Florida State University LibrariesElectronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School

A Descriptive Study of Class Piano Coursesin Florida's Secondary Public SchoolsRicardo Augusto da Silva Pozenatto

Follow this and additional works at the DigiNole: FSU's Digital Repository. For more information, please contact lib-ir@fsu.edu

FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF MUSIC

A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF CLASS PIANO COURSES

IN FLORIDA’S SECONDARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

By

RICARDO DA SILVA POZENATTO

A Dissertation submitted to the College of Music

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

2021

ii

Ricardo da Silva Pozenatto defended this dissertation on March 24, 2021.

The members of the supervisory committee were:

Diana Dumlavwalla

Professor Directing Dissertation

J. Read Gainsford

University Representative

D. Gregory Springer

Committee Member

Kimberly VanWeelden

Committee Member

The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members and

certifies that the dissertation has been approved in accordance with university requirements.

iii

For my grandfather, who will always live in my heart For my mother, who loves me unconditionally

For my husband, who brightens up my day, everyday

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Words will never truly express my deepest gratitude for all who have helped and

supported me in making this dissertation a milestone in my adult life.

Thank you to my mother, the one who taught me about resilience and faith, for never

letting me give up during difficult times. Thank you to my family (especially, my grandfather

and my aunt), who believed in my musical dreams, helping me to make them become a reality. A

special thank you to my husband, for all the encouragement, love, and for being my safest harbor

during the three years of my doctoral studies.

Thank you to my piano pedagogy mentor during my time at Florida State University, for

the many revisions, comments, and suggestions on my academic work. Beyond that, I am

grateful for the shared talks, conversations, and advice that have shaped my thoughts and

expanded my understanding of the importance of music education in today’s world. Dr. Diana

Dumlavwalla, thank you for your generosity of time, expertise, and guidance while this project

came to fruition.

A special thank you to Dr. Gregory Springer, who has taught me about the importance of

the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association and the value of the em dash.

Thank you for the revisions and suggestions on my academic writings, and especially, for

encouraging me to publish articles in research journals. My first publishing would have not

happened without your support.

I would like to extend my gratitude to the supervisory committee members of my

dissertation, Dr. Read Gainsford and Dr. Kimberly VanWeelden, professors with whom I had the

unique opportunity of receiving close guidance through piano lessons and research classes.

Thank you for humbly and generously sharing with me your passion for piano playing and

v

enthusiasm for music research. A special thank you to the Florida State University professors Dr.

Clifford Madsen and Dr. John Geringer, with whom I attended classes, and to Dr. David

Kalhous, my applied piano instructor during my first term at Florida State University. You all

contributed, in different ways, to this research project.

I extend my gratitude to all my piano students. They are the inspiration behind my

teaching and the purpose of my learning. In them, I see beautiful opportunities for making the

world a better place.

Finally, I could never have accomplished the completion of my dissertation and doctoral

degree without the help of my extended family, dear friends who have encouraged and supported

me through important debates and constructive feedback about my teaching and playing. Thank

you all who have contributed to making me become who I am today.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ ix List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... xii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1 Need for the Study .....................................................................................................................1 Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................................................2 Research Questions .....................................................................................................................2 Operational Definitions ...............................................................................................................4 CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...................................................................................6 A Brief History of Class Piano ..................................................................................................6 Class Piano at the College Level ..............................................................................................11 Class Piano for Adults ...............................................................................................................13 Class Piano for Children ..........................................................................................................15 Group Teaching Theories ..........................................................................................................17 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................20 Participants ................................................................................................................................20 Sample Selection ...................................................................................................................20 Dependent Measure ...................................................................................................................20 Procedures .................................................................................................................................22 Collecting Email Addresses of Music Teachers .....................................................................22 Administrating the Survey Questionnaires .............................................................................22 Limitations ...............................................................................................................................24 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ...............................................................................................................25 Data Collected from Secondary Public Schools’ Instructors of Keyboard Courses .................25 Research Question 1: How Many Secondary Public Schools Offer Class Piano Courses? ...25 Research Question 2: How Many Class Piano Teachers Held a Florida Teacher Certification in Music? ........................................................................................................................................26 Research Question 3: What Course Did Teachers Consider as Their Primary Teaching Assignment? ...................................................................................................................................28 Research Question 4: On Average, How Many Years of Teaching and Specifically, Teaching Class Piano Do Teachers Have? ...................................................................................28 Research Question 5: Did Teachers Have Special Training to Prepare Them for Teaching Class Piano? ..................................................................................................................................30 Research Question 6: How Important Is The Size of Class Piano Instruction? ....................31 Research Question 7: How Important Is It for Students to Develop Certain Music Skills (e.g., Ear Training, Harmonization, Improvisation, Music Reading, “Playing by Ear”, Ensemble Playing) During Class Piano? ........................................................................................................32

vii

Research Question 8: How Important Is It for Students to Learn How to Play in Different-sized Groups and Ensembles? ........................................................................................................34 Research Question 9: How Important Is It for Students to Learn How to Play Using Different Expressive Elements (Tempo, Dynamics, Phrasing, Articulation)? .............................35 Research Question 10: How Important Is It for Students to Learn Various Technical Elements (Scales, Arpeggios, Hand Position)? .............................................................................36 Research Question 11: How Much Instruction Should Be Given to Developing Keyboard Technique and General Musicianship? .........................................................................................37 Research Question 12: What Is The Number of Students Enrolled in Class Piano? ..............39 Research Question 13: How Long Do Students Take Class Piano in High School? ............40 Research Question 14: How Are Students Scheduled Into Class Courses? ...........................41 Research Question 15: Is There a Maximum Class Size for Class Piano? ............................43 Research Question 16: What Do Teachers Think Is The Ideal Number of Students in Class Piano for Effective Teaching? .......................................................................................................45 Research Question 17: What Is the Number of Pianos in a Class Piano Classroom? ...........45 Research Question 18: What Is the Technology and Equipment Used in the Class Piano Classroom? ....................................................................................................................................46 Research Question 19: Who Purchases the Materials Used During Class Piano? ................51 Research Question 20: What Are the Instructional Materials (e.g., Textbooks, Piano Methods) Used in Class Piano? ....................................................................................................52 Questionnaire’s Open-ended Final Question ..........................................................................57

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION .........................................................................................................60 Summary ..................................................................................................................................60 Teachers’ Preparation and Training for Piano and Group Teaching ........................................61 Qualifications Related to Teaching Class Piano .....................................................................61 Class Piano Learning Requirements .......................................................................................65 Instructional Settings in Secondary Schools in the State of Florida .........................................67 The Number of Students in a Class Piano Course ..................................................................67 Class Piano and Students’ Musicianship ................................................................................70 The Groups Within the Group and Students’ Diverse Playing Levels ...................................78 Materials and Resources for Group Piano Instruction ..............................................................84 Method Books .........................................................................................................................84 The Need for Adapting Music Method Books .......................................................................87 Technological and Digital Resources .....................................................................................92 Equipment Used in Group Piano Instruction ............................................................................95 Types of Pianos and Teaching Console ..................................................................................95 Limitations ................................................................................................................................98 Conclusions and Recommendations .........................................................................................99 Recommendations for Future Research ................................................................................101 APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................104 A. HUMAN SUBJECTS EXEMPTION DETERMINATION ...................................................104 B. PROJECT INVITATION EMAIL ..........................................................................................106

viii

C. PROJECT CONSENT FORM ................................................................................................107 D. SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ...............................................................................................108 References ....................................................................................................................................113 Biographical Sketch .....................................................................................................................122

ix

LIST OF TABLES

1 Questionnaire’s Response Rate ...............................................................................................26 2 Response Rate of Teachers per County ..................................................................................27 3 Florida Teacher Certification in Music ...................................................................................28 4 Teachers’ Primary Teaching Assignment ...............................................................................29 5 Teachers’ Special Training for Teaching Class Piano ............................................................31 6 The Importance of Class Size in Group Piano Instruction .....................................................32 7 The Importance of Certain Music Skills During Class Piano Instruction ..............................33 8 The Importance of Students Learning How to Play in Different Sized Settings ....................35 9 The Importance of Students Learning Expressive Musical Elements ....................................36 10 The Importance of Students Learning Certain Technical Elements .......................................37 11 Enrollment, Courses Offered, and Length of Piano Classes ...................................................39 12 Students Taking Class Piano ...................................................................................................40 13 Length of Students’ Enrollment in Class Piano ......................................................................41 14 Students’ Scheduling in Class Piano .......................................................................................42 15 Maximum Number of Students ................................................................................................43 16 How Class Size is Determined ................................................................................................44 17 The Ideal Size of Class Piano for Effective Teaching ............................................................45 18 Number of Pianos in the Classroom .......................................................................................46 19 Types of Pianos in the Class Piano Classroom .......................................................................47 20 Participants Who Possessed a Teaching Console ...................................................................48 21 The Use of a Teaching Console During Class Piano Instruction ............................................48 22 Condition of Participants’ Class Piano Instruments ...............................................................49

x

23 The Use of Projector and Screen During Class Piano Instruction ..........................................50 24 Equipment and Technology Utilized by the Teachers During Class Piano Instruction .........50 25 Purchasing of Equipment and Materials for the Classroom ....................................................52 26 The Use of a Basic Textbook in Class Piano ..........................................................................53 27 Listing of Books Utilized by the Teachers .............................................................................54 28 Supplementary Resources and Equipment Used by Middle School Piano Teachers .............55 29 Supplementary Resources and Equipment Used by High School Piano Teachers .................56 30 Adaptations of Piano Materials for Individualized to Group Piano Instruction .....................57 31 Teachers’ Statements Regarding Class Piano Instructional Issues .........................................59

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

1 Brazilian Folk Song “Se essa rua fosse minha” (If this street were mine) ............................71 2 Chord Progression Built on the Primary Chords of C Major ..................................................89 3 Melody of the French Folk Song “Au clair de la lune” .........................................................90 4 French Folk Song “Au clair de la lune” on Two Different Accompaniment Styles .............91 5 Exercise for Scale Playing in Ensemble .................................................................................92 6 Diagram of a Typical Piano Lab Classroom ...........................................................................97

xii

ABSTRACT

During the past two decades, the United States has witnessed a constant growth in

academic research about group piano at the collegiate level of education. This topic has been the

focus of attention in piano pedagogy journals and conferences. However, there are few studies

related to piano classes in the secondary public school educational system. This trend raises

questions regarding the status of these courses at this specific level of education.

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the status of group piano instruction

in public secondary schools in the state of Florida. To accomplish this goal, the researcher

collected data from instructors across the state of Florida who taught group piano courses at

public middle and high schools. The questionnaire developed by the researcher served as the

survey instrument for this investigation. The researcher used the data collected to analyze the

instructional settings of piano classes, investigate the resources and materials that group piano

teachers used, examine teachers’ preparation and training on piano and group teaching, and

describe the equipment utilized by teachers. The participants’ perspectives shed light on the

status of class piano courses in Florida’s secondary public schools.

The researcher sent a total of 980 emails to music teachers of secondary public schools

across the state. Although 120 music teachers responded to the questionnaire, only 87 met the

criteria of teaching class piano courses in secondary public schools. Therefore, the number of

participants for the present study was 87.

Results from the questionnaire indicated that most of the teachers (97.7%) possessed a

Florida teaching certification in music. However, only 28.7% of the teachers stated that

keyboard/class piano courses were their primary teaching assignment. A minority of the teachers

(36.8%) mentioned they had special training for teaching class piano, which included being a

xiii

former class piano student while in college, taking private piano lessons while in college or from

K-12, participating in piano workshops, and/or during the in-service experiences.

Data from the questionnaire revealed that the number of middle and high school students

who were enrolled in class piano varied. The enrollment of middle school students was between

10 and 160 per semester, while the enrollment of high school students was between 6 and 350. It

is important to recall that these numbers may reflect the issues brought by the global pandemic

teachers faced, especially during the academic year of 2020-2021. Additionally, teachers were

asked about the importance of certain music skills during class piano instruction. All teachers

stated that music reading was very important. Moreover, middle school teachers mentioned that

memorization and ear training were important skills to be taught during class piano while high

school teachers recognized chordal accompanying and ear training as important skills.

Most of the teachers who participated in this study (88.5%) mentioned they used a basic

method book for their class piano instruction. A variety of series was pointed, including books

for children, for teenagers, and even music books for adults. Most of the books cited were

designed for individual instruction; however, some teachers also expressed utilizing books that

were developed purposefully for group instruction.

The questionnaire also exposed diverse issues about class piano instruction that were

perceived by the participating teachers. They mentioned that because of their inability to place

students in different classes due to students’ schedule constraints, classes ended up including

students with a wide variety of playing abilities (e.g., students who have never played the piano

alongside with students who took private piano instruction for years). This issue might have

made teachers prioritize an individual instructional setting over a collective one, shadowing their

views on the advantages of group instruction during class piano.

xiv

According to the results from the research questionnaire, the researcher recommends that

teachers who instruct class piano courses in the state of Florida, in addition to music students

who are to fulfill these positions in the future, enhance their professional development on the

subject of piano teaching. This can be achieved by attending piano pedagogy courses that

universities and colleges of music offer in their curriculum. Moreover, these educators could

benefit from attending music conferences and being involved in professional music organizations

that focus on piano pedagogy.

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Need for the Study

During the past two decades, the United States has witnessed a constant growth in

academic research of group piano as many studies regarding collegiate-level class piano were

developed (Hudson, 2012, 2015; Lindsay, 2006; Young, 2013, 2016). Researchers demonstrated

interest in diverse areas of group piano pedagogy, including cooperative learning theories of

group piano instruction (Fisher, 2006; Meulink, 2011), the influence of technology on group

piano classes (Hagen et al., 2012; Worcester, 2016), group piano instruction of varied levels

(Chin, 2002; Jung, 2004; Pike, 2014), and interest in students’ perceptions during class piano

(Kostka, 1997; Amoriello, 2010; Cremaschi, 2012). Conversely, there are few studies related to

group piano classes in the public school educational system.

McCalla (1989) conducted a study on the status of class piano instruction in public

secondary schools in the state of Florida during the late 1980s. He suggested that this type of

investigation should be replicated every three to five years as a continuous evaluative measure of

the state of class piano courses in the Florida public school. However, no research on this topic

has been completed since McCalla’s study, over thirty years ago.

The present author contends that an investigation about class piano courses in the public

school system is necessary to assess the situation of its current quality of instruction, the

resources that teachers use, and the learning environments of the students and their teachers. The

present study could support the creation of materials (e.g., textbooks, piano methods) that focus

on group-piano instruction for class piano courses in secondary public schools.

2

Purpose of the Study

The lack of research related to class piano instruction in secondary public schools is

evident. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to investigate the status of group piano

instruction in public secondary schools in the state of Florida through a descriptive research

investigation.

The first section of this study provides a review of literature including a background

history of the beginnings of class piano instruction; recent class piano research at the collegiate

level; class piano for children; and group learning theories. The second section of this study

presents procedures that guided the researcher in collecting data from music teachers who

instruct keyboard courses at secondary public schools in the state of Florida. Following, a section

with the results from the questionnaire is presented, including reference to participants’ teaching

materials, classroom environment, and experience and background education. The last section of

the study offers a discussion on how to enhance group piano instruction in the secondary public

school system, including recommendations for future research.

Research Questions

The focus of the present study was to investigate the status of class piano instruction in

public secondary schools in the state of Florida. This research (1) analyzed instructional settings

in secondary schools in the state of Florida; (2) investigated the resources and materials that

group piano teachers of secondary schools use; (3) examined participant teachers’ preparation

and training on piano and group teaching, and; (4) described the environment and equipment

used by participant schools and teachers.

3

A questionnaire was prepared by the researcher, which solicited information about (a)

instructional techniques and methods; (b) teacher preparation and training; (c) curricular

philosophies, goals, and objectives; (d) student scheduling and enrollment practices; (e)

classrooms’ environment and equipment; and (f) materials and resources utilized during

instruction. Data for the study was collected online through Qualtrics. The following specific

research questions were developed to analyze the status of group piano courses in secondary

public schools in the state of Florida:

1. How many secondary public schools offer class piano courses?

2. How many class piano teachers held a Florida teacher certification in music?

3. What course did teachers consider as their primary teaching assignment?

4. On average, how many years of teaching and specifically, teaching class piano do

teachers have?

5. Did teachers have special training to prepare them for teaching class piano?

6. How important is the size of class piano instruction?

7. How important is it for students to develop certain music skills (e.g., ear training,

harmonization, improvisation, music reading, “playing by ear”, ensemble playing) during

class piano?

8. How important is it for students to learn how to play in different-sized groups and

ensembles?

9. How important is it for students to learn how to play using different expressive elements

(tempo, dynamics, phrasing, articulation)?

10. How important is it for students to learn various technical elements (scales, arpeggios,

hand position)?

4

11. How much instruction should be given to developing keyboard technique and general

musicianship?

12. What is the number of students enrolled in class piano?

13. How long do students take class piano in high school?

14. How are students scheduled into class piano courses?

15. Is there a maximum class size for class piano?

16. What do teachers think is the ideal number of students in class piano for effective

teaching?

17. What is the number of pianos in a class piano classroom?

18. What is the technology and equipment used in the class piano classroom?

19. Who purchases the materials used during class piano?

20. What are the instructional materials (e.g., textbooks, piano methods) used in class piano?

Operational Definitions

For this study, the following important terms have been defined:

Class piano: a course that provides piano instruction in groups where, theoretically, each

student uses their own digital piano. This term is interchangeable with the term Group piano

(see below).

Curriculum: a planned sequence of instruction that class piano students need to

experience while enrolled and attending class piano courses.

Group piano: a course that comprehends piano instruction in groups where, theoretically,

each student uses their own digital piano. This term is interchangeable with the term Class

piano (see above).

5

Group piano student(s): students who are currently enrolled in class piano courses in a

secondary school in Florida.

Keyboard instructor: the teacher responsible for instructing class piano courses.

Piano lab: a piano lab, or piano laboratory, is a classroom with several electronic or

digital pianos used for group piano instruction. Some labs offer more technology than others

through teaching console systems where pianos are interconnected to the main teacher’s

piano, facilitating instruction and teaching strategies (e.g., pairing of students where they can

hear each other’s piano sounds).

Recreational Music Making (RMM): “it is music-making for the joy of it in non-stressful

environments” (Dillon, 2007). RMM classes are group classes that offer piano instruction

intending to provide enjoyment and well-being for the participants and the group.

6

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A Brief History of Class Piano

Over 200 years ago, music pedagogues recognized teaching in groups as an effective

setting for piano instruction. The earliest appearance of group piano instruction occurred in 1815

in Dublin, Ireland (Richards, 1962) when the German musician Johann Bernhard Logier (1777-

1846) started teaching his students in groups (Kim, 2000). Classes had as many as 30 students,

with varying playing levels and abilities. Logier’s intention with this setup was to encourage the

beginner piano students to play, even a simple melody, in strict rhythm, since all students in the

class played simultaneously. Louis Spohr (1784-1859), a remarkable composer and musician of

his time, visited Logier’s academy in London and described some of Logier’s classes:

While the beginner plays the simple melody, those further advanced practice at the same

time, more or less different variations. One would suppose that confusion would be sure

to ensue; as however, those pupils who play the same study are placed together, you hear,

as you pass through the hall, always one study predominantly according to the place

where you are. (Richards, 1962)

Logier defended his idea on the effectiveness of teaching music theory in group piano

classes as students were able to apply musical theoretical concepts at the keyboard. However,

shortly after the group piano class gained popularity, teachers who were opposed to this

instructional setting discussed the controversies concerning group piano teaching. In 1817,

George Farquhar Graham (1789-1867), a Scottish musicologist, highlighted that the teacher’s

attention would be spread among many students, and as a result, students would not receive

individual attention.

7

In addition to piano classes, Logier established a proper training system for class piano

teachers. Some of his trainees were American teachers who introduced the group piano teaching

format to the United States. Specifically, these teachers resided in Philadelphia and New York

City (Richards, 1962). The first reports of group piano classes in the United States date from

1860, by an anonymous letter to the editor of The Etude Magazine. The letter mentioned

unsatisfied private piano teachers in the area of Holly Springs, Mississippi, who were afraid of

the disadvantages of the new teaching system. By the end of the nineteenth century, Calvin Cady

(1851-1928), a leading music pedagogue, advocated for group piano classes in the American

public school system as a viable means of instruction (Richards, 1962). He was “interested in

teaching musicianship skills and thought that the classroom was the best place to do this” (Kim,

2000). Furthermore, Cady specified that every successful piano class should include three goals:

(1) development of musical ideas, (2) development of the power to express these ideas, and (3)

musical experience by manifesting these ideas at the piano (Diehl, 1980) Finally, in 1889, the U.

