Technological Applications in the Standards-Based Music

Classroom
By Andrew T. Garcia
University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Technology has the ability to enhance the educational outcomes for students enrolled in
music education classes at the secondary level because it appeals directly to aspects of the real
world in which students inhabit and because of its inherent ability to ‘teach’ concepts at the pace
and at the whim of the individual. Learning music with technology utilizes a hands-on approach,
is student-centered, and is not limited by the knowledge of the teacher and can more readily
reflect the individual needs and experiences of students. These decidedly postmodern
approaches have been shown in general education literature to positively affect student learning
(Hammond & Collins, 1991) 1. In addition, technology is an attractive medium for students (Muro,
1997) and much of the technology used in a music technology classroom can be purchased and
utilized at home at once weakening the divide that previously existed between school and home
resources (Rudolph, 1996) and strengthening the relationship between home (community) and
school.

This paper will provide an overview of the role music technology can play in
enhancing/assisting traditional music education objectives and the requirements of the current
standards-based education movement. Technological applications are discussed that can help
meet the requirements of the content and learning standards established in the Massachusetts
Arts Curriculum Framework (1999) and how these applications can benefit music teachers,
students and the perceived role of the music curriculum in the larger educational context.

A restructuring of the secondary general music ed. curriculum through the use of
technology is suggested. The use of technology is suggested as a means of connecting with
student learners in meaningful ways (Boody, 1990) and as a way of embracing relevant, existing
paradigms related to postmodern, post-industrial society (Rudolph, 1996; Muro, 1997; Rideout,
1998).

THE PROBLEM
Two unavoidable phenomena have come to inhabit the educational world. Both have
come about as a result of research and policy. The first of these is technology. The second is
Standards-Based Education (SBE). In recent years, money, when available, has found its way to
schools/programs that exploit each of these. According to the CEO Forum (2001) the nation
spent 37.8 billion on education technology between 1990 and 2000. Anticipated spending on
technology is projected to rise sharply as old hardware is replaced and new technologies emerge.
Yet in many music programs either or both of these have been given little attention in favor of
more traditional music education practices (Phillips, 1992; Hodges, 1992) which focus more on
rote rehearsal techniques and concert performances.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF TRADITIONAL PRACTICE IN MUSIC EDUCATION

Most public school music programs consist of three basic areas of curricular focus:
“General” Music, Instrumental Music and Choral Music. General Music programs typically begin
in kindergarten or first grade and continue in some form for all students through the middle school
th
years (about 8 grade). In High School, if there is a non-performance (general) music program it
usually takes the form of electives in music theory or history. Instrumental Music programs are
typically offered in grades 4-12 and provide opportunities for students to study their instruments in
small groups and to perform in various bands modeled after the military bands of 65 years ago.
Choral music programs are typically discrete parts of middle school and high school music
programs but singing in some form is usually incorporated into the elementary general music
curriculum.
 General music programs often exist to teach the basics of music theory (steady beat,
basic time signatures and rhythms) but not much else. Often the methodology is teacher-
centered with the teacher explaining the concept and the students “doing” or echoing what the
teacher asked them to. In good programs, small instruments will be available for students to
demonstrate the concepts they learned. Even so, these skills are helpful for the students who
ultimately plan to play in band or sing in chorus. Students who do not elect to play or sing,
however, must continue to be subjected to “general music” in some form long after they have
decided it’s not for them. Arguments for keeping general music programs in the public school
curriculum have focused on such obtuse arguments as “music makes you smarter” (citing studies
that SAT scores are higher for students who participate in the arts) or “music teaches skills useful
in other subjects”. While there may be kernels of truth in these arguments they certainly miss the
boat as far as music education is concerned. The obvious problem is that they focus on
outcomes unrelated to music (Gee, 2000, p. 957).

