(NH/lWIHill/WHIIWNIINI”UHWIWIIHHHNWI

    

3
HS.

  
   

WA
.—|
NO)

      

'—1

 

W War:

 

LIBRARY
Mick .= ;.. . Siate
University

 

 

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled
THE EFFECT OF TONAL KEYBOARD PATTERN

INSTRUCTION ON THE SIGHT -READING ACHIEVEMENT
OF COLLEGE CLASS PIANO STUDENTS

presented by
Debra K. Pajtas

has been accepted towards futfillment
of the requirements for the

MM. degree in Piano Pedagggx

(Arum K01 \’

Major Professor’s Siyhature
1;). to . 5.9

Date

MSUis an Minnadw AccomEqud Oppormmry Institution

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 Dtgfib
JAN 1 8 2009 fife
G U 2‘2 u p (91X

 

‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 cJCIRC/DeteDuepBS-sz

 

THE EFFECT OF TONAL KEYBOARD PATTERN INSTRUCTION ON
SIGHT-READING ACHIEVEMENT OF COLLEGE CLASS PIANO STUDENTS

By

Debra K. Pajtas

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF MUSIC
School of Music

2002

ABSTRACT

THE EFFECT OF TONAL KEYBOARD PATTERN INSTRUCTION ON
SIGHT-READING ACHIEVEMENT OF COLLEGE CLASS PIANO STUDENTS

By

Debra K. Pajtas

Studies of eye movements in music readers suggest that strong sight-readers read
groups of notes rather than single notes. The purpose of this research was to determine if
regular instruction in the recognition and reading of groups of notes, or tonal patterns, in
elementary college class piano students aids in developing sight-reading skills. The
problems of the study were to determine if college class piano students receiving regular
tonal pattern instruction become significantly stronger sight-readers than those receiving
traditional instruction, and to determine if they read significantly better after practice.
College students from two separate elementary piano classes were the subjects of this
study. One class received traditional piano instruction. The second class received
additional instruction in the recognition and reading of tonal patterns. Both groups were
audio-taped sight-reading three piano selections and again after five minutes of practice.
The performances were evaluated for tonal and rhythmic errors. T-tests were used to
determine if there were significant differences in the mean ratings of the pieces. No
significant difference was found in either the tonal or rhythmic accuracy overall.
However, the means showed a consistent tendency for the experimental group to read
with greater tonal accuracy than the control group. Individual measures with unfamiliar
and complex notation were read better by the experimental group, particularly afier

practice. Tonal pattern instruction may assist beginners in the reading of piano music.

Copyright by
DEBRA K. PAJTAS
2002

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This project would not have been possible without the help and encouragement of
Dr. Midori Koga, Dr. Cynthia Taggart, and Professor Deborah Moriarty. They were
available at each step of the study with invaluable suggestions and smiles. I am grateful
to Dr. Taggart for introducing me to the world of music research, and for all the time she
freely gave answering my questions. My appreciation goes to Dr. Koga for her wisdom
and help. My deepest thanks go to Dr. Koga and Ms. Moriarty for granting me an
extension on a teaching assistantship so that the research could continue for another year.

I am grateful for all the college students enrolled in Music 147 for the 2000 -
2001, and 2001 - 2002 school years. Special thanks go to those who volunteered their
time to sight-read so that data collection could take place. My sincere thanks are
extended to Meghan Robinson, Yilin You, and Minjeong Suh who assisted in data
collection.

Finally, my thanks and appreciation are given to my husband, Tim, and my
children who were so patient and encouraging as I spent hours locked away in front of the
computer. Special thanks are extended to my sisters, brother, and parents who believed

in me and encouraged me to be the best that I could be.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ vii
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1
Literature Review .......................................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 2
RELATED RESEARCH ..................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 17
Subjects ........................................................................................................................ 17
Design .......................................................................................................................... 20
Procedure ..................................................................................................................... 21
Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 34
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND INTERPRETATIONS ........................................................................... 35
Inter-judge Reliability .................................................................................................. 35
Tonal Accuracy Results ............................................................................................... 36
Tonal Accuracy Interpretations .................................................................................... 38
Tonal Accuracy Results and Interpretations of
Individual Pieces .................................................................................................... 42
Rhythm Accuracy Results ............................................................................................ 44
Rhythm Accuracy Interpretations ................................................................................ 46
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ............................................................................................. 48
Purpose and Problems .................................................................................................. 48
Design and Analysis .................................................................................................... 48
Results .......................................................................................................................... 49
Conclusions and Recommendations
For Future Research ............................................................................................... 49
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................... 53
APPENDIX A
Sight-reading Screening Test ................................................................................. 54
APPENDD( B
Tonal Patterns ........................................................................................................ 55
APPENDIX C
Teaching Repertoire: Reading on a Single Line ................................................... 58

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This project would not have been possible without the help and encouragement of
Dr. Midori Koga, Dr. Cynthia Taggart, and Professor Deborah Moriarty. They were
available at each step of the study with invaluable suggestions and smiles. I am grateful
to Dr. Taggart for introducing me to the world of music research, and for all the time she
freely gave answering my questions. My appreciation goes to Dr. Koga for her wisdom
and help. My deepest thanks go to Dr. Koga and Ms. Moriarty for granting me an
extension on a teaching assistantship so that the research could continue for another year.

I am grateful for all the college students enrolled in Music 147 for the 2000 —
2001, and 2001 — 2002 school years. Special thanks go to those who volunteered their
time to sight-read so that data collection could take place. My sincere thanks are
extended to Meghan Robinson, Yilin You, and Minjeong Suh who assisted in data
collection.

Finally, my thanks and appreciation are given to my husband, Tim, and my
children who were so patient and encouraging as I spent hours locked away in fi'ont of the
computer. Special thanks are extended to my sisters, brother, and parents who believed

in me and encouraged me to be the best that I could be.

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1: INTER-JUDGE RELIABILITY (Dimension 1) ............................................. 35
TABLE 2: INTER-JUDGE RELIABILITY (Dimension 2) ............................................. 35

TABLE 3: TONAL ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 1)
“Fifes” .......................................................................................................................... 36

TABLE 4: TONAL ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 1)
“Carefree” .................................................................................................................... 37

TABLE 5: TONAL ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 1)
“Polka” .......................................................................................................................... 37

TABLE 6: COMPOSITE TONAL ACCURACY RESULTS
(Dimension 1) .............................................................................................................. 37

TABLE 7: TOTAL TONAL ACCURACY RESULTS
(Dimension 1) .............................................................................................................. 38

TABLE 8: AVERAGE TONAL ERRORS IN
MEASURE 5 OF “FIF ES” ................................................................................................ 43

TABLE 9: AVERAGE TONAL ERRORS IN
MEASURE 7 OF “CAREFREE” ...................................................................................... 44

TABLE 10: RHYTHM ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 2)
“F ifes” .......................................................................................................................... 45

TABLE 11: RHYTHM ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 2)
“Carefree” ................................................................................................................... 45

TABLE 12: RHYTHM ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 2)
“Polka” ......................................................................................................................... 46

TABLE 13: COMPOSITE RHYTHM ACCURACY RESULTS
(Dimension 2) .............................................................................................................. 46

TABLE 14: TOTAL RHYTHM ACCURACY RESULTS
(Dimension 2) .............................................................................................................. 46

vii

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

I consider myself to be a strong sight-reader. However, there was a long period of
time when I was not a good reader. Having been taught to read music the traditional way
of finding the note on the staff then locating it on the keyboard, I struggled my way
through piece after piece. Even throughout my undergraduate piano studies, I dreaded
picking up a new piece to decipher. Upon leaving university studies, I began to teach my
own piano students. I purchased volumes of easy and intermediate piano music and
played it all in my quest to find new teaching repertoire. To my delight, within a couple
of years I had been transformed from a weak reader to a strong one. What happened?
One may answer, “You practiced the piano more during that period.” However, I
practiced much more during my undergraduate years. I believe that the transformation
was due to constant practice of music containing basic keyboard patterns found in all
piano repertoire, regardless of the difficulty. I was learning, storing, and assimilating
melodic, harmonic and rhythmic patterns that had not been learned before in my piano
studies. Does one have to go though the same method of learning that I did in order to

become a strong sight-reader? Why are some pianists strong readers and others are not?

Literature Review

Many teachers today agree that there are two classifications of piano students.
One group sight-reads easily but memorizes poorly. The other group memorizes easily
but struggles to sight-read (Obenshain, 1993; Zagorski, 1994). Are we as piano teachers

resigned to accept this division in reading ability as inevitable? Is there a remedy for the

weak reader? My own personal experience disproves the fact that weak readers will
remain weak readers.

All music teachers realize the importance of producing strong sight-readers.
Students with strong reading skills will perform better at recitals and learn more
repertoire, which in turn will increase their enjoyment of music (Harrel, 1997). Sight-
reading fluency also enables students to take the important first steps toward a lifetime of
piano playing and opens doors to broad musical interests (Harrel, 1996). It is a skill that
offers a student access to all music literature, unaided by a teacher. Sight-reading is
particularly important for the future chamber musician and accompanist (Deutsch, 1950).
Since sight-reading skills are vital to the musical experience, it should be the experience
of every student to learn to sight-read well and the goal of every teacher to make sure that
his students learn to sight-read with ease. In fact, the best teacher is the one who trains
the pupil to think for himself and become fully independent of the teacher (Tobin, 1957).

How should piano teachers reach this goal? We know that sight-reading can
improve if it is approached in a structured way. “Without a structured method, sight-
reading is little more than an exercise in trial and error” (Ripley, 1997). The traditional
method of teaching sight-reading on the keyboard contains several aspects. The student
is taught to scan the piece silently, first noting the key signature, meter signature, any
extra accidentals, patterns, dynamics, and anything unusual (Obenshain, 1993). Many
teachers believe that reading ahead in the score is perhaps the most important aspect of
sight-reading. Some recommend using a pencil to point ahead to where the student’s
eyes should be (Lewis, 1989). Slow reading, “arrn-chair” reading away from the

keyboard, and analysis of the score are other methods (Obenshain, 1993). Teachers agree

that keeping one’s eyes on the score rather than looking back and forth fi'om the hands to
the music is essential to reading fluently (Fuszek, 1977). Most important, consistency
and frequency of reading is proposed to be the best way to produce a strong reader
(Hang, 1991).

Music reading is a complicated process involving not one, but several elements,
including the eye, the ear, mental comprehension, memory, tactile knowledge of the
keyboard, and technique (Rubinstein, 1950). Proficiency in sight-reading is the result of
facility in relating both the mental and physical components of reading. The brain needs
to understand what the eye sees in order for the fingers to be fluent on the keyboard in
reproducing sounds represented on the page (Rubinstein, 1950). Audiation, or hearing
and comprehending the notation in one’s mind, should take place before efi‘ective
musical decoding of notation can take place (Gordon, 1990). Proficiency in sight-reading
occurs when one is fluent in translating ocular and aural impressions into tactile
performance (Rubinstein, 1950). For pianists, these impressions include both rhythmic
and tonal aspects, as well as the reading of notes on two staves.

In order to facilitate music reading, teachers have included the drill of individual
notes, as well as common rhythm patterns, in piano lessons. Directional reading and the
recognition of intervals have also been recommended and even incorporated into many
piano method series. Pentascales, triads, scales, arpeggios, and chordal patterns have
been assigned in all major and minor keys in order to train the fingers to play what will
be encountered later in the musical score. In spite of these measures, many students have
not mastered the art of sight-reading. What have good readers discovered or mastered

that the poor readers have not? For many years some teachers felt that sight-reading was

a talent that could not be taught. A student either was or was not a good reader.
However, in the past few decades, research has uncovered new evidence concerning eye
movements while reading music. This research suggests that strong readers read groups
of notes rather than individual notes (Sloboda, 1974; Haug, 1991; Goolsby, 1994; Smith,
1988; Waters, 1997, 1998). Studies have also been conducted with wind and string
intrumentalists testing the effectiveness of teaching students to read common tonal
patterns (Grutzmacher, 1987; Hahn, 1987; Gamble, 1989; Gaynor, 1995). Results of
these studies indicate that students sight-read significantly better after tonal pattern
instruction when compared to those who receive traditional instruction with no focus on
patterns.

