Analysis of The Music Content in Ten Piano Methods 1994 2006 For The Elementary Aged Beginning Piano Student For Menc National Standards Based El

AN ANALYSIS OF THE MUSIC CONTENT IN TEN PIANO METHODS (19942006) FOR THE ELEMENTARY-AGED BEGINNING PIANO STUDENT FOR
MENC NATIONAL STANDARDS BASED ELEMENTS
by
Julie Ann Ballard
___________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the

FACULTY OF THE THORNTON SCHOOL OF MUSIC
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS
(MUSIC EDUCATION)
August 2007
Copyright 2007
Julie Ann Ballard
DEDICATION
___________________________________________________________________
This dissertation is dedicated to my family, whose love, support, and

prayers have carried me through this incredible journey. Your encouraging words
and random acts of kindness along the way have helped me realize my dreams of
pursuing a doctorate in music. Mom, Rebekah, Melissa . . . thank you. Dad and
Roger Lee, my guardian angels, I miss you. And finally, to my Heavenly Father,
whose love and tender mercies are constantly made manifest in our lives, and I am
eternally grateful. I love you all. Our family is forever!
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
___________________________________________________________________
Dedication ............................................................................................................. ii
List of Tables........................................................................................................ vi
Abstract ............................................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................... 1

1.1 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................. 1
1.2 NEED FOR THE STUDY ...................................................................................... 5
1.3 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................... 6
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ..................................................................................... 7
1.5 DELIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY......................................................................... 8
1.6 DEFINITION OF TERMS ...................................................................................... 8
1.7 OVERVIEW OF THE REMAINING CHAPTERS ........................................................ 9
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE .............................. 11

2.1 OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................... 11
2.2 LITERATURE REVIEWED ................................................................................. 11
2.2.1 Performing Alone and with Others ............................................... 12
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.2.4
2.2.5
2.2.6
Selecting an Appropriate Method ................................................. 14

Variety of Repertoire.................................................................... 16
Creating Music............................................................................ 19
Reading Music ............................................................................. 23
Technology .................................................................................. 26
iii
2.2.7 Content Analyses of Piano Method Series ..................................... 28

2.3 IMPLICATIONSCONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK .................................................. 31
2.4 SUMMARY OF RELATED LITERATURE .............................................................. 35
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .................................................................. 36

3.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 36
3.2 RESTATEMENT OF PURPOSE ............................................................................ 36
3.3 STUDY DESIGN .............................................................................................. 37
3.3.1 Selection of Study Design ............................................................ 37
3.3.2 Sample ......................................................................................... 37
3.3.3 Procedures for Sample Selection ................................................... 39
3.3.4 Data Collection ............................................................................ 40
3.3.5 Ratings for Variety of Repertoire.................................................. 43
3.3.6 Ratings for Creating ..................................................................... 43
3.3.7 Ratings for Variety of Keys.......................................................... 44
3.3.8 Associated Technology ................................................................ 46
3.3.9 Overall Ratings ............................................................................ 46
3.3.10 Time Table................................................................................. 46
3.4 CHAPTER SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 47
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DATA ANALYSIS ....................................... 48

4.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 48
4.2 FINDINGS ....................................................................................................... 49
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.2.4
4.2.5
4.2.6
Research Question 1..................................................................... 49

iv
4.5 CHAPTER SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 68
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND

CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................... 69
5.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 69
5.2 SUMMARY, OVERVIEW, AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................... 69
5.3 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................... 74
5.4 IMPLICATIONS ................................................................................................ 77
5.5 SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ........................................................... 78
REFERENCES .................................................................................................. 81
APPENDICES.................................................................................................... 98
APPENDIX A: DATA COLLECTION SHEETS ............................................................. 99
APPENDIX B: RUBRIC FOR REPERTOIRE STYLE CATEGORIES ................................ 104
APPENDIX C: ELEMENTS OF MUSIC SKILL DEVELOPMENT.................................... 105
APPENDIX D: LIST OF FAVORITE SONGS .............................................................. 126
APPENDIX E: LIST OF FAMILIAR MUSIC .............................................................. 127
LIST OF TABLES
___________________________________________________________________
TABLE 1: REPERTOIRE CATEGORIES AND PERCENTAGES ...................................... 119

TABLE 2: ALFREDS PREMIER PIANO COURSE - REPERTOIRE ................................ 124
TABLE 3: ALL-IN-ONE PIANO COURSE - REPERTOIRE .......................................... 126
TABLE 4: BEANSTALKS BASICS - REPERTOIRE .................................................... 126
TABLE 5: CELEBRATE PIANO! - REPERTOIRE ....................................................... 127
TABLE 6: HAL LEONARD: PIANO LESSONS - REPERTOIRE..................................... 167
TABLE 7: THE MUSIC TREE - REPERTOIRE ........................................................... 119
TABLE 8: NOONA COMPREHENSIVE PIANO LESSONS - REPERTOIRE ...................... 124
TABLE 9: PIANO ADVENTURES - REPERTOIRE ...................................................... 126
TABLE 10: PIANO DISCOVERIES - REPERTOIRE ..................................................... 127
TABLE 11: PIANO TOWN - REPERTOIRE .............................................................. 167
TABLE 12: FAMILIAR TUNES IN THE REPERTOIRE ................................................. 124
TABLE 13: RATINGS FOR VARIETY OF REPERTOIRE .............................................. 126
TABLE 14: PERCENTAGES OF SOLOS AND DUETS IN EACH SERIES......................... 126
TABLE 15: PERCENTAGES OF SOLOS AND DUETS IN EACH LESSON BOOK ............. 127
TABLE 16: PERCENTAGES OF SOLOS AND DUETS IN EACH LEVEL ......................... 167
TABLE 17: PERCENTAGES AND RATINGS FOR CREATING MUSIC ........................... 119
TABLE 18: VARIETY OF KEYS ............................................................................. 124
TABLE 19: VARIETY OF METERS ......................................................................... 126
TABLE 20: RATINGS FOR VARIETY OF KEYS AND METERS ................................... 127
TABLE 21: VARIETY OF MUSIC READING ACTIVITIES ........................................... 167
TABLE 22: TECHNOLOGY DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH EACH SERIES .................. 167
TABLE 23: OVERALL RATINGS ............................................................................ 167
vi
ABSTRACT
___________________________________________________________________
The purpose of this study was to investigate elements of MENC National

Standards in select piano methods for variety of repertoire (Standard 2) and the
development of skills for creating and reading music (Standards 3, 4, and 5).
The following research questions were posed: 1) What is the percentage of
repertoire in each of the following categories: author composed, non-author
pedagogical, Western art music, folk and traditional, nursery and play,
multicultural, religious, and popular? 2) What are the percentages of solo and duet
repertoire? 3) What is the percentage of music content devoted to creating music
(improvising or composing)? 4) What is the variety of keys and meters being
experienced through music reading activities? 5) What technology is available to
support performance and musicianship? 6) How do these methods rate in variety of
repertoire, inclusion of music creating activities, and variety of reading experiences
directly related to elements of both key and meter?
Excellent overall ratings were given to Hal Leonard: Piano Lessons (1996,
1997) and The Music Tree (2000) for variety of repertoire, inclusion of music
creating activities, and variety of music reading experience. High percentages of
author-composed pieces were present across all method series. High percentages of
vii
duets were found in the first books of each method, with numbers decreasing as
levels increased. Low percentages of music creating activities were found in most
series, the greatest exception being Celebrate Piano! (2003) with 20.70%. No
technology was found aside from CD and/or MIDI disk accompaniments for lesson
book repertoire.
viii
Chapter 1
___________________________________________________________________
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The periodic evaluation of teaching materials for the private piano studio is
needed to surmise educational quality and content. Piano methods and teaching
materials have never been standardized (Akins, 1982, pp. 1-2). Surprisingly,
teaching materials were the focus of only 2% of the proceedings from the National
Conference on Piano Pedagogy (NCPP) from 1981 to 1995, and only from the first
two years (Montandon, 1998). Ongoing concerns for standards in music teaching
and music learning are substantiated through related research findings.
No one piano method is perfect or complete; each has its own unique
combination of strengths and weaknesses. Albergo (1988) found that teachers often
use a combination of one to four piano methods in their teaching to compensate.
Opportunely, the movement toward a comprehensive music education has
succeeded in inspiring considerable revisions in many current piano methods
(Crum, 1998). Still, there is a need for standards in piano teaching materials.
The Music Educators National Conference (MENC, 1994), now known as
the National Association for Music Education, developed nine National Standards
for music education excellence. These were created in response to the Goals 2000:
Educate America Act passed by Congress in 1994. For the first time, educational
standards were applied to the arts. Music, dance, visual arts, and theatre were
included in the reform. A comprehensive music education may be attained through
the application of the following objectives, or National Standards:
1) Singing, alone and with others, a varied repertoire of music
2) Performing on instruments, alone and with others, a varied repertoire of
music
3) Improvising melodies, variations, and accompaniments
4) Composing and arranging music within specified guidelines
5) Reading and notating music
6) Listening to, analyzing, and describing music
7) Evaluating music and music performances
8) Understanding relationships between music, the other arts, and
disciplines outside the arts
9) Understanding music in relation to history and culture (MENC, 1994).
The National Standards may serve as a guide for a comprehensive music education
through piano study. According to Stewart: Piano teachers . . . may not be aware
of the significance of the National Standards for private teaching. As part of our
professional development, we must be prepared to help guide students toward new
standards of excellence (Stewart, 1996/1997, p. 16).
Of 162 piano teachers surveyed from Florida State Music Teachers

Association meetings, only 53% of respondents were familiar with the National
Standards for teaching and learning music; 46% claimed to implement those
standards in their teaching. Approximately 84% believed that a comprehensive
piano education involving improvisation, composition, transposition, and singing
was more profitable for beginning piano students than performance instruction
alone. Their claims, however, were not supported by individual student skill
ratings, which indicated the emphasis of music reading skills rather than music
creating skills (improvising and composing) in lessons. Respondents reported that
the development of accurate music reading skills in beginning piano students is
imperative. Individual student skill ratings supported this; music reading was
ranked higher than any other musical skill (Crum, 1998).
Creating music is an important means for the exploration of sounds and the
expression of ideas in children. Creating music is part of the Kodly curriculum at
every level. Improvisation activities for children are emphasized in Orff Schulwerk
and in Dalcroze Eurhythmics. Musical achievement in elementary music students
may increase with the development of improvisational skills (Azzara, 1992).
Children involved in improvisational music activities experience freedom and
ownership of their instrument (Blickenstaff, 2003; Thomas-Lee, 2003). According
to Campbell and Scott-Kassner (1995):
The arts come into being through the creativity of individuals and groups.
To deny children the opportunity to work creatively with the materials and
structures of music is to limit their capacity to think artistically, and

ultimately, to limit the full exploration of what it means to be musical.
Teaching music without allowing children to compose would be like
teaching art without allowing children to draw or paint, or teaching writing
by having children copy other peoples work (Campbell & Scott-Kassner,
1995, p. 246).
Little attention has been paid to the inclusion of music creating activities in
piano methods, despite numerous analyses addressing the inclusion of other music
performance skills. Many teachers today lack improvisational skills at the piano
(Farber, 1994). Young music students should be taught a variety of music skills,
including those for creating music, such as improvisation (Colwell & Goolsby,
2002). Music teaching materials are needed to address the development of
improvisational skills in young pianists.
Research studies suggest that students should be taught a wide variety of
repertoire (Colwell & Goolsby, 2002; Crouse, 1992). An analysis showed that
lesson book repertoire for ten piano methods from the early twentieth-century
included a large portion of both folk music and Western art music, each averaging
approximately 40% of the repertoire. Music referred to as familiar songs were
used to capture student interest. This was especially true in the beginning levels of
piano methods (Lewison, 1933). Is this true in methods of today?
In a more recent study (Thomas-Lee, 2003), nine beginning piano methods
for preschool-aged children (ages 4 to 5) were analyzed to determine four factors:
1) methods available for this age group, 2) activities for singing, moving, creating,
aural skills, and playing instruments (piano), 3) variety of repertoire styles, and 4)
parental involvement. Repertoire style categories for playing and listening

included: author-composed pedagogical, art music adaptations, folk and traditional,
multicultural, religious, and pop. Frequency counts and percentages were used in
data collection and analysis. Percentages across elements were found to be
dissimilar in each method (Thomas-Lee, 2003). Low percentages of art music
adaptations, multicultural, religious, and pop music were found, in contrast to high
percentages of author-composed pedagogical pieces. Folk and traditional pieces
were less than 15% of the playing repertoire. Familiar songs were listed by name,
and percentages of student/teacher duets and songs including lyrics were reported.
What is the composition of music content in elementary piano methods
published since the development of the National Standards in 1994? How do these
methods implement National Standards 2, 3, 4, and 5 in regards to variety of
repertoire styles, inclusion of student/teacher duets, inclusion of music creating
activities, and variety of elements relating to key and to meter in music reading?
1.2 Need for the Study

No research study was found in which the music content in select piano
methods for the elementary-aged beginning piano student was examined for the
implementation of relevant MENC National Standards for a comprehensive music
education. Although numerous studies address particular pedagogical elements in
various methods, no extant study analyzes methods for elements directly associated
with recreating, creating, and reading music, as recommended in MENC National
Standards 2, 3, 4, and 5. The findings of this study were presented to improve

teacher knowledge and to facilitate prudent selection of piano methods for
elementary-aged beginning piano students.
1.3 Purpose of the Study

In this study, aspects of a comprehensive music education as identified in
the MENC National Standards were investigated through an analysis of the music
content as related to recreating, creating, and reading music. The purpose of this
study was to investigate the variety of repertoire (Standard 2), the development of
skills for creating music (Standards 3 and 4), and the variety of key, meter, and
other related music reading experiences (Standards 2 and 5) in piano methods
published in the United States or Canada from 1994 to 2006 for the elementaryaged beginning piano student.
The music content of the first four consecutive lesson books of each series
was analyzed to determine the following: A) the percentage of repertoire in each of
eight categories, B) the percentages of solo repertoire and duet repertoire, C) the
percentage of music content used to create (improvise or compose), D) the variety
of keys and of meters experienced through music reading activities, E) what
technology is available to support performance and musicianship, and F) how the
music content is rated in the variety of repertoire, the inclusion of music creating
activities, and the variety of reading experiences related to key and meter.
1.4
Research Questions
The following research questions were posed for the purpose of this study:
1.
What is the percentage of repertoire in each of the following

categories: author(s) composed pedagogical pieces, nonauthor composed pedagogical pieces, Western art music
(adapted or original), folk and traditional songs and tunes
(including secular Christmas music), nursery and play songs,
multicultural music, religious music (including sacred
Christmas music), and popular music (including music
featured in television, movies, radio, and theatre)?
2.
What are the percentages of solo repertoire and duet

repertoire?
3.
What is the percentage of music content devoted to creating

music (improvising or composing)?
4.
What is the variety of keys and meters being experienced

through music reading activities?
5.
What technology is available to support performance and

musicianship?
6.
How do these methods rate in variety of repertoire, inclusion

of music creating activities, and variety of reading
experiences directly related to elements of key and meter?
1.5 Delimitations of the Study

This study examined a sample of contemporary piano methods in print for
the elementary-aged beginning piano student in private lessons. These methods
consisted of at least four consecutive beginning lesson books written by American
authors and published in the United States or Canada from 1994 to 2006. Criteria
for the selection of each series examined are found in Chapter Three. The scope of
this study was limited to the investigation of lesson books for private study. No
supplementary materials were studied (i.e., theory, performance, ensemble, or
technological supplements indirectly associated with each method series).
1.6 Definition of Terms

E CLECTIC A PPROACH : A combination of the three traditional note-reading
approaches in piano teaching (middle-C, intervallic, and limited multi-key).
ELEMENTARY-AGED STUDENTS: Students 6 to 11 years of age.
FAMILIAR M USIC: Pieces falling into categories of music styles such Western art
music, folk and traditional songs and tunes, nursery and play songs, sacred
and secular Christmas music, multicultural music, and religious music.
Most are works in public domain.
FOLK SONG: A familiar tune, melody, air, or song of unknown authorship that has
been handed down orally for many generations and has become widely
known throughout a nation or a smaller community. They are usually
developed among peasants and contain artless poems with reference to
festivities, dancing, work, death, love, children, and other aspects of

everyday life (Apel and Daniel, 1960, p. 108).
INTERVALLIC APPROACH: A teaching approach in which the piano student is taught
to read music by recognizing intervals and learning to play those intervals
with a learned fixed hand position.
LANDMARK APPROACH: A teaching approach usually associated with the intervallic
approach. In this approach, the five Cs (or landmarks) CC, C, c, c and c
are learned on the staff and on the piano. Subsequently, students are taught
to read by intervals from the landmarks already established.
METHOD: A series of graded teaching books on a particular subject.
MIDDLE-C APPROACH: A teaching approach in which the piano student is taught to
read music from a five-finger position centered on middle-C, with both
thumbs sharing middle-C.
MULTI-KEY APPROACH: A teaching approach in which the piano student is taught to
read music in various keys from the onset of piano study.
NURSERY SONGS: Composed music to traditional nursery rhymes.
PLAY SONGS: Play songs of unknown authorship commonly known among children
in the United States.
TRADITIONAL MUSIC: A category of music inclusive of traditional tunes, melodies,
airs, and songs, including folk tunes and songs.
1.7 Overview of the Remaining Chapters

Chapter One provides a synopsis of the dissertation, including the following
sections: introduction, background for the study, need for the study, research
questions, purpose statement, delimitations, definition of terms, and an overview of
chapters two, three, four, and five.
Chapter Two offers a review of related literature on the research topic, and
begins with an overview and literature reviewed. Topics covered include:
performing alone and with others, selecting an appropriate method, variety of

repertoire, creating music, reading music, technology and music education, content
analyses of piano method series, and implications and building a conceptual
framework for the study. The chapter concludes with a summary of its contents.
Chapter Three outlines the methodology for this study. After an
introduction and restatement of the purpose of this study, a framework delineating
specific procedures for collecting and analyzing data is presented. Research
questions are addressed accordingly. The chapter closes with a summary.
Chapter Four reports the results of this study, including data analysis.
Chapter Five discusses the findings of this study. Results are analyzed and
conclusions drawn based upon the research questions posed.
A reference list and appendices follow the main body of this document.
10
Chapter 2
___________________________________________________________________
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Overview
Piano methods are designed for specific age groups. The methods selected
for the purpose of this study were written for the elementary-aged beginning piano
student in the first two to four years of study. Although pedagogues often
recommend the starting age for piano study to be approximately 7 years of age,
piano methods for the elementary-aged beginner are normally appropriate for the
average beginning piano student from 6 to 11 years of age. Physical and mental
abilities for this age group include finer muscle movement readiness, reading, and
utilizing numbers (Uszler, 2000, p. 3).
This chapter offers a review of literature related to the music content in
piano methods for the elementary-aged beginning piano student, namely, variety of
repertoire, performing alone and with others, creating music, reading music, and
research on technology for musicianship development.
2.2 Literature Reviewed

Online databases were investigated for research literature related to this
study, including Dissertation Abstracts International (DAI), Education Resources
11
Information Center (ERIC), FirstSearch, and Proquest. Dissertations, theses, and

conference reports were reviewed. Articles were reviewed in periodicals such as
Piano & Keyboard (previously Piano Quarterly), Clavier, Keyboard Companion:
A Practical Magazine on Early-Level Piano Study, Journal of Research on Music
Education, Music Educators Journal, American Music Teacher, and American
Music Journal. Several piano pedagogy texts were consulted, such as Professional
Piano Teaching (2006) by Jacobson (edited by E. L. Lancaster), Practical Piano
Pedagogy: The Definitive Text for Piano Teachers and Pedagogy Students (2004)
by Baker-Jordan, The Art of Teaching Piano (2004) edited by Agay, The WellTempered Keyboard Teacher (2000) by Uszler, Gordon, and McBride-Smith,
Creative Piano Teaching (1996) by Lyke, Enoch, and Haydon, and How to Teach
Piano Successfully (1988) by James Bastien. Findings were reported in the
following sections: variety of repertoire, performing alone and with others, creating
music, and research on technology for musicianship development.
2.2.1 Performing Alone and with Others