S. office of education promoted class piano instruction as a “desirable teaching procedure”

(Fisher, 2010).

The United States became a leading country in piano manufacturing by 1910 (Skroch,

1991). By then, piano classes were established in public schools as the instrument grew in

popularity and became socially prestigious. Additionally, classes of violin paved the way for

piano class instruction, as they were introduced in the Boston Public Schools systems in 1912.

Naturally, class piano textbooks were created to support the group piano instruction, such as the

Young Student’s Piano Course in 1918, the Public School Class Method for the Piano in 1919,

and the Steps for the Young Pianist in 1919 (Fisher, 2006). Skroch (1991) mentioned that most of

8

these methods emphasized musical notation and repertoire in addition to prefacing the

“presentation of notation with singing and playing by rote.”

Class piano instruction at public schools saw steady growth from 1918 to1930. A survey

by the National Bureau for the Advancement of Education, led by Ella H. Mason and C. M.

Tremaine in 1929, revealed that 873 cities across the United States offered piano classes

(Wagner, 1968). Furthermore, the survey clarified that group piano instruction for the junior-

high-school levels was just being introduced (p. 52). The popularization of piano classes

demanded the development of appropriate teacher-training courses. Important figures stood out

as leading music educators who were concerned about teacher-training for class piano. “These

persons were T. P. Giddings, Hazel Kinscella, W. Otto Miessner, Helen Curtis, and Gail Martin

Haake” (Monsour, 1960, p. 46). By 1920, T. P. Giddings from the Chautauqua Institute offered

the course “Children’s Classes in Piano” (Fisher, 2010). In Ann Arbor, Michigan, Hazel G.

Kinsella, from the University of Nebraska School of Music at Lincoln, offered a course during

the summer of 1922. It was guided toward piano instruction for children in public schools

(Beldon, 1922). In 1924, the author of The Melody Way series, Otto Miessner, launched a

campaign for teacher-training that reached hundreds of piano teachers throughout the country.

“Miessner offered the first of many two-week teacher-training institutes in Shorewood,

Wisconsin” (Monsour, 1960, p. 48). In 1925, the Columbia University Teachers College started

to offer a program “that taught the essential principles of teaching piano classes for children”

(Fisher, 2010). Following the same idea, over 150 colleges and universities started to offer

courses including class piano pedagogy in their curriculum (Richards, 1962).

Although group piano instruction was getting recognition in the public school system, the

truth is that this teaching setting also presented its challenges. Generally, schools possessed only

9

one acoustic piano per classroom. Therefore, students had to rotate and alternate between using

the acoustic piano and wooden/cardboard keyboards that were placed on their tables (Skroch,

1991). Teachers who instructed these classes were vocal music specialists or general classroom

teachers, with little or no piano background training. Piano teachers with no group-teaching

training also instructed the group classes at public schools. Additionally, the lack of teachers’

interest, large classes, and financial problems related to the depression of 1929 contributed to the

decline of group piano instruction in public schools after 1931.

Raymond Burrows (1905-1952) may be the most important pedagogue related to group

piano teaching after 1930. In 1931, he offered piano classes for adult beginners at the Columbia

University Teachers College (Kim, 2000). He was a believer in the effectiveness of group piano

teaching, pointing out its practical benefits especially during the economic crisis. During the

Eastern Conference of 1933, he stated:

. . . as educators you are more interested in establishing a high quality of piano class

instruction to meet a permanent need, than in seeking a temporary entry for class work

during an economic crisis. The only reason why we want students to learn piano in

groups is because we are convinced that group instruction is the most satisfactory way.

(Wagner, 1968, p. 66)

As the Chairman of the Piano Committee of the Music Educators National Conference

(MENC) in 1952, Burrows reported in the Handbook for Teaching Piano Classes that 256

colleges across the country offered group piano classes to their students (Richards, 1978).

Another survey, conducted by Beth Ann Mekota, investigated the teaching of applied music

through class methods (Richards, 1978). Out of 600 questionnaires sent to colleges, 159

responses revealed that the piano classes offered served the needs of music education majors,

10

non-music majors, and music minors or majors students whose primary instrument was not the

piano.

Robert Pace, who succeeded Raymond Burrows at the Columbia University Teachers

College, was also a contributor to the field of group piano teaching. His publications included

unique teaching materials that integrated ear training, music theory, improvisation, and sight-

reading exercises, in addition to repertoire for different levels (Kim, 2000). In his books

“Classroom Music” (1956) and “Music Essentials for Classroom Teachers” (1961), Pace

provided basic music theory content along with creative works and familiar songs to teachers

(Hirokawa, 1997). Pace believed that the piano was the ideal instrument for teaching several

musical concepts in groups. He was also a believer that “learning music through group activities

[were] helpful in developing sensitive and well-balanced people” (Hirokawa, 1997).

With the installment of the first electronic piano lab in 1956, at Ball State University, the

presence of group piano classes would drastically increase in colleges and universities

throughout the country. The electronic piano lab quickly became the ideal classroom for group

piano teaching (Fisher, 2006). It facilitated the capacity of students per class due to the size of

digital pianos, offered lower costs (if compared to acoustic pianos labs), and enabled multi-use of

instructional settings (e.g., individual, paired, and group learning settings).

The decades following the 1950s witnessed growth and interest in varied forms and

levels of group piano instruction, including pre-piano classes for young beginners, class piano at

the college level for music and non-music majors, and group classes for adults. On the other

hand, Shockley (1982) addressed the lack of specialized group teaching instruction as a growing

area in which the group teaching movement was falling short. Clark (1982) reported the growth

of piano teachers seeking workshops, seminars, clinics, and study courses during summers. She

11

also mentioned that surprisingly for the first time, college educators and faculty members were

getting involved in attending these courses.

Class Piano at the College Level

The National Association of Schools of Music (NASM) requires that all undergraduate

music majors must demonstrate basic piano competencies as part of their degree program

(Hudson, 2015; NASM, 2017). Universities accredited by NASM offer group class piano courses

to teach students basic piano proficiency skills to satisfy this requirement (Pike, 2014). These

keyboard skills aim to assist the music pedagogue, music therapist, music composer, and even

the music performer in their future career. Keyboard skills covered in collegiate class piano

courses include harmonization, sigh-reading, playing of scales, playing of chord progressions,

open-score reading, transposition, ensemble playing, playing of duets, playing of solo piano

repertoire, improvisation, etc.

The growing interest in group piano instruction at the collegiate level made teachers and

researchers observe the inconsistencies in piano proficiency exams at universities across the

United States (Hamel, 2000; Young, 2016). Although most university-level group piano courses

test similar skills for proficiency, the way students are asked to demonstrate these skills varies

between institutions. Additionally, teachers questioned whether these acquired skills were indeed

useful in students’ professional futures. While the class piano course is a basic component of

university music programs, opinions differ as to the relevance of particular keyboard skills music

students are required to learn (Lowder, 1983).

Students from different music programs—performance, composition, music therapy,

music education—attend the same group piano instruction. This variety in class formation

12

contributes to the challenge of prioritizing keyboard skills to be taught during these classes.

Specific skills may be more relevant to particular music majors than to others. Music faculty

members—or graduate assistants who also teach class piano—hold the responsibility of

collecting information regarding skills and knowledge that students will need to prepare for their

future careers (Maris 2000).

In recent years, music educators and piano teachers have become interested in

investigating effective ways of instructing keyboard skills to class piano students in order to

better prepare them for their future careers. Seeking a space where discussions on these topics

could occur, conferences that focus on group piano and piano pedagogy were created. The GP 3

(National Group Piano and Piano Pedagogy Forum) is a convention that takes place with the

intention to “discuss how the direction of [the class piano/piano pedagogy] field is affecting

[piano teachers’] approach to professional development, program initiatives, and teacher

training” (Price, 2008). Relevant topics of recent GP 3 conferences include group piano curricula

(Barnett, 2008; Mendez, 2016; Young, 2016), group piano for non-music majors (Benson, 2010;

Hilley, 2010), the high school group piano instructor (Kalmbach, 2010), technology in the group

piano classes (Ajero, 2010; Perry, 2012; Garcia, 2014; Crappell & McAlister, 2014), and group

teaching and cooperative learning (Gingerich, 2012). During the GP 3 conferences, much is

discussed about the need for music majors taking group piano classes. Discussions also include

specific keyboard skills that those students are required to learn.

The use of technology in class piano instruction has been a recurrent trend in the research

concerning keyboard skills. A research study among university class piano students explored

their development with the use of technology-based on two specific skills: harmonization and

sight-reading (Betts and Cassidy, 2000). MIDI accompaniment discs were used during class

13

piano instructions; however, no significant difference was found in students’ development.

Although those skills are typical during class piano instruction, little was investigated on how the

teaching and learning approach could be more effective.

Technology has been an ally in the investigations of the sight-reading skill. In her survey

including 84 NASM-accredited colleges and universities, Craige (1993) found that the sight-

reading skill was one of the most important skills of keyboard competency. According to her

investigations, most respondents agreed that computer-assisted instruction (CAI) should be part

of the sight-reading training. Additionally, Chao (1997) examined the effects of music software

and music videos on collegiate class piano, revealing that computer music programs are

beneficial in reinforcing musical concepts and other keyboard skills (including sight-reading).

More recently, Hagen, Cremaschi, and Himonides (2012) researched the skill of sight-

reading within the use of computerized eye guides software, such as the Finale Performance

Assessment and the Home Concert Xtreme. Their study revealed that although no significant

differences were found among groups of participant students, they all improved from pre- to

post-tests of the experiment. Additionally, the researchers concluded that “using a computer to

assist the student with learning may be motivating and can be an independent method of practice

for students as they learn to play at sight” (p. 236).

Class Piano for Adults

Research that focuses on group piano instruction outside the collegiate level of

instruction is limited. Recreational Music Making (RMM) has observed a recent growth

throughout the country (Jutras, 2009). RMM instruction has been receiving more attention in

14

conferences through sessions that offer teaching strategies, resources, and materials to teachers

who specialize in this type of group teaching.

The benefits for adult students in taking group piano classes are numerous. Older students

involved in a piano study reported gains in musical achievements and in personal and social

areas (Pike, 2001). Additionally, research showed significant physiological changes, “including

lowering of stress hormones and stress signatures in the bloodstream, experienced by retirees

participating in a group music program” (Pike, 2011).

Since the goals of recreational music-making classes surround individual enjoyment and

pleasure while playing musical instruments, Wristen (2006) investigated the motivational aspects

involved in such group piano classes. She mentions that adult music students can easily

recognize the intrinsic value of music-making and music learning. Adult students find these

processes pleasurable themselves. Even though they are self-motivated, these students are prone

to drop out of the recreational music classes due to overscheduling, unforeseen imminent

circumstances, and potential discouragement when finding out that playing the piano is more

difficult than anticipated (Wristen, 2006 , p. 389). Additionally, potential interferences of adult

piano students’ motivation include unrealistic expectations for progress, an embarrassment for

playing in front of their peers and in front of anyone (Marciano, 1990), and their perception that

their pride may be at risk in the face of unfamiliar situations (Maris, 2000).

The instructional aspect of RMM adult group piano classes is unique and presents its

particular challenges. Dillon (2007) reflects on the differences between RMM adult piano classes

and traditional music teaching. She highlighted that RMM classes are student-centered, where

the adult students primarily learn the music they have always wished to learn. Additionally, she

mentioned the need for the instructor to learn that students will most likely work at their own

15

pace concerning the technical aspects of piano playing, and “students were eventually able to

master technical skills on their schedule, not [the teacher’s]” (p. 22). Due to these unique factors,

particular challenges are present in adult group piano teaching. Common issues of teaching an

older population of students include the designing of materials for students who have limited

practicing time, creation of materials intended for students who have a developed musical taste

but a lack of technical piano abilities, and accounting for the natural decay of cognitive and

physical activities in the brain and body (Pike, 2011).

Class Piano for Children

Studies that focus on group piano instruction for adults are scarce. Likewise, research on

group piano instruction for children is equally limited. Pike (2013) mentioned that “there is little

practical or systematic advice in the literature for teachers wishing to embark on group-piano

teaching”, especially in what concerns young beginners group teaching.

James Lyke, one of the country’s pioneer pedagogues concerning group piano instruction

and group teaching for children, expressed that teachers should know the level of where they

want their students to be at the beginning and the end of the semester. He advocates, in his book

Creative Piano Teaching (1977), that the teacher needs an “understanding of a curriculum that

establishes goals and directions for students” (Choi, 2012). Lyke also believed that students

should be well-rounded musicians, as he clearly described in the preface of Keyboard

Musicianship:

A well-rounded keyboard musician reads well, plays in all keys, harmonizes folk and

popular melodies, plays by ear, improvises, composes, and notates music with skill. In

addition, a knowledgeable keyboard musician plays repertoire from all the ears of

16

keyboard literature with taste and intelligence. Good keyboard musicians function well in

ensemble and accompanying situations, their bodies work in a natural way at the

keyboard. (Lyke, et al., 2003, p. iii)

Most of the influence of group piano teaching in Lyke’s music career was nurtured when

he started his studies with Robert Pace at Columbia University in 1958. He mentioned that “Pace

often brought children from his private studio […] into his piano pedagogy courses. […] they did

marvelous things, [such as] ear training and writing chords at the board and just understood how

music was put together, technically.” (Choi, 2012). In addition to Robert Pace, Lyke also

enrolled in summer programs at the Center for Piano Pedagogy, which was a new school by then,

in New Jersey. There, he was able to further his knowledge of group piano teaching with Frances

Clark, another leading piano pedagogue.

Clark promoted group piano instruction throughout her career. She stated that the group

methodology was a natural way to teach any subject and that it was possible to apply group

teaching techniques to piano teaching (Pike, 2013). Clark also mentioned that effective group

teaching must be in the very best interest of each student in the group. Supporting this position,

Jacobson (2006) stated that “group instruction is only effective if all students are actively

involved all of the time” during the group class (p. 248).

Evidence of the effectiveness of group piano teaching came from early experimental

research from the 1980s. The purpose of Diehl’s study (1980) was to evaluate the effect of group

and individual piano instruction on selected aspects of music at the beginner learning stage. The

investigation concluded that students who received group piano instruction, compared to the

ones who received individual piano instruction, scored equally as high on aural discrimination,

knowledge of musical symbols, public performance, and transposition. Additionally, students

17

who took group instruction scored higher on sight-reading tests compared to students who only

had individual instruction. Diehl concluded that “group instruction was just as effective as

individual instruction with young beginners” (p. 98). She also provided the following advantages

of the group instruction: (a) less time for teachers, more exposure time for students, (b) more

students can be taught, (c) multi-faceted approach, (d) peer dynamics, and (f) economic

advantages to both students and teacher.

In group piano classes for children, the piano is a medium that can be used to present the

fundamentals of music since it combines three musical elements—melody, harmony, and

rhythm. Alpiner (1951) summarizes a list of advantages of class piano instruction, including the

fact that constant performance in the presence of others develops poise and confidence, and

listening to the playing of others helps develop discrimination in the fields of rhythm, meter,

form, and tone quality, among others (p. 12).

Group Teaching Theories

Several learning aspects are involved in any group instruction. Mehr (1965) pointed out

two important elements of the piano learning process: the mechanistic and the gestalt point of

view. While the mechanistic approach was concerned with drills, practice repetitions, and

exercises, the gestalt approach considered the learning process with emotions, purposes, and

intelligent thoughts. Mehr explained that group piano teaching should be based on the gestalt

psychology approach, rather than the mechanistic one. When group piano was properly taught,

students gained more understanding, more insight, and more cognitive development.

Private lesson settings may lack offering opportunities for students to work with peers,

resulting in the isolation that deprives students of developing social and emotional skills (Kim,

18

2004). In a small group setting, the natural dynamics of the group and the peer interaction were

two important aspects by which the learning process occurred (Fisher, 2010). Students could

experience diverse roles within the group, such as listener, leader, encourager, etc., developing

social skills through the group work process.

Using a lab-type setting that contains several digital pianos interconnected with the

teacher and each other, group piano students learn through a combination of individual and

collaborative instruction. While research examining the efficacy of learning piano proficiency

skills in a group setting is relatively limited, it has been found that group class piano can increase

student motivation for playing the piano (Jutras, 2006), and that students’ collaborative skills

improved (Harris, 2017; Paulk, 2013).

During the 1940s, Raymond Burrows acknowledged the interdisciplinary learning that

group piano could promote. He reported that “the combination of a social learning process with

independent performing ability has given the piano class the power in personality development

which raised [the] morale of many [in] a classroom.” (Wagner, 1968, p. 80). Technology

advancements (e.g., electric/digital pianos) enabled group instruction to be varied and formatted

according to the instructor's needs, which supported further interdisciplinary opportunities to

class piano students.

The group setting of piano classes enables a variety of arrangements for activities as

students may learn individually, in pairs, in small groups, or as a whole group (the entire class

itself). Students can socialize when participating in activities that require communication among

themselves. There is a branch of research that deals with the aspects of cooperative learning

during class piano instruction. Fisher (2010) lists five essential elements that must be present for

cooperative learning to be effective. They are (1) positive interdependence; (2) face-to-face

19

interaction; (3) individual accountability; (4) development of social skills; and (5) group

processing. Aiming to connect the elements of cooperative learning to the teaching of keyboard

skills during class piano, Meulink (2011) created a teaching guide where “each lesson plan was

designed around a specific cooperative learning method chosen to teach the musical objective.”

(Meulink, 2011).

Class piano enables the possibility of learning in diverse ways. The benefits are many,

from the transfer of knowledge between subjects to social gains. The combination of effective

group teaching strategies, strong ear training development, and solid sight-reading skills would

make any class piano student become a well-rounded musician. Moreover, they would appreciate

the music-making process with pleasure and enjoyment, values that can be carried over a

lifetime.

Class piano applies to different ages and levels, including elementary, middle, and high

school students. Children and teenagers may have their first encounter with the piano through the

public school environment, where class piano courses are offered. Therefore, conducting

research in this specific niche of class piano is important to understand how these classes are

currently taught in the state of Florida.

20

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the current status of group piano

instruction in public secondary schools in the state of Florida. All secondary public schools from

Florida’s 67 districts were considered in this study. A descriptive research methodology was

used for this investigation.

Participants

Sample Selection

Criteria for participating in the study included music teachers who were currently

teaching keyboard/class piano courses in secondary public schools in the state of Florida. These

included middle and high schools. Instructors who taught other courses—such as orchestra,

band, jazz band, music theory, choir, etc.—but still taught class piano were also considered for

the study.

Dependent Measure

The researcher created a questionnaire to gather information from secondary schools’

keyboard instructors. The questionnaire contained six general areas of interest. All areas sought

to contribute to the investigation of the status of piano classes in secondary schools in the state of

Florida. The dependent measure was organized into the following sections: (I) school

information; (II) teachers’ information; (III) philosophy, goals, and objectives of class piano;

(IV) scheduling and enrollment; (V) equipment; and (VI) materials and curriculum. The primary

21

section contained information about each school, including the type of secondary school (middle

or high school) and county where the school was located.

The second section contained information about the instructor. It included questions

relevant to their training and experience in teaching class piano courses. Questions in this section

addressed certification that teachers obtained, total years of teaching experience, and the number

of years of class piano teaching experience.

The third section contained considerations concerning the goals and objectives of class

piano instruction. Participants answered these questions in a 4-point Likert-scale format—from

anchors of 1 (not important) to 4 (very important). Items addressed logistical considerations,

certain music skills, group size and ensembles, and various technical elements.

The fourth section contained information regarding the scheduling and enrollment of

class piano courses and students. Questions addressed the average number of sections of class

piano offered in each school in addition to the average number of students enrolled in class piano

per semester. This section finally posed questions concerning methods of enrolling, maximum

class sizes and how they are determined, and the ideal class size for effective teaching.

The fifth section of the questionnaire included questions regarding the equipment used in

a group class piano. It addressed questions regarding the number of pianos in the classroom and

the conditions of the instruments. Furthermore, it included questions on other equipment used for

instruction, such as whether the classrooms offered projectors and screens.

The last section of the questionnaire investigated the methods, materials, and curriculum

utilized by the teachers. It included questions about the method books and supplementary

materials teachers used. Moreover, it asked about the necessity for the adaptation of individual

piano materials to a group setting.

22

Procedures

Collecting Email Addresses of Music Teachers

The targeted participants for this study were keyboard/class piano instructors of

secondary public schools in the state of Florida. These instructors were contacted by email and

asked to respond to the online questionnaire. Their email addresses were found directly on their

schools’ website (schools’ directory/faculty listing). The researcher contacted all music teachers,

even when the school’s website did not list them as the keyboard instructor. Often, teachers who

teach keyboard courses are listed as ensemble instructors in case they also primarily teach those

courses. Therefore, the first section of the questionnaire included a question regarding whether or

not the teacher taught keyboard courses at that secondary public school. If they did, they could

continue answering the questionnaire and participating in the study. If they did not, the

questionnaire would prompt a concluding message representing the end of the survey.