Band and Chorus programs are often highly visible because they provide entertainment
for local communities. For this reason they tend to be popular and generally enjoy a high level of
community support even if the programs have hardly changed in decades. Most Band programs
consist of a teacher, students, instruments and a conducting baton which is used to start students
playing, conduct time and stop students from playing when a “mistake” is detected (usually by the
conductor). The mistake is pointed out and the process repeats itself. This ubiquitous approach
has been criticized by Colwell (2000) and others because true music literacy is overlooked in
favor of the short-term goals of preparing for concerts. Choral programs are run much the same
way. In both instances the learning environment is highly teacher-centered with the teacher
setting the tone, rehearsal process and outcomes each day, week and year. The extent of
learning by students in these circumstances is questionable even if they ultimately attain a high
level of musical performance.

STANDARDS-BASED EDUCATION

Standards-Based Education (SBE) is an approach to learning that attempts to shift the

focus from teacher to student by establishing standards and desired learning outcomes and
suggests teachers shift methodologies from more lecture-based instruction to more collaborative
methods with attention paid to the learning of ALL students as distinct from ‘the class’. The SBE
movement has gained in popularity in recent years in the nation’s schools since music is not the
only academic area to suffer from a traditional lack of clear objectives and learning outcomes for
students. By now the SBE mantra, “what should students know and be able to do as a result of
this lesson” is almost a cliché and is often mocked by teachers who resist the criticism implicit in
SBE (ie..”You haven’t been educating very well. By using SBE, you’ll improve instruction and
learning for the better.”) However, SBE was developed as an honest effort to affect the bottom
line of all education—the improvement of student learning and the result was the creation of
standards in all subject areas.

In the past decade, states throughout the country began adopting standards which have
become the backbone of curriculum guidelines for all academic subjects including music and the
arts. Their creation followed increasing pressure from politicians and National Reports such as
Goals 2000: Educate America Act calling for more accountability and productivity in Education.
While the intentions were good, this has created the problem of how to implement the standards
and how to cover them all (Marzano & Kendall, 1998). These concerns have been echoed by
Florian (1999) who conducted a study of teacher’s perceptions of the standards-based
movement. Survey data indicated that the expectations offered by academic standards are
welcomed by most educators, but the breadth of content that appears in standards documents
can be overwhelming in terms of instruction.
MUSIC STANDARDS IN MASSACHUSETTS

The standards established in the Massachusetts Arts Curriculum were officially adopted in
1999 and were arrived at following the passing of the Education Reform Act of 1993 which
established the Arts as a ‘core’ subject along with social studies, language arts, math and science
(Education Reform Act, 1993) The arts standards closely were modeled after the National
Standards for the Arts which were established and published in 1994. (See Appendix A for a list
of the Massachusetts Arts Curriculum Standards). While the national and state standards
established what should be taught they did not specify teaching methods or resources to be used
for the instruction of the recommended standards 2. Recommended methods for teaching music,
therefore, have not changed while the suggested curriculum has become more comprehensive.
This is not necessarily problematic. Tomlinson (1999) argues that standards-based instruction
can be compatible with student-centered education practices such as differentiated learning. In
any event, while there is no state assessment to monitor student outcomes in music and the arts,
the curriculum framework was adopted in 1999 and is now law 3.

TECHNOLOGY

Technology in today’s society is ubiquitous. From computers to cell phones to CD’s and
DVD’s, technology is a part of our lives whether we approve or not. A well known and
troublesome characteristic of technology is the rate at which it “improves” which usually means
faster (computing speed) or smaller (cell phones, audio discs..) or more efficient (DVD’s vs.
CD’s) At its best technology helps us to achieve commonplace tasks more conveniently or
efficiently. In other words technology is used as a tool to accomplish things which would ordinarily
need to be done. At its worst it is the end rather than the means and serves as a meaningless
distraction from the natural world.

THE WORLD WIDE WEB

The World Wide Web or Internet is probably the most educationally significant of all recent
technologies since its main commodity is information and by virtue of this fact serves as a direct
competitor to the Classroom Teacher. It is a hugely successful technological medium due to its
inherent usefulness to human beings of all ages. It is at once a means of communication
between people; it is an encyclopedia, as well as a creative and technical tool. It can be used for
leisure purposes as well as for serious study and it is not limited by time or geography.
Metaphorically it represents all things postmodern: diversity, multiple points of view (realities),
creativity, and the blurring of boundaries (the same medium is used to create art, sell jeans and
teach college courses). It is also, in a sense multicultural in that it is trans-cultural as the medium
covers the entire globe.