According to MENC National Standard 2, music students should perform
alone and with others (MENC, 1994). Students should be involved in music
activities with other students (Reist, 2002). According to Brittin (2002):
For young musicians, performing alone is an important skill, as is
performing with other instrumentalists. Solo performance leads to musical
independence, and performing with others develops certain listening skills,
sensitivity, and flexibility. Both performance settings are emphasized in the
performance standards for music educators (Brittin, 2002, p. 1).
12
There are many benefits to performing with others. Ensemble playing increases
listening and rhythmic skills (Blickenstaff, 2002). It also establishes positive bonds
between duet partners, and fosters interest in piano playing as students team up
with their friends to make music (Burggraaf, 2002).
Some advantages of student duet playing include partnership and
accountability (Sharpe, 2002). Methods books often provide beginning students
with opportunities to play with others by including duets and/or teacher
accompaniments. (Brittin, 2002). Some teachers limit their use of ensemble music
to student/teacher duets included in piano method books (Stewart, 1996/1997).
Supplementary materials such as CD or MIDI Disk accompaniments may be used
to enhance musical development and avert monotony.
Group lessons help prevent student feelings of isolation at the piano. Social
interaction at group piano lessons promotes student interest in piano playing
(Burggraaf, 2002). McCain (1993) found that 75.53% of piano pedagogues
surveyed (n=36) believe that elementary-aged beginning piano students should be
involved in both private and group lessons. The remaining percentages were as
follows: 34.04% for group lessons, 27.66% for private lessons, and 26.60% for
partner lessons (McCain, 1993).
Alpiner (1951) showed that piano class in the public elementary school
helped develop love and appreciation for music. Results from her study revealed
that children also benefit from the social aspects of piano class with opportunities
13
to cultivate confidence, poise, leadership, cooperation, and deciphering quality

music. Piano class allows students to express their individual personalities
(Alpiner, 1951).
Research supports the recommendation for children involved in music study
to perform both alone and with others. Musical independence may be developed
through solo performance. Listening skills, rhythmic skills, flexibility, sensitivity,
and increased motivation for playing from social interactions in ensemble
performance opportunities are among the many benefits of performing with others.
2.2.2 Selecting an Appropriate Method

According to Coats (2006), the selection of a method should come after the
selection of a curriculum. Teachers should use materials matching the playing level
of their students. A curriculum of music improvisation and composition is
encouraged in addition to scales, chords, harmony, and theory (Coats, 2006). Many
older as well as newer American piano methods work on developing musicianship
skills in elementary-aged students (Ko, 2005). Comprehensive method books
should be used with a variety of repertoire styles (Coats, 2006). Many older as well
as newer American piano methods work on developing musicianship skills in
elementary-aged students (Ko, 2005). The task of choosing an appropriate piano
method is a complicated one. Repertoire, reading approach, improvisation,
composition, transposition, theory, ear training, technique, history, and CD or
14
MIDI disk accompaniments are among the elements that should be present in a
beginning piano method for children (Coats, 2006).
Crouse (1992) found that variety of songs and familiarity of songs were 2 of
16 important elements a random sample of certified piano teachers (n=30) surveyed
in Kansas City consider when selecting an appropriate piano method. The variety
of songs was the number one decisive element. The playing level of pieces, the
teaching approach, the student age group, and the suitability of a book for an
individual student were also important considerations (Crouse, 1992).
Teaching materials should be selected whose music content complements
personality, learning style, and ability in order to enhance motivation and learning.
Students respond to teaching approaches in different ways according to individual
learning styles (Kim, 1987; Manus 1996; Lomax, 1990; Sallee, 1998). According to
Rosina Lhevinne, instruction should be personalized to meet student needs. No one
teaching approach or piano method is considered appropriate for every student
(Crouse, 1992; Manus; 1996). Siblings in piano lessons should study from different
methods to avoid competition; confusion of teacher markings, and monotony of
repertoire could also be avoided (Crouse, 1992).
Repertoire consideration is fundamental in choosing a suitable method. A
method should have an enjoyable repertoire as well as a variety of repertoire (Agay,
2004; Coats, 2006; Colwell & Goolsby, 2003; Lyke, 1996; Sallee, 1998). A method
should include stimulating repertoire to increase student creativity and curiosity
15
(Sallee, 1998). Some original repertoire should be assigned as well as that which
provides opportunities for technical skills development (Lyke, 1996).
A survey of piano teachers showed that repertoire, pedagogy, reading
approach, keyboard skills, and music reading skills are the elements they consider
when selecting an appropriate method, with repertoire selection being the most
important of those elements (Blickenstaff, 1998). Student repertoire should meet
appropriate requirements of rhythm, music fundamentals, theory and composition,
technique and pedal, and expression and style (Krohn, 1991).
Selecting an appropriate piano method for elementary-aged beginning piano
students is a complicated task involving the careful consideration of multiple
elements. The variety of repertoire and the development of music skills through
creating (improvising and composing) and recreating (reading) music are key
components of a comprehensive piano method. The variety, quality, and appeal of
method book repertoire is important for building basic fundamentals of
musicianship as experienced through the repertoire.
2.2.3 Variety of Repertoire

According to MENC National Standard 2, music students should perform
on instruments (piano, in this case) a varied repertoire of music (MENC, 1994).
Research supports using a wide variety of repertoire in teaching instrumental music
(Colwell & Goolsby, 2002).
16
Thomas-Lee (2003) found a variety of repertoire in a comprehensive

analysis of nine piano methods for the preschool-aged beginner (Thomas-Lee,
2003). From the highest percentages to the lowest, the variety of reading repertoire
within those nine methods were as follows: Prep Course for the Beginner (100%),
Piano for the Young Beginner (100%), Mainstreams Primer Method (93%),
Invitation to Music (91%), Music for Moppets/Kinder-Keyboard (85%), The Very
Young Pianist (78%), Sing and Play (78%), Music for Little Mozarts (69%), and
Music Readiness Series (64%) (Thomas-Lee, 2003). The study sample was selected
from The Well-Tempered Keyboard Teacher (2000) by Uszler, and How to Teach
Piano Successfully (1988) by Bastien. Elements of playing, moving, singing,
creating, aural skills, parental involvement, and repertoire were analyzed.
Percentages of playing and listening repertoire were reported, with subcategories
for playing repertoire styles including: folk/traditional, author/pedagogical, art
music, and student/teacher duets. Listening repertoire had subcategories of
repertoire styles including: folk/traditional, author/pedagogical, art music,
multicultural, and piece/songs with lyrics. Percentages of music played and music
created were also reported (Thomas-Lee, 2003).
Familiarity of tunes presented in a method can be intrinsically motivating to
young students. In a study of ten American class piano methods from the early
twentieth-century, Lewison (1933) found that familiar songs were included for
student meaning and interest. They were most frequently used in beginning level
17
method books. Many newer methods attempt to keep up with current trends by
using colorful illustrations and familiar tunes (Crouse, 1992). Although it is
expected that a portion of method lesson book repertoire is author composed and
pedagogical in nature, these types of pieces are not considered familiar as they are
original and may subsequently have little initial intrinsic motivational value. In
contrast, exploring new repertoire as well as well-known repertoire makes piano
study a positive experience (Cameron, 1994).
Crouse (1992) superficially analyzed 16 elements in 20 methods by the
following authors: Aaron, Bastien, Brimhall, Burnham, Clark, dAuberge,
Duckworth, Edison, Fletcher, George, Glover, Kadidlo, Marwick/Nagy, Medley,
Noona (Mainstreams in Music: The Pianist, 1973), Noona (Noona Clavier Method,
1989), Pace, Alfred, Patrick, and Weybright (Crouse, 1992). Variety of songs,
familiarity of songs, and rhythmic exercises were important considerations in
method selection. Students are more likely to practice when they are interested in
the repertoire (Simms, 1997; Clark, 1989; Blickenstaff, 1998).
A male subject in a research study was intrinsically motivated to play the
piano only when one of the following four factors were true about the music he
played: 1) it was enjoyable, 2) within his playing level, 3) composed by him, or 4)
it was memorized (Simms, 1997). When a student requests to learn a familiar piece
beyond their current playing ability, teachers are often surprised when they
18
accomplish the difficult task. The intrinsic motivational value of the music
promotes student learning and achievement (Blickenstaff, 1998).
A list of favorite songs was revealed in a poll taken of 40 young piano
students (see Appendix D). These songs were then used to give music lessons to
children for the purpose of her study (Lomax, 1990). It is assumed that the
familiarity of these songs played an important part in the students fondness of
them. Young children respond to fun music they know (Thomas-Lee, 2003).
Young piano students enjoy playing familiar and powerful music (Cameron,
1990). Familiar tunes should be included in lesson book repertoire often (Jacobson,
2006). Familiar tunes and contemporary lyrics to songs are usually of interest to
students (Wheeler, 1997). The learning process is made easier through the use of
familiar tunes in student repertoire (Blickenstaff, 1999). Familiarity increases
student interest and learning (Kreader, 2004).
Research suggests that the variety of repertoire experienced by young music
students is essential for their musical development and growth. Surveys have
shown that the number one factor teachers consider in the piano method selection
process is the variety of repertoire in the music content. The inclusion of familiar
tunes in the repertoire often increases student interest and assists student learning.
2.2.4 Creating Music

According to MENC National Standards 3 and 4, music students should be
taught to improvise and to compose music (MENC, 1994). Music creating activities
19
have been promoted in music classrooms by numerous music educators over the
years (Biasini, Thomas, and Pogonowski, 1970; Consortium of National Arts
Education Associations, 1994; Contemporary Music Project, 1966, 1971; National
Association of Schools of Music, 1999; Richmond, 1989), although studies show
that these creative activities are not regularly practiced (Azzara, 1993; Kratus,
1989; Schmidt & Sinor, 1986; Webster, 1987a).
History has shown improvisation to be a living part of music making and
performance. Improvisation was a profound skill of master composers such as
Scarlatti, Bach, Handel, Mozart, Hummel, and Beethoven. Carl Czerny wrote A
Systematic Approach to Improvisation (1836), Opus 200, the first comprehensive
treatise on piano improvisation to the public. Chopin, Mendelssohn, Liszt,
Bruckner, Saint-Sans, and Franck were famous, in part, for improvisational skills
reflecting their own styles of composition.
Although the role of improvisation in Western art music has diminished
since the mid-1800s, its importance in music making should not be overlooked. It is
practiced worldwide in many genres and cultures. Improvisation is the essence of
music from Java, Bali, Korea, China, Turkey, Iran, Yugoslavia, Africa, India, Peru,
and other places and cultures worldwide.
Music teaching materials are needed to address the development of
improvisational skills in pianists. Rosfeld (1989) designed instructional units to
assist pianists in learning improvisational techniques. According to Rosfeld:
20
Improvisation is essentially the formulation of musical constructs in a

musicians mind and the simultaneous performance of those tonal images.
While improvisation has been a significant factor in Western music of the
past, its role in art music has declined since the mid-1800s. It still thrives in
folk, popular, and church music and has attracted some interest in academia
in recent years (Rosfeld, 1989).
The creative potential in music students is highest when they are young.
Age and level appropriate improvisation exercises should be experienced for
recreational and educational purposes. Simple question and answer type activities
in a five-finger position can help young beginning piano students develop music
skills for creating music (Stewart, 1996/1997).
Many teachers today lack improvisational skills at the piano (Farber, 1994).
This can impair the music education of students who are not taught improvisational
skills in music lessons. No single method ideally presents all of these aspects of
music theory. The areas of composition, improvisation, ear training, and rhythm are
shown to be predominant theoretical weaknesses (Hood, 1982, pp. i, 96).
Why improvisation? The answer can be summed up in a word: ownership.
Students who can improvise have a sense of freedom and ownership of the
keyboard that most of our traditional students do not possess (Blickenstaff, 2003,
p. 42). Sloboda and Davidson (1996) studied music students (n=257) from various
backgrounds and levels of instruction. They found that high-achieving musicians
had higher levels of formal and informal practice time, formal meaning the
practicing of their teachers weekly assignments, (e.g. scales, technical exercises,
and pieces), and informal meaning the playing of their favorite pieces in some form
21
or another, improvising, playing by ear, or simply playing around. In their

practicing, they demonstrated a healthy balance of discipline and freedom, unlike
those of their other students who were less successful. The element of freedom and
leisure in their practice for purposes of enjoyment attributed to the musical
achievement of these students. In a case study, Simms (1997) found that a young
male piano student was intrinsically motivated to play when the music was
enjoyable to him, when it was memorized, when it was within his playing ability,
or when it was composed by him (Simms, 1997).
Improvisation enhances the development of other music skills in young
students (Azzara, 1992; McPherson, 1993; Montano, 1983; J. Wilson, 1971).
Musical thoughts can be expressed spontaneously in music creating activities
(Azzara; 1992). Divergent thinking skills can be developed in students through
improvisation (Holliger, 1987).
Improvisation and rhythm are the essence of jazz. Understanding harmony
and other music theory rudiments used in improvisation can give students a sense
of freedom. Expression of musical thoughts and ideas is possible. Among other
benefits, improvisational skills can help performers get through onstage memory
lapses (Blickenstaff, 2003). The use of jazz materials in piano teaching can enhance
playing skills such as rhythm, left hand activity and development, good chord
technique, articulations, and ties (Blickenstaff, 2003). Improvisation activities for
improvisation skill acquisition and growth can be found in mainstream piano
22
methods such as those by James Bastien, Frances Clark, Lynn Freeman Olson, and
Robert Pace (Kim, 1987).
Research suggests that musical creativity should be fostered through the
teaching of improvisation and composition. Freedom, expression, and
understanding of basic theory concepts are among the benefits students reap
through music creating activities in their piano lessons.
2.2.5 Reading Music

Music reading (recreating) is the focus of piano study in most piano
methods. Students tend to continue music study longer with methods that help
develop music-reading skills (Gray, 1995). According to Day (1994):
All the superior music readers I know, once they have learned how to read,
have become fluent readers by reading volumes and volumes of music. I
think we all agree that these fluent readers do not read individual notes -they read groups of notes, intervals, locations, and signs (Day, 1994, p. 18).
The implication here is that students should be taught to read music in a
way that expert readers process music when they play. The proper balance
between the knowledge from direct experience and literacy leads to successful
study (Bay, 2000, p. 12).
Emanuele (2000) found a statistically significant difference in the rhythmic
accuracy of students who sung a piece before playing it than in those who did not
(Emanuele, 2000). Knowledge of music symbols, sight-reading, transposition, aural
skills, and public performance music skills were measured in a study on the
effectiveness of group versus private piano lessons. Students in group lessons
23
scored significantly higher in sight-reading than those in private lessons, but there
was no significant difference on the other test measures (Diehl, 1980).
Lewison (1933) found great similarity in educational goals for music
reading skills and music symbol understanding in early twentieth-century American
class piano methods such as Bower-Diller-Quaile Piano Course, Conservatory
Series, Curtis Class Piano Course, The Melody Way, The Music Study Course, The
Oxford Piano Course, Playing the Piano, Public School Class Piano Method,
Williams Class Piano Method, and The Young Students Class Piano Course
(Lewison, 1933).
Manno (1993) identified 25 expressive elements in piano literature. These
were used as a baseline for discovering which of those was deemed appropriate for
young beginning piano students. A questionnaire was administered to pianists and
to piano pedagogues in order to validate the 25 elements identified as expressive
characteristics in piano performance, of which the following 11 elements were
selected for analysis: rhythmic integrity, observance of rests, good fingering,
appropriate articulation interpretation, observance of expression marks, breathing
between phrases, melodic rise and fall, appropriate use of accent, crescendo and
decrescendo paralleling, tapered phrase endings, bringing out the melody, and good
pedal use. These elements were analyzed 7 mainstream piano methods for the
elementary-aged beginner (Manno, 1993).
24
Cartwright (1996) suggests that beginning piano methods do not properly

prepare the young student for twentieth-century piano literature in which styles and
techniques in music composed post 1940 may contain elements such as special
pedal effects, quartal or quintal harmony, aleatoric writing, and improvisation
(Cartwright, 1996). Some methods are the same as they were over 50 years ago,
using the same repertoire with no sharps or flats (Crouse, 1992). When selecting
beginning piano repertoire, teachers should evaluate the content of the music in
terms of presenting a variety of musical experiences needed for musical
development. Exploring new sounds such as whole tone scales, modal scales,
cluster chords, glissandi, and other exciting sounds are interesting to young
students (Haroutounian, 1990). One-handed repertoire should also be experienced
(Bomberger, 2004). Exposure to these music elements in level appropriate
repertoire for young students enhances their music education (Blickenstaff, 2000).
Although the selection of methods is important for the teaching of music reading,
the pedagogy of the teacher is more important (Coats, 2006).
Cartwright (1996) proposes Bla Bartks Mikrokosmos as a model
collection for introducing piano students to the style and performance of early
twentieth-century music (Cartwright, 1996, p. iv). Kodly specialist Katinka
Daniel stresses teacher understanding of modal scales and cadences for teaching
Bartk, whose musical content is great. Select pieces in Bartks For Children are
for artists (King, 2000). Garvin (1998) recommends using Jon and Mary Gae
25
Georges Artistry at the Piano (1981) to prepare young students for playing art
music as such music styles are nicely mimicked in this piano method for beginning
piano students.
According to Osborn, rhythm is the life and the structure of music (Osborn,
2006). Repertoire should expose young students to an array of rhythmic patterns
and gestures (Casano, 2006). Exciting meters and rhythms make beginning
repertoire more appealing (Appleby, 1995).
Research suggests that young students should be exposed to a wide variety
of musical elements in the repertoire they study for a well-rounded music
education. A variety of keys, meters, and other music elements should be
experienced through young beginning piano student repertoire.
2.2.6 Technology and Music Education

The use of technology to help develop musicianship skills in young students
can greatly improve their music education. The use of music educational computer
software may lessen piano student attrition and increase motivation for music and
learning (Banks, 1990; Young, 1990; Simms, 1997). Computer software may help
students increase basic musical skills and awareness (Stewart, 1996/1997). Aural
skills may be acquired and enlarged (Lord, 1993). Listening skills may be
developed (McCord, 1993; Arms, 1997; Goodson, 1992; Bush, 2000; Prasso,
1997). Compositional skills may be taught to young children (MacGregor, 1992;
Stewart, 1996/1997; Younker, 1997). Creative thinking may be stimulated
26
(Clements, 1995; Liu, 1998). The benefits of music educational software for
children are far reaching.
Banks (1990) reviewed Alfreds Basic Piano Library and 25 pre-college
educational music computer programs. Lesson books 1A, 2A, 3, 4, 5, and 6 were
correlated to the following 25 computer programs: Early Music Skills, Elements of
Music, Keyboard Tutor, Listen, Music Flash Cards (I), Musical Stairs, Note
Speller, Patterns in Rhythm (I), Super Challenger, Maestroscope Theory Readiness
A, Maestroscope Theory Readiness B, Music Literacy Skills, Rhythm Drills, Merry
Bee Musical Stories, Note Trespassing, A Decent Interval, Interval Mania, Just
Between Notes, Magic Musical Balloon Game, Mode Drills, Sketch the Scale,
Theory Sampler, Bare Facts on Intervals and Chords, Bare Facts on Notes,
Rhythms, and Terms, and Key Signatures. Banks (1990) found that Alfreds Basic
Piano Library was the only piano method to have accompanying music educational
computer software.
Capell (1989) studied Bridge, Lisp Tutor, and Piano Tutor in a content
analysis of intelligent tutoring systems. Intelligent tutoring systems were
considered cutting edge music education technology in the late 1980s. Tomczak
(1999) studied performance feedback programs for their effects on variables such
as music knowledge, basic music performance, gender, instructional satisfaction,
time needed for lesson comprehension, and playing level experience on nonkeyboard instruments. The latter was the only variable that showed significance.
27
Schachter (1999) combined new technology with floppy disks containing Finale
files of a piano method. These were designed for young piano students for feedback
during practice sessions.
Most piano method series market CD and/or MIDI disk accompaniments
for use with their lesson books, although MIDI disks will soon become obsolete
with the advancement of technology. In a research study involving a listening
sample of 188 instrumentalists from middle and high school, Brittin (2002) found
CD accompaniment to be preferred over piano accompaniment. Materials for the
study were extracted from mainstream method books for beginning band.
Research suggests that technology can be used to further the development
of musicianship in young music students. Music skills such as composing,
arranging, creative thinking, and listening can be developed through the assistance
of music educational technology.
2.2.7 Content Analyses of Piano Method Series

