Instrumentalists and non-instrumentalists in the KS3 music classroom

Information about an investigation of the roles of instrumentalists and non-instrumentalists in the KS3 music classroom

This section of the site is the result of a Curriculum Development Initiative, investigating the roles of instrumentalists and non-instrumentalists in the KS3 music classroom. In particular, it was hoped to address the issue of the wide gap in the standards achieved by the two groups at the end of KS3.

However, when the project specifically investigated the role of instrumentalists, it quickly took on a new direction. Influenced by research about able pupils and thinking skills, it saw how evidence from this generic research could very usefully be applied to all music teaching. In particular, it seemed to offer both an underlying principle and a set of practical solutions to the problems faced by teachers when trying to improve the provision for instrumentalists and non-instrumentalists.

The final outcomes of the work are significant. They offer a new definition of musical giftedness, principles to develop the abilities of pupils showing this giftedness, and examples of teaching strategies which made a positive difference to the motivation and standards of pupils showing high musical ability. They also indicate how pupils with lower ability in music can consolidate their existing learning and can then be helped to achieve more advanced standards. The consequences of fully implementing these principles and strategies should be more musically-able pupils achieving the very highest standards (Levels 8 and above,) and more low-attaining pupils achieving the expected standards for music (Level 5 and above) at the end of Key Stage 3.

The work of the project is described in seven sections.

The issue

Data

Over the past five years, there has been a growing bank of evidence about the performance of all pupils in music by the end of Key Stage 3. This has been made possible by the introduction of Statutory Assessments, requiring all pupils to be assessed against national expectations at the end of Year 9. Introduced in 1998, assessments were initially made against expectations on a four-point scale (working towards expectations, working at expectation, working beyond expectation and exceptional performance). Since 2001, assessments have been made against Levels, in the same way as all other subjects.

The requirements of the first three years meant that, although assessments had to be made and reported on an individual pupil basis, there was no necessity to send them to either a national agency or a local body. Returns were made voluntarily to the national data collection agency by about half of England’s schools, and these results were published. They indicated that about 67% of all pupils reached the expectations, which was at least comparable with other subjects. In some authorities, however, the opportunity was taken to establish a wider base of evidence. Some schools therefore indicated the numbers of pupils achieving expectations who were defined either as ‘instrumentalists’ or ‘non-instrumentalists’. This indicated a more worrying trend: that although instrumentalists achieved good standards, ‘non-instrumentalists’ did not achieve anywhere near the same results: as many as 48% of this group did not meet expectations, and as few as 10% managed to exceed expectations. This compares with as many as 66% of instrumentalists exceeding expectations.

This was perhaps not entirely surprising: there has been a parallel pattern of evidence in GCSE music for many years, despite the insistence that all pupils should be able to achieve the highest grades at GCSE, whether or not they have had additional lessons outside the classroom. Nevertheless, the apparent scale of the problem seemed to be worthy of further investigation.

Implications of the data

It is true that this data must be treated with considerable caution. On a national basis, there has been no compulsory moderation of standards, and the schools sending in data were not necessarily a representative sample. On a local basis, individual teacher’s interpretation of ‘instrumentalists’ can also vary. However, the overall picture remained broadly consistent in each of the three years during which the local samples were collated, and seemed to suggest the following:

the difference in the numbers of instrumentalists and non-instrumentalists achieving the national expectation is very wide: a gap of at least 35% exists between the two groups
non-instrumentalists seem to be incapable of achieving the highest standards (originally defined as ‘exceptional performance’, and now indicated by Level 8 and above)
the numbers of ‘non-instrumentalists’ achieving standards in music beyond the expectation seem to be lower than the numbers of ‘average’ pupils in other subjects achieving standards beyond the expectation
the numbers of ‘instrumentalists’ achieving standards in music beyond the expectation seem to be lower than the numbers of ‘high-attaining’ pupils in other subjects achieving beyond the expectation – despite the instrumentalists’ additional lessons and support

Extrapolating the data for the last two statements in particular is not an exact science; but such data as there is seems to be consistent enough to suggest that the following issues were worth exploring:

why do so many non-instrumentalists fail to reach the expectations, and why do none of them reach the highest standards?
why do instrumentalists not do better than they already do, given that many of them could be getting at least 1 hour of additional teaching every week, alongside additional ‘homework’ (practice on their instrument) and ensemble opportunities?

