Causal Attributions and Teacher Effectiveness in Music Education in St. Lucia

Running head: Causal Attributions and Teacher Effectiveness in Music 1
CAUSAL ATTRIBUTIONS AND TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS IN MUSIC EDUCATION
IN SAINT LUCIA
A Research Project
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Education
Of
The University of the West Indies
Jason C. Joseph
2010
School of Education
Faculty of Humanities and Education
Cave Hill Campus

Causal Attributions and Teacher Effectiveness in Music 2
Abstract
This study uses attribution theory as a framework to investigate the causes which music teachers
and principals in St. Lucia attribute to teacher effectiveness in music education. The sample
consists of 28 music teachers and 32 principals from various primary and secondary schools.
Data was collected using a researcher-constructed survey which measured attributions
teacher-effectiveness, and teacher self-efficacy. Findings revealed that the two most frequently
endorsed attributions for both groups were resources and support. The least endorsed attribution
for teachers was effort, while principals rated time as the least important factor. There were no
significant differences in the attributions of principals and music teachers or experienced and
novice teachers. Perceptions of teacher effectiveness differed significantly in some areas, with
principals’ ratings being lower than that of teachers’. Both groups reported external, stable, and
uncontrollable attributions for teacher effectiveness, although principals had a greater tendency
to make internal attributions for failure outcomes. Implications and recommendations for
curriculum specialists are also discussed.

Table of Contents
Abstract ……………………………………………………………………………………… 2
List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………………... 5
Chapter One: Identification of the Problem …………………………………………………. 6
The Nature of the Problem …………………………………………………………... 8
Attribution Theory …………………………………………………………………… 10
Purpose of the Study ………………………………………………………………… 18
Definition of Terms …………………………………………………………………. 19
Chapter Two: Literature Review ……………………………………………………………. 20
Factors Affecting Teacher Effectiveness in Music Education ……………………… 20
Causal Attributions for Success and Failure ………………………………………... 21
Attributional Bias …………………………………………………………………… 23
Causal Attributions for Success and Failure in Music Education ………………….. 23
Causal Attributions and Self Efficacy ……………………………………………… 24
Attributions of Principals …………………………………………………………… 25
Chapter Three: Methodology ……………………………………………………………….. 28
Subjects ……………………………………………………………………………… 28
Measurement Instrument ……………………………………………………………. 28
Pilot Testing of Questionnaire ………………………………………………………. 30
Research Design …………………………………………………………………….. 31
Procedure ……………………………………………………………………………. 33
Limitations …………………………………………………………………………... 34
Ethical Issues ……………………………………………………………………….. 35

Chapter Four: Analysis and Discussion of Findings ………………………………………. 36
Treatment of Data …………………………………………………………………. 38
Open-ended Items …………………………………………………………………. 50
Discussion …………………………………………………………………………. 54
Chapter Five: Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations ………………………... 61
Summary ………………………………………………………………………….. 61
Implications for Music Curriculum Specialists ………………………………….... 63
Recommendations for Improving Teacher Effectiveness ……………………….... 66
Recommendations for Future Study ………………………………………………. 67
References …………………………………………………………………………. 70
List of Tables
Table 1 Participants by School Level and Gender ……………………………………… 37
Table 2 Comparison of Music Teachers’ and Principals’ Causal Attributions by
School Level …………………………………………………………………… 40
Table 3 Comparison of Music Teachers’ Causal Attributions by Music Teaching
Experience …………………………………………………………………….. 43
Table 4 Comparison of Teacher Effectiveness Perceptions of Music Teachers and
Principals ……………………………………………………………………… 46
Table 5 Comparison of Teacher-Efficacy Perceptions of Music Teachers and
Principals ……………………………………………………………………… 49
Causal Attributions and Teacher Effectiveness in Music Education in Saint Lucia
Chapter One: Identification of the problem
The job of a music teacher can be overwhelming, and a challenge even for those music
teachers who are qualified, have undergone preparatory training and who have high levels of
competence in practical skills (Kelly, 2008). Music teachers are expected to fulfill the normal
duties associated with the teaching profession as well as engage in many other activities related
to the field, such as working with choirs and instrumental ensemble groups, planning concerts
and other activities, and even fundraising and seeking sponsorship. They are also expected to
possess other skills like sight singing, dictation, composing, and arranging, which are necessary
for the teaching of general music. In addition, music teachers often spend much of their time
working after school hours and involved in community events. All of those roles, skills, and
activities form part of what is considered to be a good music programme which an effective
music teacher is supposed to manage.
Research has shown that an effective music education programme in schools is of great
value and has multiple benefits. A well-taught music programme taps into a variety of learning
domains and employs several skills and abilities (Caterall, Chapleau, & Iwanaga, 1999). It can
improve overall academic achievement, student attitude and attendance, as well as create a better
school climate for students, staff, and parents (Eric, 2009). Some music teachers, through their
music programmes, are able to boost their school’s image in the publics’ eye as a result of
outstanding performances of students in competitions, festivals and other activities which
showcase students’ musical talents. Such teachers are like valuable assets to the development of
school culture and morale. However, not all music teachers are able to achieve such results.
There is a fair amount of research into the various factors which impact on teacher
effectiveness in the field of music. Although most of the research is not based on attribution
theory, the findings are still relevant in highlighting some of the generic issues involved in music
teaching. In a case study which investigated issues concerning teacher retention and attrition,
Madsen and Hancock (2002) highlighted the lack of support from administration and the school
as one of the contributing factors. Music teachers who had unsupportive principals, who were not
convinced of the value of music education, or music teachers who received resistance and little
support from other staff members felt isolated and were more likely to experience “burn-out”.
Jorgensen (2008) views teacher competence in the subject as one of the most important traits of
an effective music teacher, and equates with fraud, a teacher who attempts to teach a subject that
he or she does not know well enough. In a comparative study of the opinions of pre-service and
experienced teachers, (Teachout, 1997) found that the overall teaching skills of music teachers
played a more influential role in their success as teachers than did their musical skills. Standley
& Madsen (1991) believed that the key factor was the level of experience which teachers had.
They were of the view that as teachers’ experience increased, so did their expertise in teaching
music. Other personality factors such as enthusiasm, energy, and extraversion were cited as
important attributes by Hamann, Bakery, Mc. Allister, and Bauer (2000), while Byo (1999)
asserted that the lack of time and resources to effectively teach the subject was one of the most
important setbacks.
Music Education in St. Lucia is in no way exempt from its share of challenges. Although
many of the factors highlighted in previous research are applicable to the St. Lucia context, there
is little research which deals with causal attributions from the perspectives of both the teachers
and their principals. This study will therefore investigate and compare the explanations of both
those key players in music education as to why music teachers succeed or fail at performing their
numerous roles.
The Nature of the Problem
Prior to commencing post-graduate studies, the researcher served as Curriculum
Specialist for music with the Ministry of Education for a year and a half. From school visits and
interactions with principals and music teachers, the researcher was able to get a first-hand
account of some of the challenges associated with the advancement of music education in St.
Lucia. Given the relatively recent advent of formal music in schools, music educators and
curriculum specialists continue to struggle to give more prevalence and prominence to music as a
subject. At many schools where music is being offered, the music teachers have very little
training in pedagogy and limited practical skills, and so the quality of music teaching and
learning is of great concern. In addition, most schools are equipped with very limited resources
which generally include a keyboard, recorders in some cases, and a set of percussion
instruments. At a few other schools which are fortunate to have other instruments like a
steelband, there is no music teacher with sufficient practical skills to make full use of the
resources. Some schools are unable to allocate a suitable space or classroom as a music room,
while the perennial problem of the absence of policy and the lack of importance given to music
and other subjects in the arts continue to impede efforts at promoting the subject.
Beginning in 1994, the Ministry of Education in collaboration with the St. Lucia School
of Music (SLSM) attempted to satisfy the need for more trained music teachers by organizing a
series of one-year courses for teachers in both music content and methodology. At the end of the
programme, several groups of teachers had been trained and were awarded either certificates or
advanced certificates in music teaching. Some of those teachers went on to teach music, while
others, in the absence of policy and at the imposition of their principals, were deployed to teach
other core subjects and never got the chance to teach music. Although many principals claim to
value music their attitudes toward music education are not always as positive. Music and other
arts subjects are usually the first to suffer in order to make way for other “more important”
subjects (Gerrity, 2007).
Despite efforts by the Curriculum and Materials Development Unit (CAMDU) to provide
annual, ongoing training workshops for music teachers, the researcher saw little evidence of
growth and a general unwillingness or inability among teachers to implement what was taught.
According to CAMDU records, few teachers have taken the initiative to further their musical
skills and qualifications and out of about 40 specialist teachers, only three have so far gone on to
pursue degrees in music.
The teaching of music at both the primary and secondary levels necessitates that music
teachers engage in a variety of activities including general classroom teaching, instrumental and
choir ensemble, and organizing and preparing students for participation in different activities
geared towards developing the musical talents of both teacher and student. According to
Hennesy (1995), music teachers should be able to “make and listen to music with enough
confidence and understanding to develop these qualities in their pupils” (p. 3). Very rarely is the
effectiveness of music teachers in St. Lucia judged on the pass rates of students in exams, as
applies in other subject areas. Instead, the effectiveness of a music teacher and music programme
is determined by the extent to which students are involved in making and performing music and
the level of musicianship they are able to demonstrate. When such activities are not visible at
certain schools, the music teachers are generally perceived by their principals and the curriculum
specialists to be either lacking in ability, interest, or motivation. As a result of those expectations,

it appears that music teachers who lack the necessary practical skills tend to demonstrate a lack
of confidence and eventually shy away from activities and national competitions which they
believe may highlight their weaknesses.
In addition to those concerns, during meetings with school principals in an attempt to
improve the music programme the researcher noted that the picture which principals had of the
programme sometimes contradicted with the perceptions of the music teacher. Also, music
teachers continually highlighted the need for training, yet there was little evidence that the
teachers were actually benefitting from, or applying what was taught at workshops. According to
the curriculum specialist at the time, a Primary Music Teachers’ Guide was also developed to
assist novice music teachers with their methodology. This guide, she says, is currently being
underutilized. It is against this background that the researcher saw the need to employ attribution
theory as a means of examining the previously mentioned assumptions and concerns, and to
explore further the perceived causes and explanations for those hindrances from the perspectives
of those involved in the day-to-day process of music education.
Attribution Theory
Attribution theory has received considerable attention in the area of music education. The
theory has been proposed as a way of understanding the explanations or causal attributions which
people make for the events which occur in their lives and in the lives of others (McInerney &
Van Etten, 2004). According to (Asmus, 1994), the model of attributional development begins
with an action, which leads to an outcome, which leads to an attribution. The type of attribution
made depends on one’s perception of the outcome. The nature of the attribution also produces
affect which influences the next attribution sequence. Weiner (1985), describes attribution as a
three stage process. In the first stage the behaviour is observed, whilst in the second stage, the
individual must determine that the behaviour was deliberate. In the third stage, the behaviour is
then attributed to either internal or external causes.
One of the main underlying principles of Bernard Weiner’s (1985) model of attribution
theory is that the attributions we make for success and failure on a task influence both our affect
and the manner in which we approach the task in the future. Individuals who believe that their
success is due to internal factors, such as high ability and effort, are more likely to feel good
about themselves and to expect future success. Those who attribute their success to external
factors, like luck, may see no reason to expect future success since they are unable to take credit
for it. Similarly, a student who attributes failure to a lack of ability is less likely to be motivated
to try harder than the student who believes that lack of effort was responsible for his failure.
Attribution theory is strongly related to the concept of motivation. Motivation can be
defined as an internal state or condition that causes people to behave in a particular manner (Yun
Dai & Sternberg, 2004). High achievers, therefore, are more likely to approach rather than avoid
success-oriented tasks because they believe that their success is as a result of their ability or
effort, and therefore develop confidence. Low achievers, on the other hand, tend to avoid
success-oriented activities because they view external factors, which are beyond their control, as
being responsible for their failure. As a result, they lack confidence in themselves and their
ability to succeed. The manner in which successes and failures are explained, therefore, can
affect our level of motivation and ultimately our future achievement-oriented behaviour.
Dimensions of causality
Julian Rotter (as cited in Ellis, Abrams, & Abrams, 2009) first used the term locus of
control to describe the tendency of individuals to attribute causes to either internal or external
factors. Weiner (1985) built on Rotter’s concept of locus of control and suggested four common
causal explanations for success and failure used by individuals. Those explanations are ability,
effort, task difficulty, and luck. Ability and luck refer to personal and internal factors, whereas,
task difficulty and luck refer to environmental factors. The concept of luck also encompassed
other factors such as teacher effects, mood or fatigue. Weiner classified those four factors into a
two-dimensional model: locus and stability. He later added a third dimension called
controllability (Ormrod, 2008). Most research using attribution theory, however, tends to employ
the two-dimensional approach to categorizing causal ascriptions, namely: locus of control, or
internal-external, and stability (Dick, 2006).
The locus dimension refers to the internal and external factors to which an individual
attributes causes or the extent to which people believe that success or failure originate within
them or in their environment. This dimension is central in influencing people’s affective
responses and determining one’s motivation for success. People with an internal locus of control
are usually more successful than those with an external locus of control. They feel proud when
they succeed and shame when they experience failure (Eysenck, 2004). They are more likely to
expect that their effort will yield good performance and that their performance will bring
rewards.
People also ascribe behaviours and events to factors which are liable to change from one
situation to the next (unstable), or to factors which are likely to remain the same over time
(stable). According to Smart and Tierney (2003), stability is the most important dimension
believed to affect expectancy of future achievement or predicting one’s future behaviour. People
who believe that they have succeeded at a task as a result of their ability or the simplicity of the
task are likely to expect the same results in the future due to the stable nature of those factors.
Individuals who perform poorly at a task, but believe that their poor performance was due to an
unstable cause, such as bad luck, will most probably persist at the task and have expectations of
future success.
The controllability dimension refers to the attributions which we make to things that we
believe are controllable or things which we have no influence or control over. A teacher who
believes that his students are not participating in his class activities because they don’t like music
is making an attribution based on an uncontrollable factor if he believes that he is not in a
position to make them like the subject. Conversely, if he believes that their lack of participation
is as a result of insufficient directions on his part, or poorly stated instructions, he is more likely
to attempt to remedy the situation. Depending on the type or combinations of attributions we
make (internal, external, stable, and unstable), both positive and negative emotions can be
evoked. Positive responses like pride and confidence are likely to occur when an event is
attributed to internal, controllable, and stable factors. Negative emotions, such as, guilt and
anger, will occur when attributions are based on internal, controllable, and unstable factors.
Weiner (1985) also believes that causal attributions are greatly influenced by the self-serving
bias, that is, people naturally want to feel good about themselves and will therefore interpret their
environment in a way which allows them to maintain a positive self-image. Individuals, he
asserts, have the tendency to take credit for their successes but to deny responsibility for failure.
This means that when people succeed they tend to attribute their success to their own
efforts and abilities. Conversely, when they fail they are more likely to attribute their failure to
uncontrollable factors such as the difficulty of the test or the inability of the teacher to teach
properly, in order to evade feelings of inferiority or shame. Locus can also be determined by
whether or not one is the actor in a situation, or the observer. Actors tend to attribute their
actions to external causes while observers attribute the behaviours of others to internal causes,
such as motives or personality traits (Coon, Mitterer, Talbot, & Vanchella, 2010). This is
referred to as the actor-observer bias.
Another important principle of attribution theory is that people’s attributions are merely
their perceptions and may or may not be the actual causes of events or outcomes (Ahles, 2004).
The fact that an individual believes the attribution, however, is more important than the accuracy
of the attribution in evoking a particular emotion or behaviour. Sometimes, people’s attributions
may be inaccurate because of their tendency to take credit for their success and to avoid
responsibility for failure – a situation known as self-serving bias (Eysenck, 2004). In other
instances, individuals who attempt to explain the behaviours of others tend to attribute those
behaviours to internal causes, or in other words, to blame the person for their actions or failure.
Ellis, Abrams, and Abrams, (2009) describe this as the actor-observer bias.
Self-Efficacy
Beliefs of self efficacy were also found to play an important role in influencing the
attributional styles and achievement of both teachers and students. The construct of self-efficacy
refers to people’s beliefs about their capabilities to succeed in a particular situation (Bandura,
1993). Self efficacy beliefs have been found to have an impact on motivation and teacher
effectiveness, and are useful in predicting performance in various tasks and behaviours (Bray-
Clark & Bates, 2003). People tend to gauge their self-efficacy through the combined
contributions of various factors, including personal, behavioural, and environmental factors. The
perceptions which individuals have of their ability, the amount of effort expended, the difficulty
of the specific task, and the number and nature of successes and failures experienced all affect
people’s perceptions of their self-efficacy (Alexander & Winne, 2006). If people only experience
successes which are easy to achieve, for example, they learn to constantly expect quick results
and are likely to be discouraged by failure. Conversely, people who have experienced success by
overcoming hurdles and obstacles, and through sustained effort learn to believe more in their
abilities to master challenging activities necessary to succeed.
Judgments about self-efficacy are also said to be formed in a cyclical manner, or
similarly, by a self-fulfilling prophesy. Successful outcomes tend to create positive beliefs which
are used in shaping future efficacy beliefs. The more efficacy one has, the more effort and
persistence one shows, which leads to improved performance and consequently greater self-
efficacy (Pajares, 2006). The reverse is also true for low self-efficacy beliefs. An individual with
a perception of low self-efficacy is likely to expend little effort on a task resulting in an
unsuccessful outcome. This failure outcome is viewed as further evidence of incompetence, thus
reinforcing, or further diminishing the individual’s self-efficacy beliefs.
Teacher self-efficacy has been identified as a specific form of self efficacy and is defined
as the beliefs which teachers have about their own ability to bring about desired outcomes in the
classroom, even among difficult or unmotivated students (McInerney & Van Etten, 2004).
Consistent with other research on self-efficacy, teacher self-efficacy is also considered to be
context-specific, in that teachers are expected to feel a greater or lesser sense of self-efficacy
depending on the situation that they’re in. A music teacher who feels very confident teaching
musical concepts to students, for example, may feel a much lower sense of efficacy when
engaged in singing activities or working with a choir. As a result of the contextual nature of self-
efficacy beliefs, people tend to choose activities and environments which they believe they can
handle and which would allow them to experience the most success. According to Bandura
(1993), the higher one’s perceived level of self-efficacy, the greater interest one shows in career
enhancement, personal development, and educational advancement.

