A Constructivist Application For Online Learning In Music

RI ME RESEARCH & ISSUES IN MUSIC EDUCATION
SEPTEMBER 2009 : VOLUME 7 : NO. 1
PURPOSE & COPYRIGHT : SUBMISSIONS & GUIDELINES
EDITORIAL BOARD : CONTACT : ARCHIVE
A Constructivist Application for Online
Learning in Music
by Dan A. Keast : The University of Texas of the Permian Basin
The purpose of this article is to extend the published knowledge and practices of distance
learning in music to include constructivism. Dan Keast describes his techniques for the
implementation of constructivism to an online two-course series of Music History. The
courses’ structure, activities, assessments, and other key functionality components are
shown as an example of current practices. Keast discusses the process for developing the
two courses, in conjunction with copy editors, course design specialists, and technology
reviewers. The courses highlight the need for additional improvements such as new
software and legal clarification for the use of sound recordings. Keast’s suggestion for
further research is a call for more educators to report on the current practices of online
teaching in music and the other arts.
The year: 1988. The setting: a typical classroom at a midwestern university. I am in music
history on a too-warm spring afternoon, listening to the drone of the professor's lecture
and trying not to nod off. The needle drops on a scratchy recording of Beethoven's Fifth.
Where's the copy of the score in this mess of papers? Now the instructor is shouting out
measure numbers and pertinent details about the music, which I can't even hear because
as the music gets louder, so does he. Is this how Beethoven went deaf? How long until
class is over? Am I even learning anything?
The year: 2008. The setting: my faculty office. I am a professor, holding virtual office
hours for my Music History I students who take the course online, at times that are
convenient for them and under conditions that support their learning. Music listening
examples online are of near-concert hall quality, and subsequent comments and questions
generate lively discussions. Feedback is immediate. Students motivate one another to
succeed.
Constructivism is inherent in most performance-based and applied music courses;
students can apply new knowledge immediately and receive synchronous feedback, both
from listening to themselves and from verbal and nonverbal communication from
conductors and teachers. However, knowledge-based courses such as music appreciation,
music theory, and music history, have historically relied on direct instruction and the
lecture model. Various factors, including the nature of the topics being presented, class
sizes, the physical nature of the lecture halls, and the training of the faculty members,
have resulted in these courses being taught in teacher-centered, static ways. The advent
of technology offers new opportunities for breaking this cycle and bringing contructivist
pedagogy to knowledge-based music courses.
Abstract
A Constructivist Application for Online Learning in Music
Page 1 of 8
RIME Online : September 2009 : A Constructivist Application for Online Learni...
http:/ / www.stthomas.edu/ rimeonline/ vol7/ keast.htm

Although early attempts at distance learning formats for music classes often used a read-
test model that mimicked the lecture-based format of face-to-face classes, more recent
explorations are media-rich and interactive. My online teaching includes the construction
of a fully online two-course sequence in Music History, originally taught face-to-face. The
use of recorded music from my private library during the traditional course limited the
students’ ability to access the music after class. An online transformation of the course
was logical so students could simultaneously access the recordings and have 24 – 7 access
to the lecture illustrating an analysis of each piece studied in the curriculum. The online
course took a year to design, build, edit, and review. During my tribulations of creating the
online course, I discovered that the existing literature for online music teaching was
limited, so this article is a description of my process for transforming an existing traditional
version of Music History into a web-based version.
Three important education theories form the foundation for this course. The central
assumption of constructivism is that humans are active learners and must construct
knowledge for themselves by using tools at hand to learn from their experiences. (Geary,
1995). The constructivist educator gathers materials for students to use in observing,
collecting data, generating and testing hypotheses, and working collaboratively with
others. The decision to teach using a constructivist paradigm gives students the choice to
follow trails of interest, make connections, reformulate ideas, and reach unique
conclusions. Through their course activities, students construct their own understanding of
music history by investigating the topic then completing unit assignments. The resulting
assignment is a means of assessing the student’s understanding of the curriculum.
Scaffolding in online courses is the deliberate placement of tools for student use. During
an activity, students need a varying amount of teacher support to complete a task
successfully. When developing the course, a faculty member must project what question
students might have at each step of the activity and provide assistance at the appropriate
time or location within the lecture. The teacher's provision of tools at the appropriate time
within the activity is considered scaffolding. By including scaffolding, an educator is
controlling task elements that are beyond the learner's capacity so the student can focus
on those features of the task they can grasp quickly.
In a face-to-face classroom, the teacher is able to walk around the room “dropping in” to
check on each group providing immediate feedback and answering of questions. The
embedding of expert video clips (Hmelo-Silver, Duncan, and Chinn 2007), reminders of
task structure, or other helpful resources in the online course allow students to access help
at each stage in the task completion similar to the face-to-face classroom described above.
Scaffolding can be “just-in-time” or as a learner-selectable option. The difference between
the “just-in-time” and learner-selectable option is a matter of location. “Just-in-time”
scaffolding is embedded within the activity. At any point where the instructor anticipated
a learner may need assistance, a piece of scaffolding is hyperlinked or directly pasted in.
An application of “just-in-time” scaffolding is when a word, person, or concept is
hyperlinked so learners are taken back to previous topics which remind them of their prior
knowledge, or even an alert box “pop-up” that defines a word. Learner-selectable
scaffolding is located in a single location on the page that learners move to in order to
access a variety of scaffolding. This latter technique is often used as a frequently asked
questions (FAQ) list in non-education sites.
When a constructivist educator includes scaffolding in a course, they become a facilitator
rather than a lecturer, by directing students to appropriate pools of information and
enabling them to construct their understanding of a topic. Students are given the tools,
Learning Philosophies I nform ing the Online Course Design
Page 2 of 8

