Page 1

The Development and Evaluation of a Music Mnemonic-

Enhanced Multimedia Computer-Aided Science Instructional

Module

Karl J. Kimmel

Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

in

Teaching and Learning

Glen Holmes Co-chair

Greg Sherman, Co-chair

John Burton

Michael Moore

Sue Magliaro

Vernon Burnsed

December 14, 1998

Blacksburg, Virginia

Keywords: Music mnemonic, song, lyric, recall, facilitation, multimedia, CAI, CBI, Computer

aided, life science, biology, middle school, integrative, music

Copyright © 1998, Karl J. Kimmel

The Development and Evaluation of a Music Mnemonic-Enhanced Multimedia Computer-

Aided Science Instructional Module

Karl Kimmel

(ABSTRACT)

“CellSong” is a computer aided instructional (CAI) science module designed to help

students recall information about cellular physiology. The program is designed to teach

middle school learners the music mnemonic “Cell’s Organelles” (©1995 Karl Kimmel) in

order to facilitate the recall of the targeted biological information. In addition to music, a

computer animation is synched to the five minute music file to provide visual

reinforcement for the song’s lyrics.

Two male teachers, from two different rural southern schools (mTeacher and sTeacher)

implemented the “CellSong” module in their classes. Students in mTeacher’s class

consisted of 12 fifth grade biology students. The other group was initially composed of all

of sTeacher’s sixth grade science classes (n=38). This group was divided into the regular

three classes on its second exposure to the program.

The students filled out attitude surveys after five exposures to the program. All the sixth

grade students took an aided recall tests immediately after the fifth exposure to the

program. Thirteen of the sixth graders took the same test (retest) after seven days.

Although the test scores were generally low, students who took the retest tended to be

able recall the same items that they had recalled the week before.

The fifth grade class took one recall test four days after their last exposure to the program

and scored higher than the sixth grade from the other school. These students were more

favorable in their responses on the attitudinal survey. Students in the fifth grade class (and

female students in the sixth grade classes) tended to enjoy the module and music

mnemonic strategy. The sixth grade boys reported not enjoying it.

v

Dedication

This paper is dedicated to the memory of my father

Allan Lee Kimmel

(1926 - 1998)

a committed educator, lifelong student, gifted musician,

loving husband, extraordinary father

and all I have ever aspired to be.

Thank you for all your help, support and love.

I wish he was here to see it finished.

He is missed.

iv

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my appreciation and thanks to the co-chairs, Drs. Glen Holmes

and Greg Sherman, and to the members of my committee Drs. Vernon Burnsed, John

Burton, Sue Magliaro, Michael Moore, for their council, encouragement, constructive

criticism and support throughout the doctoral program.

A special acknowledgment is due Glen Holmes for his patience and invaluable

suggestions through each step of my graduate education and to Greg Sherman for his

tremendous help and guidance in the creation, design and editing of this document.

I thank my daughter Tiffany Kimmel for the hours she spent helping to create the

artwork used in the animation. I am grateful to Tina Kimmel, for singing the song on

the recording and contributing some of the most effective and imaginative animation

ideas used in the program. I would like to express my gratitude to Courtland Stewart’s

for his assistance in engineering the audio recording.

I would like to express my appreciation to the master teachers, Steve Halterman,

Carolyn Holdren and Dave Peters, for their time and valuable insights. Without their

help and the cooperation the many administrators, parents and students contacted

though out the research process, this study would not have been possible.

Additionally, I would like to thank Francine Solomon for being there and helping out

when everything seemed the bleakest. I express my deep appreciation to my loving

Aunt Sondra Jordan, who helped glue me back together whenever my world fell apart.

I am grateful to my younger daughter Kathryn, who for five of her seven years, has

had a working father in graduate school and nevertheless continues to love him. I am

grateful to my former house-mates Ron Free, David Morrison, Debra Wagner and

Arthur Wangler for their help, patience and assistance with Kathryn. I thank Kay

Kimmel for remaining a constant support and friend. I express my deep appreciation to

Ashley Smith for her consistent willingness to help.

I thank Jon West, my partner, trusted friend and excellent musician, for protecting our

company and more specifically my job whenever my academic and musical careers

collided. I also thank Frank Spicer for being willing to sub for me on such short

notice.

I am deeply grateful to my mother, Margaret Kimmel, and all my family and friends for

their tireless support and encouragement throughout my masters and doctoral

programs.

Finally, I wish to express my love and heartfelt appreciation to my incredibly helpful

wife, Teresa Kimmel, who has generously brought beauty, unfailing support, fun,

tenderness and our son, Kyle into my life.