THE PRESENT AND FUTURE OF EDUCATION

Research on Teaching and Learning has shown that learning is contextual (Anderson,
Blumenfeld, Pintrich, Clark, Marx, & Peterson, 1995; National Commission on Teaching and
America’s Future 1996; 1997; ) and that school represents a process not, simply a place
(Thornburg, 2002). Schools can no longer represent factory-model modes of instruction.
Schools in a post-industrial world need to embrace holistic and non-linear modes of thinking
including multi-sensory stimulation and inquiry-based learning. A 1998 study by ISTE,
International Society for Technology in Education made the following recommendation about new
directions in learning:
 Traditional New Learning Environments

Teacher Centered Instruction Student Centered Learning

Single Sense Stimulation Multisensory Stimulation
Single Path Progression Multipath Progression
Single Media Multimedia
Isolated Work Collaborative Work
Information Delivery Information Exchange
Passive Learning Active/Exploratory/Inquiry-based Learning
Critical Thinking and Informed Decision
Factual, Knowledge-based
Making
Reactive Response Proactive Planned Action

Students can no longer be considered “products” of a learning system that “teaches” them
one independent concept at a time in irrelevant ways since we know that information devoid of
context is meaningless-especially to children who often claim their favorite subject was
Kindergarten because learning was linked to play which was linked to snack time which was
linked to music which was linked to recess which was linked to riding the bus, etc…In other words
the distinction between school and “the real world” was not yet apparent because learning was
still a holistic process (Garcia,1999, 2003).

HISTORY OF TECHNOLOGY IN MUSIC AND MUSIC EDUCATION

Musicians have always been great users of technology (Boody, 1990). Evidence of this is
the way in which instruments have evolved over time. Pianos evolved from mechanisms that
pluck the strings to short, hammered arms that strike the strings, brass instruments developed
valves which allowed them to play in different keys, conducting “batons” went from large staffs
that would be pounded on the floor to sleek, efficient wands. Efficiency of keys and levers on
instruments are always being improved and string makers are always attempting to find the right
wood and lacquer that will produce that perfect sound.

As early as 1980 education professionals were justifying the use of technology by arguing
that it allowed for students to learn by doing and by thinking about what they do (Taylor, 1980).
These arguments were grounded in the theories of Dewey, Piaget and Montessori. The main
argument then was that a computer can greatly assist student learning of all kinds. Once these
declarations were accepted by the educational community applications for all subjects areas were
sought. In general education, computers still provide much the same as they did then- an
electronic word processor and a place to organize information. The internet has added an
encyclopedic, one-stop-shopping element to school research projects and programs such as
Microsoft’s Powerpoint have increased the possibilities and pizzazz of student work by providing
the opportunity to work with multimedia and prepare organized slide shows, however, no
strinkingly new technologies have been developed that change the way students use technology
in general education. In music, applications have been a bit more ambitious.

MIDI
In music, early technologies were focused on attempting to get computers and musical
devices to communicate. The result (in 1983) was the creation of MIDI which is an acronym for
Musical Instrument Digital Interface. It is a language used to transmit information between
electronic instruments and computers. MIDI allows a musician to play their MIDI capable
instrument and have the music get “captured” by the computer as a MIDI file. Once MIDI was up
and running, instruments of all kinds were created to become “MIDI-capable”. So, now we have
keyboards for pianists, wind controllers for wind players, electric string instruments and MIDI-
xylophones and electronic drum sets for percussionists.
 Software followed the creation of MIDI so that a performance by a musician (or student)
could not only be recorded but could be notated in actual music notation as well. It is very much
like having a private recording studio where the musician gets to record in “real time” (following
and keeping a steady beat played by the software).

