Music Education Research

ISSN: 1461-3808 (Print) 1469-9893 (Online) Journal homepage: [Link]

The effects of an individualised ICT-based music

education programme on primary school students’
musical competence and grades

Juan R. Hernández-Bravo, M. Cristina Cardona-Moltó & José A. Hernández-

Bravo

To cite this article: Juan R. Hernández-Bravo, M. Cristina Cardona-Moltó & José A. Hernández-
Bravo (2015): The effects of an individualised ICT-based music education programme on
primary school students’ musical competence and grades, Music Education Research, DOI:
10.1080/14613808.2015.1049255

To link to this article: [Link]

Published online: 07 Aug 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 87

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

[Link]

Download by: [University of New England] Date: 15 March 2016, At: 16:10
 Music Education Research, 2015
[Link]

The effects of an individualised ICT-based music education programme

on primary school students’ musical competence and grades
Juan R. Hernández-Bravoa, M. Cristina Cardona-Moltób* and José A. Hernández-
Bravoa
a
School of Education, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Albacete, Spain; bFaculty of Education,
University of Alicante, Alicante, Spain
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

(Received 11 May 2014; accepted 29 April 2015)

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of an information and
communications technology (ICT)-based individualised music education
programme on primary students’ musical competence. A 2 × 3 aptitude
treatment interaction factorial design was used to assess the impact of the
programme as a function of students’ musical aptitude (MA) (low–average–high)
and type of intervention (experimental vs. control). Participants were a
convenient sample of 90 fifth- and sixth-grade students drawn from one public
primary school in Albacete, Spain. Results indicated that average and high
musically able participants developed a significantly higher competence in
audition, vocal expression, instrumental expression, musical language, movement
and dance, as well as in arts and culture in the ICT-based than in the non-ICT-
based programme, while those with low MA appeared to benefit more from the
non-ICT-based programme suggesting that students responded differently to the
two types of interventions. Results are discussed in terms of implications to
better adapt music teaching for student diversity.
Keywords: individualised music instruction; primary school; ICT; musical
competence; Spain

Introduction
Music education is a curricular area that greatly contributes to the integral develop-
ment of primary school students. As a core curriculum discipline has a lot of edu-
cational values that play a decisive role in the intellectual, sociocultural, emotional,
spiritual, and psychomotor child development (Gaston 1968). One of the aims of
music is to promote musical sensibility in students through the understanding and
use of sound patterns which are an essential part of students’ emotional and innate
musical abilities’ development. In music an important starting point is the assumption
that every human being is musical and, consequently, it is possible and promising to
develop musicality (Willems 1979). It is usually assumed that musical abilities are nor-
mally distributed, which means that most individuals have an average musicality in
much the same way as most people have an average intelligence (Gembris 2002). Con-
sequently, there are no completely unmusical individuals just as there are no totally
unintelligent people. Since everybody possesses at least some degree of musical

*Corresponding author. Email: [Link]@[Link]

© 2015 Taylor & Francis
 2 J.R. Hernández-Bravo et al.

aptitude (MA), everybody can also benefit from music teaching despite individual
differences in innate capacities (Gordon 1987).
Music education has its origins in innovative methodologies that emerged in early
the twentieth century in Europe and subsequently expanded to the USA, Canada, and
Argentina. These educational methodologies returned the importance of music edu-
cation that had been given from ancient times to encourage children integral develop-
ment (Willems 1979). In the early curricula of the mid-nineteenth-century music
played an important role despite not having subject status. At first, the singing of
songs was taught mechanically and was dependent on learning by ear. Later, elemen-
tary schools gave music more systematic attention, and in some countries (e.g. Britain
and Wales) it was recommended that all teaching of music in schools should be con-
sidered under two headings: ‘class teaching’ and ‘individual teaching’ (Roese 2003).
The former included the singing of good songs, breathing exercises, voice production,
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

sight-singing, ear training, and listening to good music. The latter should include the
teaching of instruments or solo singing and music theory. At the end of the nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries, educators such as Dalcroze (1907), Orff (1950)
and Kodály (1967) laid the main basis of the modern music education. Emile
Jaques-Dalcroze, a Swiss educator and composer evolved a system of coordinating
music and body movement, while Orff, a German composer, introduced worldwide
its philosophy to combine the love of sound, music-making and its appreciation in
such a manner that children could participate in their own musical education by
stimulating their imagination and musical expression. According to Lamont (2011),
most music education programmes which follow these modern musical foundations
have basically two different goals: (1) to improve musical skills and children enjoyment
of music, and (2) to develop other non-musical skills such as self-confidence, social
competence, creativity, emotional response, and even academic attainment in maths,
literacy, or language.
In Spain, music was designated a core subject in the National Curriculum of
Primary Education in 1990, PL 1/1990, Act on General Organisation of the Education
System (LOGSE 1990). Subsequent laws made music a compulsory subject for chil-
dren between the ages of 6 and 16 (LOCE 2002; LOE 2006); recently elective under
the Organic Law 8/2013 for Educational Quality Improvement (LOMCE 2013).
This legislation required that music be understood as an active experience in which
pupils compose, perform, listen attentively, and respond to music of different styles,
times and culture, and relate it to its historical and cultural background. This pre-
sented an enormous challenge to teachers because not all activities that sometimes
pass for music in primary school are music. Basically, the aims to be reached were
that students: (1) develop aural perceptive and individual musical abilities; (2) sing
and play instruments while deriving utmost pleasure; (3) learn various forms of
musical notation and use them to reproduce and create music; (4) develop an under-
standing of the basic elements and concepts of music theory, musical form, and history
of music; (5) enjoy, appreciate, and accept good quality music; and (6) get to know
music from different cultures and from their own culture. The inclusion of music as
a core curriculum discipline led to an increased awareness of its educational signifi-
cance. This provoked new questions, for example, how the requirements in the law
could be translated into expected practices. More than 20 years later there is still a
limited understanding of the true meaning and usefulness of this subject area in the
school curriculum, and underachievement is in many cases the norm.
 Music Education Research 3

