1! 111.3.

a... .. .
..».&MW

.71 .3 r «W . V ‘
fimflkfifimw

 

 

.2 .l ,

Fr 5331—. J

.11.. 1.2.1.3.. :7. I...
. 1 .. .4 .1

.. iMM

 

 

J: 6 LIBRARY
0 Michigan State
University

 

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

AH-EEE-AH-EEE-YAH-EEE, BUM, AND POP, POP, POP:
TEACHER INITIATIVES. TEACHER SILENCE, AND CHILDREN’S
VOCAL RESPONSES IN EARLY CHILDHOOD MUSIC CLASSES

presented by

Christina Marie Hornbach

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

Ph.D. degree in Music Education

 

 

CWLWACL (3M ”TB; C (LLl-F
l,\ Major ProfessSr’ s Signa
\-

Ssl lo:

I

Date

MSU is an Aflirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

v--—-.—o-—-n-o-o-o-o—o-.—-o-u—n-—-u-ca—n—-—.—u-n—n-u-c-n-c—a--a-—o--.-.—.—

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5/08 K lPrq/Acc8Pres/CIRC/DateDue.indd

 

AH-EEE-AH-EEE-YAH-EEE, BUM, AND POP, POP, POP:
TEACHER INITIATIVES, TEACHER SILENCE, AND CHILDREN’S VOCAL
RESPONSES IN EARLY CHILDHOOD MUSIC CLASSES
By

Christina Marie Hornbach

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Music Education

2005

ABSTRACT

AH-EEE-AH-EEE-YAH-EEE, BUM, AND POP, POP, POP:
TEACHER INITIATIVES, TEACHER SILENCE AND CHILDREN’S VOCAL
RESPONSES IN EARLY CHILDHOOD MUSIC CLASSES
By
Christina Marie Hornbach

With the intent of improving early childhood music education, the purpose
of this qualitative study was to develop an understanding of teacher initiatives,
children’s responses, and the wait time (teacher silence) between teacher
initiatives and children’s responses in early childhood music classes. This study
entailed naturalistic observation of the teachers (N=2) and the infants/toddlers
(N=14) in two early childhood music programs. Data was collected via field notes,
think-aloud interviews with teachers, teacher/parent interviews, and videotape
analysis; a total of six class periods, three in each setting, were observed and
videotaped for future analysis. The specific questions were as follows: (1) What
teacher behaviors (intentional or unintentional) precede children’s vocal
responses?, (2) What is the quality and length of the silence between teacher
initiatives and children’s vocal responses?, and (3) What are the characteristics
of children’s vocal responses?

Data were analyzed for emerging themes. Teacher initiatives and
behaviors that elicited children’s responses were classified as: (1) use of breath,

(2) body movement, (3) use of props, (4) teacher silence, (5) musical

anticipation, (6) space, (7) individual instruction, (8) use of touch, (9) Child joy,

(10) parent-Child relationship, (11) play, (12) teacher improvisation, (13) vocal
timbre/vowel modification, (14) teacher-child relationship, and (15) the child as
teacher. Teacher-teacher, teacher-child, and child-teacher interactions along with
silence and space form what I have labeled an interactive response chain. The
nature of children’s vocal responses was complex and varied. Vocalizations
occurred on a continuum from exploration to improvisation. In these settings,
children responded with a higher degree of musical development tonally versus
rhythmically. Other emergent themes were the importance of routine, child
independence, and the role of community in eliciting children’s responses.
Findings included the following: (1) children respond vocally in an interactionist
teaming environment; (2) the use of a musical dialogue or interactive response
chain encourages vocal responses; (3) the use of children’s explorations in
teacher improvisatory songs and chants encourages children’s participation and
engagement; (4) teacher silence elicits children’s vocal responses; (5) play elicits
children’s vocal responses; and (6) the formation and nurturing of a class

community is essential for encouraging children’s vocal responses.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

Copyright by
CHRISTINA MARIE HORNBACH

2005

DEDICATION

To my mother and my father
Catherine and Oskar Hornbach
who supported my love of music and pursuit of knowledge

and have always been by my Side

 

l
I'd

p
“—7-

us

C”

uJ‘>,_

 

SL4, a”
Fp'...

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to convey my immense gratitude and appreciation to Dr.
Cynthia Taggart for her support, caring guidance, and insights throughout the
preparation of this dissertation. Her “magic" with children and adults alike, is the
foundation and inspiration for this work. Thanks to Dr. John Kratus, Dr. Mitchell
Robinson, Dr. Jonathan Reed, and Mr. Richard Fracker for their guidance and
support as mentors and committee members, as well as teachers.

My deepest thanks go to the children and parents of Little Music Makers
and the Early Childhood Music Program at Michigan State University’s
Community Music School for their participation and assistance throughout the
project. In addition, I would like to thank the directors of both programs, MS.
Jennifer Bailey and Dr. Bruce Taggart, respectfully, for their participation and
support.

Finally, I would like to give thanks to my family and friends for their love
and encouragement throughout my degree and dissertation and to Michael, for

challenging me to see new possibilities and always being my light and support.

vi

o-s.

 

CH 0 u
”(I

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ x
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 1
Early Childhood Musical Development ...................................................... 2
Preparatory Audiation ..................................................................... 2

Singing Development in Young Children ........................................ 6

Early Childhood Music Classes ................................................................. 8
Musical Play ............................................................................................ 10
Eliciting Children’s Responses ................................................................ 14
Teacher Wait Time (Silence) ................................................................... 18

Need for Early Childhood Research ........................................................ 20

Need for the Study ................................................................................... 21
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................... 21
Problems ................................................................................................. 22
Operational Definitions of Terms ............................................................. 22
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ........................................ 23
Early Childhood Music Research ............................................................. 23
Seminal Research ......................................................................... 24

Qualitative Paradigm ..................................................................... 24

Children’s Movement Responses ............................................................ 27
Children’s Vocalizations ........................................................................... 29
Spontaneous Vocalizations in Free Play ....................................... 29

Vocal Responses of Young Children to Musical Stimuli ................ 33

Early Childhood Learning Environment ................................................... 36
Summary ................................................................................................. 37
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ..................................................................... 38
Researcher Lens ..................................................................................... 38
Design ..................................................................................................... 40
Human Subjects Approval ....................................................................... 4O
Participants .............................................................................................. 41
Settings .................................................................................................... 42
Philosophy and Program Structure ............................................... 42

Environment .................................................................................. 44

Getting to Know the Teachers ....................................................... 46

Data Collection ........................................................................................ 49
Limitations ..................................................................................... 51

Analysis ................................................................................................... 55
Teacher Initiatives Data ................................................................ 56

Teacher Silence Data ................................................................... 57

Child Response Data .................................................................... 57

Duration of the Study ............................................................................... 58

vii

CH'

CHAPTER IV: GETTING TO KNOW THE CHILDREN ...................................... 59

Look Through the Window ....................................................................... 59
CHAPTER V: TEACHER INITIATIVES .............................................................. 70
Teacher Behaviors as Initiatives .............................................................. 70
Teacher Initiative Codes ............................................................... 70

Summary of Teacher Initiatives ............................................................. 104
CHAPTER VI: CHARACTERISTICS OF TEACHER SILENCE ........................ 107
Interactive Response Chain ................................................................... 108
Teacher Silence ..................................................................................... 1 12
Summary of Teacher Silence ................................................................ 114
CHAPTER Vll: THE NATURE OF CHILDREN’S RESPONSES ...................... 115
Children’s Responses in the Early Childhood Music Classroom ........... 115

Vocal Responses ........................................................................ 1 16

Vocal Responses in Relation to Preparatory Audiation ......................... 121
Summary of Children’s Vocal Responses .............................................. 122
CHAPTER VIII: EMERGENT THEMES ............................................................ 123
Routine .................................................................................................. 123

Child Independence ............................................................................... 125
Community ............................................................................................ 127
Summary of Emergent Themes ............................................................. 128
CHAPTER IX: DISCUSSION ............................................................................ 129
Overview of the Study ............................................................................ 129
Purpose and Problems ............................................................... 129

Method ........................................................................................ 129

Findings ................................................................................................. 130
Teacher Initiatives ....................................................................... 130
Characteristics of Teacher Silence: Interactive Response Chain 134

The Nature of Children’s Responses .......................................... 135

Summary .................................................................................... 136

Implications for Future Research ................................................ 138

Implications for Early Childhood Music Teachers ....................... 140
REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 144
APPENDIXES .................................................................................................. 151
Appendix A ............................................................................................ 151
Appendix B ............................................................................................ 152
Appendix C ............................................................................................ 153
Appendix E ............................................................................................ 155
Appendix F ............................................................................................ 156
Appendix G ............................................................................................ 157
Appendix H ............................................................................................ 158

viii

Appendix J ............................................................................................. 164

Appendix K ............................................................................................ 166
Appendix L ............................................................................................. 167
Appendix N ............................................................................................ 169

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Types and Stages of Preparatory Audiation .......................................... 3

Figure 2: Stages of Child’s Singing Voice ............................................................ 7

 

“A.

L..-.

rr‘lr-
-Ct

F--

L---

"'9
'I‘SII’I

'“USI

 

AP-r‘

3

F, ‘ '
5.3..

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
“Doing research with young children is as complex, rewarding, and messy
as living and working with them” (Graue & Walsh, 1998, p. 13).

During the first year of a Child’s life, the neural synapses of the brain are
connecting in ways that establish lifelong cognitive processing patterns (Cohen,
2002). AS a result, brain development during early childhood plays an important
role in how human beings cognitively process music throughout life (Gordon,
2003b). With a stimulating musical environment, young children develop neural
networks in their brains that enhance their potential (musical aptitude) for future
musical understanding and growth. This clearly points to the need for appropriate
music environments for children in their first year of life.

Very young children learn music in much the same way that they learn a
language. In order to learn to speak, children informally listen to language being
spoken in their environments; this language learning even begins in the womb,
as hearing is fully developed by the end of the first trimester. Only after listening
to the language in their environment, children babble and eventually learn to
speak. With music, children must listen to the sounds and syntax of the musical
culture; eventually, they experiment with producing musical sounds, which is
musical babble (Gordon, 2003b).

Some children may not be exposed to as rich an environment musically as
they are linguistically, as some parents may not feel comfortable Singing or
moving to music in a rhythmic way (Taggart, 2003). Because of this and a desire

to provide the best environment possible for their children, many parents enroll

 

 

:r».

P
SC
‘ '-

C?

 

 

 

their children in music classes in the hopes of providing an appropriate music-
Ieaming environment to supplement any music-making at home.

This study will focus on observing children in a naturalistic manner in the
context of early childhood music classes; parents have voluntarily enrolled their
children in these classes, perhaps, in part, seeking additional support for their
children’s music learning. The researcher will focus on teacher behaviors and
children’s responses; details of this will be explained later in this chapter. First,
this chapter includes a discussion of early childhood music development, early
childhood music classes, and musical play, as well as eliciting children’s
responses and wait time in the context of teaching.

Early Childhood Musical Development

Early childhood music educators must be knowledgeable about what is
musically and developmentally appropriate in order to maximize learning in the
classroom. It is important that instructors provide an education in music that is
informed by the knowledge of how children learn music; this knowledge may be
gained from research, literature, and experienced practitioners. Through over
twenty-five years of research and practice in early childhood music, Gordon
(2003b) has developed a theory of music development in early childhood that
may serve as a guide to the teaching/leaming process in early childhood music,
which he calls preparatory audiation.

Preparatory Audiation
Audiation is the inner hearing or mental understanding of “music that is not

or may never have been physically present” (Gordon, 2003a, p. 361 ). Once

 

 

:w

2..

children can audiate music, they can “think” music. Before they are able to
audiate, infants and toddlers require informal music learning in the form of
preparatory audiation. Preparatory audiation is the process through which
children learn music and how to audiate (think) music (Gordon, 2003b).
According to Gordon (2003b), there are three types and seven stages of
preparatory audiation (p. 41-42). These are listed below in Figure 1. If provided
with the proper environment and instruction, young children may begin to audiate
around five years of age, after progressing through the preparatory audiation

stages and types (Gordon, 2003b).

 

 

Tyfis
Acculturation Stage 1 Absorption
(Birth to age 2-4)
Stage 2 Random Response
Stage 3 Purposeful Response
Imitation Stage 1 Shedding Egocentricity
(Ages 2-4 to 3-5)
Stage 2 Breaking the Code
Assimilation Stage 1 Introspection
(Ages 3-5 to 4-6)
Stage 2 Coordination

Figure 1: Types and Stages of Preparatory Audiation

Acculturation is the first type of preparatory audiation and includes
absorption of the musical environment as well as random (musical babble) and
purposeful responses to this environment. During the first stage, children are

absorbing the sounds in their environment, and they react to their surroundings

3

 

 

”A-
I

'40
_,,_
(TI

 

 

A‘pt .
1
N" 'A'IJ

.Agv
va

by listening. Throughout the second stage (random response), children move
and make random sounds (babble) that are, for the most part, unrelated to their
surroundings. Throughout the third stage (purposeful response), children’s vocal
and movement responses are in direct relation to their environment (Gordon,
2003b), although they may not be precise. These purposeful responses may be
the same rhythm pattern as the teacher’s in the child’s own personal tempo or
the resting tone of the song (Valerio, Reynolds, Bolton, Taggart, & Gordon,
1998). Children in Acculturation are not aware of whether their musical
utterances are the same aS or different from those of others.

Imitation is the second type of preparatory audiation and centers on the
awareness of the child as to the correctness of his/her musical responses. The
first stage of Imitation is the first of two transitional stages within preparatory
audiation. During the first stage of Imitation (shedding egocentricity), young
children become aware that their responses may be the same as or different
from their environment. They move from participating in their own musical world
to learning to approximate the music of others (Gordon, 2003b). During the
second stage of Imitation (breaking the code), children begin to imitate with
accuracy the singing and chanting in their environment. “Imitation allows children
to begin ‘breaking the code’ of the music culture that surrounds them, so that by
the time they move into the assimilation stage they are able to recognize and to
discriminate among tonal patterns and among rhythm patterns as they attempt to
imitate them” (Gordon, 2003b, p. 45). For example, in Imitation, a child may

attempt to repeat the rhythm pattern presented by the teacher and then stop and

stare as the child realizes that his/her pattern is different from the teacher’s
pattern; this is called the “audiation stare” (Valerio et al., 1998). However, even
though children’s responses sound correct in Imitation, children are not placing
those responses in the context of a tonality or a meter.

Assimilation is the final type of preparatory audiation. The first stage of
Assimilation is the second transition stage of preparatory audiation. During the
first stage of Assimilation (introspection), children become aware of the
relationship between breathing and moving and their musical output (singing or
chanting). When children realize that their musical utterances (tonal or rhythmic)
do not coordinate with their breath and movement, they are able to move on to
the final stage of preparatory audiation. During the second stage (coordination),
children become aware of tonality and meter and synchronize with relative
accuracy singing and chanting with breathing and moving (Gordon, 2003b). For
example, in Assimilation, a child may begin to chant without breathing and then
stop and begin again with a full breath before the child continues to Sing and
move. Because the child is aware of tonality and meter as understood context,
“they become acutely aware of anacrusis, metacrusis, and crusis as they perform
tonal patterns and rhythm patterns in familiar tonalities, keyalities, meters, and
tempos, which is what allows them to move out of preparatory audiation into
audiation” (Gordon, 2003b, p. 47). With an appropriate and fertile musical
environment, most Children come out of musical babble between the ages of five

and nine (Gordon, 2003a).

In a teacher-centered Ieaming environment, the teacher may follow a
specific lesson plan. In a child-centered environment, though the teacher has
plans and goals, the behaviors of the child drive the teacher—child interactions. As
early childhood music classes Should be child—centered not teacher-centered, the
three types and seven stages of preparatory audiation can serve as a guide to
help inform teaching; by observing children’s behaviors, listening to the
responses of the children, and responding to the children in a child-centered way,
teachers will be able to make more informed decisions about how to guide their
students’ musical development. During all of the stages of preparatory audiation,
teachers should provide a listening environment with a wide variety of tonalities
and meters. In response, Children explore their voices and the sounds of music
using their voices.

Singing Development in Young Children

At birth, an infant’s larynx is high in the throat, and thus, for approximately
the first year of life, a child is only able to produce vocal utterances. Only when
the larynx drops to a sufficient extent, is the child able to Sing and Speak
(Gordon, 2003a). Phillips (1997) reports that the larynx slowly descends in the
throat from birth until approximately age five.

Greenberg (1979, p. 56) classifies the young child’s singing voice into five
stages. They are listed below in Figure 2.

Stage 1. The First Vocalizations (ages birth to 3 months)

Stage 2. Vocal Experimentation and Sound Imitation (ages 3 months

to 1 year, 6 months)

 

 

 

 

C)

Stage 3. Approximation of Singing (ages 1 year, 6 months, to 3 years)

Stage 4. Singing Accuracy: Limited Range (ages 3 years to 4 years)

Stage 5. Singing Accuracy: Expanded Range (ages 4 years and up)
Figure 2: Stages of Child’s Singing Voice

Without a nurturing musical environment that emphasizes listening,
singing, and audiation, only a small number of children will achieve the last two
stages, singing accuracy (Greenberg, 1979). However, Scott-Kassner (1993)
believes that “by the time children reach the age of three years, they have
developed the ability to match sung pitches (an ability they gain at 3 months),
match fragments of melodies (19 months), and sing melody patterns from familiar
songs (2 to three years)” (p. 7).

Infants and toddlers have a limited vocal range (Flowers & Dunne-Sousa,
1998). Children’s pitch-matching accuracy and use of an appropriate vocal range
are highly correlated. Because of this, teachers should use a suitable vocal range
when singing for children. In a 1982 review of literature on children’s vocal range,
Apfelstadt concluded that research to date supported that use of an inappropriate
vocal range tended to produce vocal inaccuracy in those children. Unfortunately,
many adults do not begin song material in an appropriate singing range or begin
on a pitch that is comfortable for children (Gordon, 2003a). The most appropriate
initial singing range for early childhood is from D to A, right above middle C
(Gordon, 2003a), though an infant’s first vocal utterances are typically around 01
(one octave above middle C) (Phillips, 1997). “Children’s vocal cords are not

mature enough to be able to sing in a low range, and the resulting sound will be

more like Speech than singing” (Mclver, 2002, p. 18). Though Fox (1982) found
the composite pitch range for infant’s vocalizations in a home environment was
over two octaves, this study did not specifically target vocalizations in response
to musical stimuli or in a musical environment. Most research on range and
singing accuracy with young children has actually been performed with
elementary students, not infants, toddlers, or preschool Children. However,
researchers and practitioners agree that young children Should Sing between
approximately, the D to G or A above middle C (Kim, 2000; Scott-Kassner, 1993;
Smith, 1963). Therefore, early childhood music teachers should present song
material in the prescribed vocal range to provide an environment in which
accuracy is possible; in addition, teachers should provide vocal and sound
exploration activities over a wider range.
Early Childhood Music Classes

“The most important time for Ieaming, however, is from birth (if not before)

until eighteen months, a period during which a child learns through

exploration and from unstructured guidance by parents and other

caretakers. Following that is the period from eighteen months to three

years old, during which a child continues to receive such guidance”

(Gordon, 2003b, p. 1).

Early childhood music classes can provide quality one-to-one and group
interactions that lay the foundation for a lifetime of musical growth,
understanding, and expression. In developmentally appropriate early childhood

music classes, children participate in informal, structured guidance in music.

 

Cw

 

In:

A:
h.»

Early childhood music classes, taught by an accomplished musician and teacher,
give children the opportunity for exposure to an extensive music vocabulary that
could serve as the foundation for their music Ieaming throughout life. First
children develop a listening vocabulary in music. Eventually, they vocally play
with the sound of music (babble) and then learn to accurately imitate and give
meaning to their musical vocabulary (Gordon, 2003b). These classes also
provide Children with an opportunity to play and experiment with music.
Elementary school music classes may be too late to help children realize their full
potential in music (2003b).
MENC’s Position Statement on Early Childhood Education asserts:
“Music education for young children involves a developmentally
appropriate program of singing, moving, listening, creating, playing
instruments, and responding to visual and verbal representations of
sound...A music curriculum for young children should include many
opportunities to explore sound through singing, moving, listening, and
playing instruments, as well as introductory experiences with verbalization
and visualization of musical ideas.” (Sims, 1995, p. 89-90)
Initially, a child in an early childhood music environment is nurtured by immersion
and no formal expectations (Valerio et al., 1998). By participating in regular
music-making time, children cultivate a singing and listening music vocabulary.
In order to create a musical environment for their children at home, some
parents may need help to be comfortable singing, chanting, and moving with their

child. In classes that include parents, appropriate adult/child music interactions

 

 

 

Pr

3,,

.C

first are modeled by the teacher, and then parents engage in music play in an
informal environment, enabling parents to continue this play outside of class.
Ideally, the parents should be involved in class and not just serve as bystanders
or be absent (Gordon, 2003b).

Children need to be sung or chanted to, just as they need to be spoken to;
these social interactions aid in cognitive development. Scholars recognize the
“importance of the social environment in stimulating language development”
(Haslett & Samter, 1997, p. 57). Social interactions are also important in music
development (Campbell, 1998; Taggart, 2003). Early childhood music classes
may provide a productive musical environment that children do not experience in
any other setting. However, in order for this environment to be developmentally
appropriate, it must provide opportunities for musical play (Bredekamp, 1987).

Musical Play

The importance of play in the development of young children, both in and
outside of music, has been highlighted in recent literature (Berger & Cooper,
2003; Bredekamp, 1987; Gordon, 2003a, 2003b; Heyge & Sillick, 1998; Morin,
2001; Taggart, 2003; Valerio, 1997; Valerio et al., 1998), as well as by the
Pillsbury Foundation Studies (Moorhead 8 Pond, 1978) and the work of Piaget
(1962). The National Association for Young Children confirms that young children
learn most effectively through a play-oriented educational environment
(Bredekamp, 1987). Developmentally appropriate practice for the learning
environments of infants and toddlers calls for adults to play with children, as well

as to respect solitary play (Bredekamp, 1987). It is important that adults support

10

 

 

 

E";

the

young children’s play so that children remain “interested in an object or activity
for longer periods of time and their play becomes more complex, moving from
simple awareness and exploration of objects to more complicated play like
pretending,” (Bredekamp, 1987, p. 42) and adults need to provide an
environment that is conducive to play.

The need for free musical play is often undertaken in music centers in
which children are left without supervision to explore musical instruments or other
manipulatives; though exploration is important, if children do not yet have the
vocabulary or a sense of rhythmic and tonal syntax for contextual music making,
free play in music centers may only be exploration (Taggart, 2003). This musical
vocabulary may be provided to young children through their participation in a
group music class. In fact, developmentally appropriate practice calls for adults to
engage in interactions with infants and toddlers, listen to children, provide
supportive responses, and model appropriate interactions and responses
(Bredekamp, 1987). Early childhood music classes can provide an appropriate
musical play environment that meets the needs of the young children through
engaging activities.

Heyge and Sillick (1998) combine knowledge of the basic needs of infants
(bonding time, love and attention, stimuli, touch, sensori-motor activities, sense
of order, and time for growth) with understanding of what constitutes an
appropriate musical environment to produce suggestions for musical play. They
recommend use of interactive songs, encouraging peer and adult interactions,

including music in a variety of tonalities and meters, use of repetition, inclusion of

11

 

 

 

'-
y..-

(I)

pattern instruction, and use of music that is both energetic and active, as well as
comforting to the infant/toddler (Heyge 8 Sillick, 1998). Providing young children
with a group social environment in which they can play, develop, and work with
peers is an important facet of the socialization process (Moorhead & Pond, 1978;
Wilbum, 2000).

A summary of current learning theories for young children reveals that
early childhood music settings should provide: Ieaming through playful activity, a
diverse and inviting environment, peer interaction/community Ieaming, supportive
adult interaction, and a wide variety of modes of instruction (from traditional
teacher-led to small group activities) (Alvarez & Berg, 2002). Such informal
Ieaming environments may help maximize musical Ieaming.

“By over-structuring early childhood music environments with activity-

focused lessons plans which are filled with teacher-initiated activities,

educators do not provide children with the time or the opportunity to play
with and to explore music; time and opportunity are essential if children

are to learn to communicate musically.” (Taggart, 2003, p. 18)

Music play should be integrated into all program curricula and
methodologies of teaching early childhood music. In some music play, the
teacher acts as a teammate, initiator, and observer rather than a leader, and
materials such as scarves, costumes, and puppets help to engage children
(Morin, 2001 ). Early childhood opportunities for exploration and improvisation,

which are a part of free musical play, nurture musical skills (Gordon, 2003b;

12

 

 

 

If“:

Young, 1998/99). In fact, children’s unprompted music making may be a link to
their future composing and creating (Young, 1998/99).

With the need for musical play for young children established, the question
then becomes how to create an environment that will encourage musical play
and interaction in a group setting. What are the teacher/parent behaviors that
elicit or inhibit play? Berger and Cooper (2003) labeled three different types of
play: unfinished, extinguishing, and enhancing. Children communicated that their
musical play was unfinished by not joining in group musical activities, bringing
objects from current play to the group, or disregarding group activities. Adult
corrections or critical reviews tended to extinguish play. Adult (teacher or parent)
approval or valuing of individual play, adequate provision of time to play, and/or
objects with which to play often enhanced play. Teachers need to become aware
of what extinguishes and facilitates play so that their students are more likely to
engage in musical play, explore musical sounds, and develop their own musical
voice.

Children initially experiment with spontaneous singing and chanting in free
play (Moorhead & Pond, 1978; Young, 2002). They explore their vocal
capabilities by making sounds, chanting rhythmically, and singing. “The child’s
interest in spontaneous singing will be sustained by verbal and non-verbal
responses of the teachers around. Eye-contact, facial expression and gesture
adds to the special quality of listening to Children” (Young & Glover, 1998, p.

1 11). Interactive musical play with young children may elicit children’s vocal

responses.

13

 

 

 

 

I}.

 

Eliciting Children’s Responses

Eliciting vocalizations from young children is important so that the
instructor may meet the instructional needs of each child. “A delayed response is
typical in young children. If the teacher elicits no response from a child after
presenting ideas or music, the teacher may become frustrated or feel She has
failed to reach the child” (Andress, 1998, p. 82). Though no response or a
delayed response is typical in young children, ways to encourage a response
should be investigated. Children should not be forced to respond, but by finding
ways to encourage them to respond, instructors will not only be able to adapt
instruction, but children will be able to begin to evaluate their own responses.

A child’s response provides information about where that child is in his/her
musical development, and once children begin to vocalize, musical conversations
become possible.

“Eliciting responses from Children requires that silent moments be left in

instruction, for it is in these silent moments - rather than while making

music as a group - that children respond with their own novel musical
utterances. These musical utterances are important to their musical

Ieaming because it is during the formulation and performance of such

utterances that children are engaged in musical thinking. These

utterances also provide adults with a window into each child’s level of
music development. From such utterances, teachers gain information

about the children’s musical growth and, as a result, better understand

14

 

 

tn

 

O)

what is appropriate in terms of instructional guidance" (Taggart, 2003, p.

