A case study of music instruction according to E. Willems’ pedagogy in children with intellectual disabilities: Its impacts on music abilities and language skills

Abstract

The aim of this case study was to explore the effects of music instruction according to the E. Willems teaching method on the music abilities and language skills in students with intellectual disabilities (ID). Eight students with ID (average age 9.64 years) participated in the study. They attended 35 music lessons during the school year. Each lesson included tasks for developing four domains: auditory perception, rhythm, singing songs and natural body movement. We developed the tasks for measuring music abilities and language skills and applied them three times: before the music training, immediately after the training and in delayed measurement 10 months after the training. Results showed a significant improvement in the music abilities in rhythm between the first and the second measurements. The improvements between the first two measurements were also found in language skills, in following instructions and in discrimination and repetition of phonemes in pairs. The research method used does not allow for the generalization of results, but it is the first step in empirical research into the effects of music instruction according to the principles of E. Willems’ pedagogy in children with ID.

Keywords

E. Willems intellectual disabilities music abilities music instruction language skills

The purpose of our study was to find the possible effects of music education according to the principles of the E. Willems teaching method on the music abilities and language skills in students with intellectual disabilities (ID). The main goals of the E. Willems approach, especially with regard to an introduction to music, are as follows: providing students with a contact with music, stimulating their positive attitudes toward music, creating the conditions for optimal music development regardless of the children’s abilities, and promoting their overall development (Tomac Calligaris 2004, 2010). He did not develop his music educational system particularly for children with special needs, but it is possibly suitable for them since the children’s developmental characteristics are always considered and teaching always proceeds from concrete music experience that is later upgraded with more demanding contents.

There is a long tradition of research into the impact of music on different cognitive processes and skills. The development of research technology and neuropsychology enables a more critical assessment of the impacts that systematic engagement with music and music instruction could have (Costa-Giomi, 2015; Hallam, 2010). Research has shown that a lasting engagement with music causes changes that can be observed at the neurological and behavioral levels. Hyde and co-workers (Hyde et al., 2009) found structural brain changes in 6-year-old students who received 15 months of keyboard instruction compared with students who only participated in music classes in school. These changes were also correlated with changes in melodic and rhythmic discrimination skills. Moreno and co-workers (Moreno et al., 2009) compared the impact of 6 months’ musical or painting training in 8-year-old students. The results of the music training showed in the changes in neurophysiological measure (event-related potentials) and in improved discrimination of small pitch variations at the end of musical phrases.

Engagement in music is also related to the transfer of these abilities, especially in the field of language (Herrera, Lorenzo, Defior, Fernandez-Smith, & Costa-Giomi, 2011; Moreno et al., 2009; Piro & Ortiz, 2009). Therefore, our study focused on the impact of music instruction on the students’ music abilities and some language skills. Previous research also found short-term effects immediately after the training, which were not present in delayed measurements (Costa-Giomi, 1999; Rauscher & Hinton, 2011), thus we were also interested in the effects of training after a long period. The majority of research on the effects of music education on cognitive processes also included students from the normative population (Anvari, Trainor, Woodside, & Levy, 2002; Gordon, Jacobs, Schuele, & McAuley, 2015; Herrera et al., 2011; Piro & Ortiz, 2009). In order to extend our knowledge to other populations, we decided to include a specific group of students in the study, namely students with ID.

