PROCESS AND PRODUCT: THE SIGHT-SINGING BACKGROUNDS AND

BEHAVIORS OF FIRST-YEAR UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

A Dissertation
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
The Degree Doctor of Philosophy in The
Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By
Victoria J. Furby, B.M. M.A.
********
The Ohio State University
2008

Doctoral Examination Committee

Dr. Patricia J. Flowers, Advisor
Dr. Hilary Apfelstadt
Dr. Leila Heil

Approved By
________________________
Advisor
Graduate Program in Music

ABSTRACT

This study was designed to address the need for research examining the sightsinging backgrounds and behaviors of students who had finished a secondary school
education, but had not yet begun a college curriculum. Sample subjects (N=40) were
self-selected from the population of first-year undergraduate students who auditioned for
a choral ensemble at a large Midwestern university. Data were gathered from
questionnaire responses, video observations and audio recorded evaluations of a sightsinging task.
A large majority (97.4%) of students entering college choral ensembles had
participated in a variety of choral ensembles throughout their high school (M=3.36 years)
and middle school (M=1.92 years) educations. Many students (43.5%) had also
participated in a variety of instrumental ensembles (M=2.9 years). Most students (84.6%)
reported receiving some type of sight singing instruction and 77% reported receiving
instruction in a specific sight-singing system with a large majority (75%) receiving
instruction in movable tonic systems. A majority (59%) of students reported that they
had been instructed regarding specific strategies to prepare for sight-singing performance.
Students were asked to sight sing a newly constructed melody written in common
time and in the key of F major. Students spent an average of six minutes and thirty-two
ii

seconds preparing for sight-singing performance. Students spent the most time singing
(M=320.23 seconds) and also spent time tonicizing (M=25.13), in silent study (M=30.51),
writing (M=26.38) and keeping an external beat (M=25.62). Students also played the
starting pitch (M=10.91 occurrences), made error detections (M=9.54) and started again
(M=10.79).
Ordinary Least Squares regression analysis showed years of high school choral
participation to be the strongest predictor of sight-singing success, with years of
instrumental ensemble participation also found to be a significant predictor. Analysis of
high and low scorers showed that high scorers spent less total time than low scorers in
preparing for sight-singing, and a larger proportion of preparation time in non-singing
behaviors, including writing, silent study and external beat keeping. Low scorers
restarted the example significantly more often than high scorers. Analysis of sightsinging instruction showed that students who had received sight-singing instruction,
especially in regard to specific preparatory strategies, were more successful sight-singers.
Varied musical experiences and the inclusion of sight-singing instruction were shown to
be the best predictors of sight-singing success.

iii

Dedicated to my family

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First and foremost I thank my advisor of the last four years, Dr. Patricia Flowers.
Without her unwavering support and advice, this project would never have come to
fruition. I would also like to thank the members of my committee, Dr. Hilary Apfelstadt
and Dr. Leila Heil for their support and the unselfish donation of their valuable time.
Finally, I would also like to thank the other valued professors of The Ohio State
University for the education that made this project possible.
I wish to thank Anthony Brock, David Tomasacci and Marci Major for their help
with the evaluation portion of this project. Harold Weiss, of the sociology department,
has also been of invaluable assistance in the completion this project. I would like to
thank my fellow music education graduate student, Elizabeth Thacker, for the countless
hours of support and advice. I would also like to acknowledge my students for their
understanding and cooperation as this project was completed.
Finally, I thank my friends and family, for their encouragement, not only for this
project, but for pushing me to reach my goals. To my brother Oliver and my sister-in-law
Kristen, thank you so much for taking the time to assist in the final stages of this
research. To my mom and dad, Andrea and Brian, words cannot express what your
support has meant to me over the last four years. As I end this journey I will never be
able to thank you adequately for all you have done and for what you mean to me.
v

VITA

June 15, 1979Born- Waterford, Ireland

2000..B.M., Education, Capital University
2001-2004..Choral Director, Pickerington High School
2005...M.A. Music Education, The Ohio State University
2004-present.Graduate Teaching Assistant
The Ohio State University

FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Music

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract
Dedication
Acknowledgments
Vita
List of Tables

ii
iv
v
vi
ix

1. Chapter 1: Introduction
Problem
Research Questions
Definitions
Method
Significance of the Study
2. Chapter 2: Review of Relevant Literature
The History of Sight-Singing Practice
Ideology of Sight Singing
Systems for Sight-Singing Instruction
Current Trends in Sight-Singing Research
Conclusion
3. Chapter 3: Method
Purpose
Design
Procedure
Characteristics
Musical Example
Audio Evaluation
Observations
4. Chapter 4: Results
Sample Characteristics
High and Low Scorers
Summary
5. Chapter 5: Summary, Discussion and Conclusion
Summary
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Appendices

1
2
4
5
6
7
9
9
18
21
31
45
46
46
47
49
50
54
55
56
59
59
67
73
76
76
83
91
94
103

vii

Appendix A: Recruitment Letter

Appendix B: Consent to Participate in Research
Appendix C: Questionnaire
Appendix D: Sight Singing Test
Appendix E: Audio Evaluation Form
Appendix F: Tables

viii

104
105
109
111
112
114

LIST OF TABLES
Table

Page

2.1 Movable-do solfge syllables

2.2 Fixed-do solfge syllables
4.1 Means and Standard Deviations for
Timed Behaviors of the Sample
4.2 Linear Regression of Reported
Independent Variables
4.3 Linear Regression of Observed
Independent Variables
4.4 Means and Standard Deviations for
Timed Behaviors of High Scorers
4.5 Means and Standard Deviations for
Timed Behaviors of Low Scorers
4.6 Descriptive Data for Top and Bottom
Scorers on Sight Singing Test
F.1. Years of High School Participation-Sample
F.2. Type of High School Choral Ensemble-Sample
F.3. Years of Middle School Participation-Sample
F.4. Type of Middle School Participation-Sample
F.5. Years of Private Voice Lessons-Sample
F.6. Years of Instrumental Ensembles-Sample
F.7. Type of Instrumental Ensemble-Sample
F.8. Years of Private Instrumental Lessons-Sample
F.9. Type of Instrumental Private Lessons-Sample
F.10.Educational Background of Sight-Singing Instruction-Sample
F.11. Sight-Singing System Utilized-Sample
F.12. Descriptive Statistics of Observed Behaviors-Sample
F.13. Years of High School Participation-High Scorers
F.14. Type of High School Choral Ensemble-High Scorers
F.15. Years of Middle School Participation-High Scorers
F.16. Type of Middle School Participation-High Scorers
F.17. Years of Private Voice Lessons-High Scorers
F.18. Years of Instrumental Ensembles-High Scorers
F.19. Type of Instrumental Ensemble-High Scorers
F.20. Years of Private Instrumental Lessons-High Scorers
ix

22
23
63
65
66
69
70
72
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134

F.21. Type of Instrumental Private Lessons-High Scorers

F.22.Educational Background of Sight-Singing Instruction-High Scorers
F.23. Sight-Singing System Utilized-High Scorers
F.24. Descriptive Statistics of Observed Behaviors-High Scorers
F.25. Years of High School Participation-Low Scorers
F.26. Type of High School Choral Ensemble- Low Scorers
F.27. Years of Middle School Participation- Low Scorers
F.28. Type of Middle School Participation- Low Scorers
F.29. Years of Private Voice Lessons- Low Scorers
F.30. Years of Instrumental Ensembles- Low Scorers
F.31. Type of Instrumental Ensemble- Low Scorers
F.32. Years of Private Instrumental Lessons- Low Scorers
F.33. Type of Instrumental Private Lessons- Low Scorers
F.34. Educational Background of Sight-Singing Instruction- Low Scorers
F.35. Sight-Singing System Utilized- Low Scorers
F.36. Descriptive Statistics of Observed Behaviors- Low Scorers
F.37. Reported Characteristics Correlation Coefficients
F.38. Observed Variable Correlation Coefficients
F.39. Histogram Report Test for Heteroskedasticity
F.40. P-plot Test for Heteroskedasticity
F.41 Mean Score and Years of High School Participation

135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

One of the primary goals of music education, or indeed any educational endeavor,
is to produce interested and independent learners. Music literacy, or the ability to read
musical notation, is a necessary component of musical independence. In modern
instrumental ensembles this skill is often the first thing taught, interrelated to the actual
playing of ones primary instrument. However, the situation is much different in the
modern choral ensemble. The ability to sing is not tied to the ability to read music.
Students are taught to sing parts by rote, a process by which the instructor teaches each
part without relating aural recognition of the melody to the written musical notation.
The apparent ease of rote teaching leads to the exclusion of sight singing and music
reading instruction. Many singers can participate in school related activities and never
learn to read music accurately and/or respond to written musical notation.
The goals of a modern choral director are often different than the goals of music
teachers throughout the history of American music education. In fact, publicly available
music education was first introduced to teach the music reading skills necessary to
improve church singing. During the twentieth century, however, changes in technology
and educational ideology led to differing ideas of the importance of music reading. With
the emergence of the child-centered approach to education in the 1930s music reading
1

was considered secondary to music enjoyment (Armstrong, 2001). The inclusion of

composition, improvisation, listening analysis and performance skills was not always
associated with the need for music reading skills (Demorest, 2001). Choral directors
began to be more concerned with performances than developing musical skills that would
lead to musical independence (Guzy, 1994). The skills of music reading and sight
singing became less important to choral directors than the ability to perform a variety of
music for an audience.
Current trends in vocal music education are beginning to show resurgence in the
belief of the importance of music reading. Most choral directors agree that music reading
and sight singing skills are favorable instructional goals. However, research shows that
few include time in their daily rehearsals to teach these all-important skills (Demorest,
2001). In order to maximize productivity and increase the capacity for musical
independence, music reading and sight singing skills must be included in the choral
music curriculum.

Problem

Sight-reading must be the ultimate goal of music literacy. If one can read music
with enough skill to immediately transfer that knowledge to his or her instrument,
rehearsal time can be spent making musical decisions rather than simply teaching notes.
For vocal musicians, this skill is known as sight singing. Sight singing is defined by The
New Harvard Dictionary of Music and Musicians as the performing of a piece of music
on seeing it for the first time. The ability to sing at sight requires the ability to imagine
2

the sound of pitches or intervals without the aid of an instrument. A difficult skill for
instrumental musicians, sight-reading for a choral musician becomes even more difficult.
The difficulty lies in the number of skills that must be completed simultaneously to be a
successful sight singer (Justus, 1969; Miller 1980). Sight-reading is characterized by
high demands on the performers capacity to process complex visual [input] under realtime constraints and without the opportunity of error correction (Kopies, Lee, Ligges &
Weihs, 2006). The skill of internalizing the sounds of specific intervals, adding specific
syllable systems and maintaining one part while hearing another are added to the already
challenging task of reading rhythms and pitches simultaneously and immediately. Add a
layer of text to this task and it may seem impossible to expect singers to complete it
successfully. The sight-singing enterprise is recognized as both complex and abstract
and is indeed challenging to both instructor and student (Ewers, 2004).
Surveys of current practice have found that although most teachers have a positive
attitude towards the teaching of music reading, few spend the necessary time to teach the
skills (Johnson, 1987; Daniels 1988; May 1993). This may be due to a variety of issues
surrounding choral music education. The first of these may be linked intuitively to the
difficulty of the task itself. Sight singing is not something that can be taught quickly, or
with little practice. A structured daily routine, complete with varied activities, frequent
group and individual assessments and inclusion into the actual performance music, has
been shown to be the best way to teach students to sight sing effectively (Collins, 1993;
Demorest, 1998; Demorest, 2001). Second, many teachers of singing were probably not
taught in a way that emphasized the importance of sight singing; and so the cycle
continues, of teachers continuing to teach as they were taught and neglecting sight3

singing practice in the choral rehearsal. Finally, many teachers spend their time
emphasizing performance to the exclusion of music reading skills (Dwiggins, 1984). In
modern choral music education, the emphasis of performing music for an audience, or in
a contest situation, has led to the idea of learning music quickly by rote and a deemphasis on the importance of teaching music reading and sight-singing skills.
It may be assumed that students are being taught the basic skills of music reading
during their elementary school music career. The ability to label notes with their correct
pitch names and durational values may be regarded as a basic and necessary skill by the
elementary general classroom teacher. The translation of these basic skills to the
complex skill of sight singing appears to be the major area of neglect in the secondary
choral classroom. The question remains: what sight-singing skills are vocal musicians
learning during their pre-college school music training? This research will attempt to
determine how current practice in both the middle school and high school classroom
affects the sight-singing skill of first year collegiate ensemble participants.

Research Questions

This study will attempt to answer several questions regarding the entry-level
collegiate musician. The following questions will be the basis for the study Process and
Product: The sight-singing backgrounds and behaviors of first-year undergraduate
students.
1) What are the demographic characteristics of entry-level college choral
musicians?
4

2) What is the musical background of entry-level college choral musicians?

3) What is the sight-singing background of entry-level college choral musicians?
4) What behaviors are exhibited during sight-singing preparation as observed in
entry-level college choral musicians?
5) Are there demographic characteristics, musical background characteristics or
behaviors that are predictors of sight-singing success?

Definitions

Entry-level college choral musician: A first-year undergraduate student who has

completed an audition for participation in the collegiate choral program.
Musical background: Any music preparation undertaken by the subject prior to entry into
the college curriculum. May include participation in choral and instrumental ensembles,
private vocal or instrumental lessons, and musicals.
Sight-singing background: Any study of music reading as related to the ability to perform
a piece of music vocally at first sight. May include introduction and practice of specific
syllable systems at any school level.
Demographic characteristics: Non-musical characteristics utilized to define the sample
and the population. May include age, gender, college major and US state of high school
attendance.
Behaviors: Visually or aurally observed and/or reported physical or intellectual response
to stimuli.

Method

The population for the study consisted of entry-level college students auditioning
for placement in the choral program of a large Midwestern university. This population
was selected for a variety of reasons. These subjects were seen as students with 1) an
obvious interest in continuing their music participation, 2) a probable background in
choral music, 3) a variety of previous educational experiences and 4) a diversity of future
expectations. All students in the population were given the opportunity to participate in
the study, and those who self-selected to participate were asked to complete two tasks.
Students were asked to sing a melody from sight with minimal preparation time. They
were also asked to fill out a questionnaire asking about their musical backgrounds and
sight-singing skills.
Analysis was conducted by the researcher as well as by independent evaluators.
The researcher observed video footage to determine what behaviors the subjects
attempted in preparation for the sight-singing task. In addition, questionnaire responses
were analyzed to determine the musical backgrounds of the subjects. Independent
evaluators analyzed audio recordings of each singers final performance of the melody to
determine whether successful sight singing had taken place. Finally, musical
backgrounds and behaviors were compared to individual evaluations of success to
determine whether there were any significant predictors of sight-singing success.

Significance of the Study

Many studies have been completed that compare sight-singing systems, analyze
demographic and musical characteristics of sight singers or observe group success at
sight singing, yet there have been few studies completed that analyze the end result of
secondary school music education. This study will attempt to determine whether or not
individual students are receiving enough sight-singing instruction during their high
school careers to continue in successful music making at the college level. This study
will attempt to realize what characteristics are found among entry-level college choral
musicians, what behaviors have been taught to help students prepare for sight singing,
what sight-singing systems and strategies are frequently used by entry level college
choral musicians and whether or not these characteristics and behaviors will predict sightsinging success. This study is an important step in determining whether or not students
are learning basic sight-singing skills in their secondary school music educations.
In order that students be given the best opportunities for musical growth,
especially in the area of music literacy, it is important that teachers and teacher educators
understand the status quo of todays music education. This study will attempt to describe
the backgrounds and behaviors of entry-level college choral musicians. It will also
attempt to relate descriptive characteristics with sight-singing skill to determine if one
may predict the other. Finally, it will attempt to determine if specific observed behaviors
could be predictors of sight-singing success. This information will then be disseminated

to practicing teachers and choral conductors in the hopes of improving sight-singing

instruction at a variety of educational levels.

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE

The History of Sight-Singing Instruction and Practice

Influential European Sight-Singing Practices

Modern sight-singing practice and systems are most likely to be based upon the
system for teaching sight singing developed by Guido dArezzo (b.991/991-after 1033)
(Grout & Palisca, 1996; Hughes, 2003). In his Prologus in antiphonarium Guido
lamented the time young singers spent learning chants by heart and pointed out the
advantages of a system of lines identified as to height of pitch, permitting the sight
singing of unknown chants (Palisca, 2007). Guido is attributed to have developed a
system of teaching music reading using the hymn Ut queant laxis, a previously written
text but newly composed melody, to develop a system of syllables designating scale
degrees. The syllables ut, re, mi, fa, so, la when placed in a scale format, formed a sixpitch hexachord (Grout & Palisca, 1996). This system of movable syllables was used for
the keys of C major (hard-indicating a natural B) and F major (soft-indicating a flat B) in
order to teach hymn tones to young singers. Guidos constant search for effective
devices to train the eye and the ear also led to the development of the Guidonian hand, in
9

which six syllables were assigned to six notes and ascribed to the joints of the fingers of
the left hand, in ascending and descending order, to physicalize the practice of music
reading (Palisca, 2007).
This first known system of sight singing has had a profound impact on the field of
music reading in the history of choral music. Most important musicians of the
Renaissance (Dufay, Desprez, Willaert, Gombert, Clements, Binchois, Palestrina,
Victoira, Lassus and others) emerged from the choirboy schools as trained vocalists with
extensive experience in music reading (Collins, 1993). Books of hymns in both the
traditional Catholic tradition and the new Lutheran worship were written and performed
during the church service in true four-part choral singing. Music reading, and in
particular sight singing, was expected from the members of these choirs tied to the
churches and cathedrals of Europe.
As the composers and singers of the Renaissance period used more syllables,
livelier rhythms and shorter note values, notation and theoretical concepts of music
underwent a dramatic change (Hanning, 2002). Ramis de Pareias treatise of 1482,
introduces a system emphasizing the importance of the octave by adding a seventh and
eighth syllable in his system, although this system was never popularized (Hughes,
2007). The practice of using solmization as a sight singing system in connection with
plainchant can be regarded as definite, but the addition of accidentals and extended
ranges led to a need for different systems outside the hexachord system developed by
Guido dArezzo and used throughout this time (Hughes, 2007).
Other European practices of sight singing have continued to be influential in the
sight-singing practices of Western music notation. The field of music education
10

developed both as part of and outside of the church in Europe in the 19th and 20th
centuries. Several important European names in the field of sight singing, music literacy
and education during this time include Johann Pestalozzi, Sarah Anne Glover, John
Curwen, and Zoltan Kodly (Kuehne, 2003).
Johann Pestalozzi was a Swiss educator and author during the eighteenth century.
His ideas of education have influenced practice throughout Western culture for the past
three centuries. The major components of the Pestalozzian principles of education were
based on the method of moving from the easier to the more difficult. Pestalozzi
believed that thought began with sensation and that teaching should use the senses
(Clark, 1999).
Pestalozzi employed four fairly simple principles of teaching. These include: 1)
begin with the concrete object before introducing the abstract; 2) begin with the
immediate environment before dealing with what is distant and remote; 3) begin with
easy exercises and move toward more difficult ones and 4) always proceed gradually,
cumulatively, and slowly. These ideas were adopted and strengthened by the entire
education community, including music educators, in the proceeding centuries.
Sarah Anne Glover was an English teacher who attained recognition through the
excellence of her childrens choir, trained for her fathers church. In 1835, she published
her Scheme for Rendering Psalmody Congregational. Her system, developed over
twenty years of teaching, was based on a new set of notational syllables, do, re, mi, fa,
sol, la, te, wherein do was always the tonic pitch of the major scale. Students were
trained using the Norwich Sol-fa Ladder to sing exercises and songs, and then
introduced to traditional musical staff notation (Rainbow, 2003).
11

John Curwen is another name found in the sight-singing history of England.