A total of 980 emails were sent to music teachers of secondary public schools across the

state of Florida. Although 120 music teachers responded to the questionnaire, only 87 met the

criteria of teaching class piano in secondary public schools. Therefore, the number of

participants for the present study is 87.

Administrating the Survey Questionnaires

The researcher obtained the approval of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Florida

State University prior to the start of the study. The approval memorandum for the present human

subjects research can be found in Appendix A. All procedures concerning the protection of

identity and anonymity of the participants were followed, keeping the confidentiality of their

involvement in the project.

23

The researcher input the questionnaire into Qualtrics—an online survey software

(https://www.qualtrics.com)—so it could be distributed to the participants via email. Since the

participants were from different locations in the state of Florida, the use of Qualtrics seemed

appropriate for several reasons. First, identity confidentiality of the participants was maintained;

second, as an online tool, the Qualtrics software enabled the researcher to distribute the

questionnaire and participants to respond to it in a timely fashion and convenient manner; third,

there were no costs incurred by the researcher or participants. The researcher also included a

cover letter prior to the start of the online questionnaire. The cover letter contained an

introductory description of the study, participants’ consent, and contact information of the

researcher and the Florida State University Institutional Review Board.

A pilot test was run by the researcher before sending out the dependent measure to the

participants, asking three faculty members of Florida State University to complete the

questionnaire. The pilot tests were used to ensure that no questions were confusing or

unnecessary in the questionnaire, allowing the researcher to make proper edits before sending it

to the participants. Additionally, the pilot test helped the researcher to anticipate an estimated

response time for completing the questionnaire. The data from the pilot tests were not included in

the results of this study.

The potential participants of the study were contacted through an invitation email

message created by the researcher and sent through Qualtrics (see Appendix B). The email

contained a brief introductory purpose statement about the research project, including the

estimated time to complete the questionnaire (7 minutes), and two URL links. The first URL link

would direct the potential participant to the questionnaire, and the second URL link would opt

them out from receiving reminder emails about the questionnaire. A total of seven automated

24

email reminder messages were sent to those who had not answered the questionnaire. These

messages were emailed semiweekly for four weeks.

Limitations

To reflect a better representation of the state, the researcher made an effort to include

participants from all of Florida’s 67 counties. However, only participants from 26 counties

responded to the questionnaire. Because the listing of teachers’ positions was not clear in each

school’s website directory, it is possible that teachers who instruct keyboard courses were not

included in their directory as such. Teachers who teach class piano and were listed as ensemble

instructors or simply as music teachers may not have been reached by this study. Therefore, it is

challenging to precisely know the number of teachers who instruct keyboard courses in Florida’s

secondary public schools. The present study included participants involved in teaching either

middle schools or high schools, not including charter schools. A fully comprehensive

investigation could include charter schools and even private institutions that offer instruction at

the secondary level.

The academic year of 2020-2021 has been marked by a global education crisis due to the

spread of COVID-19. Not all students returned to face-to-face instruction, shifting to an online

format of learning. Specifically, in the musical field, there are many implications about remote

online teaching and learning. Therefore, responses from the teachers reflected the new reality

they were facing.

25

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the current status of group piano

instruction in public secondary schools in the state of Florida through a descriptive research

investigation. The researcher collected data from keyboard music teachers across the state

through an online questionnaire. This survey instrument collected information about the schools’

location; the teachers’ educational background; the teachers’ philosophies, goals, and objectives

of the class piano course; class piano students’ scheduling and enrollment; equipment used in

group piano teaching; and the materials and curriculum utilized during the keyboard classes

these instructors taught. This chapter presents the collected data organized according to each

research question.

Data Collected from Secondary Public Schools’ Instructors of Keyboard Courses

Research Question 1: How Many Secondary Public Schools Offer Class Piano Courses?

As stated in the 2020 Florida Statues, performing arts courses compose part of the public

school curriculum (Online Sunshine, 2020). Music courses—such as keyboard/group piano

classes—are part of the performing arts subject. However, not all secondary public schools may

offer piano classes. This requirement may be fulfilled by other music courses (e.g., band, choir,

orchestra ensembles). The first section of the survey instrument included a question of whether

or not the participants taught class piano courses. Table 1 lists the response rate of teachers who

were contacted, and who confirmed instructing keyboard courses in secondary public schools in

the state of Florida.

26

Table 1

Questionnaire's Response Rate

Music Teachers Middle School High School Middle and High Schools Σ % Σ % Σ %

Teachers contacted 491 50.1 489 49.9 980 100 Teachers who responded 55 45.8 65 54.2 120 100 Teachers who instructed 36 41.4 51 58.6 87 100 keyboard courses

There are 67 counties in the state of Florida. The responses reflected 25 of these 67

counties. Table 2 contains a list of the counties whose teachers responded to the questionnaire.

The largest number of teachers who responded to the survey was from Orange county, followed

by Palm Beach county. In fact, teachers’ response rate from Orange county was far superior

when compared to other counties.

Research Question 2: How Many Class Piano Teachers Held a Florida Teacher

Certification in Music?

A total of 87 teachers responded to the questionnaire confirming that they taught

keyboard courses in secondary public schools. Although not all teachers possessed a Florida

teacher certification in music, the majority did. Two middle school teachers, both from Lee

county, responded they did not have that certification. Table 3 summarizes the number of

teachers who possessed certification in music from the state of Florida.

27

Table 2

Response Rate of Teachers per County County Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

(n = 16) (n = 19) (n = 25)

Brevard 0 1 1 Citrus 0 1 1 Clay 1 0 1 Collier 1 0 1 Duval 1 2 3 Escambia 1 0 1 Flagler 0 1 1 Hernando 1 0 1 Highlands 0 1 1 Hillsborough 0 7 7 Lee 3 2 5 Leon 1 2 3 Marion 1 1 2 Miami-Dade 1 1 2 Nassau 0 1 1 Okaloosa 0 1 1 Orange 12 . 14 . 28 . Palm Beach 7 3 10 . Pasco 0 2 2 Pinellas 0 4 4 Polk 1 1 2 Sarasota 1 4 5 Seminole 1 0 1 Indian River County 1 0 1 Volusia 2 2 4

28

Table 3

Florida Teacher Certification in Music Participants Middle and High Schools

n %

(Teachers who) held a Florida certification in music 85 97.7 (Teachers who) did not hold a Florida certification in music 2 2.3

Research Question 3: What Course Did Teachers Consider as Their Primary Teaching

Assignment?

Many teachers (n = 25; 28.7%) answered that their primary teaching assignment was

keyboard/class piano courses. However, most teachers (n = 62; 71.3%) responded that their

primary teaching assignment was to instruct a different music course other than class piano.

These courses were choir, band, orchestra, guitar, music appreciation, music theory, rock

ensemble, and music & sound production academy. Table 4 summarizes the response rates of the

music teachers about their primary teaching assignment.

Research Question 4: On Average, How Many Years of Teaching and Specifically,

Teaching Class Piano Do Teachers Have?

Most of the teachers (n = 68; 78.1%) had more experience in teaching other music

courses than piano courses. Instructors whose experience in teaching music courses equal the

years of teaching class piano courses represent a minority of the respondents (n = 19; 21.9%).

One middle school teacher from Orange county stated that the current academic year is their first

year experiencing teaching in secondary public schools.

29

The middle school teachers’ experience in teaching, in general, ranged from zero to 39

years (M = 13.8; SD = 10.8). Their experience in teaching specifically keyboard courses ranged

from zero to 27 years (M = 7; SD = 6.3). The high school teachers’ experience in teaching, in

general, ranged from two to 40 years (M = 16.2; SD = 10). The experience in teaching

specifically keyboard courses from high school teachers ranged from one to 40 years (M = 7.9;

SD = 6.5).

Table 4

Teachers' Primary Teaching Assignment

Course Middle School

(n = 36) High School

(n = 51) Total

(n = 87)

n % n % n %

Choir 13 36.1 21 41.1 34 39.2 Keyboard/Class Piano 11 30.5 14 27.5 25 28.8 Band 5 13.9 10 19.6 15 17.3 Orchestra 5 13.9 3 5.8 8 9.2 Guitar 1 2.8 0 0 1 1.1 Music Appreciation 1 2.8 0 0 1 1.1 Music Theory 0 0 1 2 1 1.1 Rock Ensemble 0 0 1 2 1 1.1 Music & Sound Production 0 0 1

2 1 1.1

30

Research Question 5: Did Teachers Have Special Training to Prepare Them for Teaching

Class Piano?

The National Association of Schools of Music (NASM) states that all college music

students must develop and be able to demonstrate certain keyboard competencies and skills

(NASM, 2017). Through group piano courses offered by universities and music colleges

affiliated with the NASM, these students learn keyboard skills such as harmonization,

transposition, reading from open-score reading, etc. It is possible that some teachers who

responded to the questionnaire did not consider the experience of attending these group piano

classes in college as a preparation for teaching class piano. Most of the teachers (n = 55; 63.2%)

stated they did not have special training to prepare them for teaching class piano; meanwhile, a

minority of the teachers who responded to the questionnaire (n = 32; 36.8%), acknowledged they

did have special training (Table 5).

To further explore which special training teachers considered helpful in preparing them

for teaching class piano, the researcher asked an open-ended question to solicit responses that

would best suit individual respondents. Teachers who had some special training stated that being

a student in class piano helped them in preparing for teaching class piano. Additionally, teachers

considered piano lessons (through college as well as piano lessons from K-12), workshops, and

in-service experiences to have prepared them for teaching class piano.

Some teachers considered more than one type of special training as helping them instruct

class piano courses. These individuals stated that they had piano performance and piano

pedagogy degrees but still participated in clinics and workshops. Presentations offered during the

Florida Music Education Association (https://fmea.org) were cited as the clinics and workshops

they frequently attended. Other teachers stated they were teaching assistants in group piano

31

courses during their college degrees, and others simply mentioned they were professional piano

players.

Table 5

Teachers' Special Training for Teaching Class Piano

Teachers Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

n % n % n %

With no special training 19 52.7 36 70.6 55 63.2 With special training 17 47.3 15 29.4 32 36.8

Research Question 6: How Important Is the Size of Class Piano Instruction?

Class piano enables diverse forms of interaction between students. In addition to playing

together as an ensemble, they can engage in meaningful discussions about a specific topic or

even develop assessment skills by providing feedback to their peers. Kim (2004) mentioned that

group discussions often result in conflicting ideas, opinions, and conclusions that could

contribute to a greater understanding of a given subject. Students can also support each other

through paired and smalls group activities. Many teachers take advantage of the class piano

group setting still valuing the individualized instruction (Diehl, 1980).

Group size may affect the instruction in different ways, engaging students in activities

with larger or smaller groups. Through the questionnaire of this study, teachers were asked to

rate the importance of the class size in group piano instruction. Specifically, they were asked to

rate the importance of the following, in a Likert-scale with “not important” (1) and “very

important” (4) anchors: large group instruction (as in full class working together); small group

32

instruction (as in between 2 and 5 students working together); individualized instruction; and one

student per piano. Table 6 summarizes the response of the teachers, including the Mean (M) and

Standard Deviation (SD).

Table 6

The Importance of Class Size in Group Piano Instruction

Instructional setting Middle School High School Middle and High Schools M SD M SD M SD

Large group instruction 2.86 .94 2.88 .98 2.87 .96

Small group instruction 2.33 .92 2.78 .95 2.80 .94

Individual instruction 3.60 .70 3.74 .55 3.71 .62

One student per piano 3.70 .62 3.86 .48 3.82 .55

Most of the teachers believed that large group (56%), small group (52%), and

individualized (83%) types of instruction were very important aspects of class piano.

Furthermore, most of the teachers (84%) also acknowledged that having one student per piano

during class piano was very important.

Research Question 7: How Important Is It for Students to Develop Certain Music Skills

(e.g., Ear Training, Harmonization, Improvisation, Music Reading, “Playing by Ear”,

Ensemble Playing) During Class Piano?

By attending class piano courses, students gain the opportunity of developing an array of

music skills. These skills include ear training, harmonization, improvisation, “playing by ear”,

33

music reading, and memorization, amongst others (Fisher, 2010; Hudson, 2012; Young, 2013).

The teacher is the one who should be responsible for balancing out these competencies during

instruction time.

Participants were asked about the importance of these skills in class piano. Specifically,

they were asked about ear training, chordal accompanying, improvisation, music reading,

“playing by ear”, and memorization. Teachers rated the importance of these skills in class piano

instruction in a Likert-scale with “not important” (1) and “very important” (4) anchors (Table 7).

Table 7

The Importance of Certain Music Skills During Class Piano Instruction

Skills Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

M SD M SD M SD

Ear training 2.60 .74 2.98 .91 2.85 .86

Chordal acc. 2.40 1.06 3.07 .81 2.81 .97

Improvisation 2.20 .85 2.31 .99 2.27 .94

Music reading 3.91 .27 3.90 .45 3.90 .39

Playing by ear 2.16 .92 2.35 .96 2.27 .95

Memorization 2.66 .81 2.39 1.03 2.50 .95

Teachers may prioritize the importance of certain skills over others during class piano

instruction. Most of the teachers believed that the skills of ear training (65.5%), chordal

accompanying (64.3%), and memorization (51.7%) were very important during class piano

instruction. Other teachers answered that the skills of improvisation (34.4%) and “playing by

34

ear” (40.2%) were the important ones. The skill of music reading was acknowledged as being

very important by a high number of teachers (98.8%) who participated in this study.

Research Question 8: How Important Is It for Students to Learn How to Play in Different-

sized Groups and Ensembles?

Group classes offer the possibility of interaction between students (Burkett,1982). In

class piano, students' interactions can be promoted in diverse ways. The teacher may engage the

students in paired activities—duet playing—and ensemble playing, by assigning students to work

in small groups or by having the entire class working together (Fisher, 2010). These activities’

settings can be commonly encountered during class piano instruction. Many benefits beyond

musicianship skills can be fostered in class piano students through these diverse activities’

settings, such as leadership, self-assurance, and discipline (Gingerich, 2012; Meulink, 2011).

The researcher asked the participants of this study about the importance of having

students learn how to play in different group sizes and ensembles during class piano.

Specifically, they were asked about the importance of ensemble playing in general, small group

playing, duet playing, and solo playing. Teachers rated the importance of engaging students

through these activities’ settings during class piano instruction in a Likert-scale with “not

important” (1) and “very important” (4) anchors (Table 8).

Although class piano students can benefit from its group nature, participants favored the

individualized learning setting. Teachers (36.7%) believed that ensemble playing, in general, was

important for class piano students, followed by small group playing (42.5%) and duet playing

(59.7%). Most of the teachers (96.5%) answered that solo playing was very important during

class piano instruction.

35

Table 8

The Importance of Students Learning How to Play in Different Sized Settings

Settings Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

M SD M SD M SD

Ensemble playing 2.22 .97 2.19 1.12 2.20 1.06

Small group playing 2.38 1.00 2.23 1.04 2.29 1.02

Duet playing 2.83 .95 2.74 .90 2.78 .92

Solo playing 3.80 .46 3.84 .45 3.82 .46

Research Question 9: How Important Is It for Students to Learn How to Play Using

Different Expressive Elements (Tempo, Dynamics, Phrasing, Articulation)?

Expressive piano playing can be evaluated by an array of different factors. Most of these

attributes can be identified by careful listening to the parameters of the sound: duration, pitch,

dynamics, and timbre. Musical elements that are used in expressive piano playing and that are

directly connected to these parameters include tempo, phrasing, and articulation. Any music

student encounters these elements while learning how to play a musical instrument, and that is

also true when learning how to play the piano (Kim, 2004; Lindsay, 2006).

To inquire about students’ learning and developing expressive musicianship skills during

class piano, the researcher asked participants about the importance of teaching specific

components that are intrinsically connected to expressive music-making. Teachers were asked

about the importance of their students learning how to play in different tempi, different

dynamics, with phrasing, and including different types of articulations. In a Likert-scale with

36

“not important” (1) and “very important” (4) anchors, teachers rated the importance of teaching

these musical elements during class piano instruction (Table 9).

Table 9

The Importance of Students Learning Expressive Musical Elements

Musical elements Middle School High School Middle and High Schools M SD M SD M SD

Tempo 3.61 .71 3.68 .57 3.65 .64

Dynamics 3.61 .59 3.72 .59 3.67 .59

Phrasing 3.58 .59 3.58 .74 3.58 .68

Articulation 3.52 .64 3.60 .74 3.57 .70

Teachers seemed to believe that teaching musical expressiveness is relevant in class

piano. Most of the participants answered that playing in different tempi (93.1%), playing with

dynamics (95.4%), playing with phrasing (90.8%), and playing with different articulations

(89.6%) are very important expressive elements to be included during class piano instruction.

Research Question 10: How Important Is It for Students to Learn Various Technical

Elements (Scales, Arpeggios, Hand Position)?

The researcher asked the participants about the importance of teaching various technical

elements of piano playing during class piano instruction. Specifically, teachers were asked about

how important it was for students to learn how to play scales, arpeggios, and playing with a

37

correct hand position. On a Likert-scale, participants rated the importance of these technical

elements during class piano instruction through “not important” (1) and “very important” (4)

anchors (Table 10).

Table 10

The Importance of Students Learning Certain Technical Elements

Technical elements Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

M SD M SD M SD

Playing scales 3.44 .68 3.41 .88 3.42 .81

Playing arpeggios 3.22 .74 3.13 .95 3.17 .87

Playing with 3.91 .27 3.86 .39 3.88 .35 correct hand position

A high number of teachers answered that playing scales (83.9%) and playing arpeggios

(73.5%) were important during class piano instruction. Furthermore, only one teacher stated that

playing with a correct hand position was not important. A great majority of the participants

(98.8%) acknowledged that playing with a correct hand position was very important during class

piano instruction.

Research Question 11: How Much Instruction Should Be Given to Developing Keyboard

Technique and General Musicianship?

When learning any musical instrument, artistry is involved. Artistry may be the result of a

combination of technical and expressive aspects of the playing (Digney, 2013). The music

38

instructor is the one responsible for balancing the teaching of these aspects during a music

lesson. Similarly, in a group music class, a certain period could be reserved for understanding the

expressive elements connected to music-making, as well as understanding the technicality of the

playing. While aiming for expressive playing (e.g., shaping of a musical phrase), it is also

necessary to know how to physically achieve such result (e.g., how to move the body—finger,

hands, arms—in order to create a crescendo and a decrescendo) (Jacobi, 2011). Musicianship

activities, such as marching on a steady beat, dancing to the articulations of the music, or even

singing, in addition to modeling, are essential components that could nurture expressiveness in

the music student (Brenner & Strand, 2013; Garner, 2009).

In order to inquire about the teaching of technical and musicianship elements, the

researcher asked the participants how much instruction should be given to those skills during

class piano. Specifically, teachers selected the amount of instruction for developing skills in

keyboard technique and the amount of instruction for developing general musicianship in class

piano students through a percentage slider. In this slider, participants chose percentages of how

much instruction should be given to develop keyboard technique and to develop general

musicianship during class piano, resulting in a total of 100% (representing the total instruction of

an entire class meeting).

The participants stated that most of the class piano instruction time (56.74%) should be

dedicated to developing skills in keyboard technique, while the remaining time (42.26%) should

be reserved for developing general musicianship in class piano students. Seven middle school

teachers and twelve high school teachers (21.8% of the total teachers) answered that the amount

of time spent on these skills should be equally divided (50% of class time for each).

39

Research Question 12: What Is the Number of Students Enrolled in Class Piano?

The second section of the questionnaire concerned scheduling and enrollment of students

in class piano courses. To inquire about the enrollment status of these students, the researcher

asked the participants the average number of students enrolled in class piano courses in their

school in each semester (Table 11). Furthermore, the researcher asked the teachers about the

number of keyboard course sections they taught per semester as well as the length of each class

period.

Table 11

Enrollment, Courses Offered, and Length of Piano Classes

Schedule attributes Middle School High School Range M SD Range M SD

Enrollment per semester 10 to 160 50.19 37.66 6 to 350 57.80 61.03 Courses offered per semester 1 to 45 2.94 1.51 1 to 14 3.64 2.84 Length of class period in minutes 40 to 110 56.63 16.66 40 to 105 63.29 20.41

While responding to this question, one middle school teacher highlighted the

abnormalities that this year is presenting, due to COVID-19. They mentioned they currently have

230 students enrolled in class piano, but the usual number of enrolled class piano students is 100.

