SUSAN WOLK

Ashford University ED597 - Week Four Assignment

I CAN COUNT IN TIME!

A plan for assessing choral rhythmic reading at
the intermediate middle school level

Page | 1

Grade and Subject

This assessment plan is for Intermediate Middle School Choir: It will address NV State
Music Content Standard 5.0: Students read and notate music (Nevada State Standards, 2012). In
other words, students will be able to read and notate certain rhythmic patterns in their appropriate
clef in a variety of time signatures.

Assessment Selection
In selecting assessments for this unit, I chose to use two formative assessments and a
summative assessment. This unit would be difficult to garner data without formative
assessments along the way. As such, the choices I made are as follows:
FORMATIVE:

Perform short rhythmic examples and have students notate what they hear.
Have students create short rhythmic examples and perform them creatively for the class.

SUMMATIVE:

Pre-Test/Post-Test of matching material to demonstrate growth to mastery

Assessment Descriptions
In order to ensure that students are progressing in the rhythmic unit in intermediate choir
class, students will be played some short, two measure rhythm examples. In the examples, there
will be at least two different time signatures, and at least three different rhythmic patterns per
example. A visual of this would be:

Page | 2

Students would then be called upon in small groups to clap and count the rhythms. For the first
example, they would need to state 1 hold 2, 3 four and one and two rest three four and while
clapping in steady 4/4 time with a steady rhythm. For the second example, then would need to
state one and two three rest two hold three and clap in a steady 3/4 time. Using common
language that is well accepted by most musicians will make this assessment even stronger.
Students in other groups could explain if any groups made any errors. Studies show that students
receiving peer-based instruction demonstrated significantly higher levels of rhythm reading
achievement than students receiving traditional teacher led instruction. (Johnson, 2011). If they
have errors, they will be corrected and will have the errors explained to them, so that they
understand why they made a mistake. They will then have another opportunity to demonstrate
mastery. This will inform me of student progress, and what I need to alter in my instructional
practices for students to show mastery. This assessment can carry from one grade to the next
with more complex rhythms.
The second assessment would be for the students to create short examples themselves,
then perform them in a creative way for the class. I would ask the students to group themselves
in threes and each group would be given approximately five minutes to come up with a rhythmic
example, then perform it for the class. Students would be permitted to clap, pat their legs, tap
pencils, or other creative methods to perform their example. Students would receive immediate
feedback from me, and I would also garner data on how effective my instructional practices in
this unit are progressing. The ability to get immediate feedback on student progress in rhythmic
accuracy helps students with vocal repertoire (Henry, 2011). As with the previous example, this
can carry from one grade to the next with increasing the rhythmic complexity and the manner in
which students perform their examples as well as requiring students to be by themselves in lieu
of in groups.

Page | 3

The summative assessment would be a combination of a pre-test with notated rhythmic

examples that students would be required to label the beats, and the sub-divisions of the beats. A
similar post-test would be administered at the end of the unit to assess how well students
achieved mastery of the concepts in the unit. In addition to increasing the complexity of the
rhythms for future grade levels, the length of the examples could be increased on both the pretest and post-test to include multiple time signatures, or multiple methods of notation. It has
been stated that singers appear to give priority to pitch over rhythm, performing pitch correctly at
the expense of rhythmic accuracy (Henry, 2011). By tracking student progress over time, this
music skill can be monitored for individual student progress. Students in choir are not
necessarily in choir by grade level, but rather by choral level. This particular summative
assessment could be added to student portfolios to track their individual rhythmic progress over
time from choir level to choir level (Middle School Intermediate to Middle School Advanced,
Middle School Advanced to High School Beginner, and so on).

Standardizing the Assessments

Particular rhythmic examples could be shared across the district, so each teacher is using
a standardized set of examples for the formative assessment. If each teacher plans to cover a
rhythmic unit in the fall, then students who move from school to school will be exposed to
similar material at similar times. This standardization could aid in tracking mastery among
students from a variety of demographics as well as providing teachers with a method of
managing their time on the unit (Lopez, 2013).
For the summative assessment, we already have a standardized exam by performance
level in our district, so the when and how regarding this assessment is administered is dictated by
the district. We know that these methodology aides in equalizing achievement (Lopez, 2013).

Page | 4

All summative assessments are delivered at the culmination of the academic year, and rhythmic
mastery is part of this collaborative final exam.

Assessment Value and Practicality for Teachers

These types of assessments carry value with them for several reasons. The first is that
rhythm often falls through the cracks in choir education, and this ensures that students are
exposed to this unit across our district. Singers, in general, often learn rhythms by ear rather than
by actual rhythmic accuracy (Henry, 2011). By using formative assessments along the way early
in the year, students are required to have a certain level of mastery in reading rhythms. This
helps with learning repertoire faster, because rhythms can be read by the students in their
particular voice part. I t aids in rehearsal time saved, because students understand how their part
will flow without having to hear it first. As the only choir teacher in my school, this plan can be
used across the district, giving teachers an exceptional system (Lopez, 2013) to approach this
unit.
By standardizing the unit, this is helpful to teacher practice. Given the satellite nature
of choral teachers, we dont often get the chance to collaborate. By having a system in place for
this unit, this helps us to help our student achievement in rhythmic reading, which in turn assists
us as educators in exposing students to new literature. By knowing our students are learning to
figure out rhythms on their own, we can save rehearsal time and also have the satisfaction of
knowing that students can be independent learners on this aspect of their repertoire.
Evidence of this type of achievement can be seen in our students progress in reading
music. For a music teacher, this has a tremendous impact on our choice of concert pieces, our
level of difficulty for competition and festivals, and our ability to teach repertoire in a timely

Page | 5

manner. Most choir teachers have struggled with making difficult choices about what to sing
because the rhythmic structure is more complex than the tonal structure of the music (Henry,
2011). This system addresses this gap and gives a solution for both the teacher and the students.

Student Involvement
Within this assessment plan, students are involved from the beginning. They are part of
the pre-test. They are working collaboratively in the formative portions of the assessment
process. They are creating their own rhythmic examples as part of the unit. This is inherently
engrained in the formative assessment. Students teaching students is often a stronger approach
than direct instruction (Johnson, 2011). By including the student as both an individual and as a
group peer mentor, student, and instructor, students can take ownership over their own learning.

Page | 6

REFERENCES:
Henry, M. L. (2011). The Effect of Pitch and Rhythm Difficulty on Vocal Sight-Reading
Performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59(1), 72-84.
doi:10.1177/0022429410397199
Johnson, E. A. (2011). The Effect of Peer-Based Instruction on Rhythm Reading Achievement.
Contributions to Music Education, 38(2), 43.
Lopez, D. (2013). No Excuses University: How six exceptional systems are revolutionizing our
schools. Ramona, CA: TurnAroundTM Schools Publications
Nevada Fine Arts Standards. (2000). Nevada Department of Education. Accessed October 23,
2016.
http://www.doe.nv.gov/Standards_Instructional_Support/Nevada_Academic_Standards/Fi
neArts/