Curwen, a member of the ministry in nineteenth century England, had his first
experiences with music education whilst attempting to teach music to children during
Sunday school services. Although well guided in educational principles, Curwen himself
was not a musician. His acquaintance with the Pestalozzian theory of education and his
own study of Glovers Scheme for Rendering Psalmody Congregational, led to his
interest in developing and perfecting the scheme of tonic sol-fa. Curwens major
achievement was to develop a manual system that incorporated physical movement and
hand signs with aural recognition of pitches. This system was developed to help students
of all ages and class backgrounds to develop musical literacy (Rainbow, 2007).
Zoltan Kodly is probably one of the most well known names when discussing
the teaching of music reading to children. A Hungarian musician and educator, Kodly
was a strong proponent of the use of relative solmization, hand signs and rhythmic
syllables along with the native folk music of Hungary in order to teach music literacy to
children (Tacka, 2007). Certain aspects of Emile Jacques Dalcrozes eurhythmics were
also incorporated into the Kodly methodology. The sequences of instruction included
musical experience preceding symbolization. The teaching order is sound to sight,
concrete to abstract, drawing heavily on the work of Pestalozzi (Choksy, 1981).
Kodlys method was based upon the following ideaolgy:

music literacy is something everyone can and should enjoy

singing is the foundation of all music education
music education must begin with the very young
the folk songs of a childs own culture is his musical mother-tongue and
should be the vehicle for early instruction
only music of the highest artistic value (folk and composed) should be used in
teaching. (Choksy, 1981)
12

The Pestalozzian principles of moving from simple to complex and from concrete
to abstract had a profound impact upon the ideas of music literacy in the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries. Glover, Curwen and Kodly all used this philosophy to inform their
methods of music literacy instruction. These ideas have been developed and influence
the music literacy instruction of the present in Europe and in the United States.

Music Education in the United States

The importance of sight-singing instruction and musical literacy has raged in a

continual debate since the introduction of music education to the general public of the
United States. The first musical educationoccurred very early in the countrys history
and had as its central goal the teaching of music reading to improve church singing
(Demorest, 2001). John Tufts, an influential minister from Massachusetts, wrote the first
practical musical text An Introduction to the Singing of Psalm Tunes. This book
contained psalm tunes with directions on how to sing them, contrived in the easiest
method invented. The book has special significance for American music education
because it was intended to help children, as well as adults, learn to sing (Mark, 1999).
This book was one of the first practical users of fasola notation, in which traditional
notation was substituted with the first letters of the four solmization syllables (f)a, (s)o,
(l)a and (m)i. Tufts text and many others like it led to the development of the singing
school, introducing Americans to instruction in music literacy.

13

Singing schools were instructional sessions designed to teach the elements of

music to congregation populations (Crawford, 2007). Music teachers or singing masters
held classes in communities where people desired to learn to sing by note. Similar to the
scholae cantorum and other choir schools centuries earlier in Europe, these schools
served dual musical and social purposes (Mark, 1999). Singing schools generally had
around fifty students and lasted between one and three months. The pupils were taught to
sing in parts and to read music using sung fasola solmization singing (Collins, 1993).
Attention in singing schools was given to music reading, vocal production, style of
performance and deportment. Most schools were held in churches and led by itinerant
singing masters who traveled from town to town. These singing schools were the earliest
form of American music education and also became a major focus of social interaction
(Phillips, 2004).
Singing schools also led to developments in notation and instruction from a
variety of sources. This included a notational system using the basic musical instincts of
fasola notation. This system eventually developed into shape notes, a system still used in
a limited fashion in the United States today (Mark, 1999). Shape notes were a system of
music reading developed to help singers with little or no musical expertise sing at sight
without having to understand staff notation or key signature relationships (Downey,
2007). Shape note singing imparted to generations the joy of choral singing by note and
shared a rich repertoire of American choral music, much of which remains in todays
choral and sacred repertoire. It is also the only singing school tradition that carries on to
the present day (Demorest, 2001).

14

The importance of the singing school and the advent and popularity of singing
societies led to the inclusion of music in public school education. Lowell Mason, often
called the Father of Music Education is generally the first name associated with the
inclusion of music into the public school curriculum. Mason, a director of one of the
most famous singing societies in Boston, believed that all people had a degree of musical
talent, and that singing was a skill to be generally developed. This belief led Mason to
develop a sequential method of teaching sight-singing and singing skills to children based
upon Pestalozzian principles. Hans Georg Nageli combined the educational objectives of
Pestalozzi with basic musical knowledge in the treatise The Theory of Instruction in
Singing. Mason demonstrated the success of his own teaching method, which was based
upon these ideals, in a public concert of the children of Hawes elementary school in
Boston (Phillips, 2004).
In 1838, Mason was named the first public school music teacher in the United
States and music in the school curriculum quickly spread to other cities (Phillips, 2004).
Mason believed that music contributed to the well-being of the individual by uniting that
person with God and by creating better homes, better citizens and better human beings.
Mason became an influential figure in music pedagogy. He advocated that children
should become comfortable with singing and the sounds of music prior to learning music
reading. He also advocated for the use of movable do solfge, a seven-note pattern, in
contrast to the more popular fasola patterns used during the time (Demorest, 2001).
Mason divided music-reading instruction into the categories of rhythm, melody and
dynamics and created a course of study for each category. His specific ideas were
included in the manual Manual of the Boston Academy of Music, for Instruction in the
15

Elements of Vocal Music, on the System of Pestalozzi, and were widely disseminated
among music teachers. The emphasis on developing a sound-based understanding of
music prior to teaching the rules of notation, or the rote before note approach was
different than the pedagogy of music reading previously studied. The argument
surrounding the best way to approach music reading was and continues to be a source of
great controversy amongst the society of music educators (Demorest, 2001). The
popularity and success of Masons ideas and teachings have had a profound influence on
sight-singing instruction and music education at the elementary level. In addition, the a
capella movement of the early twentieth century led to the inclusion of choral music as a
curricular subject at the high school level, and also to the need for advanced instruction in
sight singing at that level.
With the advent and popularity of recorded music, the pursuit of scientific
knowledge and the emphasis in competing world markets, musical literacy became
secondary to experiential music. John Deweys emphasis on educating the whole child
had a profound impact upon musical instruction, making it essential in the production of
a well-rounded and educated student (Collins, 1993). The lack of sufficient trained
personnel prior to the Second World War, however, resulted in the hiring of professional
musicians to replace trained education personnel. This approach resulted in the music
classroom experience becoming a rehearsal with emphasis on performance, a practice
that is still prevalent today (Collins, 1993). The emphasis on performance led to a
converse de-emphasis on musical literacy.
The educational reform movement of the 1960s and 1970s and the belief in the
importance of educating the whole child led to the idea of comprehensive musicianship.
16

These ideas were developed during several events that included the Contemporary Music
Project for Creativity in Music Education, The Yale Seminar, The Manhattanville Music
Curriculum Program and the Tanglewood Symposium (Collins, 1993). In response to
the performance-based focus of secondary music education, comprehensive musicianship
sought a balance of performance, analysis and creativity. This led to new approaches to
learning music and a general loosening of the approach to music in the schools (Mark,
1999). In the approaches determined by the ideas of comprehensive musicianship, choral
literature is seen as the vehicle through which students learn to make musical decisions,
study historical and cultural context, analyze and describe musical concepts, and apply
them to their own compositional efforts (Demorest, 2001).
Although it seems that the ideas surrounding comprehensive musicianship would
have a positive impact upon musical literacy, and especially sight singing for choral
musicians, the need for musical reading skills is not always associated with performance
or listening experience of a particular music repertoire. Students may develop broad
musical skills including the analysis and enjoyment of music, yet not necessarily acquire
the music reading or sight-singing skills necessary to be independent musical performers.
The end of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first century has seen
some resurgence in the emphasis on developing music literacy as a necessary skill of
music education.

17

Ideology of Sight-Singing

Nearly all choral music educators and experts in the field of sight singing agree on
several important points regarding the ideology of teaching music reading. These points
include the necessity for aural recognition of musical intervals, the development of
listening and singing skills prior to reading of staff notation and the development of a
language of patterns that exist within the framework of tonal music. It should be noted
however, that the application of these ideals has been seen mostly within the framework
of learning to sight sing tonal music, and has not been formally applied to the ability to
sing highly chromatic or atonal music.
The goals of sight-singing instruction must be to establish tonality and have the
eye lead thought securely and independently. In order to reach these goals, certain
requirements must be met including the ability to lay a foundation of tonality and become
acquainted with the associated symbols of that tonality. In addition, students must learn
to associate pitches with their representation in the prescribed syllable system. Students
must also become acquainted with scales, mode and intervals as well as rhythmic forms
and sharpen their memory and concentration. The habits associated with successful
music reading include a mastery of key representations, intervals, melodic progressions
and grouping of tones as one groups letters to form words (Root, 1931).
Another supporter of the aural conception of music reading, Wilson (1954) writes
music reading cannot be taught without an aural background. He argues that the first
step for successful sight singing must be the aural recognition of patterns and direction of
musical motion. Other steps of importance include the ability to establish tonality,
18

understand fundamental chords, develop a sense of tone tendency and know major and
minor triads and keys (Wilson, 1954). Middleton (1984) advocates for the learning of
rhythmic patterns prior to pitch and the inclusion of tonal memory and consolidated
notational understanding.
Several authors have created a system of sight singing, including manuals and
examples, incorporating ear training as an important component of instruction. Bland
(1984) created a manual entitled Sight Singing through Melodic Analysis. The manual
teaches students to utilize the concepts of triadic tonal theory within their sight-singing
knowledge. This method teaches students to distinguish between structural and
decorative tones within a horizontal triad outline. The method also helps the student to
recognize and interpret melodic shapes with triad outlines in various positions. Finally,
Blands manual teaches the ability to recognize and interpret melodic shapes within entire
phrases. These steps of instruction develop knowledge of tonal relationships, phrases,
common shapes and motions in melodies. Students learn to consider melodies in relation
to larger patterns and melodic contour is used as a means of developing tonal memory.
Danish composer and educator Jorgan Jersild shares the ideology of an aural
connection to written staff notation and the idea of scale degree functionality. In a study
of Jersilds approach to sight-singing, Rogers (1996) describes the major components of
the method. Tonal Bearings, Functional Tonality, the Geography of Tonality and Tonal
Scaffolding are the building blocks of the Jersild Approach. Tonal Bearings refers to the
knowledge of ones location and relationship to carefully selected reference pitches.
Functional Tonality refers to scale degree functionality and the common resolution and
movement of pitches within a major scale outside the tonic triad. Building a Geography
19

of Tonality involves learning how to find, discern and recognize landmark musical
patterns rather than individual intervals. Notes carry different importance according to
their function and relationships to other pitches. Finally, Tonal Scaffolding refers to the
structured relationships between pitches that affect the perception and understanding of
groups of notes. This approach helps students to sight read musically, within a tonal
context (Roger, 1996).
Phillips (1996) also argues for the integration of aural training into sight-singing
instruction prior to visual training. Once students have learned to successfully navigate
patterns of sound aurally through the use of tonic and dominant tonal patterns then they
can be asked to visually recognize these patterns. An aural foundation should be laid in
a variety of ways, which will lead to an introduction of the traditional visual
representation of notes on the staff. After the relationship of aural and visual is
established, then sight singing can be attempted.
Music reading proficiency, meaningful music performance, and [indeed] all
musical activities in general are the result of clear mental images of sound (Cross &
Hiatt, 2006). Students must be able to relate the aural, oral and visual vocabularies that
are related to music literacy in order to sight sing successfully. To that end many systems
of sight singing have been developed which help to lead students from the aural
recognition of sound to its visual representation.

20

Systems for Sight-Singing Instruction

Choral music educators face a much-debated dilemma when deciding upon the
best system to be utilized for sight-singing instruction. There are two major headings
under which systems of sight-singing instruction can be placed. These include relative
solmization, which is utilized to establish tonic or a tonal center and fixed solmization,
which denotes absolute pitches (Demorest, 2001). Popular relative systems include
movable do-solfge and numbers. Popular fixed systems include fixed-do solfge and
interval drill. Other fixed methods include singing on fixed letter names and utilizing a
neutral syllable when sight singing. Much research has been completed examining the
popularity and efficacy of these sight-singing systems with no definitive results having
been obtained. However, experts and teachers alike continue to debate which system
should be utilized and advocate for their preferred system.

Movable-do solfge

Movable-do solfge is a system of teaching music reading that ascribes a

particular syllable to each scale degree of the major scale. The tonic pitch obtains the
name do, the supertonic the name re, the median mi, the subdominant fa, the dominant so,
the submedian la, and the subtonic ti. These names are ascribable to notes of the major
scale, and change according to the written key of the example. The movable-do system
also has a system of syllables in place for use in the case of accidentals. For example, if
the fourth scale degree is raised a half step, it is given the name fi, or if the third scale
21

degree is lowered a half step it is given the name me. Many educators, throughout
history, have used movable-do solfge, and its precedents to teach music literacy and
sight singing.
Scale Degree
1
Raised 1
Lowered 2
2
Raised 2
Lowered 3
3
4
Raised 4
Lowered 5
5
Raised 5
Lowered 6
6
Raised 6
Lowered 7
7

Solfge Name
Do
Di
Ra
Re
Ri
Me (or Ma)
Mi
Fa
Fi
Se
So
Si
Le (or Lo)
La
Li
Te (or Ta)
Ti

Pronunciation
/do_/
/di_/
/r__/
/re_/
/ri_/
/me_/ (/m__/)
/mi_/
/f__/
/fi_/
/se_/
/so_/
/si_/
/le_/ (/lo_/)
/l__/
/li_/
/te_/ (/t__/)
/ti_/

Figure 2.1 Movable-do solfge syllables

Fixed-do solfge

Fixed-do solfge is a system in which names are ascribed to the scale degrees of a
C major scale. As with movable-do solfge, the syllables utilized are do, re, mi, fa, so, la
and ti. However, in fixed-do solfge the pitch C is always do, the pitch D is always re,
and so forth. Fixed-do solfge uses the same system of syllables for accidentals as used
in the movable-do system. However, in the fixed-do system these changed names are
22

used far more frequently in differing key signatures. Fixed-do solfge has been utilized
with great popularity, especially in European music education.
Note Name
C
C#
Db
D
D#
Eb
E
F
F#
Gb
G
G#
Ab
A
A#
Bb
B

Solfge Name
do (sometimes "ut" in France)
di
ra
re
ri
me
mi
fa
fi
se (sometimes "sal")
so (sometimes "sol")
si (sometimes "sil")
le
la
li
te (sometimes "ta")
ti (sometimes "si")

Pronunciation
/do_/
/di_/
/r__/
/re_/
/ri_/
/m__/
/mi_/
/f__/
/fi_/
/se_/
/so_/
/si_/
/le_/
/l__/
/li_/
/te_/
/ti_/

Figure 2.2 Fixed-do solfge syllables

Numbers

A number system that has been found useful by many choral directors continues
the ideals of the movable-do system without the syllables defined by that method. In the
movable number system of pitch reading, students sing the number of the scale degree
rather than the designated solfge syllable. In this system the tonic pitch is called one,
the supertonic two, the mediant three and so forth. As with the movable-do system, key
relationships are important and the tonic pitch of any given key signature is always
23

designated the number one. This system is often used due to the familiarity of numerical
relationships, especially in regard to teaching young children concrete distances between
scale degrees.

Intervals

The interval system of sight-singing instruction is primarily concerned with the

teaching of the intervallic relationships between notes. There are many different ways to
teach using this system including drilling intervals, singing interval names, singing on a
neutral syllable and singing on letter names. These systems utilized the idea of fixed
relationships between pitches and recognizing the intervallic content between these
relationships. Although all systems deal specifically with intervallic content, a system
based upon the idea of intervallic drill does not include a syllable system or other
referential source, but instead relies specifically upon the recognition of specific intervals
in a variety of settings.

Comparison of Sight-Singing Systems

With the resurgence in popularity of teaching sight singing, a body of literature

surrounding the efficacy and popularity of the differing sight-singing systems has
appeared. This work is primarily concerned with two different aspects of sight-singing
systems. Many opinions have been written comparing the effectiveness of sight-singing

24

systems along with some experimental studies. Also, surveys have been undertaken to
determine which systems are used by directors across the country.
Studies comparing effectiveness of sight-singing systems have led to mixed
results. In a doctoral dissertation, Buchanan (1946) compared fixed-do and movable-do
solfge while teaching sight singing from the staff. In this study, all students who
received systematic instruction in sight singing improved their scores from the pre-test to
the post-test. This study concludes that more improvement may be expected from lessons
in movable-do solfge than from lessons in fixed-do solfge. Major areas of
improvement included the ability to change directions and move from one melodic or
choral pattern to another (Buchanan, 1946). Brown also compared movable and fixed
sight-singing systems with varied results. Subjects of this study were undergraduate
music majors who were instructed using two different systems of sight-singing
instruction across four universities. Movable systems of sight-singing instruction led to
higher scores on pitch accuracy for chromatic music and simple melodies than fixed
systems (Brown, 2001).
In another study, Bricher compared singing on movable-do solfge with singing
on neutral syllables. Two different method books were used with seventy students over a
nine-week instructional period. At the end of the experiment Bricher observed that the
group using movable-do solfge showed a marked improvement in melodic pattern
singing (Bricher, 1995). Mann also used movable-do solfge in conjunction with the
Kodly method of music instruction with college music students to great success (Mann,
1989).

