<%BANNER%>

The Effects of Music Activities on English Pronunciation and Vocabulary Retention of Fourth-Grade ESOL Students in Taiwan

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042744/00001

Material Information

Title: The Effects of Music Activities on English Pronunciation and Vocabulary Retention of Fourth-Grade ESOL Students in Taiwan
Physical Description: 1 online resource (151 p.)
Language: english
Creator: CHEN,JIAN-JUN
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: LANGUAGE -- MUSIC
Music -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Music Education thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of music activities (singing, speech and body percussion, and instrumental performance) on the English pronunciation and vocabulary retention of fourth-grade ESOL (English for Speakers of Other Languages) students in Chia-Yi, Taiwan. The study was conducted at an elementary school. The student participants (N = 128) had to meet two criteria for participation: 1) they had to be 9 to 10 years old, and 2) they had to be learning English at the elementary school level. Students began taking English courses in the third grade at school. English examinations were administered at the beginning of each semester. Students were grouped into classes according to examination results. Cluster random sampling technique was utilized and four classrooms were randomly selected for participation in the study. Because students were grouped according to examination results, the researcher was able to work with students who had similar levels of English proficiency. Participants were divided into two groups: experimental (n = 64) and control (n = 64). The experimental group students undertook a sequence of 12 weeks of music lessons to help improve their English pronunciation and vocabulary retention. The control group was taught using a traditional method without music (e.g., text study alone). The researcher utilized a quasi-experimental research design with pretest and posttest measurements to examine the treatment results. Results revealed that the experimental group performed significantly better on vocabulary and pronunciation posttests when compared to the control group. To provide additional evidence that music contributes to language learning, survey questionnaires were analyzed. Based on the survey questionnaire results, the experimental group students had positive attitudes toward music activities integrated with learning English. In the language development domain, most students agreed that music activities helped them improve their English pronunciation, and they learned vocabulary words faster. In the social skills development domain, responses on the posttest questionnaire showed that most students liked learning English with classmates through music activities. In the affective development domain, 97% of the students expressed that they liked having music activities in English class. Results of this study support a conclusion that music activities improve English pronunciation and vocabulary retention among fourth-grade ESOL students.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by JIAN-JUN CHEN.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Brophy, Timothy S.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2013-04-30

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0042744:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042744/00001

Material Information

Title: The Effects of Music Activities on English Pronunciation and Vocabulary Retention of Fourth-Grade ESOL Students in Taiwan
Physical Description: 1 online resource (151 p.)
Language: english
Creator: CHEN,JIAN-JUN
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: LANGUAGE -- MUSIC
Music -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Music Education thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of music activities (singing, speech and body percussion, and instrumental performance) on the English pronunciation and vocabulary retention of fourth-grade ESOL (English for Speakers of Other Languages) students in Chia-Yi, Taiwan. The study was conducted at an elementary school. The student participants (N = 128) had to meet two criteria for participation: 1) they had to be 9 to 10 years old, and 2) they had to be learning English at the elementary school level. Students began taking English courses in the third grade at school. English examinations were administered at the beginning of each semester. Students were grouped into classes according to examination results. Cluster random sampling technique was utilized and four classrooms were randomly selected for participation in the study. Because students were grouped according to examination results, the researcher was able to work with students who had similar levels of English proficiency. Participants were divided into two groups: experimental (n = 64) and control (n = 64). The experimental group students undertook a sequence of 12 weeks of music lessons to help improve their English pronunciation and vocabulary retention. The control group was taught using a traditional method without music (e.g., text study alone). The researcher utilized a quasi-experimental research design with pretest and posttest measurements to examine the treatment results. Results revealed that the experimental group performed significantly better on vocabulary and pronunciation posttests when compared to the control group. To provide additional evidence that music contributes to language learning, survey questionnaires were analyzed. Based on the survey questionnaire results, the experimental group students had positive attitudes toward music activities integrated with learning English. In the language development domain, most students agreed that music activities helped them improve their English pronunciation, and they learned vocabulary words faster. In the social skills development domain, responses on the posttest questionnaire showed that most students liked learning English with classmates through music activities. In the affective development domain, 97% of the students expressed that they liked having music activities in English class. Results of this study support a conclusion that music activities improve English pronunciation and vocabulary retention among fourth-grade ESOL students.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by JIAN-JUN CHEN.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Brophy, Timothy S.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2013-04-30

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0042744:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE S CHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 201 1

PAGE 2

2 2011 Jian Jun Chen

PAGE 3

3 To my family

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many people s upported and assisted me in co mpleti ng this dissertation. First, my sincere gratitude is extended to my advisor, Dr. T imothy S. Brophy H is methodical and generous guidance expertise in the res earch process, and statistical knowledge inspired my work. H is enduring support and cordial encouragement also helped bring this dissertation to completion. Next, my heartfelt app reciation goes to my supervisory committee: Dr s Russell Robinson, Kevin Robert Orr, and Liwei Gu I am grateful to Dr. Robinson for the opportunities and guidance he pr ovided during my studies at the University of Florida. I t hank him for allowing me the invaluable opportunity which inspired my dissertation topic. I also extend my appreciation to Dr. Orr for contributing to the development of my knowledge and musicianship. I give special thanks to Dr. Gu for his statistics knowledge. I extend my gratefulness to all my committee members who offered their valuable time and insight In addition, m y gratitude go es to a wonderful teacher, Yu Lun Huang, who served as instructor and rater of this study. Her assistance enabled me to conduct the study efficiently. She became my dear friend who inspired and supported me during this research study. I would like to give special mention and appreciation to Diane Fischler for her editorial contributions. Thanks also to Alexander Kirpich for his assistance with statistical design. Finally, I would like to thank my beloved family members for their support, advice, and encour agement during my doctoral studies.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 5 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 8 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 11 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 12 CHAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 14 Background of the Study ................................ ................................ ......................... 14 English Learning in Taiwan ................................ ................................ .............. 14 English Learning in the United States ................................ .............................. 15 Research Question 1 and Null Hypothesis 1 ................................ .......................... 17 Research Question 2 and Null Hypot hesis 2 ................................ .......................... 17 Significance of the Study ................................ ................................ ........................ 17 ................................ ................................ .............................. 19 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 20 ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 20 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................................ ................................ .................... 22 Philosophical Rationales ................................ ................................ ......................... 22 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 25 Theoretical Rationales ................................ ................................ ............................ 26 Multiple Intelligence Theory and Learning a Second Language ....................... 26 Learning Styles for Language Development ................................ ..................... 27 ................................ ................................ ....................... 28 Inner Speech ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 29 Music and Motivation ................................ ................................ ........................ 29 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 30 Research ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 31 Music Education and Language Learning ................................ ........................ 31 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 31 Speaking ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 31 Music and Memory ................................ ................................ ........................... 34 The Suzuki Method ................................ ................................ .......................... 35 Orff Schulwerk Approach ................................ ................................ ................. 37 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 38

PAGE 6

6 3 METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES ................................ ................................ 39 Pilot Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 39 Results of the Pilot Study ................................ ................................ ........................ 40 Limitations of the Pilot Study ................................ ................................ ................... 41 Present Study and Research Design ................................ ................................ ...... 42 Independent Variable ................................ ................................ ....................... 42 Dependent Variables ................................ ................................ ........................ 42 Control Variables ................................ ................................ .............................. 43 English instructor ................................ ................................ ....................... 43 Textbook and Class length ................................ ................................ ......... 43 Participants ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 44 Study Procedures ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 45 Experimental Group Curriculum ................................ ................................ .............. 46 Criteria for Musical Selections ................................ ................................ ................ 46 Reliability and Validity Procedures ................................ ................................ .......... 46 Test of Language Development Primary 3 Level (TOLD P:3) .......................... 47 This Present Study ................................ ................................ ........................... 47 S ubtest: Picture v ocabulary ................................ ................................ ....... 47 Subtest: Phonemic analysis ................................ ................................ ....... 48 Data Collection and Data Analysis ................................ ................................ .......... 49 4 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 52 Survey Questionnaires ................................ ................................ ............................ 52 ................................ .......... 52 ................................ ................................ ................ 53 Experimental Group ................................ ................................ ......................... 53 Control Group ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 53 ................................ ................................ ................ 54 Experimental Group ................................ ................................ ......................... 54 Control Group ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 54 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 55 Pretest Questionnaires ................................ ................................ ........................... 55 Affective Develop ment: Student Impressions of Learning English ................... 55 Language Development ................................ ................................ ................... 56 Social Skills Development ................................ ................................ ................ 57 Data Analyses ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 57 Pretest and Posttest Vocabulary Scores of the Experimental Group ............... 58 Prete st and Posttest Vocabulary Scores of the Control Group ......................... 59 Experimental Group Pretest and Posttest Pronunciation Scores ..................... 59 Pretes t and Posttest of Pronunciation Scores of the Control Group ................. 59 Gender and musical experience with pronunciation and vocabulary gain scores ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 61 English experience with pronunciation and vocabulary gain scores .......... 62 IMMA scores, p and parents attitudes toward with pronunciation and vo cabulary gain scores ... 62

PAGE 7

7 Reliability ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 63 Posttest Questionnaire ................................ ................................ ............................ 64 Affective Development ................................ ................................ ..................... 64 Social Skills Development ................................ ................................ ................ 64 Language Development ................................ ................................ ................... 65 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ................................ ................................ ...... 89 Summary of the Research Findings ................................ ................................ ........ 89 English Pronunciation ................................ ................................ ....................... 89 Vocabulary Retention ................................ ................................ ....................... 90 Student Impressions Prior to and Subsequent to the Study ............................. 90 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 91 Conclusions and Implications ................................ ................................ ................. 92 Recommendations for Further Study ................................ ................................ ...... 94 APPENDIX A INSTRUCTIONAL MUSIC TREATMENT ................................ ................................ 96 B PRETEST QUESTIONNAIRE: ENGLISH CLASS SELF REFLECTION FOR PILOT STUDY ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 112 C PRETEST QUESTIONNAIRE: ENGLISH CLASS AND MUSICAL INSTRUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 120 D PARENTAL CONSENT ................................ ................................ ........................ 133 E MUSICAL EXPERIENCE QUEST IONNAIRE ................................ ....................... 140 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................. 144 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 151

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3 1 Picture vocabulary and phonemic analysis test scores for all groups, pre and posttest ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 51 4 1 Demographic information ( N = 128) ................................ ................................ .. 66 4 2 experimental group ( n = 64) ................................ ................................ ............... 67 4 3 M otivation in learning English ( n = 64) ................................ ............................... 6 8 4 4 Motivation in speaking English ( n = 64) ................................ ............................. 69 4 5 Learning English with my classmat es ( n = 64) ................................ .................. 70 4 6 Independent sample t test for the pre vocabulary test scores between the experimental and control groups ( N = 128) ................................ ........................ 70 4 7 Independent sample t test for pre pronunciation test scores between the experimental and control groups ( N = 128) ................................ ........................ 71 4 8 Pretest and posttest vocabulary scores of the experimen tal group ( n = 64) ...... 71 4 9 Pretest and posttest vocabulary scores of the control group ( n = 64) ................ 71 4 10 Pretest and posttest pr onunciation scores of the experimental group ( n = 64) .. 71 4 11 Pretest and posttest pronunciation scores of the control group ( n = 64) ........... 72 4 12 Pretest and posttest scores on the picture vocabulary and phonemic analysis subtests for all groups ( N = 128) ................................ ........................... 72 4 13 One way analysis of variance for effect of music activiti pronunciation gain scores ................................ ................................ ................... 72 4 14 One vocabulary gain scores ................................ ................................ ....................... 72 4 15 One way analysis of variance (gender and pronunciation gain scores) ............. 73 4 16 One way analysis of variance (gender and vocabulary gain scores) ................. 73 4 17 Multiple analysis of covariance (musical experience and pronunciation gain scores) ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 73

PAGE 9

9 4 18 Multiple analysis of covariance (musical experien ce and vocabulary gain scores) ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 74 4 19 One sample t test (students currently taking private music lessons in the experimental and control groups and pronunciation gain scores) ....................... 74 4 20 One way analysis of variance post hoc test (the number of years of English instruction and pronunciation gain scores) ................................ ......................... 75 4 21 One way analysis of variance post hoc test (the number of years student has taken English lessons and vocabulary gain scores) ................................ .... 76 4 22 Multiple analysis of covariance (English experience and pronunci ation gain scores) ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 77 4 23 Multiple analysis of covariance (English experience and vocabulary gain scores) ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 78 4 24 General lin ear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine pronunciation gain scores with IMMA tonal scores ................................ ................................ ... 78 4 25 General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine vocabulary gain scores with IMMA tonal scores ................................ ................................ ........... 79 4 26 General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine pronunciation gain scores with IMMA rhythm scores ................................ ................................ 79 4 27 General linear model (GLM) to examine vocabulary gain scores with IMMA rhythm scores ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 79 4 28 General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine pronunciation gain sc ores with IMMA composite scores ................................ ........................... 80 4 29 General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine vocabulary gain scores with IMMA composite scores ................................ ................................ .. 80 4 30 One pronunciation gain scores) ................................ ................................ ................. 81 4 31 One tion and vocabulary gain scores) ................................ ................................ ...................... 82 4 32 One pronunciation gain scores) ................................ ................................ ................. 83 4 33 One vocabulary gain scores) ................................ ................................ ...................... 84

PAGE 10

10 4 34 General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine pronunciation ga ........................ 85 4 35 General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine vocabulary gain scores with ............................... 85 4 36 Reliability coefficients of pretest, posttest, and pretest/posttest combined ........ 85 4 37 Motivation in learni ng English ................................ ................................ ............ 86 4 38 The effect of music activities on social skills ................................ ...................... 87 4 39 Motivation in speaking English ................................ ................................ .......... 88

PAGE 11

11 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 3 1 Mean gains in the picture vocabulary and phonemic analysis test scores af ter treatment, by group. ................................ ................................ .................. 51

PAGE 12

12 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Jian Jun Chen May 2011 Chair: Timothy S. Brophy Major: Music Education The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of music activities (singin g, speech and body percussion, and instrumental performance) on the English pronunciation and vocabulary retention of fourth grade ESOL (English for Speakers of Other Languages) students in Chia Yi, Taiwan. The study was conducted at an elementary school. The student p articipants ( N = 128) had to meet two criteria for participation : 1) they had to be 9 to 10 years old and 2) they had to be learning English at the elementary school level. Students began taking English courses in the third grade at school. E nglish examinations were administered at the beginning of each semester. Students were grouped into classes according to examination results. Cluster random sampling technique was utilized and four c lassrooms were randomly selected for participation in the study. Because students were grouped according to examination results, the researcher was able to work with students who had similar levels of English proficiency. Participants were divided into two groups: experimental ( n = 64) and control ( n = 64). The e xperimental group students undertook a sequence of 12 weeks of music

PAGE 13

13 lessons to help improve their English pronunciation and vocabulary retention. The control group was taught using a traditional method without music (e.g., text study alone) The research er utilized a qu asi experimental research design with pretest and posttest measurements to examine the treatment results. Results revealed that the experimental group performed significantly better on vocabulary and pronunciation posttests when compared to the control group To provide additional evidence that music contributes to language learning, survey questionnaires were analyzed. Based on the survey questionnaire results, the experimental group students had positive attitudes toward music activities i ntegrated with learning English. In the l anguage development domain, most students agreed that music activities helped them improve their English pronunciation and they learned vocabulary words faster. In the soci al skills development domain, responses on th e posttest questionnaire show ed that most students liked learning English with classmates through music activities. In the affective development domain, 97% of the students expressed that they liked having music activities in English class. Results of t his study support a conclusion that music activities improve English pronunciation and vocabulary retention among fourth grade ESOL students.

