Citation
The repertoire selection practices of public high school choral directors in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia

Material Information

Title:
The repertoire selection practices of public high school choral directors in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia
Creator:
Forbes, Guy W
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
xi, 189 leaves : ; 29 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Choirs ( jstor )
High schools ( jstor )
Music composition ( jstor )
Music education ( jstor )
Musical aesthetics ( jstor )
Musical direction ( jstor )
Musical performance ( jstor )
Musical register ( jstor )
Popular music ( jstor )
Vocal music ( jstor )
Dissertations, Academic -- Music -- UF ( lcsh )
Music thesis, Ph.D ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1998.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 184-188).
Additional Physical Form:
Also available online.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Guy W. Forbes.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact the RDS coordinator (ufdissertations@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.
Resource Identifier:
40107830 ( OCLC )
0029541477 ( ALEPH )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text










THE REPERTOIRE SELECTION PRACTICES
OF PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL CHORAL DIRECTORS
IN FLORIDA, GEORGIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, NORTH CAROLINA, AND VIRGINIA














By

GUY W. FORBES














A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

1998





























IN MEMORY OF MY FATHER, JOHN WALTER FORBES,

FOR HIS LOVE AND UNWAVERING SUPPORT













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



Much appreciation goes to Charles Hoffer, my committee chairman, for his advice,

support, and continual editing of this document. I am also indebted to the other members of my committee for their expert guidance in the executing and writing of this study.

Furthermore, I would like to express my appreciation to all the choral directors who

gave of their time to provide the raw data for this study. Without their interest and support this study would not have been possible.

I am also grateful for the support and encouragement provided by my friends and

colleagues at Millikin University. A special note of thanks goes to Larry Lovell-Troy for his help with the statistical analysis and to Brad Holmes and Mark Nelson for their "kindly prodding" to finish the document.

Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Marise Robbins-Forbes, and my family for

always believing in me. Their love, patience, and encouragement made the completion of the document possible.















111














TABLE OF CONTENTS


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................. .............. iii

LIST OF TABLES ....................................... ......... vi

A B STRA CT ............................................................................... ...... x

CHAPTERS

1 THE RESEARCH PROBLEM ........................................................... 1

P ro b lem ...................... ....... ...................................................... 1
Purpose................................. 2...............................2
A ssum ptions............................. 3............................. 3
D elim itations......... .............. ............................... 3
Im portance of the Study.................. ................................................. 4

2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ................................................... 6

The Importance of the Literature Selection Process................................... 6
Education as a Prerequisite for Literature Selection........................... 7
Philosophy as a Prerequisite for Literature Selection................................ 8
Criteria for the Selection of Literature ...................................................... 11
Literature Selection Resources and Procedures................................ 31
History of Literature Selection ............................... 31
Studies of the Literature Selection Process......................... ....... 33
Conclusion........................................................... 46

3 PROCEDURES........................................................................ 49

Population Selection................................ 49
Instruments for Data Collection............................ ............. 52
Survey R eturns............................................................................. 56

4 R E SU LT S ................................................................................. .. 59

Sample Demographics...................................... ........... 59
Repertoire Selected for Performance............ ........................... 70
Sources for R epertoire............................. .... ...................... 83
Factors Affecting the Selection of Repertoire............................. ...... 85
Demographic Factors and Repertoire Selection............................. 95
Sum m ary .............................................................. ....................... 103



iv








5 DIRECTOR INTERVIEW S ................................................................ 105

The Repertoire Selection Process ............................... 105
Summary of the Repertoire Selection Process................................. 110
The Balance of Repertoire Students Should Sing.................................. 111
Summary of the Balance of Repertoire Students Should Sing....................... 123
Quality and Choral M usic .................................................................... 124
Summary Regarding Quality and Choral Music................................ 145

6 SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................... 149

Sum m ary ............................................................. ............. .....149
Conclusions............................... 150
Summary of Conclusions.............................. 156
Recommendations......................... 158
Recommendations for Further Research.............................. 160

GLOSSARY .............................................................................. .... 162

APPENDICES

A NOMINATION REQUEST LETTER.............................. 163

B SURVEY COVER LETTERS.................................. ........... 165

C SU RVEY .............................................................................. .... 169

D TELEPHONE INTERVIEW FORMAT........................................... 177

E CLASSICAL REPERTOIRE LISTED ON SURVEY FOR
MOST ADVANCED MIXED CHOIR................................ 178

F POPULAR REPERTOIRE LISTED ON SURVEY FOR
MOSTADVANCED MIXED CHOIR.................................. 181

BIBLIOGRAPHY .................... ......................................................... 184

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH................................... 189














v














LIST OF TABLES


Table page

2.1 Percentages of Total Music Performed ........................................... 36

3.1 Directors Nominated by State and Number of Nominations................ 51

3.2 Survey Responses by Nominated Directors .................................... 57

3.3 A Comparison of Choral Program Size Between Directors Who Returned
the Survey with those W ho Did Not........................................ 58

4.1 Community Served by School ................................................... 60

4.2 School Grade Level Distribution......................... ............ 61

4.3 Socioeconomic Composition of Student Body ................................. 61

4.4 School Enrollment................................................... 61

4.5 Student Body Minority Population................................. .......... 62

4.6 Choral Program Enrollm ent ....................................................... 63

4.7 Number of Curricular Choruses Offered.................................. 63

4.8 Number of Auditioned Choirs.................... .......... 64

4.9 Number of Literature Specific Choirs or Ensembles......................... 64

4.10 Most Advanced Degree Earned.................... ......... 65

4.11 Director Educational Background...................................... 66

4.12 Director's Principal Instrument.............................. ............ 68

4.13 Experience Teaching School Music....................................... 69

4.14 Experience Teaching High School Choral Music............................. 69

4.15 Experience Teaching Choral Music at Present School.......................... 69

4.16 High School Choral Participation........................ ............ 70


vi








4.17 College, Community, and/or Professional Choral Participation ............ 70

4.18 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Classical Compositions
Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus............................ 72

4.19 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Folk
Compositions Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus......... 73

4.20 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Popular Compositions
Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus............................ 74

4.21 Comparison of Directors Regarding Other Compositions Performed by
Most Advanced Mixed Chorus...................................... 74

4.22 Variety of "Classical" Styles Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus.. 75 4.23 Proportions of Repertoire Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus..... 75

4.24 Proportions of Repertoire Found in Programs Compared to Proportions of
Repertoire Reported on Survey for Most Advanced Mixed Chorus....... 77

4.25 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Classical Compositions
Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus............................... 78

4.26 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Folk Type
Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus.................................. 79

4.27 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Popular Compositions
Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus............................ 80

4.28 Comparison of Directors Regarding Other Compositions Performed by
Largest Beginning Chorus.................................................... 80

4.29 Variety of "Classical" Styles Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus....... 81 4.30 Proportions of Repertoire Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus ....... 82

4.31 Proportions of Repertoire Found in Programs Compared to Proportions of
Repertoire Reported on Survey for Largest Beginning Chorus......... 83 4.32 Sources for Repertoire and Frequency of Use................................. 84

4.33 Influence of Selected Elements on the Selection of Classical Music for
Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. .............................. 87

4.34 Influence of Selected Elements on the Selection of Popular Music for
Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. ............................. 90

4.35 Relationship of Community to the Selection of Baroque Music for
Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. ............ ....... 96


vii









4.36 Relationship of Community to the Selection of Romantic Music for
Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir ............................... 97

4.37 Relationship of Number of Choirs to the Selection of Folk Music and
Spirituals for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir............. 98

4.38 Relationship of Socioeconomic Status to the Selection of Pop/Rock Music
for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. ...................... 98

4.39 Relationship of High School Choral experience to the Selection of
Renaissance Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir.... 99

4.40 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Baroque
Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir.................. 100

4.41 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of
Classical Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir........ 100

4.42 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of
Romantic Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir....... 101

4.43 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of
Romantic Music for Performance by Largest Beginning Choir.......... 102

4.44 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of
Twentieth Century Music for Performance by Largest Beginning Choir.. 102

4.45 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Musical
Theatre Music for Performance by Largest Beginning Choir............... 103

5.1 Repertoire Sources and Criteria for Repertoire Selection Mentioned During
Director Interviews.............................. 107

5.2 Balance of Repertoire Advanced Students Should Sing Based on Director
Interviews............................... 112

5.3 Balance of Repertoire Beginning Students Should Sing Based on Director
Interviews............................... 115

5.4 Relationship of Repertoire for Beginning Students Compared to Advanced
Students Based on Director Interviews........................... 116

5.5 Independent Musical Elements Used to Determine Quality Based of
D irector Interview s.............................. 131

5.6 Musical Elements Related to the Ensemble Used to Determine Quality
Based on Director Interviews........................... 133

5.7 Independent Musical Elements Common in High Quality Compositions
Based on Director Interviews............................ 139

viii








5.8 Musical Elements Related to the Ensemble Common in High Quality
Compositions Based on Director Interviews........................... 140

5.9 Independent Musical Elements Common in Poor Quality Compositions
Based on Director Interviews............................ 143

5.10 Musical Elements Related to the Ensemble Common in Poor Quality
Compositions Based on Director Interviews........................... 144







































ix














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 THE REPERTOIRE SELECTION PRACTICES OF PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL CHORAL DIRECTORS
IN FLORIDA, GEORGIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, NORTH CAROLINA, AND VIRGINIA

By

Guy W. Forbes

August 1998


Chairman: Charles Hoffer, Ph. D. Major Department: Music
The purpose of this study was to provide a basis for improving the literature selection practices and procedures of current high school choral directors and undergraduate instruction in choral literature selection.

Two instruments were designed for the collection of data, a written survey and phone interview. Data were collected to determine respondent demographics, identify the criteria and procedures used by directors in selecting repertoire, identify factors affecting the use of selection criteria, determine the degree of agreement among directors regarding what constitutes "quality" in choral literature and ascertain its use as a selection criterion, and determine what relationships exist among the educational setting, the quality and kinds of literature selected, the criteria and procedures employed, the education, experience, and philosophy of the director, and the perceived success of the director and program by university choral faculty members.

Written data were solicited from 89 choral directors deemed to be outstanding by

university choral faculty in their respective states (group 1) and from 208 directors selected

x








from the remaining population (group 2). The groups returned 45 (50.1%) and 59 (28.7%) surveys, respectively. Given the low response rate for group 2, 14 directors (10%) who did not return the survey were interviewed. Based on the data collected it was determined that no significant differences exist between those who returned the survey and those who did not return the survey. Of those who returned the survey, 52 directors (26 from each group) were interviewed.

Conclusions drawn from the research findings included the need for undergraduate music education faculty to

1. Devote more time in methods classes to the study of repertoire selection.

2. Place greater emphasis on the value and importance of quality in the selection of choral music (e.g., course content should include instruction regarding how to determine quality in choral music of all styles, with special attention given to popular-style compositions).

3. Emphasize the need for secondary students to be exposed to a wide variety of

repertoire (e.g., such instruction should include substantial study of music from the major historical periods in conjunction with the study of popular, folk, and non-western style music).
















xi













CHAPTER 1
THE RESEARCH PROBLEM


One of the most important aspects of any music course is the selection of materials for study. Since World War II, performance-oriented courses have come to dominate secondary music education (Abeles, Hoffer, & Klotman, 1994). Given the nature of a performance-oriented curriculum, the literature selected for study by high school directors is a major concern.

Authorities in choral music education state the selection of appropriate music for study and performance is an exacting task; a "serious responsibility" that has tremendous impact on the education of the students and the overall success of the program (Decker & Kirk, 1988, p. 150). Mayhall (1994) states:

Expanding knowledge of choral literature is perhaps the single most
significant lifelong-learning challenge for conductors. As experience is
gained in our profession, the importance of repertoire selection in
accomplishing the mission of our groups, in developing the artistry of our
ensembles, in deepening their skills and involvement, in capturing and fulfilling audience interest, and in cultivating favorable peer judgment
becomes increasingly evident. (p. 9)

Lamb (1988) concurs, stating "the selection of repertoire is probably the most demanding and time-consuming task facing a choral conductor. The decision to program a particular work is one of the most important decisions he can make" (p. 162).


Problem

While authorities agree on the importance and difficulty of successful literature selection, they do not offer a hierarchy for selection criteria, nor suggest how a given

1








2
hierarchy might change as a function of specific variables. Are the criteria and procedures used by directors for the selection of literature common to all directors or are there differences due to factors such as educational setting, teacher experience, education, and philosophy? If differences do exist, is there a relationship among the quality and kinds of literature selected, the criteria and procedures employed, and the perceived success of the director and program?

Among the many criteria identified by the experts for the selection of repertoire, two are cited frequently enough to be considered universal: (a) the repertoire selected for study should be of high quality and (b) the repertoire should be diverse, consisting of a variety of musical styles and genres. While studies concerning or related to high school choral literature selection have investigated the diversity of high school choral repertoire, quality of repertoire has been bypassed due to the subjective nature of the quality issue (Dahlman, 1991, p. 5) or ignored on the assumption there is universal agreement among directors regarding what constitutes quality in choral literature. Given the importance authorities place on the selection of quality literature, how high school directors define "quality" is consequential.


Purpose

The purpose of this study was to provide a basis for improving the literature selection practices and procedures of current high school choral directors and undergraduate instruction in choral literature selection. Descriptive data were collected (a) to portray the demographic characteristics of the respondents, (b) to identify the quantity, types, and styles of literature selected by high school directors, (c) to determine the sources, methods, and procedures utilized by high school directors in the selection of repertoire, (d) to ascertain what factors influence the literature selection process and how, (e) to determine if








3
a hierarchy exists for repertoire selection criteria, (f) to determine the degree of agreement among high school directors regarding what constitutes quality in choral literature and identify differences if they exist, and (g) to determine what relationships, if any, exist among the educational setting, the quality and kinds of literature selected, the criteria and procedures employed, the education, experience, and philosophy of the director, and the perceived success of the director and program by university choral faculty members.


Assumptions

This study was undertaken with three assumptions: (1) the compositions listed on the programs requested from the directors and the compositions identified by the directors onthe questionaire will be indicative of the quality of literature high school directors select for performance, (2) the criteria cited by the directors for the selection of requested compositions will reflect the criteria used by the directors to select compositions of similar style and genre, and (3) the selection hierarchy found for the selected compositions will be the same as is used for the selection of compositions of similar style and genre.


Delimitations

To keep this study within a manageable scope, two delimitations were imposed. First, the study was limited to public high schools with curricular choruses in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia. Private schools, parochial schools, and schools without curricular choruses were not included. The geographical limits were chosen to keep the study within a manageable size and yet large enough to be of value to educators and researchers across the country. The geographical limits also allowed a larger sample-to-population ratio than would have been possible with a national study. Second, instructional materials other than composed choral music were not examined. Such








4
materials include sight-reading literature and texts in music theory, history, general music, and music appreciation.


Importance of the Study

Since the selection of literature for study in high school choral music classes is a highly significant topic in the field of music education, it is essential that discussions about the subject be based on factual information. Although questions have been raised regarding both the quality of choral repertoire selected for study by high school directors and the criteria and procedures employed in its selection, little research has been done regarding these concerns. Research in this area is needed so that more informed decisions may be made by music educators and others concerned with the status and improvement of secondary choral music education.

Three fundamental questions regarding the selection of literature by high school

directors were addressed by this study: (1) what is the nature of the repertoire selected,

(2) how is it selected, and (3) what factors influence the decisions directors make regarding repertoire selection? The experts in choral music have stated the repertoire selected for study should include a wide variety of styles and genres. Data on the kinds of literature chosen by high school directors will help provide a clearer understanding of current selection practices. Authorities in choral music have also stressed the importance of selecting quality repertoire. Although quality contains elements of personal preference, enough criteria have been identified such that directors can make more informed decisions regarding the selection of quality literature. A survey and analysis of opinions regarding quality in choral literature, together with an examination of selected repertoire deemed to be of quality by high school directors, may reveal differences among high school directors and between high school directors and the experts regarding what constitutes quality in








5
choral literature. Such differences may suggest different goals for repertoire selection or deficiencies in the ability of some directors to differentiate between music of greater or lessor quality.

The difficult and time-consuming nature of the repertoire selection process is well documented in the literature. Data concerning the repertoire selection methods and procedures employed by high school directors may help clarify the process and thereby lead to improvement. Such improvements might include the identification of more systematic methods for literature selection that provide for the fulfillment of educational goals, ensure diversity of repertoire, help ensure quality of repertoire, and enable directors to utilize limited planning time more efficiently.













CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE



Authorities in the field of choral music education have written extensively on the topic of literature selection. They have stated the importance of the selection process with respect to the high school choral curriculum; identified educational and philosophical prerequisites deemed necessary for appropriate and successful literature selection; defined criteria for literature selection and identified outside factors that can impact the selection process; and have suggested resource materials and procedures to aid in the compilation of suitable repertoire. In addition, researchers have periodically examined the literature selection processes utilized by high school and college choral directors. A review and synthesis of this literature and research is presented in this chapter.


The Importance of the Literature Selection Process

As was stated in Chapter 1, authorities agree the selection of repertoire for study and performance is one of the most important and challenging tasks required of choral music educators. Decker (1967) suggests that the choices a director makes regarding the selection of literature "have a direct, and very great, effect on each individual rehearsal, concert, and, ultimately, on the success or failure of the entire choral music program of the school" (p. 79). Lamb concurs, stating "the decision to program a particular work is one of the most important decisions he [the choral conductor] can make" (p. 95). Speaking directly to beginning choral directors, Lamb (1971) implores them to select literature carefully, stating "as you enter teaching, one of your most important tasks will be the

6








7
selection of repertoire. .... The selections that you make will have a direct bearing on the success of your choral program" (p. 23).

Authorities also suggest the repertoire a director selects is an indicator of teacher

competency and musicianship. Decker (1967) asserts, "the music you [choral director] choose for performance is a direct reflection of you as a musician, teacher, and person" (p. 90). Gordon (1977) points out that the repertoire a director selects is not only a measure of a director's musicianship, but also reveals whether the director is an "innovator or a follower" and serves as a "barometer" of the director's "ability to get results" (p. 98). Dunaway (1987), Lamb (1988), Roach (1989), and Sateren (1963) express similar views regarding the selection of literature as a indication of director's musicianship and abilities.


Education as a Prerequisite for Literature Selection

Leaders in the field of choral music education have described the attributes necessary for success as a choral music educator. Of particular importance to this study are those attributes that directly relate to the literature selection process. The single most important educational prerequisite identified by the experts as "essential" for successful literature selection is "in-depth knowledge of a variety of choral music from all periods and in all styles" (Lawrence, 1989, p. 38). Heffernan (1982) states the importance of a comprehensive background in music history, style, and choral repertoire as follows:

A wide knowledge of the history of music is absolutely essential for choral
conductors. They should be familiar with the works of great composers
from all periods and should have experience in performing in the styles
appropriate to the time of the compositions. . Conductors must
continually broaden their knowledge of the repertoire, neglecting no period
or style. (p. 7-8)

Gordon (1977), Miller (1988), and Robinson and Winold (1976) also express the need for extensive knowledge of choral literature of all styles and periods.








8
Heffernan (1982) expresses a concern held by many choral music educators that an unfortunately large number of choral teachers "have a limited knowledge of the repertoire and are therefore unable to bring to their choir the great variety of music it deserves" (p. 8). Wolverton (1990) echoes Heffernan's concerns, stating that his own undergraduate education and that of his university colleagues "suggests that beginning choral conductors are hindered by a lack of knowledge of repertoire suitable for a comprehensive choral program" (p. 33).
This concern for adequate education is not limited to knowledge of repertoire. The

inability of many directors to discriminate among works as to quality has also been noted. Sateren (1963) states, "many directors ... wishing to select only the best music, lack both the training and the experience which would equip them with the standards for evaluating quality" (p. 4).

Several studies since 1952 have examined pre-service choral teacher education with

regard to literature selection (Jones, 1968; Davis, 1970; Couch, 1973; Burris, 1988; Bolt, 1983). A review of these and other studies related to literature selection is presented later in this chapter.

Philosophy as a Prerequisite for Literature Selection

The need for a philosophical basis has long been recognized by the profession as necessary for effective music teaching. The philosophy from which a teacher operates directly influences every decision he or she makes, including decisions regarding repertoire. Abeles, Hoffer, and Klotman (1994) state:

Music teachers .. must make decisions and take actions. They cannot
avoid doing so, even if they can avoid thinking or talking about the reasons
for doing something. In a very real sense, each person defines a
philosophy when he or she makes a decision. Therefore, it is not a
question of whether decisions are made and actions taken, but of whether








9
the person making a decision is aware of its larger implications and how
one action relates to another. (p. 41)

While writing on the importance of an educational philosophy, Reimer (1989) speaks to the impact a teacher's philosophy has on decision making:

The final reason for the importance of a convincing professional philosophy
is the fact that everything music educators do in their jobs carries out in practice their beliefs about their subject. Every time a choice is made a
belief is applied. .. Music teachers who have forged a philosophy based
on a probing analysis of the nature of music can act with confidence,
knowing that whatever they choose to do will be in consonance with the
value of the art they represent. (p. 7)

Leonhard and House (1972) support this view of the importance and impact of a professional philosophy, stating "a philosophy of music education serves to guide and give direction to the efforts of the teacher. .... Objectives, curriculum content, course content ... are all a direct reflection of the philosophy of the school and the teacher" (p. 85).

In addition to stating the need and importance of a philosophy of music education, leaders in the field have offered arguments defining the attributes of a music education philosophy. Over the last thirty years authorities have advocated a change in philosophy away from a utilitarian approach toward a philosophy of music education based on the development of aesthetic growth (Mark, 1986).

Today, the philosophy of music education as aesthetic education is pervasive in both practice and theory (Reimer, 1989). According to Bessom, Tatarunis, and Forcucci (1974), "there is little disagreement that music education should be aesthetic education, and that musical growth cannot be achieved without aesthetic growth" (p. 42). Abeles, Hoffer, and Klotman (1994) support this conclusion stating that "aesthetic experiences are a vital part of music education" (p. 70). Several other authors have made similar statements








10
concerning music education as aesthetic education (Decker and Kirk, 1988; Leonhard and House, 1972; Robinson, 1993).

The impact of philosophical considerations on the literature selection process has been noted by a number of experts. In the course of discussing the question "Why have music in the schools?" Hoffer (1991) suggests:

Different answers to the question "Why?" lead to different practical actions.
For example, a teacher who sees school music primarily in terms of
entertainment for the public teaches differently from a teacher who tries to
give the students a better understanding of music as organized sounds.
These two teachers will choose different types of music. (p. 4)

Decker and Kirk (1988), while promoting a philosophy of aesthetic music education, also recognize the influence a teacher's philosophy can have on performance and educational goals and, in turn, the selection of repertoire.

Performance and learning goals of choral organizations differ as widely as
conductors' philosophies. Two extremes are exploration and artistic
performance of music with lasting value through which singers increase
both musical understanding and aesthetic satisfaction; and performance of
music through which singers find immediate gratification because of its entertainment potential or the relative ease with which it can be learned.
(p. 152)

Because of the impact a teacher's philosophy has on the literature selection process,

writers have suggested that it is essential to first determine a philosophy of music education and establish developmental goals based on that philosophy before attempting to select literature for study and performance (Brunner, 1992; Gordon, 1989). To do otherwise is to place the proverbial "cart before the horse." Unfortunately, such a practice is not uncommon. Richmond (1990) states that the selection of literature without prior reference to philosophical considerations or curricular objectives is "the foible in choral music education" with the selection of repertoire serving as the "'alpha and omega' of choral educational planning" (p. 23). As a solution to this problem, Richmond (1990) suggests









that directors adopt a "pre-curriculum" based on one of three curricular models for the purpose of selecting repertoire. Each model (the Exemplar, the Percepts, and the Forms model), while different in approach, provides for the establishment of some "curricular criteria" by which directors can make judicious decisions regarding the selection of repertoire (p. 24). The Exemplar model calls for the study of masterworks with an emphasis on works of historical and stylistic significance. The Percepts model places emphasis on the selection of literature based on musical fundamentals (melody, harmony, rhythm, etc.) identified for study in a given lesson. The Forms model bases the selection of literature on a systematic examination of the major forms of choral composition such as the mass, motet, madrigal, and chanson.


Criteria for the Selection of Literature

The emphasis many leaders in choral music education place on selection criteria

suggests that a systematic application of appropriate criteria is essential to the competent selection of suitable repertoire. Sateren (1963) states, "The director who is well-trained and experienced has certain criteria which he uses in judging excellence in choral music. With them he sifts 'the wheat from the chaff'" (p. 4). Mayhall (1994) asserts "repertoire and standards committees [of the American Choral Directors Association] exist as an affirmation of the belief that there are some prevailing considerations that should guide our search and choices" of literature (p. 12). Miller (1979) summarizes the need for selection criteria as follows:

Many of us have seen conductors make unwise choices because they had
no definite criteria to use in judging the music being considered; they
simply "liked" a piece of music and "thought" it would be "good" for their
choir. Selecting repertoire under such circumstances rarely produces the
best results. It is necessary for us to use criteria in selecting music if we are
to be successful in building a significant and balanced library of choral
music. (p. 21)








12
The criteria noted by the experts as fundamental to the selection of literature may be roughly divided into five categories: those that relate to (1) the director, (2) the music,

(3) the ensemble, or (4) programming, and (5) external non-musical considerations. Criteria Related to the Director

Leaders in choral music education have identified two factors specific to the director that should be considered prior to the selection of literature: director interest and director ability.

Decker (1967) asserts that:

Personal appeal is the first and most important qualification a piece must
have. It might be immediately attractive to someone else, but no conductor can ever honestly conduct a composition which does not hold some special
appeal for him. (p. 81-82)

Mayhall (1994) agrees stating, "in-depth score study, enthusiasm for rehearsal, and sustained interest are difficult to accomplish for the director, much less the singers, unless a powerful attraction is present in the music" (p. 14). In a survey of 74 choral directors in the San Diego, California, school system, Ogdin (1981) found directors ranked "teacher fulfillment" seventh in a list of criteria by which secondary choral teachers select course content. Burris (1988), Miller (1988), and Gordon (1989) have also noted the importance of director interest to the literature selection process.

Garretson (1993) and Gordon (1989), while noting the importance personal appeal has on literature selection, warn that selecting music solely on the basis of personal interest can be detrimental to the choral program. Garretson (1993) cautions against over reliance on personal background and experiences if those experiences have not been inclusive of all styles and genres of choral music. He suggests conductors choices regarding literature are influenced by personal experience, and limited personal experiences often lead to the








13
selection of repertoire lacking variety and balance. Gordon (1989) concurs stating, "directors with limited repertoire palettes hold back enterprising ensembles" (p. 28). Gordon (1989) goes on to suggest that "conductors who choose exclusively on the basis of self-interest or personal whim run the risk of losing their singers and audiences" (p. 28).

Decker (1967) and Gordon (1977) stipulate that director ability should be a

consideration in the selection of repertoire. Decker (1967) suggests "some serious soulsearching" with regard to personal ability will aid choral directors in the selection of appropriate literature. Gordon (1977) also encourages choral directors to realistically examine their capabilities and to select music they can "teach and interpret" with an eye toward improving their abilities through experience (p. 96).


Criteria Related to the Music

Criteria related to the music include the quality, technical difficulty, and artistic

demands of the music, the performing forces required, and the quality and difficulty of the accompaniment or instrumental parts. Though diverse in their specific recommendations, authorities agree the repertoire selected for study and performance must be of high quality. Brunner (1992) summarizes the importance of quality literature as follows:

Quality repertoire encourages young singers to become better at what they
do. It stimulates their imaginations, expands their appreciation, and refines
their musical skills. It challenges them intellectually, whets their appetite for further challenge, and motivates them to excel. It gives them cultural perspective and opens new doors of musical awareness. It puts them in touch with the realm of their emotive and creative life and their ability to
express themselves in an artistic way. It gives them the pride of
accomplishment. It reaches inside them and makes them feel more human,
more alive, and part of something extraordinary. (p. 32)

What constitutes quality and what musical or structural elements are essential? These questions have long been debated. Some writers have attempted to identify and quantify








14
the musical elements essential to music of aesthetic value, while others have focused on more esoteric considerations. Although the development of criteria for discerning quality compositions on the basis of technical features alone has not been wholly successful (Hoffer, 1991), criteria have been identified such that directors can make more informed, competent decisions regarding the selection of quality literature.

Sateren (1963) lists several musical elements that he considers to be indicative of

quality choral music. These include musical ideas of intrinsic value and substance, formal structure that is coherent rather than episodic or rambling, vocal lines that are 'vocal' as opposed to 'instrumental' in character, fitting harmonization, effective transitions, balance of the unexpected and the inevitable, idiom appropriate to the spirit of the text, originality, appropriateness of scale in relation to the musical ideas presented, music/text compatibility, text of literary quality, and, if accompanied, an accompaniment of merit and substance (p. 4-14). Several other authorities have made reference to various elements similar to those listed above as characteristics associated with compositions of quality (Bessom, Tatarunis, & Forcucci, 1974; Brunner, 1992; Busch, 1984; Decker, 1967; Decker & Kirk, 1988; Garretson, 1993; Gordon, 1977; Hoffer, 1991; Lamb, 1971, 1988; Leeder, 1958; Mayhall, 1994; Miller, 1979, 1988).

Many experts suggest the aesthetic content of a composition is the single most

important factor in determining its quality. A theoretical foundation for judging the quality of a composition based on aesthetic content can be found in the writings of Leonard Meyer (1956) regarding emotion and meaning in music. Abeles, Hoffer, and Klotman (1994, p. 67-69) pare down Meyer's arguments to four essential points: (1) listeners and performers generally know one syntactical style of music; (2) composers usually write music such that it conforms to the syntactical expectations of their audiences; (3) for








15
reasons rooted in human psychology, people value and find more meaningful experiences that are not routine and do not occur just about as expected; and (4) it is the balance between certainty and uncertainty, between variety and unity that, in part, determines the aesthetic value of a musical work.

Based on the work of Meyer (1956) and other aestheticians, authorities have identified and defined elements associated with compositions of high aesthetic value. Reimer (1989) states a workable base for the judging of quality in any artwork can be built on four criteria: craftsmanship, sensitivity, imagination, and authenticity. Reimer (1989) discusses each of these criteria at length (p. 135-137).

Reimer defines craftsmanship as "the expertness by which the materials of art are

molded into expressiveness" (p. 135). It is the skill a composer employs in the molding of sound; skill born of a "creative communion" with the elements of composition and "endless practice with its expressive potentials" (p. 135). Works lacking craftsmanship are signaled by "shoddiness, by disrespect for materials, by ... skill that manipulates the material rather than serving its expressiveness" (p. 135).

Sensitivity has to do with the "depth and quality of feeling captured in the dynamic

form of a work." A composer is sensitive to the materials (sounds) with which he or she works and to the composition as it develops. "Sensitivity is the 'in touchness' an artist has with the developing, forming feelings, so that he or she can make ongoing decisions that ring true, that convince, that grasp us by their expressive power" (p. 136).

"Imagination in a work of art is what captures our feelings" (p. 137). We are moved, touched, made to respond to a composition when what we expect to happen does not happen, or happens in a way different from what we anticipated. Compositions that have impact have a certain degree of unpredictability and originality; they are fresh and rich in







16
imagination. The potential of a composition to grab us is directly related to the skill and imagination with which the composer treats us with the unexpected. Compositions lacking imagination fail to touch us because they present us with the banal, the ordinary, the cliche rather than something unique.

Authenticity "is the genuineness of the artist's interaction with his materials, in which the control by the artist includes a giving way to the demands of the material" (p. 138). Reimer (1989) suggests that works in which an artist or composer consciously manipulates the materials presented to produce a given sentimental effect is "immoral" (p. 138). In this context, morality has nothing to do with the nonaesthetic content of art, but rather with how the materials of art are handled. He cites as examples Tolstoy's War and Peace and Shakespeare's Hamlet as art works that depict all kinds of immoral human behavior, yet are fine examples of "authentic" or moral works of art. In contrast, Reimer suggests works such as the dime-store paintings of Jesus in day-glo colors on black velvet, while full of "sweetness and light," are immoral and "have the effect of degrading our humanity" (p. 138).

Leonhard and House (1972) have made statements similar to Reimer's regarding quality in music. They suggest all good music is "expressive" and put together with "expert craftsmanship" (p. 102). They make a distinction between good music and great music, stating that "good music and great music differ in two essential characteristics:

(1) the subtlety of expression and (2) the abstractness of expression" (p. 103). Great compositions are more subtle than good compositions in that the musical ideas (melodic, harmonic, rhythmic, etc.) presented in great compositions require of the listener much greater attention for comprehension and appreciation. Likewise, great compositions are more abstract than works of lessor aesthetic value. They state:








17
Good music and great music. ... Both appeal to the life of feeling and call
forth a felt response. .... Listening to good music may make one feel
patriotic, merry, solemn, penitent, affectionate, devout, amused, inclined to dance, or whatever. ... Great music, on the other hand, instead of calling
forth specific feelings expresses the "life of feeling," a general state of
feeling. Great music does not give us moods and emotions but insight into
the form and structure of human feeling. (p. 104-105)

Choral music education as aesthetic education has been examined in two studies, one by Aamot (1974) and the other by Smith (1974). Aamot examined factors contributing to the aesthetic experience within the choral rehearsal. He found that several musical factors were "essential" to the aesthetic response of the students (p. 81). Although this finding is hardly surprising, several of the musical factors identified by the study as essential to aesthetic response are directly related to the inherent qualities of the literature selected for use in the study. Such factors, therefore, might be considered criteria for the selection of literature. Factors deemed by the study as essential to aesthetic response that relate to the selection of literature are (a) reaction to the horizontal expressive qualities, (b) reaction to the vertical expressive qualities, (c) awareness of musical style, (d) text of the music, and

(e) the musical climate created by the music. It follows that if a choral music educator has adopted a philosophy of music education as aesthetic education, he or she should select music for study and performance which has the potential to provide for aesthetic experience. This music would be expressive music-vertically, horizontally, and textually.

Smith (1974) developed a procedure for analyzing the aesthetic qualities of expressive choral music. His procedure involved the systematic exploration of five musical elements (melody, rhythm, tonal organization, texture, and form) in relationship to affective response. Although his procedures were developed to assist in the systematic identification of the aesthetic qualities in music already deemed to be expressive rather than







18
as a tool for discriminating between works of greater and lesser aesthetic potential, such an application seems plausible.

Perhaps the oldest criterion used to identify compositions of quality is historical

significance. Ormandy (1966), in answer to the question, "What is good music?" states:

Time ... is the steadiest criterion. Music which perennially makes its
impact upon musician and listener alike cannot be called "bad." Fashions,
in music as in mode, change, but certain composers have couched their
message in terms which defy the test of time. (p. 99)

Mayhall (1994) agrees, suggesting the "endurability of a piece, though not a guarantee of quality, is at least one factor attesting to its worth" (p. 12). Decker and Kirk (1988) define compositions of "lasting quality" as works in which "elements of aesthetic satisfaction are so inherent in the composer's artistic design that each study and performance can bring new insights and discoveries" (p. 153).

Wyatt (1988) states, "a major goal of the high school (or college) curriculum should be to introduce through study and performance the works of those composers who are considered important in the history of choral music" (p. 26). He studied five recommended lists of choral repertoire for high school ensembles in an attempt to determine (1) if a body of choral literature has been recommended often enough so as to constitute a core curriculum of choral literature for high school chorus; (2) if there are composers whose works are historically significant enough to warrant inclusion in a core curriculum for high school choir; and (3) if the lists reviewed provide selections from all historical periods. His findings, while not definitive, suggests that such a body of literature does exist; that there are significant composers whose works should be included in a core curriculum; and that the literature suggested by the experts is inclusive of all musical periods. As previously noted, the selection of repertoire based on historical








19
significance has been suggested by Richmond (1990) as one of three curricular models directors can employ to facilitate the development of a curriculum that goes beyond the teaching of performance skills alone.

A characteristic closely aligned to historical significance is durability. Durability has been defined by the experts as the ability of a composition to "stand up" under protracted, intense rehearsals (Lamb, 1971, p. 21) due to the inherent "musical purpose" of the composition "as opposed to triviality" (Gordon, 1977, p. 96).

While authorities agree compositions selected for study and performance need to be of high quality, many recognize the impracticality of performing only the established masterworks. While advocating the study and performance of quality literature, Decker and Kirk (1988) recognize that many choirs may not possess the musically maturity to successfully engage in only the study or performance of the "great" choral compositions. They suggest that for the younger and/or less musically mature choir the inclusion of lighter, more entertaining music in addition to a comprehensive repertoire of quality music, may be a practical compromise. Reimer (1989) states "it would be unrealistic and unnecessary to aim for constant use of great music in teaching and learning, partly because of the obvious limitations of students' musical capacities and partly because people, of any age, should not be expected to operate at the farthest reaches of their abilities at all times" (p. 141). He goes on to suggest that if the music selected is sufficiently challenging for the age level of the group and if, over time, the literature selected continually progresses toward music of higher aesthetic value, then music education is served.

Authorities also stress the importance of selecting quality arrangements and editions. Quality arrangements should possess the characteristics outlined above for quality








20
compositions. In addition, quality arrangements should "reflect the spirit of the original" (Miller, 1979, p. 22). Decker and Kirk (1988) suggest directors should be careful to select scholarly editions, being certain the edition is an accurate representation of the intentions of the composer.

In addition to quality, authorities have indicated the technical difficulty of a composition should be considered when selecting compositions for study and performance. It is important to note that, while technical difficulty is related to the music, the difficulty level of a given work is not finite. Rather it is relative to the abilities of the ensemble for which it is being selected. The compositional elements the experts indicate should be examined are: number of voice parts, vocal range, and tessitura; intervallic, harmonic, and rhythmic complexity; language; length; and elements that would affect memorization. Authorities citing technical difficulty as a criteria for the selection of literature include Abeles, Hoffer, and Klotman (1994); Bessom, Tatarunis, and Forcucci (1974); Busch (1984); Decker (1967); Decker and Kirk (1988); Garretson (1993); Gordon (1977); Hoffer (1991); Jipson (1972); Lamb (1971, 1988); Leeder (1958); Mayhall (1994); Miller (1979, 1988); Roach (1989); and Tait and Haack (1984).

The third criterion related to the music is the artistic demands inherent in a composition. The artistic requirements of a composition go beyond technical considerations. The question raised is: Can the ensemble musically and stylistically interpret and perform the composition in question? As with the technical difficulty of a composition, the artistic demands of a work are relative to the abilities of the ensemble. Artistic demands generally center around the vocal maturity required by the style of the composition and the emotional and intellectual maturity required by the text.








21
Lamb (1988) states "there are many works whose technical demands place them within the reach of high school singers, but whose artistic merits also warrant performances by college, university and professional choirs" (p. 99). Many masterworks and much of the music of the Romantic period, however, call for a high level of vocal maturity. Gordon (1977), citing Beethoven's Missa Solemnis as a composition inappropriate for young singers due to the vocal maturity required, states "generally, public school aged singers should sing more lyrical music" (p. 99).

Regarding text as criteria for the selection of repertoire, Miller (1988) states the music selected for performance by high school students must "be on a level such that the students will ultimately be able to grasp its meaning, for the students must communicate during a performance out of their own experience" (p. 53). Decker and Kirk (1988) agree stating, "singers' relating to and understanding of text is important to communication. Interpretation of subtleties are dependent upon life experiences" (p. 151). Several other authorities also cite artistic demands as a criteria for the selection of literature (Abeles, Hoffer, & Klotman, 1994; Bessom, Tatarunis, & Forcucci, 1974; Hoffer, 1991; and Lamb, 1988).

Authorities have also suggested the performing forces required by a composition as well as the quality and difficulty of the instrumental parts, if accompanied, be considered when selecting repertoire. It is obvious one does not select literature for performing forces one does not have available. Authorities also suggest directors consider what vocal parts are divided and if the divided parts fall to strong or weak sections of the ensemble. Writers emphasize the literature directors select should be appropriate for the performing forces available. The music should highlight the abilities rather than expose the shortcomings of the ensemble (Decker, 1967; Miller, 1979).








22
Several authors indicate that if a composition is accompanied directors should closely examine the accompaniment to determine if it is "playable, and suitable within a choral context" (Decker, 1967, p. 82), "integrated with the vocal parts" (Miller, 1988, p. 53), and within the capabilities of the accompanist (Lamb, 1988). Sateren (1963) states "an accompaniment should 'have a life of its own' which, while accompanying, adds musical value to the whole" (p. 13).


Criteria Related to the Ensemble

Authorities agree the characteristics of the choral ensemble should be considered when selecting literature for study and performance. Criteria related to the ensemble include

(1) the size of the group, performing forces available, and sectional characteristics of the ensemble; (2) the technical and reading ability of the ensemble; (3) the vocal, emotional, and intellectual maturity of the singers; and (4) the musical preferences of the ensemble.

The size of the ensemble is an obvious consideration. Authorities suggest directors should select literature stylistically appropriate to the number and type of voices in the ensemble (Brunner, 1992; Gordon, 1977, 1989). Composers usually write with a certain size ensemble in mind (Gordon, 1977). Many compositions, especially major works of the Classical and Romantic periods, were written for large performing forces and are therefore unsuitable for performance by a 30-voice high school choir. Likewise, the performance of a Renaissance madrigal by a 120-voice chorus is inappropriate. Similarly, directors should program literature that fully utilizes the performing forces available. Gordon (1989) encourages conductors to keep their soloists busy, partly as a means to enhance program variety and partly to provide individual motivation. Writers also suggest the sectional characteristics of the ensemble should be considered. Gordon (1977) points








23
out that directors are rarely fortunate enough to have a choral ensemble with equally balanced vocal sections. He suggests, however, the discerning choral director "can turn these inequities to advantage" through the judicious selection of repertoire (p. 98).

Authorities also cite the technical ability of the ensemble as an important criterion in the selection of literature. Brunner (1992) implores directors to "know your singers" stating that "to plan repertoire that will be meaningful and challenging yet accessible and successful, you must be aware of singers' abilities, training and experience" (p. 29). Lamb (1988) suggests the reading ability of the choir should also be considered. Decker and Kirk (1988) stress the importance of the relationship between the demands of a work and the technical abilities of the singers with respect to fostering vocal development:

Repertory for each choral ensemble must be selected with consideration for
the particular group of singers. The astute conductor-teacher will ...
examine pitch extremes and tessitura for each of the voice parts in repertory;
include musical works that provide the next degree of range and tessitura
challenge; increase sustaining power gradually from repertory selected; and nurture continuous development of vocal ease and flexibility through choice
of repertory. (p. 151)

Miller (1979) encourages directors to select literature of increasing difficulty in order to facilitate the development of students' technical skills. Cox (1989) also stresses the importance of selecting challenging repertoire:

The philosophy of selecting music for an ensemble within the limitations of
a group's current abilities is difficult to justify. For a more educationally
sound approach the conductor should select literature according to what an ensemble could become, that is, literature selection should come first, and the standard of the ensemble must be developed to match the expectations
that are reflected in the literature. (p. 28)

Tait and Haack (1984) caution, however, that "students need to be challenged by the literature, but they also need to be rewarded" (p. 74). They suggest "a judicious balance is necessary if progress is to be maintained" (p. 74). Brunner (1992), Johnson and Johnson








24
(1989), and Mayhall (1994) echo the concerns of Tait and Haack stating that directors should select compositions challenging enough to foster musical growth yet not so difficult they frustrate the singers.

In addition to the technical abilities of the singers, writers on the subject suggest

directors need to consider the vocal, intellectual, and emotional maturity of the ensemble. In order to effectively perform a composition, the singers must communicate the essence of the work to the audience (Miller, 1989). This requires of the performers a vocal maturity compatible with the stylistic demands of the work (Gordon, 1977) and an intellectual and emotional maturity commensurate with the requirements of the text (Decker & Kirk, 1988; Miller, 1989).

Another criterion many experts indicate should be considered when selecting repertoire are the musical tastes and interests of the choir. The importance and application of this criteria to the selection of repertoire for school ensembles is perhaps the most debated and controversial of all criteria identified by the authorities as important to the selection process. Since the musical tastes and interests of most adolescents center around various forms of popular music, the focus of the debate has been on the value and role of popular music in the choral curriculum.

In 1967, music educators at the Tanglewood Symposium agreed that:

Music of all periods, styles, forms, and cultures belongs in the curriculum.
The musical repertory should be expanded to involve music of our time in its rich variety, including currently popular teenage music and avant-garde
music, American folk music, and the music of other cultures. (Abeles,
Hoffer, & Klotman, 1994, p. 22-23)

Since the Tanglewood Symposium, experts in choral music have advocated a balanced, comprehensive repertory of quality choral literature, including popular music. Even so, several authorities have expressed concern over the value and role of popular music in the








25
school curriculum. Many experts have cautioned against an over emphasis on popular music. Hilbish (1967) states:

The conductor who continues to concentrate merely on "slick" commercial arrangements of pure "entertainment" music can neither expect to hold the
interest of today's teen-ager, nor can he establish for choral music a
position of permanent respect in our modem educational system. (p. 289)

Cox (1989) states "it seems highly inappropriate, in a choral education setting, to place an undue emphasis on popular music: Students deserve the opportunity to study literature that has depth and substance" (p. 28). Roach (1989) echoes Cox suggesting "the pop mediums ... have come to dominate the youth of today. ... Many youth already suspect there must be music of better quality in addition to the pop instantaneous gratification type" (p. 102). While each of these experts cautions against an overemphasis on popular literature, they do not suggest that it be excluded from the curriculum. They do, however, appear to question the aesthetic and educational value of such literature. Leonhard and House (1972), on the other hand, suggest popular music of today has a "musical and ideological sophistication far beyond that of the typically trite popular music of the past" (p. 109). They go on to suggest the best popular music should be included in the curriculum, and argue "it can and does provide an avenue for aesthetic experience for many young people because it represents a living music of good quality which has meaning for the new generation" (p. 110). Reimer (1989) suggests, that while "a vast wasteland of musical inanity exists in the popular music field, some popular music of the present time is of extremely high quality in musical excellence and musical expressiveness" (p. 143-144). He goes on to state the decision to included or exclude a selection from the repertoire should be based on whether the selection "exemplifies the qualities that make a work of art good," not whether it is in an "'acceptable' or 'appropriate"' style (p. 144). Pembrook (1991) agrees stating "the decision as to whether popular music will be included








26
in classroom curricula or concerts should be based on the same criteria used for any other genre of music. Does it have sufficient musical quality to justify its inclusion" (p. 31)?

Choral music educators have also suggested the ethnic and cultural diversity of the

ensemble be considered when selecting repertoire (Grant & Kohut, 1992). Reimer states "the diversity of musics represented in the school music programs must include, in addition to musics of every historical period and popular and jazz styles, musics associated with the various ethnic groups and cultures around the world" (p. 144). In the National Standards for Arts Education (Music Educators National Conference, 1994) music educators have stated, as part of the standards for senior high course content, that advanced choral students should be able to "identify and describe music genres or styles that show the influence of two or more cultural traditions, identify the cultural source of each influence, and trace the historical conditions that produced the synthesis of influences" (p. 63).