19)

A publication by MENC: The National Association for Music Education
states, “Most singing done with children occurs during gathering time when all
Sing the same song together. But children need opportunities to sing by
themselves both songs they have learned and songs they create as they play”
(Kenney & Persellin, 2000, p. 33). Responding to sound or exploring vocally is an
integral part of the early childhood music classroom. Initially, children are just
absorbing the musical environment around them in Absorption (Gordon, 2003b).
It is important at this time that precise or individual musical responses are not
insisted upon (Gordon, 2003b; Valerio et al., 1998). When children enter stages
two and three of preparatory audiation, they begin to respond randomly and
purposefully (Gordon, 2003b; Valerio et al. 1998). In order to respond, children
must first have a model, which is usually the teacher, parents, or other children.

Initially, a musical conversation may consist of the give and take of
rhythmic, vocal, or found sound initiations and responses between an adult and a
young child. Though there are no expectations for correctness at this stage, the
adult-child interaction provides the adult with an opportunity to model appropriate
responses. Musical conversations or interactions with young children are vital to
help children build a listening vocabulary and model initiations and responses.

The interactive communication of a conversation is a behavior learned by
modeling and practicing (Haslett & Samter, 1997). Haslett and Samter (1997)

outline the stages of children’s communicative skills.

15

“In the first stage, Recognizing the Interpersonal Basis of Communication,
infants recognize the fundamental role of communication in establishing
relationships with others. The second stage, Creation of Communicative
Effects, from approximately 4 months to 3 years of age. Four months —
three years is the Creation of Communicative Effects stage, occurs in
three substages: (a) preverbal dialogue, such as role reciprocity and turn
taking; (b) communicative intentionality in which children begin to
intentionally signal their needs; and (c) linguistic communication in which
Children demonstrate a functional mastery of language in accomplishing
social goals” (p. 100).
Elgin (1996) believes that young children’s conversational skills develop when
they participate in conversations with adults and observe adults’ modeling
conversations for them. Eventually with experience, infants learn the give and
take, the sounds and the silences, of conversation. Young children first absorb
and listen, then comprehend, and eventually produce language in the form of a
conversation. Buckley (2003) identifies the following as being a part of the

communication process.

- the motivation to engage in communication

- the situation in which the communication takes place...

- the relationship between the participants and their roles relative to
each other...

° the type of message that is conveyed (a request for information, a

comment, an instruction, an answer, a request...)

16

- the ability to take turns as both speaker and listener

- the ability to comprehend and use nonverbal messages
- the ability to comprehend and use verbal messages
- the ability to modify messages produced as a result of feedback

from the listener, and of feedback provided by one’s own body
(auditory feedback of one’s own speech for example).
If an individual is not motivated to communicate, there will be no
communication, or it will be limited. (p. 9)
It is clear that many factors affect whether young children will communicate or
respond to an instructor in an early childhood classroom.

Learning how to have a musical conversation is similar to Ieaming to
converse using language. The adult and the child take turns. The adult must
provide a familiar and safe environment in order for a child to be motivated to
participate. The child must have enough knowledge from listening to music in
order to produce appropriate feedback. Both verbal (singing, chanting) and
nonverbal responses are common and appropriate. In order to adjust and
respond to the adult, a child in early childhood music classes must have
developed a musical knowledge base through listening and participating in a
comfortable and encouraging musical environment.

Researchers describe the vocal responses of young children to specific
musical stimuli (Hicks, 1993; Moog, 1976, Reynolds, 1995; Santucci, 2002), as
well as their spontaneous vocal behaviors in free musical play (Foley, 1978;

Moorhead & Pond, 1978; Miller, 1986; Young, 2002), but have yet to investigate

17

the teacher initiatives that elicit vocal responses in young Children. Santucci
(2002) found little difference in infant response to baritone and falsetto Singing in
face-to-face interactions; though this study included an adult initiative, it was not
in a teaching context. Similarly, Moog (1976) studied young children’s musical
responses to musical stimuli but not in a group, teaching context. Hicks (1993)
investigated young children’s responses to musical stimuli in a teaching context,
but focused on the content (familiar and unfamiliar songs) of the musical stimuli
rather than the teacher’s initiative. Similarly, Reynolds (1995) studied movement
responses to musical stimuli (duple and triple rhythmic chants), but did not focus
on the teacher's initiative. Possibly, if they knew what was appropriate, teachers
could change their interactions to elicit more response from children and thus
enhance children’s music development.

Teacher Wait Time (Silence)

Education researchers have labeled the time in between a teacher’s
initiative and a student’s response “think-time,” “wait-time,” or “teacher silence”
(Rowe, 1987; Stahl, 1994). In a review of research on the role of “wait time” in
the classroom, Tobin concluded:

“Wait time is defined in terms of the duration of pauses separating

utterances during verbal interaction... When average wait time was

greater than a threshold value of 3 seconds, changes in teacher and
student discourse were observed and higher cognitive level achievement

was obtained in elementary, middle, and high school science....Wait time

18

 

 

 

("l
g

(n
'.

Q)
III

W

appears to facilitate higher cognitive level learning by providing teachers

and students with additional time to think” (1987, p. 69).

This topic has not been studied with young children or in a music setting.

Educational literature also discusses “wait time” in terms of memory.
Nilsen (1997) discusses wait time as a way to release the memory; in essence,
children and adults pause for a stretch of time and allow the brain to operate. As
such, “wait time” is thought of as a strategy to unlock memory, along with other
memory enhancers like rehearsal or word association (Nilsen, 1997).
Recognition, or association in Piagetian terms, is a part of the memory process
(Nilsen, 1997).

Perhaps “wait time” gives the children an Opportunity to remember or
associate an appropriate answer. “With particular regard to silence, children
must be given time to process what they are presently hearing others perform as
well as what they themselves have performed. It is during silence that children
are best able to make comparisons and, thus, to learn and to begin to grasp the
nature of audiation” (Gordon, 2003a, p. 92).

“Silence” is defined as:

“1: forbearance from speech or noise; MUTENESS - often used
interjectionally

2: absence of sound or noise; stillness...” (Webster’s, 1987, p. 1096).
When conversation participants produce a “listening silence,” the focus is on the
Situation or conversation at hand. The participants in the conversation commit to

the silence and what may occur during and after the silence. Participants are

19

wrapped in a communal agreement. Complying with silence in the conversation
does not indicate that the participants are not engaged (Mosher, 2001).

One focus of this study includes developing an understanding of the
teacher silence that initiates vocal responses from infants/toddlers involved in
early childhood music classes. Educators theorize that teacher silence or wait
time may be an important teaching technique for eliciting responses; I want to
see if this is true in the early childhood music setting. This study will investigate
what teacher initiatives produce vocalizations from infants/toddlers, as well as
whether teacher silence plays a role in children’s responses.

Need for Early Childhood Research

Music in early childhood has only recently become a charged research
topic, because the qualitative research paradigm has only recently been
accepted within music education. Early childhood music research was notably
sparse until the last decade, due to the almost exclusive use of the quantitative
paradigm in music education research. The qualitative paradigm enables
researchers to ask more complex and Situated research questions and can
expand our knowledge of how young children Ieam music, which is, by its very
nature, situated.

In the last twenty years, there has been a continued rise in interest
surrounding qualitative inquiry with regard to early childhood music (Achilles
[Metz] 1992, 1997; Barrett, 1997, 2000, 2001; Berger 8 Cooper, 2003; Metz

[Achilles] 1987, 1989; Young, 1998/99, 1999, 2002).

20

“If researchers continue to gather data among very young children while

creating music environments void of language, and with music acquisition

guidance, those researchers may begin to refine the definition of music

acquisition. Without such refinement, early childhood music educators are

relegated to a lifetime of making music because music making is fun,

music making is a diversion, or music making enhances other types of

child development” (Valerio, 2005, p. 14).
This dissertation will be part of an emerging body of qualitative research that
studies young children in context and may add to the growing knowledge of how
children learn music.

Need for the Study

There appears to be no research investigating the use of silence as a
teacher initiative to elicit children’s responses in the early childhood music
classroom. Eliciting responses is important in order to meet instructional needs of
children, for without the individual responses of the children, the teacher is less
able to adapt instruction to meet the needs of individual children.

Purpose of the Study

With the intent of improving early Childhood music education, the purpose
of this qualitative study iS to deveIOp an understanding of teacher initiatives,
children’s responses, and the teacher silence between teacher initiatives and

children’s responses in early childhood music classes.

21

Problems
1. What teacher behaviors (intentional or unintentional) precede children’s
(ages birth to three-years-old) vocal responses?
2. What is the quality and length of the teacher silence between teacher
initiatives and children’s (ages birth to three-years-old) vocal responses?
3. What are the characteristics of children’s (ages birth to three-years-old)
vocal responses?
Operational Definitions of Terms
Child’s Vocal Response - any vocalization (Singing, chanting, etc.) made by a
child
Early Childhood — children from birth through age 8 (Bredekamp, 1987)
Infant/Toddlers —children ages 0-3
Preschool —children ages 3-5
Silence or Teacher Silence —the wait time between a teacher initiative and a
child’s vocal response
Teacher Initiative —any intentional or unintentional teacher behaviors (verbal and
non-verbal) that elicit or are intended to elicit a child’s response

Wait Time —— see Silence

22

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

“Assessing children in the earliest years of life--from birth to age 8--is difficult

because it is the period when young children’s rates of physical, motor, and
linguistic development outpace growth rates at all other stages. Growth is rapid,

episodic, and highly influenced by environmental supports: nurturing parents,
quality caregiving, and the Ieaming setting” (National Educational Goals Panel,

1 998, p. 3).
Early Childhood Music Research

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, researchers studied
young children in order to inform practice in public schools (Humphreys, 1985). In
the last three decades of the twentieth century, there was increased interest in
developmental research, which resulted in the methodical study of Child
development (Zimmerman, 1993). Because early childhood is such a pivotal time
in brain development, one would think that music research in this area would be
abundant, but in fact it is notably sparse until the last decade.

The late 19803 and 19903 produced an increase in early childhood music
research, most of which was in the quantitative paradigm. An emerging body of
qualitative research focuses on studying children in context. “Context is a
culturally and historically situated place and time, a specific here and now”
(Graue 8 Walsh, 1998, p. 9). Qualitative research Changes the type of research
questions that can be asked, and thus enhances our knowledge of how young

children Ieam music. In qualitative research, the social structures of early

childhood development inform research and practice.

23

Seminal Research

The Pillsbury Foundation Studies (1937-1951) are the seminal studies of
qualitative inquiry in early childhood music (Moorhead 8 Pond, 1978). During the
Pillsbury Foundation Studies, Pond recorded daily narrative entries of
observations of young children and their interactions with music (ages 2 to 6).
One of the primary purposes of the Pillsbury Foundation Studies was to acquire
insights into the musical understandings of children in early childhood. Pond
concluded, “To produce his own music a young child’s first need, we find, is
freedom — freedom to move about in pursuit of his own interests and purposes,
and freedom to make the sounds appropriate to them” (Moorhead 8 Pond, p. 33).
There are few other notable “early” studies in the qualitative paradigm pertaining
to early childhood music education.

Qualitative Paradigm

Before the 19903, children had mainly been studied in psychological or
quantitative research as objects or instruments to provide Information, instead of
as human beings with needs. Research goals had predominantly been the
search for universal laws that would inform parenting, psychological, or
pedagogical practice (Graue 8 Walsh, 1998). Though Piaget’s research
regarding children notably was non-quantitative, the majority of research in early
childhood had been quantitative (Graue 8 Walsh, 1998).

Historically, early childhood music research has been inconsistent and
unsubstantial, no matter what the design protocol. Research designs have

typically failed to address limited language development, distractions, and the

24

researcher as a threat (Andress, 1986). Whereas there is a myriad of unknowns
in the world of early Childhood that are difficult to address in the quantitative
paradigm, ethnographies, case studies, and phenomenological inquiries, as well
as numerous qualitative data gathering techniques, appear to be particularly well-
suited to early childhood music education research and may address the
communication problems inherent with conducting research with young children.

At its best, music instruction in early Childhood is informal, in part due to
the short attention spans and emerging communication skills of infants and
toddlers. Data collection techniques must take this into account. Quantitative
research requires more structure to maintain the validity of the research. In an
effort to be precise, quantitative researchers search for a measure that most
accurately represents children’s complex behaviors, at times, perhaps
unwittingly, ignoring the context of the behavior. Interview or formal testing
methods are unlikely to reveal substantive material with this age group,
especially if the researcher is a stranger. Thus, perhaps the adaptive nature of
the qualitative inquiry is a better match for the informal Ieaming of early
childhood.

While conducting an empirical study, the researcher is theoretically
functioning at his/her best when he/she is anonymous and detached. However, in
the qualitative paradigm, the researcher becomes the instrument of data
collection through observation or participant observation. The role of the
researcher in the qualitative inquiry with young children can be discussed in

terms of proximity, description, and duration (Graue 8 Walsh, 1998). Studying

25

young children requires proximity. The researcher is required to have immediate
interaction with young children and may Choose markedly not to distance
themselves from the subjects. In effect, the researcher becomes the data
collection instrument. In the constructive science of qualitative inquiry, it is
imperative that the researcher is familiar with context of the subjects’ lives.
Researchers who are uncomfortable interacting in this more social, emotional
and physical manner, should probably work with a more distanced inquiry (Graue
8 Walsh, 1998).

Qualitative inquiry is an adaptable methodology that seeks to understand
the context of the situation through description. In its best form, it is a study of
reality, not a manipulation; it is a faith in an intricate reality (Bresler, 1995).
However, since researchers in participant observation studies become part of the
reality, it is impossible to remain neutral (Bresler, 1995). Early childhood
researchers need to look at the world as much as possible through the lens of a
child. Children view the world differently than adults. The qualitative researcher
must strive to contextualize behavior, disclosing that his/her field observations
and interpretations are from his/her own adult lens. “The goal of participant
observation is to understand the culture, or setting, being studied from the
perspective of the participants” (Hatch, 1998, p. 56). While still maintaining the
necessary academic rigor, perhaps the nature of the qualitative inquiry will help
researchers capture the heart of the Ieaming process for young children.

Valerio (2005) has summarized and divided research on the music

Ieaming process for young children, or “music acquisition research” as she terms

26

it, into two categories: guided music development research (interactionists) and
unguided music development research (constructivists), which is described
below as free play. Since this study is specifically looking at how to elicit
responses from children, interacting with children in participant observation and
observing children during a time when they receive guidance, versus free
musical play, is necessary.

Several research studies provide knowledge of Children’s musical Ieaming
in free play (unguided) (Metz, 1987, 1989; Moog, 1976; Moorhead 8 Pond, 1978;
Miller, 1984, 1986; Shelley, 1981; Suthers, 1997; and Young, 2002) and during
participant-observer or interactive music time (guided) (Hicks, 1993; Reynolds,
1995). However, as illustrated by the following discussion, there are nuances that
may affect the findings. Though Moog’s (1976) study took place through
observations during an “unguided” time, the researchers did present the children
with specific musical stimuli through a series of tests that was administered to
each child. Young (2002) observed during unguided activity, but the children had
a guided practice immediately preceding observation. Thus, the following studies
are not organized into “guided” and “unguided,” though this is an important
distinction for understanding the current study. The studies below are divided in
terms of movement responses and children’s vocalizations; issues of free play or
adult interaction are addressed as well.

Children’s Movement Responses
Although they are not the focus of this study, movement responses are

often the first musical responses in children (Hicks, 1993; Moog, 1976). Initially,

27

infants use body movements and facial expressions to communicate, because
they have not developed verbal language (Buckley, 2003). There are several
studies that examine movement responses of young Children during free musical
play (Metz, 1987, 1989; Suthers, 1997); in addition, Reynolds (1995) investigated
toddlers’ movement responses to teacher-presented rhythmic chants.

Metz (1987, 1989) observed 2-, 3-, and 4-year-old children in free-musical
play setting (centers) with adult interaction. Videotape analysis revealed that the
following child and teacher behaviors affected movement responses: suggesting,
describing, and modeling (Metz, 1989). An increase in responses was also
dependent on teacher/child interaction.

“Modeling by peers alone failed to increase music-related responses, and

one-third of teacher modeling went unheeded. Findings from this study

indicate, however, that modeling by peers and teacher(s) is more effective

In producing music-related responses when it is accompanied by

describing the movements of children and asking questions that require a

movement response. It is recommended that instructional materials for

preschool music programs involved the simultaneous use of several
methods of interaction, including modeling, describing, and suggesting, by

which teachers can reinforce children’s responses to music” (Metz, 1989,

p. 58).

Suthers (1997) observed 1- and 2-year old children’s movement
responses to sound makers (e.g., drums, shakers, bells) on a mat and

suspended on a sound line (rope) during free play. Children moved differently

28

while exploring sounds on the mat (mostly seated) than while exploring the
sound line (standing). The posture of standing opened up the possibility for a
wider range of movement (e.g., loco-motor movement, such as galloping).

Early childhood studies that investigate movement responses may inform
this study in a general manner. However, this study specifically looks at vocal
responses; the following studies address vocalizations, whether spontaneous
vocalizations in free-flow play or during direct music instruction.

Children’s Vocalizations
Spontaneous Vocalizations in Free Play

The Pillsbury Foundation Studies, conducted at the Foundation School
from 1937-1951, sought knowledge of children’s musical development by
observing and analyzing children’s unrestricted, free musical play (1978, reprint);
in addition, both Foley (1978) and Miller (1984, 1986) also carried out studies
examining children’s musical development by observing and recording
observations. Pond (Moorhead 8 Pond, 1978) recorded observations in a diary
as his main methodological tool. The Pillsbury Foundation School was
specifically designed to help young children acquire musical understanding; the
children who attended the school were 2- to 6-years-old._The school’s curriculum
included continuous Chances for unregulated music making, a rich variety of
music listening examples, and professional music instruction.

The results of the studies were originally printed in four books. The first,
“Chant,” focused on spontaneous vocal utterances (Moorhead 8 Pond, 1978).

The findings indicated that children produce two main types of vocalizations. One

29

type of vocalization was like plainsong. The Child typically sang gently to
him/herself in a rhythmically free manner over a wide range; the focus appeared
to be on the melody and not the words. In contrast, another type was rhythmic,
similar to a ritual chant. The child’s voice tended to center around one note and
did not cover a wide range. This ritual chant was typically repetitious and
performed mainly in a group; often, this activity rose to an energetic pitch
(Moorhead 8 Pond, p. 8). The researchers defined the second type as “chant”
this “chant” possessed melodic qualities.

The chants were further subdivided into two rhythmic categories:
“heightened speech,” in which the rhythm is drawn from the words and a second
type in which the words are made to match a rhythmic pattern ( 1978, p. 16). Of
the two, the bulk of the observations recorded were the second type. In the
exploratory musical environment set up by the Pillsbury Foundation School, Pond
observed individual children initiating chants that went on to be continued by the
same child, by two children, in a group, or in a group in a series. Chants were
also initiated by two children and in a group. Of note here is the social context
that encourages children to respond to vocal initiations, which in this case were
peer initiated.

In the second book, General Observations, Moorhead and Pond (1978)
note that young children’s first music experimentations are body movements and
sounds, either their own or from their environment. Of particular importance to

this study, is the following:

30

“A child does not develop any ability in the same manner nor in the same

order as an adult. He has to build a complete background for any act and

he must build it according to the characteristics and abilities of childhood.

He must accumulate a vast number of sensory impressions and co-

ordinate them by experimentation. We find that repeating an act over and

over again seems to give him clearer understandings and surer control.

His action patterns are brief in duration and are extended in time by

repetition and variation. He tends to change his occupations often,

returning periodically. He leams many small acts by imitation and
gradually incorporates these also into sequences and patterns that are his

own” (1978, p. 33-34).

From their naturalistic inquiries, Moorhead and Pond concluded that, in order for

children to create their own music, children must be provided in part with musical
play that includes: 1) freedom, 2) movement, 3) repetition, 4) imitation, 5) a social
environment, 6) group play, and 7) individual play (1978).

In 1978, Maryland’s Center for Young Children conducted an
observational study, the purpose of which, in part, was to replicate the Pillsbury
Foundation Studies and improve and revise observational methods (Foley,
1978). Two classes of children, one of 3- and 4-year-olds and one of 4- and 5-
year-olds, were observed during a free activity period; the children did have a
weekly music class run by a specialist but no data was collected during music
time. Foley used a self-devised observation form, the Music Study Observation

Form, and audiotape to catalog nineteen musical behaviors. The form cataloged

31

generic behaviors in a quantitative manner; for instance, “sing (88), chants (8C),
or moves (8M) without accompaniment” occurred 44 times total between the two
Classes (Class 1, 30 times; Class 2, 14 times) (Foley, 1978). Recordings did
support the observations of Pond; when given the opportunity (free play) and the
materials (instruments), children explore sound and produced a chant-like song
(Shelley, 1981). The Moorhead and Pond (1978) studies form the basis for
methodological choices in the present study and provide valuable information
regarding the musical behaviors of young children in free play.

Young (2002) detailed and classified the spontaneous vocalizations of six
children, ages 2- to 3-years-old. Analysis revealed six types of vocal play: free-
fiow vocalizing, chanting and intoning, reworking of known songs, movement
vocalizing, vocalizing to animate, and vocalizing actual sounds (Young, 2002).
Though Young observed the children during free play time, there was a short,
formal singing session led by the early childhood teacher immediately prior to the
free play time; this may have influenced the behavior of the children in the “free”
hour. Young collected data via field notes in a manner similar to Pond
(Moorhead 8 Pond, 1978); she purposely did not attempt to use any recording
device. This limited her ability in data analysis to share information, like range,
pitch, and rhythm, but increased the depth of the records that described the
context of the behavior. The example from Young’s field notes on free-flow
vocalizing illustrates this.

“Alone, he sits on the floor to play with the train-set. As he focuses on

joining the links of the train-set together, he melodizes in a free-ranging

32

style on an open vowel ‘aah’ sound, which is quite highly pitched and

moves freely and quickly. It settles into a snatch of melody which I notate

as: - s s s l I I s m fff— and which is repeated in its entirety, still without
words and just to the open vowel, ‘aah’. Alex, the early years practitioner
in this room is close by. ‘I play with the train-set Alex’ Richard tells him”

(Young, 2002, p. 48).

In contrast to Moorhead and Pond’s (1978) ritual chant, which usually
involved a group of children, Young’s (2002) “chanting and intoning” group
performed mostly in an isolated manner, though some group chant did evolve. In
contrast to the current study, this study was conducted in a day-care setting
versus a music classroom and documented vocalization in free play versus vocal
responses of children during informal guidance. Structured, informal guidance is
where the teacher has a specific lesson plan or set of activities (Gordon, 2003b).
Unstructured, informal guidance is where the teacher does not have a specific
lesson plan but interacts with the children (Gordon, 2003b). When engaging in
unstructured or structured informal guidance, children are not forced to
participate; rather, children have an opportunity to absorb the musical culture
(Gordon, 2003b). “Structured and unstructured informal guidance are based on
and operate in consequence to the natural sequential activities and responses of
the child” (Gordon, 2003b, p. 3).

Vocal Responses of Young Children to Musical Stimuli
A few researchers have studied the vocal responses of infants/toddlers to

musical stimuli (Hicks, 1993; Moog, 1976; Santucci, 2002). One of the formative

33

studies in this area is the quantitative study of Helmut Moog (1976). Moog
conducted over 8,000 tests with almost 500 Children. In part, the purpose of
Moog’s Study was to examine the stages of musical development of the
preschool child; his study resulted in a detailed description of musical Ieaming in
early childhood (birth through six years of age). Musical babble first occurs
typically several months after speech babble. Moog notes that infants’ responses
may be reflexive or spontaneous and that initial responses to musical stimuli are
passive (i.e., look, listen, or sleep). The first active responses are physical
movements. Soon after the physical responses emerge, infants begin to respond
vocally. Moog classified early vocal responses into two types, “vocalizations” and
“musical babbling” (Moog, 1976, p. 59). Vocalizations consist of the giggling or
laughing to communicate delight or amusement as well as “babbling
monologues,” through which infants express pleasure during or after a musical
excerpt (Moog, 1976). “Babbling monologues,” a vocalization, are different from
“musical babbling” in that the first is an expression of feelings and the precursor
to speech (p. 59). “Musical babbling” is specifically a response to a musical
initiative, music examples being played or sung to the child. Musical babbling
only happened when the young child had previously been exposed to music.
Therefore, it is important that children are exposed to an extensive listening
vocabulary before they are expected to respond. The current study is designed to
observe children during structured informal guidance and will look specifically at

“musical babbling,” or responses to Specific music initiatives.

34

Hicks (1993) modeled her study after the Moog study, but specifically
looked at responses of young children in Acculturation (birth to age 2-4) to
musical stimuli (familiar and unfamiliar songs in a variety of tonalities and
meters). Hicks found that young children listening to a familiar song may respond
with looking and movement responses prior to vocal responses (1993). In
general, vocal responses were few in comparison to other categories of response
defined by Hicks (looking, non-pulsating, pulsating, miscellaneous, and
responses of anticipation). This may be attributed in part to the age of the
Children she studied; it is developmentally appropriate for physical responses to
occur prior to verbal ones. However, this may also be attributed to the teaching
or design of the study. Perhaps with other initiatives besides the presentation of a
song, such as a tonal patterns or increased facial and/or body gestures, children
may produce vocal responses as well.

The Moog (1976) and Hicks ( 1993) studies are primarily quantitative in
nature and thus differ from the current study’s methodologY; however, they both
help delineate Ieaming behaviors and musical responses of young children.
Santucci (2002) studied infant’s responses to baritone and falsetto singing, but
again this was not in a teaching setting, and the primary focus was on vocal
quality, not other aspects of a teacher’s initiative. As stated earlier, there is no
research that looks at children’s vocal responses in direct relation to teacher
initiatives in a teaching context. Knowledge of the factors that influence children’s

verbal responses might enhance the Ieaming environment.

35

Early Childhood Learning Environment

Vygotsky (1978) notes that typical measures of young children’s mental
development focus on what they can do alone, whereas “what children can do
with the assistance of others might be in some sense even more indicative of
their mental development than what they can do alone” (p. 85). Vygotsky held
that Ieaming accompanied by social interactions exceeded Ieaming done alone.
“Music...is not an isolated thing; it is part of a life-process; it is separate neither
from the child’s consciousness nor from any aspect of his everyday life”
(Moorhead 8 Pond, 1978, p. 48). Moorhead and Pond believed that the concept
of society greatly influenced a child’s actions. Music making was predicated on
interactions with other children and adults in their environment. In order to
maximize Ieaming, young children need direct interaction with the subject matter
and social interactions with peers, parents, and teachers.

Certain teacher behaviors may foster Ieaming and elicit musical
responses. The role of instructor is a complicated and challenging one. “Beyond
providing direct instruction, the adult is responsible for preparing a rich and
stimulating environment, asking enticing questions, and adjusting the amount of
assistance according to children’s needs” (Alvarez 8 Berg, 2002, p. 128).
Determining which teacher behaviors are the most effective for eliciting
responses perhaps is the product of practice, intuition and the recommendations
of early childhood experts. Such information has been gleaned through practice
as there is little research concerning music pedagogical practice for infants and

toddlers.

36

Summary

Infants exhibit movement and vocal responses (vocalizations) to specific
music stimuli as well as in free musical play. Moog (1976) studied the responses
of young children to a pre-determined sequence of musical examples and found
that children produce vocalizations (non-musical) and musical babbling. Hicks
(1993) found that young children initially respond with movement to a specific set
of tonal and rhythm patterns. No research to date has studied teacher initiatives
and wait time (teacher silence) in conjunction with vocalizations (responses) of
young children.