25

Demorest and May (1995) tested the sight-singing skills of students in eight Texas
choirs. Students were randomly selected from pre-existing choirs at eight schools. Four
choirs utilized fixed-do solfge in sight-singing instruction and four choirs utilized
movable-do solfge. Individuals from the choirs instructed in movable-do solfge scored
significantly higher (12.89/15) than individuals instructed in fixed-do solfge (8.79/15).
Although these were significant results, the authors were quick to observe that
differences in instruction, consistency of training and the effect of individualized testing
may also have affected the study.
Blum suggests several reasons for the popularity of the movable-do system of
teaching sight singing. All of these reasons center on the idea that people are not able to
retain fixed sounds in their memories, only fixed relationships between sounds.[and]
these relationships are more important than absolutes (Blum, 1968). Other advantages
to the movable-do system as suggested by Blum include: 1) presents to the eye a set of
syllables favorable to good intonation, 2) gives demarcation to scale degrees, 3)
characterizes each interval of the scale, 4) expresses modulatory relationships and 5)
renders transposition perfectly easy (Blum 1968). Jeno (1971) notes that movable-do is
desirous because named relationships between notes remain constant allowing students to
sing in any key or mode easily. Finally it must be stated that if the mental effect of a
tones function in the key allowed so many to grasp the concepts of pitch center and sing
in tune, there is perhaps some validity to including instruction and exercises working
toward that understanding (Weidenaar, 2006).
In the same study that expressed significant relationships for movable-tonic
systems, Brown also found significant relationships for fixed sight-singing systems.
26

Students of the fixed-tonic systems scored significantly higher on atonal music and with
more difficult melodies (Brown, 2001). Cassidy (1993) examined the effects of sightsinging systems upon the success of non-music majors sight-singing abilities. The
groups using any solfge system scored significantly higher than those singing on letter
names and neutral syllables.
Proponents of the fixed-do solfge are no less committed when advocating for the
use of that system. Fixed systems lead to the development of pitch location or the ablility
to develop some sense of the absolute location of pitches in the singers voice and
memory (Robinson & Winold, 1992). Middleton argues that fixed-do provides several
benefits to music reading including the idea that note names remain constant and that
fixed-do solfge helps lead to the development of approximate if not absolute pitch
placement (Middleton, 1984). Fixed-do solfge may also be utilized so that works
written in a variety of keys can be discussed in a uniform manner. Rather than singing
the modulatory relationships of a key in movable-do solfge, fixed-do solfge allows
conductors and singers alike to refer to note names in a constant manner (Rawlins, 2005).
The biggest proponents of the fixed system of sight singing refer to the increasing
difficulty and lack of tonal center in much of the music of the twentieth century and the
idea that developing absolute pitch may be essential to sight singing that type of music
successfully (Brown, 2001).
Studies including singing on numbers, use of the actual pitch names as a naming
device and the use of intervallic idea are less common than those surrounding the two
different types of solfge. Singing on numbers has been found to be a popular system
used in a choral setting. Proponents of this system argue its superiority on the basis that
27

it uses familiar numerical relationships to teach new concepts. Also this system is similar
to the movable tonic system in that the tonic pitch of a key is labeled number one.
Therefore, the numerical intervals remain constant between scale degrees (Winnich,
1987). The advantages for a using actual pitch names include the idea that students
reinforce music reading through the alphabetical labeling of their fixed pitch names and
that students can identify notes within their key signatures and learn to understand their
pitch function (Brown, 2003).
Barnes (1960) completed a study in which students were drilled for ten hours
singing intervals using a tachistascopic drill, where visual representations of intervals are
flashed on a screen for a predetermined amount of time. These students significantly
improved their ability to sight sing intervals. In addition, a high correlation between the
ability to sing intervals and the ability to sight sing a melody was found (Barnes, 1960).
The use of the intervallic idea is supported by the argument that it is useful for all genres
and types of music, including twentieth century atonal music. According to McElhran
(1998) traditional methods of teaching sight-reading do not work well when sight reading
choral literature, especially modern choral literature. He believes that students must learn
to identify and sing a particular interval and that drill of intervals will aid in sight-singing
success. Foltz (1976) believes that in order to sing twentieth-century literature new
pedagogical techniques must be added to traditional tonal systems. An orientation
towards intervallic thinking as well as the use of interval classes (1-12) is necessary for
modern sight-singing success. [Teachers] must integrate singing through intervallic drill
so that students can sight sing in any form or genre and become comprehensive
musicians (Foltz, 1976).
28

In addition to research and advocacy positions regarding the efficacy of sightsinging systems, there have been multiple surveys completed regarding the use and
popularity of these systems. In an early study of trends of undergraduate sight-singing
instruction, Collins (1979) found that many instructors used a variety of systems to teach
sight singing. In combination the numbers revealed that 18% of instructors utilized fixed
systems of sight singing, 63% used movable systems, 51% used number systems, 45%
used neutral syllables and 20% used other systems. Daniels (1986) examined the
relationship between group sight-singing success and numerous background variables,
including the system used to teach sight singing. This study found that there was no
significant relationship between sight-singing system and sight-singing success.
However, there was a significant relationship between sight-singing success and the
attitude of the teacher towards sight-singing instruction.
Johnson (1987) surveyed directors in the North Central Region of the American
Choral Directors Association. This descriptive study determined that intervals were used
most frequently to teach pitch relationships followed by a number system and finally
movable-do solfge. All of these systems were utilized with little difference in
percentages, however, they were all used much more frequently than fixed-do solfge
(Johnson, 1987). In another survey of aural skills instruction in United States college and
university instructors, 60% favored a movable system, 20% a fixed system and 20% a
neural system of sight-singing instruction. The movable system was divided into
movable numbers (23%), movable-do solfge with tonic minor (18%) and movable tonic
with submediant minor (16%). The overwhelming majority of instructors utilized a
movable system with some type of movable-do solfge taking precedence in the
29

categories of movable systems (Pembrook & Riggins, 1990). In a survey of Texas choral
directors in 1993, movable-do solfge was found to be overwhelmingly popular.
Movable-do solfge was utilized by 82% of the teachers who responded, an
overwhelming majority. Other systems were not found to be as popular, and were used
by between 1% and 9% of the sample population (May, 1993).
In a study of high school teachers in Florida, the most popular system was shown
to be movable-do solfge, followed by intervallic drill and a movable numbers system.
(Smith, 1998). Demorest (2001) conducted a survey of volunteer teachers from the
United States and Canada administered via the World Wide Web.

In this survey only

11% of teachers responded that they did not teach sight singing, leading to the likely
assumption that teachers who did teach sight singing were more likely to respond. When
answering the question regarding choice of pitch reading system, 58% responded with
movable-do solfege, 21% used numbers, 4% used fixed-do solfege and 9% used neutral
syllables.
Another recent study surveyed All-State choristers on the practices of their high
school teachers as regarded sight-singing instruction. Commonly used melodic systems
included interval names, inflected pitch names, non-inflected pitch names, fixed-do
solfge, movable numbers, movable-do solfge and neutral syllables. These results were
then compared by state of residence. Movable numbers were used with greatest
frequency in most states including Alabama (58%), Arkansas (80%), Georgia (70%),
Tennessee (33%) and Mississippi (43%). Only one state within the population of this
survey responded that movable-do solfge was used with greatest frequency, Louisiana
(49.5%). When results were combined, inter-state means showed that 58% of
30

respondents used a movable number system, 19% used movable-do solfge, 13% used a
system of neutral syllables, 6% used a variety of systems and 4% used fixed-do solfge
(McClung, 2001).
A study of groups who had achieved sight-singing success within the Kentucky
Music Educators Association showed the 75% of teachers utilize the movable-do solfge
system of sight-singing instruction (Bradley, 2006). Yarborough, Ormann and Neill
(2007) studied the procedures of teachers during sight-singing instruction. Of the 84
teachers observed (47 high school and 37 middle school) 76 (90%) utilized movable-do
solfge during their sight-singing preparation. Data from this study clearly demonstrated
that systematic instruction in sight-singing using movable-do solfge resulted in sightsinging success. However, the authors were quick to point out that these results were due
to the inclusion of sight singing in daily rehearsals all year long.
Although these studies of sight-singing effectiveness and value to teachers have
been completed, there remains no definitive answer as to the best or most popular method
of sight-singing instruction. What has been determined through multiple studies is that
employing a designated method for teaching sight singing, and presenting it in an orderly
and effective way will result in improvement in sight-singing success, regardless of the
system utilized. As with any other subject, two cardinal rules of skill building must be
followed. Students must be taught using a structured method that moves from the known
to the unknown in a cumulative sequential fashion and students must have time to learn
to read through a series of exposures to, and respites from, the skill building process. The
ultimate goal of any system must be that, upon completion, students should be able to
sing at sight most compositions designed for their level (Collins, 1999)
31

Current Trends in Sight-Singing Research

Instructional Time
Increased demands placed upon choral conductors to provide a performancedriven curriculum and exposure to varied musical experiences may have led to a decrease
in the amount of instructional time devoted to the teaching of music literacy. The
development of competency in sight reading is a subject that is frequently neglected in
the field of choral music (Daniels, 1988). Demands upon choral conductors are high to
produce quality performances as well as to teach the skills of music listening and
evaluation. It may be supposed that choral conductors believe that in order to deliver the
instructional goals of high quality performance and thoughtful evaluation, instructional
time for music reading must be restricted. Numerous surveys and studies have attempted
to determine teacher/conductor perception regarding the importance of teaching music
reading in an educational setting. Many of these studies have also attempted to determine
the amount of time devoted to sight-singing and music-reading instruction and to
compare ideology to practice.
Researchers as early as 1961 examined teacher attitude and sight-singing
instructional time. Hales (1961) questioned directors on their attitudes and practices
regarding sight singing. Seventy percent of respondents believed that sight-singing
should be taught in all choral groups, 80% believed it should be part of students grades
and yet only 37% of instructors listed the music reading as a major component of their
32

choral curriculum. Collins (1979) surveyed collegiate aural skills instructors to

determine the amount of time spent in the teaching of sight singing. Of the professors
surveyed, 84% professed to teaching sight singing for between one and two hours a week,
12% professed to between three and four hours and no teacher taught five or more hours
of sight singing in a week of instructional time.
Surveys of teachers completed by Johnson (1987) and Daniels (1988) found
similar results for the amount of rehearsal time committed to sight singing. The subjects
for these studies included teachers from the North Central Region of the American
Choral Directors Association and the Southeast Region of the American Choral Directors
Association. Regardless of geographic region, teachers spent between five and eleven
minutes of rehearsal time engaged in sight-singing instruction. May (1993) surveyed
teachers from the state of Texas. Eighty-six percent of respondents reported teaching
sight singing for more than 25 weeks of the school year, 80% reported teaching sight
singing between four and five days a seek and 78% spent between six and fifteen minutes
a day giving sight-singing instruction. Sight singing appears to be common within the
Texas choral music programs. Smith (1998) surveyed teachers in Florida and found that
most teachers committed to including sight singing in their rehearsals approximately
three times a week for between five and fifteen minutes. Demorest and May (2001)
found that 31% of teachers report teaching sight singing at every rehearsal, 52% of
teachers report teaching sight singing at nearly every rehearsal and the average amount of
time spent sight singing during a rehearsal period was 9.4 minutes.
In a study of Kentucky choral ensembles, Bradley (2006) surveyed teachers of
ensembles who had achieved desirable results (Superior or Excellent rating) in the sight33

singing portion of the Kentucky Music Educators Association large group contest. An
average of 18% of rehearsal time was spent in sight-singing instruction, with 83% of
teachers reporting that this instruction took place at the beginning of the rehearsal. These
teachers also stated that teaching sight singing has led to better music literacy amongst
their students when reading literature. Seventy-nine percent of the teachers surveyed
teach sight singing year round as part of their choral curriculum.
Rather than relying on the accuracy of self-report among teachers, two researchers
used real-time observations to report the sight-singing behaviors of practicing teachers.
The two studies had differing results. Szabo (1992) observed ten teachers, each for a
week of rehearsal. During the observation period, no teacher utilized rehearsal time for
music reading or sight-singing instruction. However, Brendell (1996) in observation of
thirty-three Florida teachers, found that the largest percentage of time spent during the
pre-literature rehearsal time was spent in the teaching of sight-singing.
Although most teachers agree that sight singing is an important component of the
choral curriculum, quantitative studies show that adequate instructional time is not
always allotted to ensure musical literacy. Teaching sight singing as an exercise at the
beginning of class is not vitalizing the actual need for musical literacy. Sight-singing
skills must be integrated into the choral rehearsal and utilized when teaching literature for
performance (Demorest, 1998). If sight singing is taught in a meaningful way and within
the context of the actual musical needs of the students, it becomes an effective part of the
curriculum.

34

Individual Assessment
Studies concerning the effects of particular sight-singing systems have been
mostly focused upon group achievement. Measurements of success have been taken at
the group or ensemble level. Bennett (1984) has gone so far as to suggest that group
achievement may be affected by the presence of a few or even one successful sight
singer. A few or even just one good music reader may lead the group with other students
following in close imitation. Studies suggest that in order to truly determine music
reading or sight-singing skill development, individualized testing must take place.
In a study designed to determine the relationship between group and individual
success, 101 students from six Missouri choirs were tested. Three of the choirs had
achieved superior ratings (I) during the sight-singing portion of the Missouri Music
Educators Association contest, and three choirs had achieved excellent ratings (II) during
the sight-singing portion of the MMEA contest. Two groups were formed based upon
ratings earned. A random sample of students was taken and tested at an individual level
from each of the six choirs. Scores for members of the superior (I) ensemble and the
excellent (II) ensemble showed no significant difference in individualized sight-singing
proficiency (Nolker, 2006).
In another study contrasting group and individual sight singing achievement,
Demorest and Henry (1994) compared individual backgrounds and success to group
success. Subjects were members of choral ensembles who had achieved reputations for
successful sight singing. Subjects of groups had movable-do solfge and fixed-do
solfge instruction backgrounds, had received varied length of instruction in sight
35

singing, had varying voice parts and choral ensemble participation. Members of groups
who had achieved sight-singing success averaged approximately two-thirds accuracy
when tested individually. Brittain (1998) also compared individual success and group
success. She determined that a group might be largely successful with only a small
number of successful individual sight-readers.
Individualized testing has not only been utilized as a descriptive measure of sightsinging success; it has also been used as a teaching strategy by a number of teachers. In a
study of six Washington high schools, individual testing was used as a tool to develop
sight-singing skill. The subjects had varying levels of experience and were members of a
diverse population of choral ensembles. Schools were randomly divided into two groups.
All twelve ensembles involved in the study received group sight-singing instruction. The
treatment group received three individualized assessments during the course of the
semester in addition to group sight-singing instruction. It was determined that individual
assessment and feedback resulted in the improvement of sight-singing performance
(Demorest, 1998).
Another study attempting to determine successful sight singing strategies also
found that individualized assessment had an impact upon sight-singing proficiency.
Students were observed during an individual sight-singing assessment and then asked to
fill out questionnaires relating information about their musical backgrounds.
Characteristics of high scorers included individual sight-singing tests given by the
ensemble conductor of the participant (Henry & Killian, 2005). Finally, in a study
attempting to determine the teaching strategies of successful conductors, Bradley (2006)

36

reported that 79% of teachers surveyed included individual assessment as part of their
sight-singing instruction.
Although it has been determined that group success and individual success do not
always share a significant relationship, and that individual assessment could be used as an
instructional tool, many teachers do not make the time for the inclusion of instruction and
assessment at an individual level. Only 39% of directors report doing formal evaluation
of their students sight-singing proficiency. Evaluation procedures include individual
assessment (53%), small group assessment (17%) and other (Demorest, 2001). A
valuable evaluation tool, individual assessment may also lead to sight-singing proficiency
and may also be related to student motivation and progress.

Contributing Factors

There have been numerous studies that have attempted to determine what factors
may be predictors of sight-singing success. Music literacy within the choral curriculum
has been found to be important, and the majority of studies in existence are concerned
with the place of sight singing within the choral ensemble and the methods and systems
utilized to teach it. However, another body of research exists in which factors outside
specific instructional practices are related to sight-singing success at both a group and
individual level.
In an early study in the investigation of musical achievement, Colwell (1963)
examined the relationship between differing levels of ensemble participation and skill
building. Students of all age levels were divided into groups that included: vocal
37

ensemble participation, instrumental ensemble participation, instrumental ensemble

participation with piano experience and vocal ensemble participation with piano
experience. Results suggested that a variety of musical experiences resulted in superior
achievement. Instrumental ensemble participants scored higher than vocal ensemble
participants, yet vocal ensemble participants who had received piano instruction were
found to be superior to instrumental ensemble participants. However, members of
instrumental ensembles who had also received piano instruction obtained the highest
scores. This research indicates that piano training is the most related factor to the
achievement of music literacy.
Tucker (1969) completed a study of junior high students music reading ability.
At the conclusion of their junior high ensemble experiences (or lack thereof), students
aural skills, music reading and sight-singing abilities were tested. This study led to the
creation of a hierarchy of experiences that lead to the development of sight-singing and
music reading skills. These are ordered as follows: 1) a wide variety of instrumental and
vocal experience with approximately six years of piano experience, 2) instrumental
experience with approximately six years of piano experience, 3) vocal experience with
approximately six years of piano experience, 4) instrumental experience only, 5) vocal
experience only, 6) general music experience only and 7) no musical experience.
Another study led to similar results regarding ensemble experience. One hundred
sixty-four students from a large, suburban junior high from the Midwest were tested at
the fourth grade level. Following the pretest students entered band, choir, orchestra or a
combination of ensembles. At the conclusion of their junior high experience a posttest
was administered. There was a significant difference between students of instrumental
38

ensembles and choral students. Instrumental ensemble participants scored significantly

higher than choral participants in the development of aural skills. Piano study was also
determined to be a significant independent factor in the development of aural skills (May
& Elliot, 1980).
Daniels (1986) studied the relationships of selected factors to the sight-reading
ability of high school mixed choirs. Twenty schools were tested to determine what
musical and demographic characteristics correlated with music reading ability in the
choral classroom. The best musical predictors of success included 1) the percentage of
students with a piano in their home, 2) the only occasional use of rote teaching within the
music classroom, 3) the percentage of all-state choir participants and 4) the percentage of
instrumental students within the choral ensemble. Demographic characteristics that
influenced sight-singing success included 1) the ethnic makeup of the school, 2) a rural
setting, 3) a large high school population and 4) the attitude of the choral director towards
sight-singing instruction.
A descriptive study of selected Ohio secondary choral ensembles showed musical
characteristics shared by high proficiency ensembles. Six mixed-voice ensembles were
randomly selected from Ohio and questioned about student population, program
considerations and rehearsal strategies. Characteristics shared by the successful
ensembles included 1) a significant number of private instrumental students, 2) a good
junior high and elementary program with sequential learning processes, 3) varied
performance music selection 4) less time on opening exercise and more time with
literature, 5) more time spent on full group rehearsals rather than sectionals, 6) stronger
preference for classical music, 7) less talk in rehearsals and 8) more focused on the score.
39

The best predictor of high-proficiency sight singing was the commitment and skill of the
director towards the music reading process (Sunderland, 1994).
Henry and Demorest (1994) studied specific characteristics of individuals as they
related to sight-singing success as a secondary objective to their comparison of group and
individual success. Subjects were students of groups with successful sight singing
reputation of both movable and fixed-do solfge backgrounds. Characteristics examined
included the length of time in a choral ensemble, voice part, extra-curricular musical
training and participation in choral ensembles outside the school curriculum.

The only

contributing factor toward individual successes was found to be private piano study.
In a related study, Demorest and May (1995) examined the factors related to
individual performance. Choral students (n=414) from four different high schools were
tested. Students came from a variety of backgrounds, musical and demographic, and the
schools utilized both movable and fixed-do solfge. In contrast to previous findings, the
strongest predictor of individual success was the number of years of school choral
experience. Other strong predictors included the number of years of piano instruction,
the number of years of instrumental lessons and the number of years of private voice
lessons, respectively. Instrumental experience, when considered in tandem with other
variables, was also a strong predictor of success. Finally, the consistency of the teaching
method throughout grade and school level may have resulted in higher degrees of
success.
Factors related to musical participation were also considered when examining the
preparation and performance strategies of successful and unsuccessful sight singers.
Characteristics appearing among high scorers included 1) participation in regional or
40

state honor choirs, 2) private voice or piano lessons, 3) private study of an instrument, 4)
membership in an instrumental ensemble and 5) the instructional strategies of the teacher
regarding individualized assessment (Henry & Killian, 2005).
Most studies concerned with characteristics of successful sight singers have
determined that various musical experiences, especially instrumental experiences, play a
definitive role in sight singing and music reading skill. Armstrong (2001) suggests
several reasons for the increased sight singing skill of instrumentalists, and the inverse
lack of skill found in vocalists who do not play an instrument. His first argument
presents a familiar idea. Through manipulation of a key, the instrumentalist makes an
immediate connection between notes on a page, the sound of pitch and the movement of
intervalssingers have no key to manipulate. In support of multiple music experiences
Armstrong argues that by applying knowledge gained from their instrumental
experiences, singers who have had an instrumental background can often provide a level
of self-assessment that enhances their sight-reading abilities (p. 23).