Closely related to self-efficacy theory is the self-worth theory of achievement motivation.
According to Martin Covington, as cited in McInerney and Van Etten (2004), individuals are
sometimes motivated to engage in self-protective behaviour in order to maintain a sense of
personal worth and approval by others. Such behaviour could include failing to try,
procrastinating, and avoiding failure situations. People also tend to manipulate their attributional
beliefs about the sources and causes of their success and failure in order to maintain their self-
worth. They are inclined to attribute ability factors to their success which strengthens their
feelings of self-worth and motivates them to continue trying. They also prefer to believe that
failure is due to a lack of effort or some other factor rather than low ability.
Teacher effectiveness
Teacher effectiveness has been identified as being one of the most important factors
affecting student achievement. Rao and Kumar (2004) explain the term as being the ability of
teachers to accomplish their goals through the effective combination of teacher competence,
which is the ability to use knowledge and skill, and teacher performance, which is the use of
knowledge and skill in a particular situation. There are three assumptions which underlie this
definition. The first is that effective teachers must be aware of what those goals are and must
possess the competence to achieve them. Those goals are either set by themselves or by others,
such as the principal or curriculum specialist. Secondly, Those goals are usually directly or
indirectly concerned with student learning, and thirdly, teachers are not effective all the time.
The degree of teacher effectiveness depends on a range of factors, such as the teachers’ own
attitudes, values and experience. It also depends on the ability and experience of students, the
school curriculum, and the quality of goals which are set.

Marzano (2003), describes three aspects of teacher effectiveness, which he refers to as
teacher-level factors: instructional strategies, classroom management, and classroom curriculum
design. Effective teachers are believed to have at their disposal a wide variety of effective
instructional strategies, such as time management, teacher expectations, and effort reinforcement,
which they use at their appropriate times. Classroom management is one of the greatest concerns
of teachers since discipline problems contribute to the biggest share of problems which schools
face, especially at public schools (Tauber, 2007). Discipline can either make or break a teacher
and is an important deciding factor in how effective a teacher is. Sometimes, the break down in
discipline can also result from the poor design of the curriculum. Innapropriate curriculum which
does not cater for the interests or ability of students can contribute to student misbehaviour. One
of the strategies suggested for improving teacher effectiveness, apart from teacher training and
professional development activities, is the importance of support from colleagues and the
collaboration of efforts from the entire staff.
This study sought to apply ideas pertaining to attribution theory as it relates to teacher
effectiveness and self-efficacy to guide the research. The researcher therefore assumes that the
kinds of attributions which music teachers make can have an effect on their ability to execute
their roles effectively and that self efficacy plays an important role in determining both their
attributional styles and their achievement-related behaviour. An understanding of teachers’
perceptions of self-efficacy and their attributional styles, for example, could explain their
unwillingness to participate in national music competitions, to attend training workshops, or to
implement new curriculum. An insight into why it appears that music teachers are not keen to
further their musical studies can also be gained. The researcher also hypothesized that the
attributions of principals may not necessarily be congruous with that of the teachers and may
have an impact on the level of support which they give to the teachers, as well as on the
motivation of teachers to achieve.
An understanding of the causal attributions and attributional styles of teachers is also
necessary for curriculum specialists in planning intervention strategies to deal with the concerns
of those involved in music education. By identifying the needs and concerns of music teachers,
more appropriate curriculum can be designed and developed, and better training workshops to
meet the needs of teachers can be strategically organized. It is also necessary to examine how
principals perceive their music programmes and the performance of music teachers, since
principals play an influential role in music education at schools.
Purpose of the Study
Very little research has been done on the causal attributions of music teachers and principals
for teacher effectiveness in music education. Most of the research is limited to attributions for
student achievement in music, or the perceptions of pre-service music teachers about effective
teacher attributes. Other related studies don not cater for music teachers’ and principals’
perceptions about the overall music programme. This study is intended to add to the body of
knowledge on attribution theory in music education by extending the research to perceptions of
teacher effectiveness in the varied roles which music teachers are expected to fulfill at both the
primary and secondary level. This study also examines the causal attributions from the
perspectives of both music teacher and principal in an effort to obtain a more balanced view of
the factors which are perceived to affect music education. To date, no such study has been done.
The main purpose of this research project, therefore, was to investigate the causal attributions of
music teachers and principals in St. Lucia for teacher effectiveness in music education. The
following assumptions were made:

 Teacher effectiveness is influenced by the attributions which music teachers make.
 The lack of training and practical skills of music teachers are the main factors affecting
teacher effectiveness.
 The level of support which principals give to the music programme and to music teachers
is influenced by their causal attributions.
 Principals and music teachers have different evaluations of the issues affecting teacher
effectivenes and music education.
 The perceptions and attributions of music teachers are influenced by other variables, such
as, teaching experience, teacher-efficacy, and teacher effectiveness.
Definition of Terms
Causal Attributions The causes or explanations which people give for their behaviour
and the behaviour of others.
Causal Dimensions The three constructs which Weiner (1985) identifies as underlying
attribution theory – locus, stability, and controllability.
Teacher Effectiveness The ability of teachers to use their knowledge and skill to
accomplish goals set by themselves or others.
Teacher Self-Efficacy The beliefs which teachers have about their own ability to bring
about desired outcomes in the classroom.