Authorities have also offered opinions regarding active student participation in the

selection of literature. Edelson (1972) and Lamb (1971) present two decidedly different views with regard to student participation in the literature selection process. Edelson (1972) suggests students should be allowed to select some of the literature they are to perform. On the other hand, in an address to beginning teachers Lamb states:

Don't have students choose the music.... Every year I observe disastrous
results where some teacher in the field is abdicating his responsibilities in
this area. With your training and your initiative you will have ample
background to select the music. You should be capable of knowing the
type of repertoire your choir can sing; the students do not. (p. 22)
Reimer (1989) offers a compromise with regard to the selection of popular repertoire by suggesting we can engage students overtly in the decision making process by posing to them the same questions we would ask ourselves regarding the quality of a given work in








27
relation to others of the same style. He states that "explaining the reasons for our own choices, and tapping our students' (usually superior) acquaintance with good examples they can suggest, makes of the enterprise a shared exploration of the potentials for highquality musical experience" (p. 144).


Criteria Related to Programming

Authorities have identified several criteria related to programming that they believe

should be considered prior to the selection of repertoire. The criteria identified include the selection of literature from all styles, periods, and genres; program commitments and opportunities presented the ensemble; audience expectations; programmability of a work with respect to other compositions on a given program; and the acoustics of the hall in which the concert is to be presented.

The most often stated criteria for the selection of repertoire related to programming is the inclusion of literature of all styles, periods, and genres. Authorities stress the importance of a comprehensive repertoire because it (1) provides for broad and diversified educational experiences (Abeles, Hoffer, & Klotman 1994; Benner, 1972; Brunner, 1992; Decker & Kirk, 1988; Garretson, 1993; Gordon, 1977, 1989; Grant & Kohut, 1992; Heffernan, 1982; Hoffer, 1991; Jipson, 1972; Lawrence, 1989; Leeder, 1958; Leonhard & House, 1972; Mayhall, 1994; Miller, 1979; Miller, 1988; Music Educators National Conference, 1965, 1970, 1994; Roach, 1989; Roe, 1983), (2) provides for the recognition of culturally diverse student populations (Grant & Kohut, 1992; Reimer, 1989), (3) provides insights into different world cultures (Brunner, 1992; Grant & Kohut, 1992; Music Educators National Conference, 1970, 1994; Reimer, 1989), (4) provides for the recognition of student musical interests (Gordon, 1989; Grant & Kohut, 1992; Hammar,








28
1984; Miller, 1988; Roach, 1989), (5) provides students the opportunity to study and explore their cultural music heritage (Brunner, 1992; Grant & Kohut, 1992; Lamb, 1988; Leonhard & House, 1972; Reimer, 1989; Roach, 1989), and (6) serves as the corner stone for developing interesting and varied programs (Decker, 1967; Decker & Kirk, 1988; Garretson, 1993; Hoffer, 1991).

Authorities have also suggested criteria for the selection of literature with regard to

programming for specific concerts and programs. They state that prior to the selection of repertoire directors should consider the performance commitments and opportunities presented the ensemble and the expectations of the audience (Brunner, 1992; Busch, 1984; Decker & Kirk, 1988; Edelson, 1972; Garretson, 1993; Glenn, McBride, & Wilson, 1970; Gordon, 1977, 1989; Hoffer, 1991; Lamb, 1979). While authorities suggest the expectations of the audience should be considered, some caution against the selection of music solely on the basis of audience interests. Abeles, Hoffer, and Klotman (1994) state:

In a situation in which performance becomes the end rather than the means,
the emphasis shifts from learning to the gratification of the audience and
performer(s). It is true that some learning occurs in all situations, but the
attention is focused on pleasing an audience, not on meeting the needs of the learners. The instruction is geared not to what the students will derive
from the performance, but rather to what the performance will do for the
organization and its director, with only side benefits for the learners.
(p. 283)

The programmability of a work in relation to other works on a given concert is also cited as an important consideration in the selection of literature. Brunner (1994) states:

There are instances where a piece of literature is appropriate for the ensemble, the director, and the budget, but it will not fit a particular program and so must wait for another occasion. Each work should
contribute something to the overall design and effect of a specific concert
program. The program should be an entertaining, educational, and esthetic experience for the audience and should present music they want to hear and
music they should hear, arranged in a manner that enhances their listening
experience. (p. 47)








29
When selecting and programming works for performance, authorities stress the importance of creating variety within unity (Brunner, 1994; Decker & Kirk, 1988; Edelson, 1972; Glenn, McBride, & Wilson, 1970). They state programs should present a variety of tone colors and textures, drama as well as lyricism, and lovely melodies in addition to harmonic and rhythmic intricacies. They emphasize, however, that such variety needs to be by design rather than by chance. Programs should be built so that there is a planned juxtaposition of moods, voicings, texts, textures, and so forth, within an overall design that provides purpose and continuity. Decisions regarding program design should be made at the time and in conjunction with the selection of literature. Other Considerations

In addition to the criteria mentioned above, authorities suggest library considerations, budgetary realities, rehearsal time available, and accountability be considered prior to selecting literature. The experts recommend that new literature purchased for study and performance be literature that compliments current library holdings; expanding the range of composers, periods, styles, and genres (Busch, 1984; Miller, 1979).

While budgetary realities are generally not cited by the experts as a major factor in the selection process, limited resources can impose restrictions upon directors as to how much and what new music they can purchase (Miller, 1979). Budgetary constraints can also influence the kinds of literature programmed. The cost of hiring the instrumental forces required for the performance of a given composition can reduce the instrumentation utilized or eliminate the work from the repertoire entirely.

Rehearsal time is another important consideration in the selection of repertoire identified by the experts. Like many of the criteria previously mentioned, the rehearsal time








30
necessary to prepare a work for performance is relative to the technical abilities of the choir and to the difficulty of the work. Lamb (1988) suggests directors consider whether difficult works are worth the rehearsal time necessary to prepare them for performance and, conversely, whether less technically demanding compositions will stand up under the many rehearsals prior to the concert.

Although accountability is not specifically identified by the experts as a criteria for the selection of repertoire, the professional literature suggests accountability is becoming more and more a factor in the selection of music for study and performance. Professional organizations such as the American Choral Directors Association and many state vocal units of the Music Educators National Conference have established repertoire and standards committees for the purpose of providing guidance to directors in the selection of literature in an effort to improve the quality of literature studied and performed (Mayhall, 1994). Choral festivals sponsored by these organizations often have repertoire requirements for groups wishing to participate. More recently, as an outgrowth of and response to the America 2000 initiative to improve education through the development of national goals, standards for arts education were developed by the Consortium of National Arts Education Associations. The document, National Standards for Arts Education (Music Educators National Conference, 1994), includes guidelines for repertoire selection and proposes minimum standards for repertoire difficulty and variety.

In addition to professional accountability, music educators are accountable to the public for what they teach. Music educators have long fought the perception that music education, particularly performance-centered music education, is extracurricular and peripheral to the primary mission of the schools. Reimer (1989) argues that in order for







31
music performance classes to remain viable subjects in the schools, teachers must demonstrate to the public the value of a music education to each and every student. According to him, the literature studied and performed is one factor that influences the public's perception of the educational value of the program.


Literature Selection Resources and Procedures

Experts in choral music have identified a large number of resources directors may

consult in the search for appropriate literature (Decker & Kirk, 1988; Lamb, 1988; Miller, 1979). These resources include live or recorded performances by other choirs; perusal music available in libraries, in music stores, from music publishers and distributors via their mailing list or in displays at professional conventions; printed programs of other directors; reading sessions at professional conventions; repertoire lists published by professional organizations such as the American Choral Directors Association, vocal units of the Music Educators National Conference, the American Choral Foundation; and professional magazines and journals.

Authorities recommend directors organize repertoire information such that it is easily accessible. The method most often recommended by the experts is the use of a card file (Decker & Kirk, 1988; Lamb, 1988; Miller, 1979). Lamb (1988) states,

It is much easier to have the information you desire in a card file than to
look at all the reference copies. The card contains all of the information you
desire for the moment, is portable, .. and will actually stimulate you to
better examination of the music the first time. (p. 98)

History of Literature Selection

Heffernan (1983) provides a generalized summary of the trends in choral literature selection since 1900. According to him, high school choirs in the early 1900s regularly








32
performed extended masterworks as well as individual choruses from major choralsymphonic compositions. Although high school choirs of the time also performed works by composers rarely heard today, the literature performed was generally of a substantial nature. The 1930s marked the advent of the a cappella choir movement. High schools began to place more emphasis on the unaccompanied performance of short works with religious text. This emphasis lasted well into the 1960s and is still prevalent in certain parts of the country. Today, he writes:

There is a decided trend away from programs comprised exclusively of
short a cappella works. A much more eclectic approach is evident as high
school conductors present unaccompanied compositions, works with
keyboard accompaniment or small instrumental groups, and occasional
extended works with full orchestra. (p. 28)

White (1982) highlights important changes in the music educational leadership in

higher education since 1950, changes which may in part account for recent shifts in the literature selection practices noted by Heffernan. White states there has been a gradual shift in leadership away from the small liberal arts colleges of the 1930s and 1940s to the large major state universities of today. The small liberal arts colleges such as St. Olaf College and Luther College were largely responsible for the expansion of the a cappella choir movement in the 1930s and 1940s. The repertoire performed in major universities (those that offer terminal degrees in music) of today is decidedly different from that performed by the earlier small college choirs. Works in the symphonic-choral or 'major works' category make up 32% of the literature performed by major university choirs, 26% of the repertoire consists of larger motets and cantatas, while only 35% of the repertoire is comprised of smaller octavos (White, 1982, p. 126). White expresses concern that this trend in literature selection may leave beginning choral directors unprepared to select








33
literature for the high school choir. He states "much of the literature presently performed by university choirs is not appropriate for use in the secondary schools, but the novice choral director may be more familiar with this music than with that which will be most useful to him in his teaching" (p. 127). White's concerns are not new. Studies by Jones (1968) and Bolt (1983) raise similar questions concerning undergraduate exposure to literature appropriate for high school choirs.


Studies on the Literature Selection Process

Studies of varying type and scope have been made that touch on the literature selection processes utilized by high school and college choral directors. These studies describe the criteria and methodologies employed by choral directors in the selection of literature, the administrative and organizational procedures adopted by choral directors, and the influences affecting the selection of repertoire. Several of these studies employed methodologies similar to those employed in the present study.

Ten studies were examined: (1) Boody (1968) compared programming practices of high school choral directors in Minnesota with criteria directors had established for the selection of choral repertoire; (2) Jones (1968) surveyed high school choral directors of Iowa and college choral directors of Iowa and surrounding states concerning choral literature performed between 1962 and 1967; (3) Davis (1970) conducted a survey of choral repertoire in selected high schools and factors affecting its selection; (4) Couch (1973) solicited opinions from high school and college directors concerning features of college choral repertoire as a factor in teacher preparation; (5) Burris (1988) created a paradigm designed to provide a systematic and integrated approach to teaching comprehensive musicianship in high school performance-oriented choirs; (6) Ogdin (1981)








34
investigated and analyzed the criteria by which secondary choral teachers in and around San Diego, California, select curriculum; (7) Bolt (1983) surveyed 102 high school choral directors from the southwestern United States deemed successful by their peers and 41 university and college choral conductors regarding programming, literature selection practices and procedures, and adequacy of undergraduate literature selection preparation;

(8) Turley (1989) compared the educational philosophies of high school choral directors and principals with the choral activities in which the students at their schools were involved; (9) Dahlman (1991) explored the impact of choral program size, teacher experience, and teacher education on the literature selection practices of high school choral directors in Missouri; and (10) Wyatt (1995) investigated the literature performed by high school directors in South Carolina.


Boody Study

Boody (1968) studied the high school choral programs of Minnesota for the 1966-1967 school year. Participating choral programs were examined to determine how much time was allotted to (a) the performance of designated types of music, (b) the performance of music from each of the major historical periods, (c) sacred versus secular music, (d) music defined as "light," (e) accompanied versus unaccompanied music, and (f) the music of "master" composers versus the music of other composers.

The directors of participating choral programs were also surveyed to ascertain their

views regarding the types of music that should be used in teaching, how much time should be devoted to each type of music, and the use of various kinds of accompaniments. In addition, directors were requested to forward a copy of their spring concert program. From answers to items in the survey Boody (1968) synthesized criteria against which the








35
choral repertoires of the participating schools, as represented in the spring concert programs, could be compared.

Upon examination and comparison of the programs submitted with the previously synthesized criteria, Boody drew the following conclusions: (1) Directors of larger schools met the lower limits of criteria regarding amount of time spent on each type of choral music specified. Directors of smaller schools failed to meet the criteria for amount of time to be spent on music of sacred music by significant composers and secular music by significant composers. (2) There was a tendency for directors to equate music by significant composers with a cappella music. (3) In total repertoire selected, directors closely agreed with the synthesized criteria of 40% sacred to 60% secular music. (4) Many of the programs submitted contained music of poor quality. Boody surmised that most choral directors were aware of the need to maintain high standards in repertoire selection but were not responding to this need.

A unique technique employed by Boody was the establishment of criteria through the use of survey responses against which the programming practices of responding conductors could be evaluated. This attempt to compare actual programming practices with preestablished criteria for repertoire selection was a new technique in choral repertoire programming research. This concept was expanded by Jones (1968). Jones Study

Jones (1968) investigated the programming practices of high schools and colleges of Iowa and colleges of surrounding states during the period 1962-1967. Five objectives were stated for the study: (1) to determine the SATB choral literature most frequently performed by participating schools, (2) to identify the composers and arrangers of SATB








36
literature most frequently performed, (3) to determine the distribution of frequently performed SATB compositions and arrangements according to historical period and style,

(4) to determine the distribution of frequently performed SATB compositions according to composer nationality, and (5) to make recommendation for improving choral literature selection by high school choral directors.

Results of the survey regarding distribution of music according to style and musical period are summarized in the following table:


Table 2.1
Percentages of Total Music Performed


Style High Schools Colleges Renaissance 9.2 % 14.9 % Baroque 10.0 % 18.4 % Classical 2.7 % 4.4 % Romantic 9.2 % 16.7 % 20th Century 22.9 % 32.5 % Folks Songs, Hymns 19.3 % 13.2 %
& Carols
Popular & Patriotic 19.3 % 0.0 %



In a effort to identify areas of high school repertoire selection in need of improvement, Jones compared the repertoire of participating colleges with the literature selected by high school conductors. Jones reasoned that although the criteria used by college directors may not be "perfect or absolute," college conductors have more experience and education and are therefore more likely to select appropriate literature than high school directors (p. 229).








37
Using college choral repertoire as the standard, Jones concluded Iowa high school directors were programming too many arrangements of folk songs, carols, hymns, popular, and patriotic music and not enough "significant music from the major historical periods" (p. 303). He recommended that high school directors be encouraged to select literature based on the literature selection patterns established by college directors.


Davis Study

Davis (1970) surveyed 303 high school directors from Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York regarding undergraduate preparation for the selection of repertoire and actual programming practices and procedures. Regarding undergraduate education, Davis asked the respondents to rate various facets of their training as "inadequate, barely adequate, or definitely adequate" (p. 112). While a majority of the directors indicated most facets of their undergraduate training was "definitely adequate," only 18% of the conductors considered their experiences with "musical comedy and popular music" to be adequate (p. 87).

Davis found that about 21% of the directors programmed 15 or fewer selections per group a year for performance, 50% programmed between 15 and 30 selections, and 26% indicated they programmed 30 to 50 selections (p. 49). Of the selections programmed, directors favored 20th century compositions, followed in rank order by music of the Romantic, Classical, Baroque, and Renaissance periods. Directors also indicated a preference for sacred music; 70% of the directors surveyed stated they programmed a minimum of 6 to 10 sacred works per group annually. Following sacred music, directors suggested they were more likely to program secular music followed by music for special occasions, folk songs and spirituals, and musical comedy and popular selections.








38
Davis also questioned directors regarding sources for choral repertoire. The directors indicated the choral concert was the most influential source for literature, followed by attendance at choral workshops, music publisher's condensed scores, and personal appraisal of compositions in music stores. Directors considered the help offered by professional organizations to be adequate, but indicated a desire for greater attention by these groups to problems of repertoire selection.

Davis made several broad recommendations relevant to the current study: (1)

universities should place greater emphasis on the exposure of choral education students to the kinds of literature they might be expected to utilize in a high school setting; (2) undergraduate programs need to be restructured to give more attention to preparation for administrative duties, methods and criteria for the selection of repertoire, techniques for program building, and helping students develop sound aims and objectives for the high school choral program; (3) professional organizations need to take a more active role in fostering the continued growth and development of high school directors in the techniques of repertoire selection (p. 269).


Couch Study

Couch (1973) solicited the opinions of 306 high school vocal-music teachers and 277 college choral directors from across the country regarding the features college choral repertoire should possess in order to adequately provide for the preparation of future high school directors. He also compared the opinions of high school and college directors with the views expressed by a panel of experts in choral music selected by the researcher. Although many similarities were found between the views of high school directors and those of college directors and the panel of experts, the most notable differences occurred








39
regarding the role of popular music in the college curriculum. High school respondents indicated the need for (1) greater variety of literature in the college repertoire; (2) more opportunities for participation in popular music ensembles and glee clubs; and (3) a restructuring of the college choral repertoire to include a greater percentage of popular and Broadway music (p. 182-184).


Burris Study

Burris (1988) created a paradigm to provide a systematic and integrated approach to the selection and development of instructional materials designed to foster comprehensive musicianship in existing performance-oriented high school choral programs. In the first two steps of the ten step process, the director is to identify "what specific music fundamentals are desired for study" and select the "instructional content in the area of vocal technique" (p. 71). During the third step the director is to select repertoire from each of the five major historical periods (Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, and Contemporary) based primarily on the educational objective identified in the first two steps of the paradigm. She states that although the educational objectives must be the prime consideration "factors such as the type, theme, or purpose of the concert may create another criterion which may direct selection toward a more limited body literature" (p. 74). She submitted the paradigm to a panel of experts selected by the researcher. The panel deemed the paradigm to be effective in providing for the development comprehensive musicianship in performance-oriented high school choral programs.

Burris's (1988) paradigm, while not a complete curriculum, does provide for the

development of a comprehensive music education curriculum centered on the selection of varied repertoire to meet the educational objectives of the director. This form of "pre-








40
curriculum" is an example of the percepts model described by Richmond (1990), and it is closely aligned to the philosophy of music education as aesthetic education. Ogdin Study

Ogdin (1981) investigated the criteria by which secondary choral teachers from the San Diego, California area select curriculum (p. 27). Surveys were sent to 200 teachers with 74 (37%) usable surveys returned. The respondents indicated the following criteria, in rank order, to be important in the selection of curriculum content: (1) variety of musical style/experiences, (2) student skill level, (3) student growth, (4) difficulty level, (5) fundamental repertoire, (6) participation in festivals/concerts, (7) student interest, and (8) teacher fulfillment (p. 56).


Bolt Study

Bolt (1983) investigated the repertoire selection practices and procedures of selected

high school and college conductors in the southwestern United States (Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah). In addition, Bolt examined the adequacy of preparation in the selection of repertoire appropriate to the needs of beginning choral music educators. The purpose of the study was to "provide a basis for improving the teaching of concepts of choral literature selection in undergraduate teacher-education experiences" (p. iii).

Bolt solicited responses from 102 high school directors deemed to be successful by

their peers. Data were also requested from 42 college music education instructors teaching at institutions accredited by the National Association of Schools of Music. Differences were noted between the respective groups with regard to the types and styles of literature








41
performed in small ensembles. While small college choral ensembles were inclined to specialize in the performance of only one or two styles of music, small high school vocal ensembles tended to have a much broader repertoire, performing literature of several genres (p. 205-206).
Differences were also noted regarding the emphases the respective groups placed on various types and styles of literature. College music education instructors and conductors generally placed greater emphasis on the study and performance of music from the five major style periods (Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, and 20th century) than upon other choral music (Broadway, avant garde, ethnic, folk, and swing/show/jazz choir) (p. 206). High school directors, while performing literature from each of the five major style periods, placed much greater emphasis on music for swing/show choirs. Moreover, high school directors considered themselves "poorly prepared" to "minimally prepared" in the use of, and in their exposure to, choral literature from Broadway musicals, music of ethnic origins, avant garde music, and music for swing, show, or jazz choirs (p. 209).

Bolt also identified similarities between the selected college and high school choral programs. Both groups indicated a cappella sacred music made up a large percentage of the choral repertoire selected for performance. Further similarities were noted with regard to the selection of music in various languages. Music with an English text was most frequently selected by all respondents. Music utilizing a Latin text also received considerable performance. Other languages received less attention, with high school directors selecting music in Hebrew and college directors selecting music in German and French more frequently than their respective counterparts.

Results of the study also suggest similarities regarding criteria for the selection of repertoire. Bolt states:








42
Choral music educators place emphases upon educational aspects of the
selected repertoire rather than upon factors related to performance or extramusical influences. They adhere primarily to the factors that are
directly related to the development of the musicianship of the student. The
further removed the factors are from the music itself, the less significance
the respondents indicated for them. (p. 208)

The respondents indicated the following musical factors to be most important when selecting repertoire: unity, variety, and contrast within the music; vocal range and tessitura of each part; aesthetic value of the composition; music that will raise the standards of musical taste of the performers; music representative of a variety of composers, styles, and periods; a meaningful and suitable text (p. 208). Extramusical factors deemed important by the respondents were skill level of the students; amount of rehearsal time available; student ages; previous choral experience of the students; appeal of the music to the student; the number of programs to be presented (p. 208).

Bolt surmised that the colleges represented "do not offer a balanced exposure to the

various types and styles, periods, and composers of the broad spectrum of choral literature necessary to satisfy repertoire selection needs of beginning choral teachers" (p. 210). Deficiencies were also noted in the exposure of undergraduate choral students to choral literature for male and female choirs and literature for beginning and intermediate mixed choirs. He makes 20 specific recommendations for improving undergraduate instruction in the selection of literature for high school choirs. The focus of these recommendations is on increasing the exposure of future choral teachers to a broader variety of literature appropriate for high school. This includes more exposure to choral music of various styles and voicings as well as music appropriate to various levels of ability.








43
Turley Study

Turley (1989) investigated and compared the music education philosophy statements of 12 selected Indiana high schools directors and principals with the choral activities in which the students were actually involved. Turley made three assumptions at the beginning of the study: (1) there is an overemphasis on the development of swing/show choirs; (2) the development of a swing/show choir may be accompanied by a decline in traditional choral department characteristics; and (3) choral directors are subject to outside pressure to develop swing/show choirs. Based on the data collected, the first and third assumptions could not be substantiated. Turley, however, did observe a decline in traditional choral department characteristics in eight of the nine schools with swing choirs. This finding corresponds to an overemphasis on literature of a non-traditional nature (i.e. music outside the five major historical periods: Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, 20th Century) in eight of the nine choral programs. Turley states that, "although some traditional choral department characteristics may be observed in these schools, an emphasis on swing/show choir development at the expense of traditional choir characteristics was observed" (p. 157).


Dahlman Study

Dahlman (1991) investigated the impact of choral program size, teacher experience, and teacher education on the selection of choral repertoire by public high school choral directors in Missouri (p. 2). Dahlman also sought to determine whether a universally accepted hierarchy of literature selection criteria exists.

Surveys were mailed to 576 high schools with 148 (25.7%) usable surveys returned (p. 24). In addition to demographic information, Dahlman requested data on three








44
representative compositions from the 1990-1991 repertoire of all the choirs in each school. An analysis of the selected works of all respondents revealed that 52.7% of the selected compositions were sacred versus 47.3% secular, 65% were accompanied, 69.7% of the selected compositions were in English, and 20th century compositions (including choral concert, popular, and folk music) comprised almost 64.4% of the compositions selected (p. 27-39). A comparison of demographic data with the characteristics of the selected repertoire suggests that directors with advanced degrees tend to select a higher percentage of sacred repertoire than directors with only an undergraduate degree; selection of accompanied works appears to be a function of both choral program size and teacher experience, with teachers at schools with small choral programs and teachers with less experience selecting more accompanied music; directors with small choral programs tend to select a higher percentage of literature in English than other directors; teachers with smaller programs and teachers with less experience appear to choose more 20th century compositions than directors with larger programs or more experience (p. 40-41).

Regarding the criteria used by directors to select repertoire, no significant differences were found between selection criteria hierarchies used by teachers with different choral program size, experience levels and education levels (p. iii). Of the criteria identified in the study for the selection of repertoire, respondents placed a high priority on appeal of the work to the director, musical quality of the composition, educational goals, and preparation factors. Directors placed moderate importance on student appeal of the composition, programming considerations, text, and audience appeal. Criteria identified as least important were style/historical factors, accompaniment, score design/clarity, and cost (p. 44-47).








45
While Dahlman's research offers some insight into the literature selection practices of high school choral directors, the limited scope of the study, small geographical area, and low response rate reduce the effectiveness of the study. His sole reliance on "three representative compositions" as an accurate indicator of the total repertoire performed by respective programs is problematic in light of the emphasis authorities place on the selection of a diverse repertoire. In addition, Dahlman does not make a distinction between 20th century styles in his analysis of the data by placing choral concert, popular music, and folk music in one category.


Wyatt Study

Wyatt (1995) requested copies of fall and spring choral concert programs for the

1993-1994 school year from 203 high schools in South Carolina. Seventy-six schools (38%) returned usable material. It was noted, however, that of the school that did not respond, some may not have had choral programs and therefore the percentage response would be higher. Regarding the response rate, Wyatt states "this number can be considered a representative sample" (p. 1).

The purposes of the study were to establish a list of repertoire performed by high schools choruses in South Carolina, determine what composers were most frequently performed, determine what styles were most frequently performed, and ascertain the diversity of styles directors select for performance. After tabulating and classifying the repertoire listed on the programs, Wyatt compared the repertoire selected for performance with repertoire recommended in the literature by the experts for performance by high school choirs. He also compared the selected repertoire with the guidelines suggested in the "South Carolina Framework for Music Education."








46
Results of the study suggest directors in South Carolina give only limited attention to the literature recommended by authorities in choral music: Only 37% of the respondents performed any literature from the Renaissance, Classical selections were performed by only 18% of the schools, and 29% of the schools performed literature from the Romantic period. Although 62% of the schools performed one or more selections from the baroque, 22 schools, or almost half of those performing a baroque selection, performed Honor and Glory by J. S. Bach, the All-State audition piece. Recommended 20th century composers did receive more attention, with 51 % of the school performing a work by one of these composers.

Results of the study also suggest that many choral directors may have very limited repertoire palettes, selecting literature from only a few styles and historical periods with 72% of the directors selecting repertoire from fewer than three styles periods. It was also noted that directors who participated in large ensemble adjudication festivals and/or the 1993 Choral Arts Seminar in Columbia were more likely to program a wider variety of repertoire than those who did not participate. Wyatt concludes:

In this study it became obvious that a great deal of music from the 20th
century is being performed. It is primarily popular style music and music
written for the "educational market." While it may be useful and easily
accessible to the developing student, it does not serve to teach the heritage
of choral music as presented in the frameworks of education. (p. 6)

The Wyatt study raises several concerns addressed in the current study. His use of two actual programs from each school as opposed to surveying directors regarding what literature was performed or relying on a single program, enhances the value of the results.


Conclusion

It appears from this review of the literature there is general agreement among the

experts in choral music education on several issues concerning the selection of repertoire








47
for study and performance. First, the ability to select appropriate repertoire is viewed by many as an indicator of teacher competency. Second, authorities indicate a well developed philosophy of music education coupled with a comprehensive knowledge of choral literature are prerequisites to the successful selection of repertoire. Third, the use of some criteria for the selection of repertoire is critical to the selection of appropriate literature. Finally, the writers on choral music education generally agree on the criteria to be used in the selection of repertoire.

While the writers cite a variety of criteria for repertoire selection, two criteria have been emphasized: the selection of a diverse repertoire and the quality of the music. Studies investigating variety as a criterion for repertoire selection have raised some concerns. While directors state variety is an important criteria for selecting repertoire, many directors appear to be selecting repertoire from only one or two styles and historical periods. Several studies suggest high school directors are placing a great deal of emphasis on popular and light, entertainment type literature to the exclusion of music of other styles and from other historical periods.

It is interesting to note that, while studies regarding the selection of repertoire almost always address the issue of variety in repertoire selection, quality as a criterion has not been investigated. This is due, in large part, to the subjective nature of the quality issue. In light of the importance the experts place on quality as a criteria for repertoire selection, this appears to be a shortcoming in educational research regarding repertoire selection.

Recent studies on repertoire selection suggest high school directors consider musical quality to be a major factor in selecting music for performance. However, studies that included an examination of the literature actually performed by high school choirs draw








48
into question the degree to which directors apply their espoused belief in quality as an important criteria. How do directors determine the quality of a composition? Are the methods and criteria used to determine quality equally applied to all styles and genres? Do directors overlook quality as a criteria in the selection of certain styles of literature, for certain occasions, or for certain ensembles, or do some directors simply lack the ability to make a distinction between works of greater and lessor quality? These are important questions. It is true, such questions are not easily investigated. However, given the importance the experts place on quality as a criterion for the selection of repertoire, these questions need to be asked.













CHAPTER 3
PROCEDURES


The purpose of this study was to gather information important to the development of methods and procedures designed to enhance (1) the literature selection practices and procedures of current high school choral directors, and (2) undergraduate instruction in choral literature selection. Data were collected to (a) determine the demographic characteristics of the respondents, (b) identify the criteria used by high school choral directors in selecting repertoire, (c) find out if a common set of criteria exist for the selection of repertoire for high school choruses, (d) identify factors affecting the use of the criteria, (e) determine the degree of agreement among high school directors regarding what constitutes "quality" in choral literature and identify differences if they exist, (f) ascertain if a hierarchy exists for repertoire selection criteria, and (g) determine what relationships, if any, exist among the educational setting, the quality and kinds of literature selected, the criteria and procedures employed, the education, experience, and philosophy of the director, and the perceived success of the director and program by university choral faculty members.


Population Selection

Subjects for this study included two groups of public high school choral music educators. One consisted of directors identified as outstanding by university choral conductors and choral music education faculty selected from institutions accredited by the National Association of Schools of Music. The other was composed of directors who 49








50
were randomly selected from the remaining population. This group configuration was selected to facilitate the identification of repertoire selection practices that may relate to director and program success.

For the purposes of this study the population was limited to states in the southeastern United States: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia. Nominated High School Choral Directors

The College Music Society (1993-1994) listed 69 institutions accredited by the National Association of Schools of Music in the five states selected for this study. The 121 choral and music education faculty members at these institutions were asked to serve as nominators of outstanding high school choral directors in their respective states. Nominations were solicited by letter (Appendix A).

Each faculty member was asked to list up to ten public high school choral directors in their state who he or she believed to be outstanding choral music educators. Specifically, they were asked to name those they believed to be in the top 20% of all high school choral directors. Fifty-two university choral educators agreed to serve as nominators. They submitted 185 names which resulted in 177 usable nominees (P1 = 177). Eight of the nominated directors either had moved from the state or did not meet the conditions of the study, because they taught in private or parochial schools. Once the nominations were received, 89 directors (50% of the population) were selected as the sample (N1 = 89). To meet this sample size, directors were selected based on the number of times each director was nominated, with those receiving the most nominations selected first. Sixty-nine directors were nominated two or more times, with 108 directors nominated only once. The 69 directors receiving two or more nominations were selected to be part of the sample. The remaining 20 directors needed for the sample were randomly selected from the








51
remaining 108 nominees by means of simple random sampling procedures. Each director selected for the sample was mailed a survey instrument (Appendix C) together with a cover letter (Appendix B) requesting copies of their fall and spring concert programs for the 1994-95 school year. The cover letter also included a request for a telephone interview.




Table 3.1
Directors Nominated by State and Number of Nominations

Number of Directors Nominated
Number of
Nominations Florida Georgia S. Carolina N. Carolina Virginia Totals

1 14 30 9 20 35 108 2 3 7 4 11 3 30 3 9 3 1 5 1 19 4 5 3 2 2 0 12 5 2 0 2 1 0 5 6 0 0 1 1 0 2 7 0 0 1 0 0 1 8 2 0 0 0 0 2 Total
Nominated 35 43 20 40 39 177 Number
Selected 23 17 13 23 13 89



Choral Directors Not Nominated

A list of public high schools from each state in the survey was compiled from

Patterson's American Education (Educational Directories Inc., 1995) for a total of 1218 schools (P = 1218). Since data were not available to determine if high schools offered








52
choral music, all high schools listed were included as part of the population. Schools with directors previously identified by nominating university choral faculty as outstanding choral directors were removed from the list, which left a total of 1041 schools (P2 = 1041).

A sample from the remaining population was then selected using linear systematic

sampling procedures as outlined by Jaeger (1984). Jaeger states that "whenever adjacent elements in the sampling frame are more similar than those some distance apart, the withinsample variance will be larger than the overall variance, and linear systematic sampling will be more efficient than simple random sampling" (p. 114). The sampling frame used in this study ordered the population by zip code. This placed schools in close geographical proximity close together in the sampling frame. Close geographical proximity suggests similarity between demographic population elements. Thus, adjacent elements in the sampling frame were likely to be more similar than those some distance apart.

A sampling interval of 5 was used to select the sample, resulting in a sample size of

208 (N2 = 208), or 20% of the population. As with the nominated directors, each director selected for the sample was mailed a survey instrument (Appendix C) together with a cover letter (Appendix B) requesting copies of their fall and spring concert programs for the 1994-95 school year. The cover letter also included a request for a telephone interview.


Instruments for Data Collection

Two instruments were developed for the collection of data: a survey (Appendix C) and a telephone interview format (Appendix D). In addition, directors were asked to forward copies of their fall and spring concert programs for the 1994-95 school year. The reason for this approach was to provide for a better analysis of why and how high school directors select repertoire than is possible through the use of a survey alone. The phone interview allowed for the clarification of responses to the survey, provided respondents the








53
opportunity to elaborate on their beliefs regarding repertoire selection, and permitted the addition of follow-up questions based on answers to questions in the survey. The request for programs provided information regarding what literature directors actually programmed. The request for programs was added to the study as a counter to problems often associated with the use of questionnaires and interviews. Tuckman (1994) summarizes these problems, stating:

(1) respondents must cooperate when completing the questionnaire or
interview, (2) they must tell what is rather than what they think ought to be or
what they think the researcher would like to hear, and (3) they must know what
they feel and think in order to report it. Thus, these techniques measure not
what people believe but what they say they believe, not what they like but what
they say they like. (p. 216)

Furthermore, programs can be used as an indicator of how closely directors follow their expressed beliefs regarding repertoire selection. Design of the Survey

The survey (Appendix C) was developed from factors identified by the experts as

important to the literature selection process. The writer's own experiences as a high school choral director, as well as informal discussions with colleagues, were also influential in the creation of the survey.

The survey was divided into two parts. Part I requested demographic information on the community, school, and choral program, as well as information on the director's educational background and experience. Part II asked questions concerning the kinds of literature performed, the sources for repertoire, and factors that impact literature selection.

Information for completing the survey was provided in the cover letters. Responses were to be made on two scannable data collection forms ("bubble" forms commonly used for standardized testing) provided with the packet. Supplemental, short answer responses were recorded on the questionnaire. Anonymity was assured.








54
Part I of the survey collected demographic information necessary for the categorization of data collected in Part II. Data included the type of community; grade level of the school; school enrollment; student body socioeconomic composition; student body minority population; choral program size and class offerings; director education, teaching experience, and choral performance experience. Most questions were presented in a multiple choice format. Where a multiple choice format was not feasible, one to two word short answer responses were requested.

Part II of the survey was divided into three sections ( A, B, and C ) and focused on obtaining data on repertoire selection practices and procedures. Section A requested information on the number and styles of repertoire performed by the most advanced mixed chorus and largest beginning chorus. Directors were asked to indicate how many compositions each choir performed from the following musical periods and styles: Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, 20th Century, major choral works, folk music (including spirituals), multicultural music (excluding spirituals), patriotic works, pop/rock, show choir, jazz, musical theatre, carol arrangements, traditional/pop holiday songs, and other styles not mentioned. A multiple choice format was used for this section.

Section B requested directors to indicate on a Likert scale how frequently they used each of 21 possible sources for the location and selection of repertoire. The section included a question requesting the identification of other sources used, but not listed on the survey. The Likert scale consisted of five responses: never, seldom, sometimes, often, and very often.

Section C asked director to list the title, composer and/or arranger of two compositions, one "classical" and one "popular," they have recently selected for study and performance by their most advanced large mixed chorus. Directors were then asked to indicate on a








55
Likert scale how influential each of 26 listed elements were in the selection process. The Likert scale consisted of five responses: not considered, not influential, slightly influential, moderately influential, and very influential. Evaluation of the Survey

Upon completion of the survey design, it was submitted to the writer's committee chair for evaluation. After suggested revisions were made, the survey was reviewed by two high school choral directors. Additional minor changes were suggested to clarify terms and instructions.

Following this evaluation process, final revisions were made and the survey was sent to both nominated high school directors and selected high school directors who were not nominated.


The Phone Interview

The phone interview format (Appendix D) was developed after data from the survey and programs were analyzed. Following this analysis it was decided that the phone interview would focus on qualitative issues regarding (a) the repertoire selection process,

(b) beliefs regarding the balance of repertoire the students should be singing, and (c) quality in choral music. The interview consisted of ten questions: two on the repertoire selection process, three on beliefs regarding the balance of repertoire the students should sing, and five on quality in choral music.

Of the directors who returned the survey, 75 directors (36 nominated directors, 39 not nominated) or 72% agreed to be interviewed. It was decided that 52 interviews (50% of the sample) would be conducted; 26 with nominated directors and 26 with directors not nominated. In an effort to avoid samples with greatly different demographic








56
characteristics, the selection of directors to be interviewed was based on a review of the demographic data of the directors who agreed to be interviewed.

The interviews were conducted between May 17 and May 31, 1997. Four of the

directors selected could not be contacted and were replaced with four additional directors. Once contact with each director was established, permission was requested to conduct the interview. Permission was also requested to record each interview. Respondents were identified on tape by number only and anonymity was assured. Upon completion of each interview the interview was then transcribed for later analysis.


Survey Returns


Nominated Directors

The first mailing was sent on September 18, 1995 and resulted in 32 returns. A second request was mailed January 12, 1996. It resulted in an additional 13 survey returns for a total of 45. The overall return rate of the survey instrument from nominated directors was 50.1%. Table 3.2 shows the number of high school directors selected from each state for the sample and the number of usable surveys returned by state.

Directors Not Nominated

The first mailing was made September 18, 1995 and resulted in 36 survey instruments returned. A second request was mailed January 12, 1996, resulting in 30 additional survey instruments, for a total of 66 surveys. Seven of the returned instruments were incomplete and deemed unusable, which left a total of 59 usable survey instruments. The overall return rate for directors not nominated was 28.7%. In addition to the 66 returned survey instruments, letters were received from three schools stating the high school did not have a choral music program.








57
Table 3.2
Survey Responses by Nominated Directors


State: Florida Georgia S. Carolina N. Carolina Virginia Totals HS Directors
Selected 23.0 17.0 13.0 23.0 13.0 89.0 Surveys
Returned 14.0 11.0 6.0 9.0 5.0 45.0 % of Returned
Surveys 31.1 24.5 13.3 20.0 11.1 100.0 % Return
by State 60.9 64.7 46.2 39.1 38.5 50.1



Given the relatively low response rate for the non-nominated directors, it was decided to determine if there were significant demographic differences between the directors who returned the survey and those who did not. One hundred thirty-nine directors/schools did not return the survey. Fourteen schools (10%) were randomly selected using simple random sampling techniques from these 139 schools. A telephone call was made to each school and the choral director was interviewed concerning 12 demographic characteristics taken from the survey instrument. Two of the schools contacted indicated they did not have a choral music program. Two more schools were selected using simple random sampling techniques. The interview results were then compared to the demographic data of 14 directors randomly selected from those who did return the survey.

A chi-square test of significance was run on the data using the SPSS program. The test indicated there was no significant difference between the two samples on 11 of the 12 descriptors. A difference was noted regarding choral performance class enrollment (Table 3.3). An examination of these results revealed directors who returned the survey tended to








58
have moderate size programs of 50 to 150 students enrolled in choral performance classes. The data suggest that directors who did not return the survey instrument tended to have a somewhat broader range of program sizes, with a sizable number of programs with less than 50 students.



Table 3.3
A Comparison of Choral Program Size Between
Directors Who Returned the Survey with those Who Did Not


less 50 101 151
Program Size than 50 to 100 to 150 to 200 over 200 Totals Did not Return % 28.6 42.8 14.3 14.3 0.0 50 Returned % 0.0 35.7 57.1 7.2 0.0 50 Total Sample % 14.3 39.3 35.7 10.7 0.0 100

(x = .046


Although some differences with regard to program size were found between those who returned the survey and those who did not, the nature of the difference regarding program size together with the similarities identified on the other 11 descriptors was not deemed substantial enough to designate the two groups as significantly different.













CHAPTER 4
RESULTS



The population for this study consisted of all public high schools in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia. This population was divided into two sub-populations: (a) public high schools with choral directors identified by university choral faculty as outstanding and (b) public high schools not identified by university choral faculty as having an outstanding choral director. Three instruments were used for data collection: (a) survey, (b) programs submitted by directors, and (c) director interviews. Data resulting from the survey and analysis of the programs are presented below. A qualitative discussion of the data resulting from the interviews is presented in Chapter 5.

Returned surveys were each assigned a number. Each scantron@ form was checked for clarity and stray marks, coded with the appropriate number and sent to the University of Florida testing service for conversion to a computer accessible format. A chi-square test for significance (df = 4; a <.05) was used to determine if relationships exist between director identification as nominated or not nominated and (a) reported demographics, (b) the kinds of repertoire selected for performance, and (c) repertoire selection practices and procedures. Null hypotheses (Ho) were formulated for each response stating there is no relationship. Significance levels are only listed when (a < .05).


Sample Demographics

Table 4.1 shows the distribution of responses regarding the type of community each school serves. While no statistically significant relationship was found between director 59








60
identification and the type of community served, 75.6% of the nominated directors indicated their school served a small city or the suburb of a large city, compared to 55.9% for directors not nominated. Conversely, 44% of the directors not nominated indicated their school served rural, small town, or inner city populations compared to only 24.4% for nominated directors.



Table 4.1
Community Served by School


Small Small Suburb of Inner
Rural Town City Large City City Totals Nominated % 6.7 13.3 26.7 48.9 4.4 43.3 Not Nominated % 16.9 20.3 23.7 32.2 6.8 56.7 Total Sample % 12.5 17.3 25 39.4 5.8 100.0


Tables 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 show, respectively, the distribution of responses regarding grade level distribution, student body socioeconomic composition, school enrollment, and relative size of student body minority population. Statistically significant relationships were not found between director identification and either grade level distribution or student body socioeconomic composition. It should be noted, however, that directors not nominated indicated they taught in schools with a slightly lower socioeconomic standing than nominated directors.

A statistically significant relationship was noted between director identification and both school enrollment and relative size of student body minority population. The data suggest directors not nominated tended to teach in somewhat smaller schools than nominated directors. Thirty-nine percent of directors not nominated indicated they taught in schools








61
Table 4.2
School Grade Level Distribution


6-12 7-12 8-12 9-12 10-12 Totals

Nominated % 2.2 0.0 0.0 95.6 2.2 43.3 Not Nominated % 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.2 6.8 56.7
Total Sample % 1.0 0.0 0.0 94.2 4.8 100.0


Table 4.3
Socioeconomic Composition of Student Body


Predominately: Lower Upper Lower Middle Middle Middle Upper Class Class Class Class Class Family Incomes: Less $20,000 $40,000 $70,000 than to to to Over $20,000 $40,000 $70,000 $100,000 $100,000 Totals

Nominated % 4.4 26.0 57.8 8.9 2.2 43.7 Not Nominated % 10.3 41.4 39.7 6.9 1.7 56.3 Total Sample % 7.8 35.0 47.6 7.8 1.9 100.0


Table 4.4
School Enrollment


Less 1200 1701 2201 than to to to Over 1200 1700 2200 2700 2700 Totals

Nominated % 13.3 31.1 33.3 17.8 4.4 43.3 Not Nominated % 39.0 27.1 23.7 10.2 0.0 56.7 Total Sample % 27.9 28.8 27.9 13.5 1.9 100.0
a = .030








62
Table 4.5
Student Body Minority Population


Minority Population
Less 10% 30% 50%
Than to to to Over 10% 30% 50% 70% 70% Totals Nominated % 11.1 46.7 33.3 2.2 6.7 43.3
Not Nominated % 25.4 27.1 22.0 16.9 8.5 56.7
Total Sample % 19.2 35.6 26.9 10.6 7.7 100.0

a = .017



with enrollments less than 1200 students, while only 13.3% of nominated directors indicated they taught in schools with enrollments less than 1200 students. Regarding student body minority population, 36 nominated directors (80%) indicated their schools had minority populations between 10% to 50% of the student body compared to 29 (49.1%) for directors not nominated. The data also reveal directors who were not nominated taught in more schools where the minority population is either very large or very small than nominated directors.

Part I, Section C of the survey instrument collected demographic data on the choral

program of each school. Tables 4.6 and 4.7 show the distribution of responses regarding choral program enrollment and the number of curricular choruses offered during the regular school day. A statistically significant relationship was found between director identification and both choral program enrollment and number of curricular choruses. The data suggest that directors not nominated have smaller choral programs.








63
Table 4.6
Choral Program Enrollment


Less 50 101 151 Than to to to Over 50 100 150 200 200 Totals

Nominated % 0.0 26.7 37.8 11.1 24.4 43.3
Not Nominated % 16.9 45.8 23.7 8.5 5.1 56.7
Total Sample % 9.6 37.5 29.8 6.9 13.5 100.0
cc = .001




Table 4.7
Number of Curricular Choruses Offered


Number of Curricular Choruses
5 or
1 2 3 4 more Totals

Nominated % 0.0 28.9 26.7 26.7 17.8 43.7
Not Nominated % 29.3 29.3 20.7 10.3 10.3 56.3
Total Sample % 16.5 29.1 23.3 17.5 13.6 100.0
a = .001



Directors were also asked how many of the choirs in their program were auditioned (Table 4.8). Although nominated directors indicated having slightly more auditioned choirs, no statistically significant relationship was found between director identification and the number of auditioned choirs.

Since one focus of the study was to ascertain the repertoire selection practices of high school choral directors, respondents were asked to indicated how many choirs or








64
ensembles in their program specialize in the performance of only one or two kinds of repertoire (Table 4.9). No statistically significant relationship was noted regarding director identification and such ensembles.