Tonal Context and Other Related Skills

Several studies have attempted to determine the best context and skill-building
sequence for sight-singing success. In one such experiment, college students were
studied to determine whether sight singing tonal melodies within two contexts affected
sight-singing ability. Thirty undergraduate students from three levels of musical training
were tested. The two contexts 1) with harmonic accompaniment and 2) without harmonic
accompaniment, had a significant effect upon sight-singing success. The assumption for
41

the success of sight singing within a harmonic context is that melodic expectations are a
reflection of previous experience with music based upon a tonal harmonic framework.
Furthermore, sight singing in a tonal harmonic context is more akin to the tasks choral
students encounter in a choral setting that unaccompanied sight singing (Boyle & Lucas,
1990).
Another study suggests that instruction in the skill of error detection may be
useful to sight-singing skill building. Brittain (1998) found that error detection was an
excellent first step in the teaching of sight singing. This study also indicated that
harmonic accompaniment could be a contributing factor to sight-singing success,
although results determined that harmonic accompaniment was helpful only for more
advanced singers. Finally, Brittain found that group success is nearly always related to a
positive attitude of the teacher about sight singing and daily drills. Sheldon (1998) also
found a relation between error detection ability and sight singing ability. Aural skills
training may have an effect upon error detection of pitch and rhythm in exercises of
multiple parts, a skill necessary for successful sight singing.
Targeted pitch skills including scalar, cadential and chordal tasks were examined
as possible instructional tools for use in the choral rehearsal. High school students were
instructed in fifteen pitch skills emphasizing scale degree and harmonic function. These
pitch skills were utilized in two different ways, integrated into specifically targeted
melodies or familiar melodies requiring the same skills. The skills were then taught to
subjects within a choral rehearsal. All participants scored higher on the posttest than the
pretest. There was no significant difference between the treatments, but results suggest

42

that targeting specific pitch skills in both familiar and unfamiliar melodies shows promise
as an effective tool for sight-singing instruction (Henry, 2004).
Henry and Killian (2005) examined the relationship of practice and strategy with
individual sight singing success. High school singers individually sang two melodies
from notation, with and without a thirty second practice opportunity. Overall, accuracy
scores were significantly higher with practice time, suggesting that error detection and
familiarity with a melody may help increase sight-singing success. Analysis of video
recordings indicated that high scorers tonicized prior to melodic reading, used hand signs,
sang out loud during practice, physically kept the beat and finished the melody more
frequently than low scorers. High scorers also used these behaviors during the final
performance of the melody. This study suggests that specific strategies related a tonal
and rhythmic framework in preparation of a melody correlate to sight-singing success.
Furby (2005) examined the relationship between written music theory instruction
and sight-singing ability. Forty high school students from a large school in the Midwest
were randomly assigned to two groups. Both groups received traditional sight-singing
instruction, and the treatment group received additional instruction in the form of written
music theory. The treatment group studied the tonic, dominant and subdominant chords
and the use of these chords in an accompanying situation. The treatment group also
received instruction in tone tendency and the typical resolution of the pitches of the
dominant chord to tonic chord tones. Although there was no significant difference
between groups, both groups scored significantly higher on the posttest than the pretest.
This study suggests that a systematic program of instruction will lead to improvement in
sight singing.
43

In a study examining the validity of self-report middle school students were

examined in their prediction of success and assessment of sight-singing tasks. Results
were then compared to the evaluation of independent judges. Students were found to be
reasonably accurate at predicting their success of performance. They were found to be
more accurate in the evaluation process of their performance. Older students and
students who participated in a musical ensemble were generally more able to predict and
assess their sight-singing performances. Self-assessment was determined to have a strong
correlation with sight-singing success (Darrow, 2005).
Berry, Fine and Rosner (2006) examined the effect of pattern recognition and
tonal predictability on sight-singing ability. Twenty-two experienced singers sang their
part twice in each of four novel chorales. The chorales contained original or altered
melody and tonal or atonal harmony. Results showed that alterations from the original
(tonal) in both melody and harmony increased pitching errors. These results indicate that
pattern recognition and harmonic predication are integral to sight-singing success. In the
second reading of the melody, singers made fewer errors, showing that familiarity is also
related to sight-singing success.
Sight reading is characterized by high demands on the performers capacity to
process complex visual [input] under real-time constraints (Kopiez, Lee, Ligges, and
Weihs, 2006). In a study that characterized high and low achievers of sight reading, the
authors determined several musical and non-musical skills that related to sight reading
success. These included 1) aural imagery, or the ability to internalize aural skills, 2)
various sight-reading experiences, 3) quantity of sight reading experiences, 4) style of

44

thinking and 5) speed of information intake. An acquired expertise through varied and
extensive sight-reading practice is an important variable in sight singing success.

Conclusion

Since the beginning of vocal music history, music literacy has been a major
educational issue. Teaching music reading and sight singing has been the subject of
much educational ideology and debate. Many systems have been developed to aid sightsinging instruction and music reading skill. Studies have verified the importance of
teaching sight singing and the systems utilized with the most popularity. Studies have
also attempted to determine the efficacy of particular sight-singing systems with no
definitive answer to that important question. Finally, current trends in research have led
to the analysis of the individual sight-singer, the characteristics of individuals and the
effects of different instructional strategies on individual sight-singing success. This
study will attempt to determine the characteristics of the individuals who have selfselected to continue their musical experiences into their collegiate education. It will also
attempt to determine what musical experience, instructional background and personal
behavior is described or exhibited by these subjects while sight reading a melody.
Finally, this study will attempt to discover described and observed characteristics that
predict sight-singing success.

45

CHAPTER 3

METHOD

Purpose

The purpose of this study was twofold. The first purpose was to describe the
demographic and musical characteristics of choral students entering their first year of
undergraduate education. The following questions were answered by descriptive data
observed visually and gleaned from questionnaire responses.
1. What are the demographic characteristics of entry-level college choral
musicians?
2. What is the musical background of entry-level college choral musicians?
3. What is the sight-singing background of entry-level college choral musicians?
4. What behaviors are exhibited during sight-singing preparation as observed in
entry-level college choral musicians?
In addition to descriptive data, this study attempted to determine if any of the observed or
reported behaviors were correlated with successful sight singing. Tests were conducted
to answer the following question.

46

1. Are there demographic characteristics, musical background characteristics or

behaviors that are predictors of sight-singing success?
At some point, the question must be asked, are teachers adequately preparing their
students for entry into the university setting? This research will attempt to determine
what students are being taught in a secondary school setting and how that preparation
influences future success at the university level.

Design

Questionnaire response and videotape observation were used to determine data for
the project Process and Product: The Sight-Singing Backgrounds and Behaviors of First
Year Undergraduate Students. This data collection method was selected in order to
allow the backgrounds and habits developed by students prior to testing to be analyzed
for trends. It also allowed individual backgrounds to be compared to sight-singing
success as determined by independent evaluators. Subjects were recruited during choral
ensemble auditions prior to the first week of classes at the university. Subjects were
tested prior to any instruction at the university level.

This design allowed subjects to

report and practice techniques learned prior to beginning a musical career at the
university level.

Subjects
Subjects for this study (N=40) were limited to first year undergraduate students
auditioning for a choral ensemble at a large university in the Midwest. This population
47

consisted of students of varying backgrounds, musical experiences, and sight-singing

experience. By their decision to audition for a choral ensemble, subjects demonstrated a
desire to continue their musical experiences into adulthood.
Students were recruited after their initial choral ensemble audition by the choral
directors and graduate teaching assistants and given the choice to participate in the study.
A letter describing the study and the potential benefits to the field of music education by
the researcher was given to each student at the conclusion of his or her choral audition
(See Appendix A). Students self-selected to participate in the study and were shown to
another room to complete the study.
Consents for videotaping and audio recording evaluation were obtained, as well as
consent for the use of any written information obtained. Consent for the use of publicly
available information, including educational major and ensemble assignment was also
obtained. Students were informed that their participation was voluntary, they were free
to leave the study at any time and that there would be no extrinsic reward for their
participation. Students were also informed that this study would have no impact upon
their choral audition and that members of the faculty and choral staff would not be
informed of their participation in the study (See Appendix B). In order to maintain
confidentiality and anonymity, students were assigned a number that was used to match
video observations, audiotape evaluations and questionnaire responses.

48

Procedure

After students were recruited and informed consent had been obtained, students
entered a room set up for the study. The room contained a video camera, digital audio
taping device, music stand with musical example, a pencil, and an Orff style
metallophone and mallets. Students were shown into the room and given the following
instructions.
1. On the stand you will see a musical example that you will sight sing. It is
written in the key of F major and contains eight measures of four/four or
common time.
2. You will have up to ten minutes to practice the example. During that time you
may do anything you wish to prepare the example. You may make any
amount of noise or use any of the tools in this room to assist you.
3. To your right you will see an instrument similar to a xylophone. I have
removed all the notes other than F. You may use this instrument to play your
starting pitch as often as you like.
4. If you finish your preparation and are ready to move on to the final
performance of the melody prior to the ten-minute time limit, please knock on
the door and I will enter and turn on the audio taping device.
5. At the conclusion of the ten-minute time limit, I will knock on the door and
instruct you to move on to the final performance. At that time I will turn on
the audio taping device.

49

6. I will be video taping your preparation and performance. I will turn on the
video camera and leave the room. Please use the screen attached to the video
camera to be sure you can be seen. Your time will start when I have exited
the room.
7. Do you have any questions or are you ready to begin?
At the conclusion of the scripted directions, subjects were allowed to ask
questions regarding the procedure and the example. When subjects felt comfortable and
ready to begin, the video camera was turned on and the researcher left the student alone
in the room. Subjects were given as much as ten minutes preparation time and then asked
to give a final performance of the melody.
After the final performance of the melody, subjects were asked to fill out a
questionnaire regarding their backgrounds, both demographic and musical (See Appendix
C). Subjects were supplied with the questionnaire and asked to be as thorough as
possible when answering the questions on the sheet. At the conclusion of the process,
subjects were thanked for their participation and asked if they would like to receive a
summary of the results obtained.

Characteristics

The characteristics for which data were collected were grouped into two
categories. These categories included observed characteristics and reported
characteristics. Observed characteristics were any behaviors noted through video taped
50

observations. After a careful review of the literature, the following variables were
defined in the observed characteristic group:
1. Starting Pitch: a counted behavior noting the number of times the subject played
the starting pitch on the metallophone provided.
2. Error Detection: a counted behavior noting the number of times the subject noted
an error while preparing the sight singing selection. The behaviors included but
were not limited to: physical response (wincing, shaking the head), cessation of
singing and returning to error and correcting.
3. Start Again: a counted behavior noting the number of times the subject returned to
the beginning of the musical example.
4. Tonicize Key: a timed behavior noting the amount of time the subject spent
singing either scalar or chordal examples in the tonic key. This behavior could
have been used to establish tonality and train the ear toward the correct tonic
pitch, to fix errors, or to find a specific pitch within the example.
5. Singing: a timed behavior noting the amount of time the subject spent singing
aloud the example or any other singing completed. Also includes any behavior
noting the amount of time the subject spent singing sotto voce, humming or
whistling.
6. Silent Study: a timed behavior noting the amount of time the subject spent silently
studying the musical example.
7. Chant: a timed behavior noting the amount of time the subject spent chanting
either rhythm or pitch syllable systems.

51

8. Writing: a timed behavior noting the amount of time the subject spent writing on
the musical example. Observation of several musical examples with writing
determined that students were writing in solfge syllables, numbers or rhythm
syllables as memory devices and/or visual cues.
9.

External Beat: a timed behavior noting the amount of time the subject spent
keeping an audible or visually observable external beat. This could include but is
not limited to clapping, snapping of fingers, tapping of the stand or tapping of the
feet.

Data were obtained on observed characteristics by visual observation of the sight-singing

preparation of each subject.
A review of the literature also led to the creation of the questionnaire that yielded
the reported characteristics (See Appendix C). The following defined criteria were
reported and utilized to determine the generaliziblity of the sample to the population.
1. Major: collegiate undergraduate major
2. Choir: ensemble to which assigned after choral audition
3. State: United States state of high school attendance
4. Age: age at time of study completion
5. Gender: male or female
The following characteristics were reported and utilized to describe the characteristics of
first-year undergraduate students auditioning for a choral ensemble and to determine the
relationship between those characteristics to evaluated sight-singing success.

52

1. Number of years within a high school choral ensemble and type of ensemble
in which the subject participated including a gender specific choir, a mixed
gender ensemble, a show choir, an honor choir and a community chorus.
2. Number of years within a middle school choral ensemble and type of
ensemble in which the subject participated including a gender specific choir, a
mixed gender ensemble, an honor choir and a community chorus.
3. Number of years of elementary school music participation and type of
elementary music study including general music and choir.
4. Number of years of private voice study.
5. Number of years of instrumental ensemble participation and type of ensemble
in which the subject participated including band and/or orchestra.
6. Number of years of private instrumental study and what type of instrument
was studied by the subject.
7. Whether or not the subject had received sight-singing instruction.
8. Whether or not the subject had been instructed in a specific system of sight
singing.
9. What system was utilized to inform sight-singing instruction including fixeddo solfge, movable-do solfge, numbers, intervals, neutral syllable, letter
names and other.
10. The grade level during which a specific sight-singing system was utilized by
the subject including: elementary, middle and high school levels in either
choral ensembles or private voice lessons.

53

11. Whether or not students had received specific instruction of strategies to use
in the preparation of a sight-singing example.
Data were obtained from the questionnaire responses and coded by the researcher for
statistical use.

Musical Example

An original musical example was developed for the purposes of this study (See
Appendix D). It was written in common time and in the key of F major. Interval content
included: ascending minor seconds (2), ascending major seconds (4), ascending minor
thirds (2), ascending major thirds (1), ascending perfect fourths (2) ascending perfect
fifths(1), descending minor seconds (3), descending major seconds (6), descending minor
thirds (4), descending major thirds (1), and descending perfect fourths (1). Rhythmic
content included half notes, quarter notes, eighth notes and dotted quarter notes. The
range of the piece was a minor seventh from E one half step below tonic to D one major
sixth above tonic. The melody was intended to be singable for all students, with the
challenges related to intervallic pitch discrimination rather than difficulty with rhythm or
with range. The melody was evaluated by three independent experts (a college instructor,
a high school choral director and a choral music graduate student) for validity and found
to be of appropriate length and difficulty for first year undergraduate students.

54

Audio Evaluation

Two independent judges evaluated audio recordings of each subject to determine

sight-singing success. Both judges were graduate students in the field of composition and
music theory. These experts had varied experiences teaching aural skills and perceptions
for the undergraduate student and a large amount of experience in evaluating
undergraduate sight-singing skill.
The researcher created an evaluation form in order to facilitate assessment (See
Appendix E). Subjects were evaluated at two levels: rhythmic and melodic. Rhythmic
accuracy was determined on a measure-by-measure basis. A total of eight points could
be earned by singing the rhythm correctly for each measure. Melodic accuracy was
determined on an intervallic basis. A total of twenty-seven points could be earned by
singing each interval correctly. Rather than determining the number of correctly sung
pitches within the context of the correct tonality, evaluators judged the number of
correctly sung intervals. By judging intervallic relationships, one error did not lead to
multiple incorrect responses within the melody, as would have been determined by
evaluating correctly sung pitch levels.
Each evaluator received copies of the evaluation form along with instructions for
its use. Directions included:
1. Listen to the example one time through without marking.
2. Listen to the example a second time and circle the numbers of intervals sung
incorrectly.
a. Incorrectly is defined as singing the wrong pitch. Notes sung poorly or
with bad intonation but at the correct pitch should still be counted as
correct.
55

b. If an interval is sung correctly at the wrong pitch level; it should be

counted as correct.
3. Listen to the tape a third time and put an X over any measure sung with incorrect
rhythms.
4. For coding purposes, in the corresponding sections pitch and rhythm put an X
in the blanks of incorrectly sung pitches and rhythms.
Each evaluator received a compact disc with all forty audio taped assessments of each
subject. Subjects were coded with a number for anonymity and evaluators were
instructed to evaluate each student according to the directions included. Verbal
instruction to evaluators reminded them trust their own aural judgment as to the correct
nature of the interval sung. Judges were also informed that errors associated with a
particular syllable system should not be considered incorrect intervallic singing.
Inter-judge reliability was calculated for the aural observations. The number of
adjudicated agreements and disagreements were counted for each subject on an intervalto-intervals basis to calculate reliability for intervallic accuracy. Inter-judge intervallic
reliability was found at a level of .95 with a range of .89 to 1.00. The number of
agreements and disagreements were also counted for each subject on a measure-tomeasure basis to calculate reliability for rhythmic accuracy. Inter-judge rhythmic
reliability was found at a level of .94 with a range of .63 to 1.00.

Observations

Visual observations were undertaken through the use of Scribe observational

software developed by Dr. Robert Duke at the University of Texas (Duke, 2000). This
software allowed observers to make real time observations of video taped sight-singing
56

preparation. The software was used to calculate the amount of time spent in specific
behaviors as well as the number of times a behavior was attempted. Each of the observed
characteristics listed and defined above was entered into the software as a behavior for
which to observe. Counted behaviors included starting pitch, starting again and error
detection. Timed behaviors included singing, external beat keeping, tonicizing, chanting,
writing and silent study. Video recordings were watched three times, allowing for
observation and recording of multiple behaviors that occurred simultaneously. The first
playback was observed for singing, writing and silent study. The second playback was
observed for tonicizing and chanting. The final playback observed all three counted
behaviors, starting pitch, starting again and error detection. Also included in the final
observation was external beat keeping, which could be kept going throughout all of the
previous timed behaviors.
The researcher completed all observations. An independent evaluator, a choral
music education doctoral student, completed eight observations (20%) to test for
interobserver agreement. Results for reliability were calculated by finding the percentage
of matched responses.
In general, interobserver agreement was satisfactory. Eighty-seven point seven
percent agreement was found for number of times starting pitch was played. Ninetythree point three percent agreement for error detection was determined. Ninety-seven
point three percent agreement for starting again was found. Calculating the number of
seconds each behavior was attempted and determining the number of seconds in
agreement determined percentages for timed behaviors. The timed behaviors, chanting,
writing and external beat keeping received consistent reliability scores of 88.2%, 83.3%
57

and 85.5% respectively. All audible singing behaviors were combined and a reliability of
90.7% was found. Silent study had a fairly low reliability score of 76.3%. However, this
may be due to the fact that what one observer described as silent study, another observer
marked merely as a break in singing behaviors. Also, the low frequency of silent study
within the selected observations led to an issue where the method of determining
interobserver agreement was prone to under-represent the actual degree of consistency.
Most observations in silent study were within eight to ten seconds of each other. High
percentages of agreement on more frequent behaviors, as well as the similarity of real
time observation data in low frequency behaviors, support the consistency of the
observation procedure amongst independent observers.

58

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS

Sample Characteristics

The subjects comprised forty first-year undergraduate students who auditioned for
a choral ensemble at a large Midwestern university. Questionnaire response yielded
descriptive data for the sample population. Data were analyzed for thirty-nine students
after one subject was eliminated due to observation error. The sample consisted of
seventeen men and twenty-two women, four of whom were intended music majors. The
students were between the ages of seventeen and twenty-three, and thirty-five students
had graduated from high schools in the state of college attendance. At the conclusion of
the choral audition eleven students were placed in the mixed choirs (University Chorus
and Mastersingers) and twenty-eight students were placed in the more advanced Mens
and Womens Glee Clubs.
These demographic characteristics were compared to the entire body of
auditioning singers to determine differences between the sample and the population.
Population data were determined by examining anonymous audition sheets provided by
the university choral directors. The population of auditionees comprised ninety-eight
students, forty-one males and fifty-eight females; seventeen were intended music majors.
59

The students were between the ages of seventeen and twenty-three, and eighty-four
students had graduated from high schools in the state of college attendacne. At the
conclusion of the choral audition, thirty-nine students were placed in the mixed choirs
and fifty-nine were placed in the more advanced Mens or Womens Glee Clubs. A 2 X
2 chi square analysis showed that a similar proportion of students were placed in each of
the choirs for both the sample of forty students and the total population of 58 auditionees
who did not participate in the study. Results suggested that the sample was
representative of the population of first-year choir auditionees (x2=3.632 , df=1, n.s.).