PAGE 14

14 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Sing joyfully to the LORD, you righteous; it is fitting for the upright to praise him. Pr aise the LORD with harp; make music to him on the ten stringed lyre. Sing to him a new song; play skillfully, and shout for joy ( Psalm 33 :1 3) Background of the Study English Learning in Taiwan With the encouragement of the Taiwanese president, Ma Yi ng J eou, most Taiwanese are learning to speak and read English. The president promotes internationalization and encourages all citizens to learn English. Kindergarten education currently places emphasis on bilingualism (Mandarin Chinese and English). Many parents select a bilingual kindergarten so that their children can have the opportunity to succeed from the earliest age. Beginning in the third grade, English is one of the subjects that all students must take. English is also a required course in high sc hools (The Ministry of Education, 2010). When seeking admission to universities, Taiwanese students are required to take English examinations. The Ministry of Education (2010) in Taiwan endorses the study of the English language. Many universities require students to have a certain level of English proficiency to promote global awareness and to attain the highest level of overall

PAGE 15

15 development in their professional fields. To graduate, students must attain a certain English competency level established by col lege administrators. Many government employees under the age of 40 are required to pass the General English Proficiency Test (GEPT) or Test of English for Internat i onal Communication (TOEIC). According to the GEPT (2009), the Taiwanese government uses the GEPT test scores as a standard for promotion. English Learning in the United States Kottler & Kottler, 2002). Based on the 2008 U.S. Census Bureau report of race in the United States, the number of minorities has dramatically increased. In the year 2050, Asian and Pacific Island school age children will reach 41 million and A frican Americans will reach 62 million The Hispanic population is predicted to reach 102.6 million. By 2050, white schoolchildren will constitute the minority in the United States (Rong, 1998). Thus, schoolteachers need to prepare for challenges and respo nsibilities related to teaching

PAGE 16

16

PAGE 17

17 et al. Modell, DeMiero, and Rose Research Question 1 and Null Hypothesis 1 Research q uestion 1: What is the effect of music activities on English pronunciation among fourth grade ESOL students in Chia Yi, Taiwan? Null h ypothesis 1: Music activities will have no effect on English pronunciation among fourth grade ESOL students in Chia Yi, Taiwan. Research Question 2 and Null Hypothesis 2 Research q uestion 2: What is the effect of music activities on English vocabulary retention among fourth grade ESOL students in Chia Yi, Taiwan? Null h ypothesis 2: Music activities will have no effect on English vocabulary retention among fourth grade ESOL students in Chia Yi, Taiwan Significance of the Study English is a global language (Spring, 2006) Many countries value English as an e ssential tool toward internationalization. For instance, more than 80% of elementary students are studying English in Spain, Austria, and Norway (Adams & Hirsch, 2007). South Korea built English villages to imitate English speaking communities to help chil dren use the English language in their daily environment. Some large population centers in China (e.g., Shanghai and Beijing) require first grade students to begin receiving English instruction (Adams & Hirsch 2007). Educators must develop or find

PAGE 18

18 instruc tional strategies to ensure effective ways to help language learners. Fortunately, and me ntal abilities ( Mark 1996). S rk m et al. (2008) found that listening to music stimulates a positive mood and cognitive growth. Standley and Hughes (1997) stated (1981) acknowledged that songs contribute to four language learning domains: listeni ng, speaking, reading, and writing. Chang (2001) stated that English nursery rhymes and chants are effective tools for students learning English. For example, singing in the classroom gives students extra practice time with a second language. Today, to en gage the class materials and make the learning processes interesting for students, many teachers use the flocabulary program (hip hop music to incorporate lesson contents) to teach vocabulary words (Fox News, 2010; The New York Times, 2005). R apping, singi ng, and chanting provide the repetition needed for pronunciation practice and vocabulary retention. Listening, playing instruments, chanting, and singing can be effective ways to enhance critical learning and thinking skills as well as language acquisitio nature, students can remember songs and continue practicing the tunes and lyrics they learn. Music and songs are the worldwide common ground media. Linking music with language learning would produce an interesting and innovative avenue for the language classroom.

PAGE 19

19 However, empirical research has been insufficient regarding the use of music in theory, practice, and empirical literature of oral language development in English language learners are inadequate in the United States. This particular study is important because it bears implications for future curriculum development in both Taiwan and the United States. This study is also significant because the researcher, as a music educator, will utilize music as a medium that may result in improved English pronunciation and vocabulary re tention for ESOL students. R esults of these research findings, combined wi th the existing literature, w ere synthesized to make recommendations and inform teachers abo ut how to improve instruction. R esults will also help to develop inclusive pedagogies for second language learners not only in Taiwan but in ESOL classrooms around the wor ld.

PAGE 20

20 Limitations 1. The participants in this study included only 9 to 10 year old ESOL students at an elementary school in Chia Yi, Taiwan. Generalizati on extending from this research may therefore be limited. 2. The researcher investigated only the effects of music activities on English pronunciation and vocabulary retention of 9 to 10 year old ESOL students. Other improvements that might result from the i ntervention, such as communication skills and a cademic performance, were not discussed in this study. 3. nglish experience, including inside and outside of school; 4 ; 5 ) 6 post test scores. 4. The researcher utilized only singi ng, chanting, speech and body percussion, and instrumental activities as instruction in this study. 5. The researcher measured only English pronunciation and vocabulary retention of 9 to 10 year old students during the time of the study. The maturation and s election history effect were not controlled in this study. kindergarten: A common form of classroom in Taiwan in which instruction includes teaching cours es in Mandarin Chinese and English

PAGE 21

21 : A nontraditi onal teaching method using hip hop music with educational contents to teach language arts, social studies, math, and science. criterion referenced

PAGE 22

22 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE This literature review is a detailed examina tion of sources relevant to and supportive of the study. The literature examined highlights the p hilosophical an d theoretical rationales relevant to this research Contributions to language learning and current musical practices in ESOL classrooms are disc ussed. Philosophical Rationales M usic al expression has historically been associated with language (Byrd, 1588; Flores, Gomez, & Moyeda, 2006 ; Kelly, 1969; Langer, 1957; and Rose, 1985). Many anthropologists believe that man acquired song before language. L ivingstone (1973) stated, Although it is often stated that man is the only primate that can talk, it is rarely noted that he is also the only on e that can sing. Since singing is a simpler system than speech, with only pitch as a distinguishing feature, I s uggest that he could sing long before he could talk and that singing was in fact a prerequisite to speech and hence language ( p. 25) Language was generated though singing and playing. Jespersen (1925) proposed that when we say that speech originated in s ong, what we mean is merely that our comparat ively monotonous spoken language and our highly developed vocal music are differentiations of primitive utterances, which had more in them of the latter than of the former. These utterances were at first, like t he singing of birds and crooning of babies that is, they came forth from an inner craving of the individual it is perfectly possible that speech has developed from something which had no other purpose than that of exercising the muscles o f the mouth and throat and of amusing oneself and others by the production of pleasant or possibly only strange sounds. (pp. 346 347) listening comprehension in language class rooms. Learning language through song was first applied extensively during the Middle Ages. Kelly (1969) indicated that

PAGE 23

23 m usic and songs became an integral part of language teaching during the Middle Ages. The first introduction to Latin w as given to most p upils in the song school, or school of liturgical music. After the rhythm and flow of the language had been drilled by plain chant, which was based solidly on speech rhythms, the pupil began the formal study of Lati n. It seems that songs were occas ionally used in the secular classroom. St. Jerome and Abelard both mention sacred music as an essential in Latin teaching, and many of the medieval tracts on music contain large sections on pronunciation. These detail s matter like vowel quality, syllabic l ength, and intonation patterns (p. 98) The exercise of singing is delightful to nature, and good to preserve the health of Man. It is a singular ly good rem edy for stuttering and stammering in the speech . It is the best means to procure a perfect pronunciation and to make a good Orator ( 1 ) During the last half of the 20 th century, psychologists began to illustrate the effects of music on learning (Weatherford 1990). Grout (1973) indicate d that music has the that music moderates emo tional feelings that can stimulate learning. According to Crowest (1896), Vener able Beda (673 735 AD) stated: Music is the most worthy, courteous, pleasant, joyous, and lovely of all knowledge. It makes a man gentlemanly in his demeanour, pleasant, courte ous, joyous, lovely, for it acts upon his feelings . Music encourages us to bear the heaviest afflictions, administers consolation in every difficulty, refreshes the broken spirit, removes headache and sorrow, expels foul spirits, and cures crossness and melancholy. (p. 5 7 ) Sedar (1997) and Weatherford (1990) found that music can create an enjoyable Furthermore, Gordon (2007a, 2007b) made an analogy of the sequential under standing of music to that of language, progressing from aural to written abilities.

PAGE 24

24 Infants are exposed to adult communication in daily living. They imitate the speech patterns of parents, adults, and other children. As the child grows older, he begins to develop a thought based vocabulary, along with a listening vocabulary, resulting in expanded spoken, reading, and writing vocabularies. According to Valerio, Gordon's proposed sequencing of music vocabularies is nearly identical to the sequencing of langu audiating/improvising, reading, and ( 7) I nstead of thinking language, the children are audiating/ improvising through music. As infa nts, children listen to parents, adults and other children singing to them. The child uses musical interactions to process and build audiated vocabulary along with music listening, reading, performing, and composing vocabularies (Gordon, 2007a, 2007b). G ordon ( 2007a, 2007b ) proposed that music and language shar e a similar learning process but Houghton (1984) compared the symbolic systems of linguistic and sensitive, which is to say that the linguistic or musical significance of a unit may depend 32). Houghton also commented that prosodic stress is an essential (phonemic) function in la nguage. Stress and accent also a ffect musical structure. Given this connection, music educators may select materials that facilitate conceptual learning in both language and music. In Philosophy in a New Key Langer (1957) posit ed the symbolism behind musical forms as the following: They are composed of a number of re adily separable items (notes, beats, intervals, chords, etc.).

PAGE 25

25 They are easily produced (by voice or instrument). They are easily combined in a wide variety of ways (within the constraints of key, mode, meter, and style). They play no practical role more i mportant than their expressive function (unlike textiles, ceramics, etc.). They can be readily distinguished within the framework of key and meter used, and remembered and repeated. They tend to modify the characters of each other in combination, by provid ing a context for each other. This process of combination and modification generates a potentially infinite number of musical statements. (p. 228) Philosophers (Elliott, 1995; Langer, 1957) confirm learning of language. Lang er (1957) wrote, Voice play, which as an instinct that is lost after infancy, would be perpetuated in a group by the constant stimulation of response, as it is with us when we learn to speak . Song, the formalization of voice play, probably preceded speech (p. 128) F urther more, Langer stated that language has vocalizing tendencies and is developed through habits Music activities provide the opportunity to learn while forming habits. Through repetition of the song, chant, and rhymes, children can pra ctice pronunciation and retain new vocabulary words in a natural way. Language skills eventually bec Summary Connections between language acquisition and learning through music form the impetus for the current study. With tha t in consideration music is a powerful tool to enhance the emotional and cognitive growth of students. Music benefits early language acquisition ( Flores et al., 2006 ). Children learn songs easily and without inhibition (Cruz Cruz, 2005). Students actively participate in the lesson by singing songs with kinesthetic movements The implementation of kinesthetic learning in musical

PAGE 26

26 activities is intended to foster an environment to help students reach their language learning potential. Theoreti cal Rationales Multiple Intelligence Theory and Learning a Second Language Gardner (1993) advocated the application of music in the second language classroom. He indicated that performing, listening, improvising, and composing music involve the utilization of multiple intelligences which include musical, visual spatial, bodily kinesthetic, interpersonal, language in singing, spiritual, and logical mathematical aptitudes Gardner also state d that music intelligence can help students become more engaged in o ther activities. Curricula can be planned in a way to have students utilize different intelligences. Using m usic to stimulate student s interests, competencies, and self confiden ce in one area of knowledge can reinforce development in other areas (Gardner, 43). Educators may integrate arts with other disciplines (e.g. language, mathematic s ) to improve studen t s understanding of the subject. Acco provides different ways for students to think, as opposed to exclusive use of verbal and Dr. Knickerbocker recall multiplicati on tables Music also affects music to make students calm and to provide an opportunity for self e xpression (Bresler, 1995). I ntegrati ng music with other disciplines has a strong influence on stud lear ning (Hoffer, 2005). Neurological researchers stated that when children engage in music activities, many parts of the brain are activated (Colwell & Richardson, 2002). The n

PAGE 27

27 theory is the term used to describe the different kinds of thinking that children employ when learning and making music (Hetland, 2000a). Elliott (1995) suggest ed that quality of instruction in conjunction with music activities ca n assist the transfer. Both multiple intelligences and the y can help exp lain how music instruction can affect brain activity (Flohr, Miller, & deBeus, 2000). which applies music in its teaching pedagogy. In this method, Lozanov stated that optimum lear ning requires that one be relaxed, yet focused on tasks. T o provide a relaxed and positive environment for students, the suggestopedia method applies music to create an enjoyable and relaxing learning environment (Lazear, 1991). Learning Styles for Languag e Development Kolb (1984 p p 68 69 ) state d that there are four types of learning styles: A preference for learning from concrete experience that emphasizes feeling over thinking; here and now complexity over theories and generalizations; intuitive over systematic. A preference for reflective observation that emphasizes understanding over practical application; the ideal over the pragmatic; reflection over action. A preference for abstract conceptualizations that emphasizes thinking o ver feeling; theories over here and now complexity; systematic over intuitive. A preference for active experimentation that emphasizes pragmatic over ideal; doing rather than observing. The ESOL children have a tendency to favor the concrete experience and active experi mentati on learning styles. Accordingly, the s engagement in learning tasks.

PAGE 28

28 The best methods a re therefore those that supply comprehensible in put in low anxiety situations, containing messages that students really want to hear. These methods do not force early production in the second language, but allow stu dents to produce when they are ready recognizing that improvement comes from supplyin g communicative and comprehensible input, and not from forcing and correcting production. ( p. 7) Preproduc tion (silent period, 0 to 6 months): I ndividual s develop language acquisition thro ugh listening and understanding. Early p roduction (6 months to 1 year): Children begin to verbalize language in one or two word sentences. Speech e mergence (1 t o 3 years): Despite some grammar and pronunciation s incr ease comprehension and confidence of using second language in simple sentences. Intermediate f luency (3 to 5 ye ars): Children have good comprehension and use complex sentences in conversation. However, children process a new language more slow ly than a nat ive language speaker would Dornic ( 1979) stated that this is caused by children need to translate the message from one language to another. Advanced f luency (5 to 7 years): Children use the new language fluent ly and are expressive at a nearly native lev el of speech. The l improves in this stage.

PAGE 29

29 Students experi ence these stages when learning English. Teachers can use Krashen to assure that the curriculum will not go beyond or complexity level (Hill & Flynn, 2006 ; Krashen 1982 ). Inner Speech M urphey (1990) noted that the way we learn songs is paralleled to inner speech. We repeatedly hum or echo song lyrics and melodies in our head. Eventually, the words we are singing beco m e our inner thoughts Vygotsky (1986) stated : Inner speech develops through a slow accumulation of functional and simultaneously with the differentiation of the social and the egoce ntric functions of speech, and finally that the speech structures mastered by the child become the basic structures of his thinking. (p. 94) 1 7 ) : Step I : Say Step II : Say and Do Step III : Whispe r and Do Step IV : Do (Think and Do) The sequence effectively aids internalization of text while incorporating kinesthetic that is, s tudents learn how to speak Drawing the connection between inner speech and the internalization of song, e ducators may choose and design music Music and Motivation Nobody has previously advanced a successful theory for motivati ng ordinary uninterested students in classes in the lower, though far more numerous, echelons of American education, i.e., the public schools. The answer for this group may lie in music, which includes alpha states, excites, hypnotizes, holds, attracts, and otherwise absorbs the attention of this population (p p 137 138)

PAGE 30

30 which can create a relaxing and enjoyable learning environment to help second language learners (Pyper, 2005). Yeoman (1996) state d that the connection between language readiness and an emotional level is a key consideration for students to engage in authentic conversation in the L2 (Second Language). However, some students may experience anxiety which prevents them from using L 2 to communicate on an effective level. Music can serve as an avenue to break the barrier. Yeoman believe d : Ovando, Collier, and Combs (2003) support the idea stating that music in the e xplore the imagination, feel the connections between music and every other aspect of Summary Music and language mutually enhance the process of learning. Researchers who appreciate and understand the value of music should explore diff erent approaches for its use in facilitating language learning (Weatherford, 1990). Theoretical evidence supports the significant role music plays in language motivation and acquisition. Integrating music with language learning may help students acquire a vocabulary and speak effectively.

