We value what gets assessed. This is true in all walks of life, for all people, in all settings. Consider your own life. In what areas is someone checking up on you? Does that check-in affect your priorities or your behavior? For folks in the corporate world maybe it's sales numbers or productivity or some measure of profit margins. For us teachers maybe it's a bulletin board deadline, or some measure of teaching practice (discussion protocols, perhaps?). If you've noticed how students, parents, and administration seem to value math and English Language Arts above all other subjects, it's because we've been assessing those subjects exclusively on standardized tests since NCLB (No Child Left Behind) went into affect in 2002. 20 years of assessing only ELA and math have sent a clear message that we value those subjects above all others, and our school culture has responded accordingly.
Students are motivated to practice and prepare when they are aware they will be assessed on a particular skill, technique, or passage. It's why students suddenly decide to study the day before an exam and pull the infamous all-nighter (admit it, you've done it too), AND why music students suddenly start practicing the week (or day) before the concert. Therefore, it is imperative that we routinely assess students in the areas of importance, and ensure that those assessments are both authentic and meaningful (unlike those high-stakes tests!).
a bronx tale
Not too long ago, I gave my students a rhythm-reading assessment. I have a subscription to a host of software tools through MusicFirst. In this instance, I used Musition's rhythm-tapping assessment. It's a great tool for individual assessment because it forces students to work independently instead of following the rhythm of the ensemble. The students use headphones attached to any internet-connected device (chrome-books in my case). The software produces a rhythmic example notated on the screen, and a metronome click. The students must use the spacebar to tap the rhythm in time with the click of the metronome. The software automatically analyzes their accuracy and spits out a score (which auto-fills to my gradebook, YAY!).
My students FAILED - across the board!!!! Wow, does that make me feel like a horrible music teacher! We had been doing rhythm-tapping for MONTHS! They were successful in class as a group, but individually they couldn't do it, even with simple quarter notes, eighth notes, and their corresponding rests. I reported the results back to my students and said, "I am NOT going to let these failing grades stand. We are going to practice for a week together, and on Friday you will re-take this test. Whichever test you score the highest on will be the one that I put in the gradebook."
Glad to be given a chance to improve their grade, and knowing that they would be held INDIVIDUALLY responsible for their learning, suddenly students began truly concentrating on the task at hand. We got through the rhythm-reading portion of the rehearsal much faster, students identified the misconceptions they had previously held, they gained confidence, and when they re-took the test, 80% of them passed. WHEW! The truth is, they were simply not motivated to learn the concept before they understood the kind of assessment they would be held responsible for.
Why Assess?
To motivate students.
To understand where students are on an INDIVIDUAL level. Often times the group dynamic hides where students are struggling or excelling.
To identify gaps in student understanding. Sometimes students can complete a task while misunderstanding a basic concept.
To give students meaningful feedback and actionable next steps. Ultimately, if the assessment works well, it should inspire GROWTH in the individual student.
Do you have to give students a grade? Don't guess! The grade should be a meaningful reflection of the students' work and accomplishments.
To validate music as a worthy and rigorous discipline, one on equal footing with ELA and math (and science and social studies).
types of assessments
Okay, this is a bit of edu-speak babble but it is important vocabulary for us to understand, .particularly when we are speaking to our administration (aka principals) about the ways in which we assess student understanding and achievement.
Formative assessment
Formative assessment is any assessment you use to inFORM your teaching in the moment, or to help you FORMulate your next lesson. The most common assessment we strings teachers use is simply listening. We listen, we hear what is wrong, we correct, the sound improves. The second-most common assessment for us orchestra folks is watching for technique. We see what is wrong, we correct, the sound improves. This happens in the moment a gazillion times every day in the orchestra classroom. It is important that when we are being observed (aka assessed!) by our administration that we are able to articulate this process as a form of assessment, but it is equally important that this is not our ONLY kind of formative assessment we use.
summative assessment
Summative assessment is the SUMmary of the students' learning to-date. We are closing the chapter, your grade is your grade, we are moving on. State tests are an example of this, as are end-of term exams, unit tests, final projects, etc. In the orchestra room, the most common summative assessments are playing tests and concerts/recitals.