Student Background: Questionnaire Data

Descriptive data from questionnaire responses for the sample population revealed
characteristics of vocal musical background of undergraduate choral singers at the
university level. Years of high school participation showed an average participation of
3.36 years (M=3.36, S.D.=1.16). Most students (78.1%) who were questioned had
participated in choir for the maximum four years, while only one student did not
participate in a high school choral ensemble. Students participated in a variety of choral
ensembles including mixed-gender choirs (n=37, 87%), gender specific choirs (n=15,
38%), show choirs (n=9, 23%), honor choirs (n=9, 23%) and church and community
choirs (n=8, 21%). Years of middle school participation revealed an average
participation of 1.92 years (M=1.92, S.D.=1.29). Approximately 53% of the sample
participated for three years, while 23.1% did not participate in a middle school music
program. Students participated in mixed-gender choirs (n=23, 59%), general music
60

classes (n=5, 13%) and church and community choirs (n=2, 5%). Fifteen students
participated in private voice lessons (38.5%) for an average of one year (M=1.00, S.D.=
1.66).
Descriptive data from questionnaire responses for the sample population revealed
the instrumental music backgrounds of choral singers at the university level. Seventeen
subjects (43.5%) reported participation in an instrumental ensemble in their background.
Students reported participating in band, (n=11, 28%) orchestra (n=5, 13%) or both (n=2,
5%). Students spent an average of 2.90 years participating in an instrumental ensemble
(M=2.90, S.D.=3.58 ). One student spent twelve years participating in an orchestra while
the largest percentage of those participating underwent six years of instrumental
ensemble participation (n=7, 18%). Eighteen students had received private instrumental
instruction (46%) with average participation of 3.49 years (M=3.49, S.D.=4.95).
Survey responses also yielded data regarding subjects backgrounds in the field of
sight-singing instruction. Thirty-four students received sight-singing instruction (84.6%)
at some point in their backgrounds. Of the thirty-four students responding with an
affirmative answer, thirty students (77%) received instruction in high school, five (13%)
received instruction in middle school, five (13%) received instruction in private voice
lessons and one (2.6%) received instruction in the other category. Four students said
they had received sight-singing instruction but did not indicate when or where they
received the instruction.
Thirty students (77%) responded that they had been instructed in a specific system
of sight singing. These methods included movable-do solfge (n=24, 62%), fixed-do
solfge (n=4, 10%), numbers (n=5, 13%), letter names (n=3, 8%), intervals (n=12, 31%)
61

and neutral syllables (n=6, 15%). Fifteen students (38%) responded that they had
received instruction in multiple systems of music reading and sight singing. Finally,
twenty-three students (59%) responded that they had received instruction regarding
specific strategies to prepare for sight singing.
In summary, all students had received some musical instruction prior to their
audition for a college level choral ensemble. Nearly all students had participated in
choral ensembles at both the high school and middle school levels. These students
participated in a wide variety of ensembles and general music instruction. Many students
had also participated in instrumental ensembles, a few for many years. Several students
had received private instruction, vocal or instrumental, and some students had received
private instruction on multiple instruments. Many students had also received some form
of sight-singing instruction, most using movable tonic solfge or number systems. Only
a few of these students had not received instruction in specific preparatory strategies for
individual sight singing.

Observation of Sight Singing Preparation

Observational data were obtained through analysis of video recordings of the

sight-singing preparation of the sample population. The mean time of sight-singing
preparation was six minutes, thirty-two seconds (M=6:32, S.D.=2:37) ranging from 49
seconds to the maximum allowed time of ten minutes.
Counted behaviors included playing the starting pitch, starting again and error
detection. The mean count of starting pitch was 10.21 occurrences (S.D.=10.99), with a
62

range of one to fifty-two. There was a similar number of occasions when students started
again (M=10.79, S.D.=8.38), with a range of zero to thirty-one. The mean count of error
detection was 9.54 occurrences (S.D.=7.32), with a range of zero to twenty-nine.
Timed behaviors included tonicizing, singing, silent study, chanting, writing and
external beat keeping. Table 3.1 shows the number of students who engaged in each
behavior, the minimum and maximum amount of time in seconds of each behavior and
the mean time and standard deviation of each behavior in seconds.
Timed Behavior

Minimum

Maximum

Tonicize
Singing
Silent Study
Chant
Writing
External Beat

28
39
24
9
14
21

0
0
0
0
0
0

121
595
299
61
158
197

Mean in
Seconds
25.13
320.23
30.51
7.26
26.38
25.62

Standard
Deviation
30.53
152.26
56.28
16.35
42.97
45.17

Table 4.1 Means and Standard Deviations for Timed Behaviors of Sample
It is apparent that as a group, students spent most of their preparation time singing, and
while most students participated in other behaviors during their preparation, none
approached the amount of time spent in audible singing. Many students also tonicized,
used silent study and kept an external beat, but generally with much less frequency than
singing. Only a few students wrote or chanted for very small amounts of time during the
sight-singing preparation.

63

Sight-Singing Outcomes
For this analysis Ordinary Least Squares Regression (OLS) was used in order to
test hypotheses while controlling for relevant covariance. In other words, this analysis
attempted to determine predictors of sight-singing success while bearing in mind that
other variables might also affect the success of the students. 1 Linear regression analysis
was completed for the combination of reported variables years of high school choral
participation, years of middle school choral participation, years of private vocal
instruction, years of instrumental ensemble participation, and years of private
instrumental instruction. Linear regression analysis was also completed for the
combination of observed variables starting pitch, starting again, error detection, writing,
silent study, singing, chanting, tonicizing, external beat keeping and time.
Reported variables related to musical background were found to be a significant
predictor of success on sight-singing adjudication accounting for 28% of the variance
(adj.R2= .278). In particular, years of high school choral participation (p=.015) and
years of instrumental ensemble participation (p= .024) were significant predictors of
sight-singing success. Other areas contributed to the model but were not themselves
significant predictors. Analysis of standardized regression coefficients showed years of

Regression diagnostics showed that the variables are normally distributed and that error
terms were distributed randomly. There was no evidence of heteroskedasticity as
observed by histograms of residuals.
64

high school choral participation to be the strongest predictor of sight-singing success

(=.418)2.

Variable
Years of High School
Choir
Years of Middle School
Choir
Private Voice Instruction
Years of Instrumental
Ensemble
Private Instrumental
Instruction

Standardized
Coefficient

Significance

Collinearity
VIF

.418

2.574

.015

1.39

.238

1.427

.163

1.46

.257

1.756

.088

1.13

.364

2.373

.024

1.24

.262

1.774

.085

1.15

Table 4.2 Linear Regression of Reported Independent Variables

Observed variables found during video recording observation were found to be a
significant predictor of success on sight-singing adjudication accounting for 18% of the
variance (adj. R2= .183). No one behavior, however, was determined to be a significant
predictor of sight-singing success with a 95% confidence interval. The behaviors error
detection (p= .085, =.477) and singing (p=.176, =.533) contributed to the model but
were not found to be significant predictors of sight-singing success. 3

Analysis of Pearson correlation for reported independent variables determined there was
no multicollinearity found and these results were confirmed by Variance Inflation Factors
that were below 2.50 (Allison, 1999).
3
Analysis of Pearson correlation for observed independent variables determined
multicollinearity between the variables time and singing, and the variable time was
removed from the linear regression matrix.
65

Variable
Singing
External
Writing
Chant
Silent Study
Tonicize
Starting Pitch
Error Detection
Start Again

Standardized
Coefficient
-.553
-.059
.022
.211
-.120
-.127
.009
.477
-.125

t
-1.386
-.230
.138
.854
-.762
-.692
.046
1.781
-.503

Significance
.176
.820
.891
.400
.452
.494
.964
.085
.619

Collinearity
VIF
7.404
3.106
1.177
2.849
1.153
1.575
1.808
3.331
2.868

Table 4.3 Linear Regression of Observed Independent Variables

Independent t-tests also showed a significant difference between groups on the

dependent variable score comparing students who had received sight-singing instruction
and those who had not received sight-singing instruction (t(37)=3.248, p=.002). Of course,
students who had received sight-singing instruction earned higher scores than those who
had not. Students who had not received sight-singing instruction were removed from the
model and independent t-tests comparing sight-singing scores of the students who had
been instructed using a specific sight-singing system and the students who had not
received that instruction were completed. Surprisingly, those students who received
instruction in particular systems of sight-singing were not significantly different than
those who utilized no specific system (t(37)=.654, p=.518). However, results showed a
significant difference between students who were instructed regarding specific
preparatory strategies for sight-singing and those who did not receive that instruction.
(t(32)=3.272, p=.003), with those receiving instruction outperforming other students.

66

High and Low Scorers

In order to take a closer look at the behaviors of successful sight-singers,

participating students were divided into quartiles based on their sight-singing score.
Ten students were in the upper quartile (high scorers) and ten scorers were in the lowest
quartile (low scorers).

High Scorer Data

Students in the upper quartile were two music majors, five males and five
females, all of whom were eighteen or nineteen years old. Nine of the ten high scorers
were placed in the second level of choral ensemble, Mens and Womens Glee Clubs.
Data revealed the average number of years of high school choral ensemble participation
to be 3.90 (M=3.90, S.D.= .316). Only one student did not participate in all four years of
high school chorus, but did participate for three years. The average number of years of
middle school participation was 2.30 (M=2.30, S.D.= 1.160) with three students
completing the maximum three years of choral ensemble participation. Only one
member of the high scorers had participated in private voice lessons, for a total of two
years (M=.20, S.D.= .632). Five students had participated in an instrumental ensemble
for an average of 3.50 years (M=3.50, S.D.= 3.808). Finally, seven students had taken
private instrumental lessons averaging 4.90 years of instruction (M=4.90, S.D.= 5.021).
Data were also analyzed regarding subject background in sight-singing
instruction. All ten of the high scorers reported receiving sight-singing instruction and
67

90% reported the use of a specific sight-singing system. Analysis of these singers
showed that 70% utilized mixed-do solfege, 40% utilized intervallic drill, 10% utilized
movable numbers and 10% utilized letter names. Forty percent reported receiving
instruction in multiple systems of sight-singing instruction with 30% reporting instruction
in both movable-do solfege and intervallic drill. Every high scorer reported being taught
specific strategies to prepare a sight-singing example.
The average preparation time for the high scorers was four minutes five seconds
ranging from forty nine seconds to eight minutes thirteen seconds (M=4:05, S.D.=2:07).
During video observations, high scorers averaged playing the starting pitch 4.80 times
(M=4.80, S.D.= 3.615), none more than twelve times and students from this group
observed an average of 5.50 error detections (M=5.50, S.D.=4.116) also with a maximum
of twelve occurrences. High scorers started again an average of 4.60 times (M=4.60,
S.D.= 3.748) ranging from one to fourteen occurrences. Timed behaviors included
tonicizing, singing, silent study, chanting, writing and external beat keeping. Table 4.4
shows the distribution of timed behaviors for the high scorers.
Timed Behavior

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Tonicize
Singing
Silent Study
Chant
Writing
External Beat

7
10
5
4
5
8

0
24
0
0
0
0

48
365
105
51
105
197

8.20
184.80
19.10
12.60
29.10
40.20

Table 4.4 Means and Standard Deviations for Timed Behaviors of High Scorers

68

Standard
Deviation
14.54
108.51
33.30
19.51
35.48
57.74

Low Scorer Data

Scorers from the lower quartile consisted of no music majors, five males and five
females, all of whom were eighteen or nineteen years old. Five of the low scorers were
placed in the second level of choral ensemble, Mens and Womens Glee Clubs and five
of the low scorers were placed in the preparatory level of choral ensemble, University
Chorus or Mastersingers. Data revealed the average number of years of high school
choral ensemble participation to be 2.60 (M=2.60, S.D.= 1.647). One student did not
participate in high school chorus, and five did participate the maximum number of four
years. The average number of years of middle school participation was 1.20 (M=1.20,
S.D.=1.317) with three students completing the maximum three years of choral ensemble
participation. Only one member of the low scorers had participated in private voice
lessons, for a total of two years (M=.20, S.D.=.632). Three students had participated in
an instrumental ensemble for an average of 2.70 years (M=2.70, S.D.= 3.523). Finally,
three students had taken private instrumental lessons averaging 3.00 years of instruction
(M=3.00, S.D.= 4.853).
Data were also analyzed regarding subject background in sight singing
instruction. Only six of the low scorers reported receiving sight singing instruction and
50% reported the use of a specific sight-singing system. 40% utilized mixed-do solfege,
20% utilized intervallic drill, 10% utilized neutral syllables and 10% utilized letter
names. Thirty percent reported receiving instruction in multiple systems of sight-singing
instruction with 30% reporting instruction in both movable-do solfege and another

69

system. Not surprisingly, only one low scorer reported being taught specific strategies to
prepare a sight-singing example.
The average preparation time for the low scorers was six minutes fifty-six seconds
with a minimum of one minute twenty-four seconds and a maximum of ten minutes
(M=6:56, S.D.= 2:40). During video observations low scorers averaged playing the
starting pitch 13.40 times (M=13.40, S.D.=16.345) ranging from one minute twenty four
seconds to the maximum allowed time of ten minutes.

Students from this group

observed an average of 5.70 error detections (M=5.70, S.D.=3.917) yet started the
example from the beginning an average of 16.00 times (M=16.00 S.D.= 11.421). One
student restarted the example thirty-one times. Students were observed during their
sight-singing preparation for a variety of timed behaviors related to sight singing (see
Table 4.5).

Timed Behavior
Tonicize
Singing
Silent Study
Chant
Writing
External Beat

Minimum
7
10
5
4
5
8

Maximum

0
80
0
0
0
0

78
595
160
9
158
44

Mean
28.10
358.10
34.40
.90
15.80
7.00

Standard
Deviation
33.30
150.70
51.37
2.85
49.96
14.18

Table 4.5 Means and Standard Deviations for Timed Behaviors of Low Scorers

70

Comparison of Groups

Descriptive data revealed that high scorers had participated in choir, instrumental
ensembles and private instrumental lessons for more years than low scorers at both the
middle and high school levels. More high than low scorers had received sight-singing
instruction, been instructed in a specific system of sight singing and received instruction
regarding specific strategies for use in preparation for sight-singing performance (See
Table 4.6).
Observation data revealed that high scorers spent less time in the preparation
process and exhibited different behaviors when preparing for sight singing. High scorers
played the starting pitch less often than low scorers. They were just as likely to notice an
error as low scorers, yet did not respond to error detection by starting again as often as
low scorers. High scorers spent less time singing and tonicizing than low scorers during
the preparation time. However, they spent more time chanting, writing and keeping an
external beat than low scorers.

71

High Scorers
Total Sight-Singing Score*
Mean
Standard Deviation

Low Scorers

34.90
.32

13.10
2.35

3.9
2.3
.2
3.5
4.9

2.6
1.2
.2
2.7
3.0

Sight-Singing Instruction
Number of Affirmative Responses
Received Sight -Singing Instruction 10
System Utilized
9
Preparatory Strategies Learned
10

6
5
1

* t(18) = 29.02, p = .000

Prior Musical Experience
Mean Number of Years
H.S. choir
M.S. choir
Voice Lessons
Instrumental Ensemble
Instrumental Lessons

Sight-Singing Behaviors
Mean Number of Occurrences
Starting Pitch
Starting Again
Error Detection
Sight-Singing Behaviors
Mean Time in Minutes:Seconds
Total Time Spent
Tonicizing
Singing
Silent Study
Chanting
Writing
External Beat Keeping

4.8
4.6
5.5

13.4
16.0
5.7

4:06
:08
3:05
:19
:13
:29
:40

6:56
:28
5:58
:34
< :01
:16
:07

Table 4.6 Descriptive Data for Top and Bottom Scorers on Sight-Singing Test

72

Selected t-tests were performed to compare high and low scorers on variables that
the regression analysis showed to be good predictors of successful sight singing. The
selected background variables were years of high school choral participation, years of
middle school choral participation, private voice instruction, years of instrumental
ensemble participation and private instrumental instruction. High and low scorers were
also compared on the observed characteristics time, singing and starting again. A
significant difference was found between high and low scorers for only one reported
characteristic, years of high school choral participation (t(18)=2.452, p=.025). High
scorers participated in high school choir for longer periods of time than low scores.
There were significant differences between high and low scorers on the observed
behaviors time (t(18)=2.639, p=.017), singing (t(18)=2.951,p=.009) and starting again
(t(18)=2.99, p=.008). Low scorers completed all of these significantly related behaviors
more often, and for longer periods of time than high scorers.

Summary

What was clear from the data obtained is that all students who participated in the
study had received some musical instruction during their secondary school education,
most often in a choral ensemble setting. Students auditioning for a choral ensemble at the
university level had participated in choral ensembles for a large percentage of their high
school years and their junior high school years. Many of these students had also
participated in instrumental ensembles. Approximately forty percent of singers
auditioning had participated in an instrumental ensemble for the majority of their high
73

school years, and some students had participated in instrumental ensembles for longer
than their choral ensemble participation. Many of these students had also received
private instruction in their primary instrument, or the piano. Most students who
completed the study had received sight-singing instruction at some point in their musical
backgrounds. Students used a variety of systems for sight singing with the most common
being movable-do solfge. A majority of students had also received instruction in sightsinging preparation strategies. Instruction in sight singing, utilizing a specific system and
specific preparatory strategies, strongly relates to sight-singing success. Analysis of
reported behaviors showed that the number of years of high school chorus participation
was the best predictor of sight-singing success, and that years of instrumental ensemble
participation was also a good predictor of sight-singing success.
Students were observed during their sight-singing preparation and data revealed
that students spent a large proportion of their time singing. Several students also utilized
external beat keeping for a large percentage of the preparation time. Students used the
techniques of chanting, tonicizing, writing and silent study with less frequency than other
timed behaviors. All counted behaviors (starting pitch, starting again and error detection)
were utilized with approximately the same frequency. An analysis of observed behaviors
showed no significant predictor of sight-singing success for the sample.
Comparison of high and low scorers showed that increased length of choral and
instrumental ensemble participation provided a typical background for successful sight
singing. A significant difference between groups was found regarding the number of
years of high school participation. Sight-singing instruction utilizing specific preparation
strategies can also impact sight-singing success. A significant difference was found
74

between high and low scorers for three observed variables. High scorers spent less time
in the preparation process, spent less time singing and started the exercise again less
frequently. High scorers were more likely to exhibit non-singing behaviors in the
preparation process. Successful students played the starting pitch less often, and spent
more time writing and chanting. Analysis of the percentage of time spent in particular
behaviors showed that successful sight singers spent significantly more of their time
keeping an external beat than did unsuccessful sight singers.

75

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Summary

Research in the field of sight singing suggests several trends. Numerous studies
have been conducted to determine the most effective and popular systems of sight singing
instruction. Systems are usually divided into two categories, movable and fixed
solmization. Movable systems include movable-do solfge and numbers, while fixed
systems include fixed-do solfge, intervals and letter names (Demorest, 2001). Although
no system has been determined to be superior to another, effective instruction in any
sight-singing system has been shown to have a positive impact upon sight-singing
success (Brown, 2001; Demorest & May, 1995; Buchanan, 1946). This suggests that no
matter what system is utilized, sight singing is a task that requires dedicated instructional
time and practice for effective learning to take place.
Surveys regarding system popularity and instructional time use lead to similar
conclusions. Recent surveys suggest the popularity of movable systems, including
movable-do solfge (Bradley, 2006; Demorest, 2001; May, 1993; Pembrook & Riggins,
1990) and movable numbers (McClung, 2001). Fixed-do solfge and letter names were
76

used less often by practicing teachers in recent studies. Teachers believe in the
importance of using a specific system, and in the importance of sight-singing instruction,
yet few teachers delegate large amounts of rehearsal time to its use. Most teachers spend
between five and fifteen minutes of rehearsal time engaged in sight singing instruction
(Smith, 1998; May, 1993; Daniels, 1988; Johnson, 1987).
Studies of individual sight singing have become more prevalent in recent years. It
has been shown that group success is not synonymous with individual success in sight
singing (Brittain, 1998; Demorest & Henry, 1994). Factors contributing to individual
success may be related to instructional practice, or to other musical and extra-musical
characteristics. Research suggests that a variety of musical ensemble experiences may
result in superior sight-singing achievement (May & Elliot, 1980; Tucker, 1969; Colwell,
1963). Piano instruction and practice has been shown to be a musical predictor of
success in numerous studies (Demorest & May, 1995; Demorest & May, 1994, Daniels,
1986). Finally, the length of musical instruction, within both ensembles and private
lessons, has been determined to be related to sight-singing success (Demorest & May,
1995; Henry & Killian, 2005).
Among specific instructional methods, aural skills training, error detection,
harmonic accompaniment, individual assessment, self-report and pattern recognition have
also been found to promote to relate to sight-singing success (Berry, Fine & Rosner,
2006; Darrow, 2005, Henry & Killian, 2005; Henry, 2004; Brittain, 1998). A review of
relevant literature shows a need for information regarding students in higher education
who have expressed a desire to continue their musical education into adulthood.

