496 JRME,VOLUME46, NUMBER4,496-509

Eighty-threerehearsalsand four final performancesof two high schools'beginning and

advanced choruseswerevideotapedto identiJfrehearsalbehaviorsand to evaluateper-
formance achievementin relation to performancepreparation. Teacheracademicand
social instruction,student nonperformanceresponse,rated (5-point scale) performance
responsewith and without teacherverbalassistance,and teacherfeedback wereobserved.
Variableswere measuredin real time and convertedto percentagesof rehearsaltime.
Additionally,frequenciesof teachingsequenceswereidentifiedforeach rehearsalReview
of improvementsin the quality ofperformancefor each school indicateda similarityin
proximity to the final performance between beginning and advanced choruses.
Consideringthis observation,variables were calculatedfor means betweenpoints of
achievement.Findings indicate that (a) teacherspace improvementunrelatedto ensem-
ble maturity,(b) time spent in teacherverbalizationmay not relateto performancesuc-
cess, (c) teacherassistanceduring studentpracticedecreaseswith student improvement,
and (d) instructionsdecreasewith student improvement.

Anita P. Davis, Rutgers-The State Universityof NewJersey

Performance Achievement
and Analysis of Teaching
during Choral Rehearsals

It is often assumed that high achievement in performance-oriented

music classes is the natural result of effective teaching and musician-
ship; yet, many music teachers striving to produce outstanding ensem-
bles find the attainment of success elusive. So often, secondary music
specialists-who are required through the curriculum to present con-
certs and participate in adjudicated performance-attribute success or
failure to factors other than the teaching process. They might cite
"hard work" or "talented students" or, conversely, "lack of time."
Providing music teachers with the ability to recognize and demonstrate
rehearsal behaviors related to performance outcome seems essential
for efficient and consistent student achievement. In an effort to pin-
point factors that bring about high achievement in music classrooms,
researchers have examined effective teaching behaviors, use of rehear-

This article is based on the author's doctoral dissertation, "Performance Ratings and
Analysis of Teaching during Choral Rehearsals," granted in August 1993 by Florida State
University. Anita P. Davis is an assistant professor of music in the Department of Music,
Douglass Campus, Marryott Music Building, 100 Clifton Avenue, Rutgers-The State
University of NewJersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08903-1568. Copyright ? 1998 by MENG-
The National Association for Music Education.

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

 JRME 497

sal time, and evaluation procedures. Not only has this body of research
provided insight into the broad and complex issues of effective teach-
ing and music learning, but it also has provided taxonomies for obser-
vation of teaching and learning in music classrooms.
To identify and classify behaviors, models were developed for
descriptive research and naturalistic observations in music perfor-
mance classrooms. Behaviors were examined in numerous ensemble
settings: instrumental (Carpenter, 1988; Ellsworth, 1985; Goolsby, 1996;
Montgomery, 1986; Moss, 1989; Pontious, 1982; Single, 1990; Snapp,
1967), choral (Caldwell, 1980; Evarts-Kittock, 1987; Thurman, 1977;
Watkins, 1993), children's chorus (Bourne, 1990; Moore, 1987), and in
a cross-section of ensembles (Dallenbach, 1970; Erbes, 1974). From the
amalgamation of behaviors identified in these studies, observed teach-
ing behaviors included (a) verbal instruction (questioning, lecturing,
directing, modeling, illustrating, instructions about social or academic
tasks); (b) verbal instruction during student performance (teaching,
singing); (c) verbal feedback (criticizing, praising, approving, disap-
proving, responding, evaluating); and (d) nonverbal behavior (con-
ducting, approving, disapproving). Observed student behaviors were
identified as (a) student performance (musical activities), (b) student
response (responding, initiating), and (c) attending (on-/off-task
behavior). Several researchers observed silence or confusion (Erbes,
1974; Evarts-Kittock, 1987).
Research in effective teaching and the results of descriptive studies
in music education led to investigation of direct instruction in music
settings. Direct instruction in music was defined as a three-step process
termed a music teaching unit, teaching cycle, or sequential patterns of
instruction (Yarbrough & Price, 1989). A complete music teaching unit
begins with teacher presentation of the task to be learned and is fol-
lowed by student interaction with the task. Praise or corrective feed-
back immediately follows the student's response.
From research in sequential patterns of instruction, a model for
analysis of pacing and content in music teaching was developed by
Yarbrough (1988). She coded each segment of teaching cycles as "1"
for teacher presentation of task, "2" for student response, and "3" for
teacher feedback. In this study, transcripts of rehearsals of five directors
(elementary vocal, junior and senior high instrumental and choral, and
a professional conductor) were evaluated. Of all directors observed, the
professional director spent the least amount of time in task presenta-
tion (31.83%), the most amount of time in performer response
(60.53%), and the most time in feedback (7.64%). Approval to disap-
proval ratio decreased from the elementary teacher (85:15) to the pro-
fessional conductor (47:53).
While researchers in many studies investigated behaviors related to
classroom performance, few concurrently identified performance qual-
ity attainment in relation to rehearsal behavior. Whitlock (1991) relat-
ed choral curriculum development to performance ability rated on a 5-
point scale. In a study of behaviors used by elementary general music
teachers and their relationship to student development, Doane (1992)

