partially) finish the study.  To save time (mine & the students), I chose to test only what is most essential in terms of curricular planning. Specifically, I elected to test listening skills only at year’s end.

Once again the results were encouraging. Grade 5’s tonal listening scores were the highest yet; at the 88th percentile. Rhythmically, they remained very strong; again scoring in the 98th percentile.

While not measured by the Iowa's, it bears mention that all this 'ear training' richly benefits performance skill. This group of students learned rapidly, and sang with style, intonation and verve.  A choir culled from the top-scoring 5th graders beat Jumierah College's vaunted Senior Choir (11th & 12th graders) in a singing competition.  More amazingly, J.C. had 3 months of rehearsal; our kids had 6 days!  Basically, helping students to grow 'great musical ears' allows them to self-correct; to become their own music teachers.

JUNE 2009 ITML AVERAGES

• GR. 5:  Tonal Listening PR=88, Rhythm Listening PR=98
• GR. 4:  Tonal Listening PR=78, Rhythm Listening PR=90

After 3 years of Music Learning Theory, our ITML listening results now match or exceed the scores in every other subject measured by the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills at DAA. (See June 2009 results above)

I am pleased with the data and how it points towards the efficacy of the MLT approach. I welcome opportunities to discuss this data and MLT with all stakeholders.  I also remain optimistic that the combination of 1. Administrative Leadership, 2. Professional Development, 3. Effective Methods, and 4. Teacher Collaboration can vastly improve the quality of education we offer our students.

Should we choose to continue to combine the four essentials above in music at DAA, I am confident the results will be even better comprehension, more enriched performances, improved music literacy, the birth of composition, the expansion of the IB Music program, and greater enjoyment and appreciation of music for all.

I remain at your service,

Ron Malanga
*The Iowa Test of Music Literacy-Level 1 was selected for a number of reasons. Chief among these reason are that its rationale, content, design, and standardization program best fit the purpose; namely to measure students’ tonal and rhythmic listening and reading skills and to compare the results to previously established national norms. In addition, DAA has demonstrated its trust of the Iowa Tests in many other content areas.

**As prerequisite listening skills were not established, it did not make educational sense to focus on reading. And, since reading was not a focus of my teaching, at years end I did not retest all classes on that skill.

***How does music reading improve this much without it being systematically taught? Students with good listening comprehension teach themselves to read, by bringing learned auditory musical information to the page. For kids with properly trained ear, notation becomes 'icons that sing'. This is how they can make sense out of the notation they see, even with a dearth of instruction.

ITML-Level 1 Content Description:
The Rhythm Listening test involves identifying  Duple vs. Triple Meter rhythm patterns. The Tonal Listening test involves identifying Major vs. Minor tonal patterns.  The Rhythm Reading test involves determining if a rhythm passage seen matches a rhythm passage heard.  The Tonal Reading test involves determining if a tonal passage seen matches a tonal passage heard.