The low recurrent pupils’ musical achievement is a quite common phenomenon

which is often associated with music content difficulty and lack of skills necessary
for instrumental practice (Esteve-Faubel, Molina-Valero, and Stephens 2009;
Rodríguez-Quiles 2001). In fact, when teaching music teachers rarely know the
actual level of students’ musical competence neither how musical achievement is influ-
enced by musical ability. This situation often leads to students’ rejection and lack of
active participation in lessons, as well as to frustration among teachers. In addition,
as music is for all pupils, the music curriculum must be determined in response to indi-
vidual musical needs. As Roese (2003, 13) stated, ‘music is not just for the musically
gifted or able performers but needs to be differentiated.’ All pupils have equal right
to an appropriate music education.
To overcome underachievement, literature shows that information and communi-
cations technology (ICT) tools can help attain individualised music teaching (Helge
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

2011; Johnson, Adams, and Cummins 2012; Vander Ark 2012). Individualisation
through one-to-one or small-group learning became the goal of many educational
efforts when Bloom (1984) showed that students receiving one-to-one tutoring per-
formed two standard deviations better on knowledge assessments than students
taught purely in a conventional group setting. This became known as the ‘Two
Sigma Problem’. Even today teachers’ recognition that students differ in abilities,
interests, and motivations, and that each learns at a different rate (Tomlinson 2000),
schools continue to offer uniform responses to very diverse students’ educational
needs. Taking into account that many recent publications have brought to the forefront
the idea that ICT tools can enable individualised education (Dede and Richards 2012;
Johnson, Adams, and Cummins 2012; Vander Ark 2012) and that one component of
individualised education is the identification of individual student strengths and weak-
nesses, as well as the consideration of individual learning preferences and pace-tasks,
the application of this premise to music teaching can greatly contribute to improve
student results in this area.
ICT tools have demonstrated to have a deep impact upon all areas of the curricu-
lum (Kerr 2004) when successfully integrated into teaching offering a number of
advantages to both students and educators. Currently, there are a wide variety of tech-
nological tools available to schools that can be implemented to enhance students’
overall learning experiences in numerous ways such as interactive whiteboard, stu-
dents’ laptops, blog, wiki, or webquest. In music education, the use of ICT has
meant an educational revolution since teachers may design much more motivating
and varied musical activities than when using only traditional methodologies
(Hernández-Bravo 2013). Strategies to integrating new technologies into lessons
include interacting with multimedia (image, audio, or video), knowing how to edit
scores, using electronic instruments as MIDI (Musical Interface Digital Instruments),
or manipulating sound by computer. According to Cuban, Kirkpatrick, and Peck
(2001) as well as Wallace (2004), the use of ICT tools in music education requires
specific knowledge, specialised resources, and advanced technology domain, qualities
that often are not present in the repertoire of teachers’ music skills.
Webster (2002) has suggested that technology helps rethinking the way an edu-
cator teaches music. Technological tools can be used by music teachers to
promote a more dynamic, interactive, and stimulating learning. Compared with
the traditional teaching methods, the use of ICT tools offers new opportunities
for changing lessons’ pace, prepare more diverse lessons for a wider range of
 4 J.R. Hernández-Bravo et al.

students, enhance presentation possibilities, and improve the quality of learning by

increasing motivation, self-confidence, self-esteem, and creative thinking. Technol-
ogy can simulate music experiences in order to broaden the art form for a wide
range of individuals and offer an entirely new medium for performance being a valu-
able resource to improve students’ learning because its capacity to enhance student
development of musical competence, skills, and attitudes towards music (Asmus
1986; Gembris 2002; Mark and Gary 2007). Integrating new technologies into
music education programmes has a positive effect on students’ outcomes (Brown
2007). In fact, student awareness of digital processes and computing systems has
benefits beyond music education because of ICT increasingly recognition as a
generic competence or new literacy (Lines 2009). When producing music with com-
puter, students are not only developing their musical competence, but they are
gaining transferable technological skills and confidence. Therefore, the integration
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

of new technologies and musical practices associated with them into educational
programmes should be seen as an opportunity to re-evaluate learning objectives
and design critical learning pathways that focus on musical competence rather
than on a mere or superficial acquisition of musical skills and facts (Nilsson and
Folkestad 2005). However, there are some disadvantages or obstacles related to
the use of ICT in school settings such as absence of music teachers sufficiently
trained and motivated for face-to-face teaching and learning using ICT tools
(Pender 2013), difficulties in balancing instructional time with teaching and learning
of prescribed content and curriculum outcomes or in finding time for exploring and
becoming familiar with various technologies (Southcott and Crawford 2011), access
to professional development in technology training (Savage 2010) and technical
support (Gall and Breeze 2007), in addition to social problems such us isolating stu-
dents, reduced eye contact and limited field of view during ICT-based lessons
(Orman and Whitaker 2010), expensive hardware and devices, and even risks of
privacy and plagiarism.
The growing number of studies about the relationship between ICT and music edu-
cation in recent years demonstrates a prominent interest on the use of these tools in
music instruction (Becker and Ravitz 1999; Colwell and Richardson 2002; Gibson
and Oberg 2004; Kozma 2003; Savage 2005; Zhao and Frank 2003). But even
though there has been an increase in the number of studies designed to learn how
ICTs contribute to develop students’ competence and achievement in music
(Carnoy 2004), very few, if any, have explored the impact of these tools on musical
competence achievement taking into account students’ MAs, particularly, in the
Spanish educational context. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine
the effects of an individualised ICT-based music programme on elementary students’
musical competence and marks when controlling for students’ musical ability. The
study set out to explore and test the following hypotheses:

(1) Students assigned to the ICT-based music programme (experimental con-

dition) will develop a significantly better music competence and will achieve
higher marks in music than those assigned to the non-ICT-based programme
(control condition).
(2) Students with high MA will develop a significantly better music competence
and will achieve higher marks in music than average and low musically able
students.
 Music Education Research 5

(3) Independently of students’ MA, participants assigned to the individualised

ICT-based music programme will develop a significantly better music compe-
tence and will achieve higher marks in music than those assigned to the non-
ICT-based music programme.

Method
Approach and design
To compare the effectiveness of intervention this study used a 2 × 3 quasi-experimental
factorial design (Kerlinger 2002). This design allowed not only to analyse the main
effects of the intervention as a function of treatment condition (TC) (ICT-based vs.
non-ICT-based music programme) and MA (low vs. average vs. high), but also to
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

learn if the main effects of each independent variable varied according to the levels
of the other, what it is called the interaction effect (Cardona 2002).