Table 4.8
Number of Auditioned Choirs


0 1 2 3 4 Totals Nominated % 22.7 38.6 27.3 9.1 2.3 43.1
Not Nominated % 32.8 51.7 10.3 3.4 1.7 56.9
Total Sample % 28.4 46.1 17.6 5.9 2.0 100.0




Table 4.9
Number of Literature Specific Choirs or Ensembles


0 1 2 3 4 Totals Nominated % 77.3 13.6 6.8 0.0 2.3 43.6
Not Nominated % 64.9 26.3 5.3 0.0 3.5 56.4
Total Sample % 70.3 20.8 5.9 0.0 3.0 100.0




Part I, Section D of the survey instrument collected demographic data on each director. Table 4.10 lists the most advanced degree held by directors in each group and indicates how many of the advanced degrees listed are not in music. Table 4.11 lists the institutions from which directors received their degrees and the number and level of degrees granted by








65
each institution. Directors were also asked to indicate their principal instrument while in college (Table 4.12).

No statistically significant relationship was found to exist between director

identification and advanced music degrees earned or director identification and principal instrument played while in college. Although statistically significant relationships were not found to exist, differences between groups were large enough to be noted. Thirty nominated directors (66.7%) indicated they held an advanced degree in music compared to 27 (45.8%) for directors not nominated. The data also reveal 66.7% of nominated directors indicated they studied voice as their principal instrument compared to 49.1% for directors not nominated. Directors not nominated were found to have a relatively high percentage (22.1%) of directors with principal instruments other than voice or piano when compared to nominated directors (2.2%).


Table 4.10
Most Advanced Degree Earned


Bachelor Master Doctorate


Nominated # 11 25 (3.0) 5 (1.0) % 24.4 55.6 (6.7) 11.1 (2.2) Not Nominated # 24 24 (7.0) 3 (1.0) % 40.7 40.7 (11.8) 5.1 (1.7)

0 indicates degrees outside of music








66
Table 4.11
Director Educational Background


Bachelor Master Doctorate
Not Not Not Institution Nom. Nom. Nom. Nom. Nom. Nom.

Total Listed 44 54 34 28 4 1
Appalachian State 2 2 2 2
Barry College 1
Bob Jones Univ. 1
Bridgewater College 1 Campbell Univ. 1
Coe College 1
Concord College 1
Converse College 1
Crane Sch. of Music 2 2 De Paul Univ. 1
East Carolina Univ. 1 4 2 1
East New Mexico 1
Emory 1
Florida Southern 1
Florida State Univ. 5 3 5 1 3
Gardner Webb 1
George Washington U. I
Georgia College 2 1
Georgia Southern 1
Georgia State Univ. 2 1 6 4 1
Graceland College I
Greensboro College 1 1
Indiana Univ. 1
Ithaca College 1
Jacksonville State 1 1
James Madison 1 3
Kennisaw State 1
Kent 1
Louisiana College 1
Louisiana State Univ. 1
Mars Hill College 1
Mercer 1
Meredith College 1 1
Methodist College 1
Miami Univ. of OH 1








67
Table 4.11 (continued)


Bachelor Master Doctorate
Not Not Not Institution Nom. Nom. Nom. Nom. Nom. Nom.

Mississippi College 1 NCCU North Carolina 1
New Orleans Bap. 1
N. Carolina A & T 1 North East LA Univ. 1
N. Texas State Univ. 2 Nyach College 1
Old Dominion 1
Oral Roberts 2
Pennsylvania State 1 1
Pfeiffer College 1 1
Radford College 1
Sanford Univ. 2
Shenandoah Conser. 1 2 1 Shorter College 4
Southern Baptist 1
South-West Baptist 1
Stetson Univ. 2 2 1
Tennessee Tech. 1
Univ. of Dubuque 1
Univ. of Florida 1
Univ. of Georgia 1
Univ. of Illinois 1
Univ. of Iowa 1
Univ. of Miami 2 1 1
Univ. of Montevallo 1 Univ. of Missouri
Univ. of N. Carolina 1 2 2 3 Univ. of N. Florida 1 1 Univ. of S. Carolina 1 2
Univ. of S. Florida 1 1 2 2
Univ. of S. Miss. 1
Univ. of Tampa 1
Univ. of Tennessee 1 1
Univ. of Wisconsin 1








68
Table 4.11 (continued)


Bachelor Master Doctorate Not Not Not Institution Nom. Nom. Nom. Nom. Nom. Nom.

Va. Common Wealth 1 Virginia Tech. 1
Wake Forest 1
Winthrop Univ. 1 1
WBU 1


Table 4.12
Director's Principal Instrument


Directors Directors Nominated Not Nominated

Voice % 66.7 49.1 Piano % 28.9 18.6 Organ % 0 10.2 Brass % 0 6.8
Woodwind % 2.2 1.7 Percussion % 0 1.7
Guitar % 0 1.7
None Listed % 2.2 10.2


Tables 4.13, 4.14, and 4.15 show the distribution of responses regarding years of experience teaching school music, high school choral music, and choral music at present school. Statistically significant relationships were found between director identification and all three measures of teacher experience. Analysis of the data revealed nominated directors had substantially more experience than directors who were not nominated.








69
Table 4.13
Experience Teaching School Music


lyr 2 to 3 yrs 4 to 7 yrs 8 to 12 yrs over 12 yrs Totals

Nominated % 0.0 0.0 4.4 15.6 80.0 43.3
Not Nominated % 10.2 10.2 11.9 27.1 40.7 56.7
Total Sample % 5.8 5.8 8.7 22.1 57.7 100.0

= .001


Table 4.14
Experience Teaching High School Choral Music


lyr 2 to 3 yrs 4 to 7 yrs 8 to 12 yrs over 12 yrs Totals


Nominated % 0.0 0.0 13.3 22.2 64.4 43.3
Not Nominated % 20.3 16.9 23.7 18.6 20.3 56.7
Total Sample % 11.5 9.6 19.2 20.2 39.4 100.0
= .000


Table 4.15
Experience Teaching Choral Music at Present School


lyr 2 to 3 yrs 4 to 7 yrs 8 to 12 yrs over 12 yrs Totals

Nominated % 2.2 0.0 24.4 31.1 42.2 43.7
Not Nominated % 27.6 17.2 27.6 13.8 13.8 56.3
Total Sample % 16.5 9.7 26.2 21.4 26.2 100.0
a = .000


In addition to teaching experience, directors were asked to indicate how much

experience they have had as a choral singer. Table 4.16 shows how many years directors








70
sang in their high school choir. Table 4.17 depicts the number of years directors indicated they have sung in a college, community, and/or professional choir. Although no statistically significant relationships were discovered, nominated directors were found to have had more years singing in a college, community, or professional choir than directors not nominated.



Table 4.16
High School Choral Participation


0 1 yr 2 yrs 3 yrs 4 yrs Total



Nominated % 15.6 11.1 11.1 26.7 35.6 43.3
Not Nominated % 18.6 5.1 10.2 23.7 42.4 56.7
Total Sample % 17.3 7.3 10.6 25.0 39.4 100.0


Table 4.17
College, Community, and/or Professional Choral Participation



1 yr.
or less 2 to 3 yrs 4 to 7 yrs 8 to 12 yrs Over 12 yrs Totals Nominated % 0.0 0.0 35.6 24.4 40.0 43.3
Not Nominated % 5.1 6.8 37.3 23.7 27.1 56.7
Total Sample % 2.9 3.8 36.5 24.0 32.7 100.0



Repertoire Selected for Performance The first half of Part II, Section A collected data on the kinds of repertoire selected for performance during the 1994-95 school year by each director's most advanced mixed








71
choir. The second half of Part II, Section A collected data on the kinds of repertoire selected for performance by the director's largest beginning choir. The repertoire was divided into four major categories: (a) Classical Music, (b) Folk Music, (c) Popular Music, and (d) Other Music. Each category was further divided into specific style subcategories. Directors were asked to indicate how many compositions from each subcategory were performed by their most advanced mixed choir and by their largest beginning choir. Data on the type of music selected for advanced students is presented first followed by data on the type of music selected for beginning students.


Repertoire Selected for Advanced Mixed Choir

Under the "Classical" category for the advanced mixed choir (Table 4.18) statistically significant relationships were found between director identification and three subcategories:

(a) Baroque, (b) 20th Century, and (c) Major Works. The data reveal nominated directors performed more compositions from each of the three categories than directors not nominated. It should also be noted that, while significant relationships were not found between the two groups in the remaining three categories, nominated directors selected more compositions from each category than directors not nominated.

Statistically significant relationships were noted in the area of folk music between director identification and two of the three style subcategories listed: (a) Folk Music & Spirituals, and (b) Multicultural Music (Table 4.19). In subcategories where significant relationships were noted nominated directors reported performing more selections than directors not nominated.

The "Popular Music" category was divided into four style subcategories: (a) Pop & Rock Music, (b) Show Choir Music, (c) Jazz, and (d) Musical Theatre Compositions.








72
Table 4.20 shows the distribution of responses regarding the number of compositions from each subcategory selected for performance by the director's most advanced mixed choir. A statistically significant relationship was found between director identification and the number of pop/rock compositions performed, with directors not nominated selecting more pop/rock compositions for performance than nominated directors.



Table 4.18
Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Classical Compositions
Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus


Number of Titles Performed
Style 0 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5 Renaissance Nominated % 4.5 22.7 43.2 13.6 15.9
Not Nom. % 21.2 26.9 30.8 13.5 7.7


Baroque Nominated % 8.9 17.8 51.1 20 2.2 a = .010 Not Nominated % 34.0 26.4 28.3 11.3 0.0


Classical Nominated % 4.4 24.4 55.6 13.3 2.2
Not Nominated % 17.0 25.5 45.3 9.4 3.8


Romantic Nominated % 13.6 22.7 43.2 18.2 2.3
Not Nominated % 30.2 24.5 32.1 9.4 3.8


20th Century Nominated % 6.8 11.4 29.5 20.5 31.8 a = .017 Not Nominated % 22.6 20.8 11.3 28.3 17.0


Major Works Nominated % 40.0 48.9 11.1 0.0 0.0 a = .017 Not Nominated % 66.7 20.4 7.4 1.9 3.7








73
Table 4.19
Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Folk Compositions
Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus


Number of Titles Performed
Style 0 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5


Folk Music & Nominated % 0.0 0.0 60.0 31.1 8.9 Spirituals Not Nominated % 0.0 18.9 52.8 20.1 7.5 a. = .020
Multicultural Nominated % 8.9 24.4 40.0 26.7 0.0 a = .002 Not Nominated % 22.6 34.0 41.5 1.9 0.0


Patriotic Nominated % 26.7 35.6 31.1 4.4 2.2
Not Nominated % 22.6 34.0 37.7 5.7 0.0


The fourth category, "Other Music," was divided into three subcategories: (a) Carols,

(b) Traditional Holiday Songs, (c) Other. The subcategory "Other" allowed directors to list compositions they believed did not fit in one of the previously listed categories. Table 4.21 shows the distribution of responses in the in the major category "Other Music." No statistically significant relationship was found between director identification and the number of carols or traditional holiday songs performed. No additional styles were listed under the subcategory "Other."

This study also investigated the variety and proportion of styles of repertoire

performed. Director responses were analyzed to determine (a) the variety of repertoire performed within the major style category "Classical" (Table 4.22) and (b) what percentage of the total repertoire performed was represented by each of the major style categories (Table 4.23).








74
Table 4.20
Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Popular Compositions Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus


Number of Titles Performed
Style 0 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5

Pop/Rock Nominated % 28.9 31.1 17.8 15.6 6.7 c =.044 Not Nominated % 15.1 17.0 41.5 13.2 13.3


Show Choir Nominated % 51.1 17.8 20.0 2.2 8.9
Not Nominated % 43.4 17.0 17.0 7.5 15.1


Jazz Nominated % 35.6 35.6 22.2 4.4 2.2
Not Nominated % 41.5 28.3 28.3 0.0 1.9


Musical Theatre Nominated % 31.1 26.7 24.4 8.9 8.9
Not Nominated % 32.1 22.6 32.1 3.8 9.4




Table 4.21
Comparison of Directors Regarding Other Compositions
Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus


Number of Titles Performed
Style 0 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5

Carols Nominated % 8.9 11.1 31.1 24.4 24.4
Not Nominated % 11.3 24.5 34.0 17.0 13.2


Holiday Songs Nominated % 22.2 20.0 33.3 20.0 4.4
Not Nominated % 15.1 24.5 41.5 17.0 1.9








75
Table 4.22
Variety of "Classical" Styles
Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus


Not
Number of Styles Nominated % Nominated %

0 0 0.0 3 5.1 1 0 0.0 4 6.8 2 1 2.2 2 3.4 3 3 6.7 7 11.9
4 or More 41 91.1 43 72.9




Table 4.23
Proportions of Repertoire Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus


Classical Folk Popular Other Nominated % 44.2 21.2 17.2 17.4
Not Nominated % 35.3 20.6 25.9 18.2




The data reveal that nominated directors performed selections from an average of 4.6 different subcategories (i.e. Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, 20th Century), compared to 3.8 different subcategories for directors not nominated. Seven directors not nominated or 11.9% stated they performed music from one or fewer subcategories compared to none or 0.0% for nominated directors.

Director responses were also analyzed to determine what percentage of the repertoire performed by each director was from each of the previously defined major categories:








76
Classical, Folk, Popular, and Other (Traditional Christmas Selections and Carols). Averages of the percentages found were then determined for both nominated directors and directors not nominated (Table 4.23). A sizable difference was found between groups regarding the balance between the number of classical compositions performed and the number of popular compositions performed. Nominated directors were found to perform a higher percentage of classical works than directors not nominated. Directors not nominated performed a higher percentage of popular works than nominated directors.

In addition to survey questions regarding repertoire performed, directors were asked to send copies of their fall and spring concert programs. Thirty-eight directors (26 nominated, 12 not nominated) submitted programs. The repertoire listed in the programs (Appendix E) for the most advanced mixed choir was tabulated and compared to director responses on the survey regarding repertoire selected for performance (Table 4.24). The balance of repertoire reported by directors on the survey among the four major style categories was essentially the same as the balance found in the programs. The differences noted regarding "Other" music were most likely a result of the fact that winter and/or holiday programs were not requested. However, within the major style category "Classical" the data reveal, that while nominated directors who submitted programs stated on the survey they performed selections from an average of 4.7 different subcategories, an average of only 3.2 different subcategories were found in the programs. Likewise, directors not nominated stated on the survey they performed music from an average 3.4 different subcategories, while on the programs they performed music from an average of

2.2 subcategories.








77
Table 4.24
Proportions of Repertoire Found in Programs Compared to
Proportions of Repertoire Reported on Survey for Most Advanced Mixed Chorus


Classical Folk Popular Other


Nominated
Survey % 45.2 21.5 14.9 18.5
Programs % 53.4 19.8 17.6 9.2
Not Nominated
Survey % 35.8 22.0 24.3 17.9
Programs % 36.0 17.2 22.7 24.2


Repertoire Selected for Largest Beginning Choir

The second half of Part II, Section A examined the repertoire selected for performance by the directors' largest beginning high school choir. All nominated directors (45) indicated they taught a beginning high school choir. Of the 59 directors not nominated, 50 directors indicated they taught a beginning high school choir. Table 4.25 gives director responses to the number of "Classical" compositions performed by the directors largest beginning choir. Although nominated directors indicated performing slightly more compositions in every subcategory, no statistically significant relationships were found between director identification and "Classical" music subcategories.

Statistically significant relationships were found between director identification and two "Folk" music subcategories: folk arrangements and spirituals, and multicultural compositions (Table 4.26). Nominated directors indicated they performed more compositions from both sub-categories than directors not nominated.








78
Table 4.25
Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Classical Compositions
Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus


Number of Titles Performed
Style 0 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5

Renaissance Nominated % 35.6 46.7 15.6 2.2 0.0
Not Nominated % 54.0 28.0 16.0 0.0 2.0


Baroque Nominated % 28.9 40.0 31.1 0.0 0.0
Not Nominated % 46.0 40.0 14.0 0.0 0.0


Classical Nominated % 28.9 35.6 35.6 0.0 0.0
Not Nominated % 32.0 44.0 22.0 2.0 0.0


Romantic Nominated % 44.4 31.1 24.4 0.0 0.0
Not Nominated % 54.0 34.0 10.0 2.0 0.0


20th Century Nominated % 24.4 20.0 31.1 15.6 8.9
Not Nominated % 40.0 22.0 14.0 16.0 8.0


Major Works Nominated % 77.8 20.0 2.2 0.0 0.0
Not Nominated % 90.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0








79
Table 4.26
Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Folk Type Compositions
Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus


Number of Titles Performed
Style 0 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5 Folk Music & Nominated % 6.7 6.7 55.6 26.7 4.4 Spirituals Not Nominated % 10.2 28.6 59.2 2.0 0.0 a = .000
Multicultural Nominated % 17.8 28.9 48.9 4.4 0.0 a = .027 Not Nominated % 38.8 34.7 26.5 0.0 0.0


Patriotic Nominated % 31.1 44.4 22.2 2.2 0.0
Not Nominated % 38.8 34.7 24.5 2.0 0.0




Table 4.27 shows the distributions of responses regarding the number of "Popular" compositions performed by the largest beginning choir. While no statistically significant relationships were found between director identification and Popular music subcategories, directors not nominated indicated performing slightly more pop/rock, show choir, and jazz music than nominated directors. Table 4.28 shows the distribution of responses in the major category "Other Music." No additional styles of music were listed and no statistically significant relationships were noted between director identification and "Other Music" subcategories.








80
Table 4.27
Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Popular Compositions Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus


Number of Titles Performed
Style 0 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5

Pop/Rock Nominated % 31.1 26.7 35.6 4.4 2.2
Not Nominated % 22.4 14.3 42.9 16.3 4.1


Show Choir Nominated % 80.0 15.6 2.2 2.2 0.0
Not Nominated % 66.7 22.9 6.3 4.2 0.0


Jazz Nominated % 84.4 13.3 2.2 0.0 0.0
Not Nominated % 79.2 18.8 2.1 0.0 0.0


Musical Theatre Nominated % 31.1 31.1 31.1 0.0 6.7
Not Nominated % 33.3 35.4 25.0 4.2 2.1




Table 4.28
Comparison of Directors Regarding Other Compositions
Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus


Number of Titles Performed
Style 0 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5

Carols Nominated % 15.6 20 46.7 13.3 4.4
Not Nominated % 20.8 27.1 43.8 6.3 2.1


Holiday Songs Nominated % 15.9 31.8 45.5 6.8 0.0
Not Nominated % 25.0 25.0 37.5 12.5 0.0








81
As with the most advanced choir, the balance and variety of repertoire performed by the largest beginning choir were also examined. Director responses were analyzed to determine the balance of repertoire within the major style category "Classical" (Table 4.29) and the balance between the major style categories (Table 4.30).

The data reveal that, within the major style category "Classical," nominated directors performed selections from an average of 3.4 different subcategories with their largest beginning choir, compared to 2.9 different subcategories for directors not nominated. Ten directors not nominated or 20% stated they performed music from one or fewer subcategories compared to 4 or 8.9% for nominated directors.




Table 4.29
Variety of "Classical" Styles
Performed by Largest Beginning Choir


Not
Number of Styles Nominated % Nominated %

0 1 2.2 4 8.0 1 3 6.7 6 12.0 2 6 13.3 7 14.0 3 11 24.4 12 24.0
4 or More 24 53.3 21 42.0


Director responses were also analyzed to determine what percentage of the repertoire performed by each director was from each of the previously defined major categories: Classical, Folk, Popular, and Other (Traditional Christmas Selections and Carols). Averages of the percentages found were then determined for both nominated directors and








82
directors not nominated (Table 4.30). No significant differences were found between groups regarding the balance between the major style categories.



Table 4.30
Proportions of Repertoire Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus


Classical Folk Popular Other Nominated % 34.0 29.7 16.2 20.0
Not Nominated % 31.8 23.4 24.6 20.2



Twenty-three nominated directors and seven directors not nominated submitted

programs with repertoire listed for a beginning choir. The repertoire listed in submitted programs for the largest beginning choir (Appendix E) was tabulated and compared to director responses on the survey regarding repertoire selected for performance (Table

4.31). The data reveal the balance of repertoire reported by directors on the survey among the four major style categories was essentially the same as the balance found in the programs. The small differences noted were believed to be most likely the result of differences regarding classification and the fact that winter and/or holiday programs were not requested, rather than any substantial difference regarding what was reported and what was actually performed. Within the major style category "Classical" the data revealed that nominated directors who submitted programs stated on the survey they performed selections from an average of 3.1 different subcategories An average of 2 different subcategories were found in the programs. Directors not nominated stated on the survey they performed an average 3 different subcategories, while on the program an average of

1.7 subcategories were listed.








83
Table 4.31
Proportions of Repertoire Found in Programs Compared to
Proportions of Repertoire Listed in Survey for Largest Beginning Chorus


Classical Folk Popular Other Nominated
Survey % 33.0 30.8 15.8 20.4
Programs % 41.6 22.8 20.2 15.4
Not Nominated
Survey % 30.6 25.7 20.2 23.5
Programs % 42.0 13.0 29.2 15.8




Sources for Repertoire

Part II, Section B collected data on how frequently directors use 21 possible sources for repertoire. Directors were asked to indicate on a Likert Scale of 1 to 5 how often they use each source to locate and select repertoire. Table 4.32 shows the mean distribution of responses for each survey populations as well as for the total sample. An analysis of variance (df = 1; a < .05) was used to determine if significant differences exist between the survey populations regarding the use of the 21 identified sources for repertoire.

Statistically significant differences between the survey populations were found

regarding five of the listed sources for repertoire. The data suggest nominated directors use choral reading sessions, choral workshops and clinics, live performances, and materials from the American Choral Directors Association more often than directors not nominated. Conversely, the data suggest directors not nominated use publisher catalogs and repertoire lists more frequently than nominated directors.








84
Table 4.32
Sources for Repertoire and Frequency of Use


Not Total
Source Nominated Nominated Sample

Choral workshops/ clinics 3.80 (1) 3.27 (1) 3.50 (1) Live performances 3.64 (3) 3.22 (2) 3.40 (2) Choral reading sessions 3.71 (2) 3.11 (5) 3.38 (3) Music Recommended by other directors 3.29 (4) 3.20 (4) 3.24 (4)

Recordings 3.16 (5) 3.05 (6) 3.10 (5)


Music publishers' sample scores 2.87 (9) 3.22 (2) 3.07 (6) Music you performed with other groups 2.91 (8) 2.92 (8) 2.91 (7)
(church, community, professional, etc.)
Perusal of scores in music stores 2.95 (7) 2.85 (9) 2.89 (8) Music you performed in college 3.04 (6) 2.78 (11) 2.89 (8) Music publisher catalogs and repertoire lists 2.44 (12) 3.00 (7) 2.76 (10)


Music you performed in high school 2.51 (11) 2.80 (10) 2.67 (11) Materials from American Choral 2.80 (10) 2.22 (15) 2.47 (12)
Directors Association
Materials from your MENC state affiliate 2.42 (13) 2.42 (14) 2.42 (13) Materials from Music Educators 2.24 (14) 2.51 (12) 2.39 (14)
National Conference
Materials from college music education 2.09 (15) 2.46 (13) 2.30 (15)
courses


Repertoire lists in textbooks 1.93 (16) 1.98 (16) 1.96 (16) Materials from National Association 1.22 (18) 1.39 (17) 1.32 (17)
of Teachers of Singing
Materials from Choristers Guild 1.38 (17) 1.24 (19) 1.30 (18) Materials from American Choral Foundation 1.20 (19) 1.27 (18) 1.24 (19) Materials from American Guild of Organists 1.06 (21) 1.14 (20) 1.11 (20)


Materials from National Association 1.07 (20) 1.07 (21) 1.07 (21)
of Jazz Educators

1 never, 2 seldom, 3 sometimes, 4 often, 5 very often
() indicates hierarchy of use from most often to least often








85
When the sources for repertoire were placed in order according to frequency of use, noticeable differences were found between the survey populations regarding the importance of (a) materials supplied by publishers, (b) materials from the American Choral Directors Association, and (c) repertoire directors performed while in college. The responses of directors not nominated placed (a) materials supplied by publishers, higher in the hierarchy than nominated directors, with directors not nominated placing "music publisher sample scores" and "music publisher catalogs and lists" second and seventh respectively, compared to ninth and twelfth for nominated directors. The responses by nominated directors placed (b) materials from the ACDA and (c) music performed in college, tenth and sixth, respectively, compared to fifteenth and eleventh for directors not nominated.


Factors Affecting the Selection of Repertoire

In Part II, Section C directors were asked to list the title, composer and/or arranger of two compositions they have recently selected for study and performance by their most advanced mixed chorus (Appendix E). One composition was to be of a classical nature and the other was to be a popular style selection. Directors were then asked to indicate on a Likert scale how influential each of 26 listed elements were in the selection process. The Likert scale consisted of five responses: not considered, not influential, slightly influential, moderately influential, and very influential. An analysis of variance (df = 1; ca < .05) was used to determine if significant differences exist between the survey populations regarding the influence of 26 listed factors on repertoire selection.

Analysis of the data regarding the selection of the classical composition revealed

statistically significant differences between the survey populations on five of the 26 factors








86
listed (Table 4.33): (a) the work was on an approved list of compositions for a musical festival or contest (a = .035), (b) the potential of the work to provide for an aesthetic experience (a = .013), (c) the artistic demands of the composition (aX = .024), (d) the text quality, appropriate for the music and ensemble (a = .039), and (e) planned variety composition selected to expose students to music of a different style (a = .020). The data suggest factors (b), (c), and (d) were more influential in the decision process of nominated directors to select the classical composition listed than in the decision process of directors not nominated. The distribution of responses also suggests factors (a) and (e) were more influential in the decision process of directors not nominated than in that of nominated directors.

When the 26 factors were placed in order according to level of influence, noticeable differences were found between the hierarchies of the survey populations regarding the importance of (a) the artistic demands of the composition, (b) your personal abilities as conductor, rehearsal pianist, etc., (c) the text quality, appropriate for the music and ensemble, and (d) planned variety composition selected to expose students to music of a different style. Factors (a), (b), and (c) were found to be significantly higher in the hierarchy of nominated directors than in the hierarchy of directors not nominated. The responses of nominated directors placed these factors fifth, sixteenth, and eighth, respectively, compared to tenth, twenty-first, and thirteenth for directors not nominated. Factor (d) Planned variety, was placed higher (fourth) in the hierarchy for directors not nominated than in the hierarchy for nominated directors (twelfth).

Three significant differences were noted between the survey populations regarding the popular composition selected (Table 4.34): (a) this is 'quality' music and the students should be exposed to it (ca = .016), (b) the artistic demands of the composition (ca = .050),








87
Table 4.33
Influence of Selected Elements on the Selection of Classical Music for
Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir

Not Total
Source Nominated Nominated Sample

"This is 'quality music', and the students 4.79 (1) 4.59 (1) 4.68 (1) should be exposed to it."

The vocal performance skills that can be 4.51 (3) 4.44 (2) 4.47 (2) taught through the work. (legato line, singing large leaps, runs, etc.)

The technical difficulty level of the work. 4.40 (4) 4.30 (3) 4.34 (3) (range, tessitura, harmonic, rhythmic, etc.)

The potential of the work to provide for 4.58 (2) 4.15 (5) 4.34 (3) esthetic experience.

The musical elements that could be taught 4.21 (7) 4.11 (6) 4.15 (5) through this work.
(form, style, compositional techniques, etc.)

The vocal maturity of the singers. 4.23 (6) 3.98 (7) 4.09 (6)

The artistic demands of the composition. 4.33 (5) 3.87 (10) 4.07 (7)

Planned variety. 3.69 (12) 4.22 (4) 3.99 (8) (Composition selected to expose students to music of a different style)

The director appeal of the work. 3.95 (8) 3.94 (8) 3.95 (9) ("I really like this composition and would love to conduct/perform this work")

The historical & social elements that could be 3.58 (13) 3.89 (9) 3.75 (10) taught through the work. (musical period, historical period, social influences of the time, multicultural, etc.)

The text 3.95 (8) 3.43 (13) 3.66 (11) (quality, appropriate for the music, for the ensemble)








88
Table 4.33 (continued) Not Total
Source Nominated Nominated Sample The emotional maturity of the singers. 3.74 (11) 3.56 (11) 3.64 (12) The size of the chorus. 3.77 (10) 3.50 (12) 3.62 (13) The sectional characteristics of the chorus. 3.56 (14) 3.17 (14) 3.34 (14) (e.g. Strong soprano section, weak tenors section)

The programmability of the work. 3.12 (16) 3.15 (15) 3.13 (15) (holiday selection, concert opener/closer, etc.) The student appeal of the work. 3.28 (15) 3.00 (17) 3.12 (16) ("Students will love this work", recruiting) The amount of rehearsal time available. 3.12 (16) 3.06 (16) 3.08 (17) Your personal abilities 3.12 (16) 2.74 (21) 2.91 (18) (as conductor, rehearsal pianist, etc.) The technical ability of the accompanist. 2.39 (21) 2.85 (18) 2.65 (19) The "winning" potential of the work. 2.44 (20) 2.78 (19) 2.63 (20) ("We can win, get a superior, 1st place, with this work at contest") The work was on an "approved" list of 2.12 (22) 2.78 (19) 2.48 (21) compositions for a musical festival or contest. The public appeal of the work. 2.56 (19) 2.37 (22) 2.45 (22) ("The audience will love this number") Peer approval. 1.86 (23) 2.19 (23) 2.04 (23) ("Other directors will approve if we perform this work")








89
Table 4.33 (continued)

Not Total
Source Nominated Nominated Sample

Library needs. 1.77 (24) 2.09 (24) 1.95 (24)
(Compositions of this style, by this composer are needed in the library)


The work was an audition piece or on the 1.77 (24) 1.81 (25) 1.79 (25)
program of a festival such as All-State
Chorus or All-County Chorus.


Cost of the composition 1.51 (26) 1.65 (26) 1.59 (26)


1 2 3 4 5
Not Not Slightly Moderately Very
Considered influential influential influential influential
() indicates hierarchy from most influential to least influential


and (c) the text quality, appropriate for the music and ensemble (ao = .027). All three factors were found to be more influential in the decision of nominated directors than in the decision of directors not nominated to select the popular composition listed.

When the 26 factors were placed in order according to level of influence, significant

differences were found between the survey populations regarding the importance of (a) this is 'quality music' and the students should be exposed to it, (b) the director appeal of the work I really like this composition and would love to conduct/perform this work, and (c) the text quality, appropriate for the music and ensemble. The distribution of responses placed factors (a) quality of the music, and (c) quality of the text, higher in the hierarchy of nominated directors than in the hierarchy of directors not nominated. For nominated directors factors (a) and (c) were tenth and sixth, respectively, compared to sixteenth and




Full Text

PAGE 1

THE REPERTOIRE SELECTION PRACTICES OF PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL CHORAL DIRECTORS IN FLORIDA, GEORGIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, NORTH CAROLINA, AND VIRGINIA By GUY W. FORBES A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1998

PAGE 2

IN MEMORY OF MY FATHER, JOHN WALTER FORBES, FOR HIS LOVE AND UNWAVERING SUPPORT

PAGE 3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Much appreciation goes to Charles Hoffer, my committee chairman, for his advice, support, and continual editing of this document. I am also indebted to the other members of my committee for their expert guidance in the executing and writing of this study. Furthermore, I would like to express my appreciation to all the choral directors who gave of their time to provide the raw data for this study. Without their interest and support this study would not have been possible. I am also grateful for the support and encouragement provided by my friends and colleagues at Millikin University. A special note of thanks goes to Larry Lovell-Troy for his help with the statistical analysis and to Brad Holmes and Mark Nelson for their "kindly prodding" to finish the document. Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Marise Robbins-Forbes, and my family for always believing in me. Their love, patience, and encouragement made the completion of the document possible. lu

PAGE 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii LIST OF TABLES vi ABSTRACT x CHAPTERS 1 THE RESEARCH PROBLEM 1 Problem 1 Purpose 2 Assumptions 3 Delimitations 3 ^ Importance of the Study 4 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LETERATURE 6 The Importance of the Literature Selection Process 6 Education as a Prerequisite for Literature Selection 7 Philosophy as a Prerequisite for Literature Selection 8 Criteria for the Selection of Literature 11 Literature Selection Resources and Procedures 31 History of Literature Selection 31 Studies of the Literature Selection Process 33 Conclusion 46 3 PROCEDURES 49 Population Selection 49 Instruments for Data Collection 52 Survey Returns 56 4 RESULTS 59 Sample Demographics 59 Repertoire Selected for Performance 70 S ources for Repertoire 83 Factors Affecting the Selection of Repertoire 85 Demographic Factors and Repertoire Selection 95 Summai7 103 IV

PAGE 5

5 DIRECTOR INTERVIEWS 105 The Repertoire Selection Process 105 Summary of the Repertoire Selection Process 110 The Balance of Repertoire Students Should Sing Ill Summary of the Balance of Repertoire Students Should Sing 123 Quality and Choral Music 124 Summary Regarding Quality and Choral Music 145 6 SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION S 149 Summary 149 Conclusions 150 Summary of Conclusions 156 Recommendations 158 Recommendations for Further Research 160 GLOSSARY 162 APPENDICES A NOMINATION REQUEST LETTER 163 B SURVEY COVER LETTERS 165 C SURVEY 169 D TELEPHONE INTERVIEW FORMAT 177 E CLASSICAL REPERTOIRE LISTED ON SURVEY FOR MOSTADVANCED MIXED CHOIR 178 F POPULAR REPERTOIRE LISTED ON SURVEY FOR MOSTADVANCED MIXED CHOIR 181 BIBLIOGRAPHY. 184 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 189

PAGE 6

LIST OF TABLES Table page 2.1 Percentages of Total Music Perforrned 36 3.1 Directors Nominated by State and Number of Nominations 51 3.2 Survey Responses by Nominated Directors 57 3.3 A Comparison of Choral Program Size Between Directors Who Returned the Survey with those Who Did Not 58 4.1 Community Served by School 60 4.2 School Grade Level Distribution 61 4.3 Socioeconomic Composition of Student Body 61 4.4 School Enrollment 61 4.5 Student Body Minority Population 62 4.6 Choral Program Enrollment 63 4.7 Number of Curricular Choruses Offered 63 4.8 Number of Auditioned Choirs 64 4.9 Number of Literature Specific Choirs or Ensembles 64 4.10 Most Advanced Degree Earned 65 4.11 Director Educational Background 66 4.12 Director's Principal Instrument 68 4.13 Experience Teaching School Music 69 4.14 Experience Teaching High School Choral Music 69 4.15 Experience Teaching Choral Music at Present School 69 4.16 High School Choral Participation 70 vi

PAGE 7

4.17 College, Community, and/or Professional Choral Participation 70 4.18 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Classical Compositions Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus 72 4.19 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Folk Compositions Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus 73 4.20 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Popular Compositions Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus 74 4.21 Comparison of Directors Regarding Other Compositions Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus 74 4.22 Variety of "Classical" Styles Perfonned by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus.. 75 4.23 Proportions of Repertoire Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus 75 4.24 Proportions of Repertoire Found in Programs Compared to Proportions of Repertoire Reported on Survey for Most Advanced Mixed Chorus 77 4.25 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Classical Compositions Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus 78 4.26 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Folk Type Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus 79 4 27 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Popular Compositions Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus 80 4.28 Comparison of Directors Regarding Other Compositions Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus 80 4.29 Variety of "Classical" Styles Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus 81 4.30 Proportions of Repertoire Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus 82 4.31 Proportions of Repertoire Found in Programs Compared to Proportions of Repertoire Reported on Survey for Largest Beginning Chorus 83 4.32 Sources for Repertoire and Frequency of Use 84 4.33 Influence of Selected Elements on the Selection of Classical Music for Perfonnance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. 87 4.34 Influence of Selected Elements on the Selection of Popular Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. 90 4.35 Relationship of Community to the Selection of Baroque Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. 96 vu

PAGE 8

4.36 Relationship of Community to the Selection of Romantic Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. 97 4.37 Relationship of Number of Choirs to the Selection of Folk Music and Spirituals for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. 98 4.38 Relationship of Socioeconomic Status to the Selection of Pop/Rock Music for Perfomiance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. 98 4.39 Relationship of High School Choral experience to the Selection of Renaissance Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. ... 99 4.40 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Baroque Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. 1 00 4.4 1 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Classical Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. 100 4.42 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Romantic Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir. 101 4.43 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Romantic Music for Performance by Largest Beginning Choir. 102 4.44 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Twentieth Century Music for Performance by Largest Beginning Choir. 102 4.45 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Musical Theatre Music for Performance by Largest Beginning Choir. 103 5 1 Repertoire Sources and Criteria for Repertoire Selection Mentioned During Director Interviews 107 5.2 Balance of Repertoire Advanced Students Should Sing Based on Director Interviews 112 5.3 Balance of Repertoire Beginning Students Should Sing Based on Director Interviews 115 5.4 Relationship of Repertoire for Beginning Students Compared to Advanced Students Based on Director Interviews 116 5.5 Independent Musical Elements Used to Determine Quality Based of Director Interviews 131 5 6 Musical Elements Related to the Ensemble Used to Determine Quality Based on Director Interviews 133 5.7 Independent Musical Elements Common in High Quality Compositions Based on Director Interviews 139 vrn

PAGE 9

5 8 Musical Elements Related to the Ensemble Common in High Quality Compositions Based on Director Interviews 140 5.9 Independent Musical Elements Common in Poor Quality Compositions Based on Director Interviews 143 5.10 Musical Elements Related to the Ensemble Common in Poor Quality Compositions Based on Director Interviews 144 IX

PAGE 10

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 THE REPERTOIRE SELECTION PRACTICES OF PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL CHORAL DIRECTORS IN FLORIDA, GEORGIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, NORTH CAROLINA, AND VIRGINIA By Guy W. Forbes August 1998 Chairman: Charles Hoffer, Ph. D. Major Department: Music The purpose of this study was to provide a basis for improving the literature selection practices and procedures of current high school choral directors and undergraduate instruction in choral literature selection. Two instruments were designed for the collection of data, a written survey and phone interview. Data were collected to determine respondent demographics, identify the criteria and procedures used by directors in selecting repertoire, identify factors affecting the use of selection criteria, determine the degree of agreement among directors regarding what constitutes "quality" in choral literature and ascertain its use as a selection criterion, and determine what relationships exist among the educational setting, the quality and kinds of literature selected, the criteria and procedures employed, the education, experience, and philosophy of the director, and the perceived success of the director and program by university choral faculty members. Written data were solicited from 89 choral directors deemed to be outstanding by university choral faculty in their respective states (group 1) and from 208 directors selected X

PAGE 11

from the remaining population (group 2). The groups returned 45 (50.1%) and 59 (28.7%) surveys, respectively. Given the low response rate for group 2, 14 directors (10%) who did not return the survey were interviewed. Based on the data collected it was determined that no significant differences exist between those who returned the survey and those who did not return the survey. Of those who returned the survey, 52 directors (26 from each group) were interviewed. Conclusions drawn from the research findings included the need for undergraduate music education faculty to 1. Devote more time in methods classes to the study of repertoire selection. 2. Place greater emphasis on the value and importance of quality in the selection of choral music (e.g., course content should include instruction regarding how to determine quality in choral music of all styles, with special attention given to popular-style compositions). 3. Emphasize the need for secondary students to be exposed to a wide variety of repertoire (e.g., such instruction should include substantial study of music from the major historical periods in conjunction with the study of popular, folk, and non-western style music). XI

PAGE 12

CHAPTER 1 THE RESEARCH PROBLEM One of the most important aspects of any music course is the selection of materials for study. Since World War II, performance-oriented courses have come to dominate secondary music education (Abeles, Hoffer, & Klotman, 1994). Given the nature of a performance-oriented curriculum, the literature selected for study by high school directors is a major concern. Authorities in choral music education state the selection of appropriate music for study and performance is an exacting task; a "serious responsibility" that has tremendous impact on the education of the students and the overall success of the program (Decker & Kirk, 1988, p. 150). Mayhall (1994) states: Expanding knowledge of choral literature is perhaps the single most significant lifelong-learning challenge for conductors. As experience is gained in our profession, the importance of repertoire selection in accomplishing the mission of our groups, in developing the artistry of our ensembles, in deepening their skills and involvement, in capturing and fulfilling audience interest, and in cultivating favorable peer judgment becomes increasingly evident, (p. 9) Lamb (1988) concurs, stating "the selection of repertoire is probably the most demanding and time-consuming task facing a choral conductor. The decision to program a particular work is one of the most important decisions he can make" (p. 162). Problem While authorities agree on the importance and difficulty of successful literature selection, they do not offer a hierarchy for selection criteria, nor suggest how a given 1

PAGE 13

\ 2 hierarchy might change as a function of specific variables. Are the criteria and procedures used by directors for the selection of literature common to all directors or are there differences due to factors such as educational setting, teacher experience, education, and philosophy? If differences do exist, is there a relationship among the quality and kinds of literature selected, the criteria and procedures employed, and the perceived success of the director and program? Among the many criteria identified by the experts for the selection of repertoire, two are cited frequently enough to be considered universal: (a) the repertoire selected for study should be of high quality and (b) the repertoire should be diverse, consisting of a variety of musical styles and genres. While studies concerning or related to high school choral literature selection have investigated the diversity of high school choral repertoire, quality of repertoire has been bypassed due to the subjective nature of the quality issue (Dahlman, 1991, p. 5) or ignored on the assumption there is universal agreement among directors regarding what constitutes quality in choral literature. Given the importance authorities place on the selection of quality literature, how high school directors define "quality" is consequential. Purpose The puipose of this study was to provide a basis for improving the literature selection practices and procedures of current high school choral directors and undergraduate instruction in choral literature selection. Descriptive data were collected (a) to portray the demographic characteristics of the respondents, (b) to identify the quantity, types, and styles of literature selected by high school directors, (c) to determine the sources, methods, and procedures utilized by high school directors in the selection of repertoire, (d) to ascertain what factors influence the literature selection process and how, (e) to determine if

PAGE 14

3 a hierarchy exists for repertoire selection criteria, (f) to determine the degree of agreement among high school directors regarding what constitutes quality in choral literature and identify differences if they exist, and (g) to detemiine what relationships, if any, exist among the educational setting, the quality and kinds of literature selected, the criteria and procedures employed, the education, experience, and philosophy of the director, and the perceived success of the director and program by university choral faculty members. Assumptions This study was undertaken with three assumptions: (1) the compositions Usted on the programs requested from the directors and the compositions identified by the directors onthe questionaire will be indicative of the quality of literature high school directors select for performance, (2) the criteria cited by the directors for the selection of requested compositions will reflect the criteria used by the directors to select compositions of similar style and genre, and (3) the selection hierarchy found for the selected compositions will be the same as is used for the selection of compositions of similar style and genre. Delimitations To keep this study within a manageable scope, two delimitations were imposed. First, the study was limited to public high schools with curricular choruses in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia. Private schools, parochial schools, and schools without curricular choruses were not included. The geographical limits were chosen to keep the study within a manageable size and yet large enough to be of value to educators and researchers across the country. The geographical limits also allowed a larger sample-to-population ratio than would have been possible with a national study. Second, instructional materials other than composed choral music were not examined. Such

PAGE 15

4 materials include sight-reading literature and texts in music theory, history, general music, and music appreciation. Importance of the Study Since the selection of literature for study in high school choral music classes is a highly significant topic in the field of music education, it is essential that discussions about the subject be based on factual information. Although questions have been raised regarding both the quality of choral repertoire selected for study by high school directors and the criteria and procedures employed in its selection, little research has been done regarding these concerns. Research in this area is needed so that more informed decisions may be made by music educators and others concerned with the status and improvement of secondary choral music education. Three fundamental questions regarding the selection of literature by high school directors were addressed by this study: (1) what is the nature of the repertoire selected, (2) how is it selected, and (3) what factors influence the decisions directors make regarding repertoire selection? The experts in choral music have stated the repertoire selected for study should include a wide variety of styles and genres. Data on the kinds of literature chosen by high school directors will help provide a clearer understanding of current selection practices. Authorities in choral music have also stressed the importance of selecting quality repertoire. Although quality contains elements of personal preference, enough criteria have been identified such that directors can make more informed decisions regarding the selection of quality literature. A survey and analysis of opinions regarding quality in choral literature, together with an examination of selected repertoire deemed to be of quality by high school directors, may reveal differences among high school directors and between high school directors and the experts regarding what constitutes quality in

PAGE 16

5 choral literature. Such differences may suggest different goals for repertoire selection or deficiencies in the ability of some directors to differentiate between music of greater or lessor quality. The difficult and time-consuming nature of the repertoire selection process is well documented in the literature. Data concerning the repertoire selection methods and procedures employed by high school directors may help clarify the process and thereby lead to improvement. Such improvements might include the identification of more systematic methods for literature selection that provide for the fulfillment of educational goals, ensure diversity of repertoire, help ensure quality of repertoire, and enable directors to utilize limited planning time more efficiently.

PAGE 17

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Authorities in the field of choral music education have written extensively on the topic of literature selection. They have stated the importance of the selection process with respect to the high school choral curriculum; identified educational and philosophical prerequisites deemed necessary for appropriate and successful literature selection; defined criteria for literature selection and identified outside factors that can impact the selection process; and have suggested resource materials and procedures to aid in the compilation of suitable repertoire. In addition, researchers have periodically examined the literature selection processes utilized by high school and college choral directors. A review and synthesis of this literature and research is presented in this chapter. The Importance of the Literature Selection Process As was stated in Chapter 1 authorities agree the selection of repertoire for study and performance is one of the most important and challenging tasks required of choral music educators. Decker (1967) suggests that the choices a director makes regarding the selection of literature "have a direct, and very great, effect on each individual rehearsal, concert, and, ultimately, on the success or failure of the entire choral music program of the school" (p. 79). Lamb concurs, stating "the decision to program a particular work is one of the most important decisions he [the choral conductor] can make" (p. 95). Speaking directly to beginning choral directors, Lamb (1971) implores them to select literature carefully, stating "as you enter teaching, one of your most important tasks will be the 6

PAGE 18

7 selection of repertoire. The selections that you make will have a direct bearing on the success of your choral program" (p. 23). Authorities also suggest the repertoire a director selects is an indicator of teacher competency and musicianship. Decker (1967) asserts, "the music you [choral director] choose for performance is a direct reflection of you as a musician, teacher, and person" (p. 90). Gordon (1977) points out that the repertoire a director selects is not only a measure of a director's musicianship, but also reveals whether the director is an "innovator or a follower" and serves as a "barometer" of the director's "ability to get results" (p. 98). Dunaway (1987), Lamb (1988), Roach (1989), and Sateren (1963) express similar views regarding the selection of literature as a indication of director's musicianship and abilities. Education as a Prerequisite for Literature Selection Leaders in the field of choral music education have described the attributes necessary for success as a choral music educator. Of particular importance to this study are those attributes that directly relate to the literature selection process. The single most important educational prerequisite identified by the experts as "essential" for successful literature selection is "in-depth knowledge of a variety of choral music from all periods and in all styles" (Lawrence, 1989, p. 38). Heffernan (1982) states the importance of a comprehensive background in music history, style, and choral repertoire as follows: A wide knowledge of the history of music is absolutely essential for choral conductors. They should be familiar with the works of great composers from all periods and should have experience in performing in the styles appropriate to the time of the compositions. Conductors must continually broaden their knowledge of the repertoire, neglecting no period or style, (p. 7-8) Gordon (1977), Miller (1988), and Robinson and Winold (1976) also express the need for extensive knowledge of choral literature of all styles and periods.