They attributed that to the issues brought by “COVID[-19] and various needs with scheduling.”

40

Research Question 13: How Long Do Students Take Class Piano in High School?

It is important to understand that the process of learning how to play any musical

instrument may not be, in many cases, as fast as desired. Variables related to students'

achievements are known to have an influence on students’ behaviors of dropping out of music

instruction (Costa-Giomi et al., 2005). However, through sequenced music ensembles (e.g.,

choir, band, orchestra) and class piano courses, students at secondary public schools have the

opportunity of learning about music and playing a specific instrument while being involved in

music studies for longer periods. The researcher asked the participants how long students usually

take class piano courses.

Table 12

Students Taking Class Piano

Schools n (teachers) Range (years) M SD

Middle 36 . .5 to 3 1.34 .85

High 50* .5 to 4 1.40 .81

Middle and High 86 . .5 to 4 1.37 .83

Note. The * highlights that not all participants answered this question in the questionnaire.

Table 13 summarizes, in frequency and percentage, the length of students’ enrollment in

class piano. The majority of students’ enrollment in this course (55%) lasts for one year. It may

be the case that students would like to enroll in class piano in subsequent years of their

secondary education, but because of various reasons, that is not possible. One of the high school

41

teachers stated: “We are limited in our advanced piano options […] students want to take more,

but we don't have the room.”

Table 13

Length of Students' Enrollment in Class Piano

Enrollment Middle School

(n = 36) High School

(n = 50)* Middle and High Schools

(n = 86)

n % n % n %

1 semester 11 30.5 2 4 13 15.3 1 year 12 33.3 35 70 47 55 . 2 years 8 22.2 7 14 15 18 . 3 years 5 14 . 4 8 9 11 . 4 years 0 0. 2 4 2 0.7

Note. The * highlights that not all participants answered this question in the questionnaire.

Research Question 14: How Are Students Scheduled Into Class Piano Courses?

Secondary public schools students’ schedules are different across districts of the state of

Florida. Each school maintains its own scheduling policies. Even the length of the schools’

periods varies according to the district (e.g., a school’s period in one district might be longer than

schools’ periods from other districts). Class piano courses fall under the category of the

performing arts subject (Online Sunshine, 2020), which, along with musical ensembles (e.g.,

band, choir, orchestra, rock ensemble) and other music courses (e.g., music theory, music

appreciation, guitar, drums, music & sound production), can be considered as elective courses,

especially at the high school level of education.

42

The researcher asked the participants how their students were scheduled into their class

piano courses. Teachers selected scheduling either by the student’s ability, by the student’s

individual class time/schedule, or by the student’s grade. Furthermore, the participants were also

able to add and provide more information about their students’ scheduling process through an

open-ended answer.

Table 14

Students' Scheduling in Class Piano

Scheduling Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

n % n % n %

By ability 10 28 13 25.5 23 26 By class time/schedule 21 59 26 51 . 47 54 By grade 5 13 12 23.5 17 20

Although all teachers answered this question by selecting one of the options (by ability,

by class time, or by grade), some provided additional information about their scheduling process.

A middle school teacher stated that they prioritized scheduling band students into the group

piano class, and then filled the remaining available seats by grade. Some middle school teachers

stated that the scheduling happens through the students’ choice of taking the keyboard course as

an elective course (class schedule). While other teachers mentioned they wished scheduling

occurred by ability, they all agreed that for the most part, students’ class time schedules take

priority while enrolling them in class piano. High school teachers also stated they would like to

have students enrolled by ability; however, students are placed in sections that best fit their

schedule.

43

Research Question 15: Is There a Maximum Class Size for Class Piano?

In group instruction, the group size may impact the teaching in diverse ways (Murphy et

al., 2016). For instance, the teacher may find it challenging to facilitate discussions in a class

with over 50 students. In smaller group classes—between 15 and 20 students—more interaction

is possible. Similarly, the number of students in a class piano may affect which activity settings

the teacher chooses to include during instruction (Fisher, 2010). Physical limitations such as the

number of keyboards available and the physical size of the classroom may affect students’

enrollment in keyboard courses. Therefore, class size plays an important role in music education

through group piano.

To inquire about the class size, the researcher asked the participants if they had a

maximum number/limit of students for their class piano courses. Most of the teachers (n = 76,

87.3%) stated they did have a limit in the number of class piano students, while a minority (n =

11, 12.7%) mentioned they did not have any limit. Table 15 summarizes the answers from

middle and high school teachers.

Table 15

Maximum Number of Students

Limit Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

n % n % n %

Yes 33 91.4 43 84.3 76 87.3 No 3 8.4 8 15.7 11 12.7

The researcher also asked participants who had a maximum limit number of students per

class piano how the maximum class size was determined. Their responses included: by the

44

number of keyboards available; by the scheduling coordinator; or by the size of the room (in

accordance to fire code).

Table 16

How Class Size is Determined

Determined by

Middle School (n = 32)*

High School (n = 43)

Middle and High Schools (n = 75)*

n % n % n %

Number of keyboards available 28 87.5 37 86 . 65 87 . Scheduling coordinator 3 9.4 5 11.6 8 10.3 Size of the room 1 3.1 1 2.4 2 2.7

Note. Not all participants who had a maximum limit of students in their class piano courses answered the question about how the maximum class size was determined.

An open-ended answer also allowed the participants to share more precisely how the

maximum class piano size was determined. One middle school teacher stated that they were

assigned 50 students in a class. Since there was not enough space in the room for 50 keyboards,

they usually had to assign two students per keyboard. Due to COVID-19, they stated “I also have

to split the class into two groups. I cannot have them sitting close together and sharing a

keyboard (with COVID), so they alternate sitting at a keyboard one day and in seats without

keyboards on the alternating days (with a theory assignment).” A high school teacher mentioned

that usually they are assigned 25 students per class, determined by the number of keyboards in

the classroom. They also mentioned that this year, the school enrolled around 30 students per

class, which the instructor confessed: “it is far from ideal.”

45

Research Question 16: What Do Teachers Think Is the Ideal Number of Students in Class

Piano for Effective Teaching?

To further investigate what were the participants' opinions about the ideal class size, the

researcher asked the teachers what they thought was the ideal number of students in class piano

for effective teaching. Not all participants replied to this question, but Table 17 summarizes the

answers from those who did respond.

Table 17

The Ideal Size of Class Piano for Effective Teaching

Teachers from n* Range M SD

Middle School 32 10 to 35 16.65 6.07 High School 40 10 to 25 17.65 4.26 Middle and High Schools 72 10 to 35 17.22 5.17

Note. The * highlights that not all participants responded to this question.

It seems that there is an understanding by the secondary public schools’ teachers who

participated in this study that large class sizes may affect the teaching quality of the class piano.

All participants agreed that having ten students in each class would be a perfect scenario for

effective teaching. Furthermore, only one middle school teacher stated that 35 students would be

ideal as class size.

Research Question 17: What Is the Number of Pianos in a Class Piano Classroom?

Important aspects concerning lesson planning and students’ learning in groups include

the number of pianos in a piano lab as well as the number of students per group during

46

instruction (Jackson, 1980). When facing the reality of possessing fewer instruments than the

number of students, instructors would need to assign more than one student per piano. To keep

all students on task, teachers could also assign other musical activities (e.g., theory exercises) to

students who would not have access to a piano during class time. To investigate how many

students had access to a piano during class piano instruction, the researcher asked the

participants how many pianos they had in their classroom. Table 18 summarizes the answers

from the participants.

Table 18

Number of Pianos in the Classroom

Schools Range M SD

Middle 15 to 35 . 23.30 5.58 High 2 to 30 21.90 6.80 Middle and High 2 to 35 22.49 6.36

Research Question 18: What Is the Technology and Equipment Used in the Class Piano

Classroom?

The researcher asked the participants a series of questions to investigate the type and

quality of instruments they possessed in the classroom, as well as the technology (e.g., projector,

teaching console) they used for their teaching. Having digital instruments in the group piano

classroom allows students to practice simultaneously without sound interference—assuming they

use headphones. However, not all schools offer that option, presenting the class piano instructor

with acoustic pianos. Table 19 summarizes the different types of pianos the participant teachers

had in their classrooms.

47

Table 19

Types of Pianos in the Class Piano Classroom

Types of piano Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

n % n % n % Digital 24 66.7 39 76.5 63 72.4 Acoustic 1 2.8 0 0. 1 1.1 Digital and acoustic 11 30.5 12 23.5 23 26.5

A teaching console is an electronic/digital system that connects all digital pianos in the

room through wires. The instructor’s piano is directly connected to the main system station,

allowing teachers some control over all other pianos in the room (e.g., muting pianos’ sounds).

Additionally, this system permits teachers to flexibly listen to selected students or group of

students through their headphones. Students also have the opportunity of listening to one another

when this option is selected, facilitating instruction when different group arrangements take

place (e.g., pairing of students, small groups, and large group formations). Acoustic pianos,

naturally, do not offer these capabilities. There are different types of teaching consoles, and they

are not sold with digital pianos. Schools are usually responsible for purchasing and providing the

teaching console for class piano instruction since this is a piece of expensive equipment.

Participants who indicated they had digital pianos in their classrooms were also asked if they had

teaching consoles as part of their class setup. Table 20 summarizes the participants’ responses.

To further investigate the use of the teaching consoles, the researcher also asked to what

extent they listened to students during class instruction through this console. Teachers selected

options from (a) more than half of the time; (b) about half of the time; (c) about one-fourth of the

time; (d) rarely; and (e) never. Table 21 summarizes the participants' responses.

48

Table 20

Participants Who Possessed Teaching Console

Teaching console

Middle School

(n = 35)* High School

(n = 51) Middle and High Schools

(n = 86)*

n % n % n %

Yes 5 14.3 10 19.6 15 17.4 No 30 85.7 41 80.4 71 82.6

Note. The * highlights answers from teachers who possessed digital pianos in their class piano classroom.

Table 21

The Use of a Teaching Console During Class Piano Instruction

Frequency of use Middle School

(n = 5)* High School

(n = 10)* Middle and High Schools

(n = 15)*

n % n % n %

More than half of the time 3 60 2 20 5 33.4 About half of the time 0 0 1 10 1 6.7 About one-fourth of the time 1 20 3 30 4 26.6 Rarely 0 0 1 10 1 6.7 Never 1 20 3 30 4 26.6

Note. The * highlights that only participants who possessed teaching consoles in their classrooms answered this question.

49

Both acoustic and digital pianos offer advantages and disadvantages for the class piano

setting, not only concerning instruction but also maintenance. While acoustic pianos may offer a

better quality of sound and feel (touch) during the playing, they also require extra maintenance in

tuning (which should occur frequently, especially if the piano is constantly used) and

maintaining the appropriate humidity in the room. Conversely, while tuning is not required for

digital pianos, additional equipment is necessary, such as pedals, headphones, and in some cases

a stand for the piano itself. To inquire about the quality of the pianos that teachers had in their

classrooms, the researcher asked the participants about the overall condition of the instruments in

their classrooms (Table 22).

Table 22

Condition of Participants' Class Piano Instruments

Condition Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

n % n % n % Excellent 8 22.2 15 29.5 23 26.4 Good 16 44.4 28 54.9 44 50.6 Fair 11 30.6 5 9.8 16 18.4 Poor 1 2.8 3 5.8 4 4.6

Visual aids can be helpful during class piano instruction. Besides the teaching console,

instructors may also use projections through a big screen for easier playing demonstrations and

even for explaining musical theory elements while sharing a music score with the class. The

researcher asked the participants if they used a projector and a screen for instruction during class

piano. Table 23 summarizes the participants' responses.

50

Table 23

The Use of Projector and Screen During Class Piano Instruction

Projector and screen Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

n % n % n %

Yes 29 80.6 40 78.5 69 79.3 No 7 19.4 11 21.5 18 20.7

To inquire about the equipment and type of technologies participants had access to while

instructing class piano, the researcher asked an open-ended question providing an opportunity for

the teachers to list any other equipment they utilized. The participants' answers were varied.

Many of them mentioned that computers, laptops, external cameras, smart boards, and

metronomes were utilized. Conversely, other participants mentioned they did not use any other

type of technology or equipment other than the digital pianos provided within the classroom.

Table 24 summarizes a list of different equipment and technology utilized by class piano

teachers.

Table 24 Equipment and Technology Utilized by the Teachers During Class Piano Instruction

Extra material Middle School High School

Equipment Bluetooth speakers Active board Books Bluetooth speakers Chrome books Books Computers (including laptops) Computers (including laptops) Document camera Document camera iPad iPad Mobile devices Ladybug Camera Piano key poster Metronome Smartboard Microphone Snowball microphone Organ

51

Table 24 – Continued

Extra material Middle School High School

Equipment Speakers Promethean board Web camera Smartboard Whiteboard Speakers TV ViewSonic board Web camera Whiteboard

Technology Canvas* A/D converter Google classroom Apple TV Microsoft Teams* Garage band Screen share* Logic Pro X Sountrap.com

Note. The * symbolizes that those items were used by the teacher only during virtual teaching

Research Question 19: Who Purchases the Materials Used During Class Piano?

The materials and equipment utilized by teachers and students in class piano were varied.

They ranged from digital sources (e.g., websites, software) to physical apparatus (e.g., speakers,

books). Some of these items can be more expensive than others, and regardless of being physical

or digital, this equipment could shape the learning experiences and the teaching environment of

the group piano class.

To further understand how accessible this equipment and materials were to the

participants, the researcher asked them who were responsible for purchasing the materials for

their classroom: the school, the students, or the teachers. Most of the teachers (34.5 %) stated

that the equipment and materials for their classroom were purchased by the school. Table 25

summarizes the responses of the participants.

52

Table 25

Purchasing of Equipment and Materials for the Classroom

Who purchased Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

n % n % n %

School 11 30.6 19 37.3 30 34.5 Teacher 3 8.3 5 9.8 8 9.2 Student 2 5.6 4 7.8 6 6.9 School and teacher 8 22.2 9 17.7 17 19.5 School and student 4 11.1 7 13.7 11 12.6 Teacher and student 2 5.6 1 1.9 3 3.5 School, teacher, and student

6

16.6

6

11.8

12

13.8

Research Question 20: What Are the Instructional Materials (e.g., Textbooks, Piano

Methods) Used in Class Piano?

To further investigate what instructional textbooks the participants utilized in class piano,

the researcher asked if the teachers used any method book serving as a basis for instruction. Most

of them (88.5 %) stated they used a basic textbook for class piano. Additionally, participants

were asked to indicate the author and the title of the specific book utilized. Tables 26 and 27

summarize the teachers’ responses to these questions.

Two middle school teachers also mentioned they utilized extensive piano literature from

traditional piano method books. Specifically, teachers stated using materials from the Piano

Adventures series and the Bastien piano music library. Furthermore, one high school teacher

stated that they used their own piano method music.

53

Table 26

The Use of a Basic Textbook in Class Piano

Use of textbook Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

n % n % n % Yes 32 88.9 45 88.3 77 88.5 No 4 11.1 6 11.7 10 11.5

Participants also had a chance to provide a list of other supplementary materials (e.g.,

audiovisual), resources, and equipment that they utilized and found especially helpful for class

piano instruction. While Table 28 summarizes the list of supplementary resources and equipment

used by middle school class piano teachers; table 29 lists the resources and equipment used by

high school class piano teachers.

Two of the middle school teachers mentioned having a keyboard station of their own

helps them to provide clear demonstrations to the students. Another teacher expressed the same

thought, although they did not possess their own keyboard in the classroom. Within the

supplementary piano solo literature, teachers specifically mentioned some composers they favor,

such as Robert Vandall (1944-2017), Charles-Louis Hanon (1819-1900), Friedrich Burgmüller

(1806-1874), and Muzio Clementi (1752-1832). Additionally, one of the teachers mentioned

utilizing intermediate and advanced pieces of solo piano repertoire, including major piano

sonatas by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756-1791) and Ludwig van Beethoven (1770-1827),

and inventions by Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750). Furthermore, teachers cited using music

books containing popular tunes created for Disney, Harry Potter, Star Wars, and Charlie Brown

films, and The Legend of Zelda game series.

54

Table 27

Listing of Books Utilized by the Teachers

Teachers Book Title Author(s) Publisher

Middle School Accelerated Piano For the Older Beginner Nancy Faber, Randall Faber Hal Leonard Alfred's Basic Adult All-in-One Course Willard Palmer, Morton Manus, Amanda Lethco Alfred Music

Alfred's Premier Piano Course

D. Alexander, G. Kowalchyk, E. Lancaster, V. McArthur, M. Mier

Alfred Music

Dozen a Day Series Edna-Mae Burnam The Willis Music Company

John Thompson's Modern Course for the Piano John Thompson The Willis Music Company High School Adult Piano Adventures All-in-One Piano Course Nancy Faber, Randall Faber Hal Leonard

Alfred Group Piano for Adults E. Lancaster, Kenon Renfrow Alfred Music

Alfred's Basic Adult All-in-One Course Willard Palmer, Morton Manus, Amanda Lethco Alfred Music

Alfred's Piano 101 E. Lancaster, Kenon Renfrow Alfred Music

Bastien Piano for Adults Jane Bastien, Lisa Bastien, and Lori Bastien Kjos Music Company

Master Theory Charles Peters, Paul Yoder Kjos Music Company

The Older Beginner Piano Course James Bastien Kjos Music Company

55

Table 28

Supplementary Resources and Equipment Used by Middle School Piano Teachers

Teachers Resources

Middle School Adaptors for students’ headphones

Bethsnotesplus.com

Blank keyboard templates

Breezinthrutheory.com

Garage Band

Gmajormusictheory.org

Music appreciation textbooks

Musictechteacher.com

Musictheory.net

Performance recordings

Piano Marvel

Piano solo literature

Sibelius

Thesightreadingproject.com

Sightreadingfactory.com

Theory and technique books in addition to lesson books

Videos of performances and [hand] positions

Worksheets

YouTube videos

Like the middle school teachers, a high school instructor mentioned that having an

external web camera on their piano keys assisted the students to observe what the teachers were

doing. Another high school teacher mentioned that students used their cellphones during class

piano to look for and listen to songs they wanted to learn and perform. Three teachers mentioned

they utilized music books beyond the basic ones used for instruction, including books of classical

piano solo repertoire and music theory. Amongst referring to assorted books of popular and easy

classical repertoire, they also cited the books Keys to Stylistic Mastery (by I. Clairfield, and D.

56

Alexander), Alfred’s Essentials of Music Theory (by A. Surmani, K. Surmani, and M. Manus),

and Alfred’s Notespeller Book (by Gayle Kowalchyk).

Table 29

Supplementary Resources and Equipment Used by High School Piano Teachers

Teachers Resources

High School Breezinthrutheory.com

Canvas

External camera

Flipgrid

Google workspace

Headphones

Kahoot.com

Medici TV

Musictheory.net

Performance recordings

Piano lettered diagram

Piano solos

PowerPoint software

Recordings

Scale sheets with images of the keyboard and finger numbers

Theory worksheets

USB cables

Visual chord charts

Visual voicings of chords charts

YouTube videos

The equipment and materials that teachers used as supplementary resources in their class

piano instruction were from varied sources. They included books, online and digital content, and

electronic devices. Most of the books and music sheets that teachers cited are often utilized in

individual piano instruction (e.g., traditional one-on-one piano lessons). To inquire about the

57

participants’ perceptions about how these materials could be used, the researcher asked the

teachers if they found it was necessary to adapt these piano materials developed for individual

piano lessons to group piano instruction. Table 30 summarizes the teachers’ responses to this

question.

Most of the teachers (66.7%) mentioned that they adapted piano materials for

individualized to group piano instruction. More middle school teachers (72.2%) than high school

teachers (62.8%) adapted these materials for group instruction. Although these adaptations may

seem necessary for teaching group classes, it all depends on the materials’ purpose and target

audience (e.g., children, teenagers, adults) from which one is adapting. Teachers who did not

adapt (33.3%) might have used materials that did not require adaptation.

Table 30

Adaptation of Piano Materials for Individualized to Group Piano Instruction

Adaptation Middle School High School Middle and High Schools

n % n % n %

Yes 26 72.2 32 62.8 58 66.7 No 10 27.8 19 37.2 29 33.3

Questionnaire’s Open-ended Final Question

The questionnaire sent to all participants included a final open-ended question. In this

question, the researcher asked the teachers to list any specific problems they saw that were

related to class piano instruction in secondary schools. Table 31 includes statements of the

middle and high school class piano instructors.