Various dissertations and theses review piano methods from a historical
point of view (Potter, 1994; Spangler, 1950; Reddick, 1970; Thompson, 1997;
Mueller, 1995; Piersel, 1970). Other related dissertations and theses combine
historical and analytical components, such as Brubaker (1996) who analyzed piano
methods from 1796 to 1995 that were published in the United States.
Many dissertations and theses, particularly in the 1980s, deal with content
analyses of pedagogical elements in specified piano methods designated for various
28
ages groups (Akins, 1982; Albergo, 1988; Alpiner, 1951; Amaize, 1993; Banks,
1990; Briercliffe, 1982; Capell, 1989; Chan, 2002; Chung, 1992; Covington, 1981;
Crouse, 1992; Hood, 1982; Kim, 1987; Ko, 2005; Lewison, 1933; Li, 2004; Lo,
1993; Lomax, 1990; Naudzius, 1983; Prieur, 1994; Thomas-Lee, 2003; Watkins,
1979; Wheeler, 1997; Whitlock, 2002).
Numerous dissertations and theses are biographical in nature, usually
describing pedagogues and/or their teaching philosophies, theories, and/or works
(Beauchamp, 1994; Brown, 2000; Buckner, 1996; Dibble, 1992; Duarte, 2004;
Forester, 1997; Garvin, 1998; Groves, 1981; Haertling-Lint, 1988; Hendricks,
1988; Holland, 1996; Huang, 1994; Hudak, 2004; Kern, 1984; King, 2000; Owen,
1997; Schubert, 1992; Tang, 2003; Trice, 1988.
Kim (1987) analyzed four methods for teaching philosophy, learning
approach, explanation of musical terms, activities, musical materials, note-reading,
rhythm, harmony, technique, fingering, sight-reading, biography of composer,
improvisation, ornamentation, system of notation, production value, and teachers
guides. The methods studied were those by James Bastien, Frances Clark, Lynn
Freeman Olson, and Robert Pace (Kim, 1987).
Amaize (1993) analyzed 123 selected materials from 1892 to 1992 in which
the researcher looked for music concepts stressed by pianists, piano pedagogues,
and music educators as essential to the development of good musical interpretation
and expressivity in piano playing. In the study, 29 musical elements were identified
29
and ranked. These elements were then placed into 1 of 10 larger categories which
were ranked as follows: (1) musical analysis, (2) sound elements, (3.5) rhythm,
(3.5) style, (5) imagination and emotionalism, (6) aural involvement, (7) holistic
approach, (8) technique, (9) psycho-physical traits, [and] (10) imitation (Amaize,
1993, p. iv). The results of this study showed that there were only small differences
in the rakings of materials previous to 1960 than those afterwards, with the
exception of balance/voicing, which moved from ranking 20 to 6.5.
Chan (2002) analyzed 28 adult piano methods for elements such as
repertoire style, melodic structure, basic concepts presented, purpose of fingering,
and supporting activities. In addition, a catalog was complied of over 60 adult
piano methods currently on the market and published in the United States from
1980 to 2001 for non-degree programs of study (Chan, 2002).
Chung (1992) analyzed the Beyer piano methods for elements such as
teaching approach, music reading, rhythm, technique, literature, musicianship and
theory, and organization and format. These methods are widely used in Korea for
teaching beginning piano students. Chung found a need for Korean piano method
authors to study the work of American piano method authors to improve their piano
teaching materials (Chung, 1992).
Briercliffe (1982) analyzed and compared four methods for beginning piano
students for elements such as teaching philosophy, presentation and structure, and
theory. Research findings showed that Music for Piano (1979) by Robert Pace and
30
Piano Lessons (1976) by James Bastien ranked highest in addressing concepts of

music theory, with Pace providing the most comprehensive theory elements
(Briercliffe, 1982).
Albergo (1988) investigated the objectives in 8 American beginning piano
methods for children (ages 6-11) and in 240 piano pedagogue survey respondents
from the National Conference on Piano Pedagogy in 1986. The objectives
identified were divided into one of the following four categories: playing, listening,
creating, and knowing and understanding. In these categories, 27 piano teachers
agreed with the importance of playing objectives in piano method series for
teaching elementary-aged beginning piano students; 16 agreed with knowing and
understanding, 10 with listening, and only 5 with creating (Albergo, 1988).
2.3 ImplicationsConceptual Framework

Methods in the first half of the twentieth-century for the beginning piano
student frequently used familiar tunes and Western art music themes in their
repertoire, with subsequent books including original masterpieces progressively
(Sturm, 2000). The researcher of this study calculated an average of 40% of the
repertoire in piano methods for the time to be Western art music adaptations or
originals (Ballard, 2007). The highest percentage of this repertoire, aside from
Bartks Mikrokosmos (100%), was a surprisingly high average of 88% found in
Piano Study Series by Nelson (Ballard, 2007).
31
Representative methods from the same era include: William Berolds Piano
Course (1904) by William Berold, Melody Books 1-2 (1916) by Dorothy Gaynor
Blake, Oxford Piano Course for Class and Individual Instruction (1927-1932) by
Ernest Schelling, Gail and Charles Haake, and Osbourne McConathy, Modern
Graded Piano Course (1936-1942) by John Thompson, Bernard Wagness Piano
Course (1938) by Bernard Wagness, Michael Aaron Piano Course (1945-1952) by
Michael Aaron, and You Can Play Piano: A Book for the Older Beginner (1947) by
Ada Richter (Sturm, 2000). With the technological advancements in printing of the
period, methods for children had larger print size, colorful covers, illustrations
coinciding with the names of the tunes, and text written for children readers.
Publishers were interested in meeting abilities and aspirations of piano students.
Student repertoire was featured periodically in a series of articles entitled A
Favorite Composer in The Etude (1932-1938) music magazine (Sturm, 2000).
Akins (1982) suggests four primary divisions for piano method analysis: 1)
teaching approach, 2) layout and organization, 3) quality and types of repertoire,
and 4) organization into levels and its influence on the purchase price of the
method books. In her study, five methods were analyzed: Modern Course for the
Piano by John Thompson, Piano Study Series by Allison Nelson, Oxford Piano
Course by Ernest Schelling, Gail Martin Haake, Charles J. Haake, and Osbourne
McConathy, The Bastien Piano Library by James Bastien, and Mikrokosmos by
Bla Bartk (Akins, 1982).
32
Akins (1982) reported frequency counts of repertoire styles in method

lesson books analyzed in her study. These were tallied into one of five categories:
1) original, 2) popular, 3) folk, 4) classical, and 5) other. Totals from each lesson
book were also tallied. Totals frequency counts for each repertoire style category in
the Modern Course for the Piano lesson books combined were: 154 original, 1
popular, 37 folk, 197 classical, and 57 other, with a total of 446 pieces in all 6
lesson books combined. In Piano Study Series, lesson book repertoire was as
follows: 25 original, 0 popular, 5 folk, 225 classical, and 0 other, with a total of 255
pieces in all 6-lesson books combined. In Oxford Piano Course, lesson book
repertoire was as follows: 40 original, 0 popular, 33 folk, 47 classical, and 67 other,
with a total of 187 out of 5 available lesson books. In The Bastien Piano Library,
lesson book repertoire was a follows: 112 original, 0 popular, 37 folk, 7 classical,
and 6 other, with a total of 162 pieces (Akins, 1982). Music in the 6 volumes of
Bartks Mikrokosmos was 100% author-composed. This fact resembles the piano
method Artistry at the Piano (1981) by Jon George. All music in that series was
100% author-composed, with a total of 227 original compositions.
In order to strengthen the basis for an examination of variety in repertoire,
the researcher of this study (Ballard, 2007) calculated the percentages of repertoire
styles from the frequency counts listed in the study by Akins (1982). The
percentages of repertoire styles and the names of the primary authors of the
methods are displayed in the following table for analysis:
33
Repertoire Percentages in Five Categories for Five Piano Methods

Repertoire:
Original
Popular
Folk
Classical
Other
Thompson
34.53%
0.22%
8.30%
44.17%
12.78%
Nelson
9.80%
0%
1.96%
88.24%
0%
Schelling
21.39%
0%
17.65%
25.13%
35.83%
Bastien
69.14%
0%
22.84%
4.32%
3.70%
Bartk
100%
0%
0%
0%
0%
The following percentages were calculated for the method series of Thompson,
Nelson, Schelling, and Bastien (not Bartks Mikrokosmos). Only 0.06% of the
lesson book repertoire in the four series combined included popular music (one
popular piece in Thompson). A substantial amount of Classical, or Western art,
music was included in the repertoire, averaging 40.47%. A wide variety of original,
or author-composed, works existed in those methods, with percentages varying
from 9.80% to 69.14%, and averaging 33.73% among the four methods. Folk music
comprised an average of 12.69% of the repertoire, as expected. The category
labeled other contained as much as 35.83% of the music in one of the methods
studied (Oxford Piano Course). This leads one to question what style of music was
placed in this category, and why more specific categories were not identified.
34
2.4 Summary of Related Literature

The literature reviewed supported the use of variety in music, creating
music, and reading music in teaching, as recommended in MENC National
Standards 2, 3, 4, and 5. These standards include using a variety of repertoire in
teaching (Standard 2), performing alone and with others (Standard 2), improvising
and composing (Standards 3 and 4), and reading music (Standard 5). Research
literature on the use of technology in music teaching was also reviewed for related
findings on the development of musicianship skills. A comprehensive music
education incorporates these elements for an optimal teaching and learning
experience. No content analysis of piano methods was found in which direct
reference was made to the National Standards for teaching and learning music.
35
Chapter 3
___________________________________________________________________
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter describes the procedures for data collection and data analysis
as pertaining to the research questions and purpose statement of this study.
3.2 Restatement of Purpose

the MENC National Standards were investigated through an analysis of the music
content related to recreating (Standard 2), creating (Standards 3 and 4), and reading
music (Standard 5). The purpose of this study was to investigate the variety of
repertoire (Standard 2), the development of skills for creating music (Standards 3
and 4), and the variety of keys and meters experienced in reading music (Standards
2 and 5) in piano methods published in the United States or Canada from 1994 to
2006 for the elementary-aged beginning piano student.
The music content of the first four consecutive lesson books of each series
was analyzed to determine the following: A) the percentage of repertoire in each of
eight categories, B) the percentages of solo repertoire and duet repertoire, C) the
percentage of music content used to create (improvise or compose), D) the variety
36
of keys, meters, and other music reading activities, E) what technology is used to
support performance and musicianship, and F) how the music content is rated for
variety of repertoire, inclusion of music creating activities, and variety of music
reading experiences related to key and meter.
3.3 Study Design

3.3.1 Selection of Study Design
A descriptive research study design was deemed appropriate for the purpose
of this study. The music content in select piano method lesson books was analyzed
for variety of repertoire styles, solo repertoire and duet repertoire, creating music
(improvising and composing), and reading music. Accompanying technology was
also investigated. This study involved the examination of piano methods written by
American authors and published from 1994 to 2006 in the United States or Canada
for the elementary-aged beginning piano student.
3.3.2 Sample
A sample size of 40 lesson books (n=40) from 10 piano methods (n=10)
was selected for the purpose of this study. The first 4 consecutive lesson books of
each series were addressed in alphabetical order as follows: Alfreds Premier Piano
Course (2005, 2006) by Dennis Alexander, Gayle Kowalchyk, E. L. Lancaster,
Victoria McArthur, and Martha Mier; All-in-One Course (1994, 1995) by Willard
A. Palmer, Morton Manus, and Amanda Vick Lethco; Beanstalks Basics Piano
Course (1998, 1999) by Cheryl Finn and Eamonn Morris; Celebrate Piano! (2003)
37
by Cathy Albergo, J. Mitzi Kolar, and Mark Mrozinski; Hal Leonard Piano
Library: Piano Lessons (1996, 1997) by Barbara Kreader, Fred Kern, Phillip
Keveren, and Mona Rejino; The Music Tree (2000) by Frances Clark; Noona
Comprehensive Piano Lessons (1997) by Walter and Carol Noona; Piano
Adventures (1996, 1997) by Nancy and Randall Faber; Piano Discoveries (2001)
by Janet Vogt and Leon Bates; Piano Town (2004) by Keith Snell and Diane Hidy.
The first 4 lesson books in each series were chosen for study due to the fact
that each of the series in the study sample contained at least 4 lesson books. Any
additional lesson books beyond that point were not studied, as they could not be
compared to other method series consisting of only 4 lesson books. Many piano
teachers use piano methods as preparatory material to the introduction of Western
art music, and do not use them for students any longer than deemed necessary.
The method series in the study sample were published between 1994 and
2006. The reason for the selection of methods published in this particular time
period was based in part on the publishing of MENC National Standards in 1994 in
response to the Goals 2000: Educate America Act passed by Congress that same
year. Comprehensive piano methods written by American authors and published in
the United States and Canada since 1994 were selected for the purpose of this study
to investigate their implementation of specified components of those Standards.
38
3.3.3 Procedures for Sample Selection

Approximately 25 piano methods were examined during the selection
process over the course of eight months. These were procured from online sheet
music vendors, including: discountpianomethods.com, www.burtnco.com, and
willismusic.com, and sheetmusicplus.com. Several piano pedagogy texts were
consulted at the onset of this study, including: The Well-Tempered Keyboard
Teacher (2000) by Uszler, Professional Piano Teaching (2006) by Jacobson and
edited by E. L. Lancaster, Practical Piano Pedagogy: The Definitive Text for Piano
Teachers and Pedagogy Students (2004) by Baker-Jordan, The Art of Teaching
Piano (2004) edited by Agay, Creative Piano Teaching (1996) by Lyke, Enoch,
and Haydon, and How to Teach Piano Successfully (1988) by Bastien. Online
databases were investigated for related literature, including: DAI, ERIC,
FirstSearch, and Proquest.
Alfred Publishing, Kjos, and Lee Roberts Music were contacted for
information on the latest piano method publications for the elementary-aged
beginner. Alfred Publishing and Kjos responded to my inquiries. Alfred Publishing
representatives, Karen Surmani, Early Childhood and Young Classroom Editor,
and E. L. Lancaster, Piano Education Department and co-author of Alfreds
Premier Piano Course (2005, 2006) replied. After conversing with E. L. Lancaster,
the researcher was briefed on recently published piano methods on the market.
39
Kjos representative, Leslie Fox, Piano Editor, provided contact information

for the primary writer of their most recent piano method, Piano Town (2004), by
Keith Snell (and Diane Hidy). Fox also answered a few questions the researcher
posed regarding publishing plans for computer software or other technology
accompanying piano methods for the specified aged group. It was reported that
publishing plans could not be divulged. No technological supplements aside from
compact disk accompaniments for lesson book repertoire in the first three lesson
books (Primer Level, Level One, and Level Two) of Piano Town were available.
After surveying numerous piano methods, the researcher ran a pilot study
over the course of four weeks to investigate repertoire style categories and other
elements relating to music content as found in American piano methods for the
elementary-aged beginning piano student.
Following the involved survey and pilot study of mainstream piano
methods, the researcher selected those by American authors that were published
from 1994 to 2006 in the United States or Canada. These consisted of at least four
consecutive lesson books for the elementary-aged beginning piano student in
private lessons.
3.3.4 Data Collection

Data collection sheets were developed for this study (see Appendix A). One
set of sheets was needed for each of the 40 lesson books analyzed. In a chart
containing 1 column and 7 rows at the top of the first sheet, general information
40
was collected, including: name of the method analyzed, specific lesson book
analyzed, author name(s), year of publication, number of pages, teaching approach,
and accompanying technology. More specific information was collected in a chart
located directly below the general information chart. Data were collected, recorded,
and referenced on these sheets to facilitate retrieval, with 9 columns and 84 rows
numbering from 1 to 80 (each number representing the corresponding page in a
lesson book, 80 being the greatest number of pages in any of the lesson books
analyzed). The sheets were marked with checks, numbers, or letters indicating the
presence or absence of a specified element. Data was collected for the following
element categories (in order of appearance on the chart): 1) page number, 2)
repertoire style, 3) key(s), 4) meter(s), 5) lyrics, 6) student/teacher duets, 7) reading
music (E for exploration, PS for pre-staff (including partial single staff reading),
SS for single staff, or GS for grand staff), 8) improvising, and 9) composing.
Rhythmic and transposition exercises were also noted with letters R or T on left
and right sides of the chart, respectively.
Repertoire from categories 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 (the majority of works in
public domain) were recorded in a separate chart located directly underneath the
former (see Appendix A). This chart consists of two columns, one showing the
corresponding page number of a lesson book, with rows numbered from 1 to 80,
the other showing the title of a piece. A separate sheet was created compiling all
familiar tunes found in the data collection process (see Appendix E). This table
41
includes titles of a tune (e.g. Au clair de la lune/Pierrot/In the Silvery Moonlight),

the category in which it was included, and the lesson book(s) in which it was found.
In cases where the same tune was used in multiple lesson books of the same
method series, that familiar tune was counted for each occurrence in data
collection. In cases where the same tune was used twice within the same lesson
book, that familiar tune was counted only once in data collection.
Tables for each lesson book were formed to display occurrences of
specified music elements, including: keys, transposition exercises, meters, rhythm
exercises, exploration of the keyboard, pre-staff reading, single staff reading, grand
staff reading, reading (the sum of pre-staff, single staff, and grand staff reading),
improvising, composing, solos, duets, lyrics, and technology (see Appendix C).
Percentages were calculated from these sheets for data analysis.
Repertoire in the first four lesson books of each series was placed into one
of the following seven categories: 1) author(s) composed pedagogical pieces, 2)
non-author composed pedagogical pieces, 3) Western art music (adaptation or
original), 4) folk and traditional songs and tunes, 5) nursery and play songs, 6)
multicultural music, 7) religious music, and 8) popular music. A rubric was
developed to illustrate the division of repertoire style categories and the criteria for
selecting a piece to be included in any particular category (see Appendix B).
Data collection sheets were tallied and transferred to frequency charts of
repertoire styles to analyze variety in repertoire within each lesson book. The data
42
were then added to tables for analysis that display elements for music skill
development in individual lesson books (see Appendix C). Percentages of nonauthor composed music (referred to as familiar music) were reported for each series
(see Appendix E).
3.3.5 Ratings for Variety of Repertoire

Ratings were given for the variety of repertoire in each series (see Table
13). The percentages of repertoire styles for the eight categories identified were
calculated. A rating rubric was developed as follows: poor (0), fair (1), good (2),
and excellent (3). These ratings were calculated as described hereafter.
Series with 80% (rounded to the nearest percentage) or more authorcomposed repertoire and 2% or less in each of 4 or more other repertoire style
categories were given poor (0) ratings. Series with 70-79% author-composed
repertoire and 2% or less in each of 3 other repertoire style categories were given
fair (1) ratings. Series with 60-69% author-composed repertoire and 2% or less in
each of 3 other repertoire style categories were given good (2) ratings. Series with
59% author-composed repertoire and 2% or less in each of 2 or less other repertoire
style categories were given excellent (3) ratings.
3.3.6 Ratings for Creating

The percentage of music content devoted to music creating (improvisation
and composition) in each series was calculated. Ratings were given for the
implementation of music creating activities. A rating rubric was developed as
43
follows: poor (0), fair (1), good (2), and excellent (3). Ratings were given for the
implementation of music creating activities (see Table 17). A rating rubric was
developed as follows: poor (0), fair (1), good (2), and excellent (3). These ratings
were calculated as described hereafter.
Series with 0.00-5.17% of the music content devoted to music creating
activities including improvisation and composition were given poor (0) ratings.
Series with 5.18-10.34% were given fair (1) ratings. Series with 10.35-15.52%
were given good ratings. Series with 15.53-20.70% were given excellent (3)
ratings. The lowest percentage (0.00%) of music creating activities was subtracted
from the highest percentage (20.70%) of music creating activities. The difference
(20.70%) was divided by 4 for a quotient (5.18%) representing the interval
percentage for each of the 4 rating categories previously stated (poor, fair, good,
and excellent).
3.3.7 Ratings for Variety of Keys and Meters

Data tables display keys and meters (and additional music elements) listed
in order of their first appearance in each lesson book (see Appendix C). Data on
keys and meters were added to three tables (Tables 18, 19, and 20) as described in
the following paragraphs.
The first table (Table 18) includes the following four columns: name of
method, major keys, minor keys, and other keys (i.e. modal, whole tone, and
44
pentatonic). Twin and triplet black key groupings frequently used in primer level
books were included in the other keys category.
The second table (Table 19) contains four columns: method name,
symmetrical meters, asymmetrical meters, and change in meter within a piece.
The third table (Table 20) includes ratings for variety of key, variety of
meter, and variety of key and meter combined. A rating rubric was included above
this table with ratings of poor (0.0), fair (0.5-1.0), good (1.5-2.0), and excellent
(2.5-3.0). These ratings were calculated as described hereafter.
Up to 20 different keys and scales were used in a series. Every series used
at least C major, G major, F major, and a minor. Series using from 5 to 8 keys and
scales (i.e. major, minor, modal, chromatic, whole tone, pentatonic, etc.) in all four
books combined were given poor (0) ratings. Series using 9 to 12 keys were given
fair (1) ratings. Series using 13 to 16 keys were given good (2) ratings. Series using
17 to 20 keys were given excellent (3) ratings.
The sums of the meters used beyond 2/4, 3/4, and 4/4 meters were added.
Series using 2/4, 3/4, and 4/4 meters exclusively were given poor (0) ratings. Series
including one additional meter were given fair (1) ratings. Series including two
additional meters were given good (2) ratings. Series including three or more
additional meters were given excellent (3) ratings.
Ratings for variety in both key and meter were averaged for an overall
rating for keys and meters experienced in music reading. Ratings of poor (0.0), fair
45
(0.5-1.0), good (1.5-2.0), and excellent (2.5-3.0) were used for key and meter
ratings, which were combined and averaged for each series.
3.3.8 Associated Technology

Technology directly associated with each series was reported in tables
consisting of the following columns: name of method, CD accompaniment
availability, MIDI Disk accompaniment availability, and other technology.
3.3.9 Overall Ratings for Implementation of National Standards 2-5

Overall ratings for each series were given by combining averages of rating
scores for variety of repertoire (National Standard 2), creating music (National
Standards 3 and 4), and reading music (National Standard 5). The following rubric
of four ratings was used: poor (0.00-0.75); fair (0.76-1.59); good (1.60-2.25);
excellent (2.26-3.00).
3.3.11 Time Table