This study occurred in context in on-going early childhood music classes,
which was particularly suited to qualitative data collection techniques. Participant
observation allowed the researcher to purposefully interact with the children as
they engaged in structured, musical guidance. This study focused on the context
of the vocalizations: teachers’ initiatives and the wait time (silence) prior to the
vocal responses (vocalizations) in early childhood music classes. Specifically, the
current study focused on musical babbling, or responses to musical stimuli,

versus other vocal babbling (Moog, 1976).

37

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
“Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to walk from here?”
“That depends a good deal on where you want to go,” said the Cat”
(Carroll, 2000, p. 65).
Researcher Lens

When I undertook my undergraduate degree, I planned on becoming a
middle school choir teacher. I held this course until my student teaching, when I
fell in love with elementary school teaching. Since then, I have continually been
drawn toward teaching younger and younger children. With my continued work at
the university and at the Michigan State University Community Music School,
providing quality musical experiences for young children has become a passion
for me.

I have studied the work of Edwin Gordon, upon whose work both of the
early Childhood music programs in this study are based, through coursework at
Michigan State University, including three Music Learning Theory certification
courses during my graduate work, and specific coursework in early childhood
music as well. I have been an instructor in the Early Childhood Music Program of
the Community Music School since the Fall of 2003. Currently, I am teaching
infant/toddler and preschool music classes, but I began as an assistant in a
preschool class. In the Spring of 2004, I also taught a Young Musicians class,
which is not an official “early childhood” class, but did include children of early
Childhood age according to the National Association for the Education of Young
Children (NAEYC) guidelines. I have taken specific coursework in early childhood

music as well. I also have had the privilege of working with infants and toddlers

38

from the lngham lntennediate School District Early On Music Playgroup. In
addition, I have taught six years of elementary general music in the public
schools, working with students in kindergarten through sixth grade. As a result, I
have experience with a variety of student communities, including various
socioeconomic, multicultural, urban and suburban, and special needs
populations. In addition, I have observed undergraduate student teachers and
taught several university courses for undergraduate music education majors in
the past three years.

For this study, I chose to work with an early childhood music class at the
Community Music School, led by Cynthia Crump Taggart, my mentor and
advisor. In addition, I also observed a class at Little Music Makers taught by a
colleague. As the instrument for data collection in this participant-observation
study, I chose specifically not to distance myself from the participants, but to
interact with them. My experiences as a teacher and as a researcher in early
childhood music provide me with a unique perspective. I have thoughts and
opinions about what teacher behaviors elicit or do not elicit reSponses from
children; I have tried out ideas in my own teaching. This is both a weakness and
a strength of this study. This study may be limited by my propinquity to the
research subject, but it also may be enhanced by my familiarity with the children,
the early childhood music classes, and the teaching that is occurring in these
sfiuafions.

My research questions emerged as I taught my own early childhood music

classes and tried to elicit responses from children. I wanted information about the

39

stages of musical development of my students and what they knew, which can
only be gained by finding teaching behaviors that elicit individual responses. I
have experimented in my own teaching, trying to elicit responses from children
as well as discussed these ideas with my mentor and other colleagues. This
dissertation continues my search for means of eliciting responses from young
children, including, but not limited to the relationship between eliciting responses
from young children and teacher silence.
Design
This participant-observation qualitative study entailed naturalistic
observation of the teachers and infants/toddlers in two separate early childhood
music settings: Michigan State University Community Music School and Little
Music Makers, a private early childhood class located in a suburban church. I
used qualitative data gathering techniques. Data was collected via field notes,
teacher interviews, and videotape analysis. This research targeted a specific
occurrence: the teacher silence that occurs after a teacher initiative and prior to a
child’s response. Data described the nature of the teacher’s initiative, the silence,
and the child’s response.
Human Subjects Approval
Initially, the directors of both programs were contacted regarding the
possibility of doing research at their facilities (see Appendix A for an example).
Prior to beginning this research, I obtained approval for this study from Michigan
State University’s University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects

(UCRIHS) (see Appendix B). The teachers were approached individually about

40

participating in the study, and I informed them of the purpose and scope of the
study and that participation was voluntary. Following, I answered any questions,
and, since they both agreed to participate, I asked for their written consent (see
Appendix C). Next, I attended an early childhood music class at both sites and
collectively explained the purpose and scope of the study to the parents. I also
explained the consent process and offered time to answer questions or concerns
in the group as well as individually after class. The teachers and the investigator
were available to address questions and concerns. Due to the age level of the
children, they were not involved in the consent process. The parents were then
asked for informed written consent at the end of class; all parents at both sites
agreed to participate (see Appendix D).
Participants

Participants in this study were the two early childhood music teachers
(N=2) and the children (N’=10; N2=4) involved in one class at each of the early
childhood music settings. “Music Teacher” or “Music Specialist” refers to the
professional music educator from the Community Music School or Little Music
Makers who guides children ages 0-7 (this age range includes children in all
classes offered at both sites) in learning music. The children in this study ranged
in age from approximately birth to three-years-old; one Child was thirty-eight
months. The sample at each site represented children from a predominantly
Caucasian, middle-class population. This was not necessarily an accurate
representation of all classes at the Community Music School. Though there is a

fee involved to attend the early childhood music classes, financial assistance is

41

available based on need. The parents of the infants/toddlers were secondary
participants.
Settings
Philosophy and Program Structure

The philosophy and methodology of the early childhood classes in both
settings are based on the research and writing of Gordon (2003a, 2003b). “MSU
early childhood classes follow a curriculum developed by Dr. Cynthia Crump
Taggart, Associate Professor of Music Education at MSU and Director of the
Early Childhood Music Program of the Community Music School” (Community
Music School Flyer). The curriculum is also based on the resource, Music Play
(Valerio et al., 1998), of which both Gordon and Taggart are co-authors. Little
Music Makers, though based on the same philosophy, draws curricular materials
from the work of Beth Bolton as well as Music Play, of which Bolton is also a co-
author.

Both programs are predicated on the idea that children Ieam music like
they Ieam a language. In order to Ieam to speak, children informally listen to
people talk all day long; this language Ieaming even begins in the womb. As
early as birth, children in both programs participate in forty-five minutes of
informal, structured guidance in music. Professional musicians and teachers
provide the children with exposure to an extensive music vocabulary and
opportunities to play and experiment with music. By participating in regular
music-making time, the children cultivate a working music vocabulary (singing

and listening).

42

The Community Music School’s Early Childhood Program Philosophy
states:
Early childhood classes offered through the Community Music Program at
MSU are designed to create a rich music environment for the child to
interact with in whatever way she or he feels most comfortable. Some
children will be active participants, while others will prefer to watch and
absorb. Although the classes will differ according to the age level and
readiness of the children, all classes will include singing and chanting for
the children in a wide variety of tonalities and meters. Many of the songs
that we perform in class will be without words, because children tend to
focus on words rather than upon musical content. We will also provide lots
of opportunity for age-appropriate movement, with a focus on guiding
Children to move in a sustained, continuous, relaxed way. Children will be
exposed to a vocabulary of tonal and rhythm patterns, which they may or
may not perform in class or later at home. In addition, there will also be a
limited amount of exploration of simple percussion instruments. “Correct”
responses will not be required of children; rather, children will be given the
opportunity to explore their musical environment in the same way that they
were given the opportunity to explore their language environment. (CMS
Flyer 2)
Jennifer Bailey, the founder of Little Music Makers, imparts philosophical
thoughts informally through a fiyer that includes, in part, a parent “do’” and “don’t”

list, appropriate child social behaviors, a list of typical musical behaviors, and

43

answers to parents’ frequently asked questions. In response to a typical parent
question regarding why most of the curriculum entails songs without words,
Jennifer Bailey, director and founder of Little Music Makers, responds:
We use songs both with words and without words in our Classes. Young
children are exploring language in their everyday lives but our purpose
here is to explore music. Songs without words offer your child a chance to
hear and absorb the musical sounds around them instead of the language
sounds surrounding them. (LMM Flyer 1)
At both locations, the majority of the curriculum consists of songs without words,
but both programs use songs with words as well. Both programs require one
parent/guardian to attend class, encourage parent participation, and ask parents
not to force children to participate.
Environment
“Early Childhood Music Classes” at the Community Music School include
Infant/Toddler Classes (ages 0-3), Preschool Classes (ages 3—5), and
Transitional Classes (ages 5-7) (Community Music School Website).
The Michigan State University Community Music School is located off-campus in
a building that was formerly a church. The facility is leased from and shared with
the East Lansing Public Schools. The off-campus location provides ample
parking and facility use for the large number of children that attend the
Community Music School for early childhood music classes, young musician
classes, Suzuki lessons, private instrumental lessons, children’s choir, and music

therapy sessions.

44

The early childhood classroom is located at the end of a neat, carpeted
hallway that includes the main office, administrative offices, music therapy room,
and other music classrooms. There are windows that fill one wall of the early
childhood classroom; they overlook the parking lot and are a frequent
entertainment and gathering center for the children. This room used to be an
early childhood classroom in the church; hence the windows are low and
accessible. The ceiling and walls are white, plain with absolutely no adornment.
The floor is blue-specked carpet that seems to hide the occasional stain well.
There is no furniture except a couple of chairs by the door. The vibrancy and life
that fills the room only appears when the parents and children enter. Part of one
wall consists of dark wood cupboards used to store instruments, musical props,
and the sound system. It is, in essence, a blank slate, perhaps only broken up by
the appearance of props, such as colorful scarves, hula hoops, and
boomwhackers. During instruction, props are used primarily to focus the
children’s attention, though some small percussion instruments are used as well.

The environment of the Little Music Makers is similar to the Community
Music School (CMS). However, classes take place in a classroom that is rented
from an active church. The classroom also has minimal furniture in it when the
parents and children arrive; the instructor moves the furniture into the hallway
prior to class. There is a short table in the front on which the instructor stores
props and her stereo system. The classroom is more versatile than the
Community Music School’s classroom, as it is used for other purposes besides

the early childhood music classes. The walls similarly are barren, and there is

45

also a large window that floods the room with light on sunny days, in addition to a
small sink area. The room is carpeted and smaller than the one at CMS.
Occasionally, there are random items that are left behind from previous activities
that distract the Children. During this study, one music class moved to a
preschool room in the building, as there was an overnight retreat that needed the
regular room. The preschool room is bright and colorful and filled with toys and
distractions. The carpet uses a rainbow of colors and has a variety of game
boards from various games woven in it.
Getting to Know the Teachers

I purposely chose both teachers for this study. I selected Cynthia Taggart,
my advisor and mentor, as a study participant because of her extensive
theoretical and practical experience in early childhood music education, diverse
musical and educational background, and national and international reputation as
a scholar of children’s musical Ieaming. She has taught instrumental and
elementary general music in the public and private schools; in addition, she
currently teaches Early Childhood Music Methods and Elementary General Music
Methods for undergraduate students at Michigan State University, as well as the
early childhood music classes at Michigan State University’s Community Music
School for infants, toddlers, and preschoolers. She began her work with early
childhood music at Temple University with Edwin Gordon; she team-taught with
Gordon, taught her own classes, and eventually became director of the early
childhood music program at Temple University. After completing her Ph.D. from

Temple University, she focused on collegiate teaching at Case Western Reserve

46

University and did little work in the field of early childhood music. Then, she was
hired by Michigan State University to specifically focus on early childhood music.
Here, she began, developed, and is currently the director of the Early Childhood
Division of the Community Music Program.

I have had the joyful opportunity to watch Dr. Taggart engage students of
all ages in musical Ieaming (early childhood, undergraduate students, graduate
students, and practicing teachers); I find her to be one of the most caring,
engaging, and challenging teachers I have observed. Her student-centered
teaching style focuses the student, either infant or undergraduate, on the content
and the process of Ieaming, which enables the student to learn and continue
his/her own musical growth. Though I had already watched her successfully work
with adults, it was Dr. Taggart’s personality and style of teaching in the early
childhood classroom, as well as her implementation of Gordon’s theoretical work
in the classroom, that specifically captured my interest for this study. Her over
fifteen years of teaching early childhood music classes combined with her
extensive curricular work in early childhood music (Jump Right In: The Music
Curriculum and Music Play: The Early Childhood Curriculum) made Dr. Taggart
an ideal participant for this study.

I chose Jennifer Bailey for this study as well for her teaching skills and
experience. I first met this colleague when my mentor and I conducted a
research project with her elementary students. Initially, I was planning to just
observe Dr. Taggart and the young children at the Community Music School for

this study. However, after observing Ms. Bailey’s teaching and interactions with

47

elementary students, I asked her if I could come observe her work with infants
and toddlers.

Ms. Bailey began her work in early childhood music when she took an
undergraduate course, Early Childhood Music Methods, with Dr. Taggart in the
Fall of 1994; she also participated in Michigan State University’s Community
Music School Early Childhood Music Program as a teaching assistant. She
taught early childhood music in Houston, Texas and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
where she continued her education at Temple University working towards a
master’s degree in music education with Beth Bolton, Dr. Taggart’s co-authors
for the early childhood music curriculum, Music Play. While teaching elementary
general music in the Detroit area, Ms. Bailey taught early childhood music
classes on Saturday mornings at a satellite location, Fannington Hills, MI, of
Michigan State University’s Community Music School. Currently, Ms. Bailey is
founder and director of Little Music Makers, an early childhood music program.
After viewing Ms. Bailey teaching early childhood music classes, I knew that her
elegant teaching and insights would enrich this study. Her own eariy childhood
music teaching experience combined with her work with Dr. Taggart and other
scholar/teachers of the music Ieaming theories of Edwin Gordon made Ms.
Bailey a model participant for this study. Both Ms. Bailey and Dr. Taggart are
currently certification teachers for the Gordon Institute of Musical Learning in
Early Childhood Music; Dr. Taggart is also a workshop director. I believe
including two master teachers in this study has provided a richness that would

have been absent with just one.

48

Data Collection

This study was qualitative and descriptive in nature. There were four
primary data sources: (a) field notes, (b) think-aloud interviews with teachers
while viewing videotapes, (c) video tape analysis, and (d) formal and informal
teacher/parent interviews. A total of six classes, three in each setting, were
observed and videotaped for future analysis. I not only observed the classes that
I attended, but participated as the opportunity presented itself. It is typical in this
methodology for researchers to adopt both a participant and observer role
(participant observations) (Bresler, 1995).

The first data source consisted of observing the preschool early childhood
classes and recording naturalistic observations through field notes at the same
time that the class was video-recorded (see Appendix E for an example of field
notes). I recorded significant vocal responses by noting the time and behavior,
followed by codes and/or a narrative description of the quality of the teacher/child
interaction. This technique, event sampling, is an established method of
Observation (Bentzen, 1993). Digital photos were taken to illustrate codes or
sampling at a later point. This isolated visual was not used to identify codes, but
only to help organize data from the video recordings and perhaps illustrate
findings for later publishing or presenting opportunities.

The second data source consisted of think-aloud interviews with the
teacher (see Appendix F). Within one week after each videotaped class session,
the researcher and the instructor of the class viewed the tape together and

conducted a think-aloud protocol (Ericsson 8 Simon, 1993). A thinking-aloud

49

process is one in which the “subject is required to verbalize thoughts that he
himself generated in the course of performing a task (Ericsson 8 Simon, 1993).
The think-aloud interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. The video was
paused when the comments were lengthy; the researcher took notes as needed.

The third data source consisted of analyzing the video material. The video
recordings were viewed for event sampling and description; analysis was
recorded on a Video-tape Analysis Form that was adapted from a form Dr.
Mitchell Robinson based on Miles and Huberrnan (1994) (see Appendixes G and
H).

The fourth data source occurred simultaneously with class observations
and analysis of recordings as needed. I conducted a formal interview with the
main teacher in each location (N=2). I used questions designed to elicit the
teacher’s thoughts regarding teacher initiatives, wait time (silence) before
children’s responses, and children’s vocal responses as a springboard for
discussion. I also conducted informal, impromptu interviews/conversations with
both teachers and parents (see Appendixes l and J). I recorded formal interviews
with teachers using a Sony M-645V Microcassette-recorder and then transcribed
them (see Appendix K for an example). The formal interview protocol included
the following: my explaining the purpose of the study, subsequent discussion,
and engagement in a recorded conversation that was guided by previously
determined questions (see Appendix I). In order to improve trustworthiness,
participants were asked to member check the transcriptions. lnforrnal

conversations with teachers and/or parents were recorded in field notes during or

50

immediately following the impromptu conversation; these conversations occurred
at the beginning or end of class. In addition, artifacts were copied and/or typed
into word-processed documents.
Limitations
“’Pooh,’ he said, ‘where did you find that pole?’
Pooh looked at the pole in his hands.
‘I just found it,’ he said. ‘I thought it ought to be useful. I just picked it up.’
‘Pooh,’ said Christopher Robin solemnly, ‘the Expedition is over. You have
found the North Pole!” (Milne, 2001, p. 125, 127).

Christopher Robin’s “North Pole” is certainly not what most people would
consider the “North Pole.” When considering the results of this study, the
limitations need to be considered. This is a qualitative study. Thus, any
generalizations to other children and settings are not appropriate; however, the
observations and implications from this study still need to be considered against
the limitations. The researcher was the instrument of data collection in this
participant-observation study. The researcher’s personal biases, known and
unknown, may have affected what data was collected, how it was coded, as well
as how it was interpreted.

It should be noted that my advisor for this dissertation was also a study
participant. The reasons that I chose her (explained in depth in the Getting to
Know the Teachers section) as a study participant were also the main reasons I
chose her as my advisor for this dissertation; in addition, she is the only music
education faculty member in early childhood music at Michigan State University. I

could have chosen another teacher’s class to study at the Community Music

School, but I wanted to observe the most experienced teacher available. Though

51

Dr. Taggart’s dual role may appear to be a weakness of this study, I believe that
her depth of knowledge and experience have strengthened this study and that
my other committee members, in particular, Dr. Mitchell Robinson and Dr. John
Kratus, were able to offer non-participant ideas, thoughts, and opinions about
qualitative methodology and early childhood music research. Thus, Dr. Taggart
was required to take on multiple roles in this study. When asked about balancing
being an advisor and a participant in the same study, Dr. Taggart said the
following:

I am continually aware of the fact that l have to change roles as I engage

in my different functions within this project. When I teach, I am trying to be

the most child-centered, musical teacher that I can be. I am not thinking
about the research project. However, when I am reading parts of the
dissertation, I am trying to view my teaching through your eyes. (Teacher

Interview, Cynthia Taggart).

The parents and children involved in this study were primarily Caucasian,
upper-middle class families. This segment of society was not sought out; they
just happen to be the families that are involved in these programs. There is more
ethnic and racial diversity at the Community Music School setting than was
represented by who signed up for this class this semester. However, the
economic status and racial make-up of early childhood music classes would be a
topic for another study. Finally, both teachers in this setting have been trained in

one particular early childhood music methodologY. Music Learning Theory.

52

This research does not attempt to make a comment on other
methodologies or strengths and weaknesses of methodologies; however, that
these two teachers use similar methodologies and teaching practices is
fundamental to understanding the context of this study. In observations and
analysis, there always remains room for error and difference in interpretation; this
is the nature of qualitative research. However, I made every attempt to be
consistent and triangulate data. In fact, there was only one case in which the
researcher’s interpretation of a response differed from the teacher. This vocal
response was not included in the analysis, as it could not be triangulated. The
following is an excerpt from the think-aloud interview in which this particular
response occurred (JB=Jennifer Bailey, the Little Music Maker’s teacher;
CH=Christina Hornbach, the researcher).

JB: Now, I’m just singing to Child 1.

CH: That was a ‘bum” from Child 2 though, did you hear that?

JB: (no)

CH: That was from Child 2 while you were singing to Child 1?

CH: I thought it was.

(rewind tape)

CH: That was Child 2’s “bum?”

JB: No, that was me.

CH: Right before that.

JB: (no)

CH: You were singing (sings la-sol-la) how could you go (sings tonic

53

burn)?

JB: Let’s listen again.

CH: It doesn’t sound like you at all. You think it was you though?

JB: I think it was, yes. I don’t recall him doing it in class either, so.

(Think-Aloud Interview, Jennifer Bailey)
Throughout this study, observations centered specifically on recounting teacher
initiatives, the wait time between teacher initiatives and children’s responses, and
the vocal responses of children. The classes were rich with material and
inspiration. So rich was each class that the scope of the questions may well have
been answered by observing one class and perhaps triangulating this data with a
teacher interview and artifacts; however, the original methodology called for the
observation of several classes and the analysis of these classes through video-
summary forms and think-aloud protocols with the teachers, and I chose to follow
that methodology. In essence, each class was analyzed via the teacher’s
perspective (think-aloud protocol and artifacts), the parent’s perspective
(recording of spontaneous conversations with parents before and after class in
field notes), and the researcher’s perspective (video-summary forms, think-aloud
protocols, and field notes). Perhaps the most important perspective was the
children’s. However, due to the age level and communication skills of the children
involved, interviews or any direct questioning was prohibitive and assuredly

unfruitful.

54

Analysis

I began this study believing that I would prepare my data analysis with one
of the myriad of computer-assisted qualitative data analysis systems. A speedy
and proficient software package would take away some of the tedious tasks of
categorizing, arranging and cross-referencing material, and then I could move
fonrvard with presenting the results. On the advice of several members of my
committee, I abandoned my quest for the perfect software program to use in
analyzing my data, and I did it by hand. Twenty-three glue sticks, a Dab ‘n stick,
51 pieces of cardboard, several stacks of colored copying paper, some tape, part
of a box of staples and numerous trips to the office supply store later, I finished
my analysis of the data. It took countless hours of lying on the floor amidst piles
of scraps of coded paper, reading, sorting, re-sorting, and re-coding, but I
became familiar and conversant with the material in a way that I would not have
without physically manipulating the data myself. In order to index the material, I
had to read and re-read material that I had transcribed from think-aloud protocols
and interviews, as well as field notes and artifact collection.

In order to assist in triangulation, the different data sources were given
different fonts and forms, a “style” if you will, one for each of the data sources
(field notes, video-tape analysis forms, think-aloud protocol transcriptions, and
artifacts). In addition, the sources from Michigan State University’s Community
Music School were copied in shades of green and Little Music Makers was
copied in shades of pink and orange. Then, once the materials had been coded,

as they were cut apart and sorted, their original source could be tracked. For

55

instance, at a glance, the researcher could see if a code had occurred in both
settings (checking colors) and from what sources (checking fonts/styles). The
codes were then written on larges pieces of poster board that were folded in half.
The codes from various sources were then glued, taped, and/or stapled onto the
poster board. The resulting codes on the poster board could then be sorted and
accessed like recipe cards in a filing box.

Observations specifically focused on describing teacher initiatives, the
time between teacher initiatives and children’s responses, and the vocal
responses of children. As is typical with event sampling (Bentzen, 1993), codes
were chosen to identify behaviors, and narrative descriptions followed in field
notes. Data was collated and analyzed for emergent themes.

Teacher Initiatives Data

Data describing teacher initiatives was collected. The main categories for
coding teacher initiatives initially were breath, body movements, facial
expression, silence, and singing/chanting initiatives and/or any combination of
these five; these initial categories were extrapolated from research, literature,
and the author's personal teaching experience and do not represent any actual
categories used for prior research in teacher initiatives in research (Hicks, 1993;
Reynolds, 1995; Valerio et al., 1998; Young 8 Glover, 1998). Codes and sub-
codes emerged and were eliminated as the study progressed and will be

discussed in Chapter 4.

56

Teacher Silence Data

The characteristics of wait time (teacher silence) are of interest in this
particular study. Practice suggests that silences in instruction may be
organizational (the teacher is in between activities), anticipatory (the teacher
leaves silence so the child will fill in the answer), or imitation (the teacher leaves
silence so the child will imitate the teacher’s initiative) (Teacher Interview,
Cynthia Taggart). As there is no particular research in this area within music
education, the codes initially came from science literature and were deveIOped as
the project unfolded. “Recommended definitions and nomenclature for the four
species of wait time are provided below.

°Wait time T8: [WTTS] The pause following any teacher utterance and
preceding any student [child] utterance.

-Wait time ST: [WT ST] The pause following any student utterance and
preceding any teacher utterance.

~Wait time SS: [VVTSS] The pause following a student utterance and
preceding an utterance from the same or a different student.

-Wait time TT: [WT'I'I'] The pause separating consecutive teacher
utterances” (Tobin, 1987, p. 90).

Child Response Date

Children’s responses were initially categorized into vocal (musical) and
vocal (non-musical). Movement response was an emergent theme. The musical
vocal responses were then coded into the sub-categories of rhythmic and tonal.

The coding system continued to evolve as the data collection ensued; a small

57

number of descriptive codes were used as needed to enrich the analysis (tonic
bum, dominant-tonic, absorption, imitation, exploratory, etc.).
Duration of the Study

The data collection occurred during the second semester of the school
year. So as to minimize interruption in the early childhood music classes and to
familiarize the children with the researcher, the researcher began attending the
early childhood music classes at both locations from their inception and
participated as an assistant. The researcher then observed and recorded three
classes in a row in each setting. Teacher and parent interview data collection
was ongoing the last few weeks of the semester. The investigator collected data
from the teachers at pre-arranged, separate times, as well as during informal,
impromptu meetings. In an effort to increase trustworthiness, the data was
triangulated among field notes, think-aloud interviews, videotape analysis, and

teacher and parent interviews.

58

CHAPTER IV: GETTING TO KNOW THE CHILDREN
“’I should like to look all around me first, if I might.’
‘You may look in front of you, and on both sides, if you like,’ said the
Sheep; ‘but you ca’n’t [sic] look all round you — unless you’ve got eyes at the
back of your head.’
But these, as it happened, Alice had not got; so she contented herself with
turning around, looking at the shelves as she came to them”
(Carroll, 2000, p. 200-01).
Look Through the Window

In order to comprehend the analysis of this data, the most pertinent place
to start is with the children. Both teachers in this study referred several times to
the information that teachers acquire about children as a “window” into the
children’s music development and behavior. One by one, we must look through
the window for each child in order to discuss the data in context.

The children in this study will be identified and characterized using familiar
characters from children’s literature. This will serve several purposes. First, in
order to protect the subjects’ (children and parents’) privacy, their names may not
be disclosed; so, this was a way in which to secure pseudonyms. (The teachers
are public figures whose identities are pertinent to the research, so their identities
have not been protected.) Second, the researcher noticed that, in order to
capture moments and relevant characteristics of the Children, both the researcher
and the teachers often referred to the children using characters from children’s
literature. Thus, I have given the children literature-based pseudonyms from

children’s literature that will serve to share a glimpse into their personalities.