What defines a tonal pattern? What are common groupings of notes that the
strong reader has been able to decode more rapidly than the weak reader? Although the
term “tonal pattern” has been used by many teachers and researchers, there appear to be
different definitions of the concept. Harrel (1996) advocates teaching piano students
patterns based on major and minor pentascales, scales, triads and their inversion, and
seventh chords and their inversions. Gordon (1990) has isolated what he believes are
common tonal patterns based on the I, IV, and V7 chords, as well as step-wise patterns.
He advocates teaching students to sing and audiate (hear internally) these patterns in
order to build a vocabulary of tonal patterns. Tonal patterns, according to Gordon, are,
“Two, three, four, or five pitches in a given tonality that are audiated sequentially and
form a whole.” Teachers such as Massoud (1995) and Pace (1979) define a tonal pattem
as any grouping of notes that repeats within a piece. This final view appears to be the

prevailing definition of a tonal pattern among piano teachers.

The concept of teaching piano students to read groups of notes has been used in a
limited sense by only a few piano teachers and music publishers. A review of current
piano method books revealed only two series that incorporated tonal pattern recognition
into instruction. Berlin’s series, The ABC of Piano Playing, was the first to pioneer this
concept (Berlin, 1983; Beaucharnp, 2001). Berlin believed that a student should see
music as something that moves. He should see not single notes, but groups of notes that
form some kind of a pattern (Beaucharnp, 2001). Pattems to be played in a new piece are
introduced first on the opposite page, practiced, and then applied to the piece to be
learned. Pace (1979) also uses pattern instruction in the first book of the Music for Piano
method series. Students are introduced to common tonal patterns before reading actual
notation. Once notation is introduced in the book, students are asked to look for patterns
and repetitions of patterns before playing new pieces.

A new piano method series, Celebrate Piano! by Albergo, Kolar, and Mrozinski
and published by Frederick Harris Music, will be released in the spring of 2003 (Albergo,
Kolar, and Mrozinski, 2002). This series also makes use of pattern instruction. Before
the student is introduced to notation, the teacher is instructed to play specific patterns on
the piano, have the student sing them, and then have the student play the pattems back.
Three-note tonal patterns as well as rhythm patterns are taught in the first book. Once the
student is reading notation, he is instructed to locate and circle tonal patterns that repeat
in each piece. Patterns, according to this series, are defined as groups of notes that repeat
within a piece and can be up to eight notes in length.

Outside of these three, there are no beginning piano method series known to the

researcher that teach piano students to recognize or read groups of notes. However, there

are supplementary books and products available to the piano teacher that drill or teach
tonal pattern recognition. Covello (1997) has written Step, Skip, and Repeat, Basic
Patterns for Note Reading, Books One and Two. This set contains short musical excerpts
for the beginning pianist that teach movement by step, skip, and repeat. In this set,
Covello does not isolate common groupings of notes and label them as patterns, but
rather labels steps (2nds), skips (3rds), and repeated notes as patterns. He appears to
equate intervals and movement by certain intervals with pattern reading, without
identifying specific combinations of these intervals as patterns to be recognized. Hal
Leonard Corporation publishes supplementary flash cards that contain three-note tonal
patterns displayed on one to three staff lines. A total of twenty-two tonal patterns are
categorized, labeled, and displayed, with one pattern per card. These cards were
published to encourage students to read directionally (Hal Leonard). F J H Music
Company also publishes a set of flashcards containing tonal patterns (Faber and Faber,
1999). Twenty-seven of the cards contain a note on or near the treble or bass clef staff.
Below the note is a four-note pattern beginning on the same note to sight-read, followed
by a more challenging group of notes. The patterns do not appear to be organized in
order of difficulty, but contain random mixings of repeated notes, small intervals, and
larger intervals. However, the goal of the flashcards does not appear to be to teach
pattern recognition but to give the student practice sight-reading a group of notes
beginning on the featured note.

Considering the evidence that strong music readers read groups of notes, the
positive outcome of studies conducted on wind and string students who received

instruction in reading tonal patterns, and the lack of instruction among piano teachers in

tonal pattern recognition, the researcher felt that it was time to conduct a study using
pattern instruction with beginning piano students. The purpose of this research was to
determine whether regular tonal pattern instruction with college class piano students
would be effective in developing sight-reading skills. The specific problems of the study
were to determine if college class piano students receiving regular tonal pattern
instruction would become significantly stronger sight-readers than those receiving
traditional sight-reading instruction without pattern instruction, and to determine if these
same students would read significantly better after a short period of practice than students

who did not receive tonal pattern instruction.

Chapter 2

RELATED RESEARCH

In 193 8, a study by Kenneth Bean revealed that short fragments of musical text
displayed briefly were more accurately recorded by good sight-readers than by poor
sight-readers. He also found that good sight-readers could record five notes accurately in
any one fixation, whereas poor sight-readers could record only two or three with the same
degree of accuracy (Sloboda, 1974). Levin and Kaplan, in 1970, coined the phrase “eye-
voice span” to refer to the number of words one could see and remember after a light
illuminating a text was timed off. In studies with readers of English text, it was
discovered that the eye-voice span was longer for more experienced readers, shorter for
more difficult material, and longer for structured material such as sentences rather than
unorganized material (Sloboda, 1974). This technique of testing was applied to the
reading of music by John Sloboda in 1974, who coined a new phrase, “eye-hand span,”
refening to the use of the hands in responding to the musical selection presented.
Experiments were done in a similar manner as Levin’s recording the number of pitches
that one could remember and play or sing afier music was removed from view. It was
discovered that the best music readers had the largest eye-hand spans, with a mean span
of six to eight notes, as compared to the poorer readers, whose span was as low as three
notes. The eye-hand span varied for individual readers depending on the complexity of
the notation. Sloboda concluded that good sight-readers make use of redundancies or
structures to increase their capacities. He also referred to studies done by Reicher (1968)
who, in working with the reading of language, has proposed that linguistic units, such as

words, may be processed as single units. This notion is referred to as “chunking.”

Sloboda proposed that good music readers “chunk” parts or all of musical phrases,
perceiving them as a single unit rather than individual notes.

Studies have also been conducted on the actual eye movements of language and
music readers. It has been found that the eyes do not move steadily from the left to the
right when reading, as previously thought. Instead the eyes move in a series of jumps,
called saccades. These saccades can be forward (progressive) in motion or backward
(regressive) (Haug, 1991 ). The actual perception of notes takes place in pauses between
saccades, called fixations. While reading, the eyes do not move steadily across the page
but stop to fixate on particular notes before moving on. The eyes take in a visual picture
and then move ahead for another picture (Harrel, 1996). These fixations are very brief.
Studies reveal that the eye stops and perceives music or text three to six times per second
(Goolsby, 1994).

Many teachers have thought that a good sight-reading strategy is to always look
ahead and never look back at previously viewed notes. However, studies indicate the
opposite. Good readers actually do more rereading than poor readers (Young, 1971).
Tests reveal that the eye movement of music readers follows an irregular path, constantly
jumping ahead and back (Young, 1971). Goolsby reports that skilled music readers use a
greater number of both regressive and progressive fixations than do less skilled readers.
He believes that the skilled music reader may use a reading strategy in which fixations
are directed well ahead of the performance to perceive where the melody is “headed,”
then back to the point of performance (Goolsby, 1994). It has also been found that when
the tempo is slower or the musical score is easier, there are more regressive eye

movements in the reader (Haug, 1991).

Studies reveal that the accurate sight-readers use more visual information than
inaccurate readers by fixating more frequently, at a faster rate, and by seeing more in
each fixation (Smith, 1988; Waters, 1998). A study conducted by Goolsby (1987)
revealed that less skilled music readers use fewer but longer progressive fixations across
all levels of notation. While the less skilled reader fixates on virtually every note, the
skilled reader does not. The less skilled readers also fixate longer on longer notes, while
the skilled readers use the time provided by longer notes to explore the notation. Both
groups use fewer and shorter fixations to read complex notation. It was found in the
same study that the spacing of notation greatly affects eye movement and processing time
as well.

What accounts for the differences in eye movements between good and poor
music si t-readers? Haug (1991) believes that eye movements themselves are a result
or symptom, not a cause of reading problems. Fluency of reading depends in part on how
many notes the eyes can grasp in one glance (Harrel, 1996). Poor sight-readers are
unaware of or are unable to use structures or redundancies found in musical texts
(Sloboda, 1994). Two separate studies conducted by Andrew Waters (1997, 1998)
investigated eye movements in skilled and novice music readers. In the first study,
musicians were given a pattem-matching task and asked to indicate if two displayed
patterns were the same or different. The expert groups performed the comparisons more
quickly than the novices and used fewer flips, or large eye movements, back and forth
between the patterns. The more experienced musicians used larger units to compare the
melodies and processed those units with fewer fixations and in less time. Coherent
material required fewer eye movements to compare than randomized material among the

skilled readers. However, the novice readers showed no difference in the number of flips

10

required to compare coherent and randomized material. These results indicate that
skilled readers have developed mechanisms by which they process groups of notes in a
more efficient manner. This test, using single line melodies, indicates that more
experienced musicians use larger units in reading.

The second study by Waters (1998) tested pianists by requiring them to match
passages of piano music. All of the examples were of two-bar length and contained at
least eighteen notes on two staves. Subjects were asked to indicate if the passages were
the same or different. The more skilled readers were able to perform the comparisons
more quickly than the less skilled readers, indicating that they can code music in larger
chunks than the less skilled readers.

The reading of music is very similar to the reading of language text. When one
first learns to read, he learns the letters of the alphabet, then sees groups of letters as
words, then finally groups of words. In the same manner, a music student first sees
individual notes, then learns to read groups of notes (Harrel, 1996). A language-reading
student recognizes words by the shape of letter groups. In time, he can group words,
paragraphs, and even pages at a glance (Zagorski, 1994). We read words by associating
their appearance with their meanings. We also read music not by seeing individual notes
but note patterns. We then associate them with functional keyboard behavior that is
familiar to us (Giles, 1988). A note by itself has no meaning, just as single letters in a
word have no meaning by themselves. If we read a sentence by looking at each letter of
each word individually, the sentence becomes gibberish. If students read one note at a
time, music also becomes gibberish for them (Giles, 1988).

Unfortunately, a large number of music students read only one note at a time.

This may be the reason for their poor sight-reading ability. A student will never be able

ll

to sight-read fluently as long as he sees only one note or chord at a time. Instead, he must
learn to see combinations of notes and chords with tonal patterns suggesting a hand shape
(Bryant, 1962). The eyes should take in groups of notes, not just one note at a time. The
eyes should find a starting note and then see the others as a pattern (Harrel, 1996).
Psychologists tell us that short-term memory can hold approximately seven bits of
information at a time (Miller, 1956). If we see individual notes as part of a larger
grouping, such as a triad, it is possible to increase the amount of information available to
us at one time (Haug, 1991). Successful sight-readers have learned to increase the
number of notes or information taken off of a page by “chunking” or grouping notes
(Haug, 1991). The eyes of a good reader search first for familiar patterns and for
deviations from them (Zagorski, 1994). The more basic patterns one incorporates into his
musical comprehension, the more successful are his reading skills (Giles, 1988). At least
part of sight-reading expertise is dependent on the acquisition of a vocabulary of
commonly occurring note groups, or chunks, that can be rapidly encoded and processed
in reading. Skilled readers appear to possess a larger vocabulary with larger chunks or
may be able to process the chunks more rapidly (Waters, 1997).