77

The study Process and Product: The sight-singing backgrounds and behaviors of
first year undergraduate students was designed to describe the demographic and musical
characteristics of students auditioning for a choral ensemble upon entry into college. The
study was also designed to determine the best predictors of achievement on a sightsinging task. Five research questions were developed:
1. What are the demographic characteristics of entry-level college choral
musicians?
2. What is the musical background of entry-level college choral musicians?
3. What is the sight-singing background of entry-level college choral musicians?
4. What behaviors are exhibited during sight-singing preparation as observed in
entry-level college choral musicians?
5. Are there demographic characteristics, musical background characteristics or
behaviors that are predictors of sight-singing success?
The population for the study was first-year undergraduate students who
auditioned for a choral ensemble at a large public university in the Midwest. Subjects for
the study were forty (n=40) first-year undergraduate students who self-selected to
participate in the study. Students were recruited at the conclusion of their choral audition
and those who elected to participate moved to another office to complete the sightsinging test and questionnaire. Analysis of collegiate choral ensemble placement showed
that there was no significant difference between those who chose to participate in the
study and those who did not.
Subjects of the sample completed a sight-singing test of a melody containing eight
measures of common time written in the key of F major. Students were instructed that
78

they would have as much as ten minutes to prepare to sing the melody. They were
instructed that they could do whatever they wished in the preparation time, given an
instrument to play the starting pitch, a copy of the melody, a pencil and were left alone in
the room with the video camera. They were told that if they wished to perform the
melody prior to the completion of the ten-minute preparatory period they could choose to
end their preparation time at any point. Finally, students performed the melody, alone in
the room, recorded by an audio recording device. At the conclusion of the sight-singing
test, students completed a questionnaire regarding their musical backgrounds as well as
their backgrounds in sight-singing instruction.
Data were collected from questionnaire responses, evaluations of students audiorecorded sight-singing performances, and video taped observations of students
preparation behaviors. Reported variables gleaned from questionnaire responses
regarding musical background included: years of high school choral ensemble
participation, type of high school choral ensemble participation, years of middle school
choral ensemble participation, type of middle school choral ensemble participation, years
of private voice instruction, years of instrumental ensemble participation, type of
instrumental ensemble participation, and years of private instrumental instruction.
Information about prior sight-singing instruction was also gained from the background
survey. Data were coded into variables including: received sight-singing instruction,
instruction in a specific sight-singing system, type of sight-singing system utilized,
when/where sight singing instruction occurred, received instruction in specific
preparatory strategies for sight singing. Behaviors observed during the videotaped sightsinging preparation sessions included: singing, tonicizing, chanting, silent study, writing,
79

keeping an external beat, starting again, error detection and playing the starting pitch.
Final sight-singing scores for individuals were determined by two independent
evaluators, and high reliability between observers was determined.
Data were analyzed in order to answer each of the five previously developed
research questions.
What is the musical background of entry-level college choral musicians?
Students auditioning for university choral programs have both choral and
instrumental musical backgrounds. Of the students questioned (n=40) most (78%)
participated in choir for the maximum four years of high school and many (54%)
participated in middle school choirs for the maximum three years. The average high
school participation was 3.36 years and the average middle school participation was 1.92
years. Students participated in a variety of choral ensembles including mixed-gender
choirs, gender specific choirs, show choirs, honor choirs and church and community
choirs. Thirty-nine percent of students also received private voice lessons for an average
of one year.
Forty-four percent of students participated in instrumental ensembles, both
orchestra and band programs, for an average of 2.90 years. The largest percentage (41%)
of those students participating in an instrumental ensemble participated throughout their
middle school and high school careers. Students played many different instruments
including violin, trumpet and oboe. Many students (46%) had received private
instrumental lessons including lessons on their primary instrument as well as piano and
guitar.

80

What is the sight-singing background of entry-level college choral musicians?

Most students (85%) received sight-singing instruction at some point in their
musical backgrounds. Most responded that they received instruction in their high school
choral ensemble. Students had also received instruction regarding sight singing in middle
school, private voice lessons and in a community chorus. Many students (77%) had also
been instructed in specific systems of sight singing. Most received instruction in a
movable solmization system (90%) including both movable-do solfge (77%) and
movable numbers (13%). Other systems utilized were fixed-do solfge, letter names and
intervals. However, some students (38%) received instruction in multiple systems of
music reading, most using both movable-do solfge and interval training. Sixty percent
of students responding received instruction regarding specific preparatory strategies for
sight singing.
What are the demographic characteristics of entry-level college choral musicians?
The subjects consisted of a large percentage of non-music majors (89%) and were
between the ages of seventeen and twenty-three. Most students (89%) had graduated
from high school in the state of college attendance. The population consisted of twentytwo women (56%) and seventeen men (44%). Students were placed in two levels of
chorus upon entry into the college program with 28% placed in the mixed choirs and 72%
placed in the upper level freshman choirs, Mens and Womens Glee Clubs.
What behaviors are exhibited during sight-singing preparation as observed in entry-level
college choral musicians?
Data were analyzed for observed behaviors through evaluation of videotapes of
sight-singing preparation. Behaviors were divided into two categories, counted and
81

timed observed behaviors. Counted behaviors included playing the starting pitch
(M=10.21), starting the example again from the beginning (M=10.79) and detecting
errors (M=9.54). Timed behaviors included tonicizing (M=25.13 seconds), singing
(M=320.23 seconds), silent study (M=30.51 seconds), chanting (M=7.26 seconds),
writing (M=26.38 seconds) and keeping an external beat (M=25.62 seconds). Students
spent the majority of their preparation time singing, and also spent a substantial amount
of time in silent study, writing and keeping an external beat.
Are there demographic characteristics, musical background characteristics or behaviors
that are predictors of sight-singing success?
Inferential statistics were used in data analysis to determine what characteristics
and/or behaviors are related to sight-singing success. Analysis of the sample population
showed two reported variables that predict sight-singing success. These characteristics
were years of high school choral participation (p=.015) and years of instrumental
ensemble participation (p=.024). T-tests conducted on the variable received sightsinging instruction showed that there was a significant difference between students who
had received sight-singing instruction and those who had not (p= .002). Students who
had also received instruction in preparatory sight-singing strategies performed
significantly better than those who did not received similar instruction (p=.003). Data for
the sample population revealed no observed behaviors that significantly predict sightsinging success, although the variables singing and external beat keeping were found to
be good predictors.
Analysis of high and low scorers showed significant differences between groups
for one reported characteristic and three observed characteristics. There was a significant
82

difference between groups for the observed characteristic years of high school choral
participation (p=.025). High scorers participated in choral ensembles for an average of
3.90 years while low scorers participated for an average of 2.60 years. There was also a
significant difference between successful and unsuccessful sight-singers for the
characteristics time (p=.017), singing (p=.009) and starting again (p=.008). High scorers
spent significantly less time preparing (M=4:05) than did low scorers (M=6:56) and also
spent significantly less time singing in their preparation time (M=184.80, M=357.10).
Finally, high scorers (M=4.60) started again less often than low scorers (M=16.00).

Discussion
Purpose

The purpose of the study Process and Product: An Investigation of the SightSinging Backgrounds and Behaviors of First-Year Undergraduate Students was to
provide information regarding choral musicians entering college and their backgrounds
and habits relating to sight-singing practice. It was hoped that the information obtained
from the participants in this study would help practicing teachers better prepare their
students for college music study, and would help university instructors better understand
the skills with which their new students enter the world of higher education.
The history of sight-singing instruction is long and varied, with many methods
and systems developed to help singers attain higher achievement and be more prepared to
become independent musicians. Many studies have focused upon the skills of secondary
83

school musicians or practicing collegiate musicians. This study differs in that it

attempted to catch students in the divide between secondary and higher education. The
study was completed with students who had finished their secondary careers, but had not
yet received instruction at the university level. This study examined the backgrounds and
behaviors of students who had expressed a desire to continue their musical experiences,
and had not yet been influenced by a particular college instructor or choral director. It is
important for college choral conductors to know and understand the background of the
incoming ensemble population, and also to understand how this may relate to sightsinging success at the beginning of the college experience. It is also important for high
school teachers to know and understand what musical experiences and sight-singing
instruction may lead to independent music making.

Description

First year students auditioning for a choral ensemble reported varied, yet similar,
musical backgrounds. All students had received some form of musical instruction prior
to the audition for the university choral ensembles. All but one student had participated
in a high school choral ensemble, and many students had participated in numerous years
of choral participation, private vocal lessons, instrumental ensemble participation and
private instrumental lessons. Students had participated in a variety of choral and
instrumental ensembles. What is clear from this analysis is that students who choose to
participate in music into adulthood do so because of the instruction they received in their
elementary and secondary school educations. If music educators desire students who are
84

lifelong musicians, encouraging students participation in a variety of musical

experiences may foster the desire to continue music participation beyond secondary
school education. For the most part students without musical experience do not choose to
become involved in a musical ensemble as an adult if they did not participate in music
throughout childhood and adolescence.
Students who chose to participate in the study also had varied backgrounds in
sight-singing instruction. Most students had received some form of sight-singing
instruction prior to the collegiate audition. However, varied backgrounds, systems and
instruction in sight singing were found. Students were taught using a variety of sightsinging systems including movable-do solfge, fixed-do solfge, movable numbers, letter
names, intervallic drill and neutral syllables. The most prevalent systems were those
based upon the movable-tonic system (movable-do solfge and movable numbers) and
many students were taught multiple systems of music reading. Some students were
taught specific strategies in order to prepare for sight singing, exhibited clearly in the
behaviors observed during videotaped preparation. It is clear that a systematic
presentation of ideas and systems may be beneficial to students. Perhaps knowledge of
students sight-singing backgrounds will inform the choices of both secondary school and
collegiate educators with regards to sight-singing instruction.
Students exhibited many different behaviors during their preparation of the
melody for performance. One student used the provided instrument to play the starting
pitch one time, while another student played the starting pitch a total of fifty-two times.
The student who only used the instrument once was able to retain the fixed sound of the
tonic pitch within her tonal memory, while the student who played it fifty-two times often
85

could not retain the fixed sound of the tonic pitch for even a few seconds. The need for
students to be able to develop and maintain a tonal memory is an important musical skill,
as shown during the observed sight-singing preparation. Students who do not have a
strong tonal memory may need to rely on an external source until they learn strategies for
internalizing pitch sounds.
Another counted behavior, starting again, also showed great variability ranging
from no occurrences of starting again to thirty-one restarts. This speaks to the training of
students and how they handle error detection or difficult passages. Some students
detected an error and fixed only the measure in which they made a mistake. However,
some students detected an error and returned to the beginning of the piece after each
mistake. Not all students have learned the practice techniques of isolating an error,
correcting the error and finally putting the corrected section back within the whole.
Teaching the skill of musical problem solving is important to creating independent and
lifelong musicians.
The final counted behavior, error detection, has been shown in the past to bear a
strong relationship to sight-singing success. Subjects in the present study exhibited as few
as zero and as many as twenty-nine error detections. Error detections were marked by
audible or physical responses observed by the evaluator. These included but were not
limited to: cessation of singing, verbal behavior (speaking, sighing, cursing), and physical
behavior (shaking head, wincing, snapping fingers). Many students made errors that they
did not detect, and many students detected an error but did not attempt correction, or
were unable to correct it. Although teaching the skill of error detection may be an

86

important first step in building musical literacy, equally important is teaching the skill of
error correction.
The most commonly exhibited timed behavior was singing or making audible
pitch sounds. Every student performed some audible singing during his or her
preparation time. This suggests that students are more comfortable with audible music
making rather than the skill of audiation (internal hearing), and may help to inform
teaching practices in regards to sight-singing instruction. Teachers may wish to help
students develop audiation skills as well as singing and listening skills.
Timed behaviors exhibited with less frequency than singing also had varied usage.
Several students used the skill of external beat keeping with great success. The ability to
keep a steady and consistent tempo is clearly tied to music reading, and should be
encouraged in all music students. Tonicizing was a skill previously determined as being
related to sight-singing success. This research defined tonicizing as any chordal or scalar
pattern audibly represented by the subject. Although several students tonicized in order
to assist in tonal memory and tonic pitch recognition, many students used tonicization in
order to find pitches about which they were unsure, or to assist in error correction.
Many students also used time for silent study. This suggests thought and
reflection about the piece and may also suggest audiation, which was not directly
observable. Silent study was closely tied with writing for some students. After a visual
study of the score, students chose to write visual cues on the musical example to help
lead to sight-singing success. Very few students exhibited any type of chanting behavior
(rhythmic or melodic) during their preparation time. Many instructors use chanting in a
group setting in order to facilitate successful sight singing, and especially to practice
87

rhythmic elements. The individuals in this study, however, exhibited this behavior with
very little frequency.
Individuals in a preparatory setting do not always exhibit behaviors commonly
used during group sight-singing practice. Some teachers encourage their students to
think about and study the example, write visual cues, chant before singing and keep a
steady beat while sight singing in a group setting. Data gathered from this study suggest
that students are not always following established patterns that lead to sight-singing
success, or perform differently as individuals than in a group setting. It is difficult to
ascertain from this study whether they have simply never been taught these behaviors, or
if they have chosen not to utilize taught behaviors in an individual setting. One thing has
been suggested by this study however: students who exhibited certain behaviors or
background characteristics were more likely to be successful sight singers when entering
the college choral ensemble.

Factors Related to Sight-Singing Success

Analyses showed that students who had successful performances on the sightsinging test were more likely to have spent more time singing in high school choral
ensembles than unsuccessful students. The number of years of high school choral
participation was the strongest predictor of sight-singing success. These findings impact
the profession of music education and choral conducting positively, as these results
suggest that ensemble participation helps to build transferrable musical skills. The results
also suggests that students who wish to pursue music into their adult lives would be well
88

served by continuing their musical education throughout their secondary school careers.
The analysis of high and low scorers also suggests that instrumental ensemble experience
is related to sight-singing success and may suggest that music literacy is positively
impacted by instrumental music experience. These results suggest that varied musical
experiences may help to develop musical skills considered important to adult music
educators and conductors.
Other musical background factors that were related strongly to sight-singing
success were related to instruction prior to entry in higher education. Students who had
received sight-singing instruction were better sight-singers. There was also a significant
difference in sight-singing score between students who had received instruction in
specific strategies in preparation for sight-singing performance and sight-singing success
and those who had not. Although these results are hardly surprising, commonly held
ideals about the instruction of sight singing are validated. Music educators should be
aware that students who are successful sight singers have received instruction in specific
strategies regarding sight singing. Although there are factors beyond the scope of sightsinging instruction that may influence sight-singing success, one must assume that skill is
developed through instruction and practice.
Among observed behaviors of the sample population, there were no variables that
significantly predicted posttest scores. However, t-test analyses of high and low scorers
showed that high scorers utilized less time in sight-singing preparation, spent less time
singing during their sight-singing preparation and played the starting pitch less often than
low scorers. High scorers were also spent larger percentages of their preparation time
keeping an observable beat.
89

These results suggest that high scorers were well prepared and could quickly
review and practice the sight-singing example. Observers noted that high scoring singers
appeared to be more confident and used an organized and product-oriented process to
read through the example. For several of the high scorers, the example appeared very
easy, and was read with minimal practice time and little audible practice. On the other
hand, low scorers were less confident, sang more quietly, made more mistakes and took
more time in the preparation of their melody. Often the practice time was poorly
organized, and no specific plan was followed to sight sing the example.
These results also suggest that successful sight singers have a better tonal
memory. Students who were successful at the sight-singing task played the starting pitch
far less frequently, and returned to an accurate tonic pitch more easily than unsuccessful
students. The tonal memory displayed by successful students suggests either an innate
musical skill or a learned response to sight singing a tonal music example. Finally,
students who were successful kept an external beat for a larger percentage of their
preparation time, often in tandem with other behaviors (singing, chanting, silent study).
This suggests that the ability to keep a steady beat, the ability to audiate, and the ability to
sight sing an example all the way through without stopping may be important skills for
students.
Conclusion
Relevance to Educational Practices
Any process or skill that has been linked to educational success must be
considered when contemplating optimal teaching practices. Teachers attempting to
90

prepare their students for collegiate choral music programs, or indeed for any adult
musical participation, should consider sight-singing instruction and specific pedagogical
practices in order to ensure the best possible outcome for their students. This study
attempted to determine what behaviors and backgrounds were exhibited by entry-level
college choral musicians and related these variables to sight-singing success. Successful
singers displayed several behaviors and characteristics that could be used to inform the
teaching practices of secondary school teachers, and to inform the expectations and ideals
of practicing college choral conductors. Educators should be aware that students are
more likely to be successful sight-singers and music readers when they have received
specific instruction in sight-singing and in a particular system. Students are also more
likely to show signs of music literacy when they have continued participation in both
choral and instrumental ensembles. Factors relating to tonal memory, audiation skills
and confidence during sight-singing preparation and performance can be practiced and
taught during the secondary school music curriculum, and are vital skills for musicians
wishing to continue their musical careers into adulthood.

Suggestions for Further Research

Although there were significant findings relating specific factors to sight-singing

success, more and differing research is needed in order to truly understand the elusive
nature of sight-singing skill. If this study were replicated, it would be interesting to see if
results were consistent across universities and school types. Studies with more students,
of different demographic characteristics should be completed to determine
91

generalizability of the study. It would also be helpful to more fully investigate different
teaching styles and the impact of specific teaching strategies on sight-singing success.
Other studies could be undertaken to examine the role of tonal memory and
audiation skills and their relationships to sight-singing success. Although the present
study has suggested that skillful sight singers have a strong tonal memory and are able to
audiate, no significant relationship between the differing skills has been established. It
could be an important study to determine the relationships between these essential
musical skills.
In addition, the relationships between error detection and error correction abilities
and sight-singing success should be examined. During videotaped observation it was
noted that although most students could correctly identify an error, at least some of the
time, not all students knew how to effectively correct that error within a singing situation.
Some students used the skills of singing a scale or a chord pattern in order to correct
errors, but some students had no skills upon which to fall in order to effectively correct
an error within an a cappella setting.
One final suggestion for further research is to examine the relationship between
student background and college instructor expectation. There is little research examining
the expectations of college instructors regarding the entry-level students. In order that
students can best prepare for the higher education experience, and secondary school
teachers can assist them towards successful college auditions and choral participation,
collegiate expectations should be examined. College choir directors, vocal instructors and
music educators should be surveyed as to the desired characteristics of future music
students. Once the desirable characteristics of potential adult musicians have been
92

determined, the relationship of those characteristics to the actual background

characteristics of entry-level college musicians should be examined. Students and
teachers alike should be aware of whether or not they are meeting the expectations of
future instructors.

Conclusions

This research has shown that specific musical backgrounds are likely to be found
within the population of entry-level college choral musicians. It has also determined that
entry-level college choral musicians are likely to have received at least some sort of
sight-singing instruction and that many received instruction in movable tonic systems.
The research also determined several behaviors that are likely to be exhibited by students
when preparing for sight singing. Finally, this research has shown several characteristics
and behaviors that are related to sight-singing success. It is hoped that this research study
will help to inform the practices of secondary school level musical instructors and the
expectations of the college choral instructor. The improvement of sight-singing pedagogy
will help to create self-sufficient and self-motivated learners. As pedagogical practices
change and improve, a primary goal of music education will be met and perhaps
exceeded.