activity, and guidelines to complete a learning unit. Scaffolding a constructivist activity is
challenging for the educator, yet rewarding for both the learner and the teacher when
done effectively. The active and exploratory nature of a virtual student’s use of
scaffolding, and the motivational aspect of choices in constructivism, are of interest to me.
The tenets of Vygotsky's (1978) Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) work well in an
online course taught from a social constructivist base. The ZPD was developed by Lev
Vygotsky and refers to the student’s ability to complete an activity. The relationship
between the instructor and the student is crucial to understanding Vygotsky’s concept.
The ZPD is considered “optimal” when a student cannot complete the task without some
interaction with the educator. However, the task cannot be too difficult as to require the
educator to be present during the student’s entire engagement of the task. The goal is
simply to provide a piece of information and leave the student to continue learning alone.
Social constructivism includes the use of student interaction with the constructivist
philosophy. With a mixed population of musicians and non-musicians in a Music History
course such as this, the ZPD is large for group activities. The optimal place of learning
occurs only when the student needs a "nudge" from the teacher in the form of a piece of
information, and is then left to complete the task himself, without the teacher's presence.
By asking students to form groups with specific roles in mind, the small groups are
structured as a support team building upon the strengths of one another.
Activity theory is another philosophical framework by which we can understand how people
learn. According to activity theorists Jonassen and Rohrer-Murphy, the activity is engaged
in by a learner who is motivated to find the solution to a problem by using the tools
supplied by the teacher and in collaboration with others. "Activity theory posits that
conscious learning emerges from activity (performance), not as a precursor to
it" (Jonassen and Rohrer-Murphy, 1999, p. 62). In several learning theories, such as
Behaviorism, Social Cognitive Theory, and Information Processing Theory, the learning
must occur before the activity. Activity theory, however, suggests that learning is a
product of interaction with the environment and activity. In activity theory, each “activity
is composed of a ‘subject’ (a person or group engaged in an activity), and an ‘object’ (a
learning objective held by the subject), mediated by a ‘tool’ (that could be material as well
as mental).” (Roussou, Oliver, Slater, 2008, p. 143). The overlapping relationship between
activity theory and constructivism hinges upon the active nature of the learner, student
use of tools in the learning process, and the collaboration of students in small groups in
order to accomplish assignments.
My goals for the transformation to the online environment included the accessibility of
resources, but also to make the course more actively engaging to the students. The
influence of activity theory and constructivism on the virtual classroom was described by
Scarnati and Garcia (2007, p. 2) as “allow[ ing] a greater degree of engagement, self-
motivated knowledge construction, and collaborative learning.” The construction of the
activities for these courses was also influenced by Salmon. Among her key principles for
building online activities, which she refers to as "e-tivities," are three points:
1. Ensure that the activities are focused on sharing,
shaping, elaborating, or deepening understanding.
2. Build in motivation as part of the process of
undertaking the activity and not as something separate from it. Motivation occurs
because of the learning activities. Avoid trying to motivate people simply to log on and
"discuss." Instead, provide an activity that makes taking part worthwhile.
3. Ensure that participants need to work together in
some way to achieve the learning outcomes. (2003, p. 88)
Related to Salmon's second principal is Jonassen's (1999) construction of activities based
on the concept of an "ill-structured" problem – an activity mirroring real world situations
that do not yield a particular, certain answer because of inconclusive or conflicting data.
Page 3 of 8

