•  
  •  
 

Abstract

One of the common realities of music education is that its teachers work as professional musicians whose administrators usually have little or no training in music education. As such, music educators must commonly defend the academic rigor of music instruction using terminology and concepts that are more commonly used and accepted by those outside the music education career field. The purpose of this study was to analyze the verbs in the National Standards for Music Education and the NCCAS Core Arts Standards, and generate inventories of music verbs ranked in the style of Bloom’s Taxonomy and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge. This process endeavored to establish clear and direct connections between Bloom’s and Webb’s instructional vocabulary and music instruction, establish criteria to evaluate the academic rigor of music instruction, and thereby empower music educators to more effectively communicate music learning objectives to administrators who are not music educators. To develop research questions, we inquired the extent verbs in instructional objectives from the 1994 National Music Standards and the 2014 Core Arts standards aligned with verbs in Bloom’s Taxonomy and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge, and examined the positive and negative implications of applying Bloom’s Taxonomy (Cognitive Domain) and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge to music instruction. Results indicated that while there are many direct applications of Webb and Bloom to music instruction, there may also be some areas of incongruence when presenting music pedagogy through these contexts.

Download

Share

COinS