93

REFERENCES

Allison, P. (1999) Multiple Regression: A Primer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Armstrong, M. (2001). Adjudicated Sight-Reading for the Choral Ensemble: An
Incentive for Musical Literacy. Choral Journal. 41(10), 21-30.
Banton, L.J. (1995). The Role of Visual and Auditory Feedback During the Sight
Reading of Music. Psychology of Music. 23(1), 3-16.
Barnes, J.W. (1960). An Experimental Study of Interval Drill as it Affects Sight-Singing
Skill. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms Inc.
Bennett, P. (1984) Tricks, Masks and Camouflage: Is Imitation Passing for Music
Reading? Music Educators Journal. 71(3), 62-62,65-69.
Bentley,A. (1959). Fixed or movable do? Journal of Research in Music Education, 7 (2),
164-68.
Berry, A., Fine, P. Rosner, B. (2006) The Effect of Pattern Recognition and Tonal
Predictability on Sight-Singing Ability. Psychology of Music. 34 (4), 431-474.
Bland, L. (1984). Sight Singing Through Melodic Analysis. Chicago: Nelson Hall
Publishers.
Blum, B.E. (1968). Solmization in nineteenth-century American sight-singing
instruction. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Michigan, 1968). Dissertation
Abstracts International 30-01A.
Boyle, D.J. and Lucas, K.V. (1990). The Effect of Context on Sight Singing. The Bulletin
of the Council for Research in Music Education, 106, 1-9.
Bradley, K.D. (2006). Teaching Strategies Related to Successful Sight Singing in
Kentucky Choral Ensembles. UPDATE: Applications of Research in Music
Education. 25(1), 70-81.
Brendell, J.K. (1996) Time Use, Rehearsal Activity and Student Off-Task Behavior
during the Initial Minutes of High School Choral Rehearsals. Journal of Research
in Music Education. 44, 6-14.
94

Bricher, D.M. (1995). The Effects of Two Methods for Teaching Sight Singing on JuniorHigh School Choir Students Sight Singing Achievement. Unpublished M.M.
Thesis, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio.
Brittain, L.M. (1998). Sight-singing pedagogy: Research applied to classroom methods.
Choral Journal, 31 (1), 9-18.
Brown, K.D. (2001). Effect of fixed and movable sight-singing systems on
undergraduate music students ability to perform diatonic, modulatory, chromatic
and atonal melodic passages. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, 2001).
Dissertation Abstracts Insternational, AAT 3035562.
Brown, K. D. (2003) .An Alternative Approach to Developing Literacy Skills In A
Transient Society. Music Educators Journal, 90:2 , 46-54.
Buchanan, W. (1946). Comparison of fixed and movable solfge in teaching sight
singing from the staff. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, 1946).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 10-04, 0080.
Cassidy, J. (1993). Effects of various sight singing strategies on non-music majors pitch
accuracy. Journal of Research in Music Education. 41, 293-302.
Choksy, L.(1974). The Kodaly Method: Comprehensive Music Education From Infant to
Adult. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.
Collins, D.L. (1993). Teaching choral music. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Collins, I. H. H. (1979). Current attitudes and trends in the teaching of sight singing in
higher education. (Doctoral dissertation, Temple University, 1979). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 40-05, A2336.
Colwell, R. (1963). An investigation of musical achievement among vocal students,
vocal-instrumental students and instrumental students. Journal of Research in
Music Education, 11, 123-30.
Costanza, A. P. & Russell, T. (1992). Methodologies in music education. In R. Colwell
(Ed.), Handbook of research on music teaching and learning. (pp. 498-508). New
York: Schirmer Books.
Coye, N.B. (1938). Sight Singing and Theory in the Junior High School. Music
Educators Journal, 25, 32.
Crawford, R. (2007). Psalmody: North America. Grove Music Online. Ed. L. Macy
(Accessed [2/19/2008], <http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu>
Cross, S. & Hiatt, J.S. (2006). Teaching and using auditaion in classroom instruction and
95

applied lessons with advanced students. Music Educators Journal, 92(5), 46-49.
Cutietta, R. (1979). The effects of including systemized sightsinging drill in the middle
school choral rehearsal. Contributions to Music Education, 7, 12-20.
Daniels, R.D. (1986). Relationships among selected factors and the sight-reading ability
of high school mixed choirs. Journal of Research in Music Education, 34 (4),
279-89.
Daniels, R. D. (1988). Sight-reading instruction in the choral rehearsal. UPDATE:
Applications of Research in Music Education, 6 (2), 22-24.
Darazs, Arpad A. (1973). A Study of the Zoltan Kodly Approach to Music Reading.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation ,Columbia University, New York.
Darrow, A. (2006). Examining the Validity of Self-Report: Middle Level Singers Ability
to Predict and Assess Their Sight-Singing Skills. International Journal of Music
Education. 24 (1), 21-29.
Demorest, S. & May V. (1995). Sight-singing instruction in the choral ensemble: Factors
related to individual performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 43
(2), 156-67.
Demorest, S. M. (2001). What Research Offers Teachers. In Building Choral Excellence:
Teaching Sight Singing in the Choral Rehearsal. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Demorest, S. M. (1998). Rehearsal Breaks: Integrating Sight Singing into the High
School Choral Rehearsal. Choral Journal, 39, 55-58.
Demorest, S. (1998). Improving Sight-Singing Performance in the Choral Ensemble: The
Effect of Individual Testing. Journal of Research in Music Education. 46: 182192.
Downey, J.C. (2007). Shape-note Hymnody. Grove Music Online. Ed. L. Macy
(Accessed [2/19/2008], <http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu>
Duke, R.A. & Farra, Y. (2000). SCRIBE: Simple Computer Recording Interface for
Behavioral Evaluation. Austin, TX: Learning and Behavior Assoicates.
Dwiggins, R. (1984) Teaching sight reading the high school chorus. UPDATE:
Applications of Research in Music Education, 2(2), 8-11.
Ewars, M. (2004) Computer assisted music instruction as supplemental sight singing
instruction in the high school choir. (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Champaign-Illinois, 2004). Dissertation Abstracts International, AAT 3160882.
96

Foltz, R.E. (1976). Sight singing: Some new ideas on an old institution. College Music
Symposium, 16, 95-100.
Foulkes-Levy, L. (2006). Music for everyone: Pedagogical tools for all: Part 1:
Introduction and a brief history of solmization syllables. Kodaly Envoy, 32(3), 1519,22.
Furby,V. (2003). The effects of learning tonal harmonic function on the sight-singing
skill of high school students. Unpublished Masters Thesis, The Ohio State
University.
Gordon, E. E. (1997).Learning sequences in music: A music learning theory. Chicago:
GIA Publications.
Gregory, T. (1972). The effect of rhythmic notation variable on sight reading errors.
Journal of Research in Music Education, 20, 462-8.
Grout, D.J. & Palisca, C.V. (1996). A History of Western Music. New York: W.W.
Norton & Co.
Grushin, Martin. (1997). Professional Sight Singing Technique. Vanderbilt: Jubal Press.
Guzy, G. (1984). Techniques for developing sight reading skills as used by high school
choral directors in Ohio. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Bowling Green State
University: Ohio.
Hales, B. (1961). A study of music reading programs in high school chouses in the Rocky
Mountain states. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, 1961). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 22, 2416.
Halfpenny, E., Ho, S., Kurosawa, K. & Wollner,C. (2003). The Effects of Distracted
Inner Hearing on Sight-Reading. Psychology of Music. 31 (4), 377-389.
Hanson, J. (1978). Questionnaire: Sight Singing Procedures, Theory & Practice. Journal
of the Music Theory Society of New York State. 3(1), 147-56.
Hayes, A.F & Cai, L. (2007). Using heteroscedasticity-consistent standard error
estimators in OLS regression: An introduction and software implementation.
Behavior Research Methods, 39, 709-22.
Henry, M.L. & Demorest, S.M. (1994). Individual sightsinging achievement in successful
choral ensembles. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 13 (1),
4-8.

97

Henry, M. & Killain J. (2005). A Comparison of Successful and Unsuccessful Strategies

in Individual Sight-Singing Preparation and Performance. Journal of Research in
Music Education. 53: 51-65.
Henry, M. (2004). The Use of Targeted Pitch Skills for Sight-Singing Instruction in the
Choral Rehearsal. Journal of Research in Music Education. 52: 206-217.
Hodges, D.A. (1992). The acquisition of music reading skills. In R. Colwell (Ed.),
Handbook of research on music teaching and learning. (pp. 466-71). New York:
Schirmer Books.
Horton, J.D. (1974). The relative effectiveness of three systems of sight singing in
developing melodic sight singing ablility at the six-grade level. (Doctoral
dissertation, Peabody College for Teachers of Vanderbilt University, 1974).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 3512A 00066.
Houlahan, M. & Tacka, P. (1990). A suggested sequence for teaching musical elements
based on the philosophy of Zoltan Kodly for a college music theory course.
Journal of Music Theory Pedagogy, 4, 85-109.
Hughes, A. (2003). European medieval and renaissance systems. Grove Music Online.
Ed. L. Macy (Accessed [1/15/2008],<http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.lib.ohiostate.edu>
Hughes, A. (2007). Solmization. Grove Music Online. Ed. L. Macy (Accessed
[1/19/2008],<http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu>
Jeno, A. (1971). Growing in music with movable do: Translation of the original Kodaly
method. Highland Park, New Jersey: Georgiana Peterson Press.
Johnson, A. (1998). Rehearsal Breaks: Using Literacy Learning Theories to Facilitate
Sight-Reading and Music Learning. Choral Journal. 39(1), 37-39.
Johnson, G. J. B. (1987). A descriptive study of the pitch-reading methods and the
amount of time utilized to teach sight-singing by high school choral teachers in
the north central region of the American Choral Directors Association. (Master's
thesis, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 1987). Masters Abstract International 2601, 0022.
Justus, L.D. (1969). Developing satisfactory techniques for high school vocal students.
Choral Journal. 9, 10-23.
Kipiez, R., Lee, J., Ligges, U, & Weihs, C. (2006). Classification of High and Low
Achievers in a Music Sight-Reading Task. Psychology of Music. 34 (1), 5-26.

98

Lehmann, A.C. & McArthur, V. (2002). Sight Reading in The Science and Psychology of
Music Performance, Creative Strategies for Teaching and Learning. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Mark, M. (1999) A History of American Music Education. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
May, J. A . (1993). A description of current practices in the teaching of choral melody
reading in the high schools of Texas. (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Houston, 1993). Dissertation Abstracts International 54-03, A0856.
May W. V. & Elliot C.A. (1980). Relationships among ensemble participation, private
instruction, and aural skill development. Journal of Research in Music Education.
28, 155-61.
McClung, A. C. (1996). A descriptive study of learning assessment and grading practices
in the high school choral music performance classroom. (Doctoral dissertation,
Florida State University, 1996). Dissertation Abstracts International 57-08A,
AAG9700217.
McClung, A. (2001). Sight-Singing Systems: Current Practice and Survey of All-State
Choristers. UPDATE: Applications of Research in Music Education. 20: 3-8.
McElhran, B. (1998). Music Reading by Intervals: A Modern Sight Reading and Ear
Training Method for Singers, Conductors and Teachers. New York: Brichtmark
Music.
Middleton, J.A.(1984). Develop Choral Reading Skills. Music Educators Journal, 70:7,
29-32.
Miller, S. D. (1980). Literacy for the beginning and intermediate high school choir.
Choral Journal, 20, (7), 11-14.
Mann, R. (1989). Why Should Elementary Students Have All the Fun? (Kodaly Method
at the College Level). Music Educators Journal, 76, 39-42.
McClung, A. (2001). Sight Singing Systems Current Practices and Survey of All State
Choristers. UPDATE: Applications of Research in Music Education, 20,
3-8.
McElhran, B. (1998). Music Reading by Intervals: A Modern Sight Reading and Ear
Training Method for Singers, Conductors and Teachers. New York: Brichtmark
Music.
Middleton, J.A.(1984). Develop Choral Reading Skills. Music Educators Journal, 70:7,
29-32.
99

More, B. E. (1985). Sight singing and ear training at the university level: A case for the
use of Kodly's system of relative solmization. Choral Journal, 25 (7), 9-22.
Nelson, J.C. (1970). A comparison of two methods of measuring achievement in sight
singing. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, 1970). Dissertation Abstracts
International, AAT 7015629.
Neumann, C. (2006). Music makers: Elementary-The Kodaly method and learning
theories. Canadian Music Educator. 47(4), 48-9.
Nolker, B. (2006). The relationship between large ensemble sight reading rating and the
individuals sight singing success. Missouri Journal of Research in Music
Education. 43, 3-14.
Norris, C. E. (2003). The Relationship Between Sight Singing Achievement and Melodic
Dictation Achievement. Contributions to Music Education. 30 (1), 39-53.
Norris, C. (2004). A Nationwide Overview of Sight-Singing Requirements of LargeGroup Choral Festivals. Journal of Research in Music Education. 52: 16-28.
Ottman, R.W. (1956). A Statistical Inversitgation of the Influence of Selected Factors on
the Skill of Sight Singing. Unpublished masters thesis. North Texas College.
Ozeas, N. L. (1991). The effect of the use of a computer assisted drill program on the
aural skill development of students in beginning solfge. (Doctoral dissertation,
University of Pittsburgh, 1991). Dissertation Abstracts International, 52-10,
A3553.
Palisca, C.V. (2007) Guido of Arezzo. Grove Music Online. Ed. L. Macy (Accessed
[1/15/2008],<http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu>
Paulk, J. (2004). Perspectives on sight reading choral repertoire. Choral Journal. 45(3),
28-35.
Pembrock,R. G. & Riggins, H. L. (1990). ''Send help!'' Aural skills instruction in U.S.
colleges and universities. Journal of Music Theory Pedagogy, 4, 231-41.
Phillips, K. H. (1984). Sight singing: Where have we been? Where are we going? Choral
Journal, 24 (6), 11-17.
Phillips, K. (1996). Teaching Singers to Sight Read. Teaching Music, 3,
32-33.
Phillips, K. H. (2004). Directing the Choral Music Program. New York: Oxford
University Press.
100

Rainbow, B. (2007). John Curwen. Grove Music Online. Ed. L. Macy (Accessed
[2/15/2008],<http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu>
Rawlins, R. (2005,6). Sight singing for Instrumentalists. American Music Teacher. 55(3),
26-9.
Robinson R. & Winold A. (1992) The Choral Experience. Prospect Heights, IL:
Waveland Press Inc.
Rogers, M. (1996). The Jersild Approach: A Sight singing Method from Denmark.
College Music Symposium, 36, 149-61.
Root, F.W. (1931). Methodical Sight-Singing: Lessons in Vocal Culture. Bryn Mawr,
Pennsylvania: Theodore Presser Co.
Ross, J. & Vuram, A. (2006). Producation and perception of musical intervals. Music
Perception. 23(4), 331-44.
Scott, T. B. (1996). The construction of a holistic, criterion-referenced sight-singing test
for high school sopranos based on the voluntary national standards for music
education. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois--Urbana-Champaign,
1996). Dissertation Abstracts International 57-11, A4684.
Scott, T. M. (1995). Sight-singing in the college-level choral program. American
Organist, 20, 68-71.
Sheldon, D.A. (1998). Effects of contextual sight reading and aural skills training on
error detection abilities. Journal of Research in Music Education. 46(3), 384-95.
Siler, H. (1956). Toward an international solfeggio. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 4 (1), 40-43.
Smith, S. A (1998). Sight singing in the high school choral rehearsal: Pedagogical
practices, teacher attitudes, and university preparation. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Florida State University at Tallahassee.
Smith, T. A. (1991). A comparison of pedagogical resources in solmization systems.
Journal of Music Theory Pedagogy, 5 (1), 1-24.
Stebelton, E. (1987). Predictors of sight-reading achievement: A review of the literature.
Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 6 (1), 11-15.
Sunderland, M.R. (1994). A description of selected Ohio secondary choral ensembles
with particular attention to sight reading skills. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Cincinnati.
101

Szabo, C. E . (1992). A profile of ten high school choral directors and their activities
during one week. (Doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, 1992).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 53-08, A2730.
Tacka. P. (2007). Kodaly. Grove Music Online. Ed. L. Macy (Accessed
[2/17/2008],<http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu>
Tucker, D. W. (1969). Factors related to music reading ability of senior high school
students participating in choral groups. (Doctoral dissertation, University of
California, Berkeley, 1969). Dissertation Abstracts International 31, 2427A.
Weidenaar, G. (2006). Solmization and the Norwich and Tonic Sol-Fa Systems. Choral
Journal. 46 (9), 24-33.
White, R. A. (1983). A measure of the effects of a movable number system upon the
perception and vocal performance of nontonal music. (Doctoral dissertation,
Boston University, 1983). Dissertation Abstracts International 44-05, A1372.
Wilson, Harry R. (1954). Sing a Song at Sight: A Practical and Rapid Method of
Developing Music Reading. Chicago: Hall and McCreary Co.
Winnich, William. (1987). Hybrid Methods in Sight Singing. Choral Journal. 28, 24-30.
Yarbrough, C., Orman, E. & Neill, S. (2007). Time Usage by Choral Directors Prior to
Sight singing Adjudication. UPDATE: Applications of Research in Music
Education. 27-34.

102

APPENDICES

103

Appendix A
Recruitment Letter
Patricia J. Flowers & Victoria J. Furby
The Ohio State University
110 Weigel Hall
Columbus, Ohio 43210
Dear Participant:
The study entitled Process and Product: An Investigation of the Sight Singing
Backgrounds and Behaviors of First-Year Undergraduate Students has been undertaken
in order that singers and teachers of singing might gain a better understanding of what
makes successful sight singers. This study will attempt to determine what musical habits
and demographic characteristics indicate successful sight singers.
Today, we are asking that you participate in this study by completing a sightsinging task and filling out a survey questionnaire relating to your musical background.
These tasks will take you approximately twenty minutes to complete and will lead better
understanding of the sight singing process and outcome. We expect that the information
gleaned from this study will help teachers in deciding what are the necessary skills for
students to learn in a choral classroom. Your involvement is important to the success of
this study. You have the right to refuse to participate in this study. Your refusal will
have no bearing upon your choral audition for Ohio State, and the OSU choral directors
will not be informed of your participation or refusal to participate. If you have any
questions we would be happy to answer them. Thank you for your consideration.
Patricia J. Flowers

Victoria J. Furby

Music Education Professor

Graduate Teaching Assistant

The Ohio State University

The Ohio State University

flowers.1@osu.edu

furby.2@osu.edu
104

Appendix B

The Ohio State University Consent to Participate in Research

Study Title:
Researcher:

Process and Product: An investigation of the sight singing

backgrounds and behaviors of first year undergraduate
students.
Patricia J. Flowers and Victoria J. Furby

Sponsor:

This is a consent form for research participation. It contains important information about
this study and what to expect if you decide to participate.
Your participation is voluntary.
Please consider the information carefully. Feel free to ask questions before making your
decision whether or not to participate. If you decide to participate, you will be asked to
sign this form and will receive a copy of the form.
Purpose:
The purpose of this study is to determine what pre-performance and performance habits
are related to successful sight singing. Also, characteristics, such as whether or not you
play an instrument, or whether you learned a specific sight-singing method, will be
examined to see if they lead to successful sight singing.

Procedures/Tasks:
You will be asked to prepare and sing a melody consisting of eight measure of common
time. You will have a time limit of ten minutes. The ten minute preparation and
performance of the melody will be videotaped and the final melody performance will be
105

audio recorded. At the conclusion of the ten minute observation you will be asked to fill
out a questionnaire relating to your musical background and skills.
Duration:
This task will take approximately twenty minutes to complete. The melody performance
and preparation will last ten minutes, and it will take you approximately ten minutes to
complete the questionnaire. You may leave the study at any time. If you decide to stop
participating in the study, there will be no penalty to you, and you will not lose any
benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. Your decision will not affect your future
relationship with The Ohio State University.