58

Overall, middle school teachers were concerned about students continuing their piano

studies through high school, especially since not all high schools offered class piano courses,

forcing them to decide between either advancing their studies through private piano lessons or

stopping the learning process. Many teachers stated that the number of students per class was a

real issue. Furthermore, when students with diverse playing and pre-musical knowledge levels

were placed in the same class, concerns about the balance of consistent learning progress

between beginners and more advanced students were raised. Finally, middle school teachers also

expressed their discontent with the maintenance of their classroom instruments. They mentioned

that pianos were unkept, not fully functioning and that often, piano technicians were quite

expensive, causing some teachers to bring their own instruments to the classroom. Unfortunately,

they reported that their private instruments brought to the school were frequently vandalized by

students who were unhappy with the class.

Overall, the high school teachers stated some similar issues that middle school teachers

mentioned. They understood that a large number of students in one piano classroom makes the

teaching quite challenging. Teachers also referred to students’ playing levels quickly differing

between one another, where in two or three months into the course, students were all at different

levels, carrying this discrepancy to subsequent years of class piano studies. Some teachers

confessed that the piano was not their primary instrument and that they could not help more

advanced students regarding difficulties in technical aspects of the playing. Teachers also

mentioned that students were unable to focus on the piano during long periods of the daily class

meetings. Finally, teachers agreed that many students were forced into class piano due to agenda

or class scheduling conflicts.

59

Table 31

Teachers' Statements Regarding Class Piano Instructional Issues

Middle School Teachers High School Teachers (n = 36) (n = 51)

• Lack of continuity between levels[from the middle to high school]

• Some kids are put in elective classesthey did not sign up for

• Unkept instruments • Students of different levels

• Each student is at a different level:some had lessons, others are beginners

• Proper equipment (full-sized keys, 1:1keyboard per students)

• Students do not know how to utilizepractice time and are generally off taskduring class instruction

• Students do not have [the] means topractice outside of school if they wishto

• Too many students […], especially [in]classes without a teaching console unit

• [Limiting] available space [in themusic classroom]

• Not being able to model for students • A high number of students per class

• I am a pianist, but many teachers arehired [to teach at the] secondary level[of education] with minimal pianopedagogy training

• The state of the equipment is abysmal,and the students must share pianos dueto overcrowding and a lack ofinstruments

• Not having enough funds to buy betterpianos (with 88 weighted or even justtouch-sensitive keys), headphones,pedals, a "music lab", and chairs/tablesthat are the correct size for each student

• Since [the] piano is not my primaryinstrument, I always question whetherI am teaching in the proper sequenceor efficiently

• The difference [in] music notationcomprehension from their primaryschool

• It can be difficult to give every studentin the class the individualizedattention they need every day

• It is very hard to give each student theattention they need

• Students on various levels ofknowledge and achievement

• How to help students of differentlevels progress

60

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION

Summary

This study explored the status of class piano in secondary public schools in the state of

Florida. Specifically, the focus of this research was to: (1) analyze instructional settings in

secondary schools in the state of Florida; (2) investigate the resources and materials that group

piano teachers of secondary schools use; (3) examine participant teachers’ preparation and

training on piano and group teaching, and; (4) describe the environment and equipment used by

participant schools and teachers.

A review of the literature revealed that, although music pedagogues recognized the

efficacy of group piano teaching over 200 years ago, there is still a lack of research in class piano

instruction at the secondary level of education. Conversely, investigations about class piano at

the collegiate level have gained popularity. For example, the National Group Piano and Piano

Pedagogy Forum (GP3) is a conference created to promote research and discussions about group

piano courses at the tertiary level of education (GP3 – Teaching, Learning, Sharing, 2021).

Additionally, the keyboard proficiency requirements established by the National Association of

School of Music (NASM, 2017) for undergraduate music students—along with piano pedagogy

conferences—have supported the growth in collegiate group piano research.

The literature also revealed that researchers observed inconsistencies in piano proficiency

exams at universities across the country (Hamel, 2000; Young, 2016). Collegiate class piano

students are, most likely, enrolled in different music programs (e.g., performance, composition,

music therapy, music education). This variety of music students may contribute to the challenges

61

of prioritizing keyboard skills in piano proficiency exams, resulting in examinations’ disparities

in universities across the country.

While this study targets a different teacher population, it is possible that similar

discrepancies occur at the middle and high school levels of instruction. The researcher developed

a questionnaire that was emailed to music teachers (n = 980) who taught in secondary public

schools across the state of Florida during the academic year of 2020–2021. Responses were

obtained from 120 teachers (12.2%). However, 87 teachers met the study’s participation criteria

of instructing class piano, yielding an 8.8% response rate.

Teachers’ Preparation and Training for Piano and Group Teaching

Qualifications Related to Teaching Class Piano

Results from the questionnaire indicated that most of the teachers (97.7%) possessed a

Florida teaching certification in music. However, only 28.7% of the teachers stated that

keyboard/class piano courses were their primary teaching assignment. Additionally, just over a

third of the teachers (36.8%) mentioned they had special training for teaching class piano.

Teachers stated that this special training included being a former class piano student while in

college, taking private piano lessons while in college or from K-12, participating in piano

workshops, and in-service experiences.

Although many teachers who participated in this study had some type of experience with

class piano, it is not clear how many of them, in fact, were trained to teach class piano. This type

of training and experience can be primarily obtained during piano pedagogy courses offered by

universities and colleges at the graduate level. Since there was no indication about participants’

academic music studies in the participants’ responses, it is deemed that these teachers have never

62

participated in piano pedagogy courses. Therefore, it is possible that the effectiveness of their

teaching abilities may be inhibited for not having that specific training.

High school teachers expressed concerns about their piano playing capabilities. Most of

them stated that the piano was not their primary instrument. They bluntly confessed not being

able to properly teach students—especially the more advanced ones—about keyboard technique.

One of the teachers stated that “since piano is not my primary instrument, I always question

whether I am teaching in the proper sequence or efficiently.” Another participant mentioned

“piano is not [my] first instrument” while another reinforced “not my primary instrument. I

cannot help students that are highly advanced with technique.”

High school teachers taught group piano courses even when choir (41%) or band (19.6%)

were their primary assigned teaching courses. These results may indicate that the piano was not

the principal instrument of these high school teachers. Therefore, it is not surprising to learn

about these teachers’ inability to technically assist more advanced students during class piano.

Assigning a teacher to instruct multiple courses even when some of these are outside of their

primary area of specialization may reflect the school’s low budget for their music program. Not

only could this result in students not receiving proper education but also in decreasing students’

motivation for the piano classes due to teachers’ weak instructional abilities for that group

setting. When students feel they are not progressing in their studies, their lack of attention and

focus may increase during the class piano meetings. Therefore, it is also not surprising that

teachers also reported that students’ lack of attention during class piano was a major and growing

concern among high school students.

Although class piano enables group learning, instructors prioritized an individualized

teaching approach. While the learning of some instruments occurs through group or ensemble

63

playing in secondary schools (e.g. brass and woodwind instruments in band ensemble), piano

learning is traditionally perceived through the means of individual instruction (e.g., one-on-one

piano lessons). If teachers took piano pedagogy courses, they would understand that group piano

must be approached and taught differently than typical piano lessons. Unfortunately, there are no

current teaching standards for teachers who instruct class piano at the secondary level of

education in the state of Florida. One middle/high school teacher may be assigned to fulfill

diverse duties through their teaching position (e.g., directing a choir, teaching music theory, and

instructing class piano).

It seems that many of the participant-teachers did not recognize the piano as their primary

or principal instrument. Besides having a teacher’s music certification, they shared concerns

about their inability to teach keyboard technique to more advanced class piano students.

Teachers who instruct piano, either in the group or individual settings, should feel comfortable

and confident while teaching different facets of the instrument, technically and artistically.

Therefore, more teacher preparation may be needed, either during their previous collegiate music

studies or during in-training services.

To play an instrument does not necessarily mean that one possesses the tools and

knowledge of comprehensively teaching students how to play that instrument—in this case, the

piano. Pedagogical knowledge differs from content knowledge (e.g., knowing how to play is

different than knowing how to teach). While most music teachers experienced learning how to

play the piano during their undergraduate studies (through required class piano courses), they

were not required to participate in piano pedagogy courses. It is important to highlight that in

collegiate class piano courses students learn basic keyboard skills (e.g., playing scales, chord

progressions, harmonization, accompaniment, etc.) but not about the fundamentals on how to

64

teach them. Therefore, the researcher recommends that teachers receive some sort of training

regarding how to properly teach group piano in secondary public schools as part of their own

post-secondary education or professional development.

Since no specific teaching standards for class piano has been established, it seems that

universities and colleges of music could better prepare and equip undergraduate music students

for their future roles as music educators. These institutions could offer piano pedagogy courses

specifically geared to music education students. These students could then learn the

fundamentals of teaching the piano in individual and group settings. If universities had a chance

to tailor or design a piano pedagogy course for music education students, those courses could

aim for developing an understanding of the basic mechanisms of piano playing (e.g., sitting

posture, physical gestures, tone quality), strategies and significance of group piano teaching, and

above all, how to instruct all these elements in middle and high school environments.

In addition to piano pedagogy courses for music students at the undergraduate level,

universities could include further requirements or options about group piano teaching in their

master's degree of music education. These courses could cover content from piano pedagogy and

group piano courses. This could better equip and inform graduate music students with more and

stronger tools for teaching group piano in the public school setting. Enabling graduate music

students to have close contact with piano pedagogy could change and/or create a culture of

professional development related to piano instruction. Individuals would realize that receiving

professional training on how to properly teach piano could make their instruction more impactful

and meaningful to public school’s students.

Mid-career teachers who have gone through their college music education and already

teach group piano courses in secondary schools also have options of enhancing their

65

understanding of class piano instruction. Webinars from professional music organizations, such

as the Music Teachers National Association - MTNA (https://mtna.org) and the Frances Clark

Center (https://www.keyboardpedagogy.org) offer valuable content about group piano teaching

and piano instruction in general. These professional organizations promote conferences about

piano and piano pedagogy with frequency. The previously mentioned GP3 conference, which

focuses on group piano instruction, is led by the MTNA, occurring biannually. Additionally, the

MTNA annually presents a national music conference, and similarly to the National Association

for Music Education – NAfME (https://nafme.org), it possesses national and state levels of

membership. Being a member of these organizations and attending conferences offered by them

could greatly benefit secondary group piano teachers who did not have the experience of taking

formal piano pedagogy courses.

Further resources for group piano teachers at the secondary school level may include

scholarly articles and journals for practitioners that incorporate topics about piano and group

piano teaching. The Florida Music Director (https://fmea.org/publications/florida-music-director)

is a publication that can be readily accessed by the members of the Florida Music Education

Association (https://fmea.org), the state branch of the NAfME. This journal encompasses varied

articles about music education in addition to topics about piano teaching. Group piano teachers

could benefit from this resource by directly applying recommendations and suggestions found in

this publication to their teaching, possibly enhancing their level of group piano instruction.

Class Piano Learning Requirements

Although the National Association of Schools of Music established requirements about

keyboard proficiency for collegiate music students during their undergraduate degree (NASM,

66

2017), there are no specific skills that students need to learn during class piano at the secondary

level of education. Instead, learning standards for middle and high schools were ratified on more

comprehensive aspects of education. The 2020 Florida Statues (Online Sunshine, 2020)

established broader guidelines for performing arts (which includes music): “[…] performing arts

[…] standards must establish curricular content and include distinct grade level expectations for

the core content knowledge and skills that a student is expected to have acquired […].”

Additionally, it is stated that “Curricular content for all subjects must integrate critical-thinking,

problem-solving, and workforce-literacy skills; communication, reading, and writing skills;

mathematics skills; collaboration skills; contextual and applied-learning skills; technology-

literacy skills; information and media-literacy skills; and civic-engagement skills.”

The teaching standards provided by the 2020 Florida Statues highlighted the importance

of differentiating grade content. It reinforced that essential aspects of education, such as critical

thinking and collaboration skills, are to be integrated into the subject matter. In the case of the

present study, this is music, and more specifically, class piano. The keyboard skills taught to

middle and high school students in class piano can easily integrate these important aspects of

education. For instance, critical thinking can be developed through musical analysis (e.g., form,

harmony, phrasing), and collaboration skills through ensemble playing (e.g., piano duets, small

group formations). Ensuring that class piano students learn certain keyboard competencies and

specific music skills in effective and meaningful ways reinforces the educational aspects

highlighted by the 2020 Florida Statues to be carried over for years after they graduate from high

school.

67

Instructional Settings in Secondary Schools in the State of Florida

The Number of Students in a Class Piano Course|

Results from the questionnaire revealed that the number of middle and high school

students who were enrolled in class piano varied. Teachers mentioned that the enrollment of

middle school students was between 10 and 160 per semester, while the enrollment of high

school students was between 6 and 350. It is important to recall that these numbers may reflect

the issues brought by the current global pandemic teachers are facing, especially during the

academic year of 2020-2021. One of the teachers stated that enrollment grew 56.5% this year.

The same teacher also mentioned they had a total of five piano classes and only one chorus—

referring to this as a “wonky year.” This teacher attributed the uncommon increase of students’

enrolment to the situation stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic. Music ensembles such as

choir and band were probably reduced and even canceled to promote safety for students and

teachers. Due to the risk of spreading the easily infectious COVID-19 virus through aerosolized

means, large ensembles, particularly involving singers, wind, and brass instrumentalists were

often put on hold during the period of pandemic (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,

2020; Weaver et al., 2020).

It is possible that some secondary public schools in the state of Florida were not capable

of following such safety guidelines to mitigate the aerosol transfer of particles. Therefore, they

might have opted to dismiss their large music ensembles, canceling or postponing orchestra,

choir, and band courses from their schedules. This may have resulted in students migrating to

piano classes to fulfill their performing arts credit requirements. In the survey, many teachers

mentioned that class piano instruction was occurring fully or partially online. Teachers

mentioned that the hybrid format of piano classes included face-to-face instruction with few

68

students while most of them attended the class virtually. Although one of the teachers mentioned

that “it [was] challenging teaching face-to-face and virtual students at the same time” and that

“classes [were] very large because of [the] blended modalities due to COVID”, this aspect of the

group piano classes enabled students to safely continue their music education through the 2020-

2021 academic year.

Teachers were also asked if there was a limit to the number of students in their class

piano courses. Most of the instructors (87.3%) stated that they did have a maximum number for

their classes. Amongst these instructors, most of them (87%) mentioned that the limiting factor

for class size was the number of keyboards available in the piano lab. Although teachers had a

limiting factor for class size, they did not have control over the number of students enrolled in

the class. The reasons for the varied number of students in a class can be attributed to enrollment

rates, number of classes offered, classroom’s physical size, students’ schedules, number of

instruments available in the piano lab, etc. It seems that students’ schedule is a decisive factor in

student’s enrollment for class piano. Most of the teachers (57%) stated that enrollment occurred

based upon other classes that students attended.

The size of a piano class is critical. A piano class should not have more students than the

space permits (Pike, 2017). Therefore, a teacher should not have more students than pianos in

their classroom. The number of students in a class also affects the quality of the group

instruction. Jackson (1980) highlights that group piano instruction offers opportunities for

students to interact with one another and to participate in a variety of activities that would

increase the appeal of the group class. Furthermore, Fisher (2010) states that, for more proper

instruction, small groups within the group class could range from two to six members. Having

69

four groups of six students in a piano class brings the total number to twenty-four students.

Nevertheless, experts suggest that “the smaller the group the better” (p. 56).

The number of students in a group piano class can also impact other essential aspects of

instruction, such as assessment and evaluation. Fisher (2010) presents the assessment as a

“continual process in which the instructor seeks to measure student comprehension or skill

mastery.” He describes evaluation as it “attempts to understand how the learner is progressing

toward achieving the established curricular goals” (p. 104). Although both assessment and

evaluation can occur through group settings, both should also happen on an individual basis. The

larger the class size is the more challenging it is for the teacher to individually assess and

evaluate students. A short individual three-minute feedback segment to students in a class

containing twenty-four students would take over one hour to completely occur, which might be

longer than a typical period of most secondary public schools. Therefore, even with a reasonable

class size, instructors should carefully plan how assessment and evaluation could happen without

consuming precious instructional and practice time during class.

Some secondary public school teachers may have the advantage of meeting daily with

their students. This schedule can be beneficial for assessing and evaluating them. Teachers can

reserve a certain amount of time each day to check on a few or specific students, being able to

observe all students of the same class within a week. Students would know that they would be

assessed and/or evaluated with certain regularity and this could serve as a practice motivational

tool to enhance progress.

Pike (2017) mentions that “students should be assessed individually even if much of their

work takes place in the group setting” (p. 86). Teachers could facilitate individualized

assessment and evaluation while engaging students in small groups during ensemble playing.

70

Each student could be assigned a few measures or one musical phrase of the piece, giving them

the chance to play by themselves in front of their peers. This can be an effective way of

individually assessing students within a group setting, saving class time for further instruction

and other activities. Students can learn by listening and observing the playing of their colleagues

during exercises like this. Figure 1 illustrates how one student at a time could be responsible for

playing one phrase of the music. Students would play their assigned sections/phrases one after

the other, maintaining a steady beat and continuity of the piece. The combination would result in

a complete performance of the piece.

The example selection of Figure 1 includes a Brazilian folk song. This selection is not

typically found in traditional method books for piano. Folk songs that are commonly present in

these books—such as Mary had a little lamb, Old MacDonald, Kumbaya, etc.—may serve as a

basis for arrangement creations, specifically for ensemble playing. However, teachers should not

feel restricted to use only materials from piano method books. If they know folk songs or any

other types of songs that are uncommon, they should feel confident in making their own

arrangements, such as the example in Figure 1.

Class Piano and Students’ Musicianship

One of the main musical goals of collegiate class piano courses is to support students in

developing a proficient keyboard playing ability. This is achieved through intense and frequent

practice of music skills such as music reading, chordal accompanying, harmonization, open score

reading, sight-reading, improvisation, etc. The process of learning these keyboard skills is

intended to help music students during their professional future careers, either as performers,

71

music therapists, music educators, or composers. While doing so, class piano reinforces the

development of their general musicianship, especially through the experience of group playing.

Note. The colored boxes represent a musical phrase for which each student would be responsible for playing for the class. Figure 1

Brazilian Folk Song “Se essa rua fosse minha” (If this street were mine)

72

Class piano at the secondary level of education may share the same philosophy regarding

providing students information about how to play the piano. However, the prioritization of

musical skills and keyboard competencies to be taught for middle and high school students are

yet unclear. When asked about the importance of certain music skills during class piano

instruction, teachers stated that music reading was very important. Middle school teachers also

mentioned that memorization and ear training were important skills to be taught during class

piano.

While teachers prioritize music reading in their piano classes, students may find this skill

challenging and, at times, frustrating—especially at the early learning stages. Some students

might be joining the piano class simply for fun and pleasure. Others might be enrolling in the

class to fulfill their schedules. Regardless, they are at risk of quickly getting unmotivated with

their piano and music studies if teachers do not consider a proper approach while instructing

these courses. The statement below comes from a middle school teacher who answered the

questionnaire:

“The students think that coming into [class] piano they will be able to play the songs they

hear on the radio. It's challenging to get them to read notes. They want to play by ear or

use the YouTube tutorials that show the keyboard to learn to play. Fundamentals have to

come first before the fun stuff. Many times, students are not given the choice to come

into [the] piano [class]. They are dumped in the class because they needed something on

their schedule. This causes disciplinary issues in the classroom.”

Contentious issues in the field of music pedagogy include when and how to introduce music

notation to a beginner instrumentalist. McPherson and Gabrielsson (2002) point out that:

73

Most current teaching introduces musical notation very early in the process, perhaps

because many teachers believe that beginners who are taught by ear will never reach the

same level of reading proficiency as children who are introduced to notation from their

earliest lessons. In contrast, proponents of the sound before sign approach argue that

children will have difficulty learning to read notation unless their musical knowledge is

sufficiently developed for them to be able to relate the sound of what they can already

play with the symbols used to represent them. (p. 99)

It is possible that learning by ear is more appealing to students and could be of interest to

the teacher since it could facilitate the students’ music reading ability. Furthermore, “Teachers

should recognize the importance of ear playing as an important facet of training that enhances

overall musical growth and that provides for more enjoyable and meaningful learning”

(McPherson & Gabrielsson, 2002, p. 109).

Children might not attend school to have fun; however, learning in an enjoyable

classroom environment may be more pleasant for them. Fundamentals of piano playing could be

connected to fun activities, serving as motivation for these students as they continue to develop

in their piano studies. Technology such as the internet (e.g., YouTube, music theory websites)

and other digital applications (e.g., music apps found in cellphones and tablets) should also be

used to enhance students’ motivation. Research tells us that “technological improvements […]

have affected how we can listen to music” and that “the ways in which young children

experience music has drastically changed in the past few years” (Rajan, 2014). The fact that

students would like to learn how to play the piano by ear may be a reflection of how these

students have experienced learning through their elementary music education.