SEQUENCERS
Sequencers have been around since the early part of recording technology in some form
or another but became more accessible to musicians in time. The term familiar to most people is
the 4 track recorder (and/or 8 and/or16 track). Sequencers are different than MIDI because they
record actual sound. (MIDI converts music to a language recognizable to a computer.) In the
case of the 4 track recorder, 4 different instruments or tracks can be recorded. For example, in a
typical rock band, the drums and bass can be on one track while the vocals, guitar and keyboards
can each be on another track.

Following the creation of MIDI, sequencers began appearing as software on computers.

The problem early on was that computer memory capabilities were limited and couldn’t handle
the memory strain of pure recorded sound (sound files take up much more space than text-only
files). Now, however, sequencers have become common and are used frequently by musicians
and non-musicians alike. What used to be the exclusive technology of recording engineers is
now readily available to the average person in the form of inexpensive or even free software.

Both MIDI and sequencing applications have changed the music world by creating an
accessibility that did not exist to the average person. Both have changed the possibilities for
music education and opened the door of access to music much wider, especially for the non-
performing student.

TECHNOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS IN MUSIC EDUCATION

In our present day, we can add CD-Roms, Mp3 and wave files, digital recording
technology and interactive web-pages to MIDI and sequencers as tools for learning about and
understanding music. An increasing amount of music is being produced by individuals with no
formal training in music performance because of these technologies. CD-Roms are packaged
multimedia encyclopedias containing information about any aspect of music, typically, history and
style. Mp3 files are CD quality (wave) files that take up much less space on a computer hard
drive. Most sequencing programs can convert to wave and mp3 files for easy accessibility and
sharing. Digital recording technology allows live music to be captured directly to a computer for
processing and “burning” to CD’s. All of these are real world possibilities that can and should be
exploited in the music classroom.

In Appendix B, I suggest uses for technology in the standards-based music classroom.

The suggestions can be used in general, choral or instrumental music classrooms. The
suggestions are not meant to be exhaustive but are simply starting points for the use of
technology in the music classroom. Included in Appendix C are internet-based technology
resources available to music educators.

ON CHANGE IN THE MUSIC EDUCATION PROFESSION

I firmly believe it is important for the music education profession to embrace the
technologies that have been with us for two decades now and to expand the borders of what is
possible as outcomes of music in our schools. Research has shown that even band students
have a limited understanding of music after graduating high school (Colwell, 2000). Non
performing students of general music classes probably fare far worse in terms of music literacy.
The first thing I am advocating for is a much broader, even primitive definition of music. If the
definition of music is the “organization of sound” and we didn’t attach subjective notions such as
good or bad to this definition, students would be much freer to create and enjoy producing their
own music and by default becoming musically literate in the process.
 The second recommendation is for music specialists to understand that what the do (read,
write and perform music) is accessible to anyone, anywhere. Schools are not the only places
where students can be exposed to music in a performing or, especially a creative context. It used
to be that school was the place where students could get musical training (outside the church)
particularly in band or chorus. There is more to music and music literacy. In a post-industrial
world technology has allowed for the decentralization of education. It is now commonly known
that business leaders do not need to be in the office to be “connected” and in touch with what is
going on thanks to communications and information technologies. Technological innovations in
music have allowed for the same kind of opportunities for students. What a teacher uses at
school to teach can be purchased and used by a student at home. This notion of decentralization
levels the playing field for students and teachers and expands the possibilities, definition and role
of music programs-enriching them and students for the better. In a music technology class, a
student can e-mail a file home and work on it later. Furthermore, he or she would likely be
motivated to do so because of the complete ownership of the process of creating. It would be
very easy to advocate for this kind of education. To hold firm to traditional notions of music
programs with heavy emphasis on marching bands and show choirs would be like a math teacher
arguing the benefits of the abacus for solving trigonometric formulas.

RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE USE OF MUSIC TECHNOLOGY

It will be impossible for any music teacher to use any technological application if she or he
does not fully understand how it works. My first recommendation with regard to music and
technology is for the teacher to spend a good deal of time learning technological applications they
feel they might use. It is important that a full understanding is acquired before teaching students
the new technology. Summer vacation provides an excellent opportunity to purchase and learn
new technology. It may even be possible to obtain professional credit for doing so or to create a
curriculum project for payment by the district.