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

498 DAVIS

observed the strongest relationship between teacher presentation of

subject matter or communication skills-both verbal and nonverbal-
and student performance. In only two studies did researchers attempt
observation of behaviors in relation to final performance. Watkins
(1986) examined a secondary choral rehearsal for 2 weeks prior to and
1 week following concert performance. In a case study, Buell (1990)
observed rehearsal behaviors of a college band director from initial
reading to the final performance.
How teacher behavior influences student performance over total
performance preparation time has yet to be determined. It is unclear
how teaching variables in the Watkins (1986) study changed across the
entire performance preparation period, and Buell's (1990) case study
provided a single glimpse into the behaviors of a conductor in perfor-
mance preparation. Continued observation improvements in the qual-
ity of performance during rehearsals may provide music educators valu-
able information regarding the development of musical achievement
in performance-oriented classrooms. Such investigations could con-
tribute to the body of literature concerning effective teaching and con-
sequently provide students with more opportunities for skill develop-
ment in performance classrooms.
As the study of rehearsal effectiveness provided a knowledge base of
teaching pedagogy, it would seem that evaluation of the ensembles' suc-
cessful or unsuccessful performance during the entire teaching process
could increase understanding of student performance outcomes. To
provide insight into the relationship between ensemble achievement
and performance preparation during high school choral rehearsals,
the investigator in the present study evaluated performance, observed
time use, and classified behaviors during teaching sequences.

METHOD

Subjects

Two senior high school choral directors were selected for accessibil-
ity of the beginning and advanced choral rehearsals for observation by
the researcher and by evidence of continued performance excellence
at Florida Vocal Association (FVA) District and State Festivals. At the
annual FVA State Festivals, the choral director at School X had received
superior ratings for 17 years, and the director at School Y had received
superior ratings for 14 years.
Beginning and advanced choruses at both schools were observed in
their rehearsal rooms from initial reading until performance at the
FVA District Festival scheduled in a performance hall of a major uni-
versity. School X beginning chorus consisted of 48 students, including
36 ninth-grade students, 9 tenth-grade students, 2 eleventh-grade stu-
dents, and 1 twelfth-grade student. These students were not auditioned
and were divided equally into soprano and alto sections. Forty-eight
auditioned students participated in the advanced chorus, which was
divided into soprano (12), alto (11), tenor (9), and bass (11) sections

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

 JRME 499

and consisted of 9 ninth-grade students, 10 tenth-grade students, 15

eleventh-grade students, and 14 twelfth-grade students. School Y's
beginning chorus was not auditioned and involved 89 ninth-grade stu-
dents divided into various combinations of soprano and alto voice
parts. The advanced chorus was divided into four voice parts: soprano
(17), alto (14), tenor (7), and bass (14). Fifty-two auditioned eleventh-
and twelfth-grade students participated in this chorus.