PAGE 31

31 Research During the past 50 years, researchers have conducted studies that produced significant results regarding the relationship between music and language learning. This section c onsists of four topics related t o and su pportive of this study : music education and langu age learning, music and memory the Suzuki method, and the Orff Schulwerk approach. Music Education and Language L earning Auditory discrimination ability Visual discrimination ability Oral language development Speaking Diction Intonation Stress/accent Rhythm Phrasing (p.24) According to Krashen (1982), students with high motivation, good self confidence, and low anxiety tend to have better achievement in second langua ge acquisition. especially in language arts Students gain enormous fulfillment from engag ing in the se activit ies. I ncreased motivation and fulfillmen t levels translate into increased attainment of knowledge. S tudents can learn language in a productive way.

PAGE 32

32 Cruz Cruz (2005) further investigated the effects of music and songs on English grammar and vocabulary. He hypothesized that music incorporated with language lish grammar and vocabulary comprehension tests. Twenty eight second graders participated in th at study. The control group learned by the t raditional method without music (e.g. text study alone) T he experimental g roup listened to songs from cassettes, vi deos, or from the researcher singing while playing the guitar. Students also sang along with the songs to learn grammar and vocabulary. Participating and listening to music in class can motivate students, decrease anxiety and create an optimal atmosphere for learning voc abulary and grammar. In the Cruz Cruz (2005) study, the experimental group performed better than the cont rol group. S inging songs and listening to music can help second graders improve their grammar and vocabulary skills. Gromko (2005) sta te d that music stimulates the brain waves, motivate s learning, and improves learning outcome s Furthermore, the utilization of music in classrooms benefits phonemic fluency, literacy, and comprehension. Whereas Carlos (2003) and Gromko (2005) focused on mo tivating students in the language learning environment, Anvari, Trainor, Woodside, and Levy (2002) focused on music instruction and vocabulary. Anva ri et al. found significant correlations among melody and timbre discrimination and vocabulary reception wit h phonological awareness. Flores et al. (2006) investigated the relationship between musical a nd vocabulary skills with 30 children averaging 5.5 years old They compared gro ups that received or did not receive music training Their study consisted of thr ee groups with each group containing 10 children. Group A1 children had music instruction that involved listening

PAGE 33

33 memory and harmonic, rhythmic, and melodic discr imination. Group A2 children were exposed to general music activities (songs, rhythm and gam es). Group B children rece ived no music activities. Flores et al. used a 1986 Spanish Adaption of the Picture Vocabulary Test (Spanish version of the Peab ody Picture Vocabulary Test) as the test instrument. The experimental study was for a period of 10 wee ks ( 40 minutes per section twice a week with a total of 20 session s). G roup A1 children had a significant increase in receptive vocabulary than c hildren in the other groups. Flores et al. confirmed that rhythm, melody and timbre discrimination activities can help children develop phonological awareness by recognizing syllables a nd phonemes in the spoken language. In r esearch on chant, scholars found a close rel ationship between speech and chant. The voice is used in the same manner in speech as in song M u ch speech approached music both in its rhythmic and tonal patterns (Moorhead & Pond, 1978). from enjoyment, is in the disguised practice they give in individual sounds, st ress and 91). Billows (1961) affirmed that when students sing, they Jolly (1975) believed in respond to the rhythmic patterns of language. By using songs as teaching aids in the foreign language classroom, we are merely capitalizing on this Somers (2000) conducted a study on the effects of chant, music, song, and r hythm on listening and speaking English in Korean classrooms. Participants were from two

PAGE 34

34 South Korean universities ( N = 33). Students were studying English and one group received music as instructional treatment. Somers used student survey responses and pr etest to posttest gain scores on the Idea Oral Language Proficiency Test (IPT) to determine the effectiveness of musical treatments. Test domains include d syntax, morphology, phonology, and oral production. R esearch survey questions included: 1 ) listening comprehension impro ) Has your pronunciation improved after tak R esearch showed gain scores were higher for the treatment group than for the control grou p S tudents responded positivel y on the survey when asked about listening compre hension and pronunciation. R epetition of music, songs, and chants provide an enjoyable way of practicing pronunciation and improving listening comprehension. Music and Memory Flores et al. (2006) focused on music and vocabulary skills O ther researchers investigated the relationship between music and memory. Wilcox (1995) stat ed that music qualities ( temporal, rhythmic, and organizational ) can facilitate retention. Children find it easier to store information in long ter m memory and recall it later through organized materials, such as rhyming words, melody (prosody), and chunking (grouping phrases and lyrics into small attainable portion s ) (Thompson 1987). R hythmic phrases can stimulate musical behavior (e.g. tapping, dancing) that can help memory (Wilcox, 1995). In additio n words combined with rhyme are effective for memory as words combined with meaning (Ur, 1996). Ho, Cheung, and Chan (2003) found that young children who received music instruction at an e arly age have greater verbal memory and vocabulary. Chan, Ho, and Cheung (1998) conducted a study of music t raining and memory. They found that verbal

PAGE 35

35 memory can be improved by mus ical training. V erbal memory is primarily controlled by the left temporal lo be, which tends to be larger in musicians than in non musicians. Accordingly, music training plays an i mportant role in developing vocabulary retention. The Suzuki Method Dr. Shunichi Suzuki was a music educator in Japan after World War II. His theory of education is called the teaching children their first language in a step by step approach. Parents and teachers practice words with children every day. Childr en develop competencies by masteri ng at o ne level before going to another level. Through practice, vocabulary is gradually expanded and developed in oral speech. Grilli (1987) made the following observation: By the time children are five or six years old, they have developed the ability to spe ak three or four thousand words a fact that merits amazed admiration. Here we have the secret of an educational method by which all children can develop th eir natural ability to an extra ordinary degree (p. 10) repetition, and gradual development of intelligence awaren ess ( Kendall, 1986) Parent their children continually outside class. F amily particip ation helps c hildren gradually develop competencies. When applying the Suzuki method to an academic curriculum, students learn through engagement with the e nvironment. Students gain knowledge by observing and understanding the consequences after they inter act with other students and materials. They learn from simple ideas and use them to understand complex concept s Musical activities and games allow students to gain and apply language without worry about making errors. Singing songs, chanting, movement, an d rhythmic

PAGE 36

36 activities help students improve their readiness, pronunciation, and vocabulary retention skills. Students also dev elop their motor skills by movement and playing instruments. ea ching with respect and encourag ing students Pierredon (1995) also state d pect children and parents to guide them in a cooperative effort with conviction but without coercion education creates a natural learning environment for students to reach their potential. Cherwi ck (1994) assert ed and with so much joy, then we must find ways to incorporate the natural mother tongue 33) The Suzu ki method is a way to develop the whole child. Ludeke (1995) commented that students develop the fo llowing abilities by using the Suzuki method of teaching: Listening Observing and imitating Memorization Performing Concentration Sensitive response to aest hetic qualities Discipline Listening, observing and imitating enable students to receive knowledge and practice the materials. Concentration and discipline are essential for quality and successful learning. Students will develop confidence and be able to perform what they have lea rned and what they know. Furthermore, Ludeke commented: Dr. Suzuki was just obeying the laws of human nature when he suggested that children learn music the same way they learn their native language. Imitation is the principle m eans through which we learn to interact and adapt to our environment. Nature provided us with eyes and ears, which possess incredible potential. We should use them fully for learning, as nature intended (p. 63)

PAGE 37

37 Orff Schulwerk Approach The Orff Schulwerk a pproach involves rhythmic speech, movement, and singing that can contribute to pronunciation and vocabulary retention practice. McLullich (1981) applied Orff instruments to language learning, especially pronunciation. He used non pitched and pitched instr u ments in activities, including chimes, triangles, wood blocks, tone barred instruments, and maraca s From this work he designed a five stage curriculum with the following components: Timbre discrimination and short listening Response to listening stimuli through rhythmic chants Creating and imitating sounds to accompany stories, songs, and poems Developing imaginative abilities through listening to music and translating them into words (e.g., story writing) Creating and performing music in groups Mclullich posit ed that the advantages of this curriculu m can help students improve: Motor skills when playing instruments Rhythmic awareness and perception necessary for speaking, writing, and reading Li stening ability which especially helps students who experience dif ficulty in differentiating syllables Auditory abilities when spelling especially in the area of discrimination and recall. T o ensure a successful learning experience for each student, concentration is important (Ludeke, 1995). Douglas (1972) developed a three phrase model: stop, look and listen. Teachers use the word s concentrate during the activity

PAGE 38

38 Summary For this study, the musical treatment consisted of 12 weeks of lessons with musical activities emp loying s the Suzuki method, and the Orff Schulwerk approach ( see Appendix A) Children were instructed to stop what they are doing in order to look and listen to the singing, chanting, instrument playing, and movemen t or dancing as demonstrated by the researcher. The singing, chanting, instrument playing, and movement and dancing were then imitated by the children. The examination of literature guide d the development of a curriculum that will be utilized to improve c Children w ere trained to observe the activiti es being demonstrated, and continually practice vocabulary through the repetition of music activiti es.

PAGE 39

39 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY AND PROC EDURES This chapter consists of the m ethodology and research procedures utilized to answer the research questions: 1) What is the effect of music activities on English pronunciation among fourth grade ESOL students in Chia Yi, Taiwan? 2) What is the effect of music activities on English vocab ulary retention among fourth grade ESOL students in Chia Yi, Taiwan? Chapter 3 is co nsists of 10 parts: 1) a pilot study for establishing and examining the validity of the study, 2) results of the pilot study, 3) limitations of the pilot study, 4) the pres ent study and research design, 5) participants, 6) study procedures, 7) experimental group curriculum, 8) criteria for musical selections, 9) reliability and validity procedures, and 10) data collection and data analysis. Pilot Study This researcher conduc ted a pilot study at an elementary school in Taiwan for six weeks May to June 2010. P articipants were enrolled in fourth grade at an elementary school in southwestern Taiwan ( N English teacher administe red an English examination. The researcher randomly chose students w ith similar levels of English proficiency, and divided the students into experimental Group A ( n = 30) and control Group B ( n = 30). Students in both groups had studied English at least on e year. During the pilot study Group A received the pronunciation and vocabulary retention capabilities. Group B had traditional methods of instruct ion. P retests and p osttests on the picture vocabulary and phonemic analysis tests from the Test of Language Development Primary 3 level (TOLD P: 3), as well as pretest and posttest of the survey questionnaires ( see Appendix B ) were evaluated.

PAGE 40

40 The purpose of the pilot study was to develop and revise the researcher designed curriculum and survey questionnaires, and to establish the reliability and validity of the present study. Results of the Pilot Study All 60 students in Group A (experimental) and Group B (control) showed ov erall improvement. In Group A, students' overall English pronunciation score ranges were 25 to 90 on the pretest and 45 to 100 on the posttest. Twenty seven of the 30 students in Group A showed improvement in English pronunciation. Students' vocabulary sco re ranges were 15 to 95 on the pretest and 20 to 100 on the posttest. Twenty four participants in Group A showed improvement in the vocabulary test. Group A's pretest and posttest English pronunciation mean scores increased by 13.67 points (pretest: M = 73 .33, posttest: M = 87) The participants' vocabulary mean scores increased by 16.67 points (pretest: M = 65.83, posttest: M = 82.5) Table 3 1 shows the pretest and posttest scores for Group s A and B. In general, p articipants in Group B showed improvement. Students' overall pronunciation score ranges were 60 to 100 on the pretest and 30 to 100 on the posttest. Four of the 20 participants in Group B showed improvement in English pronunciation. Group B students' vocabulary score ranges were 5 to 100 on the pr etest and 10 to 100 on the posttest. Nineteen participants in Group B showed improvement in vocabulary retention. Group B's English pronunciation mean scores increased by 3 5 points (pretest: M = 77, posttest: M = 80.5) Group B's vocabulary mean scores in creased by 11.67 points (pretest: M = 65, posttest: M = 76.67) Subsequently, participants in Groups A and B were compared to see who made the largest increase in English pronunciation and vocabulary retention. Figure 3 1

PAGE 41

41 presents the increase in mean scor es for the two groups. R esults showed all groups increased in both pronunciation and vocabulary skills. The experimental group, Group A, increased significantly compared to Group B. Figure 3 1 also shows the pretest and posttest picture vocabulary and pho nemic analysis subtest score increases of Groups A and B. Group A made significant improvements compared to the control group, supporting a conclusion that music activities have an effect on English pronunciation and vocabulary retention among fourth grade ESOL students. Limitations of the Pilot Study Survey items in questionnaires used for the pilot study contained items that were difficult for fourth graders to comprehend. First, the survey items appeared to be too numerous, as students did not take the t ime to carefully consider all items (see Appendix B understand the concept of the Likert scale, item responses were fully anchored in the present study. Question items were simplified to reflect fourth comprehension. Second, as a result of the pilot study, the survey items were divided into three categories: affective development, language development, and social skill s development (see Appendix C ). Categorical d ivisions allowed tracking of student attitudes in specific areas of language instruction. In addition, students received the Chinese version of both pretest and posttest survey questionnaires. One ESOL researcher, one linguistics professor, and five fourth graders examined and validated the que stionnaires. Third, the researcher and one elementary English teacher graded r correlation coefficients ( r = .43) were calculated to reflect interjudge r eliability. To increase the

PAGE 42

42 interjudge reliability for the present study, training on the grading procedures for judges was necessary. A third judge was added to further establish reliability. Finally, a more detailed curriculum was designed, allowing for use by language teachers. Present Study and Research Design The researcher revised and designed a more thorough curriculum, grading procedures, and survey questionnaires after the pilot study was conducted. In the present study, the researcher employed a q uasi experimental research /nonequivalent comparison group design. There were 128 participants (using G*Power 3.0.10 Software, with a medium effect size (.25), = .05, 1 error = .80, and a total of two groups) Classrooms were randomly assigned into e xperimental ( n = 64) and control ( n = 64) groups. The experimental group received 12 week s of music activities for instruction (see Appendix A) The control group had a traditional teaching method with no music Pretest and posttest measurements were utili zed to determine if music activities could retention skills. Independent Variable The researcher employed the presence and absence technique. The independent variable of th e study wa s mus ic activities. The experimental group received music instruction in English class. The control group used a traditional method for teaching strategy Both groups underwent 12 week s of lessons. Dependent Variables D ependent variable s in this research were t he vocabulary retention skills. Both experimental and control groups took the picture vocabulary and phonemic analysis subtests from TOLD P: 3 before the experimental

PAGE 43

43 treatment. After 12 weeks of lessons, both groups rec eived the same test instruments as posttests. Each subtest score was calculated to examine treatment outcomes. Control Variables There were factors that served as control variables in this study. The grade level of the p articipants was limited to fourth gr aders Students were currently learning English during the study Both groups received instruction from the same teacher. English instructor Textbook and Class l ength

PAGE 44

44 Participants The researcher adopted non random purposive sampling to select the participants. The study involved 128 part icipants The student participants had to meet two criteria for participation : 1) they had to be 9 to 10 years old, and 2) they had to be learning English at the elementary school level. They were chosen from an elementary school located in urban Chia Yi C ity in southwestern Taiwan. Students began taking English courses in the third grade at school. English examinations were administered at the beginning of each semester. Students were grouped into classes according to examination results. P articipants wer e fourth graders (9 years old) Classrooms were randomly selected for participation in the study. Because students were grouped according to examination results, the researcher was able to work with students who had similar levels of English proficiency. T he researcher began this experimental study after the school principal, and the academic administrator. All participants took English classes taught by the same instructor. The researcher rando mly divided classrooms into experimental ( n = 64) and control ( n = 64) groups. Prior to the study, both groups of students received the traditional method for the instruction. The traditional teaching method included vocabulary cards, posters, CD s and vid eo for the textbook contents. Students had not previously experienced music activities integrated with English lessons. Information presented in Chapter 4.