Existing literature and teaching strategies

Teaching strategies currently used

It seems that existing strategies used by music teachers both to support the weaker pupils and stretch the more able musicians do not actually make a significant impact on the achievement of these pupils. Instrumentalists are often given differentiated performing materials – but these sometimes remain below the level of expertise that the pupils actually possess, and according to the end of Key Stage Assessments do not help enough of these pupils to reach the highest standards. Anecdotally, many of these pupils are also bored in KS3 lessons, and, quite probably as a consequence, do not always opt for GCSE music – despite their interest and aptitude in music.

At the same time, the weakest pupils do not seem to progress: it is still possible to see many Year 9 pupils apparently incapable of playing the simplest parts, and showing no apparent improvement in their ability to listen to and talk about music.

Existing literature and guidance

General

Where guidance on able musicians does exist, it seems to address neither the key issues of how they become able, nor on the strategies that teachers can use to improve their work in the classroom. Rather, it focuses on simply identifying such pupils, and suggesting a range of ideas about extended provision (such as more advanced performing tasks or ensemble opportunities). This therefore fails to address their advanced musical learning and how to improve it.

Hampshire

For instance, the chapter on ‘Able and Talented pupils in Music’ to be found in the Hampshire publication ‘Challenging Able Pupils – Guidelines for Secondary School’ (October 1998) has the following headings:

Able and talented pupils’ characteristics
Identification and monitoring
Enrichment
Organisation
Provision – resources
Opportunities and provision in Hampshire
Scholarships and Awards

These are all very helpful, and provide useful pointers both to the characteristics of able pupils, and the types of additional provision one can make for them outside of the usual music classroom. However, they do not address the issue of musical learning for such pupils, and how they can be challenged and motivated to improve their overall musical progress.

QCA

Similarly, the QCA ‘Gifted and Talented’ website had sections which identified the characteristics of such children, but overemphasised the importance of instrumental and vocal skills to such pupils. For instance, the section on ‘Teaching talented pupils’ included as two of the first three suggestions:

letting them take the lead, for example by conducting the class or starting a song
involving other skills that the pupils developed outside the classroom, for example instrumental skills

These are worthy, and typical of the sorts of ‘differentiated’ activities that music teachers have tried in the past – and which, according to the End of Key Stage Assessments, do not actually improve their musical learning as one would expect. Again, there is very little on how pupils become musically able, and how their learning can be improved.

Lower attaining pupils

By the same token, there seems to be little advice on specific strategies to improve the musical learning of the lower attaining pupils. This is very different from the range of advice and material for supporting pupils with special educational needs. What is required is an approach which will help the ‘lower than average’ pupil in music, and in a way which goes beyond the inverse of the ‘differentiated parts’ – ie the simple bass line instead of the full walking bass. Again, this has been tried very often – but, according to the data, does not actually help these pupils to improve their overall musical learning.

The research programme

Musical aims and objectives

The group of teachers involved in this curriculum development initiative wanted more than a few simplistic 'tips on accommodating the able'; or 'strategies to help the lower attaining musician'. What they wanted was much more than this: how and why are 'able musicians' like they are, ensuring that the definition of an 'able musician' was not restricted to 'a pupil with outstanding technical instrumental and / or vocal expertise'.

'Able musician': limitations of current definitions

It was very clear from the outset that this traditional view was known to be simplistic and limited. All the teachers were able to describe 'able' pupils who had, by dint of general high intelligence, perseverance, effective teaching and supportive home backgrounds, been able to develop performing skills which, on the face of it, were well in advance of their peers - and yet who were clearly not 'musically gifted'. They were simply 'bright' children who, with the right provision and circumstances, had been able to become competent musical performers: the typical Grade 5 (pass) pianist, who really does not possess outstanding musicianship. At the same time, there are known examples of pupils who are clearly highly musically intelligent, showing musical perception and a personal response that indicates the most advanced musical awareness and ability - but who for various reasons do not have technical expertise on any instrument.