74

It could be beneficial for these teachers to prioritize the skills taught during class piano in

connection to how they teach general music classes for middle schoolers. For instance, the skill

of improvisation is frequently utilized in general music classes since it is a tool that can provide

comprehensive standards-based music education (Guderian, 2012). Improvisation possesses

stronger foundations on ear training rather than music reading. Since students acquire this skill

by ear, memorization processes occur through imitation and rote playing, and not after reading

music notation. Edmund and Keller (2020) point to five principles to be used during

improvisation activities in the general music classroom. They are: (1) experience first, before

intellectualizing; (2) improvise within structure/syntax; (3) perform by ear; (4) improvisation is a

way of being in music; and, (5) balance freedom with structure. Utilizing these principles during

class piano could be extremely valuable, especially if implemented before introducing students

to music reading. By doing so, teachers would be taking advantage of students’ preferences of

learning by ear, which could also motivate students’ learning desire.

By introducing music reading in later stages of piano studies, students would be offered

the opportunity to primarily focus on physical gestures and habits that are important for

developing a good and healthy piano playing (e.g., proper sitting position, use of full-arm weight

while creating vigorous sound production and good tone quality, arm movements without

tension). The improvisation activities could then engage students and better motivate them to

play and practice the piano from their first-class meetings while creating strong foundations for

their technique development. Eventually, the improvisation exercises would become activities of

composition as students learn how to notate their improvisations/creations. Giebelhausen (2016)

highlights that “middle school students are at an ideal age when it is possible for them to

differentiate music composition from improvisation.” It is important to mention that repetition is

75

an essential practice when composing and/or annotating a spontaneous improvisation. Research

reveals that 7-year-old children have more difficulty in repeating their musical ideas while 9- and

11-year-old children can replicate them more easily (Kratus, 1989). Therefore, composition

activities are more suitable for middle school students than younger ones. By transiting between

improvisation and composition activities, students would be transferring their knowledge

obtained aurally to a concrete form of a musical manuscript, inciting them to further learn about

traditional musical notation in piano playing. This could be a pathway to then introduce music

reading at the piano to middle school students.

High school teachers also stated that music reading was a very important skill to be

taught during class piano. They recognized chordal accompanying and ear training as being

important skills for group piano instruction. Unlike middle school teachers, the high school

instructors did not list the skill of memorization as being important.

High school teachers could also allow students to focus on essential physical gestures of

piano playing before introducing traditional music reading to their students. Since teenage

students might have the urge—and excitement—of immediately being able to play the piano

after a few classes, playing from lead sheets could connect aurally learned chordal

accompaniments with music reading. Eventually, the theoretical music aspects underneath the

chord symbols could be introduced through proper music notation. This approach would allow

students to play with more ease while focusing on their gestures and posture before attending to

the music notation in front of them.

The teachers were also asked about the importance of students learning expressive

musical elements during class piano instruction, including tempo, dynamics, phrasing, and

articulation. Both middle school and high school teachers stated that all these elements were very

76

important within class piano instruction. Playing with dynamics was considered the most

important expressive musical element. The researcher also inquired about the importance of

teaching certain technical elements during class piano instruction, including playing scales,

arpeggios, and playing with a correct hand posture. Middle school and high school teachers

agreed that playing with a correct hand position was the most important technical element,

followed by playing scales and finally playing arpeggios.

Secondary school instructors who participated in this study shared different perceptions

about the priority of skills to be taught during class piano. However, both middle and high school

teachers perceived the skill of music reading as very important during instruction. Although

students might be naturally engaged when presented with a keyboard to work with during the

piano class, they might have the necessity to understand the importance and applicability of

reading music. Therefore, traditional music reading must be meaningful to these students,

otherwise, they will not experience a pleasant and easy process while learning this skill. It can be

effective for students to transition from meaningful musical experiences—such as well-

structured improvisation and composition activities—to then learning how to read traditional

music notation. The comment below from one of the teachers makes it clear how students look

for meaningful experiences in their piano classes:

“Students do not enjoy having to learn how to read music when there does not seem to

be a reason or way for them to apply that knowledge in any way. With the keyboard

classes, I can see how most of my students are more engaged and an active part of the

learning process.”

Regardless of the music skills these instructors prioritized, they must be better informed

about the importance of teaching basic technical elements of piano playing before introducing

77

music reading to students. Such fundamental pieces of information could be obtained through

piano pedagogy courses that colleges and universities offer. Additionally, they could attend

conferences that are specifically geared towards piano or attend webinars that focus on that

content. Therefore, it seems relevant that teachers who instruct secondary group piano courses in

public schools should have a more extensive professional development experience by attending

these piano pedagogy courses during their academic formal music studies.

The musical skills mentioned above may possess varying degrees of importance in class

piano, especially when considering students’ ages and musical preferences. It is relevant to stress

that all these skills and abilities (music reading, memorization, playing in diverse tempi, playing

with diverse articulations) can be developed within the group piano instruction. In fact,

collectively experiencing them (e.g., reading music in groups, accompanying each other, etc.)

may facilitate the teaching while engaging students in more enjoyable events during class piano.

This can be a better option rather than offering students the isolation of the individual practice

even when present in a group class.

Traditionally, learning how to play the piano is often seen as a lifelong journey,

especially for ones who remain a musician for the whole life. Developing students’ musicianship

may take years before coming to fruition. Middle school teachers expressed concerns about the

ongoing musical education of their students. Some of them observed that, after graduating from

middle school, students moved to high schools that did not offer class piano courses. A

participant teacher stated in the questionnaire: “my middle school does not feed to a high school

with class piano courses, so after 8th grade, my students must choose to continue privately if

they continue.” For those cases, students would either completely stop their piano studies or

switch to private lessons. Teachers acknowledged knowing some students not being able to

78

afford private instruction, highlighting the importance of high schools offering class piano

through their performing arts curriculum. One of the teachers shared the difficulties of resources

in their community:

“I teach at a low-income school, so availability of resources is scarce. Some students only

receive instructions at school and when practice opportunities are given. The

inconsistencies make progress really slow, so I have started to request keyboard

donations from communities and other entities. Fortunately, students who are in my class

help build the reputation and create a positive buzz for others to invest in the

opportunities presented for free public music education. More parents and community

members are looking to invest in public music education and musical growth.”

Class piano at the secondary level of education can be acknowledged as a gateway for

children and teenagers to get involved with music and the instrument. Teachers’ observations

about students' affordability for private piano instruction reflect a reality of many families and

students. In a way, the importance of providing quality group piano courses at the secondary

level of education is beyond any financial justification. Class piano may be the only way these

students will ever have to study piano and more deeply learn about music.

The Groups Within the Group and Students’ Diverse Playing Levels

Class piano enables students to work collectively due to its group nature. Within a large

class, an array of group formations can be generated according to the activity proposed by the

instructor. Depending on the skills that are being practiced, the teacher can group students in

pairs, small groups (between three and five students), or even have the class work collectively as

a large group.

79

There are many benefits of group instruction during class piano. As Fisher (2010) states,

“the group has the potential to generate a spirit of enthusiasm and motivation toward the subject

matter in a way that the instructor could never achieve alone. […] Groups may also present

opportunities to motivate students through healthy competition” (p. 9). Additionally, Pintão

(2013) highlights that group teaching causes behavioral reactions in students, which facilitate

their understanding of key-concepts through group dynamics, cooperative learning, discovery

learning, and constructive learning. Furthermore, Baker-Jordan (2003) expresses important

considerations about group teaching. She mentions that in group instruction:

The teacher [is] more of a guide and facilitator than an authority figure. […] Students

interact with one another, work together on group activities, share ideas, influence one

another, help set goals for the group, and make decisions together. […] They have the

opportunity to observe one another, hear questions from others they have not thought of,

hear greater variety of music played, perform in front of an audience, and critique the

playing of their peers. (p. 275)

Baker-Jordan (2003) also mentions that positive peer pressure is an important aspect of

group instruction. Teachers of any subject aim for maintaining a learning environment of care,

mutual respect, and cooperation between students. Peer pressure can be experienced in a friendly

and supportive manner in group piano instruction, especially when activities enable such

experiences. Additionally, students have a chance to explore a given concept while applying it

through diverse activities enabled by the group setting (Allsup, 2003; Fisher, 2010, Meulink,

2011). A frequently mentioned benefit from group settings is cooperative learning.

The results of leading research about cooperative learning (Johnson & Johnson, 1975;

Kagan, 1989; Sharan, 1990; Slavin, 1990) list the benefits of this alternative teaching method,

80

including: (1) increased academic achievement and positive social skills development, (2)

positive student feelings through participation and improved ethnic relations, (3) promotion of

cultural democracy, (4) increased observance of pro-academic peer norms (students encouraging

each other to do their best), (5) increased internal locus of control, and (6) improved time-on-task

and general classroom behavior. Both Fisher (2006) and Meulink (2011) consider the group

piano classroom a perfect environment for cooperative learning to occur.

Although students could benefit from cooperative learning during group instruction,

participant teachers in this study stated that the individualized instructional setting during class

piano was more important than group instruction. However, while attempting to teach group

piano students individually, other issues are perceived by the teachers. One of them shared that

“it is difficult to keep them[, the students,] motivated and have so many individual "lessons"

happening at the same time.” This statement reveals how teachers may yet continue to perceive

the class piano group instruction as individualized lessons.

The questionnaire also revealed other issues perceived by the instructors participating in

this study. Teachers mentioned that because of their inability to place students in different

classes due to students’ schedule constraints, classes ended up including students with a wide

variety of playing abilities (e.g., students who have never played the piano with students who

took private piano instruction for years). The challenge of having an unbalanced class including

students with diverse playing levels is also found in collegiate group piano instruction. Although

clearer guidelines define which skills and abilities collegiate students must acquire after one or

two years of classes, collegiate class piano consists of students from different majors (e.g.,

performance, composition, therapy, etc.). Similarly, middle and high school students may bring

to class piano their diverse background musical and non-musical experiences. The heterogeneity

81

of students can be perceived as a common characteristic of group instruction; and although

challenging, one can recognize this as the beauty of group teaching.

One teacher expressed their discontent with the different playing levels of students who

were placed in the same class through the following statement:

“The biggest issue is that the teacher must have strategies to deal with students of many

different ability levels. Many students arrive already having had piano lessons

somewhere. This does not automatically mean that the student should be in a more

advanced class. There should be a system of evaluation in place for new students. This is

important so that they get placed in the correct level in consideration of their current

skills and the teacher's curriculum.”

Duke and Benson (2004) acknowledge that “one of the most daunting challenges of

group instruction […] is accommodating the many disparities among individual students in a

given class.” Although challenging, Baker-Jordan (2003) describes this issue as a misconception

about group piano teaching. She states that more advanced students’ development is not held

back by beginner students. This is because not all students learn the same pieces at the same time

in group piano classes (p. 286). Advanced students should learn more challenging pieces while

beginner students should focus on simpler pieces of repertoire. Teachers should reserve a portion

of the class time for individualized practice, and that is when students can progress according to

their abilities. However, this does not mean that individualized instruction should be prioritized

over group instruction.

The challenge of having students of diverse levels in the same piano class can be

approached in many ways. A commonly found solution is to teach to the average student.

82

However, this is not as effective as many might think. Duke and Benson (2004) describe this

approach as:

The least viable prescription, since teaching to the middle increases the likelihood that the

most able students will be bored by the lack of challenge while the least able students will

be frustrated by their inability to meet the demands of the tasks presented to them by the

teacher (p. 41)

Their research (Duke & Benson, 2004) investigated the pacing of group piano instruction

according to the least skilled student in the class. Teachers in that study more often simplified the

tasks performed by students rather than increased them, allowing the least skilled students to

accomplish the goals of the tasks. This modified sequence of instruction “had no apparent effect

on the students’ perceptions of the pace of instruction or on their levels of interest in the class

activities” (p. 46). They added that students expressed enjoyment while working on repertoire,

that the instructional pace was appropriate, and that the instructor was helpful and positive.

Although this study occurred within a university environment (students were freshman and

sophomore music students), these findings could “allay some teachers’ concerns that attending to

the needs of students who experience problems will inevitably frustrate or bore the more skilled

students in a class” (p. 47).

Other challenges concerning group piano instruction are often studied and analyzed

through piano pedagogy courses. Additional resources regarding these issues may be found in

the research literature. The dissertation of Lindsay (2006), for instance, offers sixty-seven

creative activities to be utilized during group piano instruction. Although these activities were

primarily developed to be implemented in collegiate-level class piano, they can be adapted to a

83

class with students of younger ages. Many of the activities created by her allow simultaneous

engagement of students with diverse playing levels and abilities.

The challenge of having students of varying playing levels in the same class may have

generated, amongst these teachers of the present study, a false impression that individual

instruction might be more effective than group instruction during class piano. The individualized

instructional setting, although important, may not be crucial for class piano teaching. Great

learning opportunities are lost when approaching class piano with a one-on-one teaching

mindset. Students at different levels can learn by simply observing the playing and practicing of

their classmates. Peer observation is an essential component of the visual learning modality and

learning from one another as well as learning to help each other are common benefits of group

piano instruction (Pike, 2017), especially when the group setting is correctly employed.

Advanced students, for instance, could effectively guide beginner students on specific keyboard

skills—such as scales played with correct fingerings—allowing the more advanced student to

check, revise, and reinforce concepts that they are familiarized with.

Teachers in this study were also asked about ensemble playing and group formations

during class piano. They stated that solo playing was more important than duets or small

ensembles. Teaching piano repertoire during class piano does not necessarily mean an

individualized instructional format, especially when several students from the same class might

be learning the same piece of music. Although many are the advantages of group instruction

during class piano, teachers continued to value an individual instructional approach. This issue

can be attributed not only to the lack of understanding about the effectiveness and benefits of

group instruction—which could be achieved through formal training and appropriate piano

pedagogy courses—but also to the lack of materials and textbooks that are pertinent for class

84

piano at the secondary level of education. Additionally, piano possesses a teaching tradition of

individual lessons whereas the same does not occur with other instruments. The teaching of brass

and wind instruments, for instance, traditionally happens through ensembles and groups in public

schools (e.g., band, jazz band). Piano teaching should also be seen by these teachers as an

instrument that is fit for group instruction while it can collectively develop collaborative skills,

steady pulse, and critical listening in all students.

Materials and Resources for Group Piano Instruction

Method Books

It is common to find teachers who utilize music method books when instructing

individual and/or group classes. These books are usually developed to support a well-sequenced

and well-balanced learning curriculum. They are often designed to attend to a specific audience,

with language, vocabulary, images, and repertoire that are age-appropriate. Some of these

methods offer different types of books within the same level, such as the lesson book, the music

theory book, the technique book, and the repertoire book. Among these series, one will also find

method books that combine materials in one volume, frequently called the “all-in-one” series.

These books include a combination of the materials found in the lesson, technique, and music

theory books, aiming to offer a comprehensive approach to learning in a singular volume.

Additionally, some series were created to support faster learning for teenagers who are starting

their music studies. These series often possess words such as “older beginner” or “accelerated”

in their titles.

Most of the teachers who participated in this study (88.5%) mentioned they used a basic

method book for their class piano instruction. A variety of series was pointed, including books

85

for children, for teenagers, and even music books for adults. Most of the books cited were

designed for individual instruction; however, some teachers expressed utilizing books that were

developed for group instruction. The types of books utilized by the participants could be

organized into three general categories: children’s method books intended for individual piano

instruction, adult method books for individual piano instruction, and group piano textbooks for

adults. Each of these types of books offers advantages and disadvantages regarding teaching

group piano classes at the secondary level of education.

Method books for kids (e.g., Alfred’s Premier Piano Course) may offer pleasant musical

selections including folk tunes and traditional melodies that children may enjoy. Very frequently

these books include appealing and colorful images and drawings that correlate to the title of a

piece or to a technical concept that is being introduced. These characteristics may facilitate the

imaginary musical image of the piece while motivating the young student to practice piano.

Conversely, these books were created for one-on-one instruction. Although many selections may

include a duet part (to be played by the teacher), the books do not offer a repertoire for ensemble

playing. Group collaboration is an important element of the class piano, and achieving ensemble

playing with this type of material is not possible without adaptations.

Adult method books (e.g., Adult Piano Adventures All-in-One Piano Course, Alfred’s

Basic Adult All-in-One Course, Bastien Piano for Adults) offer the advantage of presenting the

musical materials appropriately to teenager students. The language utilized is fit for adolescent-

aged students and the musical concepts are often introduced more seriously—not as infantile as

in children's books. On the other hand, musical selections included in these books are often not

recognized by teenage students, being more familiar to adults. To sustain students’ engagement

in their music studies while using this type of book, the teacher must supplement with musical

86

selections that teenage students recognize. By doing so, students may find their practice more

meaningful.

The participant teachers utilized two different types of group piano textbooks in their

classes: one for teaching the collegiate piano class (Alfred Group Piano for Adults), and another

for teaching the recreational music-making class to adults (e.g., Alfred’s Piano 101). Both types

of books similarly present their content, including appropriate languages for adults. The

collegiate piano textbook focuses on keyboard skills that are very specific to college music

students’ career fields, not being directly applicable for middle nor high school students. On the

other side, books that focus on recreational music-making offer skills that are compatible for

students who want to play and learn for fun. This happens because books for recreational music-

making classes do not address keyboard skills as much as collegiate group piano books.

Recreational music-making is a sector of the music field that is geared towards adults who want

to learn and play for fun. Instruction during recreational music-making classes is completely

student-centered, where the students’ desires are at the heart of the teaching. If a balance

between student- and teacher-centered instruction is found, some parameters of the recreational

music-making teaching could be effectively transferred for middle and high school group piano

instruction. For that reason, recreational music-making materials could be more suitable for

secondary group piano classes more than any other type of textbook.

The book most cited by the participants was the Adult All-in-One Course – Level 1, from

the Alfred’s Basic Adult Piano Course series (Palmer et al., 1996). Not only was this book

created for an individualized teaching setting, its target audience is adults (as the title suggests)

and may include music more familiar to older generations. Many middle and high school

teachers mentioned utilizing this method alongside supplementary materials (other method

87

books). These books may have influenced teachers’ prioritization of the individualized teaching

setting. On the other hand, it is also possible that teachers adapted these books to the group

instructional setting.

The Need for Adapting Music Method Books

Although a few teachers mentioned utilizing books intended for group instruction, these

books were created and intended for collegiate-level piano classes, not for children or teenagers.

The reality is that there are few existing method books (if any) designed for group instruction at

the secondary level of education. The Alfred Music publishing company offers a series entitled

Alfred’s Basic Group Piano Course (Lancaster, 1995), describing it as a course developed for

group instruction using acoustic or electronic instruments. This may be the only available

material on group piano instruction designed for young students (e.g., children, young

teenagers).

Due to the existing issue of the lack of music method books, it is natural that teachers

utilize what is most accessible for them (e.g., method books for individual piano instruction).

Most of the teachers (66.7%) stated they had to adapt piano materials for individualized teaching

to group piano instruction. These adaptations can be time-consuming, and while teachers may

have a genuine interest in exploring the group setting, these materials seem to impact teachers'

discernment of the benefits between individual and group instruction. As previously stated,

teachers mentioned that the individual instructional setting was more important than a collective

one during group piano classes.

Teachers could take advantage of the materials they have at their disposal (e.g., method

books) through effective adaptations for group instruction at the secondary level of instruction.

88

For that, they must consider important aspects of group teaching, such as peer interaction and

collaboration. Teaching strategies of cooperative learning can be utilized even when the music

materials utilized were not primarily created for group instruction. These method books should

be used as a sequence for introducing keyboard skills and musical concepts to students.

While adapting materials for group piano instruction, teachers should also understand the

importance of meeting students’ needs and how to provide help and support to them. In recent

research, Davis (2011) points out three central needs of middle school students from their

general music class. They are (1) active, hands-on learning challenges; (2) in-depth exploration

of focused listening; and (3) opportunities for social connection. Although she specifically

diagnosed these students’ needs from the general music class, the group piano classes

environment can be a great fit for these needs to be fulfilled.

Hands-on learning challenges involve students in their music-making. This is easily

achieved with a student directly applying their musical knowledge to the playing of the

instrument—in this case, the piano. Any piece of music or technical exercise at the keyboard can

provide opportunities for this need to be fulfilled. An in-depth exploration of focused listening

concerns students’ availability of listening opportunities while teaching them what to listen for.

In group piano, especially during ensemble playing, collective and active listening is crucial for

the success of an in-class performance. Finally, opportunities for social connection draws

students and teachers together, in a community of music makers. The teacher is then not seen as

an authoritarian figure and cooperative learning strategies occur while students interact socially.