My second recommendation is to know when and when not to use technology! Though I
clearly advocate for the use of technology in the music classroom, there are appropriate and
inappropriate times to use it. When should a music teacher use technology? The answer lies in
what is being taught and the questions that must be answered to learn material within the music
curriculum. The following question can help determine whether technology should be used:
• Can technology help students to know and understand this concept/unit better?
• Is there an opportunity for or potential for differentiation, individual creativity,
diverse outcomes?
If the answer to either of these questions is “yes” then it may be wise to explore using
the technology.

CONCLUSION

Ultimately, the question of using music technology should not be whether its use makes
learning more efficient but whether it enhances the student’s ability to learn music. In school
music programs, technology should be used as a tool rather than an entertaining and distracting
medium unto itself even as it holds great potential.

Rideout (1998) suggests that music education is stuck in a modern world view in a
postmodern world. If this is true (and so much practice in schools suggests it is) then technology
is a way of embracing the postmodern paradigm without jettisoning core music education values.
If the standards represent a modernistic view, the delivery of the curriculum through the use of
technology can at least represent present day postmodernism as it is playing out in schools
throughout our nation and in all aspects of society. The time is ripe for its implementation. The
lightening-speed-fast evolution of computer processing and memory capabilities on electronic
machines will positively influence what will be possible in the music world and, by relation, music
education.

We cannot be anywhere but now and if we are pining for a past that has no relation
whatsoever to today’s society, the future of music education is in trouble. What is technologically
possible and relevant is played out daily in our student’s real world complete with technological
gizmos tailored to their specific tastes. Differentiation is played out all the time in the marketplace
because businesses understand the bottom line: the individual. Technology allows for
differentiation as in advertising and this is appealing to human beings young and old. There is
nothing more educationally relevant than a class of students engaging in personally relevant
projects in real time for real purposes.

I believe that the traditional role of the Teacher is passé. Technology, taken as a whole
and projected onto the educational scene has the potential to irrevocably change the role of all
teachers. Music teachers must heed this suggestion, in particular, because of music’s close
historical relationship to technology and its overweight dependence on nostalgic, western-based
music making. These statements are not as nihilistic as they seem. Teachers are still needed.
They are just needed in different ways. They are no longer the great Knowers. They are pointers
to what is known rather than what they know. It’s a much less egotistical enterprise (and much
more realistic!) to proclaim that one doesn’t know all but that one can point to sources of potential
answers to potential questions. This understanding is where the breakdown of modernism is
most apparent. It is still and always will be the student’s job to learn but the teacher’s job will be
to lead students to where learning can take place especially those places that exist outside the
teacher’s classroom-cyberspace or the real world complete with modern technology ready and
waiting to be used.

NOTES

1. In this article, I take the position that postmodern notions such as the
encouragement of creativity, the shifting of power from autocratic to student-centered methods,
recognizing diversity and equality and the dissolution of fixed points of view are desirable and are
here for the long haul and that the use of technology presents an opportunity to embrace many of
these notions directly.

2. It is generally accepted that the standards themselves represent a guideline for a

comprehensive curriculum in music in general. The inclusion in Massachusetts of arts standards
that all arts-based subjects strive for, including the encouragement of exploring music and arts of
different cultures indicates a more up to date conception of previous music curricula.

3. The Massachusetts Department of Education did plan on establishing a statewide

test for the arts but dismissed the idea after a year and a half of meetings and assessment
development with top music and arts specialists in the state. I was on this committee and no
explanation was given why the project was abandoned.
 REFERENCES

Anderson, L. M., Blumenfeld, P., Pintrich, P. R., Clark, C. M., Marx, R. W., & Peterson, P. (1995).
Educational psychology for teachers: Reforming our course, rethinking our roles.
Educational Psychologist, 30, 143–157

Boody, Charles G.; TIPS: Technology for Music Educators; published by MENC, Reston, VA;
1990.