Chapter Two: Literature Review
The literature reviewed in this chapter will focus on the theories which are pertinent to
the scope of this research. An overview of research dealing with some of the overall factors
which influence teacher effectiveness in music education will first be presented. The findings of
studies showing various perspectives in relation to causal attributions in success and failure
related situations will then be highlighted. Causal attributions in the music education context, as
well as research on the mediating role of self efficacy on the formation of attributions will then
be reviewed. Findings in relation to the causal ascriptions of school principals for the
achievement behaviour of teachers will also be reviewed.
Factors Affecting Teacher Effectiveness in Music Education
Although there is limited research on causal attributions for teacher effectiveness in
music teaching, several authors and researchers have examined the various obstacles and
concerns which music teachers face in their quest to achieve their goals. Jorgensen (2008)
suggests that in many instances, music teachers are forced to work under less than optimum
conditions, with a scarcity of resources, in order to maintain continuity in the music programmes.
This sacrifice that music teachers make, he adds, results in a disconnect between what they
would like to do and what they are actually able to do. He identified funding, insufficient
instructional time, and equipment as some of the factors affecting music teachers.
In a study of 1,121 preservice music educators from 16 institutions of higher learning,
Campbell and Thompson (2007) employed a 45-item Stages of Concern checklist based on the
Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM), in order to identify the concerns of music teachers.
Among the concerns identified were teachers inability to maintain class control, feelings of
incompetence in certain situations, like in front of parents, and a lack of support for the music
programme. The lack of time to plan and prepare, and being able to motivate students were also
some concerns raised. In another study, Gardner (2010) compared the findings of 1, 903 music
teachers with 45, 954 other regular teachers and indicated that music teachers were more likely
than other types of teachers to change jobs as a result of disatisfaction with their working
conditions. His findings also revealed that music teachers perception of administrative support
had the most salient influence on both teacher satisfaction and retention.
In another study, Miksza, Roeder, and Biggs (2010), surveyed 235 band directors in an
effort to find their opinions about the skills and characteristics which they believed contributed to
effective music teaching, as well as their perceptions of the struggles and rewards which band
directors experience. The subjects were required to rank a list of music and personal teaching
skills and characteristics in order of importance and to also respond to open-ended items.The
findings indicated that personal and teaching skills were ranked higher than music skills.
Teachers highlighted factors like their enthusiasm, energy, and ability to motivate students.
Issues related to classroom management were cited the most as challenge factors, whilst student
success was the most often cited reward factor.
Causal Attributions for Success and Failure
The relationship between individuals' causal ascriptions of success and failure and
achievement-related behaviour has been demonstrated in several studies. In such studies, it has
been shown that the type of ascriptions individuals make for the outcome of an achievement task
influences them to perform differently on these tasks. In an early correlational study by Weiner,
Heckhausen, Meyer, and Cook (1978) experimenters presented a set of tasks which included a
series of consecutive failures. The subjects were asked to ascribe attributions for the failures
according to the four causal factors. The findings revealed that given the same situation,
individuals who make different ascriptions will perform differently, and that there was a
relationship between their causal attributions and the intensity of their performance. Individuals
who attributed failure to unstable causes - bad luck or insufficient effort, appeared to perform
with greater intensity than individuals who attributed their failure to stable causes - lack of
ability or task difficulty.
In another study, however, Bar-Tal and Efraim (1979) argued that many of the studies in
which individuals attributed success to internal factors and failure to external factors, were
contrived in laboratory settings. In their study, Bar-Tal & Efraim (1979) used an actual situation
in a real classroom setting to investigate the manner in which causal ascriptions were made in
relation to success and failure. A sample of 236 children were given questionnaires and asked to
rate the grade which they received on a test as a success or a failure. The participants were then
asked to rate the degree to which each cause influenced the grade which they received. The list
of causes was obtained from a previous pilot study which was conducted. The results of the
study indicated that the pupils tended to attribute success mainly to external causes and failure
mainly to internal causes. Those findings contradicted previous research and implied that
feelings of pride are not enhanced in success situations, while feelings of shame in failure
situations are increased.
Another study which added a new dimension to causalities of success or failure was one
by Frieze and Weiner (1971). In this experiment, task difficulty was controlled through the
percentage of past successes which participants had on a task. When the task was perceived as
easy, or the probability of success seemed high, individuals attributed success more to ability
effort, and ease of task. The more difficult the task appeared, however, the fewer attributions
were made for task difficulty and the more attributions to effort and ability that were made. The
opposite seemed to happen when participants were told that they failed. A lack of effort was
given as the main explanation for failure on an easy task, whereas task difficulty and lack of
ability were believed to be responsible for failure at a difficult task. The study showed that
individuals’ perceived levels of task difficulty as significant determinants of the weighting which
various causal ascriptions will receive.
Attributional Bias
Guskey (1981) used Weiner’s model for causal attributions to find out the relationships
between teachers’ perceptions of responsibility, and student learning outcomes. One hundred
and eighty-four teachers from two metropolitan schools were given questionnaires to complete.
The questionnaires contained four probable causes for a simulated classroom situation in which
the teachers were successful or unsuccessful with a group of students. Elementary teachers were
found to attribute their lack of success to lack of effort more than secondary teachers. Generally,
teachers who were successful with a class of students attributed their success to internal
attributions of ability and effort. When unsuccessful, the tendency was to attribute their lack of
success mainly to external factors, such as, task difficulty for the particular group. In another
study, Kremer and Kurtz (1987) used the Rotter IE scale to examine the locus of control of two
hundred, randomly-selected student teachers. The subjects were also given eight situations
which simulated educational problems and were asked to choose between solutions which had an
inclination towards either internal or external attributions. The findings showed that teachers
tended to attribute their failure to their students, rather than themselves.
Causal Attributions of Success and Failure in Music Eduction
In the field of music education, Legette (1998) in a survey, administered the Asmus
Music Attribution Orientation Scale (MAOS) to 1,114 elementary, middle, and high school
students in an effort to find out the attributions which they made for their success or failure in
music. Five hundred and ninety-five girls and 519 boys from two neighboring cities and county
public school systems in north Georgia were selected. The findings showed that musical ability
was the most important causal attribution followed by effort. For the county schools, class
environment was the most important, while females, more than males, perceived ability and
effort to be more important. This implied that students who passed music because of ability
were likely to expect success in the future; however, those who failed music because of ability
might continually expect failure.
Legette (1993) found similar results in relation to attributions for success, in a survey of
43 music majors and 62 non music majors enrolled in a beginning level guitar class. The
students were given the Asmus MAOS containing four attributions and were asked to indicate
how important they thought the attributions were in terms of contributing to their success or
failure. Findings showed that the students collectively placed more emphasis on internal factors,
namely effort, affect for music, and musical ability.
Causal Attributions and Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy is believed to have both a direct and indirect impact on achievement-raising
standards and goals. It acts like a mediator in the manner in which our attributions influence our
motivation and performance (Bandura, 1993). Attributing success to internal, stable factors such
as having high ability strengthens one’s self efficacy. Teachers who are high in self-efficacy tend
to be more effective, and make use of better teaching methods and materials. They are also
better at handling stressful situations (Bray-Clark & Bates, 2003).
In a survey of the attributions of 240 teachers, Hall (1993) found that teachers with a high
sense of self-efficacy saw themselves as responsible for students’ learning outcomes, regardless
of whether the students succeeded or failed. In another study comparing high and low efficacy
teachers in relation to classroom management, Gordon (2001) found that high efficacy teachers
were more confident about being able to manage misbehaviour, and less likely to feel angry or
embarrassed about student misbehaviour. Low efficacy teachers, however, were more likely to
judge difficult students as having chronic problems, and more likely to use severe punishment.
Bandura (1993) also posits that self-efficacy is a good predictor of one’s persistence,
achievement, goal setting behaviours, and career development.
In another study in which the attributions, self-efficacy and achievement of 500
undergraduate language learners were examined, Dei-Hsuan (2004) found that self-efficacy
correlated positively with ability and effort attributions and negatively with luck and teacher
attributions. The students who made internal, personal, and stable attributions also reported
higher levels of self-efficacy and received higher grades than those making external attributions.
Attributions of Principals
It has also been found that the performance of music teachers depends on their perceived
needs and concerns, and that those needs tend to differ from that of their supervisors. Johanson
(2008) surveyed a group of music supervisors, tenured, and non-tenured music teachers, and
assessed the differences in their perceived needs in relation to teaching level, areas of
specialization, and 12 areas of needs and concerns which he identified. He found that non-
tenured teachers’ greatest area of need was teaching materials and resources, followed by
motivating students, and dealing with problems of individual students. Tenured teachers
identified motivating students, and teaching materials and resources as their greatest area of
concern. The supervisors, on the other hand, saw classroom management, and lesson planning
and preparation as the most important concern.

In another study, which examined the perceptions of choral directors and principals about
their school’s choral programme, Mays-Jackson (2005) found that most principals expressed
satisfaction in the choral director and saw the choral music programme as contributing
significantly to school climate. There was a notable difference in the perceptions of the younger
administrators (25 – 29years), however, who did not view the choral music programme as being
important to the development of the child. The differences in perceptions between teachers and
administrators were further illustrated in a study by Rittenhouse (1989). The attitudes and
perceptions of 151 choral directors and their principals relating to participating in choral contests
and festivals were investigated. The findings revealed that administrators generally favoured
competitions mainly for winning awards and for the honor derived for the school. They also
interpreted the ratings which the choir received at the festivals or contests as an assessment of the
ability of both the choir and choir director. The teachers, on the other hand, were completely
opposed to this approach. They saw the choral competition as a learning experience and as an
opportunity for musical growth.
From the previously discussed literature, there are three general assumptions which can
be made. The first is that the attributions which people make influence their feelings,
expectations for success or failure, and their future behaviour. Secondly, attributions vary
depending on whether one is the actor or observer, or in a position of authority, such as a
principal. Thirdly, self-efficacy is an important component of both attribution theory and teacher
effectiveness or achievement. The level of one’s self-efficacy influences the type of attributions
made, and the more success one has the higher his sense of self-efficacy becomes. Those ideas
will form the basis for the questions guiding this research.
This study will differ from previous research on teacher and student attributions in that it
is concerned with the attributions of music teachers and principals of primary and secondary
schools within the St. Lucian context. The study examines teacher effectiveness and achievement
from the standpoint of music teachers being able to perform their various roles successfully and
from the perspectives of both teachers and principals. Other studies, elsewhere, have focused on
the self-efficacy of music teachers, the attributions which student teachers or music majors make
for their success or failure as students, teacher attributions for student performance or behaviour,
and the perceptions of principals about individual aspects of music teaching.
This research will therefore be guided by the following questions:
 What causes do music teachers and principals attribute to teacher effectiveness in
music education?
 Are there any differences in the causal attributions of experienced and novice music
teachers?
 Are there any differences in the attributional styles of music teachers and school
principals?
 Are there any differences in the perceptions of teacher effectiveness between music
teachers and principals?
 Are there any differences in music teachers’ perceptions of self efficacy and
principals’ perceptions of music teachers self efficacy?
It is hoped that the findings of this study will provide, a) greater insight into the status of
music education in St. Lucia, and b) a framework for future planning, and organizing of teacher
training and professional development activitie

Chapter 3
Methodology
Subjects
The subjects identified for this study consisted of all primary and secondary music
teachers who were at the time actively involved in teaching music, and their principals. The
sample was identified with the assistance of the current curriculum specialists for music and the
District Education Officers. The researcher specified only this group because it was felt that the
contributions of former or non-active music teachers would not accurately reflect the current
trends in music education. This form of purposive sampling consisted of 114 individuals; 35
principals and 45 teachers at the primary level, and 17 teachers and 17 principals at the
secondary level. Several teachers at the primary level were assigned to more than one school;
hence there were a greater number of principals than teachers. Although non-probability
sampling in some instances is said to be bias-prone or non-generalizable, the use of purposive
sampling in this study is most appropriate since it ensures that the sample fits the specific
requirements, and that the sample is an accurate or near to accurate representation of the
population. The results are therefore also expected to be accurate.
Measurement Instrument
Two separate researcher-designed questionnaires were used in this study - one for music
teachers, which contained 36 items, and a slightly modified one for principals. The principals’
questionnaire contained 29 items and sought less biographical information than the teachers’
instrument. The wording of some of the items was also changed to third person pronouns where
necessary. For example, where the teachers’ questionnaire required Yes or No to the statement: “I
generally enjoy teaching music”, the principal’s version read, “My music teacher appears to
enjoy teaching music”. In order to minimize reliability and response bias issues, the
questionnaire employed three different question types: dichotomous or yes/no items, rating
scales, and open ended questions. The questionnaires sought to obtain four categories of
information: the causal attributions of participants, perceptions of teacher confidence and self
efficacy, perceptions of music teachers’ effectiveness in carrying out their roles and
responsibilities, and biographical information. A combination of dichotomous items and open-
ended questions were used to gain an insight into the causal attributions of teachers and
principals (see appendix A). Respondents were required to indicate their agreement or
disagreement to the statements by placing an X in front of either Yes or No, for example, “I feel
unqualified to teach music”. Open-ended questions asked respondents to either give reasons for
various behaviours or to complete statements such as:
“I would be a more effective music teacher if … “
Although open-ended questions are sometimes difficult to quantify and analyze they have
been utilized successfully in several studies and have the advantage of allowing respondents to
provide a wide range of causal attributions than is possible with structured approaches (Asmus
Jr, 1986).
The perception of teachers’ self-efficacy in relation to practical and music teaching skills
was solicited using a five-point semantic differential scale, with one representing Very weak and
5 representing Very strong. Teachers and principals were asked to indicate their perceptions of
teacher competence in areas such as singing, playing the recorder, and working with a choir. The
extent to which teachers were able to carry out music-related roles was also measured using a
five-point Likert-type scale. The quantifiers used were never, rarely, sometimes, often, and
always, and included items such as, “I participate in national music festivals and competitions”.
The survey also consisted of items designed to elicit background and biographical
information including, gender, age, musical experience and qualifications, and current and future
academic plans.
Pilot Testing of Questionnaire
The pilot testing of survey questions is an essential procedure in the preliminary stages
of a study. It is usually a small-scale trial of the study and its purpose is to minimize
measurement error and to identify any problems with the planned approach to conducting the
survey. Ideally, according to Mertens (2010), testing a questionnaire should be done with a
sample that closely resembles, or is drawn from the population under study. Due to the
inaccessibility of the target population at the time, however, the questionnaire was instead pre-
tested with a group of eight music teachers from Barbados. One possible disadvantage of not
being able to test the questionnaire with St. Lucian music teachers is that the difference in
teaching context would not give an accurate estimate of the reliability or validity of the
instrument. However, it was felt that Barbadian music teachers could identify equally well to the
concerns being addressed in this study. There are also several other objectives of pilot testing
which were achieved. The instructions, wording and sequence of questionnaire items were
clarified. The teachers were instructed to provide written feedback on any questions which were
difficult to answer or ambiguous. Defective items were edited while a few confusing items which
were stated in the negative were reversed. Unanticipated responses were also identified, which
prompted the revision of certain items and the inclusion of an additional item for further
clarification. The data was also entered into the SPSS data base where the coding scheme was
tested and the quality of data analyzed in relation to the objectives of the study.
Validity
The questionnaire items, although adapted for this study, were patterned after other
survey instruments used in other studies examining attribution theory. In order to cater for
attributions which would not fall under Weiner’s four causal factors, open-ended questions were
included. A readability test was done by colleagues and the structure of questionnaire items, item
wording, and order effect were analyzed The questionnaire was also analyzed by a psychology
expert for construct validity and its ability to collect the relevant information in relation to the
goals of the study.
Reliability
Due to the small number of participants involved in the pilot study (N = 8), and the
difference in context between Barbados and St. Lucia, a reliability estimate was not done for the
pilot survey. However, a split-half reliability test was estimated on the teachers’ questionnaire in
this current study using the Spearman Brown formula. The reliability coefficient for the items on
the self efficacy scale was high (r = .83), while the reliability of items related to teacher
effectiveness and achievement was moderate (r = .42). The open-ended items related to causal
attributions were categorized by the researcher and therefore, no inter-rater reliability estimates
are provided.
Research Design
For this study, the descriptive research method was used. This method is useful, in that it
describes the nature of a situation as it exists at the time of the study and raises possible issues
for future investigation and explanation (Balnaves & Caputi, 2001). This current research was
mainly concerned with highlighting the existence and the nature of causal attributions, and
describing possible relationships between variables without attempting to establish causal