These pseudonyms are not in any way meant to capture all of the child’s

59

characteristics or give the child all of the literary character’s personality or unique
traits. Before this story is told, I must introduce you to the cast of characters.
Community Music School
The class at the Community Music School had 10 children enrolled. The
children varied in their musical development but were all engaged at some point
in the environment.
1. Tigger
Tigger, a 27-month-old boy, who was full of energy and everywhere in the -
room, gave the most fertile responses in the Community Music School setting. At
any given moment, Tigger might be captured bouncing around the room or rolling
around the floor at his mother’s feet. Again, his vocal responses were also wide-
ranging. The following are excerpts from a video summary form.
Children’s vocal responses with movement
Tigger sings 5—1 on “ah” bending over and touching the floor
immediately following an “ah” (5—1) with arms up and down from
Cindy.
Tigger sings 3 and pats his beanbag repeatedly.
Tigger sings tonic and throws his beanbag to the floor - mirroring
Cindy.
2. annie-the-Pooh
Winnie-the-Pooh, a 16-month-old boy, was Tigger’s counterpart at the
Community Music School. He was dichotomous in his behavior, at times he

would be sitting safely in his mother’s lap and at other times he would be

60

wandering around the circle looking for a game to play. “Sometimes Winnie-the-
Pooh likes a game of some sort when he comes downstairs, and sometimes he
likes to sit quietly in front of the fire and listen to a story” (Milne, 2001, p. 4). At
times, Pooh would turn into a “growl-y” bear.

Pooh’s ‘ooo’ noises turn a little “growl-y” towards the end of class. As he

picks another microphone out of the basket he makes a “growl-y/barf-y”

sound. He again later is in the middle of the circle and leans over and
makes another sound as if he is going to vomit - there is a lot of tension,
but he seems to be just playing around. (Video Summary Form)

These “growl” noises came out of nowhere, except for the fact that Pooh
was having an especially good time that day. Were they sounds of fun? Sounds
of play? Sounds of an impending trip to the bathroom? The teacher did not do
anything apparent to the researcher to originate or continue this sound, yet Pooh
came up with this on his own to express something and continued to play with it
on his own. His mother looked perplexed, as did Cindy and myself.

3. Tinker Bell

For the moment they were feeling less eerie, because Tink was flying with

them, and in her tight they could distinguish each other. Unfortunately she

could not fly so slowly as they, and so she had to round and round them in

a circle in which they moved as in a halo. (Barrie, 2003, p. 59)

Tink, a 25-month-old girl, flew about the room as if she possessed it. She
responded with movement to every song or chant that I observed in that class;

she rarely sat still. “’She can’t put it out [her light]. That is about the only thing

61

fairies can’t do. It just goes out of itself when she falls asleep, same as the
stars.” (Barrie, 2003, p. 60) At times, she would flit back to her father and land in
his lap for a moment’s rest, but at a moment’s notice she was up dancing in the
circle again, seeking Cindy’s attention or examining Cindy’s earrings. Though her
musical responses were predominantly movement this semester, Cindy says
that, in previous semesters, she did respond both tonally and rhythmically. Tink
interacts socially with other parents and children, but flits back to check in with
her dad (her Peter Pan). She seems to embody light, flow, and movement.

In the next example, the movements by parent, teacher, and child were
not verbally teacher-directed; holding hands was a physical initiative from Cindy
to Tink, which Tink engaged in willingly. It is unclear whether Tink’s Dad initiated
the hand-holding with Cindy or vice versa, but the movements were natural and
organic as Cindy sang the song.

Tink has moved to Cindy; they hold hands. They start to sway to the song

that Cindy Is singing and they are changing their body weight from foot to

foot. Cindy reaches her hand out to Tink’s Dad who joins hands with

Cindy. Tink then reaches out for her dad, too, and now they have formed a

circle that is swaying and changing body weight to the song. They are a bit

awkward as they are all not going the same way. Tink does not know
whom to follow. They stay like this while Cindy goes back to the chant.

And they all bounce their knees but are still holding hands. They all go

back to swaying when the song starts again and are all going the same

62

way. Tink is free but holding hands with both and her legs fling into the air

at each transfer of body weight. (Video Summary Form)

4. The Little Prince

Picture a 35-month-old boy whose blonde hair is unkempt and uneven,
ruffled and disheveled, but he is at the same time clean and loved. Naturally
curious and easily amused, the Little Prince lives partly in his own wortd and
partly in the music class. Though he is the oldest child in the class, his social
skills are delayed a bit, so he fits in. Whether it is his mom or dad who bring him,
the Little Prince stays safe on their “planet” their family unity is tight-knit. He day
dreams during class and chants along with words to some chants. His parents
bring him late almost every class, so he has difficulty adjusting to the class at
times; he also has difficulty warming up to Cindy at times — it means venturing
outside his own world. “’You have to be very patient... First you’ll sit down a little
ways away from me, over there, in the grass. I’ll watch you out of the corner of
my eye, and you won’t say anything... But day by day, you’ll be able to sit a little
closer. . .’” (De Saint-Exupéry, 2000, p. 60)

Cindy “buzzes” (sings tonic on “buzz” and tickles the child with her index

finger). The Little Prince during the beginning song and he reacts in a shy

manner. She stays with him and asks, “Can you ‘buzz’ your Dad, you

think? What do you think?” He turns and runs his finger over his Dad’s leg.

He then sits up and starts crawling his fingers over the carpet towards

Cindy. Cindy starts singing tonic “buzzes” to match his fingers crawling.

The Little Prince crawls his fingers up Cindy’s arm and gets in her space,

63

but does not took her in the eye. He then pulls away and looks very happy,

but remains quiet. (Video Summary Form)

5. Madeline

Madeline, a 24-month-old girl with curly black hair, interacted the most
with her Mom. Her Mom specifically works with her on music at home, though
she is not a musician herself. They listen to a wide variety of music, encourage
movement, and have instruments with which she explores (Parent Interview).
Madeline’s life appears regimented, yet Madeline is still a bit mischievous and
independent and likes acting as the teacher. “Cindy sings “ah-ah” on 5-1 and
Madeline sings “ah-ah” on 5-2 and then offers her microphone to Cindy who does
several “ah-ah” on 5-1 in response to Madeline’s initiative” (Video Summary
Form). In addition, Madeline is focused on language skills and knowledge at this
time; she is engaged in language absorption. Taggart explained, “’Madeline
seems more interested in language than music.’ (Referring to trying to converse
on ‘pops’ with Madeline and Madeline was pointing out colors - white and
purple.” (Think-Aloud Protocol, Cynthia Taggart)

6. Snow White

Snow White plays a minor role in this story, as she was absent often. This
19-month-old with shoulder length brown hair looked like a young woman,
Disney’s Snow White in miniature. She was an extremely quiet, but community-
oriented young girl who respectfully soaked it all in. Her mother described her as
liking order and loving to clean up. One class, as I sat in the circle with the

camera on my shoulder, Snow White brought me a shaker egg when she noticed

64

that I had not gotten one. My profuse thanks for thinking of me inspired her to
bring me another, and another, and another... she also put them away for me at
the end. All without saying a word. Snow White did give movement responses.
She would gently flow one scarf back and forth with one hand; however, vocal
responses were minimal.

7. Alice in Wonderland

Alice was 13-months-old and is the most active and out-going one-year-
old baby I have ever observed or taught. She is curious about everything and
confident enough to spend most of the class in the middle of the circle socializing
with her friends and not in Mom’s lap. Alice’s movement responses are prolific,
and she also responds with lip movement and breathing as well as some vocal
responses.

Cindy leans down to the floor and sings tonic “ah” for Alice; Alice looks at

her and is quiet for a moment. She then responds by what looks like a

heave. She is not sick or upset, but this seems to be her movement and

attempt at a vocal response. (Video Summary Form)

8, 9, 8 10: Happy, Bashful, and Doc

The last three children were often referred to as “The Three Musketeers”
as they were the three baby boys in the class, but this moniker buries some other
qualities that must be known, so I dubbed them the three dwarfs. Happy is a 9-
month-old boy who is, well, happy and who became continually more vocally
responsive as I observed. Bashful, an 11-month-old boy, was clingy with mom

and only began to wander away during the last class that I observed. Bashful

65

was engaged in class though: “I [Cindy] changed volume and Bashful’s head
twirled around and looked at me [her]” (Think-Aloud Protocol). He also had a
ritual at the end of every class during which Cindy held him and sang to him and
he did not want to go back to his Mom. From a boy who never wanted to leave
his mom, this was an important statement about how he felt about Cindy and
music. Doc, a 10-month-old baby boy, was also quiet; he rarely left his mother’s
space but did sit on his own, quietly soaking in the scene.
Little Music Makers

The class at Little Music Makers was considerably smaller than the
Community Music School; only four students were enrolled, which meant that
usually two or three were present considering illness and family obligations. The
Mad Matcher and Gretel were the most active and responsive children, while
Sleeping Beauty and the baby soaked it all in.

1. The Mad Matcher

l dubbed a 38-month old boy “The Mad Matcher,” from the first time I
observed his music class. He was obsessed with matching the colors of the
props that Jen, the teacher, brought out for play. He also possesses some of the
zeal, creativity, impatience, and desire for control issues of Lewis Carroll’s
famous character, the Mad Hatter. An excerpt from a video summary form
illustrates some of these characteristics.

“The Mad Matcher is responding musically and socially during this class.

He is having control issues. He is easily frustrated when things don’t go

his way, but also quickly gets over it. For example, he says in

66

exasperation when the beanbags won’t stay on his legs, ‘Mom, they won’t

stay!’ Again, later, Jen sings an improvisatory song about putting the eggs

away and Sings, ‘Put them in the basket.’ The Mad Matcher gets upset

and screams, ‘Box!’ Jen acknowledges that it is a box. It is actually a

plastic tub.”

The Mad Matcher’s responses were the most prolific at Little Music Makers. His
responses varied wildly from singing tonic on “bum” (tonic bum) while throwing a
group of scarves in the air to singing dominant and Re in a major-duple song
while playing with beanbags.

2. Gretel (as in Hansel and Gretel)

Imagine the most delicate 32-month old girl you can, with big round eyes
and long lashes and short, wispy brunette hair; the quality and texture of her hair
and the shape of her head are reminiscent of a newborn, yet she is almost three.
I will always remember Gretel in her faded blue jeans with the elastic waist, white
long-sleeved t-shirt with colored flower flecks, and pink shoes. Her signature
move was holding a scarf in one hand, never two scarves and never both hands,
and flowing that one scarf gently through the air as she guardedly glanced
around to see what everyone else was doing. Gretel mostly came to class with
her mother, but one of the days that l was collecting data, class was moved to
the preschool room due to a church retreat. It happened that that particular day,
Gretel came to class with her Dad and brother. Her brother, a five-year-old
Hansel, had been in early childhood music classes previously. With her brother

present, Gretel was more socially vocal than she had been in previous classes

67

and was more aggressive. This is an excerpt from that classes’ video summary
form.

“Gretel is the most vocal [non-musical] that l have ever heard her — during

a case of “sibling rivalry,” her brother takes her egg and she cries and

calls out, “Mine!” (Video Summary Form)

I had never even heard Gretel speak before this. Her previous responses
had consisted of extremely soft singing and chanting and lip movement. Thus,
she became Gretel because the relationship with her brother, not a normal
member of the class, elicited the ability to reach deep down and let it out! This
class also happened to be her most prolific for musical responses beyond
movement. Gretel also spent a large portion of this music class entering and
leaving the gingerbread-like, plastic playhouse in the preschool room. Ironically,
though she is vocally responsive during this class, she does not appear to be
engaged.

“Gretel is distracted in this room and is checking out the playhouse and

other areas of the room. She is not engaged, as she normally is — the

room? Mom not being there?” (Video Summary Form)

3. Sleeping Beauty

Strong and intelligent, sleepy and Daddy’s little girl, this 18-month-old
Sleeping Beauty came to the 9 am. early childhood music class often very tired
and yawning. Sleeping Beauty spent most Classes nestled in the arms of her
Prince Charming, her father, languidly gazing out upon the other parents and

children and Jen in her adorable purple outfit with penetrating, dewy eyes. Jen

68

said that Sleeping Beauty would sing tonic and dominant “burns” and respond
rhythmically last semester; yet during this semester she was very quiet. Perhaps
this was due to her age and a self-imposed “social silence;” according to her
father, 9 am. was a bit early for her as well. Most times she refused to participate
and did not demonstrate fluid movement.

4. Baby

The two-month-old baby boy, Baby, did not demonstrate any particular
personality characteristics to warrant a literary nomenclature, yet his
vocalizations and presence enhanced the Ieaming environment and his absence
left a void in the classroom. Baby came to his first class when he was two-weeks-
old with his mother and grandmother. Subsequently, he attended class with his
mother the majority of the time; his father, a public school music teacher, also

attended class once with the mother and Baby.

69

CHAPTER V: TEACHER INITIATIVES

Teacher Behaviors as Initiatives

I collected data describing teacher behaviors (intentional or unintentional)
that came before the children’s vocal responses. The data sources for this were
field notes, think-aloud interviews with the teachers, analysis of video recordings
of the classes, and formal interviews with the teachers. As stated previously, the
initial main categories for coding teacher initiatives were use of breath, body
movements, facial expression, silence, singing/chanting initiatives and/or any
combination of these five. Facial expression and singing/chanting initiatives were
eventually eliminated as codes for teacher initiatives. Further codes emerged as
the study progressed: using props as initiatives; musical anticipation; space;
individual instruction; initiatives that contain touch; child joy as a factor in eliciting
children’s responses; parent-child relationship as a factor in eliciting children’s
responses; play as a means to elicit children’s responses; teacher improvisation
as a means to elicit children’s responses; vocal timbre and vowel choice of the
teacher; teacher-child relationship as a means of eliciting children’s responses;
and child as teacher.

Teacher Initiative Codes

Use of Breath

“Cindy takes an audible breath when she expects a response, even if she
is the one responding” (Video Summary Form). The use of an audible breath as
an initiative was consistent from both teachers. “Jen has beanbags in both hands

and sings “yum-ba-da-bum-bum” on 5 and then takes an audible breath and

70

waits. The Mad Matcher fills in a “burn” on 2 that slides to 1. Jen provides tonic
“bum” (Video Summary Form). Both teachers are so involved in their teaching,
that providing a preparatory breath, perhaps once practiced, is now automatic.

“CT: I try to use breath in the initiative, although I’m not always as
consistent about it as I would like to be.

CH: You are very consistent...

CT: That’s interesting, because I’m not aware of it anymore.” (Teacher
Interview, Cynthia Taggart)

It is in that audible breath that the teacher hears (audiates) what she/he is going
to sing or chant; if children learn to do a preparatory breath, they may team to
audiate earlier in their musical development (Teacher Interview, Cynthia
Taggart). Cynthia Taggart believes that a preparatory breath in singing should
not be audible; however, in the early years, it may be necessary to make it
audible to help children become aware of its presence (Teacher Interview,
Cynthia Taggart). Though necessary initially, she believes, the use of an audible
breath should be monitored with young children and used with discretion.

CT: I don’t want to introduce tension into the vocal mechanism but I do
want it to be something that the kids notice. Then, they may begin
to habituate it themselves. There is a thin line here between doing
what is vocally healthy and simply trying to get them to audiate
(Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart).

Not surprisingly, the teachers’ continual modeling of a preparatory breath

resulted in similar child behavior.

71

JB:

I’m noticing Gretel’s breath responses and her leaning. She is
holding herself still for the duration of the pattern that was given to
her and then she pulls away at the end of that time. Those are all
indications that she is audiating something. (Think-aloud Interview,

Jennifer Bailey)

Children in both classes took noticeable breaths and then responded.

CH:
CT:

See the Little Prince breathing into it [the toy microphone]?
Yes, and he made some noises into it too. He made some “bah,
bah” noises. Actually they were fairly correct in relation to what I

had just done. (Think-aloud Interview, Cynthia Taggart)

Happy and Tigger from the Community Music School both also played with their

breath. Happy began audibly playing with his breath during the last class that I

observed.

CT:

CT:

Happy was much more comfortable and there were a lot of
breathing sounds that I had not heard before.

Yes, and the breathing had pitch to it every so often. It was not in a
tonal context, but he was definitely trying to communicate

something. (Video Summary Form)

The teacher’s preparatory breath let the child know when he/she should

breathe, as well as gave them an opportunity to audiate. This breath was used as

an initiative to encourage children’s responses but also became part of the

musical process for the children. Breath was a noteworthy theme, both as a

teacher's initiative and as a child’s response.

72

Body Movement

Movement is discussed here both as a teacher initiative and as a child’s
response, as it was difficult to separate “movement as a teacher initiative” from
“movement as a child’s response.” Research confirms that children respond with
movement to music (Hicks, 1993; Metz, 1989; Moog, 1976; Moorhead 8 Pond,
1978; Reynolds, 1995; Suthers, 1997), and that movement is often their first
response (Hicks, 1993; Moog, 1976; Moorhead 8 Pond, 1978). Though
movement responses were not the focus of this study, movement responses
became important for two reasons: (1) movement responses perhaps occur prior
to vocal responses (Hicks, 1995; Moog, 1976) and (2) movement responses
appear to be connected with vocal responses.

We do see the movement responses first. And then I think that we still see

them first, but in close proximity with the vocal response. Sometimes their

bodies tell their voices what to do. First, the children get there with their

body and then vocally respond a split-second later, almost while doing the

movement. (Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart)
Since movement responses are some of the first musical responses teachers get
from children, perhaps movement initiatives may elicit responses. In this study, it
was evident that children both imitated teacher movement and responded to
teacher body movement. “Cindy moves with flow and Tigger twirls his arms
mimicking Cindy’s movements during the improvisatory chant on the syllable ‘ch”’
(Video Summary Form). “Cindy sings ‘ah’ on 5 with her arms in the air and then

puts both hands down on the floor as she sings tonic. Tink falls over as she sings

73

5 and lifts one hand and hits it on the floor to correspond with the tonic ‘ah
(Video Summary Form). Here, Cindy’s large arm movements perhaps have
inspired a large whole body movement by Tink and an imitative arm movement
with one hand.

Both teachers gave initiatives that contained large arm movements. Both
arms would be in the air as they sang dominant and both arms would come down
and touch the floor on tonic. Variations of this movement were abundant. Other
teacher initiative movements occurred as well.

“Infants and toddlers team by experiencing the environment through their
senses (seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and feeling), by physically moving
around, and through social interaction” (Bredekamp, 1987, p. 5). The teachers in
this study were in constant movement when singing and Chanting, flowing with
their arms and whole body. Children inthis study responded with movement as
well.

Tigger runs out from his mother’s lap and hops around during the

children’s response time and then runs back to his Mom’s lap during the

“teacher time” of “Hickety Pickety.” When he is approached to do a

pattern, “Can you do a rhythm for me?” He stands up and stomps twice to

accompany a “growl-y,” bah-bah. (Video Summary Form)
Moorhead and Pond (1978) also concluded “much spontaneous music occurs
with physical activity” (p. 35) and that “the child sings freely, especially when he
is moving” (p. 41). In my study, both teachers modeled continuous fluid

movement and gave vocal initiatives combined with movement. Children’s

74

movement responses occurred with and without vocal responses; however,
children’s vocal responses rarely, if ever, occurred without a prior or
simultaneous movement response.

Using Props as Initiatives

’3 u

Movement is intertwined with “using props as initiatives. Initiatives with
props” really do not exist without movement; the teacher may throw the scarves
in the air or drop the beanbag. However, movement may exist without props,
hence the previous category. Teacher initiatives with props are discussed as they
assist in musical interactions with the children. “Music is teamed most
meaningfully through action and manipulation (sensorimotor learning)” (Andress,
Heimann, Rinehart, 8 Talbert, 1993, p. 6).
The Mad Matcher is lying on the floor with a beanbag on his belly during
“Love Somebody.” Jen sings “yum-ba-da-bum-bum” on dominant and
drops her beanbag; she sings tonic “burn” as her beanbag hits the floor.
The Mad Matcher dumps his beanbag on the floor and sings tonic “bum.”
Jen picks hers up again and drops it and sings tonic “burn.” The Mad
Matcher sings tonic “burn” as he throws a beanbag on the floor", he does
this three times in a row and then gets distracted by matching beanbags
on the floor. (Video Summary Form)
Similarly, “throwing a scarf at Sleeping Beauty and singing tonic “burn” elicits her
picking it up and setting it down and looking at Jen; Jen provides the tonic “bum”

(Video Summary Form). Jen also had a prolific interaction with the Mad Matcher

during which she shook an egg. dropped it on the floor, and then rolled it to him;

75

he responded tonally and then rolled it back to Jen (Video Summary Form).
Atypical items were also used as props in an impromptu manner. In one class,
Jen used her recorder as a microphone and sang diatonic tonal patterns on
“burn” for the Mad Matcher. He chanted back into the recorder, “Bum, bum,
burn,” but he did not sing (Video Summary Form).

“Mobile infants and toddlers increasingly use toys, language, and other
Ieaming materials in their play" (Bredekamp, 1987, p. 5). The props were used as
an initiative in these classes and serve several purposes. The props (1) helped
make children less self-conscious or just inspired them to be creative, (2) were
made animate and took on singing, chanting, or movement behaviors that the
children would not do otherwise, (3) provided children with yet another way to
interact and play with music, and (4) provided the teacher with another way to
illustrate musical ideas. For instance, a child who was not ready to sing or chant
may have made the beanbag have a voice; The Mad Matcher loved playing with
the beanbags and, pressing them, and sang a note.

The following illustrates another example of an initiative with a prop:

Cindy is standing. She bends over and grabs a bunch of scarves and

throws them in the air singing “ah” on dominant and then sings “ah” on

tonic as they land on the floor. Tigger runs over and grabs scarves and
throws them in the air. (Video Summary Form)
For the shy children, the props seem to become a way to communicate without

putting themselves at risk.

76

The Little Prince and Cindy play a game with rolling shaker eggs to each
other. This starts with Cindy singing “ah” on 5 with her arms in the air and
then singing tonic as she rolls an egg to the Little Prince. He rolls it back
but does not respond. She responds back with a tonic “ah” and rolling the
egg. The Little Prince continues to respond/interact by sending the egg
back, but does not sing. He does laugh and giggle. He is engaged socially
more than musically. (Video Summary Form)

Plastic microphones that echo the children’s voice back to them often aid
in eliciting responses. In the Community Music School setting, during one prolific
class, the microphones elicited vocal responses from Madeline, the Little Prince,
Tigger, and Tink (Video Summary Form). The babies loved to suck and chew on
the microphones and bury their faces in them. For all children, the microphones
provided a private way to hear their own voices.

Whether it was scarves, beanbags, microphones, or shaker eggs, both
classes used props with a majority of the songs and chants to engage the
children and elicit responses.

Jen asks if the class can put the beanbags on their feet. The Mad Matcher

says, “No, let’s make a row of them.” Jen suggests that they do that at the

very end. The Mad Matcher is game and joins the group by singing the
song, “Love Somebody,” with some of the words and putting beanbags on
both feet. He kicks the beanbag off his foot and sings 4 and then tonic

“burn” as he crawls to go get it. (Video Summary Form)

77

Here, Jen elicits a vocal response by making suggestions and modeling use of a
prop, the beanbag.

Perhaps the most advanced response developmentally that was observed
during this study was a unique interaction between Jen, the Mad Matcher, and
his beanbag keyboard. The Mad Matcher is the oldest child in the study by three
months; he is 38-months-old. He is an anomaly, at once musically independent
but socially shy. He attends class with a variety of caregivers. The Mad Matcher
and his mom live with his grandparents. Both of the grandparents are musical
and the grandmother teaches piano lessons out of the home, something the Mad
Matcher observes frequently. He sings songs with his mom at home, especially
at bedtime. The following interaction is illustrative of the Mad Matcher’s frequent
tonal improvisations. He loved lining the beanbags up on the floor and matching
them in color pairs; it is vaguely reminiscent of a keyboard. One class, he was
extremely intrigued by “pressing” the beanbag with his finger and singing a note.
(One of the Mad Matcher’s tonal improvisations on his “game board” is outlined
in Appendix L so that the reader may view how he set up his “keyboard” and
where he placed the notes.) He sang the following notes all on “bum” in a clear
head voice 1-2-1-2-4-6-3-1-5-7-5-1. Jen then sang 4-3-2 and left a space; The
Mad Matcher does not fill in tonic burn and turns away. The teachers articulated
that props help to free the inner voice of the child.

I find that I can engage them with the props. They will get the beanbag

and dump it and sing tonic when it falls on the floor. Sometimes having a

78

prop will get them singing, because I sing when l have that same prop.
They will imitate what it is that I do. (Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart)
The use of props in these early childhood music classes engaged the
children and elicited vocal responses. The props enabled children to engage in
musical play without being as self-conscious; the props reduced the children’s
inhibitions. The use of props as a teaching initiative provided the teachers with
ways to interact and play with the children; illustrate musical ideas for the
children; and elicit responses from the children.
Teacher Silence
Silence was an important instructional tool in the early childhood music
classroom. It helped teachers elicit individual responses when interacting with a
child on a one-to-one basis, but teacher silence in the group environment was
also important as well. When asked if there were any teaching behaviors that
tended to elicit children’s vocal responses, Cynthia Taggart responded:
Yes, hundreds! There are many of them. Certainly leaving silence so that
they can respond, because many children, not all, but many, don’t want to
make noise when I’m making noise. When I’m making noise, they want to
listen to me. And when I quit making noise, they can play with my sounds.
So, by giving them opportunities to do that, they respond. I’ve found that,
when kids are at a certain level, I can leave off the last note of things or
sing (She sings quarter, eighth-eighth, quarter, quarter on dominant) and

just put my hands down and not sing anything. That’ll sometimes pull

79

something out of a child, because they know what’s supposed to go in that

Silence. (Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart)

Silence was an effective teaching tool when used in combination with the
children’s needs. “Early in the class I think I leave a little bit more silence; I
extend the‘activities longer to try and pull more out of them. But I feel like, later in
the class, I can’t do that as much, because I’m afraid I will lose the children”
(Think-aloud Interview, Cynthia Taggart). Silence as a teaching behavior is even
suggested in early childhood music curricula. Here, for example, are some
instructions for early childhood music teachers from Music Play: The Early
Childhood Music Curriculum Guide for Parents, Teachers, and Caregivers on
using silence in their teaching.

“After you sing a tonal pattern to a young Child, your pattern may be

followed by silence — a listening response. It is important that you ask the

other adults sometimes to be silent following your patterns. It is often
during the silences that a child to whom you are singing, or even another
child across the room, will vocalize or sing responses. (Valerio et al.,

1998,p.23)

Silence, as a teaching tool, is mentioned several times in Music Play. “If silence
usually follows your tonal Acculturation Pattern, a child eventually will babble
different types of vocal responses...” (Valerio et al., 1998, p. 23). Silence is also
discussed in theory as well: “With regard to lesson plans, it would be well to

remember three words: repetition, variety, and silence. Repetition and variety are

80

especially important for younger children, whereas silence (time to audiate) is
necessary for children of all ages” (Gordon, 2003b, p. 114).

Silence is even called for in the parent flyer from Little Music Makers: “Do
allow for silence. Listening and absorbing can be the best response for your
child” (Little Music Makers Handout). The silences tended to be longer in the
Little Music Maker setting, as there were fewer children enrolled. The children in
both settings seemed to thrive on the quiet time as much as the music time; they
needed time to process what they had just heard in their music environment.

The Mad Matcher is not demonstrating flow [performing continuous fluid

movement with the scarves] when Jen is singing. When there is silence,

he demonstrates flow with one arm [with a scarf]. He starts hitting

Grandpa in the face with the scarf when Jen starts singing “Jeremiah” and

stops his fluid movement.

The Mad Matcher, an older, perhaps more musically developed child, seemed to
thrive on these silences. In one interaction, the Mad Matcher had his beanbag
balanced on his body and Jen sang dominant and waited and waited... At some
point, he could not stand it any longer and had to sing the resting tone. He had it
inside, and, because Jen did not sing it for him, he had to resolve it for himself
(Think-aloud Interview).

