reply to Orzolek

At first it seemed Orzolek was running in circles with his head cut off describing all of the paradoxical effects in todays education. I feel more connected to what Orzolek has to say in regards that assessment needs to be opportunity filled for feedback with the students. The only feedback that students usually recieve is a letter grade which only tells the student if they have met the certain standard. Assessment is an important tool because it provides places of feedback where and how the students can specifically improve, rather than just telling the students they need to do better. I agree with Orzolek and really enjoy entertaining the new forms of assessment in portfolio's. I believe this is a huge step in the right direction. Not only does the product become assessed but also the process, which is a key factor that was being ignored previously. Something else I found to be interesting was that the States require that the standards be met but many do no have any means of reporting the progress. Since there are no formal ways to report progress, the states figure the arts programs are easy budget cuts. Problem, I think so.
Brophy treats assessment as an important means to report progress to whomever requires it. But he also seems to disclude room for critical thinking. Formal tests are the only way to show progress...NOT! I am sure this is not is goal, he just seems to be moving in this direction.

I believe that improvisation should be included in the musical skills area because it is a creative aspect of music. It can be an assessing tool to let the teacher know that the students know basic musical aspects, harmony, pitch, rhythm. Improvisation helps devolpe the musicians ear as well. Plus improv. is one of the 9 National standards for music Education. Along with creativity, improvisation is an important skill to have that you can bring to the real world; be it dealing with customers at your part time job or interacting with friends when bored

I believe that using standardized tests in the music classroom defeats the entire purpose of learning about music. Standardized tests put a fear in the heart of every teacher because it lists a criteria need to be met in order for the school to have a reputable program. But the people who benefit from the standardized tests are the administrators who do not care about music in schools unless it adds more zeros to the end of their paycheck.

If the teacher wasn’t intending on testing the students in an official way, they would obviously have to incorporate tests into their curriculum. They can also use testing as a weapon to make sure every student is doing at least some work. Choir isn’t really something that people think would affect their GPA but if they are in the class they might as well do some work so they can improve it. The teachers aren’t going to be able to do exactly what they wanted to unless what they want to do is to use standardized tests.

Assessment is a science because it isnt particular to just one subject. Assessment also has to be a trial and error process until you find a way that works. Music is an art form. Its hard to explain to non music people but you can use the science of assessment to prove that music is a valued art form. I don’t believe that assessment is necessarily important to prove musical development. Forms of assessment can be concerts and rehearsals, not just paper tests. Assessment is testing what the students learn. When someone hears the word assessment they automatically think of a paper test that is fill-in-the____ or multiple choice. But I believe that a great way to assess the learning is through concerts and rehearsals where the students will feel most comfortable and therefore give their best efforts.