PAGE 19

8 Heffernan (1982) expresses a concern held by many choral music educators that an unfortunately large number of choral teachers "have a limited knowledge of the repertoire and are therefore unable to bring to their choir the great variety of music it deserves" (p. 8). Wolverton (1990) echoes Heffernan' s concerns, stating that his own undergraduate education and that of his university colleagues "suggests that beginning choral conductors are hindered by a lack of knowledge of repertoire suitable for a comprehensive choral program" (p. 33). This concern for adequate education is not limited to knowledge of repertoire. The inability of many directors to discriminate among works as to quality has also been noted. Sateren (1963) states, "many directors wishing to select only the best music, lack both the training and the experience which would equip them with the standards for evaluating quality" (p. 4). Several studies since 1952 have examined pre-service choral teacher education with regard to literature selection (Jones, 1968; Davis, 1970; Couch, 1973; Burris, 1988; Bolt, 1983). A review of these and other studies related to literature selection is presented later in this chapter. Philosophy as a Prerequisite for Literature Selection The need for a philosophical basis has long been recognized by the profession as necessary for effective music teaching. The philosophy from which a teacher operates directly influences every decision he or she makes, including decisions regarding repertoire. Abeles, Hoffer, and Klotman (1994) state: Music teachers must make decisions and take actions. They cannot avoid doing so, even if they can avoid thinking or talking about the reasons for doing something. In a very real sense, each person defines a philosophy when he or she makes a decision. Therefore, it is not a question of whether decisions are made and actions taken, but of whether

PAGE 20

9 the person making a decision is aware of its larger implications and how one action relates to another, (p. 41) While writing on the importance of an educational philosophy, Reimer (1989) speaks to the impact a teacher's philosophy has on decision making: The final reason for the importance of a convincing professional philosophy is the fact that everything music educators do in their jobs carries out in practice their beliefs about their subject. Every time a choice is made a belief is applied. Music teachers who have forged a philosophy based on a probing analysis of the nature of music can act with confidence, knowing that whatever they choose to do will be in consonance with the value of the art they represent, (p. 7) Leonhard and House (1972) support this view of the importance and impact of a professional philosophy, stating "a philosophy of music education serves to guide and give direction to the efforts of the teacher. Objectives, curriculum content, course content ... are all a direct reflection of the philosophy of the school and the teacher" (p. 85). In addition to stating the need and importance of a philosophy of music education, leaders in the field have offered arguments defining the attributes of a music education philosophy. Over the last thirty years authorities have advocated a change in philosophy away from a utilitarian approach toward a philosophy of music education based on the development of aesthetic growth (Mark, 1986). Today, the philosophy of music education as aesthetic education is pervasive in both practice and theory (Reimer, 1989). According to Bessom, Tatarunis, and Forcucci (1974), "there is little disagreement that music education should be aesthetic education, and that musical growth cannot be achieved without aesthetic growth" (p. 42). Abeles, Hoffer, and Klotman (1994) support this conclusion stating that "aesthetic experiences are a vital part of music education" (p. 70). Several other authors have made similar statements

PAGE 21

10 concerning music education as aestiietic education (Decker and Kirk, 1988; Leonhard and House, 1972; Robinson, 1993). The impact of philosophical considerations on the literature selection process has been noted by a number of experts. In the course of discussing the question "Why have music in the schools?" Hoffer (1991) suggests: Different answers to the question "Why?" lead to different practical actions. For example, a teacher who sees school music primarily in terms of entertainment for the public teaches differently from a teacher who tries to give the students a better understanding of music as organized sounds. These two teachers will choose different types of music, (p. 4) Decker and Kirk (1988), while promoting a philosophy of aesthetic music education, also recognize the influence a teacher's philosophy can have on performance and educational goals and, in turn, the selection of repertoire. Performance and learning goals of choral organizations differ as widely as conductors' philosophies. Two extremes are exploration and artistic performance of music with lasting value through which singers increase both musical understanding and aesthetic satisfaction; and performance of music through which singers find immediate gratification because of its entertainment potential or the relative ease with which it can be learned, (p. 152) Because of the impact a teacher's philosophy has on the literature selection process, writers have suggested that it is essential to first determine a philosophy of music education and establish developmental goals based on that philosophy before attempting to select literature for study and performance (Brunner, 1992; Gordon, 1989). To do otherwise is to place the proverbial "cart before the horse." Unfortunately, such a practice is not uncommon. Richmond (1990) states that the selection of literature without prior reference to philosophical considerations or curricular objectives is "the foible in choral music education" with the selection of repertoire serving as the "'alpha and omega' of choral educational planning" (p. 23). As a solution to this problem, Richmond (1990) suggests

PAGE 22

11 that directors adopt a "pre-curriculum" based on one of three curricular models for the puipose of selecting repertoire. Each model (the Exemplar, the Percepts, and the Forms model), while different in approach, provides for the establishment of some "curricular criteria" by which directors can make judicious decisions regarding the selection of repertoire (p. 24). The Exemplar model calls for the study of masterworks with an emphasis on works of historical and stylistic significance. The Percepts model places emphasis on the selection of literature based on musical fundamentals (melody, harmony, rhythm, etc.) identified for study in a given lesson. The Forms model bases the selection of literature on a systematic examination of the major forms of choral composition such as the mass, motet, madrigal, and chanson. Criteria for the Selection of Literature The emphasis many leaders in choral music education place on selection criteria suggests that a systematic application of appropriate criteria is essential to the competent selection of suitable repertoire. Sateren (1963) states, "The director who is well-trained and experienced has certain criteria which he uses in judging excellence in choral music. With them he sifts 'the wheat from the chaff" (p. 4). Mayhall (1994) asserts "repertoire and standards committees [of the American Choral Directors Association] exist as an affirmation of the belief that there are some prevailing considerations that should guide our search and choices" of literature (p. 12). Miller (1979) summarizes the need for selection criteria as follows: Many of us have seen conductors make unwise choices because they had no definite criteria to use in judging the music being considered; they simply "liked" a piece of music and "thought" it would be "good" for their choir. Selecting repertoire under such circumstances rarely produces the best results. It is necessary for us to use criteria in selecting music if we are to be successful in building a significant and balanced library of choral music, (p. 21)

PAGE 23

12 The criteria noted by the experts as fundamental to the selection of literature may be roughly divided into five categories: those that relate to (1) the director, (2) the music, (3) the ensemble, or (4) programming, and (5) external non-musical considerations. Criteria Related to the Director Leaders in choral music education have identified two factors specific to the director that should be considered prior to the selection of literature: director interest and director ability. Decker (1967) asserts that: Personal appeal is the first and most important qualification a piece must have. It might be immediately attractive to someone else, but no conductor can ever honestly conduct a composition which does not hold some special appeal for him. (p. 81-82) Mayhall (1994) agrees stating, "in-depth score study, enthusiasm for rehearsal, and sustained interest are difficult to accomplish for the director, much less the singers, unless a powerful attraction is present in the music" (p. 14). In a survey of 74 choral directors in the San Diego, California, school system, Ogdin (1981) found directors ranked "teacher fulfillment" seventh in a list of criteria by which secondary choral teachers select course content. Burris (1988), Miller (1988), and Gordon (1989) have also noted the importance of director interest to the literature selection process. Garretson (1993) and Gordon (1989), while noting the importance personal appeal has on literature selection, warn that selecting music solely on the basis of personal interest can be detrimental to the choral program. Garretson (1993) cautions against over reliance on personal background and experiences if those experiences have not been inclusive of all styles and genres of choral music. He suggests conductors choices regarding literature are influenced by personal experience, and limited personal experiences often lead to the

PAGE 24

13 selection of repertoire lacking variety and balance. Gordon (1989) concurs stating, "directors with limited repertoire palettes hold back enterprising ensembles" (p. 28). Gordon (1989) goes on to suggest that "conductors who choose exclusively on the basis of self-interest or personal whim run the risk of losing their singers and audiences" (p. 28). Decker (1967) and Gordon (1977) stipulate that director ability should be a consideration in the selection of repertoire. Decker (1967) suggests "some serious soulsearching" with regard to personal ability will aid choral directors in the selection of appropriate literature. Gordon (1977) also encourages choral directors to realistically examine their capabilities and to select music they can "teach and interpret" with an eye toward improving their abilities through experience (p. 96). Criteria Related to the Music Criteria related to the music include the quality, technical difficulty, and artistic demands of the music, the performing forces required, and the quality and difficulty of the accompaniment or instrumental parts. Though diverse in their specific recommendations, authorities agree the repertoire selected for study and performance must be of high quality. Brunner (1992) summarizes the importance of quality literature as follows: Quality repertoire encourages young singers to become better at what they do. It stimulates their imaginations, expands their appreciation, and refines their musical skills. It challenges them intellectually, whets their appetite for further challenge, and motivates them to excel. It gives them cultural perspective and opens new doors of musical awareness. It puts them in touch with the realm of their emotive and creative life and their ability to express themselves in an artistic way. It gives them the pride of accomplishment. It reaches inside them and makes them feel more human, more alive, and part of something extraordinary, (p. 32) What constitutes quality and what musical or structural elements are essential? These questions have long been debated. Some writers have attempted to identify and quantify

PAGE 25

14 the musical elements essential to music of aesthetic value, while others have focused on more esoteric considerations. Although the development of criteria for discerning quality compositions on the basis of technical features alone has not been wholly successful (Hoffer, 1991), criteria have been identified such that directors can make more informed, competent decisions regarding the selection of quality literature. Sateren (1963) lists several musical elements that he considers to be indicative of quality choral music. These include musical ideas of intrinsic value and substance, formal structure that is coherent rather than episodic or rambling, vocal lines that are 'vocal' as opposed to 'instrumental' in character, fitting harmonization, effective transitions, balance of the unexpected and the inevitable, idiom appropriate to the spirit of the text, originality, appropriateness of scale in relation to the musical ideas presented, music/text compatibility, text of literary quality, and, if accompanied, an accompaniment of merit and substance (p. 4-14). Several other authorities have made reference to various elements similar to those listed above as characteristics associated with compositions of quality (Bessom, Tatarunis, & Forcucci, 1974; Brunner, 1992; Busch, 1984; Decker, 1967; Decker & Kirk, 1988; Garretson, 1993; Gordon, 1977; Hoffer, 1991; Lamb, 1971, 1988; Leeder, 1958; Mayhall, 1994; Miller, 1979, 1988). Many experts suggest the aesthetic content of a composition is the single most important factor in determining its quality. A theoretical foundation forjudging the quality of a composition based on aesthetic content can be found in the writings of Leonard Meyer (1956) regarding emotion and meaning in music. Abeles, Hoffer, and Klotman (1994, p. 67-69) pare down Meyer's arguments to four essential points: (1) listeners and performers generally know one syntactical style of music; (2) composers usually write music such that it conforms to the syntactical expectations of their audiences; (3) for

PAGE 26

15 reasons rooted in human psychology, people value and find more meaningful experiences that are not routine and do not occur just about as expected; and (4) it is the balance between certainty and uncertainty, between variety and unity that, in part, determines the aesthetic value of a musical work. Based on the work of Meyer (1956) and other aestheticians, authorities have identified and defined elements associated with compositions of high aesthetic value. Reimer (1989) states a workable base for the judging of quality in any artwork can be built on four criteria: craftsmanship, sensitivity, imagination, and authenticity. Reimer (1989) discusses each of these criteria at length (p. 135-137). Reimer defines craftsmanship as "the expertness by which the materials of art are molded into expressiveness" (p. 135). It is the skill a composer employs in the molding of sound; skill born of a "creative communion" with the elements of composition and "endless practice with its expressive potentials" (p. 135). Works lacking craftsmanship are signaled by "shoddiness, by disrespect for materials, by skill that manipulates the material rather than serving its expressiveness" (p. 135). Sensitivity has to do with the "depth and quality of feeling captured in the dynamic form of a work." A composer is sensitive to the materials (sounds) with which he or she works and to the composition as it develops. "Sensitivity is the 'in touchness' an artist has with the developing, forming feelings, so that he or she can make ongoing decisions that ring true, that convince, that grasp us by their expressive power" (p. 136). "Imagination in a work of art is what captures our feelings" (p. 137). We are moved, touched, made to respond to a composition when what we expect to happen does not happen, or happens in a way different from what we anticipated. Compositions that have impact have a certain degree of unpredictability and originality; they are fresh and rich in

PAGE 27

X 16 imagination. The potential of a composition to grab us is directly related to the skill and imagination with which the composer treats us with the unexpected. Compositions lacking imagination fail to touch us because they present us with the banal, the ordinary, the cHche rather than something unique. Authenticity "is the genuineness of the artist's interaction with his materials, in which the control by the artist includes a giving way to the demands of the material" (p. 138). Reimer (1989) suggests that works in which an artist or composer consciously manipulates the materials presented to produce a given sentimental effect is "immoral" (p. 138). In this context, morality has nothing to do with the nonaesthetic content of art, but rather with how the materials of art are handled. He cites as examples Tolstoy's War and Peace and Shakespeare's Hamlet as art works that depict all kinds of immoral human behavior, yet are fine examples of "authentic" or moral works of art. In contrast, Reimer suggests works such as the dime-store paintings of Jesus in day-glo colors on black velvet, while full of "sweetness and light," are immoral and "have the effect of degrading our humanity" (p. 138). Leonhard and House (1972) have made statements similar to Reimer' s regarding quality in music. They suggest all good music is "expressive" and put together with "expert craftsmanship" (p. 102). They make a distinction between good music and great music, stating that "good music and great music differ in two essential characteristics: (1) the subtlety of expression and (2) the abstractness of expression" (p. 103). Great compositions are more subtle than good compositions in that the musical ideas (melodic, harmonic, rhythmic, etc.) presented in great compositions require of the listener much greater attention for comprehension and appreciation. Likewise, great compositions are more abstract than works of lessor aesthetic value. They state:

PAGE 28

17 Good music and great music. Both appeal to the life of feehng and call forth a felt response. Listening to good music may make one feel patriotic, merry, solemn, penitent, affectionate, devout, amused, inclined to dance, or whatever. Great music, on the other hand, instead of calling forth specific feelings expresses the "life of feeling," a general state of feeling. Great music does not give us moods and emotions but insight into the form and structure of human feeling, (p. 104-105) Choral music education as aesthetic education has been examined in two studies, one by Aamot (1974) and the other by Smith (1974). Aamot examined factors contributing to the aesthetic experience within the choral rehearsal. He found that several musical factors were "essential" to the aesthetic response of the students (p. 81). Although this finding is hardly surprising, several of the musical factors identified by the study as essential to aesthetic response are directly related to the inherent qualities of the literature selected for use in the study. Such factors, therefore, might be considered criteria for the selection of literature. Factors deemed by the study as essential to aesthetic response that relate to the selection of literature are (a) reaction to the horizontal expressive qualities, (b) reaction to the vertical expressive qualities, (c) awareness of musical style, (d) text of the music, and (e) the musical climate created by the music. It follows that if a choral music educator has adopted a philosophy of music education as aesthetic education, he or she should select music for study and performance which has the potential to provide for aesthetic experience. This music would be expressive music-vertically, horizontally, and textually. Smith (1974) developed a procedure for analyzing the aesthetic qualities of expressive choral music. His procedure involved the systematic exploration of five musical elements (melody, rhythm, tonal organization, texture, and form) in relationship to affective response. Although his procedures were developed to assist in the systematic identification of the aesthetic qualities in music already deemed to be expressive rather than

PAGE 29

18 as a tool for discriminating between works of greater and lesser aesthetic potential, such an application seems plausible. Perhaps the oldest criterion used to identify compositions of quality is historical significance. Ormandy (1966), in answer to the question, "What is good music?" states: Time ... is the steadiest criterion. Music which perennially makes its impact upon musician and listener alike cannot be called "bad." Fashions, in music as in mode, change, but certain composers have couched their message in terms which defy the test of time. (p. 99) Mayhall (1994) agrees, suggesting the "endurability of a piece, though not a guarantee of quality, is at least one factor attesting to its worth" (p. 12). Decker and Kirk (1988) define compositions of "lasting quality" as works in which "elements of aesthetic satisfaction are so inherent in the composer's artistic design that each study and performance can bring new insights and discoveries" (p. 153). Wyatt ( 1 988) states, "a major goal of the high school (or college) curriculum should be to introduce through study and performance the works of those composers who are considered important in the history of choral music" (p. 26). He studied five recommended lists of choral repertoire for high school ensembles in an attempt to determine (1) if a body of choral literature has been recommended often enough so as to constitute a core curriculum of choral literature for high school chorus; (2) if there are composers whose works are historically significant enough to warrant inclusion in a core curriculum for high school choir; and (3) if the lists reviewed provide selections from all historical periods. His findings, while not definitive, suggests that such a body of literature does exist; that there are significant composers whose works should be included in a core curriculum; and that the literature suggested by the experts is inclusive of all musical periods. As previously noted, the selection of repertoire based on historical

PAGE 30

19 significance has been suggested by Richmond (1990) as one of three curricular models directors can employ to facilitate the development of a curriculum that goes beyond the teaching of performance skills alone. A characteristic closely aligned to historical significance is durability. Durability has been defined by the experts as the ability of a composition to "stand up" under protracted, intense rehearsals (Lamb, 1971, p. 21) due to the inherent "musical purpose" of the composition "as opposed to triviality" (Gordon, 1977, p. 96). While authorities agree compositions selected for study and performance need to be of high quality, many recognize the impracticality of performing only the established masterworks. While advocating the study and performance of quality literature, Decker and Kirk (1988) recognize that many choirs may not possess the musically maturity to successfully engage in only the study or performance of the "great" choral compositions. They suggest that for the younger and/or less musically mature choir the inclusion of lighter, more entertaining music in addition to a comprehensive repertoire of quality music, may be a practical compromise. Reimer (1989) states "it would be unrealistic and unnecessary to aim for constant use of great music in teaching and learning, partly because of the obvious limitations of students' musical capacities and partly because people, of any age, should not be expected to operate at the farthest reaches of their abilities at all times" (p. 141). He goes on to suggest that if the music selected is sufficiently challenging for the age level of the group and if, over time, the literature selected continually progresses toward music of higher aesthetic value, then music education is served. Authorities also stress the importance of selecting quality arrangements and editions. Quality arrangements should possess the characteristics outlined above for quality

PAGE 31

20 compositions. In addition, quality arrangements should "reflect the spirit of the original" (Miller, 1979, p. 22). Decker and Kirk (1988) suggest directors should be careful to select scholarly editions, being certain the edition is an accurate representation of the intentions of the composer. In addition to quality, authorities have indicated the technical difficulty of a composition should be considered when selecting compositions for study and performance. It is important to note that, while technical difficulty is related to the music, the difficulty level of a given work is not finite. Rather it is relative to the abilities of the ensemble for which it is being selected. The compositional elements the experts indicate should be examined are: number of voice parts, vocal range, and tessitura; intervallic, harmonic, and rhythmic complexity; language; length; and elements that would affect memorization. Authorities citing technical difficulty as a criteria for the selection of literature include Abeles, Hoffer, and Klotman (1994); Bessom, Tatarunis, and Forcucci (1974); Busch (1984); Decker (1967); Decker and Kirk (1988); Garretson (1993); Gordon (1977); Hoffer (1991); Jipson (1972); Lamb (1971, 1988); Leeder (1958); Mayhall (1994); Miller (1979, 1988); Roach (1989); and Tait and Haack (1984). The third criterion related to the music is the artistic demands inherent in a composition. The artistic requirements of a composition go beyond technical considerations. The question raised is: Can the ensemble musically and stylistically interpret and perform the composition in question? As with the technical difficulty of a composition, the artistic demands of a work are relative to the abilities of the ensemble. Artistic demands generally center around the vocal maturity required by the style of the composition and the emotional and intellectual maturity required by the text.

PAGE 32

21 Lamb (1988) states "there are many works whose technical demands place them within the reach of high school singers, but whose artistic merits also warrant performances by college, university and professional choirs" (p. 99). Many masterworks and much of the music of the Romantic period, however, call for a high level of vocal maturity. Gordon (1977), citing Beethoven's Missa Solemnis as a composition inappropriate for young singers due to the vocal maturity required, states "generally, public school aged singers should sing more lyrical music" (p. 99). Regarding text as criteria for the selection of repertoire. Miller (1988) states the music selected for performance by high school students must "be on a level such that the students will ultimately be able to grasp its meaning, for the students must communicate during a performance out of their own experience" (p. 53). Decker and Kirk (1988) agree stating, "singers' relating to and understanding of text is important to communication. Interpretation of subtleties are dependent upon life experiences" (p. 151). Several other authorities also cite artistic demands as a criteria for the selection of literature (Abeles, Hoffer, & Klotman, 1994; Bessom, Tatarunis, & Forcucci, 1974; Hoffer, 1991; and Lamb, 1988). Authorities have also suggested the performing forces required by a composition as well as the quality and difficulty of the instrumental parts, if accompanied, be considered when selecting repertoire. It is obvious one does not select literature for performing forces one does not have available. Authorities also suggest directors consider what vocal parts are divided and if the divided parts fall to strong or weak sections of the ensemble. Writers emphasize the literature directors select should be appropriate for the performing forces available. The music should highlight the abilities rather than expose the shortcomings of the ensemble (Decker, 1967; Miller, 1979).

PAGE 33

22 Several authors indicate that if a composition is acconnipanied directors should closely examine the accompaniment to detennine if it is "playable, and suitable within a choral context" (Decker, 1967, p. 82), "integrated with the vocal parts" (Miller, 1988, p. 53), and within the capabilities of the accompanist (Lamb, 1988). Sateren (1963) states "an accompaniment should 'have a life of its own' which, while accompanying, adds musical value to the whole" (p. 13). Criteria Related to the Ensemble Authorities agree the characteristics of the choral ensemble should be considered when selecting literature for study and performance. Criteria related to the ensemble include (1) the size of the group, performing forces available, and sectional characteristics of the ensemble; (2) the technical and reading ability of the ensemble; (3) the vocal, emotional, and intellectual maturity of the singers; and (4) the musical preferences of the ensemble. The size of the ensemble is an obvious consideration. Authorities suggest directors should select literature stylistically appropriate to the number and type of voices in the ensemble (Brunner, 1992; Gordon, 1977, 1989). Composers usually write with a certain size ensemble in mind (Gordon, 1977). Many compositions, especially major works of the Classical and Romantic periods, were written for large performing forces and are therefore unsuitable for performance by a 30-voice high school choir. Likewise, the performance of a Renaissance madrigal by a 120-voice chorus is inappropriate. Similarly, directors should program literature that fully utilizes the performing forces available. Gordon (1989) encourages conductors to keep their soloists busy, partly as a means to enhance program variety and partly to provide individual motivation. Writers also suggest the sectional characteristics of the ensemble should be considered. Gordon (1977) points

PAGE 34

23 out that directors are rarely fortunate enough to have a choral ensemble with equally balanced vocal sections. He suggests, however, the discerning choral director "can turn these inequities to advantage" through the judicious selection of repertoire (p. 98). Authorities also cite the technical ability of the ensemble as an important criterion in the selection of literature. Brunner (1992) implores directors to "know your singers" stating that "to plan repertoire that will be meaningful and challenging yet accessible and successful, you must be aware of singers' abilities, training and experience" (p. 29). Lamb (1988) suggests the reading ability of the choir should also be considered. Decker and Kirk (1988) stress the importance of the relationship between the demands of a work and the technical abilities of the singers with respect to fostering vocal development: Repertory for each choral ensemble must be selected with consideration for the particular group of singers. The astute conductor-teacher will examine pitch extremes and tessitura for each of the voice parts in repertory; include musical works that provide the next degree of range and tessitura challenge; increase sustaining power gradually from repertory selected; and nurture continuous development of vocal ease and flexibility through choice of repertory, (p. 151) Miller (1979) encourages directors to select literature of increasing difficulty in order to facilitate the development of students' technical skills. Cox (1989) also stresses the importance of selecting challenging repertoire: The philosophy of selecting music for an ensemble within the limitations of a group's current abilities is difficult to justify. For a more educationally sound approach the conductor should select literature according to what an ensemble could become, that is, literature selection should come first, and the standard of the ensemble must be developed to match the expectations that are reflected in the literature, (p. 28) Tait and Haack (1984) caution, however, that "students need to be challenged by the literature, but they also need to be rewarded" (p. 74). They suggest "a judicious balance is necessary if progress is to be maintained" (p. 74). Brunner (1992), Johnson and Johnson

PAGE 35

\ 24 (1989), and Mayhall (1994) echo the concerns of Tait and Haack stating that directors should select compositions challenging enough to foster musical growth yet not so difficult they frustrate the singers. In addition to the technical abilities of the singers, writers on the subject suggest directors need to consider the vocal, intellectual, and emotional maturity of the ensemble. In order to effectively perform a composition, the singers must communicate the essence of the work to the audience (Miller, 1989). This requires of the performers a vocal maturity compatible with the stylistic demands of the work (Gordon, 1977) and an intellectual and emotional maturity commensurate with the requirements of the text (Decker & Kirk, 1988; Miller, 1989). Another criterion many experts indicate should be considered when selecting repertoire are the musical tastes and interests of the choir. The importance and application of this criteria to the selection of repertoire for school ensembles is perhaps the most debated and controversial of all criteria identified by the authorities as important to the selection process. Since the musical tastes and interests of most adolescents center around various forms of popular music, the focus of the debate has been on the value and role of popular music in the choral curriculum. In 1967, music educators at the Tanglewood Symposium agreed that: Music of all periods, styles, forms, and cultures belongs in the curriculum. The musical repertory should be expanded to involve music of our time in its rich variety, including currently popular teenage music and avant-garde music, American folk music, and the music of other cultures. (Abeles, Hoffer, & Klotman, 1994, p. 22-23) Since the Tanglewood Symposium, experts in choral music have advocated a balanced, comprehensive repertory of quality choral literature, including popular music. Even so, several authorities have expressed concern over the value and role of popular music in the

PAGE 36

25 school curriculum. Many experts have cautioned against an over emphasis on popular music. Hilbish (1967) states: The conductor who continues to concentrate merely on "slick" commercial an-angements of pure "entertainment" music can neither expect to hold the interest of today's teen-ager, nor can he establish for choral music a position of permanent respect in our modern educational system, (p. 289) Cox (1989) states "it seems highly inappropriate, in a choral education setting, to place an undue emphasis on popular music: Students deserve the opportunity to study literature that has depth and substance" (p. 28). Roach (1989) echoes Cox suggesting "the pop mediums have come to dominate the youth of today Many youth already suspect there must be music of better quality in addition to the pop instantaneous gratification type" (p. 102). While each of these experts cautions against an overemphasis on popular literature, they do not suggest that it be excluded from the curriculum. They do, however, appear to question the aesthetic and educational value of such literature. Leonhard and House (1972), on the other hand, suggest popular music of today has a "musical and ideological sophistication far beyond that of the typically trite popular music of the past" (p. 109). They go on to suggest the best popular music should be included in the curriculum, and argue "it can and does provide an avenue for aesthetic experience for many young people because it represents a living music of good quality which has meaning for the new generation" (p. 1 10). Reimer (1989) suggests, that while "a vast wasteland of musical inanity exists in the popular music field, some popular music of the present time is of extremely high quality in musical excellence and musical expressiveness" (p. 143-144). He goes on to state the decision to included or exclude a selection from the repertoire should be based on whether the selection "exemplifies the qualities that make a work of art good," not whether it is in an "'acceptable' or 'appropriate'" style (p. 144). Pembrook (1991) agrees stating "the decision as to whether popular music will be included

PAGE 37

26 in classroom curricula or concerts should be based on the same criteria used for any other genre of music. Does it have sufficient musical quality to justify its inclusion" (p. 3 1 )? Choral music educators have also suggested the ethnic and cultural diversity of the ensemble be considered when selecting repertoire (Grant & Kohut, 1992). Reimer states "the diversity of musics represented in the school music programs must include, in addition to musics of every historical period and popular and jazz styles, musics associated with the various ethnic groups and cultures around the world" (p. 144). In the National Standards for Arts Education (Music Educators National Conference, 1994) music educators have stated, as part of the standards for senior high course content, that advanced choral students should be able to "identify and describe music genres or styles that show the influence of two or more cultural traditions, identify the cultural source of each influence, and trace the historical conditions that produced the synthesis of influences" (p. 63). Authorities have also offered opinions regarding active student participation in the selection of literature. Edelson (1972) and Lamb (1971) present two decidedly different views with regard to student participation in the literature selection process. Edelson (1972) suggests students should be allowed to select some of the literature they are to perform. On the other hand, in an address to beginning teachers Lamb states: Don't have students choose the music. Every year I observe disastrous results where some teacher in the field is abdicating his responsibilities in this area. With your training and your initiative you will have ample background to select the music. You should be capable of knowing the type of repertoire your choir can sing; the students do not. (p. 22) Reimer (1989) offers a compromise with regard to the selection of popular repertoire by suggesting we can engage students overtly in the decision making process by posing to them the same questions we would ask ourselves regarding the quality of a given work in

PAGE 38

27 relation to others of the same style. He states that "explaining the reasons for our own choices, and tapping our students' (usually superior) acquaintance with good examples they can suggest, makes of the enterprise a shared exploration of the potentials for highquality musical experience" (p. 144). Criteria Related to Programming Authorities have identified several criteria related to programming that they believe should be considered prior to the selection of repertoire. The criteria identified include the selection of literature from all styles, periods, and genres; program commitments and opportunities presented the ensemble; audience expectations; programmability of a work with respect to other compositions on a given program; and the acoustics of the hall in which the concert is to be presented. The most often stated criteria for the selection of repertoire related to programming is the inclusion of literature of all styles, periods, and genres. Authorities stress the importance of a comprehensive repertoire because it (1) provides for broad and diversified educational experiences (Abeles, Hoffer, & Klotman 1994; Benner, 1972; Brunner, 1992; Decker & Kirk, 1988; Garretson, 1993; Gordon, 1977, 1989; Grant & Kohut, 1992; Heffernan, 1982; Hoffer, 1991; Jipson, 1972; Lawrence, 1989; Leeder, 1958; Leonhard & House, 1972; Mayhall, 1994; Miller, 1979; Miller, 1988; Music Educators National Conference, 1965, 1970, 1994; Roach, 1989; Roe, 1983), (2) provides for the recognition of culturally diverse student populations (Grant & Kohut, 1992; Reimer, 1989), (3) provides insights into different world cultures (Brunner, 1992; Grant & Kohut, 1992; Music Educators National Conference, 1970, 1994; Reimer, 1989), (4) provides for the recognition of student musical interests (Gordon, 1989; Grant & Kohut, 1992; Hammar,

PAGE 39

28 1984; Miller, 1988; Roach, 1989), (5) provides students the opportunity to study and explore their cultural music heritage (Brunner, 1992; Grant & Kohut, 1992; Lamb, 1988; Leonhard & House, 1972; Reimer, 1989; Roach, 1989), and (6) serves as the corner stone for developing interesting and varied programs (Decker, 1967; Decker & Kirk, 1988; Garretson, 1993;Hoffer, 1991). Authorities have also suggested criteria for the selection of literature with regard to programming for specific concerts and programs. They state that prior to the selection of repertoire directors should consider the perfomaance commitments and opportunities presented the ensemble and the expectations of the audience (Brunner, 1992; Busch, 1984; Decker & Kirk, 1988; Edelson, 1972; Garretson, 1993; Glenn, McBride, & Wilson, 1970; Gordon, 1977, 1989; Hoffer, 1991; Lamb, 1979). While authorities suggest the expectations of the audience should be considered, some caution against the selection of music solely on the basis of audience interests. Abeles, Hoffer, and Klotman (1994) state: In a situation in which performance becomes the end rather than the means, the emphasis shifts from learning to the gratification of the audience and performer(s). It is true that some learning occurs in all situations, but the attention is focused on pleasing an audience, not on meeting the needs of the learners. The instruction is geared not to what the students will derive from the performance, but rather to what the perfomiance will do for the organization and its director, with only side benefits for the learners, (p. 283) The programmability of a work in relation to other works on a given concert is also cited as an important consideration in the selection of literature. Brunner (1994) states: There are instances where a piece of literature is appropriate for the ensemble, the director, and the budget, but it will not fit a particular program and so must wait for another occasion. Each work should contribute something to the overall design and effect of a specific concert program. The program should be an entertaining, educational, and esthetic experience for the audience and should present music they want to hear and music they should hear, arranged in a manner that enhances their listening experience, (p. 47)

PAGE 40

29 When selecting and programming works for performance, authorities stress the importance of creating variety within unity (Brunner, 1994; Decker & Kirk, 1988; Edelson, 1972; Glenn, McBride, & Wilson, 1970). They state programs should present a variety of tone colors and textures, drama as well as lyricism, and lovely melodies in addition to harmonic and rhythmic intricacies. They emphasize, however, that such variety needs to be by design rather than by chance. Programs should be built so that there is a planned juxtaposition of moods, voicings, texts, textures, and so forth, within an overall design that provides purpose and continuity. Decisions regarding program design should be made at the time and in conjunction with the selection of literature. Other Considerations In addition to the criteria mentioned above, authorities suggest library considerations, budgetary realities, rehearsal time available, and accountability be considered prior to selecting literature. The experts recommend that new literature purchased for study and performance be literature that compliments current library holdings; expanding the range of composers, periods, styles, and genres (Busch, 1984; Miller, 1979). While budgetary realities are generally not cited by the experts as a major factor in the selection process, limited resources can impose restrictions upon directors as to how much and what new music they can purchase (Miller, 1979). Budgetary constraints can also influence the kinds of literature programmed. The cost of hiring the instrumental forces required for the performance of a given composition can reduce the instrumentation utilized or eliminate the work from the repertoire entirely. Rehearsal time is another important consideration in the selection of repertoire identified by the experts. Like many of the criteria previously mentioned, the rehearsal time

PAGE 41

30 necessary to prepare a work for performance is relative to the technical abilities of the choir and to the difficulty of the work. Lamb (1988) suggests directors consider whether difficult works are worth the rehearsal time necessary to prepare them for performance and, conversely, whether less technically demanding compositions will stand up under the many rehearsals prior to the concert. Although accountability is not specifically identified by the experts as a criteria for the selection of repertoire, the professional literature suggests accountability is becoming more and more a factor in the selection of music for study and performance. Professional organizations such as the American Choral Directors Association and many state vocal units of the Music Educators National Conference have established repertoire and standards committees for the purpose of providing guidance to directors in the selection of literature in an effort to improve the quality of literature studied and performed (Mayhall, 1994). Choral festivals sponsored by these organizations often have repertoire requirements for groups wishing to participate. More recently, as an outgrowth of and response to the America 2000 initiative to improve education through the development of national goals, standards for arts education were developed by the Consortium of National Arts Education Associations. The document, National Standards for Arts Education (Music Educators National Conference, 1994), includes guidelines for repertoire selection and proposes minimum standards for repertoire difficulty and variety. In addition to professional accountability, music educators are accountable to the public for what they teach. Music educators have long fought the perception that music education, particularly performance-centered music education, is extracurricular and peripheral to the primary mission of the schools. Reimer (1989) argues that in order for

PAGE 42

31 music performance classes to remain viable subjects in the schools, teachers must demonstrate to the public the value of a music education to each and every student. According to him, the literature studied and performed is one factor that influences the public's perception of the educational value of the program. Literature Selection Resources and Procedures Experts in choral music have identified a large number of resources directors may consult in the search for appropriate literature (Decker & Kirk, 1988; Lamb, 1988; Miller, 1979). These resources include live or recorded performances by other choirs; perusal music available in libraries, in music stores, from music publishers and distributors via their maiUng list or in displays at professional conventions; printed programs of other directors; reading sessions at professional conventions; repertoire lists published by professional organizations such as the American Choral Directors Association, vocal units of the Music Educators National Conference, the American Choral Foundation; and professional magazines and joumals. Authorities recommend directors organize repertoire information such that it is easily accessible. The method most often recommended by the experts is the use of a card file (Decker & Kirk, 1988; Lamb, 1988; Miller, 1979). Lamb (1988) states. It is much easier to have the information you desire in a card file than to look at all the reference copies. The card contains all of the information you desire for the moment, is portable, ... and will actually stimulate you to better examination of the music the first time. (p. 98) History of Literature Selection Heffernan (1983) provides a generalized summary of the trends in choral literature selection since 1900. According to him, high school choirs in the early 1900s regularly

PAGE 43

32 performed extended masterworks as well as individual choruses from major choralsymphonic compositions. Although high school choirs of the time also performed works by composers rarely heard today, the literature performed was generally of a substantial nature. The 1930s marked the advent of the a cappella choir movement. High schools began to place more emphasis on the unaccompanied performance of short works with religious text. This emphasis lasted well into the 1960s and is still prevalent in certain parts of the country. Today, he writes: There is a decided trend away from programs comprised exclusively of short a cappella works. A much more eclectic approach is evident as high school conductors present unaccompanied compositions, works with keyboard accompaniment or small instmmental groups, and occasional extended works with full orchestra, (p. 28) White (1982) highlights important changes in the music educational leadership in higher education since 1950, changes which may in part account for recent shifts in the literature selection practices noted by Heffeman. White states there has been a gradual shift in leadership away from the small liberal arts colleges of the 1930s and 1940s to the large major state universities of today. The small liberal arts colleges such as St. Olaf College and Luther College were largely responsible for the expansion of the a cappella choir movement in the 1930s and 1940s. The repertoire performed in major universities (those that offer terminal degrees in music) of today is decidedly different from that performed by the earlier small college choirs. Works in the symphonic-choral or 'major works' category make up 32% of the literature performed by major university choirs, 26% of the repertoire consists of larger motets and cantatas, while only 35% of the repertoire is comprised of smaller octavos (White, 1982, p. 126). White expresses concern that this trend in literature selection may leave beginning choral directors unprepared to select

PAGE 44

33 literature for the high school choir. He states "much of the literature presently performed by university choirs is not appropriate for use in the secondary schools, but the novice choral director may be more familiar with this music than with that which will be most useful to him in his teaching" (p. 127). White's concerns are not new. Studies by Jones (1968) and Bolt (1983) raise similar questions concerning undergraduate exposure to literature appropriate for high school choirs. Studies on the Literature Selection Process Studies of varying type and scope have been made that touch on the literature selection processes utilized by high school and college choral directors. These studies describe the criteria and methodologies employed by choral directors in the selection of literature, the administrative and organizational procedures adopted by choral directors, and the influences affecting the selection of repertoire. Several of these studies employed methodologies similar to those employed in the present study. Ten studies were examined: (1) Boody (1968) compared programming practices of high school choral directors in Minnesota with criteria directors had established for the selection of choral repertoire; (2) Jones (1968) surveyed high school choral directors of Iowa and college choral directors of Iowa and surrounding states concerning choral literature performed between 1962 and 1967; (3) Davis (1970) conducted a survey of choral repertoire in selected high schools and factors affecting its selection; (4) Couch (1973) solicited opinions from high school and college directors concerning features of college choral repertoire as a factor in teacher preparation; (5) Burris (1988) created a paradigm designed to provide a systematic and integrated approach to teaching comprehensive musicianship in high school performance-oriented choirs; (6) Ogdin (1981)

PAGE 45

34 investigated and analyzed the criteria by which secondary choral teachers in and around San Diego, California, select curriculum; (7) Bolt (1983) surveyed 102 high school choral directors from the southwestern United States deemed successful by their peers and 41 university and college choral conductors regarding programming, literature selection practices and procedures, and adequacy of undergraduate literature selection preparation; (8) Turley (1989) compared the educational philosophies of high school choral directors and principals with the choral activities in which the students at their schools were involved; (9) Dahlman (1991) explored the impact of choral program size, teacher experience, and teacher education on the literature selection practices of high school choral directors in Missouri; and (10) Wyatt (1995) investigated the literature performed by high school directors in South Carolina. Boody Study Boody (1968) studied the high school choral programs of Minnesota for the 1966-1967 school year. Participating choral programs were examined to determine how much time was allotted to (a) the performance of designated types of music, (b) the performance of music from each of the major historical periods, (c) sacred versus secular music, (d) music defined as "light," (e) accompanied versus unaccompanied music, and (f) the music of "master" composers versus the music of other composers. The directors of participating choral programs were also surveyed to ascertain their views regarding the types of music that should be used in teaching, how much time should be devoted to each type of music, and the use of various kinds of accompaniments. In addition, directors were requested to forward a copy of their spring concert program. From answers to items in the survey Boody (1968) synthesized criteria against which the

PAGE 46

35 choral repertoires of the participating schools, as represented in the spring concert programs, could be compared. Upon examination and comparison of the programs submitted with the previously synthesized criteria, Boody drew the following conclusions: (1) Directors of larger schools met the lower limits of criteria regarding amount of time spent on each type of choral music specified. Directors of smaller schools failed to meet the criteria for amount of time to be spent on music of sacred music by significant composers and secular music by significant composers. (2) There was a tendency for directors to equate music by significant composers with a cappella music. (3) In total repertoire selected, directors closely agreed with the synthesized criteria of 40% sacred to 60% secular music. (4) Many of the programs submitted contained music of poor quality. Boody surmised that most choral directors were aware of the need to maintain high standards in repertoire selection but were not responding to this need. A unique technique employed by Boody was the establishment of criteria through the use of survey responses against which the programming practices of responding conductors could be evaluated. This attempt to compare actual programming practices with preestablished criteria for repertoire selection was a new technique in choral repertoire programming research. This concept was expanded by Jones (1968). Jones Study Jones (1968) investigated the programming practices of high schools and colleges of Iowa and colleges of surrounding states during the period 1962-1967. Five objectives were stated for the study: (1) to determine the SATB choral literature most frequently performed by participating schools, (2) to identify the composers and arrangers of SATB

PAGE 47

36 literature most frequently performed, (3) to determine the distribution of frequently perforaied SATB compositions and arrangements according to historical period and style, (4) to determine the distribution of frequently performed SATB compositions according to composer nationality, and (5) to make recommendation for improving choral literature selection by high school choral directors. Results of the survey regarding distribution of music according to style and musical period are summarized in the following table: Table 2.1 Percentages of Total Music Performed Style High Schools Colleges Renaissance 9.2% Baroque 10.0 % Classical 2.7 % Romantic 9.2 % 20th Century 22.9 % Folks Songs, & Carols Hymns 19.3 % Popular & Patriotic 19.3 % 14.9 % 18.4 % 4.4% 16.7 % 32.5 % 13.2 % 0.0% In a effort to identify areas of high school repertoire selection in need of improvement, Jones compared the repertoire of participating colleges with the literature selected by high school conductors. Jones reasoned that although the criteria used by college directors may not be "perfect or absolute," college conductors have more experience and education and are therefore more likely to select appropriate literature than high school directors (p. 229).

PAGE 48

37 Using college choral repertoire as the standard, Jones concluded Iowa high school directors were programming too many arrangements of folk songs, carols, hymns, popular, and patriotic music and not enough "significant music from the major historical periods" (p. 303). He recommended that high school directors be encouraged to select literature based on the literature selection patterns established by college directors. Davis Study Davis (1970) surveyed 303 high school directors from Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York regarding undergraduate preparation for the selection of repertoire and actual programming practices and procedures. Regarding undergraduate education, Davis asked the respondents to rate various facets of their training as "inadequate, barely adequate, or definitely adequate" (p. 1 12). While a majority of the directors indicated most facets of their undergraduate training was "definitely adequate," only 18% of the conductors considered their experiences with "musical comedy and popular music" to be adequate (p. 87). Davis found that about 21% of the directors programmed 15 or fewer selections per group a year for perfonnance, 50% programmed between 15 and 30 selections, and 26% indicated they programmed 30 to 50 selections (p. 49). Of the selections programmed, directors favored 20th century compositions, followed in rank order by music of the Romantic, Classical, Baroque, and Renaissance periods. Directors also indicated a preference for sacred music; 70% of the directors surveyed stated they programmed a minimum of 6 to 10 sacred works per group annually. Following sacred music, directors suggested they were more likely to program secular music followed by music for special occasions, folk songs and spirituals, and musical comedy and popular selections.