The eyes perceive some patterns almost instantaneously, while others take longer
to assimilate. For instance, it is more difficult for most musicians to read the music of
Boulez than the music of Mozart. The notes of Boulez’s score are not patterned in ways
to which we are accustomed (Giles, 1988). Two recent studies conducted by Clifion
(1986) with skilled pianists revealed that small intervals are read more accurately than
large intervals under brief presentation conditions. A study by Chang (1993) comparing
the eye movements of trained pianists reading contrapuntal, homophonic, and

contemporary pieces revealed that eye movements differ in the reading of the different

12

styles. This indicates cognitive process of structural pattern recognition in music reading.
The highest sight-reading error ratio occurred in contemporary music, and the lowest
ratio was found in contrapuntal music.

Just as in the reading of language one samples the text for clues that make sense
in light of the reader’s experience in order to construct meaning, so also does a music
reader search for clues in the musical score. Good music readers do not read every note
but sample the score and predict continuations that are likely or appropriate within a
certain musical idiom (Hahn, 1987). For example, when a student is aware of predictable
cadence patterns at phrase ending, it allows him to predict or chunk information
extending his eye-hand boundary to match phrase boundaries (Sloboda, 1977). A student
who can readily recognize melodic patterns and perform them automatically will read
music in larger units. This ability will allow him to look ahead, to perceive complete
phrases, and to concentrate more on musical expression (Wolfe, 1989). Certainly, this
ability to perceive and read music as a whole, rather than in minute parts, should be the
goal of every teacher for his students.

What does this new information mean for the music teacher? How can we apply
the concept of chunking or pattern reading to the teaching of music? Can a student be
taught to read by patterns rather than by single notes as has been done for decades?

Some students learn to read by patterns or groups without specific instruction, such as a
young student of the researcher who has been able to sight-read hymns and relatively
difficult music easily since she was six years of age. No specific instruction was given to
her in sight-reading. However, the vast majority of music students do not learn to read
patterns at such a young age, and many do not learn at all. Is it possible for all music

students to learn to read patterns, just as language readers learn to read groups of letters

13

as words and phrases? In the past fifteen years several articles have appeared in music
magazines, music journals, and books encouraging teachers to teach their students to read
by groups of notes rather than individual notes (Giles, 1988; Haug, 1991; Zagorski, 1994;
Harrel, 1996, 1997).

At the same time, several research studies have been done to determine if
instruction in chunking or pattern reading will produce stronger sight-readers.
Grutzrnacher (1987) experimented with fifth and sixth grade brass and woodwind
students by dividing them into two groups. The control group used the traditional single-
note identification approach to learn to read music. The experimental group received
instruction in recognition of tonal patterns both aurally and from notation. These patterns
were both isolated fi'om and used within the context of melodies through performance
activities involving harmonization and vocalization. Results indicated that the
experimental group scored significantly higher than the control group on the aural
identification of major and minor tonalities and in melodic sight-reading achievement.
There was no significant difference between the two groups in reading recognition. This
study indicates that a similar design using two different groups of beginning pianists may
reveal similar results.

Similarly, Hahn (1987) designed a research study with two beginning public
school elementary string classes. The classes were divided into a control group and an
experimental group. The control group received instruction from a string method book
with emphasis on recognition of isolated pitches and note values along with flashcards
used to facilitate note recognition. Instruction of the experimental group was based on
perception of melodic contour and rhythmic units, with no emphasis on exact pitch. A

significant difference in favor of the experimental group showed that music-reading skill

14

could be facilitated by reading instruction with a focus on whole-to-part strategies.
Students trained in these strategies were better able to read both familiar and unfamiliar
music notation. This study indicates that students taught to observe larger units than the
single note could grasp more on the written page. The beginning pianist with not one but
two staves to read could also possibly benefit from instruction encouraging him to
observe more on the page.

Gamble (1989) tested the effect of tonal pattern instruction on beginning clarinet
students based on the music leaming theory of Edwin Gordon. Seventy-six students were
divided into three groups. Students in group one received traditional instrumental
instruction, while those in groups two and three received tonal pattern instruction with
arpeggio and diatonic patterns, respectively. The tonal pattern instruction included
listening, singing, recognizing, playing and reading patterns both in major and minor
tonalities. A significant difference was found between groups one and two indicating that
those who learn sequential skills based on music learning theory containing arpeggio
patterns obtain superior skills in tonal audiation and music reading. Gamble’s study
included the hearing and singing of tonal patterns as well as pattern recognition and
performance. Perhaps pattern instruction apart from singing could still be effective for
the beginning pianist.

Gaynor (1995) tested the proposition that students who were taught memory
recall, eye movement as an aid to chunking, and the predictive structures of melody,
would learn to incorporate those strategies into the music reading process. Seventh
through twelfth grade flute students were given instruction to facilitate chunking and
melodic predicting. Before being tested, the students were pre-tested and classified into

two categories: more skilled and less skilled music readers. Results showed that the

15

instruction aimed at chunking and melodic predicting resulted in significantly better
reading skills for the less-skilled readers. Melodic predicting instruction was more
effective for the more-skilled readers. This study indicates that even older students may
benefit fiom instruction in chunking and melodic predicting. Perhaps beginning college-
age piano students, even with previous musical training, would benefit as well.

A study involving college-age piano students was conducted by Beeler (1995).
This study measured the effects of two sight-reading strategies used with group piano
students. One involved the pre-study of melodic intervals and the other a cue for
rhythmic continuity using an accompaniment by digital sequencers. The melodic interval
pre-study was effective for improving sight-reading pitch accuracy. This study indicates
that college-age piano students form effective subjects for a study using two different
methods of musical instruction.

The study conducted by Beeler applied interval study to sight-reading but not
tonal patterns. Even though the interval study was helpful, pattern instruction was not
explored. The studies conducted with various beginning instrumental students indicated
that pattern instruction is an aid to sight-reading fluency. However, sight-reading at the
piano involves more than a single-line melody. To date, there has been no study
conducted with piano students involving tonal pattern instruction in relation to sight-
reading fluency as far as the researcher is aware. The researcher is also unaware of any
studies determining the exact common tonal patterns found in easy classical keyboard

literature.

16

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

Subjects

Students from two separate college piano classes at Michigan State University
served as the subjects of the study. The semester-long classes consisted of non-music
majors who were taking elementary class piano as an elective course. Both classes were
taught by the researcher during the 2001 — 2002 school year. Each class contained
twenty students who were roughly between the ages of eighteen and twenty-two years of
age. The Fall 2001 class also contained a graduate student in his mid-twenties and an
older student in his thirties. The Spring 2002 class contained one student in his thirties.

Music 147, Elementary Class Piano, at Michigan State University is a one-
semester course designed for the college student with no previous musical instruction.
However, it has been the researcher’s experience, after teaching the course for two years
prior to the study, that many students in the class have previous musical training, and a
few students even have previous instruction on the piano. In order to determine the
nature and extent of that instruction, each student was asked to fill out a card on the first
day of class briefly describing his or her musical background. The researcher wished to
determine who would be eligible from the class to participate in data collection at the end
of the semester. Those with previous musical instruction would not necessarily be
excluded from the study, but those with previous piano experience would need to be
tested early in the semester to determine if they were already able to sight-read piano
music. Those who demonstrated the ability to sight-read piano music would be

eliminated from data collection at the end of the semester.

l7

Although there were twenty students enrolled in the Fall 2001 class, ultimately
only eleven from the class participated in the sight-reading, or data collection, portion of
the study. The other nine members were either eliminated because they displayed
proficient sight-reading skills on the piano prior to the study or chose not to participate in
the study. Out of these eleven, all had previous musical instruction prior to taking the
course. Two of these students could play the guitar by ear, but could not read musical
notation. Three had minimal instruction on an instrument but had not continued their
studies past middle school. Six students had continued their musical studies into high
school. Out of these six, five played an instrument in high school band, and one had sung
in high school choir. Two of these six students continued their musical studies while in
college. One had taken a year of college music theory the previous year, and one was
singing in the Michigan State University Men’s Glee Club.

Out of the Spring 2002 class, ten students ultimately participated in the study. It
was determined that all of these students, also, had some kind of previous musical
instruction or experience prior to taking the course. Three of these students could not
read musical notation. Two had not continued their musical instruction beyond
elementary school, and one stopped after middle school. Only four continued instruction
while in high school. Two of these were in high school band, and two in were in high
school choir. This group had less previous musical instruction and experience than the
control group.

Although nearly all of the students enrolled in the two classes had received
previous musical instruction, the researcher did not find it necessary to exclude these
students from the study or testing. It has been the researcher’s experience, after teaching

three years of studio piano lessons at Michigan State University to music majors who are

18

not pianists, that non—pianists have weak sight-reading skills on the piano in spite of their
general musical education and facility in playing a different instrument. Although these
students were fine musicians on their major instrument, they almost consistently
displayed weak reading skills at the piano. The researcher believes that this is due to
inexperience in transferring visual cues (notation) to the keyboard, as well as to the
difficulty of coordinating the reading of two staves to performing with two hands. Since
every other instrument involves the reading of only one staff, those with instrumental or
vocal experience were only proficient in the reading of the staff of their instrument and
could also only decode that notation on their major instrument. Because the previous
musical instruction of the subjects in this study was quite minimal compared to the music
majors referred to above, the researcher did not feel that it was necessary to exclude any
student from the study who had not had previous piano experience, yet could perform
music with case on a different instrument.

The initial survey of class members also revealed that several had previous piano
experience. Ten from each class as a whole indicated that they could either play the
piano by ear or that they had received previous instruction on the piano. All of these
students were given a sight-reading test early in each semester to determine their reading
ability. A piece from the course text, “Italian Song”, by Lynn Freeman Olson, was
chosen. (See Appendix A.) The piece consisted of a right hand melody accompanied by
intervals of a fifth, fourth, and third in the left hand. Movement in the melody was
mostly by step, with a couple of skips of a third. Note values were mostly quarter notes,
with a few half notes and one dotted-quarter/eighth note rhythm. Students were asked to
read only the first line. The left hand remained in one hand position, while the right hand

made a switch from C position to G position midway through the line. Those students

19

who could read the complete line, even with errors, were eliminated from the sight-
reading test to be given as part of the study at the end of the semester. Students who
could not perform the complete line were not excluded from the study. It was obvious to
the researcher that the students could not read the notation. In conferring with the
students as well as observing their initial performances in class, it was determined that
many who had taken piano lessons as a child had forgotten how to read notation. One
student who had taken a semester of class piano in high school also had poor reading
skills. Four students from the fall semester and two students from the spring semester
were eliminated from the study based on the sight-reading test. These students
demonstrated the ability to sight-read by performing the first line of “Italian Song” with
few or no errors.

Four students from the F all 2001 group with previous piano experience remained
in the study. Two played the piano only by ear. One had taken piano lessons from
second through fourth grade. One had taken three years of piano in middle school. None
of these students were able to sight-read “Italian Song” proficiently. Five students from
the Spring 2002 class with previous piano experience also remained in the study. Two of
these played only by ear. Another had only taken two lessons prior to taking Music 147.
One had taken piano lessons from age five to age eight. Another had taken one semester

of class piano in high school, yet could not sight-read the example given.

Design

The students in the Fall 2001 class served as the control group for the study,
receiving traditional, non-pattem instruction in music reading and sight-reading. The

Spring 2002 class served as the experimental group. This class received the same

20

instruction with additional instruction in the recognition and reading of tonal keyboard
patterns. During the final three weeks of each semester, the students from each class
were invited to take two separate sight-reading tests. Participation in the sight-reading
tests was voluntary. Twelve students from the control group and twelve students from
the experimental group originally agreed to participate. One musical selection was read
at the first performance, and two were read at the second performance for a total of three
pieces. After sight-reading a piece, each student was given the opportunity to practice for
a short period of time and to perform the piece again. Each performance was audio-taped
by the researcher. The same musical selections were read by both the control group and
the experimental group. The taped performances from each semester were randomly
scrambled and dubbed onto one tape. Copies of the tape were given to two graduate
students at Michigan State University for evaluation. Both students were piano majors
with teaching experience. The judges evaluated the tapes for both tonal and rhythmic
accuracy. Tonal accuracy was evaluated by keeping a tally of tonal errors in each
performance. Rhythmic accuracy and fluency was evaluated on a five-point continuous

rating scale.