PAGE 45

45 Study Procedures Treatment and data collection took place from September to December 2010. Parent(s)/guardian(s) were asked to sign the informed consent letter and complete the Mu sical and English Experience questionnaires ( see Appendix E ). Participating students were required to sign an assent letter ( see Appendix D ) All students were pretested on picture vocabulary and phonemic analysis tests from the Test of Language Developmen t Primary 3 level (TOLD P: 3 ). The teacher audio responses for the phonemic analysis test. The following demographic data were ; 2) gender ; 3) pretest scores ; 4 ) studen nside and outside of school ; 5 ) Music Audiation (IMMA) ; and 6 post test scores. The researcher employed a nonequivalent compariso n group design. Furthermore, t he researcher controlled of this study The experimental group had 12 weeks of music lessons, whereas the control group received the traditional method of instruction. The researcher designed treatment curriculum was piloted and validated by four experts: two English teachers, one music education professor, and one elementary music teacher. The 40 minute music lesson was conducted twice per week during school days in a classroom at the elementary school. Participants in both groups received the posttest of the picture vocabulary and phonemic analysis tests after the 12 week treatment period. In addition, the experimental group recei ved pretest and posttest survey questionnaires for examining

PAGE 46

46 Experimental Group Curriculum The researcher utilized songs, rhymes, chants, speech, and body percussion, as well as instrumental perform ance throughout the curriculum (see Appendix A) Based on the theoretical and rationale domains presented in Chapter 2, the pedagogy to affect speaking and vocabulary retention was used as an avenue in four categories: 1) song and chant as a carrier of voc abulary ; 2) rhyme as rhythmic and organized material to facilitate retention; 3) speech and body percussion as a stimulus to feel the language tempo and phonemic analysis; and 4) instrumental performance as a means to practice auditory discrimination for d eveloping phonological awareness (Carlos 2003 ; McDonald & Fisher, 2006; M urphey 1990; Somers, 2000) Criteria for Musical Selections The researcher selected songs that could enhance pronunciation and vocabulary retention, based on Somers s model (2000). C riteria for selection of musical materials and activities, including songs, included: 1) repetitive vocabularies, 2) slow tempo, 3) short phrases with simple syntax, 4) appropriate lyrics for the grade level, and 5) clear pronunciation of vocabulary. Ove rall, the content of the songs should have reinforced the lesson objectives (Carlos, 2003; Somers, 2000). Copies of the lyrics were provided and compiled into a music activity book. The music activities were used to support the curriculum. The researcher selected simple and Reliability and Validity Procedures I nstruments used for the language test in this study h ave been proven to have good reliability and validity ratings. The following is the summary of the test instrument:

PAGE 47

47 Test of Language Development Primary 3 Level (TOLD P:3) The Test of Language Development Primary 3 level asses ses the level of English langu age proficiency of students. The TOLD P: 3 was intended for use with children between the ages of 5 and 8 in the United States. The TOLD Primary 3 was chosen as the test instrument in the present study based upon multiple factors. One elementary language t eacher and one language professor examined the test instrument and its compatibility with the textbook Hello, Darbie! which the researcher used during the instructional treatment. Both experts stated that the test instrument was approp riate for Taiwanese fourth graders. In addition, the researcher piloted the test instrument with the purpose of establishing content validity. This Present Study English pronunci ation abilities. Therefore, only picture vocabulary and phonemic analysis subtests from the TOLD P: 3 were utilized as the test instruments. The administration time of each subtest was 30 minutes. Students were required to answer each test i tem in no more than 10 seconds. S coring of each subtest was objective. According to Newcomer and Hammill (1997) standard scores for each subtest from the TOLD P3 had a standard errors of measurement (SEMs) of 1 at each age level interval. Newcomer and Hammill further st ated that the TOLD has high content validity, criterion related validity, and construct validity. The item difficulty of both subtests ranged from 15 % to 85%. Subtest: Picture v ocabulary The picture vocabulary was designed to provide an assessment of a par

PAGE 48

48 contained 30 items. Test items include d a variety of sections: animals, birds, adjectives, adverbs, musical instruments, nature scenes, occupations, human actions, and manmade objects (Newcomer & Hammill, 1997). P articipants were required to point to each picture and identify the correct English term for the object found in the picture. For the present study, t he researcher provided the examiner a Profile/ Examiner Record of internal consistency had an average reported coefficient alpha of .81 (Newcomer & Hammill, 1997). The split half coefficients had a reported range between .61 and .72. The average of test retest reliability coefficients was .87. Newcomer and Hammill correlated the TOLD P:3 with the Bankson Language Test Second Edition (BLT 2). They found that the picture vocabulary test ha d a criterion related validity coefficient o f .70 when compared to BLT Hammill, 1997). Subtest: Phonemic a nalysis The p honemic analysis subtest measure d to break down spoken words into shorter phonemic porti ons (Newcomer & Hammill, 1997). The student was given a portion of a word and was required to pronounce the portion or syllables omitted. The p honemic analysis contain ed 14 test items. The internal consistency reliability ha d an average reported coefficien t alpha that ranged at .86. The average of test retest reliability coefficients was .87 (Newcomer & Hammill, 1997). The p honemic analysis subtest also ha d a reported criterion related validity coefficient of .70 when compare d to BLT subtest (Newcomer & Hammill, 1997).

PAGE 49

49 Data Collection and Data Analysis To control the confounding variables, the researcher collected d ata on six control year ; 2) gender ; 3) pretest scores ; musical and E nglish experience i nside and outside of school, (IMMA) ; and 6) p ost test scores The pretest and posttest survey questionnaires for the experimental group an d pretest and posttest scores from the picture vocabulary and phonemic analysis tests for both experimental and control groups were collected and calculated to evaluate treatment outcome. The s tatistical procedures are describe d in Chapter 4. The researche r employed quantitative analysis in the study. Pretest and posttest scores of both groups on each language test were imported and calculated into Statistical Analysis Software (SPSS 18). A one way analysis of variance (ANOVA), a general linear model (GLM), and a multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) were utilized to determine: 1) the significance of the effect of music activities on English pronunciation and vocabulary retention of ESOL students; and 2) the effect of English pronunciation and vocabu the Intermediate Measures o f Music Audiation scores). The independent sample t test was employed to determine whether or not the performance difference between the means of experimental and control groups was statistically significant. The P earson r correlation coefficients were cal culated for interjudge reliability. Additionally, the researcher used a general linear model to determine interactions

PAGE 50

50 among English pronunciation and vocabulary retention scores with continuous variables ( IMMA scores )

PAGE 51

51 Table 3 1 Picture v ocabulary and p honemic a nalysis test s cores for a ll g roups, p re and p osttest Pronunciation Vocabulary Group s Pre Post Pre Post Group A (experimental) 73.33 87 .00 65.83 82.5 0 Group B (control) 77 .00 80.5 0 65 .00 76.67 Figure 3 1. Mean gains in the p icture v ocabulary and p honemic a nalysis test scores after treatment, by group. Group A ( the experimental group ) received music instruction. Group B (the control group ) received no music instruction. A B

PAGE 52

52 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS This chapter presents the resear ch findings. Statistical analyses were applied to examine and compare the English language development of students who received music instruction for language learning with students who were not exposed to this method of instruction. Chapter 4 includes sta tistical results after music intervention, reflection prior to and subsequent to the experimental study. Survey Questionnaires The Musical Experience and English Experience questionnaires for the experimen tal and control groups and the pretest questionnaires on English class self reflection exclusively for the experimental group were administered prior to the implementation of the music instruction. D s gender, pare English. Audiation (IMMA) scores, is presented in Table 4 1. The average age of students in the experimental group was one month younger than that of the control group (experimental = 9 years and 3 months control = 9 years and 4 months ) education was college level in both groups. Males wer e predominant in both group s The e xperimental group had four more males than females; the control group had 12 more males than females.

PAGE 53

53 On average, students in the experimental group performed 2.14 points higher than those in the control group on the tona l test of the IMMA, and 2.54 points higher on the rhythm test of the IMMA C omposite scores of the IMMA in the experimental group were 1.03 points higher than those of the control group. Experimental Group Twelve experimental g roup students were currently taking music lessons. Students had been taking lessons for as little as four months and as long as three years. Sixteen children did not take lessons during the study, but they had previously studied privately from one week to two years. Twenty four students participated in organize d musical activities outside school, ranging in length from 20 to 90 minutes per week. The organized activities included private lesson time, practice time, choir or instrument participation time, fam ily music time, and community or school music events. Thirty six children participated in leisure music al activities outside school from 1 to 18 hours per week. Leisure music activities included listening to music on the radio, MP3, and iPod, participating in musical plays (including singing games and playground songs), and listening to music videos or music television programs (such as MTV). Control Group In the control group, 11 students were currently taking music lessons. Fifteen children did not take lessons during the study, but they had studied privately before the study f rom one month to three years. Twenty six students participated in organi zed music activities outside school from one to six hours per week. Thirty eight children participated in lei sur e musical activities outside school from 1 to 20 hours per week.

PAGE 54

54 Experimental Group Forty seven students had studied English before third grade. Thirty nine percent of the students had learned English before the third grade for less than one year, 20% about one year, 19% about two years, 4% about three years, and 8% for more than four years. Students were asked to approximate the amount of time dedicated to English studies after school. Forty three percent of the children st udied English after school for less than one hour each week, 21% studied about one hour, 18% studied about two hours, 10% studied about three hours, and 8% studied about four hours or more each week. Among the 47 students who studied English before the thi rd grade, 34% had English teachers who were native English speakers Fifty nine percent of the parents schoolwork. Control Group Forty three students studied English before third grade. Forty three percent of the students studied En glish less than one year before third grade, 21% about one year, 15% about two years, 10% about three years, and 7% for four or more years. Students were asked to approximate the amount of time dedicated to English studies after school. Thirty two percent of the children studied English after school for less than one hour each week, 28% studied about one hour, 21% studied about two hours, 12% studied about three hours, and 7% studied about four hours or more each week. Among

PAGE 55

55 the 43 students who studied before third grade, 35% had English teachers who were native English speakers. Fifty five percent Summary The experimental group contained four more students who studied English before the third grade than students in the control group. However, based on the test res ults, the control group pretest means ( see Table 4 12) on the pronunciation (experimental: M = 6 2 03, control: M = 6 4 69) and vocabulary (experimental: M = 6 3 04, control: M = 6 7 97) subtest s were higher than those of the experimental group. In both groups the majority of the students had learned English before third grade for less than one year. Students were asked to approximate the amount of time dedicated to English studies after school. Most students studied English after school for less than one hour each week in both groups. In both groups, about 30% of the students wh o studied English before third grade had English teachers who were native English speakers More than 50% of parents in both groups rated themselves as eir Pretest Questionnaires Affective Development: Student Impressions of Learning English learning English. The students responded to fully anchored ra ting scales ( see Table 4 2). The percentages of responses in each category were expressed by whole numbers.

PAGE 56

56 A large percentage of the students (44%) in the experimental group disagreed that they liked English class. Eleven percent had no opinion and 16% ag reed that they enjoyed the class. Regarding the levels of difficulty when students had to memorize that took place in the English class, most (33%) felt somewhat dissatis fied and many others (30%) felt undecided. Thirty three percent of the students claimed a lack of interest in learning English in the classroom due to the methods used by their teachers. Prior to the study, students had not experienced learning English int egrated with music Forty enjoy music activities in English class, and 44% felt that learning English songs would not be very effective to help them learn the language. English at school ( see Table 4 3). Thirty three percent of the students felt that they liked to learn English at school, but 30% of them disagreed. The majority of the students (52%) d id not like to raise their hands and answer questions during the class. Forty four percent disagreed that they studied hard during the class. Furthermore 38% felt that they often thought about something else during English class. Language Development Whil e this study was intended to explore the oral speaking ability of ESOL speaking English ( see Table 4 4). Many students (34%) did not like to practice speaking Englis h, and many (48%) did not like to carefully pronounce vocabulary words and sentences when speaking. In addition, not many students (58%) practiced speaking English with their friends and/or family, and many (44%) did not feel confident when

PAGE 57

57 speaking Englis h in class. Survey results suggested that learners of English (44%) in Taiwan experienced a greater degree of emphasis on reading than learners of English (9%) on speaking. Forty four percent of students lacked confidence when speaking English to native sp eakers, and 39% lacked confidence when speaking English in front of their classmates. Forty one percent considered their English pronunciation to be Social Skill s Development h classmates ( see Table 4 5). Many students (45%) felt that they did not work well with their peers and other students (52%) learned how to help their fellow classmates in the lessons. Twenty to learn English alongside their classmates. These attitudes suggest a need for more group oriented approaches to teaching English. Data Analyses The primary objective of this study was to determine if ESOL students in a treatment program made significant improvements in English pronunciation and vocabulary retention skills. Individual pretest and posttest scores on the p icture v ocabulary and p honemic a nalysis subtests from the Test of Language Development Primary 3 level (TOLD P : 3) were compared in the ex perimental and control groups. A comparison of participants' p icture v ocabulary and p honemic a nalysis pretest and posttest scores would determine if the experimental treatment program increased the students' English language skills. Prior to the experiment all students learned under the traditional method described in Chapter 3. Two class sessions took place each week, and each session

PAGE 58

58 lasted 40 minutes. Pretest and posttest scores on vocabulary and pronunciation tests were evaluated. The results of the pr e vocabulary and pre pronunciation test scores for the experimental and control groups are illustrated in Tables 4 6 and 4 7. The researcher considered .05 as the significance level. The experimental group pretest means ( see Table 4 12) on the vocabulary s ubtest were lower ( M = 63.05) than those of the control group ( M = 67.97). Independent sample t tests may be used to compare the differences of means between the two groups ( Ag r e sti & Franklin, 2009 ; Johnson & Christensen, 2008). Therefore, an independent sample t test was employed to compare mean differences between the two groups in the present study. Larger sample sizes will result in more precise t distribution values ( Agresti & Franklin, 2009; Hinton 200 4 ). The results suggest no statistical significa nce ( p = .18) between the two groups on the mean scores of the pre vocabulary test ( see Table 4 6). The mean scores of the pre pronunciation test of the experimental group ( M = 62.03) were lower than the control group ( M = 64.69) by 2.66 points ( see Table 4 12). The significant level was p = .76 ( see Table 4 7). Accordingly, no significant differences of the pre vocabulary and pre pronunciation test scores occurred between the two groups. Before the research study, the students in the experimental and contr ol groups had similar levels of English proficiency. Pretest and Posttest Vocabulary Scores of the Experimental Group Table 4 8 shows the vocabulary test results of the experimental group before and after the 12 week music treatment. After students receive d music activities for inversion, the mean scores (91.48) of the posttest were higher than the pretest mean scores (63.05) by 28.43 points. According to Agresti and Franklin (2009), a paired difference t test is used when comparing the means of a single sa mple. Therefore, a paired t test

PAGE 59

59 was applied to compare the means of the pretest and posttest scores in the experimental group ( p = .00 ) A significant difference in the mean scores therefore occurred between the pretest and posttest scores after music act ivities were integrated with learning English. Pretest and Posttest Vocabulary Scores of the Control Group Table 4 9 shows the result s of the pretest and posttest vocabulary scores after the control group received the traditional method for teaching. Stude M = 70.86) were higher than their pretest scores ( M = 67.97). The p value was above the significant level of .05. As a result, no statistically significant difference occurred between the means of the pre test and posttest scores. Cons equently, no significant improvements of the control group occurred after the students received the 12 week traditional method for teaching. Experimental Group Pretest and Posttest Pronunciation Scores Table 4 10 shows the pronunciation test results of the experimental group before and after the 12 week music treatment. After students received music activities for inversion, the mean scores of the posttest ( M = 92.27) were higher than the pretest mean scores ( M = 62.03) by 30.2 3 points p = .0 0. Accordingly a significant difference occurred of the means scores between pretest and posttest after music activities were integrated with learning English. Pretest and Posttest of Pronunciation Scores of the Control Group Table 4 11 shows the results of pretest and posttest vocabulary scores after the control group received the traditional method of teaching with no music posttest scores ( M = 67.81) were higher than their pretest scores ( M = 64.69) p = .091.