Jonassen argues that an ill-structured problem is interesting, relevant, engaging, and will
foster a learner's ownership of the activity.
Salmon’s first principle echoes constructivist philosophy for creating deeper understanding
through a research process. Sharing of one’s understanding with the class, a social
aspect, provides motivation to succeed. The third principle from Salmon, ensuring
participants work together, also contains connotations of social constructivism in the
fostering of group-structured activities to spur interaction and deeper learning.
Both Music History I and Music History II contain four units; each unit in the course
includes four textbook chapters and requires students to author three two-page reflective
papers. After reading the text and submitting the reflective papers, students are asked to
read an online lecture presenting musical selections relating to the reading. At the
conclusion of the lecture is a formative self-check covering material from the text and
lecture. Additionally, a formative listening quiz self-check is offered so students can
prepare for each unit's listening quiz. The listening quiz presents four audio samples
discussed in the online lecture. To encourage use of this formative scaffolding, the
students are informed that one of the audio samples, and its corresponding questions, is
pulled directly from the graded listening quiz.
The courses use a variety of assessment methods, some constructivist-based and others
more traditional. The constructivist assessments are intended to be problem -based, such
as the individual assignments, group activities, and class discussion questions. The
students create individual assignments (Exhibit 1) that are often pieces to be incorporated
into the group activity, which leads to the discussion topic for the unit. The
interconnectivity of the individual assignments, group activities, and discussions is
engaging to the learner. The traditional methods of assessment include four listening
quizzes, two m ultiple-choice exams, and reflection papers of the readings (Exhibit 2).
The social constructivist nature in online education is challenging for those not prepared to
engage in virtual group work. The small groups collaborate in virtual classrooms,
discussion forums, and via e-mail. After reading the lecture, students interact in their
small groups creating projects drawing upon the lecture material. The activity is designed
to be possible only with research beyond the material presented in the textbook and
lecture. The lecture serves as the advanced organizer, while the small group researches
and creates a project that is posted for viewing by the entire class. Activities often contain
multiple roles such as sections written by various group members that comprise a larger
project (Exhibit 3).
Discussion forums serve as the culminating activity of each unit. The discussion provides
the opportunity for extending the reading, lecture, individual assignments, and group
activities into the real world. As viewed in Exhibit 4, students are displaying higher-order,
critical thinking skills such as synthesis, analysis, and evaluation suggesting that their
understanding of the topic is deeper than factual memorization, but operational
understanding.
Students take Music History as an elective in their history and psychology degrees, but
also as a requirement of the music minor and major. Thus, course content must reflect the
needs of both experienced musicians and non-musicians. Planning for each student's ZPD
(Zone of Proximal Development) in the course is a difficult task. The activities I designed
allow for small groups to give less-experienced musicians more of the assembling tasks,
such as collating the parts of the presentation collected from their peers, while the more-
knowledgeable musicians complete the challenging musical analyses.
The Online Music History Courses
Page 4 of 8