Procedures

Rehearsals of selected choral literature were videotaped during reg-

ularly scheduled class times. Final rehearsals and performances at the
District II FVA Festival were also videotaped for analysis of performance
and teaching at the conclusion of preparing a piece of choral litera-
ture. Music selected by the conductors for each chorus included (a)
beginning X-'Velvet Shoes" by Randall Thompson, (b) advanced X-
"Paratum cor ejus" by Antonio Vivaldi, (c) beginning Y-"Now come
and join the song" by Orlando di Lasso, and (d) advanced Y-"Daniel,
Daniel, Servant of the Lord" by Undine Moore. Conductors agreed to
rehearse pieces selected for this study only during prearranged obser-
vation periods. Only those rehearsal portions involved in preparation
of the selected literature were videotaped by the researcher. The video-
camera was positioned directly behind the chorus and focused on the
conductor for minimal student or teacher interaction. The researcher,
an experienced adjudicator for the FVA, evaluated a total of 83
rehearsals and four final performances: (a) beginning X-18, (b)
advanced X-23, (c) beginning Y-18, and (d) advanced Y-24.
Selected variables were measured in real time using a continuous
response digital interface (CRDI) dial with an overlay developed to
indicate selected variables of teacher behavior and student perfor-
mance ability level. The dial was affixed to a potentiometer and inter-
faced with a microcomputer to translate placement of the pointer to a
numerical rating measured in half-seconds (Greenfield, 1985). Specific
numerical ratings were designated as zone categories based on the
selected variables that were developed from guidelines defined for fes-
tival evaluation (5/poor to I/superior) in the FVA Festival Manual
(Florida Vocal Association, 1985) and from research literature related
to sequential instructional patterns in music rehearsals (Yarbrough &
Price, 1989). Zone categories with code included:
1. N. nonacademic activity-silence, confusion, announcements, or
interruptions.
2. IA: teacher instruction (academic)-academic task presentation,
directions, counting beats, "do it" commands, modeling by voice or
piano, questioning academic material, or directions.
3. IS: teacher instruction (social)-social task presentation, present-
ing rules, planning social activities, questioning social behavior or activ-
ity.
4. PSR. student practice/response (nonperformance), verbal and
nonverbal.

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

500 DAVIS

5. P5v(erba: student practice/response (performance) rated poor,

with teacher verbal assistance.
6. Pn(onverbal):student practice/response (performance) rated poor,
with teacher nonverbal assistance (including conducting).
7. P4,: student practice/response (performance) rated fair, with
teacher verbal assistance.
8. P4n: student practice/response (performance) rated fair, with
nonverbal assistance.
9. P3v: student practice/response (performance) good, with teacher
verbal assistance.
10. P3n: student practice/response (performance) good, with
teacher nonverbal assistance.
11. P2V: student practice/response (performance) excellent, with
teacher verbal assistance.
12. P2n: student practice/response (performance) excellent, with
teacher nonverbal assistance.
13. PlV: student practice/response (performance) superior, with
teacher verbal assistance.
14. Pln: student practice/response (performance) superior, with
teacher nonverbal assistance.
15. F+: teacher feedback positive, including specific/nonspecific ver-
bal response and applause.
16. F-: teacher feedback negative, including specific/nonspecific
verbal response.
Teacher instruction or feedback provided during any student prac-
tice/response time was categorized as one of the student prac-
tice/response zones with teacher verbal assistance zones (5, 7, 9, 11, or
13).
A reliability observer, an experienced senior high school choral adju-
dicator, was trained in use of the evaluation instrument (all zone cate-
gories) and evaluated 28% of all videotaped rehearsals. Interobserver
reliability-obtained by comparing means of time in each zone evalu-
ated by the researcher and the reliability observer-was r = .92 for
teacher instruction zones (I; zones 2, 3), r= .98 for student practice
zones (P; zones 4-14), and r= .67 for teacher feedback zones (F; zones
15, 16). It was speculated that lower reliability for teacher feedback was
a result of the inherent difficulty in identification of these behaviors
and the small percentage of rehearsal time spent in feedback. For the
purposes of this study, the reliability measures were determined accept-
able.

