Assessment in elementary music education : perspectives and practices of teachers in Winnipeg public schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assessment and evaluation in music education presents one of the greatest challenges for music teachers today.Elementary music specialists often question what it is that needs to be assessed, how other music teachers are assessing, and how to best facilitate successful assessment that is meaningful for students, parents, and teachers alike.The purpose of this study was to examine the assessment perspectives and practices of elementary music teachers in Winnipeg public schools.A survey was sent out to 190 elementary music teachers asking them to respond to a variety of questions focusing on assessment in music education.Approximately half of the teachers returned the surveys.The amount of instructional time teachers devote to assessment, the tools and strategies teachers used in their practice, the tools and strategies that teachers considered to be most effective, the factors affecting teachers assessment practices, and the beliefs music teachers hold about assessment are presented and discussed.Findings suggested that elementary music teachers believe that assessment is valuable and they do use a variety of tools and strategies that they feel are most effective when tryrng to assessment their students.Coping with the challenges of implementing effective assessment and dealing with the many factors that make assessment difficult in music learning contexts however, have left music teachers feeling that their assessment practices are inadequate.This study establishes a starting point for music educators to begin the task of examining many issues surrounding assessment and supporting the profession in their quest to improve their practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".