Participants and context

This study was conducted in four primary classrooms from an urban public school
of a medium-sized town located in the province of Albacete, Spanish Autonomous
Community of Castilla-La Mancha. Its population was around 10,000 inhabitants
who work mainly in the service sector, industry, construction, and transportation.
There were four primary and one secondary schools in town with a total school
population of 1563 students (325 kindergarten, 720 elementary, and 518 secondary).
The school was chosen due to pupils’ unsatisfactory results and little enthusiasm
in music, as well as school staff commitment in increasing musical competence
attainment while adapting and individualising music to student needs. The
student population of this school was predominantly Spaniards (91%), with an
approximately 9% of minority students from Latin America, Africa, and Eastern
Europe countries.
Participants were ninety 10- to 12-year-old primary students from grades 5th
and 6th homogeneously distributed by gender (48% males, 52% females) and
grade level. Via pretest scores, these 90 students were rank ordered on the following
measures: (1) curriculum-based competence in music (audition, vocal expression,
instrumental expression, musical language, movement and dance, and arts and
culture); and (2) MA (low, average, high). Next, we randomly assigned the pupils
who scored lowest, average, and highest on music ability and competence to exper-
imental or control groups. The final sample included 47 (fifth- and sixth-grade
pupils) in the experimental group (ICT-based programme) and approximately
equal number (43 fifth- and sixth-grade pupils in the control group (non-ICT-
based programme). Participants in the control group composed of low, average,
and high musically able students received the class’ conventional music programme
taught by the music teacher using his natural method of teaching but without
making use of ICT tools, while pupils in the experimental group received the
ICT-based music programme. In all four classrooms the class was staffed by a cer-
tified primary teacher who held a bachelor degree with emphasis in music and a
master degree in educational research. He had 10 years of experience in teaching
music to elementary students.
 6 J.R. Hernández-Bravo et al.

Measures
All instruction, training, practice, and testing connected with this study was designed
as part of the class music curriculum. As such, all activities were carried out in the
regular classroom staffed by the music teacher.

Music aptitude
Music aptitude was defined as a set of skills that individuals possess at a greater or
lesser extent giving them the ability to learn music and appreciate it (Gordon 1987),
including the ability through which music is perceived, created, responded to, and
incorporated to everyday life (Tan, Pfordresher, and Harré 2010). The MA test (Sea-
shore, Lewis, and Saetveit 1956) which measures Tone, Intensity, Time, Timbre,
Rhythm, and Tonal Memory was used to classify students as low, average, and high
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

musically performers. Although this test has not been absent of criticism, the test
was used in this investigation for its capacity, as a test of specific aural discrimination
skills, to discriminate excellent, average, and poor auditory discriminators. In practice,
there is no one criterion for selecting a measure of MA. Colwell (1970) discuses four
criteria for selecting an appropriate test for a particular purpose (reliability, validity,
usability, and usefulness, or how well the test differentiates among those who take
it). The researchers in this study were interested in a student’s ability to succeed in
the context of formal music instruction not in making a decision about a music
future which should imply a judicious blending of information about a student’s intel-
ligence, interests, resourcefulness, and self-discipline, regardless of any aptitude test. In
this sense, the Seashore battery was feasible, reliable (Kuder–Richardson reliability
coefficients range from .55 to .85, Seashore, Lewis, and Saetveit 1956), and useful
for our purposes. The test was administered orally following a group format for all
items. After testing, scores in the six subtests were set out on a grid of individual
profile that showed students’ MA according to three levels: low (with scores below per-
centile 25), average (between 25 and 75), or high (over 75). We identified 21 pupils who
scored low, 52 average, and 17 high in this MA test. Time (M = 33.55; SD = 5.54) and
Intensity (M = 33.51; SD = 6.29) were the musical skills better developed and Tonal
Memory (M = 18.53; SD = 6.22) the less developed in the participants.

Competence in music
Pupils’ curricular needs in music were assessed with a 62-item curriculum-based test,
the Musical Competence Test (MCT) developed by Hernández-Bravo (2007) that
measures musical competence in terms of concepts, procedures, and attitudes
through six content blocks: Audition (aural expression and the perception of
sounds), Vocal Expression (singing tone and development of the possibilities of the
voice), Instrumental Expression (playing, reading, and understanding the language
of music through percussion instruments), Musical Language (study of notation,
rhythm, melody, and harmony), Movement and Dance (rhythmic, body expression
and alignment, forms, genres, and styles of dance), and Arts and Culture (musical
manifestations along history). These six blocks included both sound patterns and
musical emotions across-curricular contents. The MCT used a four-point Likert-
type scale that ranged from low to high music competence achievement (1 = Low, 2
= Below average, 3 = Above average, 4 = High. The maximum total score in the test
 Music Education Research 7

was 248 and the minimum 62 (midpoint around 155), so that a high score (above 186
points) reflected a high musical competence, while a score of 124 or lower indicated a
low competence in music. Face validity was assessed by comparing the test with the
school’s core music curriculum for fifth and sixth grades. The MCT was administered
two times (pretest and postest). Qualitative analyses were conducted at pretest to
identify strengths and weaknesses in order to help design the class’ music programme.
The results of the curriculum-based test suggested that participants had the most sig-
nificant needs in Instrumental Expression (skills), Musical Language (concepts), and
Arts and Culture (concepts and skills). Hence, the adaptive music programme
implemented during the study focused mainly on these content areas.

Marks in music
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

This measure was defined as the qualification (grades) achieved in music at the end of
the school year. Marks ranged from 0 to 10. A mark close to 10 indicated outstanding
musical attainment, while marks around five or below were indicative of under musical
achievement.

Procedure
The ICT-based music programme was administered for 24 weeks from January to June
2011, two times per week. Students were retested at the end of the programme
implementation. Following is a description of the TCs. Both experimental and
control conditions emphasised similar content knowledge and skills, but ICT tools
were only used in the experimental condition.

Experimental condition
There were 48 scripted lessons that integrated the use of ICT tools, each designed to
last approximately 45–50 minutes and consisting of three or four short activities that
required between 10 and 15 minutes to implement. Lessons usually developed two
different blocks of curricular content (Audition, Vocal Expression, Instrumental
Expression, Musical Language, Movement and Dance, Arts and Culture), and
focused on ICT-based musical activities like: (1) active listening of videos hosted on
YouTube; (2) commentary of music auditions by means of blogs and wikis; (3)
singing using a karaoke; (4) using an online translator to transcribe songs written in
languages other than Spanish; (5) learning finger positions to play a recorder; (6)
reading online scores; (7) creating MIDI files in order to accompany students as
they played instruments; (8) using an interactive whiteboard with a specific notation
software; (9) recording the steps in a dance performed by students using a video
camera; (10) searching musical contents in websites such as Wikipedia; and (11)
working with PowerPoint, webquests, blogs, and wikis. Examples of a typical lesson
can be seen in Table 1.