RESULTS

Raw data recorded in half-second intervals were categorized by zone

utilizing the Continuous Response Observation Data Analysis program
(Greenfield, 1985), and zone means were calculated for each of the
rehearsals. Performance rating means were calculated from zones 5
though 14 for each rehearsal to facilitate the purpose of this study: the
investigation of performance improvement during the teaching

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

 JRME 501

Table 1
RatingMeans
Performance

SchoolX SchoolY

Rehearsal Beginning Advanced Beginning Advanced

1 4.74 (5) 4.69 (5) 4.92 (5) 4.76 (5)

2 4.80 (5) 4.83 (5) 4.99 (5) 4.65 (5)
3 4.56 (5) 4.84 (5) 4.97 (5) 4.54 (5)
4 4.74 (5) 4.96 (5) 4.38 (4) 4.64 (5)
5 4.17 (4) 4.92 (5) 2.90 (3) 3.98 (4)
6 4.56 (5) 4.77 (5) 2.72 (3) 3.49 (3)
7 2.12 (2) 4.25 (4) 2.92 (3) 2.86 (3)
8 2.74 (3) 4.04 (4) 2.93 (3)a 2.35 (2)
9 2.66 (3)a 3.13 (3) 2.19 (2)b 2.76 (3)
10 2.10 (2) 2.66 (3) 2.19 (2) 2.06 (2)
11 2.09 (2) 3.24 (3) 1.97 (2) 1.94 (2)
12 1.65 (2) 3.07 (3) 2.18 (2) 2.62 (3)a
13 1.73 (2) 2.40 (2) 2.16 (2) 1.96 (2)b
14 2.08 (2) 3.02 (3) 2.11 (2) 1.92 (2)
15 2.07 (2) 2.91 (3) 2.23 (2) 1.79 (2)
16 1.73 (2)b 3.66 (4) 2.15 (2) 1.88 (2)
17 1.36 (1) 2.75 (3)a 2.08 (2) 1.58 (2)
18 1.07 (1) 1.80 (2) 1.46 (1) 1.47 (1)
19 2.25 (2) 1.69 (2)
20 2.06 (2) 1.32 (1)
21 2.41 (2) 1.06 (1)
22 1.36 (l)b 1.03 (1)
23 1.22 (1) 1.07 (1)
24 1.23 (1)
Festival 1.05 (1) 1.25 (1) 1.56 (2) 1.01 (1)
a Lastoccurrenceof
good (3) ratingor lower.
b Startof rehearsalspriorto performanceconsecutivelyratedwithin1 point of finalrating.

process. Table 1 provides performance rating means from initial re-

hearsal of festival literature to final performance for each of the cho-
ruses observed. Ratings determined from overall performance rating
were (1) superior, 1.00-1.50; (2) excellent, 1.51-2.50; (3) good, 2.51-
3.50; (4) 3.51-4.50; and (5) 4.51-5.00. This classification by overall per-
formance achievement during each rehearsal provided a foundation
for observation of other zone categories.
From review of total rehearsal performance ratings (Table 1), an
increase in performance achievement was noted at similar points for
the beginning and advanced chorus of School X. Likewise, School Y
beginning and advanced choruses demonstrated achievement at simi-

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

502 DAVIS

Table 2
of SelectedVariables
Comparison for SchoolX

Rehearsals

Beginningchorus 1-9a 10-15 1-18b

Percentage of total rehearsals 50% 33% 17%

Performance rating mean 3.90 (4) 1.95 (2) 1.39 (1)
Verbalinstructionc 53% 52% 34%
Student performance timec 24% 41% 58%
Teacher conductingd 67% 90% 98%
Instruction ratee 2.22/min. 2.11/min. 0.64/min.
Positive:Negativefeedbackf 13:4 6:1 1:0

Rehearsals

Advancedchorus 1-17a 18-21 22-23b

Percentage of total rehearsals 74% 17% 9%

Performance rating mean 3.77 (4) 2.13 (2) 1.29 (1)
Verbalinstructionc 58% 48% 46%
Student performance timec 33% 40% 50%
Teacher conductingb 45% 91% 99%
Instruction ratec 1.99/min. 1.71/min. 0.72
Positive:Negativefeedback 8:3 5:1 1:0

a Rehearsals
priorto/includinglastoccurrenceof good (3) rating.
b Rehearsals
consecutivelyratedwithin1 pointof finalrating.
c Percentageof totalrehearsals.
d Percentageof totalstudentperformance/practice time.
e
Frequencyof teachingsequences.
f Averagecombinedrehearsals.

lar points. This performance achievement progression, which

appeared unique to each school, provided a basis for comparison of
teaching variables to performance rating improvement.