Procedure

Prior to conducting the study, the researcher sought to define and identify
common tonal patterns found in keyboard music. The literature review for the study
revealed different definitions of common tonal patterns from patterns based on scales and
triads (Harrel, 1996), groups of two to five pitches in a given tonality (Gordon, 1990), to
any grouping of notes that repeats within a piece. This grouping could be from two to

eight or more notes. Although the researcher believes that all of these views are valid,

21

she sought to identify patterns that are common in keyboard music. Since the early
intermediate level repertoire written by respected classical composers from the 1600’s to
the present forms the foundation of most keyboard studies and has remained a standard of
keyboard literature, the researcher examined two collections of this literature for common
three-, four- and five-note patterns.

The collections examined were “Celebration Series, Piano Repertoire Album 1,
2"d Edition,” Frederick Harris Music, 1994, and “Essential Keyboard Repertoire, Volume
1, 2“d Edition,” Lynn Freeman Olson, editor, Alfred Publishing Company, Inc.1995. The
researcher compiled a list of the most common tonal patterns for keyboard found in these
collections. These patterns are listed in Appendix B, along with the frequency of their
usage. The number appearing with each pattern refers to the total number of
compositions in which the pattern was found in both volumes of repertoire. The
frequency of a pattern’s appearance within a single piece is not indicated in this list.
Since the researcher believes that different performers may view patterns differently, all
different possible interpretations were included. The most common patterns discovered
include the three-note descending scalar pattern, the three-note ascending scalar pattern,
the three-note repeated-note pattern, the four-note descending scalar pattern, the
descending broken triad, the descending one step, then ascending one step (D-C-D)
pattern, and descending five-note scalar pattern. Sixty-eight patterns are listed in
Appendix B. Although the most common tonal patterns identified were based on scalar
or triadic patterns, the study also revealed many patterns that used combinations of
intervals such as the second and third. Common examples are seen in pattern #13 (C-A-
B) and #14 (A-B-G). A common keyboard cadential pattern was discovered consisting of

a descending 4"l followed by the descending 5‘”. (See example #9, Appendix B.) This

22

pattern is reversed to form a common keyboard accompaniment pattern (example #41).
Many patterns were discovered that are not based solely on 'a scale or triad. The most
common tonal patterns consisted of smaller intervals of a second or third. Patterns
containing larger intervals were less common.

Based on the repertoire examination, the researcher did not include patterns over
five notes in length. The vast majority of patterns found were three notes long. These
patterns did not necessarily repeat within a piece, although some pieces were found to
contain several patterns that formed the basis for the entire composition. (See Appendix
F.) Patterns larger than five notes were found to consist of two or more smaller patterns
already identified. Therefore, none above five notes in length were counted, with the
exception of #68, a six-note ascending scalar pattern. (See Appendix B.) Two-note
patterns were also not included. The researcher believes that two-note patterns are
broken intervals and could only be considered a pattern if the interval repeats within a
piece. Based on the repertoire examination, the researcher believes that a tonal pattern
for keyboard should not be merely defined as a group of notes that repeats within a piece.
It is possible to find groups of notes that occur only once in a particular composition; yet
these same pattems are found again and again in written music. This concept can be
compared to a single written word occurring only once in a written statement, yet read,
not as a group of letters, but as one unit that has meaning for the reader. The researcher
sought to discover common groups of notes that also have meaning for the music reader,
regardless of the frequency of their usage within a piece. The patterns discovered in the
repertoire examination were presented to the experimental group as the treatment for this

study.

23

Music 147 met three times a week for fifteen weeks each semester. Class
sessions lasted fifty minutes each. Each student sat at his own electronic keyboard that
could be played with or without headphones. The class curriculum was based on the
class text, “Piano for Pleasure, A basic Course for Adults, 4th Edition,” co-authored by
Martha Hilley and Lynn Freeman Olson (2002). All of the basic fundamentals of music
reading were taught in the course and applied to keyboard performance. The recognition
and reading of treble and bass clef notes, notes up to three leger lines above and below
the staves, intervals up to an octave, triads and their inversions, and seventh chords were
introduced, drilled, and applied to repertoire and sight-reading. Intervals and chords,
broken and blocked, were learned and performed. Major and minor pentascales major and
minor scales, the chromatic scale, and the I — IV6/4 — I — V6/5 I chord progression were
taught in several keys. Note values from the whole note to the 32nd note, rests, upbeats,
dotted rhythms, syncopation, triplets, simple and compound meters, and some irregular
meters were taught and applied to repertoire and sight-reading. Musical form was
introduced with the identification of motives, sequences, phrases and common large
forms, such as through-composed, binary, rounded binary, ternary, rondo, and theme and
variations. Common musical terminology and directions were taught. The identification
of keys and tonalities, and the function of the primary triads (I, IV, and V) were explored.
Sight-reading and the study of repertoire fiom the text were assigned regularly. Sight-
reading took place during the class sessions. Repertoire was introduced in class and
assigned for weekly repertoire quizzes. Much of the repertoire used in the class came
from the class text, but some supplementary pieces were assigned from the Bastien

“Piano for Adults, Books 1 and 2,” method books (1999). Students in both classes also

24

had limited opportunities to write musical notation, harmonize simple melodies,
improvise, transpose and play by ear.

The class text introduced music reading in the following manner and was used in
both the control and experimental classes. Simple repertoire using only finger numbers
was taught first, along with note values from the eighth note to the whole note. The
musical alphabet and the names of the white keys were introduced next, and the students
were given repertoire to practice using simple rhythms and note names. By the third
week of classes, students were reading notes on and around one or two staff lines,
followed by the complete treble and bass staves. Intervallic reading by steps (2nds) and
skips (3rds) on single and double lines was introduced in the text before actual reading on
a staff took place. Repertoire was initially written on single and double lines. The treble
and bass staves were introduced by leaming treble clef G and bass clef F, then the C’s
from middle C to two octaves above and two octaves below middle C. All other notes
were learned by their proximity to these notes. By the fourth week of classes, all
repertoire was read on both the treble and bass staves and consisted of single melodic
lines or melodies accompanied by single notes and/or intervals up to a fifth. As the
semester progressed, larger intervals, triads, inversions of triads, and finally seventh
chords were used to harmonize simple melodies. As a new concept was introduced, it
was applied to repertoire to be practiced and learned.

Common tonal patterns for keyboard found in beginning method books were
taught in both classes, such as major and minor pentascales, scales, triads and inversions,
and seventh chords. As each pattern was introduced, passages containing the patterns
were identified in assigned repertoire. Some repertoire featured these patterns, giving the

student practice in applying the new concept to keyboard playing. The curriculum for

25

both classes was identical until the third week of classes, when additional tonal patterns
for keyboard were introduced to the experimental group.

Pattern instruction for the experimental group began the third week of classes
when the text introduced note reading on and around a single line. The control group was
instructed to look for directional movement by 2nds and 3rds, or notes that repeated. The
experimental group received the same instruction, but was also presented with three- and
four-note tonal patterns that appeared in the first reading assignment in the text. (See
Appendix C.) The patterns were initially presented to the class on 7” by 11” flash cards
designed by the researcher. The cards each contained one pattern drawn with quarter
notes on and around a single or double line. Each pattern was identified or labeled (three
repeated notes, three-note descending, step-up-step-down), and then instructions were
given about how to decode or perform the pattern. The students were asked to perform
each pattern beginning on different, random notes. Then the musical exercises on page
43 of the text were examined, line by line, for the same patterns. (See Appendix C.)
After the patterns were verbally identified, the students were instructed to perform one
line at a time. It was pointed out to the students that although many patterns were
confined to a measure, some patterns could extend over a barline into another measure or
more. Patterns could also be found, not only as equal quarter notes, but in rhythms of
differing note values. Exercise “a” from page 43 of the text, for example, contained five
different tonal patterns. (See Appendix C.) These included the three repeated-note
pattern (measures one and five), the ascending three-note pattern (measure two), the
repeat-once-step—up pattern (measures three and four), the descending three-note pattern
(measure six), and finally the step-up-step-down pattern (measures seven and eight).

Some of these patterns were confined to one measure and consisted of quarter notes.

26

Two were extended over two measures and consisted of a half note, quarter note, and
dotted-half note.

Example “b” on the same page addressed different issues. (See Appendix C.)
Two of the patterns in this example combined the intervals of a second and a third. These
patterns (down-a-third-up—a-step) were found in measures one and two, and seven and
eight. One pattern immediately repeated a step higher (measures five and six). One
pattern was an elaboration of the first pattern (measures three and four). The patterns
were identified, practiced beginning on random notes, and then performed as written.
This activity was repeated in each of the exercises to follow, as well as in each sight-
reading and repertoire assignment throughout the semester.

Beginning repertoire for both groups was found in the text and was written on one
or two staff lines. “Round Dance” was one of the first repertoire pieces for both groups.
(See Appendix D.) While the control group read by interval and directionally, the
experimental group identified and practiced the following patterns contained in the piece:
Step-up-step-down (measures one and two, and nine and ten), five-note ascending
(measures six, and fourteen and fifteen), the “musical frown” (measures seven and eight),
ascending three-note, descending third (measure eleven), and three-note ascending
(measures twelve and thirteen). Once the patterns were drilled and learned, students were
asked to locate them in “Round Dance” before performing the piece.

A similar teaching process was followed after the students began reading on the
treble and bass clef staves and had learned the names of the notes on each staff. Common
tonal patterns were drawn on 7” by 11” cards near the bottom of the narrow end. The
cards were inserted into a transparent photo album sleeve that had the treble and bass

staves drawn on one side. The pattern could be moved up and down to start on any line

27

or space of either staff. Students practiced identifying the starting note of a pattern,
finding that note on the keyboard, and then performing the pattern. Patterns to be
performed in new repertoire were practiced independently first, then identified in the new
piece. Finally, the new piece would be performed. One example is seen in “Lightly
Row,” a duet found on page 126 in the text. (See Appendix E.) Part one was examined
first for patterns. Once the initial pattern in measure one (down-a-third, repeat) was
identified, the students were asked to scan the piece to see if and where the pattern
repeated (measures two, five, six, thirteen, and fourteen). The starting notes of the
patterns were identified, and then the students practiced playing the patterns beginning on
those notes. The process was completed by a performance of all of part one. Part two
was also examined for a repeating pattern. The entire piece consisted of only one pattern
played between the two hands beginning on either bass clef C or F. The pattern was
practiced, and then part two was performed. The class was then divided in half, and the
piece was performed as a duet.

Some pieces, such as “Rigaudon” were discovered to contain only four or five
patterns that repeated throughout the entire piece. (See Appendix F.) Once the patterns
were identified and located in the piece, the piece was performed.

As the class progressed, patterns containing larger intervals were identified,
drilled, and applied to repertoire and sight-reading. The sight-reading examples on page
167 of the text were approached in a similar manner as the performance repertoire. (See
Appendix G.) Students were instructed to scan the exercise for patterns following
identification of the key. Example “e” contains patterns using a fourth and a fifth. The
blocked thirds and fourths in the treble clef were also identified as a repeating pattern

with rhythmic and tonal qualities. Each time the class was asked to sight-read new

28

material, this process was repeated. “Night Flight” was used to introduce the cadential/
accompaniment pattern of an ascending fifth and fourth, or descending fourth and fifth.
(See Appendix H.) Once again, the pattern was introduced, practiced, and then applied to
the piece.