PAGE 49

38 Davis also questioned directors regarding sources for choral repertoire. The directors indicated the choral concert was the most influential source for literature, followed by attendance at choral workshops, music publisher's condensed scores, and personal appraisal of compositions in music stores. Directors considered the help offered by professional organizations to be adequate, but indicated a desire for greater attention by these groups to problems of repertoire selection. Davis made several broad recommendations relevant to the current study: (1) universities should place greater emphasis on the exposure of choral education students to the kinds of literature they might be expected to utilize in a high school setting; (2) undergraduate programs need to be restructured to give more attention to preparation for administrative duties, methods and criteria for the selection of repertoire, techniques for program building, and helping students develop sound aims and objectives for the high school choral program; (3) professional organizations need to take a more active role in fostering the continued growth and development of high school directors in the techniques of repertoire selection (p. 269). Couch Study Couch (1973) solicited the opinions of 306 high school vocal-music teachers and 277 college choral directors from across the counti-y regarding the features college choral repertoire should possess in order to adequately provide for the preparation of future high school directors. He also compared the opinions of high school and college directors with the views expressed by a panel of experts in choral music selected by the researcher. Although many similarities were found between the views of high school directors and those of college directors and the panel of experts, the most notable differences occurred

PAGE 50

39 regarding the role of popular music in the college curriculum. High school respondents indicated the need for (1) greater variety of literature in the college repertoire; (2) more opportunities for participation in popular music ensembles and glee clubs; and (3) a restructuring of the college choral repertoire to include a greater percentage of popular and Broadway music (p. 182-184). Burris Study Burris (1988) created a paradigm to provide a systematic and integrated approach to the selection and development of instructional materials designed to foster comprehensive musicianship in existing performance-oriented high school choral programs. In the first two steps of the ten step process, the director is to identify "what specific music fundamentals are desired for study" and select the "instructional content in the area of vocal technique" (p. 71). During the third step the director is to select repertoire from each of the five major historical periods (Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, and Contemporary) based primarily on the educational objective identified in the first two steps of the paradigm. She states that although the educational objectives must be the prime consideration "factors such as the type, theme, or purpose of the concert may create another criterion which may direct selection toward a more limited body literature" (p. 74). She submitted the paradigm to a panel of experts selected by the researcher. The panel deemed the paradigm to be effective in providing for the development comprehensive musicianship in performance-oriented high school choral programs. Burris' s (1988) paradigm, while not a complete curriculum, does provide for the development of a comprehensive music education curriculum centered on the selection of varied repertoire to meet the educational objectives of the director. This form of "pre-

PAGE 51

\ 40 curriculum" is an example of the percepts model described by Richmond (1990), and it is closely aligned to the philosophy of music education as aesthetic education. Ogdin Study Ogdin (1981) investigated the criteria by which secondary choral teachers from the San Diego, California area select curriculum (p. 27). Surveys were sent to 200 teachers with 74 (37%) usable surveys returned. The respondents indicated the following criteria, in rank order, to be important in the selection of curriculum content: (1) variety of musical style/experiences, (2) student skill level, (3) student growth, (4) difficulty level, (5) fundamental repertoire, (6) participation in festivals/concerts, (7) student interest, and (8) teacher fulfillment (p. 56). Bolt Study Bolt (1983) investigated the repertoire selection practices and procedures of selected high school and college conductors in the southwestern United States (Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah). In addition. Bolt examined the adequacy of preparation in the selection of repertoire appropriate to the needs of beginning choral music educators. The purpose of the study was to "provide a basis for improving the teaching of concepts of choral literature selection in undergraduate teacher-education experiences" (p. iii). Bolt solicited responses from 102 high school directors deemed to be successful by their peers. Data were also requested from 42 college music education instructors teaching at institutions accredited by the National Association of Schools of Music. Differences were noted between the respective groups with regard to the types and styles of literature

PAGE 52

41 performed in small ensembles. While small college choral ensembles were inclined to specialize in the performance of only one or two styles of music, small high school vocal ensembles tended to have a much broader repertoire, performing literature of several genres (p. 205-206). Differences were also noted regarding the emphases the respective groups placed on various types and styles of literature. College music education instructors and conductors generally placed greater emphasis on the study and performance of music from the five major style periods (Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, and 20th century) than upon other choral music (Broadway, avant garde, ethnic, folk, and swing/show/jazz choir) (p. 206). High school directors, while performing literature from each of the five major style periods, placed much greater emphasis on music for swing/show choirs. Moreover, high school directors considered themselves "poorly prepared" to "minimally prepared" in the use of, and in their exposure to, choral literature from Broadway musicals, music of ethnic origins, avant garde music, and music for swing, show, or jazz choirs (p. 209). Bolt also identified similarities between the selected college and high school choral programs. Both groups indicated a cappella sacred music made up a large percentage of the choral repertoire selected for performance. Further similarities were noted with regard to the selection of music in various languages. Music with an English text was most frequently selected by all respondents. Music utilizing a Latin text also received considerable performance. Other languages received less attention, with high school directors selecting music in Hebrew and college directors selecting music in German and French more frequently than their respective counterparts. Results of the study also suggest similarities regarding criteria for the selection of repertoire. Bolt states:

PAGE 53

42 Choral music educators place emphases upon educational aspects of the selected repertoire rather than upon factors related to performance or extramusical influences. They adhere primarily to the factors that are directly related to the development of the musicianship of the student. The further removed the factors are from the music itself, the less significance the respondents indicated for them. (p. 208) The respondents indicated the following musical factors to be most important when selecting repertoire: unity, variety, and contrast within the music; vocal range and tessitura of each part; aesthetic value of the composition; music that will raise the standards of musical taste of the performers; music representative of a variety of composers, styles, and periods; a meaningful and suitable text (p. 208). Extramusical factors deemed important by the respondents were skill level of the students; amount of rehearsal time available; student ages; previous choral experience of the students; appeal of the music to the student; the number of programs to be presented (p. 208). Bolt surmised that the colleges represented "do not offer a balanced exposure to the various types and styles, periods, and composers of the broad spectrum of choral literature necessary to satisfy repertoire selection needs of beginning choral teachers" (p. 210). Deficiencies were also noted in the exposure of undergraduate choral students to choral literature for male and female choirs and literature for beginning and intermediate mixed choirs. He makes 20 specific recommendations for improving undergraduate instruction in the selection of literature for high school choirs. The focus of these recommendations is on increasing the exposure of future choral teachers to a broader variety of literature appropriate for high school. This includes more exposure to choral music of various styles and voicings as well as music appropriate to various levels of ability.

PAGE 54

43 Turley Study Turley (1989) investigated and compared the music education philosophy statements of 12 selected Indiana high schools directors and principals with the choral activities in which the students were actually involved. Turley made three assumptions at the beginning of the study: (1) there is an overemphasis on the development of swing/show choirs; (2) the development of a swing/show choir may be accompanied by a decline in traditional choral department characteristics; and (3) choral directors are subject to outside pressure to develop swing/show choirs. Based on the data collected, the first and third assumptions could not be substantiated. Turley, however, did observe a decline in traditional choral department characteristics in eight of the nine schools with swing choirs. This finding corresponds to an overemphasis on literature of a non-traditional nature (i.e. music outside the five major historical periods: Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, 20th Century) in eight of the nine choral programs. Turley states that, "although some traditional choral department characteristics may be observed in these schools, an emphasis on swing/show choir development at the expense of traditional choir characteristics was observed" (p. 157). Dahlman Study Dahlman (1991) investigated the impact of choral program size, teacher experience, and teacher education on the selection of choral repertoire by public high school choral directors in Missouri (p. 2). Dahlman also sought to determine whether a universally accepted hierarchy of literature selection criteria exists. Surveys were mailed to 576 high schools with 148 (25.7%) usable surveys returned (p. 24). In addition to demographic information, Dahlman requested data on three ^ — A.. -*.3!t

PAGE 55

44 representative compositions from the 1990-1991 repertoire of all the choirs in each school. An analysis of the selected works of all respondents revealed that 52.7% of the selected compositions were sacred versus 47.3% secular, 65% were accompanied, 69.7% of the selected compositions were in English, and 20th century compositions (including choral concert, popular, and folk music) comprised almost 64.4% of the compositions selected (p. 27-39). A comparison of demographic data with the characteristics of the selected repertoire suggests that directors with advanced degrees tend to select a higher percentage of sacred repertoire than directors with only an undergraduate degree; selection of accompanied works appears to be a function of both choral program size and teacher experience, with teachers at schools with small choral programs and teachers with less experience selecting more accompanied music; directors with small choral programs tend to select a higher percentage of literature in English than other directors; teachers with smaller programs and teachers with less experience appear to choose more 20th century compositions than directors with larger programs or more experience (p. 40-41). Regarding the criteria used by directors to select repertoire, no significant differences were found between selection criteria hierarchies used by teachers with different choral program size, experience levels and education levels (p. iii). Of the criteria identified in the study for the selection of repertoire, respondents placed a high priority on appeal of the work to the director, musical quality of the composition, educational goals, and preparation factors. Directors placed moderate importance on student appeal of the composition, programming considerations, text, and audience appeal. Criteria identified as least important were style/historical factors, accompaniment, score design/clarity, and cost (p. 44-47).

PAGE 56

45 While Dahlman's research offers some insight into the literature selection practices of high school choral directors, the limited scope of the study, small geographical area, and low response rate reduce the effectiveness of the study. His sole reliance on "three representative compositions" as an accurate indicator of the total repertoire performed by respective programs is problematic in light of the emphasis authorities place on the selection of a diverse repertoire. In addition, Dahlman does not make a distinction between 20th century styles in his analysis of the data by placing choral concert, popular music, and folk music in one category. Wyatt Study Wyatt (1995) requested copies of fall and spring choral concert programs for the 1993-1994 school year from 203 high schools in South Carolina. Seventy-six schools (38%) returned usable material. It was noted, however, that of the school that did not respond, some may not have had choral programs and therefore the percentage response would be higher. Regarding the response rate, Wyatt states "this number can be considered a representative sample" (p. 1). The purposes of the study were to establish a list of repertoire performed by high schools choruses in South Carolina, determine what composers were most frequently performed, determine what styles were most frequently performed, and ascertain the diversity of styles directors select for performance. After tabulating and classifying the repertoire listed on the programs, Wyatt compared the repertoire selected for performance with repertoire recommended in the literature by the experts for performance by high school choirs. He also compared the selected repertoire with the guidelines suggested in the "South Carolina Framework for Music Education." IH.'"^*' -. "i...-i|/-_,

PAGE 57

46 Results of the study suggest directors in Soutti Carolina give only limited attention to the literature recommended by authorities in choral music: Only 37% of the respondents performed any literature from the Renaissance, Classical selections were performed by only 18% of the schools, and 29% of the schools performed literature from the Romantic period. Although 62% of the schools performed one or more selections from the baroque, 22 schools, or almost half of those performing a baroque selection, performed Honor and Glory by J. S. Bach, the All-State audition piece. Recommended 20th century composers did receive more attention, with 5 1 % of the school performing a work by one of these composers. Results of the study also suggest that many choral directors may have very limited repertoire palettes, selecting literature from only a few styles and historical periods with 72% of the directors selecting repertoire from fewer than three styles periods. It was also noted that directors who participated in large ensemble adjudication festivals and/or the 1993 Choral Arts Seminar in Columbia were more likely to program a wider variety of repertoire than those who did not participate. Wyatt concludes: In this study it became obvious that a great deal of music from the 20th century is being performed. It is primarily popular style music and music written for the "educational market." While it may be useful and easily accessible to the developing student, it does not serve to teach the heritage of choral music as presented in the frameworks of education, (p. 6) The Wyatt study raises several concerns addressed in the current study. His use of two actual programs from each school as opposed to surveying directors regarding what literature was performed or relying on a single program, enhances the value of the results. Conclusion It appears from this review of the literature there is general agreement among the experts in choral music education on several issues concerning the selection of repertoire

PAGE 58

47 for study and performance. First, the ability to select appropriate repertoire is viewed by many as an indicator of teacher competency. Second, authorities indicate a well developed philosophy of music education coupled with a comprehensive knowledge of choral literature are prerequisites to the successful selection of repertoire. Third, the use of some criteria for the selection of repertoire is critical to the selection of appropriate literature. Finally, the writers on choral music education generally agree on the criteria to be used in the selection of repertoire. While the writers cite a variety of criteria for repertoire selection, two criteria have been emphasized: the selection of a diverse repertoire and the quality of the music. Studies investigating variety as a criterion for repertoire selection have raised some concerns. While directors state variety is an important criteria for selecting repertoire, many directors appear to be selecting repertoire from only one or two styles and historical periods. Several studies suggest high school directors are placing a great deal of emphasis on popular and light, entertainment type literature to the exclusion of music of other styles and from other historical periods. It is interesting to note that, while studies regarding the selection of repertoire almost always address the issue of variety in repertoire selection, quality as a criterion has not been investigated. This is due, in large part, to the subjective nature of the quality issue. In light of the importance the experts place on quality as a criteria for repertoire selection, this appears to be a shortcoming in educational research regarding repertoire selection. Recent studies on repertoire selection suggest high school directors consider musical quality to be a major factor in selecting music for performance. However, studies that included an examination of the literature actually performed by high school choirs draw

PAGE 59

48 into question the degree to which directors apply their espoused beUef in quaUty as an important criteria. How do directors determine the quaUty of a composition? Are the methods and criteria used to determine quahty equally applied to all styles and genres? Do directors overlook quality as a criteria in the selection of certain styles of literature, for certain occasions, or for certain ensembles, or do some directors simply lack the ability to make a distinction between works of greater and lessor quality? These are important questions. It is true, such questions are not easily investigated. However, given the importance the experts place on quality as a criterion for the selection of repertoire, these questions need to be asked.

PAGE 60

CHAPTER 3 PROCEDURES The purpose of this study was to gather information important to the development of methods and procedures designed to enhance (1) the Hterature selection practices and procedures of current high school choral directors, and (2) undergraduate instruction in choral literature selection. Data were collected to (a) determine the demographic characteristics of the respondents, (b) identify the criteria used by high school choral directors in selecting repertoire, (c) find out if a common set of criteria exist for the selection of repertoire for high school choruses, (d) identify factors affecting the use of the criteria, (e) determine the degree of agreement among high school directors regarding what constitutes "quality" in choral literature and identify differences if they exist, (f) ascertain if a hierarchy exists for repertoire selection criteria, and (g) determine what relationships, if any, exist among the educational setting, the quality and kinds of literature selected, the criteria and procedures employed, the education, experience, and philosophy of the director, and the perceived success of the director and program by university choral faculty members. Population Selection Subjects for this study included two groups of public high school choral music educators. One consisted of directors identified as outstanding by university choral conductors and choral music education faculty selected from institutions accredited by the National Association of Schools of Music. The other was composed of directors who 49

PAGE 61

50 were randomly selected from the remaining population. This group configuration was selected to facilitate the identification of repertoire selection practices that may relate to director and program success. For the puiposes of this study the population was limited to states in the southeastern United States: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia. Nominated High School Choral Directors The College Music Society (1993-1994) listed 69 institutions accredited by the National Association of Schools of Music in the five states selected for this study. The 121 choral and music education faculty members at these institutions were asked to serve as nominators of outstanding high school choral directors in their respective states. Nominations were solicited by letter (Appendix A). Each faculty member was asked to list up to ten public high school choral directors in their state who he or she believed to be outstanding choral music educators. Specifically, they were asked to name those they believed to be in the top 20% of all high school choral directors. Fifty-two university choral educators agreed to serve as nominators. They submitted 185 names which resulted in 177 usable nominees (Pj = 177). Eight of the nominated directors either had moved from the state or did not meet the conditions of the study, because they taught in private or parochial schools. Once the nominations were received, 89 directors (50% of the population) were selected as the sample (Nj = 89). To meet this sample size, directors were selected based on the number of times each director was nominated, with those receiving the most nominations selected first. Sixty-nine directors were nominated two or more times, with 108 directors nominated only once. The 69 directors receiving two or more nominations were selected to be part of the sample. The remaining 20 directors needed for the sample were randomly selected from the

PAGE 62

51 remaining 108 nominees by means of simple random sampling procedures. Each director selected for the sample was mailed a survey instrument (Appendix C) together with a cover letter (Appendix B) requesting copies of their fall and spring concert programs for the 1994-95 school year. The cover letter also included a request for a telephone interview. Table 3.1 Directors Nominated by State and Number of Nominations Number of Directors Nominated Number of Nominations Florida Georgia S. Carolina N. Carolina Virginia Totals 1 14 2 3 3 9 4 5 5 2 6 7 8 2 Total Nominated 35 Number Selected 23 30 7 3 3 43 17 9 4 1 2 2 1 1 20 13 20 11 5 2 1 1 40 23 35 3 1 39 13 108 30 19 12 5 2 1 2 177 89 Choral Directors Not Nominated A list of public high schools from each state in the survey was compiled from Patterson's American Education (Educational Directories Inc., 1995) for a total of 1218 schools (P = 1218). Since data were not available to determine if high schools offered

PAGE 63

52 choral music, all high schools listed were included as part of the population. Schools with directors previously identified by nominating university choral faculty as outstanding choral directors were removed from the list, which left a total of 1041 schools (P2 = 1041). A sample from the remaining population was then selected using lineaisystematic samphng procedures as outlined by Jaeger (1984). Jaeger states that "whenever adjacent elements in the sampling frame are more similar than those some distance apart, the withinsample variance will be larger than the overall variance, and linear systematic sampling will be more efficient than simple random sampling" (p. 1 14). The sampling frame used in this study ordered the population by zip code. This placed schools in close geographical proximity close together in the sampling frame. Close geographical proximity suggests similarity between demographic population elements. Thus, adjacent elements in the sampling frame were likely to be more similar than those some distance apart. A sampling interval of 5 was used to select the sample, resulting in a sample size of 208 (N2 = 208), or 20% of the population. As with the nominated directors, each director selected for the sample was mailed a survey instrument (Appendix C) together with a cover letter (Appendix B) requesting copies of their fall and spring concert programs for the 1994-95 school year. The cover letter also included a request for a telephone interview. Instruments for Data Collection Two instruments were developed for the collection of data: a survey (Appendix C) and a telephone interview format (Appendix D). In addition, directors were asked to forward copies of their fall and spring concert programs for the 1994-95 school year. The reason for this approach was to provide for a better analysis of why and how high school directors select repertoire than is possible through the use of a survey alone. The phone interview allowed for the clarification of responses to the survey, provided respondents the

PAGE 64

53 opportunity to elaborate on their beliefs regarding repertoire selection, and permitted the addition of follow-up questions based on answers to questions in the survey. The request for programs provided information regarding what literature directors actually programmed. The request for programs was added to the study as a counter to problems often associated with the use of questionnaires and interviews. Tuckman (1994) summarizes these problems, stating: (1) respondents must cooperate when completing the questionnaire or interview, (2) they must tell what is rather than what they think ought to be or what they think the researcher would like to hear, and (3) they must know what they feel and think in order to report it. Thus, these techniques measure not what people believe but what they say they believe, not what they like but what they say they like. (p. 216) Furthermore, programs can be used as an indicator of how closely directors follow their expressed beliefs regarding repertoire selection. Design of the Survey The survey (Appendix C) was developed from factors identified by the experts as important to the literature selection process. The writer's own experiences as a high school choral director, as well as informal discussions with colleagues, were also influential in the creation of the survey. The survey was divided into two parts. Part I requested demographic information on the community, school, and choral program, as well as information on the director's educational background and experience. Part II asked questions concerning the kinds of literature performed, the sources for repertoire, and factors that impact literature selection. Information for completing the survey was provided in the cover letters. Responses were to be made on two scannable data collection forms ("bubble" forms commonly used for standardized testing) provided with the packet. Supplemental, short answer responses were recorded on the questionnaire. Anonymity was assured.

PAGE 65

54 Part I of the survey collected demographic information necessary for the categorization of data collected in Part II. Data included the type of community; grade level of the school; school enrollment; student body socioeconomic composition; student body minority population; choral program size and class offerings; director education, teaching experience, and choral performance experience. Most questions were presented in a multiple choice format. Where a multiple choice format was not feasible, one to two word short answer responses were requested. Part II of the survey was divided into three sections ( A, B, and C ) and focused on obtaining data on repertoire selection practices and procedures. Section A requested information on the number and styles of repertoire performed by the most advanced mixed chorus and largest beginning chorus. Directors were asked to indicate how many compositions each choir performed from the following musical periods and styles: Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, 20th Century, major choral works, folk music (including spirituals), multicultural music (excluding spirituals), patriotic works, pop/rock, show choir, jazz, musical theatre, carol arrangements, traditional/pop holiday songs, and other styles not mentioned. A multiple choice format was used for this section. Section B requested directors to indicate on a Likert scale how frequently they used each of 21 possible sources for the location and selection of repertoire. The section included a question requesting the identification of other sources used, but not listed on the survey. The Likert scale consisted of five responses: never, seldom, sometimes, often, and very often. Section C asked director to list the tide, composer and/or arranger of two compositions, one "classical" and one "popular," they have recently selected for study and performance by their most advanced large mixed chorus. Directors were then asked to indicate on a

PAGE 66

55 Likert scale how influential each of 26 listed elements were in the selection process. The Likert scale consisted of five responses: not considered, not influential, slightly influential, moderately influential, and very influential. Evaluation of the Survey Upon completion of the survey design, it was submitted to the writer's committee chair for evaluation. After suggested revisions were made, the survey was reviewed by two high school choral directors. Additional minor changes were suggested to clarify terms and instructions. Following this evaluation process, final revisions were made and the survey was sent to both nominated high school directors and selected high school directors who were not nominated. The Phone Interview The phone interview format (Appendix D) was developed after data from the survey and programs were analyzed. Following this analysis it was decided that the phone interview would focus on qualitative issues regarding (a) the repertoire selection process, (b) beliefs regarding the balance of repertoire the students should be singing, and (c) quality in choral music. The interview consisted of ten questions: two on the repertoire selection process, three on beliefs regarding the balance of repertoire the students should sing, and five on quality in choral music. Of the directors who returned the survey, 75 directors (36 nominated directors, 39 not nominated) or 72% agreed to be interviewed. It was decided that 52 interviews (50% of the sample) would be conducted; 26 with nominated directors and 26 with directors not nominated. In an effort to avoid samples with greatly different demographic

PAGE 67

56 characteristics, the selection of directors to be interviewed was based on a review of the demographic data of the directors who agreed to be interviewed. The interviews were conducted between May 17 and May 31, 1997. Four of the directors selected could not be contacted and were replaced with four additional directors. Once contact with each director was established, permission was requested to conduct the interview. Permission was also requested to record each interview. Respondents were identified on tape by number only and anonymity was assured. Upon completion of each interview the interview was then transcribed for later analysis. Survey Returns Nominated Directors The first mailing was sent on September 18, 1995 and resulted in 32 returns. A second request was mailed January 12, 1996. It resulted in an additional 13 survey returns for a total of 45. The overall return rate of the survey instrument from nominated directors was 50.1%. Table 3.2 shows the number of high school directors selected from each state for the sample and the number of usable surveys returned by state. Directors Not Nominated The first mailing was made September 1 8, 1995 and resulted in 36 survey instruments returned. A second request was mailed January 12, 1996, resulting in 30 additional survey instruments, for a total of 66 surveys. Seven of the returned instruments were incomplete and deemed unusable, which left a total of 59 usable survey instruments. The overall return rate for directors not nominated was 28.7%. In addition to the 66 returned survey instruments, letters were received from three schools stating the high school did not have a choral music program.

PAGE 68

57 Table 3.2 Survey Responses by Nominated Directors State: Florida Georgia S. Carolina N. Carolina Virginia Totals HS Directors Selected 23.0 17.0 13.0 23.0 13.0 89.0 Surveys Returned 14.0 11.0 6.0 9.0 5.0 45.0 % of Returned Surveys 31.1 24.5 13.3 20.0 11.1 100.0 % Return by State 60.9 64.7 46.2 39.1 38.5 50.1 Given the relatively low response rate for the non-nominated directors, it was decided to determine if there were significant demographic differences between the directors who returned the survey and those who did not. One hundred thirty-nine directors/schools did not return the survey. Fourteen schools (10%) were randomly selected using simple random sampling techniques from these 139 schools. A telephone call was made to each school and the choral director was interviewed concerning 12 demographic characteristics taken from the survey instrument. Two of the schools contacted indicated they did not have a choral music program. Two more schools were selected using simple random sampling techniques. The interview results were then compared to the demographic data of 14 directors randomly selected from those who did return the survey. A chi-square test of significance was run on the data using the SPSS program. The test indicated there was no significant difference between the two samples on 1 1 of the 12 descriptors. A difference was noted regarding choral performance class enrollment (Table 3.3). An examination of these results revealed directors who returned the survey tended to

PAGE 69

58 have moderate size programs of 50 to 150 students enrolled in choral performance classes. The data suggest that directors who did not return the survey instrument tended to have a somewhat broader range of program sizes, with a sizable number of programs with less than 50 students. Table 3.3 A Comparison of Choral Program Size Between Directors Who Returned the Survey with those Who Did Not less 50 101 151 Program Size than 50 to 100 to 150 to 200 over 200 Totals DidnotRetum % 28.6 42.8 14.3 14.3 0.0 50 Returned % 0.0 35.7 57.1 7.2 0.0 50 Total Sample % 14.3 39.3 35.7 10.7 0.0 100 a = .046 Although some differences with regard to program size were found between those who returned the survey and those who did not, the nature of the difference regarding program size together with the similarities identified on the other 1 1 descriptors was not deemed substantial enough to designate the two groups as significantly different.

PAGE 70

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS The population for this study consisted of all public high schools in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia. This population was divided into two sub-populations: (a) public high schools with choral directors identified by university choral faculty as outstanding and (b) public high schools not identified by university choral faculty as having an outstanding choral director. Three instruments were used for data collection: (a) survey, (b) programs submitted by directors, and (c) director interviews. Data resulting from the survey and analysis of the programs are presented below. A qualitative discussion of the data resulting from the interviews is presented in Chapter 5. Returned surveys were each assigned a number. Each scantron form was checked for clarity and stray marks, coded with the appropriate number and sent to the University of Florida testing service for conversion to a computer accessible format. A chi-square test for significance (df = 4; a < .05) was used to determine if relationships exist between director identification as nominated or not nominated and (a) reported demographics, (b) the kinds of repertoire selected for performance, and (c) repertoire selection practices and procedures. Null hypotheses (Hq) were formulated for each response stating there is no relationship. Significance levels are only listed when (a < .05). Sample Demographics Table 4. 1 shows the distribution of responses regarding the type of community each school serves. While no statistically significant relationship was found between director 59

PAGE 71

60 identification and the type of community served, 75.6% of the nominated directors indicated their school served a small city or the suburb of a large city, compared to 55.9% for directors not nominated. Conversely, 44% of the directors not nominated indicated their school served rural, small town, or inner city populations compared to only 24.4% for nominated directors. Table 4.1 Community Served by School Small Small Suburb of Inner Rural Town City Large City City Totals 13.3 26.7 48.9 4.4 43.3 20.3 23.7 32.2 6.8 56.7 17.3 25 39.4 5.8 100.0 Nominated % 6.7 Not Nominated % 16.9 Total Sample % 12.5 Tables 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 show, respectively, the distribution of responses regarding grade level distribution, student body socioeconomic composition, school enrollment, and relative size of student body minority population. Statistically significant relationships were not found between director identification and either grade level distribution or student body socioeconomic composition. It should be noted, however, that directors not nominated indicated they taught in schools with a slightly lower socioeconomic standing than nominated directors. A statistically significant relationship was noted between director identification and both school enrollment and relative size of student body minority population. The data suggest directors not nominated tended to teach in somewhat smaller schools than nominated directors. Thirty-nine percent of directors not nominated indicated they taught in schools

PAGE 72

61 Table 4.2 School Grade Level Distribution 6-12 7-12 8-12 9-12 10-12 Table 4.3 Socioeconomic Composition of Student Body Totals Nominated % 2.2 0.0 0.0 95.6 2.2 43.3 ot Nominated % 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.2 6.8 56.7 Total Sample % 1.0 0.0 0.0 94.2 4.8 100.0 Predominately: Lower Class Lower Middle Class Middle Class Upper Middle Class Upper Class Family Incomes: Less than $20,000 $20,000 to $40,000 $40,000 to $70,000 $70,000 to $100,000 Over $100,000 Totals Nominated % 4.4 26.0 57.8 8.9 2.2 43.7 Not Nominated % 10.3 41.4 39.7 6.9 1.7 56.3 Total Sample % 7.8 35.0 47.6 7.8 1.9 100.0 Table 4.4 School Enrollment Less than 1200 1200 to 1700 1701 to 2200 2201 to 2700 Over 2700 Totals Nominated % 13.3 31.1 33.3 17.8 4.4 43.3 Not Nominated % 39.0 27.1 23.7 10.2 0.0 56.7 Total Sample % 27.9 28.8 27.9 13.5 1.9 100.0 a = .030 K'JUr.-* fc-Wdr.'Ji-ir:?^— -V"^,*

PAGE 73

62 Table 4.5 Student Body Minority Population Minority Population Less 10% 30% 50% Than to to to Over 10% 30% 50% 70% 70% Totals Nominated % 11.1 46.7 33.3 2.2 6.7 43.3 Not Nominated % 25.4 27.1 22.0 16.9 8.5 56.7 Total Sample % 19.2 35.6 26.9 10.6 7.7 100.0 a = 017 with enrollments less than 1200 students, while only 13.3% of nominated directors indicated they taught in schools with enrollments less than 1200 students. Regarding student body minority population, 36 nominated directors (80%) indicated their schools had minority populations between 10% to 50% of the student body compared to 29 (49.1%) for directors not nominated. The data also reveal directors who were not nominated taught in more schools where the minority population is either very large or very small than nominated directors. Part I, Section C of the survey instrument collected demographic data on the choral program of each school. Tables 4.6 and 4.7 show the distribution of responses regarding choral program enrollment and the number of curricular choruses offered during the regular school day. A statistically significant relationship was found between director identification and both choral program enrollment and number of curricular choruses. The data suggest that directors not nominated have smaller choral programs.

PAGE 74

\ Table 4.6 Choral Program Enrollment Table 4.7 Number of Curricular Choruses Offered 63 Less 50 101 151 Than to to to Over 50 100 150 200 200 Totals Nominated % 0.0 26.7 37.8 11.1 24.4 43.3 Not Nominated % 16.9 45.8 23.7 8.5 5.1 56.7 Total Sample % 9.6 37.5 29.8 6.9 13.5 100.0 a = .001 Number of Curricular Choruses 5 or 1 2 3 4 more Totals Nominated % 0.0 28.9 26.7 26.7 17.8 43.7 Not Nominated % 29.3 29.3 20.7 10.3 10.3 56.3 Total Sample % 16.5 29.1 23.3 17.5 13.6 100.0 a = .00) Directors were also asked how many of the choirs in their program were auditioned (Table 4.8). Although nominated directors indicated having slightly more auditioned choirs, no statistically significant relationship was found between director identification and the number of auditioned choirs. Since one focus of the study was to ascertain the repertoire selection practices of high school choral directors, respondents were asked to indicated how many choirs or

PAGE 75

64 ensembles in their program specialize in the performance of only one or two kinds of repertoire (Table 4.9). No statistically significant relationship was noted regarding director identification and such ensembles. Table 4.8 Number of Auditioned Choirs Nominated % 22.7 38.6 27.3 9.1 2.3 43.1 Not Nominated % 32.8 51.7 10.3 3.4 1.7 56.9 Total Sample % 28.4 46.1 17.6 5.9 2.0 100.0 Table 4.9 Number of Literature Specific Choirs or Ensembles 1 2 3 4 Totals Nominated % 77.3 13.6 6.8 0.0 2.3 43.6 Not Nominated % 64.9 26.3 5.3 0.0 3.5 56.4 Total Sample % 70.3 20.8 5.9 0.0 3.0 100.0 Part I, Section D of the survey instrument collected demographic data on each director. Table 4.10 lists the most advanced degree held by directors in each group and indicates how many of the advanced degrees listed are not in music. Table 4. 1 1 lists the institutions from which directors received their degrees and the number and level of degrees granted by

PAGE 76

65 each institution. Directors were also asked to indicate their principal instrument while in college (Table 4.12). No statistically significant relationship was found to exist between director identification and advanced music degrees earned or director identification and principal instrument played while in college. Although statistically significant relationships were not found to exist, differences between groups were large enough to be noted. Thirty nominated directors (66.7%) indicated they held an advanced degree in music compared to 27 (45.8%) for directors not nominated. The data also reveal 66.7% of nominated directors indicated they studied voice as their principal instrument compared to 49.1% for directors not nominated. Directors not nominated were found to have a relatively high percentage (22.1%) of directors with principal instruments other than voice or piano when compared to nominated directors (2.2%). Table 4.10 Most Advanced Degree Earned 1 Bachelor Master Doctorate Nominated 1 # 11 25 (3.0) 5 (1.0) 1 1 % 24.4 55.6 (6.7) 11.1 (2.2) Not Nominated # 24 24 (7.0) 3 (1.0) % 40.7 40.7 (11.8) 5.1 (1.7) indicates degrees outside of music

PAGE 77

66 Director Table 4.11 Educational Background Bachelor Master Doctorate Institution Nom Not Nom. Not Nom. Nom. Not Nom. Nom. Total Listed 44 54 34 28 4 I Appalachian State Barry College Bob Jones Univ. Bridgewater College Campbell Univ. 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 Coe College Concord College Converse College Crane Sch. of Music De Paul Univ. 1 1 1 2 1 2 East Carolina Univ. East New Mexico Emory Florida Southern Florida State Univ. 1 1 5 4 1 3 2 1 1 5 1 3 Gardner Webb George Washington U. Georgia College Georgia Southern Georgia State Univ. 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 6 4 1 Graceland College Greensboro College Indiana Univ. Ithaca College Jacksonville State 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 James Madison Kennisaw State Kent Louisiana College Louisiana State Univ. 1 1 1 3 1 1 Mars Hill College Mercer Meredith College Methodist College Miami Univ. of OH 1 1 1 1 1 1

PAGE 78

67 Institution Mississippi College NCCU North Carolina New Orleans Bap. N.Carolina A &T North East LA Univ. N. Texas State Univ. Nyach College Old Dominion Oral Roberts Pennsylvania State Pfeiffer College Radford College San ford Univ. Shenandoah Conser. Shorter College Southern Baptist South-West Baptist Stetson Univ. Tennessee Tech. Univ. of Dubuque Univ. of Florida Univ. of Georgia Univ. of Illinois Univ. of Iowa Univ. of Miami Univ. of Montevallo Univ. of Missouri Univ. of N. Carolina Univ. of N. Florida Univ. of S. Carolina Univ. of S. Florida Univ. of S. Miss. Univ. of Tampa Univ. of Tennessee Univ. of Wisconsin Table 4.11 (continued) Bachelor Not Nom. Nom. 1 1 2 1 4 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 Master Not Nom. Nom. Doctorate Not Nom. Nom. 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 2 1

PAGE 79

Institution Va. Common Wealth Virginia Tech. Wake Forest Winthrop Univ. WBU Table 4. 1 1 (continued) Bachelor Not Nom. Nom. Master Not Nom. Nom. 68 Doctorate Not Nom. Nom. Table 4.12 Director's Principal Instrument Directors Nominated Voice % 66.7 Piano % 28.9 Organ % Brass % Woodwind % 2.2 Percussion % Guitar % None Listed % 2.2 Directors Not Nominated 49.1 18.6 10.2 6.8 1.7 1.7 1.7 10.2 Tables 4.13, 4.14, and 4.15 show the distribution of responses regarding years of experience teaching school music, high school choral music, and choral music at present school. Statistically significant relationships were found between director identification and all three measures of teacher experience. Analysis of the data revealed nominated directors had substantially more experience than directors who were not nominated.

PAGE 80

69 Table 4.13 Experience Teaching School Music lyr 2to3yrs 4 to 7 yrs 8tol2yrs overl2yrs Totals Nominated % 0.0 0.0 Not Nominated % 10.2 10.2 Total Sample % 5.8 5.8 a = .001 4.4 15.6 80.0 43.3 1.9 27.1 40.7 56.7 8.7 22.1 57.7 100.0 Table 4.14 Experience Teaching High School Choral Music lyr 2 to 3 yrs 4 to 7 yrs 8 to 12 yrs over 12 yrs Totals Nominated % 0.0 0.0 13.3 22.2 64.4 43.3 Not Nominated % 20.3 16.9 23.7 18.6 20.3 56.7 Total Sample % 11.5 9.6 19.2 20.2 39.4 100.0 a = 000 Table 4.15 Experience Teaching Choral Music at Present School lyr 2 to 3 yrs 4 to 7 yrs 8 to 12 yrs over 12 yrs Totals Nominated % 2.2 0.0 24.4 31.1 42.2 43.7 Not Nominated % 27.6 17.2 27.6 13.8 13.8 56.3 Total Sample % 16.5 9.7 26.2 21.4 26.2 100.0 a = 000 In addition to teaching experience, directors were asked to indicate how much experience they have had as a choral singer. Table 4. 1 6 shows how many years directors

PAGE 81

70 sang in their high school choir. Table 4. 17 depicts the number of years directors indicated they have sung in a college, community, and/or professional choir. Although no statistically significant relationships were discovered, nominated directors were found to have had more years singing in a college, community, or professional choir than directors not nominated. Table 4.16 High School Choral Participation lyr 2 yrs 3 yrs 4 yrs Total Nominated % 15.6 11.1 11.1 26.7 35.6 43.3 Not Nominated % 18.6 5.1 10.2 23.7 42.4 56.7 Total Sample % 17.3 7.3 10.6 25.0 39.4 100.0 Table 4.17 College, Community, and/or Professional Choral Participation 1 yr. or less 2 to 3 yrs 4 to 7 yrs 8 to 12 yrs Over 12 yrs Totals Nominated % 0.0 0.0 35.6 24.4 40.0 43.3 Not Nominated % 5.1 6.8 37.3 23.7 27.1 56.7 Total Sample % 2.9 3.8 36.5 24.0 32.7 100.0 Repertoire Selected for Performance The first half of Part II, Section A collected data on the kinds of repertoire selected for performance during the 1994-95 school year by each director's most advanced mixed

PAGE 82

71 choir. The second half of Part II, Section A collected data on the kinds of repertoire selected for performance by the director's largest beginning choir. The repertoire was divided into four major categories: (a) Classical Music, (b) Folk Music, (c) Popular Music, and (d) Other Music. Each category was further divided into specific style subcategories. Directors were asked to indicate how many compositions from each subcategory were performed by their most advanced mixed choir and by their largest beginning choir. Data on the type of music selected for advanced students is presented first followed by data on the type of music selected for beginning students. Repertoire Selected for Advanced Mixed Choir Under the "Classical" category for the advanced mixed choir (Table 4.18) statistically significant relationships were found between director identification and three subcategories: (a) Baroque, (b) 20th Century, and (c) Major Works. The data reveal nominated directors performed more compositions from each of the three categories than directors not nominated. It should also be noted that, while significant relationships were not found between the two groups in the remaining three categories, nominated directors selected more compositions from each category than directors not nominated. Statistically significant relationships were noted in the area of folk music between director identification and two of the three style subcategories listed: (a) Folk Music & Spirituals, and (b) Multicultural Music (Table 4.19). In subcategories where significant relationships were noted nominated directors reported performing more selections than directors not nominated. The "Popular Music" category was divided into four style subcategories: (a) Pop & Rock Music, (b) Show Choir Music, (c) Jazz, and (d) Musical Theatre Compositions.

PAGE 83

72 Table 4.20 shows the distribution of responses regarding the number of compositions from each subcategory selected for perfoi-mance by the director's most advanced mixed choir. A statistically significant relationship was found between director identification and the number of pop/rock compositions performed, with directors not nominated selecting more pop/rock compositions for performance than nominated directors. Table 4.18 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Classical Compositions Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus Style Number of Titles Performed 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5 Renaissance Nominated % 4.5 22.7 43.2 13.6 15.9 Not Nom. % 21.2 26.9 30.8 13.5 7.7 Baroque Nominated % 8.9 17.8 51.1 20 2.2 a = .010 Not Nominated % 34.0 26.4 28.3 11.3 0.0 Classical Nominated % 4.4 24.4 55.6 13.3 2.2 Not Nominated % 17.0 25.5 45.3 9.4 3.8 Romantic Nominated % 13.6 22.7 43.2 18.2 2.3 Not Nominated % 30.2 24.5 32.1 9.4 3.8 20th Century Nominated % 6.8 11.4 29.5 20.5 31.8 a = .017 Not Nominated % 22.6 20.8 11.3 28.3 17.0 Major Works Nominated % 40.0 48.9 11.1 0.0 0.0 a = .017 Not Nominated % 66.7 20.4 7.4 1.9 3.7

PAGE 84

73 Table 4.19 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Folk Compositions Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus Number of Titles Performed Style 1 2to3 4 to 5 Over 5 Folk Music & Spirituals a = .020 Multicultural a = .002 Patriotic Nominated % 0.0 0.0 60.0 31.1 8.9 Not Nominated % 0.0 18.9 52.8 20.1 7.5 Nominated % 8.9 24.4 40.0 26.7 0.0 Not Nominated % 22.6 34.0 41.5 1.9 0.0 Nominated % 26.7 35.6 31.1 4.4 2.2 Not Nominated % 22.6 34.0 37.7 5.7 0.0 The fourth category, "Other Music," was divided into three subcategories: (a) Carols, (b) Traditional Holiday Songs, (c) Other. The subcategory "Other" allowed directors to list compositions they believed did not fit in one of the previously listed categories. Table 4.21 shows the distribution of responses in the in the major category "Other Music." No statistically significant relationship was found between director identification and the number of carols or traditional holiday songs performed. No additional styles were listed under the subcategory "Other." This study also investigated the variety and proportion of styles of repertoire performed. Director responses were analyzed to detennine (a) the variety of repertoire performed within the major style category "Classical" (Table 4.22) and (b) what percentage of the total repertoire performed was represented by each of the major style categories (Table 4.23).

PAGE 85

74 Table 4.20 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Popular Compositions Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus Style Number of Titles Performed 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5 Pop/Rock Nominated % 28.9 31.1 17.8 15.6 a =.044 NotNominated % 15.1 17.0 41.5 13.2 6.7 13.3 Show Choir Nomdnated % 51.1 17.8 20.0 2.2 8.9 NotNominated % 43.4 17.0 17.0 7.5 15.1 Jazz Nominated % 35.6 35.6 22.2 4.4 2.2 Not Nominated % 41.5 28.3 28.3 0.0 1.9 e Nominated % 31.1 26.7 24.4 8.9 8.9 Not Nominated % 32.1 22.6 32.1 3.8 9.4 Style Table 4.21 Comparison of Directors Regarding Other Compositions Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus Number of Titles Performed 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5 1 Carols Nominated % 8.9 11.1 31.1 24.4 24.4 Not Nominated % 11.3 24.5 34.0 17.0 13.2 Holiday Songs Nominated % 22.2 20.0 33.3 20.0 4.4 Not Nominated % 15.1 24.5 41.5 17.0 1.9 a -^i — V. idpB'id''*

PAGE 86

75 Table 4.22 Variety of "Classical" Styles Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus Number of Styles Nominated % Not Nominated % 0.0 3 5.1 1 0.0 4 6.8 2 1 2.2 2 3.4 3 3 6.7 7 11.9 4 or More 41 91.1 43 72.9 Table 4.23 Proportions of Repertoire Performed by Most Advanced Mixed Chorus Classical Folk Popular Other Nominated % 44.2 21.2 17.2 17.4 Not Nominated % 35.3 20.6 25.9 18.2 The data reveal that nominated directors performed selections from an average of 4.6 different subcategories (i.e. Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, 20th Century), compared to 3.8 different subcategories for directors not nominated. Seven directors not nominated or 1 1 .9% stated they performed music from one or fewer subcategories compared to none or 0.0% for nominated directors. Director responses were also analyzed to determine what percentage of the repertoire performed by each director was from each of the previously defined major categories:

PAGE 87

76 Classical, Folk, Popular, and Other (Traditional Christmas Selections and Carols). Averages of the percentages found were then determined for both nominated directors and directors not nominated (Table 4.23). A sizable difference was found between groups regarding the balance between the number of classical compositions performed and the number of popular compositions performed. Nominated directors were found to perform a higher percentage of classical works than directors not nominated. Directors not nominated performed a higher percentage of popular works than nominated directors. In addition to survey questions regarding repertoire performed, directors were asked to send copies of their fall and spring concert programs. Thirty-eight directors (26 nominated, 12 not nominated) submitted programs. The repertoire listed in the programs (Appendix E) for the most advanced mixed choir was tabulated and compared to director responses on the survey regarding repertoire selected for performance (Table 4.24). The balance of repertoire reported by directors on the survey among the four major style categories was essentially the same as the balance found in the programs. The differences noted regarding "Other" music were most likely a result of the fact that winter and/or holiday programs were not requested. However, within the major style category "Classical" the data reveal, that while nominated directors who submitted programs stated on the survey they performed selections from an average of 4.7 different subcategories, an average of only 3.2 different subcategories were found in the programs. Likewise, directors not nominated stated on the survey they performed music from an average 3.4 different subcategories, while on the programs they performed music from an average of 2.2 subcategories.

PAGE 88

77 Table 4.24 Proportions of Repertoire Found in Programs Compared to Proportions of Repertoire Reported on Survey for Most Advanced Mixed Chorus Classical Folk Popular Other Nominated Survey % 45.2 21.5 14.9 18.5 Programs % 53.4 19.8 17.6 9.2 Not Nominated Survey % 35.8 22.0 24.3 17.9 Programs % 36.0 17.2 22.7 24.2 Repertoire Selected for Largest Beginning Choir The second half of Part II, Section A examined the repertoire selected for performance by the directors' largest beginning high school choir. All nominated directors (45) indicated they taught a beginning high school choir. Of the 59 directors not nominated, 50 directors indicated they taught a beginning high school choir. Table 4.25 gives director responses to the number of "Classical" compositions performed by the directors largest beginning choir. Although nominated directors indicated performing slightly more compositions in every subcategory, no statistically significant relationships were found between director identification and "Classical" music subcategories. Statistically significant relationships were found between director identification and two "Folk" music subcategories: folk arrangements and spirituals, and multicultural compositions (Table 4.26). Nominated directors indicated they performed more compositions from both sub-categories than directors not nominated.

PAGE 89

78 Table 4.25 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Classical Compositions Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus Style Number of Titles Performed 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5 Renaissance Nominated % 35.6 46.7 15.6 2.2 0.0 Not Nominated % 54.0 28.0 16.0 0.0 2.0 Baroque Nominated % 28.9 40.0 31.1 0.0 0.0 Not Nominated % 46.0 40.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 Classical Nominated % 28.9 35.6 35.6 0.0 0.0 Not Nominated % 32.0 44.0 22.0 2.0 0.0 Romantic Nominated % 44.4 31.1 24.4 0.0 0.0 Not Nominated % 54.0 34.0 10.0 2.0 0.0 20th Century Nominated % 24.4 20.0 31.1 15.6 8.9 Not Nominated % 40.0 22.0 14.0 16.0 8.0 Major Works Nominated % 77.8 20.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 Not Nominated % 90.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 '-rjV**z^'^ .—

PAGE 90

79 Table 4.26 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Folk Type Compositions Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus Number of Titles Performed Style 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5 Folk Music & Nominated % 6.7 6.7 55.6 26.7 4.4 Spirituals Not Nominated % 10.2 28.6 59.2 2.0 0.0 a = .000 Multicultural Nominated % 17.8 28.9 48.9 4.4 0.0 a = .027 Not Nominated % 38.8 34.7 26.5 0.0 0.0 Patriotic Nominated % 31.1 44.4 22.2 2.2 0.0 Not Nominated % 38.8 34.7 24.5 2.0 0.0 Table 4.27 shows the distributions of responses regarding the number of "Popular" compositions performed by the largest beginning choir. While no statistically significant relationships were found between director identification and Popular music subcategories, directors not nominated indicated performing slightly more pop/rock, show choir, and jazz music than nominated directors. Table 4.28 shows the distribution of responses in the major category "Other Music." No additional styles of music were listed and no statistically significant relationships were noted between director identification and "Other Music" subcategories. .•-* r.l>y..^tr-il-i-ih->i'i| ^-*u
PAGE 91

80 Table 4.27 Comparison of Directors Regarding the Number of Popular Compositions Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus Number of Titles Performed Style 1 2to3 4to5 Over 5 Pop/Rock Nominated % 31.1 26.7 35.6 4.4 2.2 Not Nominated % 22.4 14.3 42.9 16.3 4.1 Show Choir Nominated % 80.0 15.6 2.2 2.2 0.0 Not Nominated % 66.7 22.9 6.3 4.2 0.0 Jazz Nominated % 84.4 13.3 2.2 0.0 0.0 Not Nominated % 79.2 18.8 2.1 0.0 0.0 e Nominated % 31.1 31.1 31.1 0.0 6.7 Not Nominated % 33.3 35.4 25.0 4.2 2.1 Table 4.28 Comparison of Directors Regarding Other Compositions Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus Number of Titles Performed Style 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 Over 5 Carols Nominated % 15.6 20 46.7 13.3 4.4 Nominated % 20.8 27.1 43.8 6.3 2.1 Holiday Songs Nominated % 15.9 31.8 45.5 6.8 0.0 Not Nominated % 25.0 25.0 37.5 12.5 0.0

PAGE 92

81 As with the most advanced choir, the balance and variety of repertoire performed by the largest beginning choir were also examined. Director responses were analyzed to determine the balance of repertoire within the major style category "Classical" (Table 4.29) and the balance between the major style categories (Table 4.30). The data reveal that, within the major style category "Classical," nominated directors performed selections from an average of 3.4 different subcategories with their largest beginning choir, compared to 2.9 different subcategories for directors not nominated. Ten directors not nominated or 20% stated they performed music from one or fewer subcategories compared to 4 or 8.9% for nominated directors. Table 4.29 Variety of "Classical" Styles Performed by Largest Beginning Choir Number of Styles Nominated % Not Nominated % 1 2.2 4 8.0 1 3 6.7 6 12.0 2 6 13.3 7 14.0 3 11 24.4 12 24.0 4 or More 24 53.3 21 42.0 Director responses were also analyzed to determine what percentage of the repertoire performed by each director was from each of the previously defined major categories: Classical, Folk, Popular, and Other (Traditional Christmas Selections and Carols). Averages of the percentages found were then determined for both nominated directors and

PAGE 93

82 directors not nominated (Table 4.30). No significant differences were found between groups regarding the balance between the major style categories. Table 4.30 Proportions of Repertoire Performed by Largest Beginning Chorus Classical Folk Popular Other Nominated % Not Nominated % 34.0 31.8 29.7 23.4 16.2 24.6 20.0 20.2 Twenty-three nominated directors and seven directors not nominated submitted programs with repertoire listed for a beginning choir. The repertoire listed in submitted programs for the largest beginning choir (Appendix E) was tabulated and compared to director responses on the survey regarding repertoire selected for performance (Table 4.3 1). The data reveal the balance of repertoire reported by directors on the survey among the four major style categories was essentially the same as the balance found in the programs. The small differences noted were believed to be most likely the result of differences regarding classification and the fact that winter and/or holiday programs were not requested, rather than any substantial difference regarding what was reported and what was actually performed. Within the major style category "Classical" the data revealed that nominated directors who submitted programs stated on the survey they performed selections from an average of 3.1 different subcategories An average of 2 different subcategories were found in the programs. Directors not nominated stated on the survey they performed an average 3 different subcategories, while on the program an average of 1 .7 subcategories were listed.