Performance Rating Achievement

As points of improvement were noted for the School X beginning

chorus between rehearsals 6 and 7, and between rehearsals 16 and 17,
means of performance ratings for combined rehearsals were calculated
based on these observations (Table 2). For School X advanced chorus,
points of improvement were observed between rehearsals 8 and 9 and
between rehearsals 21 and 22. Percentage of total rehearsals calculated
from the observed points of achievement indicated a similar rate of
improvement. For the beginning chorus, the first 33% of total

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

 JRME 503

Table 3
for SchoolY
Comparisonof SelectedVariables

Rehearsals

Beginningchorus 1-8a 9-18b

Percentage of total rehearsals 44% 56%

Performance rating mean 3.84 (4) 2.07 (2)
Verbal instructionc 45% 51%
Student performance timec 47% 43%
Teacher conductingd 15% 71%
Instruction ratee 1.55/min. 1.82/min.
Positive:Negativefeedbackf 8:1 72:28

Rehearsals

Advanced worus 1-12a 13-24

Percentage of total rehearsals 50% 50%

Performance rating mean 3.39 (4) 1.50 (1)
Verbal instructionc 47% 47%
Student performance timec 45% 47%
Teacher conductingd 28% 81%
Instruction ratee 2.05/min. 1.86/min.
Positive:Negativefeedbackf 6:2 3:1

a Rehearsals
prior to/including last occurrence of good (3) rating.
b Rehearsals consecutively rated within 1 point of final rating.
c
Percentage of total rehearsal.
d Percentage of total student performance/practice time.
e
Frequency of teaching sequences.
f Average combined rehearsals.

rehearsals rated poor (4.60) while the advanced chorus rated poor
(4.66) also during their initial 35% of total rehearsals. The next 56% of
rehearsals were rated good or excellent followed by both choruses
achieving a superior rating for the final two rehearsals.
For School Y, points of improvement were noted for the beginning
chorus following rehearsals 4, 8, and 17 and for the advanced chorus
following rehearsals 5, 12, and 19. Again, means of performance rat-
ings for combined rehearsals were calculated based on observed
improvement points (Table 3). For the beginning chorus, rehearsals
1-8 (44% of total rehearsals) rated at or below good (3) and, for the
advanced chorus, rehearsal 12 (at 50% of total rehearsals) attained the
final good rating. The remaining half of total rehearsals for both cho-
ruses (56%, 50%) rated excellent or superior.

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

504 DAVIS

VerbalInstruction and Student Performance

Although the director at School X used a large portion of rehearsal

time in verbal instruction (zones 2, 3), verbal instruction decreased for
both of the choruses as performance rating increased (Table 2).
Consequently, both choruses increased performance time (zones
5-14), although only a small percentage increase was observed for the
beginning chorus (+3%).
School Y's director offered less verbal instruction during the final
rehearsals of the advanced chorus, which resulted in increased student
performance time (Table 3). However, during other rehearsal stages of
the advanced chorus, the director demonstrated an increase in verbal
instruction as performance ratings improved. For beginning chorus
rehearsals, little difference in teacher instruction and student perfor-
mance time was observed.

TeacherConducting/NonverbalAssistanceduringStudentPerformanceTime

Teacher conducting or nonverbal assistance included all student

performance time in which the conductor offered no verbal or audible
assistance. Percentages were calculated from the total rehearsal time
spent in zones 6, 8, 10, 12, and 14 divided by total student performance
(zones 5-14) time. It should be noted that the School X director
accompanied both choruses until the week of performance; therefore,
only instances of additional parts playing or vocal modeling were
judged to be assistance. Conducting for this teacher was accomplished
while accompanying by facial gesture, occasional hand cues, and full
conducting during sections practiced without accompaniment.
Literature for School Y was a cappella.
Each teacher demonstrated a large portion of student performance
time during the final portion of rehearsals in conducting or nonverbal
assistance. For both choruses at School Y, the teacher provided a high
proportion of modeling or verbalization during student performance
time in the initial rehearsals (Table 3). The School X teacher offered
less verbalization as students achieved performance success (Table 2).