The E. Willems approach to music education

In the lessons, the methodological approach of Edgar Willems (1890–1978), a Belgian music teacher who developed his teaching method by connecting music, humans, and the environment, was used. He connected the physiological, emotional and cognitive level of an individual with rhythm, melody, and harmony (Tomac Calligaris, 2010) and considered music an important value that should be available to every individual. Children should be correctly guided in the development of their music interest, sensibility, skills, and, finally, in their competencies to participate in different musical activities from a very early age. Willems based his musical education approach on four levels (Tomac Calligaris, 2004, 2010). Musical introduction—first level; musical introduction—second level; musical introduction and preparation for solfeggio and instrument—third level; and “live” solfeggio and instrument learning—fourth level: these are the levels through which students go and the speed of progression depends on the age, ability and motivation of students (see also Appendix). The objective of the first level is to spark the student’s interest in music and expose them to different musical experiences. The child is not learning the music, but actually living it. The second level is similar to the first, with the broadening of musical knowledge, experiences and graphic representation of musical elements. The third level prepares the student for studying solfeggio and instrument. It familiarizes them with the musical concepts such as tonal height, scale degrees, rhythmic values, and notation systems. The attention is focused on body coordination and precision of movement, which are important in learning to play an instrument. The fourth level includes the beginning of the reading and writing of music (use of notation), as well as the studying of instrument playing (Tomac Calligaris, 2010).

E. Willems’ approach to music education provides students with ID with a large amount of quality and enjoyable music experiences and opportunities for developing their potential, regardless of their level. In this approach, students do not need to know and use notation, which is usually a much too complicated symbolic system for students with ID. In our study, we used the first stage of music introduction, which does not include any reading or writing of notes.

Development and training of music abilities

An individual’s musical abilities develop based on their genetic predispositions and environmental influences, especially their exposure to various experiences with music. Altenmüller (2001, pp. 274) stressed that an individual’s “biography of auditory learning,” which is the sum of their musical experiences, reflects in the processing of music information in their brain. Recent longitudinal neuropsychological research into the development of musical abilities in early and middle childhood (Putkinen, Tervaniemi, Saarikivi, & Huotilainen, 2015) shows the importance of early experiences (e.g., with singing or playing simple instruments) due to the great plasticity of the neurological system at this age. The most important factor is the exposure to various, rich music experiences, and not just learning to play an instrument (Pearce & Christensen, 2012). Research into children in late childhood (Smolej Fritz, 2000) also confirms that the students’ experiences are related to the development of their musical abilities. She found that the development of pitch discrimination and retention of short melodic and rhythmic sequences is faster and completed at a higher level in students who attend music school than in those who do not.

The pioneers of musical ability research Bentley (1966) and Seashore (1967) speak of basic abilities that include perception of key sound attributes (pitch, colour, volume) and rhythmic abilities. Rhythm is, according to Willems (2012), the most physical dimension of music, because a human body functions with variety of internal rhythms, e.g., breathing, heart pulse, and walking rhythm. Therefore, the body rhythms have to be connected with the musical rhythm. Through this connection, the feeling for rhythm and meter is stronger (Tomac Calligaris, 2010). At the beginning of the introduction to music, a child does not have a metric structure, their rhythm is irregular. Through introduction to various rhythmical activities, regularity increases to the point at which they can experience, perform and analyze rhythmical patterns of musical works. The second important aspect represents the auditory development. According to Willems (2012), there are three important domains in auditory development: sensory, affective, and intellectual. Sensory development refers to listening, recognizing, and reproducing different sound dimensions (color, pitch, duration and movement). Auditory affectivity is connected to melodic and harmonic elements and their emotive charge. Auditory intelligence “transcends the physical and effective” (Willems, 2012, p. 54) and is connected to awareness, defining, and understanding all experienced elements in music. Willems’ approach differs mostly from other approaches by not allowing the use of non-musical elements in teaching. By non-musical elements, Willems (2012) means different gestures, colors, and pictures that teachers use to teach students particular musical elements (e.g., red for major, blue for minor or a bird with a tail for a whole note, and a bird without a tail for a half note). Such associations limit the students’ experience and understanding of music. There are also good associations, for example the connection between the tone movement and the hand movement, because the high–low tone localization is a reality in sound space.