At times, silence did encourage Children’s responses, as illustrated by the
above example with the Mad Matcher; however, that was not always the case.
The silences still seemed to serve an educational purpose, even if they did not

elicit responses: they allowed the children time to think. During the silence, the

81

children were given an opportunity to respond vocally or audiationally (thinking).

Pooh responded with movement during one of the teacher silences in
between song repetitions; he did the teacher—modeled movement for the song,
“Grandma Bear.” Yet, at another point in the same class, Pooh was making vocal
sounds during the songs. Cynthia Taggart comments:

Mostly I’ve been hearing the kids make noise when I’m not making noise.

So for Pooh to make it when I am making noise surprised me a little. And

it makes it hard for me as a teacher, because I can’t respond to him

because I’m making sound at the same time. (Think-aloud Interview,

Cynthia Taggart)

Teacher silence was a valuable teaching technique in both Classroom
settings. Silence as a teacher behavior is discussed in the early childhood music
curricula for both programs and in educational literature for parents. Silence
elicited responses from children by offering a chance for musical thinking; in
addition, silence in combination with musical anticipation also elicited vocal
responses from the children.

Musical Anticipation

Musical anticipation works in partnership with silence. “And here the
conversation dropped, and the party sat silent for a minute... .the Hatter was the
first to break the silence” (Carroll, 2000, p. 71). The Mad Hatter was one of
several children that had progressed far enough in his musical development that
an unfinished musical fragment would inspire him to respond if he was given the

silence and time.

82

During “Love Somebody,” all adults in the room are quiet. The song has

been sung one time through. Jen [teacher] sings on dominant a rhythmic

pattern. Jen leaves space and looks at The Mad Hatter. He can’t stand it
any longer - he sings a tonic “burn” (a bit sharp). Jen sings the rhythm
pattern again on dominant and waits, The Mad Hatter sings tonic right on.

(Field Notes)

Here the musical anticipation was the primary factor, but the silence was
necessary to evoke the musical anticipation.

Some children were able to anticipate musically because they could
predict what would logically follow musically, while others anticipated as a result
of becoming familiar with the routine.

I do think that children anticipate. And I think they don’t anticipate as much

early on. They begin to anticipate more partly through familiarity but also

through context [she sings 5-1]. Some kids are doing that just because
they have imitated it and know that there is something else that is
supposed to go there. Other kids really do want resolution to tonic. Either
of those is fine; they just represent different points developmentally.

(Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart)

Cindy commented while watching a videotape, “Tink just now anticipated
the rocking part of the song. She was running across the room, stopped and
moved” (Think-aloud Interview, Cynthia Taggart). In another situation, Tink would

run into the middle of the circle during the song and then would head back to her

83

dad‘s lap in order to be able to lean back with him on dominant and come back to
center on tonic (the class was holding on to a large stretchy band together).
Musical anticipation occurred in the Little Music Makers setting. While
doing the “bah-bah” chant, Jen holds her hands up just before the end in a long
fennata. The chant ends with “bah” and patting the floor with both hands. Jen
held the ferrnata and the Mad Matcher forced the end by purposefully falling over
and hitting the floor (Video Summary Form). Gretel also demonstrated some sort
of musical anticipation and responded with movement during the same chant.
Everyone is standing and doing flow [continuous fluid movement] with
their arms during the chant. Gretel reaches high at the end and Jen holds
a ferrnata — Gretel holds it and holds it — she even gets up on her
tiptoes.... While waiting for it to resolve, she does open and close her
hands, as if to prompt the continuation of the chant. But she holds the
pause with the rest of her body with Jen and then releases when Jen does
by bending down and patting the floor. (Video Summary Form)
Teacher-planned use of musical anticipation elicited rhythmic and vocal
response from children in both settings; musical anticipation may be in the form
of the teacher‘s initiative (teacher singing dominant and waiting for the child to
sing tonic) or it may be embedded in a chant or song (see Appendix M). Cindy
comments, “That’s why I do that song [“Bubble Gum”]. (Singing) ‘See that bubble
it grows and grows...’. Leaving it right on the leading tone and then waiting until
one of the children often will say, ‘pop,’ to initiate the resolution” (Teacher

Interview, Cynthia Taggart).

84

When presented with teacher silence and the element of musical
anticipation, Children in both settings responded with vocal and movement
responses. By providing silence at an opportune moment in a song or activity,
the teachers were able to elicit vocal and movement responses. Some children
were highly engaged by musical anticipation when they were challenged to finish
songs or supply tonal resolutions.

Space

Moorhead and Pond (1978) found that young children need freedom in
order to produce vocalizations. The “freedom” that Moorhead and Pond
described is similar to the emergent code, space, in this study. Space, as
differentiated from “silence,” is a time when the focus is not on the child; space
may occur both when the teacher is singing or chanting or during teacher silence.
It appeared that sometimes children not only needed silence, but space. Children
often wandered behind the teachers or their parents, and babbled as they
wandered. They behaved as if they needed a safe space to explore their new-
found sounds.

Both teachers found that, if they gave the children space, the children
would experiment with the musical materials from the group and individual child-
teacher interactions. Jennifer Bailey notes of Gretel, “What I noticed today is that
she is responding mostly in safe places where the focus was not on her. That if I
went up to her and tried to engage her, she wasn’t going to give me a response.
But if I was doing something else with another child or the activity, she’d

respond” (Think-aloud Interview). The children seemed to thrive on “space.”

85

The following two examples with the Little Prince illustrate children’s need
for space. In the first example, the Little Prince was using material from individual
child-teacher time when there was not attention on him. Cindy has been
spending individual time with each child giving rhythm initiatives on “pop”
interspersed throughout the repetitions of the chant, “Popcorn.” While the class
was waiting for the props for the next activity, the Little Prince was drawing
circles in the air, mimicking Cindy’s arm movement with the flow that she had
modeled during her initiatives (Video Summary Form). He did this in the space
when everyone else was done with the activity. In the second example, the Little
Prince was interacting in the time frame of an activity, but only when he was not
directly engaged and after teacher initiatives.

He sings “booaaa” for a longtime on the la, the 6th scale degree. Cindy

has rhythm sticks out for the kids and they are singing “Obwisana.” The

Little Prince is perhaps imitating Cindy’s long "ah” on dominant (5) that

she has repeatedly modeled. When she sings 5, her rhythm sticks are in

the air and shaking. She is NOT looking at the Little Prince and she taps
her sticks on the floor and waits. She does not make a sound. Then, the

Little Prince Sings on the 6th scale degree on a very loud “boooohaaah.”

Cindy sings 5-1 in response. As soon as he is acknowledged, the Little

Prince shuts down. Cindy sings a long “Aaah” again. Nothing from the

Little Prince. (Video Summary Form)

Sometimes the teacher interactions with other children would elicit a

jealousy response from a child that was the equivalent of, “Hey, remember me!”

86

Here, the space was too much for the child, and, consequently, the child sought
out attention. During one class, Cindy had just “buzzed” Tink’s belly with her
finger and sung tonic “bum.” As Cindy progressed around the room singing the
song and working with individual children, Tink buzzed nearby and even came to
stand in between Cindy and the child she was engaging at the time. Tink puffed
out her belly and looked down at it as if to say, “Come on, buzz me!” The Mad
Matcher also thrived on teacher attention, and Jen spending her time elsewhere
would elicit responses from him.
Jen turns her back to the Mad Matcher after they have just each sent an
egg to each other to interact with another child. She sings 5-1 to the other
child and the Mad Matcher sends her an egg. Jen turns and sings 5-1 for
him and sends him an egg. She immediately repeats the gesture but
changes from “yum” on 5 to “brrr.” He responds with a near tonic bum.
Jen echoes a tonic bum. He then rolls Jen an egg and sings a very long
dominant (that starts flat but becomes right on) then jumps toward the
center; Jen supplies tonic bum when he lands. She immediately gives an
initiative to Gretel. She gives both Gretel and Sleeping Beauty several
initiatives that include shaking and rolling the egg to them; she even uses
the Mad Matcher’s vowel and length on dominant “baaaaaaaah” and then
tonic bum. (Video Summary Form)
Teacher silence and space work together at times, like movement and
using props. Space manifested itself differently for different children. For Tigger,

it was hopping around behind Cindy’s back exploring vocal sounds as she

87

continued teaching the rest of class. For the Little Prince, it was not having any
social acknowledgement. For the Mad Matcher, he needed space to “work” but
wanted the social acknowledgement from the teacher. The children in both
settings often gave vocal responses when given the physical and emotional
space to feel safe and experiment, or as in some cases, the space inspired the
child to seek out the teacher’s attention by responding vocally.
Individual Instruction

Another teacher activity that elicited children’s vocal responses was
“individual instruction.” Space and individual instruction are in a sense the yin
and the yang of instruction. Children needed their personal space and freedom to
experiment vocally but also thrived on interactions with the teacher. Gretel
responded vocally most frequently when the focus was not on her (space), yet
she was engaged when Jen spent individual time with her and would give her
rhythmic patterns. She would breathe and lean forward into the microphone as if
she was responding; then she would stay at the microphone the length of time
that equaled Jen’s initiative as if she were echoing the pattern in her head (Think-
aloud Interview, Jennifer Bailey). The children, even the shy ones for the most
part, appeared to need the time and attention of the teacher, but also blossomed
when no one was paying attention. Individual instruction provided a time for
teacher-child relationship building, trust, and for the teacher to glean information

about the child’s musical development.

88

Initiatives that Contain Touch

Both teachers used touch as an initiative. Touch was used to gain a child’s
attention, develop the teacher-child relationship, and elicit children’s responses. It
was a code that intertwined with movement. “Jen is on her hands and knees
during the “bah-bah” chant and reaches over and touches Gretel’s foot as she
gives her a rhythmic initiative on “bah” (quarter-quarter). Gretel responds by
moving her feet (movement response) and stepping closer” (Video Summary
Form). Gretel in her own quiet way, sought out these interactions with Jen, as if
to say, “Interact with me more, please!"

These types of interactions occurred at the Community Music School as
well. “Cindy sang ‘bum’ repeatedly on tonic and crept her fingers up Madeline’s
leg” (Video Summary Form). Another example is when Madeline purposefully
came over and stood in front of Cindy as if to say, “Play with me. It’s my turn
now.” Cindy gave her a rhythmic “pop” pattern and swirled her finger on
Madeline’s shirt. During any song or chant in which Cindy was “buzzing” bellies
with her finger on tonic or approaching individual children and giving them
rhythmic patterns that contained a touch (a gentle tap or swirl with her finger on
their toes, arms, etc), the children were engaged and looking fonrvard to when it
was their turn.

Touch contributes as much to relationship building as it does to serving as

an initiative piece. It lets me into their world. The anticipation of being

poked develops audiation. However, I pretty much know that they are not

'going to sing tonic for me, because they are so excited about and

89

engaged in when I’m going to poke them. So, I’m working on audiation but

not really expecting a response and using physical proximity to build a

relationship. (Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart)

The use of touch as an initiative elicited some vocal response, but was primarily
a factor in engaging children and building relationships with the children.
Child Joy as a Factor in Eliciting Children’s Responses

Child joy elicited numerous vocal responses. Here, I am purposefully
focusing on the emotion “joy.” Other emotions may elicit or inhibit responses, but
did not become emergent themes in this study. Also, what I have labeled “child
joy” is what appeared to be the emotion of joy, happiness, or excitement, as
expressed by the children’s body language, facial expressions, and vocal
responses. It should be understood here that this is my interpretation of “joy” and
that other emotional states may or may not elicit responses, but were not
emergent in this study.

There are numerous things that may have affected the amount of joy that
the children demonstrated, from their own personalities to whether they had had
a good night’s sleep. However, by joyfully playing with them, both teachers and
parents elicited child joy, which in turn sometimes elicited children’s responses
(movement and vocal). Teachers often saw different behaviors from the same
child depending on the day. Cindy found that, when children missed a class or
there was a vacation break, they may be more vocal upon their return to class

and theorized they seem to be thinking, “I’m so excited to be back” (Think-aloud

90

interview, Cindy Taggart). “Child joy” was affected by their primary caregiver.
Alice came with her dad for one class.

CH: She didn’t have the same zip on her face during the dancing that

she has with mom.

CT: No, and she didn’t even kick her feet as much.

CH: It was very interesting.

CT: I liked him. I thought he was loving. But, it was a very different

Alice. (Think-aloud Interview, Cynthia Taggart)

Level of “child joy” is a complex theme that cannot be fully described or
explored in this context. It is affected by numerous things that are unknown and
not controlled by the teacher; however, when joy could be elicited by the teacher
through play and choice of material, it seemed to result in more children’s
responses.

Parent-Child Relationship as a Factor in Eliciting Vocal Responses

Gretel picks up a beanbag when they are first dumped on the floor and

goes and gives one to her mom. She turns and sits facing her mom, ready

to play. Her mom grabs another one for Gretel and hands it to her. (Video

Summary Form)

Gretel came to class predominantly with her mom. One class, mom was
gone and Gretel came with her father and brother. “Gretel is very independent
today. She does not go to snuggle with dad as much as she does with mom
perhaps. Or is it the change of room — too much fun in the preschool room to

ignore?” (Video Summary Form).

91

The parent-child relationship may have an influence on whether children
will respond or if they will even interact socially. The parent/caregiver-child
relationship and family-life are complex. Some children come to class with mom,
some with dad, some with grandma, and some with a different caregiver every
week. The Mad Matcher from Little Music Makers came with mom and her
boyfriend or grandma and grandpa; he was not as socially independent as a
younger child in the same class, Gretel, who came with primarily her mom.

It is interesting to look at how the children interact with their parents. Some

children will use that as play time with mom, musical playtime with mom.

You’ll see a lot of interaction between the parent and the child. The parent

is really trying to engage with the Child; similarly, the child is really trying to

engage the parent in play. And some children will use the parent as a

“stopping-off" place between engaging in the larger community. There are

two primary kinds of interactions going on: the parent-child dyad and the

child engaging in the whole community and using the parent as a check-in
point. (Think-aloud Interview, Cynthia Taggart)

Alice in “Wanderland” came to all classes with her mom and only to one
with her dad.

Alice is here with her dad today. She tries to crawl away and socialize as

she usually does. He perhaps does not know that this is appropriate and

tries to bring her back. Cindy advises, “Let her go. She will crawl all over

the room and that is absolutely fine.” (Video Summary Form)

92

Perhaps due to his unfamiliarity with the rituals and acceptable behaviors in class
or his own needs, Alice’s dad continued to pull Alice back on his lap when she
tried to escape and go play.

CH: She got away though (laughing — Alice crawled away from Dad)

CT: But he’s hovering in the background. (Think-aloud Interview,

Cynthia Taggart)
Alice engaged differently that class. The interactions with her dad took precedent
over her participating in class. Perhaps he thought he was acting in Alice’s best
interest by holding her back and keeping her “safe” by him; however, it overtly
inhibited her participation in class and her joy, which was lacking during this
class.

The complexity of children’s relationships with their parents and caregivers
is beyond the scope of this study; however, the influence that these fundamental
relationships have on the children in Class was apparent. From Sleeping Beauty,
who came primarily with her father and loved snuggling with him, to the Mad
Matcher, who came to class with mom, mom and her boyfriend, or grandpa and
grandma.

Play as a Means to Elicit Vocal Responses

Playful initiatives from both teachers often elicited responses from
Children. The importance of play and musical Ieaming is emphasized in teaching
curricula, literature, and research (Berger 8 Cooper, 2003; Heyge 8 Sillick, 1998;

Morin, 2001; Taggart, 2003; Valerio et al., 1998).

93

"We know that children love to play. Through play, children are actively
involved in understanding the world around them. Through play, children
develop a sense of self-worth. Through play, Children teach themselves
how to think and audiate and how to work and make music with others”
(Valerio et al., 1998, p. 10)

Playful initiatives from the teachers included both spirited play with
beanbags and shaker eggs with individual children and the quiet “Buzz Game”
Cindy would play at the beginning of every class (Video Summary Form). The
“Buzz Game” consisted of Cindy singing her song and crawling around to each
Child and buzzing them on the stomach in between repetitions of the song;
responses to the “Buzz Game” were predominantly movement responses (Video
Summary Form). However, playful initiatives also elicited vocal responses.

The Mad Matcher is singing tones as he presses the beanbags on the

floor. It is a game - each beanbag has a certain tone in his head. He has

laid all of the beanbags in his area out in a row and is singing a note as he
touches each one. Jen sings a pattern to him and then leaves him alone.

He continues and is joined by mom who tries to sings a scale as she

touches the beanbags - the Mad Matcher gets Irritated and makes it clear

that he wants to play alone. He is in the tonality — he keeps on stopping at
re (low and high). Jen presses the beanbags and resolves it to tonic. The

Mad Matcher turns away while she plays with the beanbags and comes

back with a few more to put on the end. He doesn’t get a chance to finish

94

as she sings, “Let’s put our beanbags away.” The Mad Matcher complies.

(Video Summary Form)

Both teachers were playful in their group teaching and individual
interactions; parents also played with their own and other children. “Tigger and
his mom shoot fire hoses at each other during ‘Firemen, Firemen,’ and then
when it is done, Tigger runs in for a hug” (Video Summary Form).

It must be emphasized here that the “play” that occurred and described in
this study was primarily interactive play between a teacher and a child, a child
and another child, and a child and a parent. This is different from “free-play,”
during which children are left to explore instruments or a music center (Moorhead
8 Pond, 1978; Young, 2002) Individual play was observed some in this setting,
but because of the presence of so many play partners (other children, parents,
and the teacher), the more prominent type of play in this setting was interactive
play.

I’m going up [to the child] and delivering individual pattern instruction and

not getting responses, but yet when l frame it in a play-way, I’m more apt

to get responses. Ifl go up to the child with a microphone, 9 out of 10

times I get nothing. If I play the little beanbag game with the Mad Matcher,

suddenly I’ve got all these arpeggiated patterns. Or if I roll an egg to him,
then suddenly I get a resting tone response or get the child to provide the
patterns for me. (Think-Aloud Interview, Jennifer Bailey)

This interactive, playful teaching is similar to improvisatory theatre.

lmprovisational theatre training is often based on playing games; it is a way for

95

novices to be set free from unnatural, affected behavior on stage and free the
child within (Spolin, 1999). “Interactive theatre is the art of play” (Izzo, 1997, p.
5). Play elicited vocal responses in both teaching settings.
Teacher Improvisation as a Means of Eliciting Responses

Teacher Improvisation was an emergent theme. Teaching behaviors in
both settings often resembled improvisatory theatre acting techniques. While
playing musically with the Children, the teachers would capitalize on vocal and
rhythmic responses to engage the children and attempt to elicit responses. If a
child gave a non-musical vocal response, the teacher would incorporate that
response in a song or Chant for the whole class or interact individually in an
improvisatory manner. Some children had enough of a musical vocabulary to not
mimic the teacher’s initiative, but make up a response of their own. This resulted
in improvisatory interchanges between the teacher and the child. Cynthia Taggart
likened early childhood music teaching to improvisation in the theatre (Teacher
Interview, Cynthia Taggart). Spolin (1999), an educator in theatrical
improvisation, defines improvisation in a theater context.

Improvisation: Playing the game; setting out to solve a problem with no

preconception as to how you will do it; permitting everything in the

environment (animate or inanimate) to work for you in solving the problem;

it is not the scene, it is the way to the scene; a predominate function of the

intuitive” (Spolin, 1999, p. 361).

96

The teachers were both intuitive enough to realize that playing games and using
musical material from their environment and from the children’s vocalizations
both engaged the children and encouraged vocal responses.

Improvisation in the early childhood music classroom serves several
purposes. First, improvisation may engage the child by using his/her own
material in an improvised song or chant. In the next example, the Mad Matcher
was distracted by an object, a crayon, in the Classroom. After ignoring his first
few protests, Jen made his un-musical vocalizations musical by improvising.

The Mad Matcher finds a crayon on the counter in the room. He tries to

get everyone’s attention by saying, “Uh-a crayon.” Nobody responds, so

he tries again, louder, “Uh-oh a crayon.” Jen responds by chanting, “Uh-oh

a crayon, uh-oh a crayon, what shall we do? What shall we do? Uh-oh a

crayon, uh-oh a crayon, brrrrrrrr (brrrringg on lips).” While she chants she

flows with the scarves. (Video Summary Form)
Second, an improvisatory exchange between the teacher and child also engages
the child in more complex musical thinking than imitation, though the child’s
responses may be based partially on imitation (See Appendix N). Musically,
improvisation is required for the complete development of audiation (Valerio et
aL,1998,p.10)

There is an instinctive understanding that great teachers possess, an
intuitiveness that binds the child-teacher relationship, but also is the glue for the
whole teaching process. The teachers in both settings seemed to intuitively

understand when to push a child to respond by continuing a musical interaction

97

and when to end the improvisation. “Experiencing is penetration into the
environment, total organic involvement with it. This means involvement on all
levels: intellectual, physical, and intuitive. Of the three, the intuitive, most vital to
the Ieaming situation, is neglected” (Spolin, 1999, p. 3). Here, Cindy changed her
teaching initiatives to work with the vocal responses from Pooh and Tigger.
Tigger sings a sliding "ee” from approx 5-1; Cindy changes to “ee” and
sings 1 and then 5-1 with movement. She proceeds to do stepwise tonal
patterns on “eee.” She switches back to “ah” when Pooh laughs on an “ah-
ish” sound and leans back into his mother. Cindy sings the song again and
during the song Pooh intones several growly dominant “aahs” at the same
time that he is pounding both hands on the floor. (Video Summary Form)
By adapting their teaching to the needs of the children, the teachers seized upon
situations to enhance learning. The National Association for the Education of
Young Children’s (NAEYC) Guidelines for Developmentally Appropriate Practice
state that “developmentally appropriate interactions are based on adults’
knowledge and expectations of age-appropriate behavior in children balanced by
adults’ awareness of individual differences among children” (Bredekamp, 1987,
p. 9). By extrapolating upon the sounds that children made, the teachers turned
children’s vocal explorations into musical responses. Using the children’s “own”
material helped to engage the children. The teachers and children created their
own dialogue and movement, according to whatever was going on at that
moment in class. The children were able to work in this manner naturally - it also

appeared to be an innate teaching behavior for both teachers.

98

Vocal Timbre and Vowel Choice of Teacher
The modification and improvisation of the teacher with “vocal timbre” and
“vowel choice” are an outgrowth of teacher improvisation. The teachers would
often change the neutral syllable that they were using for a song or chant to a
different vowel given by a child. “Infants and young children experience music by
hearing it, by feeling it, and by experimenting with pitch and timbre in their
vocalizations,” (Music Educators National Conference Task Force for National
Standards in the Arts, 1994, p. 10). Cindy found that the use of the vowel “ah”
elicited vocal responses from children, while Jen found “ee” to be more effective
in her class this semester, though both used the other’s syllable as well.
I have found that “ah”, the syllable “ah,“ often will elicit responses from the
little ones. Not from the older ones, but from the little ones, because it
tends to be a noise they make. And so, when I don’t get something by
going (singing on 5-1) “bum-bum,” I’ll often try (singing on 5-1), “ah-ah.”
Because I’ve found historically that it has elicited vocal responses from the
children. (Think-aloud interview, Cynthia Taggart)
Gretel’s first tonal pattern came after Jen modified her vowel choice to imitate the
Baby.
I think that when I started imitating the Baby and going “eh-eh-eh” (sings
3-2-1), I would hear Gretel go “eh” (sings 1) in the back. And that’s what
she would imitate. But it’s the first time she’s responded to me with tonal

patterns. (Think-aloud Interview, Jennifer Bailey)

99

The Baby vocalized on “eh” or more of a nasal “ee” often in class; Gretel would
often mimic this sound. She was relatively quiet the class that the Baby was not
there. The vowel choice also extended beyond “ah” and “eh” or “eee” to “ooo-
ooo” noises and intoned “bums” for singing or “bahs” or “pops” for Chanting. The
most interesting was the continual singing on dominant of “ah-eee-ah-eee-yah-
eee” by one of the children at Community Music School. Moorhead 8 Pond
(1978) also noted children’s natural curiosity and interest in playing with vocal
timbre/tone color.
Teacher-Child Relationship as a Factor in Children ’3 Vocal Responses

The teacher-child relationship in both settings was warm and playful; this
may have encouraged children to respond. Both teachers prioritized developing a
relationship with each child individually by spending individual time with each
child as well as through facial expressions, body language, verbal
encouragement, and physical proximity. As a result, the children felt more
confident to try new things and explore, which is developmentally appropriate
practice. “Adults play a vital socialization role with infants and toddlers. Warm,
positive relationships with adults help infants develop a sense of trust in the world
and feelings of competence... ..The trusted adult becomes the secure base from
which the mobile infant or toddler explores the environment” (Bredekamp, 1987,
p. 5). Both of these teachers adore children, think children are funny, and love
being around them. It shines from their faces, even on days when they were not

perhaps feeling well themselves.

100

The teachers recognized that every child’s needs in this relationship were
unique and sought to identify those needs to increase social comfort, which, in
turn facilitated exploration and Ieaming.

I want my relationship with the children to be sort of the musical equivalent

of feeling free to tell me anything (laughs). With different kids, that takes

different forms. With Tigger particularly, it’s a little bit more aggressively
playful, whereas, with Bashful, it’s being very gentle and loving. And every
day after class I have a few minutes with Bashful when he melts onto my
shoulder and tries to avoid going back to his Mom. This is not a statement
on how he feels about his mom, but it is a statement of how he feels about
me. (Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart)

Tink often would come up, hang around Cindy, and play with her earrings. Tigger

would often come lay down in front of her waiting for her to play with him.

The teacher-child relationship was often enhanced by physical proximity,
though sometimes children needed space. NAEYC’s Guidelines for
Developmentally Appropriate Practice state that adults assist in a child’s
accomplishments by their supplying encouragement and physical proximity
(Bredekamp, 1987). Both teachers would often lay on the floor with the children.
“When you are above a child, you feel more threatening to them. So I try to get
down on the floor so that they are as big or bigger than I am” (Teacher Interview,
Cynthia Taggart). The children would also seek the teachers out, to just be closer
to them and perhaps initiate attention or play; however, when the teachers

approached the children, there was a mixed response. Some children, Sleeping

101

Beauty for instance, retreated more into her parent when Jen would approach.
Jen tried laying down and turning her head away and did not try and touch
Sleeping Beauty. She respected the child’s need for a boundary at that point.
This appeared to be more a product of where Sleeping Beauty was in her social
development and the early hour than anything else. When queried about her
laying down a lot when giving the children tonal patterns, Jen responded, “I just
want to be on their level so I’m not above them and so I’m not intimidating to
them if I’m giving patterns. It I can get below them that’s even better” (Teacher
Interview, Jennifer Bailey).

Jen had four different children to work with, and one was the Baby; it is
difficult to report on a relationship with a two-month old baby. Sleeping Beauty
needed a lot of space, and Jen respected that; she did comment though that this
was different from last semester and was perhaps just a toddler phase. Gretel
adored Jen and watched her unceasingly. She trusted Jen and let her in her
space. During one class, her dad tried to dance with Gretel, and she looked
towards Jen and tried to move toward her. The Mad Matcher often tried to
monopolize Jen. As he was the oldest, in the room with two shy toddlers and a
baby, he attempted to interact with Jen constantly, though she was conscious of
trying to spread her attention equally between the children. Jen understood his
need to play and be challenged, yet also his need for space. He wanted to be
engaged, but on his own terms. The Mad Matcher often challenged the order of

songs and props and, at times, “taught” with Jen.