PAGE 60

60 As a result, no statistically significant diff erence occurred between the means of the pretest and posttest scores. Most participants in the experimental and control groups showed overall improvement. In the experimental group, participants' overall English pronunciation score ranges were 25 to 95 on the pretest and 70 to 100 on the posttest. Sixty one of the 64 students in the experimental group showed improvement in English pronunciation. Students' vocabulary score ranges were 20 to 95 on the pretest and 70 to 100 on the posttest. All participants in the experimental group showed improvement in the vocabulary test. Table 4 12 shows the pretest and posttest scores for both the experimental and control groups. The experimental group's pretest and posttest English pronunciation mean scores increased by 3 0.24 points. The participants' vocabulary mean scores increased by 28.44 points. Participants in the control group showed overall improvement. The students' overall pronunciation score ranged from 30 to 95 on the pretest and from 35 to 100 on the posttest. Thirty six of the 64 participants in the control group showed improvement in English pronunciation. The control group students' vocabulary scores ranged from 20 to 100 on the pretest and from 15 to 100 on the posttest. Thirty eight participants in the con trol group showed improvement in vocabulary retention. The control group's English vocabulary mean scores increased by 2.89 points. According to the results, students in both g roups increased their pronunciation and vocabulary skills. The experimental group increased significantly compared to the

PAGE 61

61 control group. Furthermore, the researcher utilized a one way ANOVA to investigate the significance of the effect of music activities on English pronunciation and vocabulary retention of ESOL students. S music activities ( p = .00). Consequently, null Hypothesis 1 ( music activities will have no effect on En glish pronunciation among fourth grade E SOL students in Chia Yi, Taiwan ) was rejected ( see Table 4 13). M usic activities had a statistically significant effect on p = .00). Accordingly, null Hypothesis 2 ( music activi ties will have no effect on English vocabulary retention among fourth grade E SOL students in Chia Yi, Taiwan ) was rejected ( see Table 4 14). Gender and musical experience with pronunciation and vocabulary gain scores Moreover, the researcher conducted a o ne way ANOVA post hoc test to investigate the interactions of English pronunciation and vocabulary scores with and musical and English experience. R esults showed that gender has no ry scores ( see Tables 4 15 and 4 16). Four categories of musical experience were covariates: 1) students who currently take private music lessons; 2) students who do not take lessons now, but have taken lessons before; 3) students who participate in organi zed musical activities outside school; and 4) students who participate in leisurely musical activities outside school. In pronunciation and vocabulary scores (DV), a multipl e analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was utilized ( see Tables 4 1 7 to 4 18 ). Results indicated a significant effect of currently private music instruction on pronunciation scores ( p = .00). The researcher utilized a one sample t test to examine

PAGE 62

62 mean score d ifferences between experimental and control group students who were currently engaged in private music instruction. The results indicated a s ignificant difference between mean gain scores of the two groups (see Tables 4 19 ). The finding suggested that the music treatment had a positive effect on participants' gain scores. English experience with pronunciation and vocabulary gain scores Three categories of English experience included : 1) students who have taken English lessons before third grade; 2) number o f years of English instruction; and 3) Significant differences were found between students with less than one year of English lessons and all other students on the pronunciation measure. Measures of significance increased in accordance with the number of years of instruction ( see Table 4 20 ). However, the number of years of English lessons had no effect on vocabulary gain scores ( see Table 4 21 ) To explore the effect of English experience on pronunciation and vocabulary gain scores, a multiple analysis of covariance (MANCOV A) was applied to account for all covariates Results have shown no significant effects of English experience on pronunciation and vocabulary scores (see Tables 4 22 and 4 23 ). IMMA scores, p and parents work with pronunciation and vocabulary gain scores T he researcher used a g eneral l inear m odel (GLM) ANOVA and a one way ANOVA post hoc test to examine the effect of IMM A tonal subtest scores, IMMA rhythm subtest scores, IMMA composite scores p and parent s attitudes on pronunciation and vocabulary gain scores. The effect of the IMMA tonal subtest on pronunciation gain scores the IMMA rhythm subtest scores on vocabulary gain scores and the IMMA composite scores on pronunciation and

PAGE 63

63 vocabulary gain scores were all significant ( see Tables 4 24 to 4 29 ). In addition results showed effect on pronunciation and vocabulary gain scores (see Tables 4 30 to 4 35). Reliability To establish the reliability of this study, the researcher utilized the Pearson r correlation coefficients to determine the interjudg e reliability on the pronunciation test ( see Table 4 36 ). The researcher graded 100% of the students. Judge 1 and Judge 2 scored 20% of the total participants on both the pretest and posttest. Pretest and ges rated data samples, which included pretest and posttest responses from both the experimental and control groups. Data samples were not identified as "pretest" or "posttest" results. The Pearson r correlation coefficients were calculated using SPSS 18 t ratings on both the pretest and posttest. The Pearson r correlation coefficients between grading on the pretest ( n = 14) was r = .71 p = 0.005. The correlation between the researcher and Judge 2 o n the pretest ( n = 14) w as r = .86 p = .0 0 The posttest correlation and significant level ( n = 14) between the researcher and Judge 1 was r = .80 p = .001. Scores between the researcher and Judge 2 on the posttest were r = .89 p = .0 0 For the combined pretest and posttest scores ( n = 28), the correlation between the researcher and Judge1 was r = .85 p = 0 0 The correlation between the researcher and Judge 2 ( n = 28) was r = .90 p = .0 0. The correlations from the posttest scores presented a higher co rrelation than those on the pretest. The reliability was found to be significant on pretest, posttest, and combined pretest posttest scores.

PAGE 64

64 Posttest Questionnaire After the treatment period, the experimental group received the posttest questionnaire. Post test questionnaire items were divided into three categories: affective development, social skills development, and language development. Q uestionnaire instruction. Affecti ve Development English ( see Table 4 37 ). Most of the students (84%) felt that music activities raised their interest in learning English. Forty eight percent strongly agreed tha t music activities helped them concentrate more in their English class and overcome a fear of learning English. Ninety seven percent liked hav ing music activities in English class, and those students (77%) wanted to continue having music activities in Engl ish class in the future. Sixty six percent of students strongly agreed that music activities got them more involved in learning English, and they (67%) felt confident when learning English through singing songs. Social Skill s Development cooperation with classmates during music instruction ( see Table 4 38 ). Ninety two percent liked sing ing songs with classmates in English class. Fifty percent strongly agreed that music activities h elped them work well with classmates, and 56% stated that music activities helped them get along better with classmates. Eighty pe rcent felt that they learned to help classmates through music activities, and 73% stated that they learned to appreciate other

PAGE 65

65 Language Development attitudes toward speaking English during music instruction ( see Table 4 39 ). Eighty one percent felt music activities helped them improv e English pronunciation, and 67% felt that music activities also reduced their fear of speaking English. Fifty two percent strongly agreed that music activities provided them with opportunities to learn new vocabulary words, and 58% stated that they learne d vocabulary words faster than before. Seventy five percent responded that music activities helped them enjoy practicing English pronunciation, and 84% stated that music activities helped improve their confidence when speaking English aloud. Seventy five p ercent strongly agreed that music activities made them want to speak English even more.

PAGE 66

66 Table 4 1. Demographic information ( N = 128) Demographic A Experimental ( n = 64) B Control (n = 64) Age* 9 years and 3 months 9 years and 4 months Gender Boys 34 38 Girls 30 26 Father College College Mother College College IMMA Tonal** 34.56 32.42 Rhythm** 33.45 30.91 Composite** 68.01 63.33 *Expressed by the mean age ** Expressed by the group m ea n

PAGE 67

67 Table 4 experimental group ( n = 64) Questionnaires n % a. I like English class. Strongly disagree 14 22 Disagree 28 44 Undecided 7 11 Agree 10 16 Strongly agree 5 8 b. How difficult do you find it to memorize vocabulary words? Very difficult 17 27 Somewhat difficult 35 55 Undecided 3 5 Somewhat easy 6 9 Very easy 3 5 c. H ow do you feel about the activities that take place in English class? Very dissatisfied 4 6 Somewhat dissatisfied 21 33 Undecided 19 30 Somewhat satisfied 16 25 Very satisfied 4 6 d. The way the English teacher teaches makes me interested in learning English. Strongly disagree 9 14 Disagree 21 33 Undecided 14 22 Agree 16 25 Strongly agree e. In the English classroom, we learn mostly through. Writing 21 3 3 Reading 33 52 Undecided 1 2 Speaking 4 6 Listening 5 8 4 21 28 1 6 9 6 33 44 2 9 14 f. I enjoy having music activities in English class. Strongly disagree 11 17 Disagree 17 27 Undecided 2 6 41 Agree 7 11 Strongly agree 3 5 g. Do you feel that learning English songs helps you learn the language? Not at all effective 4 6 Not very effective 28 44 Undecided 19 30 Somewhat effective 7 11 Very effective 6 9

PAGE 68

68 Table 4 3. Motivation in learning English ( n = 64) h. I like learning English in school. Strongly disagree 8 13 Disagree 19 30 Undecided 5 8 Agree 21 33 S trongly agree 11 17 i. I like to raise my hand and answer questions in English class. Strongly disagree 16 25 Disagree 33 52 Undecided 4 6 Agree 9 14 Strongly agree 2 3 j. I study hard during English class. Strongly disagree 17 27 Disagree 28 44 Undecided 3 5 Agree 9 14 Strongly agree 7 11 k. I often think about other things during English class. Strongly disagree 18 28 Disagree 16 25 Undecid ed 5 8 Agree 24 38 Strongly agree 1 2

PAGE 69

69 Table 4 4. Motivation in speaking English ( n = 64) Questionnaires n % l. I like to practice speaking English. Strongly disagree 19 30 Disagree 22 34 Undeci ded 4 6 Agree 12 19 Strongly agree 7 11 m. I carefully pronounce vocabulary words and sentences when speaking English. Strongly disagree 23 36 Disagree 31 48 Undecided 2 3 Agree 6 9 Strongly ag ree 2 3 n. I practice speaking English with my friends and/or family. Strongly disagree 14 22 Disagree 37 58 Undecided 3 5 Agree 8 13 Strongly agree 2 3 o. I feel confident when speaking English in class. Strongly disagree 16 25 Disagree 32 50 Undecided 2 28 Agree 13 3 Strongly agree 1 2 p. I feel confident when speaking English to native speakers. Strongly disagree 21 33 Disagree 28 44 Und ecided 4 6 Agree 9 14 Strongly agree 2 3 q. How well do you pronounce English words? Very bad 8 13 Bad 26 41 Undecided 17 27 Good Very good 7 6 11 9 r. How do you feel when you speak English in f ront of your classmates? Very uncomfortable 14 22 Uncomfortable 25 39 Undecided 9 14 Comfortable 10 16 Very comfortable 6 9

PAGE 70

70 Table 4 5. Learning English with my classmates ( n = 64) s. I like to learn English with classmates. Strongly disagree 8 13 Disagree 19 30 Undecided 26 41 Agree 8 13 Strongly agree 3 5 t. I work well with my classmates in English lessons. Strongly di sagree 16 25 Disagree 29 45 Undecided 6 9 Agree 7 11 Strongly agree 6 9 u. I have learned how to help classmates in English lessons. Strongly disagree 14 22 Disagree 33 52 Undecided 4 6 Agree 10 16 Strongly agree 3 5 Table 4 6. Independent sample t test for the pre vocabulary test scores between the experimental and control groups ( N = 128) 95% Confidence Interval F p t df Sig. Mean SE Lower Upper Vocabula ry a. 3.752 .055 1.342 126 .182 4.922 3.667 12.179 2.335 b. 1.342 116.980 .182 4.922 3.667 12.184 2.340 a. Equal variances assumed b. Equal variances not assumed

PAGE 71

71 Table 4 7. Independent sample t test for pre pronunciation test scores between th e experimental and control groups ( N = 128) 95% Confidence Interval F p t df Sig. Mean SE Lower Upper Pronunciation a. .094 .760 .838 126 .404 2.656 3.170 8.931 3.618 b. .838 125.995 .404 2.656 3.170 8.931 3.618 a. Equal variances assumed b. Equal variances not assumed Table 4 8. Pretest and posttest vocabulary scores of the experimental group ( n = 64) *p <.05 Table 4 9. Pretest and posttest vocabulary scores of the control group ( n = 64) Table 4 10 Pretest and posttest pronunciation scores of the experimental group ( n = 64) *p < .05

PAGE 72

72 Table 4 11. Pretest and posttest pronunciation scores of the control group ( n = 64) Table 4 12. Pretest and posttest scores on the pic ture vocabulary and phonemic analysis subtests for all groups ( N = 128) Table 4 13. One way analysis of varianc pronunciation gain scores Table 4 14. One way ana vocabulary gain scores

PAGE 73

73 Table 4 1 5. One way analysis of variance (gender and pronunciation gain scores) Table 4 16. One way analysis of v ariance (gender and vocabulary gain scores) Table 4 17. Multiple analysis of covariance (musical experien ce and pronunciation gain scores) Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p Corrected Model 26967.405a 5 5393.481 22.576 .000 Intercept 8281.309 1 8281.309 34.664 .000 1. 3187.076 1 3187.076 13.340 .000 2. 9.952 1 9.952 .042 .839 3. 23.181 1 23.181 .097 .756 4. 377.781 1 377.781 1.581 .211 Group 25746.614 1 25746.614 107.769 .000 Error 29146.462 122 238.905 Total 91725.000 128 Corrected Total 56113.867 127 *p < .05 1. Students currently take private music lessons. 2. Students not taking lessons now Total

PAGE 74

74 Table 4 18. Multiple analysis of covariance (musi cal experience and vocabulary gain scores) Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p Corrected Model 22489.686a 5 4497.937 24.250 .000 Intercept 7966.264 1 7966.264 42.949 .000 1. 1159.321 1 1159.321 6.250 .0 6 4 2. 553.275 1 553.275 2.983 .087 3. 23.354 1 23.354 .126 .723 4. 145.016 1 145.016 .782 .378 Group 22044.333 1 22044.333 118.849 .000 Error 22628.868 122 185.483 Total 76525.000 128 Corrected Total 45118.555 127 1. Students currently take private music lessons. 2. Students n ot taking lessons now Table 4 19. One sample t test (students curren tly taking private music lessons in the experimental and control groups and pronunciation gain scores) *p < .05 1. Students currently take private lessons in the experimental group 2. Students currently take private lessons in the experimental group