relationships. It also aimed to examine various patterns of attributions and behaviours, which
makes the descriptive method particularly suitable for achieving these objectives.
The study utilizes a quantitative approach in obtaining, analyzing, and reporting data.
With this method, information can be easily organized, summarized, and analyzed using a
variety of statistical methods. Although qualitative methods are sometimes useful in gaining a
deeper understanding of such abstract concepts as attributions, perceptions, and beliefs, the
researcher leaned toward Barbie (2009) who views the survey method as an “excellent vehicle
for measuring attitudes and orientations in a large population.” (p. 254).
The survey design allows the researcher to make inferences about the attitude, behaviour,
or some other characteristic of a selected group of persons (Leacock, Warrican, & Rose, 2009). It
involves the collection of original data using various methods, such as questionnaires and
interviews, to describe a population which is usually too large to observe directly. A researcher-
constructed questionnaire was the main data gathering instrument used in this study. The
researcher noted that other standard instruments used to measure causal attributions in other
studies lacked domain-specific attributional measures. Items relating specifically to choir,
ensemble work, and the participation of music teachers in festivals and competitions, for
example, were lacking. Constructing a questionnaire allowed for specific items to measure the
various dimensions and constructs in this study relevant to music teachers.
The use of self-report questionnaires in cross-sectional surveys is particularly effective
because of their flexibility. They can be used to measure the characteristics of a large population
using a small sample, and they are more economical and relatively easy to administer. The nature
of the design also allows the researcher to study an unlimited number of phenomena using a
limited number of questions. (Muijs, 2004). The use of questionnaires in research has also been
criticized for their reliance on the motivation, honesty, and memory of subjects to respond, and
for their low response rate. According to Mertens (2010), these issues can be addressed with the
careful construction of questionnaire items, as well as contacting subjects prior to administering
questionnaires, personalizing relationships, and making it easy for questionnaires to be returned.
All of these were implemented in this study in order to increase the validity and reliability of the
questionnaire.
Although interviews have been recommended as an effective way of gathering rich, in
depth data and as a method of triangulation (Leacock, Warrican, & Rose, 2009), this data-
gathering technique was not utilized in this study mainly because of academic time constraints,
and also to minimize induced bias and respondent effects. The researcher strongly believed that
as a result of his position as curriculum specialist for music, respondents would approach the
survey from a position of subordination and would be tempted to modify their responses or to
give information which they deem to be politically correct.
Procedure
Permission to conduct research in schools was sought from the MOE by means of a
signed consent form. About one week prior to the commencement of the survey, the researcher
sent out an email to principals and DEO’s to inform them of the intended research and to solicit
their assistance in identifying the schools which had music programmes. Data were collected
during a two week period in the month of May. Three different mediums were utilized in
distributing questionnaires. Firstly, a soft copy was emailed to all music teachers and principals
who were on the researcher’s contact list. Packaged questionnaires were then delivered to two
education district offices – district one and four, so that education officers could assist the
researcher with the distribution. The researcher also personally delivered questionnaires to
schools in the remaining six districts around the island. Some participants opted to complete the
questionnaires on the spot, while others agreed to a two-day time frame to complete them and to
leave them at the district offices, or have them collected subsequently by the researcher. Trips
were made on six different days to various parts of the island for the purpose of distributing and
collecting questionnaires.
Subjects were encouraged in the cover page to be as frank and honest as possible, and
were reminded that the purpose of the research was to ultimately improve the standard of music
education in St. Lucia. Participants were also encouraged to write any additional comments on
the questionnaire which they believed would assist in clarifying their responses.
Limitations
This present study acknowledges certain limitations which need to be taken into account
when examining the findings. The data-gathering instrument used was a researcher-designed
questionnaire which dealt with psychological constructs such as attributions and self-efficacy.
Although attempts were made to establish the validity of questionnaire items by soliciting the
expertise of a psychologist, a true estimate of the questionnaires construct validity was not
determined since a factor analysis was not done. Time constraints also did not allow for a
thorough pilot testing of the survey instrument. One of the pitfalls of the instrument which
surfaced during the analysis of data is the imbalance in the number of items under the various
causal factors. It is possible that had this been achieved, more accurate findings would have been
obtained.
Another limitation of this study is that the open-ended items were categorized based
solely on the judgement of the researcher and therefore does not provide any inter-rater
reliability estimates. The response rate, particularly for the teachers was also relatively low;
therefore, the findings of this study may not be generalizable due to the small size of the sample.
Ethical Issues
One of the main ethical issues addressed at the data collection stage was the need to
ensure that subjects did not feel coerced into participating in the survey. This was a real
possibility since the participants were likely to view the research as a Ministry of Education
initiative, and therefore feel obliged to participate. This issue was dealt with by stating very
clearly on the cover page, that the survey was in no way related to the Ministry of Education, that
participation was voluntary, and that the annual appraisal of music teachers and principals would
in no way be affected as a result of their honest comments.
The issues of confidentiality and anonymity were allayed by requesting in bold text on
the cover page that subjects not write their names or schools on the questionnaires.
Questionnaires which were returned via email were immediately downloaded and put in a
separate folder, where each questionnaire was given a unique identification code. The
questionnaires for music teachers and principals were distributed and collected separately as
much as possible in order to ensure the appearance of confidentiality between both parties.
Chapter Four
Analysis and Discussion of findings
Questionnaires were sent to 114 participants: 52 principals and 62 teachers. A total of 60
correctly completed surveys were returned for an overall response rate of 53%. One
questionnaire was void because most of the items were incomplete. Thirty-two principals and 28
teachers in all responded. One of the main factors which contributed to a low response rate is the
short time frame which participants had to complete the questionnaires. Some principals and
music teachers were at meetings, ill, or absent on the days when questionnaires were to be
collected.
Not everyone agrees on the minimum response rate which should be achieved, however,
Johnson and Christensen, as cited in Mertens (2010), suggest a response rate of 70%. Other
authors suggest that the significance of the response rate also depends on the main focus of the
study (IAR, 2007), and that it is not as important if the emphasis is to obtain insight into a
particular phenomenon, as this study aims to do.
The number of completed surveys returned is reported according to school level and
gender in Table 1.
Table 1
Participants by school level and gender
Teachers Principals
____________ ___________
Males Females Males Females

_________________________________________
Primary 9 9 3 19
Secondary 7 3 5 5
_________________________________________
Total 16 12 8 24
A total of 16 music teachers had taught music for 5 years or less, whilst 4 fell in the
6 – 10 years category, and 8 in the 11 – 20 category. Sixteen of the music teachers had been in
the teaching profession for over 20 years. There were 11 teachers in both the 21 – 34 and 45 – 54
age groups, and 6 in the 35 – 44 age group. Three of the principals had been in the post for over
20 years and there were 14 principals who had served in that capacity for 5 years or less.
In order to be able to put the findings into better perspective, a descriptive analysis of the
musical background and experience of music teachers was done. Seventy one percent of the
teachers reported having grade 3 and above in the Associated Board of Royal Schools of Music
(ABRSM) theory exams, with one teacher reporting a grade 7, which was the highest in the
group. In the ABRSM practical exams, 29% reported having grade 3 and above, with one person
reporting a grade 8 in violin. Only one music teacher had done the CXC music examinations,
whilst 25% reported having done the teachers’ programme at the St. Lucia School of Music.
Fifty-four percent of the teachers also indicated that they were active members of various
musical groups.
Treatment of data
The questionnaires were first checked for the completeness of responses and any glaring
errors. One questionnaire had to be discarded since the majority of it was left unanswered by a
teacher who indicated on the questionnaire that she was no longer involved in teaching music.
The data were then entered into SPSS and coded, whilst items which were negatively worded
were reverse coded. The principals’ data were entered into a separate data base, since
questionnaire items for the teachers’ questionnaire were different. A preliminary descriptive
analysis was carried out to further clean the data, check for errors, verify missing responses, and
ensure that proper coding was done.
Contingency tables are used in this study to describe findings and to show associations
between variables. According to Punch (2005), contingency tables are useful for their
readability, ease of construction, and their application to a wide range of situations. They are also
a foundation for more sophisticated analyses. The chi square was used to make inferences and
test the level of association between variables. This statistical technique is commonly used with
contingency tables and the sort of categorical variables used in this study. The z test was also
utilized to test for significant differences between percentage scores.
Research question #1: What causes do music teachers and principals attribute to teacher
effectiveness in music education?
In order to examine the causal attributions of teachers and principals, the percentage of
positive responses was first calculated for the Yes/No items on the attribution scale for both
music teachers and principals. The causes given by respondents in the open ended questions
were then analyzed and categorized into Weiner’s four causal factors as well as other emerging
factors which could not be placed under Weiner’s four categories. The causal factors identified
were: ability, effort, task difficulty, luck and chance, resources, time, and support. The resources
factor included explanations such as, the need for musical instruments, and a space or room to
teach music. The time factor encompassed reasons, such as, the inability of teachers to find time
amidst the school’s busy schedule to organize activities and to rehearse with the various musical
ensembles, while the support factor included causes pertaining to the lack of support from
principals, other staff members, parents, and the curriculum specialists in terms of providing
more opportunities for training.
A frequency count was done for the number of responses in each category in the open-
ended items and an aggregate score for both scales was calculated. The results for music teachers
and principals are shown according to school level in table 2.

Table 2
Comparison of Music Teachers’ and Principals’ Causal Attributions by School Level
Variable Primary Secondary Total
Music Teachers Average
Resources 37.2% 29.2% 33.8%

Support 20.9% 33.8% 26.5%
Time 23.3% 16.9% 20.5%
Ability 10.5% 3.1% 7.3%
Luck and Chance 4.7% 7.7% 6%
Task Difficulty 2.3% 4.6% 3.3%
Effort 1.2% 4.6% 2.6%
*
n 86 65 151
Principals Average
Resources 32.6% 36% 33.7%
Support 24% 34.4% 27.4%
Ability 17% 9.8% 14.7%
Task Difficulty 14% 8.2% 12.1%
Effort 7% 9.8% 7.9%
Luck and Chance 3.1% 0% 2.1%
Time 1.6% 0% 1.1%
n 129 61 190
*
n = number of responses
Primary music teachers identified resources as the most influential factor for teacher
effectiveness compared to secondary music teachers who endorsed the need for support as more
important than resources and rated it second. Primary teachers also appeared to be more affected
by the lack of time and ability than secondary music teachers, although both groups rated them
the third and fourth most influential factors, respectively. Secondary teachers did not perceive
the ability factor to have much influence on teacher effectiveness and rated it the least
significant, compared to primary teachers who believed that effort was the least influential
factor. Neither group felt that task difficulty played a significant role in determining teacher
effectiveness.
Both primary and secondary principals ranked most of the seven factors similarly.
Principals identified the lack of resources as the most important factor influencing music teacher
effectiveness followed by support. The findings suggest that secondary school principals saw a
greater need for support for music teachers than did primary school principals, and although both
groups rated ability third, primary principals appeared to feel more strongly about its impact on
teacher effectiveness. Both primary and secondary principals rated time as the least important
factor. Although the data reveal some noticeable differences in percentage scores among various
groups, the results of a contingency table chi square statistical test revealed that those differences
are not statistically significant and that there is no difference in the degree of influence between
the attributions of primary and secondary school teachers (X2 = 0.157E-01, df = 1, p < 0.900), or
primary and secondary school principals (X2= 0.444, df = 1, p < 0.505).
Both principals and music teachers perceived the lack of resources to be the main factor
influencing the ability of music teachers to carry out their roles effectively. The need for more
support was also endorsed by both groups as the second most influential factor for teacher
effectiveness. Questionnaire items regarding support indicated that a high percentage of the
music teachers and principals were satisfied with the amount of support given by the principals
(75% and 78% respectively), however, only 54% of teachers and 31% of principals reported
being satisfied with the support from curriculum specialists. The need for training and more
music workshops for teachers was the most endorsed support factor by both groups
(teachers = 89%, principals = 82%). This suggests that there is a common perception by music
teachers and principals that the responsibility for professional and musical development of
teachers lies primarily in the hands of the Ministry of Education. This view is further supported
by data from this study which show that only 43% of music teachers were at the time of the
survey engaged in private music classes, whilst 46% had plans within a five-year period to
pursue musical studies.
The lack of time was the third next highly endorsed causal factor by music teachers.
Principals, on the other hand, rated ability more highly than time and perceived the time factor as
the least important, with only two primary school principals citing it as a cause (1.1%, n = 190).
Other differences in the attributions of music teachers and principals were revealed in their
ratings of task difficulty as a factor for teacher effectiveness. Task difficulty was ranked 4th on
the principals’ list of attributions (12.1%), whereas, music teachers rated it 6th (3.3%). Principals,
more than music teachers, perceived teaching music to be challenging and a relatively significant
influence on music teachers’ ability to excel. Other findings suggest that although both groups
perceived music teaching to have its challenges, they did not view the actual teaching of music
as difficult. In response to the statement “teaching music is a difficult task”, none of the music
teachers agreed, whilst only 3 principals agreed that it was. A few principals also expressed a
different view in their explanatory comments and opined that music was not difficult but a “fun
to teach” subject.
Research question #2: Are there any differences in the causal attributions of experienced and
novice music teachers?
The two groups which were selected to address this question were teachers who had
taught music from 1 – 5 years, and teachers who have been teaching music for over 20 years.
There were no participants in the under 1 year category. The percentage of responses for each
causal factor was calculated for both groups and then ranked. The findings of this question are
reported in Table 3.
Table 3
Comparison of Music Teachers’ Causal Attributions by Music Teaching Experience
Experience
_____________
Variable 1 – 5 years Over 20 years
Resources 40% 50%

Support 28% 43%
Time 24% 27%
n 25 60
There was a similar pattern to what was found before in the factors which were identified
as being the most influential. Both inexperienced and experienced music teachers identified
resources as the most influential factor for teacher effectiveness followed by support. Time was
rated as the third most important factor. A contingency table chi square statistical test revealed
that there was no significant difference in the observed frequencies between the two groups (X2 =
0.408, df = 1, p < 0.523). The higher percentage scores for the more experienced music teachers,
therefore, do not necessarily imply a greater intensity of endorsement than less experienced
music teachers.
Research question #3: Are there any differences in the attributional styles of music
teachers and school principals?
The attributional style of music teachers and principals was identified by comparing the
causes most and least endorsed by both groups as impacting on teacher effectiveness and
categorizing the attributions according to Weiner’s three-dimensional model. Comparisons were
also made across school level. The dimensions of the most influential cause of teacher
effectiveness for both groups and across school levels are external, stable, and uncontrollable.
The attribution which principals identified as being least influential is also external, stable, and
uncontrollable in nature, whereas, the dimensions of the least influential attribution identified by
the music teachers are external, unstable, and uncontrollable. Both music teachers and principals
therefore display similar attributional styles and are consistent particularly in the locus and
controllability dimensions. These findings imply that both groups are of the view that the ability
of music teachers to effectively carry out their roles is due mainly to external factors of which
music teachers have no control. Effective music teaching, managing a school choir or musical
ensemble, and organizing and having students participate in musical activities, are therefore
currently more dependent on external/uncontrollable factors, like resources and support, than on
internal/controllable factors, like ability and effort. The findings also revealed that despite
viewing external, stable, and uncontrollable factors as responsible for their effectiveness, music
teachers continue to be motivated and put in a fair amount of effort. For example, none of the
teachers surveyed reported having lost their passion for teaching music, while 89% indicated that
they enjoy teaching music. In addition, 86% reported that they enjoy participating in festivals
and competitions.
Research question #4: Are there any differences in the perceptions of teacher
effectiveness between music teachers and principals?
Perceptions of teacher effectiveness were examined in two ways. Firstly, music teachers
were asked to rate their overall performance in executing their roles on a scale of one to ten,
while principals were asked to rate the music teachers using the same scale. Individuals who
received scores of 6 or above were categorized as effective teachers, whereas, those who
received scores of 5 and below were categorized as ineffective teachers. Both groups were also
asked to rate the extent to which they believed music teachers were involved in various key
aspects of music education using a Likert-type scale. Ratings of 4 and above (often and always)
were categorized as effective for items such as, “my music lessons involve listening, performing,
and composing activities”, since such activities ought to be a regular part of music teaching.
Some items which received ratings of 3 and above (sometimes) were also categorized as
effective, since those behaviours were not expected to occur regularly. One example of such an
item is: “I invite musicians and other resource persons to my school”. The percentage of
effective and ineffective responses for both groups in the different scales was then calculated.
The results are shown in table 4.