102

Both teachers prioritized developing a relationship with the children. Each
child was unique in their personality and personal needs; thus, the teachers
adapted their use of facial expressions, body language, verbal encouragement,
and physical proximity to each child.

Child as Teacher

The children also functioned as the teacher; the teachers sometimes used
this as an opportunity to elicit vocal responses. Children would often try to control
the order of songs or props, but often also enjoyed being the one to give vocal or
rhythmic patterns. The Mad Matcher loved to organize and match props and
would often turn into the teacher and tell Jen what to do next.

The Mad Matcher is the “teacher.” He has the microphone and is giving

Jen patterns and offers his grandpa a turn as well. He is taking turns. He

has vocally given patterns — but then it turns into a game. He is now

pressing the microphone into grandpa’s nose and gets up to do the same

to grandma. (Video Summary Form)
Madeline, along with several other children, took a turn as the “teacher.” The
behavior of the child acting as teacher was teacher-, parent-, and child-initiated.
When the child acted as the teacher and gave either his/her teacher an initiative
or his/her parent, it automatically elicited responses from the child in the form of
the child’s initiative. The Mad Matcher’s responses were initiatives, but it helped
him to vocalize what was in his head. This technique seems to remove the

pressure of the situation for some children.

103

Summary of Teacher Initiatives

In summary, fifteen themes emerged as teacher initiatives, behaviors, or
factors that elicited children’s responses. The following is a list of the teacher
initiatives that elicited children’s responses: use of breath, body movement, use
of props, teacher silence, musical anticipation, space, individual instruction,
initiatives that contain touch, child joy, parent-child relationship, play, teacher
improvisation, vocal timbre/vowel choice, teacher-child relationship, and the child
asteachen

The following is a brief summary of each teacher initiative.

- The teachers modeled use of breath as an initiative and also to give the
children a chance to audiate.

° The teacher’s body movements, often large arm movements, inspired the
children’s movement responses and vocalizations. Also, movement
responses nearly always accompanied vocal responses.

- Movement was often combined with the use of props (beanbags, scarves,
etc.) in order to play musically with the children and elicit vocal responses.

- Silence was used as an instructional tool so that children were given time
to think and respond.

- When silence was combined with musical anticipation, some children
responded vocally to finish the song or resolve to tonic.

- When given the space to experiment, children would often respond
vocally, perhaps because they believed that they were not being observed

or to gain the teacher’s attention.

104

Individual instruction between one child and the teacher functioned both
as a time to build the teacher-child relationship and to elicit children’s
vocal responses.

The use of touch was also a factor in both building the teacher-child
relationship and eliciting vocal responses.

The presence of child joy would often elicit vocal responses, though the
reason for the child joy is beyond the scope of this study.

The parent-child relationship and how the child functioned with the parent
affected whether the child would respond; this related also to the child’s
comfort level in the classroom.

The Children loved to play, and playful initiatives and interactions would
often elicit vocal responses.

This play would often turn into teacher-child interactions that resembled
improvisatory theatre on a theoretical level; the teachers would take the
children’s vocalizations (musical and non-musical) and turn them into
songs/chants or the teacher and child would interact in an improvisatory
musical conversation.

The teachers found that altering their vowel choice or vocal timbre during
songs and chants to imitate vocalizations from the children engaged the
children and elicited responses/participation.

Just as the parent-child relationship is important, the teacher—child

relationship affected whether the children would respond.

105

- Finally, some of the children also enjoyed taking their turn as teacher,

where they got to give the initiatives, which were vocal responses as well.

106

CHAPTER VI: CHARACTERISTICS OF TEACHER SILENCE

Wait time or teacher silence was the focus of a question in this study. The
data gathered concerning teacher initiatives also helped to inform this question.
The initial coding categories for wait time were:

~Wait time T8: [VVTTS] The pause following any teacher utterance and

preceding any student [child] utterance.

~Wait time ST: [WT ST] The pause following any student utterance and

preceding any teacher utterance.

~Wait time 88: [VVTSS] The pause following a student utterance and

preceding an utterance from the same or a different student.

~Wait time TT: [WTTT] The pause separating consecutive teacher

utterances (Tobin, 1987, p. 90)

These initial coding categories were used in the analysis of a segment of
one class and were analyzed along with descriptive data from field notes,
interviews, and other videotape analysis to become the emergent code,
interactive response chain. In the attempt to label and code teacher
initiatives/responses and the children’s initiatives/responses, I became aware
that often responses became initiatives from either the teacher or child. These
interactions were so complex, that I tried to develop a model for them to help
illustrate the interactions. Exchanges between the teacher and child were like the
spiraling links of DNA, a double helix (teacher and child). This musical exchange

was given the name “interactive response chain.”

107

Interactive Response Chain

A segment of one class was analyzed using WTTS, WTST, WTSS, and
WTTT. It was evident, after a large amount of time analyzing data in this manner,
that these codes would only be partially effective in detailing the child/teacher
interactions. It was not my intention in this study to label length of wait time
beyond describing what it “feels” like in the classroom; thus, wait time was
labeled “short,” “medium,” and “long.” It became evident that the teacher-
teacher, teacher-child, and child-teacher interactions were much more complex
than the original codes led one to believe and that they formed what the
researcher has dubbed an “interactive response chain.”

This interactive response Chain is linked with the discussion on teacher
improvisation in the previous chapter. It is the teacher improvisation with the child
that forms and facilitates the interactive response chain. A teacher would give an
initiative and a child would respond. The child’s response became an initiative for
the teacher, and so on. The child would often give a different response than
he/she was given by the teacher; this formed an improvisatory musical
conversation. It is this improvisation that resulted in the interactive response
chain. The teacher improvisation elicited conversational responses from the
children. An excerpt from the wait time analysis codes that illustrates the
conversational aspects of the interactive response chain follows.

WTI’S — Cindy’s initiative is singing song (Major) with flowing arms,

Tigger‘s response has little body movement but he is leaning

108

WTST —

WTTS —

WTST —

\NI '8.

WTTT-

W'I'I'S —

WTST —

his head forward towards the floor. He sings on “eee” and is
melismatic between 3 and tonic. (Short Wait Time)

Cindy’s response to Tigger is to mimic his final “eee” (TB —
Tonic Bum) on tonic with no body movement and then sing
5-1 eee—eee (TP — Tonal Pattern) with arm movements (BM
— Body Movement) (Short Wait Time)

Cindy’s initiative (previous response) (TP) - Tigger’s
response is 3 on “eee” several times as he sways back and
forth (BM) while sitting in Mom’s lap —

Tigger sings 3 on “eee” — Cindy sings “eee” on 3, 2, 1.
Cindy sings “eee” on 3, 2, 1, - Tigger leans towards floor as
she is singing and touches the floor on 1 (he’s done at this
point and does not look at her again).

Cindy sings on “eee” 5-6-5 (no responses except for an adult
mimicking her) and then she responds by singing on “eee” 3-
2- 1.

Cindy’s “eee” 3-2-1 has a (Medium Wait time) after it and
Pooh laughs on a sort of “ah.”

Cindy responds to Pooh’s laugh by singing 5-1 on “Ah” with
arm movement (BM-) and starts singing song again.

(Long wait time) song is being sung, Pooh responds by

leaning forward and pounding both hands simultaneously on

109

the floor while singing/growling around dominant on ‘amah”,
he does this three times. (Wait Time Analysis)
Here, the teaching improvisation has formed an interactive response chain.
Cindy uses elements of the children’s vocal responses, repetition, imitation,
vowel choice, and silence to engage the children and elicit vocal responses.
The following are examples of the “interactive response chain.” If one
came in during the middle of the exchange, it would be difficult to tell what was a
response and what was an initiative, because they become so intertwined.
Pooh is shaking eggs and chanting “bahs” sort of underneath his breath
as Cindy does an improvisatory “bah” chant after “Obwisana.” He throws
an egg and does a vocal slide on “bah” as he throws another egg and
does a vocal slide on “bah” in a precious head voice, Cindy mimics him.
He hugs his mom and laughs after he throws the second egg — he is very
amused. He chants some “bahs;” Cindy chants back “bahs” as well. He
crawls to get the eggs and shakes one of them. He then starts counting
the eggs on the floor, “One, two, three,” as he points to them. All of the
parents laugh. Cindy starts an improvisatory chant on “bah.” Again, Pooh
shakes his eggs. (Video Summary Form)
Here, again, the teacher (Cindy) responded to the child’s vocalizations by
changing to his activity and vowel choice. She changes from a song to an

improvisatoryI chant as she interacts back and forth with Pooh.

110

Sometimes, children do not need a warm-up time in order to engage in a
musical conversation or interactive response chain. Consider this interaction with
Tigger, which occurred less than ten minutes into class.

Tigger and Cindy improvise together during “Popcorn.”

Cindy was looking/half—facing Tigger and modeling a two macrobeat “pop"

pattern while flowing arms. Tigger models back his OWN pattern, I think

very deliberately different while he flows his arms. Cindy gives him
another pattern/responds and there is silence. Tigger does not respond.

Cindy says excitedly, “Go for another one!” Tigger responds. Cindy

responds. Tigger responds. Cindy responds. Tigger responds and then

turns away and hugs his mother. The moment is over. (Video Summary

Form).

This interaction is captured in more detail in Appendix N. Cindy maintained a
steady tempo throughout the interaction; Tigger’s responses contained a steady
beat, but were at a personal tempo that was slightly faster than Cindy’s tempo.

These interactive response chains also occurred at Little Music Makers.
Mostly between Jen and the Mad Matcher, as he was the oldest chronologically
and also the most musically developed in the class. It is of note that the Mad
Matcher‘s responses begin as imitations, some are improvisational interactions,
and some are pure play.

Jen is laying on her left side with the microphone in her right hand. She

sings a tonal pattern “yum-bum-bum” 1-2-3 for the Mad Matcher and

places the microphone in front of his face, he responds “yum-bum-bum”

111

on 1-2-3. They go through a series of initiatives and responses here.
Some of the Mad Matcher’s responses are imitations and some are more
play. Some are “correct,” as in an exact imitation, others are more speech-
like, perhaps when he gets more nervous from the attention. An excerpt
from their interaction goes as follows: Jen gives him a 1-3-1 and his
response is closer to 5-1 so she does a 5-1 and then he does a 5-1 that is
closer to speaking. She does 1-3—5 and he does a quick 1-3 that is again
closer to speaking voice. Jen does a 5-4-2, the Mad Matcher’s response is
2-7 (that is more speech-like) and then a clear tonic bum. (Video
Summary Form)
The interactive response chain was an improvisatory musical conversation
between the teacher and child. Depending on the skill level and engagement of
the child, these interactions were fruitful in highlighting the child’s musical
development. An important aspect of the interactive response chain is the use of
silence to allow for the child’s response or initiative.
Teacher Silence
Practice suggests silences in teaching may be organizational, anticipatory,
or imitation (Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart). Organizational silence, which is
when a teacher is taking care of collecting props or turning on a recording, was
minimal in both teaching settings and was not noted in data collection as
pertinent for this study. Both anticipatory (the teacher leaves silence so the child
will fill in the answer) and imitation (the teacher leaves silence so the child will

imitate the teacher’s initiative) silences were prevalent in both settings. A3

112

mentioned under teacher initiatives, often silence and musical anticipation would
elicit responses (JB=Jennifer Bailey; CH=Christina Hornbach).
CH: How about that vocal response where the Mad Matcher had a
beanbag on his arm and you sang dominant and then waited?
JB: And I waited and waited for him. I think that he just couldn’t wait
any longer (laughing) and he had to sing the resting tone.
CH: He had it inside of him.
JB: I think 30.
CH: And because you waited, provided silence, and didn’t sing it for
him...
JB: He had to resolve it himself. (Think-aloud Interview, Jennifer Bailey)
Often, both musical anticipation and imitation silence were linked as in the
following example. As is typical, there are multiple things occurring at the same
time, including space and use of a prop as an initiative.
Jen and the Mad Matcher have been playing together. At the end of their
exchange, they each send an egg to each other. Then, Jen moves on to
interact with another child. She sings 5-1 to the other child and the Mad
Matcher sends her an egg. Jen turns and sings 5-1 for him and sends him
an egg. She immediately repeats the gesture but changes from “yum” on 5
to “brrr.” He responds with a near tonic bum. Jen echoes his tonic burn
and waits. He then rolls Jen an egg and sings a very long dominant (that
starts flat but becomes right on) then jumps toward the center; Jen

supplies tonic bum when he lands. (Video Summary Form)

113

Here, the Mad Matcher was answering musically, but also imitating Jen’s
previous responses. Another example of an imitation silence is when Cindy
repeatedly modeled singing dominant on a very long “ah” with her hands in a big
“V” in the air. After she waited, the Little Prince responded by singing “booaaaa”
for a longtime on the 6th scale degree with his rhythm sticks in the air (Video
Summary Form). This example with the Little Prince has been previously
discussed regarding teacher initiatives and space in the previous chapter.
Summary of Teacher Silence

Teacher silence elicited vocal responses from the children. The teacher-
teacher, teacher-child, child-teacher interactions interspersed with teacher
silence formed the researcher labeled “interactive response chain.” In these
interactive response chains (musical conversations), the teachers’
initiatives/responses and the children’s initiatives/responses were complex and
intertwined; the initiatives and responses fed off of each other. Organizational
teacher silences were not necessarily meant to elicit vocal responses, but
sometimes did as they allowed the children the space to explore. Musical

anticipation and imitation silences also were key to eliciting vocal responses.

114

CHAPTER Vll: THE NATURE OF CHILDREN’S RESPONSES
“It took me a long time to understand where he came from. The little prince, who
asked me so many questions, never seemed to hear the ones I asked him. It was
things he said quite at random that, bit by bit, explained everything” (De Saint—
Exupéry, 2000, p. 7).
Children’s Responses in the Early Childhood Music Classroom

Defining the characteristics of a child’s (age birth to three-years-old) vocal
response is the third question of this study. Children’s responses initially were
labeled as vocal, non-vocal, or none; it quickly became apparent that coding the
“none” was not productive. The main codes for a children’s vocal response
evolved into vocal responses (subcategories: tonal and rhythmic) and non-
musical responses. The vocal responses were first sorted into tonal and rhythmic
and then the tonal ones were described as tonic, dominant, or dominant-tonic.
Beyond “tonic,” “dominant,” and “dominant-resting tone,” children’s answers
tended to be unique.

At the beginning of the semester, it took a while to get to know the children
and for them to get to know the teacher, which is why I focused on mid-semester
classes when gathering my data. Even if the child had had the teacher in a
previous semester, it took a while to get comfortable with the new classroom
environment (new music, children and parents). I, too, have experienced in
practice that children need a few classes to become familiar with the musical

repertoire and the new social relations before they perform vocal responses;

Hicks (1993) found this to be true In her research with infants. Still, children were

115

immediately responding vocally, but became more prolific as the semester
progressed.
Vocal Responses
Tonal
Children’s tonal responses in the classes ranged from complex tonal
improvisations to vocal explorations; this is typical for this age range.
“Between ages 12 and 18 months children engage in vocal play and
experimentation, and by 19 months most children begin to acquire melodic
and rhythmic patterning. Vocal play and spontaneous songs continue for
the next several months, consisting mostly of small melodic intervals and
free flexible rhythm patterns. During the second year of life children begin
to employ culturally endorsed musical patterns in their own singing.
Children of 30 to 36 months often are able to imitate standard rhythms and
pitch contours, but rarely with total accuracy.” (Simons, 1986, p. 44).
The most common response was a dominant or tonic intonation on “ah" or “bum,“
though, as discussed previously, the vowel choice varied. Some of these were
random responses and others were purposeful, in relation to Gordon’s model of
preparatory audiation. Some children also sang along with the songs, though this
tended to be true only of the older children (the Mad Matcher, the Little Prince);
these responses were imitative. Vocal tonal responses at the Community Music
School tended towards the extremes; responses usually were either vocal

exploration or more experienced song singing. Though dominant and tonic

116

responses were perhaps the most regular vocal musical response, they may not
have been as prolific as in previous class sessions.
I didn’t hear as much tonic and dominant this semester as I usually hear.
The beanbags and some of the scarves didn’t elicit that (sings 5-1 on
“bum”). The 5 when it’s in the air and the 1 when it’s on the ground
responses, like I have had in many Classes were missing. I seem to get
those kind of responses from kids typically around Pooh’s age. They are
between the infant just soaking it up like a sponge and older kids like
Tigger and the Little Prince. I get it from that middle group, and I did not
have children that age in this group. It was kinds of two ends of the
spectrum in this class this semester. (Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart)
Four of the children in the Community Music School class were 9-13 months, two
were 16-19 months, and the last four were 24-35 months. Although I chose a
typical class setting, there indeed was a small number of children between 12
and 14 months in this class, relatively speaking, and one of the two in the middle
group was Snow White, a child who was extremely quiet and often absent. Pooh,
the other child in the middle age group, was one of the most prolific children in
the class as far as vocal experimentation. Tink, who was in the older group, gave
more responses previous semesters. “I’ve heard more response from her in the
past than I heard this semester, and I think part of that is that she had become so
much more socially aware that she doesn’t quite have time for the musical
responses” (Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart). Both Tigger’s and the Little

Prince’s vocal tonal responses were sometimes sharp this semester, but Cindy

117

noted that this had not been consistent enough to notice a pattern. Tigger
frequently sang dominant-tonic vocal responses. “That was Tigger (referring to a
sung 5-1 on “ah” on the tape). I thought it was interesting that the minute I
switched to ‘ah,” I got noise” (Think-aloud Interview, Cynthia Taggart). This vocal
response was not perfectly in tune but was a purposeful response in relation to
Gordon’s model of preparatory audiation.

Little Music Makers had one child in the youngest group, only 2-months
old; one child was in the middle group, 18-months-old; and two were in the older
group, 32- and 38-months-old. The Baby was quite vocal. His vocalizations were
at times within the tonal context of the preSented song material, although they
were probably random responses, in Gordon’s model. Jen termed these
vocalizations as “biological” vocalizations (Think-aloud Interview, Jennifer
Bailey).

I don’t think he [the Baby] is consciously thinking, “I’m going to sing this

response.” But I think that most of his responses are related to the resting

tone and to the fifth above of any given song. And in fact, he modulates,
because not every song is in the same key. (Think-aloud Interview,

Jennifer Bailey)

Jen was surprised when Gretel gave her a tonal response, as she had been quiet
up until then. “I think that was kind of a monumental thing (laughing/excited) just
because I have been anticipating it for weeks and I don’t think she purposefully
meant to do it” (Think-aloud Interview, Jennifer Bailey). Gretel, 32-months-old,

was imitating Jen in the “baby voice” that she was using with the Baby.

118

But if that’s the way she’s accessible, then I need to run with that. And
then draw more out of her. It was just curious to me that she was doing
that. And that’s really the first time she’s ever sung for me or done any
kind of purposeful tonal response in class. (Think-aloud Interview, Jennifer
Bailey)

Sleeping Beauty did not respond much vocally this semester, though Jen
said that she had given tonic and dominant responses the previous semester
(Think-aloud Interview, Jennifer Bailey). The Mad Matcher, 38-months-old,
responded tonally by singing bits and pieces of songs. He also responded on
dominant and tonic, though at times he too was sharp. He, however, corrected
himself. He thought he was going to the resting tone and landed a little high.
After he heard it come out of his body, he adjusted (Think-aloud Interview,
Jennifer Bailey). The Mad Matcher also produced a tonal improvisation that
contained tonic, sub-dominant, and dominant functions (see Appendix L). These
may be imitative responses; but if he is indeed applying a tonal context to his
singing, he is at Assimilation according to Gordon’s model.

Rhythmic

Vocal rhythmic responses seemed to the researcher to be less prolific
than vocal tonal responses. This may be due to teachers giving fewer rhythmic
initiatives, or perhaps I inadvertently focused more on vocal tonal responses.
Also, some of the noises that children made that sounded rhythmical to me may,

in fact, have been more social, language, or transitional noises.

119

“During the first three years of life, children engage in a great deal of
vocalization, some of which seems to be nondescript noise-making, some
of which appears to be linguistic (or pre-Iinguistic) in nature, but much of
which seems related to the subsequent acquisition of music competence.”
(Davidson, McKemon, 8 Gardner, 1981, p. 302)

Tigger produced some accurate tonal and rhythmic imitations, partly
imitative and partly exploratory (Think-aloud Interview, Cynthia Taggart).
Rhythmically, “Tigger was starting to explore different sounds but still with rhythm
patterns. I don’t think he is feeling context at all; I think he is imitating the longs
and the shorts and how many ‘pops.’ He’s at Imitation yet” (Think-aloud
Interview, Cynthia Taggart). Though probably capable of rhythmic responses in
Imitation, the Mad Matcher gave rhythmic responses in Acculturation, according
to Gordon’s model.

Jen talks about trying to push the Mad Matcher ahead rhythmically.

He surprised me today....l went up and gave him 4-beat rhythm patterns

and most of his rhythmic responses, even when he took over and was

giving them to me, were two-beat patterns. (Think-aloud Interview,

Jennifer Bailey)

The rhythmic responses consisted of absorption, beat movement,
exploration of vocal sounds, and mostly two-beat rhythm patterns. Rhythmic

responses were random, purposeful, and imitative.

120

Vocal Responses in Relation to Preparatory Audiation

Preparatory audiation is a musical development model that illustrates the
process through which young children team and audiate music (Gordon, 2003b).
The types and stages of preparatory audiation are outlined in Chapter One. If a
child is not responding vocally, it is difficult to ascertain his or her type or stage of
musical development. However, it is helpful to have this information so the
teacher can individualize instruction to the child’s personal musical Ieaming
needs. The vocal responses given by the children in this study provided the
teachers with information on how to adapt instruction to those particular children.
For instance, the Baby at Little Music Makers was at Stage 1 and 2 of
Acculturation (absorption and random response); he provided random responses
that were related to resting tone and the dominant (Think-aloud Interview,
Jennifer Bailey). Thus, Jen would continually bathe him in songs and chants in
various tonalities and meters. At times, she would acknowledge his random
responses with a gentle touch on his foot or hand. Jen would also sit right next to
his mother as the mother cuddled with the Baby and sing to him and smile at
him. The Baby was a child who was in Acculturation.

Tigger, as mentioned previously, often sang precise tonic and dominant
responses. Tonally, Tigger was most likely in Imitation (Stage 2 - breaking the
code). Rhythmically, Tigger was imitating and beginning to improvise his own
content in part (see Appendix N); however, though Tigger‘s responses contained

correct content, they were not always in context. Thus, Tigger is in Imitation.

121

The Mad Matcher’s vocal responses (rhythmic and tonal) occurred over a
wide range. Some isolated responses might make a teacher think that he was
only at Acculturation, as his responses were at times almost random. However,
with closer examination and study, the Mad Matcher’s responses that were less
developed were when he was acting shy, bored, or distracted. In actuality, he
was at least at Imitation (Stage 2 — breaking the code). He gave dominant and
tonic responses that were precise and also improvised tonally as illustrated in
Appendix L, which may mean he is starting to put a tonal context to his singing
and thus would be at Assimilation. It was more difficult to ascertain where he was
developmentally for rhythm, because he responded less rhythmically and tended
to get silly. The majority of the children in both settings were in Acculturation and
Imitation, both tonally and rhythmically.

Summary of Children’s Vocal Responses

The children in this study produced both tonal and rhythmic vocal
responses, along with non-musical vocal responses. Tonal responses were
primarily tonic, dominant, and dominant-tonic (resting tone) responses, though
some children did sing short diatonic tonal patterns. Children’s vocalizations
ranged from random vocal explorations to tonal improvisations. Rhythmic
responses occurred less frequently than vocal and most were random chanting
or two-beat rhythm patterns. The teachers both maximized the children’s non-

musical responses by turning them into musical improvisations.

122

CHAPTER Vlll: EMERGENT THEMES
“We team through experience and experiencing, and no one teaches
anyone anything. This is as true for the infant moving from kicking to
crawling to walking as it is for the scientist with equations. If the
environment permits is, anyone can Ieam whatever he or she chooses to
team; and if the individual permits it, the environment will teach everything
it has to teach” (Spolin, 1999, p. 3).

As the data for this study were coded and analyzed, a few emergent
themes continually showed up in the coding process. Even thought they do not
directly answer the initial research questions, the emergent themes (routine, child
independence and community) shed light on the overall process of eliciting vocal
responses from children in early childhood music class.

Routine

Valerio et al. (1998) confirm that parents/caregivers and children react
positively to routine. The routines of the classroom increased child comfort,
engagement, and awareness. In both early childhood music classes, the children
experienced routines or rituals that occurred within the class and also within
activities. For instance, each class had a specific song that they did as a “Hello
Song” and “Goodbye Song;” most classes included a dance with scarves and
activities associated with beanbags and egg shakers. Giving the beanbag a “ride”
on their head was a typical activity in these classes; it encouraged continuous
fluid movement by the children. Also, singing dominant while the beanbag was
on their head and dumping it to the ground and singing tonic was a familiar

activity designed to tonally acculturate children and to elicit response. The simple

rituals of always placing a beanbag on their head and singing dominant and then

123

singing tonic when it hit the floor gave the children a musical routine to follow. In
the next example, Tigger shows he remembers what to do with his beanbag. “As
soon as the beanbags are handed out, Tigger places one on his head and drops
it to the floor and looks very happy” (Video Summary Form). These routines may
contribute to child comfort and may elicit child joy.

Both teachers regularly performed the following activity with the children.
The children put a scarf over their head and wait to be “found.” The teacher sang
“Where’s [insert child’s name)?” on dominant as she approached and then sang,
“There he is” on tonic when she pulled off the scarf. The children would often
place the scarves on their head as soon as they were brought out in anticipation
of this routine. However, Jen worried about perhaps getting too predictable.

JB: I keep on thinking that I’ve got to do a new song Part of it is that I

just get tired of it [referring to the Hello Song] and part of it is such a
ritual with the kids that a new song would kind of make them say,
“Hey, what are you doing?”

CH: “That’s not our beginning song.”

JB: Yes. (Think-aloud Interview, Jennifer Bailey)

Both teachers recognized the importance of rituals. “The rituals are very
important....They know it is the end. This is a marker in the class period and so
they go find their parents and come back to the circle” (Think-aloud Interview,
Cynthia Taggart). It appeared that the children became accustomed to the

musical and social routines and thrived on them.

124

Child Independence

Independence was an emergent theme as well. Child independence was
encouraged in both settings; children were offered the opportunity to play
individually and in a group with a variety of props. “Important independence skills
are being acquired during these years, including personal care such as toileting,
feeding, and dressing. The most appropriate teaching technique for this age
group is to give ample opportunities for the children to use self-initiated repetition
to practice newly acquired skills and to experience feelings of autonomy and
success” (Bredekamp, 1987, p. 5). In some cases, the children who were the
most independent were producing the most vocal responses, though this
relationship was inconsistent.

Tigger is very socially independent and we got a millions responses from

him. Tink is very socially independent and we didn’t get a million

responses from her. I do think that we will at some point... I do think that

the initial willingness to be independent is sort of a breaking point at which

you’ll hear responses. (Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart)
The children’s behaviors are wildly varied in this area.