Control condition
Participants in the control condition received the same music curricular programme as
the experimental condition by the music teacher (48 non-ICT-based scripted lessons)
 8 J.R. Hernández-Bravo et al.

Table 1. Scripted typical lesson by TC.

Experimental condition Control condition

Ten-fifteen-minute lecture in which the music A typical lesson included a music teacher-led
teacher explained a concept/skill, demonstrated segment similar to that described in the
the sequence of the required steps, and experimental condition without using ICT
provided examples. Warm-up activities: tools for teaching
auditions, musical games, body expression
For the next 30 minutes, pupils worked The groups combined 4–5 high/average/low
independently in small homogeneous groups music achieving students. Activities: rhythms,
supervised by the teacher. The groups instrumental practice, songs, music theory,
comprised 4–5 high, average and low music dances, history of music
achieving students
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

Pupil activities (rhythms, instrumental practice, Student assignments do not include the use of
songs, music theory, dances, history of music) ICT tools, only Orff, Kodály, and Willems
were presented in worksheets in the form of methodologies were used
handheld cards and were completed using ICT
tools: students’ laptops, interactive whiteboard,
PowerPoint, webquests, blogs, wikis, videos.
Lessons usually lasted one week (two sessions)
Weekly, pupils took a curriculum-based test at Similar to experimental condition, pupils
the end of the lesson. Assessment was took a test at the end of the week
administered in whole-class format

being the content of instruction the same but without using ICT tools for teaching and
learning. See Table 1 for a more detailed description of TCs.

Fidelity of intervention
To address concerns about variable implementation (e.g. that control group teaching
matched the normal modus operandi or way of teaching of the control group teacher,
the music teacher was observed). Research staff observed the music teacher in the four
participant classrooms at least once every two weeks. During this 15- to 30-minute
observations, project staff looked at the following actions: starting lessons on time, fol-
lowing lessons formats by music teacher and students, managing student behaviours
and needs, and using the specific TC strategies. In conjunction with the observations,
teacher and pupils were often given brief written or oral feedback (e.g. suggestions for
another way to teach or give praise/support to some students). Average fidelity
implementation of experimental and control conditions was 92% (range 86–95%)
and 96% (range 88–98%) agreement, respectively. Finally, participants were tested
on mastery of lesson content with items drawn directly from completed lessons.
Reliability in the assessment of answers to the tests was intended by having two
people (the music teacher and a project staff member) correct the tests. If both had
marked an answer correct, then this was registered as an agreement. Any other differ-
ence or discrepancy was registered as a disagreement. The agreement percentage was
calculated by dividing the number of agreements by the number of agreements plus
disagreements. The percentage of agreements inter-appraisers was 99%. To control
for extraneous variables, referring to any source of error that could affect the results
 Music Education Research 9

and provide internal validity to the experiment, two strategies were used: (1) random
assignment of participants to the experimental and control groups and (2) introduc-
tion of a covariate (pretest) to counteract individual differences in the dependent
variables.
As a measure of treatment intensity, the music teacher maintained daily logs of
attendance in both TCs and lesson progress for all pupils (low, average, high able).
According to these logs, students attended from 42 to 48 sessions for 180 days of
implementation.

Data analyses
Data were analysed at the beginning and at the end of the programme implementation
using a series of two-way 2 × 3 between-group analysis of variances (ANOVAs) taking
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

as factors TC (experimental vs. control) and music aptitude (low vs. average vs. high).
The effects of these independent variables were analysed on the dependent measures
(scores on musical competence and marks in music) achieved by the six resulting sub-
groups (TC × music aptitude) at the posttest. Pretest scores were used as covariates to
control for individual differences. For further analyses, post hoc multiple comparisons
were performed through Scheffé or Tamhane tests depending on whether the variances
were equal or unequal (Cohen 1988).

Results
Pretest
A series of two-way between-group ANOVA were conducted to explore the groups’
equivalence in musical competence as measured by the MCT and marks in music at
the beginning of the intervention. Participants were divided into three groups accord-
ing to their MA (low, average, high). As Table 2 shows, there was a statistically signifi-
cant main effect for audition (p = .022), instrumental expression (p = .015), and arts
and culture (p = .019), however, the effect sizes were small (η 2 = .015, .032, and
.010, respectively). Mean comparisons using Tamhane tests for unequal variances
indicated that the mean scores for the average (M = 2.76, 2.51, 2.16) and high musi-
cally able (M = 2.93, 2.56, 2.35) groups in audition, instrumental expression, and
arts and culture, respectively, were significantly different from the same measures
(audition, instrumental expression, and arts and culture) in the low musically able
group (M = 2.50, 2.21, 1.86). The main effect for TC and the interaction effect
(TC × MA) did not reach statistical significance. Similarly, the experimental and
control groups were equivalent in marks in music, nevertheless, musically high able
participants achieved significantly better grades than average and low able participants
(p > .05). The interaction effect was not statistically significant.
To summarise, before programme implementation variances between the exper-
imental and control groups were equal in musical competence and marks but
unequal between high, average, and low musically able groups, particularly, in audi-
tion, instrumental expression, and arts and culture. These differences, even though
logical, were taken into account in assessing the results of the intervention, reason
why pretest scores were entered as covariates (measures of adjustment) in posttest
analyses.
 10
Table 2. Group means, SD, and two-way ANOVAs (TC × MA) for all pretest measures.

J.R. Hernández-Bravo et al.

