The effects of self-evaluation, self-listening, and modeling on junior high instrumentalists' music performance and practice attitude

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects that self-evaluation, self-listening, and modeling have on junior high school instrumentalists' music performance and practice attitude. Eighty-two seventh, eighth, and ninth-grade students were randomly assigned to one of eight groups in the 2 x 2 x 2 pretest/posttest factorial design. Participants prepared three brief musical excerpts during 15-minute in-school weekly practice sessions and at home. Three adjudicators independently evaluated both pretest and posttest performances using the Woodwind Brass Solo Evaluation Form. Practice attitude was assessed by having students complete the Practice Attitude Questionnaire after each practice session. A general linear model repeated measures analysis with multiple dependent variables was performed to determine relationships among the variables. Results indicated that students who listened to a model recording improved their performance more so than students who did not listen to a model in the areas of tone, technique/articulation, rhythmic accuracy, tempo, interpretation, and overall performance, but not in the areas of intonation or melodic accuracy. A significant interaction between modeling, self-evaluation, and test was also discovered. Students in the Model/Self-Evaluation treatment group improved their performances more than the No Model/Self-Evaluation group in the areas of tone, melodic accuracy, rhythmic accuracy, interpretation, and overall performance. Also, there were no differences in scores between the Model/No Self-Evaluation and No Model/No Self-Evaluation for any performance subarea. In regard to practice attitude, no statistically significant interactions or main effects were found in the data. This indicates that mean practice attitude scores remained constant throughout the duration of the study for all of the groups and also that the treatment groups did not differ from each other in terms of their attitude about the procedure at any time during the treatment period. Furthermore, each group exhibited a favorable attitude toward their particular practice strategy.