The data collection and data analysis portions of this study took place in
consecutive weekdays over the course of approximately six weeks for consistency.
A pilot study was performed on eight mainstream American piano methods for
children published before 1994 a few months previous in order to work out any
unforeseen difficulties. In this study, the first four lesson books of ten piano method
series were analyzed (n=40), with no more than two series investigated per day in
random order. One to four hours of examination was required per lesson book. Data
analysis was subsequently performed in relation to the research questions posed.
46
3.4 Chapter Summary

Forty lesson books from ten piano methods published from 1994 to 2006 for
the elementary-aged beginning piano student in private lessons were analyzed for
components relating to MENC National Standards 2, 3, 4, and 5, including variety
of repertoire, solo repertoire and duet repertoire, music content devoted to music
creating activities such as improvisation and composition, and variety of keys and
meters experienced through music reading in the first four lesson books of each
series in the study sample.
The methodology for this research study was designed to answer the six
research questions formulated for the purpose of this study. Descriptive data sheets
and tables were created to collect and to analyze the data. Rubrics were developed
containing criteria used in categorizing the data. Rating systems were developed
and described.
47
Chapter 4
RESULTS AND DATA ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction
This chapter begins with a restatement of the research questions conceived
for the purpose of this study. The research sample is addressed in alphabetical order
throughout this chapter: Alfreds Premier Piano Course (2005, 2006) by Dennis
Alexander, Gayle Kowalchyk, E. L. Lancaster, Victoria McArthur, and Martha
Mier; All-in-One Course (1994, 1995) by Willard A. Palmer, Morton Manus, and
Amanda Vick Lethco; Beanstalks Basics Piano Course (1998, 1999) by Cheryl
Finn and Eamonn Morris; Celebrate Piano! (2003) by Cathy Albergo, J. Mitzi
Kolar, and Mark Mrozinski; Hal Leonard Piano Library: Piano Lessons (1996,
1997) by Barbara Kreader, Fred Kern, Phillip Keveren, and Mona Rejino; The
Music Tree (2000) by Frances Clark; Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons (1997)
by Walter and Carol Noona; Piano Adventures (1996, 1997) by Nancy and Randall
Faber; Piano Discoveries (2001) by Janet Vogt and Leon Bates; Piano Town
(2004) by Keith Snell and Diane Hidy.
The first four lesson books of each series were analyzed. Analyses involved
the comparison of each series with the other series in the research sample. Tables 123 display the data corresponding to the research questions posed.
48
4.2
Findings
4.2.1 Research Question 1

What is the percentage of repertoire in each of the following categories: author(s)
composed pedagogical pieces, non-author composed pedagogical pieces, Western
art music (adapted or original), folk and traditional songs and tunes (including
secular Christmas music), nursery and play songs, multicultural music, religious
music (including sacred Christmas music), and popular music (including music
featured in television, movies, radio, and theatre)? (Standard 2)
The majority of repertoire in each of the method series examined was
author-composed. Percentages of this repertoire style (Category 1) ranged from a
rounded low of 43% in Hal Leonard Piano Library: Piano Lessons, to a rounded
high of 82% in Beanstalks Basics, Alfreds Premiere Piano Course, and Celebrate
Piano!, with an overall average of 72% author-composed repertoire across all
method series. Multicultural, religious, and popular music categories contained the
lowest percentages of repertoire. The highest percentages in these categories were
as follows: 7% multicultural in Hal Leonard: Piano Lessons, 5% popular in The
Music Tree, and 2% religious in All-in-One Piano Course.
The following tables (Tables 1-12) show the division of repertoire styles in
each series. Table 1 contains the percentages of repertoire styles as categorized for
each series.
49
Table 1. Repertoire Categories and Percentages

Category
Nos./Codes
1
A1
2
Na2
3
Wa3
Nursery/Play
Multicultural
Religious
Popular
8
PM8
Folk/Traditional
7
R7
Western Art
6
M6
Non-author
5
N5/P5
Author(s)
Categories
Names
4
F4/T4
Alfred
82.09%
0%
8.96%
5.97%
2.24%
0%
0%
0.75%
All-in-One
78.40%
0%
1.60%
10.40%
4.00%
3.20%
2.40%
0%
Beanstalks
82.28%
0%
1.27%
8.23%
7.59%
0.63%
0%
0%
Celebrate
81.92%
3.39%
1.13%
9.60%
3.95%
0%
0%
0%
H. Leonard
42.67%
17.33%
9.33%
14.67%
9.33%
6.67%
0%
0%
Music Tree
56.69%
20.77%
2.46%
10.21%
3.52%
1.06%
0%
5.28%
Noona
68.47%
0%
5.38%
14.62%
7.69%
3.85%
0%
0%
Adventures
78.40%
2.47%
2.47%
12.35%
3.70%
0.62%
0%
0%
Discoveries
71.32%
8.09%
5.88%
10.29%
2.21%
0.74%
1.47%
0%
Town
79.80%
0%
6.57%
7.58%
3.54%
1.52%
1.01%
0%
In general, author-composed pieces were less frequent as lesson books advanced.

The use of folk/traditional and nursery/play pieces varied across series and levels.
Western art music was used more frequently as lesson books advanced. The last
three categories of music (multicultural, religious, and popular) were used least
50
often across all series and levels. Tables 2-11 show the frequencies of repertoire
styles present in each series for each of 4 lesson books.
Table 2. Alfreds Premier Piano Course (2005, 2006)
Method Author(s) Other Art

Book 1 41
0
3
Book 2 32
0
3
Book 3 20
0
4
Book 4 17
0
2
Total
110
0
12
Reading Repertoire Total: 134
Folk
4
0
3
1
8
Nursery
2
1
0
0
3
Multicultural
0
0
0
0
0
Religious
0
0
0
0
0
Pop
0
0
0
1
1
Nursery
2
0
2
1
5
Multicultural
1
0
3
0
4
Religious
0
0
1
2
3
Pop
0
0
0
0
0
Folk
2
1
6
4
13
Nursery
0
1
5
6
12
Multicultural
0
0
1
0
1
Religious
0
0
0
0
0
Pop
0
0
0
0
0
Folk
0
8
4
5
17
Nursery
3
2
1
1
7
Multicultural
0
0
0
0
0
Religious
0
0
0
0
0
Pop
0
0
0
0
0
Table 3. All-in-One Piano Course (1994, 1995)

Book 1 32
0
0
Book 2 32
0
0
Book 3 10
0
2
Book 4 24
0
0
Total
98
0
2
Folk
2
3
5
3
13
Table 4. Beanstalks Basics (1998, 1999)

Book 1 35
0
0
Book 2 35
0
2
Book 3 32
0
0
Book 4 28
0
0
Total
130
0
2
Table 5. Celebrate Piano! (2003)

Book 1 43
0
0
Book 2 33
1
0
Book 3 32
3
1
Book 4 37
2
1
Total
145
6
2
51
Table 6. Hal Leonard Piano Library: Piano Lessons (1996, 1997)

Book 1 18
2
1
Book 2 12
11
2
Book 3 15
6
3
Book 4 19
7
8
Total
64
26
14
Folk
10
5
5
2
22
Nursery
4
3
2
5
14
Multicultural
4
1
4
1
10
Religious
0
0
0
0
0
Pop
0
0
0
0
0
Folk
2
4
16
7
29
Nursery
1
3
1
5
10
Multicultural
0
1
1
1
3
Religious
0
0
0
0
0
Pop
0
3
8
4
15
Nursery
3
2
5
0
10
Multicultural
0
1
2
2
5
Religious
0
0
0
0
0
Pop
0
0
0
0
0
Nursery
1
1
2
2
6
Multicultural
0
1
0
0
1
Religious
0
0
0
0
0
Pop
0
0
0
0
0
Table 7. The Music Tree (2000)

Book 1 57
0
3
Book 2 44
25
1
Book 3 30
20
1
Book 4 30
14
2
Total
161
59
7
Table 8. Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons (1997)

Book 1 25
0
0
Book 2 30
0
1
Book 3 19
0
3
Book 4 15
0
3
Total
89
0
7
Folk
5
4
6
4
19
Table 9. Piano Adventures (1996, 1997)

Book 1 34
1
1
Book 2 44
3
1
Book 3 28
0
0
Book 4 21
0
2
Total
127
4
4
Folk
7
4
0
9
20
52
Table 10. Piano Discoveries (2001)

Book 1 26
3
0
Book 2 36
2
3
Book 3 18
3
3
Book 4 17
3
2
Total
97
11
8
Folk
1
4
4
5
14
Nursery
0
0
2
1
3
Multicultural
0
0
1
0
1
Religious
0
0
0
2
2
Pop
0
0
0
0
0
Folk
2
4
7
2
15
Nursery
3
2
2
0
7
Multicultural
0
1
2
0
3
Religious
0
1
0
1
2
Pop
0
0
0
0
0
Table 11. Piano Town (2004)

Book 1 43
0
2
Book 2 47
0
0
Book 3 41
0
1
Book 4 27
0
10
Total
158
0
13
Table 12 displays the percentages of familiar tunes in each series. These tunes are
found in categories 3-8. All are non-author composed and most are in public
domain. A list of familiar tunes was complied with category numbers, subcategory
codes, and specific lesson books in which those tunes were found (see Appendix
E). These represented categories 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, namely: 3) Western art music
adaptations (mostly orchestral themes), 4) folk and traditional songs and tunes, 5)
nursery and play songs, 6) multicultural music, 7) religious music, and 8) popular
music. Original and arranged works for piano in the Western art music category
were not referred to as familiar tunes with the exceptions of Musette in D by J. S.
Bach and Harvest Song by Robert Schumann. The percentages of familiar tunes in
each series are as follows:
53
Table 12. Familiar Tunes in the Repertoire
Method
Number
Percentage
Alfreds Premier Piano Course
19
14.18%
All-in-One Piano Course
24
19.20%
Beanstalks Basics
26
16.46%
Celebrate Piano!
25
14.12%
Hal Leonard Piano Lessons
42
28.00%
The Music Tree
51
17.96%
Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons
38
29.23%
Piano Adventures
30
18.52%
Piano Discoveries
29
21.32%
Piano Town
30
15.15%
In cases where the same tune was used in multiple lesson books of the same
method series, that familiar tune was counted for each occurrence in data
collection. In cases where the same tune was used twice within the same lesson
book, that familiar tune was counted only once in data collection. Percentages of
familiar music within a series ranged from a low of 14.12% in Celebrate Piano! to
a high of 29.23% in Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons. The average percentage
of familiar music in lesson book repertoire was 17.90%.
Ratings were given for the variety of repertoire in each series (see Table
13). The percentages of repertoire styles for the eight categories identified were
54
calculated. A rating rubric was developed as follows: poor (0), fair (1), good (2),
and excellent (3). These ratings were calculated as described hereafter.
Ratings were given for the variety of repertoire in each series. The
percentages of repertoire styles for the eight categories identified were calculated.
A rating rubric was developed as follows: poor (0), fair (1), good (2), and excellent
(3). These ratings were calculated as described hereafter. Series with 80% (rounded
to the nearest percentage) or more author-composed repertoire and 2% or less in
each of 4 or more other repertoire style categories were given poor (0) ratings.
Series with 70-79% author-composed repertoire and 2% or less in each of 3 other
repertoire style categories were given fair (1) ratings. Series with 60-69% authorcomposed repertoire and 2% or less in each of 3 other repertoire style categories
were given good (2) ratings. Series with 59% author-composed repertoire and 2%
or less in each of 2 or less other repertoire style categories were given excellent (3)
ratings. See Table 13 below for ratings given to each series for variety of repertoire.
Alfreds Premier
All-in-One
Beanstalks Basics
Celebrate Piano!
Hal Leonard
The Music Tree
Noona Comprehensive
Piano Adventures
Piano Discoveries
Piano Town
Table 13. Ratings for Variety of Repertoire
55
Ratings for variety of repertoire were given as follows: excellent ratings were given
to Hal Leonard: Piano Lessons and The Music Tree; a good rating was given to
Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons, fair ratings were given to All-in-One, Piano
Adventures, Piano Discoveries; and poor ratings were given to Alfreds Premier
Piano Course, Beanstalks Basics, Celebrate Piano!, and Piano Town.

What are the percentages of solo repertoire and duet repertoire? (Standard 2)
An overall average of 65% solo repertoire and 35% duet repertoire was
found in all method series combined. See Tables 14-16 for percentages.
Table 14. Percentages of Solo Repertoire and Duet Repertoire
Method
Solo
Duet
48.75%
51.25%
77.75%
22.25%
Beanstalks Basics
79.25%
20.75%
Celebrate Piano!
44.00%
56.00%
47.75%
52.25%
The Music Tree
54.00%
46.00%
Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons
81.75%
18.25%
Piano Adventures
56.25%
43.75%
Piano Discoveries
76.25%
23.75%
Piano Town
79.50%
20.50%
56
Percentages of solo and duet repertoire in each lesson book are as follows:
Table 15. Solo Repertoire and Duet Repertoire (National Standard 2)
Lessons
Book 1
Book 2
Book 3
Book 4
Solo
Duet
Solo
Duet
Solo
Duet
Solo
Duet
Alfred
0%
100%
40%
60%
69%
31%
86%
14%
All-in-One
24%
76%
94%
6%
100%
0%
93%
7%
Beanstalks
76%
24%
64%
36%
77%
23%
100%
0%
Celebrate
40%
60%
35%
65%
50%
50%
51%
49%
Hal Leonard
37%
63%
50%
50%
51%
49%
53%
47%
Music Tree
20%
80%
60%
40%
58%
42%
78%
22%
Noona
27%
73%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
P. Adventures
20%
80%
71%
29%
63%
37%
71%
29%
P. Discoveries
60%
40%
68%
32%
77%
23%
100%
0%
Piano Town
40%
60%
78%
22%
100%
0%
100%
0%
Most first lesson books held the highest percentages of duet repertoire, the overall
average being 66%. Alfreds Premiere, Celebrate Piano!, Hal Leonard, and Piano
Adventures showed near equal percentages for solo repertoire and duet repertoire.
Table 16. Percentages of Solo Repertoire and Duet Repertoire
Method Lesson Books
Books 1
Books 2
Books 3
Books 4
Duet Repertoire
66%
34%
26%
17%
Solo Repertoire
34%
66%
74%
83%
57
A steady decrease in student/teacher duets across books one, two, three, and four
was discovered. The average percentage of duet repertoire in all ten series
combined was 65.60% in books one, 34.00% in books two, 25.50% in books three,
and 16.80% in books four. Student/teacher duets (teacher accompaniments) are
included in the duet repertoire category.

What is the percentage of music content devoted to creating music (improvising or
composing)? (Standards 3 and 4)
Music content devoted to creating music through improvisation and
composition ranged from a high of more than 20% in Celebrate Piano! to a low of
less than 1% in All-in-One Piano Course, Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons
(with one activity), and Piano Town.
Celebrate Piano! was given the only excellent rating. Hal Leonard: Piano
Lessons, The Music Tree, and Piano Adventures were given good ratings. Piano
Discoveries was given the only fair rating, and the remaining 5 methods (Alfreds
Premier Piano Course, All-in-One Piano Course, Beanstalks Basics, Noona
Comprehensive Piano Lessons, and Piano Town) were given poor ratings. See
Table 17 for percentages and ratings for music content devoted to creating music in
each series.
58
Table 17. Creating Music (National Standards 3 and 4)

Rating Rubric
Excellent
Good
Fair
3
2
1
Poor
0
Methods
Percentage
Rating
3.62%
0%
Beanstalks Basics
1.25%
Celebrate Piano!
20.70%
11.25%
The Music Tree
12.71%
Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons 0.76%
Piano Adventures
14.29%
Piano Discoveries
8.55%
Piano Town
0%
The percentage of music content devoted to music creating (improvisation and

composition) in each series was calculated. Ratings were given for the
implementation of music creating activities. A rating rubric was developed as
follows: poor (0), fair (1), good (2), and excellent (3). Ratings were given for the
implementation of music creating activities (see Table 17). A rating rubric was
developed as follows: poor (0), fair (1), good (2), and excellent (3). These ratings
were calculated as described hereafter.
59
Series with 0.00-5.17% of the music content devoted to music creating

activities including improvisation and composition were given poor (0) ratings.
Series with 5.18-10.34% were given fair (1) ratings. Series with 10.35-15.52%
were given good ratings. Series with 15.53-20.70% were given excellent (3)
ratings. The lowest percentage (0.00%) of music creating activities was subtracted
from the highest percentage (20.70%) of music creating activities. The difference
(20.70%) was divided by 4 for a dividend (5.18%) representing the interval
percentage for each of the 4 rating categories previously stated (poor, fair, good,
and excellent).

What variety of keys and meters is being experienced through the repertoire in each
series? (Standard 5)
See Tables 18-21 for variety of keys, variety of meters (Table 18), and
ratings for variety of key (Table 19), meter, key and meter combined (Table 20),
and variety of other music reading activities (Table 21) for each series. Keys are
listed in order of appearance in each series within the following three categories:
major keys, minor keys, and other keys. The other keys category includes twin
black keys, triplet black keys, whole tone scale patterns, pentatonic scale patterns,
chromatic scale patterns, and modal keys such as dorian, phrygian, lydian, and
mixolydian. Keys used in each series are as follows:
60
Table 18. Variety of Keys
Method
Major Keys
Minor Keys
Other Keys
Alfreds Premier
C, G, D, A
F
a, e, d, g, c
All-in-One
C, G, F
a, d, g
Beanstalks Basics
C, G, D, A, F
a, g, c
Celebrate Piano!
C, G, D, A, E, F#, a, d, c, f
F, B-flat, E-flat, Aflat, D-flat, G-flat
C, G, D, F
a, e, d, g
Twin and Triplet Black

Keys, Whole Tone, g
Mixolydian,
Twins, Triplets,
Chromatic, Whole Tone
Twins, Triplets,
g Lydian
Twins, Triplets, f
Lydian, d-flat Lydian
Hal Leonard
The Music Tree
C, G, D, A, E, F, a, e, d, g, c, f
B-flat, G-flat
Noona
Piano Adventures
C, G, D, A, F
C, G, D, A, F
Piano Discoveries
Piano Town
C, G, F
a, d, c, f
C, G, D, A, E, F, a, e, d, g, c, f
B-flat
a, d, g, c, f
a, d, g, c, f
Twins, Triplets, Whole

Tone, f Lydian,
g Lydian, c Mixolydian
Twins, Triplets, Whole
Tone, Pentatonic,
f Lydian, g Mixolydian
Twins, Triplets,
e Phrygian, Whole
Tone, f Lydian,
f Mixolydian
Twins, Triplets,
Chromatic,
Whole Tone,
g Mixolydian
The greatest variety of keys was found in Celebrate Piano!, The Music Tree, and
Piano Town. These were the only method series with major keys containing more
than one flat in the key signature. Celebrate Piano! had the greatest variety of
major keys, The Music Tree, and Piano Town had the greatest variety of minor
keys, and Hal Leonard: Piano Lessons, The Music Tree, and Piano Town had the
greatest variety of other keys (i.e. modal, whole tone, pentatonic, and chromatic).
61
Table 19. Variety of Meters
Method
Alfreds Premier
Symmetrical
Meters
2/4, 3/4, 4/4
All-in-One
2/4, 3/4, 4/4
Beanstalks Basics
2/4, 3/4, 4/4, 6/8
Celebrate Piano!
2/4, 3/4, 4/4, 6/4
Hal Leonard
2/4, 3/4, 4/4, 2/2,
Asymmetrical
Meters
Changes in Meter
within a Piece
4/4 3/4 4/4
3/8, 6/8
The Music Tree
2/4, 3/4, 4/4, 6/4
Noona
2/4, 3/4, 4/4, 6/4,
5/4
5/4-4/4-5/4-4/4
6/4-9/4
9/4, 2/2, 6/8

Piano Adventures
2/4, 3/4, 4/4
Piano Discoveries
2/4, 3/4, 4/4
Piano Town
2/4, 3/4, 4/4, 6/8
Meters of 2/4, 3/4, and 4/4 were used in all series in the study sample. Alfreds
Premier Piano Course, All-in-One, Piano Adventures, and Piano Discoveries did
not introduce any additional meters. A few additional meters were introduced in
other series: Beanstalks Basics, 6/8; Celebrate Piano!, 6/4; Hal Leonard: Piano
Lessons, 2/2, 3/8, and 6/8; The Music Tree, 6/4, and 5/4; Noona Comprehensive
Piano Lessons, 6/4, 9/4, 2/2, and 6/8; Piano Town, 6/8.
62
Table 20. Ratings for Variety of Keys and Meters