Instruction Rate

Teaching sequences were defined as teacher instruction(s) followed

by student practice or performance. Three types of sequences were rec-
ognized in this study: (a) complete sequence: instruction (zones 2-3),
followed by practice/performance (zones 4-14), and concluded with
feedback (zones 15-16); (b) incomplete sequence: instruction and
practice/performance; and (c) complete sequence with additional
instruction: instruction, practice/performance, instruction and feed-
back. It was necessary to identify the third sequence type as teachers
observed in this study occasionally offered instructions without subse-
quent student practice but followed by specific feedback referenced to
previous student performance. If the second instruction was repeated

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

 JRME 505

after feedback, it was classified as the beginning of another sequence.

The rate of instruction was determined by the incidence of teaching
sequences delivered per minute.
For School X's beginning and advanced choruses, fewer sequences
occurred as performance achievement increased. A similar rate
occurred between the two choruses in initial rehearsals (2.43, 2.22), yet
the final rehearsals varied from 1.62 sequences per minute for the
beginning chorus to .72 for the advanced chorus (Table 2). School Y"s
beginning chorus received fewer instructional sequences during the
final rehearsals with the high performance ratings; yet, teaching
sequences occurred with little variation related to performance
achievement for the advanced chorus (Table 3).

Teacher Feedback

Teacher verbal feedback was judged by the researcher as negative or

positive. Occasionally teacher feedback was difficult to identify. For
example, teacher verbal instruction that incorporated feedback was
classified as teacher academic instruction. A teacher comment, such as
"Begin at measure ... and correct the dynamics" delivered with nega-
tive facial expression, was classified as teacher instruction even though
it may have functioned negatively for the students. Correspondingly,
verbalizations offered with a positive demeanor, such as "Go back to the
first measure and sing as well as you did ...," were classified also as
instruction.
Although a small percentage of time was spent in feedback during
all chorus rehearsals, teachers in this study maintained a high propor-
tion of positive to negative feedback. The lowest ratio occurred for
School X choruses during final rehearsals (Table 2); however, singers
in School Y increased the proportion of positive to negative as perfor-
mance ratings improved (Table 3).

Positive Teaching Sequences

Previous studies indicated that students achieve high performance

standards and are more on-task with approval rates higher than 75%
(Forsythe, 1975; Moore, 1986). Yarbrough (1988) noted that rein-
forcement rates decreased with increased maturity of the ensemble.
These data might lead one to expect differing ratios for the beginning
and advanced chorus ensembles. Although most sequences in this
study were not reinforced, a high ratio of positive to negative was
observed for all choruses regardless of ability. Moreover, the director of
School Y provided no feedback for the beginning chorus during the
highest rating period.
DISCUSSION