PAGE 75

75 Table 4 20. One way analysis of variance post hoc test (the number of years of Engli sh instruction and pronunciation gain scores) Year Mean Difference SE p 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound 1** 2 16.449 4.603 .016 2.05 30.85 3 23.116 5.493 .002 5.94 40.30 4 23.116 4.086 .000 10.34 35.89 5 27.266 3.441 .000 16.50 38.03 2** 1 16.449 4.603 .016 30.85 2.05 3 6.667 6.703 .911 14.30 27.63 4 6.667 5.608 .841 10.87 24.21 5 10.817 5.157 .360 5.31 26.95 3** 1 23.116 5.493 .002 40.30 5.94 2 6.667 6.703 .911 27.63 14.30 4 .000 6.359 1.000 19.89 19.89 5 4.150 5.965 .975 14.51 22.81 4** 1 23.116 4.086 .000 35.89 10.34 2 6.667 5.608 .841 24.21 10.87 3 .000 6.359 1.000 19.89 19.89 5 4.150 4.701 .941 10.55 18.85 5** 1 27.266 3.441 .000 38.0 3 16.50 2 10.817 5.157 .360 26.95 5.31 3 4.150 5.965 .975 22.81 14.51 4 4.150 4.701 .941 18.85 10.55 p < .05 **1. (less than one year) 2. (1 year) 3. (2 years) 4. (3 years) 5. (4 or more than 4 years)

PAGE 76

76 Table 4 21. One way analysi s of variance post hoc test (the number of years student has taken English lessons and vocabulary gain scores) Year Mean Difference SE p 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound 1** 2 5.746 6.514 .941 26.12 14.63 3 4.254 7.773 .990 20.06 28.56 4 10.504 5.782 .512 7.58 28.59 5 7.854 4.870 .628 7.38 23.09 2** 1 5.746 6.514 .941 14.63 26.12 3 10.000 9.485 .892 19.66 39.66 4 16.250 7.936 .385 8.57 41.07 5 13.600 7.298 .485 9.22 36.42 3** 1 4.254 7.773 .990 28 .56 20.06 2 10.000 9.485 .892 39.66 19.66 4 6.250 8.998 .975 21.89 34.39 5 3.600 8.441 .996 22.80 30.00 4** 1 10.504 5.782 .512 28.59 7.58 2 16.250 7.936 .385 41.07 8.57 3 6.250 8.998 .975 34.39 21.89 5 2.650 6.653 .997 23.4 6 18.16 5** 1 7.854 4.870 .628 23.09 7.38 2 13.600 7.298 .485 36.42 9.22 3 3.600 8.441 .996 30.00 22.80 4 2.650 6.653 .997 18.16 23.46 **1. (less than one year) 2. (1 year) 3. (2 years) 4. (3 years) 5. (4 or more than 4 years)

PAGE 77

77 Table 4 22. Multiple analysis of covariance (English experience and pronunciation gain scores) Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p Corrected Model 23931.297a 4 5982.824 22.866 .000 Intercept 4127.140 1 4127.140 15.774 .000 1. 272.003 1 272.003 1.040 .310 2. 1.408 1 1.408 .005 .942 3. 301.757 1 301.757 1.153 .285 Group 21365.245 1 21365.245 81.657 .000 Error 32182.570 123 261.647 Total 91725.000 128 Corrected Total 56113.867 127 1. Students have t ak en English lessons before third g rade 2. T he number of years of English instruction outside English teacher who is a native English speaker

PAGE 78

78 Table 4 23. Multiple analysis of covariance (English experience and vocabulary gain scores) Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Sq uare F p Corrected Model 30538.233a 4 7634.558 64.405 .000 Intercept 17193.084 1 17193.084 145.041 .000 1. 39.843 1 39.843 .336 .563 2. 8802.165 1 8802.165 74.255 .0 6 0 3. 439.071 1 439.071 3.704 .057 Group 12591.957 1 12591.957 106.226 .000 Error 14 580.322 123 118.539 Total 76525.000 128 Corrected Total 45118.555 127 1. Students have t ak en English lessons before third grade 2. N umber of years of English instruction outside English teacher who is a native English speaker Ta ble 4 24. General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine pronunciation gain scores with IMMA tonal scores Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p Corrected Model 27322.729a 2 13661.364 59.312 .000 Intercept 805.030 1 805.030 3.495 064 Tonal 3805.346 1 3805.346 16.521 .000* Group 17853.898 1 17853.898 77.515 .000 Error 28791.138 125 230.329 Total 91725.000 128 Corrected Total 56113.867 127 p < .0

PAGE 79

79 Table 4 25. General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine vocabulary gain scores with IMMA tonal scores Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p Corrected Model 20887.263a 2 10443.631 53.875 .000 Intercept 829.976 1 829.976 4.282 .041 Tonal 2.692 1 2.692 .014 .906 Group 19523.991 1 19523.991 100.717 .000 Error 24231.292 125 193.850 Total 76525.000 128 Corrected Total 45118.555 127 Table 4 26 General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine pronunciation gain scores with IMMA rhythm scores Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mea n Square F p Corrected Model 23544.802a 2 11772.401 45.182 .000 Intercept 592.915 1 592.915 2.276 .134 Rhythm 27.419 1 27.419 .105 .746 Group 21759.576 1 21759.576 83.513 .000 Error 32569.066 125 260.553 Total 91725.000 128 Corrected Total 5611 3.867 127 Table 4 27. General linear model (GLM) to examine vocabulary gain scores with IMMA rhythm scores Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p Corrected Model 24691.557a 2 12345.779 75.548 .000 Intercept 768.034 1 768.034 4.700 .032* Rhythm 3806.987 1 3806.987 23.296 .000 Group 15489.494 1 15489.494 94.786 .000 Error 20426.997 125 163.416 Total 76525.000 128 Corrected Total 45118.555 127 p < .05

PAGE 80

80 Table 4 28. General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine pro nunciation gain scores with IMMA composite scores Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p Corrected Model 25494.267a 2 12747.134 52.038 .000 Intercept 306.270 1 306.270 1.250 .266 Composite 1976.885 1 1976.885 8.070 .005* Group 17412.946 1 17 412.946 71.086 .000 Error 30619.600 125 244.957 Total 91725.000 128 Corrected Total 56113.867 127 p < .05 Table 4 29. General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine vocabulary gain scores with IMMA composite scores Source Type I II Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p Corrected Model 22609.601a 2 11304.800 62.779 .000 Intercept 262.951 1 262.951 1.460 .229 Composite 1725.031 1 1725.031 9.580 .002* Group 15491.825 1 15491.825 86.031 .000 Error 22508.954 125 180.072 Total 76525 .000 128 Corrected Total 45118.555 127 p < .05

PAGE 81

81 Table 4 30. One pronunciation gain scores) Ed Mean Difference SE p 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound 1* 2 .466 6.686 1.000 21.38 20.44 3 .250 7.788 1.000 24.61 24.11 4 2.083 7.718 .999 26.22 22.06 5 3.125 9.735 .999 27.32 33.57 2* 1 .466 6.686 1.000 20.44 21.38 3 .216 5.435 1.000 16.78 17.21 4 1.617 5.334 .999 18.30 15.07 5 3. 591 7.978 .995 21.36 28.54 3* 1 .250 7.788 1.000 24.11 24.61 2 .216 5.435 1.000 17.21 16.78 4 1.833 6.664 .999 22.67 19.01 5 3.375 8.922 .998 24.53 31.28 4* 1 2.083 7.718 .999 22.06 26.22 2 1.617 5.334 .999 15.07 18.30 3 1.833 6 .664 .999 19.01 22.67 5 5.208 8.861 .987 22.51 32.92 5* 1 3.125 9.735 .999 33.57 27.32 2 3.591 7.978 .995 28.54 21.36 3 3.375 8.922 .998 31.28 24.53 4 5.208 8.861 .987 32.92 22.51 1. ( Middle school or below) 2. (High school) 3. ( Vocational college) 4. (University) 5. (Graduate degree)

PAGE 82

82 Table 4 31. One vocabulary gain scores) Ed Mean Difference SE p 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound 1* 2 5.180 5.960 .944 13.46 23.82 3 2.333 6.943 .998 19.38 24.05 4 1.726 6.881 1.000 19.79 23.25 5 8.958 8.679 .899 18.19 36.10 2* 1 5.180 5.960 .944 23.82 13.46 3 2.847 4.845 .987 18.00 12.31 4 3.454 4.755 .970 18.33 11.42 5 3.77 8 7.113 .991 18.47 26.02 3* 1 2.333 6.943 .998 24.05 19.38 2 2.847 4.845 .987 12.31 18.00 4 .607 5.941 1.000 19.19 17.97 5 6.625 7.955 .952 18.25 31.50 4* 1 1.726 6.881 1.000 23.25 19.79 2 3.454 4.755 .970 11.42 18.33 3 .607 5. 941 1.000 17.97 19.19 5 7.232 7.900 .933 17.48 31.94 5* 1 8.958 8.679 .899 36.10 18.19 2 3.778 7.113 .991 26.02 18.47 3 6.625 7.955 .952 31.50 18.25 4 7.232 7.900 .933 31.94 17.48 1. ( Middle school or below) 2. (High school) 3. ( Vocational college) 4. (University) 5. (Graduate degree)

PAGE 83

83 Table 4 32. One pronunciation gain scores) Ed Mean Difference SE p 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound 1* 2 7.010 5.976 .848 11.68 25.70 3 1.510 7.380 1.000 24.59 21.57 4 3.410 6.755 .992 24.54 17.72 5 8.000 10.063 .959 23.47 39.47 2* 1 7.010 5.976 .848 25.70 11.68 3 8.520 5.684 .691 26.30 9.26 4 10.421 4.845 .333 25.57 4.73 5 .99 0 8.895 1.000 26.83 28.81 3* 1 1.510 7.380 1.000 21.57 24.59 2 8.520 5.684 .691 9.26 26.30 4 1.900 6.498 .999 22.22 18.42 5 9.510 9.893 .921 21.43 40.45 4* 1 3.410 6.755 .992 17.72 24.54 2 10.421 4.845 .333 4.73 25.57 3 1.900 6.4 98 .999 18.42 22.22 5 11.410 9.436 .833 18.10 40.92 5* 1 8.000 10.063 .959 39.47 23.47 2 .990 8.895 1.000 28.81 26.83 3 9.510 9.893 .921 40.45 21.43 4 11.410 9.436 .833 40.92 18.10 1. ( Middle school or below) 2. (High school) 3. (Vocational college) 4. (University) 5. (Graduate degree)

PAGE 84

84 Table 4 33. One vocabulary gain scores) Ed Mean Difference SE p 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound 1* 2 3. 917 5.407 .971 12.99 20.83 3 .863 6.677 1.000 21.75 20.02 4 1.949 6.111 .999 21.06 17.16 5 11.833 9.105 .792 16.64 40.31 2* 1 3.917 5.407 .971 20.83 12.99 3 4.779 5.143 .929 20.86 11.31 4 5.865 4.384 .774 19.58 7.84 5 7.917 8.048 .914 17.25 33.09 3* 1 .863 6.677 1.000 20.02 21.75 2 4.779 5.143 .929 11.31 20.86 4 1.086 5.879 1.000 19.47 17.30 5 12.696 8.950 .734 15.30 40.69 4* 1 1.949 6.111 .999 17.16 21.06 2 5.865 4.384 .774 7.84 19.58 3 1.086 5.879 1.000 17.30 19.47 5 13.782 8.537 .627 12.92 40.48 5* 1 11.833 9.105 .792 40.31 16.64 2 7.917 8.048 .914 33.09 17.25 3 12.696 8.950 .734 40.69 15.30 4 13.782 8.537 .627 40.48 12.92 1. ( Middle school or below) 2. (High school) 3. (Vocational college) 4. (University) 5. (Graduate degree)

PAGE 85

85 Table 4 34. General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine pronunciation Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p Corrected Model 23849.891a 2 11924.945 46.201 .000 Intercept 5900.622 1 5900.622 22.861 .000 332.508 1 332.508 1.288 .259 Group 23789.702 1 23789.702 92.168 .000 Error 32263.976 125 258.112 Total 91725.000 128 Corrected Tot al 56113.867 127 Table 4 35 General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance to examine vocabulary gain scores with Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p Corrected Model 21027.747a 2 10513.8 74 54.553 .000 Intercept 5872.423 1 5872.423 30.470 .000 143.177 1 143.177 .743 .390 Group 21023.316 1 21023.316 109.084 .000 Error 24090.808 125 192.726 Total 76525.000 128 Corrected Total 45118.555 127 Table 4 36. Reli ability coefficients of pretest, posttest, and pretest/posttest combined

PAGE 86

86 Table 4 37. Motivation in learning English Experimental Group Questionnaires n % a. Music activities raise my interest in learning English. Strongly disagree 1 2 Disagree 0 0 Undecided 9 14 Agr ee 9 14 Strongly agree 45 70 b. Music activities help me concentrate more in English class. Strongly disagree 1 2 Disagree 1 2 Undecided 14 22 Agree 17 27 Strongly agree 31 48 c. I like to have music acti vities in English class. Strongly disagree 0 0 Disagree 1 2 Undecided 1 2 Agree 25 39 Strongly agree 37 58 d. Music activities help me overcome my fear of learning English. Strongly disagree 1 2 Disagree 4 6 Undecided 17 27 Agree Strongly agree 11 31 17 48 e. I would like to continue having music activities in English class in the future. Strongly disagree 1 2 Disagr ee 2 3 Undecided 12 19 Agree 12 19 Strongly agree 37 58 f. I feel confident when learning English through singing songs. Strongly disagree 0 0 Disagree 2 3 Undecided 9 14 Agree 10 17 S trongly agree 43 67 g. Music activities make me more involved in learning English. Strongly disagree 1 2 Disagree 2 3 Undecided 9 14 Agree 10 17 Strongly agree 42 66

PAGE 87

87 Table 4 38. The effect of music activities on social skills Experimental Questionnaires n % h. I like to sing songs with classmates in English class. Strongly disagree 0 0 Disagree 1 2 Undecided 4 6 Agree 14 22 Strongly agree 45 70 i. Music activities help me work well with classmates. Strongly disagree 1 2 Disagree 2 3 Undecided 14 22 Agree 15 23 Strongly agree 32 50 j. Music activities help me get along better with classmates. Strongly disagree 0 0 Disagree 1 2 Undecided 16 25 Agree 11 17 Strongly agree 36 56 k. I have learned how to help classmates through music activities. Strongly disagree 0 0 Disagree 2 3 Undecided 11 17 Agree Strongly agree 14 37 22 58 l. music activities. Strongly disagree 1 2 Disagree 3 5 Undecided 13 20 Agree 15 23 Strongly agree 32 50

PAGE 88

88 Table 4 39. Motivation in speaking English Experimental Questionnaires n % m. Music activities help me improve my English pronunciation. Strongly disagree 1 2 Disagree 1 2 Undecided 10 16 Agree 13 20 Strongly agree 3 9 61 n. Music activities provide me with many opportunities to learn vocabulary words. Strongly disagree 2 3 Disagree 1 2 Undecided 16 25 Agree 12 19 Strongly agree 33 52 o. Through music activities, I enjoy pract icing English pronunciation. Strongly disagree 2 3 Disagree 2 3 Undecided 12 19 Agree 14 22 Strongly agree 34 53 p. Through music activities, I learned vocabulary words faster than before. Strongly disag ree 0 0 Disagree 2 3 Undecided 12 1 Agree 13 20 Strongly agree 37 58 q. During music activities, I can confidently speak English aloud. Strongly disagree 0 0 Disagree 0 0 Undecided 10 17 Agree Strongly agree 13 41 20 64 r. Music activities can reduce my fear of speaking English. Strongly disagree 2 3 Disagree 4 6 Undecided 15 23 Agree 16 25 Strongly agree 27 42 s. Music act ivities make me want to speak English even more. Strongly disagree 0 0 Disagree 0 0 Undecided 8 13 Agree 8 13 Strongly agree 48 75