Rating Rubric
Excellent
Good
2.5 3.0
1.5 2.0
Fair
0.5 1.0
Poor
0.0
Method
Variety in Key
Variety in Meter
Combined Rating
Alfreds Premier
All-in-One
0.5
Beanstalks Basics
Celebrate Piano!
Hal Leonard
2.5
The Music Tree
Noona
Piano Adventures
Piano Discoveries
Piano Town
A poor rating was given to Piano Discoveries for a limited range of keys and
meters in the music reading activities. A fair rating was given to Alfreds Premier
Piano Course, All-in-One Course, Beanstalks Basics, and Piano Adventures, a
good rating was given to Celebrate Piano!, Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons,
and Piano Town, and an excellent rating was given to Hal Leonard: Piano Lessons,
and The Music Tree.
Criteria for meeting these ratings are described hereafter. Table 20 includes
ratings for variety of key, variety of meter, and variety of key and meter combined.
63
A rating rubric was included above Table 20 with ratings of poor (0.0), fair (0.51.0), good (1.5-2.0), and excellent (2.5-3.0). These ratings were calculated as
described in the following:
The sums of the keys in each method series were added. Series using up to
8 keys in all four books combined were given poor (0) ratings. Series using 9-12
keys were given fair (1) ratings. Series using 13-16 keys were given good (2)
ratings. Series using 17-20 keys were given excellent (3) ratings.
The sums of the meters used beyond 2/4, 3/4, and 4/4 meters were added.
Series using 2/4, 3/4, and 4/4 meters exclusively were given poor (0) ratings. Series
including one additional meter were given fair (1) ratings. Series including two
additional meters were given good (2) ratings. Series including three or more
additional meters were given excellent (3) ratings.
Table 21 shows the average occurrences of music reading activities and
skills, including: exploration, 3.8; pre-staff, 17.4; single staff, 8.7; grand staff,
132.9; reading music, 159.0; rhythmic exercises, 21.4; transposition exercises, 9.8.
The most significant find was the high number of transposition exercises in
Celebrate Piano! compared to the other methods in the study, the total being 69.
The next highest number was found in The Music Tree, the total being 10. The
difference between these two numbers (69 -10) was substantial (59). Celebrate
Piano! excelled in the number of rhythmic exercises as well, the total being 67. The
64
next highest number was found in Alfreds Premier Piano Course, the total being
46. The difference between these two numbers (67-46) was a significant 21.
Table 21. Variety of Music Reading Activities (National Standard 5)
Exploration
Pre-Staff
Single Staff
Grand Staff
Reading Music
Rhythmic
Exercises
Transposition
Exercises
Methods
Alfreds
24
109
133
46
All-in-One
14
101
124
13
Beanstalks
18
11
129
158
Celebrate
25
25
130
180
67
69
H. Leonard
18
119
142
18
Music Tree
46
27
181
254
29
10
Noona
126
130
P. Adventures
15
141
156
P. Discoveries
139
139
28
P. Town
14
154
174

What technology is used to support performance and musicianship?
There were no technological supplements directly associated with each
series to further the development of musicianship in students aside from CD and/or
65
MIDI Disk accompaniments for lesson book repertoire. These encourage the
feeling of ensemble playing when live performers are not available. Variety of
repertoire and playing with others (National Standard 2) are both enhanced by the
inclusion of this technology. See Table 22 for technology associated with each
method series.
Table 22. Technology Directly Associated with Research Sample
Method
CD
Alfreds Premier CD accompaniment

Piano Course
available with lesson
books.
All-in-One Piano None.
Course
Beanstalks Basics
Celebrate Piano!
CD accompaniment
available with lesson
books.
CD accompaniment
available.
Hal Leonard Piano None.

Lessons
MIDI Disk
Other
MIDI Disk
accompaniment
available separately.
MIDI Disk
accompaniment
available.
None.
None.
MIDI Disk
accompaniment
available.
MIDI Disk
accompaniment
MIDI Disk
accompaniment
MIDI Disk
accompaniment
None.
None.
The Music Tree
CD accompaniment
Noona
Comprehensive
Piano Lessons
Piano Adventures
CD accompaniment
Piano Discoveries
MIDI Disk
accompaniment
available.
CD accompaniments for MIDI Disk
Primer, Level 1, and 2.
Primer, Level 1, and 2.
Piano Town
CD accompaniment
CD accompaniment
available.
None.
None.
None.
None.
None.
None.
None.
None.
66

How do these methods rate in their implementation of National Standards 2, 3, 4
and, 5 for variety of music, creating music, and reading music?
Excellent ratings were given to Hal Leonard: Piano Lessons and The Music
Tree. The highest numerical rating was given to The Music Tree (2.7). See Table 23
for individual ratings.
Table 23. Ratings for Implementation of National Standards 2, 3, 4, and 5
Rating Rubric
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
2.26 3.00
1.60 2.25
0.76 1.59
0 0.75
Method
Variety
Creating
Reading
Overall
Alfreds Premier
0.3
All-in-One
0.5
0.5
Beanstalks
0.3
Celebrate Piano!
1.7
Hal Leonard
2.5
2.5
The Music Tree
2.7
Noona
1.3
Piano Adventures
1.3
Piano Discoveries
0.7
Piano Town
0.7
Basics
67
Five out of ten of the methods in the study sample were given poor ratings: Alfreds
Premier Piano Course, All-in-One, Beanstalks Basics, Piano Discoveries, and
Piano Town. Fair ratings were given to Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons and
Piano Adventures. A good rating was given to Celebrate Piano!.
Overall ratings for each series were given by combining averages of rating
scores for variety of repertoire (Standard 2), creating music (Standards 3 and 4),
and reading music (Standard 5). The rating rubric was as follows: poor (0.00-0.75);
fair (0.76-1.59); good (1.60-2.25); excellent (2.26-3.00).
4.5 Chapter Summary

Six research questions were posed addressing music content and its use in
the first four lesson books of ten piano methods published in the United States or
Canada from 1994 to 2006 for the elementary-aged beginning piano student. These
were examined for components of MENC National Standards 2, 3, 4, and 5.
Technological supplements directly associated with each series to support
musicianship were reported. Ratings of each method for implementation of
specified elements in the National Standards such as variety in repertoire, creating
music, and reading music were given.
68
Chapter 5
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

5.1
Introduction
In this chapter, a discussion of results and conclusions is given. Its contents
include the background for the study, the MENC National Standards for teaching
and learning music, the purpose for the study, and the research questions posed.
Data analysis procedures are summarized. Results and implications are presented.
This chapter concludes with suggestions for future research.
5.2
Summary, Overview, and Conclusions

There are no regulations or standards in piano teaching materials. As a
result, both the quality and content of piano methods vary considerably (Akins,
1982). In reaction to Goals 2000: Educate America Act passed by Congress in
1994, the Music Educators National Conference (the National Association of Music
Education) developed a set of nine objectives, or National Standards (MENC,
1994), for a comprehensive music education. These are as follows:
1) Singing, alone and with others, a varied repertoire of music
2) Performing on instruments, alone and with others, a varied repertoire of
music
3) Improvising melodies, variations, and accompaniments
69
4) Composing and arranging music within specified guidelines

5) Reading and notating music
6) Listening to, analyzing, and describing music
7) Evaluating music and music performances
8) Understanding relationships between music, the other arts, and
disciplines outside the arts
9) Understanding music in relation to history and culture (MENC, 1994).
The MENC National Standards have significant implications for teaching in
the private piano studio (Stewart, 1996/1997). In a survey of Florida State Music
Teachers (Crum, 1998), only 53% of respondents were familiar with the National
Standards, and 46% claimed to implement those standards in their teaching.
Approximately 84% preferred a comprehensive piano education involving
improvisation, composition, transposition, and singing to performance instruction
alone for beginning piano students. Teachers viewed accurate music reading skills
as essential in beginning piano students, who ranked higher in music reading than
in any other music skill (Crum, 1998).
the MENC National Standards were investigated through analysis of music content
related to recreating (Standard 2), creating (Standards 3 and 4), and reading music
(Standard 5). The purpose of this study was to investigate the variety of repertoire
(Standard 2) and the development of skills for creating music (Standards 3 and 4)
70
and reading music (Standard 5) in piano methods published in the United States or
Canada from 1994 to 2006 for the elementary-aged beginning piano student in
private lessons. Ten piano method series lesson books were examined in relation to
the following six research questions posed:
1. What is the percentage of repertoire in each of the following categories:
author(s) composed pedagogical pieces, non-author composed
pedagogical pieces, Western art music (adapted or original), folk and
traditional songs and tunes (including secular Christmas music), nursery
and play songs, multicultural music, religious music (including sacred
Christmas music), and popular music (including music featured in
television, movies, radio, and theatre)? (National Standard 2)
2. What are the percentages of solo repertoire and duet repertoire (National
Standard 2)
3. What is the percentage of music content devoted to creating music
(improvising or composing)? (National Standards 3 and 4)
4. How does the variety of repertoire in each series support the learning of
music reading? (National Standard 5)
5. What technology is used to support performance and musicianship?
6. How do these methods rate in their implementation of Standards 2, 3, 4,
and 5 for variety of music, creating music, and reading music?
71
The music content of the first four consecutive lesson books of each series was
analyzed to determine the following: A) the percentage of music in each of eight
categories, B) the percentage of solo repertoire and duet repertoire, C) the
percentage of music content used to create (improvise or compose), D) the ways in
which music content supports the learning of music reading, E) how technology is
used to support performance and musicianship, and F) how music content is rated
in each series as pertaining to MENC National Standards 2, 3, 4, and 5 for variety
of music, creating music, and reading music.
Frequency counts of music content components related to re-creating music
(repertoire), creating music (improvisation and composition), and reading music
were reported. Data analysis included the calculation of percentages. Data were
displayed in tables, charts, and lists for analysis and comparison. Averages within
and among series were reported.
A high percentage of author-composed pieces were present across all
method series. This was not surprising, as similar results surfaced in a pilot study
by the researcher involving 8 mainstream American piano methods for children.
Surprisingly low percentages of Western art music adaptations, multicultural
music, religious music, and popular music comprised the remainder of the
repertoire in each series.
High percentages of student/teacher duets were found in the first books of
each method, with numbers decreasing as playing levels increased. The average
72
percentage of duet repertoire in all ten series combined was as follows: 65.60% for
books one; 34.00% for books two; 25.50% for books three; 16.80% for books four.
Significantly low percentages of music content incorporated activities for
creating music through improvisation and composition. Percentages ranged from a
high of 21% in Celebrate Piano! to a low of 0% in All-in-One Piano Course (2005,
2006) and Piano Town (2004).
Music reading skills were developed through whole tone, pentatonic, and
modal scales in addition to traditional major and minor keys in some methods.
Other methods offered a very limited number of keys. The greatest variety of keys
was found in Celebrate Piano!, The Music Tree, and Piano Town. These were the
only method series with major keys containing more than one flat in the key
signature. Celebrate Piano! had the greatest variety of major keys, The Music Tree,
and Piano Town had the greatest variety of minor keys, and Hal Leonard: Piano
Lessons, The Music Tree, and Piano Town had the greatest variety of other keys
(i.e. modal, whole tone, pentatonic, and chromatic).
Music reading skills were also developed through a variety of meters.
Asymmetrical meters and changes in meter within a piece were reported in addition
to traditional simple and duple meters. Meters of 2/4, 3/4, and 4/4 were used in all
series in the study sample. Alfreds Premier Piano Course, All-in-One Piano
Course, Piano Adventures, and Piano Discoveries did not introduce any additional
meters. A few additional meters were introduced in other series: Beanstalks
73
Basics, 6/8; Celebrate Piano!, 6/4; Hal Leonard: Piano Lessons, 2/2, 3/8, and 6/8;
The Music Tree, 6/4, and 5/4; Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons, 6/4, 9/4, 2/2,
and 6/8; Piano Town, 6/8. The Music Tree was the only series that used an
asymmetrical meter (5/4) in the repertoire. Three series practiced meter changes
within a piece: Hal Leonard: Piano Lessons, 4/4-3/4-4/4; The Music Tree, 5/4-4/45/4-4/4; Noona Comprehensive Piano Lessons, 6/4-9/4.
No technological supplements aside from CD and/or MIDI disk
accompaniments for lesson book repertoire were found to support music learning
and musicianship.
5.3
Discussion
The majority of repertoire in each of the method series examined was
author-composed. Percentages of this repertoire style (Category 1) ranged from a

rounded low of 43% in Hal Leonard Piano Library: Piano Lessons, to a rounded
high of 82% in Beanstalks Basics, Alfreds Premiere Piano Course, and Celebrate
Piano!, with a 72% overall average in this repertoire category across all method
series. Multicultural, religious, and popular music categories held the lowest
percentages of repertoire, the highest percentage of each being 7% multicultural in
Hal Leonard: Piano Lessons, 5% popular in The Music Tree, and 2% religious in
All-in-One Piano Course.
It was interesting to note that half of the research sample received poor
ratings (according to rating procedures outlined in Chapters Three and Four), for a
74
lack of music creating activities such as improvisation and composition. Those

methods were as follows: Alfreds Premier Piano Course, All-in-One Piano
Course, Beanstalks Basics, Noona Comprehensive Piano Course, and Piano
Town. Celebrate Piano! was exceptional in incorporating music creating activities
of improvisation and composition throughout the series. A substantial 21% of the
music content was devoted to creating music.
Although some methods were given high ratings for music reading skills
developed through a variety of repertoire (according to the guidelines specified in
Chapters Three and Four of this document), the quality of music was sometimes
questionable. Does the implementation of research related suggestions for the sake
of meeting specified guidelines for a comprehensive music education compromise
the quality of music being taught? Has the importance of aesthetic value in music
lessened with the increased attention paid to the application of research-based
recommendations for music teaching and learning? The researcher believes so.
According to Colwell and Goolsby (2002), students should be taught with good
music as well as a variety of music (Colwell & Goolsby, 2002, p. 46).
Piano Adventures (1996, 1997) by Faber and Faber does an exemplary job
in using good music in the lesson book repertoire. Familiar tunes were included
in 19% of the repertoire. It is the opinion of the researcher that many series suffer
from the lack of compositional skills in their author(s), although this was not the
case in the Faber series. The music is diverse in sound and delightful in appeal.
75
Ratings for variety in music did not reflect the quality of music content in this
method. Music quality was not compromised with the application of multiple keys
in the repertoire for music reading skills development. Whole tone, Phrygian,
Lydian, and Mixolydian palettes were explored in addition to a wide range of major
and minor keys. This method promoted activities for creating music, as manifest in
the excellent rating given to the series for devoting 14% of its music content to
improvisation and composition.
Although the repertoire in Piano Town (2004) by Keith Snell and Diane
Hidy was at times, in the opinion of the researcher, monotonous and uninteresting,
particularly in the first two books (Primer Level and Level 1), the inclusion of
quality pedagogical pieces by Western art music composers as lesson books
progressed was commendable. This was especially true in the four book examined
(Level Three).
The use of asymmetrical meters was interesting. In The Music Tree: A Time
to Begin (2000), meters such as 4/4, 5/4, 2/4, 3/4, and 6/4 were introduced and used
throughout the lesson book repertoire, with 5/4 being used for a new beginning
students third piece. Meter changes within a piece (5/4-4/4-5/4-4/4) were also used
in this book designated as a Primer Level lesson book. Did the music demand the
use of such meters, or did extrinsic factors stipulate their use?
76
5.4
Implications
Although the application of research-based standards in music teaching and
learning is recommended, the quality of music being used to teach music should
not compromise the aesthetic of music. The purpose of music and music making is
expression and communication. The aesthetic quality of music content in teaching
materials should be evaluated. The researcher found that music in some of the older
methods was more appealing than in some of the newer methods on the market.
According to Uszler (2000), this could be due to the fact that, in general, many of
these books use the traditional middle-C approach, and more tuneful melodies can
be played from middle-C position, as opposed to intervallic, landmark, multi-key or
eclectic reading approaches.
Repertoire plays a significant role in the musical training of young
beginning piano students. Keeping the student interested and challenged while
providing good quality pieces of different styles for the student to play is of
paramount importance (Crouse, 1992, p. 27). To a great extent, the quality and
content of the students repertoire determines what the student actually learns and
how he is musically motivated to develop (Lymenstull, 1993, p. 12). According to
Hongsermeier (1995):
Of the three commonly covered elements in published piano texts in the
United States (pitch/rhythm notation, keyboard exploration/technical skills,
and theory/musicianship), technical issues of beginning piano playing
receive the most adequate attention. While some piano methods include
imaginative musical materials, others fail to present a sufficient quantity of
simple, bonafide musical examples for beginning pianists. The quality of
77
musical material which developing pianists use to learn musical concepts,

skills, and technical habits is an important concern for piano teachers who
are aware of the aesthetic dimension of beginning piano study
(Hongsermeier, 1995, p. 9).
The aspect of supplemental technology directly associated with piano
method series is an interesting one. With recent advancements in technology, one
would expect the industry to be more aggressive in developing computer software
directly associated with method series to strengthen musicianship and knowledge.
5.5 Suggestions for Future Research

In 2005, Alfred Publishing purchased the music catalogues of the second and
the third top music publishers (i.e. Warner Bros. Publications) in the world. This
could change the repertoire makeup in piano methods of the future, as copyrighted
works could more easily be included in addition to original (author-composed) and
public domain works. The researcher predicts a greater quantity of popular music to
be included in music education method series repertoire as a result, including piano
method lesson book repertoire. This study can serve as a basis for a similar study in
a decade or two in order to track changes in lesson book repertoire due to constant
changes in the music industry.
Research studies addressing the motivational value of music content in piano
method series for children would be beneficial. Similarly, research studies rating
the quality of lesson book repertoire would be helpful.
78
Research studies on the effectiveness of piano method series for the

elementary-aged beginning piano student would be valuable in this virtually
unexplored area of music education research. According to Uszler (1992):
Despite the profusion and diversity of piano methods, and the attention paid
in pedagogy classes and elsewhere, there is no scientific research into the
relative effectiveness of these methods. Here, indeed, is an area to which
those engaged in pedagogical research must turn their attention (Uszler, 1992,
p. 587).
The development of a computer database of piano literature for the
elementary-aged beginning piano student would be useful. Such a database was
developed for the retrieval of intermediate piano literature from collections
(Wilson, 2000, i). A database for elementary piano literature would facilitate the
discovery and the retrieval of pertinent teaching materials and music for children.
Research studies investigating pianist-composers and their contributions to
piano literature for children would be extremely valuable. Untapped resources
could be explored and subsequently improve lesson book repertoire for this age
group. The move from knowledgeable, seasoned, nineteenth-century pianistcomposers such as Hummel, Czerny, Chopin, Liszt, Kullak, Deppe, and
Leschetizky, who taught as a hobby or as an occupation secondary to performing
(Hendricks, 1988, p. ii), to the many modern-day piano instructors with little to no
qualifications who teach as a primary occupation is unprecedented. Competence
nurtures competence (Faber, 2003, p. 103).
79
The pedagogical piano works of numerous women composers, particularly