CEO Forum (2001). School technology readiness report. Washington, DC: CEO Forum.
Available: http://www.ceoforum.org/downloads/report4.pdf

Colwell, R.J. (2000). Assessment’s potential in music education. In RJ. Colwell & C. Richardson
(Eds.), New handbook of research on music teaching and learning: A project of the Music
Educator’s National Conference (pp.-1128-1158). New York: Schirmer Books.

Education Reform Act of 1993. Available online: http://www.doe.mass.edu/edreform/

Florian, J. (1999). Teacher survey of standards-based instruction: Addressing time. Available

online:
http://www.mcrel.org/PDF/Standards/5997RR_AddressingTime.pdf

Garcia, A.T. (1999) Schooling and student perceptions: understanding meaning and relevance of
‘the place called school’ in the lives of middle school children. North Adams, MA:
Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts.

Garcia, A.T. (2003). Middle school student’s conception’s of learning. Unpublished study.

Gee, C.B. (2000). The “use and abuse” of arts advocacy and its consequences for music
education. In R.J. Colwell & C. Richardson (Eds.), New handbook of research on music
teaching and learning: A project of the Music Educator’s National Conference (pp.941-
961). New York: Schirmer Books.

Goals 2000: Educate America Act, Pub. L. No. 103-227, 108 Stat. 125 (1994). Available online:
http://www.ed.gov/legislation/GOALS2000/TheAct/

Hammond, M. & Collins, R. (1991) Self-Directed Learning. Critical Practice, London: Kogan Page

Hodges, D. (1992). The acquisition of music reading skills. In R.J. Colwell (Ed.), Handbook of
research on music teaching and learning: A project of the Music Educator’s National
Conference (pp.466-471). New York: Schirmer Books.

International Society for Technology in Education. (1998). Technology foundation standards for
all students.[Online] http://cnets.iste.org/students/s_stands.html

Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (1998). Awash in a sea of standards. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent
Research for Education and Learning.

National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future (1996). What matters most: Teaching for
America’s Future. New York: Columbia University.
National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future (1997). Doing what matters most:
Investing in quality teaching. New York: Columbia University.

National Standards for Arts Education. What every young American should know and be able to
do in the arts. MENC, 1994.
Phillips, K (1992). Research on the teaching of singing. In R.J. Colwell (Ed.), Handbook of
research on music teaching and learning: A project of the Music Educator’s National
Conference (pp.568-576). New York: Schirmer Books.

Rideout, R. (1998). On leadership in American music education. Unpublished manuscript,

University of Oklahoma, Norman.

Rudolph, T. E. (1996) Teaching Music with Technology. Chicago: GIA Publications.

Taylor, R. (1980) (Ed.) The computer in the school: Tutor, tool,tutee. New York,NY: Teachers
College Press.

Thornburg, D. (2002). The new basics: education and the future of work in the telematic age.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development: Reston, VA.

Tomlinson, C. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
APPENDIX A: The Massachusetts Arts Curriculum Standards
STANDARD 1 SINGING
Students will sing, alone and with others, a varied repertoire of music.

STANDARD 2 READING AND NOTATION

Students will read music written in standard notation.

STANDARD 3 PLAYING INSTRUMENTS

Students will play instruments, alone and with others, to perform a varied repertoire of
music.

STANDARD 4 IMPROVISATION AND COMPOSITION

Students will improvise, compose, and arrange music.

STANDARD 5 CRITICAL RESPONSE

Students will describe and analyze their own music and the music of others using
appropriate music vocabulary.
When appropriate, students will connect their analysis to interpretation and evaluation.

STANDARD 6 PURPOSES AND MEANINGS IN THE ARTS

Students will describe the purposes for which works of dance, music,
theatre, visual arts, and architecture were and are created, and, when
appropriate, interpret their meanings.

STANDARD 7 ROLES OF ARTISTS IN COMMUNITIES

Students will describe the roles of artists, patrons, cultural organizations,
and arts institutions in societies of the past and present.