Caution is appropriate in generalizing these findings to other popu-

lations due to the small sample of choral directors and the bias poten-

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

506 DAVIS

tial of the researcher. However, some interesting contrasts and com-

parisons among the four choruses observed are noted.
Of particular interest, the two choral directors in this study achieved
performance improvement at the same rate with both beginning and
advanced choruses, yet, between schools, performance achievement
differed in proximity to the festival performance. The director of
School X achieved performance success for both choruses during the
final two rehearsals, while School Ys director achieved and maintained
a high level of performance during the second half of total rehearsals
leading to performance. This occurred despite differences between the
beginning and advanced choruses in literature, experience or maturity
of the ensemble, size of the ensemble, and number of rehearsals
required for festival preparation. Perhaps the equal pacing of perfor-
mance gains observed in this study was a result of the personal affect of
the teacher or their individual instructional pacing or style. Although
both teachers provided their students with a superior performance
experience, the rate of ensemble achievement seems unique to the
director.
In previous studies, investigators found that approximately 40% of
rehearsal time is occupied in teacher verbalization (Caldwell, 1980;
Evarts-Kittock, 1987; Montgomery, 1986; Pontious, 1982; Single, 1990;
Thurman, 1977; Yarbrough, 1988); however, teachers maintained a
greater proportion of verbal behavior through most rehearsals.
Directors in this study may have relied on verbalization for varying pur-
poses. The School X director was rebuilding a program and provided
description, examples, and modeling. On the other hand, School Ys
director frequently used time questioning students to elicit higher-
order or critical thinking. Results for the School X director reveal a
decrease in verbalization related to performance achievement similar
to Yarbrough's (1988) study in which decreased verbalization related to
ensemble maturity. Yet, the variation in School Ys verbalization was
irrelevant to improvement (although performance time increased for
the advanced chorus during the highest rating period). Again, this dif-
ference between teacher behavior may indicate a preference that does
not affect ensemble performance outcome even though previous stud-
ies indicate that increased student engagement time increases individ-
ual achievement and on-task behavior (Brophy & Good, 1986).
As the final goal in performance-oriented music classrooms is a con-
ducted performance, it seems appropriate that the conductors in this
study provided more nonverbal communication during student per-
formance time as students became more proficient. Also, several fac-
tors, such as experience and the demands of literature, may influence
teacher assistance as students practice. In this study, literature seemed
appropriate for each of the choruses. However, literature selected for
School X was accompanied whereas School Y literature was a cappella,
which may have caused differences in teacher assistance during initial
rehearsals. Because the choral parts were reinforced in the piano
accompaniment for School X choruses, less teacher assistance was
needed than for School Y choruses. The beginning School X chorus

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

 JRME 507

prepared "Velvet Shoes" for unison voices with the melody doubled in
the accompaniment. Although this chorus was the least experienced,
this literature enabled the teacher to provide less modeling during
practice. School Y choruses received much assistance during initial
practice either by vocal model or parts played on piano. Although this
study was limited, these observations indicate that literature selection
influences time spent in assisting students during initial rehearsals.
All choruses required more instructional sequences in the initial
stage. As competence increased, students appeared more capable of
responding to the teachers' conducting, consequently allowing for
fewer verbal instructions. Therefore, a decrease in instructional se-
quences across time seems to be a positive and appropriate rate during
ensemble rehearsals. Of those few sequences ending with feedback,
most were positive. During the highest performance rating period for
School Y, the teacher provided either a higher portion of negative feed-
back or no feedback at all. As Forsythe (1975) noted, music can be
intrinsically rewarding, and perhaps less reinforcement is required
when high performance achievement is attained.
Directors of ensembles may benefit from results of this study-limit-
ed though it is to observation of two teachers-that indicate the influ-
ence of teacher preference in performance preparation. These teach-
ers, while achieving performance success, demonstrated rates of
achievement unrelated to ensemble maturity. Because other factors
(instructional rate, feedback, conducting, practice time) seem to vary
with performance achievement, directors should consider how the pac-
ing of improvement affects individual student achievement and atten-
tion.

REFERENCES

Bourne, P. A. S. (1990). Instructional techniques for children's choirs: A cur-

ricular model (Doctoral dissertation,Arizona State University,1990). Disser-
tationAbstracts International,51, 1150A.
Brophy,J.E., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacherbehaviorand student achievement.
In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbookof researchon teaching(pp. 328-375). New
York:MacmillanPublishing.
Buell, D. S. (1990). Effectiverehearsalwith the instrumentalmusicensemble:A case
study(Doctoral dissertation,Universityof Wisconsin-Madison, 1990). Disser-
tationAbstracts International,51, 1257A.
Caldwell,W. M., Jr. (1980). A time analysisof selected musical elements and
leadership behaviors of successfulhigh school choral conductors (Doctoral
dissertation,Florida State University,1980). DissertationAbstracts Internation-
al, 41, 976A-977A.
Carpenter,R. A. (1988). A descriptiveanalysisof relationships between verbal
behaviors of teacher-conductorsand ratings of selected junior and senior
high school rehearsals. Update:TheApplicationsofResearch in MusicEducation,
7(1), 37-40.
Dallenbach, C. C. (1970). Identificationand classificationof musiclearningbehav-
iors utilizing videotaperecordingtechniques.(ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 042 790)
Doane, C. (1992). Music teacher behaviorsin the general music classroomand