Another difficulty, from an instructor's perspective, is training the students to know their
abilities. In order to have them self-assess early in the course, students introduce
themselves to the rest of the class using a checklist style of skills. The list covers several
families of skills, from computer skills and music performing abilities to their individual
preferences for writing, researching, and constructing projects. When placing the students
into groups, the students analyze their peers' self-reported abilities and balance their
suggestions for groups to include a musician, a technology person, a writer, and a
researcher. After students post their suggestions and discuss the suggestions of others in
the discussion forum, the instructor can finalize groupings and resolve any differences of
opinion. Based on this early assignment, students are responsible for creating their own
support system – their small group peers – while completing some of the course
activities. Building this support structure reflects the deliberate use of social constructivist
philosophy in the course. The students' freedom to create their virtual small groups is
similar to facilitating a learning community in the face-to-face course. The virtual sm all
group activities enable students to accomplish the course objectives mutually, using each
others’ strengths by collaborating to meet objectives, often surpassing stated expectations
in the scoring rubrics provided in the assignment.
Scaffolding the courses includes the placement of resources available for student use in
activities. One link I placed on each assignment screen, besides the 24 – 7 hotline for
technical assistance, is the University of Texas Telecampus
(http: / / www.telecampus.utsystem.edu/ learningresources/ library.aspx) virtual library
hyperlink. This allows the students two synchronous methods of help. Other links include
those to short video presentations for: narrowing a topic, creating appropriate search
terms for use in library databases, avoiding plagiarism, and style guidelines. Through an
e-mail link to the library's resource desk, students are able to ask the library staff for
suggestions in locating materials pertinent to their topic, locating audio files in online
listening libraries, and receive feedback.
Entry screens (Exhibit 5) to each unit provide students with step-by-step directions to
complete the unit including objectives and activities. The page serves as an organizer for
student progress through the unit. An introductory paragraph prepares students for the
materials they will need to reference during the lecture (Exhibit 6). These steps are
provided as organizational tools to show students a checklist approach to meeting the unit
objectives. As discovered by Keast (2004), the student research process is meandering, so
this checklist serves as a structural item in each unit.
Other links include the academic tutoring link to SMARTHINKING
(http: / / www.sm arthinking.com/ ) and the campus writing center that provides both in-
person and online writing assistance. These resources provide tutors who give specific
responses to each student's writing, personalized advice for strengthening a paper, style
guidelines, grammar, topic development, and specialized assistance for ESL students. For
a Texas educational institution, ESL assistance is especially beneficial since my institution
is designated a Hispanic Serving Institution by the federal government based on our high
percentage of Hispanic students.
Other scaffolding specific to this course are a formative self-check over the lecture and a
formative self-help listening quiz. Music History courses utilize two-part assessments:
written and aural. The written exam is similar to that in traditional courses such as history
and math. The placement of a self-check to review the lecture allows students the
opportunity to review major themes from the reading and lecture. Material on the midterm
and final exams is drawn from lecture, textbook, and group projects posted in the
discussion forums.
Scaffolding the Online Course
Page 5 of 8

The listening quiz is different and therefore a challenge for some non-musicians. The
listening self-help presents audio files paired with a bank of questions to assess a student's
knowledge of that particular piece. The student must describe who wrote the piece, name
the work, and discuss the structure or organizational form. Often the answers are supplied
in the lecture, but there are instances in the listening quizzes when students are expected
to hear an unfamiliar work and discuss the form using terminology from lecture. The self-
help affirms that the audio technology is functioning properly on the end-user’s machine.
Student evaluations of the course emphasize the rigorous workload while highlighting the
thoroughness of course content: "I sometimes thought there was too much busy work for
an upper-level course. However, all the work was relevant and there was something to
gain from it." Another student commented: "I really enjoyed this course and the
instructor's involvement in our learning." And in response to the survey question, "The
instructor's teaching methods created an environment that encouraged online learning,"
87% answered "agreed" or "strongly agreed."
Virtual office hours were maintained for students to leave asynchronous e-mail or to "chat"
using the feature in the course menu. Only six out of 45 students logged in to
synchronously speak with the instructor using the chat function. Another small portion
called to ask specific questions. The vast majority utilized email which was generally
responded to by the instructor within a few hours. I do not think the continuation of chat
is a valuable use of an instructor’s time if there is a quick reply to email.
At this time, I believe the addition of a few essential components would improve the
course: 1) an interactive quiz mechanism that delivers up to ten questions at once using a
single audio file; 2) a Flash-type file that shows a musical score with the current measure
highlighted as the sound file is played; 3) the "interactive syllabus" of Sylvie Richards
(2003), aptly renamed "assignment guide" by Scott Windham (2008), and; 4) a method of
legally using audio files in distance education.
The current method of quiz question delivery is all at once – every question with its own
link to the corresponding sound file. The delivery of a set of ten questions, all dealing with
the same sound file, is essential to effective student assessment. Currently, students are
forced to check the audio file for each question, when they should be given the directive
"the next ten questions reference this piece of music." The effect on student assessment is
frustration, lengthened quiz time, and sluggish servers at peak times, such as in the hours
leading up to a quiz closing.
In traditional face-to-face Music History courses, a PowerPoint file was used for focused
listening lessons. Before the days of the computer, the instructor shouted measure
numbers over the stereo. The media-rich technology of today's online environment is
limitless, yet course designers struggle to create a Flash file of a musical score timed with
an audio file to a reliable online format. The Macromedia Flash attempts, to date, are
damaging to either the visuals or audio. Additionally, the technology is cumbersome to
highlight the place in the printed music in conjunction with the recording.
When using learning platforms such as Blackboard or WebCT, course designers prefer to
use packaged files for items such as the course calendar, units, and syllabus. While this
approach creates opportunities for enhanced visual appeal, it limits the ability to link to
files externally. For instance, hyperlinking an assignment in the calendar (inside one
package file) to the actual assignment (within a different package file) is, at this point,
highly problematic. My proposed solution would be to create stable links or abandoning the
use of package files. The result would allow faculty uninhibited linking within the course.
I m plications for Future Learning
Page 6 of 8