Experimental Control

Musical competences M SD M SD Preintervention effects F p Direction ES

Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

Audition
Low 2.50 0.68 2.51 0.72 TC 2.41 .045* C>E .008
Average 2.84 0.71 2.68 0.60 MA 4.29 .022* H,A > L .015
High 3.05 0.59 2.82 0.82 TC × MA 1.49 .124 .006
Vocal expression
Low 2.35 0.88 2.41 0.72 TC 2.35 .049* C>E .012
Average 2.60 1.02 2.67 0.89 MA 2.01 .078 .000
High 2.91 0.66 2.90 0.58 TC × MA 1.32 .146 .005
Instrumental expression
Low 2.25 1.12 2.17 0.88 TC 1.07 .168 .001
Average 2.58 0.89 2.44 1.02 MA 4.54 .015* H,A > L .032
High 2.67 0.78 2.45 0.73 TC × MA 0.94 .231 .016
Musical language
Low 1.91 0.58 1.95 0.59 TC 1.82 .089 .000
Average 2.35 0.63 2.31 0.64 MA 2.41 .046* H,A > L .002
High 2.58 0.66 2.68 0.50 TC × MA 1.05 .192 .004
Movement and dance
Low 1.88 0.61 2.21 0.70 TC 2.09 .073 .017
Average 2.43 0.73 2.24 0.69 MA 2.03 .065 .001
High 2.48 0.74 2.49 0.71 TC × MA 0.68 .305 .008
Arts and culture
Low 1.80 0.78 1.92 0.56 TC 2.45 .039* E>C .009
Average 2.18 0.72 2.15 0.52 MA 4.47 .019* H,A > L .010
High 2.39 0.66 2.31 0.43 TC × MA 1.62 .177 .000
Grades in music a
Low 5.10 0.84 5.06 1.01 TC 1.09 .162 .001
Average 6.77 0.79 6.46 0.92 MA 2.51 .042* H>A>L .003
High 9.01 0.61 9.06 0.68 TC × MA 0.83 .261 .012

Note: Level of competence: 1 = Low, 2 = Below average, 3 = Above average, 4 = High.

a
Range: 0–10 points.
*p < .05 (df = 1,86; 2,86; 5,86).
 Music Education Research 11

Posttest
Table 3 provides the posttest means and standard deviations adjusted for pretest, as
well as the 2 × 3 between-group analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) results indicating
significant group differences for almost all posttreatment means. Preliminary checks
were conducted to ensure that there was no violation of the assumptions of normality,
linearity, homogeneity of variances, homogeneity of regression slopes, and reliable
measurement of the covariate. After adjusting for musical competence scores at
pretest, significant interaction effects (ICT-based vs. non-ICT-based music pro-
gramme × MA) were found on audition [F(5, 86) = 11.53, p = .001], vocal expression
[F(5, 86) = 3.47, p = .025], instrumental expression [F(5, 86) = 28.36, p = .000], musical
language [F(5, 86) = 23.40, p = .000], movement and dance [F(5, 86) = 5.17, p = .008],
and arts and culture [F(5, 86) = 10.04, p = .002] with large effects’ sizes (see Table 3).
The main effect of TC (ICT-based vs. non-ICT-based music programme) also
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

was statistically significant on all musical competences: audition [F(1, 86) = 74.38,
p = .000], vocal expression [F(1, 86) = 35.08, p = .000], instrumental expression [F(1,
86) = 157.87, p = .000], musical language [F(1, 86) = 90.69, p = .000], movement and
dance [F(1, 86) = 23.60, p = .000], and arts and culture [F(1, 86) = 11.87, p = .001] with
large effect sizes in all sub-competences (moderate effect size for movement and dance)
reflecting that participants in the ICT-based music programme developed their music
competence significantly better than in the non-ICT-based programme. The main
effect for MA was also statistically significant on almost all music competences except
on vocal expression (p > .05) and movement and dance (p > .05), indicating that pupils
with average and high MA increased their competences in audition [F(2, 86) = 7.33,
p = .003], instrumental expression [F(2, 86) = 12.59, p = .000], musical language [F(2,
86) = 19.76, p = .000], and arts and culture [F(2, 86) = 4.53, p = .014] significantly more
than low musically able pupils. These results suggest that participants responded differ-
ently to the two types of interventions. Average and high musically able pupils showed
a more substantial increase in all music sub-competences after participation in the
ICT-based programme than low musically able students. On the other hand, these low
able performers appeared to benefit more from the non-ICT-based music programme.
The main effect for TC on marks in music at the end of the year [F(1, 86) = 1.17,
p = .185] and the interaction effect [F(5, 86) = 0.38, p = .685] did not reach statistical
significance, indicating that, independently of MA, TC did not impact significantly
on students’ marks. Only the main effect of MA was significant (p < .05) at the end
of the school year reflecting that high musically able students achieved better marks
in music than average students and these last also took better grades than low musi-
cally able students.
Taken together, these results demonstrate the superiority of the ICT-based music
programme to enhance musical competence in audition, vocal expression, instrumen-
tal expression, musical language, movement and dance, and arts and culture particu-
larly for average and high musically able pupils. Students with low MA appeared to
benefit more from the non-ICT-based music programme.

Discussion
This study investigated the effects of an intervention programme focused on the use of
ICT in teaching music controlling for MA. The implementation of this intervention
 12
J.R. Hernández-Bravo et al.
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

Table 3. Group means, SD, and two-way ANCOVAs (TC × MA) for all posttest measures.

Experimental Control
Musical Postintervention
competences M SD M SD effects F p Direction ES

Audition
Low 2.88 0.69 2.48 0.63 TC 74.38 .000* E>C .122
Average 3.29 0.59 2.57 0.65 MA 7.33 .003* H,A > L .135
High 3.72 0.35 2.79 0.73 TC × MA 11.53 .001* E-H,A > C-H,A, .117
L
Vocal expression
Low 2.54 0.77 2.62 0.65 TC 35.08 .000* E>C .115
Average 3.23 0.50 2.75 0.76 MA 1.58 .165 .014
High 3.76 0.31 2.92 0.63 TC × MA 3.47 .025* E-H,A > C-H,A, .077
L
Instrumental expression
Low 2.48 0.89 2.39 0.63 TC 157.87 .000* E>C .115
Average 3.35 0.49 2.54 0.62 MA 12.59 .000* H,A > L .138
High 3.84 0.24 2.98 0.56 TC × MA 28.36 .000* E-H,A > C-H,A, .106
L
Musical language
Low 2.21 0.68 2.20 0.59 TC 90.69 .000* E>C .122
Average 3.06 0.53 2.41 0.54 MA 19.76 .000* H, A > L .023
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