Occasionally, as time allowed, patterns were randomly practiced in class using
either the flash cards inserted into the photo album sleeve or by drawing various patterns
on the staves painted on the chalkboard at the front of the classroom. When the latter
method was used, the researcher randomly pointed at a pattern, skipping from pattern to
pattern. Students were asked to verbalize the starting note, locate that note on the
keyboard, and then perform the pattern together as a class. As the semester progressed,
the students were no longer asked to verbalize the starting note but were given four beats
to find the next pattern before performing it together as a class. The researcher would
point to the pattern, count four beats, and then cue the class to perform during the next
four beats. The new pattern was indicated during the next four beats of rest, followed by
the performance of the new pattern. This process continued until all of the patterns were
performed.

In order to begin data collection, the researcher obtained approval from the
University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (U CRIHS). (See
Appendices I and J.) The researcher had originally conducted a pilot study the previous
year with permission from UCRIHS. This permission was extended for a second year
when actual data collection for this study took place. Late in each semester, the
researcher invited those participating in the study to take two separate sight-reading tests
that would be audio-taped. Participation in data collection was voluntary, and consent

forms were signed by each student who agreed to participate.

29

(See Appendix K.)

During the final three weeks of each semester, twelve students from each group

were tested in two different sessions that were two weeks apart. The students were taped

one at a time in the piano pedagogy library where they had privacy and no distractions

from other students. The process was as follows:

1.

6.

Each student read one piece at the first session and two pieces at the second
session.

The student was given two minutes to scan a piece before sight-reading it. He
was not allowed to play during this time, but could trace the notes silently on
the tops of the keys. The researcher left the room during the scanning period
so that the student would feel more at ease.

The student was audio-taped sight-reading the piece. The researcher remained
in the room during the taping.

The researcher left the room for five minutes during which the student
practiced the piece that he just sight-read. The student was allowed to practice
in any manner that he chose.

After practicing, the student was audio-taped performing the piece in the
presence of the researcher.

The same process was followed at the second session for each piece.

The piece read at the first session was, “Carefree,” by Daniel Gottlob Turk. (See

Appendix L.) At the second session, “Polka,” by Dmitri Kabaevsky, and “F ifes,” by

the researcher were taped. (See Appendices M and N.) This repertoire was selected as a

result of a pilot study conducted on class piano students the year before. It was

30

discovered that the repertoire previously chosen was too difficult for students from both
classes to read comfortably, so easier pieces were chosen for this study.

“Carefree,” by Turk, was chosen based on the patterns present in the piece. (See
Appendix L.) The researcher was also curious to see how the students from each group
wOuld perform the final two measures of the piece. Previous teaching experience had
revealed that beginning students have difficulty reading contrapuntal keyboard music,
particularly when the two hands are playing two independent patterns or lines. It was
hoped that those students who had received pattern instruction would read these two
measures with greater success than those who had not received pattern instruction.
Instruction was given to the experimental group at one point late in the semester
concerning the reading of music with two independent lines in the two hands. Students
were told to look for patterns in both clefs. Often one clef would contain a pattern that
was easier to read and play. If a mental note were made of that pattern, then the student
could direct his conscious attention to the more difficult pattern, while playing the easier
pattern in the other hand from memory.

The researcher chose “Polka,” by Kabalevsky, because of the unique challenges
for the beginner of reading both hands in the treble clef, as well as playing a melody in
the left hand and an accompaniment in the right hand. (See Appendix M.) It was hoped
that pattern reading would help the experimental group read the left hand with greater
ease than the control group.

The researcher sought in vain to find a simple piano composition to read
consisting of leger-line notes, so she composed “Fifes” to test the students’ ability to
sight-read notes above the treble clef staff. (See Appendix N.) It had been the

researcher’s experience that students with previous piano and general musical instruction

31

had little or no experience reading notes above or below the staves, since most beginning
literature is limited to notes on the staff. The researcher sought to discover if those
students with pattern instruction would be able to read leger-line notes with greater
accuracy than those who did not have pattern instruction. It was the researcher’s belief
that those who decoded musical notation solely by recognizing note names would have a
more difficult time reading unfamiliar notes than those who could also read patterns.

Following the sight-reading test, the researcher discovered that one of the students
who participated in the study from the control group had more previous piano experience
than she had revealed on the first day of class. Her response on the musical experience
card indicated that she had no previous piano experience. However, upon hearing her
sight-read with greater case than her classmates, the researcher questioned the student
and found that she had taught herself to play the piano prior to taking the course. This
student was eliminated from the study based on her prior piano experience. The control
group now contained eleven subjects.

The researcher also found it necessary to remove two students from the
experimental group who had participated in data collection. These students had a high
number of absences from the class and were not present for much of the pattern
instruction. It was felt that these students did not accurately represent the experimental
group. This left the experimental group with ten subjects.

The recordings of the sight-reading sessions were randomly scrambled so that the
subjects from the control group and the experimental groups were interspersed
throughout the master tape. The researcher had introduced each subject during the initial
taping by assigning a number to the student. The number of the student was announced

on the tape each time before he performed. The researcher was able to determine which

32

student belonged to each group by the number assigned. After the students were
randomly scrambled on a master list, each was assigned a new number in the order of his
performance on the new tape. The recordings of “Fifes” were dubbed first on the master
tape, followed by “Carefree” and “Polka.”

The master tape was copied and distributed to two graduate students from
Michigan State University during the summer of 2002. Both students were piano
performance and/or piano pedagogy majors with previous teaching experience. The
performances were evaluated based on two dimensions: a) tonal accuracy, and g) rhythm
accuracy and fluency. The criterion measures used for this study were a tally of incorrect
notes for tonal accuracy, and a five-point continuous rating scale for rhythm accuracy and
fluency. Dimension one, tonal accuracy, was evaluated by keeping a tally of each of the
following errors:

1. Incorrect notes

2. Omitted notes

3. Extra notes

4. Missed accidentals

5. Repetitions of a note

6. “Start-overs”: One tally per “start-over” was given even if two or more notes

were replayed. If in both the initial performance and in the “start-over” a

mistake was made and repeated, the mistake was tallied each time.
Barely perceptible “stumbles,” such as a quick “grace” note effect from a finger that
bumped another key while attempting to play the correct note, were not tallied as

incorrect notes.

33

Dimension two, rhythmic accuracy and fluency, was evaluated with the following
five-point rating scale:

5 — Uses all correct rhythms and plays with a steady tempo with barely

perceptible pauses, if any.

4 — Plays with few (up to 3) incorrect rhythms and/or few pauses and “start-

overs.” The performance is basically steady.

3 - Plays with several incorrect rhythms and/or several pauses and “start-overs.”

The performance is somewhat halting.

2 — Plays with many incorrect rhythms and/or many pauses and “start-overs.”

The performance is not fluent, but halting and unsteady.

1 — Plays with mostly incorrect rhythms and/or very many pauses and “start-

overs.” The pauses are often long. The performance is not fluent, but halting and

“painful” to listen to.

Analysis

One-tailed t tests were used to determine whether there were significant
differences in the mean ratings of the pieces as performed by those subjects who received

pattern instruction and those students who did not.

34

Chapter 4

RESULTS AND INTERPRETATIONS

Inter-judge Reliability
In order to determine the reliability of the ratings between the two judges, their
results were correlated using the Pearson Product Moment Formula. Below are tables of
the correlations between the judges for each of the two performance conditions.
Table l
INTER-JUDGE RELIABILITY

TONAL (Dimension 1)

 

 

“Fifes” “Carefree” “Polka”
Sight-reading .782 .825 .853
Practice .831 .917 .877

 

The correlation was high in the tonal dimension.

 

 

Table 2
INTER-JUDGE RELIABILITY
RHYTHM (Dimension 2)
“Fifes” “Carefree” “Polka”
Patterns .819 .462 .808
Non-pattem .810 .521 .782

 

The correlation between judges was high for “Fifes” and “Polka” in the rhythm

dimension, but low in “Carefree.” The low correlation in “Carefree” was due to a great

35

number of tonal errors, both in sight-reading and after practice. Because the subjects
experienced great difficulty in reading the selection, it was impossible for them to
maintain rhythmic regularity. It was equally as difficult for the judges to properly

evaluate their rhythmic performance.

1%] Accuracy Results

There were no statistically significant differences in the tonal accuracy of those who
received pattern instruction and those who did not for individual songs or for the composite
tonal ratings. (See Tables 3 through 7.) However, the means showed a tendency for the
group receiving pattern instruction to read with greater tonal accuracy than the group that did
not receive pattern instruction. This tendency was found in all three pieces, both when sight-

reading and when reading after practice, as well as in the composite and total tonal ratings.

Table 3

TONAL ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 1)
“Fifes” Sight-reading

 

 

 

 

M SD t P
Patterns 10.200 8.548
-1.152 .26
Non-pattem 1 5.091 1 0.653
“Fifes” After Practice
Patterns 3 .300 3. 1 64
-l .152 .26
Non-pattem 5.364 4. 1 54
p > .05

36

Table 4

TONAL ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 1)
“Carefree” Sight-reading

 

 

 

 

 

M SD t P
Patterns 44.200 1 7.63 7
-.409 .69
Non-pattem 46.909 12.534
“Carefree” After Practice
Patterns 30.000 1 7.582
-.360 .72
Non-pattem 32.545 1 4.767
p > .05
Table 5

TONAL ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 1)
“Polka” Sight-reading

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M SD t P
Patterns 30.500 10.886
-.654 .52
Non-pattem 35.455 21.556
“Polka” After Practice
Patterns 20.500 14.624
-.524 .61
Non-pattem 24.273 1 8.001
p > .05
Table 6
COMPOSITE TONAL ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 1)
_S_ight-reading
M SD t P
Patterns 84.900 30.461
-.979 .34
Non-pattem 97.545 28.721
After Practice
Pattern 53.800 30.331
-.633 .53
Non-pattem 62.1 82 30.245
p > .05

37

Table 7

TOTAL TONAL ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 1)

 

 

M SD t P

Patterns 138.700 57.948
-.852 .41

Non-pattern 159.818 55.643

 

p> .05

Tonal Accuracy Interpretations

The means indicate that the experimental group, who received pattern instruction,
read better in each piece, both while sight-reading and after practice. This was also true
in the composite and total tonal results. However, the differences between the two
groups were not enough to be significant. The researcher believes that there are several
possible reasons for these results.

Although both groups began with twenty possible subjects per class, that number
was cut in half by the time the researcher conducted the sight-reading tests. This was due
to the preliminary sight-reading test given early in each semester that eliminated those
with proficient sight-reading ability on the keyboard, the number of students per class
that actually volunteered to participate in testing, and the further elimination of one
student from the control group and two from the experimental group that did not
accurately represent the rest of the class. The sample that remained was too small to
reveal a significant difference in the tonal results. The researcher also found that two
from the experimental group who participated in the reading tests, read considerably
poorer than the rest of the subjects in that group, affecting the overall performance of the

group. Again, a larger sample may have not been as affected by their performance.

38

Another possible explanation for the results could be the difference in the
personality of each group. It had been the researcher’s experience in teaching the class
the previous two years, to find classes that were relatively equal in intelligence,
motivation, and general attitude from semester to semester. This did not prove to be the
case during the 2001 — 2002 school year. The control group as a whole contained a large
number of students who were highly motivated and energetic. These students were quite
vocal in class, displaying an unusual amount of curiosity and exuberance. Students
would often arrive early and leave late in order to ask questions, practice, and interact
with one another. Often, a more experienced student would be observed helping a less
experienced student both during and outside of class. On a couple of occasions, various
students asked the researcher for more difficult music to practice in place of the assigned
repertoire. Class participation was high during tonal and rhythmic drills. Almost every
student was prepared for both written and repertoire quizzes.

