2012-2013Student Assessment & Performance Data

Mr. Kasey Chitmon - BandLamar High School

Houston ISD

SmartMusic Assessments: Connemara SketchesTexas UIL Music Difficulty Level: Grade 2

(PL-2)

Cycle 4 Cycle 5

Connemara Sketches Mvt. 1 - 84.16 Connemara Sketches Mvt. 1 - 93.91

Connemara Sketches Mvt. 2 - 77.91 Connemara Sketches Mvt. 2 - 91.86

Connemara Sketches Mvt. 3 - 83.19 Connemara Sketches Mvt. 3 - 88.52

• Mvt. 1: 11.6% increase of class average from cycle 4 to cycle 5.• Mvt. 2: 17.9% increase of class average from cycle 4 to cycle 5.• Mvt. 3: 6.4% increase of class average from cycle 4 to cycle 5.

Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

84.16%

77.91%

83.19%

93.91%

91.86%

88.52%

Connemara Sketches Mvt. 1

Connemara Sketches Mvt. 2

Connemara Sketches Mvt. 3

SmartMusic Assessments: Connemara Sketches Mvt. 1Texas UIL Music Difficulty Level: Grade 2

(PL-2)

Grading Scale Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0 or Incomplete 3 14

1 - 69 F 2 0

70 - 74 D 3 1

75-79 C 8 0

80 - 89 B 11 2

90 - 100 A 12 21

Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

0 or INC

1-69 (F)

70-74 (D)

75-79 (C)

80-89 (B)

90-100 (A)

SmartMusic Assessments: Connemara Sketches Mvt. 2Texas UIL Music Difficulty Level: Grade 2

(PL-2)

Grading Scale Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0 or Incomplete F 2 9

1 - 69 F 3 0

70 - 74 D 8 0

75-79 C 9 0

80 - 89 B 3 6

90 - 100 A 10 17

* Percussionist (5 students) did not play (tacet) during this movement and their grades are not included in the 0 or INC category.

Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

0 or INC *

1-69 (F)

70-74 (D)

75-79 (C)

80-89 (B)

90-100 (A)

SmartMusic Assessments: Connemara Sketches Mvt. 3Texas UIL Music Difficulty Level: Grade 2

(PL-2)

Grading Scale Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0 or Incomplete F 14 14

1 - 69 F 2 1

70 - 74 D 1 1

75-79 C 1 3

80 - 89 B 15 3

90 - 100 A 7 15

Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0 3 6 9 12 15

0 or INC

1-69 (F)

70-74 (D)

75-79 (C)

80-89 (B)

90-100 (A)

SmartMusic Assessments: In the Shining of the StarsTexas UIL Music Difficulty Level: Grade 3

(PL-2)

Cycle 4 Cycle 5

In the Shining of the Stars - 82.75 In the Shining of the Stars - 91.63

• 10.73% increase of class average from cycle 4 to cycle 5.

Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0.81 0.838 0.865 0.893 0.92

82.8%

91.63%

In the Shining of the Stars

SmartMusic Assessments: In the Shining of the Stars Averages BreakdownTexas UIL Music Difficulty Level: Grade 3

(PL-2)

Grading Scale Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0 or Incomplete F 14 17

1 - 69 F 1 0

70 - 74 D 1 1

75-79 C 2 0

80 - 89 B 13 6

90 - 100 A 9 15

Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0 4 8 12 16 20

0 or INC

1-69 (F)

70-74 (D)

75-79 (C)

80-89 (B)

90-100 (A)

SmartMusic Assessments: Marching SongTexas UIL Music Difficulty Level: Grade 2 (Director’s Choice Selection)

(PL-2)

Cycle 4 Cycle 5

Marching Song - 83.33 Marching Song - 84.96

• 1.95% increase of class average from cycle 4 to cycle 5.

Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0.82 0.828 0.835 0.843 0.85

83.3%

84.96%

Marching Song

SmartMusic Assessments: Marching Song Averages BreakdownTexas UIL Music Difficulty Level: Grade 2 (Director’s Choice Selection)

(PL-2)

Grading Scale Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0 or Incomplete F 7 10

1 - 69 F 0 5

70 - 74 D 5 0

75-79 C 5 0

80 - 89 B 18 3

90 - 100 A 4 21

Cycle 4 Cycle 5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

0 or INC

1-69 (F)

70-74 (D)

75-79 (C)

80-89 (B)

90-100 (A)

Lamar High School Band UIL Ratings by Year2010 - 2013

(PL-2)

Marching Band Symphonic Winds Prepared

Symphonic WindsSight Reading

2010

2011

2012

2013

3 / 2 / 2 -- --

2 / 2 / 2 3 / 3 / 3 2 / 2 / 2

1 / 2 / 2 3 / 3 / 3 2 / 4 / 4Information Not Available

until Fall 20132 / 2 / 2 1 / 2 / 3

* Does not include Wind Ensemble ratings as Mr. Chitmon is not the primary conductor of the ensemble.