High 3.67 0.31 2.75 0.50 TC × MA 23.40 .000* E-H,A > C-H,A, .061
L
Movement and dance
Low 2.08 0.90 2.38 0.70 TC 23.60 .000* E>C .021
Average 3.00 0.67 2.48 0.67 MA 2.04 .061 .035
High 3.52 0.45 2.71 0.52 TC × MA 5.17 .008* E-H,A > C-H,A, .111
L
Arts and culture
Low 2.31 0.86 2.16 0.59 TC 11.87 .001* E>C .125
Average 3.14 0.60 2.39 0.60 MA 4.53 .014* H,A > L .089
High 3.70 0.39 2.88 0.68 TC × MA 10.04 .002* E-H,A > C-H,A, .095
L
Grades in music a
Low 5.50 1.41 5.16 0.96 TC 1.17 .185 .036

Music Education Research 13

Average 7.07 0.93 6.76 1.20 MA 2.45 .040* H>A>L .121
High 9.50 0.47 9.57 0.53 TC × MA 0.38 .685 .009

Note: Level of competence: 1 = Low, 2 = Below average, 3 = Above average, 4 = High.

a
Range: 0–10 points.
*p < .05 (df = 1,86; 2,86; 5,86).
 14 J.R. Hernández-Bravo et al.

programme was justified because of the music educational needs identified in primary
school children.

Initial curricular competence in music

The initial assessment of participants’ competence in music revealed differentiated
results in the degree of acquisition of musical concepts, skills, and attitudes. In this
regard, it was observed that students had educational needs in almost all dimensions
of musical competence, except in audition in which participants demonstrated an
acceptable competence level. These findings give support to other studies (Daza and
Phillips-Silver 2008; Goodson 1992) that stated that pupils usually need musical com-
petence development in a regular basis to adequately develop aural perception such as
tone, timbre, intensity, and time.
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

Regarding vocal expression, participants showed poor development in concepts

related to voice, skills to choral practice, and attitudes towards singing before interven-
tion. Taking into account that voice changes occur at approximately the age of 10 (par-
ticipants’ age in this study) this fact can explain the need for development of this
musical competence which predominantly affect boys due to increased growth in
their vocal cords and therefore being good candidates to instrumental practice
(Young 1971).
In instrumental expression participants lacked adequate competence, especially in
skills to play instruments. In this area children usually have good knowledge of the
instruments and they are very motivated for playing them early (Bentley 1966),
however, instruments require good technique to play them (Maneveau 1993), conse-
quently, discrimination of rhythms was deemed necessary to perform adequately
(Arms 1997; Austin 1988).
With respect to musical language, all participants at the beginning of the study
demonstrated poor performance. This low performance can be attributed to the
abstract nature of musical language that requires specific work for theoretical and
musical concepts to be acquired. The inherent difficulty to address the acquisition
of these concepts and skills in primary school is evident reason why the use of ICT
tools can help teaching musical language in a different and more intuitively way.
In movement and dance, pupils’ level of competence was clearly below what it is
expected for the age of participants. Initial curricular level in this specific competence
showed student (a) ignorance of simple steps in dance, (b) difficulties to invent chor-
eography, and (c) lack of interest in movement following guidelines.
In arts and culture, a low level of competence was also evident in all participants
before intervention, but changes were expected to occur with the use of ICT tools in
arts and culture teaching.
Lastly, participants’ grades in music before the beginning of this study were slightly
low (M = 6.91). These results evidenced again music educational needs and deter-
mined the convenience to introduce a music education programme based on the use
of ICT tools to improve students’ attainment in this curricular subject area.

Postintervention effects
Researchers in this study tested the initial equality of variances between the exper-
imental and control groups in all dimensions of musical competence and grades and
 Music Education Research 15

determined the suitability of the groups to participate in this research. During the
implementation of the intervention, the experimental group received a music pro-
gramme based on the use of new technologies, while the control group was taught
in a traditional way without making use of ICT tools in teaching music. At the end
of study, main effects for TC, and MA were found on musical competence, as well
as for the interaction effect (TC × MA) indicating that while average and high musi-
cally able pupils developed a significantly higher musical competence in the ICT-
based music programme, pupils with low MA appeared to benefit more from the
non-ICT-based music programme suggesting that students responded differently to
the two types of interventions. Marks in music, however, were not affected by TC
neither by the interaction effect.
These findings give support to hypothesis 1 allowing us to confirm that children in
the experimental group developed a significantly better musical competence (knowl-
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

edge, skills, and attitudes) than pupils in the control group demonstrating the super-
iority of the ICT-based music programme to increase competence in audition, vocal
expression, instrumental, expression, musical language, movement and dance, and
arts and culture in line with studies by Prasso (1997). The use of new technologies
in teaching and learning music seems to be much more attractive to students
because these tools allow interactivity, immediate feedback and access to multiple
and varied resources that with the traditional way of teaching music not always is
possible.
The findings give also partial support to hypothesis 2. Except for vocal expression
and movement and dance, pupils with average and high MA developed a significantly
better music competence in audition, instrumental, expression, musical language, and
arts and culture than low musically able students. Results give also partial support to
hypothesis 3. As can be observed, participants responded differently to the two types
of interventions. The ICT-based music programme was more effective for average and
high musically able students than for low able pupils who appeared to perform better
in the non-ICT-based programme. McCord (1993) suggests that children with low
level of MA require more continuous work in time with ICT tools to get better
results in achieving musical competence. In addition, improvement of music skills
depend largely on whether or not ICT is used in quality learning environments in
which students learn in a meaningful way with the help of not only of new technologies
but the teacher.
Contrary to our expectations, participants in the experimental group did not
achieve higher marks in music than those assigned to the non-ICT-based programme
neither the ICT-based music programme worked differently as a function of MA in
terms of grades. Perhaps other factors such as personal training, attention, interest
and motivation towards music, intelligence, or even the process of evaluation itself
which was different for the two outcome variables of this study could influence stu-
dents’ academic marks in music as measured at the end of the school year.
Thus, it can be concluded from this study that the implementation of a programme
that used new technologies in teaching music enhanced pupils’ musical learning and
significantly contributed to the development of musical competence, but the ICT-
based programme did not influence substantially the grades in music. Further research
need to be conducted in order to explore the kind of tasks and conditions required to
guaranty not only to attain musical competence but also to achieve substantially better
grades.
 16 J.R. Hernández-Bravo et al.