Almost the opposite was found to be true in the experimental group. In fact, this
class was the most difficult class for the researcher to teach in all six semesters of
teaching Music 147. A large number of students regularly displayed apathy by skipping
class, skipping quizzes, and not preparing for written and repertoire quizzes. There were
also a few students who were ill during the semester, which caused them to fall behind in
their assignments. It was observed that during drill work in class, both pattern and non-
pattem, a large number of students chose to sit and observe rather than to participate.
Many students were not prepared for repertoire quizzes, indicating that they did not
practice. Although the students who actually participated in the sight-reading test were
largely the top students in the class academically, they did not display the attitude and

preparation of the control group the semester before.

39

Another possible reason for the results could be the difference in the musical
background of each group. All of the subjects for this study had some kind of previous
musical training or experience. However, this background was not equal between the
two groups. Out of those who actually participated in the study, it was found that the
control group had a stronger musical background than the experimental group. Six
members of the control group had a strong musical background, compared to three in the
experimental group. Those students that the researcher considered to be strong were
those who had participated in band or choir all through high school or even beyond.
Three in the control group had minimal training in the reading of notation compared to
four in the experimental group. The researcher defines minimal experience as those who
had received musical instruction in elementary school or middle school, but had not
continued instruction beyond that time. Two students in the control group could not read
notation compared to three in the experimental group at the beginning of the class. This
difference in background could explain the control group’s ability to decode tonal
notation with nearly equal ability as the experimental group.

It is possible that neither group received enough instruction before data collection.
Music 147 is a fifteen-week course with one week at mid-term devoted to oral
presentations on a topic of the student’s choice and the final week devoted to final exams.
Each subject had only been studying the piano for about three months when the sight-
reading tests were administered. In these three months, the students of Music 147 learned
what a normal child would learn in approximately three years of piano instruction. The
students had an insecure mental knowledge of the fundamentals of music and were
novices when it came to reading and performing keyboard literature. The researcher

noted that many mistakes were due to the students’ inability to properly identify notes on

40

the staff under the pressure of testing. It is possible that different results could have been
found had the study been conducted over an entire school year or longer. The subjects
would have been more secure in both reading and pattern recognition.

Finally, the sight-reading repertoire that was chosen for collecting data may not
have accurately measured the subjects’ ability to recognize and sight-read patterns. The
researcher had a difficult time finding repertoire that was simple enough to sight-read yet
still contained patterns that the experimental group had learned throughout the semester.
A pilot study conducted the year before with different repertoire revealed that the chosen
repertoire was much too difficult for the subjects to read. The researcher attempted to use
classical literature, but the subjects had read largely folk music and music from two
different method series throughout the semester that contained many clear patterns. The
students were not as experienced in the reading of classical literature. “Carefree” was
particularly difficult for them to read, as evidenced by the high number of tonal errors
and the judges’ difficulty in rhythmic evaluation. (See Tables 2 and 4.) All three pieces
contained tonal patterns that both groups had learned to recognize and read. (See
Appendices L, M, and N.) The melody in “F ifes” was largely based on a pentascale.
Both groups had been taught to recognize patterns based on pentascales. “Carefree”
contained repeated-note patterns and a pentascale that both groups could recognize and
play. “Polka” contained triadic patterns and a pentascale that, again, both groups had
been taught to recognize and perform. Only measures two and three contained different

patterns.

41

[Maccuracv results and interpretation_s of individufiagfieces

The researcher asked the judges not only to evaluate the performances for tonal
errors as a whole, but also measure by measure to see if pattern reading would assist in
specific situations. “Fifes” was composed and selected by the researcher for its use of
leger-line notes. It was the researcher’s experience that students with previous musical
training also had limited experience in reading notes off the staff. If students with a
strong musical background were relying on individual note recognition to read, they
would display difficulty in reading notes that were unfamiliar. Other methods of
decoding would have to be used to read these notes with ease. Both groups were taught
interval reading as well as the recognition of patterns based on pentascales and triads,
since these methods are commonly used in piano instruction today. “Fifes” makes use of
pentascale patterns as well as intervals from the second to the fifth. Both groups had
equal success in the reading of the measures containing pentascales and larger intervals
written in slower rhythmic notation. However, measure five contains a more complicated
tonal pattern, not based merely on a pentascale. Because note values are quicker in this
measure, interval reading would be not as useful in decoding the notation, particularly for
the beginner. (See Appendix N.) It was found that the experimental group had greater
success in the reading of the pattern in measure five than the control group, both while
sight-reading and after practice. The greatest difference was seen after practice. (See

Table 8.)

42

Table 8

AVERAGE TONAL ERRORS IN MEASURE FIVE OF “F IFES”

 

 

Sight-reading Sight-reading Practice Practice
Judge 1 Judge 2 Judge 1 Judge 2
Patterns 2 1.7 .2 .2
Non-pattems 2.1 8 2.45 .91 1 .09

 

The numbers in Table 8 indicate the average number of errors per group in
measure five of “F ifes”. These trends indicate that those students who have been
instructed to recognize and read patterns have greater success reading notation that is
unfamiliar by using pattem recognition to decode notation. Since these students had not
been reading keyboard music for very long, both groups were weak in sight-reading
skills. Perhaps there would have been more of a difference in the sight-reading results, as
there was after practice, if they had been playing longer prior to the testing.

“Carefree,” by Turk, was selected to see if beginning piano students would have
more success reading two independent lines if they were instructed in the recognition and
reading of tonal patterns. The researcher was particularly interested in the students’
ability to read measure 7. (See Appendix L.) It was found that both groups were fairly
equal in their ability to sight-read the measure, but a noticeable difference was seen after
practice. The difference was not as dramatic as seen in “Fifes,” but the notation was
much more complex in this case. (See Table 9.) The equal sight-reading ability may,
again, be attributed to lack of experience coupled with the difficulty of the notation.
However, the difference after practice indicates that the experimental group may have

used pattern recognition to assist in practicing.

43

Table 9

AVERAGE TONAL ERRORS IN MEASURE 7 OF “CAREF REE”

 

 

Sight-reading Sight-reading Practice Practice

Judge 1 Judge 2 Judge 1 Judge 2
Patterns 6.6 6.5 3.5 4.3
Non-pattems 7.82 6.27 5.36 6.36

 

“Polka” by Kabalevsky was chosen for the left hand melody that was read in the
treble clef rather than the usual bass clef, as well as for the patterns in the left hand. (See
Appendix M.) The researcher did not find any notable difference in the reading of left
hand patterns between the two groups. This is no doubt due to the fact that the patterns
were largely triadic and based on a pentascale, and both groups knew how to read these
patterns. In a couple of cases in this piece as well as the other two pieces, a student from
the experimental group performed the correct pattern but began the pattern on the wrong
note. The researcher believes that these students were still weak in identifying notes
written on the staff. This tendency was usually corrected after practicing the piece.

Many students in both groups read the accompanying intervals in the right hand of
“Polka” incorrectly. It was most commonly observed that the thirds were played with
incorrect notes, and the sixths were performed as fifths in these cases. This can be
explained, again, as a weakness in identifying notes on the staff as well as inexperience in
performing intervals of a sixth. Much of the repertoire used throughout the semester used

the intervals of a fifth or smaller to accompany a melody.

Rhythm Accuracy Results
There were no statistically significant differences in the rhythmic accuracy and

fluency of those who received pattern instruction and those who did not for individual

44

songs or for the composite rhythmic ratings. The mean trends varied from piece to piece
between the two groups, with the control group reading with slightly better rhythmic
fluency and accuracy than the experimental group in “Fifes” and “Polka,” but the
experimental group reading better in “Carefiee.” The composite and total mean
differences indicated a slight tendency for the control group to read with greater rhythmic

accuracy and fluency than the experimental group. (See tables 10 — 14.)

Table 10

RHYTHM ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 2)
“Fifes” Sight-reading

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M SD t P
Patterns 6.150 1.334
-.727 .48
Non-pattem 6.636 1 .690
“F ifes” After Practice
Patterns 7.000 1 .472
-l .087 .29
Non-pattem 7.682 1 .401
p > .05
Table 11
RHYTHM ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 2)
“Carefree” Sight-reading
M SD t P
Patterns 4.000 .577
1.668 .11
Non-pattem 3.318 1 .168
“Carefree” After Practice
Pattern 5.350 .851
1.696 .11
Non-pattem 4.455 1 .457
p > .05

45

Table 12

RHYTHM ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 2)

“Polka” Sight-reading

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M SD t P
Patterns 5.050 1 .066
-.496 .63
Nomattem 5.409 2.047
“Polka” After Practice
Patterns 6.300 1 .274
-.795 .44
Non-pattem 6.81 8 1 .662
p > .05
Table 13
COMPOSITE RHYTHM ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 2)
Sight-reading
M SD t P
Patterns 15.200 2.312
-.131 .90
Non-pattern 13.364 3.287
After Practice
Patterns 18.650 2.636
-.217 .83
Non-pattem 1 8.955 3.664
p > .05
Table 14
TOTAL RHYTHM ACCURACY RESULTS (Dimension 2)
M SD t P
Patterns 32.850 6.236
-.520 .61
Non-pattem 34.3 1 8 6.653
p > .05

Rhythm Accuracy Interpretations

The rhythm accuracy results appear to indicate that the control group read with

greater rhythmic accuracy than the experimental group, with the exception of “Carefree.”

46

This difference was slight, overall. The researcher believes, again, that this is due to the
stronger musical background found in the control group as opposed to the experimental
group. The control group would have had more experience reading rhythms than the
experimental group. The reading of rhythm patterns would not be affected by a change in
instrument as much as the reading of tonal patterns.

There was no difference in the amount of rhythmic instruction or testing between
the two groups as there was in tonal keyboard pattern instruction. Both groups received
the same instruction in the reading of rhythms. However, as stated earlier, the control
group was observed to participate more in the actual clapping and counting of rhythms
during rhythm exercises as opposed to the experimental group. Many in the experimental
group refrained from active participation. The researcher believes that this contributed to

a weakness in the experimental class as a whole in performing rhythms.

47

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Purpose and Problems

The purpose of this research was to determine whether regular tonal pattern
instruction with college class piano students would be effective in developing sight-
reading skills. The problems of the study were to determine if college class piano
students receiving regular tonal keyboard pattern instruction would become significantly
stronger sight-readers than those receiving traditional sight-reading instruction without
pattern instruction and to determine if these same students would read significantly better

after a short period of practice than students who did not receive tonal pattern instruction.

Desiga and Analysis

Twenty-one college students from Music 147, Elementary Class Piano, at
Michigan State University participated in the study. Eleven students from the Fall 2001
class formed the control group and were taught the rudiments of music reading using
traditional methods of piano instruction. Ten students from the Spring 2002 class formed
the experimental group, receiving the same instruction as the control group with
additional instruction in the recognition and performance of common tonal keyboard
patterns. Prior to the experiment, the researcher identified common tonal patterns found
in early-interrnediate classical keyboard literature by examining two collections of
repertoire. The patterns found in these collections were introduced and practiced
throughout the spring semester. All performance repertoire and sight-reading exercises

were examined for tonal keyboard patterns prior to reading.

48

At the end of each semester, the subjects were audio-taped sight-reading three
different selections. They were taped again after practicing each selection for five
minutes. The recordings were given to two judges for evaluation on two dimensions: a)
tonal accuracy and b) rhythm accuracy and fluency. The criterion measures consisted of
a tally of tonal errors for dimension one, and a five-point continuous rating scale for
rhythm accuracy for dimension two. One-tailed “t” tests were use to determine whether
there were significant differences in the mean ratings between those who received

traditional piano instruction and those who received pattern instruction.

Baits

There were no statistically significant differences in the tonal or rhythm
accuracies of those who received pattern instruction and those who did not. However the
means showed a tendency for the group receiving pattern instruction to read with greater
tonal accuracy than the group that did not receive pattern instruction in all three pieces.
Individual measures isolated in two of the selections that contained more complex
patterns written off the staff and contrasting patterns between the two hands also showed
a greater degree of tonal accuracy for the group receiving pattern instruction than for

those who did not receive pattern instruction, particularly after practice.

Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Resegch

Beginning piano students receiving tonal pattern instruction using patterns drawn
from classical literature may read with greater tonal accuracy than those who do not
receive pattern instruction. However, the results of this study were not significant and
therefore not conclusive. Tonal pattern instruction for keyboard may be helpful with

reading notation that is not familiar to beginning piano students, such as notes off the

49

staff. Tonal pattern instruction also may be helpful in reading complex notation such as
two independent lines between the two hands. This is particularly true after a short
period of practice. Tonal pattern instruction on the keyboard may help a student learn a
new piece more quickly as he practices that piece. Rhythmic accuracy does not appear
to be affected by tonal pattern instruction on the keyboard. Beginning piano students in
both a studio and class setting may benefit from regular tonal pattern instruction on the
keyboard along with traditional instruction.

The two groups used in this study were not equal in musical background,
motivation, or attitude. This inequality, along with the small sample, a short period of
instruction, and a poor choice of sight-reading repertoire for collecting data, may have
affected the outcome of the results. Since previous studies involving beginning students
on wind and string instruments found tonal pattern instruction to produce a significant
improvement in reading skills, the researcher believes it is still possible for beginning
pianists to experience the same improvement. Because the results of this study also
indicated a consistent tendency for those receiving pattern instruction to read better
tonally, the researcher believes that a study conducted under different circumstances
could produce more conclusive results. Therefore, the researcher believes that future
research is necessary to determine if tonal pattern instruction on the keyboard can
produce a significant difference in the sight-reading and general reading ability of the
beginning piano student.

The researcher recommends using children who have no musical background or
training to draw upon, rather than college-age students with varying degrees of previous
musical training. A larger sample may provide different results, as well as a study

conducted over a longer period of time. Tonal pattern instruction may be more effective

50

if taught systematically. The researcher recommends teaching simple patterns first such
as patterns based on repeated notes and seconds. One might progress to patterns
containing thirds and larger intervals as the initial patterns are reviewed. Perhaps
instruction would be more effective if the students were introduced to the patterns aurally
before reading them in notation. Singing the patterns as well as learning them by rote or
imitation could also precede reading notation. Once the students are reading patterns,
constant practice both in isolation and in the context of musical selections may facilitate
recognition and reading. Just as one does not learn to read language by reading the same
paragraph over and over, perhaps piano students could benefit from reading patterns in a
variety of musical examples. Since the pianist is faced with reading two staves at the
same time, the researcher recommends incorporating the use of both hands into the
practice of reading tonal patterns. The students could possibly practice patterns in one
hand while playing a simple accompaniment in the other. Even during rote practice an
open fifth or triad could accompany a pattern to prepare the student for reading both
staves. Beginning piano students may also benefit from writing tonal patterns out in
musical notation. Perhaps pattems could be assigned to be transposed or written through
melodic dictation.

The patterns taught should be those actually found in keyboard literature,
regardless of whether they repeat within a piece. The student should be able to recognize
a tonal pattern as easily as a single note, interval, or chord. Three-note patterns and a few
four- or five- note patterns should constitute the majority of patterns taught.

The researcher’s own experience using tonal pattern instruction with younger students
in a studio setting has indicated that piano students who are taught to recognize and read

groups of notes tend to read with more confidence, accuracy, and fluency than those who

51

read single notes or intervals alone. Interviews with college-age students who did not
participate in the study but were enrolled in Music 147 with previous piano experience
also revealed that tonal pattern instruction aided them in learning to read with fluency.
Based on this evidence, the tendency for the subjects in this study to read better tonally,
and the results of studies conducted with other instrumentalists, the researcher believes
that research involving the use of tonal pattern instruction with beginning piano students
should continue and might eventually result in the improvement of sight-reading skills in

beginning pianists.

 

52

APPENDICES

53

afisa Eco :23an as, 85 .955 @0333 88 Emeaoo

be

 

A
23353 .exoewo=<

ZOwAO gamma“ Z754

muom Game:

Emmi. OZHmeMUm OE%§-EOE

< Nae/Ema?

54

APPENDIX B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TONAL PATTERNS
Pagems Frequency (# of pieces) Patterns Frequency
1 l
1. 7_9 13. 17
l
l l
2 3 -_- _7_3 14. j 16
l
3 49 15 '—F 16
I
J
4 “i 1 4_5 16 15
l
l
I 1
5 T 39 17. , 14
l
6 :2 39 18 '— _l;
7 '— 28 19 :E, 13
l
l l E
8 :21 21 20. 1_2
L l
9. 29 21. g
.4
E 1 t
10. _1_8 22. ’:i: _1_1
l
j 41 E L l
11 LL}: 17 23 L. _1_1
l 1
12. 7: 17 24 1———.t——Jl: u
I

55

APPENDIX B

TONAL PATTERNS (CONTINUED)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Battems Frequency (# of pieces) Patterns Frequency
'—
25. -a 19 38. FrI— 3
I l
l
26. ”‘ 19 39. 8
l l
27. _19 40. _. L_. g
4‘
28. 19 41. — §
29. _9_ 42. 1 8
I
i
30. 9 43. _. j:— z
31. 9 44. I 2
' c
32, 1 1 9 45. _6
T l
l
33. '— 9 46. 4'1 9
l
34. ,8 47. E 6
l l 1—
l I
35. ———:i:—i: 8 48. 9
l
36 8 49 i;— 6
I
'—
37. 8 50. 6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

56

APPENDIX B

TONAL PATTERNS (CONTINUED)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Patterns Frequency (# ofipieces) Battems Frequency
51. § 64. 5
52. "’ 5 65. 4
i
53. § 66. E g
I
L
54 '— 5 67 F 4
_I_
l
l
55. 5 68. j ' l 53?; 5
l
56. '— 5
57. f ‘.—:,l: _5_
. ,1_
i
58. " i 51
l
59. T 4
l
60. £1
61. :1
62. £1
63. £1

 

 

 

 

 

57

.6553 2: mo :23an .53 womb 9.90 saga—625 Noon Emtaoo

 

 

 

«N
"_aflwrmm

< co Emom .n

7 ti
—0
:0
j
5 c:
" <1

 

 

 

 

if fininga .1 72.1% P44...

m :0 5me .m

 

 

m2: mag/mm < 20 magma “EOHMm—mmd OZHEU<mE1

U Nae/man?

58

cone—ea of mo :23an 55 wow: .955 E9333 Noom Ewtaoo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n N [In _ n {'1 Tl?
_ T _ _E_ —fi _!L_ __ _r_ [E _ _ _.m
as
_ __ _ _ _ _ _w L. _ _ _:u
p L :3:
ZOmAOEEmmMmZH/SA

Deana 95cm

MUZVQ 3,59% ”EOHmmmm—d OZHIU<mE1

D XHQZmn—nz

59

.3233 2: Ho 58$an 5H3 new: @390 :toBmHenB Noom Ewaraoo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H . H H I H s
_ L H L H H H l 0‘!
H l‘ H T - H H T a:
i. C. H be
\ \ \ \ m
I \ I N “F H N . \ fl
- H N . H N H H N . H N
H H \ H if N H _\ H H N
H J N H H N _/l\ j H N 3
H/l\ _(\1 Hl/ll\ c
_ L L H . H
M ll H u M . H. w H.“ n L:— a . H H
F H . . H H H H H ‘IHH H H .
Hl ill fl H H. H « HH “ “ Q
HII/llLliF _ lIll\ H m
» » H H “a I.
. H H H H - . J i N
H l H L H H H l ‘1 oh}
H T H T - H H T N o
C. t. _ .1.
b 1‘1
- N - N 1 H \ - \ J‘-
H N - H N H H N . H \ d
H N H 1H \ J .\ H H \ if
H H \ H H \ ./l\ r H\ 1| 3
H/|\ H(\ _ _ _ H(\ _ <
RE
i. H m HrH 1H 1 n _- H n u 1. H H 1. a
1.. it. a I H r t
.l. _a - n_H .H m H H H H H H H H u 4.. H
. _ H
HoHHHwH «5.52 t3 vowcmt<
HecoHHHUEH. \HHQQHHHHHOE .mHyHHOHHHmHnHmHMH OZHHHU<mH1

mH XHQZmHHAH<

60

.6233 2:6 8&an 5H3 BS .386 €9,323 88 easaoo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ll 7 Nil H H
UT, H H. M . , 1.1 H t.
\ /.l\ /: rllx
RE
\l l t
1” HI 1” ‘7 H IlHH ‘ A H T H m H H
m H L A A III n I a 11 H
_ H H H
D D D D D
F. II I‘ 'I _I W
F H
Hl H H F JH r H H H
1‘ l w 11 h E Hrl . l l Hr l H <
HemoHrkanH

MUHUHQMOU mmngmq<

:35.“me

20g EOE HMHHHHOHuyHmHAHmHMH OZHHHU<mH

H 5929564

61

.6553 05 Ho :28qu 55 com: 955 stages? Noon EwPaoU

 

 

 

 

 

 

ARAV

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I
Mr
[\‘H
:14,
E

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A O O O O O
H H L _th H .. 1 a,

F H

m

I L H T

l“ . . o
L 98
H H F H I I A
m 3.893. HH

mxH<>MHmHHZH MmOyH<H HHHHB OZHnH<mHMH UmHMHHOHpHmHAHmHMH OZHHHU<mH1

O XHDZmHAHAZ

 

62

.HoHHmHBEH 05 Ho :23qu SH? BmD .965 ntoBmHHSS NOON Emtaoo

it-
1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 1"]! O O “0’ O O I
JM/ \1 I n . n v . .\1_9 T . F
H _ NH ”E E H 4 _ M M H .~
m I Who.»
c{llllll\CH
. w . R an 1
1y 1.1 _. . .1 v 1.1 1 1..
m Ll h m Hi E r H m
K TNT . H _
r H
«ME
aw”.
. 1 u c
as 8 1 a 5.62
2030 525% 225 ,

Bag 332

RIDER REOHZ HmMHHOHMHmHAHmHMH OZHHHU<mHH

H.H XHAHZmHAHAz

63

 

OFFICE or
RESEARCH
AND
GRADUATE
STUDIES

Dnlverslty Dommlttee on
Research Involving
Human Subjects
Michigan State University
246 Administration Building
East lensing, Michigan
48824-1046

517/355-2180

FAX 517/353-2976

3: mmsueduluser/ucrihs
E-Mail' ucrihsOmsuedu

APPENDIX 1

UCRIHS APPROVAL

MICHIGAN STATE

 

UNIVERSITY

December 7, 2000

TO: Midori KOGA
4665 Jadestone Dr.
Williamston, MI 48895

RE: IRB# 00-736 CATEGORYz1-A, 1-B
APPROVAL DATE: November 14, 2000

TITLE: THE EFFECT OF TONAL PATTERN INSTRUCTION ON THE
SIGHT-READING ACHIEVEMENT OF COLLEGE CLASS PIANO STUDENTS

The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects' (UCRIHS) review of this
project is complete and I am pleased to advise that the rights and welfare of the human
subjects appear to be adequately protected and methods to obtain informed consent are
appropriate. Therefore, the UCRIHS approved this project.

RENEWALS: UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year, beginning with the approval
date shown above. Projects continuing beyond one year must be renewed with the green
renewal form. A maximum of four such expedited renewals possible. Investigators wishing to
continue a project beyond that time need to submit it again for a complete review.

REVISIONS: UCRIHS must review any changes in procedures involving human subjects, prior
to initiation of the change. If this is done at the time of renewal, please use the green renewal
form. To revise an approved protocol at any other time during the year, send your written
request to the UCRIHS Chair, requesting revised approval and referencing the project's IRB#
and title. Include in your request a description of the change and any revised instruments,
consent forms or advertisements that are applicable.

PROBLEMS/CHANGES: Should either of the following arise during the course of the work,
notify UCRIHS promptly: 1) problems (unexpected side effects, complaints, etc.) involving
human subjects or 2) changes in the research environment or new information indicating
greater risk to the human subjects than existed when the protocol was previously reviewed and
approved.