-Sleeping Beauty did not leave the shelter of her mother except when her

mother got up and walked away to dance and she didn’t move. [She was

not vocally responsive this semester]

-The Mad Matcher went to both extremes. He would leave his

grandparents and also snuggled. He was more snuggly and shy at the

125

beginning of the class and then as he warmed-up, went out to play on his
own. [Numerous vocal responses this semester]

-[In another class], The Mad Matcher stayed in between mom and her
boyfriend but did not need to be touching them or in their laps all the time.
He did interact with both of them and come back for hugs every so often.
He did interact with Jen if she came to his share of the circle.

~Alice was very independent [and not very vocally responsive yet, though
her lips were moving a lot].

~Tigger ran away to play but came back to his mom [numerous vocal
responses this semester].

-Tink moved away and came back to her dad [few vocal responses].
(Video Summary Form)

Child independence is associated with the social skills that allow for

children to respond musically. If a child is socially withdrawn, no matter how

much there is going on in his/her head musically, he/she will be unable to share it

in an individual response. The children who are the most shy, do share if the

other factors come together, for example, if they are given the space to explore

or the focus is not on them. Children who were more independent from their

parents gave the majority of the responses in this study; however, the less

independent children were able to find ways to increase their comfort level and

respond. One of the ways that the comfort level of the children was nurtured in

the music classes was the sense of community that was developed in both

settings.

126

Community
Gretel throws an egg at Jen [teacher]; Jen throws an egg at Gretel, who is
in the middle of the circle with all of the eggs, and sings tonic “bum.” Who
started this game? Gretel throws one back at Jen. Baby makes a
vocalization in the background and Jen sings “aeeh” on tonic and sends
an egg again to Gretel. Jen extends the game to Sleeping Beauty and
then Gretel turns and includes her mother. (Video Summary Form)
Parents and children in class work to clean up props together; Gretel
helps the Mad Matcher put away the beanbag “keyboard” he has laid out on the
carpet. There was a feeling of community in both music classrooms; children
were interacting with other children and parents are interacting With other
children.
The Baby’s mom, who is typically relatively quiet in class, jumps in when
the Mad Matcher won’t take a ride in the parachute. She asks him to Show
the Baby how to take a ride. The Mad Matcher takes his mom’s boyfriend
into the center and they ride on the parachute together. The Baby’s mom
says, “Excellent. Good job,” when he gets in the parachute. (Video
Summary Form)
The parents had created a community in which they interacted with each other
and helped each other out.
The children are comfortable enough with each other now. Tigger tried to
hug and kiss Tink and she fell over because he was a little rough. Cindy

pulled him back and asked him to apologize. As Tink turned to go back to

127

her dad, Tigger tried to kiss her again, but since she had turned away, he

bend down and kissed her bottom. Everyone in the room laughed. (Video

Summary Form)
“I like how the parents really like all of the other children and think they’re fun”
(Think-Aloud Interview, Cynthia Taggart). There was a point in both Classrooms
at which the children felt comfortable to explore and interact with other parents.

Summary of Emergent Themes

The routine/rituals of the classroom, child independence, and a sense of
community all contributed to an educational setting in which perhaps the children
felt it was safe or were inspired to respond vocally. Both Classroom settings
offered a rich, musical environment that was supportive and stimulating for the
children. The routines and rituals established in these environments enabled the
children to develop behavior patterns and expectations that increased their
comfort levels. The children in this study varied wildly in their level of
independence. Level of child Independence did not seem to have a definitive
effect on whether a child would respond; perhaps other factors, such as space
and community, may have compensated for a child’s lack of independence.
Finally, the development of a sense of community increased the overall comfort

of both the children and parents and may have increased musical interactions.

128

CHAPTER IX: DISCUSSION
“’The Eighth Square at last!’ she cried as she bounded across, and threw
herself down to rest on a lawn as soft as moss, with little flower-beds dotted
about it here and there. ‘Oh, how glad I am to get here! And what is this on my
head?’ she exclaimed in a tone of dismay, as she put her hands up to something
very heavy, that fitted tight all around her head.
‘But how can it have got there without my knowing it?’ she said to herself,
as she lifted it off, and set it on her lap to make out what it could possibly be”
(Carroll, 2000, p. 248).
Overview of the Study
Purpose and Problems
The purpose of this research was to gain an understanding of teacher
initiatives, children’s responses, and the time (teacher silence) between teacher
initiatives and children’s responses in early childhood music classes. The
problems of this study were: (1) What teacher behaviors (intentional or
unintentional) precede children’s vocal responses? (2) What is the quality and
length of the teacher silence between teacher initiatives and children’s vocal
responses?, and (3) What are the characteristics of children’s vocal responses?
However, data also emerged regarding what environmental factors and
relationships helped elicit children’s vocal responses and the nature of the
‘ complex interactions between a teacher and a child (interactive response chain).
Method
Naturalistic inquiry proved to be a fruitful method for this study. Because I
have been and am currently an early childhood music teacher, I felt comfortable

in the environment and with interacting with the teachers, parents, and children.

Experiencing the classes first-hand by sitting in the circle and videotaping

129

provided me with one level of insight. The depth of my understanding increased
as I recorded what I saw in field notes and then discussed it with the teachers
and parents. This journey continued as I sat and watched the tapes for the first
time with the teachers. The think-aloud interviews proved to be an invaluable
source for data; the teachers both had unique ideas and interpretations that often
matched my own or alerted me to a behavior/interaction that I had missed. Third,
conducting parent and teacher interviews allowed me the opportunity to ask
questions that emerged from other data collection and analysis. Next, as a result
of watching the videotapes again alone, I was able to begin coding the behaviors
into emergent themes as I filled out video summary forms. In addition, I was
simultaneously coding the transcribed teacher/parent interviews, teacher think-
aloud interviews, field notes, and artifacts from the sites (flyers and brochures).
Finally, this information was cut and pasted into themes and organized for
analysis.
Findings

In a participant-observation study, the aim, in part, is to be aware of the
culture and environment from a participant’s point of view (Hatch, 1998). This is
an interpretive science, a narrative approach in which proximity and interactions
with subjects is key (Graue 8 Walsh, 1998); there is no claim that the findings are
generalizable.

Teacher Initiatives
The use of breath, body movement, props, teacher silence, musical

anticipation, space, individual instruction, initiatives that contain touch, play,

130

teacher improvisation, and vocal timbre as well as the existence and/or nature of
child joy, the parent-child relationship, the teacher-child relationship, and the
child as teacher all elicited children’s vocal responses in these two eariy
childhood music settings. The teachers used an audible breath, large body
movements, and musical interactions with props as a means towards eliciting
vocal responses. Often, an audible breath combined with silence would elicit a
response from a child. Musical initiatives that included the teacher "buzzing” the
student on their stomach or tickling their toe served to engender the teacher-child
relationship. Though it is not clear from this study what brings about child joy, it is
clear that when the children were joyful, they responded vocally. Also, the parent-
child and teacher-child relationships were intertwined in whether a Child would
respond. Some parents were more relaxed than others in their interactions with
their children. The behavior patterns of the parent and child come mostly set from
home environment interactions, but the teacher has the unique opportunity to
foster a relationship in which the child feels comfortable enough to participate.
Playing with the children in an improvisatory manner elicited vocal responses and
musical interactions in which the teachers adapted their vocal timbre or
song/chant to fit the child’s vocal responses. In both settings, the children often
enjoyed acting as the teacher; this follows along with the children enjoying play
behaviors.

The preceding ideas are of course not all-inclusive. These particular
classes were unique sub-cultures that will not be replicated again. However, the

findings may provide practitioners with information to inform their teaching by

131

trying out similar teacher initiatives to see if indeed they elicit responses in their
own teaching setting.

Of particular note is the use of play and teacher improvisation as teaching
tools. These two themes distinguished themselves in part because of the
frequency that they occurred in both settings and data sources, but also because
they were continual themes throughout the class. Other initiatives were more
isolated events that continually occurred throughout the class (e.g., not every
activity had initiatives that contained touch). It was the intermingling of play and
teacher improvisation throughout the classes that formed the foundation for the
individual activities and encouraged communication between the child and the
teachen

Izzo (1997) theorizes that we, as a society, have lost the art of conversation
and communication. Communities have changed, as parents, in order to maintain
a certain standard of living, both tend to work. lzzo notes that changes in society
have increased the amount of information we receive, but not the quality of the
interaction. For instance, in order to get the day’s news, we turn to the television
rather than a neighbor; for music, we turn on an electronic device instead of
playing an instrument; and for our natural inclination to play, we turn to video
games and movies instead of imaginative play (lzzo, 1997). “What we are
missing is simple creative play, the first play we ever knew, the play of
connection, experimentation, and discovery, the play of make-believe” (lzzo,
1997, p. 7). I220 (1997) presents ideas regarding play and relates them to

interactive theatre. The following are a selection of concepts that Izzo (1997)

132

uses to discuss interactive, improvisatory theatre that pertain to play and the
findings of the current study:

1. There must be enjoyment.

2. There are rules.

3. There is an element of tension.

4. Play builds community.

5. Play begins with an invitation

6. The players must be approachable.

Community, play, and child enjoyment were a part of whether a child gave
an individual vocal response. The “rules” of the “game” in musical play became
apparent to the children as they got to know the teacher and music class. For
instance, the answer to a rhythmic pattern sung on dominant was “burn” sung on
tonic. When the teacher chanted a two-beat rhythm pattern, the child figures out
that he/she was supposed to echo the pattern.

Developing “community” in early childhood music classes enhances
children’s participation and individual vocal responses. Each class had its own
sub-culture, and the strength of the community grew as the semester
progressed. Parents increased their interactions with other children as all people
in the situation became more familiar and comfortable. Here, play began with an
invitation and musical interaction began with a musical initiative. Finally, the
teacher must be approachable, so that, in time, in their own way, the children

become approachable.

133

Characteristics of Teacher Silence: Interactive Response Chain

I have coined the term “interactive response chain” to describe the
complex interactions that occur in the complex sub-cultures between the players
(teacher, parents, and children). Often when observing the classes, it was difficult
to tell what was an initiative and what was a response, as some teaching
behaviors served both purposes. This interactive response chain may be thought
of as a teaching model. Teachers may provide an initiative that came from a
child’s response. The teacher’s initiative inspires the child to respond, and his/her
response becomes an initiative for the teacher. This interactive response chain is
inextricably intertwined with teacher improvisation; one cannot exist without the
other or the whole interaction would be just an imitation of the same original
teacher initiative.

The idea of the interactive response chain and use of improvisation is
useful in teaching practice and study. All teacher musical utterances, whether
they were intended as an initiative or response, become possible initiatives for
the child with whom the teacher is interacting or for another child in the
classroom. In addition, teachers may use child utterances (musical or non-
musical) and respond to them musically. Utterances from children are primarily
responses, but many of these may be turned into initiatives. Teachers should feel
free to use silence in combination with an interactive response chain to elicit

children’s vocal responses.

134

The Nature of Children’s Responses

The results suggest that children from birth to approximately three-years-
old are capable of spontaneous vocalizations, exploration of vocal sounds,
random responses, and purposeful responses. Children’s vocal responses were
predominantly tonic, dominant, and dominant-resting tone combinations; these
were in imitation and response to, in part, the modeling of the teachers. Some
vocal responses were non-musical, “Oh, goodie, she’s getting out the eggs!” or
“Let go of me!” from a toddler who is being penned in by a parent. Children were
also capable of highly developed musical responses.
Other Findings

The spontaneous musical interactions that I had the pleasure of observing
in these classes highlighted the importance of reactive teaching, in which the
teacher is almost facilitating improvisational theater. Improvisation in this sense is
a totally unscripted musical interaction with children, in which the magic of the
interaction lies in the spontaneity of the situation. Seham (2001) states, “The
devotion that many improvisers feel, both for the improv form in general and
usually for their particular troupe (or for their own team within a larger company),
is part of the basis for my definition of Chicago improv as a subculture” (p. 38).
The devotion of the teachers to the children is apparent and the teacher, parents,
and children form a sub-culture in their early childhood music classes. In this
study, this has been supported by the themes of community, parent-child

interactions, and teacher-child interactions.

135

The results suggest that there are numerous ways to elicit vocal
responses from children, but did not address perhaps reasons why some
children do not respond. As I think about the findings of this study, I have
reflected upon the original purpose and problems and emergent themes, but wish
to think ahead to how this information may maximize instructional effectiveness
or guide future research.

Summary

The major points of this study that I wish to highlight are reviewed below,
followed by suggestions for future research and implications for early childhood
music teaching. A child’s musical development is the result of interactions with
the environment, the sub-culture of music class, the teacher, his/her parent, other
parents, and other children; this is an interactionist teaching environment. The
thoughts of Dewey and Piaget support the interactionist perspective (Losardo 8
Notari-Syverson, 2001). Teaching is not a monologue; it is process-oriented. It is
active, not passive. Teachers should maximize individual and group interactions
with children that are driven by the children’s’ needs.

Teachers should provide children with a rich and diverse musical
environment. This environment should be comfortable and playful. Musical
Ieaming should be presented in an informal, play-oriented environment.
Assessment may also occur in the context of play through observation of student
response. Play is an “occasion” or opportunity for responses — children are
inviting you into their world. “The child is observed in spontaneous play with a

caregiver or another adult without restrictions on environment, toys, or timing”

136

(Losardo 8 Notari-Syverson, 2001, p. 210). The combination of a playful yet
engaging environment enhances the probability of a fruitful learning environment.
“It is this serious playfulness, this combination of concern and humiliw, that
makes it possible to be both engaged and carefree at the same time”
(Csikszentmihalyi, 1997, p. 133).

The formation and nurturing of an interactive community is essential for a
vital Ieaming environment. Teachers must develop relationships with children
and children with teachers. Parents are vital to this community. Parents form
relationships with other children, parents, and the teacher. For it to be productive,
all people involved need to be aware that it is a community and must be willing to
participate.

“All communication is an interactive feedback loop, and any loop you feed
will grow” (Elgin, 1996, p. 10). Elgin points out that except in memorized
discourse (a play, a concerto), people create what they say from what is said to
them. Similarly, young children in a musical setting will base their responses on
the musical initiatives of the teacher and the teacher bases his/her responses on
what the children say or do — it is a never-ending chain. However, this interaction
does not just loop back and forth, it spirals into a chain of responses and
initiatives. The interactive response chain in early childhood music class, which is
a term that l coined as an emergent theme in this study, would support the idea
that children learn through dialogue versus isolated thinking or play. “This type of

instruction is characterized by adult-child interactions in which the adult typically

137

follows the child’s lead or capitalizes on a child’s interests” (Losardo 8 Notari-
Syverson, 2001, p. 210).

Teachers should include silence in their teaching initiatives and behaviors.
“Teachers who consciously managed the duration of pauses after their
questioning and provided regular intervals of silence during explanation created
an environment where thinking was expected and practiced” (Tama, 1989, p. 3).
Children need an opportunity to process material and to formulate their
responses; if there is no silence, there is no thinking time.

In the Pillsbury Foundation Studies, Moorhead 8 Pond (1978) observed
young children and their interactions with music in a free-play setting. Moorhead
8 Pond (1978) found that in order to produce music, children needed free play
time that included freedom, movement, repetition, imitation, a social environment,
group play and individual play. Similarly, in this study, imitation (teacher
adaptation/improvisation) movement, environment (community), and play were
emergent themes. In my study, both teachers naturally imitated the children’s
vocal responses and used child musical utterances as ideas for improVisations
and chants. There is little research on how children team in early childhood
music classes. It is my hope that the this study may help develop an
understanding of teacher initiatives and silence and their usefulness in eliciting
responses from children in early childhood classes.

Implications for Future Research
This research examined children’s vocal responses in direct relation to

teacher initiatives in early childhood music classes. Further study of the elements

138

that influence children’s vocal responses in a teaching context would be useful in
enhancing teacher preparation and practice. It would be worthwhile to replicate
this study with young children in other age ranges, specifically 3-5 years-old and
5-7 years-old. In addition, further study with children birth to 3-years-old in which
there are more children in the class who are 12 to 24-months-old should be
conducted. Both of the classes in the current study had few children in this age
range. It would be valuable to seek out children of this age range when
replicating this study.

Though community and relationships were not the focus of this study,
these themes emerged as important to eliciting children’s responses. McCusker
(2001) also found this to be an emergent theme; being a part of a community of
learners affected the children’s music making. More research on early childhood
music classes as a sub-culture and the formation of a community may provide
insights into this unique Ieaming environment. More specifically, research should
continue to look at silence in instruction in the early childhood music setting as
well as the dynamic equation of the interactive response chain. There is minimal
research investigating the types of responses children are capable of in informal,
structured guidance in music (versus free-play).

Berger 8 Cooper (2003) noted that adult valuing or approval enhanced a
child’s musical play, future research should investigate the role of play in a young
Child’s musical development. Specifically, research should investigate the role of

cooperative play in an informal, structured guidance music class.

139

Finally, I noticed that children’s vocal responses seem to have connection
with their movement responses; further investigation into what the link is between
movement and vocal responses would prove useful in research and practice. As
researchers continue to study teaching behaviors (type of teacher initiatives, use
of silence/space) that elicit children’s responses, researchers and practitioners
will continue to gain insight into the process of music acquisition for young
children.

There is also a need for research regarding the collegiate education and
professional development of early childhood music teachers. What type of early
childhood music theory and method are undergraduate students practicing and
Ieaming? How many undergraduate programs offer early childhood music
methods as a course? As there is an increasing awareness of the importance of
early childhood music education, numerous challenges face early childhood
music teachers; answers to these challenges may be found in practice, the
education of the practitioners, and in future research.

Implications for Early Childhood Music Teachers

It is not appropriate to generalize findings of a qualitative study beyond the
immediate research environment. However, based on the findings of this study,
the following are a few suggestions for early childhood music teachers to explore
and experiment with in their own teaching.

1. Provide an interactive teaching environment. This study suggests that
the ideal early childhood music environment is most effective when it is an

interactive environment, not unlike improvisatory theatre. When the stage

140

is set, the teacher, parents, and children (characters) are co-creators in
musical learning. The teacher should contribute to this environment by
adapting instructing to children’s responses and thus engaging children in
the creation of the conversation.

. Provide a playful and improvisatory environment. Because this
environment should be spontaneous, the success of the teaching is based
upon the teacher’s ability to teach in an improvisatory manner. Teachers
should use children’s musical utterances as a basis for improvisatory
songs and chants. Teachers should provide a playful, unstructured music
Ieaming environment.

. Provide a playful model for children and parents/caregivers. In a
teaching environment, you get what you give. Teachers should be playful
and uninhibited in their movement and music making. The children will
only be as playful and adventurous in their music making as the teacher is
in his/her modeling.

. Develop and value relationships and community. It is helpful to build
relationships with children and a classroom community. When children
feel comfortable and enjoy interacting with a teacher, they are more likely
to respond. Community interactions with other parents and children also
provide a social network of support for infants and toddlers in early

childhood music classes.

141

5. Seek individual responses from children. Teachers must continue to
find ways to elicit individual responses from children as it provides
information on the children’s musical Ieaming and development.

6. Consciously provide moments of silence to allow children time to
think.

Perhaps this is all conjecture of what it is like to look through a child’s eye
or try to look through the window at a child’s skill, development, or soul.
Children’s Ieaming and development is a complicated and often misunderstood
world. However, my experiences with these children have led me to believe that
researchers and practitioners may find useful information about children’s
musical development by participating in and observing early childhood classes;
data gathered may improve both research and practice. I have grown immensely
in my own teaching by participating in these classes and observing these
children and teachers playing and making music. The knowledge I have gleaned
will continue to inform my own practice and research.

Epilogue

I change the “pop-pops” into “beep-beeps” for the rest of the activity or as

long as l have his/her attention. Yeah, that’s why I say it really is almost

like improvisational theatre in that I really don’t have a lesson plan. I have

a list of songs and the associated props that I could use with them,

although sometimes I don’t even use the songs on the list. And I always

have way more songs than I need, so that I can use it more as a menu

than as a roadmap. But in some ways I would love to not even have to use

142

any of that. I would love to be able to take what the kids give me and go
there. But in order to do that, I need a lot of responses from them, and I
don’t necessarily find that the things that I do in terms of improvisation with
one group of children consistently pull responses out of others. I find that
the repetition of songs so that kids are comfortable with them and they can
predict and anticipate a little bit is what pulls responses out of most kids.
But, when l improvise based on a child’s response, the child that gave me
the response absolutely entrains on me and is mine for the moment.

(Teacher Interview, Cynthia Taggart)

143

REFERENCES

Achilles [Metz], E. (1992). Musical interactions with children: Parents’ beliefs,
attitudes, and values. In H. Lees Music Education: Sharing Musics of the
World, Proceedings of the 20’" World Conference of the International
Society for Music Education held in Seoul, Korea (pp. 42-47).
Christchurch, New Zealand: The Printery.

Achilles [Metz], E. (1997). Music in migrant preschool education programs.
[Abstract]. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 131,
21-22.

Alvarez, B. J. & Berg, M. H. (2002). Musical learning and teaching and the young
child. In E. Boardman (Ed.), Dimensions of musical learning and teaching
(pp. 121-137). MENC: The National Association for Music Education.

Andress, B. (1986). Toward an integrated developmental theory for early
childhood music education. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music
Education, 86, 10-17.

Andress, B. (1998). Music for young children. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College
Publishers.

Andress, B. L., Heimann, H. M., Rinehart, C. A., & Talbert, E. G. (1973). Music in
early childhood. Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference.

Apfelstadt, H. (1982). Children’s vocal range: Research findings and implications
for music education. Update: Applications of Research in Music
Education, 1(2), 3-7.

Barrett, M. (1997). Invented notations: A view of young children’s musical
thinking. Research Studies in Music Education, 8, 2-14.

Barrett, M. (2000). Windows, mirrors, and reflections: A case study of adult
constructions of children’s musical thinking. Bulletin of the Council for
Research in Music Education, 145, 43-61.

Barrett, M. (2001). Constructing a view of children’s meaning-making as notators:
A case-study of a five-year-old’s descriptions and explanations of invented
notations. Research Studies in Music Education, 26, 33-45.

Barrie, J. M. (2003). Peter Pan. New York: Aladdin Classics.

Bentzen, W. R. (1993). Seein young children: A guide to observing and
recording behavior (2n Ed.). Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers.

144

Berger, A. A. & Cooper, S. (2003). Musical play: A case study of preschool
children and parents. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(2), 151-
165.

Bredekamp, 8., Ed. (1987). Developmentally appropriate practice in early
childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8.
Washington, 0.0.: National Association for the Education of Young
Children.

Bresler, L. (1995). Ethnography, phenomenology and action research in music
education. The Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning, 6(3), 4-
16.

Buckley, B. (2003). Children’s communication skills: From birth to five years.
London: Routledge.

Campbell, P. S. (1998). Songs in their heads: Music and its meaning in children’s
lives. New York: Oxford University Press.

Carroll, L. (2000). The annotated Alice: The definitive edition. Alice’s adventures
in wonderland & through the looking glass. New York: W. W. Norton and
Company.

Cohen, D. (2002). How the child’s mind develops. London: Routledge.

Community Music School Flyer (n.d.). School of Music: Michigan State University
[Flyer]. East Lansing, MI.

Community Music School Flyer 2 (n.d.). School of Music: Michigan State
University [Flyer]. East Lansing, MI.

Community Music School Website. Retrieved December 5, 2003, from
httpzllwww.msu.edu/~commusicl

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: The Psychology of engagement with
everyday life. New York: Harper Collins.

Davidson, L., McKemon, P., & Gardner, H. (1981 ). The acquisition of song: A
developmental approach. In Documentary Report of the Ann Arbor
Symposium (pp. 301-315). Reston, VA: Music Educators National
Conference.

De Saint-Exupéry, A. (2000). The Little Prince. San Diego: Harcourt, lnc..

Elgin, S. H. (1996). The gentle art of communicating with kids. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.

145

Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data
(revised edition). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Flowers, P. J., & Dunne-Sousa, D. (1988). Pitch-pattern accuracy, tonality, and
vocal range in preschool children’s singing. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 38(2), 102-114.

Foley, J. R. (1978). Observing the nature of young children ’s musicality: An
observation study of two classes in the Center for Young Children. A
seminar paper, MENC Historical Center, Special Collections in Performing
Arts, University of Maryland Libraries.

Fox, D. B. (1982). The pitch range and contour of infant vocalizations.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus.

Gordon, E. E. (2003a). Learning sequences in music: Skill, content, and pattern.
Chicago: G. I. A. Publications, Inc..

Gordon, E. E. (2003b). A music learning theory for newborn and young children.
Chicago: G.l.A. Publications, Inc.

Graue, M. E. & Walsh, D. J. (1998). Studying children in context: Theories,
methods, and ethics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Greenberg, M. (1979). Your children need music. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.:
Prentice-Hall.

Haslett, B. B., & Samter, W. (1997). Children communicating: The first 5 years.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Hatch, J. A. (1998). Qualitative research in early childhood education. In Issues
in Early Childhood Educational Research. Spodek, B, Saracho, O. N., and
Pellegrini, A. D. (Eds.) New York: Teachers College Press.

Heyge, L. & Sillick, A. (1998). Music: A natural way to play with babies. Early
Childhood Connections, 8-13.

Hicks, W. K. (1993). An investigation of the initial stages of preparatory audiation
(Doctoral dissertation, Temple University, 1993).

Humphreys, J. T. (1985). The child-study movement and public school music
education. Journal of Research in Music Education, 33(2), 79-86.

lzzo, G. (1997). The art of play: The new genre of interactive theatre.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

146

Kenney, S. H., & Persellin, D. (Compilers) (2000). Designing music environments
for early childhood. Reston, VA: MENC: The National Association for
Music Education.

Kim, J. (2000). Children’s pitch matching, vocal range, and developmentally
appropriate practice. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 14(2),
1 52-60.

Little Music Makers Flyer (n.d.). Little Music Makers [Flyer]. Farrnington Hills, MI.

Losardo, A., & Notari-Syverson, A. (2001). Alternative approaches to assessing
young children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co..

McCusker, Joan (2001). Emerging musical literacy: Investigating young
children’s music cognition and musical problem-solving through invented
notations (Doctoral dissertation, Eastman School of Music, 2001).

Mclver, K. (2002). Simple techniques for good vocal health. Early Childhood
Connections, 8(4), 16-19.

Metz [Achilles], E. (1987). Movement as a musical response among preschool
children (Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, 1986),

Metz [Achilles], E. (1989). Movement as a musical response among preschool
children. Journal of Research in Music Education, 37(1), 48-60.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded
sourcebook (2”d ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Miller, L. B. (1984). Music in early childhood: Naturalistic observation of young
children’s musical behaviors (Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas,
1983)

Miller, L. B. (1986). A description of children’s musical behaviors: Naturalistic.
Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 87, 1-16.

Milne, A. A. (2001). Wrnnie-the-Pooh. New York: Dutton Children’s Books.

Moog, H. (1976). The musical experience of the pre-school child (C. Clarke,
Trans). London: Schott.

Moorhead, G. E., and Pond, D. (1978 [1941-1951]). Music of young children:
Pillsbury Foundation Studies. Santa Barbara: Pillsbury Foundation for
Advancement of Music Education.

Morin, F. L. (2001). Cultivating music play: The need for changed teaching
practice. General Music Today 14(2), 24—29.