from the first half of the twentieth-century, have been overlooked to a great extent.
A research study investigating such composers whose works include those for
children involved in piano study would be advantageous. One such
pianist/pedagogue/composer was Thusnelda Birscak (1899-1989), whose gem-like
works were featured in The Etude magazine on more than one occasion, and whose
educational music creating activities (improvisation and composition) were
published on one known occasion.
80
REFERENCES
Agay, D. (Ed). (2004). The art of teaching piano. New York, NY: Yorktown Music
Press, Inc.
Akins, M. L. (1982). An analysis and evaluation of selected methods for the
beginning private student. Doctoral dissertation, Peabody College for
Teachers of Vanderbilt University.
Albergo, C. F. (1988). Objectives for elementary level piano instruction: A survey
and comparison of the objectives of eight American childrens piano
methods with the objectives of piano/piano pedagogy teachers. Doctoral
dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Albergo, C., Kolar, J. M., & Mrozinski, M. (2003). Celebrate piano!, Lesson and
Musicianship 1A. Mississauga, Ontario: The Frederick Harris Music Co.
Musicianship 1B. Mississauga, Ontario: The Frederick Harris Music Co.
Musicianship 2A. Mississauga, Ontario: The Frederick Harris Music Co.
Musicianship 2B. Mississauga, Ontario: The Frederick Harris Music Co.
Alexander, D., Kowalchyk, G., Lancaster, E. L., McArthur, V., Mier, M. (2005).
Alfreds premier piano course: Lesson 1A. Van Nuys, CA: Alfred
Publishing Co.
Alfreds Premier Piano Course: Lesson 1B. Van Nuys, CA: Alfred
Publishing Co.
Alfreds Premier Piano Course: Lesson 2A. Van Nuys, CA: Alfred
Publishing Co.
81
Alfreds Premier Piano Course: Lesson 2B. Van Nuys, CA: Alfred
Publishing Co.
Alpiner, A., (1951). Piano class at the elementary school level: A foundation for
other music study. Masters thesis, University of Southern California.
Amaize, H. P., (1993). Musical concepts for fostering expressivity and
interpretation in piano playing: A content analysis of selected written
materials (1892-1992). Doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina.
Apel, W., & Daniel, R. T. (Eds.). (1960). The Harvard Brief Dictionary of Music.
New York, NY: Washington Square Press.
Arms, L. (1997). The effects of computer-assisted keyboard instruction on meter
discrimination and rhythm discrimination of general music education
students in the elementary school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Tennessee State University.
Azzara, C. D. (1992). The effect of audiation-based improvisation techniques on
the music achievement of elementary instrumental music students. Doctoral
dissertation, Eastman School of Music, University of Rochester.
Azzara, C. D. (1993). Audiation-based improvisation techniques and elementary
instrumental students music achievement. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 41(4), 328-342.
Baker-Jordan, M. (2004). Practical piano pedagogy: The definitive text for piano
teachers and pedagogy students. Miami, FL: Warner Bros. Publications.
Banks, D. W. (1990). The correlation of selected pre-college music computer
programs with the Alfred Basic Piano Library. Doctoral dissertation, The
University of Oklahoma.
Bastien, J. W. (1988). How to teach piano successfully, Third Edition. San Diego,
CA: Neil A. Kjos Music Company.
Bay, A., & Pearce, E. (2000). Is there a relationship between student dropouts and
when and how reading is introduced? Keyboard Companion, (11)2, 12-14.
Beauchamp, L. D. (1994). Boris Berlins career and contributions to piano
pedagogy. Doctoral dissertation, The University of Oklahoma.
82
Bebeau, M. J. (1982). Effects of traditional and simplified methods of rhythmreading instruction. Journal of Research in Music Education, 30, 107-119.
Biasini, A., Thomas, R., & Pogonowski, L. (1970). MMCP interaction (2nd ed.).
Bardonia, NY: Media Materials.
Blickenstaff, M., Sherer, K., Steffen, A., Lapp, B., & Hochstedler, M. (1999). Do
you ever assign arrangements of traditional repertoire? Keyboard
Companion, 10(4), 36-41.
Blickenstaff, M., Sherer, K., Steffen, A., Lapp, B., & Hochstedler, M. (2000). How
does the students reading level influence your repertoire assignments?
Keyboard Companion, 11(1), 42-43.
Blickenstaff, M., Moore, V., Moore, K., Rowe, C., & Thickstun, K. (2003). What
jazz materials do you use with your students? Keyboard Companion, 14(1),
42-44.
Bomberger, E. D., Parker, S. L., & Short, R. (2004). What repertoire do you use
when a student can play with only one hand and how do you assign it?
Keyboard Companion, 15(3), 38.
Bradley, I. L. (1974). Developments of aural and visual perception through creative
processes. Journal of Research in Music Education, 22, 234-240.
Briercliffe, J. Beryl. (1982). A comparative analysis of four selected piano method
books for beginning students. Masters thesis, East Texas State University.
Brittin, R. V. (2002). Instrumentalists assessment of solo performances with
compact disc, piano, or no accompaniment. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 50(1), 63-74.
Brown, C. A. (2000). A humane approach to private piano instruction: An analysis
and application of the ideas of Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and Jerome
Bruner. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University.
Brubaker, D. (1996). A history and critical analysis of piano methods published in
the United States from 1796 to 1995 (keyboard, pedagogy). Doctoral
dissertation, University of Minnesota.
Brubaker, G., & Chong, Y. (1999). What encourages your students? Part I.
Keyboard Companion, 10(3), 32-35.
83
Buckner, N. A. (1996). Philip Anthony Corri/Arthur Clifton: His life and piano
works with a new edition (England, United States). Doctoral dissertation,
University of Maryland College Park.
Bukspan, Y. (1979). Introduction of musical literacy to children by means of a
binary system of music notation: An experimental study. Bulletin of the
Council for Research in Music Education, 59, 13-17.
Burggraaf, C., Cope, L., Sharpe, D., & Smith, M. K. (2002). Are duets a regular
part of your elementary and intermediate level students repertoire
assignments? Keyboard Companion, 13(4), 36-39.
Bush, J. E. (2000). The effects of a hypermedia program, cognitive style, and
gender on middle school students music achievement. Contributions to
Music Education, 27(1), 9-26.
Cameron, J. (1992). What makes you (your child) want to practice? Keyboard
Companion, 3(2), 34-36.
Cameron, J. (1994). What makes piano study a positive experience for
you/your child? Keyboard Companion, 5(4), 32-34.
Cameron, J. (1998). What repertoire do you pull out of the hat when a student
falls into a slump? Keyboard Companion, 9(4), 8.
Cameron, J. (1999). How do you encourage your students? Part II. Keyboard
Companion, 10(4), 28-31.
Cameron, J., & Duckworth, G. (1990). How do you motivate your piano
students? Keyboard Companion, 1(1), 34-35.
Cameron, J., Yeager, J., & Allen, D. (1990). What music motivates children to
enjoy playing? Keyboard Companion, 1(2), 34-35.
Campbell, P. & Scott-Kassner, C. (1995). Music in childhood: From preschool
through the elementary grades New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan.
Campbell, V., Caramia, L. S., McCain, C., & Haroutounian, J. (1990). What
are your favorite pieces? Why do you like them? Keyboard Companion,
1(3), 54-56.
84
Canine, H., Miller, B. A., & McClellan, E. G. (1998). When choosing a method for
your beginning students, what role does the repertoire play in your
decision? Part II. Keyboard Companion, 9(2), 44-46.
Capell, P. S. (1989). A content analysis approach used in the study of the
characteristics of instructional design in three intelligent tutoring systems:
The lisp tutor, bridge, and piano tutor. Doctoral dissertation, University of
Pittsburgh.
Cartwright, L. M. (1996). A study and computer database of innovative
compositional and performance techniques in intermediate piano literature
composed from 1940 through 1990. Doctoral dissertation, West Virginia
University.
Casano, H. & Osborn, S. (2006). What are some rhythmic pieces you like to teach
and why? Keyboard Companion, 17(2), 24-27.
Chan, P. M. (2002). Catalog and analysis of adult piano method books published in
America from 1980 to 2001. Doctoral dissertation, University of Miami.
Chung, W. K. (1992). An analysis and evaluation of beginning piano methods used
in Korea (piano, Western music). Doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech
University.
Clark, F. (1989). Repertoire requirements for the private piano student. Clavier,
28(11), 9.
Clark, F., Goss, L., & Holland, S. (2000). The music tree: Time to begin. Van
Nuys, CA: Summy-Birchard, Inc.
Clark, F., Goss, L., & Holland, S. (2000). The music tree: Part 1. Van Nuys, CA:
Summy-Birchard, Inc.
Clark, F., Goss, L., & Holland, S. (2000). The music tree: Part 2A. Van Nuys, CA:
Clark, F., Goss, L., & Holland, S. (2000). The music tree: Part 2B. Van Nuys, CA:
Clements, D. (1995). Teaching creativity with computers. Educational Psychology
Review, 7(2), 141-161.
85
Coats, Sylvia. (2006). Thinking as you play. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University
Press.
Colwell, R. J., & Goolsby, T. W. (2002). The teaching of instrumental music, Third
Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Consortium of National Arts Education Associations. (1994). National Standards
for Arts Education. Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference.
Colley, B. (1987). A comparison of syllabic methods for improving rhythm
literacy. Journal of Research in Music Education, 35, 221-235.
Covington, V. L. (1981). Approaches to piano reading in a selected sample of
current instructional materials for adult beginners. Doctoral dissertation,
University of Illinois, Urbana.
Crouse-Neth, A. S. (1992). A comparative analysis of method books used in the
private piano lesson. Masters thesis, University of Kansas.
Crum, J. T. (1998). Attitudes and opinions toward beginning through intermediate
piano instruction among Florida State Music Teachers Association piano
teachers. Doctoral dissertation, Auburn University.
Day, C. D. (1994). When choosing a method, what do you look for in the area of
note reading? Keyboard Companion (5)2, 18.
Dibble, C. S. (1992). John Sylvanus Thompson: Pianist, pedagogue, composer
(Thompson John Sylvanus). Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri.
Diehl, L. P. (1980). An investigation of the relative effectiveness of group and
individual piano instruction on young beginners in an independent music
studio utilizing an electropiano laboratory. Doctoral dissertation, University
of Southern California.
Dillon, B. (1996). A question for publishers: How is your adult method different
from your childrens method? Part I. Keyboard Companion, (1), 32.
Dillon, B. (1996). A question for publishers: How is your adult method different
from your childrens method? Part II. Keyboard Companion, (3), 44.
Duarte, K. S. (2004). The piano music of William Gillock. Doctoral dissertation,
The University of Oklahoma.
86
Emanuele, R. (2000). The effect of singing on the development of music reading

skills in young piano students. Masters thesis, Michigan State University.
Faber, R. S. (2003). Motivational and developmental stages in piano study.
Doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University.
Faber, N., & Faber, R. (1996). Piano adventures: Primer level. Fort Lauderdale,
FL: The FJH Music Company, Inc.
Faber, N., & Faber, R. (1996). Piano adventures: Level 1. Fort Lauderdale, FL: The
FJH Music Company, Inc.
Faber, N., & Faber, R. (1997). Piano adventures: Level 2A. Fort Lauderdale, FL:
The FJH Music Company, Inc.
Faber, N., & Faber, R. (1997). Piano adventures: Level 2B. Fort Lauderdale, FL:
The FJH Music Company, Inc.
Farber, A., & Cameron, J. (1994). How do you use improvisation to motivate your
students? Keyboard Companion, 5(1), 36-40.
Finn, C., & Morris, E. (1998). Beanstalks basics for piano: Lesson book,
preparatory level A. Florence, KT: The Willis Music Company.
Finn, C., & Morris, E. (1998). Beanstalks basics for piano: Lesson book,
preparatory level B. Florence, KT: The Willis Music Company.
Finn, C., & Morris, E. (1998). Beanstalks basics for piano: Lesson book, level 1.
Florence, KT: The Willis Music Company.
Finn, C., & Morris, E. (1998). Beanstalks basics for piano: Lesson book, level 2.
Florence, KT: The Willis Music Company.
Forester, J. J. (1997). Robert Pace: His life and contributions to piano pedagogy
and music education. Doctoral dissertation, University of Miami.
Fuszek, R. M. (1990). Sight-reading sight-playing at the keyboard. Unpublished
paper, California State University, Fullerton.
Garvin, D. E. (1998). Jon George: The composer and his contributions to piano
pedagogy (piano methods, didactic music, learning theories, Mary Gae
George, Artistry at the Piano). Doctoral dissertation, University of Miami.
87
George, J., & George, M. G. (2003). Artistry at the piano: Musicianship 1. Miami,
FL: Warner Bros. Publications.
George, J., & George. M. G. (2006). Artistry at the piano: Musicianship 4. Miami,
Glover, D. C. (1988). David Carr Glover method for piano: Primer. Van Nuys,
CA: Belwin-Mills Publishing Corp.
Glover, D. C. (1988). David Carr Glover method for piano: Level one. Van Nuys,
Glover, D. C. (1989). David Carr Glover method for piano: Level two. Van Nuys,
Glover, D. C. (1989). David Carr Glover Method for Piano: Level three. Van
Nuys, CA: Belwin-Mills Publishing Corp.
Goodson, C. A. (1992). Intelligent music listening: An interactive hypermedia
program for basic music listening skills. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Utah.
Gray, V., Mason, J. & Winborne, C. (1995). Is the repertoire you are teaching in
1994-1995 different from the repertoire you taught in 1984-1985? Keyboard
Companion, 6(1), 44.
Groves, R. W. (1981). The life and works of W. S. B. Mathews (1837-1912).
Doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa.
Grutzmacher, P. A. (1987). The effects of tonal pattern training on the aural
perception, reading recognition, and melodic sight-reading achievement of
first-year instrumental music students. Journal of Research of Music
Education, 35, 171-181.
88
Haertling-Lint, A. E. (1988). A graded annotated bibliography of selected solo

piano works of Alexandre Gretchaninoff. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio
State University.
Haroutounian, J., Campbell, V., Caramia, L. S., & McCain, C. (1990). What are
your favorite pieces? Why do you like them? Keyboard Companion, 1(3),
54-56.
Hendricks, R. C. (1988). An examination of the teaching methods of seven
nineteenth-century piano pedagogues. Masters thesis, The American
University.
Holland, S. S. (1996). Louise Wadley Bianchis contributions to piano pedagogy.
Doctoral dissertation, The University of Oklahoma.
Holliger, Y. M. (1987). An investigative study on developing divergent thinking
responses in children using a cognitive approach in music education.
Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teachers College.
Hongsermeier, J. E. (1995). Kodly-inspired musicianship training and the
beginning piano student: Integrating musical and technical skill
development (Zoltan Kodly). Doctoral dissertation, The Catholic
University of America.
Hood, D. R. (1982). The teaching of music theory in the piano lesson: A survey of
methods. Masters thesis, Western Michigan University.
Huang, F. (1994). Bartks contributions to piano pedagogy: His edition of Bachs
Well-Tempered Clavier and impressions of former students (Bartk, Bla,
Hungary). Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University.
Hudak, A. L. (2004). A personal portrait of Frances Oman Clark through the eyes
of her most prominent students and collaborators. Doctoral dissertation, The
University of Texas at Austin.
Hutton, D. (1953). A comparative study of two methods of teaching sight singing
in the fourth grade. Journal of Research in Music Education, 1, 119-126.
Jacobson, J. M. & Lancaster, E. L. (2006). Professional piano teaching: A
comprehensive piano pedagogy textbook for teaching elementary-level
students. Los Angeles, CA: Alfred Publishing Co., Inc.
89
Kern, R. F. (1984). Frances Clark: The teacher and her contributions to piano
pedagogy. D.A. Dissertation, University of Northern Colorado.
Kim, H. S. (1987). An examination of four leading piano methods and four master
teachers approaches. Masters thesis, University of Southern California.
King, M. B. (2000). Teaching piano with the Kodly method as developed by
Katinka Scipiades Daniel. Masters thesis, University of Southern
California.
Ko, K. A. (2005). An investigation of the Beyer piano methods used in Korea.
Kratus, J. (1989). A time analysis of the compositional processes used by children
ages 7-11. Journal of Research in Music Education, 37(1), 5-20.
Kreader, B. (1998). Should siblings study in the same method? Keyboard
Companion, (2), 4-7.
Kreader, B. (2004). What are your all-time favorite pieces? Keyboard Companion,
15(2), 6-9.
Kreader, B., Kern, F., Keveren, P. & Rejino, M. (1996). Hal leonard student piano
library: Piano lessons, book 1. Milwaukee, WI: Hal Leonard Corporation.
Kreader, B., Kern, F., Keveren, P. & Rejino, M. (1996). Hal leonard student piano
library: Piano lessons, book 2. Milwaukee, WI: Hal Leonard Corporation.
Kreader, B., Kern, F. & Keveren, P. (1996). Hal leonard student piano library:
Piano lessons, book 3. Milwaukee, WI: Hal Leonard Corporation.
Kreader, B., Kern, F. & Keveren, P. (1997). Hal leonard student piano library:
Piano lessons, book 4. Milwaukee, WI: Hal Leonard Corporation.
Krohn, S., Hedges, L. S. & Lyke, J. B. (1991). How do you plan a students
repertoire for the coming school year? Keyboard Companion, 2(2), 46-48.
Kyme, G. H. (1960). An experiment in teaching children to read music with shape
notes. Journal of Research in Music Education, 8, 3-8.
Lancaster, E. L. (1985). The American beginning piano method: The Yamaha
music education system. Piano Quarterly, 128(4), 19-33.
90
Lewison, E. M. (1933). A comparative study of certain class piano methods.

Masters thesis, University of Southern California.
Li, K. (2004). Usage and development of piano method books in Taiwan:
Interviews and observations with piano teachers (China). Doctoral
dissertation, The University of Oklahoma.
Liu, M. (1998). The effect of hypermedia authoring on elementary school students
creative thinking. Journal of Educational Computing and Research, 19(1),
27-51.
Lord, C. H. (1993). Harnessing technology to open the mind: Beyond drill and
practice for aural skills. Journal of Music Theory Pedagogy, 7, 105-117.
Lo, S. Y. (1993). A reading course for Suzuki piano students. Doctoral dissertation,
Texas Tech University.
Lomax, E. L. (1990). A comparison of three approaches to teach note-reading and
note location on the piano keyboard to children, ages four to six (four-yearold, six-year-old). Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Kansas
City.
Lyke, J., Enoch, Y., & Haydon, G. (1996). Creative piano teaching. Champaign,
IL: Stripes Publishing L.L.C.
Lymenstull, T. J. (1993). Measure to measure: Technical features of beginning
piano repertoire. The American Music Teacher, 42(5), 12.
MacGregor, R. C. (1992). Learning theories and the design of music compositional
software for the young learner. International Journal of Music Education,
20, 18-26.
MacKnight, C. B. (1975). Music reading ability of beginning wind instrumentalists
after melodic instruction. Journal of Research in Music Education, 23, 2334.
Madved, L. M. (1987). The development of piano student learning style profiles
and recommendations for adaptation to selected piano method books.
Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University.
91
Manno, M. A. (1993). An investigation into the nature of musical expression and

its application in elementary piano teaching (teacher guide). Doctoral
dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.
Manus, M., & Dillon, B. (1996). A question for publishers: How is your adult
method different from your childrens method? Part I. Keyboard
Companion, (1), 32.
McCain, C. J. F. (1993). Current teaching practices in music store education
programs. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
McCord, K. (1993). Teaching music fundamentals through technology in middle
school music classes. In K. Walls (Ed.), Third International Conference on
Technological Directions in Music Education (pp. 68-71). San Antonio,
TX: IMR Press.
Montandon, M. I. (1998). Trends in piano pedagogy as reflected by the proceedings
of the national conference on piano pedagogy (1981-1995). Doctoral
dissertation, The University of Oklahoma.
Mueller, S. M. P. (1995). Concepts of nineteenth-century piano pedagogy in the
United States. Doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado at Boulder.
National standards for arts education. (1994). Reston, VA: Music Educators
National Conference.
Naudzius, A. K. (1983). Analysis of class piano books for the beginning adults.
Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois.
Noona, W., & Noona, C. (1997). Noona comprehensive piano library: Music
magic, Primer Lessons. Dayton, OH: Heritage Music Press.
Noona, W., & Noona, C. (1997). Noona comprehensive piano library: Piano
lessons, 1. Dayton, OH: Heritage Music Press.
lessons, 1+. Dayton, OH: Heritage Music Press.
lessons, 2. Dayton, OH: Heritage Music Press.
Novak, C. (1976). Piano repertoire for beginners. Piano Quarterly, Summer, 94.
92
Osborn, S., & Casano, H. (2006). What are some rhythmic pieces you like to teach
and why? Keyboard Companion, 17(2), 24-27.Osborn (2006)
Owen, L. J. (1997). The contributions of Clarence A. Burg to piano pedagogy
(Clarence A. Burg). Doctoral dissertation, The University of Oklahoma.
Palmer, W. A., Manus, M. & Lethco, A. V. (1994). All-in-one course: Book one.
Van Nuys, CA: Alfred Publishing Company, Inc.
Palmer, Willard A., Manus, M. & Lethco, A. V. (1994). All-in-one course: Book
two. Van Nuys, CA: Alfred Publishing Company, Inc.
three. Van Nuys, CA: Alfred Publishing Company, Inc.
four. Van Nuys, CA: Alfred Publishing Company, Inc.
Palmer, M. (1976). Relative effectiveness of two approaches to rhythm reading for
fourth-grade students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 24, 110118.
Parncutt, R., & McPherson, G. E. (Eds.). (2002). The science and psychology of
music performance: Creative strategies for teaching and learning. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Piersel, D. T. (1970). Ornamentation as presented in method books, ca. 1790-1850.
Doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa.
Potter, S. M. (1994). The piano method in mid-nineteenth century America: A
study of method writers and their works published in the United States
(nineteenth-century). Doctoral dissertation, Temple University.
Prasso, N. M. (1997). An examination of the effect of writing melodies, using
computer-based song-writing program, on high school students individual
learning of sight-singing skills. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Columbia University Teachers College.
Prieur, T. G. P. (1994). A critical analysis of the premises underlying North
American introductory piano methodologies. Masters thesis, Concordia
University, Canada.
93
Reddick, J. F. (1970). Recital and treatise: A short survey of selected piano

methods from Muzio Clementi to Tobias Matthay. Doctoral dissertation,
The Florida State University.
Reist, J. M., Conda, M., & Hisey, A. (2002). How do you make learning
experiences fun for yourself and for your students? Keyboard Companion,
(13)3, 24-28.
Renwick, J. & McPherson, G. E. (2000). Ive got to do my scale first!: A case
study of a novices clarinet practice. In C. Woods, G. B. Luck, R. Brochard,
F. Seddon, and J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International
Conference on Music Perception and Cognition. Keele, UK: Keele
University, Department of Psychology. CD-ROM.
Richardson, H. V. (1972). An experimental study utilizing two procedures for
teaching music reading to children in second grade. Bulletin of the Council
for Research in Music Education, 30, 47-50.
Rosfeld, M. D. (1989). The development of a series of instructional units for
teaching improvisational principles to pianists. Doctoral dissertation, The
University of Oklahoma.
Sallee, M., Byrns, C., Dula, V. M. & March, C. (1998). When choosing a method
for your beginning students, what role does the repertoire play in your
decision? Part I. Keyboard Companion, 9(1), 42-47.
Schachter, B. N. (1999). The use of new technology for piano instruction in a
structured learning environment (Robert Pace, Music for Piano series).
Schmidt, C., & Sinor, J. (1986). An investigation of the relationships among music
audiation, musical creativity, and cognitive style. Journal of Research in
Msuci Education. 34(3), 160-172.
Schubert, K. L. (1992). Willard A. Palmers contributions to piano pedagogy
(Palmer Willard A.). Doctoral dissertation, The University of Oklahoma.
Sharpe, D., Burggraaf, C., Cope, L., & Smith, M. K. (2002). Are duets a regular
part of your elementary and intermediate level students repertoire
assignments? Keyboard Companion, 13(4), 36-39.
94
Shehan, P. K. (1987). Effects of rote versus note presentations on rhythm learning