Table 4
Comparison of Teacher Effectiveness Perceptions of Music Teachers and Principals
Variable Music Teachers Principals
Active Choir 53.6% 50%

Active ensemble 53.6% 25%
Participate in Festivals 85.7% 100%
Concerts and assemblies 71.4% 56.3%
Music lesson activities 78.6% 46.9%
Invite resource persons 60.7% 46.9%
Perception of effectiveness 85.7% 59.4%
Total 69.9% 54.9%
Results based on aggregate scores from the entire teacher effectiveness scale show that
69.9% of music teachers perceived themselves to be effective compared to 54.9% of principals
who rated music teachers as being effective. The results of a contingency table chi square
statistical test indicated that there was no significant difference in the observed distributions of
both groups (X2 = 3.27, df = 2, p < 0.195). However, in the questionnaire item which asked both
groups to rate, on a scale of one to ten, the overall effectiveness of music teachers. Most of the
music teachers rated themselves above 5 (85.7%), compared to 59.4% of principals. The results
of a z test calculated for those two percentages revealed that the difference between the scores
was significant (z = -3.005, p < .05). Hence, the combined teacher effectiveness scale produced a
different result from the individual item which sought to obtain the same information.
The results of z tests revealed significant differences in the way principals and music
teachers responded to the item pertaining to the prevalence of active ensembles in the schools.
Only 25% of principals reported that there were functional instrumental ensembles at their
schools, compared to 53.6% of music teachers (z = -2.673, p < .05). One of the implications of
this is that music teachers in some cases may not always be aware of the efforts and activities of
music teachers, particularly what goes on inside the classroom. Also significant, and to illustrate
further, 78.6% of teachers, compared to 46.9% of principals reported that music lessons typically
include a variety of activities, such as, listening, composing, and performing (z = -2.946, p <
.05). Music teachers also reported inviting resource persons to the school or to music classes
more often than principals perceived (teachers = 60.7%; principals = 46.9%). Results of a z test,
however, revealed that this difference was not statistically significant (z = +1.257, p > .05). In
response to how often opportunities were provided for students to showcase their talents, 71.4%
of music teachers indicated that they regularly organize activities like special assemblies and
concerts, compared to 56.3% of teachers. This finding was also not statistically significant
(z = +1.39, p > .05).
Music teachers are generally more satisfied with their performance whilst principals
believe that there is more which music teachers can do in most areas of music teaching. All
principals reported, however, that music teachers often participate in festivals and competitions,
which was statistically more significant than the 85.7% of teachers who agreed (z = -2.568, p <
.05). This difference in expectations between principals and music teachers and in perceptions of
how music is taught was further highlighted in the response of principals to a questionnaire item
which examined their general understanding of music teaching. Findings showed that 61% of
principals believed that it was important to teach theory before students could begin playing
music, which was significantly less than 96% of music teachers who correctly responded that it
was not necessary to do so (z = -3.72, p < .05).

Research question #5: Are there any differences in the attributions of perceived effective and
ineffective music teachers?
Results of a frequency count revealed that teachers who rated themselves highly on the
effectiveness scale endorsed the need for support as the main factor influencing their
effectiveness (31.2%), as compared to teachers from the low group who identified the lack of
resources (27.2%). Both groups rated support as the second most influential factor for teacher
effectiveness (effective = 31.2%, ineffective = 23.5%). Music teachers in the high effectiveness
group rated effort as the third most influential factor (12.3%), compared to the low effectiveness
group which rated ability as third (19.8%). The results of a chi square test revealed, however,
that those differences were not sufficient to be statistically significant (X2 = 0.111, df = 1, p <
0.739). Principals also made the same attributions for teachers, whom they rated highly for
effectiveness, as teachers whom they gave lower ratings. As consistent with other findings in this
research, principals identified resources as the most important causal factor for both high and
low groups.
Research question #6: Are there any differences in music teachers’ perceptions of self efficacy
and principals’ perceptions of music teachers’ self efficacy?
The self efficacy scale consisted of nine Likert-type items ranging from 1 = very weak, to
5 = very strong. Participants were asked to rate their perceptions of music teachers’ confidence
levels in areas such as, singing, playing various musical instruments, knowledge of music theory,
and working with ensembles. Individuals with scores of 3 and above were categorized in the high
efficacy group, whereas those receiving scores below 3 were categorized in the low efficacy
group. An aggregate score for each group was calculated for both the responses of music
teachers and principals. The percentage of responses is shown in table 5.

Table 5
Comparison of teacher efficacy perceptions of music teachers and principals
Variable Music Teachers Principals
Singing 50% 56.3%

Recorder 82.1% 75%
Keyboard 35.7% 56.3%
Other 42.9% 46.9%
Choir 67.9% 50%
Ensemble 67.9% 46.9%
Composing 50% 25%
Arranging 42.9% 21.9%
Theory 96.4% 75%
Total 59.5% 50.3%
The overall percentage score for music teachers’ perceived self-efficacy was 59.5%,
whilst the principals rated music teachers similarly with a score of 50.3%. Both groups felt that
the strength of music teachers lay mainly in music theory and playing the recorder. In response
to a questionnaire item concerning the confidence of music teachers with music theory, 96.4% of
teachers indicated that their knowledge of music theory was adequate for the age groups which
they taught, compared to 75% percent of the principals. Playing the recorder was rated the
second highest for both groups (teachers = 82.1%; principals = 75%). Music teachers felt the
least confident in their keyboard skills, whilst principals identified arranging as teachers’
weakest area. Principals generally rated music teachers lower in most of the areas, although the
results of a contingency table statistical test revealed that differences between the two groups
were not statistically significant (X2 = 6.91, df = 8, p < 0.546).

Open-Ended Items
Six open-ended items were included in the questionnaire in order to gain a more detailed
idea of the perceptions of participants. Three of the items elicited the perceptions of both groups
as to why music teachers did not have a choir or ensemble, did not participate in festivals or
competitions, and were not engaged in any immediate plans to further their musical studies.
Other items sought to examine the causes which both groups believed restricted music teachers
from being more effective, while one item investigated what participants perceived to be the
greatest strength of music teachers.
Inability to engage in musical activities
Among the responses given for not having a school choir, the lack of time and support
were most frequently cited. Music teachers highlighted inadequate time to juggle among their
many activities, and time to rehearse with students during or after school as some of the key time
factors influencing teacher effectiveness. Other teachers believed that the amount of time allotted
to music per week, or per class, was insufficient to accomplish anything worthwhile. One music
teacher explained that apart from teaching music to practically the entire school, which takes up
most of her time, she also has other groups to attend to. In order to address this time issue, one
music teacher attempted to appoint a student as choir head or director but explained that this
initiative had not been going too well. Other teachers attempt to pull students out of class for
rehearsals but claim that they do not always receive the support of their colleagues who are often
unwilling to release the choir members for an activity which they consider to be of little
academic importance.
The lack of instruments or resources was the main reason given for not having an
instrumental ensemble. Music teachers explained that even in instances where the school has
instruments, they are not sufficient to do any meaningful work with a large group. One music
teacher didn’t view ensemble work as a priority. He explained that he already made some use of
musical instruments in general music classes and didn’t see the need at the moment to establish a
separate ensemble. Very little internal attributions, like ability or effort, were made as music
teachers had a general tendency to make external ascriptions for the absence of a choir and
ensemble at their schools. One teacher further explained that he abandoned his choir because of
the indiscipline of his choir members. These findings were informative since it implies that
music teachers do not currently believe that the establishment of a successful choir or ensemble
is in their control. In addition, although other findings show that music teachers perceive
themselves to be moderately competent they view external factors, such as adequate time and
resources, and the support of colleagues as crucial factors.
Whilst principals also cited the lack of resources as reasons why music teachers did not
have choirs or ensembles, there was more of a tendency for them to identify reasons which were
internal to music teachers. More than one principal stated that their music teachers were not
committed and that they didn’t feel that choir or ensemble was a priority for the teachers.
Another principal hypothesized that although she knows of her music teachers’ practical
instrumental skills, she doesn’t believe that the teacher is as competent in choral work and hence
the reason why the school choir is not active. Several principals also cited the lack of skill,
qualifications, and motivation of music teachers as explanations for the absence of ensembles at
the school. Both principals and music teachers, however, were in concordance with the view that
music teachers generally participate in music festivals and competitions.
There also appeared to be differences in expectations between principals and music
teachers. Several principals explained, for example, that their school choirs only appear to be
functional when there is a special occasion or festival. This implies that those principals would
prefer to have a school choir that is more active throughout the school year. Some music
teachers, on the other hand, are satisfied with putting together choral or ensemble performances
only when necessary. One secondary school principal, in an attempt to elucidate further on the
rating which she gave her music teacher for effectiveness, explained that music to her is
something which must be heard and that she hardly ever hears any music happening at the
school. She expects to see at least a few students playing instruments and performing at various
occasions, such as, school assemblies.
Plans to further musical studies
Over half of the music teachers (55%) reported that they were not currently engaged in
any private music classes, neither did they have any immediate plans to further their musical
studies. The most frequent reasons offered were time and money. Some music teachers explained
that it is difficult for them to attend classes after school because of other commitments and that
the location of SLSM poses transportation issues. Other teachers, however, explained that they
were either currently pursuing other courses of study or that they had plans to do so. Of the
music teachers who had plans to further their studies, only 3 planned to study music-related
areas. The other teachers identified courses of study such as theater, business management
clinical psychology, and computer engineering and maintenance. This implies that although over
85% of music teachers reported having a passion for teaching music, many of them do not see
the need to pursue studies in music, or they view other subject areas as more of a priority at
present.
Hindrances to teacher effectiveness
The most frequently cited factor contributing to teacher effectiveness in the open-ended
item was the need for more resources. Although three teachers identified the need for more
training, music teachers were of the view that the lack of adequate resources, such as musical
instruments, and a music room, was the key factor preventing them from achieving more as
music teachers. None of the music teachers believed that their lack of effort deterred them from
being more effective. Also worthy of mention is the fact that one teacher felt that being required
to teach at two different schools limited the impact that she could make at either school. This is
revealing since the assigning of music teachers to more than one school is a fairly recent
initiative in order to compensate for the shortage of music teachers. More than one principal also
viewed the issue of music teachers servicing more than one school as a hindrance. Although the
need for resources also dominated principals’ causal ascriptions, there was a greater inclination
on their part to cite personal and internal causes, as compared to the music teachers. Some of the
internal causes identified included the need for music teachers to show more initiative, to be
more serious, zealous, and to get more training.
Music teachers’ biggest challenge
The responses of music teachers to what they perceived as their biggest challenge elicited
more variety in responses than previous open-ended items. In addition to the lack of resources,
other factors such as difficulty in promoting the importance of music to students, colleagues, and
parents were identified. Other music teachers cited their workload, and having to teach at more
than one school as their biggest challenge. Only one teacher identified the lack of skill as being a
challenge. The responses of principals to the same questionnaire item were just as varied but
again leaned toward more internal factors than did music teachers. Principals highlighted
challenges, such as, music teachers’ lack of class control, charisma, music ability, and their
inability to manage their time efficiently. The large size of the classes was also viewed by
principals as one of the biggest challenges of music teachers.
In order to obtain a further insight into the perceptions of participants about the factors
which contribute to teacher effectiveness, a questionnaire item which examined the greatest
strength of music teachers was included. Among the responses given from both groups, 93%
identified ability factors as being the greatest assets of music teachers. Most of the ability factors
mentioned, however, were categorized as general teacher characteristics. Assets such as,
creativity, the ability to motivate students, and skill in working with infants were identified the
most (music teachers = 64%, principals = 55%), as compared to musical ability, such as, working
with choirs, knowledge of theory, and practical instrumental skills. Among the teacher
characteristics, music teachers and principals identified the ability of music teachers to motivate
and generate interest among students as their primary strength. This implies that both groups
tend to view general teacher characteristics as more important in determining teacher
effectiveness than musical ability.
Discussion
The most highly endorsed attribution for teacher effectiveness by both principals and
music teachers is the lack of resources. This differs from the initial assumptions made in this
study, and from most research on attribution theory in achievement related situations which show
a strong relationship between ability and effort attributions and achievement (Bar-Tal & Efraim,
1979; Legette R. M., 1998). Weiner (1983), however, emphasized that the traditional
attributions (ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck) may not be as relevant in certain
achievement domains as in others. In some artistic and athletic-related research for example
other dominating attributions have surfaced. A further explanation for this could be that the lack
of resources in St. Lucian schools to teach music is a much graver concern there than it is in
schools at which such studies have been conducted. Both music teachers and principals perceive
the lack of resources as being a significant hindrance to teacher effectiveness and consequently a
deterrent to the improvement in the quality of the music programme. The endorsement of the
lack of adequate resources by music teachers, however, is not a new finding and has also been
highlighted in other countries, such as, Africa and Ireland, in other related studies which
investigate factors affecting the music programmes at schools (Russel-Bowie, 2009).
The identification of support as the second most dominant attribution is also consistent
with other research on music teacher retention and attrition, such as, Gardner (2010). Music
teachers are usually the only ones in their field at their schools and tend to feel alone and
alienated. The demanding nature of the curriculum specialists’ job makes it difficult for him or
her to visit all music teachers on a regular basis. Principals aslo perceived curriculum specialists
to be more unsupportive than music teachers perceived. This suggests that principals judge the
level of assistance from curriculum specialists based on the visibility of specialists at the school
and may not always be aware of other contact or interactions which teachers may have had with
the specialists.
In the context of attributions theory, both resources and support are external, stable, and
uncontrollable factors, which means that music teachers and principals believe that increased
effectiveness among music teachers is currently not within their control. Making such
ascriptions, according to attribution theory, implies that music teachers can also be expected to
show little improvement in their professional development, as well as in the achievement of
desired goals, unless adequate resources and training opportunities are provided for them by the
Ministry of Education. Research on attributional styles in achievement related situations also
suggest that people are less likely to persist on a task and to be motivated when they make
external, stable and uncontrollable attributions (Weiner, 1985). The findings of this study
however, do not support this belief to the extent that music teachers in St. Lucia continue to be
passionate about music teaching. This implies that they do not view their inability to effectively
carry out their roles as failure, nor do they believe that they are lacking in the required effort. As
a result of the large number of classes which they are required to teach, and the additional
activities which they are involved in, music teachers tend to equate effort with success and
effectiveness. They are particularly satisfied with their general classroom teaching where
according to the findings, most students appear to enjoy music. This confidence which they have
albeit in some areas of music education, is internal and stable, and enables them to have
expectations of future successful outcomes.
Despite the overall external locus of control of music teachers, particularly where their
weak areas were concerned, they all viewed themselves as being primarily responsible for and
capable of good teaching, motivating students, and making the music experience enjoyable. This
trend is characteristic of the self-serving bias principle, which purports that individuals have a
tendency to take credit for their successes while denying any responsibility for failure. Based on
this theory and according to Eysenck (2004), it is possible that music teachers’ self esteem is
being enhanced by this behaviour, while at the same time their growth and progress are being
hindered. Such patterns of attributions are also believed to result in increased pride and the
expectation that similar outcomes can be achieved in the future. This offers further support to the
view that music teachers perceive themselves as effective, particularly in the teaching of general
music, despite the lack of resources and support. In addition, due to their demanding time table it
is understandable that music teachers would regard general music teaching as their main role
while other related activities, like choir, are viewed as optional, or not as equally important.
Success in classroom teaching, therefore, becomes synonymous with an overall feeling of self-
efficacy.
Although this study did not specifically focus on success and failure scenarios or
outcomes, the findings indicate that apart from the external, stable, and uncontrollable
attributions of music teachers and principals for teacher effectiveness, both groups also reveal a
trend in attributing successful music teaching to ability, which is an internal, stable, and
uncontrollable factor.
Some of the differences observed in this study in the perceptions and expectations
of principals and music teachers imply that principals are not always aware of what goes on with
the music programmes at their schools and inside music classes. They also appear to have a
different idea of what teacher efficacy and effectiveness are. Principals, compared to music
teachers, perceive time as the least important factor affecting teacher effectiveness. This suggests
that although principals understand other constraints which music teachers work with, they
believe that music teachers have ample time to engage in classroom music as well as manage
other groups and activities. Some principals may lack an appreciation for the amount of time
involved in preparation, rehearsals, and in organizing various musical activities, for example.
Based on the demanding schedule which music teachers have, it is also implied that principals
expect music teachers to find extra time during their lunch breaks or after school to engage in
musical activities. The differences in the perception of time as an influential factor could prevent
principals from providing further administrative support to music teachers, which is necessary to
improve teacher effectiveness.