Music training and language skills development

Engagement with music is a way to improve the abilities of listening in students in the normative population and in students with special needs (Geritty, Hourigan, & Horton, 2013; Hallam, 2010). A significant part of this learning process is implicit; it is carried out through experiences that is accumulated while listening to and performing music, and during language experiences. Music and language processing includes some common neurological mechanisms which can affect each other. Engagement with music can influence perceptual abilities (pitch, rhythm, and melody discrimination) that are also important in recognizing sounds and language patterns (Hallam, 2010). The abilities to discriminate small differences in the pitch, loudness, tempo, and rhythm patterns of spoken language, i.e., prosody, are further related to reading ability (Hansen & Milligan, 2012). The transfer of effects of music instruction was also found in executive functions. In a longitudinal study, Putkinen and his co-workers (2015) found faster maturation in attention control in 11 to 13-year-old children who were included in music instruction compared with students who were not.

The research on the relationship between music and language skills was correlational at first. Anvari and co-workers (2002) found relationships between music abilities, phonological awareness and early reading in 4- and 5-year-old children. According to the authors, this finding could imply that music and reading were related through the same perceptual and cognitive mechanisms. The abilities for analysis of time sequences included in discrimination of rhythms and melodies in music as well as in speech might be one of them.

The relationships between music abilities and phonological awareness were also found by Božič, Habe and Jerman (2007) in a sample of 5- and 6-year-old children. They found a positive correlation between pitch recognition and recognition of the first and the last phoneme in the word, as well as between recognition of rhythmic patterns and connecting phonemes into words. Melodic patterns recognition and sounds recognition are both based on the recognition of pitch, duration, and timbre of sounds or phonemes. Recognition of rhythmic patterns and connecting phonemes and syllables into words are both related to the arrangement of elements in time and space.

Gordon and co-workers (2015) found relationships between rhythmic abilities, syntax complexity in speech, and abilities of grammatical transformations in 6-year-old children. Children able to differentiate small variations in rhythms might be more sensitive to voice prosody that marks the elements in syntax. This might increase their attention to the accordance of stressed syllables.

A step further in confirming the causal relationships between promoting musical abilities and auditory abilities important for reading was made with experiments and quasi experiments. Gromko (2005) confirmed the impact of music lessons on the phonemic awareness and speed of phonemic segmentation in 4-year-old children. In the 4-month program, children learned songs for 30 minutes a week, accompanied them with movement, and played simple instruments. Students who had music lessons performed significantly better in the phonological segmentation than students who had not had lessons. The research thus confirmed the hypothesis of the transfer of musical training to a similar skill, i.e., faster naming of phonemes in words.

Piro and Ortiz (2009) compared 5- to 7-year-old students who had 3 years of piano lessons with students who did not have any music education. The lessons were directed toward pitch detection, repetition of melodies, timbre, rhythm, and tonal pattern differentiation. Results showed a significantly higher development of vocabulary and the ability to recognize word sequences. Authors explained these by the enrichment of the curriculum in the period of great neuroplasticity in the students’ development.

Furthermore, Herrara and co-workers (2011) confirmed the impact of music training on the phonological awareness of final phonemes in the word and the speed of naming in 4.5-year-old students. They were assigned to three conditions: a control group and two experimental groups. In one experimental group, they were included in the 8-week-long phonological training, while in the other they were included in a phonological training accompanied with music activities. Both types of training improved the students’ phonological abilities in comparison with the control group, but further analysis showed the second type of training to be significantly more effective than the first. The authors assigned these effects to the use of children’s songs, which include a lot of rhymes and accents on the last syllable.

Problem

In our study, we were interested in the effects of music instruction designed according to the first introductory level of the E. Willems approach in two domains, namely music abilities and specific language skills, in a sample of students with ID. The E. Willems approach is especially suitable for students with ID since it is based on the promotion of auditory perception, rhythmic development, singing songs, and natural body movement without using notation. In defining music abilities, we followed Gordon’s description of the stages in the development of audition that represent musical abilities (Gordon, 1990), namely the perception of the sound and giving meaning to the sound through tonal and rhythmic patterns.