STANDARD 8 CONCEPTS OF STYLE, STYLISTIC INFLUENCE, AND

STYLISTIC CHANGE
Students will demonstrate their understanding of styles, stylistic
influence, and stylistic change by identifying when and where art
works were created, and by analyzing characteristic features of art works
from various historical periods, cultures, and genres.

STANDARD 9 INVENTIONS, TECHNOLOGIES, AND THE ARTS

Students will describe and analyze how performing and visual artists use
and have used materials, inventions, and technologies in their work.

STANDARD 10 INTERDISCIPLINARY CONNECTIONS

Students will apply their knowledge of the arts to the study of English
language arts, foreign languages, health, history and social science,
mathematics, and science and technology/engineering.
 Appendix B:
Music Content Standards and Potential
Music Technology Applications

Content Standard Potential Application to meet standard

STANDARD 1 • Use Midi files with a “music minus one” approach.

SINGING Choral parts can be turned into midi files. Singers
Students will sing, alone and part can be “muted” on playback or can be used as
with others, a varied repertoire basic accompaniment. Rhythmic aspects, pitch and
of music. expression can all be practiced.

• Using a sequencing program such as Cakewalk,

record a “barbershop” harmony version of a song.
Use a sequencing program to help learn how to sing
independently with other voices.

• Smartmusic (Coda Music Technology) can be used

by advanced singers to identify issues with pitch and
tempo.

STANDARD 2 READING • Read standard music notation files using notation

AND NOTATION
Students will read music
written in standard notation.
programs such as Finale and Cakewalk.
• Use a software or CD-rom program on the computer
such as Mibac Music Lessons to read pitch notation
in several clefs and to identify symbols, terms and
other aspects of music theory.

STANDARD 3 PLAYING • Perform rhythmic, melodic and chordal patterns on

INSTRUMENTS MIDI instruments.
Students will play instruments,
alone and with others, to • Play music by ear on MIDI keyboards
perform a varied repertoire of
music

STANDARD 4 • Use notation programs to compose simple melodies.

IMPROVISATION AND
COMPOSITION
Students will improvise,
compose, and arrange music.
• Use MIDI keyboards to improvise around a MIDI
playback file created by the teacher.
• Use notation programs to arrange music for a variety
of ensembles

• Use Band In a Box to improvise around a song file.

• Use a sequencing program to create a “sound

canvas” using multiple tracks and strategic, personal
placement of different sounds (not necessarily