The group was keen to know how we can more widely and accurately describe the musical learning that the best musicians possess. If we could identify this, it might then be possible to see how we can improve the abilities of these 'good musicians' to become the 'very good' or 'exceptional' musicians. This would then address the issue of why instrumentalists apparently do not achieve as well at the highest levels in music as high attaining pupils do in other subjects (KS3 data suggests the most able pupils do better in nearly all other subjects: in 2001, only 6% of all pupils reached Levels 7+ in music, whereas 10% of all pupils reached Levels 7+ in history and geography. Given that in Hampshire, 'instrumentalists' represent about 20% of all KS3 pupils, this seems surprising - why do the best instrumentalists at the very least not match the performance of the best historians and geographers?).

Supporting lower ability musicians

At the same time, the group wanted to find a way of working which would enable music teachers to stretch the development of the weakest 'musicians'. Many secondary music teachers will be familiar with the Year 9 pupils who cannot play the simplest of rhythms, work within an ensemble, produce creative ideas when composing, or explain how music works / why they like the music they hear. These pupils seem never to move off the bottom of the musical learning / ability ladder, and appear to make no progress. They are, almost exclusively, 'non-instrumentalists', but it seems wrong that pupils without the advantage of additional lessons should be so penalised. If we could address this, the data for these pupils (as many as half of whom do not meet the national expectations) should improve.

The influence of generic able child research

It soon became apparent that the generic research on the 'Able Child', together with its focus on 'thinking skills' could provide an appropriate route forward. Much of the research on able / gifted and talented pupils emphasises the importance of pupils thinking about and understanding the subject matter. Teachers are encouraged to 'stretch' able pupils by challenging their assumptions so that they 'understand' rather simply 'complete the activity'. Quite apart from the intrinsic value of this approach being applied to music, the group quickly identified strong parallels between these kinds of generic approaches and the latest advice about Music in NC2000, as well as links to past research on musical development by Swanwick and Tillman.

This approach therefore seemed to offer a broader definition of 'musically gifted and talented'. which avoided simply re-iterating dependence on technical / performing musical ability. Because of existing work on thinking skills with generally able and talented pupils, there were also a range of specific teaching strategies already described which could be applied to music teaching.

Moreover, since the research associated with able children defines thinking skills from the lowest to the highest levels, it was also felt that some of the ideas could be applied to working with non-instrumentalists. Again, by addressing their 'musical thinking skills', it should be possible not only to identify where their development had reached, but also to move them up the 'musical achievement ladder'.

The task for the research phase

This, then, was the approach adopted for the 'research' part of the initiative: to find out how 'thinking skills' strategies could be used to challenge and extend the most able musicians (the instrumentalists) while at the same time supporting and encouraging the least able musicians (the non-instrumentalists).

In order to gain some understanding of why and how this 'able child' research influenced the development of this initiative, see the Able child research section.

For an explanation of how this was seen to apply to music, see the Linking able child research to music section.

To see how this was turned into a practical strategy, see the Linking able child research to music section and the Case studies section.

Able child research

There has been considerable research into this area over the past thirty years. It would not be appropriate here to try and summarise what is a large and complex area of human and educational research. However, it seems pertinent to outline the key publications which informed the progress of this Curriculum Development Initiative.

Hampshire documentation

Considerable use was made of three documents produced by Hampshire. They are:

Policy on the education of able and talented pupils
Challenging Able Pupils - Guidelines for Secondary Schools (October 1998)
Challenging Able Children (May 2000)

Between them, these three documents provided a clear overview of the current research and sufficient detail to establish appropriate strategies to use with both instrumentalists and non-instrumentalists. The most useful aspects were those areas dealing with:

the learning brain and intelligence: the triune brain
multiple intelligences
modes of learning
meta-learning approaches, including the relationship of planning questions to a hierarchy of thinking skills

These contributed to our thinking, but may be very briefly summarised as follows. For further information, please refer to the original documents:

The learning brain and intelligence - Dr Paul Maclean's research on the triune brain

The reptilian brain (responsible for survival behaviours, leading to lower-order responses)
The mammalian brain(responsible for 'emotional intelligence', and resulting attitudes to learning)
The neo-cortex (which acknowledges the unique parts of the brain - within both hemispheres - which process music)

Professor Howard Gardiner's theory of multiple intelligence

This suggests that intelligence is not a single thing, but consists of a range of distinct intelligences (which can be independent of each other - so high linguistic intelligence can be independent of high musical intelligence), which must interact to solve problems and/or create culturally-valued products Musical intelligence is regarded by Gardiner as one of the separate intelligences

Metacognitive intelligence is the most important of the human intelligences. Basically concerned with how we know what we know, it plays an intrinsic part in processing all the other forms of intelligence (a clear link with 'thinking skills', therefore!)