authentic assessment
Did you know that the playing test model developed by music teachers was one of the very first examples of what an authentic assessment should be? For any assessment to be "authentic" it should mimic the situation as one would encounter it in the real world as closely as possible. When we do playing tests, concerts, and adjudication festivals, we do a pretty good job of that! Certainly much better than standardized tests, which are the very opposite of what an authentic assessment should be. A playing test can be a formative assessment as long as students have the option to re-take the test, otherwise it functions as a summative assessment. Concerts and festivals are always summative, as you cannot re-do a performance.
self-assessment
(Typically formative) Challenging to get right with students, this is a critical skill for musicians. Can you listen to yourself and diagnose problems? Prescribe solutions? Students often struggle with hearing themselves while they play (recording can be helpful here). More often than not, I find my students to be too hard on themselves. They will often rate themselves lower than I do and often need encouragement.
Peer-Assessment
(Typically formative) Equally difficult to get right with students, but a critical SOCIAL skill for musicians. Can you help a friend without being overly critical? Can you diagnose the problem correctly and help find solutions? Can you engage in a productive dialogue about how to improve without being mean or bossy? If your students can learn how to do this well, this is the BEST solution to all of your problems. The students help each other improve, thus multiplying the teachers in the room, and you can let them do all the work!
Do you love this picture? If so, you are not a strings teacher!!! As a pre-cursor to giving peer feedback, I put stock photos like this one on the smartboard and ask students to be the "teacher" for this poor, untrained violinist. First they must comment on the positive. "What is she doing well?" Then, "What would you say to correct her technique? Can you say it non-judgmentally?" Give them some sentence stems to frame their comments like, "I notice..." "Did you mean to...." "Have you considered..." This gives me an opportunity to assess their understanding of fundamental technique as well as their ability to engage in constructive criticism. Once students are practiced in this approach, they will begin to engage in such conversations naturally with each other.
what do we assess?
If we value what we assess, it stands to reason that we should assess what we value. But often we don't do that at all! Typically we assess what is EASY to assess. This is why so many of our standardized tests are completely inauthentic. It is hard to standardize an assessment of real-life problem solving skills, so we throw a bunch of math problems on a page with a bubble sheet.
To that point, we need to consider what we are assessing in orchestra. What matters most? How can we most efficiently and effectively assess that in a way that gives students meaningful, actionable feedback? Below is an incomplete list of things we might consider, in no particular order:
Beauty, connection, communication, pathos
Technique/Fundamentals
Posture/Position
Bow hold/Bow arm
Left Hand
Expression (dynamics, phrasing)
Style
Articulation
Bowing Techniques
Tone (as in timbre)
Balance/blend (in ensemble)
Pitch accuracy/Intonation
Vibrato
Rhythmic accuracy
Tempo
Groove/Time-feel
Notation (sight-reading)
rhythms
pitches
bowings
dynamics
articulations
Improvisation
pitch sets
stylistic choices (rhythms, bowings, articulations)
communicating feeling (dynamics, expression)
Form analysis
Historical context/accuracy
Harmonic structures
Tension/Resolution
Cadences
Harmonic tendencies
Key signatures
Functional analysis
The list could go on and on. Some of what we try to assess is physical, a SKILL the students are trying to master. We also assess what students understand, their COMPREHENSION of an idea. Sometimes there is a disconnect between what they understand and what they can do in the moment, where students may understand a concept but struggle to execute it in real time. Conversely, sometimes students can play instinctually (by ear) what they do not understand from the page or on a theoretical level. Or perhaps there is a gap in understanding that we have not yet recognized that needs to be uncovered. This is the primary goal of assessment: to uncover the misconceptions or gaps in our students' understanding.
how do we assess?
As efficiently as possible. No one has time to waste. If COVID lockdowns taught me one thing, it is that they joy of making music together in the same space, at the same time, cannot be replaced by any cyber-space hack (and believe me, I tried ALL the hacks!). Therefore, our focus in the classroom needs to center around the beauty and joy that comes from playing together as an ensemble. Note-bashing is a necessary part of learning music, but it need not occur during our precious together-time!