PAGE 94

83 Table 4.31 Proportions of Repertoire Found in Programs Compared to Proportions of Repertoire Listed in Survey for Largest Beginning Chorus Classical Folk Popular Other Nominated Survey % 33.0 30.8 15.8 20.4 Programs % 41.6 22.8 20.2 15.4 Not Nominated Survey % 30.6 25.7 20.2 23.5 Programs % 42.0 13.0 29.2 15.8 Sources for Repertoire Part II, Section B collected data on how frequently directors use 21 possible sources for repertoire. Directors were asked to indicate on a Likert Scale of 1 to 5 how often they use each source to locate and select repertoire. Table 4.32 shows the mean distribution of responses for each survey populations as well as for the total sample. An analysis of variance (df = 1 ; a < .05) was used to determine if significant differences exist between the survey populations regarding the use of the 21 identified sources for repertoire. Statistically significant differences between the survey populations were found regarding five of the listed sources for repertoire. The data suggest nominated directors use choral reading sessions, choral workshops and clinics, live performances, and materials from the American Choral Directors Association more often than directors not nominated. Conversely, the data suggest directors not nominated use publisher catalogs and repertoire lists more frequently than nominated directors. --.^-^-^ •>...,,(.-T'k

PAGE 95

Table 4.32 Sources for Repertoire and Frequency of Use 84 Source Nominated Not Nominated Choral workshops / clinics Live performances Choral reading sessions Music Recommended by other directors Recordings Total Sample 3.80 (1) 3.27 (1) 3.50 (1) 3.64 (3) 3.22 (2) 3.40 (2) 3.71 (2) 3.11 (5) 3.38 (3) 3.29 (4) 3.20 (4) 3.24 (4) 3.16 (5) 3.05 (6) 3.10 (5) Music publishers' sample scores Music you performed with other groups (church, community, professional, etc.) Perusal of scores in music stores Music you performed in college Music publisher catalogs and repertoire lists Music you performed in high school Materials from American Choral Directors Association Materials from your MENC state affiliate Materials from Music Educators National Conference Materials from college music education courses 2.87 2.91 (9) (8) 3.22 2.92 (2) (8) 3.07 2.91 (6) (7) 2.95 3.04 2.44 (7) (6) (12) 2.85 2.78 3.00 (9) (11) (7) 2.89 2.89 2.76 (8) (8) (10) 2.51 2.80 (11) (10) 2.80 2.22 (10) (15) 2.67 2.47 (11) (12) 2.42 2.24 (13) (14) 2.42 2.51 (14) (12) 2.42 2.39 (13) (14) 2.09 (15) 2.46 (13) 2.30 (15) Repertoire lists in textbooks 1.93 (16) 1.98 (16) 1.96 (16) Materials from National Association 1.22(18) 1.39(17) 1.32(17) of Teachers of Singing Materials from Choristers Guild 1.38 (17) 1.24 (19) 1.30 (18) Materials from American Choral Foundation 1.20 (19) 1.27 (18) 1.24 (19) Materials from American Guild of Organists 1.06(21) 1.14 (20) 1.11 (20) Materials from National Association of Jazz Educators 1.07 (20) 1.07 (21) 1.07 (21) 1 never, 2 seldom, 3 sometimes, 4 often, 5 very often indicates hierarchy of use from most often to least often

PAGE 96

85 When the sources for repertoire were placed in order according to frequency of use, noticeable differences were found between the survey populations regarding the importance of (a) materials supplied by publishers, (b) materials from the American Choral Directors Association, and (c) repertoire directors performed while in college. The responses of directors not nominated placed (a) materials supplied by publishers, higher in the hierarchy than nominated directors, with directors not nominated placing "music publisher sample scores" and "music publisher catalogs and lists" second and seventh respectively, compared to ninth and twelfth for nominated directors. The responses by nominated directors placed (b) materials from the ACDA and (c) music performed in college, tenth and sixth, respectively, compared to fifteenth and eleventh for directors not nominated. Factors Affecting the Selection of Repertoire In Part II, Section C directors were asked to list the title, composer and/or arranger of two compositions they have recently selected for study and performance by their most advanced mixed chorus (Appendix E). One composition was to be of a classical nature and the other was to be a popular style selection. Directors were then asked to indicate on a Likert scale how influential each of 26 listed elements were in the selection process. The Likert scale consisted of five responses: not considered, not influential, slightly influential, moderately influential, and very influential. An analysis of variance (df = 1; a < .05) was used to determine if significant differences exist between the survey populations regarding the influence of 26 listed factors on repertoire selection. Analysis of the data regarding the selection of the classical composition revealed statistically significant differences between the survey populations on five of the 26 factors -;^_Jk-3.1 — -*.

PAGE 97

86 listed (Table 4.33): (a) the work was on an approved list of compositions for a musical festival or contest (a = .035), (b) the potential of the work to provide for an aesthetic experience (ex = .013), (c) the artistic demands of the composition (a = .024), (d) the text quality, appropriate for the music and ensemble (a = .039), and (e) planned variety composition selected to expose students to music of a different style (a = .020). The data suggest factors (b), (c), and (d) were more influential in the decision process of nominated directors to select the classical composition listed than in the decision process of directors not nominated. The distribution of responses also suggests factors (a) and (e) were more influential in the decision process of directors not nominated than in that of nominated directors. When the 26 factors were placed in order according to level of influence, noticeable differences were found between the hierarchies of the survey populations regarding the importance of (a) the artistic demands of the composition, (b) your personal abilities as conductor, rehearsal pianist, etc., (c) the text quality, appropriate for the music and ensemble, and (d) planned variety composition selected to expose students to music of a different style. Factors (a), (b), and (c) were found to be significantly higher in the hierarchy of nominated directors than in the hierarchy of directors not nominated. The responses of nominated directors placed these factors fifth, sixteenth, and eighth, respectively, compared to tenth, twenty-first, and thirteenth for directors not nominated. Factor (d) Planned variety, was placed higher (fourth) in the hierarchy for directors not nominated than in the hierarchy for nominated directors (twelfth). Three significant differences were noted between the survey populations regarding the popular composition selected (Table 4.34): (a) this is 'quality' music and the students should be exposed to it (a = .016), (b) the artistic demands of the composition (a = .050),

PAGE 98

87 Table 4.33 Influence of Selected Elements on the Selection of Classical Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir Not Total Source Nominated Nominated Sample "This is 'quality music', and the students 4.79 (1) 4.59 (1) 4.68 (1) should be exposed to it." The vocal performance skills that can be 4.51 (3) 4.44 (2) 4.47 (2) taught through the work, (legato line, singing large leaps, runs, etc.) The technical difficulty level of the work. 4.40 (4) 4.30 (3) 4.34 (3) (range, tessitura, harmonic, rhythmic, etc.) The potential of the work to provide for 4.58 (2) 4.15 (5) 4.34 (3) esthetic experience. The musical elements that could be taught 4.21 (7) 4.11 (6) 4.15 (5) through this work. (form, style, compositional techniques, etc.) The vocal maturity of the singers. 4.23 (6) 3.98 (7) 4.09 (6) The artistic demands of the composition. 4.33 (5) 3.87 (10) 4.07 (7) Planned variety. 3.69 (12) 4.22 (4) 3.99 (8) (Composition selected to expose students to music of a different style) The director appeal of the work. 3.95 (8) 3.94 (8) 3.95 (9) ("I really like this composition and would love to conduct/perform this work") The historical & social elements that could be 3.58(13) 3.89 (9) 3.75(10) taught through the work, (musical period, historical period, social influences of the time, multicultural, etc.) The text 3.95 (8) 3.43 (13) 3.66 (11) (quality, appropriate for the music, for the ensemble) -,H -^*r,-*-^^''

PAGE 99

88 Table 4.33 (continued) The emotional maturity of the singers. 3.74(11) 3.56(11) 3.64(12) The size of the chorus. 3.77 (10) 3.50 (12) 3.62 (13) The sectional characteristics of the chorus. 3.56(14) 3.17(14) 3.34(14) (e.g. Strong soprano section, weak tenors section) Theprogrammability ofthework. 3.12 (16) 3.15 (15) 3.13 (15) (holiday selection, concert opener/closer, etc.) The student appeal of the work. 3.28 (15) 3.00 (17) 3.12 (16) ("Students will love this work", recruiting) The amount of rehearsal time available. 3.12(16) 3.06(16) 3.08(17) Your personal abilities 3.12 (16) 2.74 (21) 2.91 (18) (as conductor, rehearsal pianist, etc.) The technical ability of the accompanist. 2.39 (21) 2.85 (18) 2.65 (19) The "winning" potential ofthework. 2.44 (20) 2.78 (19) 2.63 (20) ("We can win, get a superior, 1st place, with this work at contest") The work was on an "approved" list of 2.12 (22) 2.78 (19) 2.48 (21) compositions for a musical festival or contest. The public appeal ofthework. 2.56 (19) 2.37 (22) 2.45 (22) ("The audience will love this number") Peer approval. 1.86 (23) 2.19 (23) 2.04 (23) ("Other directors will approve if we perform this work")

PAGE 100

Table 4.33 (continued) 89 Source Nominated Not Nominated Library needs. (Compositions of this style, by this composer are needed in the library) Total Sample 1.77 (24) 2.09 (24) 1.95 (24) The work was an audition piece or on the program of a festival such as All-State Chorus or All-County Chorus. 1.77 (24) 1.81 (25) 1.79 (25) Cost of the composition 1.51 (26) 1.65 (26) 1.59 (26) 1 2 Not Not Considered influential 3 4 5 Slightly Moderately Very influential influential influential indicates hierarchy from most influential to least influential and (c) the text quality, appropriate for the music and ensemble (a = .027). All three factors were found to be more influential in the decision of nominated directors than in the decision of directors not nominated to select the popular composition listed. When the 26 factors were placed in order according to level of influence, significant differences were found between the survey populations regarding the importance of (a) this is 'quality music' and the students should be exposed to it, (b) the director appeal of the work 1 really like this composition and would love to conduct/perform this work, and (c) the text quality, appropriate for the music and ensemble. The distribution of responses placed factors (a) quality of the music, and (c) quality of the text, higher in the hierarchy of nominated directors than in the hierarchy of directors not nominated. For nominated directors factors (a) and (c) were tenth and sixth, respectively, compared to sixteenth and

PAGE 101

90 Table 4.34 Influence of Selected Elements on the Selection of Popular Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir Not Total Source Nominated Nominated Sample The student appeal of the work. 4.16 (2) 4.38 (1) 4.29 (1) ("Students will love this work", recruiting) The programmability of the work. 4.29 (1) 3.93 (2) 4.07 (2) (holiday selection, concert opener/closer, etc.) The public appeal of the work. 4.16 (2) 3.77 (4) 3.93 (3) ("The audience will love this number") Planned variety. 3.78 (4) 3.82 (3) 3.81 (4) (Composition selected to expose students to music of a different style) The vocal maturity of the singers. 3.66 (7) 3.46 (6) 3.54 (5) The potential of the work to provide for 3.74 (5) 3.39 (7) 3.53 (6) esthetic experience. The director appeal of the work. 3.32(11) 3.54 (5) 3.45 (7) ("I really like this composition and would love to conduct/perform this work") The vocal performance skills that can be 3.66 (7) 3.21 (8) 3.39 (8) taught through the work, (legato line, singing large leaps, runs, etc.) The emotional maturity of the singers. 3.61 (9) 3.20 (9) 3.36 (9) The text 3.68 (6) 3.05 (11) 3.31 (10) (quality, appropriate for the music, for the ensemble) The technical difficulty level of the work. 3.21 (13) 3.09(10) 3.14(11) (range, tessitura, harmonic, rhythmic, etc.)

PAGE 102

91 Table 4.34 (continued) Not Total Source Nominated Nominated Sample The musical elements that could be taught 3.18(15) 2.98(12) 3.06(12) through this work. (form, style, compositional techniques, etc.) The size of the chorus. 3.21 (13) 2.89 (14) 3.02 (13) The sectional characteristics of the chorus. 3.11 (17) 2.96 (13) 3.02 (13) (e.g. Strong soprano section, weak tenors section) The artistic demands of the composition. 3.29 (12) 2.71 (15) 2.95 (15) "This is 'quality music', and the students 3.34(10) 2.66(16) 2.94(16) should be exposed to it." The amount of rehearsal time available. 3.16 (16) 2.57 (17) 2.81 (17) The historical & social elements that could be 2.92(18) 2.54(18) 2.69(18) taught through the work, (musical period, historical period, social influences of the time, multicultural, etc.) The technical ability of the accompanist. 2.22 (20) 2.51 (19) 2.39 (19) Your personal abilities 2.58 (19) 2.11 (20) 2.30 (20) (as conductor, rehearsal pianist, etc.) Library needs. 1.66 (22) 1.98 (21) 1.85 (21) (Composition of this style, by this composer are needed in the library) The "winning" potential of the work. 1.79(21) 1.79(23) 1.79(22) ("We can win, get a superior, 1 st place, with this work at contest")

PAGE 103

92 Table 4.34 (continued) Not Total Source Nominated Nominated Sample Peer approval. 1.58 (23) 1.84 (22) 1.73 (23) ("Other directors will approve if we perform this work") Cost of the composition 1.58 (23) 1.73 (24) 1.67 (24) The work was an audition piece or on the 1.37(25) 1.47(25) 1.43(25) program of a festival such as All-State Chorus or All-County Chorus. The work was on an "approved" list of 1.16 (26) 1.36 (22) 1.28 (26) compositions for a musical festival or contest. 12 3 4 5 Not Not Slightly Moderately Very Considered influential influential influential influential indicates hierarchy from most influential to least influential eleventh for directors not nominated. Factor (b), The director appeal of the work, was placed higher in the hierarchy for directors not nominated (fifth) than in the hierarchy for nominated directors (eleventh). A comparison was also made between the influence selected elements have on the selection of "classical" music and the influence the same elements have on the selection of popular music (Fig. 4. 1). Differences of more than one point were found regarding nine of the selected elements. The elements public appeal and student appeal of a composition were significantly more influential in the decision to select the popular composition than in the decision to select the classical work. The quality of the work, the historical and social

PAGE 104

0) .a o X s u e: ca > c s a a s a, U 93 I— I -4— -a c a I ;2; Oj-. •'vis \ \ \ . "^^^ . \ \ \ ^ ^ v^ ^. :^v^. ^... %. %. '^.. "<=>. Vr ^4., ^ ^^c % ^

PAGE 105

T3
PAGE 106

95 elements that can be taught through the work, the technical difficulty of the work, the musical elements that can be taught through the work, the artistic demands of the work, and the work was on an approved contest list were elements significantly more influential in the decision to select the classical compositions than in the decission to select the popular J compositions. Demographic Factors and Repertoire Selection This study also examined the relationship between eight demographic characteristics and the repertoire directors select for performance. A chi-square test of significance (df = 1 6, a = .01) was used to determine if statistically significant relationships exist between the demographic factors of the respondents and the repertoire they select for performance. Where statistically significant relationships were found, a Spearman rank order correlation was used to determine the strength of the relationship. The demographic characteristics included (a) the type of community served by the school, (b) the school enrollment, (c) the socioeconomic composition of the school student body, (d) the ethnic composition of the school student body, (d) the number of students enrolled in choral performance classes, (e) the number of curricular choruses, (f) the degree level attained by the director, and (g) the years the director has taught high school choral music. Of the eight demographic factors examined, four were found to have a significant relationship to the repertoire directors select for performance: (a) the type of community served by the school, (b) the number of curricular choruses, (c) the socioeconomic composition of the school student body, and (d) the years the director has taught high school choral music. A statistically significant relationship (a = .006) was found between the community the school serves and the number of Baroque compositions directors select for performance

PAGE 107

96 for their advanced choir. Directors were asked to indicate which of five community types most closely resemble the community their school serves: (a) rural, (b) small town, (c) small city (d) suburb of a large city, or (e) inner city. The data suggest directors from relatively large population centers (small city, suburb of a large city, and inner city) tend to do more Baroque music with their advanced students than directors from rural and small town schools (Table 4.35). Table 4.35 Relationship of Community to the Selection of Baroque Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir Number of Baroque Selections PerfoiTned During School Year Rural Type Small Town of Community Small Suburb of City Large City Inner City None: 3 11 4 4 1: 3 1 4 13 1 2 to 3: 3 6 8 16 5 4 to 5: 2 6 7 Over 5: 1 A statistically significant relationship (a = .000) was also found between the community the school serves and the number of romantic compositions directors select for performance for their advance choir. Directors from small city schools and the suburbs of large cities indicated performing more Romantic music than those from other communities (Table 4.36).

PAGE 108

97 Table 4.36 Relationship of Community to the Selection of Romantic Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir Number of Romantic Selections Performed During School Year Rural Type Small Town of Community Small Suburb of City Large City Inner City None 3 12 2 2 3 1 5 2 5 10 1 2 to 3 3 3 10 19 1 4 to 5 5 7 1 Overs 1 1 1 A statistically significant relationship (a .002) was found between the number of curricular choruses and the number of folk type compositions and spirituals directors select for performance by their advance students. The data suggest directors with more choruses tend to perform more folk music and spirituals with their most advanced mixed choir than directors with fewer choirs. (Table 4.37) A Spearman rank order correlation revealed a significant, but low, positive correlation (a = .012, r = .253). A statistically significant relationship (a = .002) was also found between the socioeconomic composition of the school student body and the number of popular and rock type compositions directors select for performance by their advance students. Analysis of the data suggest directors who teach in schools where the students come from more affluent homes tend to do less pop/rock music than directors who teach students from less affluent homes (Table 4.38). A Spearman rank order con-elation revealed a significant, but relatively low, negative correlation (a = .004, r = -.287).

PAGE 109

98 Table 4.37 Relationship of Number of Ciioirs to the Selection of Folk Music and Spirituals for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir Number of Selections Performed During School Year 1 2 Number of Choirs 3 4 5 or More None: 1: 6 4 2 to 3: 4 16 14 14 6 4 to 5: 3 7 5 3 7 Over 5: 1 1 4 1 1 Table 4.38 Relationship of Socioeconomic Status to the Selection of Pop/Rock Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir Number of Selections Performed During School Year Lower Class Lower Middle Class Middle Class Upper Middle Class Upper Class None: 1 3 14 2 1 1: 8 11 3 1 2 to 3: 5 10 13 1 4 to 5: 1 3 8 2 Over 5: 9 1

PAGE 110

99 High school choral teaching experience was found to have a significant relationship to the selection of four compositional styles for advanced students and three compositional styles for beginning students. For advanced students, high school choral teaching experience was found to have a significant relationship to the selection: (a) Renaissance music (a = .017), (b) Baroque music (a = .013), (c) Classical music (a = .014), and (d) Romantic music (a = .003). The data suggest that directors with more experience tend to perform more of each of style of music listed above than directors with less experience. A Spearman rank order correlation revealed significant, but low, positive correlations between each style and director experience: Renaissance (a = .015, r = .247), Baroque (a = .000, r = .398), Classical (a = .001, r = .386), Romantic (a = .002, r = .316) as indicated in Tables 4.39, 4.40, 4.41, and 4.42. Table 4.39 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Renaissance Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir Number of Selections Performed During School Year 1 2 to 3 Years of 4 to 7 Experience 8 to 12 Over 12 None: 4 4 2 1 2 1: 2 2 5 7 8 2 to 3: 2 5 9 19 4 to 5: 2 3 3 5 Over 5: 1 4 1 5

PAGE 111

Table 4.40 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Baroque Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir 101 Number of Selections Performed During School Year 1 Years of Experience 2 to 3 4 to 7 8 to 12 Over 12 None 5 4 4 5 4 1 1 6 5 3 7 2 to 3 1 7 10 20 4 to 5 4 3 8 Overs 1 Table 4.41 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Classical Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir Number of Selections Years of Experience Performed During School Year 1 2 to 3 4 to 7 8 to 12 Over 12 None 4 3 2 2 1 3 2 6 4 9 2 to 3 4 9 15 21 4 to 5 1 2 2 6 Over 5 1 2

PAGE 112

10 Table 4.42 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Romantic Music for Performance by Most Advanced Mixed Choir Number of Selections Years of Experience Performed During School Year 1 2 to 3 4 to 7 8 to 12 Over 12 None 5 6 3 4 4 1 1 2 4 5 11 2 to 3 2 11 8 15 4 to 5 1 2 10 Over 5 1 1 1 For beginning students, high school choral teaching experience was found to have a significant relationship to the selection: (a) Romantic music (a = .000), (b) 20th Century music (a = .016, and (c) musical theatre works (a = .005). The data suggest that directors with more experience tend to perform more of each of style of music listed above than directors with less experience. A Spearman rank order correlation revealed significant, but low positive correlations between each style and director experience: Romantic (a = .000, r = .409), twentieth century (a = .001, r = .326), musical theatre (a = .025, r = .232). Tables 4.43, 4.44, and 4.45 show the relationship of experience to the selection of Romantic, twentieth century, and musical theatre compositions respectively.

PAGE 113

10: Table 4.43 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Romantic Music for Performance by Largest Beginning Choir Number of Selections Performed During School Year 1 2 to 3 Years of 4 to 7 Experience 8 to 12 Over 12 None: 5 8 13 9 12 1: 1 5 10 15 2 to 3; 1 5 10 15 4 to 5: 1 Table 4.44 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Twentieth Century Music for Performance by Largest Beginning Choir Number of Selections Performed During School Year Years of Experience 2 to 3 4 to 7 8 to 12 Over 12 None: 1: 2 to 3: 4 to 5: Over 5: 4 1 1 3 12 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 2 6 6 9 7 3 13 2 9 5

PAGE 114

10: Table 4.45 Relationship of High School Choral Experience to the Selection of Musical Theatre Music for Performance by Largest Beginning Choir Number of Selections Performed During School Year 1 2 to 3 Years of 4 to 7 Experience 8 to 12 Over 12 None: 6 3 6 4 11 1: 5 7 7 12 2 to 3: 7 4 15 4 to 5: 2 Over 5: 3 1 Summary The purpose of this study was to provide a basis for improving (1) the literature selection practices and procedures of current high school choral directors, and (2) undergraduate instruction in choral literature selection. Descriptive data were collected to (a) portray the demographic characteristics of the respondents, (b) identify sources and criteria used by high school choral directors in selecting repertoire, (c) determine if a universal set of criteria exists for the selection of repertoire for high school choruses, (d) identify factors affecting the use of identified criteria, (e) determine if there is a high degree of agreement among high school directors regarding what constitutes "quality" in choral literature and identify differences if they exist, (f) determine if a hierarchy exists for repertoire selection criteria, and (g) determine what relationships, if any, exist between the educational setting; the quality and kinds of literature selected; the criteria and procedures employed; the education, experience, and philosophy of the director; and the perceived success of the director and program by university choral faculty members.

PAGE 115

104 Demographic data collected from directors portrayed the size, kind of community, and student body served by the directors present school; composition and size of the choral program; and college education and experience of the director. Directors identified a variety of sources for the selection of repertoire. These sources were used to select repertoire with varing degrees of frequency. Directors also identified and rated criteria for the selection of repertoire.

PAGE 116

CHAPTER 5 DIRECTOR INTERVffiWS Following procedures outlined in Chapter 3, 52 directors (26 nominated and 26 not nominated) were interviewed regarding the repertoire selection process, their beliefs regarding the balance of repertoire students should sing, and quality as a factor in the selection of choral music. The interview format consisted of ten questions: Questions 1 and 2 focused on the collection of data regarding the repertoire selection process; questions 3, 4 and 5 were designed to collect data on director beliefs regarding the balance of repertoire students should sing; and questions 6 through 10 focused on the collection of data regarding how directors view and apply quality in the selection of choral music. In cases in which directors had difficulty answering a question, questions were reworded for clarity and restated. Each question is presented and discussed here in the order listed on the interview format. Questions asked during the interview are printed below in italics. A brief summary of director responses, when appropriate, is then presented, followed by a discussion of director responses to the question supported by quotes from the respondents. All quotes are followed by a director identification symbol: "Y" for nominated directors and "N" for directors not nominated. A summary of responses to related questions is presented following each group of questions identified above. The Repertoire Selection Process Question 1: What process do you use to select music for your most advanced choir? 105

PAGE 117

106 Initial responses to the question were, more often than not, in the form of "laundry lists" of repertoire sources and criteria used to select repertoire rather than the outline of any systematic process. A compilation of the repertoire sources and criteria for repertoire selection mentioned during the interviews is presented in Table 5.1. There was little difference between the two groups of directors regarding how often each repertoire source or each criterion for repertoire selection was mentioned. However, based on frequency mentioned, the two groups seemed in overall agreement regarding the top five repertoire sources and selection criteria, with these resources and criteria mentioned significantly more than other sources or criteria (shown by asterisk in Table 5.1). No attempt was made to further categorize the sources or criteria regarding frequency mentioned. In addition to giving a list of sources and criteria for repertoire selection, some of the directors provided a sense of sequence and priority with regard to given sources and criteria. If directors did not offer much information on the sequencing of the repertoire selection process or on the prioritized use of sources and criteria, the question was reworded for clarity and restated: Is there a systematic approach or sequence to your selection process? Although most directors went on to describe a somewhat sequential approach and/or offer priorities with regard to selection criteria, they also stated the process was generally not formalized or systematic. A few directors declined to offer any more information and simply stated they did not use a sequential or systematic approach. Directors who elaborated on their selection process generally described a process in which potential repertoire was first identified through the application of one or two criteria of significant importance to the director. The list of potential selections was then further refined through the application of other criteria. Directors mentioned five criteria as being

PAGE 118

107 most important and/or the first criteria tiiey apply in the selection process (listed below). There was generally little difference between groups regarding the frequency each of these criteria were cited as the first or most important criteria. However, although an equal number of directors from both groups mentioned student interest as a criterion used for the selection of repertoire, only directors not nominated cited students interest as the first criterion applied. Table 5.1 Repertoire Sources and Criteria for Repertoire Selection Mentioned During the Director Interviews Repertoire Sources Criteria for Repertoire Selection Choral music reading sessions/workshops Ability and balance of choir Concert programs Publisher catalogs, tapes, sample scores Variety What can be taught through the music Music previously conducted or performed Text and music meaningful to the students Recommendations from others Programming issues Personal knowledge Language Recordings (other than publisher) Difficulty of the music Festival adjudication Entertainment value of the music Music sung by All State or All County Choir Director appeal Perusal of music in music stores Cross-curriculum uses of the music School or county choral library Personal choral library Standard repertoire students should know Quality of the music Cultural needs of the group Text and music meaningful to the audience Musically challenging Cost Potential of the work for esthetic experience If religious, is it of historical importance indicates sources and criteria most frequently cited

PAGE 119

108 Director Appeal The first thing I do is make a Hst of pieces that I hke and that I'm interested in doing. Then I write them down, breaking them into three groups: fast, moderate, and slow. Then, on the list, I identify whether they are sacred or secular and, for secular, whether it is serious, light hearted, or novelty. I then look to see if I am representing the different periods of music. Y I really don't use any systematic process. I just divide the music into a "yes" pile and a "no" pile. Then if the "yes" pile is larger than the money I have to spend I go through and try to balance my selections for variety.... To tell you the truth, I play through a piece and just decide whether I like it or not. If I do then I consider it, if I don't then I toss it. N Evaluate the Needs and Abilities of the Choir I spend some time with the choir first to evaluate their abilities before I try to select the music. Then I select music that will help them move forward developmentally. I also will pick a concert theme to help guide my selection of repertoire.... Once I have made a list of possibilities I try to select pieces that will work together. YFirst I evaluate the ability of my choir. Then I take the sample recordings of the things I think they can handle and play them for the students. I have found that 99% of the time they like what I like. N First, I look to see if the voicing is something we can handle and whether or not it is accompanied. We do almost all "a cappella" music because I don't have an accompanist. I will use some taped accompaniments, but only if it enhances what is being sung. N Programming Issues The first thing I do is select the major work we are going to do that semester. Then, depending on the major work I decide to do, I select the other compositions based on how they would fit within the program. Y I focus on madrigals with my advanced choir so I begin by looking at madrigals first. Then I will pick some spirituals and other type compositions to go with the madrigals. N Quality of the Music The first question I ask is "Can I make music with it?" If it's not quality, I don't consider it. Next I look to see if it will fit in my program and what I can teach through the piece. Y First, I listen to the composition and try to determine its worth. Then, if I'm still interested, I will get a score from the publisher or run the recording through some of the electronic equipment I have to obtain a score to determine if the piece has any glaring problems. N

PAGE 120

109 Student Interest The first consideration is to give them something they Hke, otherwise I can forget trying to teach it to them if they don't want to learn it. Of course you try to give them good music, but still, if it's good music and they don't like it they are not going to learn it. N Question 2: How does the process you just described differ in the selection of music for your beginning high school students? An analysis of director responses suggested there was little, if any, difference in the repertoire sources or selection process (i.e. the application of selected criteria deemed important to identify possibilities followed by the application of additional criteria to make the final decision) directors use to select repertoire for their beginning students. About half of the directors stated that, apart from the fact the repertoire selected would be less difficult, there was little or no difference in the sequencing or prioritized use of selection criteria. However, the remaining directors stated they approached the selection of repertoire for beginning students differently. These directors identified three differences in the prioritized use of criteria: Quick Success Several directors stated they more closely scrutinize the difficulty of the repertoire to ensure students find quick success: I don't know that it is a whole lot different. With beginning groups I try to pick things that will give them quick success and bring them enjoyment, but at the same time teach them things. Maybe it's a little more oriented toward giving them quick success, especially the first half of the year. Then as the year goes on I will put a little more teeth into the literature. Y I look more closely at accessibility. Beginning students need to be successful right from the start. I don't mean just doing simple stuff of little value. The music still must have some meat to it to hold up under rehearsal. Y

PAGE 121

110 Student Interest Other directors stated student interest is more important to the selection process because beginning students are new and not yet committed to the program: I tend to look a Httle more for music that will catch their interest. Most of my beginning students are younger kids new to the program. I'm more concerned in keeping them interested and in the program and a little less concerned about giving them a lot of real meaty music, especially the first semester. Y Student appeal is more important. With beginning students you are trying to hook them into the program. Unlike many of my advanced students, they are not taking choir because they just love to sing. They are taking choir in order to fulfill their fine arts requirement. N Skill and Concept Development A number of directors indicated they place more emphasis on finding selections that facilitate the teaching and development of fundamental musical skills and concepts: I'm more prone to look for things that get a musical idea across or teach specific vocal skills.... I tend to pick those things that foster the development of the technical rather than emotional. Y When I look for music for my beginning students I'm looking more for music through which I can teach specific skills vocally and intellectually. N Summary of the Repertoire Selection Process Directors generally use the same repertoire sources for both beginning and advanced students. Although directors use a variety of sources for repertoire selection, five are used much more frequently than others: (a) choral music reading sessions / workshops, (b) programs from concerts attended, (c) publisher catalogs, tapes, and sample scores, (d) music previously conducted or performed, and (e) recommendations from other directors. The basic repertoire selecdon process used by directors appears to be universal and does not differ with regard to the level of the ensemble. Directors generally described a process in which potential repertoire is first identified through the application of one or two

PAGE 122

m criteria of significant importance to the director. The list of potential selections is then further refined through the application of other criteria. While directors use a wide variety of criteria to select repertoire, five criteria were identified as the most important and/or first criterion they apply in the selection process. These criteria are best described as questions directors ask themselves as they evaluate compositions: (a) Do I like it?, (b) Can my choir perform it and does it meet the needs of the ensemble?, (c) Will it work as part of the program I have planned?, (d) Is it a quality composition?, and (e) Will the students like it? For about half of the directors interviewed, the only difference between the selection of music for beginning students and the selection of music for advanced students is the difficulty level of the music selected. These directors stated there was essentially no difference in the sequencing or prioritized use of selection criteria. The remaining directors, however, identified three differences in their prioritized use of selection criteria: (a) they are more careful to select music that will bring quick success, (b) they put more emphasis on selecting music the students will like, and (c) they focus more on finding selections that will meet the developmental needs of beginning students. The Balance of Repertoire Students Should Sing Question 3: What do you believe to be the proper balance between classical music, folk music, and popular music for advanced students? Classical music is defined as music from the five major historical periods; folk music as arrangements of folk songs, spirituals, and multicultural based compositions; and popular music as arrangements of pop/rock music, musical theatre pieces, and vocal jazzThe purpose of this question was to generate discussion regarding balance between styles of music as well as solicit percentages from directors for each category. Although

PAGE 123

112 the question asked what directors believe should be taught, directors tended to answer based on what they do rather than what they believe should be done. Directors, as a whole, indicated that advanced students should sing a higher percentage of classical music than folk music or popular music (Table 5.2). They also generally agreed on the relative percentage of folk music advanced students should sing. However, a notable difference was found between nominated directors and directors not nominated regarding the balance between classical and popular music. Although a comparison of mean percentages for both groups suggests they believe advanced students should sing more classical music than either folk or popular music, the data suggest nominated directors believe advanced students should sing a much higher percentage of classical music than directors who were not nominated. The data also suggest directors not nominated believe advanced students should sing a much higher percentage of popular music than nominated directors. Table 5.2 Balance of Repertoire Advanced Students Should Sing Based on Director Interviews Mean Percentages Classical Folk Popular Nominated 53.7 29.5 16.8 Not Nominated 44.2 29.4 26.4 The Balance Between Classical and Popular Music All but four of the nominated directors interviewed indicated classical music should comprise at least 45% of the repertoire with most suggesting a much higher percentage.

PAGE 124

113 Less than half of the directors not nominated had similar beliefs with one director indicating that, while they sung a high percentage of classical music, it was not what she really wanted to do: Advanced students need a good representative diet of classical music. I offer enough of the folk and spiritual literature to give them a sense of history; a sense of what music has been in the past and what has led us to the music of today with the pop literature. I give them enough of that to let them know where we have come from and why. Then I do have them sing some pop literature to keep them interested. Y (65% Classical 20% Folk and 15% Popular) It depends on the students and what they like, what kind of concerts you have, and what festival you are going to. My advanced students liked the classical music more than the other two styles you mentioned and we did more of that. It really wasn't my choice, they were kind of snobby and that's what they wanted to do. N (75% Classical, 15% Folk, 10% Popular ) I believe its important for students to be exposed to classical music, but I wouldn't want to overwhelm them with it, especially in today's classroom when we are struggling to keep students interested in music. I do some classical music, but I think it is important to do music that appeals to the students. N (25% Classical, 35% Folk, 40% Popular) Community Influence on the Balance of Repertoire Directors Select Several directors not nominated indicated the repertoire they select is influenced by the expectations of their community. In all cases this meant a greater emphasis on popular music as opposed to classical music. My philosophy is, that for my situation, I go heavy on the pop and folk music. I do some classical things so my students are aware there are different kinds of music. But, my group is a community performing ensemble, so I try to sing what the audience wants to hear which is more pop and folk music. N (25% Classical, 35% Folk, 40% Popular)

PAGE 125

114 Popular Music While all of the directors interviewed stated they perform some kind of popular music, 19 of the directors interviewed (15 nominated and 4 not nominated) stated they perform litde, if any, pop/rock music. Most went on to clarify the role popular music plays in their program, with several directors stating they met student interest in popular music through the use of choirs or specific concerts that focus on popular music. I don't use arrangements of pop tunes; so much of that stuff is so trite and poorly written. I do use some vocal jazz, though, to train the ear. Y (No percentages given) We do some popular composidons just for fun and I save a specific time of the year to do those kind of things. ... If they can sing good classical literature well, they can sing anything else they want to. We will do some popular music as part of our spring concert, but we will only spend about two weeks on it. If they know how to sightread and have learned good vocal technique it is nothing to learn the popular music in a couple of weeks. Y (75% Classical, 15% Folk, 10% Popular) I have a jazz-showchoir to meet student desires to do popular music. But in order to be in the jazz-showchoir, they must also be in my concert choir. Y (60% Classical, 20% Folk, 20% Popular) My students like to sing pop music as much as the next, but I don't do any of that with my choir. At the end of the year we produce a solo pop show, and that is where my students get the chance to do that kind of music. Y (65% Classical, 25% Folk, 10% Popular) Question 4: What do you believe is the proper balance between classical music, folk music, and popular music for beginning students and how does it differ with regard to the balance you just described for advanced students? niH>..l.rft>iM4r-.n

PAGE 126

115 The purpose of this question was to generate a discussion regarding balance between styles of music as well as to solicit percentages from directors for each category regarding the balance of repertoire beginning students should sing. As with question 3, directors tended to answer this question based on the proportion they actually teach rather than on what they believe should be taught. As with advanced students, nominated directors stated beginning students should sing a higher percentage of classical music than did directors not nominated. Directors not nominated stated they should sing a higher percentage of popular music than nominated directors. However, the differences were less pronounced than those found with regard to advanced students (Table 5.3). Table 5.3 Balance of Repertoire Beginning Students Should Sing Based on Director Interviews Mean Percentages Classical Folk Popular Nominated 40.1 35.5 24.4 Not Nominated 35.9 33.4 30.7 Twenty-one directors, a little less than half of those interviewed, stated the balance of repertoire for beginning students should be the same as used for advanced students. Although more than half of the directors stated the balance of music used for beginning students should be different, the changes suggested were usually moderate. All but three of the directors who indicated the balance should be different stated they increase the percentage of popular and/or folk music beginning students sing and therefore reduce the percentage of classical music they perform (Table 5.4).

PAGE 127

116 Table 5.4 Relationship of Repertoire for Beginning Students Compared to Advanced Students Based on Director Interviews Direction of Change from that Recommended for Advanced Students Number of Number of Classical, Folk, Popular Nominated Directors Directors Not Nominated 0,0,0 8 13 (2)^ i,T,T 7 5 i, 0, T 4 4 i, t, 5 1 i, i, t 1 1 0, i, t 1 0, T, i 1 t, T, I 1 Two directors not nominated did not give percentages, but stated the balance should be the same. Discussion regarding the balance of styles selected for beginning students focused on five influential issues: Problems M^ith Popular Music as a Vehicle for Vocal Development Several directors cited the poor quality and the inappropriateness of popular music for the development of good vocal technique as influential in the selection of repertoire. Most directors cited these concerns as reasons why they don't increase the percentage of popular music they use, rather than as reasons for reducing the percentage of popular selections they perform. One director, however, did indicate he reduces the percentage of popular selections because of these concerns:

PAGE 128

117 I may pay more attention to what appeals to the student, but the balance I do is essentially the same. I teach my students that most of the commercial music they listen to is written to touch surface emotions. I encourage my students to give themselves credit for being deeper and more complex individuals able to experience and comprehend music of more substance. Y (Adv & Beg: 60% Classical, 20% Folk, 20% Popular) I know some directors give more pop music to their beginning students, but I don't. I find popular music is often more difficult to teach and generally has less lasting value. N (Adv & Beg: 33% Classical, 33% Folk, 33%, Popular) You will probably need to use some popular music with beginning students, and that is OK provided you are careful to maintain proper vocal technique and production. Y (Adv: 45% Classical, 45% Folk, 10% Popular) (Beg: 20% Classical, 45% Folk, 35% Popular) You must be very careful in selecting popular music for beginning kids. With young singers you are really working on trying to build proper vocal production. You don't always sing pop music with proper vocal production and so you are sort of giving your students mixed signals. So, I feel it is better to perform such music with more mature singers who are better able to know the difference. N (Adv: 30% Classical, 30% Folk, 40% Popular) (Beg: 30% Classical, 40% Folk, 30% Popular) Maintaining Student Interest Another issue mentioned by directors is the need many directors feel to keep beginning students interested and, by extension, enrolled in the program: I think with beginning students the balance should be shifted a little bit more toward popular repertoire. So many of these kids who come in are just beginners testing the waters and are not really committed to the program yet. If you throw a lot of classical stuff at them right away you are going to run them off. Y (Adv: 35% Classical, 35% Folk, 30% Popular) (Beg: 25% Classical, 25% Folk, 50% Popular)

PAGE 129

118 I do more popular music with my beginning students in order to grab them and get them to buy into the program. N (Adv: 75% Classical, 15% Folk, 10% Popular) (Beg: 55% Classical, 15% Folli, 30% Popular) Finding Classical Music for Beginning Students Several directors indicated finding classical music appropriate for beginning level students is often difficult. Directors indicated such difficulties can be an influence on the balance of repertoire they select for beginning students: The balance would only differ if I couldn't find classical music appropriate to the level of the students. I will not use watered down versions. Y (Adv & Beg: 33% Classical, 33% Folk, 33%, Popular) I believe the balance should be the same. However, sometimes it is difficult to find classical music appropriate for this level. So, sometime I have to use simplified arrangements of classical music with my beginning students. (Adv & Beg: 45% Classical, 25% Folk, 30% Popular) Moving Students from Lighter to More Sopliisticated Styles Some directors state that, due to the initial interest of beginning students in popular music, they begin with more popular, lighter styles and then, as the year progresses, they work to introduce them to more sophisticated classical repertoire. Directors imply the reason for this approach is that you need to begin where the students are and then gradually teach them an appreciation for music of other styles. This approach, however, did not always correspond to an overall change in the balance of repertoire beginning students perform compared to advanced students: I think it is important when in the year styles of music are introduced, especially for beginning students. I tend to start with lighter selections and gradually introduce the students to more sophisticated classical styles. I also tend to end the year with somewhat lighter selections. Y (Adv & Beg: 40% Classical, 40% Folk, 20% Popular)

PAGE 130

119 I do a little bit lighter literature with my beginning students, especially in the beginning. I think they have to be taught an appreciation for the more serious classical styles. Y (Adv: 60% Classical, 35% Folk, 5% Popular) (Beg: 35% Classical, 60% Folk, 5% Popular) With the young students, I don't want to overwhelm them with classical music. However, I do expose them to some simple things. As the students mature I tend to do more classical music. N (Adv: 25% Classical, 35% Folk, 40% Popular) (Beg: 1 5% Classical, 40% Folk, 45% Popular) Teaching Pieces Several directors indicated they select more 'teaching pieces' or works some have described as 'music written for the educational market,' Given the categories directors had to work with, many had a difficult time with the classification of much of this music. Most directors classified this music as 20th Century music, with some placing selections in the folk or pop category: I tend to select works based more on the specific skills or concepts I am planning to teach.... For the most part I rely on standards I know will work with young singers as well as more recent things written especially for beginners. I try to stay away from the Hal Leonard stuff. Y (Adv: 50% Classical, 25% Folk, 25% Popular) (Beg: 33% Classical, 33% Folk, 33% Popular) For beginning students I have to start out with much lighter repertoire. We sing a lot of Ed Lojeski pieces, one or two Kirby Shaw pieces, and a lot of works by Sally Albrecht, Jay Althouse, Gene Grier, and Roger Emerson. These composers write a lot of nice pieces for beginning students. These pieces are very simple and not that challenging, but they are pieces that deal with self motivation, self esteem, team spirit that kind of thing. N (Adv: 60% Classical, 25% Folk, 15% Popular) (Beg: 50% Classical, 25% Folk, 25% Popular) If you consider classical music to be music of dead composers, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Handel, no, I don't do any of that with my beginning students because of the difficulties with range and vocal quality needed for those kinds of advanced classical pieces. I consider classical pieces to be

PAGE 131

120 octavos that are not fluff; that have good voice leading and have some musical depth. N (Adv & Beg: 40% Classical, 50% Folk, 10%, Popular) Question 5: How important is it for students to sing at least one composition from each of the major historical periods during the course of a school year? The directors interviewed universally agreed students need to sing a wide variety of repertoire, including music from the major historical periods. However, there was some disagreement about how important it is for students to sing at least one composition from each of the historical periods during the course of a school year. Some directors stated they believe it is very important for both beginning and advanced students to sing at least one composition from each of the major historical periods during the course of a school year. Several of these directors cited state curriculum guidelines that require study of the historical periods as evidence of its importance. Several also indicated they believe directors have a responsibility beyond simply teaching students how to perform. They stated directors should teach students about the history of music and that such instruction should include exposing students to music from a variety of composers and historical styles: I believe it is very important for both beginning and advanced students. You have to start somewhere. If you are exposing students to classical music at the beginning level, when they get to the advanced level they can delve more into some of the more obscure composers and into some of the more difficult repertoire. Y I think its very important. I believe it is important for well-rounded musicians to have an understanding of choral style in all the different periods and to be exposed to the composers of the different periods. Y I think it is very crucial because you may only have them one year. And if you only have them for one year you want to be sure you have touched upon as many different styles as you can, so they can make up their minds as to what they like the most. Y

PAGE 132

121 I feel it is very important. Being able to identify and discuss the different historical styles is required as part of the North Carolina music competencies for both beginning and advanced students. Y I believe it is of primary importance. Choral directors should not teach just singing, they should also teach some music history. I feel the best way to do that is through the literature. N Other directors stated that, while they believe it is important for students to sing music from each of the historical periods, it is not always practical or necessary to do so with every student every year. This, some say, is especially true for beginning students. A number of directors indicated they use a multi-year plan in which, after two or three years, students will have been exposed to music from each of the historical periods: I think students should be exposed to music from each of the major historical periods, either through performance, or listening exercises. I don't believe it is absolutely necessary for students to sing works from every musical period each year. Y In college they told me it was very important, but, to be honest, we don't do it. Philosophically I believe it is important and if a student is with me for 3 or 4 years they will be exposed to music from each of the major historical periods. But to do it all in one year is very difficult. Y I think it's important, but it depends on what your performance responsibilities are. Sometimes its just not practical. N I would hope to do that, but that is not always the case with my beginning students. It is extremely difficult to cover that much literature, especially with younger, less able students. Y Several directors made a distinction between beginning and advanced students, suggesting it is less important for beginning students to sing a composition from each of the historical periods during the course of a school year than for advanced students. Most stated that, in addition to not being as practical for beginning students, the development of basic skills and an understanding of fundamental concepts is more important for young students than comprehensive exposure to the historical periods: I really believe in that [students should sing at least one composition from each of the historical periods during the course of a school year] and I make sure it happens with my advanced kids. I don't believe it is as important

PAGE 133

122 for beginning students. With them I'm more concerned with developing fundamental skills and knowledge, and I put more emphasis on selecting music that fosters that kind of development. I still try to do a wide variety of styles, including classical music, its just not as important as other considerations. Y I think it is very important for advanced students. I don't believe it's as important for beginning students. There is a fine line between getting beginning students hooked on classical music and pushing it too far. I try to do a vaiiety of styles with them and I introduce them to different periods, but we usually don't sing a work from every period. Y I try for that with advanced students, but I don't think it is necessary for beginning students. I think it is important for them to be exposed to each of the styles, but I don't believe that it needs to be through performance. N Still other directors stated it is relatively unimportant when compared to other issues. Some suggested that providing students with quality, in-depth experiences, and therefore fewer experiences, is more important than covering all the periods. Some stated that the educational setting may preclude an emphasis on a comprehensive exposure to classical music while others cited personal abilities or interest as limiting factors: I don't think it's all that important. Frankly, not all students can learn that much music and learn it to a level of proficiency with which I'm satisfied. I would rather they experience fewer compositions at a high level of success than sing a work from each historical period. Besides, within each historical period there are many forms and styles of composition. Singing one work is not going to truly give them any kind of comprehensive understanding of the music of the period. Y I don't believe it is terribly important. I think if you are hung up on that, you are going to force that issue regardless of what kind of clientele you may have and that might not really be the best thing to do to maintain student interest. I will tell you my philosophy has changed since I have changed schools. My students are much different than those at my previous school. Y It probably is important, but I don't believe I meet that criteria (sic). I tend to go more with my strengths. I would rather do things that I feel I'm strong with already than possibly not give my students the best experience at something I'm not that great at doing. I'm not wonderful with Brahms, so I tend to shy away from that, whereas put Pinkham in my lap and I will run with it. Y I don't think it's very important. At least it's not what is important to me. Besides, the students could care less. N

PAGE 134

123 In my present situation it's not very important. Pliilosophically I would like to do it, but realistically, in a small school with 450 students, few private lessons it's not a reality and not a goal. I am pleased if I can bring them to a positive experience with something beside what they grow up with which is country and gospel music. N Summary of the Balance of Repertoire Students Should Sing The data suggest directors universally agree students should sing a wide variety of repertoire, including classical compositions, folk compositions, and popular works. The data also suggest that, on average, directors believe both advanced and beginning students should sing a higher percentage of classical compositions than folk or popular compositions, with beginning students singing a somewhat lower percentage of classical music than advanced students. Although almost half of the directors interviewed stated beginning and advanced students should sing the same balance of repertoire, the remaining directors stated they increase the percentage of folk and/or popular music beginning students sing and correspondingly decrease the percentage of classical music they perform. The central issues affecting changes in the selection of repertoire for beginning students were (a) the perception that much popular music is of poor quality and stylistically inappropriate for the development of good vocal technique, (b) the need directors feel to keep beginning students interested, and by extension enrolled in the program, (c) the difficulty directors have in finding classical music appropriate for the ability level of beginning students, and (d) the belief that most beginning students start with an interest in popular music but generally need to be taught an appreciation of other styles. Significant differences, however, were also found between nominated directors and directors not nominated regarding the suggested balance between "classical" and popular music. Nominated directors suggested advanced students should sing a much higher percentage of classical music than the percentage suggested by directors not nominated.