Modes of learning

Visual, auditory and kinaesthetic learning: how all individuals have specific preferences.

Meta-learning approaches

Following the work of Sterberg, Flavell and Resnick, present day developments such as 'Somerset Thinking Skills' / 'Cognitive acceleration through Science' recognise the importance of meta-cognition as a key indicator of high-ability pupils. Planning questions have been devised which, following the work of Bloom, associate a hierarchy of planning to levels of thinking skills, and provide examples of relevant questions for each level. This was so important to the group that the table from page 106 of 'Challenging Able Pupil' is reproduced here:

Thinking skill	Level of thinking	Questions
Knowledge	Lower-order thinking	What do you know? What do you remember?
Comprehension	Lower-order thinking	Describe in your own words How can you explain? What does it tell about?
Application	Higher/lower-order thinking	How else could you use? Where else does this occur?
Analysis	Higher-order thinking	What caused? What are the benefits / disadvantages of? What is the result of?
Synthesis	Higher-order thinking	How else might you tackle this? What other ways might be used to? How could you improve?
Device your own evaluation	Higher-order thinking	Why do you think? How could you improve your work? What is there still to understand / find out about?

Defining the able child

In summary, the group felt that the all this pointed clearly to a simple definition of the able child: one who can 'think' in their subject /area using highest level / order thinking skills.

This is, clearly, very different from the 'instrumentalist-based' definitions of able musicians, and enabled the group to move forward.

Equally significant was the fact that basing the definition on a hierarchy of thinking skills meant that the group could, at the same time, address the needs of the lower attaining pupils: how could they best think about and consolidate their existing work, and then be encouraged and challenged to think about music learning at a higher level?

At the same time, this approach to defining the musically able child raised an important question: what do we mean by 'musical thinking'? The research phase of the project tried to answer this question, informed by further consideration about linking able child research to music.

Linking able child research to music

The initial hypothesis: Applying generic Able Child research to Music

If the definition of the generically able child was based upon 'thinking skills', this led to the question: how can the musically able child be defined? Clearly, to connect with other educational research, the definition would need to emphasise the importance of 'thinking about music' and 'understanding music' as much as practical competence.

It quickly dawned upon the group that this kind of approach is exactly that promoted by the NC2000 Orders for Music: understanding is a critical feature, especially at KS3, and is a crucial indicator for awarding the highest Levels. QCA has made this very plain, with its constant reference to the importance of 'understanding' music, and not simply aggregating marks from the separate 'activities' of performing, composing and appraising to produce a final 'Level' at the end of Year 9.

Moreover, in the same way, the so-called 'Swanwick Spiral' (published in the British Journal of Music education in 1988) clearly connects to research on 'thinking' skills. The highest level of thinking skills for able pupils in general is often referred to as 'metacognition' ('knowing what you know', or being able to reflect accurately and personally on what you know). In the research theories that led to the development of the 'Spiral', there is a deliberate link between 'play' theories and musical development: at the top of the play column is 'metacognition', and in the description of its musical equivalent ('value' through 'symbolic' and 'systematic' composition), there is specific reference to the 'musical meta-cognitive processes' to be found at this level.

Agreeing a way forward

The correlation between generic 'able child work' and developments in music of the very recent (NC2000) and recent past (Swanwick spiral) seemed to be a fruitful area to explore: it made sense of intuitive understanding about genuinely musically gifted children (ie not those who are merely technically competent) - and offered a pathway to the development of specific strategies which would enable teachers to make better provision for instrumentalists and non-instrumentalists.

At this stage of the project, a full definition of the 'musically able' child was not formalised, although it was clear already that at least part of the definition would need to include something about musical understanding and musical imagination.