Thank you one and all.

v

Table of Contents

Page

Abstract

................................................................................................ii

List of Tables ...............................................................................................vi

List of Figures ..............................................................................................vii

Table of Appendixes....................................................................................viii

1. Introduction..............................................................................................1

Description of the “CellSong” Module ................................................4

Program Components..........................................................................5

Program Objectives.............................................................................5

Interface............................................................................................10

2. Evaluation Methods...............................................................................30

Expert Review - Participants/Procedures...........................................30

Scholarly...........................................................................................30

Administrative...................................................................................31

The Trenches ....................................................................................31

Results Expert Review......................................................................31

Scholastic..............................................................................32

Trenches................................................................................33

Small Group/Field Test Evaluation....................................................34

Participants.......................................................................................34

Procedures........................................................................................35

Data Sources.....................................................................................37

3. Results ..............................................................................................40

Responses from the Aided Recall Test...............................................40

Responses from the Student Attitude Questionnaire .........................43

4. Discussion .............................................................................................57

References

..............................................................................................63

Appendix

..............................................................................................66

vi

List of Tables

Page

1. Aided Recall Test - Percent correct responses by ....................................41

item and location/test

2. Student’s mean scores and standard deviations.......................................42

on aided recall test

3. Percentage correct test and retest scores at .............................................43

Location S by student

4. Mean scores and standard deviations across items ..................................44

related to novelty

5. Mean scores and standard deviations across items...................................45

related to students' attitudes towards strategy

6. Mean scores and standard deviations across items...................................47

related to students' attitudes towards module

7. Mean scores and standard deviations across items...................................50

related to students' focus and metacognition.

8. Mean scores and standard deviations across items...................................52

related to students' musical attitudes

9. Mean scores and standard deviations across items...................................54

related to students' music education

vii

List of Figures

Page

1.

Keyword Mnemonics .........................................................................4

2.

User Interface ...................................................................................13

3.

Time Signature..................................................................................14

4.

Organelles I.......................................................................................15

5.

Organelles II .....................................................................................16

6.

Cell Membrane I ...............................................................................17

7.

Cell Membrane II..............................................................................18

8.

Cell Wall...........................................................................................19

9.

Vacuoles...........................................................................................20

10.

Mitochondrion I................................................................................21

11.

Mitochondrion II...............................................................................22

12.

Ribosome..........................................................................................23

13.

Endoplasmic Reticulum.....................................................................24

14.

Chromatin.........................................................................................25

15.

Chloroplasts......................................................................................26

16.

Diffusion...........................................................................................27

17.

Active transport ................................................................................28

18

Three Part Harmony..........................................................................29

19.

Item Analysis Graph..........................................................................56

20

Forgetting Graph...............................................................................57

viii

Table of Appendixes

Page

A

Technical Specifications....................................................................66

B

Recording Procedures.......................................................................67

C

Models for Program Development.....................................................68

D

Cell Song Recall Test........................................................................70

E

Consent Forms For Internal Review Board (IRB)..............................71

F

Transcriptions from Meetings - Gifted Students.................................73

Program Director and Teachers

G

One -To- One Subject Sophisticate Evaluation.................................79

Questionnaire

H

Teacher’s Program Evaluation Questionnaire ...................................80

I

Student’s Program Evaluation Questionnaire.....................................83

J

Student’s Questionnaire (by class).....................................................87

K

Student Evaluation - Short Answers.................................................88

L

National Standard of Learnings For Arts Education...........................92

Choral Performing Groups (Grades 7-8)

1

Chapter 1. Introduction

“CellSong” is an interactive multimedia, computer-assisted instructional (CAI)

program that provides a highly elaborative rehearsal vehicle to aid middle-school life

science students in the recall of specific biological concepts and facts. It functions to help

a group of students learn a song about cellular physiology. In the song “Cell’s Organelles”

(Kimmel, 1998), the text of a series of lessons about cellular physiology is reconstructed

into the lyric of a song. The resulting music mnemonic is coupled with an animation that

uses visual metaphors to illustrate concepts relating to the lyric and thereby reinforce

them. Additionally, a metaphor structured into the song and program highlights the

similarity between the simultaneity and individuality of the functions of the musical

instruments working within a musical system and the simultaneity and individuality of the

functions of the cell’s organelles and processes occurring in the living cell’s biological

system.

This report summarizes the development and evaluation of the “CellSong”

instructional program. It documents how the development of the program incorporated

the findings of contemporary empirical research concerned with musical and lyrical

facilitation of recall, as well as research dealing with the implementation and development

of other types of mnemonic teaching strategies. The song, “Cells Organelles,” was written

to explain, as thoroughly and aesthetically as possible, the targeted verbal information.

Clarifications of these compositional considerations used in crafting the song are

conveyed. The report relates how specific graphics and animations were created in order

to make the lyrical content more tangible to the targeted students. The design of the

“CellSong” computer application, which combines the song and animation with an

intuitive user interface, is described. The expert review and one-to-one (with subject

sophisticates) evaluational procedures are summarized, as are resultant changes made to

the program’s user interface. Finally, data from the small groups and field test evaluational

procedures are summarized and discussed.

Wallace (1994) concluded that a song can aid recall if the melody is repetitive and

easy to learn, the lyrics and melody agree rhythmically, the reconstruction of targeted

2

content into a lyric makes good use of rhyme, imagery and poetics, is understandable, and

the lyric is rehearsed or presented several times. It is therefore expected that when

students learn the song employed as a music mnemonic in “CellSong,” their ability to

recall the biological information contained within it will be facilitated. These concepts and

facts are made more concrete to the students through the utilization of cartoon-like two-

dimensional animation. Musical instruction is provided so that the musical aspects of the

song may be studied and attention drawn to the similarities between the musical and

cellular systems. This offers learners something familiar with which to associate and

understand the new material.

When facing new fields of knowledge, learners are faced with many new

classifications, sequences and facts. The terms “fields of knowledge” or “disciplines” refer

to knowledge systems. For example, foreign languages, branches of science, history, math,

religion, art, etc., have their own jargon or vernacular. Verbal information and concepts

only have meaning within the systems as a whole. A comprehension of the whole is a

precursor for efficient understanding individual words or concepts. Mastery is difficult

because there are too many new things to learn. For example, to effectively learn how to

change a tire, subjects should have a working knowledge of the component parts and tools

(e.g., the tire, lug nut, jack, car, etc.), know the sequences of the necessary actions (e.g.,

loosening lug nuts, jacking up car, removing tire, etc.) and an idea of the final goal or

purpose of the repair (e.g., car’s functionality is enhanced when tires are filled with air). If

learners have little or inaccurate prior knowledge with which to relate this new

knowledge, their ability to accurately recall the mechanical information is inhibited.

Bartlett’s (1932) research demonstrated that when subjects are asked to remember

new information, they actively relate it to their general world knowledge (or schemata)

that pertain to the new information. If the new information does not fit into their world

knowledge, they tend to reconstruct the information to make it fit. Researchers suggest a

general world knowledge or schema, similar to Bartlett’s schema for meaning, also exist

for a song’s musical structure (Chang & Trehub, 1977; Dowling, 1973; Dowling, 1982;

Deutsch, 1977; Gardner, Davidson, & McKernon,1981; Gfeller, 1982; Kessen, Levine, &

3

Wendrich, 1979; McKernon, 1979, Wallace 1994, Wallace & Rubin 1988, Zenatti, 1975)

and lyrical structure (Kelly & Rubin 1988, Rubin 1977 Wallace & Rubin 1988, Wallace

1994). When textual information is presented as the lyric of a song, it is better recalled

(Chazin & Neuschatz, 1990; Gfeller, 1982; Wallace, 1994; Yalch, 1991), and its memory

is more durable (Wallace, 1994, Experiments 1, 2, and 4).

Gfeller (1982; 1983) demonstrated that the interaction of both repeated musical

rehearsal of a music mnemonic and the teacher-directed modeling and cueing of the

mnemonic strategy significantly aided retention for both LD and “normal” male children

aged 9.0- 11.9. Gfeller also noted that if the musical rehearsal was not modeled, then

recall was not significantly facilitated. It has been demonstrated, when using other

mnemonic strategies with younger students, that more external support or effort to teach

students how to use the strategy is needed for effective recall facilitation. (Pressley &

Dennis-Rounds, 1980; McGivern as cited by Pressley, Levin, & Delaney, 1982, p. 66-67;

Pressley & Levin, 1978; Pressley, Samuel, Hershey, Bishop, & Dickinson, 1980; Miller,

Levin, & Pressley, 1980; as cited by Pressley, Levin & Delaney, 1982, p. 71-72)

The successes of mnemonic strategies utilizing imagery to enhance recall (i.e.,

Keyword mnemonics) have been widely demonstrated. Although the mnemonic itself is

semantically unrelated to the targeted knowledge, information stored using imagery is well

remembered. The “Reconstructive Elaboration Model” described by Scruggs and

Mastropieri (1990, p. 275) employs pictures of keyword mnemonics or acoustical

reconstructionsfor encoding unfamiliar information (see Figure 1.), symbolic pictures

(symbolic reconstruction - i. e., scales to represent justice), and literal pictures (mimetic

reconstructions) are used for familiar, concrete information. This model is used to adapt

entire domains of content to mnemonic instruction. Other types of mnemonics may also be

used when appropriate. The idea behind this model is that the more concrete a subject can

be made to a learner, the better it will be remembered.

The CellSong program is based on the “Reconstructive Elaboration Model” but

with some differences. The program utilizes animation instead of static pictures in order to

make whole concepts concrete. To make the verbal information more memorable,

4

CellSong uses a music mnemonic rather than text. This song attempts to make all the

related concepts and verbal information a cohesive whole and therefore more

understandable and memorable.

Figure 1 - Keyword Mnemonic

This example of the "Reconstructive Elaboration Model" uses a picture of a horn (the

keyword mnemonic) and a beehive (from the pegword mnemonic, "five is a hive") to lock

in the knowledge that “hornblende” is a mineral with a hardness of five on Moh’s scale.

Description of the “CellSong” Program

“CellSong” was designed for groups of English-speaking, middle school, life

science students of any ethnicity or gender. The program’s function was to facilitate the

students’ recall of the concepts and facts necessary for mastery of a cellular physiology

unit. The program runs slightly over five minutes in length. The field tests were conducted

5

using whole classes and were directed by the students’ science teachers (mTeacher,

sTeacher). Students had some previous instruction in cellular physiology.

Program Components.

The “CellSong” instructional program is comprised of a computer program that

supplies graphic animation and dynamically controls the digital musical file for the song.

“CellSong.exe” (K. Kimmel, T. J. Kimmel, T. R. Kimmel & C. Stewart, 1998) is designed

to help students learn the song “Cell’s Organelles.” It was meant to be operated by a

middle-school life science teacher to instruct a whole class using a large monitor or LCD

overhead projector. The program can also be operated by individual students in centers

using headphones. Animations are integrated with the song’s lyrics to illustrate various

organelles and cellular functions. In presenting the song to the class, it was recommended

that the instructors should model the singing behavior. It could also be made available for

students on individual work stations. In order to ensure recall facilitation, students were to

sing the biological portion of the song a minimum five times.

Technical specifications of the program are summarized in Appendix A. The

recording procedures used to record the “Cell’s Organelles” song are summarized in

Appendix B. Software models used in developing the program are discussed in Appendix

C.

Program Objectives.

As previously described, “CellSong” was designed in accordance with empirical

evidence regarding the use of a music mnemonic. It was anticipated that students would

improve their recall of the targeted information presented within the song. Visual

examples and metaphors were used to make the information contained in the mnemonic

more concrete. Accordingly, an aided recall test was employed to determine whether

students were able to recall the targeted knowledge. In order to determine how much of

the targeted knowledge was stored in long-term memory, an aided recall test was given

6

about a week after students sang the song for the last time. (See Appendix D for Aided

Recall Test.)

It was hoped that “CellSong” would facilitate broad-based learning in

mainstreamed, diversified middle-school life-science classrooms. It was expected that

programs of this type would be useful in the same instructional situations that image-based

mnemonics have proven successful (e.g., with populations that generally have difficulty

remembering or in educational disciplines where memorization of foundational knowledge

is necessary for academic success).

“Cell’s Organelles” (Kimmel, 1995) is a song composed to help middle-school

students recall aspects of cell structure and their organelles. It was written in accordance

with the Life Science Standards of Learning (SOL) for Virginia Public Schools (State

Board of Education, 1995). The specific key concepts covered by the song include:

LS. 2 - Cell structure and organelles

Cell membrane, cell wall, vacuole, mitochondrion,

endoplasmic reticulum, nucleus and chloroplast);

Similarities and differences between plant and animal

cells;

LS.3 - cellular transport (specifically diffusion and active transport);

LS.6 - energy transfer between sunlight and chlorophyll. (p. 45)

Cells structures and organelles covered by the program are introduced in the first

verse of the song as a group, “Specialized functions in living cells are performed by bodies

known as organelles.” The organelles are successively displayed on the screen (see Figure

4). The chorus of the song also deals with the organelles as a group. Lyrically it states

“Organelles work in cells. Specialties in harmony.” The program displays the organelles

going to work in a cell. Then an image of the organelles performing their individual

cellular function is presented. The animation cuts to an image of each organelle playing a

musical instrument (see Figure 5). This animation sequence was used to highlight the

simultaneity and individuality of the organelles’ functions within the biological system of

the cell. The visualization of this metaphor between a biological and a musical system is

7

also used to address two national musical SOL’s: SOL 8 “Understanding Relationships

between music …and disciplines outside the arts,” and SOL 8b “The students will apply

information learned in music to science classes.” (National Association for Music

Education, 1998).

The concept of components functioning simultaneously in order to maintain a

system occurs both in musical compositions (the instruments and voices) and a cell (the

organelles). The roles of the various musical instruments within the song function are

presented at the beginning of the song (“Notated mode”) so that the simultaneity of their

function may be discussed and compared.

This concept of simultaneity of component function is also presented musically

within the song. After several organelles or cellular functions are introduced, the vocals

are layered into counterpoint. A melody must be learned in order to facilitate the recall of

its lyric (Wallace 1994, experiments 3 and 4). As students are not be able to sing the

different parts until they master the melody, this counterpoint furnishes the teacher with an

intrinsic gauge for determining students' mastery of the melody.

The lyrics of the “Cell’s Organelles” song state “In every cell what goes in or out,

needs a cell membrane to figure it out,” which addresses the life science SOL dealing with

cell membranes. Visually, the program presents an animation that flashes both the animal

and plant cell’s membranes while arrows move into and out of the cell (see Figure 6). The

animation then drops away all the cell parts except the outlines of the cell membranes.

These outlines then morph into question marks (see Figure 7). It was presumed that

students would try to figure out what the membrane was morphing into, thus providing a

metaphor for the function of the cell membrane.

The song addresses the function of the plant’s cell wall by stating “Cellulose in the

plant cell wall keeps a plant rigid so plants can grow tall.” The animation flashes the cell

wall to show its location within the cell. The fact that animal cells do not have cell walls

was not specifically addressed by the program (see Figure 8, Frames 1 and 2). Next, the

animation displays a series of frames to demonstrate a growing plant. Rigidity is suggested

by successively building new portions of the plant on top of the younger sections (see

8

Figure 8, Frames 3-7).

The cellular function of vacuoles are addressed in the song stanza “Vacuoles are

bubble-like structures, Used for storing wastes and extra food and water.” Visually, the

program presents bubbles rising around and between the pictured animal and plant cell

while the vacuoles are flashed. Although visually apparent, the difference in the shape and

size of the animal cell’s vacuoles and the plant cell’s vacuoles is not spoken to in the

song’s lyric (see Figure 9, Note: The arrows were not present in the actual animation).

The animation then presents a garbage pail, a dinner plate and a cup of water as metaphors

for cellular wastes, food and water.

The song uses alliteration and assonance to poetically connect the concept of the

function of the mitochondrion and its “powerhouse” function, stating “In the cells of

animals, plants like flowers, the mighty mitochondria provide the power.” Visually, while

all of the cells’ mitochondria are flashing, two mitochondria are brought out of the cell and

morphed into an arm flexing the biceps muscle (see Figure 10, Frames 2 - 5). The lyric

further defines the mitochondria’s biochemical function, adding “Packaging sugar’s

energy, Into practical portions of ATP.” The animation presents a spoon coming out of a

sugar bowl. As a metaphor for sugar’s exothermic chemical nature, the sugar in both the

spoon and bowl appear to explode (see Figure 11, Frames 1 and 2). The animation then

provides a visual metaphor for the biochemical process, oxidative phosphorylation, by

cutting to a mitochondrion figure spooning smaller portions of this energy into packets

labeled ATP (see Figure 11, Frames 3-6).

Although there is no mention of ribosomes in Virginia’s middle school SOL’s at

this grade level, the program’s designer felt that a discussion of the cellular function of the

nucleus and endoplasmic reticulum would be incomplete without including them.

Additionally, ribosomes were discussed in all the middle school life science textbooks

reviewed by the designer. The function of ribosomes is presented lyrically, “The ribosome

is where the protein’s made, Following directions from the DNA.” The animation flashes

the ribosomes to indicate their location and relative size within the cell. At the same time,

two of the ribosomes are enlarged and brought to the center of the screen (see Figure 12,

9

Frames 1 - 6). The enlarged ribosomes are then shown stringing together balls

(representing amino acids) while viewing a strand of messenger RNA (see Figure 12,

Frames 7 - 9). This animation provides a visual metaphor for the ribosomes role in protein

synthesis.

The song’s lyric states the function of the endoplasmic reticulum: “The

endoplasmic reticulum, Gives the nucleus a network for communication.” The animation

again flashes the organelle. In the next series of frames, the animal cell’s endoplasmic

reticulum is enlarged and the plant and animal cells in the background disappear (see

Figure 13, Frames 1 - 6). Finally, a nucleus is portrayed speaking to two ribosomes on a

phone system where the endoplasmic reticulum is the connecting wire network (see Figure

13, Frame 7).

The program does not go into the nucleus’ role in cellular reproduction;

consequently, it is limited to covering the nucleus’ role in protein synthesis. The song’s

lyric states “Chromatin in the nucleus, Holds the plans for protein synthesis.” Visually, the

chromatin in the nucleus is flashed (see Figure 14, Frame 1). The animation then cuts to a

depiction of two DNA molecules. This was structured to ensure students could

understand that DNA, stored in the nucleus of a cell, holds the plans for protein synthesis.

This segment of the program, coupled with the segments dealing with the roles of the

endoplasmic reticulum and ribosomes, was developed to help the students form a fairly

comprehensive conception about the cellular process of protein production.

The lyric describes the functions of chloroplasts and chlorophyll within a plant cell

without delving into biochemistry. It states, “Chloroplasts in a green plant cell, Capture

solar energy with Chlorophyll.” The display again flashes the organelle. The animation

cuts to a chloroplast character, holding a butterfly net, and chasing and capturing a ray of

sunlight. The butterfly net was intended to represent the function of the chemical

compound chlorophyll (see Figure 15). The program does not directly state that animal

cells do not have chloroplasts nor does it discuss the process of discuss photosynthesis.

Diffusion and active transport are covered using a flat tire as a visual metaphor.

The lyrics state “ Concentrations move from high to low, diffusion won’t need energy to

10

make it flow.” Visually, a dense concentration of carbon dioxide molecules is shown in the

center of the screen, surrounded by a semi-permeable membrane represented by a dotted

line. Arrows move and point to the outside of the membrane, representing the direction of

the concentration gradient. Then the animation shows a tire losing air (see Figure 16).

Next, to describe active transport, the lyric states, “When concentrations move from low

to high, They’re actively transported to the higher supply.” The same image of the carbon

dioxide molecules and semi-permeable membrane is used; however, the arrows move and

point in the opposite direction, into the area of higher concentration. The same image of

the flat tire is shown with a pump inflating the tire (see Figure 17). It was hoped that

students would infer that it requires energy to move molecules across a semi-permeable

against a concentration gradient.

Interface.

Eight buttons, located at the top of the screen, allow teachers to manipulate the

program (see Figure 2.). The “Loop” button causes the program to repeat musical phrases

(usually four measures long). Clicking this button brings up a selection list for zero, one,

two, three or an infinite number of loops. (See Figure 2.) A loop count of “1,” means that

a selection will be repeated twice or looped once. The “Skip Back,” “Skip Forward,”

“Rewind,” and “Go To” buttons override a loop selection but will not effect the “Loop”

button’s counting variable. The “Rewind,” “Notation” and Denotation” buttons all re-

initialize the “Loop” button’s counting variable.

The “Denotation” button (see Figure 2) causes the program to remove the musical

notation and display a textual version (see Figure 4). It also toggles with the “Notation”

button, re-displaying the musical notation. In the “Denotated Mode,” the sections of the

song that deal with harmony and rhythm are not available to the user. In the “Notation

Mode,” the “Rewind” button (see Figures 2) returns to the beginning of the musical aspect

of the program (see Figures 3). In the “Denotated Mode,” the button returns the user to

the beginning of the biological portion of the song (see top of Figure 3).

11

The “Stop” button (see Figure 2

1

) pauses the animation and song. When clicked it

toggles to the “Play” button. The “Play button” may then be clicked to restart the

program. The “Stop” button allows teachers to show specific stills pictures within the

animation. The “Skip Back” button returns to the beginning of the musical section that

was just played. The “Skip Forward” skips to the beginning of the next section.

The "Help" button (see Figure 2) displays text that describes all the known issues

associated with using the program. The user interface at the top of the screen allows users

to click on a button for a textual description of its the functionality. A button at the

bottom of the screen allows users to return to the program.

The “Go to” button (see Figure 2) causes the program to go to a specific part of

the song. Clicking the button brings up the selection list. The available selections are

“Harmony,” “Rhythm,” “First Verse,” “Second Verse,” “Third Verse” and “Cancel.” In

the “Denotated Mode,” the selections that deal with harmony and rhythm are deactivated.

Clicking on the selection list allows the user to go to the selected part of the program (see

Figure 10 and 16).

After students have learned the “Cell’s Organelle’s” song (by way of the

“CellSong” program), it was predicted that they would be better able to recall the

biological nomenclature and key concepts contained within it. This facilitation of recall

should enable students to better employ this knowledge in more complex cognitive tasks.

The song was written using a simple melodic, rhythmic and harmonic structure. There

were no interval jumps larger than a major third. The song has a single octave range. The

designer made efforts to incorporate some of the National Standards of Learning for

music (NAFME, 1998) into the program (see Appendix L). All of music had been notated

to encourage reading. The students were encouraged to sing in three part harmony ( see

Figure 18). The program’s opening “rap” and animation discusses the key signature, time

signature, chordal progression. The song was put a half-step below what would be

considered the normal vocal range of sixth-grade students in order to encourage beginning

students who played a little guitar or electric bass to play along with the program (It is

1

Note: All figures are located at the end of the chapter in which they are cited

12

easier to play in the key of “E” than the key of “F” on a guitar or bass). None of the

students in either location had difficulty singing the low notes in tune. The designer

recognized that if the program were delivered by a music teacher, vocal issues such as

singing posture, breathing skills, breath support, enunciation, vocal placement, etc., would

be a focus of the lesson.

13

Figure 2 - User Interface

14

Figure 3 - Time Signature

15

Figure 4 - Organelles I

16

Figure 5 - Organelles II

17

Figure 6 - Cell Membrane I

18

Figure 7 Cell Membrane 2

19

Figure 8 - Cell Wall

20

Figure 9 - Vacuoles

21

Figure 10 -Mitochondrion I

22

Figure 11 - Mitochondrion II

23

Figure 12 - Ribosome

24

Figure 13 Endoplasmic Reticulum

25

Figure 14 - Chromatin

26

Figure 15 - Chloroplasts

27

Figure 16 - Diffusion

28

Figure 17 - Active Transport

29

Figure 18 -Three Part Harmony

30

Chapter 2. Evaluation Methods

Initially, the “CellSong” CAI program was reviewed by instructional design,

subject matter and teaching experts and educational psychologists. The program was then

reviewed by subject sophisticates in a one-to-one procedure. Finally, the program was

field tested with several groups of middle school students. The purposes, participants,

procedures and results for each of the formative evaluations were distinct. They occurred

in different locations and involved different people. These steps were self-inclusive; each

step of the formative evaluational led to conclusions that were acted upon before the next

step was initiated. To avoid confusion, each procedure will be described and discussed in

the chronological order in which it took place. A summative discussion follows.

Expert Review - Participants/Procedures

Scholarly.

Seven faculty members from the Department of Teaching and Learning at Virginia

Tech, one faculty member from the Music Department (also at Virginia Tech) and one

independent instructional designer provided the initial formative evaluation of the

“CellSong” program. Their collective areas of expertise include cognitive and behavioral

educational psychology, instructional systems design, middle school music curriculum,

middle school science curriculum, and instructional program evaluation. These expert

evaluations led the designer to make several changes in the program as noted.

Before the “CellSong” program was developed, the song “Cell’s Organelles” was

presented to a science curriculum and the music curriculum expert. The song was initially

presented to the music curriculum expert as adjunct to a middle school music curriculum.

The following year, the designer presented a cassette of “Cell’s Organelles” with eight

other songs to one of the science curriculum experts at Virginia Tech.

After a working model of the program was developed, it was presented to two

members of the faculty from the Department of Teaching and Learning. Shortly afterwards

it was presented to two more faculty members along with the music curriculum expert.

The designer then individually demonstrated the program to the independent instructional

31

designer and the remaining faculty member. Comments regarding the potential efficacy of

the song were elicited and constructive feedback was noted.

Administrative.

Following the incorporation of the suggested change in the program’s design, the

evaluational team, composed of the developer, Karl Kimmel, and his associate, Teresa

Kimmel, secured approval from Virginia Tech’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) to

perform an investigation utilizing human subjects. (IRB forms are included in Appendix

E.) The evaluation team then presented the program to three district superintendents and

their curriculum specialists from two different rural counties (populations 4,800 and

13,176) and one larger county (population 74,000). The administrators were all enthused

by the program. When asked, none of the superintendents or curriculum specialists offered

any suggestions for ways to improve the program. The small-town assistant

superintendent in charge of research projects warned that his system would not allow the

program to be evaluated in their schools if it appeared the testing was oriented more

toward “research” than “education.” Each district’s administrator suggested a contact

person or a prospective teacher to contact within a specific school. At this point, the

evaluational team went to the schools to secured permission to approach the teachers or

contact person from each individual school’s principal.

The Trenches.

A colleague of the design team established a program with a large middle school to

help train teachers evaluate educational software. The middle school had a sixth grade

class of about 600 students. The contact person there was the Director of Gifted

education. (The large middle school was located in the same district as the small town

superintendent.) The colleague invited “CellSong’s” evaluational team to meet the

director.

After viewing the program, the director set up meetings with a biology teacher, a

music teacher and five seventh grade students. At the second meeting with the director,

32

she asked the evaluation team to play the program for the eight Special Education and

Gifted teachers who were already in her office. The evaluation team discussed the

program with the teachers and recorded their criticisms. On March 5, 1998, the director

arranged for the evaluation team to meet with a science and music teacher in her office.

The team presented the program to the teachers and recorded the conversation on tape

(see Appendix F for the transcript of the dialog).

The evaluation team presented the program to five seventh grade students in the

director’s office. Each student was shown the program and interviewed individually in the

director’s small office while their biology class completed an assignment. The students

interviewed had all covered the biological material covered in the song (a subject-

sophisticates review). They were presented first with a sung (musical) version of the

program and then a spoken (non-musical) version of the program. The evaluator observed

the students as they watched the two versions of the program. In this one-on-one review

the students were then asked a series of questions. The results were recorded by the

evaluator and are displayed in Appendix G by item.

Results - Expert Review

Scholastic.

Two experts agreed that the displayed musical notation might distract some

learners from the biology curriculum objectives. One expert felt that the notation might

facilitate other types of learning. In response, the designer of the program added a button

that toggled text with a musically-notated display (see Figures 2 and 4).

The two content experts (and all the biology teachers) questioned during the

evaluation agreed that the content was accurate, complete, up-to-date and if learned

would help learners recall the requisite information. The science curriculum expert at

Virginia Tech stated in regard to the song, “Cell’s Organelles,” “… this song is about the

parts of the cell, but many concepts can be drawn from it, and it could be used in the

classroom as a support for concept development. It is appropriate at the 5th-7th grade

level, in my opinion.” (Bentley, 1997)

33

Trenches.

Although the Director of Gifted education was enthusiastic about the program, she

requested that several changes made in the evaluational instruments. As a result, the

directions of the recall test were modified so that students were immediately informed that

the test’s purpose was to evaluate the program’s success, not the students’. The

underlined blanks for answers were uniformly sized (see Appendix D - Aided Recall Test).

The interviews with eight Special Education and gifted teachers pointed to the need for

developing a Macintosh version of the program. This need was confirmed in subsequent

interviews with science, music and Special Education teachers as well as a rural

elementary school librarian.

The science teacher reported that the program would be useful for her class and

requested a copy of the recall test. The music teacher was not as enthused about using the

program in her class. However, she mentioned that the program addressed the National

Standards of Learning for Music that students sing music written in two and three parts

(NAFME, 1998).

The seventh grade students (subject-sophisticates) appeared to be interested in the

presentation as evidenced by their visual focusing on the activity on the computer monitor.

The director later described these five students interviewed as being of average to gifted

ability. One student was described by the director as being mildly learning disabled though

highly intelligent. He was the only student to glance away from the computer’s screen

while the programs ran. The lack of focus occurred twice and only for a moment during

the time the two programs ran -- a little over ten minutes.

The students felt that the content of the “CellSong” musical program would help

them remember the biological material better. Two of the students thought that the non-

musical program was easier to understand but harder to remember. One suggested that if

he was not already familiar with the material, he would have liked to see the non-musical

version before the musical one. Students requested that the notated version be displayed

for at least the first three to five presentations if they were expected to learn to sing the

34

song. They agreed that the song would be easier to learn with the notation but “after a

while it would get in the way.”

Small Group/Field Test Evaluation

Participants.

Fifty students from two rural southern schools, Location M and Location S,

participated in the field study/small group evaluation. Subjects from Location M consisted

of the students of a single fifth grade class from a very small rural elementary school (n =

12). The science teacher at Location M (mTeacher) stated that the six male and eight

female students ranged from slightly below average to gifted with respect to academic

ability. There was another fifth grade class in the school of unknown size that was made

up of students of low ability. Two female students were absent for the delayed recall test

because they were being recognized in a special honors ceremony off the schools'

premises. All six male students and six female students filled out the attitude survey.

Location S consisted of the sixth grade life science classes from a larger southern

rural elementary school. The teacher at Location S (sTeacher) stated that the twenty four

male and fourteen female students (n = 38) were a “nice heterogeneous grouping.” The

students ranged from very low to gifted, with respect to academic ability. All 38 students

completed the aided recall test immediately after hearing the song for the fifth time. Eight

males and six females from Location S filled out the attitudinal survey. Eight males and

five female took the delayed retest of the original recall test. The teacher determined the

sample of students based on whether or not the student had returned the Internal Review

Board (IRB) permission slips at that point. The teacher stated that the sample represented

a good mix of the academic ability of the whole class.

The science teachers at both schools were men in their late fifties. Each had more

than ten years experience teaching middle school life science classes. Their teaching ability

was highly regarded by both their district administrations. They both had established

reputations for quickly mastering and readily utilizing innovative and experimental teaching

methods. Prior to teaching at the elementary school, the science teacher at Location M

35

worked for seven years as a research biologist studying sheep reproduction. Additionally, he

is musically talented and had considered pursuing a musical career before entering graduate

school. He has a strong baritone voice and sings well. In contrast, the teacher at Location S

stated that he was not musical and would not sing in public.

Procedures

Two questionnaires were developed to ascertain the teachers’ and students’ attitudes

towards the program. An 11-item questionnaire (see Appendix H) was developed to

determine the teachers’ attitudes regarding the implementation, usability, and appropriate

price for the program. A 40-item questionnaire (see Appendix I) was developed to determine

the students’ attitudes regarding various aspects of the program, their previous musical

experience, and the relative novelty of the teaching strategy. A 16-item aided recall test (see

Appendix D) was developed to determine whether students were able to recall the targeted

verbal information. The students’ regular life science teachers were expected to introduce

and operate the program throughout the evaluation. Afterwards, these teachers were to

administer the evaluational instruments. The evaluation team planned to be present

throughout the evaluation. Constant changes in the classes’ schedule associated with the end

of the school year made this impossible. The team stayed in contact with the teachers by way

of phone calls, email and visits to the sites.

During the class session immediately before exposing the students to the program,

the teachers spent approximately 45 minutes familiarizing students with the various parts

of the cell and assigned textbook readings for homework (see Appendix F). The teachers

contacted the evaluation team each time they ran the program, either by email or

telephone. One of the team members followed up with a telephone call or a personal visit

to find out what happened.

Location S had a media specialist/librarian who set up the program to run on a

333Mhz Pentium computer attached to a 42 inch Sony monitor for the first three

showings. The program was presented to the whole sixth grade class (n = 38). The

students were told that they should sing along with the program but the teachers present

36

neither modeled the behavior nor required it. The students heard the program three times.

At this point, only some of the students sang along with the program.

The teacher at Location S found that some male students became unruly during

Thursday’s large group presentation and reduced the effectiveness the program. He

decided to present the program in smaller, more controllable groups. The following

Tuesday, the students returned to their normal life science classes for their fourth and fifth

exposure to the program. Immediately after their fifth exposure they were asked to

respond to the aided recall test. Appendix D includes all the items presented on the recall

test. Seven days later, the fourteen students who had brought in the signed IRB permission

slips filled out the attitude survey and took the same aided recall test (test-retest).

In the three districts approached, the evaluational team installed the “CellSong”

program on a single computer and explained its purpose. The functionality of the control

buttons was demonstrated and teachers' questions were answered. The evaluation team

then attempted to persuade the teachers to operate the controls themselves. Generally, the

teachers, though impressed with the program, were uncomfortable operating the controls

on their own and waited until the team left before experimenting.

The teacher at Location M, was the only classroom teacher that did not need to be

coaxed into working the program by himself. His classroom had a new 333Mhz Gateway

2000 Pentium Computer with a 17 inch monitor that he set up himself (except for the

connection to the Local Area Network). Although he seemed to lack a good deal of basic

knowledge of the Windows 95 Operating System, mTeacher had a good feel for the

computer’s capabilities. He was comfortable playing with it, using or adding peripherals

(even when it meant opening the up the case and adding a PCI card), or experimenting

with new educational uses for the computer. He was the only classroom teacher the team

encountered who allowed students to freely access a computer; essentially unrestricted

before and after class.

Location M used block scheduling in which each class session lasted for an hour

and a half, meeting alternately on Monday, Wednesday and Friday of one week and

Tuesday/Thursday of the next. Along with 45 minutes spent introducing the biological

37

information, mTeacher spent 15 minutes introducing the musical symbols to the students

before exposing them to the program. At the beginning of next class session, he

introduced the program to the class. Sitting slightly diagonal to the monitor, with his class

gathered round, mTeacher a