and retention. Journal of Research in Music Education, 35, 117-126.
Simms, B. E. (1997). The effects of an educational computer game on motivation
to learn basic musical skills: A qualitative study (educational technology).
Doctoral dissertation, University of Northern Colorado.
Sloboda, J. A., & Davidson, J. W. (1996). The young performing musician. In I.
Delige and J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Musical beginnings: The origins and
development of musical competence (pp. 171-190). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Sloboda, J. A. (1976). The effect of item position on the likelihood of identification
by interference in prose reading and music reading. Canadian Journal of
Psychology, 30, 228-237.
Snell, K., & Hidy, D. (2004). Piano town: Primer level lessons. San Diego, CA:
Kjos Music Press.
Snell, K., & Hidy, D. (2004). Piano town: Level 1 lessons. San Diego, CA: Kjos
Music Press.
Music Press.
Music Press.
Spangler, H. S. (1950). History of pianoforte methods. Doctoral dissertation,
University of North Dakota.
Stewart, S. (1997). Private teachers and the national standards for music education.
The American Music Teacher 50(3), 16-19.
Sturm, C. A. (2001). Celebrating 100 years of progress in American piano teaching,
Part II: 1950-2000. The American Music Teacher 50(3), 24-28.
Tang, M. (2003). Pedagogical works for piano by Samuel Adler. Doctoral
dissertation, Texas Tech University.
95
Thomas-Lee, P. M. (2003). Piano pedagogy for four- and five-year-olds: An

analysis of selected piano methods for teaching preschool children.
Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia.
Thompson, D. B. (1997). Piano music in the South during the Civil War period,
1855-1870. Doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina.
Tollefson, M. (2000). How do you motivate students to want to practice?
Keyboard, 11(2), 26-28.
Tomczak, L. M. (1999). The evaluation of two self-instruction learning approaches
assessing music knowledge and simple music keyboard performance skills.
Doctoral dissertation, University of Cincinnati.
Trice, P. J. (1988). Gray Thomas Perry, piano performer and pedagogue. Doctoral
dissertation, The Florida State University.
Uszler, M., Gordon, S., & Smith, S. M. (2000). The well-tempered keyboard
teacher, Second Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group/Thomson
Learning.
Uszler, M. (1992). Research on the teaching of keyboard music. In R. Colwell
(Ed.), Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and Learning: A Project
of the Music Educators National Conference (pp. 584-593). New York, NY:
Schirmer Books.
Van Nuys, K., & Weaver, H. E. (1943). Memory span and visual pauses in reading
rhythms and melodies. Psychological Monographs, 55, 33-50.
Vogt, J., & Bates, L. (2001). Piano discoveries: On-staff starter. Dayton, OH:
Heritage Music Press.
Vogt, J., & Bates, L. (2001). Piano discoveries: Explorer book, level 1A. Dayton,
OH: Heritage Music Press.
Vogt, J., & Bates, L. (2001). Piano discoveries: Explorer book, level 1B. Dayton,
Vogt, J., & Bates, L. (2001). Piano discoveries: Explorer book, level 2A. Dayton,
96
Watkins, G. M. (1979). An analysis of contemporary class piano methods and the

establishment of norms for their evaluation. Doctoral dissertation, The
Catholic University of America.
Weaver, H. E. (1943). A study of visual processes in reading differently
constructed musical selections. Psychological Monographs, 55, 1-30.
Webster, P. (1987a) Conceptual bases for creative thinking in music. In J. C. Perry,
I. W. Peery, & T. W. Draper (Eds.), Music and child development (158174). New York City, NY: Springer.
Wheeler, Teresa. (1997). An analysis, evaluation, and teachers guide for the Hal
Leonard student piano method books. Masters thesis, Pittsburg State
University, Kansas.
Whitlock, M. N. (2002). The application of music learning theory concepts to a
notation-based piano method. Doctoral dissertation, University of South
Carolina.
Wilson, P. N. (2000). A practical guide to exploring intermediate piano literature
found in collections: The development of a computer database to select
piano repertoire from collections for the intermediate student. Doctoral
dissertation, The University of Alabama.
Young, B. G. (1990). The use of computer and keyboard technology in selected
independent piano studios. Doctoral dissertation, The University of
Oklahoma.
Younker, B. (1997). Thought processes and strategies of eight, eleven, and
fourteen year old students while engaged in music composition.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University.
97
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Data Collection Sheets

Appendix B: Rubric for Repertoire Style Categories
Appendix C: Elements for Music Skill Development
Appendix D: List of Favorite Songs
Appendix E: List of Familiar Music
98
Appendix A: Data Collection Sheets
Name of Method:
Lesson Book:
Author(s):
Year of Publication:
Number of Pages:
Teaching Approach:
Technology:
Page Repertoire Key(s) Meter(s) Lyrics Duet Reading Improv.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Comp.
99

27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
Comp.
100

67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Sum
Page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Comp.
Familiar Music Public Domain Works Titles of Pieces in Categories 3-8
101
Page
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
102
Page
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Categories
Type
Sum
3
4
5
6
Art: Adaptation F o l k
o r Nursery or Multior Original
Traditional Play
cultural
7
Religious
103
Appendix B: Rubric for Repertoire Style Categories
No.
Rubric for Repertoire Style Categories
1.
Author(s) composed pedagogical pieces A piece within a lesson book composed by the author(s) of
the method. Unfamiliar pieces with no composer indication were assumed to be by the author(s).
2.
Non-author composed pedagogical pieces A piece within a lesson book by a composer other than
the author(s) for the purpose of teaching. Composers of Western art music were not included in this
category.
3.
Western art music (adaptation or original) A piece within a lesson book that is either an
arrangement of an orchestral work, a simplified arrangement of a piano work, or an original piano
work. This category includes works by J. C. Bach, J. S. Bach, Bartk, Clarke, Clementi, Czerny,
Diabelli, Dvork, Gurlitt, Haydn, Hook, Kabalevsky, Mozart, Reinagle, Rossini, Salutrinskaya,
Schumann, Schytte, Tchaikovsky, and Telemann.
4.
Folk and Traditional songs and tunes Western folk and traditional songs and tunes of known and
unknown authorship (e.g. known: Camptown Races, by Stephen Foster; unknown: Au !clair de lune,
French), including patriotic music, secular Christmas music (e.g. Jingle Bells, Rudolph the RedNosed Reindeer, Frosty the Snowman, etc.), and nationally associated tunes (e.g. The Irish
Washerwoman, Londonderry Air, Tarantella, etc.).
5.
Nursery and Play songs Nursery songs are nursery rhymes (e.g. Mother Goose) set to composed
music, many of which were composed by J. W. Elliott in the 1870s. Nursery songs are typically in
simple duple or triple meters with a wide range of melody notes. Play songs are of unknown
authorship and are typically in compound duple meter (6/8) with a limited range of melody notes.
6.
Multicultural music Nonwestern music, including African-American spirituals (e.g. When the
Saints Go Marching In, Down by the Riverside, Let Me Fly, etc.). Religious music with a strong
affiliation to non-Western culture (e.g. Kum-ba-yah) was included in this category.
7.
Religious music Hymns (e.g. Come Thou Almighty King, Simple Gifts, Amazing Grace, etc.),
Hanukkah music, and sacred Christmas music celebrating the birth of Christ.
8.
Popular music Music associated with television programs, motion pictures, radio broadcasts, or
theatrical productions in the United States.
104
Appendix C: Elements for Music Skill Development
The numbers along the left columns of the tables in Appendix C (see sample
below) refer to these categories of information:
1. Keys and Transposition Exercises
2. Meters and Rhythm Exercises
3. Exploration, Pre-staff, Single Staff, and Grand Staff
4. Reading, Improvising, and Composing
5. Solos, Duets, and Lyrics
6. Associated Technology
No.
Method Series Lesson Book and Author Name(s)
1.
Keys:
Transposition Exercises:
2.
Meters:
Rhythm Exercises:
3.
Exploration:
4.
Reading:
Improvising:
Composing:
5.
Solos:
Duets:
Lyrics:
6.
Technology:
Pre-staff:
Single Staff:
Grand Staff:
105
No.
Alfreds Premier Piano Course (2005) Lesson 1A by Alexander, Gayle, Kowalchyk, Lancaster,
McArthur and Mier
1.
Keys: Twin Black Keys, Triplet Black Keys, C, F, a,

g Mixolydian
Transposition Exercises: 0
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 23
3.
Exploration: 5
4.
Reading: 50
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 0
Duets: 50
Lyrics: 47
6.
Technology: CD accompaniment included with each lesson book; MIDI accompaniment disks available.
No.
Alfreds Premier Piano Course (2005) Lesson 1B by Alexander, Gayle, Kowalchyk,

Lancaster, McArthur and Mier
1.
Keys: C, d, a, G, g Mixolydian, D, F, g, c
2.
Meters: 3/4, 4/4
Rhythm Exercises: 9
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 36
Improvising: 0
Composing: 2
5.
Solos: 14
Duets: 21
Lyrics: 31
6.
Technology: CD accompaniment included with each lesson book; MIDI disks available separately.
Pre-staff: 24
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 26
Grand Staff: 36
106
No.
Alfreds Premier Piano Course (2006) Lesson 2A by Alexander, Gayle, Kowalchyk,

1.
Keys: C, G, c, d, F, Whole Tone, D
2.
Meters: 4/4, 2/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 5
3.
Exploration: 1
4.
Reading: 26
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 18
Duets: 8
Lyrics: 16
6.
Technology: CD accompaniment included with each lesson book; MIDI accompaniment disks
No.
Alfreds Premier Piano Course (2006) Lesson 2B by Alexander, Gayle, Kowalchyk,

1.
Keys: C, a, A, e, d, G, c
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4
Rhythm Exercises: 9
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 21
Improvising: 0
Composing: 3
5.
Solos: 18
Duets: 3
Lyrics: 6
6.
Technology: CD accompaniment included with each lesson book; MIDI accompaniment disks
Pre-staff: 0
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 26
Grand Staff: 21
107
No.
All-in-One Course (1994) Book One by Palmer, Manus and Lethco
1.
Keys: D-flat, G-flat, a, C, F, d
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 4
3.
Exploration: 6
4.
Reading: 37
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 9
Duets: 28
Lyrics: 36
6.
Technology: MIDI accompaniment available separately.
No.
All-in-One Course (1994) Book Two by Palmer, Manus and Lethco
1.
Keys: C, F, G, g
2.
Meters: 3/4, 4/4
Rhythm Exercises: 1
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 35
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 33
Duets: 2
Lyrics: 31
6.
Pre-staff: 14
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 7
Single Staff: 1
Grand Staff: 16
Grand Staff: 34
108
No.
All-in-One Course (1995) Book Three by Palmer, Manus and Lethco
1.
Keys: C, G, a
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4
Rhythm Exercises: 3
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 23
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 23
Duets: 0
Lyrics: 8
6.
No.
All-in-One Course (1995) Book Four by Palmer, Manus and Lethco
1.
Keys: C, G, g, a, Chromatic, Whole Tone
2.
Meters: 2/4, 4/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 5
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 29
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 27
Duets: 2
Lyrics: 24
6.
Pre-staff: 0
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Single Staff: 1
Grand Staff: 23
Grand Staff: 28
109
No.
Beanstalks Basics (1998) Preparatory Level A by Finn and Morris
1.
Keys: Twin Black Keys (D-flat), Triplet Black

Keys (G-flat), C
2.
Meters: 4/4, 2/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 1
4.
Reading: 37
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 28
Duets: 9
Lyrics: 20
6.
Technology: CD accompaniment available.
No.
Beanstalks Basics (1998) Preparatory Level B by Finn and Morris
1.
Keys: C, F, a, G, c, g
2.
Meters: 3/4, 4/4, 2/4
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 39
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 25
Duets: 14
Lyrics: 27
6.
Pre-staff: 18
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 8
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 11
Grand Staff: 39
110
No.
Beanstalks Basics (1998) Level 1 by Finn and Morris
1.
Keys: C, a, c, G, F, f, D, g, g Lydian
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 44
Improvising: 2
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 34
Duets: 10
Lyrics: 24
6.
No.
Beanstalks Basics (1998) Level 2 by Finn and Morris
1.
Keys: C, G, F, c, D, A
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4, 6/8
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 38
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 38
Duets: 0
Lyrics: 2
6.
Pre-staff: 0
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 1
Single Staff: 2
Grand Staff: 43
Grand Staff: 36
111
No.
Celebrate Piano! (2003) Lesson and Musicianship 1A by Albergo, Kolar and Mrozinski
1.
Keys: Twin Black Keys (D-flat), Triplet Black

Keys (G-flat), G, F, C, a, f Lydian
2.
Meters: 4/4, 12/8 (implied with teacher

accompaniment), 3/4, 2/4
3.
Exploration: 6
4.
Reading: 47
Improvising: 4
Composing: 8
5.
Solos: 19
Duets: 28
Lyrics: 29
6.
Technology: CD or MIDI accompaniment available.
No.
Celebrate Piano! (2003) Lesson and Musicianship 1B by Albergo, Kolar and Mrozinski
1.
Keys: C, G, f Lydian, F, f, c
2.
Meters: 4/4, 6/4, 3/4, 2/4
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 46
Improvising: 6
Composing: 3
5.
Solos: 16
Duets: 30
Lyrics: 19
6.
Pre-staff: 19
Pre-staff: 4
Single Staff: 9
Single Staff: 3
Grand Staff: 19
Grand Staff: 39
112
No.
Celebrate Piano! (2003) Lesson and Musicianship 2A by Albergo, Kolar and Mrozinski
1.
Keys: F, C, c, G, A, d, D, a, E, d-flat Lydian
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4, 6/4
3.
Exploration: 1
4.
Reading: 40
Improvising: 8
Composing: 6
5.
Solos: 20
Duets: 20
Lyrics: 10
6.
No.
Celebrate Piano! (2003) Lesson and Musicianship 2B by Albergo, Kolar and Mrozinski
1.
Keys: C, D, G, A, E, F, A-flat, D-flat, E-flat, Bflat, f Lydian, G-flat, F-sharp
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 47
Improvising: 6
Composing: 6
5.
Solos: 24
Duets: 23
Lyrics: 10
6.
Pre-staff: 2
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 3
Single Staff: 10
Grand Staff: 35
Grand Staff: 37
113
No.
Hal Leonard Student Piano Library (1996) Piano Lessons: Book 1 by Kreader, Kern, Kevern
and Rejino
1.
Keys: Twin Black Keys, Triplet Black Keys, C,

Whole Tone, c Mixolydian, f Lydian, a, F, G
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 8
3.
Exploration: 6
4.
Reading: 39
Improvising: 4
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 23
Duets: 40
Lyrics: 29
6.
No.
Hal Leonard Student Piano Library (1996) Piano Lessons: Book 2 by Kreader, Kern, Kevern
and Rejino
1.
Keys: C, a, D, G, F, g
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 34
Improvising: 2
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 17
Duets: 17
Lyrics: 12
6.
Pre-staff: 18
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 5
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 16
Grand Staff: 34
114
No.
Hal Leonard Student Piano Library (1996) Piano Lessons: Book 3 by Kreader, Kern and
Kevern
1.
Keys: C, a, G, F, g Lydian, Whole Tone, e, d
2.
Meters: 4/4, 2/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 3
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 35
Improvising: 6
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 18
Duets: 17
Lyrics: 5
6.
No.
Hal Leonard Student Piano Library (1997) Piano Lessons: Book 4 by Kreader, Kern and
Kevern
1.
Keys: C, a, G, e
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4, 3/8, 6/8, meter changes

within a piece (4/4 - 3/4 - 4/4), 2/2
Rhythm Exercises: 7
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 34
Improvising: 6
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 18
Duets: 16
Lyrics: 0
6.
Pre-staff: 0
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 35
Grand Staff: 34
115
No.
The Music Tree (2000) Time To Begin by Clark, Goss and Holland
1.
Keys: Twin Black Keys, Triplet Black Keys, F,

C, G, e, a, E, A, D, c
2.
Meters: 4/4, 5/4, 2/4, 3/4, meter changes within

a piece (5/4 - 4/4 - 5/4 - 4/4), 6/4
3.
Exploration: 4
4.
Reading: 51
Improvising: 0
Composing: 9
5.
Solos: 10
Duets: 41
Lyrics: 56
6.
No.
The Music Tree (2000) Part 1 by Clark, Goss and Holland
1.
Keys: C, F, f Lydian, Whole Tone, G, g

Mixolydian, d, a, e, D, B-flat, G-flat
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 6/4, 5/4, 2/4
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 80
Improvising: 6
Composing: 3
5.
Solos: 48
Duets: 32
Lyrics: 67
6.
Pre-staff: 45
Pre-staff: 1
Single Staff: 3
Single Staff: 14
Grand Staff: 3
Grand Staff: 65
116
No.
The Music Tree (2000) Part 2A by Clark, Goss and Holland
1.
Keys: C, G, A, F, B-flat, Pentatonic Scale, d, g,

g Mixolydian, c, f, D, E
2.
Meters: 4/4, 5/4, 2/4, 3/4, 6/4
Rhythm Exercises: 1
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 64
Improvising: 5
Composing: 4
5.
Solos: 37
Duets: 27
Lyrics: 27
6.
No.
The Music Tree (2000) Part 2B by Clark, Goss and Holland
1.
Keys: C, G, g Mixolydian, D, Whole Tone, e,

F, A, a, B-flat, d, Pentatonic Scale
2.
Meters: 6/4, 4/4, 2/4, 5/4, 3/4, 6/8, 9/8, 12/8
Rhythm Exercises: 4
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 59
Improvising: 4
Composing: 6
5.
Solos: 46
Duets: 13
Lyrics: 14
6.
Pre-staff: 0
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 9
Single Staff: 1
Grand Staff: 55
Grand Staff: 58
117
No.
Noona Comprehensive Piano Library (1997) Primer Lessons by Walter and Carol Noona
1.
Keys: a, C, G, D
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 33
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 9
Duets: 24
Lyrics: 28
6.
No.
Noona Comprehensive Piano Library (1997) Piano Lessons: Level 1 by Walter and Carol
Noona
1.
Keys: C, G, a, g, f, c, d, F
2.
Meters: 4/4, 2/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 4
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 38
Improvising: 0
Composing: 1
5.
Solos: 38
Duets: 0
Lyrics: 28
6.
Pre-staff: 0
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 4
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 29
Grand Staff: 38
118
No.
Noona Comprehensive Piano Library (1997) Piano Lessons: Level 1+ by Walter and Carol
Noona
1.
Keys: C, F, G, c, g
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4, 6/4, meter change within

a piece (6/4 9/4)
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 35
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 35
Duets: 0
Lyrics: 16
6.
No.
Noona Comprehensive Piano Library (1997) Piano Lessons: Level 2 by Walter and Carol
Noona
1.
Keys: C, F, G, d, c, a, D, A
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/2, 6/4, 2/4, 6/8
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 24
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 24
Duets: 0
Lyrics: 6
6.
Pre-staff: 0
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 35
Grand Staff: 24
119
No.
Piano Adventures (1996) Lesson Book: Primer Level by Nancy and Randall Faber
1.

f Lydian, f, F, d, a
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 5
3.
Exploration: 6
4.
Reading: 44
Improvising: 0
Composing: 6
5.
Solos: 9
Duets: 35
Lyrics: 38
6.
Technology: CD orchestrations functioning as accompaniments in both practice and performance

tempi are available.
No.
Piano Adventures (1996) Lesson Book: Level 1 by Nancy and Randall Faber
1.
Keys: C, a, F, d, Whole Tone, c, f Mixolydian,

G
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 48
Improvising: 3
Composing: 5
5.
Solos: 34
Duets: 14
Lyrics: 36
6.

Pre-staff: 15
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 29
Grand Staff: 48
120
No.
Piano Adventures (1997) Lesson Book: Level 2A by Nancy and Randall Faber
1.
Keys: G, C, f, Whole Tone, D, A, d, a, c, g
2.
Meters: 4/4, 2/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 1
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 30
Improvising: 1
Composing: 3
5.
Solos: 19
Duets: 11
Lyrics: 15
6.