Research exercise: trying new strategies to improve musical thinking

The teachers involved undertook to try out the following, and report back with their findings:

take 1 module in the Spring term (from any one of Years 7, 8 or 9)
try and re-work it to emphasise 'musical understanding' (how the music works - the 'conventions, processes and procedures' of the genre or style being studied) for ALL pupils, including the non-instrumentalists
try to make sure that the non-instrumentalists, or less able pupils, are moved at least one rung up the 'thinking skills' ladder: from knowledge to comprehension; from comprehension to application; from application to analysis etc. This may well involve a shift away from 'learn this part' to 'learn about this music'
try to make sure that instrumentalists are given more advanced 'musical thinking' rather than simply more difficult 'lower order skills'. This may well involve use of more open ended questions and tasks, rather than closed questions and tasks (class does a 12 bar blues; instrumentalists have to create a blues piece based on a repeating sequence of complex blues chords - and are asked to justify their decisions)

NB try this with one class only - possibly targeting specific pupils: don't try and change the whole of KS3 for all pupils!

If possible, 'record' the evidence - of those classes where the new approach has been tried, and of those where your 'standard' approach has been used. Are there any differences - and if so, what are they?

Case studies

The two case studies represent very different approaches; but they both show clearly how teachers can encourage pupils to 'think' about their music.

Case Study 1 (Reggae) is essentially a task-based or lesson-specific approach. It takes a standard type of musical activity, and changes the content dramatically by including specific tasks to make the pupils think about what they are doing
Case Study 2 (Sound Cards) takes a wider view, and tries to incorporate thinking throughout a whole module. The tasks themselves do not change, but an insistence on evaluation throughout makes the pupils constantly think about what they are trying to achieve, and how they can make their work better as a result

Both therefore apply specific thinking skills strategies to music. It may be of interest to know that neither department is within an 'advantaged' school: both fall within the lowest quartile for 5 A*-C GCSE results within the LEA, and these figures are therefore below or well below the national average

Case Study 2 (Sound Cards): Year 7

This department took a very different approach, building on developments already under way. Rather than adding questions and challenges to specific tasks as in Case Study 1, pupils were expected to developing their musical thinking throughout a module by focusing on the criteria for learning throughout their work, and being expected to write about this at the end of the module.

Thinking about the learning

The key to the success of this strategy lies in the fact that pupils are made aware of the following at the very outset of the module:

The learning objectives, covering understanding, knowledge and skills
The specific aspects of musical understanding that they will be asked to write about at the end of the module
The activities / skills and knowledge that they will be asked to write about at the end of the module

In this way, pupils know right from the start what it is they are expected to learn. It is stressed that this is about understanding and analysis as much as practical competence, and that they must constantly think about how they are meeting the objectives, using musically appropriate language at all times. Because of this, the pupils do continually think about what they are doing: they refer to the objectives constantly in their work, and are able to talk and write about their work in an articulate manner.

Teaching resources

There are two important aids to this process:

a) an 'understanding' sheet which pupils refer to during work in progress, and which is completed at the end of the unit. The sheet has two main sections:
- a box containing the learning objectives
- a box containing key questions about the musical understanding being developed by the module.
These questions can be answered in two ways:
- 'supported' (in which case, pupils underline the correct answer in multiple choice style) or
- 'unsupported' (in which case pupils write their answers from their own knowledge)
b) an 'assessment' sheet which poses a range of more specific questions for the pupils to answer. The questions cover all the main points of learning from the module of work and lots of the details. Pupils are expected to write answers in response to these questions, based on what they have learnt. Perhaps more important, though, is that by having to answer these questions, the pupils are being asked to reflect upon what they have done - to think about their musical development. Again, pupils get this early on in the module - so they know what it is they are supposed to be working on and thinking about.

Examples from a Year 7 module on 'Sound Cards' or graphic scoring are also available: they include the original planning documents, the understanding sheets (supported and unsupported versions), the assessment sheet, and a response from a pupil to the assessment sheet.

Supporting instrumentalists and non-instrumentalists

Since all modules of work have the same sorts of format - the same understanding sheets, and the same assessment sheets - pupils very quickly become aware that they are expected to think about what they are doing, to reflect on their understanding, and to focus on their musical learning as much as their practical activity. In this way, musical understanding and imagination become more significant than technical competence. The weaker pupils therefore have a variety of attainable goals to strive for, and can gain success by showing their understanding without necessarily achieving high standards in technical performance. The more able pupils are able to use their technical competence within a secure context, and quickly develop an understanding of how to improve not only the musical 'quantity' or 'demand' of their work, but also - and more importantly - the musical quality of what they are producing.