Limitations and practical implications

The main limitations in this study focus on generalisation and representativeness of
findings, as well as on music teacher subjectivity as researcher. Regarding the first
issue, although the pool of 90 participants can be considered suitable to give validity
to the study, this size was not large enough to be able to generalise results maximum
having been taken from just one school. For the same reason, although the sample
used for this study did not guarantee representativeness these findings, however,
could serve as reference for other studies and researchers working in similar edu-
cational contexts and school settings. A second limitation that should be noted is
that the quantitative method we used usually creates a separation between researchers
and teachers who are in reality who engage in practical experience. In this case, the
music teacher was part of the research team and, consequently, this separation did
not exist but results could have been contaminated by the researcher professional inter-
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

est and personal subjectivity.

As main contribution, this investigation aims to broaden the empirical research
framework in music education. Its innovative and practical importance derives
from the intention of adapting instruction while integrating ICT tools into music
teaching. To do this, the study used two different strategies, first, adapted lessons
to students’ MA using curriculum-based measures of initial musical competence;
and second, differentiated music learning by integrating the use of ICT tools in
music lessons and evaluating its effects as a function of music aptitude level. The find-
ings of the study have contributed not only to change the music teacher opinion
towards the usefulness and potential of new technologies in teaching music, but
what it is most important to increase participants’ musical competence and enthu-
siasm for this curricular subject and, ultimately, to improve the quality of music
education.
Future studies should use larger and more diverse and representative samples in
terms of age, sociocultural status, type of schools, and regions using random sampling
procedures to gain in generalisation of results. Further, student differences in emotion-
al engagement, ICT tools’ usage impact on potential retention of pupils in later years,
as well as other lifelong learning implications should be studied. Because of its high
effectiveness, programmes like this one should be extensive to all primary and second-
ary grades by adapting curricular content and ICT tools and techniques to students’
musical needs and aptitude level. Lastly, this study may serve as a reference not
only for music teachers but for regular teachers who in the context of a democratic
and inclusive school should consider how to differentiate instruction for student diver-
sity in other curricular areas different than music.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Funding
This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education [grant number TME2011-
00254] and by the Spanish Autonomous Community of Castilla-La Mancha, Department
of Education and Science (Order of 26 February, Diario Oficial de Castilla-La Mancha, 6
March).
 Music Education Research 17

Notes on contributor
Juan R. Hernández-Bravo, Ph.D. with European Mention, is a primary school teacher of music
and an Associate Professor in the Department of Didactics of Music, Arts, and Corporal
Expression at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, Albacete, Spain. His research interests
include the integration of ICT tools in music education, as well as instructional adaptations
of music to student diverse learning styles. Recently he has been involved in several European
educational research projects focused on ICT and music.

María C. Cardona-Moltó, Ph.D., is a professor of research methods in special and inclusive edu-
cation at the Faculty of Education, University of Alicante, Spain, institution where she directed
for more than a decade the doctoral programme on Attention to Diversity in Educational Con-
texts. Her research interests focus on diversity and inclusive education, co-teaching, and teacher
education for diversity. Currently, she is serving on various national boards and expert panels for
programme verification and faculty accreditation.
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

José A. Hernández-Bravo, Ph.D. with European Mention, is a primary school teacher of music
and an Associate Professor in the Department of Didactics of Music, Arts, and Corporal
Expression at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, Albacete, Spain. His research interests
focus on teaching music for diversity, inclusion, and intercultural education. He has participated
in several European educational research projects on music education in collaboration with
various European universities.

References
Arms, L. 1997. “The Effects of Computer-Assisted Keyboard Instruction on Meter
Discrimination and Rhythm Discrimination of General Music Education Students in the
Elementary School.” PhD diss., University of Tennessee, Memphis, TN.
Asmus, E. P. 1986. “Student Beliefs about the Causes of Success and Failure in Music: A Study
of Achievement Motivation.” Journal of Research in Music Education 34 (4): 262–278.
Austin, J. R. 1988. “The Effect of Music Contest Format on Self-concept, Motivation,
Achievement, and Attitude of Elementary Band Students.” Journal of Research in Music
Education 36 (2): 95–107.
Becker, H. J., and J. Ravitz. 1999. “The Influence of Computer and Internet Use on Teacher’s
Pedagogical Practices and Perceptions.” Journal of Research on Technology in Education 31
(4): 356–384.
Bentley, A. 1966. Musical Ability in Children and Its Measurement. Oxford, UK: October House.
Bloom, B. S. 1984. “The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as
Effective as One-to-One Tutoring.” Educational Researcher 13 (6): 4–16.
Brown, A. 2007. Computers in Music Education: Amplifying Musicality. New York: Routledge.
Cardona, M. C. 2002. Introducción a los Métodos de Investigación en Educación. Madrid: EOS.
Carnoy, M. 2004. “ICT in Education: Possibilities and Challenges.” Inaugural lecture of the
UOC 2004-2005 academic year, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain,
October. [Link]
Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Colwell, R. 1970. The Evaluation of Music Teaching and Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Colwell, R., and C. Richardson, eds. 2002. Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and
Learning. New York: Oxford University Press.
Cuban, L., H. Kirkpatrick, and C. Peck. 2001. “High Access and Low Use of Technologies in
High School Classrooms: Explaining an Apparent Paradox.” American Educational Research
Journal 38 (4): 813–834.
Dalcroze, E. J. 1907. Método para el Desarrollo del Instinto Rítmico, del Sentido Auditivo y del
Sentido Tonal. Paris: Sanzo.
Daza, M. T., and J. Phillips-Silver. 2008. “La Aptitud Musical y su Medida.” In El Cerebro
Musical, edited by D. Alonso, A. Estévez, and F. Sánchez-Santed, 163–183. Almería,
Spain: Universidad de Almería.
 18 J.R. Hernández-Bravo et al.