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

508 DAVIS

their relationship to student achievement in music. ResearchPerspectivesin

Music Education, 3, 4-11.
Ellsworth, E. V. (1985). A descriptive analysis of the characteristics of effective
high school orchestra directors including a study of selected rehearsal char-
acteristics (Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison).
DissertationAbstractsInternational, 47, 2070A.
Erbes, R. L. (1974). The development of an observational system for the analy-
sis of interaction in the rehearsal of musical organizations. Bulletin of the
Councilfor Researchin Music Education, no. 40, 52-55.
Evarts-Kittock,C. (1987). Perceptions of teachers, students and an observer in
selected choral classrooms. DissertationAbstractsInternational, 47, 2938A.
Florida Vocal Association. (1985). Guidelinesforadjudicatorsof FVAevaluation/fes-
tivals. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Vocal Association.
Forsythe, J. L. (1975). The effect of teacher approval, disapproval, and errors
on student attentiveness: Music versus classroom teachers. In C. K. Madsen,
R D. Greer, & C. H. Madsen, Jr. (Eds.), Researchin music behavior:Modifying
music behaviorin the classroom(pp. 49-55). New York: Teachers College Press.
Goolsby, T. W. (1996). Time use in instrumental rehearsals: A comparison of
experienced, novice, and student teachers. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 44, 286-303.
Greenfield, D. (1985). The evaluation of a computer system for behavioral
observation training and research. Journal of Music Therapy,22 (2), 95-98.
Hanley, E. M. (1970). Review of research involving applied behavioral analysis
in the classroom. Review of Educational Research,40, 596-625.
Montgomery, C. (1986). A comparative analysis of teacher behavior (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Oklahoma, 1986). DissertationAbstractsInternation-
al, 47, 3351.
Moore, R. S. (1987). The use of rehearsal time by an experienced conductor
with a children's choir. MissouriJournal of Researchin Music Education, 5 (5),
39-56.
Moss, B. B. (1989). Differential approaches to rehearsing and conducting an
instrumental ensemble (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University,
1989). DissertationAbstractsInternational, 50, 2296A.
Pontious, M. F (1982). A profile of rehearsal techniques and interaction
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, 1982). DissertationAbstractsInter-
national, 43, 2920.
Single, N. A. (1990). An exploratory study of pacing in the instrumental
rehearsal. Contributionsto Music Education, 17, 32-43.
Snapp, D. W. (1967). A study of the accumulative musical and verbal behaviorof
teachersand students in fifth grade instrumentalmusic classes.Unpublished mas-
ter's thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus.
Thurman, V. L. (1977). A frequency and time description of choral directors'
use of modeling, metaphorical language, and musical/technical language
related to student attentiveness (Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at
Austin, 1986). DissertationAbstractsInternational, 38, 3135A.
Watkins, R. C. (1993). Nonperformance time use in middle and junior high
school choral rehearsals. Update:Applicationsof Researchin Music Education,
11 (2), 4-11.
Watkins, R. E. (1986). A descriptive study of high school choral directors' use
of modeling, metaphorical language, and musical/technical language relat-
ed to student attentiveness (Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at
Austin, 1986). DissertationAbstractsInternational, 47, 1644A.
Whitlock, R. H. S. (1991). Choral curriculum as it affects performance at the
secondary level. ChoralJournal, 32(3), 39-45.

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015

 JRME 509

Yarbrough, C. (1988). Content and pacing in music teaching. In P.J. Flowers

(Ed.), Currentissues in music education: Vol. 13. Student and teachercompetencies:
Interactingfor success.Columbus, OH: Division of Music Education, School of
Music, Ohio State University.
Yarbrough, C., & Price, H. E. (1989). Sequential patterns of instruction in
music. Journal of Researchin Music Education, 37, 179-187.

Submitted September 30, 1996; accepted August 20, 1998.

Downloaded from jrm.sagepub.com at OAKLAND UNIV on May 3, 2015