Case Study 1 (Reggae): Year 8

As part of this module of work, pupils were expected to create their own reggae piece based on a given chord sequence.

Original planning

In the original planning for this work, the task was tightly controlled. Pupils were expected to play 2 set sequences of chords (one pattern for the A section, another pattern for the B section), and then create a melody to go above these sequences.

Differentiation was largely by outcome: the more advanced pupils (usually instrumentalists who could quickly play the chords, and who had some facility at creating melodic patterns) achieved more by completing the task. The weaker pupils may only have been able to complete the initial stage of playing the chords. Consequently, the 'able' pupils reinforced their ability to 'play' at a technically competent level; the weaker pupils reinforced their inability to play. Thinking about the music (as defined by the earlier research) came further down the list of learning priorities.

New planning: setting 'thinking challenges' through task-specific questions

Using the new strategies, a range of specific questions were asked of the pupils at key points throughout the process. Each question was designed to pose a 'thinking challenge' - problem for the pupils to solve, using their musical understanding of the reggae style.

Initial thinking challenges for all pupils

Once the pupils had sung the sequence, and had revised basic information on playing fingered chords and how to set up the keyboard, they were asked to play the chord sequence. However, this task changed from the original by not only getting the pupils to play the sequence, but also to consider a range of options. These included:

what tempo the piece should be played at
whether to keep the chord sequence as written, or whether to repeat each chord in the sequence (making a 16 bar pattern instead of an 8 bar pattern; or if they chose to have some chords as single bars and some as two bars, any number of bars between 8 and 16!)
whether the number of bars per chord should be the same in each of the A and B sections: ie if the first section was now 16 bars long, could the B section remain at 8 bars long? Or if the first section was 10 bars long because the first and fifth chords (Am) had been played for two bars instead of one, could / should the B section work in the same way (with each Dm chord also being played for two bars)
whether fills should be included or not; and if so - which one was to be used, and where exactly should it be played?
whether sections should be repeated, or played straight though once each

Extended thinking challenges for some pupils

Once the pupils were confident in performing their chosen version with single fingered chords, they were now asked to play them with fully fingered chords. A new set of questions then came into play:

can you select an appropriate voice to play the chords on?
if working on a piano - can you add octaves in the LH and make a reggae type rhythm between the bass and the chords. Once established (ie L RR L R), can you find ways to vary and / or decorate it?

Advanced thinking challenges for a few pupils

For the more advanced pupils, the following questions were then set before a tune was asked for:

What happens if you change the order of the chords?
What happens if you go back to the original sequence, but make the major chords minor, and vice versa?
Can you come up with a completely 'alternative' sequence (but still using the original Am / G / F; Dm / C / E chords)?

Musical attainment through thinking

Throughout this work, pupils had been asked to make musical judgements through thinking challenges: their understanding of reggae style was revealed by their decisions, as well as their imagination in creating new and interesting patterns. They also had to grasp some complex theory at the more advanced stages, and in order to complete the tasks, needed to develop technical dexterity. Significantly, these demands were made of pupils of all performing / composing abilities - understanding and imagination is not restricted to how well a sequence of chords can be played in time. Consequently, this addition of 'musical thinking' questions was able to stretch the less able musicians, and the more able at the same time.

It is true that the more advanced pupils were able to cover a broader range of questions, since the technical demands did not keep them occupied for so long. However, once these had been completed, they were presented with a whole range of challenges which stretched their thinking about and understanding of music.

It is also true that the weaker pupils did not progress to the more advanced stages. Indeed, with the least able class, the teacher decided to focus just on a successful ensemble performance of the basic chord patterns (though in an 'arrangement' agreed by the whole class in response to the initial 'thinking challenges'). However, by referring to the 'hierarchy of thinking skills' chart, the teacher was able to identify where the class was ('knowledge'), and then move its musical understanding on by asking questions pertinent to the next stage ('comprehension'). The performing may not have improved, therefore, but the understanding and thinking certainly had.