Although no significant differences were reported in the overall teacher effectiveness
scale between music teachers and principals, there were statistically significant differences
among some of the items. The results of the individual questionnaire item which required
participants to rate teacher effectiveness is also relevant to the findings of this study. The lower
scores which both groups received in the overall scale can be attributed to the low scores
reported for certain variables, such as, having active ensembles and choirs. Whilst this overall
score may present a more accurate and realistic picture of teacher effectiveness in schools, scores
obtained on the individual rating scale item reveals a more accurate picture of the perceptions of
both groups and the extent to which shortfalls in the variables measured actually affect
perceptions of teacher efficacy. In other words, despite the weaknesses of music teachers in
selected areas, overall perceptions of teacher efficacy were still high.
The difference in ratings for teacher effectiveness on the individual rating scale further
highlights the apparent disconnect between the perceptions of principals and music teachers in
some instances. It indicates that, a) music teachers have an exaggerated view of their
achievements, b) the work of music teachers needs to be more visible, or c) principals need to
show a greater interest in the activities of music teachers. Whatever the explanation, it must be
reiterated that what matters are the perceptions of individuals and not the veracity of the
circumstances. Music teachers who have an amplified belief about their level of effectiveness,
for example, could hinder their ability to improve, since they would be satisfied with their
outcome and less inclined to expend the required effort. Similarly, principals who inaccurately or
unknowingly undermine the impact of their music teachers’ efforts can come across as being
unsympathetic, unappreciative, and unfair in their evaluation of the school’s music programme.
The difference in attributions between principals and music teachers can also be
explained with the actor-observer bias theory, in the sense that principals as observers tend to
make different attributions from teachers as actors. This was most evident in the manner in
which music teachers attributed causes for the absence of ensembles in schools to situational
factors, whereas, the principals were more inclined to attribute causes more to the internal
dispositions of the teachers. Such cognitive biases, particularly on the part of principals, could
absolve them of their responsibility to provide the necessary support.
The similarity in attributions between novice and inexperienced music teachers further
highlights the prevalence of resources and support as influential to teacher effectiveness. The
findings also revealed that the more experienced music teachers who had been teaching for over
20 years were not any more capable of coping with the lack of resources and support than the
less experienced teachers. This emphasizes the importance of adequate resources to the success
of a music programme and how limited, even very experienced music teachers, perceive
themselves to be without those resources. The resources factor encompasses a range of materials,
equipment, and musical instruments which music teachers utilize. Depending on the nature of
those resources, they can either be controllable or uncontrollable factors. Resources such as
audio recordings, sheet music, a CD player, and even an electronic keyboard can either be
perceived as being controllable or uncontrollable factors depending on the resourcefulness and
motivation of the music teacher and administration. Since this survey did not request details from
respondents concerning the various types of resources, the findings do not provide any insight
into the controllability dimension of the resource factor.
Although the ratings for music teachers in certain skills were relatively high, the overall
perception of teacher self-efficacy was average. This finding is not unusual since most music
teachers will be skilled in some areas and lacking skill and confidence in other areas. The high
scores which were reported for music theory and recorder further substantiates the confidence
which music teachers have in this particular aspect of music education, since both skills are
utilized mainly in general classroom teaching. The moderate to low ratings for choir, singing,
and keyboard, however, could explain the disatisfaction of curriculum specialists in the standard
of choral performances by some schools.

Chapter Five
Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations
This study utilized attribution theory as a framework for investigating the causal
attributions of music teachers and principals for the effectiveness of music teachers in carrying
out their roles. In chapter one, a description of the background and nature of some of the issues
associated with teacher effectiveness in music education in St. Lucia was given, as well as a
discussion of the main theories which underpin this study. Research related to attribution theory,
teacher effectiveness, and teacher efficacy, as well as other inter-related constructs, was
presented in chapter 2, whilst a description of the design and methodology employed in
collecting data was detailed in chapter 3. Chapter 4 dealt with the analysis and discussion of the
findings using the principles of attribution theory as a theoretical framework. This chapter
concludes with a summary of relevant findings and their implications for music curriculum
specialists. Recommendations are also made for addressing some of the pertinent issues coming
out of this research, as well as for future study.
Summary
Attribution theory is concerned with how individuals interpret events and how they
attempt to explain why people do what they do. The type of attributions we make tends to
determine our affective reactions to success and failure and influences our motivation to persist
on a task. Attribution theory has been found to be closely related to motivation, whilst self-
efficacy is related to achievement. Weiner (1985), identified ability, effort, task difficulty, and
luck as the most important factors affecting attributions for achievement and classified
attributions into three dimensions: locus, stability, and controllability. Three more factors were
identified in this study, namely, resources, time, and support.

The participants identified for this study were 52 music teachers and 62 school principals
from both primary and secondary schools in St. Lucia. The instrument used for this study was a
researcher designed survey in which participants were asked to respond to a combination of
forced-choice and open-ended items. Completed surveys were returned by 60 participants: 28
music teachers and 32 principals.
All of the assumptions which guided this study were supported to various degrees by the
findings, with the exception of the main factor assumed to influence teacher effectiveness. The
most frequently endorsed attributions for teacher effectiveness for both music teachers and
principals in rank order were resources, and support. Those causes were consistently highlighted
in both groups across primary and secondary schools as the most influential factors in facilitating
or hindering the effectiveness of music teachers in carrying out their various roles. The results of
this study also showed that although teachers and principals from both primary and secondary
schools rated resources and support more highly, there was no significant difference in how
strongly the various groups felt about the endorsed causes. Music teachers also placed more
importance on time as one of the factors influencing teacher effectiveness compared to
principals. Principals rated time as the least influential factor and identified ability as being more
important.
Both groups believe that music teachers are generally competent enough to teach the level of
music required and that they are putting in the necessary effort, despite not being able to achieve
maximum results. Most of the ability attributes identified by both groups endorsed general
teacher characteristics rather than musical ability. Findings revealed that there were no
significant differences in the perceptions of self-efficacy between music teachers and principals.
Music teachers rated themselves moderately on the self-efficacy scale and this perception was
also strongly endorsed by principals. Both groups highlighted music theory and recorder as the
areas in which music teachers’ possessed the strongest skills, whilst musical arranging
keyboard, and ensemble were identified as the weakest areas.
There was a significant difference, however, in the principals’ perception of teacher
effectiveness in some areas as compared to the music teachers. Principals gave much lower
ratings for teacher effectiveness than music teachers. Principals also held different expectations
for teacher effectiveness than did music teachers. On the other hand, music teachers who were
categorized as effective identified similar causal factors, namely resources and support, as those
who were rated ineffective.
There was a systematic trend for both groups to make external, stable, and uncontrollable
attributions for teacher effectiveness and internal, stable, and uncontrollable attributions for
success-related outcomes. Principals had more of a tendency to ascribe causes to internal factors
whilst music teachers made more external attributions for teacher effectiveness. Despite the
predominantly external locus of control of music teachers where teacher effectiveness is
concerned, they continue to demonstrate a passion for music teaching and to be highly
motivated.
Implications for Music Curriculum Specialists
Knowledge of the causal attributions perceived by music teachers and principals to
influence teacher effectiveness can assist curriculum specialists in identifying more accurately
the concerns of those involved, and providing the right conditions to enable music teachers to be
more effective. According to the principles of attribution theory, an understanding of the overall
attributional style of music teachers may also enable curriculum specialists to predict the future
behaviour of teachers and to assist them where necessary in changing harmful attributions and
making more appropriate ones, which would lead to more success-oriented behaviour and
outcomes.
The lack of resources in schools in St. Lucia was consistently identified as the key factor
influencing teacher effectiveness and needs to be investigated and addressed on a per school
basis. The traditional practice of purchasing musical instruments en masse and depositing them
in schools without first identifying the needs of the school and the abilities of the music teacher
may need to be revisited. One of the findings coming out of this study is that music teachers have
specific skills in various aspects of music teaching. Providing a teacher who is skilled at guitar
with an electronic keyboard, therefore, would not be a frugal use of resources.
The support of music specialists in proposing alternative strategies which can be
employed in situations where financial constraints limit the provision of adequate resources to
schools is also necessary. Marshall (2004), suggests that there is a lot which music teachers can
do, primarily at the primary level, to provide students with a rich and solid musical foundation.
He further recommends a variety of activities which utilize rhythms and songs, for example, to
encourage exploration, creativity, and improvisation. In light of the reported dearth in resources
therefore, it is imperative that professional training workshops also provide music teachers with
the requisite skills so that they could adapt to the situation.
There is need for more intervention efforts among specialists, principals and other
stakeholders, for example, to solve issues such as the lack of space in some schools to teach
music and to provide assistance to schools in sourcing their own funds to procure musical
instruments. The kind of support given must transcend the mere organizing of training
workshops into providing follow-up visits to individual music teachers in order to assist them in
such activities as implementing various teaching strategies, working with ensembles, or the
planning and preparation of lessons for instruction. One example of such a support mechanism is
a mentoring and professional development programme identified by Haack (2006), where more
experienced and expert teachers are utilized to assist in meeting the specific needs of novice
teachers. Curriculum specialists also need to work with school principals in promoting the value
of music education so that principals would be more inclined to encourage other members of
staff to give the required support when necessary.
Given the varied abilities and areas of strength of music teachers, the need for training
identified by both teachers and principals should be addressed only after identifying the needs of
individual teachers. A strategy such as the CBAM Stages of Concern Questionnaire (SoCQ)
should be utilized to obtain a more in depth knowledge of not only the needs and concerns of
music educators, but also the various degrees of urgency of those needs. The SoCQ has been
advocated as one of the most useful tools for planning staff development programmes to address
the individual needs of people (Loucks, 1983). Rather than having mass workshops for teachers
therefore, training sessions can be organized in smaller groups which could ensure greater
impact. In order to address the shortage of suitable human resources for this task, however, there
is need to begin the training of more experienced and qualified music teachers to serve as trainers
and facilitators.
Although the findings show that music teachers continue to demonstrate motivation for
music teaching, their propensity to make external, stable, and uncontrollable attributions for
teacher effectiveness implies that very little change can be expected in their behaviour unless
efforts are made to change their beliefs and perceptions. The heavy reliance on external
assistance or on the Ministry of Education by both principals and music teachers is likely to
create a sense of stagnation in such schools, and frustration among those whose continuous
efforts appear to yield little results. Curriculum specialists also need to create more opportunities
for music teachers to share best practices and to discuss alternative ways of achieving goals by
focusing more on teacher ability, appropriate effort, and creativity.
In order for both music teachers and principals to have a more objective view of how
effective music teachers are in carrying out their roles, it is necessary for curriculum specialists
to establish some form of minimum standards to be achieved by both students and teachers.
Clear guidelines should be communicated to all parties involved as to what exactly constitutes a
good music programme. According to Spruce (2005), achievement in music education can be
increased to a great extent if attainable goals are set and communicated clearly to teachers. Music
teachers, particularly at the primary schools where there are no CXC exams, should be able to
have an idea as to whether or not they are meeting the basic curriculum requirements for the
various levels. There should also be annual teacher appraisals which would serve to inform
music teachers of their strengths and weakness and to enable curriculum specialists to provide
specific assistance to teachers in need.
Recommendations for Improving Teacher Effectiveness
Based on the previous discussion, the following recommendations are made:
 The music department of CAMDU should undertake a survey of the specific needs of
music teachers using the CBAM Stages of Concern Questionnaire. This will enable
music specialists to identify the types of resources and the nature of the support needed.
 CAMDU should organize a series of training workshops for music teachers to share
practical, alternative, and innovative teaching strategies which can be employed in order
to improve teacher effectiveness and cope with the lack of musical instruments.
 Curriculum specialists should organize meetings with school principals and District
Education Officers in order to clarify and discuss the desired approach to music
education in schools and the goals and objectives of a music programme. Those goals
should also be clearly articulated in document form and disseminated to all music
teachers at an appropriate forum.
 Curriculum specialists need to commence the training and empowering of experienced
music teachers to assist in providing more support to the novice or less competent
colleagues through a mentoring programme.
 An annual music teacher appraisal should be implemented by CAMDU. This will enable
both teachers and music specialists to have a clearer idea of the extent to which the goals
of music education are being achieved.
Recommendations for Future Study
This study was unable to obtain a clear distinction between highly effective and
ineffective music teachers as most music teachers perceived themselves to be effective
competent, and expending the required effort. Curriculum specialist may benefit from further
research which uses purposive sampling to identify music teachers who are known to be
effective, and those who are considered to be ineffective, according to CAMDU’s criteria, in
order to examine the attributional styles of these two groups and to determine whether or not
there is any relationship between attributional styles and teacher effectiveness. Also related
would be a study of specific schools which have the necessary resources as compared to those
schools without, in order to examine the attributions for success and failure outcomes. This
would further verify the significance of resources as the most influential factor in teacher
effectiveness.
Although the majority of music teachers were satisfied with the amount of support
provided by their principals, further research into the type and quality of support given would be
valuable, since some music teachers also cited causes which are within the jurisdiction of
principals as influential factors of teacher effectiveness, such as, the lack of support from
colleagues and the lack of time. In addition, it would also be useful to investigate whether the
attitude and behaviour of principals toward music teachers are influenced in any way by the
causal attributions and beliefs which they hold, and whether there is any relationship between
teacher effectiveness and principals’ attributions.
In order to get a more complete idea of the status of music education in St. Lucia, there is
also need to examine causal attributions from the perspective of the students, since the ultimate
aim of music education is for the students’ development. Curriculum specialists, as well as music
teachers and principals, would benefit from getting a further understanding into the causes which
students give for their success and failure outcomes in music, and their perceptions of teacher
effectiveness and the value of the music programme.
The essence of attribution theory implies that our explanations for success and failure can
have lasting effects on our future achievement-oriented behaviours. In order to improve teacher
effectiveness in music education in St. Lucia, it is first necessary to address the perceptions of
music teachers and principals, who are the ones directly responsible for implementing the music
programmes. Those perceptions, whether accurate or not, and the explanations given for success
and failure can have lasting effects on the future achievement-oriented behaviours of music
teachers. The ultimate aim should be to get teachers to change their attributional styles from an
external to an internal locus of control by addressing the urgent needs of music teachers or by
working with them to enable them to see alternative ways of achieving success in the current
circumstances.
References
Ahles, Paula M. (2004). Attribution theory in a cooperative learning situation: Can it explain
helping behavior? Ph.D. dissertation, Arizona State University, United States -- Arizona.
Retrieved July 21, 2010, from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text.(Publication No. AAT
3123510).Alexander, P. A., & Winne, P. H. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of Educational
Psychology (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Routledge.
Asmus Jr, E. P. (1986). Students beliefs about the causes of success and failure in music: A study
of achievement motivation. Retrieved from http://music.arts.usf.edu/rpme/rpmelege.htm.
Asmus, E. P. (1994). Motivation in music teaching and learning. The Quaterly Journal of Music
Teaching and Learning, 5, 5-32. Retrieved from ERIC Data Base.
Balnaves, M., & Caputi, P. (2001). Introduction to quantitative research methods: an