PAGE 135

124 Directors not nominated, on the other hand, suggested advanced students should sing a much higher percentage of popular music than the percentage suggested by nominated directors. There was also some disagreement between directors of both groups regarding how important it is for students to sing a composition from each of the major historical periods during the course of a school year. Some felt it was essential for both beginning and advanced students to sing a composition from each of the major historical periods during the course of a school year. Other felt that, while it was important for advanced students to have a comprehensive exposure to classical music, it was less important for beginning students. Still others stated that while they would like to have their students sing music from each of the major historical periods during the course a school year, it is often not practical or necessary given the outside performance demands on the program and other factors such as the development of performance skills they consider to be more important. Quality and Choral Music Question 6: Choirs that perform a high percentage of popular music are sometimes criticized because the quality of much of the music performed is deemed by some to be substandard. What are your beliefs on this topic? Of the 26 nominated directors interviewed, 22 stated they agreed much of the repertoire performed by choirs that focus on popular music is of poor quality. The remaining 4 nominated directors, while not outright agreeing with the statement, identified other problems associated with choirs that perform a high percentage of popular music. In contrast, only 1 1 of the 26 directors not nominated agreed with the statement in question 6: I would have to say I tend to agree. Many of the newer arrangements are just knock-offs of what the kids are listening to on the radio. Much of the

PAGE 136

125 pop repertoire out there does not stretch the students musically or intellectually. Y Because there is so much garbage out there that is probably a very reasonable statement. The classical repertoire has been filtered through the years and a lot of the riffraff and the chaff has been eliminated. The classical music we have available now is generally pretty good literature. Recent literature is written by anybody and everybody and a lot of it is bubble-gum music and a lot of it is baby-shoes music and we have some folks who are doing that. The level of the quality of that literature over the whole scope is nowhere near the level of quality of the classical literature that is available. Y I would agree with the statement that a lot of the popular music published today is not quality music suitable for music education. You can go to just about any reading session today and read through 25 to 30 pieces and you will only find one or two works of any quality. N I agree! It has to do with the "chord-factory" mentality of the aixangers. The arrangements seem to be formulized they are written according to a formula. They are very predictable. You see the same arrangers over and over again, who produce these pieces almost on a daily basis. They are writing for publishers who mail out recordings of 30 and 40 new pieces at a time. These pieces really don't have a lot to say musically, intellectually, or spiritually. N Many directors stated a major problem with popular music, especially arrangements of pop tunes, is that it is not a good vehicle for the development of good musicianship or proper vocal technique. One director suggested the vocal production traditionally used for much popular music can be damaging to young voices. Another director who strongly disagreed with the statement that much of the repertoire perfomned by choirs that focus on popular music is of poor quality, implied later that they resorted to using more classical music because their students needed to work on the basics: You cannot compare the classical masters with contemporary pop musical theatre composers. The inherent musical quality of classical works by the masters will make students better musicians than the lighter music. I feel it is important for students to understand there is a time and a place for everything. In our business it is educadon, and education to me means the classics. Y I believe most of it is substandard. Literaturewise, I don't think it builds good vocal habits. I don't believe it helps students learn to read, and I don't believe it facilitates the development of musicianship to the same degree as a traditional classical program. Y

PAGE 137

126 I would have to agree. Pop music is not kind to young voices. There are a lot of leaps and a lot of pressed and belting kinds of traditions there that I consider damaging to young voices. And if that is all they are singing then they are not building any vocal technique that is going to take them through and put them out in a position where they can sing that kind of music, if that is what they want later in life. Y I would have to agree. A lot of pop arrangements are poorly written for high school voices. The ranges are often extreme and the tessitura is generally too high for the guys and too low for the altos. N I don't agree. ... I have a showchoir that ended up this year being less on the show and more on the classical side of things. I wish I had balanced that better with more entertainment-type music. They seemed to enjoy doing the popular music but, they needed work on the basics. N Another major concern directors had regarding popular music was the excessive use of popular music. Showchoir programs were held up by many directors as one manifestation of the problem: I see it happen and it's a disservice to the child. A lot of the smaller town high schools hide behind pop music. They entertain period. They don't do anything else. They don't sing at any of the choral festivals or go to any of the workshops or clinics because they don't want anybody else to know that's what they are doing. They sing only pop repertoire and their community loves them because, as a whole, they don't know any better. It's a real crime because they are selling their students short. Y I have a good example of that. There is a choir around here that has 200 kids in the program with 4 or 5 choirs and they are all showchoirs. Those kids wouldn't know Mozart if he came up and bit-em on the rear end. I think that's wrong. It's the tail wagging the dog. I have heard those kids rehearse and standing still not much is happening. I have found this to be true in a lot of programs that emphasize popular music. I want to hear them stand still and sing. You have to ask the question: 'Have they been taught good vocal technique? Have they been taught to read music? Do they know what dynamics are? Can they sit down with a piece of music and do it on their own? Are they aware of where this music came from?' I would say in 95% of the programs that focus on popular music the students have not been taught these skills or musical concepts. There are a few programs that focus on vocal jazz and high quality arrangements and the students are being taught how to read music. But, I still think the vast majority do not. Y I believe if a director has his or her students sing popular music to the exclusion of other styles, it's wrong. You don't go to an English literature class and only study Agatha Christie. There are higher levels of intellectual stimulation that our students need to be exposed to to help them grow

PAGE 138

127 through our art. Popular music is designed to entertain rather than to enrich and stimulate growth. Y There is a time and place for all styles. I think, however, that it is a disservice to the students if they are in a showchoir and they never experience other styles of music. For that reason I have a real problem when showchoir is the total program. I would much rather see it as an ensemble that is part of a larger choir that does sing a wide variety of repertoire. There are very few groups that do only classical literature, but there are plenty of groups that do only popular, and I think that is a major problem. Y Several directors stated that, although they agree an emphasis on popular music is not as educationally sound as a more classically based program, the community may dictate, to a large degree, the balance of music use: I believe there is some validity in that statement. I think that singing popular music is certainly not the challenge that singing classical music is. Popular tunes also do not have the lasting quality that most of the classical music has, and that is probably where the criticism comes from. However, you need to consider the makeup of your audience. There are very few people who attend my concerts who would appreciate classical music. We want to keep full-time music in the schools, and we must have community support to do that. N I believe that statement has some validity. I do believe, however, that some of that is dictated by the area you are in. If we were to do 80% classical music, we would lose a lot of our audience. N Although many directors were critical of those who place popular music as the central focus of their program, most indicated popular music can and should be part of the total repertoire, provided that directors select quality arrangements and compositions. Some suggested quality popular compositions could be used to teach many of the skills and concepts taught through classical music, with many indicating vocal jazz as a primary source. Many directors, however, stated that finding quality popular music is often difficult: I think it is wrong to only do popular music. However, I also think it is wrong to condemn a director because he is exposing his students to that music. If they are doing it right, then the students will be able to be critical of that style of music and sing that music with a high quality of musicianship. Y

PAGE 139

128 I totally agree. Most of the choirs that do a lot of pop music do a lot of low quality junk. However, pop music has its place. I believe good quahty arrangements, like some of the vocal jazz things, are out there and should be included. I don't believe, however, that students need a big dose of it because they listen to it all day long. Y There are some quality Broadway, pop, and jazz pieces out there, but overall I'm not seeing good quality. I have to really look to find something of lasting value. N I have a showchoir and we did a medley of Gershwin tunes this year. I had to really, really search to find what I thought were quality arrangements. It's a big concern for me. I do believe that there are programs who are doing a lot of substandard literature. However, there is good literature out there — you just have to look for it. N I feel it depends on the type of popular music. I think some of the jazz compositions available can provide wonderful training. There are some good arrangements out there of Broadway and showchoir music, too. Y You can teach a lot of things through popular music. Many of the musical skills and concepts you teach through more classical selections can also be taught through popular music and jazz, provided, of course, you select quality compositions. Y Nine of the directors not nominated stated they did not agree with the statement that much of the repertoire performed by choirs that focus on popular music is of poor quality: I know people look at popular music and don't believe it is very involved. They don't believe it is teaching you all of the fundamentals. Popular music is just as involved as any other music. If you are teaching a pop song, you are still going to teach the same things. You are going to teach phrasing, breathing, diction — all those things you would teach through other music. I don't criticize groups who do a lot of popular music if they are getting a child to appreciate music. It may be that singing pop music is the only way the child will be interested and, if that is something they can relate to, then that is the best way to go. N I don't agree. I will say, however, if you are going to do pop, do it in conjunction with other types of music. For example, I have a showchoir that performs all popular music, but in order to be in the showchoir you must also be in my advanced choir. Therefore they are exposed to what some people would call real music or music with value [said with humor as if making fun of those with such a narrow view]. I say that with a little bit of disgust because I believe you can find value in anything. It just depends on what you do with it. N I think if you can get the students to sing and enjoy singing it does not matter what they are singing as long as it is sung in that style well. N

PAGE 140

129 Question 7: In evaluating the quality of a composition, what do you look for? Most directors initially responded to question 7 with a list of elements they examine to determine the quality of a composition. Many of the descriptive comments made by directors about these elements were subjective and open to wide interpretation. For that reason, all relevant statements made by directors regarding each of the elements are presented below, with only duplicate statements eliminated. Because much of the criteria directors suggested was so subjective, descriptive information and/or examples of how they use a given criterion was requested when possible. The elements can be broken down into four general categories: (a) independent musical elements, (b) musical elements directly related to the abilities and characteristics of the ensemble for which the selection is being considered, (c) the director appeal of the composition, and (d) non-musical elements. Each category will be discussed below followed by a table listing the elements directors stated they consider to be indicators of quality. Tables also include descriptive quotes from directors when available and deemed necessary. Independent Musical Elements The independent musical elements directors consider to be indicators of the quality of a composition can be broken into categories related to various fundamental elements in choral music: melodic material, harmonic material, rhythmic material, style, form, texture, voice leading, text, accompaniment, repetition and predictability (Table 5.5).

PAGE 141

130 There was generally little difference between these two groups of directors with regard to the kinds of criteria mentioned (almost every criterion was mentioned by one or more directors from each groups). There was also little difference between the qualitative descriptions offered by directors for most criteria. However, for 'Melodic Material' and 'Text' statements were made by directors that can be viewed as in opposition. For melodic material, one director indicated she looks for "a melody that is easily implanted in the minds of the students" (N). This is in contrast to directors who stated they look for melodies that are "more than just a tune to sing" (Y) and melodies that "don't use a lot of melodic cliches" ( Y). For text, one director indicated they look for text with "a positive message" (N). Another director indicated they look for "lyrics that are meaningful" stating: "There is an awful lot of 'let's all hold hands and smile because music makes the world go round' stuff out there" (Y). While "a positive text" may not refer to lyrics of a nature similar to the example above, the possibility exists that the kind of text the first director is looking for is exactly the kind of text the second director is trying to avoid. Table 5.5 presents a list of independent musical elements identified by directors in response to question 7. For each element listed, descriptive responses from directors are presented. A noticeable difference was found between groups regarding the number of directors who identified "text"'as an indicator of the overall quality of a composition. Twenty-one of the 26 nominated directors mentioned text as a criterion for the determination of quality compared to 7 out of 26 for directors not nominated. 1 -ei i — Aiiir'^^i'^v^ •-

PAGE 142

131 Table 5.5 Independent Musical Elements Used to Determine Quality Based on Director Interviews Criteria Qualitative Description Melodic Material Harmonic Material Rhythmic Material quarter Style Form Texture Voice Leading Text "fluid melodic line" Y; "the melodic line should have a logical sequence" Y; "more than just a tune to sing" Y; "the maturity of the musical line, I don't want a lot of melodic cliches" Y; "all parts have a 'melodic line' rather than a one-note samba" N; "I look for a melody that is easily implanted in the minds of the students" N "interesting harmonic structure ... everything is not in root position" Y; "consonant sounding ... the harmonic progression needs to make sense" Y; "rich harmonies ... something beyond I-IV-V-I" Y; "logical harmonic sequence" N "interesting rhythmic structures ... I like to see more than notes and half notes with every one singing the same rhythm all the time" N "the music is in a style appropriate for the text ... 'Kyrie Eleison' not set to a dance/rock beat" Y "something beyond 'ABA Coda'" Y; "is the work in something besides standard song form" N "is there interesting use of texture ... changes in the number of parts singing at one time" Y; "more than continual, four-part homophony" N "good voice leading ... is the movement of each of the parts from one note to the next logical" Y; "are the vocal lines singable or is the voice leading so disjointed as to make the piece unmusical" N "is the text of recognized literary value apart from the music" Y; good text ... a poetic text taken from literature rather than a text just written by the composer" Y; "wedding of the music to the text ... does the composer work with or against the natural accents of the text" Y; "does the music portray the text effectively" Y; "lyrics that are meaningful ... There is an awful lot of 'let's all hold hands and smile because music makes the world go round' stuff out there." Y; "text I know they will be seeing in their language arts class not 'moon in June' stuff Y; "is it the kind of message I want to give my students and audience" N; "text with a positive message" N

PAGE 143

132 Table 5.5 (cont.) Criteria Qualitative Description Accompaniment "Accompaniment that is well written ... that adds to the composition and doesn't just reproduce the vocal lines" Y; "is it appropriate to the style of music" N; "I try to stay away from taped accompaniments" N Repetition and "If it has a tremendous amount of repetition in it or the pop Predictability hook, I'm not interested" Y; "A pop tune that repeats the same lyrics over and over again and has a real redundant accompaniment is not going to teach the students anything" Y; "is there use of deception enough to keep me, the audience, and the students interested" Y Musical Elements Related to Ensemble Ability Directors also identified a number of musical elements direcdy related to the abilities, characteristics, and needs of the ensemble for which the work is under consideration. Some directors indicated they consider these elements first and more often than others when deciding whether or not a composition is of quality. In fact, directors were so inclined to offer only criteria related to the abilities of the ensemble that the question was often reworded and restated: In evaluating the quality of a composition are there things you examine apart from those related to a specific ensemble ? The emphasis directors place on the use of such criteria suggests that the quality of a composition may be largely a factor of the abilities, characteristics, and needs of the ensemble for which it is intended: I think we as directors often say a piece is good or bad based on how we see it working with a particular group rather than based on the piece alone. Everybody has their own taste with regard to music and everyone is developing their own program. What may work for me may not work for somebody else. N

PAGE 144

133 The musical elements directors equate with quality that are related to the ensemble can be divided into three categories: the difficulty of the composition relative to the abilities of the ensemble, those that foster student interest, and what can be taught through the work (Table 5.6). Table 5.6 Musical Elements Related to the Ensemble Used to Determine Quality Based on Director Interviews Criteria Qualitative Description Relative Difficulty Student Interest than What can be Taught Through the Work "I look for works with comfortable ranges" Y; "I look at the range and tessitura to see if they are appropriate for my students" Y; "is the composition kind to the high school voice" Y; "something that will challenge their ears" Y; "things that are rhythmically challenging" Y; "I look for things that are challenging within their ranges" N; "are the ranges and tessitura appropriate for high school singers" N; "musical lines that are challenging but within their reach" N "is it something the students are interested in" Y; "will the text speak to the students" Y; "is the text a text with which the students can identify" Y; "will it touch the students on more a surface level" Y; "with more classical things I decide whether or not my students will like the way it sounds" N "Quite frankly, sometimes, what it comes do to is what I think my students will like to sing. And that does not necessarily mean what they like to sing with the radio, but things I think they will actually enjoy learning" N "what is it going to teach the kids how does it help them grow musically" Y; "Good teaching pieces. A work that has a lot of stuff in it." Y; "stylistic forms that can be taught through the work" Y; "the teaching opportunities the work provides" Y; "will it help my students develop good musicianship" Y; "can I teach good vocal habits" N; "what can be taught through the work" N

PAGE 145

134 Director Appeal Directors also equated the quality of a composition with the degree to which they find a composition appealing. Directors used a variety of ways to describe this relationship: If the students are not going to be initially interested in the composition, am I interested in it enough to bring the students along with me. Y Am I moved by the piece? Y Do I find the work aesthetically pleasing? Y Can I identify with the text? Y This is going to sound really stupid, but if I play through a piece and I like it then I guess I think of it as quality. N Non-musical Elements In addition to the musical elements of a composition and their relationship to the director and the ensemble, some directors stated they look at non-musical elements as indicators of the quality of a composition. Several directors indicated they consider the reputation or personal knowledge they have of the composer as a possible indicator of the quality of a composition: Some of the contemporary composers are writing good program pieces. I'm thinking of the John Leavets and the Linda Spevaceks. I think they are writing for the young voice. They are not as concerned with being master composers as they are with providing invigorating, fun, challenging and yet accessible music for young singers. Y The credibility of the composer. I look to see if it is an established composer such as Joyce Eilers or John Rutter. N Some directors stated they look at the publisher as an indicator of the quality of a composition: I look to see who published the piece. There are publishers out there you know generally don't put out quality material. Y The historical significance of a work was also mentioned as a non-musical element directors consider to be an indicator of the quality of a composition:

PAGE 146

135 Is the work of historical significance or is it just another tune that is here today gone tomorrow? Y Question 8: How difficult is it to determine the quality of a composition once you have examined the work? Twenty-eight of the 52 directors interviewed stated that after examining a composition it was fairly easy to make a decision regarding the quality of the work. The remaining directors were about evenly divided between those who felt it was somewhat difficult and those who felt it depended on the composition. Many of the directors who indicated it was relatively easy to determine the quality of compositions they examine stated their ability to evaluate the quality of choral works was generally a function of experience: It is not so hard now because I have been doing this for so many years. I didn't have a clue what I was doing when I graduated from college. I bought a lot of music at that time that I really hope nobody does again. It is embarrassing to think some of that music might still be in somebody's library. ... It is something you learn through experience. You can learn some fundamental knowledge about repertoire selection, but until you start doing it and picking music and seeing how it works with an ensemble you really don't know what you are doing. Y After teaching for 29 years it's not real difficult. A lot of it is just experience and knowing what a work is going to sound like for a particular group. N Some of these directors also indicated they found it relatively easy to determine the quality of a composition because the decision is based, in part, on just knowing what you like: It's not real difficult. I think much of the decision is based on personal taste and learning through experience what you like. ... I think repertoire selection can be taught to a degree, but a lot of it is simply what you like. Y I'm very fast at that. Appeal is the thing I start with. If what I'm looking for is not there then I'm just not interested. N

PAGE 147

136 Several of the directors who indicated they felt it was somewhat difficult to determine the quality of a work also suggested their ability or lack of ability was, in part, a matter of experience: It's difficult but becomes less troublesome with experience. Y I feel it is very challenging, but then I'm fairly new at this. N A number of directors indicated they believe that the difficulty in determining the quality of a composition depends on the composition. Most suggest it is generally easy to identify the very poor quality compositions and the very high quality compositions. Determining the quality of the remaining compositions, however, is somewhat more difficult and usually takes more time: Sometimes the quality just jumps off the page. Other times you must live with it some. I often find I need to hear a work performed in order to detennine the quality maybe as much as 40% of the time. Y Since I have taught for 20 years, it is not difficult to throw out the ones that are of really poor quality. Some things, however, are sort of iffy, but I find that in the end I seldom use them because I will find something better. Y It's not difficult at all, it just doesn't happen all at once. Some compositions just take more time than others. I have always found that the pieces that take a little time to grow on me I end up liking better than the ones I hear for the first time and I say "Wow that's great". N Several directors spoke of the difficulties related to questions concerning quality. Some indicated that quality is hard to define, especially without reference to a given ensemble. Others suggested that quality was an issue they had never given much thought: I don't think it is that hard, but it is extraordinarily difficult to explain what you might be thinking. When you examine a composition, it comes down to whether or not it is useful to you. It is hard to determine quality apart from a given ensemble. Every decision I make about quality is couched in the context of whether or not I will be able to use this piece with my group. If I find a piece that is not useful to me, I might recognize it as good quality, but I don't know that I would be able to give you reasons for my decision. Y

PAGE 148

137 It's like pornography; hard to define, but I know it when I see it There are, however, occasional disagreements between directors as to whether a work is quality or not. Y I don't evaluate music in terms of quality. If it fits my performance criteria it probably is quality, but I don't think of music in those terms. You have to be more practical. You have nine weeks to get a concert together and during that time you may also have to go to a contest and prepare other programs. I think that if in the future we are made to look at it [examine music in terms of quality] because of accountability then I guess we will have to, but I don't look at music in those terms. N Quality 1 don't know that's just so hard. I have never thought about myself as looking at a piece and going "Oh this is quality stuff. I guess I just try to pick stuff that will challenge the kids and teach them something. I don't know. N Question 9: What elements do you believe are common in compositions of high quality? Question 9 generated a list of elements directors believe to be common in compositions of high quality. As with question 7, many of the descriptive comments made by directors about these elements are subjective and open to wide interpretation. For that reason, all relevant statements made by directors regarding each of the elements is presented below, with only duplicate statements eliminated. The elements can be broken down into four general categories: (a) independent musical elements, (b) musical elements directly related to the abilities and characteristics of the ensemble for which the selection is being considered, (c) the director appeal of the composition, and (d) non-musical elements. Each category will be discussed below followed by a listing the elements directors stated they consider to be indicators of high quality.

PAGE 149

138 Independent Musical Elements The independent musical elements directors consider to be indicators of high quality can be broken into categories related to various fundamental musical elements: melodic material, harmonic material, rhythmic material, form, phrasing, texture, voice leading, text, dynamics, and accompaniment (Table 5.7). The last category in Table 5.7, "craftsmanship," gives descriptive statements directors made concerning the craftsmanship composers exhibit in the combined use of various musical elements as well as broad statements regarding the overall musical character of quality works. Musical Elements Related to Ensemble Ability The musical elements directly related to the abilities and characteristics of the ensemble can be divided into three categories: the relative difficulty of the elements to the abilities of the ensemble; those that foster student interest; and what can be taught through the work (Table 5.8). Director Appeal Directors also equated the quality of compositions with the degree to which they find a composition appealing. Directors used a variety of ways to describe this relationship: Quality compositions move me. They are more than just notes they speak to the soul. Y When I listen to a piece, I really like it or I don't, and that gives me something to base my decision on. N I think quality is really a matter of personal taste. N

PAGE 150

139 Table 5.7 Independent Musical Elements Common in High Quality Compositions Based on Director Interviews Criteria Qualitative Description Melodic Material Harmonic Material Rhythmic Material Form Phrasing Texture Voice Leading Dynamics variety Text Accompaniment "memorable melody" Y; "fluid melodic line" Y; "beautiful melodic line" Y; "all parts have some melodic material" Y; "a melodic line that has shape, is not repetitive, and does not have an overly limited range" Y; "a melodic line written to accentuate the text" N; "original melodic writing" N; "melodic writing where the extremes of range are used sparingly and only for special effect" N "makes sense harmonically" Y; "unique harmonic progression" Y; "neat chord structures" Y; "harmonies that are interesting -that grab more than just the brain" Y; "beautiful harmonies" Y; "interesting harmonic progression" Y "unusual rhythms" Y; "rhythmically interesting" Y; "rhythmic variation" Y; "competitive rhythms" N; "rhythmic variety" N; "interesting rhythmic structure" N "well-conceived stmcture ~ the piece has a beginning, middle, and end" Y; "a form that involves the development of musical ideas rather than continual repetition" Y; "well organized with contrasting sections" N "works that carry a musical idea through long passages rather than simple two-bar phrases" Y; "good sense of musical phrasing" N "varied use of texture as an expressive element" Y "artistic voice leading" N "dynamic variations, especially when it is strophic" Y; "a of dynamics" N "text of literary value" Y; "a lasting text" Y; "lyrics that 'speak'" Y; "a text with a message" N; "text with some word painting" N; "intelligent text" N "Accompaniment that adds to the composition" Y; "an accompaniment that is more than just the voice parts" Y

PAGE 151

140 Table 5.7 (cont.) Criteria Craftsmanship Qualitative Description "the music has the necessary elements for producing an esthetic experience" Y; "music that needed to be written rather than something written to keep the publisher happy" Y; "compositions that do not rely solely upon one element, but are able to use all elements effectively together in a variety of ways" Y; "good use of varied compositional techniques" Y; "uniqueness of presentation" Y; "music works with the style implied by the text" N; absence of awkwardness" N; "If I listen to it ten times and I hear ten different things" N Table 5.8 Musical Elements Related to the Ensemble Common in High Quality Compositions Based on Director Interviews Criteria Qualitative Description Relative Difficulty Student Interest What can be Taught Through the Work "each line is singable" Y; "does it sit well for the high school voice" Y; "intellectually challenging" Y; "there is a challenge within each part" Y; "challenging rhythmic and harmonic structures" Y; "an accompaniment that does not require the hiring of a professional" N; "realistic writing for the intended voices" N; "harmonies accessible to the students" N; "ranges that are not to high" N "text that has meaning for the students and will bring them to a higher level" Y; "can it bring the students to an aesthetic experience" Y; "will students be able to relate to the work through time" Y; "student appeal" N; "things students will be able to relate to emotionally" N; "something the students will feel good about doing" N; "something expressive that the students will find enjoyable to sing" N; "will singing the work help students develop their talents and appreciation for the choral art" Y; "they have teachable elements" N

PAGE 152

141 Non-musical Elements In addition to the musical elements of a composition and their relationship to the director and the ensemble, directors identified two non-musical elements common to compositions of high quality: some stated the composer or arranger is a good indication of the quality of a work, while others suggested quality works tend to be placed on various festival and state music lists directors can access: Some composers just have a sense of how music should go while others just don't get it. Y I look to see if works are approved or not. ... I check state and festival repertoire lists. N Several directors not nominated had difficulty with the evaluation of quality in music: I don't know 1 don't think in those terms. If I listen to it, and I like it, and I think the students will like it, we do it. N Gosh, these are hard questions. I've never thought about this stuff before. I just pick stuff that I want my kids to do because I like the piece. I really have not thought about this before. N Question 10: What elements do you believe are common in compositions of poor quality? Directors generally found it easier to identify elements common in compositions of poor quality than compositions of high quality. Question 10 generated a list of elements directors believe to be common in compositions of poor quality. As with question 9, many of the descriptive comments made by directors about these elements are subjective and open to wide interpretation. For that reason, all relevant statements made by directors regarding each of the elements is presented below, with only duplicate statements eliminated.

PAGE 153

142 The elements can be broken down into three general categories: (a) independent musical elements, (b) musical elements directly related to the abilities and characteristics of the ensemble for which the selection is being considered, and (c) non-musical elements. Each category will be discussed below followed by a list of the elements directors stated they consider to be indicators of high quality. In addition to the categories above, several directors suggested popular song arrangements are likely to be poor quality compositions. A listing of these comments is presented at the end of this section: Independent Musical Elements The independent musical elements directors consider to be indicators of poor quality can be broken into categories related to various fundamental musical elements: melodic material, harmonic material, rhythmic material, texture, voicing and voice leading, text, dynamics, and accompaniment (Table 5.9). The last two categories of Table 5.9, "arrangements" and "craftsmanship," give descriptive statements directors made concerning musical characteristics particular to poor quality arrangements and the lack of craftsmanship composers exhibit in the combined use of various musical elements, as well as broad statements regarding the overall musical character of poor quality works. The musical elements directly related to the abilities and characteristics of the ensemble can be can be divided into two categories: those that make the work too difficult and those that don't challenge the students (Table 5.10).

PAGE 154

143 Table 5.9 Independent Musical Elements Common in Poor Quality Compositions Based on Director Interviews Criteria Qualitative Description Melodic Material Harmonic Material Rhythmic Material Texture Voicing and Voice Leading Dynamics Text Accompaniment Arrangements Craftsmanship "silly melody" Y; "syrupy melody that never develops" Y; "melodic cliches" Y "harmony is predictable they all sound like graduation songs and Hal Leonard will advertise them that way" Y; "very basic harmony" Y; "harmonic structure where the parts are in thirds and basically nothing else" Y; "abrupt key changes" N; "a T chord for four measures" N "repetitious rhythms" Y; "works that rely on showy, rhythmic gimmicks" Y; "relies heavily on a rhythmic pattern in order to sell" Y; "no variety in rhythm" Y; "boring rhythmic ideas not enough counterpoint" Y "continual homophonic singing with no variation" Y "boring alto and bass lines" Y; "predictable vocal lines" Y; "limited divisi" N; "awkward leaps" N "either continual extreme dynamic changes or mezzo forte throughout" Y "Music does not fit the text" Y; "trite text T believe in the world' and T believe in myself ~ these things are sappy" Y; "poor text like bad high school poetry" Y; "poor translations" Y; Corny text that plays strictly to the surface emotions" Y; "repetitive text" Y; "syrupy, drippy text if it is another song about a butterfly or a rainbow" Y "'boom-chuck' piano parts" Y; "T-IV-V-I-Um-Pah-Pah' piano parts" Y; "accompaniment is not integrated as part of the whole" Y; "arpeggiated chords that don't do anything" Y; "accompaniment not in the proper style" Y; "accompaniment written for a non-player" Y; "accompaniment that follows the voice parts" Y; "accompaniment that does not add to the perforaiance" Y "watered down classical works" Y; "not tme to the original" Y; "pop medleys with only 5 measures of each song" N "parodies on things" Y; "common" Y; "overly repetitive musical ideas" Y; "works written to a formula" Y; "simplistic and redundant harmony, melody and rhythm" Y; "pieces that try to be difficult for the sake of difficulty" Y

PAGE 155

144 Table 5.10 Musical Elements Related to the Ensemble Common in Poor Quality Compositions Based on Director Interviews Criteria Qualitative Description Relative Difficulty "not singable 20th Century dissonances approached so poorly they are impossible to sing" Y; "extreme tessituras" Y; "range not appropriate for the students for which it was written" Y; "low tessitura for the altos and a high tessitura for the tenors" Y; "unison writing to make it easier rather than for the beauty of the unison" N Musical Elements that "does not stretch the singers vocally or harmonically" Y; "all Don't Challenge the parts have a limited range" Y Non-musical Elements In addition to the musical elements of a composition and their relationship to the director and the ensemble, directors stated non-musical elements such as the reputation of the publisher or the look of the cover are sometimes clues to the quality of the composition: When the piece is voiced for every possible combination SATB, SSA, SA, etc. Y The reputation of the pubUsher. I will seldom do anything from Alfred and less and less from Shawnee. Boosey Hawkes & Oxford, however, usually have good stuff. Y Poor compositions almost always have a colorful cover. Y Several directors not nominated equated the quality of compositions with the degree to which they find a composition appealing and with their ability to play the accompaniment: I guess it is really what you prefer and what you like. N Again, I don't know. If I don't like the way it sounds I don't pick it. N Several directors made a point of citing arrangements of popular music as examples of poor quality compositions: So many of the pop things tend to want the same dynamic level for pages and pages. We certainly don't have much interest when that is the case. N

PAGE 156

145 Basically, any popular song that is arranged for choir. These are done for commercial reasons; they are written to make money. Often little thought is given to should high school tenors be singing e, f, and g over and over again. It's commercial. Y Reach by Gloria Estephan is not a high quality piece of music. However, I selected this piece not because of its quality but because we were going to sing it in front of the student body, which is somewhat less than educated musically. If we had stood up there and sung Consecrate the Place and Day those kids would have said "Yuck." So I chose something that was an audience pleaser for that audience. Besides, I was sure I would have some students say "Gosh, that was neat. Maybe I'll take chorus." Then, when they take chorus I will have the opportunity to teach them some other styles of music. N And we go back to pop, so much of that stuff is written so poorly for the voice the tenors are high in their tessitura with the altos down low. I don't think it's good treatment of the voice or good for development of the voice. Extreme repetitiveness. I think that is what bothers me about pop music with three verses and one bridge with just a different set of text and the fact that the notes never change to work with the different text. N Summary Regarding Quality and Choral Music Questions 6 through 10 focused on obtaining opinions regarding quality in choral music. Directors were asked (a) to identify and discuss the elements they examine when trying to determine the quality of a composition, (b) to discuss those elements they believe to be common to compositions of high quality as well as those common to compositions of poor quahty, (c) how difficult it is for them, upon examination of a work, to determine its quality, and (d) to discuss their views regarding quality as it pertains to popular music. Little difference was found between nominated directors and directors not nominated regarding the elements directors examine to determine quality or in the qualitative descriptions offered. The elements directors identified can be divided into four major categories: (a) independent musical elements, (b) musical elements related to the characteristics, abilities, and needs of the ensemble, (c) director appeal of the composition,

PAGE 157

146 and (d) non-musical elements. The independent musical elements identified by directors consisted of fundamental elements in choral music such as melodic material, harmonic material, form, text, and so forth. Directors offered a variety of descriptive opinions regarding the character of each of these elements and how they relate to the quality of a composition. Also included were descriptive opinions regarding the combined use and interaction of these fundamental elements and the relationship of such interactions to quality. Most of the descriptive opinions offered were subjective in nature, requiring a judgment call on the part of the director. The musical elements related to the characteristics, abilities, and needs of the ensemble consisted of elements divided into three categories: (a) the difficulty of various elements of the work relative to the abilities of the ensemble, (b) elements that impact student interest, and (c) the number and variety of elements contained in a composition, through which directors can teach various skills and concepts. As with the independent musical elements, directors gave a variety of descriptive opinions regarding the character of each of these elements and how they relate to the quality of a composition. These opinions were also subjective and open to varied interpretation. Personal appeal was also identified as a factor in determining the quality of a composition. Most directors citing personal appeal as a factor stated their perception of the quality of a composition was related to how appealing they found the work. High appeal was most often equated to high quality. Directors also identified several non-musical elements as indicators of quality. The most frequently cited non-musical elements were the reputation of the composer or arranger and the reputation of the publisher.

PAGE 158

147 Although little difference was found between nominated directors and directors not nominated regarding the elements directors examine to determine quality or in the qualitative descriptions offered, several directors not nominated indicated it was very difficult to answer questions about quality because it was something they never considered and/or felt was not important when compared to other considerations. Directors were also asked how difficult it is for them to detenTiine the quality of a composition after it has been reviewed. About half of those interviewed indicated it was relatively easy. The remaining 50% were equally divided between those who felt it was relatively difficult to determine the quality of a composition and those who felt the difficulty of the decision depended on the specific composition under consideration. Those who placed a great deal of emphasis on personal appeal in determining quality generally found quality relatively easy to determine, stating it was simply a matter of knowing what you like. Most all directors stated their ability to determine the quality of compositions has become easier with experience. Finally, directors were asked to discuss their views regarding quality as it pertains to popular music. Almost all of the nominated directors stated they believe much of the repertoire performed by choirs that focus on popular music is of poor quality. Less than half of the directors not nominated had similar beliefs. Many directors stated a major problem with popular music, especially arrangements of pop tunes, is that many such compositions are not good vehicles for the development of good musicianship or proper vocal technique. A number of directors also cited the growing prevalence of choral programs that perform popular literature to exclusion of other styles, such as show choir programs, as a serious problem. Several directors stated that, although they believe they should do a more balanced variety of repertoire (less popular music and more classical

PAGE 159

148 music), the audiences they perform for will not support a more classically-based program. Although a majority of directors indicated they believe much of the popular repertoire available is of poor quality, most also stated they believe quality popular music should be included as part of the repertoire students perform. Directors who stated they did not believe much of the repertoire performed by choirs that focus on popular music is of poor quality indicated that, while some popular music is of poor quality, the same can be said for classical music. They also indicated they believe the skills and concepts that are taught through classical music can also be taught through popular music.

PAGE 160

CHAPTER 6 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary The principal purpose of this study was to gather information that could be used to improve the literature selection practices and procedures of current high school choral directors and undergraduate instruction in choral literature selection. A review of related research and literature regarding repertoire selection revealed that, while a variety of factors are important in the repertoire selection process, researchers and writers on the subject agree two competencies are essential for successful repertoire selection: (1) a broad knowledge of music of all types and styles, and (2) the ability to determine and select repertoire of high quality. The survey instrument and interview format were conceived and designed (a) to portray the demographic characteristics of the respondents, (b) to identify the quantity, types, and styles of literature selected by high school directors, (c) to determine the criteria, sources, methods, and procedures utilized by high school directors in the selection of repertoire, (d) to ascertain what and how factors influence the literature selection process, and (e) to collect director opinions regarding quality in choral repertoire selection. Data were solicited from two groups of public high school choral directors from states comprising the southeastern seaboard of the United States (Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia). One group consisted of directors deemed to be outstanding choral directors/music educators by university choral directors and choral 149

PAGE 161

150 music educators, referred to in this chapter as "outstanding directors." The second group consisted of directors selected from the remaining population using a linear systematic selection process, referred to in this chapter as "not nominated." The sample size for outstanding directors was 89. Directors from this group returned 45 surveys for a return rate of 50. 1 %. The sample size of directors not nominated was 208, of which 59 (28.7%) returned the survey. Due to the relatively low return rate from directors not nominated, 10% of the directors who did not return the survey were selected at random and interviewed regarding 12 demographic characteristics to determine if their were significant differences between those who returned the survey and those who did not return the survey. Results indicated there was no significant difference between these groups. Of the 102 directors who returned the survey 52 directors (50%), 26 from each group, were also interviewed by telephone. Conclusions Based on the data collected through the survey and from telephone interviews several conclusions may be drawn: Demographics 1 Directors identified as outstanding tend to teach in schools with larger student populations than directors who were not nominated. 2. An analysis of the relationship between student body minority populations and director identification suggests directors deemed to be outstanding are more likely to teach in schools where the student body minority population is between 10% and 50%. Data collected reveal 80% of outstanding directors taught in schools with minority populations between 10% and 50% compared to only 49.1% for directors not nominated. Directors

PAGE 162

151 not identified as outstanding were more likely than directors identified as outstanding to teach in schools with large or small minority populations. 3. Directors not identified as outstanding tend to teach in smaller choral programs than outstanding directors. 4. Directors deemed to be outstanding are more likely to hold an advanced degree in music than directors not so identified. 5. Directors not identified as outstanding are less likely to have studied voice or piano as their principal instrument while in college than outstanding directors. 6. There is a positive correlation between teaching experience and director success. Outstanding directors cited considerably more teaching experience than directors not identified as outstanding. The Repertoire Selection Process 1. High school directors tend to use a selection process that is generally not formalized or systematic. The process used usually consists of directors sifting through possible selections using one or two significant criteria in order to reduce the number of possible selections down to a manageable size. With this completed, directors then apply other criteria to further refine their choices. Criteria most frequently cited as the first criteria applied were director appeal, the educational needs of the choir, the technical ability of the choir, programming issues, quality of the music, and student interest. 2. The repertoire selection process used by directors for their beginning students is essentially the same as that used to select music for more advanced students. Differences identified in the selection process for beginning students center around the criteria directors use rather than a change in procedure. In selecting repertoire for beginning students.

PAGE 163

152 directors give more importance to technical difficulty and student interest, with an eye toward selecting compositions that provide for quick success and facilitate the teaching of fundamental performance skills and musical concepts. 3. Directors identified as outstanding tend to select and perform more classical music with advanced students than directors not nominated. The data also suggest these directors tend to perform major works more frequently than directors not nominated. 4. In the area of folk music, outstanding directors tend to perform considerably more multicultural and folk music (including spirituals) with advanced students than directors not identified as outstanding. 5. In the area of popular music, directors not identified as outstanding tend to select considerably more pop/rock music for advanced students than directors identified as highly successful. 6. Directors identified as highly successful tend to perform a wider variety of classical repertoire with advanced students than other directors, with 1 1.9% of directors not identified as outstanding selecting no classical music or classical music from only one period (Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, 20th Century) compared to 0% for directors identified as outstanding. 7. While the data suggest that, on average, directors of both groups select a higher percentage of classical music than folk or popular music for advanced students, outstanding directors tend to select a higher percentage of classical repertoire than directors not identified as outstanding. The data also reveal that directors not identified as outstanding tend to select a higher percentage of popular repertoire than outstanding directors with some directors selecting popular music to the exclusions of other styles, particularly classical music.

PAGE 164

153 8. High school directors generally select less classical music and more folk and popular music for their beginning students than they select for their advanced students. The data suggest that, while outstanding directors tend to select more folk and multicultural music for their beginning choirs, directors not identified as outstanding tend to select more popular music, especially pop/rock style compositions. 9. Directors identified as highly successful often select a wider variety of classical compositions for their beginning ensembles than directors not identified as outstanding. Analysis of collected data revealed 20% of directors not identified as outstanding selected either no classical music or classical music from only one period compared to 8.9% for directors identified as outstanding. 10. Regarding the selection of classical style compositions, directors place more importance on criteria directly related to the educational value of the music, with slightly less importance placed on the relative technical and artistic perfonnance difficulties inherent in the music. Other criteria such as extra-musical factors are considerably less important in the selection process. Criteria related to the educational value of a work that directors deem most important are the quality of a composition, the vocal performance skills that could be taught through a composition, and the potential of a composition to provide for aesthetic experience. Technical performance considerations include criteria such as the technical difficulty of a composition, the vocal maturity of the singers, and the artistic demands of a composition. 11. While data collected through the survey indicate directors, on the whole, consider the quality of a composition to be the most important criteria for repertoire selection, interview results suggest there are directors (from the group not identified as outstanding) who consider quality to be relatively unimportant and/or a criterion not considered in the repertoire selection process.

PAGE 165

154 12. Interview results also suggest the ability to determine quality may be a function of experience. Some directors, especially those with limited experience, had difficulty defining, discussing, or elaborating on what constitutes high or low quality in choral music or what they look for when determining the quality of a composition. Other directors, especially those with many years of experience and identified as outstanding, were very articulate and were easily able to address issues regarding quality. 13. In contrast to the hierarchy of selection criteria for classical compositions, directors selecting popular music place considerably less importance on criteria related to the educational value of a composition and decidedly more importance on extra-musical factors such as student appeal, programmability, and public appeal. In addition to the data collected through the survey, several directors interviewed stated they feel pressure from their community to program more popular music than they believe is appropriate for their students. 14. There is serious concern among directors regarding the perceived proliferation of choral programs that focus on the performance of popular music, much of which is in their estimation of poor quality and not well suited for the development of fundamental vocal skills. In addition, many directors feel that programs that focus on the performance of popular music do so to the exclusion of music of other styles. Although results of this study are not conclusive, the data do suggest such concerns may be justified. Analysis of the data revealed there are directors (from the group not identified as outstanding) who appear to perform popular music to the exclusion of other styles, particularly classical music. Further analysis of the data revealed these same directors had difficulty defining, discussing, or elaborating on issues of quality, with several stating they believed quality to be relatively unimportant and/or a criteria they did not consider in the repertoire selection process.