*The Non-Varsity band did not attend UIL prior to Spring 2011.

An adjudicator who judged the group on stage in 2012 and judged sight-reading in 2013 had the opportunity to listen to the 2013 stage performance. He commented numerous times on how the band had grown in maturity of individual sounds, playing together, improvements in balance & blend, technique, and the overall improvement of the ensemble sound.

Number of Failing Band Students vs. Passing Band Students Per Grading CycleCycles 1 - 5

(End of Cycle grading results, includes Incomplete grades as failing)

• Start of Cycle 1: All students promoted to the next grade level are eligible.• Start of Cycle 2: 22.5% of band students are ineligible due to grades.• Start of Cycle 3: 28.8% of band students are ineligible due to grades.• Start of Cycle 4: 33.75% of band student are ineligible due to grades.• Start of Cycle 5: 20% of band students are ineligible due to grades.• Start of Cycle 6: 24.8% of band students are ineligible due to grades.

2012-13 Plan of Action to Increase Student Academic Achievement:

Action: Require tutorials for those students who failed at least one class on the cycle 1 progress report and any subsequent classes failed at any other reporting period.

Outcome: On average, the same number of students failed each cycle.

Possible Reasons: The students were made aware of the tutorial requirement, but there was no real plan for student accountability put in place.

Lessons Learned: Reevaluation and/or further planning is needed to improve student academic achievement in all classes. Student and parent input may produce additional methods to decrease student class failures, increase overall eligibility, resulting in continued opportunities to participate/perform with the band

Failing Passing

0

40

80

1823 27

16 19

62 57 53 64 61

Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5

Scientific Evidence of Higher-Level Thinking Skills Displayed On A Daily Basis in Band (I-4)

Playing music: There are few activities that require more of the brain than playing music. It uses complex feedback systems that take in information, such as pitch and melody, through the auditory cortex (1), and allow the performer to adjust his playing. The visual cortex (2) is activated by reading — or even imagining — a score; the parietal lobe (3) is involved in a number of processes, including computation of finger position; the motor cortex (4) helps control body movements; the sensory cortex (5) is stimulated with each touch of the instrument; the premotor area (6) remains somewhat mysterious but somehow helps perform movements in the correct order and time; the frontal lobe (7) plans and coordinates the overall activity; and the cerebellum (8) helps create smooth, integrated movements

Scientific Evidence of Higher-Level Thinking Skills Displayed On A Daily Basis in Band(I-4)

Brain PET scan research provides support for higher-level learning occurring in the performing ensemble classroom.

PL-1

Annual Objectives

• Students in the Lamar Wind and Percussion Studies Program will continually seek to achieve a superior level of performance through rehearsals, individual practice and active class participation.

• Students will strive to become better musicians on both an individual level and as an ensemble.

At the close of each year, all band students reflect and evaluate on the events of the year. As a group, the students discuss with the directors, as well as their peers what they feel were their greatest and most significant accomplishments. The students also discuss what they, both as an individual and a group, could have done to augment the level of achievement for the year. Discussions are also conducted for the expectations and goals for the following year in regards to marching band, individual practice and growth, and concert band.

PL-2

SmartMusic assessment data is used immediately after marching band to begin assessing the student’s sight-reading levels, as well as concert music grade levels. Throughout the year, SmartMusic assessment data is used to track student growth and drive weekly lesson plans.

Using SmartMusic, students are instantaneously able to track their own progress. The students are given grade expectations for each assessment task given, and most work to meet those expectations on their own. However, some students are just unable to meet the grading requirements of the SmartMusic program and will ask for a “more personalized” assessment by Mr. Chitmon. As all students do not have the same computers, internet speeds, etc. the program will often experience “lags” in processing the real-time student playing assessments causing the program to grade the students ineffectively. (This is not a regular issue with the SmartMusic program, and affects only a small number of students).

Further student growth measures will be explored for 2013-2014 which will include evaluating the progress of individual student tone quality, technique, sight-reading ability, and rhythmic knowledge.

PR-7

2012-13 School Year:

• 84 emails sent to parents regarding information about upcoming events, grading deadlines, and upcoming assignments.

• 63 emails sent to parents regarding their student’s individual grade(s). Not limited to only band grades.

• Various parent conversations about grades and/or student progress while at football games, concerts, after school meetings, etc.

• Immediate parent communication with five parents with whom their students received a disciplinary referral during the 2012-13 school year. Three of the five incidents required immediate action thus resulting in parent communication taking place after the student was sent to the office.