An effective adaptation from the frequently used book Adult All-In-One Course (Palmer

et al., 1996) can be developed based on Activity 7: Volleyball found from Lindsay’s (2006)

study. This improvisation-based activity facilitates the fulfillment of all students’ needs

89

abovementioned. After teaching the students the primary chords in the key of C major, a

fundamental chord progression can be introduced (Figure 2).

Lindsay’s activity (Lindsay, 2006, p. 38) suggests that the class is divided into two teams,

and like a volleyball match, each team will have the chance of “hitting the ball” three times

before tossing it back to the opposing team. In this case, “hitting the ball” translates to an

improvisational segment. The goal of this activity is to achieve continued improvisation by

different people. While adapting the exercise, three students of each team improvise a melody

(with their right hand) while playing the chord progression from the method book (with their left

hand) in a way that no disruption occurs when passing the playing (“passing the ball”) to one

another. The third student of the team to improvise would then pass the improvisation to the

opposing team.

Figure 2

Chord Progression Built on the Primary Chords of C Major

By experiencing this activity, students would have hands-on challenges (improvising in

the new context of a chord progression; therefore, applying musical knowledge through playing);

exploration of focused listening (attentive listening to their peers’ improvisation so the “chained

melody” is continued with the same tempo and not interrupted); and social connection (students’

interaction could happen through body language and eye contact). This activity is an example of

90

how a teacher could effectively combine resources at their disposal (method book and assets of

activities) while implementing cooperative learning elements in their teaching. Aiming for such

adaptations could enhance one’s instruction and students’ learning processes, all withing the

group setting.

Other adaptations can be generated from simple folk tunes. The melody of the French

folk song Au clair de la lune is easily accessible to beginner students (Figure 3). Students who

are more advance and who are learning about chord progressions, for instance, could be guided

in accompanying the beginner students while utilizing primary chords.

Figure 3

Melody of the French Folk Song “Au clair de la lune”

Additionally, advanced students could create diverse accompaniment styles (e.g., while

using broken or blocked chords, ballad style, Alberti bass style, waltz accompaniment style),

while beginner students could enhance the tune by playing the melody with their hands together

(a single melody split between the two hands). The teacher could challenge students in being

creative. Advanced students could develop their keyboard accompanying abilities by creating

different accompaniment styles for the same piece (Figure 4). This type of ensemble playing

could occur through students pairing or small group settings, generating discussions, active

listening, and social interaction between students.

91

Figure 4

French Folk Song “Au clair de la lune” on Two Different Accompaniment Styles

When approaching technical playing exercises in group piano instruction, it is important

to consider the development of activities where both beginner and advanced students have

opportunities of being involved. To accommodate different playing levels, the teacher could

increase the difficulty of the same exercise (e.g., playing scales) played by a beginner student.

Learning how to play scales is fundamental in piano studies. Figure 5 illustrates how beginner

and advanced students can play and practice a scale. The same scale (C major) is simultaneously

played by both types of students. However, the difficulty is increased by adding a second octave

92

to the playing. Activities like this could happen in different group settings—such as pairing,

smalls groups, large groups—during class piano. Peer observation and other elements of

cooperative learning could also be implemented through this exercise.

Figure 5

Exercise for Scale Playing in Ensemble

Technological and Digital Resources

Results from the questionnaire indicated that teachers used an array of electronic

equipment and technological resources in support of their teaching during class piano instruction.

Teachers mentioned using doc cams, iPads, whiteboards, smartboards, and even different

musical instruments (one teacher mentioned they took advantage of the organ that was placed in

the classroom). A few of the items, such as Canvas, Microsoft Teams, and screen-sharing options

of conference call software (e.g., Zoom) were only utilized during virtual teaching. Additionally,

teachers stated using diverse music software (e.g., Garage Band, Logic Pro X) and websites for

music learning (e.g., soundtrap.com) during their class piano course.

93

Technological advancements have facilitated music education in many ways. Electronic

devices such as computers, tablets, and even cellphones became useful tools while offering apps

that support music studies (especially music theory and ear training). Music websites were also

developed to reinforce the most varied musical subjects, including music reading, rhythmic

readings, and music harmony. Since this technology, in addition to dynamic teaching and other

learning tools, is prevalent in K–12 schools, music instructors may need guidance to make

informed technology choices in their classrooms (Riley, 2016).

Teachers participating in the present study mentioned many digital resources they utilized

during their class piano instruction, besides the use of print method books. These resources

included websites for music learning (e.g., musictheory.net, breezinthrutheory.com,

gmajormusictheory.org, bethsnotesplus.com, sightreadingfactory.com,

thesightreadingproject.com), websites of video sharing and watching (e.g., YouTube, Medici

TV), and computer software (e.g., Garage Band, Sibelius). Teachers also shared that they used

additional digital resources that were not initially intended for musical purposes, but that still

supported musical learning. They were computer software (e.g., PowerPoint) and websites that

helped with the organization and presentation of class content (e.g., Canvas, Google Workspace,

kahoot.com). Many teachers may have utilized these digital and online resources solely because

they were teaching virtually for most of the 2020-2021 academic year, due to COVID-19

restrictions. Besides these adversities, most of the teachers stated using a mix-use of physical and

digital resources during their class piano instruction.

Regardless of teachers adhering to these technologies due to restrictions of COVID-19

and enforced virtual/remote teaching, it is evident how the technology can shape the class piano

instruction. Many of the items teachers used are accessed through computers. Even music books,

94

nowadays, are being offered in digital versions, making the computer an important tool for music

instruction.

Regarding the digital resources utilized by the instructors, it is unclear if and how they

were adapting them to different instructional settings during class piano. In her article, Riley

(2016) recommends a few apps that facilitate students’ improvising, composing, and/or

arranging while utilizing iPads (e.g., LoopsequeKids, by Casual Underground; Singing Fingers,

by Beginner’s Mind; and GarageBand, by Apple Inc.). Additionally, Dumlavwalla (2020) points

to apps that are effective for online teaching settings; however, they could also be utilized during

in-person group piano instruction (e.g., Superscore, ForScore, Home Concert Xtreme, and

iRealPro). These digital resources could be adapted to class piano through games and ensemble

playing at the keyboard.

Two digitally available music curriculums could be adapted to the group piano class as

well. One of them is targeted for K–8 instruction (Quaver music), and the other for collegiate

group piano class (eNovative Piano). Both digital resources offer valuable advantages for group

instruction.

Quaver music (https://www.quavermusic.com) combines technology and story-telling

with a music curriculum focused on general music classes. The layouts of the software include

colorful images that are appealing to children. Therefore, this material could be more suitably

adapted for middle school group piano classes rather than for teenage students. Conversely, the

eNovative Piano (https://enovativepiano.com) curriculum presents its contents in a language

more suitable for adults. Teachers who would like to utilize this curriculum during high school

piano classes would not need to adapt the instructional setting as much since its content is

properly developed for group piano instruction.

95

There are apps, software, and digital curriculums, such as the abovementioned, that

private piano instructors have found to be successful in their teaching of young students. Group

piano teachers in public schools could adopt these resources and adapt these materials to their

students and their teaching settings. These digital resources could also be beneficial for at-home

practice since not all students might have a piano at their disposal in the houses.

Equipment Used in Group Piano Instruction

Types of Pianos and Teaching Console

The inauguration of the first electronic piano lab at Ball State University in 1956 (Fisher,

2006) was a historical accomplishment that directly reflected the development of class piano

instruction. Along with adaptations to the teaching settings, changes also occurred in the

classroom environment. As the technology evolved throughout the decades, digital pianos

became more compact, lighter, and easier to maneuver—especially compared to acoustic pianos.

Group piano classrooms were able to accommodate a higher number of students (if considering

one student per piano) in smaller physical spaces. Additionally, it became easier for the

instructor to change the placement of these pianos, rearranging the room as desired (e.g., students

facing a whiteboard, students facing one another, pianos placed in rows, pianos placed against

the walls, etc.). Finally, digital pianos were (and still are) more financially accessible if

compared to acoustic pianos. All these benefits favored the digital piano as the best and most

appropriate instrument for group piano instruction.

Results from the questionnaire indicated that only one middle school teacher possessed

an acoustic piano in their classroom while 23 had a mixture of acoustic and digital pianos. Most

of the teachers (72.4%) stated they had digital pianos in their classrooms. These pianos seem to

96

be more commonly used during class piano instruction at the secondary level of education.

Results also indicated that the number of pianos in teachers’ classrooms varied between two and

35. These results are, somewhat, concerning. Teaching group piano classes while having only

two pianos in the room is likely extremely challenging, especially with a high number of students

in the class. Situations like these may be a reflection of a school’s inability of providing proper

resources (e.g., number of instruments) to their music program due to financial adversities. When

facing difficulties like this, not much can be done by the teacher, except adapting the class

instruction or bringing private instruments to the classroom.

In addition to the benefits already mentioned, a digital piano lab can offer a teaching

console. A teaching console is an electronic/digital system that connects all pianos in the room

through wires. The instructor’s piano allows teachers control over all other pianos in the room,

also permitting them to flexibly listen to selected students or groups of students through their

headphones. This system also enables pairing or grouping students so they can listen to each

other—through individual headphones—while practicing ensemble or duet repertoire. A teaching

console can support group piano teaching, enabling a variety of instructional settings during class

piano. Figure 6 illustrates a typical piano lab set-up that offers a teaching console in a classroom

including 16 digital pianos in addition to the instructor’s piano. Two leading companies provide

this technology (teaching consoles) for a group piano classroom: Roland

(http://www.rolandmusiced.com) and Yamaha (https://usa.yamaha.com).

Only 15 teachers (17.4%) mentioned they had a teaching console in their classrooms.

This may reflect how expensive this electronic system is, justifying not many schools being able

to purchase it and offer it in their class piano courses. Some teachers who had this system in their

classrooms stated they rarely or never used it. These teachers may have not realized the

97

advantages of using this console, mainly when instructing through different group formations

(e.g., students in pairs, small groups, or larger groups). Furthermore, it is also possible that

teachers did not know how to use a teaching console, especially if they did not have any previous

training on group piano instruction.

Note. The teacher’s piano/station is presented here in the red square. Each student’s piano possesses a box that is connected to the teacher’s lab unit. It is from this unit that the teacher controls all pianos in the classroom. Figure 6 Diagram of a Typical Piano Lab Classroom

98

Limitations

While the researcher made an effort to include a maximum number of participant-

teachers who instructed secondary level group piano classes during the 2020-2021 academic

year, it is unclear how many schools and teachers were not included in this study. The researcher

aimed to obtain a fair representation of the state of Florida by accessing teachers from all

counties. While results obtained did not come from all counties, a meaningful number of teachers

did respond to the research questionnaire. A more comprehensive descriptive study about the

status of class piano instruction at secondary public schools could include participant teachers

from all counties of the state.

The research questionnaire, although detailed, did not include specific questions about

teachers’ educational professional background, such as which music degree they graduated with

(e.g., music education, performance, composition) and which was their main instrument. Without

this information, it was somewhat unclear if teachers were assigned to primarily teach class

piano courses even when the piano was not their principal instrument.

One of the main issues brought by the pandemic of 2020—with the outbreak of COVID-

19—was the disruption of social interaction, at many levels. Institutions quickly moved face-to-

face classes to online settings by the end of Spring 2020 and through 2021, in order to continue

offer education to students. In many cases, teachers who were obligated to transition to the

virtual environment did not receive training about important changes and necessary adaptations

for online teaching. Most likely, responses from participants in this study reflected this new

reality, faced daily by them. The equipment they used during this academic year, such as

electronic devices, may not be part of their actual routine of class piano teaching (e.g., cameras,

99

microphones, video conference software). Therefore, responses may have differed if these

teachers had not been impacted by the pandemic.

Finally, the present study did not include participants who taught at charter or private

schools in the state of Florida. These potential participants who were left out would likely bring

extra and/or new perspectives about group piano instruction and equipment they utilize at their

schools.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Results from the questionnaire indicated that teachers prioritized individualized teaching

over collective instruction. The strategies from the cooperative learning theory were found useful

in public school classrooms (Slavin, 1980). The essential elements of this theory (positive

interdependence, face-to-face interaction, individual accountability, social skills, and group

processing) can be easily and effectively adapted to group piano classes (Fisher, 2006; Meulink,

2011). The researcher suggests that secondary public school teachers utilize teaching strategies

of cooperative learning during class piano instruction. Along with individualized learning

settings, the class piano setting offers the opportunity for diverse group formations and activities

that nurture collaborative efforts, often resulting in a collective group achievement. This unique

feature presented by the group setting should be more frequently explored while instructing

middle and high school students.

Most of the teachers (88.5%) expressed using a readily available piano method for their

class piano instruction. Amongst the books utilized, only a few of them were intended for group

instruction, and even those materials focused on collegiate music/non-music or adult students

and not at the typical age of secondary-level students. The researcher recognizes the existing lack

100

of resources (e.g., textbooks, piano methods) appropriate for middle and high school class piano

courses. For that reason, he understands that changes in these materials are born from the

necessity of adapting them to group instruction and the age of secondary school students.

One of the main concerns when adapting any material from individual to group

instruction should be related to gauging students’ interactions while taking into consideration

students’ varied playing abilities. Teachers could take advantage of the teacher’s duet that is

often included in method books. Frequently, one of the parts of the duet is more challenging than

the other; therefore, the same duet could be of mutual interest to beginner and advanced students.

When practicing technical elements, such as arpeggios and scales, students could easily

work in pairs where they observe each other’s playing, helping themselves with fingering,

posture, etc. These technical keyboard playing elements can also be exercised in groups. Fisher

(2010) proposes an activity called Scale Ensembles (p. 142) where students work in small groups

while manipulating the playing of scales in different ways. Advanced students could harmonize

the scales (e.g., by playing blocked or broken chords) while beginner students play the scales one

hand at a time. These types of activities offer opportunities for social interaction and other

elements of cooperative learning to occur.

Middle school and high school students may present genuine excitement and a natural

desire for immediate results in their piano studies. Perhaps teaching skills such as improvisation

and playing by ear before introducing students to traditional music reading could facilitate

students’ playing at the early stages of their piano studies. This could result in satisfaction and

motivation, encouraging them to then learn proper music notation. Teachers could bridge the gap

between students’ music-reading development and actual playing by implementing readings that

include lead sheets (since it can be less complex than traditional music notation). Activities that

101

involve the reading from lead sheets could further enhance students’ motor coordination,

creativity, and healthy hand and finger postures at the piano.

Lastly, there were many teachers who confessed not having any training in piano

teaching during their formal music studies. They stated that their only experience with group

piano occurred through class piano courses they attended as undergraduate music students.

Although students learn how to play the piano in these courses, they do not necessarily learn how

to teach group piano. Therefore, the researcher recommends that the professional development of

these teachers should be enhanced.

Piano pedagogy classes discuss diverse subjects of piano teaching, including group piano

teaching. Universities and colleges of music could provide opportunities for music education

students to enroll in piano pedagogy classes. That way, these future teachers could be better

informed about how to properly instruct group piano classes. Additionally, some universities

offer pedagogy courses specifically directed to group piano instruction. Students who will be

working in the field of music education could benefit by attending these courses.

Recommendations for Future Research

The present study focused on the status of class piano instruction in secondary public

schools in the state of Florida while considering aspects such as teachers’ educational musical

background, teachers’ instructional strategies, students’ scheduling and enrolment; and

classroom equipment and materials utilized by the teachers. Participants of this study taught at

public middle and high public schools. However, the study did not include charter and private

schools. Future research could replicate the present study accounting for charter public schools in

the state of Florida.

102

As mentioned, this study solely focused on schools and teachers from the state of Florida.

Each state in the United States has its particular legislation and laws concerning their musical

education in public schools. Therefore, future research could replicate this same investigation in

different states across the country. A broader study could include and group states of a specific

area, investigating in-depth that region of the country (e.g., southern region, northern region,

etc.).

History shows us that technology has impacted and continues to impact class piano

instructional settings, environment, and equipment utilized by teachers. Additionally, piano

pedagogy conferences have also changed the teaching perspective about group piano instruction,

such as the National Group Piano and Piano Pedagogy Forum (GP3). This biennial conference

has prioritized discussions about group piano instruction while providing valuable resources for

instructors across the country. Since group piano instruction seems to be in constant change and

development, future research could engage in duplicating the present study every four or five

years, maintain its parameters, and observing the advances in group piano instruction.

The present study investigated the background experiences and training of class piano

teachers. However, the research did not explore these teachers' formal music studies (their

specific majors) in-depth nor their abilities in instructing singular aspects of piano playing (e.g.,

technique on how to play scales, arpeggios, dynamics, etc.). Future research could focus on the

music studies of these teachers, including more detailed investigations about teachers’

preparation for teaching class piano and background areas of teachers’ professional music

studies.

Finally, according to the results of the present study, participant teachers did not value the

group instruction opportunities offered by the class piano setting. They seemed to prioritize

103

individual learning over a collective teaching approach. Future experimental studies could

investigate the efficacy of group learning—including cooperative learning strategies—during

class piano instruction in secondary schools.

104

APPENDIX A

HUMAN SUBJECTS EXEMPTION DETERMINATION

105

106

APPENDIX B

PROJECT INVITATION EMAIL

Dear Music Teacher, My name is Ricardo Pozenatto and I am a doctoral student at Florida State University. I am working on my doctoral dissertation to satisfy the requirements of the Ph.D. degree. I am conducting a survey to explore the instruction of class piano/keyboard courses in secondary public schools in the state of Florida. The completion of this survey should take approximately 7 minutes, and your responses will be entirely anonymous. If you are the group piano/keyboard instructor at the school that you teach: Could you please take some time to respond to my survey? Please respond to the survey only once. If you are not the group piano/keyboard instructor at the school that you teach: Could you please forward this survey to the group piano/keyboard instructor of the school you teach?

Follow this link to the Survey: [link to the survey]

Or copy and paste the URL below into your internet browser: [URL to the survey]

Follow the link to opt out of future emails: [opt out link] I appreciate your help and your willingness in sharing your experiences. Thank you very much! Sincerely, -- Ricardo Pozenatto Graduate Teaching Assistant MTNA at FSU, President Florida State University, College of Music [email address]

107

APPENDIX C

PROJECT CONSENT FORM Hello! My name is Ricardo Pozenatto and I am a doctoral student at the Florida State University. I am working on my doctoral dissertation to satisfy the requirements of the Ph.D. degree. I am conducting a survey to explore the instruction of class piano/keyboard courses in secondary public schools in the state of Florida. You are being asked to voluntarily participate in this research study. If you choose to participate, you will be answering this online survey. Completion of this survey should take approximately 7 minutes, and your responses will be entirely anonymous. Your participation is strictly voluntary, and you are free to withdraw from the study at any time. I will not record your name or any information that shows your identity. You will not be signing this survey. Your participation in this survey is vital to my research, and I would be extremely grateful for your response. By clicking "Next" and beginning the survey, you acknowledge that you have read this information and agree to participate in this research, with the knowledge that you are free to withdraw your participation at any time without penalty. If you have any questions concerning this survey, feel free to contact me at [email address] or you may contact my faculty supervisor and committee chair at Florida State University: Dr. Diana Dumlavwalla Assistant Professor, Piano Pedagogy College of Music Florida State University Tallahassee, FL 32306-1180 [email address] [office phone number] If you have any questions or concerns about your rights as a research participant, or regarding the study and would like to talk to someone other than the researcher(s), you are encouraged to contact the FSU Office for Human Subjects Protection (OHSP) at (850) 644-7900. You may also contact the OHSP by email at humansubjects@fsu.edu, or by writing OHSP at 2010 Levy Avenue, Research Foundation Building B, Suite 276, Tallahassee, FL 32306-2742. Thank you very much for your time. Ricardo Pozenatto | Graduate Teaching Assistant College of Music Florida State University Tallahassee, FL 32306-1180

108

APPENDIX D

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Do you currently teach class piano? a. Yes b. No

IF NO, YOU MAY STOP AT THIS POINT. THANK YOU!

I. SCHOOL INFORMATION

2. School name and County

II. TEACHER INFORMATION

3. Do you hold Florida teacher’s certification in music? a. Yes b. No

4. Please indicate your teaching assignments this school year. Please check the course

that you consider your primary teaching assignment: a. Band b. Choir c. Orchestra d. Keyboard/Piano e. Guitar f. Music Theory g. Music Appreciation h. Other. Please list _____________

5. How many years have you been a teacher?

6. How many years have you taught class piano?

7. Did you have special training to prepare you for teaching class piano?

a. Yes. _____________________ b. No. (logic skip to 9.)