Feeding the 'imagination' and 'understanding' thinking

As a result of this way of working, pupils were also motivated to seek ways of developing more advanced technical competence at performing. Instead of being required to complete a performing activity, with technical demands that may have been beyond them, they were being asked to realise their musical ideas and imagination through the development of practical competence - a very different proposition. Further, pupils wanted to understand theoretical issues (such as how to turn major chords into minor and vice versa) in order to try out the more challenging and imaginative musical material. Indeed, it was noticeable that pupils wanted and needed to find out how to use theoretical knowledge or how to develop performing skills in order to complete the tasks: they seemed to need 'feeding' with this information in order to 'grow' in their musical understanding of the tasks being set.

This was, perversely, helped by a serious misfortune: the music department had to be relocated for a while as a result of the roof blowing off (!), and non-practical lessons were required for a short period. In tackling major and minor chords during this time, the teacher again tried a new approach. Instead of just teaching the notes of the chords, pupils were taught how to work out the notes of any given major or minor chord through a series of 'thinking challenges'. These were related closely to the E major chord at the end of the B section: pupils were challenged to identify why it sounded so different - and how to play it, given the need for a G sharp instead of a G natural. As this work progressed, pupils understood the 'how' quite quickly - and comprehensively disproved the notion that F# minor is any more 'difficult' as a key than A minor: once you know how to construct a scale and its chords, all keys are the same, regardless of the number of sharps and flats!

Alternative evidence

This thirst for theory and improved practical skills to feed a musical imagination was witnessed in another setting at the same time. A Year 10 pupil within the school with limited previous musical experience, and relatively limited 'traditional' performing and notational skills, had already shown astonishing musical imagination and exceptional aural abilities. When heard improvising around a limited set of chords on the piano, a visiting instrumental teacher (a guitarist) was so impressed with the quality of the musical being produced that a conversation between the two soon developed. The teacher was able to 'feed in' information about new chords to use - which, though a challenge both technically and theoretically, provided a real spur to the pupil. Some intense work from the pupil showed that the new knowledge of how to see new chord sequences develop, and how to get around them on the piano, was the impetus for deeper, more complex improvisations. The key here seemed to be the context: the musical understanding of the style and desire to use a musical imagination came first: the theory and practical skills were used to realise these more effectively than had the chord structures and / or technical demands been set as tasks first.

Case Study 2 (Sound Cards): Year 7

Thinking about the learning

The key to the success of this strategy lies in the fact that pupils are made aware of the following at the very outset of the module:

The learning objectives, covering understanding, knowledge and skills
The specific aspects of musical understanding that they will be asked to write about at the end of the module
The activities / skills and knowledge that they will be asked to write about at the end of the module

Teaching resources

There are two important aids to this process:

a) an 'understanding' sheet which pupils refer to during work in progress, and which is completed at the end of the unit. The sheet has two main sections:
- a box containing the learning objectives
- a box containing key questions about the musical understanding being developed by the module.
These questions can be answered in two ways:
- 'supported' (in which case, pupils underline the correct answer in multiple choice style) or
- 'unsupported' (in which case pupils write their answers from their own knowledge)
b) an 'assessment' sheet which poses a range of more specific questions for the pupils to answer. The questions cover all the main points of learning from the module of work and lots of the details. Pupils are expected to write answers in response to these questions, based on what they have learnt. Perhaps more important, though, is that by having to answer these questions, the pupils are being asked to reflect upon what they have done - to think about their musical development. Again, pupils get this early on in the module - so they know what it is they are supposed to be working on and thinking about.

Supporting instrumentalists and non-instrumentalists

Outcomes

In both of the schools described in the case studies, the teachers were clear that standards and motivation improved. Specific examples included:

Reggae case study

Pupils understood the construction of chords much better
They developed greater experimentation skills: this was not part of the original module, but was now a key part of the learning - and the pupils responded well to the challenges set
The highest ability children really enjoyed the challenge of the harder tasks, and were keen to tackle and solve them
Pupils appreciated the way that the theoretical content was taught through problem-solving approaches: a typical comment from a 'bright' but not 'musical' pupil was: 'that really sorted some problems'

With classes containing fewer high ability pupils (the classes are set against their languages ability), there was still a sense of 'ownership' of the agreed performances. Since they had to think about and agree questions of tempo, style, chord structure etc, they felt as though the performances were 'theirs', and this improved motivation.