investigative approach. London: Sage. Retrieved from Google Books:
http://books.google.com/
books?uid=911515654698636441&hl=en&q=Introduction+to+quantitative+research+me
thods%3A+an+investigative+approach.
Bandura, A. (1993). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge [u.a]: Cambridge Univ.

Press. Retrieved from Google Books: http://books.google.com/books?uid=-
911515654698636441&hl=en&q=Self-efficacy+in+Changing+Societies
Barbie, E. R. (2009). The practice of social research. California: Wadsworth Pub. Retrieved
from Google Books: http://books.google.com/books?uid=911515654698636441&hl=
en&q= The+practice+of+social+research
Bar-Tal, D., & Efraim, D. (1979). Pupils' attributions of success and failure. Child development.
50, 264-267. Retrieved from JSTOR Data Base.
Bray-Clark, N., & Bates, R. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs and teacher effectiveness: Implications
for professional development. Professional Educator, 26 (1), 13 - 22. Retrieved from
ERIC Data Base. EJ842387
Byo, S. J. (1999). Classroom teachers and music specialists' perceived ability to implement the
National Standards for Music Education. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47
(2),111-123. Retrieved from JSTOR Data Base.
Campbell, M. R., & Thompson, L. K. (2007). Perceived concerns of preservice music education
teachers: A cross-sectional survey. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55 (2), 162-
176. Retrieved from ERIC Data Base. EJ779758
Caterall, J. S., Chapleau, R., & Iwanaga, J. (1999, September). Higher achievement, staying in
school and better attitudes. (E. B. Fiske, Ed.) Involvement in the Arts and Human
Development: General Involvement and Intensive Involvement in Music and Theatre Arts
. Retrieved from: http://artsedge.kennedy-center.org/champions/pdfs/Involvmt.pdf
Coon, D., Mitterer, J. O., Talbot, S., & Vanchella, C. M. (2010). Introduction to psychology:
Gateways to mind and behavior. California: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Retrieved
from Google Books: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=
bks%3A1&q=Introduction+to+Psychology%3A+Gateways+to+mind+and+behavior&aq
= f&aqi=g1& aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
Dei-Hsuan, H. (2004). How college students explain their grades in a foreign language course:
The interrelationship of attributions, self-efficacy, language learning beliefs, and
achievement. Retrieved from: http://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/1332
Dick, H. J. (2006). The relationship between instrumental music achievement and causal
attributions for success and failure. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete Data
Base.
Ellis, A., Abrams, M., & Abrams, L. D. (2009). Personality theories: Critical perspectives. Los
Angeles: SAGE Publications. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&tbo=
1&tbs= bks%3A1&q=Personality+Theories%3A+Critical+Perspectives&aq=f&aqi=
&aql=&oq= &gs_rfa
Eric, B. (2009). The music teaching artist's bible: Becoming a virtuoso educator. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. Retrieved from Google Books: http://www.google.com/search?
hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=The+Music+Teaching+Artist%27s+
Bible%3A+Becoming+a+Virtuoso+Educator&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=
&oq=&gs_rfai=
Eysenck, M. W. (2004). Psychology: An international perspective. New York: Psychology Press

Ltd. Retrieved from Google Books: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&tbo
= 1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=Psychology%3A+An+International+Perspective&aq=f&aqi=
&aql =&oq=&gs_rfai=
Gardner, R. D. (2010). Should I stay or should I go? Factors that influence the retention,
turnover, and attrition of K-12 music teachers. Arts Education Policy Review, 111 (3),
112-121. Retrieved from ERIC Data Base. EJ879609
Gerrity, K. W. (2007). No Child Left Behind: Determining the impact of policy on music
education. Retrieved June 14, 2010 from: http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.cgi?acc_num=
osu1180474950
Gordon, L. M. (2001). High teacher efficacy as a marker of teacher effectiveness in the domain
of classroom management. Retrieved from ERIC Data Base. ED465731
Guskey, T. R. (1981). Differences in teachers' perceptions of the causes of positive versus

negative student achievement outcomes. Retrieved from ERIC Data Base. ED200624
Haack, P. A. (2006). Mentoring and professional development programs: Possibilities and

pitfalls. Music Educators Journal, 92 (4), 60-64. Retrieved from ERIC Data Base.
EJ755082.
Hall, B. W. (1993). Attributions that teachers hold to account for student success and failure and
their relationship to teaching level and teacher efficacy beliefs. Retrieved from ERIC
Data Base. ED349280
Hamann, D. L., Bakery, D. S., Mc. Allister, P. A., & Bauer, W. I. (2000). Factors affecting
university music students' perceptions of lesson quality and teaching effectiveness.
Journal of Research in Music Education, 48 (2), 102-113. Retrieved from JSTOR Data
Base.
Hennesy, S. (1995). Music 7 - 11. London: Routledge. Retrieved from Google Books:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=Music+7+-
+11&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
IAR. (2007). IAR: Instructional Assessment Resources. Retrieved July 14, 2010, from
http://www.utexas.edu/academic/diia/assessment/iar/teaching/gather/method/survey-
Response.php
Jorgensen, E. R. (2008). The art of teaching music. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Retrieved from Google Books: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&tbo=
1&tbs= bks%3A1&q=The+art+of+teaching+music&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
Kelly, S. N. (2008). Teaching music in the American society: A social and cultural
understanding of music education. New York: Routledge. Retrieved from Google Books:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=Teaching+
Music+in+the+American+Society%3A+A+Social+and+Cultural+Understanding+of+
Music+Education&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
Kremer, L., & Kurtz, C. (1987). Locus of control, perceptions and attributions of student
teachers in educational situations. Retrieved from ERIC Data Base. ED212614
Leacock, C. J., Warrican, J. S., & Rose, G. S. (2009). Research methods for inexperienced
researchers. Kingston: Ian Randle Publishers.
Legette, R. M. (1993). Causal attributions of music majors and nonmusic majors regarding
success and failure in music: A study of motivation and achievement. Research
Perspectives in Music Education, Fall (4), 9-12. Retrieved from ERIC Data Base.
ED375033
Legette, R. M. (1998). Causal beliefs of public school students about success and failure in
music. Journal of Research in Music Education , 102-111.
Loucks, S. F. (1983). The Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM): Series Paper (Number 2).
Retrieved from ERIC Data Base. ED233524
Madsen, C. K., & Hancock, C. B. (2002). Support for music education: A case study of issues
concerning teacher retention and attention. 50 (1), 6-19. Retrieved from ERIC Data Base.
EJ675449
Marshall, H. D. (2004). Improvisation strategies and resources. General Music Today,17 (3), 51-
53. Retrieved from ERIC Data Base. EJ704545
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, Va.:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Retrieved from Google
Books: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=
What+works +in+schools%3A+Translating+Research+into+Action&aq=f&aqi=&aql=
&oq =&gs_rfai=
Mays-Jackson, Debra Lynette (2005). The quality of choral music programs in the Jackson
Public School District as perceived by choral directors and school administrators. Ph.D.
dissertation, Mississippi State University, United States -- Mississippi. Retrieved July 04,
2010, from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text.(Publication No. AAT 3201851).
McInerney, D. M., & Van Etten, S. (Eds.). (2004). Big theories revisited:Research on
sociocultural influences on motivation and learning (Vol. IV). Greenwich, Conn.:
Information Age Pub. Retrieved from Google Books: http://www.google.com/search?hl=
en&safe=off&tbo= 1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=Big+theories+revisited%3AResearch+on+
sociocultural+ influences+on+motivation+and+learning&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_
rfai=
Mertens, D. M. (2010). Research and evaluation in education and psychology : Integrating

diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (3rd Edition ed.).
Los Angeles: Sage. Retrieved from Google Books: http://www.google.com/search?hl=
en&safe=off&tbo= 1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=Research+and+Evaluation+in+Education
+and+Psychology+%3A+ Integrating+Diversity+with+Quantitative%2C+
Qualitative%2C+and+Mixed+Methods&aq =f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
Miksza, P., Roeder, M., & Biggs, D. (2010). Surveying Collorado band directors' opinions of
skills and characteristics important to successful music teaching. Journal of Research in
Music Education, 57 (4), 364-381. Retrieved from ERIC Data Base. EJ877137.
Muijs, D. (2004). Doing quantitative resarch in education with spss. London: Sage. Retrieved
from Google Books: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=
bks%3A1&q=Doing+quantitative+resarch+in+education+with+spss&aq=f&aqi=
m1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
Ormrod, J. E. (2008). Human Learning (5th Edition ed.). New Jersey: Merril Prentice Hall.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-Efficacy beliefs of Adolescents. Greenwich, Conn. IAP: Information Age
Publ. Retrieved from Google Books: http://www.google.com/search? hl=en&safe=
off&tbo= 1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=Self-Efficacy+beliefs+of+Adolescents&aq
=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
Punch, k. (2005). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches

(2nd ed.). London: Sage. Retrieved from Google Books: http://www.google.com/search?
hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=Introduction+to+Social+Research%3A
+Quantitative+and+Qualitative+Approaches+&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
Rao, D. B., & Kumar, D. N. (2004). School teacher effectiveness. New Delhi: Discovery Pub.
House. Retrieved from Google Books: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=
off&tbo= 1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=School+Teacher+Effectiveness&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=
&gs_rfai=
Rittenhouse, Jacob H. (1989). Competitive and noncompetitive choral festivals at the secondary
level. D.M.A. dissertation, Arizona State University, United States -- Arizona. Retrieved
July 21, 2010, from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text.(Publication No. AAT 8919644).
Russel-Bowie, D. (2009). What me? Teach music to my primary class? Challenges to teaching
music in primary schools in five countries. Journal of Research in Music Education ,
11(1), 23-36. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete Data Base.
Smart, J. C., & Tierney, W. G. (2003). Higher education: Handbook of theory and research.
London: Kluwere Academic. Retrieved from Google Books: http://www.google.com/
search? hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=Higher+education%3A+Handbook
+of+ theory +and+research.&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
Spruce, G. (Ed.). (2005). Teaching music. New York: RoutledgeFalmer. Retrieved from Google
Books: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=
Teaching+Music&aq=f&aqi=g1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
Standley, J. M., & Madsen, C. K. (1991). An observation procedure to differentiate teaching

experience and expertise in music education. Journal of Research in Music Education ,
39, 5-11. Retrieved from JSTOR Data Base.
Tauber, R. T. (2007). Classroom management: Sound theory and effective practice. Westport,
Conn.: Praeger Publishers. Retrieved from Google Books: http://www.google.com/
search?hl= en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=Classroom+Management%3A+
Sound+Theory +and+Effective+Practice.&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_
rfai=
Teachout, D. J. (1997). Preservice and experienced teachers' opinions of skills and behaviors
important to successful music teaching. Journal of Research in Music Education , 45, 41-
50. Retrieved from: http://bama.ua.edu/~chancock/page13/files/3345464.pdf.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. Psychological Review.