8. What was that special training?

a) As a student in class piano b) Secondary piano lessons c) Workshops and/or in-services d) Other. Please list _______________

109

III. PHILOSOPHY, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES

9. How important is it to include the following for class piano instruction?

Not important

Very important

A. Large group instruction (full class working together).

B. Small group instruction (2-5 students working together).

C. Individualized instruction

D. One student per piano.

E. Ear training

F. Chordal accompanying

G. Improvisation

H. Music reading

I. Playing by ear ?

J. Memorization

K. Ensemble playing

L. Small group playing

M. Duet playing

N. Solo playing

O. Playing in different tempi

P. Playing with dynamics

110

Q. Playing with phrasing

R. Playing with different articulations

S. Playing scales T. Playing arpeggios U. Playing with correct hand position

10. How much instruction should be given to the following skills which in total equal 100%?

- Develop skills in keyboard technique.

- Develop general musicianship.

IV. SCHEDULING AND ENROLLMENT

11. What is the average number of sections of class piano in your school per semester?

12. What is the average number of students enrolled in class piano in your school per semester?

13. What is the length of your class periods in minutes?

14. On average, how long do students take class piano for? a. 1 semester b. 1 year c. 2 years d. 3 years e. 4 years f. Other. Please list: ________

15. Indicate how students are enrolled into class piano

a. By ability b. By grade c. By class time/schedule d. Other (please explain)

111

16. Do you have a maximum number of students for your class piano courses? (skip logic questions)

a. Yes b. No (skip logic to 19)

17. How is the maximum class size determined?

a. By the number of keyboards available. b. By the scheduling coordinator. c. By the size of the room (fire code). d. By the department chairperson. e. Other:___________________

18. What do you think is the ideal class size for effective teaching?

V. EQUIPMENT

19. How many pianos do you have in your classroom?

20. What type of pianos do you have in your classroom?

a. Digital b. Acoustic (Skip logic to 24) c. Both

21. Do you have a teaching console?

a. Yes b. No (skip logic to 24)

22. To what extent do you use the teaching console to listen to individuals (check one).

a. More than half of the time b. About half of the time c. About one-fourth of the time d. Rarely e. Never

23. Overall, what is the condition of the instruments? a. Excellent b. Good c. Fair d. Poor

24. Do you use a projector and screen for instruction in your classroom?

112

a. Yes b. No

25. List any other equipment in your classroom other than the ones listed above. VI. MATERIALS AND CURRICULUM 26. Indicate who purchases the materials for your classroom (check one):

a. Student b. School c. Teacher d. Both

27. Do you use a basic textbook (e.g., method books)? If yes, please indicate Author(s)

and Title) a. Yes. ___________________ b. No

28. List any other supplementary materials (e.g., audiovisual) that you find especially

effective for class piano instruction.

29. Do you find it necessary to adapt piano materials for individual instruction to group piano instruction?

a. Yes b. No

30. List any specific problems you see related to class piano instruction in secondary

schools.

THANK YOU!

113

REFERENCES

Ajero, M. (2010, August 5–7). Technology in the group piano lab and beyond [Conference session]. National Group Piano and Piano Pedagogy Forum: Retooling Tradition, Keeping Our minds Sharp, and Our Feet to the Ground, OH: Oberlin. https://www.mtna.org/downloads/GP3/History/Programs/2010.pdf

Allsup, R. E. (2003). Mutual learning and democratic action in instrumental music education.

Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(1), 24–37. doi:10.2307/3345646 Alpiner, A. (1951). Piano class at the elementary school level: A foundation for other music

study [Master thesis, The University of Southern California]. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/1652568103/A4EA5674CE5B42D0PQ/1?accountid=4840

Amoriello, L. (2010). Teaching undergraduate class piano: A study of perspectives from self,

students and colleagues [Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/756539700/fulltextPDF/B448A8F3987D44FCPQ/1?accountid=4840

Baker-Jordan, M. (2003). Practical piano pedagogy: the definitive text for piano teachers and

pedagogy students. Miami: Warner Bros. Barnett, J. (2008, July 31–August 2). Where do we go from here? Striking among class piano,

theory and musicianship curricula [Conference session]. National Group Piano and Piano Pedagogy Forum: “Staying Focused, Staying Fresh”. https://www.mtna.org/downloads/GP3/History/Programs/2008.pdf

Beldon, A. (1922). Music News, volume 14(2).

https://books.google.com/books?id=bmhFAQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=Ann%20Arbor&f=false

Benson, M. (2010, August 5–7). Group piano for non-music majors in the small college

[Conference session]. National Group Piano and Piano Pedagogy Forum: Retooling Tradition, Keeping Our minds Sharp, and Our Feet to the Ground, OH: Oberlin. https://www.mtna.org/downloads/GP3/History/Programs/2010.pdf

Betts, S. L., & Cassidy, J. W. (2000). Development of harmonization and sight-reading skills

among university class piano students. Journal of research in Music Education, 48(2), 151–161. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.2307/3345573

Brenner, B., & Strand, K. (2013). A case study of teaching musical expression to young

performers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 61(1), p. 80–96. https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/doi/pdf/10.1177/0022429412474826

114

Burkett, T. A. (1982). The challenge of group piano teaching and the rewards. Music Educators Journal, 69(3), p. 31–33. https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/doi/pdf/10.2307/3396017

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020, December 31). Guidance for child care

programs that remain open. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/schools-childcare/guidance-for-childcare.html#SocialDistancing

Chao, S. L. (1997). An examination of music software and music videos for college beginning

class students [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Memphis]. ProQuest Dissertation & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/304460446/AFF6F63C085848F5PQ/1?accountid=4840

Chin, H. L. (2002). Group piano instruction for music majors in the United States: A study of

instructor training, instructional practice, and values relating to functional keyboard skills [Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/305556203/fulltextPDF/305EF64658D548FAPQ/1?accountid=4840

Choi, C. H. (2012). The contributions of James Lyke to piano pedagogy [Doctoral dissertation,

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign]. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/1426815883/50AFC51B137E422BPQ/1?accountid=4840

Clark, F. (1982). Perspectives on piano teaching. Clavier, 21(1), p. 44–45. Costa-Giomi, E., Flowers, P. J., & Sasaki, W. (2005) Piano lessons of beginning students who

persist or drop out: Teacher behavior, student behavior, and lesson progress. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53(3), p. 234–247. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/10.1177/002242940505300305

Craige, M. A. (1993). A survey of the instruction of sight-reading skills to undergraduate piano

majors in selected NASM colleges and universities [Doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas]. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc278258/m2/1/high_res_d/1002722151-craige.pdf

Crappell, C., & McAlister, A. (2014, August1–2). Update! Low-cost and free apps for your

studio [Conference session]. National Group Piano and Piano Pedagogy Forum, OH: Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati College–Conservatory of Music. https://www.mtna.org/downloads/GP3/History/Programs/2014.pdf

Cremaschi, A. M. (2012). The effect of a practice checklist on practice strategies, practice self-

regulation and achievement of collegiate music majors enrolled in a beginning class

115

piano course. Research Studies in Music Education, 34,(2), 223–233. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/10.1177/1321103X12464743

Davis, V. W. (2011). What middle school students need from their general music class (and how

we can help). General Music Today, 24(3), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1048371310373457

Diehl, L. P. (1980). An investigation of the relative effectiveness of group and individual piano

instruction on young beginners in an independent music studio utilizing an electropiano laboratory [Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California]. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/1651939598/1F8D1143E7EC4EC0PQ/1?accountid=4840

Digney, B. (2013). Expressing the inexpressible: An exploration of the practice and pedagogy of

musical artistry. American Music Teacher, 63(1), p. 20–23. https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/doi/pdf/10.1177/000313131306300104

Dillon, B. (2007). The future of music teaching? Recreational music making. American Music

Teacher,57(1), p. 21–23. www.jstor.org/stable/43543329 Duke, R. A., & Benson, C. (2004). Steering from the caboose: Setting the pace of group piano

instruction according to the least skilled students in the class. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 23(1), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/87551233040230010106

Dumlavwalla, D. (2020). Striving for excellence in online piano pedagogy: Characteristics of

expert teachers using the video-conferencing format. Clavier Companion, COVID19 Special Issue, 15–21. https://www.claviercompanion.com/article-details/striving-for-excellence-in-online-piano-pedagogy

Edmund, D. C., & Keller, E. C. (2020). Guiding principles for improvisation in the general

music classroom. General Music Today, 33(2), 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1048371319885361

Fisher, C. C. (2006). Applications of selected cooperative learning techniques to group piano

instruction [Doctoral dissertation, University of Oklahoma]. ProQuest Dissertations & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/305299672/4340544EE6074E61PQ/1?accountid=4840

Fisher, C. C. (2010). Teaching piano in groups. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Garcia, S. (2014, August 1–2). Online! My experiment teaching group piano—How I did it, what

I learned, and why I “will/will not” do it again [Conference session]. National Group Piano and Piano Pedagogy Forum, OH: Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati College-

116

Conservatory of Music. https://www.mtna.org/downloads/GP3/History/Programs/2014.pdf

Garner, A. M. (2009). Singing and moving: Teaching strategies for audiation in children. Music

Educators Journal, 95(4), 46–50. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0027432109335550

Gingerich, C. (2012). Maximize your teaching time with cooperative learning. MTNA e-Journal,

4(2), p. 19–22. https://www.mtna.org/downloads/GP3/History/Reports/2012_Reports.pdf GP3 – Teaching, Learning, Sharing. (2021, February 8). Group piano/piano pedagogy.

https://www.mtna.org/GP3/GP3_Home/GP3/Home.aspx?hkey=de2ebd5e-4006-4a1e-b99d-45da1d453a35

Guderian, L. V. (2012). Music improvisation and composition in the general music curriculum.

General Music Today, 25(3), 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1048371311415404 Hagen, S. L., Cremaschi, A., & Himonides, C. S. (2012). Effects of extended practice with

computerized eye guides for sight-reading in collegiate-level class piano. Journal of Music, Technology & Educations, 5,(3), 229–239. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259482411_Effects_of_extended_practice_with_computerized_eye_guides_for_sight-reading_in_collegiate-level_class_piano

Hamel, B. (2000). Playing piano across the curriculum. Teaching Music 7, 50–54.

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ628659 Harris, A. K. (2017). Motivation in private instruction for adolescents: A social-cognitive

analysis of piano pedagogy [Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington]. ProQuest Dissertation & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/1944510740/fulltextPDF/2FB9EEBD4FEA45E0PQ/1?accountid=4840

Hilley, M. (2010, August 5–7). Group piano adult hobby classes [Conference session]. National

Group Piano and Piano Pedagogy Forum: Retooling Tradition, Keeping Our minds Sharp, and Our Feet to the Ground, OH: Oberlin. https://www.mtna.org/downloads/GP3/History/Programs/2010.pdf

Hirokawa, E. (1997). Robert Pace: Music theorist, composer, and educator. The Bulletin of

Historical Research in Music Education, 18(3). https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40214934.pdf?acceptTC=true

Hudson, T. L. (2012). Group teaching thoughts. MTNA e-Journal, 4, (2), 14–18.

http://www.mtnaejournal.org/publication/?m=7797&i=134239&p=2

117

Hudson, T. L. (2015). Do we have to take piano? Motivating collegiate class piano students. MTNA e-Journal, 7,(1), 2–19. http://www.mtnaejournal.org/publication/?m=&i=272567&p=2

Jackson, A. (1980). The effect of group size on individual achievement in beginning piano

classes. Journal of Research in Music Education, 28(3), p. 162–166. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345233

Jacobi, B. S. (2011). Kodály, literacy, and the brain: Preparing young music students to read

pitch on the Staff. General Music Today, 25(2), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1048371311414182

Jacobson, J. M. (2006). Professional piano teaching (2nd e., Vol. 1). Los Angeles: Alfred Music Johnson, D. G., & Johnson, R. T. (1975). Learning together and alone. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice-Hall. Jung, E. (2004). Promoting comprehensive musicianship in keyboard harmony classes:

Suggestions for university piano instructors of non-keyboard music majors in Korea [Doctoral research project, West Virginia University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/305108758/fulltextPDF/279F40B2D5174A2EPQ/1?accountid=4840

Jutras, P. J. (2006). The benefits of adult piano study as self-reported by selected adult piano

students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(2), 97–110. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/002242940605400202

Jutras, P. J. (2009) The benefits of adult music study. American Music Teacher, 59(2), p. 21–22.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/43539656 Kagan, S. (1989). The structural approach to cooperative learning. Educational Leadership,

47(4), 12–15. http://www.ascd.org/ascd/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_198912_kagan.pdf Kalmbach, P. (2010, August 5–7). High school group piano instructor [Conference session].

National Group Piano and Piano Pedagogy Forum: Retooling Tradition, Keeping Our minds Sharp, and Our Feet to the Ground, OH: Oberlin. https://www.mtna.org/downloads/GP3/History/Programs/2010.pdf

Kim, S. Y. (2000). Development of materials and teaching strategies for comprehensive

musicianship in group piano instruction for college-level piano majors [Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University]. ProQuest Dissertation & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/304592371/64AC69682CA14D7CPQ/1?accountid=4840

118

Kim, C. (2004). Nurturing students through group lessons. American Music Teacher, 54(1), 28–31. https://jstor.org/stable/43547529

Kostka, M. J. (1997). Effects of self-assessment and successive approximations on “ knowing”

and “valuing” selected keyboard skills. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45,(2), 273–281. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3345586

Kratus, J. (1989). A time analysis of the compositional processes used by children ages 7 to 11.

Journal of Research in Music Education, 37(1), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.2307/3344949 Lancaster, E. L., & Renfrow, K. D. (1995). Alfred’s group piano for adults, Book 1. Van Nuys,

CA: Alfred Publishing Co., Inc. Lindsay, C. A. (2006). Putting research into practice: Creative activities for college-level group

piano [Doctoral Dissertation, Florida State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Thesis Global. https://login.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/docview/305332225?accountid=4840

Lowder, J. E. (1983). Evaluation of keyboard skills required in college class piano programs.

Contributions to Music Education, 10, 33–38. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24127376?seq=1

Lyke, J., Caramia, T., Alexander, R., Haydon, G., & Chioldi, R. (2003). Keyboard Musicianship.

Stipes Pub Llc. Marciano, T. (1990). A sociologist investigates the adult piano student. American Music

Teacher, 39(6), 24–27. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43544343 Maris, B. E. (2000). Redefining success: Perspectives on the education of performers. College

Music Symposium, 40, 13–17. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40374390 McCalla, D. C. (1989). The status of class piano instructions in the public secondary schools of

Florida [Doctoral dissertation, University of Miami]. ProQuest Dissertations & Thesis. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/303783041/fulltextPDF/DB1E704927F2450FPQ/1?accountid=4840

McPherson, G., & Gabrielsson, A. (2002). From sound to sign. In Parncutt, R., & McPherson, G.

(Eds.), The science and psychology of music performance (pp. 99–115). New York: Oxford University Pres. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286056275_From_Sound_to_Sign

Mendez, M. (2016). Practical Piano Training for Music Majors. MTNA e-Journal, 8(2), p. 27–28.

https://www.mtna.org/downloads/GP3/History/Reports/2016_Reports.pdf Mehr, N. (1965). Group piano teaching. Evanston, IL: Summy-Birchard Company

119

Meulink, J. N. (2011). Cooperative learning methods for group piano: The development of a teaching guide [Doctoral dissertation, Ball State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/966217527/5C5548BE56D24F1EPQ/1?accountid=4840

Murphy, P. K., Firetto, C. M., Wei, L., Li, M., Croninger, R. M. V. (2016). What really works:

Optimizing classroom discussions to promote comprehension and critical-analytic thinking. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), p. 27–35. https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/doi/pdf/10.1177/2372732215624215

NASM - National Association of Schools of Music (2017). Handbook and any current addenda.

https://nasm.arts-accredit.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/08/M-2017-18-Handbook-08-01-2018.pdf

Online Sunshine. (2020). The Florida Statutes 2020. Official Internet Site of the Florida

Legislature. http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=1000-1099/1003/Sections/1003.41.html

Palmer, W. A., Manus, M., & Lethco, A. V. (1996). Adult All-In-One Course. USA: Alfred

Publishing Co., Inc. Paulk, K. L. (2013). Playing well with others: Nurturing collaborative skills in the private piano

studio. American Music Teacher, 62(4), 24–28. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43540140 Perry, M. (2012). Apps that engage. MTNA e-Journal, 4(2), p. 6–8.

https://www.mtna.org/downloads/GP3/History/Reports/2012_Reports.pdf Pike, P. D. (2001). Leisure piano lessons: A case study of lifelong learning [Doctoral

dissertation, University of Oklahoma]. ProQuest Dissertations & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/304716668/40F30DB08DAD45B2PQ/1?accountid=4840

Pike P. D. (2011). Using technology to engage third-age (retired) leisure learners: A case study

of a third-age MIDI piano ensemble. International Journal Of Music Education, 29(2), p. 116–123. https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/doi/pdf/10.1177/0255761410396965

Pike, P. D. (2013). Profiles in successful group piano for children: a collective case study of

children’s group-piano lessons. Music Education Research, 15(1), p. 92–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2012.754416

Pike, P. D. (2014). The differences between novice and expert group-piano teaching strategies: A

case study and comparison of beginning group piano classes. International Journal of

120

Music Education, 32,(2), 213–227. https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/doi/full/10.1177/0255761413508065

Pike, P. D. (2017). Dynamic group-piano teaching. New York, NY: Routledge. Price, S. (2008). GP 3 Goals. National Group Piano and Piano Pedagogy Forum: “Staying

Focused, Staying Fresh,” p. 1. https://www.mtna.org/downloads/GP3/History/Programs/2008.pdf

Rajan, R. S. (2014). Tapping into technology: Experiencing music in a child’s digital world.

General Music Today, 28(1), 8–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/1048371314544169 Richards, W. H. (1962). Trends of piano class instruction, 1815 – 1962 [Doctoral dissertation,

University of Missouri at Kansas]. ProQuest Dissertations & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/302102194/fulltextPDF/EBF01A8728F243D1PQ/1?accountid=4840

Richards, W. H. (1978). History: A brief chronology. Piano Quarterly, 101, 12–14. Riley, P. (2016). iPad apps for creating in your general music classroom. General Music Today,

29(2), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1048371315594408

Sharan, S. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory and research. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Shockley, R. P. (1982). Advanced group instruction: Some implications for teacher training. College Music Symposium, 22(2), p. 103–109. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40375186.pdf?acceptTC=true

Skroch, D. (1991). A descriptive and interpretive study of class piano instruction in four-year

colleges and universities accredited by the national association of school of music with a profile of the class piano instructor [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Oklahoma]. ProQuest Dissertations & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/303936183/D94EDA7D99FC4219PQ/8?accountid=4840

Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315–342.

https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543050002315 Slavin, R. E. (1999). Comprehensive approaches to cooperative learning. Theory Into Practice,

38(2), 74–79. Wagner, E. E. (1968). Raymond Burrows and his contributions to music education [Doctoral

dissertation, University of South Carolina]. ProQuest Dissertations & Thesis Global. https://search-proquest-

121

com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/302364400/AC92EBCA9BD04FACPQ/1?accountid=4840

Weaver, J., Spede, M., Miller, S., & Srebric, J. (2020, November 13). International coalition

performing arts aerosol study. https://www.nfhs.org/media/4294910/third-aerosol-report.pdf

Worcester, L. (2016). iPads in the group piano classroom. MTNA e-Journal, 8,(2). 24–26.

http://www.mtnaejournal.org/publication/?m=&l=1&i=354840&p=3 Wristen, B. (2006). Demographics and motivation of adult group piano students. Music

Education Research, 8(3), 387-406. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14613800600957503

Young, M. M. (2013). University-level group piano instruction and professional musicians.

Music Education Research, 15,(1), 59–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2012.737773

Young, M. M. (2016) A national survey of university-level group piano programs. MTNA e-

Journal, 7,(3), 13–35. http://www.mtnaejournal.org/publication/?i=290270

122

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

EDUCATIONAL SUMMARY Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA

Ph.D. in Music Education-Piano Pedagogy (2021)

Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, USA

M.M. in Piano Solo Performance (2017)

Lynn University, Boca Raton, FL, USA

M.M. in Instrumental Collaborative Piano (2015)

Faculdade de Artes Alcântara Machado, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

B.M. in Piano Performance (2009)

TEACHING EXPERIENCE Florida State University - College of Music, Tallahassee, FL

Graduate Teaching Assistant (2018-2021)

Florida Atlantic University – Department of Music, Boca Raton, FL

Graduate Assistant (2015-2017)

Lynn University – Preparatory School of Music, Boca Raton, FL

Piano Instructor (2013-2015)

Faculdade de Artes Alcântara Machado, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

Teaching Assistant (2009)