147

Mosher, R. S. (2001). Silence, listening, teaching, and the space of what is not.
Language Arts, 78(4), 366-70.

Music Educators National Conference (MENC) Task Force for National
Standards in the Arts (1994). The school music program: A new vision —
The K-12 national standards, pre-K standards and what they mean to
music educators. Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference.

National Education Goals Panel (1998). Principles and recommendations for
early childhood assessments. Washington, D. 0: US. Government
Printing Office: Author.

Nilsen, B. (1997). Week by week: Plans for observing and recording young
children. Albany: Delmar Publishers.

Phillips, K. H. (1992). Teaching kids to sing. New York: Schirmer.

Phillips, K. H. (1997). Effects of psychomotor instruction on elementary general
music students’ singing performance. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 45, 185-196.

Piaget, J. (1962). Play dreams, and imitation in early childhood. New York:
Nonon.

Reynolds, A. M. (1995). An investigation of the movement responses performed
by children 18 months to three years of age and their caregivers to rhythm
chants in duple and triple meters (Doctoral dissertation, Temple
University, 1995).

Rowe, M. B. (1987). Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up.
American Education, 11, 38-43, 47.

Santucci, P. (2002). Infant responses to baritone and falsetto singing during face-
to-face interactions. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of South
Carolina, Columbia.

Scott-Kassner, C. (1993). Musical characteristics. In Music in Prekindergarten:
Planning and Teaching. Palmer, M., and Sims, W. L. (Eds.) Reston, VA:
Music Educators National Conference.

Seham, A. E. (2001). Whose improv is it anyway? Beyond second city. Jackson:
University Press of Mississippi.

Shelley, S. (1981). Investigating the musical capabilities of young children.
Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 68, 26-34.

148

Simons, G. (1986). Early childhood musical development: A survey of selected
research. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 86, 36-
52.

Sims, W. L. ( Ed.) (1995). Strategies for teaching Prekindergarten Music. Reston,
VA: Music Educators National Conference.

Smith, R. B. (1963). The effect of group vocal training on the singing ability of
nursery school children. Journal of Research in Music Education, 11(2),
137-141 .

Spolin, V. (1999). Improvisation for the theater: A handbook of teaching and
directing techniques. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.

Stahl, R. J. (1994). Using “think-time” and “wait-time” skillfully in the classroom
(Report No. EDO-SO-94-3). Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearinghouse for
Social Studies/Social Science Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 370885)

Suthers, L. (1997). Infant and toddler movement responses to sound-making.
Early Childhood Connections, 3(1), 19-24.

Taggart, C. C. (2003). Child-centered play in music: Developmentally appropriate
practice. Early Childhood Connections 9(2), 15-23.

Taggart, C. C., Bolton, B. M., Reynolds, A. M., Valerio, W. H., & Gordon, E. E.
(2000). Jump right in: The music curriculum. Chicago: GIA Publications.

Tama, M. C. (1989). Critical thinking: Promoting it in the classroom. Bloomington,
IN: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED306554).

Tobin, K. (1987). The role of wait time in higher cognitive level Ieaming. Review
of Educational Research, 57(1), 69-95.

Valerio, W. H. (1997). Surprise! Music development means music play for adults
as well as children. Early Childhood Connections, (Summer), 7-14.

Valerio, W. H. (2005). A music acquisition research agenda for Music Learning
Theory. In M. R. Runfola & C. C. Taggart (Eds), The Development and
Practical Applications of Music Learning Theory (pp. 101-114). Chicago:
GIA Publications.

Valerio, W. H., Reynolds, A. M., Bolton, B. M., Taggart, C. C., & Gordon, E. E.
(1998). Music play. Chicago: GIA Publications.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

149

Webster’s ninth new collegiate dictionary (1987). Springfield, MA: Merriam-
Webster, Inc..

Wilbum, R. E. (2000). Understanding the preschooler. New York: Peter Lang
Publishing.

Young, S. (1998/99). Just making a noise? Reconceptualizing the music-making
of 3- and 4-year-olds in a nursery setting. Early Childhood Connections,

(Winter), 14-22.

Young, S. (1999). The interpersonal basis of spontaneous instrumental play
among three- and four-year-olds in a nursery setting. Bulletin of the
Council for Research in Music Education, 142, 96.

Young, S. (2002). Young children’s spontaneous vocalizations in free-play:
Observations of two- to three-year—olds in a day-care setting. Bulletin of
the Council for Research in Music Education, 152, 43-53.

Young, S. & Glover, J. (1998). Music in the early years. London: The Falmer
Press.

Zimmerman, M. P. (1993). An overview of developmental research in music.
Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education

150

APPENDIXES
Appendix A
Example Communication with Program Directors

Dr. Bruce Taggart, Acting Director
Community Music School

841 Timberlane

East Lansing, MI 48823

Dear Dr. Taggart:

I am writing to you to inquire whether it would be possible to conduct my doctoral
dissertation research at Michigan State University’s Community Music School.

I am currently a graduate student at Michigan State University. As part of my doctoral
dissertation (MUS 999), I would like to observe early childhood music classes at the
Community Music School The purpose of this qualitative research is to develop an
understanding of teacher initiatives, student responses, and the wait time (teacher
silence) between teacher initiatives and student responses in early childhood music
classes. This qualitative study will entail naturalistic observation of the teachers and
infants/toddlers in two separate early childhood music classes.

Participation in this study would occur during regular music class time (forty-five
minutes) and take approximately two or three class periods. I would be taking
observational notes, as well as videotaping the classes for future analysis. Participation
is voluntary. Parents may choose not to have their child participate at all or may
withdraw their child from the study at any time without penalty. Participants’ privacy
will be protected to the maximum extent allowable by law. All data will be stored
under secure conditions and destroyed upon completion of the data analysis.

If you have any questions about this study, please contact me at 333-2575
(hombac7@msu.edu), or the responsible project investigator (Dr. Cynthia Taggart,
353-9122, taggartc@msu.edu).

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Christina Hornbach
Doctoral Student — Music Education
Michigan State University

151

Appendix B

Human Subjects Application Approval

 

 

 

 

MICHIGAN STATE Initial IRB
u N I v E R s I r r Application
March 10, 2005 Approval
To: Cynthia Taggart

209 Music Practice Bldg.
Re: IRB 0 05-155 Category: EXPEDITED 2-6. 2-7

Approval Date: Ilarch 10, 2005

Expiration Date: March 9. 2006

Title: TEACHER INITIATIVES. INFANT AND TOWLER RESPONSES. AND WAIT TIME IN EARLY
CHILDHOOD MUSIC CLASSES

The UriversityCormnitteeon Research Involving I-lunanSthects (UCRIHS) has completedthekreview of
mauled. lampleasedtoadviseyouthatyourpmlecthaabeenapproved.

Thecarunlteehaslomdmatymtreseardtpmiedlsappmpnatehdesign.protectsthenghtsandmtfareot
MamasmumeasmeWMdMSUsFedaUWideAsmauMme
(4SCFR46and210FRPaI150).'flteprotedionofllmnstbiedshreseardfisapamadipbetweenme
IRB andthehvestigators. Welooklorwam toworkingwith you aswe bothfulfill wrresponsbilities.

Renewals: UCRIHSwprovdIsvalidufltheexplrafiondatelistedabove. Ityouarecontlmingyouproiect.
wumstalmflmApplkadmforRmewflappficfionatIeastonemafihbefaeexpiafim. lftheproiectls
completed. please stmItanAppllcatlon for Permanent Closure.

Revisions: UCRIHSmustrefiewanychangeshthepmiect, pdortoinltiationolthechange. Pleasescbmttan
Application for Revision to have your changes reviewed. It changes are made at the time at mewal, please
include an Application for Revision wIth the renewal application.

Problems: If issues shodd arise during the conduct d the research, such as unanticipated problems, adverse
events. or any problem that may increase the risk to the human subjects, notify UCRIHS promptly. Forms are
available to report these Issues.

PIeaseusetheIRBmmberIistedaboveonanyfonnsstbmittedwhichrelatetotlisproject,oronany
correspondencewlthUCRII-IS.

Good luck it your research. Ifwe can be oflurther assistance, please contact us at 517-355-2180 or via email
at UCRIHSQmsuedu. Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

Peter Vasilenko. PhD.

UCRIHS Chair
CI Christina Hornbach
1045 Whitman Dr.

East mm, Ml 48823

152

Appendix C

Participation Consent Form — Teacher

PARTICIPATION CONSENT FORM - Teacher

'Title of Project: Teacher Initiatives, Infant and Toddler Responses, and Wait Time in
Early Childhood Music Classes.

[RB 05-I55/i02l832

Responsible Project Investigator: Cynthia C. Taggart

Secondary Investigator: Christina M. Hornbach

Revised: 2°25-05

Dear Teacher:

I am currently a graduate student at Michigan State University. As part of my
coursework, I will be observing early childhood music classes at Michigan State
University’s Community Music School and Little Music Makers in Farmington Hills, MI.
This research is for my doctoral dissertation (MUS 999). The purpose of this qualitative
research is to develop an understanding of teacher initiatives, student responses, and the
wait time (teacher silence) between teacher initiatives and student responses in early
childhood music classes. This qualitative study Will entail naturalistic observation of the
teachers and infants/toddlers in two separate early childhood music classes. I will be
taking observational notes, as well as videotaping the classes for future analysis.

Participation in this study will occur during regular music class time (forty-five minutes)
for approximately two or three class periods, two or three teacher/investigator think-aloud
protocols (one hour),>a'nd an interview session (one hour). Music classes will be
videotaped. Participation is voluntary. You may choose not to participate at all or may
withdraw from the study at any time without penalty. All interviews will. be audiotaped
and transcribed. You will have the opportunity to review the transcriptions for accuracy.
'All data will be stored under secure conditions and destroyed after a period of five years.

The results of this study may be presented at conferences or may be published; since you

are a public figure in this field, your identity is pertinent to this research. Your comments
made during this project and data derived from videotape analysis and field notes may be
attributable. Your identity and comments will not be confidential or private.

’ If you have any questions about this study, please contact the secondary investigator
(Christina Hornbach, phone (517)333-2575, fax: (517) 432-2880, e-mail:
hombac7@msu.edu, or regular mail: School of Music, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, MI 48824), or the responsible project investigator (Cynthia Taggart, phone:
(5l7) 355-7555, fax: (5 I 7) 432-2880, e-mail: taggartc@msu.edu, or regular mail: School
of Music, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824). If you have questions or
concerns regarding your rights as a study participant or your student’s rights as a study
participant, or are dissatisfied at any time with any aspect of this study, you may contact
— anonymously if you wish — Peter Vasilenko, Ph.D., Chair of the University Committee
,on Research Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS) by phone: (5l7) 355-2I80, fax: (517)
432-4503, e-mail: ucrihs@su.edu, or regular mail: 202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, MI
48824.

153

Your signature below indicates yoUr voluntary agreement to participate in this istudy.

 

Signature of Participant Date

Your signature below indicates your voluntary agreement to be videotaped during early
childhood music classes.

UCRIHS APPROVAL FOR
THIS project EXPIRES:

 

Signature of Participant 9 Date
~ MAR - 9 2005
SWENEWAL To
ABOVEDATETOCONTIWE

154

Appendix 0

Participation Consent Form — Parent/Child

PARTICIPATION CONSENT FORM - Parent/Student

Title of Project: Teacher Initiatives, Infant and Toddler Responses, and Wait Time in
‘Early Childhood Music Classes.

IRB 05-155/i021832

Responsible Project Investigator: Cynthia C. Taggart

Secondary Investigator: Christina M. Hombach

Revised: 2025-05

Dear Parent/Guardian:

-I am currently a graduate student at Michigan State University. As part of my
coursework, I will be observing early childhood music classes at Michigan State
University’s Community Music School and Little Music Makers in Farmington Hills, MI.
This research is for my doctoral dissertation (MUS 999). The purpose of this qualitative
research is to develop an understanding of teacher initiatives, student responses, and the
wait time (teacher silence) between teacher initiatives and student responses in early
childhood music classes. This qualitative study will entail naturalistic observation of the
teachers and infants/toddlers in two separate early childhood music classes. I will be
taking observational notes, conduct informal interviews with parents and teachers, and
videotape several classes for future analysis.

Participation in this study will occur during regular music class time (forty-five minutes)
and will take approximately two or three class periods. Classes will be videotaped and the
secondary investigator will take notes. You may be asked, as a parent, to participate in a
short discussion (five-ten minutes) regarding your child, at your convenience.
Participation is voluntary. You and your child may choose not to participate or may
withdraw from the study at any time without penalty. Your and your child’s privacy will
'be protected to the maximum extent allowable by law. All data will be stored under
secure conditions and will be destroyed after a period of five years.

The results of this study may be presented at conferences or may be publiShed; however,
your and your child’s identity will not be disclosed. Each subject will be given a
pseudonym and will only be known by age and gender.

If you have any questions about this study, please contact the secondary investigator
(Christina Hornbach, phone (5I7)'333-2575, fax: (5 I 7) 432-2880, e-maiI:
hombg7@msu.edu, or regularmailz School of Music, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, MI 48824), or the responsible project investigator (Cynthia Taggart, phone:

(5 I7) 355-7555, fax: (5 I7) 432-2880, e-mail: taggartc@msu.edu, or regular mail: School
of Music, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824). If you have questions or
concerns regarding your rights as a study participant or your student’s rights as a study
participant, or are dissatisfied at any time with any aspect of this study, you may contact
— anonymously if you wish — Peter Vasilenko, Ph.D., Chair of the University Committee
on Research Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS) by phone: (5 I7) 355-2180, fax: (5I7)
432-4503, e-maiI: ucrihs@rnsu.edu, or regular mail: 202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, MI
48824.

 

155

Your signature below indicates your voluntary agreement for you and your child to
participate in this study.

. UCRIHS APPROVAL FOR
Name of Student THIS project EXPIRES:

 

IIAR - 9 2005

Signature of Parent/Guardian Date ABOVE DATE 16%

 

Your signature below indicates your voluntary agreement for you and your child to be
videotaped during early childhood music classes.

 

Name of Student

 

Signature of Parent/Guardian Date

156

Appendix E

Example of Field Notes

 

TIME
10:14
10:15

10:16

10:18

10:18

10:20

 

 

NOTES

-Pooh has a vocal exploration with Cindy
during a chant.

~Cindy changes to “aah” versus “pa-da” in
response to ‘aah” from Tink.

-Tigger whispers “pa-da-pum.”

“Sam, Sam” is sung with sticks.

~Happy is chewing on sticks (the beanbags
earlier)

-Alice does big vocal exploration.

~Tigger imitates. Tigger is making noises
while playing with sticks.

~Pooh sings a tonic “burn.”
-The Little Prince enters class with Mom.

~Happy - vocalizing on dominant — “ee”
?? anger over not getting his way with
rhythm stick??

-Pooh sings “uh” around tonic on floor.

-Alice - loves scarf dance, the joy on her
face is effervescent — laughing.

-Pooh — took own scarf off and “ooh”
vocalization as he took the scarf off, not in
pitch context;

-Tigger sings “Dah” on tonic while laying on
his back

-During “ch” chant, Tigger is nodding head
to beat — Cindy is nodding her head, Tigger
is doing “ch, ch.”

-Tigger — jumping in circle - flying singing
dominant while laying on his stomach
~Pooh — “bahing” while in circle; he did
upward movement and then both hands on
ground, but no sound.

 

CODE

Vocal Response-
exploration
Teacher Adapt.

Vocal Response

Props
Vocal Response

Vocal Response

Vocal Response
Props

Vocal Response
Family Dynamics

Vocal Response
Vowel

Vocal Response
Child Joy

Vocal Response

Vocal Response

Movement Response
Vocal Response

Vocal Response

Movement Response

 

157

 

CH:

JB:

CH:

JB:

CH:

JB:

JB:

CH:

JB:

CH:

JB:

CH:

JB:

Appendix F

Example of Think-aloud Interview
That was a vocal response from Gretel. She responded on “eeh” again.
All of her tonal responses for me today were all in that “eeh” sound.
That was while putting toys away, so another “safe” time.
I noticed today is that she is responding mostly in safe places when the
focus wasn’t on her. If I went up to her and tried to engage her, she didn’t
give me a response. But if I was doing something else with another child,
she’d respond.
Right now, the Baby is crying and vocalizing.
At that point, because he was getting so agitated, I didn’t pay that much
attention to what he was doing. I could tell that there was something else
going on and then once she changed his diaper, you could tell the
difference in his demeanor (laughing together).
Gretel is doing movement responses. The Mad Matcher is doing
movement responses but nothing tonally at this point.
And there’s Gretel doing that rocking movement (during a song).
She is switching her body weight.
And look at the Mad Matcher singing resting tone.
There was quite a big silence before that response (tonic).
(affirms) At that point, I just wanted to see if he’d do it without me.
And in order to do that, you needed to...

Give him some silence

(JB=Jennifer Bailey; CH=Christina Hornbach)

158

Appendix G

Video-tape Analysis Summary Form

 

Date of Class: Today’s Date:

 

Site/Group: Teacher:

 

 

 

 

1. What were the main themes of this video/class? (Give examples.)

2. Pick out the most salient interactions in this video. Number in order on this
sheet and note time in video. Assign a theme to each point in CAPITALS.
Invent themes where no existing ones apply and affix asterisks (*).

 

TIME SALIENT INTERACTION THEMES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. What else was interesting or unexpected in this video?

159

Appendix H

Example of Video-tape Analysis Summary Form

 

Date of Classz3-23-05 Today’s Datez4-6-05

 

Site/Group:CMS -10:00 Class Wed Teacher: Cynthia Taggart

 

 

 

 

1. What were the main themes of this video/class? (Give examples.)
Teacher Initiatives with Touch
Cindy sings “bum” repeatedly on tonic and creeps up Madeline’s leg.

Cindy “buzzes” the stomachs of students during opening song. Students
will lean into it and giggle and laugh and then turn and hug their parents.

Teacher Initiatives with Movement

Cindy has hands in a big V in the air and holds dominant on “ah for a long
period of time and then leaves a space, with no response, she fills in a
tonic bum.

Teacher Adaptation

Cindy is interacting with Madeline and she lifts her foot up towards Cindy.
Cindy reaches out and touches it and sings “shoe” on tonic.

Pooh runs over across the circle and behind Cindy and sings
approximately dominant on “000” and changes her “’ah” 5-1 to “000” on 5.
She repeats it to acknowledge Pooh and to try and elicit another
response.

Happy does a vocal slide on “mm” while trying to suck on a beanbag
during the popcorn chant. Cindy repeats his “mm.”

Pooh is standing out of the circle behind Cindy again and does a short
rhythm on “ooo.” Cindy improvises a short rhythm back on “ooo” to try and
engage him. She continues doing patterns on “000” and when he doesn’t
engage, ends the activity.

During “Obwisana” Pooh is running around outside of the circle making

noises, some on “00.” He makes a sound on “aaeh” around dominant and
Cindy picks up on it and brings in into “aaeh” 5-1.

160

In a silence between repetitions of “Obwisana,” the Little Prince starts
holding one stick still and using the other one to tap it. Cindy takes this
idea and repeats it and the whole class does it. She never verbally
acknowledges this, but the Little Prince is pleased.

Madeline recognizes the drums in the move and freeze song and starts
making that movement. Cindy stops the music and gets out drums (an
unplanned activity) and improvises a chant.

Breath

Cindy takes an audible breath when she expects a response, even if she
is the one responding.

Teacher-Child Relationship/Comfort
Tink leaves her Dad and walks up to Cindy and sticks her belly out to get
one last “buzz.” She puts her belly out at the appropriate time musically
and giggles and run backs to her dad after Cindy “buzzes” her. “Buzz” is
when Cindy sings tonic on “buzz” and “stings” the belly or other body part
of the student.
Tink grabs Cindy’s finger and leads her over to the counter and points.
Cindy asks, "Is this what you want? What do you want? Ok.” Tink runs
with excitement and pleasure around the room — Cindy is getting the
rhythm sticks out.

Props

Pooh is throwing a fit about something and Cindy changes activities to a
song with mics. He grabs a mic and is happy.

Children’s Responses
Pooh is still doing “ooo” sounds around dominant several songs later.

Happy sings/breaths on tonic.

161

Parent-Child Relationship

Alice is here with her Dad today. She tries to crawl away and socialize as
she usually does. He perhaps does not know that this is appropriate and
tries to bring her back. Cindy advises, “Let her go. She will crawl all over
the room and that is absolutely fine.”

Alice insists on sitting in the middle of the circle with the
props/basketslother children. Her dad lets her go, but follows her and is
the only adult in the middle.

Musical Anticipation

Tink runs into the circle to dance during the song and heads back to dad
to be able to the dominant lean back with the stretchy band.

. Pick out the most salient interactions in this video. Number in order on this

sheet and note time in video. Assign a theme to each point in CAPITALS.
Invent themes where no existing ones apply and affix asterisks (*).

 

TIME SALIENT INTERACTION THEMES

 

3:16 Cindy buzzes the Little Prince during the Teacher/Child

beginning song and he reacts in a shy Relationship
manner. She stays with him and asks,
“Can you buzz your Dad, you think? What
do you think?” He turns and runs his
finger over his Dad’s leg. He then sits up
and starts crawling his fingers over the
carpet towards Cindy. Cindy starts singing Response associated
tonic “buzzes" to match his fingers with movement
crawling. The Little Prince crawls his
fingers up Cindy’s arm and gets in her
space, but does not look her in the eye.
He then pulls away and looks very happy,
but remains quiet.

 

 

12:50 Cindy does 5-1 on “ah” with her hands in Response with
the air and then down on her lap. She is movement
standing during this. The Little Prince
responds from across the room on “ah”
but sings about 5-3. He is standing in the Parent/Child
shelter of his father who has bent over relationship
him. It is unclear if the Little Prince moved
when he did this as the camera moved to
him just as he finished.

 

 

 

 

162

 

29:21

 

 

Cindy sings “ah-ah”-5-1 and Madeline
sings "ah-ah” on 5-2 and then offers her
microphone to Cindy who does several
“ah-ah” on 5-1 for her initiative.

 

Props

Vocal response with
movement

Vowel

 

3. What else was interesting or unexpected in this video?

Pooh’s “ooo” noises turn a little growly towards the end of class. As he picks

another microphone out of the basket he makes a growly/barfy sound. He
again later is in the middle of the circle and leans over and makes another

sounds as if he is going to vomit — there is a lot of tension, but he seems to be

just playing around.

163

 

Appendix I
Teacher Interview Guide
. How many years have you been teaching early childhood classes?
. Where did you receive your training?
. What theories or beliefs do you hold about early childhood music
programs?
. What do you believe are the primary responsibilities of the teacher? Of the
parents/guardians in the class?
. What kind of experiences do you want to provide for the children?
. What do you think is the purpose of trying to elicit vocal responses from
children during class?
. In your time teaching early childhood classes, have you noticed any
particular behaviors that seem to consistently elicit vocal responses from
children?
. Have you ever been surprised by a child’s vocal response? Do you recall
what you were doing prior to the child’s response?
. Do you purposefully leave time or space after your initiative in order to
encourage a response? How long do you wait? Do you repeat the Initiative
or move on if the child does not respond?
. What are the characteristics of the childrens’ vocal responses that you are
getting currently in your early childhood class that I am observing?
. What are the “typical” characteristics of a child’s vocal response in the

infant/toddler years or have you noticed a trend in responses?

164

9. How does receiving a “correct” response change your next teaching

behavior?

10. How does receiving an “incorrect” response change your next teaching

behavior?
11. How do you evaluate the children’s growth throughout the semester?

12. How do you evaluate the effectiveness of your teaching?

165

Appendix J

Parent Interview Guide

1. What kind of musical experiences do you provide your child at home?

2. Please talk about the singing you do with your child outside of class.

a.

b.

When do you sing to your child?

What do you sing? (Familiar songs, songs from childhood, from
class)

Where do you sing?

Does anyone else sing to your child?

(Grandparents/siblings/spouse/caregivers?)

3. Describe the responses that you get from your child.

4. Talk about the chanting you do with your child outside of class.

a.

b.

C.

d.

When do you chant to your child?
What do you chant?
Where do you chant?

Does anyone else chant to your child?

5. Describe the things you may do, vocally or physically, if any, to elicit a

response from your child.

6. Describe any things you do while singing or chanting to your child that are

similar to what the teacher does in class.

7. Describe the way your child responds to you.

8. Describe the singing/chanting you overhear when your child is unaware

that anyone is listening.

166

9. Describe your interaction with your child in class.
10.What do you do if your child does not respond to the instructor?
11. In class, what do you think is the purpose of trying to get your child to sing

or chant alone?

167

CH:

CT:

CH:

CT:

Appendix K

Example of Teacher Interview Transcript
Talk to me about teacher adaptation to children’s responses. The Little
Prince said, “uh-oh” and you improvised a chant on “uh-oh.”
If I am doing a chant on “pop” and a child says, “beep,” I change the “pop-
pops" into “beep-beeps” for the rest of the activity or as long as I have
his/her attention. That is why I say early childhood music teaching is like
improvisational theatre. I have a list of songs and the associated props
that I could use with them, although sometimes I don’t even go there. And
I always have more songs than I need so I can use it more as a menu
than as a roadmap. In some ways, I would love to not even have to use
any of that. I would love to be able to take what the kids give me and go
there. In order to do that, I would need a lot of responses from the
children. Also, I don’t necessarily find that the things that I do from an
improvisatory standpoint are the things that pull responses out of other
kids.
(agrees)
I find that repeating the songs so that the children are comfortable with
them and can predict and anticipate a little bit is what pulls responses out
of them in general. However, when I improvise, the child who gave me the

response is absolutely entrained on me and is mine for the moment.

(CT=Cynthia Taggart; CH=Christina Hornbach)

168

Appendix L

The Mad Matcher’s Tonal Improvisation

The Mad Matcher placed beanbags in the pattern outlined below. The
numbers represent scale degrees in major. The Mad Matcher pressed the
beanbag as he sang each note. He sang 1, 2, 1, and 2; then, he started again at
the beginning of the beanbag row and sang 4, 6, 3, 1, 5, 7, 5, and 1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AGINU'I

 

 

 

169

Appendix M

Bubble Gum

Betsy Schulte

 

Bub - ble gum, bub - ble gum, fun to
D A7 D A7 D

 

chew I can make much big - ger bub-bles than you.
G D

 

See that bub - ble, it grows and
C G D A 7 D

 

grows. Pop went that bub - ble all 0 - ver my nose

Copyright © I980 by GIA Publications. Inc.,
Chicago. Illinois. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

170

Appendix N

Example of Interactive Response Chain (Cindy and Tigger)

 

 

 

 

==—_.
Cindy: éf -‘ fi- ,, .- - _ ll
Tigger: é .1 fl. .- 71%

P09

 

 

.0
E.
‘5
it .
it
‘L

POP Pop Pop
Pap

 

J;

° I
Cmdy; g} (30 For Another One;

 

 

:I
i
tag-
I

 

 

g.
g,
l
I
‘l
l
l
l
é

Pop P09 P09 Pop

 

 

:‘l
:3;
ad»..-
l

l

l

l

l

l
j.

 

 

 

 

Pop POP Pop
'2 _=
. . A A 4 —— u
Cmdy. , fl ’ v! u
POP Pop Pop
v K
agent..- .. SEE...___.--_M__ j __ ,1
Pop Pop I GROW-1'”

171

   

”'illlllllll'llWW