92(4), 548-573. Retrieved from: http://education.ucsb.edu/janeconoley/ed197/documents/
weinerAnattributionaltheory.pdf
Weiner, B., Heckhausen, H., Meyer, W., & Cook, R. E. (1978). Causal ascriptions and
achievement behaviour: The conceptual analysis of efort. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 21(2), 239-248. Retrived from ProQuest Data Base.
Weiner, I. B., Renolds, W. M., Freedheim, D. K., & Miller, G. E. (2003). Handbook of
psychology: Educational Psychology. NJ Wiley: Hoboken.
Yun Dai, D., & Sternberg, R. J. (2004). Motivation, emotion, and cognition: Integrative
perspectives on intellectual functioning and development. New Jersey:
Laurence Earlbaum Associates Inc. Retrieved from Google Books:
http://books.google.com/ books?uid=-911515654698636441&hl=en&q=Motivation
%2C+ emotion%2C+and+cognition%3A +Integrative+perspectives+on+intellectual+
functioning+and+development
APPENDIX A
Survey Instrument for Music Teachers
University of the West Indies

Faculty of Education
Cave Hill
Barbados
______________________________________________________________________________
EDRS 7201 QUESTIONNAIRE
The following questionnaire is part of a study being conducted as a Master of Education project
at the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill. The purpose of the questionnaire is to find out
the reasons which music teachers in St. Lucia have for their ability or inability to carry out their
roles effectively.
Please do not write your name on the questionnaire to ensure the confidentiality of your
responses. The information which you provide is for research purposes only and will be used to
improve teacher training, and music education in St. Lucia. Rest assured that this study is NOT a
Ministry of Education initiative and will in no way affect your annual teacher appraisal. You are
therefore invited to be as frank and honest as possible.
Please omit any questions you do not wish to answer and please feel free to add comments or
clarifications to any of the questions. Thank you for your cooperation.
Jason C. Joseph
Biographical Data
Please provide the following background information by placing an “x” in the appropriate
box.
1. Gender: Male Female
2. Age range: under 21 21 – 34 35 – 44 45 – 54 55 and over
3. What level do you teach? Infant/Primary Secondary
4. How long have you been in the teaching profession?

Under 1 year 1- 5yrs 6 -10 yrs 11 – 20 yrs over 20 yrs
5. How long have you been teaching music?

6. What are your musical qualifications?

I have no formal qualifications
ABRSM theory Grade
ABRSM practical Grade Instrument
Grade Instrument
SLSM teachers certificate/advanced certificate in music teaching
Degree (Please provide details about your music degree)
Other
7. Are you currently a member of any musical performing group? Yes No
8. What is your professional status?
Unqualified teacher
Qualified teacher
Degree
Qualified with degree (Please give more details about your degree and the course of
study)
Other qualifications:
9. Are you currently taking any private practical

or theory music classes? YES NO
If NO, please give your reason(s)

10. Do you have plans within the next five years to do any of the following?
Enroll at the St. Lucia School of Music Yes No
Pursue a degree in music Yes No
If you answered Yes to any item in no. 10, please skip question no. 11.
11. What are your reasons for not furthering your musical studies at this time?
12. Do you have plans within the next five years to pursue
any other course of study? Yes No
If Yes, please name the course of study
Teacher Confidence
Please indicate your level of confidence in the following areas by marking the appropriate
box with an “x”.
Very weak Very Strong

1 2 3 4 5
12. a Singing
b. Playing the recorder
c. Playing the keyboard
d. Other instrument
(name instrument)
e. Working with a choir
f. Working with an instrumental ensemble
g. Composing
h. Arranging
i. Knowledge of content required

for the age group that you teach
Roles and Responsibilities
For each of the following statements, please indicate your agreement or disagreement by
placing an “x” in the appropriate box.
13. I teach more than 28 periods of music a week. Yes No
14. I have an active choir at my school. Yes No
If No, please explain your reasons for not having one.
15. I have an active ensemble group at my school

(recorder, percussion, or other instruments). Yes No
16. I enjoy participating in music festivals/competitions

with my students. Yes No
If No, please give reasons why not
17. Teaching music is a difficult task. Yes No
18. I feel unqualified to teach music. Yes No
19. I feel overwhelmed by my work load. Yes No
20. I generally enjoy teaching music. Yes No
21. I receive enough support from the curriculum specialist. Yes No
22. I receive enough support from my principal. Yes No
23. It is important for students to learn the theory of

music before they can start playing music. Yes No
24. The number of training workshops organized for

music teachers is enough. Yes No
25. I am satisfied with the resources and instruments at my disposal. Yes No
26. My students are interested in the subject. Yes No
27. I have lost my passion for teaching music. Yes No
Please indicate to what extent you engage in each of the following activities. Circle only one
number. (Never=1, rarely=2, sometimes=3, often=4, always=5)
Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

28. I create opportunities, like special
assemblies, and concerts for my students
to perform. 1 2 3 4 5
29. My music lessons involve listening

performing, and composing activities. 1 2 3 4 5
30. I participate in national music festivals

and competitions. 1 2 3 4 5
31. I invite musicians and other resource persons

to my school/classes. 1 2 3 4 5
32. I am able to apply what I learn at workshops

in my teaching. 11 22 33 44 55
Please complete the following statements:

33. I would be a more effective music teacher if
34. My biggest challenge as a music teacher is
35. My greatest strength as a music teacher is
36. On a scale of 1 – 10 (1 being poor and 10 being excellent), how would you rate your
overall performance as a music teacher? (Circle only one number)
Poor Excellent
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Thank you for your cooperation!

APPENDIX B
Survey Instrument for Principals
University of the West Indies

Faculty of Education
Cave Hill
Barbados
______________________________________________________________________________
EDRS 7201 QUESTIONNAIRE
The following questionnaire is part of a study being conducted as a Master of Education project
at the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill. The purpose of the questionnaire is to find out
the reasons which music teachers in St. Lucia, and their principals, have for the ability or
inability of music teachers to carry out their roles effectively.
Please do not write your name on the questionnaire to ensure the confidentiality of your
responses. The information which you provide is for research purposes only and will be used to
improve teacher training, and music education in St. Lucia. Rest assured that this study is NOT a
Ministry of Education initiative and will in no way affect your appraisal as principal. You are
therefore invited to be as frank and honest as possible.
Please omit any questions you do not wish to answer and please feel free to add comments or
clarifications to any of the questions. Thank you for your cooperation.
____________________
Jason C. Joseph
Biographical Data
Please provide the following background information by placing an “x” in the appropriate
box.
1. Gender: Male Female
2. What level do you manage? Infant/Primary Secondary
3. How long have you been a head teacher/principal?

4. Do you have any musical experience or qualifications? Yes No
If yes, please explain further
5. Are you currently a member of any performing group? Yes No
Teacher Confidence
Please indicate how confident you perceive your music teacher to be in the following areas
by marking the appropriate box with an “x”.
Very weak Very Strong

2 2 3 4 5
6 a. Singing
b. Playing the recorder
c. Playing the keyboard
d. Other instrument
e. Working with a choir
f. Working with an instrumental ensemble
g. Composing
h. Arranging
i. Knowledge of content required

for the age group that you teach
Roles and Responsibilities
For each of the following statements, please indicate your agreement or disagreement by
placing an “x” in the appropriate box.
7. I have an active choir at my school. Yes No
8. I have an active ensemble group at my school

(recorder, percussion, or other instruments). Yes No
9. I enjoy having my school participate in music festivals/competitions.

Yes No
If No, please give reasons why not
10. Teaching music is a difficult task. Yes No
11. My music teacher is skilled enough to teach music. Yes No
12. My music teacher feels overwhelmed by

his/her workload. Yes No
13. My music teacher appears to enjoy teaching music. Yes No
14. My music teacher receives enough support from the

curriculum specialist. Yes No
15. I provide enough support to my music teacher. Yes No
16. It is important for students to learn the theory of

music before they can start playing music. Yes No
17. The number of training workshops organized for

music teachers is enough. Yes No
18. I am satisfied with the musical resources and instruments Yes No
at my disposal.
19. My students are interested in the subject. Yes No
20. My music teacher has lost his/her passion for teaching music. Yes No
Please indicate to what extent your music teacher engages in each of the following
activities. Circle only one number. (Never=1, rarely=2, sometimes=3, often=4, always=5)
Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always
21. Create opportunities, like special
assemblies, and concerts for students
to perform. 1 2 3 4 5
22. His/her music lessons involve listening

performing, and composing activities. 1 2 3 4 5
23. He/she participates in national music

festivals and competitions. 1 2 3 4 5
24. He/she invites musicians and other resource

persons to school/classes. 1 2 3 4 5
25. He/she is able to apply what is learnt at

workshops in his/her teaching. 11 22 33 44 55
Please complete the following statements:
26. My music teacher would be more effective music if
27. My music teacher’s biggest challenge appears to be
28. My music teacher’s greatest strength is
29. On a scale of 1 – 10 (1 being poor and 10 being excellent), how would you rate your
music teacher’s overall performance? (Circle only one number)
Poor Excellent
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Thanks for your cooperation!

Causal Attributions and Teacher Effectiveness in Music Education in St. Lucia

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Causal Attributions and Teacher Effectiveness in Music Education in St. Lucia

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Running head: Causal Attributions and Teacher Effectiveness in Music 1

CAUSAL ATTRIBUTIONS AND TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS IN MUSIC EDUCATION

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

The University of the West Indies

Faculty of Humanities and Education

Cave Hill Campus

Data was collected using a researcher-constructed survey which measured attributions

curriculum specialists are also discussed.

List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………………... 5

Chapter One: Identification of the Problem …………………………………………………. 6

The Nature of the Problem …………………………………………………………... 8

Attribution Theory …………………………………………………………………… 10

Purpose of the Study ………………………………………………………………… 18

Definition of Terms …………………………………………………………………. 19

Chapter Two: Literature Review ……………………………………………………………. 20

Factors Affecting Teacher Effectiveness in Music Education ……………………… 20

Causal Attributions for Success and Failure ………………………………………... 21

Attributional Bias …………………………………………………………………… 23

Causal Attributions for Success and Failure in Music Education ………………….. 23

Causal Attributions and Self Efficacy ……………………………………………… 24

Attributions of Principals …………………………………………………………… 25

Chapter Three: Methodology ……………………………………………………………….. 28

Measurement Instrument ……………………………………………………………. 28

Pilot Testing of Questionnaire ………………………………………………………. 30

Research Design …………………………………………………………………….. 31

Ethical Issues ……………………………………………………………………….. 35

Chapter Four: Analysis and Discussion of Findings ………………………………………. 36

Treatment of Data …………………………………………………………………. 38

Open-ended Items …………………………………………………………………. 50

Chapter Five: Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations ………………………... 61

Implications for Music Curriculum Specialists ………………………………….... 63

Recommendations for Improving Teacher Effectiveness ……………………….... 66

Recommendations for Future Study ………………………………………………. 67

Table 1 Participants by School Level and Gender ……………………………………… 37

Table 2 Comparison of Music Teachers’ and Principals’ Causal Attributions by

School Level …………………………………………………………………… 40

Table 3 Comparison of Music Teachers’ Causal Attributions by Music Teaching

Table 4 Comparison of Teacher Effectiveness Perceptions of Music Teachers and

Table 5 Comparison of Teacher-Efficacy Perceptions of Music Teachers and

Causal Attributions and Teacher Effectiveness in Music Education in Saint Lucia

Chapter One: Identification of the problem

music teacher is supposed to manage.

outstanding performances of students in competitions, festivals and other activities which

The Nature of the Problem

Prior to commencing post-graduate studies, the researcher served as Curriculum

subjects (Gerrity, 2007).

pursue degrees in music.

specialists to be either lacking in ability, interest, or motivation. As a result of those expectations,

believe may highlight their weaknesses.

In addition to those concerns, during meetings with school principals in an attempt to

of those involved in the day-to-day process of music education.

then attributed to either internal or external causes.

Attribution theory is strongly related to the concept of motivation. Motivation can be

the two-dimensional approach to categorizing causal ascriptions, namely: locus of control, or

internal-external, and stability (Dick, 2006).

them or in their environment. This dimension is central in influencing people’s affective

is making an attribution based on an uncontrollable factor if he believes that he is not in a

to attempt to remedy the situation. Depending on the type or combinations of attributions we

environment in a way which allows them to maintain a positive self-image. Individuals, he

referred to as the actor-observer bias.

of the attribution in evoking a particular emotion or behaviour. Sometimes, people’s attributions

abilities to master challenging activities necessary to succeed.

Judgments about self-efficacy are also said to be formed in a cyclical manner, or

a perception of low self-efficacy is likely to expend little effort on a task resulting in an