The final m issing piece is the Achilles' heel of music education. Because music is an aural
art form, our students must listen to music to receive course content, and ultimately learn.
New directives from universities' general counsels are suggesting the avoidance of sound
in online music courses (Exhibit 7). The concept is frustrating to those adapting curricula
to use only the works placed on a student's textbook-supplied CD. Pieces highlighted by
one instructor may not be the same as another. The legal limitations are constraining and
deserve additional guidance and resolution by legal authorities. Baruch
(http: / / www.baruch.cuny.edu/ tutorials/ copyright/ ) created a helpful presentation, but the
UT System (http: / / www.utsystem.edu/ ogc/ intellectualproperty/ copypol2.htm# music) is
conservative in its approach of recordings used online.
So, how will Music History be taught in 2028, compared with today? There are many
experiments currently underway by music educators. Their discoveries will inform and
improve future educational endeavors. It is time for them to publish their methods,
successes, and failures so that all may gain from them.
Geary, D. C. 1995. Reflections of evolution and culture in children’s cognition: Implications
for mathematical development and instruction. American Psychologist 50: 24-37.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., R. G. Duncan, and C. A. Clark. 2007. Scaffolding and achievement in
problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006).
Educational Psychologist 42 (2): 99-107.
Jonassen, D. H. 1999. Designing constructivist learning environments. In Instructional
design theories and their models: Their current state of the art (2nd ed), ed. C. M.
Reigeluth, 215-239. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jonassen, D. H., and L. Rohrer-Murphy. 1999. Activity theory as a framework for designing
constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology: Research & Development,
47 (1): 61-79.
Keast, D. (2004). Implementation of constructivist techniques to an online activity for
graduate music education students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Missouri-Columbia.
Richards, S. L. 2003. The interactive syllabus: A resource-based, constructivist approach
to learning. The Technology Source, July/ August.
http: / / www.technologysource.org/ article/ interactive_syllabus/ . Accessed: August 2008).
(Archived by WebCite at http: / / www.webcitation.org/ 5i7XVjxAa
Roussou, M., M. Oliver, and M. Slater. 2007. Exploring activity theory as a tool for
evaluating interactivity and learning in virtual environments for children. Cognition
Technology & Work (2008) 10: 141-153.
Salmon, G. 2003. E-tivities: The key to active online learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus
Publishing.
Scarnati, B., and P. Garcia. 2007. The fusion of learning theory and technology in an
online music history course. Innovate 4 (2). http: / / www.innovateonline.info/ index.php?
view= article&id= 328&action= article. Accessed: June 2009.
Sutinen, A. 2008. Constructivism and education: Education as an interpretative
transformational process. Studies in Philosophy & Education, 27 (1): 1-14.
References
Page 7 of 8

Vygotsky, L. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Windham, S. 2008. The interactive syllabus: Modifications and new insights. Innovate 4
(6). http: / / www.innovateonline.info/ index.php?view= article&id= 515. Accessed: February
2009.
About the Author - Dan A. Keast (PhD, University of Missouri-Columbia) is an
Assistant Professor of Music at The University of Texas of the Permian Basin where
he serves as Director of Bands and Chair of Music. His teaching experiences
include elementary and secondary band, general music at all age levels, and a
variety of collegiate courses. He maintains an active schedule as a clinician and
adjudicator. As an researcher, Dr. Keast is an invited presenter at conferences for
topics such as integrating reading in music classrooms, grant writing, online
pedagogy, and student collaboration. His preferred method of communication is via
email at keast_d@utpb.edu.
PRINT : EMAIL TO A FRIEND
Alumni · Maps & Directions · Giving
Jobs at UST · EEO Statement · Directories
© 2010 University of St. Thomas · Minnesota · ISSN 1532 8090
2115 Summit Avenue · LOR 103 · Saint Paul, Minnesota 55105 · USA
1-651-962-5729 · bpgleason@stthomas.edu
Page 8 of 8

A Constructivist Application For Online Learning In Music

More Related Content

Similar to A Constructivist Application For Online Learning In Music (20)

More from Lori Moore (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A Constructivist Application For Online Learning In Music