PAGE 166

155 Demographic Factors and Repertoire Selection The data suggest some demographic factors may be related to repertoire selection: 1. There are indications that the socioeconomic composition of the school student body is related to the number of popular and rock type compositions selected for study and performance. The data suggest directors who teach in schools in which students come from less affluent homes tend to select more pop/rock music than directors who teach students from more affluent homes. 2. There appears to be a positive correlation between director experience and the number of classical compositions selected for study and performance. The data suggest the more experience a director has, the greater the number of classical style compositions selected for study and performance. Sources for Repertoire 1. Choral workshops, live performances of choral music, choral reading sessions, music recommended by other directors, and recordings were identified as the top five sources of repertoire for high school directors. 2. Choral directors indicate they seldom use material from college music education courses or repertoire lists in textbooks. 3. While directors do use material from the American Choral Directors Association and the Music Educators National Conference, they indicated they very seldom if ever use material from other music organizations such as the National Association of Teachers of Singing and the Choristers Guild. 4. While high school directors tend to use many of the same sources for repertoire, outstanding directors indicated they use choral reading sessions, choral workshops, live

PAGE 167

156 performances of choral music, and material from the American Choral Directors Association more frequently than directors not identified as outstanding. Conversely, directors not identified as outstanding use music publisher catalogs, recordings, and sample scores more often than outstanding directors. Summary of Conclusions The repertoire selection process used by directors is generally not systematic. Directors tend to sift through possible selections using one or two significant criteria in order to reduce the number of possible selections down to a manageable size. They then apply other criteria to further refine their choices. This process is fairly universal and is used for the selection of repertoire for both beginning and advanced students. While directors use a variety of criteria for the selection of repertoire, the relative importance they place on any one factor varies depending on the given situation. Marked differences were found regarding the relative importance directors place on given criteria in the selection of classical music versus popular music. In selecting classical music directors tended to place more importance on criteria direcdy related to the development of the musicianship of the students. In contrast, directors placed criteria related to entertainment above educational considerations in the selection of popular music. In keeping with the views of published choral experts, directors agree students should be exposed to a wide variety of repertoire. In practice, directors generally select and perform a variety of styles including classical, folk, and popular compositions. On average, directors select and perform more classical music than either folk or popular music with their advanced students. With beginning students directors tend to perform more popular and folk compositions and fewer classical works.

PAGE 168

157 Although similarities among directors regarding the repertoire selection process have been identified, results of this study suggest there are important differences between the repertoire selection practices of directors identified as outstanding and directors not identified as outstanding. Directors not identified as outstanding tend to select more popular music and less classical music for both advanced and beginning students, perform fewer multicultural compositions, select a narrower variety of classical styles, rely more heavily on promotional materials from publishers as a source of repertoire, and some place more emphasis on criteria related to entertainment than on educational considerations. Some of these directors went as far as to state quality is a criterion of little importance and/or a criterion they do not consider when they select music. It should be noted that many of the directors who were not identified as outstanding expressed views regarding repertoire selection very similar to those given by outstanding directors. One reason for this similarity of view, but difference in identification may be attributed to the fact that some of the directors not identified as outstanding may not have been nominated because they have not taught as long and therefore simply are not yet known to the college nominators. Despite the fact many of the directors not identified as outstanding held views similar to outstanding directors, substantial differences were noted between the two groups. The differences found between groups were precipitated by the views and practices of a subgroup within the sample rather than an "across the board" difference between the groups. The views and practices of this subgroup appear to substantiate the serious concerns expressed by many directors regarding the perceived proliferation of choral programs that focus on the performance of popular, entertainment type music to the exclusion of music of other styles.

PAGE 169

158 This study also identified demographic differences between directors identified as outstanding and directors who were not identified as outstanding. Those not identified as outstanding tended to come from smaller schools, were more likely to teach in schools with either large or small minority populations, were less likely to have studied voice as their principal instrument, were less likely to hold an advanced degree in music, and have less teaching experience. The results of this study suggest some of these differences may influence repertoire selection practices. The data indicate the socioeconomic composition of the student body is related to the number of popular and rock type compositions directors select. Directors who teach students from less affluent homes tend to select more pop/rock music than directors who teach more affluent students. Results also suggest directors with more experience tend to select more classical music than directors with less experience. In addition to demographic differences that may influence repertoire selection practices, other elements were identified as contributing factors. Interview and survey results suggest many directors, particularly those who have small programs, are concerned about job security. Keeping students in the program is a major concern. The data suggest many of these directors believe the best, if not the only way to keep students in the program is to perform popular music. Directors state this is especially true for retention of beginning students. Some directors also cite community pressure to perform popular music as a factor that impacts what repertoire they select. Recommendations 1 It is recommended that more time in undergraduate music education classes be devoted to the study of methods for the selection of repertoire.

PAGE 170

159 2. It is recommended that undergraduate instruction regarding repertoire selection be examined and revised to include greater emphasis on the value and importance of quality in the selection of choral music. Course content should include instruction regarding how to determine quality in choral music of all styles, with special attention given to popular-style compositions. Such instruction might include the use of exemplars of both high and low quality compositions, together with analysis and discussion of the elements that contribute to informed conclusions regarding quality. 3. Music education students should be encouraged or required to begin compiling a personal reference file of high-quality choral literature with selections appropriate for beginning students as well as selections for more advanced students. 4. The need for secondary choral students to be exposed to a wide variety of repertoire, that includes western art music, should be emphasized in music methods courses. Future teachers should be encouraged to provide instruction that includes substantial study of music from the five major historical periods in conjunction with the study of popular, folk, and non-western styles, regardless of initial student interest or the socioeconomic and/or cultural background of the student body. The writer is not suggesting that such student characteristics should not be considered in the selection of repertoire. Such factors are important and should influence the selection of repertoire to some degree. However, such considerations are not valid reasons for completely denying these students the opportunity to sing and learn about our vast musical heritage. Instructors should inform future teachers about resources that include repertoire of all styles, especially classical music appropriate for small choirs and beginning students. Such resources should also be coupled with instructional methodologies proven to be successful for the presentation of this repertoire.

PAGE 171

160 5. It is recommended that informational materials be developed outlining the importance and value of a diverse choral curriculum that includes substantial study of musics beyond popular compositions. These materials should be developed specifically for distribution to administrators, parents, and the community at large. Although teacher-developed materials may be helpful, it is believed materials developed and endorsed by professional organizations such as ACDA or MENC would be more effective. These materials could then be made available to directors nation-wide. 6. It is recommended that other methods of exposing future teachers to standard choral repertoire be devised. Teachers in the field find most valuable those sources of repertoire that combine access to the score with a live or recorded performance of the music. Such exposure to repertoire could be incorporated into vocal music education curricula through the use of reading choirs and/or recordings of standard choral repertoire, together with reference scores the students may retain as a resource for future repertoire selection. 7. Given the value teachers in the field place on reading sessions and workshops regarding repertoire selection, it is recommended that ACDA and MENC continue to offer such opportunities and encourage participation by undergraduate music education students. Recommendations for Further Research 1 It is recommended that research of a similar nature be conducted in other geographic areas of the country. 2. It is recommended that further research on this topic be conducted regarding how directors define and evaluate quality in choral music. 3. It is recommended that studies be developed to investigate concerns expressed by directors in this study regarding choral programs that focus on the performance of popular music. -. —in ^-.-•hH Ji I

PAGE 172

161 4. It is recommended similar research be conducted using different methods for determining success (e.g. contest ratings, opinions of school principals, etc.) 5. It is recommended that research be conducted regarding future teacher predispositions about repertoire selection upon entering college and the influence and/or impact of undergraduate instruction on precoUege behefs.

PAGE 173

GLOSSARY Classical music Music from the five major historical periods: Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, twentieth century (excluding folk and popular style compositions). Curricular chorus Choral ensembles of 20 or more students scheduled as a class during the regular school day. Experienced directors Directors with four or more years of secondary choral teaching experience. Folk music Arrangements of folk music, spirituals, non-western based compositions, and patriotic works. High School Any public school containing grades 10 through 12. Inexperienced directors Directors with less than 4 years of secondary choral teaching experience. Large choral programs High school choral programs with three or more curricular choruses. Multicultural music Compositions of a non -western origin. Popular music Arrangements of pop/rock music, original showchoir compositions, vocal jazz compositions, and musical theatre compositions. Selection criteria Factors used by directors to evaluate and choose choral music for study and/or performance by high school ensembles. Selection hierarchy A prioritized list of selection criteria employed for the puipose of selecting repertoire for high school choral ensembles. Small choral programs High school choral programs with fewer than three curricular choruses. Successful directors Directors deemed to be successful by university choral conductors at institutions accredited by the National Association of Schools of Music. 162

PAGE 174

APPENDIX A NOMINATION REQUEST LETTER March 21, 1995 Dear Colleague: One of the most challenging tasks we face as choral music educators is the selection of repertoire for study and performance. The decisions we make regarding repertoire have a tremendous impact on the quality of our programs and the education our students. I am a doctoral student at the University of Florida. For my dissertation I am conducting a study of the literature selection practices of public high school choral directors in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia. As part of this study, I am comparing the literature selection practices of directors deemed to be outstanding choral music educators with the selection practices of directors randomly selected from the remaining choral directors in each state. I am writing to you and other university conductors in an effort to identify outstanding high school directors in your area. Your professional opinion is highly valued. Without your interest and that of other experts in the field of choral music, this study would not be possible. Please indicate on the enclosed form up to ten public high school choral directors in your state you believe to be outstanding (in the top 20%) choral music educators. To ensure the confidentiality of your nominations, your name will only appear in the study as part of a list of nominators; your name will be separated from your actual nominations upon receipt. For your convenience I have enclosed a stamped, self-addressed reply envelope. If possible, please return your nominations at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions regarding this request, or if you would like additional information about this study, please do not hesitate to contact me at either the address above or by calling (813) 920-5057. Thank you for your time and assistance in this project. Sincerely, Guy W. Forbes Director of Choral Activities H. B. Plant High School End. 163

PAGE 175

164 NOMINATIONS State: Name School & City 1. 2. 5. 6. 10.

PAGE 176

APPENDIX B SURVEY COVER LETTERS Guy W. Forbes School of Music Millikin University Decatur, IL 62522-2084 September 18, 1995 First_Name Last_Name School Dear First_Name, One of the recurring challenges we face as choral music educators is the selection of choral repertoire. The decisions we make regarding repertoire have a tremendous impact on the quality of our programs and the education of our students. As part of my doctoral research I am conducting a study of the types of literature and literature selection processes utilized by outstanding high school choral directors in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia. You were selected to participate in this study by university choral conductors based on your outstanding performance as a teacher and director of choral music. Your insight and expertise regarding the selection of repertoire is highly valued. Enclosed you will find a survey and 2 computer response forms (Test Form A &Test Form B). Simply mark your answers on the appropriate computer response form. Occasionally, supplemental information is requested which must be answered on the questionnaire. To ensure the confidentiality of your responses, your name will not appear in the study and will be separated from your responses upon receipt. Having spent many years as a high school director, I am keenly aware of the demands on your time. Therefore, I have endeavored to make the questions short and succinct. Pilot studies have shown the survey takes less than 15 minutes to complete. For your convenience, I have enclosed a stamped, self-addressed reply envelope. Please return this letter, together with the survey and answer forms at your earliest opportunity. In addition to the survey, would you also please enclose a copy of your fall and spring concert programs from last year (only the listing of selections performed is needed). This information is very important to this study. If you have any questions regarding this request, or if you would like additional information about this study, please do not hesitate to contact me at either the address above or by calling (217) 424-6301. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request. Without your assistance and that of other outstanding directors, this project would not be possible. Sincerely, Guy Forbes Asst. Director, Choral Studies Millikin University RS. If possible, I would also like to conduct a brief telephone interview (5 min.) with you on this subject. I would prefer to call in the evenings or on the weekend it's less expensive! If, however, you prefer me to call during the day I will be happy to do so. Please list below the phone number and time you would prefer me to contact you. Thank you! i ) _______ Area Code & Phone Day(s) (M-F, Sat., etc.) Time(s) 165

PAGE 177

166 Guy W. Forbes School of Music Millikin University Decatur, IL 62522-2084 September 18, 1995 Dear Colleague, One of the recurring challenges we face as choral music educators is the selection of choral repertoire. The decisions we make regarding repertoire have a tremendous impact on the quality of our programs and the education of our students. As part of my doctoral research I am conducting a study of the types of literature and literature selection processes utilized by high school choral directors in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia. You have been selected for this study as part of a carefully selected sample of directors from your state. It is most important your survey be completed and returned to insure a representative study of literature selection practices in your area. Your insight and expertise regarding the selection of repertoire is highly valued. Enclosed you will find a survey and 2 computer response forms (Test Form A & Test Form B). Simply mark your answers on the appropriate computer response form. Occasionally, supplemental information is requested which must be answered on the questionnaire. To ensure the confidentiality of your responses, your name will not appear in the study and will be separated from your responses upon receipt. Having spent many years as a high school director, I am keenly aware of the demands on your time. Therefore, I have endeavored to make the questions short and succinct. Pilot studies have shown the survey takes less than 15 minutes to complete. For your convenience, I have enclosed a stamped, selfaddressed reply envelope. Please return this letter, together with the survey and answer form at your earliest opportunity. In addition to the survey, would you also please send me a copy of your fall and spring concert programs from last year (only the listing of selections performed is needed, you need not send ads, etc.). If you have any questions regarding this request, or if you would like additional information about this study, please do not hesitate to contact me at either the address above or by calling (217) 424-6301. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request. Without your assistance and that of other outstanding directors, this project would not be possible. Sincerely, Guy Forbes Asst. Director, Choral Studies Millikin University P.S. If possible, I would also like to conduct a brief telephone interview (5 min.) with you on this subject. I would prefer to call in the evenings or on the weekend it's less expensive! If, however, you prefer me to call during the day I will be happy to do so. Please list below the phone number and time you would prefer me to contact you. Thank you! Name ( L Area Code & Phone Day(s) (M-F, Sat., etc.) Time(s)

PAGE 178

167 Guy W. Forbes School of Music Millikin University Decatur, IL 62522-2084 January 12, 1996 First_Name Last_Naine School Dear First_Name, I am writing to you a second time to request your assistance in a study of the choral music selection practices of outstanding high school choral music educators. You were selected for this study not at random but by professionals who believe you to be one of the finest choral conductors in the state. With such a distinction comes a certain responsibility to the profession. The results of this research can be highly valuable to university music education instructors charged with preparing future teachers; to state, county, and school administrators who's duty it is to evaluate choral programs; and, most importantly, to other teachers in the field seeking inspiration and guidance. I say "can" because the success level of this study is directly related to whether or not you respond. So please, take a few minutes to complete the enclosed survey. Your insight and expertise regarding the selection of repertoire is essential to success of this study. Enclosed you will find a survey and 2 computer response forms (Test Form A & Test Form B). Simply mark your answers on the appropriate computer response form. Occasionally, supplemental information is requested which must be answered on the questionnaire. To ensure the confidentiality of your responses, your name will not appear in the study and will be separated from your responses upon receipt. Having spent many years as a high school director, I am keenly aware of the demands on your time. Therefore, I have endeavored to make the questions short and succinct. Pilot studies have shown the survey takes about 15 minutes to complete. For your convenience, I have enclosed a stamped, selfaddressed reply envelope. Please return this letter, together with the survey and answer forms at your earliest opportunity. In addition to the survey, would you also please enclose a copy of your fall and spring concert programs from last year (only the listing of selections performed is needed). This information is very important to this study. If you have any questions regarding this request, or if you would like additional information about this study, please do not hesitate to contact me at either the address above or by calling (217) 424-6301. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request. Without your assistance and that of other outstanding directors, this project would not be possible. Sincerely, Guy Forbes Asst. Director, Choral Studies Millikin University P.S. I would also like to conduct a brief telephone interview (5 min.) with you on this subject. I would prefer to call in the evenings or on the weekend it's less expensive! If, however, you prefer me to call during the day I will be happy to do so. Please list below the phone number and time you would prefer me to contact you. Thank you! £ } Area Code & Phone Day(s) (M-F, Sat., etc.) Time(s)

PAGE 179

168 Guy W. Forbes School of Music Millikin University Decatur, IL 62522-2084 January 12, 1996 Dear Colleague, I am writing to you a second time to request your assistance in a study of the choral music selection practices of outstanding high school choral music educators. You have been chosen for this study as part of a carefully selected sample of directors from your state. The results of this research cmi be highly valuable to university music education instructors charged with preparing future teachers; to state, county, and school administrators who's duty it is to evaluate choral programs; and, most importantly, to other teachers in the field seeking inspiration and guidance. I say "can" because the success level of this study is directly related to whether or not you respond. So please, take a few minutes to complete the enclosed survey. Your insight and expertise regarding the selection of repertoire is essential to success of this study. If you have already returned the earlier survey please disregard this request, and thank you for your assistance! Enclosed you will find a survey and 2 computer response forms (Test Form A & Test Form B). Simply mark your answers on the appropriate computer response form. Occasionally, supplemental information is requested which must be answered on the questionnaire. To ensure the confidentiality of your responses, your name will not appear in the study and will be separated from your responses upon receipt. Having spent many years as a high school director, I am keenly aware of the demands on your time. Therefore, I have endeavored to make the questions short and succinct. Pilot studies have shown the survey takes about 15 minutes to complete. For your convenience, I have enclosed a stamped, selfaddressed reply envelope. Please return this letter, together with the survey and answer form at your earliest opportunity. In addition to the survey, would you also please send me a copy of your fall and spring concert programs from last year (only the listing of selections performed is needed, you need not send ads, etc.). If you have any questions regarding this request, or if you would like additional information about this study, please do not hesitate to contact me at either the address above or by calHng (217) 424-6301. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request. Without your assistance and that of other outstanding directors, this project would not be possible. Sincerely, Guy Forbes Asst. Director, Choral Studies MiUikin University P.S. If possible, I would also like to conduct a brief telephone interview (5 min.) with you on this subject. I would prefer to call in the evenings or on the weekend it's less expensive! If, however, you prefer me to call during the day I will be happy to do so. Please list below the phone number and time you would prefer me to contact you. Thank you! Name ( L Area Code & Phone Day(s) (M-F, Sat., etc.) Time(s)

PAGE 180

APPENDIX C SURVEY Part I: Demographics (Answer on list Form A.) A: The Community 1. I consider the community my school serves to be: a) Rural b) Small Town c) Small City d) Suburb of Large City e) Inner City B: The School 2. The grade level distribution for my school is: a) 612 b)712 c) 8 12 d)912 e) 1012 3. The enrollment at my school is: a) b) c) d) e) less than 1200 1200 to 1700 1701 to 2200 2201 to 2700 over 2700 6. Please indicate which statement most accurately describes the ethnical composition of your school's student body. a) Very small minority population, less than 10% of student body. b) Minority students constitute 10% to 30% of student body. c) Minority students constitute 30% to 50% of student body. d) Minority students constitute 50% to 70% of student body. e) Very large minority population, more than 70% of student body C: The Choral Program: 7. How many students are enrolled in choral performance classes at your school during the regular school day? (do not count students in other music classes such as keyboard, etc.) Please indicate which statement most accurately describes the socio-economic composition of your school's student body. a) Predominately lower class, many students live under the poverty level. b) Predominately lower middle class, blue collar earners with family incomes $20,000 to 40,000 c) Predominately middle class, mixture of white and blue collar earners with family incomes 540,000 to $70,000. d) Predominately upper middle class, white collar professionals with family incomes $70,000 to $100,000. e) Predominately upper class, many families with 6 figure incomes. Does your school have a "magnet program?" a) No b) Yes, Performing Arts c) Yes, International Baccalaureat or Academic d) Yes, Technical/Business e) Yes, (Other, Please Specify below) a) b) c) d) e) less than 50 50 to 100 101 to 150 151 to 200 over 200 How many choruses of more than 20 voices meet as a class during the regular school day? (If none please leave blank.) a) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5 or more (Indicate how many ) How many ensembles of less than 20 voices meet as a class during the regular school day? If none please leave blank. a) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5 or more (Indicate how many ) For the choruses and ensembles identified above, please indicate how many from each category below are select (i.e. membership is by audition or some other selection process). 169

PAGE 181

170 1 0. Select choruses (more than 20 voices) a) b) 1 c) 2 d) 3 e) 4 1 1 Select ensembles (less than 20 voices) a) b) 1 c) 2 d) 3 e) 4 1 2. How many choruses or ensembles specialize in the performance of only one or two styles of literature (e.g. Pop Group, Jazz Choir, Madrigal Group)? a) b) 1 c) 2 d) 3 e) 4 14. Is your most advanced degree in music? a) Yes b) No 14A. If you hold a degree in music, what was your principal instrument? Instrument: 14B. From what institution(s) did you earn your degree(s)? Bachelor: Master: 12A. For the groups identified above as specializing in the performance of only one or two kinds of literature, please identify the kind of group (chorus or ensemble) and specify the kind(s) of literature each group performs. Group 1: Chorus Ensemble Lit. Group 2: Chorus Ensemble Lit. Group 3: Chorus Ensemble Lit. 16. Group 4: Chorus Lit. Ensemble D: The Director: 1 3. Please indicate the most advanced degree you hold. a) Bachelor b) Master c) Doctorate Doctorate: 1 5 How many years have you taught school music? a) 1 year b) 2 to 3 years c) 4 to 7 years d) 8 to 1 2 years e) Over 1 2 years How many years have you taught high school choral music? a) 1 year b) 2 to 3 years c) 4 to 7 years d) 8 to 12 years e) Over 1 2 years How many years have you taught choral music at your present school? a) 1 year b) 2 to 3 years c) 4 to 7 years d) 8 to 1 2 years e) Over 1 2 years When you were in high school, how many years did you sing in the chorus? a) b) 1 c) 2 d) 3 e) 4

PAGE 182

171 19. Including your years as an undergraduate, how many years have you sung in a college and/or community/professional chorus? 24. Twentieth Century a) 1 year or less b) 2 to 3 years c) 4 to 7 years d) 8 to 1 2 years e) More than 12 years 25. Part II: Repertoire A: Kinds of Literature Performed 22. 23. How many compositions from each of the following categories were performed by your most advanced mixed chorus during the 1994-95 school year? CLASSICAL MUSIC 26. 20. Renaissance a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many 2 1 Baroque a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many Classical a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many Romantic a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many Major Choral Works (e.g. Gloria -Vivaldi, RequiemRutter) a) b) 1 c) 2 d) 3 e) 4 or more FOLK MUSIC Folk Music (including spirituals) a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many 27. Multicultural (excluding spirituals) a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many 28. Patriotic Works a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many POPULAR MUSIC 29. Pop/Rock (top 40) a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many

PAGE 183

30. Show Choir a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 10 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many Jazz 36. a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many 3 2 Musical Theatre a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many 172 How many compositions from each of the following categories were performed by your beginning chorus (mixed, girls, or men) during the 1994-95 school year? (If you have more than one group please give the information for the largest group only.) CLASSICAL MUSIC Renaissance a) b) I c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many ) 37. Baroque a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many OTHER MUSIC 38. Classical 33. Carol Arrangements a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many a) b) d) e) 2 to 3 4 to 5 over 5 (please specify how many ) 39. Romantic 34. Traditional/Pop Holiday Songs (e.g. "White Christmas", "Jingle Bell Rock") a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many 35. Other. a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many 40. 20th Century a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many 4 1 Major Choral Works (e.g. Gloria -Vivaldi, Requiem Rutter) a) b) 1 c) 2 d) 3 e) 4 or more

PAGE 184

173 FOLK MUSIC 42. Folk Music (including spirituals) a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many 43. Multicultural (excluding spirituals) a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many 44. Patriotic Works a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many POPULAR MUSIC 48. Musical Theatre a) b) I c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many OTHER MUSIC 49. Carol Arrangements a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many 50. Traditional/Pop Holiday Songs (e.g. "White Christmas", "Jingle Bell Rock") a) b) I c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many ) 45. Pop/Rock (top 40) Other a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many a) b) I c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many ) 46. Show Choir a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many Continue on to Back of this Page. The remainder of the survey is to be answered on Test Form "B". 47. Jazz a) b) 1 c) 2 to 3 d) 4 to 5 e) over 5 (please specify how many

PAGE 185

174 Note: Sections B and C are to be answered on Test Form "B". B: Sources for Repertoire For each of liie following sources of literature, please indicate how often you have used each source to locate and select repertoire for your choruses. The higher the number the more frequent the use. 12 3 4 5 Never Seldom Sometimes Often Very Often Never Very Often 1 Choral reading sessions 12 3 4 5 2. Choral workshops / clinics 12 3 4 5 3. Live performances 12 3 4 5 12. Materials from National 12 3 4 5 Association of Jazz Educators 13. Materials from National 12 3 4 5 Association of Teachers of Singing 4. Music publishers sample scores 12 3 4 5 5 Music Recommended by other 12 3 4 5 directors 6 Materials from American Choral 12 3 4 5 Directors Association 14. Materials from your MENC state 12 3 4 5 affiliate Music publisher catelogs and repertoire lists 2 3 4 5 16. Music you performed in college 12 3 4 5 Materials from American 12 3 4 5 Choral Foundation Materials from American Guild 12 3 4 5 of Organists Materials from Choristers Guild 12 3 4 5 I 0. Materials from college music education courses 2 3 4 5 11. Materials from Music Educators 12 3 4 5 National Conference I 7 Music you perl'ormcd in high school 12 3 4 5 1 8 Music you performed with other 12 3 4 5 groups (church, community, professional, etc.) 19. Perusal of scores in music stores 12 3 4 5 20. Recordings 12 3 4 5 21. Repertoire lists in textbooks 12 3 4 5 Continue to Section C Literature Selection.

PAGE 186

175 C: Literature Selection Tlie goal of this section is twofold: 1) to identify factors directors consider when selecting repertoire, and 2) determine how influential each factors is in the selection of repertoire of different styles. Please give the title, composer, and arranger (if applicable) for two compositions you have recendy selected for study and performance by your most advanced large mixed chorus. The first composition should be a "Classical" work (i.e. a work from one of the major historical periods). The second work should be a "Popular" composition (e.g. rock/pop work, musical theatre, jazz). For each composition you will answer the same set of questions. For the "Classical" composition, answer questions 22 47. For the "Popular" selection, answer the same set of quesdons, but mark your answers as indicated (48 73). "Classical" Composition: Tide: Composer: Arranger:, "Popular" Composition: Tide: Composer: Arranger:, In selecting each of these compositions for study and performance, on a scale of 1 to 5, which elements were considered and how influential was each element in the decision to prepare and perform each work? The higher the number the more influential the element: 12 3 4 5 Not Not Slightly Moderately Very Considered Influential Influential Influential Influential "Classical" "Popular" 12. 48. The public appeal of the work. 12 3 4 5 ("Tlie audience will love this number") 23. 49. The student appeal of the work. 12 3 4 5 ("Students will love this work", recruiting) 24. 50. The "winning" potential of the work. 12 3 4 5 ("We can win, gel a superior, 1st place, with this work at contest") 25. 51. "This is 'quality music', and the students 12 3 4 5 should be exposed to it." 26. 52. The vocal performance skills that can be taught through 12 3 4 5 the work, (legato line, singing large leaps, runs, etc.) 27. 53. The programmability of the work. 12 3 4 5 (holiday selection, concert opener/closer, etc.) 28. 54. Peer approval. 12 3 4 5 ("Other directors will approve if we perform this work") 29. 55. The historical & social elements that could be taught 12 3 4 5 through the work, (musical period, historical period, social influences of the time, multicultural, etc.)

PAGE 187

176 "Classical" "Popular" 30. 56. The work was on an "approved" list of compositions 12 3 4 5 for a musical festival or contest. 31. 57. The technical difficulty level of the work. 12 3 4 5 (range, tessitura, harmonic, rhythmic, etc.) 32. 58. The director appeal of the work. 12 3 4 5 ("I really like this composition and would love to conduct/perfoiTTi this work") 33. 59. The musical elements that could be taught through 12 3 4 5 this work, (form, style, compositional techniques, etc.) 34. 60. The potential of the work to provide for esthetic 12 3 4 5 experience. 35. 61. The work was an audition piece or on the program of a 12 3 4 5 festival such as All-State Chorus or All-County Chorus. 36. 62. The artistic demands of the composition. 12 3 4 5 37. 63. The size of the chorus. 12 3 4 5 38. 64. The sectional characteristics of the chorus. 12 3 4 5 (i.e. Strong soprano section, weak tenors section) 3965. The amount of rehearsal time available. 12 3 4 5 40. 66. The vocal maturity of the singers. 12 3 4 5 41. 67. The emotional maturity of the singers. 12 3 4 5 42. 68. The technical ability of the accompanist. 12 3 4 5 43. 69. Your personal abilities. 12 3 4 5 (as conductor, reheai-sal pianist, etc.) 44. 70. The text. 12 3 4 5 (quality, appropriate for the music, for the ensemble) 45. 71. Cost of the composition. 12 3 4 5 46. 72. Library needs. 12 3 4 5 (Composition of this style, by this composer are needed in the library) 47. 73. Planned variety. 12 3 4 5 (Composition selected to expose students to music of a different style)

PAGE 188

APPENDIX D TELEPHONE INTERVIEW FORMAT Introduction Identify myself. Request permission to conduct the interview. Request permission to record the interview. Questions 1 What process do you use to select music for your most advanced choir? 2 How does the process you just described differ in the selection of music for your beginning high school students? 3 What do do believe to be the proper balance between classical music, folk music, and popular music for advanced students? Classical music is defined as music from the five major historical periods; folk music as arrangements of folk songs, spirituals, and multicultural based compositions; and popular music as arrangements of pop/rock music, musical theatre pieces, and vocal jazz. 4 What do do believe to be the proper balance between classical music, folk music, and popular music for beginning students and how does this balance differ with regard to the balance you just described for advanced students? 5 How important is it for students to sing at least one composition from each of the 5 major historical periods during the course of a school year? 6 Choirs that perform a high percentage of popular music are sometimes criticized because the quality of much of the music performed is deemed by some to be substandard. What are your beliefs on this topic? 7 In evaluating the quality of a composition, what do you look for? 8 How difficult is it to determine the quality of a composition once you have examined the work? 9 What elements do you believe are common in compositions of high quality? 10. What elements do you believe are common in compositions of poor quality? 177

PAGE 189

APPENDIX E CLASSICAL REPERTOIRE LISTED ON SURVEY FOR MOST ADVANCED MIXED CHOIR Directors Not Nominated Frequency Title Composer Arranger Selected Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring Bach Joyful Joyful Beethoven M. Warren The Eyes of All Berger How lovely is Thy Dwelling Place Brahms Ave Maria Bruckner Auf Stimnet die Saiten Buxtehude Ave Verum Corpus Byrd I'll Say It Anyway Certon 2 Sanctus from Faure's Requiem Faure Rutter 1 Awake the Trumpets Lofty Sound Handel 2 Hallelujah, Amen Handel 2 Hallelujah Chorus (Messiah) Handel 2 Gloria (Heiligmesse) Haydn 2 Eyes of my Beloved Lasso Carol of the Bells Leontovich Wilhowsky Laetatus Sum M. Haydn Hear the Mwnnuring Water Montiverdi Now is the month of Maying Morley Emerson Ave Verum Corpus Mozart 2 Dixit Dominus Mozart Alice Parker Gloria from 12th Mass Mozart Laudate Dominium Mozart Missa Brevis in D Major K194 Mozart Regina Coeli Mozart Sanctus Mozart Liebergen Cry Out and Shout Nystedt Carmina Burana Orff Deus In Adjutorium Pachelbel Adoramus te Palestrina Damrosch God Rules in might and splendor Pergolesi Hopson Psallite Praetorious For the Beauty of the Earth Rutter Come Sail with Me Schubert Larson Kyrie from Mass in G Schubert Ehret Sing Forever Schubert Liebergen Hodie Christus Natus Est Sweelinck 178

PAGE 190

179 Directors Not Nominated (continued) Title Alleluia The Road Not Taken Salvation is Created Fa Una Canzona Gloria (Gloria) Weep, O Mine Eyes Frequency Composer Arrang er Selected Thompson 1 Thompson 1 Tscheonkoff 1 Vecchi 1 Vivaldi 4 Wilbye Summer 1 Nominated Directors Frequency Tide Composer AiTanger Selected Crown Him Hing of Kings Bach Hopson 1 Hallelujah (Mount of Olives) Beethoven All Creatures Are Merry Minded Benet Chichester Psalms Bernstein Liebeslieder Walzer Brahms Shaw / Parker 1 Ceremony of Carols Britten Christus Factus Est Bruckner The Lords Prayer Clausen Lautrier Priay de Danser Costeley Agnus Dei Faure Cantique de Jean Racine Faure Ave Maria Franz Biebl Your Voices Tune Gallus Sing Me to Heaven Gawthrop And the Glory of the Lord (Messiah) Handel Messiah (Part 1) Handel Cantate Domino Hassler Greyson 1 Saul Hovland Le Chant de Oyseaux Janequin Song of Exultation John N Bech My Heart is Offered Still to You Lasso D. Randolph 1 occhi manza mia Lasso Ehret 1 Dirait-on Lauridsen Filii et Filiae Leistiug D. Thompson 1 Cruxifixus Lotti Lacrymosa (Requiem) Mosart 2 Gloria (12 Mass) Mozart Missa Brevis in D Mozart Placido E 11 Mar Mozart Regina Coeli Mozart Requiem Mozart Veni Spititus Sanctus Mozart The Path of the Just Nystedt Ave Maria Rachmaninoff Bogorodistyah Rachmaninoff

PAGE 191

180 Nominated Directors (continued) Title Composer Dancing Day Cycle 7 movt's Rutter Magnificat Rutter What Sweeter Music Rutter Ehre sei dir Christe Schiitz Have Ye Not Known Thompson vos Omnes Vittoria Arranger Frequency Selected 1 1 1 1 1 1

PAGE 192

APPENDIX F POPULAR REPERTOIRE LISTED ON SURVEY FOR MOST ADVANCED MIXED CHOIR Directors Not Nominated Frequency Title, Composer Arranger Selected There's no business like show business Berlin Brymer, Mark 1 Lion King Medley John/Price Brymer, Mark 1 Waitin for the light to shine Miller Brymer, Mark 1 Jingle Bells Charles, Ray 1 And so it goes Billy Joel Chilcott, B. 1 Cabert, Applause, This Is It Chinn, Tina 1 Rhythm of the Rain Gammoe Chinn, Tina 1 Witness Emerson 1 Angels Among Us Alabama Emerson 1 Colors of the Wind Menken Hayes, Mark 1 Love in Any Language Higgins, John 1 Top 40 Huff, Mac 1 Humty Dumpty Medley King Singers 1 A Whole New World Lojeski 1 Shenandoah Lojeski 1 The Secret Garden Norman Lojeski 1 In the Still of the Night Parris Lojeski 1 I Dreamed a Dream Schonberg Lojeski 1 Masguerade Webber Lojeski 1 The Music of the Night Webber Lojeski 1 The Phantom of the Opera Webber Lojeski 1 More I Can Not Wish You F. Loesser Mattson, Phil 1 He's Gone Away Nelson, Ron 1 Make Our Garden Grow Bernstein Page, R. 1 Johnny I Hardly Knew Ye Parker, Alice 1 Wayfarin' Stranger Schrader 1 And All That Jazz Shaw, Kirby 1 Let It Shine Shaw, Kirby 1 My Funny Valentine Shaw, Kirby 1 One Song Shaw, Kirby 1 Summertime Shaw, Kirby 1 Longer Dan Folger Berg Shaw, Kirby 1 Without a Song Youmans Shaw, Kirby 1 Ride the Chariot Smith, William 1 I am Your Child Manilow Snyder 1 I am Your Child Manilow Snyder 1 Hero Carey Strommen 1 181

PAGE 193

182 Directors Not Nominated (continued) Frequency Title Composer Arranger Selected My Melancholy Baby Burnett Thygerson The Lion Sleeps Tonight Urbanski Joyful, Joyful from Sister Act Beethoven Warren This Little Light of Mine Work, John One Candle lights the way Albrecht/Altouse Ticket to ride Beatles Anytime you need a friend Carey, Mariah Jamaican Market Place Farrow, Larry Let's Begin Again Rutter Blockbuster Ballads of the 90's Colors of the wind Hakuna Mata I Swear Like Someone in Love Sifuni Mungo When Yuba Plays the Rumba on the Tuba Nominated Directors Frequency Title Composer Arranger Selected Christmas from the Heart Brymer, Mark Medley from the Lion King Brymer, Mark String of Pearls Brymer, Mark Ain't Misbehavin Waller/Brooks Cassey, C. Can You Feel the Love John, Elton Christopher, K Swingin with the Saints Hayes, Mark Ev'ry Time I Feel the Spirit Hogan, Moses Follow the Drinking Gourd Horman Disney Spectacular Huff, Mac Made in the USA Huff, Mac True Colors Steinberg Janssen, T. or Man River Kerr Hands of Time Legrand Leavitt Medley from Les Miserable Lojeski Medley from Beauty and the Beast Menken Lojeski Cats Webber Lojeski 1 Come Sunday Ellington, D. Parker, Alice I Feel Good RAO Holiday Festival Review Schmutte 1 Big Band Swing Shaw, Kirby 1 I Love a Piano Shaw, Kirby When I Fall in Love Shaw, Kirby Longer Fogelberg Shaw, Kirby Since I Fell For You Johnson Shaw, Kirby West Side Story Medley Bernstein Thomas, Len

PAGE 194

183 Nominated Directors (continued) Frequency Title Composer Arranger Selected Camelot Loewe Warnick I'll be Home for Christmas Gannon/Kent Zegree Jamaican Market Place Farrow, Larry I'm Gonna Sing When the Spirit ... Hogan, Moses Gospel Magnificat Ray, Robert I Return to Music Shaw, Kirby Danza Spevacek Lollipop Masquerade Nutcracker Jingle Schindler's List Medley Time After Time

PAGE 195

BIBLIOGRAPHY Aamot, M. C. (1974). A study of contributing factors to tlie aesthetic experience within the choral performance area (Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, 1 974). Dissertation Abstracts International. 35 3946A. Abies, H. R, Hoffer, C. R., & Klotman, H. K. (1994). Foundations of music education (2nd ed.). New Yorlc: Schirmer Books. Benner, C. H. (1972). Teaching performing groups Washington, DC: Music Educators National Conference. Bessom, M. E., Tatarunis, A. M., & Forcucci, S. L. (1974). Teaching music in today's secondary schools New York: Holt, Rhinehart, & Winston. Bolt, G. R. (1983). Choral repertoire selection competency development in undergraduate music education curricula (Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, 1983). Dissertation Abstracts International. 44 697A. Boody, C. G. (1968). Choral programming in Minnesota: a constructive approach based on a rapprochement between music education and musicology. Choral Journal 9(1), 19-21. Brunner, D. L. (1992). Choral repertoire: A director's checklist. Music Educators Journal. 79 (1). 29-32. Brunner, D. L. (1994). Choral program design: Structure and symmetry. Music Educators Journal. 80 (6). 46-49. Burris, D. L. (1988). A systematic and integrated approach to teaching comprehensive musicianship and voice in high school performance oriented choirs (Doctoral dissertation, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 1988). Dissertation Abstracts International. 4911 A 3296. Busch, B. (1984). The complete choral conductor New York: Schirmer Books/Macmillian. CMS Publications, Inc. (1993-1994). College music society directory of music faculties in colleges and universities, U.S. and Canada (16th ed.). Missoula, MT: CMS Pubications Couch, L. D. (1973). A comparison of opinions concerning characteristics college repertoires should possess to meet the needs of students preparing to teach high school vocal music. Dissertation Abstracts International. 33 6 155 A. (University Microfilms No. 73-11872) 184

PAGE 196

185 Cox. J. (1989). Choral conducting: More than a wave of the hand. Music Educators Journal. 75 (9). 26-30. Dahlman, H. N. (1991). The effect of choral program size, teacher experience, and teacher education level on the selection of high school choral music literature (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Kansas City). Dissertation Abstracts International. 52 3551 A. Davis, J. L. (1970). A study of choral repertoire in selected high schools and factors affecting its selection (Doctoral Dissertation, Columbia University). Dissertation Abstracts International. 3 1 04 A. Decker, H. A. (1967). Choosing music for performance. In K. L. Neidig & J. W. Jennings (Eds.), Choral director's guide (pp. 79-1 14). West Nyak, NY: Parker. Decker, H. A., & Kirk, C. J. (1988). Choral conducting: Focus on communication Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Dunaway, J. (1987). Characteristics of successful high school choral programs. Choral Journal. 28 r2). 15-23. Edelson, E. (1972). The secondary school music program from classroom to concert hall West Nyack, NY: Parker. EducationalDirectories, Inc. (1995). Paterson's American Education Vol. 91 Mount Prospect, IL: Educational Directories, Inc. Garretson, R. L. (1993). Conducting choral music (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Glenn, N. E., McBride, W. B., & Wilson, G. H. (1970). Secondary school music: Philosophy, theory, and practice Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Gordon, L. (1977). Choral director's complete handbook West Nyack, NY: Parker. Gordon, L. (1989). Choral director's rehearsal and performance guide West Nyack, NY: Parker. Grant, J. W., & Kohut, D. L. (1992). Performance teachers for the future. Music Educators Journal. 19 (2). 35-64. Hammar, R. A. (1984). Pragmatic choral procedures Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow. Heffeman, C. W. (1982). Choral music: Technique and artistry Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Heffernan, C. W. (1983). Standard works for chorus: Ein deutsches requiem "How lovely is thy dwelling place." Music Educators Journal. 70 (4). 27-3 1 Hilbish, T. (1967). Establishing a program of permanent value. In K. L. Neidig & J. W. Jennings (Eds.), Choral director's guide (pp. 289-299). West Nyack, NY: Parker.

PAGE 197

186 Hoffer, C. R. (1991). Teaching music in the secondary schools (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wads worth. Jaeger, R. M. (1984). Sampling in education and the social sciences New York: Longmar. Jipson, W. R. (1972). The high school vocal music program WestNyack, NY: Parker. Johnson, E. L., & Johnson, M. D. (1989). Planning + effort = a year of success. Music Educators Journal. 75 (6). 40-43. Jones, P. O. ( 1 968). The choral literature performed by the high schools of Iowa and the colleges of Iowa and surrounding states during the period of time from 1962 to 1 967 (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Iowa). Dissertation Abstracts International. 29llA 4040. Lamb, G. H. (1971). Selection of music for the high school choir. Choral Journal. \2 (3). 12-14. Lamb, G. H. (1988). Choral techniques (3rd ed.). Dubuque, lA: William C. Brown. Lawrence, J. E. (1989). The right stuff: Success begins with the director. Music Educators Journal. 75 (61. 37-39. Leeder, J. A. (1958). Music education in the high school New York: McGraw-Hill. Leonhard, J. A., & House, R. W. (1972). Foundations and principles of music education (2nded.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Mark, M. L. (1986). Contemporary music education (2nd ed.). New York: Schirmer Books/Macmillan. Mayhall,B.(1994). The quest for high-quality repertoire. Choral Journal. 35 (21. 9-15. Meyer, L. B. (1956) Emotion and meaning in music Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Miller, K. E. (1979). Handbook of choral music selection, score preparation and writing West Nyack, NY: Parker. Miller, K. E. (1988). Vocal music education Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Music Educators National Conference. (1970). Goals and objectives for music education. Music Educators Journal. 57 (41. 23-26. Music Educators National Conference. (1994). National standards for arts education Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference. Music Educators National Conference & American Association of School Administrators. (1965). Music in the school curriculum. In B. C.Kowall, (Ed.) (1966). Perspectives in music education: Sourcebooks Washington, DC: MENC.

PAGE 198

187 Ogdin, P. K. (1981). An analysis of criteria by which secondary choral teachers select course content (Doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts International. 41 4323A. Omiandy, E. O. (1966). And we quote. High Fidelity 7(16), MAIL Pembrook, R. G. (1991). Exploring the musical side of pop. Music Educators Journal. 77(8), 30-34. Reimer, B. (1989). A philosophy of music education (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Richmond, J. W. (1990). Selecting choral repertoire as pre-curriculum: Planned serendipity. Choral Journal. 30 (1 OV 23-30. Roach, D. W. (1989). Complete secondary choral music guide West Nyack, NY: Parker. Robinson, R. L. (1993). Achieving and maintaining quaUty in choral music education. Teaching Music. U 3y 34-35. Robinson, R., & Winold, A. (1976). The choral experience New York: Harper's College Press. Roe, P. F. (1983). Choral music education r2nd ed.V Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall. Sateren, L. B. (1963). Criteria for judging choral music and those straight-tone choirs Minneapolis: Augsburg. Smith, C. K. (1974). Choral music education as aesthetic education. Dissertation Abstracts International. 34 6428A. (University Microfilms No. 74-8888) Tait, M., & Haack, P. (1984). Principles and process of music education: New perspectives New York: Teachers College Press. Tuckman, B. W. (1994). Conducting educational research f4th ed.V Ft Worth TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Turley, P. W. (1989). Activities and philosophical principles employed in selected Indiania high school choral departments (Doctoral dissertation. Ball State University, 1988). Dissertation Abstracts International. 49 2577A. White, J. P. (1982). Significant developments in choral music education in higher education between 1950-1980. Journal of Research in Music Education. 30 121-128. Wolverton, V. D. (1990). Repertoire for the small vocal ensemble in high school. Choral Journal. 3 1 (31 33-40. Wyatt, L. D. ( 1 988). A study of five recommended lists of repertoire for the high school choral ensemble. Update, 7(1), 24-26.

PAGE 199

188 Wyatt, L. D. (1995). Choral literature performed by high school directors in South Carolina 0993-1994) Paper presented at a meeting of the South Carolina Music Educators Association, (February, Columbia). Unpublished study.

PAGE 200

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Guy W. Forbes served as a choral conductor, clinician, and music educator in Florida from 1980 to 1995. In 1995 he accepted his current position. Associate Conductor of Choirs at Millikin University in Decatur, Illinois. His teaching responsibilities at Millikin University include secondary choral methods, student teacher supervision, undergraduate conducting, choral literature, and three university choral ensembles. Before coming to Millikin University Guy Forbes eamed his Bachelor of Music Education degree from Jacksonville University, Jacksonville, Florida, and his Master of Music degree in choral conducting from Florida State University. While at Florida State University Guy Forbes studied conducting with Dr. Andre Thomas, Dr. Colleen Kirk, and Mr. Clayton Krehbiel. Under the direction of Dr. Charles Hoffer, Guy Forbes will complete his Ph.D. in music education from the University of Florida in August, 1998. An active member of the Music Educators National Conference and the American Choral Directors Association Mr. Forbes has served as chairman elect for Florida Vocal Association (vocal component of the Florida Music Educators Association) district III and has recentiy accepted a position on the board of the Illinois Chapter of the ACDA. 189

PAGE 201

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Charles R. Hoffer, Ch^ir Professor of Music I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Russell L. Robinson Associate Professor of Music I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ^WiHis R. Bodine Professor of Music I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. /S^M/7: IdiUL-^ Budd A. Udell Professor of Music I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. David Z. ^Hshner Professor of Music I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. M. David Miller Professor of Foundations of Education

PAGE 202

This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the College of Fine Arts and to the Graduate School and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. August 1998 /^' Dean, College of Fine Arts Dean, Graduate School


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID ES1QXXLLK_W3JFA0 INGEST_TIME 2015-01-09T20:07:52Z PACKAGE AA00026604_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES