1. An Updated Profile of Music Programs at Residential Schools for Blind and Visually Impaired Students Edward P. Kahler, II, Ph.D., MT-BC Jeremy Coleman, MM, MT-BC Della Molloy-Daugherty, Ph.D., MT-BC American Music Therapy Association National Conference Jacksonville, FL 2013

2. Background Clinical work Higher education experiences – Graduate research projects Corn & Bailey, 1991 Survey, JVIB Corn, A. L. & Bailey, G. L. (1991). Profile of music programs at residential schools for blind and visually impaired students. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 86(11), 379-382.

3. Current Research Students with visual impairments are the least represented disability group in music research (Brown & Jellison, 2012) Brown, L. S. & Jellison, J. A. (2012). Music research with children and youth with disabilities and typically developing peers: A systematic review. Journal of Music Therapy, 49(3), 335-364.

4. Current Research Memorization and other self-developed strategies are primary methods of music learning for public high school band students who are blind/visually impaired (Moss, 2009) Moss, F. W. Jr. (2009). Quality of experience in mainstreaming and full inclusion of blind and visually impaired high school instrumental music students. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Michigan. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Retrieved from http:// search.proquest.com/docview/304928945?accountid=7118

5. Research Questions What is the current landscape for music programming at residential schools for blind and visually impaired students? Has it changed since 1991? If so, how has it changed? What are the teaching methods and materials being used, and what is the self-perceived effectiveness in using those methods?

6. Procedures 1.Reconstruct the survey – From a paper survey/U.S. mail  SurveyMonkey – Pilot testing, troubleshooting 2.IRB approval – West Texas A&M University (IRB) – University of Texas at Austin – University of Missouri, Kansas City

7. 3.Council of Schools for the Blind (COSB) 1.2012-2013 membership list acquired - online 2.Initial emails sent to top administrators of 40 state residential schools for the blind (SRSB) Procedures

8. 4.Develop survey using SurveyMonkey 1.Membership 2.Upload survey 3.Testing and troubleshooting 4.Pilot test to 3 colleagues 5.Upload emails provided by administrators 6.Send out reminder email 7.Send out secondary survey to additional addresses provided by first respondents Procedures

9. Responses 1.Administrators from 40 programs 1.37 top administrators responded to email request 2.3 did not respond 3.2 reported they had no music faculty 4.35 out of 37 RSRBs who responded have music programs 5.Administrators provided 43 music faculty contacts

10. Responses 2.43 initial invitations to participate – 2 were incorrect email addresses – bounced – 1 faculty chose not to participate – 1 person did not complete the survey – 25 initial responses to participate 3.Reminder invitation to participate sent to 14 who had not responded 4.Total participation = 29 respondents

11. Responses 5.Secondary invitations sent – Email addressed provided by initial group of respondents – 15 additional email addresses given – 2 were duplicates – 2 were incorrect – bounced – Secondary invitations = 3 responses out of 11

12. Participation Results Administrators – 93% participation – 88% of programs (35/40) reported music programs and provided faculty contacts Music Faculty – 32 total completed responses out of 52 sent – 62% rate of participation in the survey

13. The Students

19. The Music Faculty

20. Faculty: Demographics 31/32 are full time staff 68% are female 50% of respondents are between the ages of 40 and 60 years 5 individuals are over the age of 60 years

21. Faculty: Tenure in Their Field 72% have worked 20 years or less 28% have worked between 16 – 20 years 19% (6 individuals) have worked in the field more than 30 years!

22. Faculty: Tenure at the Current SRSB 88% working in current position 20 years or less 28% have been there between 6 – 10 years 2 individuals have worked there for more than 30 years! 97% feel their job is stable

23. Faculty: Job Description vs. Classification Job Classification – 88% classified as TEACHER – 9.4% classified as RELATED SERVICES – 3.1% classified as CONTRACT SERVICES “Which one best describes you?” – 72% “music teacher” – 6% (2 individuals) “music therapist” – 22% (7 individuals) “both”

24. Faculty: Education, Certifications Education – 47% hold a Master’s degree – 40% hold a Bachelor’s degree – 3% (1 person) holds a Doctoral degree Certifications – 84% Certified as a Music Teacher – 6.3% Certified as a Music Therapist (2) – 3.1% Certified as both (1)

25. Faculty: Other Certifications Music Related Certification – 2 people held Braille Music Certification – 2 people held Orff Certification Additional Certifications – 47% held Teacher of the Visually Impaired – 25% held Special Education Teacher

26. The Job

27. Job Characteristics 44% do music during the school day only 53% do music both during and after school Department Size – 38% are the only music faculty at their facility – 34% have two at their facility

30. Other Types of Duties 87% develop music materials for students to use in the school 78% have individual lesson times with students 53% target IEP goals in classes 40% write IEP goals

31. Perceived Effectiveness of Techniques/Strategies 1.Rote learning - 31/32 2.Professional CD Recordings - 28/32 3.Technological Devices - 27/32 Lowest Rated for Perceived Effectiveness: 9.Student Developed strategies - 15/32 10. Braille Music - 14/32

32. Techniques/Strategies: Rate of Use Daily or 2-3 Times a week: 1.Rote Learning – 32/32 2.Using Professional CD Recordings - 24/32 3.Using Technological Devices - 24/32 Least Used Techniques/Strategies: 8.Student Developed Strategies - 14/32 9.Recordings of Individual Part – 14/32 10.Braille Music - 13/32

33. Summary: The Schools and Programs ½ of schools have a student body of less than 100 students 35 out of 37 RSRBs have music programs Over 1/3 of the programs have 1 faculty Another 1/3 have two faculty members 9 programs have 3 or more music faculty

34. Summary: The Faculty Most are music educators Over 2/3 are female Only 2 are certified in braille music Nearly half are also certified as TVIs (Teachers of the the Visually Impaired) Only 3 (?) are music therapists (2 MT; 1 dual) Nearly all feel that their job is secure

35. Ages Served – Everyone works with high schoolers – Nearly everyone works with middle schoolers – Most work with elementary and post-secondary – Less than half work with early childhood

36. Abilities Served – More than 2/3 said that half or more of their student workload has severe and multiple disabilities – Duties somewhat evenly across the spectrum of ability – less than half work with deaf/blind kids

37. Job Duties – Nearly 2/3 report that music skill development is PRIMARY focus in their job – Nearly 30% report that functional and nonmusical skill development is the PRIMARY focus

38. Materials, Methods, and Perceived Effectiveness Rote learning, pre-recorded CDs, and technology devices are most used and rated most effective means to teach music Braille music was least used 100% said they used rote learning

39. Corn and Bailey, 1991 Administrators of 19 schools (22%) stated that their school offered music therapy – Not asked: MT-BC? Dual certified? Neither? 81% were full time music teachers Private lessons, choir, band, music appreciation were the highest offerings 71% use braille music 98% use rote learning

40. Corn and Bailey, 1991 No comparisons made with students who are blind and attending public schools Faculties were aging (!) Administrators expressed a need to “attract qualified music therapists” (p. 381) “A nationwide assessment of teaching methods and inservice needs may be helpful” (p. 381) – braille music issue

41. Corn and Bailey, 1991 Recommendations: – Communication amongst music faculty across agencies – Attract music therapists – Inservice education for music faculty to address changing needs – Further research needed regarding what is happening in public schools – music ed? MT?

42. Future What is the landscape outside SRSBs Staffing classification within the agency – i.e., “music teacher” position requires music education certification so students get a fine arts credit – Impact on music therapists working at SRSBs

43. Future Is rote the BEST for this population? Music teachers are feeling like they are doing music therapy? Are student needs being met? – Educationally: music READING? Music SKILLS? – Therapeutically? Functional Skills?

44. Contact Della Molloy-Daugherty dellamolloy@me.com Jeremy Coleman jmc.guitar@gmail.com Edward P. Kahler ekahler@wtamu.edu