STANDARD 5 CRITICAL
RESPONSE
Students will describe and
analyze their own music and
the music of others using
appropriate music vocabulary.
When appropriate, students
will connect their analysis to
interpretation and evaluation.
STANDARD 6
PURPOSES AND MEANINGS
IN THE ARTS
Students will describe the
purposes for which works of
dance, music,
theatre, visual arts, and
architecture were and are
created, and, when
appropriate, interpret their
meanings.
STANDARD 7
ROLES OF ARTISTS IN
COMMUNITIES
Students will describe the
roles of artists, patrons,
cultural organizations,
and arts institutions in
societies of the past and
present.
STANDARD 8
CONCEPTS OF STYLE,
STYLISTIC INFLUENCE,
AND STYLISTIC CHANGE
Students will demonstrate their
understanding of styles,
stylistic
influence, and stylistic change
by identifying when and where
art works were created, and by
analyzing characteristic
features of art works
from various historical periods,
cultures, and genres.
STANDARD 9
INVENTIONS,
TECHNOLOGIES, AND THE
ARTS
Students will describe and
analyze how performing and
musical).
• Use the Internet to access different performances
and arrangements of the same piece. Compare and
contrast them based on stylistic differences. Record
observations on the computer.
• Create a web page containing music listened to,
analysis and description.
• Use the internet to explore the history of the creation
of works of music.
• Use CD-Rom programs to learn the various
purposes and meanings artists have created for.
• Find a musician’s web-page online. If an e-mail link
is listed, e-mail the artist with questions about how
and why he or she creates music. If possible, invite
him/her to school to share with others.
• Use the internet to research various roles of
artists and create a Powerpoint presentation
with the findings.
• Use the internet to read about, and listen to music
from various time periods.
• Imitate what was learned by composing music in a
similar style using a notation program
• Create a web-page with links to original works by
students that imitate the styles of different historic
pieces.
• Publish a “history of music” newsletter on the web,
with links to sites about different styles.
• Same as standard 8 above-substitute “inventions”
for “style”
• Using a sequencer, create sounds that imitate
sounds made by earlier instruments such as the
harpsichord.
visual artists use and have
used materials, inventions,
and technologies in their work.
STANDARD 10
INTERDISCIPLINARY
CONNECTIONS
Students will apply their
knowledge of the arts to the
study of English
language arts, foreign
languages, health, history and
social science, mathematics,
and science and
technology/engineering.
• Using a word processor and spreadsheet, create a
musical timeline indicating when instruments were
created. Create a parallel timeline indicating when
different technologies were invented or introduced.
Explain the relationship. Publish to the web and/or
create a powerpoint slide show.
• Create songs using existing poetry. Use the lyric
tool in Finale or another notation program to type in
text. Create music that “fits” the mood and rhythm of
the poetry. Do the same with non-English texts.
• Use the internet to research ways in which music
has been used to heal. Create a bibliography of
resources and publish to the web.
• Learn the relationship of songs to historic events
using a search engine. Use a synthesizer or
notation program to create songs about current
events
• Learn about the science of sound on the web.
Create effects such as delay, reverb or glissando to
demonstrate how sound can be manipulated.
• Create the “Doppler effect” by using a synthesizer.
 Appendix C:
Internet-Based Web Sites for Music Instruction and Learning

• ABC's of Using MIDI Files on the Net For new MIDI users
• ATMI Association for Technology in Music Education Scholarly journal on music
technology
• Classical Guitar MIDI Archives
• Classical Music Archives The largest audio music archive on the net
• Classical MIDI With Words Art songs with synchronized lyrics
• EMUSIC-L Home Page Listserv
• Harmony Central MIDI Resources A complete archive of tools and software
• Instrument Encyclopedia large resource of information about all instruments
• Medieval and Renaissance Instruments
• MIDI-Karaoke Library
• The MIDI Archive Includes resource listings
• MIDI BASE Search engine for computer music and MIDI related sites
• MIDI Database Free popular music midi files
• MIDI Farm Internet Midi archives
• MIDI on the Macintosh Excellent "how to" for Mac users by Twin Cities Midi
• MIDI for Windows Users Also from Twin Cities Midi
• MIDI Home Page at www.midi.org
• MIDI Players, MIDI Plugins, & Karaoke Players Freeware for Playing MIDI Files
• MIDI.Com Includes a large midi search engine
• MidiTyper Instantly convert PC midi files to Mac.
• MusicTheory.net Lessons in basic and advanced music theory and ear training.
• MusicRobot.com Midi Search engine
• Standard MIDI Files on the Net
• Oldtime Music MIDI Archive 19th and 20th Century dance tunes arranged for
fiddle and banjo!
• Planet Midi Includes TV & movie themes, and popular music
• Peter and the Wolf read the story, hear the music
• QuickTime Software Quick Time site—useful to download to play some music
links.
• Ragtime MIDI Archives of John Roache
• Squeak and Blat Music Technology Message Board
• Shareware.Com Find shareware music software here.
• Shareware Music Machine Music software to download
• Stephen Foster Songs Midi archive of 278 songs
• Technology Institute for Music Educators (TI:ME) Promoting technology in Music
Ed. with articles.
• Twin Cities Midi A very complete source for all midi applications, Mac & Windows
• The Ultimate MIDI Page
• UCSD Midi ArchivesUniversity of California, San Diego
• ZDNet.com Shareware library

Source of some links: http://www.isd77.k12.mn.us/resources/staffpages/shirk/midi.html and

http://www.asd.wednet.edu/EagleCreek/Engell/kidlinks.htm