Risks and Benefits:

There are no risks to this study. Data will be stored by the researcher and destroyed at
the end of the study. The benefits of this study include increased knowledge in the field
of sight singing that will allow teachers of singing to learn what methods and skills are
most important to teach their students.

Confidentiality:
Efforts will be made to keep your study-related information confidential. However, there
may be circumstances where this information must be released. For example, personal
information regarding your participation in this study may be disclosed if required by
state law. Also, your records may be reviewed by the following groups (as applicable to
the research):

Office for Human Research Protections or other federal, state, or international

regulatory agencies;

The Ohio State University Institutional Review Board or Office of

Responsible Research Practices;

The sponsor, if any, or agency (including the Food and Drug Administration
for FDA-regulated research) supporting the study.
Incentives:
There will be no incentives to participate. We hope singers will participate so that they
can add to the body of knowledge surrounding the teaching of singing.
106

Participant Rights:
You may refuse to participate in this study without penalty or loss of benefits to which
you are otherwise entitled. If you are a student or employee at Ohio State, your decision
will not affect your grades or employment status. This study will have no bearing upon
the choral audition you have just completed. The people making the decisions about
choral placement will not be informed of your participation or refusal to participate.
If you choose to participate in the study, you may discontinue participation at any time
without penalty or loss of benefits. By signing this form, you do not give up any personal
legal rights you may have as a participant in this study.
An Institutional Review Board responsible for human subjects research at The Ohio State
University reviewed this research project and found it to be acceptable, according to
applicable state and federal regulations and University policies designed to protect the
rights and welfare of participants in research.
Contacts and Questions:
For questions, concerns, or complaints about the study you may contact
Patricia J. Flowers, Principal Investigator
flowers.1@osu.edu (614)292-6389
110 Weigel Hall
The Ohio State University
Columbus, Ohio 43210
For questions about your rights as a participant in this study or to discuss other studyrelated concerns or complaints with someone who is not part of the research team, you
may contact Ms. Sandra Meadows in the Office of Responsible Research Practices at 1800-678-6251.
If you are injured as a result of participating in this study or for questions about a studyrelated injury, you may contact
Patricia J. Flowers, Principal Investigator
flowers.1@osu.edu (614)292-6389
110 Weigel Hall
The Ohio State University
Columbus, Ohio 43210

107

Signing the consent form

I have read (or someone has read to me) this form and I am aware that I am being asked
to participate in a research study. I have had the opportunity to ask questions and have
had them answered to my satisfaction. I voluntarily agree to participate in this study.
I am not giving up any legal rights by signing this form. I will be given a copy of this
form.

Printed name of subject

Signature of subject

AM/PM
Date and time

Printed name of person authorized to consent for subject

(when applicable)

Signature of person authorized to consent for subject

(when applicable)

Relationship to the subject

Date and time

AM/PM

Investigator/Research Staff
I have explained the research to the participant or his/her representative before requesting
the signature(s) above. There are no blanks in this document. A copy of this form has
been given to the participant or his/her representative.

Printed name of person obtaining consent

Signature of person obtaining consent

AM/PM
Date and time

108

Appendix C
Questionnaire
Process and Product: An Investigation of the Sight-Singing Backgrounds and Behaviors
of First Year Undergraduate Students
Name: _______________________ Age: _____________ Gender: ____________
High School Attended: ________________________________________________
State of High School Attendance: ________________________________________
Choral Experience:
Briefly describe your high school choral experiences including years of involvement (if
applicable)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Briefly describe your middle school choral experiences including years of involvement
(if applicable)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Briefly describe your elementary school musical experiences including years of
involvement (if applicable)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Other Musical Experience:
Briefly describe musical experiences outside choral ensemble participation including
years of involvement (include instrumental ensembles, music classes and private music
instruction)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Sight-Singing Experience:
Did you receive sight singing instruction at any time in your singing career? Yes/No
*If no, please proceed to the section on todays experience.
109

*If yes, please answer the following questions.

Were you taught using a specific sight singing method? Yes/No

If yes, what sight singing method did you use?

__________Moveable do solfege
__________Fixed do solfege
__________Numbers
__________Letter Names
__________Interval Recognition
__________Neutral Syllables
___________Other (please specify______________________)
Where did you learn this sight singing method?
___________High school choral rehearsals
___________Middle school choral rehearsals
___________Elementary choral rehearsals or music class
___________Private voice lessons
___________Other (please specify______________________)
Were you taught specific strategies to prepare for sight singing? Yes/No
If yes, briefly describe the strategies you were taught:
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
Todays Experience
Briefly describe the process undertaken during your sight singing experience today.
Include all methods used and behaviors attempted before and during your final
performance of the melody.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

110

Appendix D
Sight-Singing Test

111

Appendix E
Audio Evaluation Form
Directions:
5. Listen to the example one time through without marking
6. Listen to the example a second time and circle the numbers of intervals sung
incorrectly
a. Incorrectly is defined as singing the wrong pitch, notes sung poorly or
with bad intonation that are sung as the correct pitch should still be
counted as correct
b. If an interval is sung correctly at the wrong pitch level should be counted
as correct
7. Listen to the tape a third time and put an X over any measure sung with incorrect
rhythms.
8. In the corresponding sections pitch and rhythm put an X in the blanks of
incorrectly sung pitches and rhythms.

112

Singer Number _________________

Pitch:
1. Ascending P5_______
2. Descending m3________
3. Ascending m2 _________
4. Ascending M2 ________
5. Ascending M2 ________
6. Descending M2 _________
7. Descending M2 ________ 8. Ascending M2 ________
9. Descending m3 _________
10. Ascending M3_______
11. Descending P4________
12. Ascending P4_________
13. Descending M2________
14. Descending m2 ________
15. Ascending m3 _________ 16. Ascending M2________
17. Descending M3________
18. Descending m2________
19. Descending M2________
20. Ascending m3 ________
21. Descending m2 ________
22. Descending M2 ________
23. Descending M2 ________ 24. Ascending P4 ________
25. Descending m3 ________
26. Descending m3 ________
27. Ascending m2 ________
Rhythm:
Measure 1__________ Measure 2_________ Measure 3__________
Measure 4__________ Measure 5__________Measure 6_________
Measure 7__________ Measure 8__________

113

Appendix F

Tables

114

Frequency

Percent

Years 0

2.6

10.3

7.7

7.7

28

71.8

Total

39

100.0

F.1. Years of High School Participation-Sample

115

Frequency
Type

Percent

2.6

11

28.2

1,2

12.8

1,2,3,4

2.6

1,2,3,4,5

2.6

1,2,4

7.7

1,2,5

2.6

1,3

12.8

1,3,5

2.6

1,4

2.6

1,4,5

7.7

1,5

5.1

7.7

2.6

Total

39

100.0

0=No Choir, 1=Mixed Gender Choir, 2= Gender Specific Choir, 3=Show Choir,
4=Honor Choir, 5=Community Choir
F.2. Type of High School Choral Ensemble-Sample

116

Frequency
Years

Percent

23.1

15.4

7.7

21

53.8

Total

39

100.0

F.3. Years of Middle School Participation-Sample

117

Frequency
Type

Percent

23.1

23

59.0

1,3

5.1

1,4

2.6

7.7

2.6

Total

39

100.0

0=No Choir, 1=Mixed Gender Choir, 2=Gender Specific Choir, 3=General Music,
4=Community Chorus

F.4. Type of Middle School Choral Participation-Sample

118

Frequency
Years

Percent

24

61.5

12.8

12.8

5.1

5.1

2.6

Total

39

100.0

F.5. Years of Private Voice Lessons-Sample

119

Frequency
Years

Percent

21

53.8

2.6

2.6

2.6

2.6

17.9

5.1

7.7

2.6

12

2.6

Total

39

100.0

F.6 Years of Instrumental Ensemble Participation-Sample

120

Frequency
Type

Percent

21

53.8

11

28.2

1,2

5.1

12.8

Total

39

100.0

0=No Instrumental Ensemble, 1=Orchestra, 2=Band

F.7. Type of Instrumental Ensemble-Sample

121

Frequency
Years

Percent

21

53.8

2.6

7.7

2.6

5.1

2.6

5.1

2.6

10

2.6

11

2.6

F.8. Years of Private Instrumental Lessons-Sample

122

Frequency
Type

Percent

None

17

43.6

Guitar

7.7

Guitar &Piano

2.6

Oboe & Piano

2.6

Piano

13

33.3

Trumpet & Piano

2.6

Violin

7.7

Total

39

100.0

F.9. Type of Instrumental Private Lessons-Sample

123

Frequency
When/
Where

Percent

20.5

22

56.4

1,2

10.3

1,2,4

2.6

1,4

5.1

1,4,5

2.6

2.6

Total

39

100.0

0=None, 1=High School Chorus, 2=Middle School Chorus, 3=Elementary School Music
4=Private Voice Lessons, 5=Other
F.10. Educational Background of Sight-Singing Instruction-Sample

124

Frequency
System

Percent

20.5

23.1

1,2,3,5,6

2.6

1,2,5

2.6

1,3

2.6

1,3,6

2.6

1,4

5.1

1,4,5,6

2.6

1,5

12.8

1,6

5.1

1.5

2.6

2.6

5.1

7.7

2.6

Total

39

100.0

0=None, 1=Movable-do solfege, 2=Fixed-do solfege, 3=Numbers, 4=Letter Names,

5=Intervals, 6=Neutral Syllables, 7=Other

F.11. Sight-Singing System Utilized-Sample

125

Behavior

Minimum Maximum

Mean

Std. Deviation

StartingPitch

39

52

10.21

10.988

ErrorDetection

39

29

9.54

7.316

StartAgain

39

31

10.79

8.383

Tonicize

39

121

25.13

30.528

Singing

39

595

320.23

152.260

SilentStudy

39

299

30.51

56.280

Chant

39

61

7.26

16.348

Writing

39

158

26.38

42.965

External

39

197

25.62

45.169

Score

39

8.5

35.0

24.833

8.770

F.12. Descriptive Statistics of Observed Behaviors-Sample

126

Frequency
Years

Percent

10.0

90.0

Total

10

100.0

Table 13. Years of High School Participation-High Scorers

127

Frequency
Type

Percent

10.0

1,2

30.0

1,2,4

10.0

1,2,5

10.0

1,3

10.0

1,3,5

10.0

1,4,5

10.0

1,5

10.0

Total

10

100.0

0=No Choir, 1=Mixed Gender Choir, 2= Gender Specific Choir, 3=Show Choir,
4=Honor Choir, 5=Community Choir

F.14. Type of High School Choral Ensemble-High Scorers

128

Frequency
Years

Percent

10.0

20.0

70.0

Total

10

100.0

Table 15. Years of Middle School Participation-High Scorers

129

Frequency
Type

Percent

10.0

60.0

1,3

10.0

10.0

10.0

Total

10

100.0

0=No Choir, 1=Mixed Gender Choir, 2=Gender Specific Choir, 3=General Music,
4=Community Chorus
F.16. Type of Middle School Choral Participation-High Scorers

130

Frequency
Years

Percent

60.0

10.0

20.0

10.0

Total

10

100.0

F.17. Years of Private Voice Lessons-High Scorers

131

Frequency
Years

Percent

50.0

30.0

10.0

10.0

Total

10

100.0

F.18. Years of Instrumental Ensemble Participation-High Scorers

132

Frequency
Type

Percent

50.0

30.0

1,2

10.0

10.0

Total

10

100.0

0=No Instrumental Ensemble, 1=Orchestra, 2=Band

F.19. Type of Instrumental Ensemble-High Scorers

133

Frequency
Years

Percent

30.0

20.0

10.0

20.0

10

10.0

15

10.0

Total

10

100.0

F.20. Years of Private Instrumental Lessons-High Scorers

134

Frequency
Type

Percent

20.0

Guitar

10.0

Oboe & Piano

10.0

Piano

60.0

Total

10

100.0

F.21. Type of Instrumental Private Lessons

135

Frequency
When/
Where

Percent

10.0

60.0

1,2

10.0

1,2,4

10.0

1,4

10.0

Total

10

100.0

0=None, 1=High School Chorus, 2=Middle School Chorus, 3=Elementary School Music
4=Private Voice Lessons, 5=Other

F,22. Educational Background of Sight Singing Instruction-High Scorers

136

Frequency
System

Percent

10.0

30.0

1,4

10.0

1,5

30.0

10.0

10.0

Total

10

100.0

0=None, 1=Movable-do solfege, 2=Fixed-do solfege, 3=Numbers, 4=Letter Names,

5=Intervals, 6=Neutral Syllables, 7=Other

F.23. Sight Singing System Utilized-High Scorers

137

Behavior

Minimum Maximum

Mean

Std. Deviation

Starting Pitch

10

12

4.80

3.615

Error Detection

10

12

5.50

4.116

Start Again

10

14

4.60

3.748

Time

10

00:49

08:13

04:05

02:07

Tonicize

10

48

8.20

14.536

Singing

10

24

365

184.80

108.510

Silent Study

10

105

19.10

33.301

Chant

10

51

12.60

19.506

Writing

10

105

29.10

35.482

External

10

197

40.20

57.735

Score

10

34

35

34.90

.316

Valid N (listwise)

10

F.24. Descriptive Statistics of Observed Behaviors-High Scorers

138

Frequency
Years

Percent

10.0

30.0

10.0

50.0

Total

10

100.0

F.25. Years of High School Participation-Low Scorers

139

Frequency
Type

Percent

10.0

40.0

1,2

10.0

1,3

10.0

1,4,5

10.0

10.0

10.0

Total

10

100.0

0=No Choir, 1=Mixed Gender Choir, 2= Gender Specific Choir, 3=Show Choir,
4=Honor Choir, 5=Community Choir
F.26. Type of High School Choral Ensemble-Low Scorers

140

Frequency
Years

Percent

40.0

30.0

30.0

Total

10

100.0

F.27. Years of Middle School Participation-Low Scorers

141

Frequency
Type

Percent

40.0

50.0

10.0

Total

10

100.0

0=No Choir, 1=Mixed Gender Choir, 2=Gender Specific Choir, 3=General Music,
4=Community Chorus

F.28. Type of Middle School Choral Participation-Low Scorers

142

Frequency
Years

Percent

90.0

10.0

Total

10

100.0

F 29. Years of Private Voice Lessons-Low Scorers

143

Frequency
Years

Percent

70.0

10.0

10.0

12

10.0

Total

10

100.0

F.30. Years of Instrumental Ensemble Participation-Low Scorers

144

Frequency
Valid

Percent

70.0

10.0

20.0

Total

10

100.0

0=No Instrumental Ensemble, 1=Orchestra, 2=Band

F.31. Type of Instrumental Ensemble-Low Scorers

145

Frequency
Years

Percent

50.0

10.0

10.0

10.0

12

20.0

Total

10

100.0

F.32. Years of Private Instrumental Lessons-Low Scorers

146

Frequency
Type

Percent

40.0

Guitar

20.0

Piano

20.0

Violin

20.0

Total

10

100.0

F.33. Type of Instrumental Private Lessons-Low Scorers

147

Frequency
When/
Where

Percent

50.0

40.0

1,4

10.0

Total

10

100.0

0=None, 1=High School Chorus, 2=Middle School Chorus, 3=Elementary School Music
4=Private Voice Lessons, 5=Other

F.34. Educational Background of Sight Singing Instruction-Low Scorers

148

Frequency
System

Percent

50.0

10.0

1,2,5

10.0

1,4

10.0

1,6

10.0

10.0

Total

10

100.0

0=None, 1=Movable-do solfege, 2=Fixed-do solfege, 3=Numbers, 4=Letter Names,

5=Intervals, 6=Neutral Syllables, 7=Other
F.35. Sight Singing System Utilized-Low Scorers

149

Descriptive Statistics
N

Minimum Maximum

Mean

Std. Deviation

StartingPitch

10

52

13.40

16.345

ErrorDetection

10

11

5.70

3.917

StartAgain

10

31

16.00

11.421

Tonicize

10

78

28.10

33.305

Singing

10

80

595

358.10

150.704

SilentStudy

10

160

34.40

51.368

Chant

10

.90

2.846

Writing

10

158

15.80

49.964

External

10

44

7.00

14.181

Score

10

8.5

16.5

13.10

2.3547

F.36. Descriptive Statistics of Observed Behaviors-Low Scorers

150

High School Pearson

Years
Correlation
Sig.(2-tailed)
N
Middle
Pearson
School
Correlation
Years
Sig.(2-tailed)
N
Private
Pearson
Voice
Correlation
Years
Sig.(2-tailed)
N
Instrumental Pearson
Ensemble
Correlation
Years
Sig.(2-tailed)
N
Private
Pearson
Instrumental Correlation
Years
Sig.(2-tailed)
N

HSYears

MSYears

1.000

.337*

.192

-.213

-.325*

39.000

.036
39

.241
39

.192
39

.043
39

.337*

1.000

-.173

-.414**

.018

.036
39

39.000

.291
39

.009
39

.911
39

.192

-.173

1.000

-.053

-.074

.241
39

.291
39

39.000

.747
39

.655
39

-.213

-.414**

-.053

1.000

.068

.192
39

.009
39

.747
39

39.000

.679
39

-.325*

.018

-.074

.068

1.000

.043
39

.911
39

.655
39

.679
39

39.000

F.37. Reported Characteristics Correlation Coefficients

151

Pri.Voice

IEYears

Pri.Inst.

Key:A-Time, B-Starting Pitch, C-Error Detection, D-Start Again, E-Tonicize, F-Silent

Study, G-Chanting, H-Writing, I-External Beat Keeping, J-Singing
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
Corr. 1.000 .548** .605** .578** .502**
.254
-.128
.111
-.056
.894**
Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.001
.119
.438
.501
.735
.000
N
39.000
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
**
*
**
B Corr. .548
1.000
.404
.487
.250
-.083
-.130
-.135
-.004
.644**
Sig.
.000
.011
.002
.125
.615
.430
.414
.981
.000
N
39 39.000
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
*
C Corr. .605** .404* 1.000
.251
.379
-.249
.033
-.097
.207
.726**
Sig.
.000
.011
.123
.017
.126
.843
.558
.207
.000
N
39
39 39.000
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
D Corr. .578** .487**
.251
1.000
.216
-.012
-.211
-.237
-.229
.687**
Sig.
.000
.002
.123
.187
.944
.197
.147
.161
.000
N
39
39
39 39.000
39
39
39
39
39
39
**
*
E Corr. .502
.250
.379
.216
1.000
-.122
-.047
.186
-.062
.507**
Sig.
.001
.125
.017
.187
.459
.775
.257
.707
.001
N
39
39
39
39 39.000
39
39
39
39
39
F Corr.
.254
-.083
-.249
-.012
-.122
1.000
-.184
-.085
-.207
-.094
Sig.
.119
.615
.126
.944
.459
.261
.605
.206
.568
N
39
39
39
39
39 39.000
39
39
39
39
**
G Corr.
-.128
-.130
.033
-.211
-.047
-.184
1.000
-.018
.784
-.161
Sig.
.438
.430
.843
.197
.775
.261
.912
.000
.327
N
39
39
39
39
39
39 39.000
39
39
39
H Corr.
.111
-.135
-.097
-.237
.186
-.085
-.018
1.000
-.060
-.130
Sig.
.501
.414
.558
.147
.257
.605
.912
.718
.429
N
39
39
39
39
39
39
39 39.000
39
39
**
I
Corr.
-.056
-.004
.207
-.229
-.062
-.207
.784
-.060
1.000
-.054
Sig.
.735
.981
.207
.161
.707
.206
.000
.718
.745
N
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39 39.000
39
**
**
**
**
**
K Corr. .894
.644
.726
.687
.507
-.094
-.161
-.130
-.054
1.000
Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.000
.001
.568
.327
.429
.745
N
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39 39.000
F.38. Observed Variable Correlation Coefficients
A

152

F.39. Histogram Report Test for Heteroskedasticity

153

F.40. P-Plot Test for Heteroskedasticity

154

F.41 Mean Score and Years of High School Participation

155