No.
Piano Adventures (1997) Lesson Book: Level 2B by Nancy and Randall Faber
1.
Keys: C, a, G, e Phrygian, c, F
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4
Rhythm Exercises: 1
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 34
Improvising: 1
Composing: 7
5.
Solos: 24
Duets: 10
Lyrics: 11
6.

Pre-staff: 0
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 30
Grand Staff: 34
121
No.
Piano Discoveries (2001) On-Staff Starter by Vogt and Bates
1.
Keys: C, F, a
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4
Rhythm Exercises: 7
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 30
Improvising: 6
Composing: 1
5.
Solos: 18
Duets: 12
Lyrics: 29
6.
No.
Piano Discoveries (2001) Level 1A Explorer Book by Vogt and Bates
1.
Keys: a, G, C, F, d
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 3
3.
Exploration: 2
4.
Reading: 38
Improvising: 2
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 26
Duets: 12
Lyrics: 32
6.
Pre-staff: 0
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 30
Grand Staff: 38
122
No.
Piano Discoveries (2001) Level 1B Explorer Book by Vogt and Bates
1.
Keys: C, G, d, c, f, F
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 31
Improvising: 3
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 24
Duets: 7
Lyrics: 15
6.
No.
Piano Discoveries (2001) Level 2A Explorer Book by Vogt and Bates
1.
Keys: C, G, F, c
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4
Rhythm Exercises: 8
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 40
Improvising: 0
Composing: 1
5.
Solos: 40
Duets: 0
Lyrics: 0
6.
Pre-staff: 0
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 31
Grand Staff: 40
123
No.
Piano Town (2004) Primer Level by Snell and Hidy
1.

F, G, g Mixolydian, B-flat
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4
Rhythm Exercises: 2
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 50
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 20
Duets: 30
Lyrics: 50
6.
Technology: CD or MIDI Disk accompaniment available.
No.
Piano Town (2004) Level 1 Lessons by Snell and Hidy
1.
Keys: C, F, c, G
2.
Meters: 2/4, 3/4, 4/4
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 49
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 38
Duets: 11
Lyrics: 44
6.
Pre-staff: 14
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 4
Single Staff: 2
Grand Staff: 32
Grand Staff: 47
124
No.
1.
Keys: C, F, G, Chromatic, Whole Tone, f, D, A,

E
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 6/8, 2/4
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 43
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 43
Duets: 0
Lyrics: 24
6.
No.
1.
Keys: F, C, D, A, a, d, e, G, B-flat, g
2.
Meters: 4/4, 3/4, 2/4, 6/8
Rhythm Exercises: 0
3.
Exploration: 0
4.
Reading: 32
Improvising: 0
Composing: 0
5.
Solos: 32
Duets: 0
Lyrics: 5
6.
Technology: None.
Pre-staff: 0
Pre-staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Single Staff: 0
Grand Staff: 43
Grand Staff: 32
125
Appendix D: Favorite Songs List
1. Mary Had a Little Lamb

2. Yankee Doodle
3. Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star
4. The Alphabet Song
5. Name
6. I Can Play
7. This Old Man
8. Peas Porridge Hot
9. Surprise Symphony theme by Haydn
10. Happy Birthday
11. Oh Where, Oh Where Has My Little Dog Gone?
12. London Bridge
13. Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush
14. Skip to My Lou
15. Ten in the Bed . . . Roll Over!
16. Hot Cross Buns
17. Ring Around the Rosie
18. Go Tell Aunt Rhody
19. The Farmer in the Dell
20. Three Cs Clock Song
21. Fourths and Thirds
22. Indian Song
23. Oh, When the Saints Go Marching In
24. Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush
25. The Lord Is My Shepherd
26. This Little Light
27. Its Raining, Row, Row, Row Your Boat
28. Zaccheus
29. Jesus Loves Me
30. The B-I-B-L-E
126
Appendix E: Familiar Music List

___________________________________________________________________
Familiar Music in Categories 3-8
Wa3
F4
T4
N5
Titles of Pieces and their

Composers
All the Pretty Horses
All Through the Night
Alouette
Category
Codes
T4
T4
F4
Also sprach Zarathustra

by Strauss
Amaryllis by Henri Ghys
Amazing Grace
A Tisket, a Tasket
Au clair de la lune/
Pierrot/
In the Silvery Moonlight
Auld Lang Syne
Aura Lee
Barcarolle by Offenbach
Wa3
T4
R7
P5
T4
T4
F4
Wa3
P5
M6
R7
Popular
Religious
Multicultural
Play
Nursery
Traditional
Folk
Western art
Rubric for Repertoire Category Names and Subcategory Codes
PM8
Method Names and Lesson Books 1-4

Hal Leonard 4
Hal Leonard 3
Alfred 1; All-in-One 3; Celebrate Piano 4;
Piano Adventures 1; Hal Leonard 2;
Music Tree 4; Noona 2; Piano Town 2
Alfred 4
Piano Adventures 4
Piano Town 4
Noona 3
Alfred 3; Celebrate Piano 2; Piano
Adventures 2; Hal Leonard 1 (twice);
Music Tree 2
Piano Adventures 4
Celebrate Piano 2
Piano Discoveries 3
127
Titles of Pieces and their Category

Composers (continued)
Codes
(contd)
Beautiful Dreamer
T4
by Stephen Foster
Bells in the Steeple
F4
Bingo
P5
Birch Tree, The
Blow the Man Down
Boom, Boom!
Bring a Torch, Jeannette,
Isabella
Camptown Races
by Stephen Foster
Waltz Song
(German folk song)
Carry Me Back To Old
Virginny
by Bland
Casey Jones
Clapping Song
(Guatemalan)
Clementine
Come, Thou Almighty
King
by Felice de Giardini
Country Gardens
(English)
Cowboy Song
Cuckoo, The
Dakota Melody
(Native American)
Dance of the Ukraine
Deck the Hall
Donkey, The
Donkey Riding
Down by the Bay
Down by the Riverside
(Spiritual)
F4
F4
T4
R7
T4

(continued)
Music Tree 4
Celebrate Piano 2
Alfred 1: Beanstalks 3; Hal Leonard 2;
Music Tree 2
Piano Adventures 1
Music Tree 4
Piano Adventures 4
Piano Discoveries 4
T4

Music Tree 1
Piano Adventures 4
T4
Noona 1
T4
M6
Hal Leonard 3
Hal Leonard 2
F4
R7
All-in-One 3
All-in-One 3
T4
Beanstalks 4
F4
F4
M6
Noona 3
Beanstalks 3
Hal Leonard 1
F4
T4
T4
F4
T4
M6
Piano Discoveries 4
Piano Discoveries 3
All-in-One 2
Celebrate Piano 4
Piano Adventures 4
Noona 3
128

Codes
(contd)
Down in the Valley
F4
Do Your Ears Hang Low? T4
Duke of York, The
P5

(continued)
Eine Kleine Nachtmusik

by W. A. Mozart
Eensie, Weensie Spider
Farmer in the Dell, The
Fiddle-Dee-Dee
Folk Song (German)
For Hes a Jolly Good
Fellow/
The Bear Went Over the
Mountain
Frre Jacques
Brother John
French Lullaby
Fuzzy Wuzzy
Good Catch
Good King Wenceslas
Go Tell Aunt Rhody
Wa3
Piano Town 4
Alfred 3
Beanstalks 4; Piano Adventures 4; Music
Tree 4
Alfred 1; Piano Discoveries 2
P5
P5
F4
F4
T4
Noona 3
Music Tree 2
Music Tree 4; Piano Town 3
Music Tree 3
Noona 4; Piano Town 3
P5
Go To Sleep
Grandmother
Happy Birthday
by Hill and Hill
Harvest Song (theme)
from Album for the Young
by Robert Schumann
Here We Go Round the
Mulberry Bush
Hey, Hey, Look At Me!
Hickory, Dickory Dock
Hot Cross Buns
F4
T4
T4
Beanstalks 2; Noona 1, 2; Piano

Discoveries 3; Piano Town 1
All-in-One 4
Celebrate Piano 2
Music Tree 3
Piano Discoveries 3
All-in-One 4; Beanstalks 3; Music Tree
4; Noona 3; Piano Town 3
Hal Leonard 2
Piano Adventures 1
All-in-One 2; Beanstalks 3; Music Tree 3
Wa3
Hal Leonard 3
P5
Beanstalks 4
T4
N5
N5
Hound Dawg Song, The

Hush, Little Baby
F4
F4
Piano Adventures 1
Noona 3
Beanstalks 3; Celebrate Piano 1; Hal
Leonard 1; Music Tree 4
Celebrate Piano 4
F4
F4
F4
T4
P5
129

Codes
(contd)
I Feel Like a Morning T4
Star
If Youre Happy and You P5
Know It
I Know Where Im Going F4
I Like You!
F4
I Love Little Pussy/
N5
Listen to the Mocking
Bird
Im a Fine Musician
T4
by Grean and Glazer
Im Gonna Sing!
M6
Irish Washerwoman, The T4
Iroquois Lullaby
M6
(Native American)
I Saw Three Ships
T4
Jericho
M6
Jingle Bells by J. Pierpont T4
Jolly Old St. Nicholas
T4

(continued)
Noona 3
Beanstalks 3
Piano Discoveries 2
Hal Leonard 1
All-in-One 3
Noona 1
All-in-One 3
Hal Leonard 2, 4; Music Tree 4
Celebrate Piano 3
Just Being Me
(Czechoslovakian)
Knock-Knock Joke
(Guatemalen)
Kum-ba-ya
La Bamba
Land of the Silver Birch
(Canadian)
Largo from the
New World Symphony
by Anton Dvork
Lavenders Blue
M6
Piano Discoveries 3
Music Tree 4
Noona 3, 4
All-in-One 1; Noona 1; Piano Discoveries
1
Hal Leonard 1
M6
Hal Leonard 1
M6
M6
F4
All-in-One 3; Piano Town 3

Music Tree 3
Beanstalks 4
Wa3
Lazy Mary
Let Me Fly! (Spiritual)
Lightly Row
T4
M6
F4
Beanstalks 2; Piano Adventures 4; Music

Tree 4; Noona 2, 3; Piano Discoveries 4;
Piano Town 3
All-in-One 3; Celebrate Piano 3; Hal
Leonard 3; Piano Town 3
Piano Discoveries 3
Hal Leonard 1
Beanstalks 1; Celebrate Piano 3; Piano
Adventures 2; Music Tree 3; Noona 1;
Piano Discoveries 4; Piano Town 2
F4
130

Codes
(contd)
Little Bird
F4
Little Brown Jug
F4
Little River Flowing
P5
Loch Lomond
F4
London Bridge
P5
Long, Long Ago
F4
Looby Loo
P5
Love Somebody
P5
Lucy Locket/
F4
Bounce High,
Bounce Low
Lullaby (Polish)
M6
Main Theme
T4
from Star Wars
Malaguea (Spanish folk M6
tunes, not by Lecuona)
March of the Toreadors Wa3
from Carmen by Bizet
Marines Hymn, The
T4
Mary Ann
M6
(Jamaican folk song)
Mary Had a Little Lamb
P5
Merrily We Roll Along/
T4
Good Night Ladies
Merrily We Roll Along
from Looney Tunes
by Cantor, Tobias, and
Mencher
Merry-Go-Round Broke
Down, The
from Bugs Bunny
by Friend and Franklin
Mexican Hat Dance
Mister Banjo (Creole)
Morning Has Broken
Musette in D (theme)
by J. S. Bach

(continued)
Hal Leonard 3
Celebrate Piano 2
Hal Leonard 2, 3
Piano Discoveries 4
All-in-One 3; Piano Adventures 4
Hal Leonard 1
Piano Town 3
Celebrate Piano 2; Piano Town 3
Celebrate Piano 2 (twice)
Hal Leonard 3
Music Tree 4
All-in-One 3
Hal Leonard 2; Music Tree 4
Piano Town 3
Noona 3
PM8
Hal Leonard 1; Piano Town 1

Alfred 1; All-in-One 1; Beanstalks 1;
Celebrate Piano 1; Piano Adventures 1;
Music Tree 1; Noona 2, 3
Music Tree 3
PM8
Music Tree 2
M6
M6
T4
Wa3
All-in-One 1
Hal Leonard 4
Alfred 2
131

Codes
(contd)
My Bonnie Lies Over the T4
Ocean/
The Cowboys Song
My Country Tis of Thee T4
My Pony
F4
O Bury Me Not on the F4
Lone Prairie
Ode To Joy from Wa3
Symphony No. 9
by Beethoven

(continued)
Beanstalks 4; Noona 2
Piano Adventures 4; Music Tree 4
Piano Adventures 2; Music Tree 2
All-in-One 4
Oh! If My Monk Would

Only Dance
Oh Susanna
by Stephen Foster
Old Abe Lincoln
Old Brass Band Wagon
Old King Cole
Old MacDonald
F4

Music Tree 1; Noona 3, 4; Piano
Discoveries 2, 4; Piano Town 1
Piano Discoveries 3
F4
Beanstalks 4; Music Tree 3; Noona 3
T4
F4
T4
P5
Once a Canadian Lad

Once a Man Was So, So
Mad
On the Bridge at Avignon
On Top of Old Smoky
Oranges and Lemons
Polly Wolly Doodle
Pop! Goes the Weasel
F4
F4
Music Tree 3
Music Tree 4
Piano Discoveries 4
Hal Leonard 1; Music Tree 1; Noona 2
Beanstalks 3; Celebrate Piano 4
Hal Leonard 1
Puff, the Magic Dragon

by Yarrow and Lipton
Rain, Rain, Go Away
Red River Valley
Reuben and Rachel
Reveille
Ride With Me
Ring Around the Rosy
PM8
All-in-One 3
Piano Town 4
Beanstalks 3
Celebrate Piano 4
Beanstalks 4; Celebrate Piano 3; Hal
Leonard 2; Noona 1
Music Tree 4
P5
F4
T4
T4
F4
P5
Hal Leonard 1
Beanstalks 3; Piano Town 4
Music Tree 2
Celebrate Piano 3
Piano Discoveries 3
P5
F4
F4
F4
N5
132

Codes
(contd)
Row, Row, Row Your P5
Boat

(continued)
Russian Sailor Dance

Scotlands Burning
Scottish Air
Shave and a Haircut
Shell Be Comin Round
the Mountain
Shepherds Song from
Symphony No. 6
by Beethoven
Shortnin Bread
Simple Gifts
Simple Song
(Scandinavian)
Skip To My Lou
F4
P5
F4
T4
F4
Alfred 2; All-in-One 1; Celebrate Piano 2;

Piano Adventures 2; Music Tree 4; Piano
Town 1
Piano Adventures 2
Music Tree 2
Hal Leonard 1
Piano Adventures 4
Wa3
Piano Adventures 2
M6
R7
F4
Hal Leonard 3; Noona 4

Piano Discoveries 4; Piano Town 2
Music Tree 2
P5
Somewhere, Over the

Rainbow
by Arlen
Song To Celia
Spring from
The Four Seasons
by Vivaldi
Street Fair (Armenian)
Surprise Symphony
(theme)
by Haydn
Sweet Betsy from Pike
Sweet Molly Malone
Take Me Out To the Ball
Game
by Norworth and Tilzer
Tambourine Tune
Taps
(U. S. Army bugle call)
Ten Little Indians
PM8

Alfred 4; Music Tree 2
F4
Wa3
Beanstalks 3
M6
Wa3
Hal Leonard 3
Alfred 1; Hal Leonard 1; Music Tree 2;
Noona 3
F4
F4
T4
Music Tree 3
Noona 4
Alfred 4; Hal Leonard 3
F4
T4
Hal Leonard 1
Piano Adventures 4
P5
Noona 1
133

Codes
(contd)
Theme from
Wa3
Symphony No. 5
by Beethoven
Theme
Wa3
by Tchaikovsky
This Is It! from
PM8
The Bugs Bunny Show
by David and Livingston
This Land Is Your Land T4
by Guthrie
This Old Man
P5
Three Blind Mice
Trumpet Voluntary
by Jeremiah Clarke
Tumbalalaika
Turkey in the Straw
Twinkle, Twinkle,
Little Star
Voyagers Song, The
(German Lullaby)
Water Is Wide, The
(English folk song)
Westminster Chimes/
Big Ben

(continued)
Piano Discoveries 3
Piano Town 1
Music Tree 2
Music Tree 3
P5
Wa3
All-in-One 3; Piano Adventures 3; Noona

3; Piano Discoveries 3
Beanstalks 4
M6
F4
N5
Piano Town 3
Alfred 3; Piano Town 3
Piano Discoveries 4
F4
Noona 3
F4
Piano Discoveries 4
T4
Alfred 1; Piano Adventures 1; Hal

Leonard 2; Music Tree 3; Piano
Discoveries 3; Piano Town 1, 2
Noona 4
When Johnny Comes T4

Marching Home
When the Saints Go M6
Marching In
Whistle,
D a u g h t e r , F4
Whistle
William Tell Overture
Wa3
by G. Rossini
Wind Beneath My Wings, PM8
The
by Henley and Silbar
All-in-One 2; Beanstalks 3; Celebrate

Piano 3; Piano Adventures 2; Music Tree
2; Noona 2, 4; Piano Discoveries 3; Piano
Town 2
Celebrate Piano 3
All-in-One 3
Music Tree 4
134

Codes
(contd)
Yankee Doodle
T4
You Light Up My Life

by Brooks
1812 Overture
by Tchaikovsky
5001 Miles

(continued)
PM8
All-in-One 4; Beanstalks 2; Celebrate

Piano 2; Piano Adventures 1; Hal Leonard
1; Music Tree 3; Noona 1; Piano
Discoveries 2; Piano Town 1
Music Tree 4
Wa3
Alfred 2
T4
Noona 2
135

Analysis of The Music Content in Ten Piano Methods 1994 2006 For The Elementary Aged Beginning Piano Student For Menc National Standards Based El

Cargado por

Información del documento

Título original

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Analysis of The Music Content in Ten Piano Methods 1994 2006 For The Elementary Aged Beginning Piano Student For Menc National Standards Based El

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

AN ANALYSIS OF THE MUSIC CONTENT IN TEN PIANO METHODS (19942006) FOR THE ELEMENTARY-AGED BEGINNING PIANO STUDENT FOR

MENC NATIONAL STANDARDS BASED ELEMENTS

A Dissertation Presented to the

Julie Ann Ballard

This dissertation is dedicated to my family, whose love, support, and

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................... 1

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE .............................. 11

Selecting an Appropriate Method ................................................. 14

2.2.7 Content Analyses of Piano Method Series ..................................... 28

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .................................................................. 36

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DATA ANALYSIS ....................................... 48

Research Question 1..................................................................... 49

4.5 CHAPTER SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 68

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND

TABLE 1: REPERTOIRE CATEGORIES AND PERCENTAGES ...................................... 119

The purpose of this study was to investigate elements of MENC National

Of 162 piano teachers surveyed from Florida State Music Teachers

structures of music is to limit their capacity to think artistically, and

parental involvement. Repertoire style categories for playing and listening

1.2 Need for the Study

Standards 2, 3, 4, and 5. The findings of this study were presented to improve

1.3 Purpose of the Study

What is the percentage of repertoire in each of the following

What are the percentages of solo repertoire and duet

What is the percentage of music content devoted to creating

What is the variety of keys and meters being experienced

What technology is available to support performance and

How do these methods rate in variety of repertoire, inclusion

1.5 Delimitations of the Study

1.6 Definition of Terms

festivities, dancing, work, death, love, children, and other aspects of

1.7 Overview of the Remaining Chapters

performing alone and with others, selecting an appropriate method, variety of

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.2 Literature Reviewed

Information Center (ERIC), FirstSearch, and Proquest. Dissertations, theses, and

2.2.1 Performing Alone and with Others

to cultivate confidence, poise, leadership, cooperation, and deciphering quality

2.2.2 Selecting an Appropriate Method

2.2.3 Variety of Repertoire

Thomas-Lee (2003) found a variety of repertoire in a comprehensive

2.2.4 Creating Music

Improvisation is essentially the formulation of musical constructs in a

or another, improvising, playing by ear, or simply playing around. In their

2.2.5 Reading Music

Cartwright (1996) suggests that beginning piano methods do not properly

2.2.6 Technology and Music Education

2.2.7 Content Analyses of Piano Method Series

Piano Lessons (1976) by James Bastien ranked highest in addressing concepts of

2.3 ImplicationsConceptual Framework

Akins (1982) reported frequency counts of repertoire styles in method

Repertoire Percentages in Five Categories for Five Piano Methods

2.4 Summary of Related Literature

3.2 Restatement of Purpose

3.3 Study Design

3.3.3 Procedures for Sample Selection

Kjos representative, Leslie Fox, Piano Editor, provided contact information

3.3.4 Data Collection

includes titles of a tune (e.g. Au clair de la lune/Pierrot/In the Silvery Moonlight),

3.3.5 Ratings for Variety of Repertoire

3.3.6 Ratings for Creating

3.3.7 Ratings for Variety of Keys and Meters

3.3.8 Associated Technology