My rule of thumb is, if a machine can do it, a machine SHOULD do it! There is so much wonderful technology that can help you and your students get through the basics, it can fast-track your students to having more meaningful music experiences during rehearsal. Consider the list above. What can easily be measured by software? What requires human interpretation?
SOFTWARE: The software available to assess student understanding and skill in music grows every day. I will be posting many detailed recommendations on many different software options on upcoming blog posts. But the most critical options for strings teachers are PLAYING assessments. In this category, you really have two options: PracticeFirst (from MusicFirst) and SmartMusic. Both do the same thing - they record the student playing a piece of music on their instrument and measure the accuracy of pitch and rhythm. The interface is a bit different for each platform, as is the price point.
SmartMusic (the most expensive option) has beautiful recordings to play along with. The feedback is easy to understand, but only if your students have a really firm grasp of music notation, which is NOT true for all of my students. However, if you use it in the classroom on a smartboard, you can only view one part at a time - never a score. Additionally, I have difficulty getting it to stream seamlessly on my board ever since they went cloud-based. The internet at my school is not strong enough to stream without buffering issues. Very frustrating. However, the recordings you play along with are beautiful and the subscription includes access to all of Alfred Publishing's library, which is significant.
PracticeFirst is available through MusicFirst. It is a much cheaper option, and can be paired with a host of other wonderful products in the MusicFirst suite. Music in PracticeFirst is viewable in any part (including a score), but relies on MIDI to play the parts rather than a live recording. The feedback on PracticeFirst is easier to interpret if your students have some difficulties reading from the staff. Many great strings methods books are available on this platform as part of your subscription. Additional content can be purchased with an additional fee.
Both platforms offer students the opportunity to record themselves and receive feedback in real time on what they are and are not playing accurately. Both also have the option for those scores to be automatically entered into your gradebook!! For me, SmartMusic is cost-prohibitive, but I encourage you to check out what both platforms can do for you and your students. Both will give you a deeper understanding of the individual capabilities of your students.
HUMAN-WARE: For that which a machine cannot measure, we humans need to develop metrics to help us quantify that which is difficult to assess. In such a situation, a checklist or a rubric can be helpful. It will be important that any such measure is discussed with (if not developed by) the students prior to its use. Students should know what they are being measured on in advance of the assessment. In terms of efficiency, usually a video or audio recording is fastest way of collecting data, as it will take little to no rehearsal time. The evaluation and feedback can also occur outside of class if needed, though some in-class feedback can also be helpful.
There are many considerations to take into account when constructing a checklist or rubric. I will be posting in more detail various considerations on upcoming blog posts. For now, consider the following: we are attempting to asses what we value, so what is the top priority? How can I measure that? What are the components that contribute to that value? How can I best describe that quality? How can I describe a less desirable or un-desirable quality?
Below is an example. This is essentially a checklist, also known as a 1-point rubric, that assesses a beginner's fundamental technique. It is designed to be used by the teacher, a peer, AND the student.
Obviously this example contains nomenclature unique to my classroom, and my students know what each criteria means because we've discussed it AT LENGTH. But the idea is that students should be able to look at a video recording of themselves or a friend and easily assess - "yeah you've got that," or "no, you aren't doing that yet!" The rubric describes that which is observable (either by sight or sound), without counting (you messed up 3 times) or judgement (that sounded bad or good). By definition, the criteria clearly indicates what the next step is for the student when they are in the "not yet" category.
This is meant to be used as FORMATIVE assessment, and is therefore a completion grade in my gradebook. Students should be able to track their progress using the same rubric over and over again since we are measuring fundamentals rather than any repertoire-based skill.
PS - The bow hold category doesn't apply to German Bow on the bass. They get a separate rubric.
for your consideration
How do you know what your students understand or are struggling with? What can help you dig a little deeper?
How do you currently assign grades? Are your assessments truly measuring student skill and understanding? Or just compliance? Or just a guess?
What feedback do your students receive? How do they receive it? Are students able to articulate their own strengths, weaknesses, and next steps?
Are your students able to accurately assess themselves and their peers? What scaffolds do they need to be able to do so?
What area needs the most work in your ensemble? How can you assess that area meaningfully? How can you communicate to students what the expectation is for that assessment?