If we can be of further assistance. please contact us at 517 355-2180 or via email:
UCRIHS@msu.edu. Piease note that all UCRIHS forms are located on the web:
http://wwwmsu.eduluserlucrihs

Sincerely,

 

Ashir Kumar, MD
Interim Chair, UCRIHS

64

 

Roman Subjects
Midnigan State University
246 ministration Building
East lensing. Michigan
48824-1046

517/355-2180

APPENDIX J

UCRIHS RENEWAL

MICHIGAN STATE
U N 1 v E R s I T Y

November 27, 2001

TO: Midori KOGA
4665 Jadestone Dr.
Williamston, MI 48895

 

RE: IRB # 00-736 CATEGORY: 1-A. 1-B EXEMPT
RENEWAL APPROVAL DATE: November 26, 2001

TITLE: THE EFFECT OF TONAL PATTERN INSTRUCTION ON THE SIGHT-READING
ACHIEVEMENT OF COLLEGE CLASS PIANO STUDENTS

The University Committee on Research involving Human Subjects' (UCRIHS) review of this project
is complete and I am pleased to advise that the rights and welfare of the human subjects appear to
be adequately protected and methods to obtain informed consent are appropriate. Therefore, the
UCRIHS APPROVED THIS PROJECTS RENEWAL.

This letter also approves the revised consent form.

RENEWALS: UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year, beginning with the approval date
shown above. Projects continuing beyond one year must be renewed with the green renewal form.
A maximum of four such expedited renewal are possible. Investigators wishing to continue a project
beyond that time need to submit it again for complete review.

REVISIONS: UCRIHS must review any changes in procedures involving human subjects, prior to
initiation of the change. If this is done at the time of renewal, please use the green renewal form. To
revise an approved protocol at any other time during the year, send your written request to the
UCRIHS Chair, requesting revised approval and referencing the project's IRB# and title. Include in
your request a description of the change and any revised instruments, consent forms or
advertisements that are applicable.

PROBLEMSICl-IANGES: Should either of the following arise during the course of the work. notify
UCRIHS promptly: 1) problems (unexpected side effects. complaints, etc.) involving human subjects
or 2) changes in the research environment or new information indicating greater risk to the human
subjects than existed when the protocol was previously reviewed and approved.

If we can be of further assistance, please contact us at 517 355-2180 or via email:
UCRIHS@piIot.msu.edu.

Sincerely,

 

Ashir Kumar, M.D.
UCRIHS Chair

65

FAX: 517/353-2976 AKI bd

1- «fame; arIn/Irser/Imihs

APPENDIX K

CONSENT FORM
Dear student,

I would like to invite you to participate in a study that I am conducting this year at
Michigan State University. This study concerns the sight-reading and general music
reading ability of college class piano students receiving two slightly different methods of
music reading instruction in the two semester of class piano during the 2001-2002 school
year. The purpose of the study is to improve music reading and sight-reading instruction
for future piano students.

At the end of each semester I will be administering two separate music reading
tests to each student in the Music 147 class. Students will be asked to sight-read one or
two short piano selections at each session. They will be given two minutes to scan each
selection before playing. The performances will be audio-taped. Following the initial
reading, the student will be given five minutes per piece to privately practice the
selections, followed by another taping of performances. There are no risks or benefits for
you as a participant. The results of these tests will n_ot influence or affect your grade in
Music 147! It is hoped that your participation will result in better piano instruction for
future piano students.

Full confidentiality will be maintained. Only I, as the researcher and examiner,
will know the identity of each participating student. All students will remain anonymous
in any report of research findings. Your privacy will be protected to the maximum extent
allowable by law.

Participation in this study is voluntary, and you may withdraw at any time without
penalty. If you have any questions or concerns about your rights as human subjects of
research, please contact David Wright at:

University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS)
Michigan State University

246 Administration Building

East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1046

(517)355-2180

You may also direct any questions to me at (989) 288-5728 or Imitasde@msu.edu.

 

I, (print name) agree to participate in this
study conducted by Debra Pajtas by taking two music reading tests at the end of the
semester in the Music 147 class.

 

 

(signature) (date)

66

 

Saga 236 SHEER 5H3 8.5 .8 @2253 8.5. $2 Reece

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HOH — ' n
H H JHm M HI I ‘H M
H q a H e a
3 I
H "i
H
m H. 1 If. H hr _
d I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I

 

0
i

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2576?: 886.52
HEP 8:80 .355

62.330

MMQKMHHHO H7HOH.H.UmH1H1HOU <H.<Q MOH MMHHOHthmHmHyH OZHQ<mHMH1H1wHOHm

1H XHQZmHHAH<

67

.5233 3:0 Simian 5? E55 .8 @2233 EéEE< 32 23:38

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E E E E .1 I I \L D E! | E! E
E E E E E E El E E! I E 1 E E
E . . E E E E E E E E E E . y
E . E E E E E . E E I
— d u u E c
[A
E _ _ _ E E _ E
E E E E E T E E E
i b B u D E b I Ev
EHmlTLlL . - J. - . E 1
L E E E E
If“ a m t 1 . <
N E E . m
v m m m
\‘llljm
D b V b
— 1 | a - — i
E E El E _I E
L E E E E E E
. E E m E
__ E E E m E
a L c L
gill; E E «E E «E
. . N ‘ ‘ .‘
m
N 52 .2 do .3228wa BEE 2.9.3.?

«Ev—Eon

VENQR UZOHHUMAAOU <H<Q MOm mMEOHmmmmm OZEQ<mMQIOEm

SE XEQZmnE/x

68

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a a c c
a D a chl.
he
3
¢ IE I: J. I . ‘. I I. l... E It I. I. I. d
M” M” d. t «E Q Q d m d .M t. d. u” m
a a a a
he
h —
I I I I I. v I I. I I I IL: I Ifi
NW 6 ‘ Um dfi ‘. t . dE “m dfi NE “W dfi ‘ w
m<.:<m émmfl

mm—h—h

WERE UZOCUmEJOU <H<Q MOm gaps—mag OZEQEQ man—.105,

Z XEQZm—n—AZ

 

05:.

69

BIBLIOGRAPHY

7O

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Albergo, C., Kolar, J. M., & Mrozinski, M. (2002). Celebrate piano! lesson and
musicianship, 1A. Canada: Frederick Harris Music Company.

Bastien, J. 8., Bastien, L. (1999). Piano for adults, a beginning course. boom
&_2. San Diego, Califonia: Kjos Music Press.

Beauchamp, L. (2001, Winter). A tribute to Boris Berlin: Canada’s pioneer of the
piano. Keyboard Companion, 12 (4), 19-21.

Beeler, C. J. (1995). The effect of interval prestudy and a cue for rhythmic continuig
on piano sight readingachievement of group piano students. Doctoral
Dissertation. University of Texas at Austin.

Berlin, B. (1983). The ABC. of piano plaflng, an easy method for beginners, books 1,
2, & 3. Ontario, Canada: The Frederick Harris Music Company, Ltd.

Bryant, C. M. (1997, February). Sightreading is an art. Clavier 36, 42-44.

 

Chang, S. (1993). A study of eye movement during sight-reading of selected piano
compositions. (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teachers College).
Dissertation Abstracts lntemational, 09A: 2756.

 

Clifton, J. V. (1986). Cognitive components in music reading and sight reading
performance. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Waterloo, Canada).
Dissertation Abstracts lntemational, 47, 05B: 2203.

Covello, S. (1997). Step, skip, and regat: basic patterns for note reading, books 1 &
A Florida: The FJH Music Company.

 

Deutsch, L. (1950). Guided sight-reading. New York: Crown Publishers.

Faber, N. & Faber, R. (1999). _P_i_ano adventures, flashcards-in-a-box. Florida: The
FJH Music Company, Inc.

F uszek, R. (1977, Autumn). Sight reading at the college level, part III. Keyboard Arts
Magazine, 9-10.

Gamble, D. K. (1989). A study of the effects of two types of tonal pattern instruction
on the audiational and performance skills of first-year clarinet students.
(Doctoral dissertation, Temple University). Dissertation Abstracts lntemational,
50, 04A: 0893.

71

Gaynor, J. (1995). Music reading comprehension: the effect of aid to chunking and
melodic predicting on sight reading performance achievement of secondary
school instrumental music students. (Doctoral dissertation, University of San
Francisco). Dissertation Abstracts International, 48, 07A: 1690.

 

Giles, A. (1988, October). Reading music not notes. Clavier, 27, 31-32.

 

Goolsby, T. W. (1987). The parameters of eye movement in vocal music reading.
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 48, 07A: 1690.

Gordon, B. (1990). A muaic learning theory for newborn and young children. Chicago:
G. I. A. Publications, Inc.

Grutzmacher, P. A. (1987). The effect of tonal pattern training on the aural perception
reading recognition, and melodic sight-reading achievement of first-year
instrumental music students. Journal of Research in Mu_sic Education. 35 (3),
171-181.

Hahn, L. (1987, late summer). Music reading a language reading: correlations in
processes and instruction. Council for Research in Mu_sic Education Bulletm,’
93, 41-49.

Harrel, R. (1996, February). Components of sight-reading. Clavier, 35 (2), 25-27.

 

Harrel, R. (1997, May / June). The habit of reading slowly. Clavier 36 (5), 22-23.

 

Haug, S. (1990, December — 1991, January). Sight playing and visual perception: the
eyes have it. The American Mu_sic Teacher, 40, 22-23.

Hefferman, C. W. (1968). Teaching children to read mus_ic. New York: Appleton-
Century-Crofts.

Hilley, M., & Freeman, L. F. (2002). Piano for pleasure, a basic course for guns, 4th
edition. Belmont, California: Wadsworth / Thomson Learning.

Lewis, M. (1989, September). How to teach sight-reading. Clavier, 28, 31-32.
Massoud, K. (1995). Let’s sightplay! books 1 — 4. Florida: FJH Music Company, Inc.

Miller, G. (1956). The magic number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our
capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.

Music flash cards, 120 cards for any beginning music student. set A. Milwaukee:
Hal Leonard Corporation.

72

Obenshain, K. (1993), July / August). Navigating the notes. Clavier, 32, 43-44.

 

Pace, R. (1979). Music for piano, book__1_ . Hal Leonard Corporation. New York:
Lee Roberts Music Publications, Inc.

Ripley, J. C. (1997, November). Sightreading with a plan. The Instrumentalist, 52, 91.

Rubinstein, B. (1950). The pi_anists’ approach to sight-reading and memorizing. New
York: Carl Fischer, Inc.

Sloboda, J. (1974). The eye-hand span: an approach to the study of sight reading.
Psychology of Mu_sg, 4, 2 (2), 4-10.

Smith, D. J. (1988). An investigation of the effects of varying temppral settings on eye

movement while sigm-reading trummt music and while reading langu_age aloud.
Doctoral dissertation. RILM: 88-11040-dd.

 

Tobin, J. R. (195 7). Common sense in sight-reading. London: Joseph Williams, Ltd.

Waters, A. J ., Underwood, G., & Findlay, J. M. (1997). Studying expertise in music
reading: use of a pattem-matching paradigm. Perception & Psychophysich, 59
(4), 477-488.

Waters, A. J ., Townsend, E., & Underwood, G. (1998). Expertise in musical sight
reading: a study of pianists. British Journal of Psycholgy, 89, 123-149.

Young, L. J. (1971). A study of the eye-movements and eye-hand temporal relationship
of successful and unsuccessful piano sight-readers while sight-reading.
Doctoral dissertation. RILM: 71-01721-dd. Indiana University.

Zagorski, P. C. & Tan, N. J. (1994, November). Reading music by finding pulses and
chord patterns. Clavier, 33 (9), 6-11.

73

    

    
 

lllllllljflljljlflllljlll1111111711!

_ 3 8 0653