The teacher was also able to identify that the pupils were largely working at the 'Knowledge' level of thinking skills (see Able Child planning and thinking skills chart), and was able to start devising ways of moving these pupils up the thinking levels. For instance, they might be moved on to the 'Comprehension' stage to describe and explain in their own words what they had done, how it had worked and why it had been successful. For some in the class, it would be possible to move them still further to the 'Application' stage by asking them to consider how the chord sequencing ideas could be used in other pieces, or to reflect on other pieces they had played which used similar ideas.

Sound card case study

Since this work built on existing developments within the department, there was less obvious evidence of the specific impact. However, the teacher is clear that pupils are generally making better progress, and are better able to identify how they can improve their work. This is because:

the expectations of the work are built into the planning from the outset
pupils are challenged to meet them
pupils, knowing what it is expected of them, start thinking about how to achieve the challenges
to 'feed' this process, a routine of questions to ask is built into every module: pupils know that they will be asked these sorts of questions, and work to answer them
the routine includes the teacher providing very clear guidance on what to write about, and how to answer the questions
equally important is the insistence on the use of a musical vocabulary: pupils are expected to use a common language to describe the effectiveness of their work, explaining how they achieved the aims
by incorporating regular 'reviewing' sessions, pupils are able to develop their musical understanding: they have to learn about the music - not just learn the music

Definition of musically gifted pupils

As part of the review of the work carried out, teachers re-considered the issue of defining the able / gifted musician. This question had been considered before; but had not been answered until the case studies had been worked through.

Reflecting on the work of the most able pupils during the research, and bearing in mind the importance of thinking skills, the teachers considered that the most able musicians were the 'thinking musicians'. Moreover, these 'thinking musicians' possess four essential characteristics, each of which needs to be developed by 'thinking skills' strategies:

A powerful creative and aesthetic imagination: the ability both to interpret existing music with sensitivity and to create new music which communicates personal meaning
A strong awareness and understanding of musical styles, genres and purposes: the ability to locate musical ideas within a stable and clearly-defined framework.
A powerful aural acuity: a sharp awareness of, and liking for sounds and sound patterns, with the ability to see how they operate within textures and structures
A good knowledge of musical theory and a range of effective technical performing skills

Further, they agreed that imagination and understanding were the most important in terms of developing musical ability, since it is in these areas that pupils' musical thinking can best be extended. Aural, theoretical and technical skills all need to be developed alongside imagination and understanding: indeed, they feed and can accelerate musical thinking by providing the necessary raw materials and capabilities. By giving pupils greater 'musical information', the most gifted are able to grasp the opportunity and take their musical thinking even further forward.

The case of the pupil shown some new jazz chords is a good example: the pupil's mind was immediately set buzzing - 'how can I use these chords to extend my understanding of jazz, and how I can use it create something new and more powerful than before'. It also seems true that providing new aural, theory and technical skills are best done through a 'thinking skills' challenge: the bright musicians immediately grasp the wider potential of the new resource, and are able to apply it more effectively to their musical work.

The model shows the importance of using thinking skills at all times, and the way that aural acuity and theory / practical skills feed the essential characteristics of creativity / imagination and understanding of styles - which lie at the heart of the process.

At the same time, it indicates how the most able pupils bring their own, personal characteristics to music: these can be seen as both indicators of exceptional ability, but also as yet more 'feeders' of imagination and understanding.

Teaching strategies to support gifted and non-gifted pupils in music

The results of this research shows that there are clear and specific strategies music teachers can employ to support both instrumentalists and non-instrumentalists in the classroom. They should, in principle:

ensure that teaching addresses musical thinking - how to develop creativity / imagination and understanding of styles / genres / purposes
plan to a progression of thinking skills - as defined by the linked hierarchy of planning questions and thinking skills
ensure that aural, theory and practical skills feed the development of musical thinking
ensure that pupils are encouraged to use thinking strategies at all times

They can then adopt one of two methods to support pupils' musical thinking:

Build thinking tasks into each practical activity - as in the Reggae case study
Build thinking and evaluation into modules' evaluation and appraisal systems - as in the Sound card case study

If these principles are followed, there is every indication that instrumentalists will achieve the very highest Levels; and that non-instrumentalists will achieve consistently higher Levels than at present.