Dede, C., and J. Richards, eds. 2012. Digital Teaching Platforms: Customizing Classroom
Learning for Each Student. New York: Teacher College, Columbia University.
Esteve-Faubel, J. M., M. A. Molina-Valero, and J. Stephens. 2009. “A Qualitative Assessment of
Students’ Experiences of Studying Music: A Spanish Perspective on the European Credit
Transfer System (ECTS).” Music Education Research 11 (2): 241–265. doi:10.1080/
14613800902924516.
Gall, M., and N. Breeze. 2007. “The Sub-culture of Music and ICT in the Classroom.”
Technology, Pedagogy, and Education 16 (1): 41–56. doi:10.1080/14759390601168015.
Gaston, T. 1968. Tratado de Musicoterapia. Buenos Aires: Paidós.
Gembris, H. 2002. “The Development of Musical Abilities.” In The New Handbook of Research
on Music Teaching and Learning, edited by Richard Colwell and Carol Richardson, 487–508.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Gibson, S., and D. Oberg. 2004. “Visions and Realities of Internet Use in Schools: Canadian
Perspectives.” British Journal of Educational Technology 35: 569–585.
Goodson, C. A. 1992. “Intelligent Music Listening: An Interactive Hypermedia Program for
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

Basic Music Listening Skills.” PhD diss., University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Gordon, E. 1987. The Nature, Description, Measurement, and Evaluation of Music Aptitudes.
Chicago, IL: GIA.
Helge, J. 2011. “Teaching and Learning Music Composition in Primary School Settings.” Music
Education Research 13 (1): 29–50.
Hernández-Bravo, J. R. 2007. Prueba de Nivel de Competencia Curricular en Música. Alicante,
Spain: Faculty of Education, University of Alicante.
Hernández-Bravo, J. R. 2013. “Las TIC en el Aula 2.0: Una Visión Práctica acerca de su
Integración.” In Las TIC en el Aula desde un Enfoque Multidisciplinar, coordinated by
Ramón Cózar and María Valle de Moya, 29–44. Barcelona: Octaedro.
Johnson, L., S. Adams, and M. Cummins. 2012. NMC Horizon Report: 2012 K-12 Edition.
Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.
Kerlinger, F. 2002. Investigación del Comportamiento. México City: McGraw-Hill.
Kerr, S. 2004. “Toward a Sociology of Educational Technology.” In Handbook of Research on
Educational Communications and Technology, edited by David Jonassen, 113–142.
Nahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kodály, Z. 1967. Método Kodály. Buenos Aires: Kapeluz.
Kozma, R., ed. 2003. Technology, Innovation, and Educational Change: A Global Perspective.
Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
Lamont, A. 2011. “The Beat Goes On: Music Education, Identity and Lifelong Learning.”
Music Education Research 13 (4): 369–388.
Lines, D., coord. 2009. La Educación Musical para el Nuevo Milenio. Madrid: Morata.
LOCE. 2002. “Ley Orgánica 10/2002, de 23 de Diciembre, de Calidad de la Educación.” Boletín
Oficial del Estado, December 24. [Link]
pdf.
LOE. 2006. “Ley Orgánica 2/2006, de 3 de Mayo, de Educación.” Boletín Oficial del Estado,
May 4. [Link]
LOGSE. 1990. “Ley 1/1990, de 3 de Octubre, de Ordenación General del Sistema Educativo.”
Boletín Oficial del Estado, October 4. [Link]
[Link].
LOMCE. 2013. “Ley Orgánica 8/2013, de 9 de Diciembre, para la Mejora de la Calidad
Educativa.” Boletín Oficial del Estado, December 10. [Link]
10/pdfs/[Link].
Maneveau, G. 1993. Música y Educación. Madrid: Rialp.
Mark, M., and Ch. Gary. 2007. A History of American Music Education. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield.
McCord, K. 1993. “Teaching Music Fundamentals Through Technology in Middle School
Music Classes.” In Third International Conference of Technological Directions in Music
Education, edited by Kimberly Walls, 68–71. San Antonio, TX: IMR Press.
Nilsson, B., and G. Folkestad. 2005. “Children’s Practice of Computer-Based Composition.”
Music Education Research 7 (1): 21–37.
Orff, C. 1950. Music for Children. Mainz, Germany: Schott.
 Music Education Research 19

Orman, E., and J. Whitaker. 2010. “Time Usage During Face-to-Face and Synchronous
Distance Music Lessons.” American Journal of Distance Education 24 (2): 92–103. doi:10.
1080/08923641003666854.
Pender, K. 2013. “Promoting Music Education Using ICTs.” [Link]
Music.
Prasso, N. M. 1997. “An Examination of the Effect of Writing Melodies, Using a Computer-
Based Song-Writing Program on High School Students’ Individual Learning of Sight-
Singing Skills.” PhD diss., Columbia University Teachers College, New York.
Rodríguez-Quiles, J. A. 2001. “La Educación Musical en los Proyectos Curriculares de
Educación Primaria: Evaluación de su Propuesta y Desarrollo.” PhD diss., University of
Granada, Granada, Spain.
Roese, C. 2003. Music Education in Primary School. Bangor, UK: School of Education,
University of Wales.
Savage, J. 2005. “Working Towards a Theory for Music Technologies in the Classroom: How
Pupils Engage with and Organize Sounds with New Technologies.” British Journal of
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 16:10 15 March 2016

Music Education 22 (2): 167–180. doi:10.1017/S0265051705006133.

Savage, J. 2010. “A Survey of ICT Usage Across English Secondary Schools.” Music Education
Research 12 (1): 89–104. doi:10.1080/14613800903568288.
Seashore, C. E., D. Lewis, and J. G. Saetveit. 1956. Seashore Measures of Musical Talents-
Revised. New York: Psychological Corporation.
Southcott, J., and R. Crawford. 2011. “The Intersections of Curriculum Development: Music,
ICT, and Australian Music Education.” Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 27
(1): 122–136. [Link]
Tan, S., P. Pfordresher, and R. Harré. 2010. Psychology of Music: From Sound to Significance.
New York: Psychology Press.
Tomlinson, C. A. 2000. Differentiation of Instruction in the Elementary Grades. ERIC Digest.
Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education.
Vander Ark, T. 2012. Getting Smart: How Digital Learning Is Changing the World.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wallace, R. M. 2004. “A Framework for Understanding Teaching with the Internet.” American
Educational Research Journal 41 (2): 447–488.
Webster, P. R. 2002. “Computer-Based Technology and Music Teaching and Learning.” In The
New Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and Learning, edited by Richard Colwell and
Carol Richardson, 416–439. New York: Oxford University Press.
Willems, E. 1979. Las Bases Psicológicas de la Educación Musical. Buenos Aires, Argentina:
Eudeba.
Young, W. T. 1971. “The Role of Musical Aptitude, Intelligence, and Academic Achievement in
Predicting the Musical Attainment of Elementary Instrumental Music Students.” Journal of
Research in Music Education 19 (4): 385–398.
Zhao, Y., and K. A. Frank. 2003. “Factors Affecting Technology Uses in Schools: An
Ecological Perspective.” American Educational Research Journal 40 (4): 807–840.