PAGE 89

89 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCL USIONS The purpose of this study was to inv estigate the effects of music activities on English pronunciation and vocabulary retention of fourth grade ESOL students in Chia Yi, Taiwan. One hundred and twenty eight students participated in this study. Students were from one elementary school and taki ng English lessons during the study. E xperimental group students ( n = 64) received 12 weeks of lessons to help improve their English pronunciation and vocabulary retention. Conversely, students in the control group ( n = 64) had a 12 week traditional method for teaching. This chapter contains the conclusions of this study, the limitations of the study, the implications for pedagogical practice, and recommendations for future language and music teaching. Summary of the Research Findings The following conclusi ons were derived from the result s of this study. English Pronunciation A statistically significant difference was found between pretest an d posttest pronunciation scores for the experimental group after music instruction ( p = 00 ) No statistical ly signifi cant difference was found between pretest and posttest pronunciati on scores for the control group after the students received 12 week s of traditional method teaching ( p = 09 ) A statistically significant difference was found between pronunciation gain sco res and students who received English instruction for less than one year (See Table 4 20) A statisticall y significant difference in pronunciation scores was found among 1) students who currently take private music lessons ( p = 00 ) 2) scores on the IMMA tonal subtest ( p = 00 ) and 3) the IMMA composite scores ( p = 01 ) No statistically significant difference was found between pronunciation scores and 1) gender ( p = 59 ) 2) students who did not take private music lesson s during the study but ha d taken lessons before ( p = 84 ) 3) students who participate d in organize d musical activities outside school ( p = 76 ) 4) students who participate d in leisurel y musical activities outside school ( p = 21 ) 5)

PAGE 90

90 students who had taken English lessons before third g rade ( p = 31 ) and 6 ) students whose outside English teacher was a native English speaker ( p = 29 ) previous private music lessons, music activities outside school, studying English earlier, or the nationality of their outside English teacher. Vocabulary Retention A statisticall y significant difference was found between pretest and posttest vocabulary scores for the experimental group after music instruction ( p = 00 ) No statist i cally significant difference was found between pretest and posttest vocabulary scores for the control group after 12 week s of traditional method teaching ( p = 07 ) A statistically significant difference in the vocabulary scores was found among 1) scores o n the IMMA rhythm subtest ( p = 03 ) and 2 ) the IMMA composite scores ( p = 00 ) No statistical significance was found among the vocabulary scores and 1) gender ( p = 23 ) 2) students who currently have taken private music lessons ( p = 06 ) 3) students who did not take private music lesson s during the study but ha d taken lessons before ( p = 09 ) 4 ) students who participate d in organize d musical activities outside school ( p = 72 ) 5 ) students who participate d in leisurel y musical activities outside school ( p = 38 ) 6) students who had taken English lessons before third grade ( p = 56 ) and 7 ) students whose outside English teacher was a native English speaker ( p = 06 ) scores were not affected by gender, private music in struction during the study, previous private music lessons, music activities outside school, study ing English earlier, or the nationality of their outside English teacher. Student Impressions Prior to and Subsequent to the Study Based on the su rvey questio nnaire results, experimental group st udents had positive attitudes toward music act ivities integrated with English instruction In the language development category, the majority of the students agreed that music activities helped them improve their Englis h pronunciation and they learned vocabulary words faster than they had previously. In this study, the researcher designed curriculum required students to exercise teamwork and

PAGE 91

91 with the ir peers. Prior to the study, only 20% of the students agreed that they worked well with their classmates during English lessons. Responses on the posttest questionnaire indicated that 73% of the students felt that they worked well with their classmates du ring English lessons. Overall, the responses on th e posttest questionnaire indicated that most of the students agreed that they liked learn ing English with classmates through music activities. In addition, more than 90 % of the students liked sing ing songs in English class with their classmates. In the affective development domain, most students had different attitudes after music activities were integrated with learning English. More than 50% disagreed that they like English class prior to the music instruc tion implementation. At the end of the study, 84% felt that music activities raised their interests in learning English. Moreover, 97% expressed that they liked having music activities in English class. In addition, 83% agreed that they became more involv ed and engaged in learning English. Limitations Second, the length of the study could be a limitation. The instructional treatment period of the present study lasted only 12 weeks. As students began to recognize and apply music activities in language learning, the mu sic instructional time was close to completion. Because participants were second language learners, students could have gained more pronunciation and vocabulary retention skills by having more time to practice and become accustomed to applying music for learning English.

PAGE 92

92 Third, the present study was administered by only one English teacher. G eneralization of this study could be increased by having more language teachers implement the resea rcher designed curriculum Fourth, certain variables (history, testing, and differential selection) may have affected the internal validity of this study. These researc her cannot assert that the notable improvement of the experimental group designed curriculum. Finally, researchers and educators should consider the limitations of this study when generalizi ng these research findings. Nonetheless, results of this study have shown that students who received music activities as a teaching strategy had significant improvement compared to students who had no music instruction in the language classroom. Conclus ions and Implications T he research results indicated that music contributes to language learning confirm ing the findings of Cruz Cruz ( 2005 ) and Flores et al. (2006). The findings indicated that current private music lessons, IMMA ton al subtest scores, a nd IMMA composite scores had a statistical ly significant effect on pronunciation gain scores In addition, results from the study suggested statistical significance when vocabulary scores were compared with scores on the IMMA rhythm subtest and the IMMA co mposite test. These results may affirm the findings by Flores et al. (2006) and Anvari et al. (2002), both of whom suggested that music benefits language acquisition. Students who had musical training became more proficient at syllable detection pronuncia tion, and phonemic discrimination, all of which contribute to language learning

PAGE 93

93 Furthermore, the researcher suggest s the following implications : f irs t, interesting and comprehens ive activities play important roles in language learning (Bell, 1981; Carlos 2003; Gromko, 2005; Pyper, 2005; Yeoman, 1996) According to the research findings, s attitudes change d after the study because music activities stimulated engagement in the class. In addition, music activi ties provided students the opportunity to practice the second language. Students can memorize vocabulary words and focus on their pronunciation in enjoyable and artistic ways. Second, music activities may help students who have a n attention deficit disorde r. Singing and rhyming interesting songs provide the opportunity for students to actively memorize and feel a sense of achievement in language learning. Third, introverted individuals may develop a more extroverted personality through the researcher design ed curriculum Students develop interpersonal skills through cooperation with their peers in group activities. Reponses from the post test questionnaire support this conclusion. Fourth, r esults of this study demonstrated that the T he researcher designed curriculum may b enefit both English and music teachers to practice sequential instruction and develop inclusive pedagogies for their students. Music therapy, speech language pathology, and language educators who work with speech impaired

PAGE 94

94 chil dren and second language learners may apply the researcher designed curriculum in their work environments. Recommendations for Further Study The number of English language learners is increasing worldwide. The findings from this research suggest that mus ic can benefit language proficiency for second language learners. R ecommendations for furt her study are as follows. A random assignment of students into experimental and control groups is highly recommended. By applying random assignment, the researcher ma y enhance the probabilities of both groups on extraneous variables. According to Krashen (1982), language acquisition is developed through study is needed to investigate student A portfolio assessment may be designed for teachers and students to track Similar research could be duplicated with different age groups. Music activities m ay affect each group in various ways. Language teachers may have to adjust their pedagogy accordingly. Additional practice and positive reinforcement should be applied for slower learners. With proper practice and reinforcement, students are more likely t o have successful learning experiences and positive attitudes toward language learning. This research could be conducted in different countries. Music activities m ight differently in various countrie s. Finally, the finding s of this study, in conjunction with the existing literature and the researcher designed curriculum, enrich teaching and research professional fields. This researcher recommends that teachers apply these results and develop inclusive pedagogies to enhance student learning This study might then inspire researchers therapists, and educators to find new pedagogies to facilitate

PAGE 95

95 speech impairment, attention deficit disorder, and language acquisition i n school settings around the wor ld.

PAGE 96

96 APPENDIX A INSTRUCTIONAL MUSIC TREATMENT Measures of Music Audiation (IMMA) Test of Language Development (TOLD P : 3 ) ______________________________________________________________________ ____ __________________________________________________________________________

PAGE 97

97 What time is it? Chen et al, 2006 a. b. __________________________________________________________________________

PAGE 98

98 a.

PAGE 99

99 Chen et al., 2006

PAGE 100

100 __________________________________________________________________________ Where are Andy and Betty? Chen et. al., 2006

PAGE 101

101 c. d. _______________________________________________ ___________________________ b. __________________________ ________________________________________________

PAGE 102

102 Chen, et. al., 2006 __________________________________________________________________________

PAGE 103

103 ________________________________________________________________________ G e. f.

PAGE 104

104 Chen, et. al., 2006 c.

PAGE 105

105 Chen, et. al., 2006

PAGE 106

106

PAGE 107

107 G

PAGE 108

108 Chen, et.al., 2006

PAGE 109

109 Chen, et. al., 2006

PAGE 110

110

PAGE 111

111 _______________ ___________________________________________________________

PAGE 112

112 APPENDIX B PRETEST QUESTIONNAIR E: ENGLISH CLASS S ELF REFLECTION FOR PILOT STUDY Name _______________________ Number _______________ Dear student, The purpose of this survey is to optimize your English learning experience. This Information obtained from this study will remain strictly confidential Thank you for your participation! Sincerely, Jian Jun Chen Part I: Basic Information Please answer the following questions as accurately as possible by placing a checkm ark ¡ (1) Father: Middle school or below High school Vocational college University Graduate degree (2) Mother: Middle school or below High school Vocational college University Graduate degree 2. How carefully do your parent(s) monitor your school work? very carefully carefully somewhat carefully rarely do not care Part II: English Learning Experience Based upon your learning experience, place a ¡ inside the best answer For multiple choi ces questions, only have one ¡ in each question. 1. Did you ever learn English before 3rd grade? Yes No (If you have not learned English before 3rd grade, please skip the following questions and go on to Part III ) 2. How many years have you spent l earning English before 3rd grade? less than one year 1 2 years 2 3 years 3 4 years above 4 years: around _____ year

PAGE 113

113 3. Where did you learn English before 3rd grade? (can select more than one choice) kindergarten after school program one on one English lessons group English program outside of school other (please describe): _______________________ 4. If you learned English in an after school program or in one on one English lessons outside of school, how many hours did you spend learning English during each week? within 1 hr 1 2hrs 2 3hrs 3 4hrs above 4hrs:about____hrs 5. Is/was your after school English teacher a native English speaker? Yes No 6. The average of your English grades from grades 3 to 4 90 100 80 89 70 7 9 60 69 below 60 7. The average of your music grades from grades 3 to 4 90 100 80 89 70 79 60 69 below 60 Part III: English Learning Status in School Please answer the following questions regarding your current in school English language class. Make a x inside the best answer Disagree Agree 1 I like learning Englis h in school because English class is very interesting 1 2 3 4 5 2 It is boring to learn English in school 3 I feel nervous when I think about English class 4 I would like to be a model student who answer s 5 I like to learn English with classmates 6 I often forget to complete English assignments 7 English assignments are annoying. I hope someone will complete them fo r me 8 I often write English assignments at the last minute 9 I study hard during English class 10 I often think about other things and become distracted in English class 11 When learning English, I practice speaking. I also focus on the pronunciation of vocabulary words and sentences 12 I feel that it is enjoyable to include music with English learning 13 I can apply wha t we learn in the English class in my daily conversation 14 I feel confident to speak English in class

PAGE 114

114 15 I feel English exams are easy. I am not nervous about them 16 It bothers me to v olunteer to answer questions in English class 17 I do want to have English class 18 I feel nervous when I speak to native English speakers 19 I worry that other classmates will l augh at me because my English pronunciation is not good 20 I feel nervous and uncomfortable when I speak English in front of other classmates 21 I feel more nervous and under pressure in English class than in other c lasses 22 I feel confident and much easier when learning English through singing songs 23 I feel nervous and do not know what I am talking about when I speak in English class 24 I associa te music activities with English pronunciation to help memorize the vocabularies 25 I am very satisfied with our English curriculum 26 I am more interested in learning English after English class 27 I feel that I overcome my English difficulties after English class 28 The pedagogy of the English teacher can stimulate my interests in learning English 29 I am less frustrated after English class 30 I do not like English. I only study it for the examination Yeah! Thank you for your help!

PAGE 115

115 Posttest Questionnaire: English Class Self Reflection after Musical Instruction for Pilot Study Name __________ _____________ Number ______________ Please answer the following questions regarding your current in sch ool English language class. Make a x inside the best answer 1 Strongly disagree 2 disagree 3 neutral (no opinion) 4 agree 5 very agree Disagree Agree 1 Music activities enhance my interest in learning English 1 2 3 4 5 2 Music activities help me concentrate more in English class 3 I would like to be a student model and answer the questions during the music activities 4 I like to learn English through singing songs with classmates 5 Through music activities, I am less nervous while learning English 6 Music activities help me improve my English pronunciation 7 Music activities provide me with many opportunities to speak vocabulary words 8 Through music activities, I enjoy practicing English pronunciation 9 I enjoy having music activities in English class 10 During music activities, I can speak English aloud and not be afraid other people will laugh at me 11 I associate music activities with English pronunciation to help memorize the vocabularies 12 Music activities help me overcome my fear in learning English 13 Music activities can reduce my frustration in learning English

PAGE 116

116 14 Music activities increase my motivation in speaking English 15 Music activities improve my cooperation wit h classmates 16 Music activities enhance my relationship with classmates 17 Music activities help me better understand my peers 18 Through music activities, I have learned how to help classmates 19 Music activities improve interaction between classmates and me 20 Music activities benefit the communication between classmates and me 21 Through music activities, I know how to appreciate 22 Music activities help me get more required skills in speaking English 23 Music activities make me actively learn Eng lish 24 Through music activities, I believe that I can learn English well 25 Music activities can reduce my anxiety in speaking English 26 Through music ac tivities, I learned vocabulary words faster than before 27 I can readily sing English songs after the class which we learned in class 28 I feel confident when learning English through singing songs 29 I am very satisfied with having music activities in English class 30 I hope that we can have music activities in English class in the future

PAGE 117

117 A _______________ : : 1 :( ) (1) ( (2) ( 2 : 1 ( 2 : ____ 3 ? _______________________ 4 :( ) 2 3 4 : __ 5 ( ) :( ) 6 3 4 100 89 79 69 7 3 4 100 89 79 69

PAGE 118

118 : : 1 2 3 4 5 ) 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

PAGE 119

119 B : 1 2 3 4 5 ) 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

PAGE 120

120 APPENDIX C PRETEST QUESTIONNAIR E: ENGLISH CLASS AND MUSICAL INSTRUCTION Name _______________________ Number __________ ____ Please answer the following questions about your in school English class. Circle the best answer. I. English Learning : a. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree b. 1 2 3 4 5 Very Somewhat Undecided Somewhat Very Difficult difficult ea sy easy c. 1 2 3 4 5 Very Dissatisfied Undecided Somewhat Very dissatisfied satisfied satisfied d. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree e. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree f. 1 2 3 4 5 Not at all Not very Undecided Somewhat Very effective effective effective effective Motivation in English Learning: g. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree Agree

PAGE 121

121 h. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree i. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree j. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree II. Motivation in speaking English: k. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Stro ngly disagree agree l. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree m. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree n. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree o. 1 2 3 4 5 Strong ly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree p. 1 2 3 4 5 Very Bad Undecided Good Very Bad Good

PAGE 122

122 q. 1 2 3 4 5 Very uncomfortable Und ecided comfortable Very uncomfortable comfortable III. Learning English with my classmates: r. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree s. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree t. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree

PAGE 123

123 Posttes t Questionnaire: English Class Self Reflection after Musical Instruction Name _______________________ Number ______________ Please answer the following questions about your in school English class. Circle the best answer. I. Motivation in English Learning: a. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disa gree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree b. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree c. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree d. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree e. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree f. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree g. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree Agree

PAGE 124

124 Social S kills Development Learning English with my classmates (the effect of music activities on social skills): h. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree i. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree j. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree k. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree l. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree II. Motivation in speaking English: m. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree n. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree o. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree

PAGE 125

125 p. Through music activities, I learned vocabulary words faster than before. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree q. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree r. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagre e agree s. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree

PAGE 126

126 : _______________________ ______________ I. : a. 1 2 3 4 5 b. ? 1 2 3 4 5 c. ? 1 2 3 4 5 d. 1 2 3 4 5 e. 1 2 3 4 5 f. ? 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 127

127 : g. 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 128

128 h. 1 2 3 4 5 i. 1 2 3 4 5 j. 1 2 3 4 5 II. : k. 1 2 3 4 5 l. 1 2 3 4 5 m. 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 129

129 n. 1 2 3 4 5 o. 1 2 3 4 5 p. ? 1 2 3 4 5 q. ? 1 2 3 4 5 III. : r. 1 2 3 4 5 s. 1 2 3 4 5 t. 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 130

130 : _______________________ ______________ I. : a. 1 2 3 4 5 b. 1 2 3 4 5 c. 1 2 3 4 5 d. 1 2 3 4 5 e. 1 2 3 4 5 f. 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 131

131 g. 1 2 3 4 5 II. : h. 1 2 3 4 5 i. 1 2 3 4 5 j. 1 2 3 4 5 k. 1 2 3 4 5 l. 1 2 3 4 5 III. : m. 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 132

132 n. 1 2 3 4 5 o. 1 2 3 4 5 p. 1 2 3 4 5 q. 1 2 3 4 5 r. 1 2 3 4 5 s. 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 133

133 APPENDIX D PARENTAL CONSENT De ar Parent(s)/Guardian(s), I am a Ph.D candidate in music education at the University of Florida. I am conducting a study on the effects of music activities on English pronunciation and vocabulary retention under the supervision of Dr. Timothy S. Brophy. T he purpose of this research is to explore the benefits of music activity (e.g., singing, speech and body percussion, and instrumental activities) on elementary school ESOL students. The results of the study may benefit music and language teachers to better understand the amount of knowledge gained, allowing them to design instructional practices accordingly. With your permission, I would like to ask that your child participate in this research. The study will involve 12 week During those visits, I will be conducting music clinics and working with select students. All work toward this study will take place during English class. Students will not miss any additional class time. Participants will not miss any classroom activitie s in order to participate in this study The researcher will follow the curriculum schedule and teach the existing curriculum using the classroom text. Music activities will be used to support the curriculum. Since the researcher will teach the existing cu rriculum and follow the curriculum schedule, participants will not have any academic risk and will not miss daily academic work. than detract, from classroom instructio n. The Test of Language Development (TOLD P:3) pretest and posttest will take 30 minutes. All test material relates to the core curriculum of the English class. Students selected to participate in the study will have 12 week music sessions to reinforce l anguage learning in the English classroom. Students will receive the Test of Language Development (TOLD P:3) Test. Though there will be no monetary compensation for participating, the study will be educationally beneficial for all involved. Because this is a music education study involving language learning, the research will not interfere with the current English identification number will be used in place of his/her name. Information obtained from this study will remain strictly confidential. All recordings will be destroyed at the end of the study. Participation or non participation in this study will not affect school programs. Participation in this study is completely voluntary. You and your child have the right to withdraw consent for your child's participation at any time without consequence. In order for your child t o be considered for participation in this project, this consent form must be English teacher no later than September 3rd

PAGE 134

134 Your child will also need to complete an assent form. Please return the forms marked If you have any questions about the study, please feel free to contact me at the e mail address listed above. You may also contact my supervising professor, Dr. Timothy Brophy, at tbrophy@arts.ufl.edu or his office phone 352 273 3193. For questions about your rights as a research participant, contact the University of Florida IRB at 352 392 0433. Sincerely, Jian Jun Chen Date:__________________ I have read the procedure de scribed above. I voluntarily give my consent for my child, _________________ to participate in Jian Jun Chen music and language learning ________________________________

PAGE 135

135 Jian Jun Chen University of Florida School of Music 101 Music Building Gainesville, FL 32611 Email: jc2675 @ufl.edu Dear Student, My name is Jian Jun Chen and I am a music teacher. I am conducting a research study on the effects of music on your ability with the English language. During the next few weeks I will be visiting your school to help you learn English Your parents have granted their permission for me to work with you. Some of you will be selected to participate in this research study. If you are chosen, I am going to ask you to take the Test of Language Development (TOLD P:3) Test which will take place during my first visit : Each session will take place during your English class. You will not miss any additional class time. I will teach the school curriculum with music activities for reinforcement. The following is the weekly class sessions: Week 1: Pretest (exam), Greeting, Name game Week 2: What time is it? Week 3: What time is it? Week 4: Where are Andy and Betty? Week 5: Where are Andy and Betty? Week 6: What do you like? Week 7: What do you like? Week 8: What do you like? Week 9: Do you like dogs? Week 10: Do you like dogs? Week 11: Do you like dogs? Week 12: Posttest (exam) Participation in this study is voluntary. Participation or non participation will have no effect on your grades or status in the music and English program. If at any time, you choose not to participate, you may stop without any questions. Please indicate below whether or not you are interested. Thank you very much. I look forward to meeting you! Yours truly, Jian Jun Chen Would you like to participate in this music and language research study? ______Yes ______No

PAGE 136

136 101 32611 (0910) 749 067 Email: jc2675@ufl.edu Dr.Timothy S.Brophy. ( ) TOLD 30 9 3 tbrophy@arts.ufl.edu :352 273 3193. IRB :352 392 0433 Email: jc2675@ufl.edu -------------------------------------------------------------

PAGE 137

137 _____________ _______ ______ : ________________ _____________

PAGE 138

138 Dr.Timothy S.Brophy. Test of Language Development (TOLD P:3 ) : : : ? : ? : ? : : ? : ? : ? : ? : ? : ? : 9 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------_____________ __ _____ ___ ____ ______ ________ _____________

PAGE 139

139 ______Yes ______No _________ _______ _____________ _______ _______ Participant Name _________________ Participant Number ___________ Participant Age _____________ Date of Participation __________ Gender ________________

PAGE 140

140 APPENDIX E MUSICAL EXPERIENCE Q UESTIONNAIRE In conjunction with the Parental Instructions: Plea se answer the following questions as accurately as possible. This information will be used for statistical purpose only. Please return with your consent form. 1. Yes No a. If yes, how many weeks, months, or years has your child taken lessons? _______________ months (number) 2. If not taking lessons now, has your child taken lessons Yes No If no, go on to question number 3. a. If yes, how long? __________ months (number) b. When did your child stop taking lessons?____________________ (month) 3. Approximately how much time per week does your child participate in organized musical activities outside of school?_________________ hours/week (number) (circle one) NOTE: Organized acti vities include: private lesson time, practice time, choir or instrument participation time, family music time, community or school music events, etc. 4. Approximately how much time per week does your child participate in leisure musical activities outside of school? _____________ minutes hours/week (number) (circle one) NOTE: leisure music activities include listening to music on the radio, mp3, ipod, listening to favorite recordings, musical play (includes sin ging games and playground songs), listening to music videos or music television programs (such as MTV), etc.

PAGE 141

141 Participant Name _________________ Participant Number ___________ Participant Age _____________ Date of Participation ______ ____ Gender ________________ English Learning Experience Questionnaire Parental Instructions: Please answer the following questions as accurately as possible. This information will be used for statistical purposes only. Please return with your consent for m. 1. Has your child taken English lessons before 3 rd Yes No b. If no, please skip to item number 4 below. 2. Before 3 rd grade, how many years has your child taken English lessons? 4 or more than 4 years. If more than 4 years, how many? _____ 3. Where did your child learn English before 3 rd grade (You many choose more than ____ 4. 5. school English teacher a native English speaker? Yes No

PAGE 142

142 : 1. ( ) 6. ? _______________ ( ) 2. ? a. ? __________ ( ) b. ?____________________ ( ) 3. ?_________ / ( ) : : ) 4. ?____________ / ( ) ( ) : MP3 ipod )

PAGE 143

143 ) 1 ? ( ) 2 ? : ____ 3 ? _______________________ 4 :( ) 1 1 2 3 4 4 : __ 5 ( ) :( )

PAGE 144

144 LIST OF REFERENCES Ag r e sti A. & Franklin C. (2009 Statistics: The arts and sciences of leaning from data (2 nd ed.), Pearson Prentice Hall. Anvari, S ., Trainor, L., Woodside, J., & Levy, B (2002). Relations among m usical s kills, p honological p rocessing, and e arly r e ading a bility in p reschool c hildren. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 83 (2), 111 130. Billows, F. (1961). The techniques of language teachi ng London: Longman. Bresler, L. (1995). The subservient, co equal, affective, and social integration styles and their implications for the arts. Arts Education Policy Review 96 (5), 31 37. Burton, J., Ho rowitz, R., & Abeles, H. (1999). Learning in and through the arts: Curriculum implications (Champions of c hange r eport). The Arts Education Byrd, W. (1588). Psalmes, sonets & songs of sadness and pietie C arlos, A. (2003). No hablo Ingls: Breaking the language barrier in music instruction Music Educators Journal 89 (5), 38 43. Chan, A., Ho, Y ., & Cheung, M. (1998). Music training improves verbal memory. Nature 396, 128. Cherwick, E. (1994). Bringing together talent ed ucation & psychological research. American Suzuki Journal 22 (4), 32 36.

PAGE 145

145 Crowest F. (1896). The story of Briti sh music, from the earliest times to the T ud or Cruz Cruz, M. (2005). The e ffects of s elected m usic and s ongs on t eaching g rammar and v ocabulary to s econd g rade English l anguage. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas A &M University Kingsville. Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. In California State Department of Education (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework Los Angeles: California State University; Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center. Dornic, S. (1979). Information processing in bilinguals: Some selected issues. Psychological Record 40, 329 348. Fu, D. (2003). An island of English teaching ES L in Chinatown Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. http://www.lttc.ntu.edu.tw/E_LTTC/gept_eng_main.htm

PAGE 146

146 Gordon, E. (1982). Intermediate measures of music audiation Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc Gordon, E. (1986). Manual for the primary measures of music audiation and the intermediate measures of music audiation. Chicago: GIA Publications Inc. Gordon, E. (2007a). Awakening newborns, children, and adults to the world of audiation: A sequential guide Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Gordon, E. (2007b). Learning sequences in music: A con temporary music learning theory Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc Haley, H. (2001). Understanding learner centered instruction from the perspective of multiple intelligences. Foreign Language Annals 34 (4), 355 367. Hill, J. & Flynn, K. (2006). Classroom instruction that works with English language learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD Hinton, P. ( 2004 ). Jespersen, O. (1925). Language: Its nature, development, and origin London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

PAGE 147

147 Johnson, B. & Christensen, L. (2008). Educati onal r esearch : Quantitative, q ualitative, and m ixed a pproaches Los Angeles: Sage Publications. Jolly, Y. (1975). The use of songs in teaching foreign languages. M odern Language Journal 59 (1), 11 14. Kottler, E. & Kottler, J. (2002). Children with l imited English : Teaching strategies for the regular classroom (2 nd e d.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. Krashen, S ( 198 2) Principles and p ractice in s econd l anguage a cquisition (1 st Krashen, S. (2003) Explorations in l anguage a cquisition and u se: The Taipei l ectures. P ortsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Langer, S. (1957). Philosophy in a new key Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Lazear, D. (1991). Seven ways of knowing New York: Skylight Publishing. Livingstone F. (1973) Did the australopithecines sing? Current Anthropology 14 (1 2), 25 29. Luedke, J. (1995). Developing the whole child through Suzuki study American Suzuki Journal 63(4 ), 63 Mark, M. (1996). Contemporary music education New York: Schirmer Books. McLullich, H. (1981). Musical experience: An aid to the development of lan guage, (Paper presented at the annual m eeting of the United Kingdom Reading Association, 18 th Edinburgh, Scotland, July 27 31).

PAGE 148

148 Ministry of Education. (2010 ). http://engli sh.moe.gov.tw /mp.asp?mp=1 Modell, H., DeMiero, F., & Rose, L. (2009). In pursuit of a holistic learning environment: the impact of music in the medical physiology classroom. Advances in P hysiolo gy E ducation 33 ( 1 ), 37 45. Moorhead, G. & Pond, D. (1978). Music of young children Santa Barbara, CA: Pillsbury Foundation for the Advancement of Music Education. Bern, Verlag Peter Lang AG. New York Times, The. (2005). The way we live now : 7 17 05: On language, mnemonics, 2005 Doctoral d issertation. Michigan State University. S rk m T., Tervaniemi, M., Laitinen, S., Forsblom, A., Soinila, S., Mikkonen, M ., et al. (2008). Music listening enhances cognitive recovery and mood after middle cerebral artery stroke. Brain 131 866 87 6

PAGE 149

149 Short, D. (1991). Integrating language and content instruction: S trategies and techniques NCBE Program Information Guide Series, No. 7 Somers, L. (2000). The e ffects of r hythm, music, s ong, and c hant in the K orea n E nglish l anguage c lassroom Doctoral d issertation Union Institute. Spring, J. (2006). The intersection of cultures: Multicultural education in the United States and the global community (3 rd e d.). New York: McGraw Hill. Standley, J., & Hughes, J. (1 997). Evaluation of an early intervention music curriculum for prereading/writing skills. Music Therapy Perspectives 15 (2), 79 86. http://www.toeic.c om.tw/about_01.jsp Thompson, I. (1987). Memory in language learning. i n A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language l earning (pp. 43 56). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice/Hall International. Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory Cambridge England: University Press. U.S. Census Bureau (2008). Race in the United States Retrieved December 21, 2009, from http://www.census.gov/Press

PAGE 150

150 Valer io, W. (n.d.). The Gordon approach: Music learning theory. In The Alliance for Active Music Making Retrieved January 27, 2011, from http://www.alliancea mm.org/resources_elem_Gordon.htm l Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Weatherford, H. (1990). Techniques for learning vocabulary Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Foreign Language Association, Atlanta : (ERIC Document Reproduction Service N O. ED 332449) Weikart P. ( 1982 ). Teaching movement & dance: A sequential approach to rhythmic movement 2 nd ed. Ypsilanti, MI: High Scope Press. Whittaker, F. (1981). Notes on g rammar: s inging in ESL with s ongs for the g rammar c lass Washington, D C : U .S. Government Printing Office Wilcox, W. (1995). Music cues from classroom singing for second language acquisition: Prosodic memory for pronunciation of target vocabulary by adult non native English speakers Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas. Wolverton, V. (1991). Facilitating language acquisition through music. Update: Application of Research in Music Education 9 (2), 24 30. Yeoman, E. (1996). The meaning of meaning: Affective engagement and dialogue in a second language. Canadi an Modern Language Review 52 (4), 596 610

PAGE 151

151 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Jian Jun Chen is a Ph.D. candidate and Teaching Assistant in music education at the University of Florida. She currently serves as lab instructor in Music for the Elementary Child. Ms. Ch en earned her Master of Arts degree in music and music education at Teachers College, Columbia University. In January, 2009 Ms. Chen presented at the Florida Music Educato ociation conference. In April 2009, she presented research at the Second International Symposium on Assessment in Music Education Her research areas of interest include indigenous folk music of Taiwan and connections between music instruction and English language acquisition. Ms. Chen has taught music in New York City, Taiwan, and Florida. She maintains a piano studio in Gainesville, Florida and judges piano competitions for the Florida Federa tion of Music Clubs.