Besides the potential effects of this instruction on music abilities, we were also interested in the transfer of training to specific language skills, which have already been found to be related to reading in the normative population (Anvari et al., 2002; Božič et. al., 2007; Gordon et. al., 2015; Gromko, 2005; Herrara et al., 2011; Piro & Ortiz, 2009). As far as we knew, there was no research on these effects in the population of students with ID, despite the fact that students with mild and even moderate ID can learn how to read at a certain level and certain pre-literacy skills (e.g., phonological awareness, phonological discrimination) are essential for the success of their reading acquisition.

Method

We have used a case study with a group of students with ID as a research method. According to Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011), we could classify it as an exploratory pilot case study.

Participants

In the beginning, 12 students from a Slovene school for students with special needs were included in music lessons. We were not able to collect data for all the measurements for some students. Therefore, the final sample consists of eight students (five girls and three boys). Their average age was 9.64 years, ranging from 6.11 to 13.00 years at the beginning of the research. The students’ intellectual abilities were as follows: one student had under-average IQ, three students had mild ID, and four students had moderate ID.

Instruments

Due to the low intellectual abilities of the participants, we had to develop the tasks for measuring music abilities and tasks for language skills that were simple enough and understandable for students with mild ID. Music ability tasks were developed on the basis of the Bentley music ability test (1966) and language tasks were developed on the basis of the tasks for phonological awareness from the Reading competencies assessment form for students in grades 1 to 3 (Pečjak, Magajna, & Podlesek, 2011). Some figures used in the tasks were part of the test of Perceptual motoric abilities for children (Mitić-Petek, 2001). Each student’s answer was graded with 0 or 1 points: 0 points were assigned to incorrect answers or answers that were impossible to evaluate and 1 point was assigned to correct answers.

Musical ability tasks

The tasks for measuring the musical abilities included five subtests: pitch comparisons, melody comparisons, rhythmic pattern comparisons, rhythmic pattern repetition (clapping), and rhythmic pattern repetition (vocalization).

Pitch comparison is comprised of seven tasks, featuring seven pairs of bells. Each pair is visually almost identical, but with a different height of tone (e.g., pitch of the first bell: 440 Hz (one-lined A), pitch of the second bell: 587.33 (two-lined D)). The experimenter plays two bells and students have to recognize whether the pitches of two bells are the same.

Short melodies comparison is comprised of 10 tasks—10 pairs of short melodies (e.g., first melody [see Figure 1], second melody [see Figure 2]). The melodies were sung on a neutral syllable la). The student has to recognize whether the melodies in the pair are the same.

Figure 1.

First melody

Figure 2.

Second melody

Rhythmic patterns comparison includes 10 pairs of rhythmic patterns. The experimenter claps two rhythmic patterns (e.g., first pattern [see Figure 3], second pattern [see Figure 4]). The student has to tell whether the patterns are the same or not.

Figure 3.

First pattern

Figure 4.

Second pattern

Rhythmic patterns repetition (clapping) has seven tasks. The experimenter claps a short rhythmic pattern (e.g., Figure 5) and the student has to repeat it. Patterns get more complex with increasing length. If the student cannot repeat the pattern, the experimenter gives them another chance with a similar pattern of same length.

Figure 5.

Short rhythmic pattern (clapping)

Rhythmic patterns repetition (spoken) has five tasks. The experimenter vocalizes a short rhythmic pattern (e.g., Figure 6) and the student has to repeat it. Each time, the student has two attempts. If the student cannot repeat the pattern, the experimenter gives them another chance with a similar pattern of same length.

Figure 6.

Short rhythmic pattern (spoken)

The Cronbach alpha coefficients of reliability for subtests, calculated at the first measurement were 0.57, 0.93, 0.90, 0.75 and 0.69. Alpha coefficients for pitch comparison and spoken rhythm repetition tasks are low. According to Field (2005) they should be higher than 0.70. We have to consider this limitation in the interpretation of the results.

Language skills tasks

Cognitive and language abilities were measured with the following subtests: following instructions, auditory discrimination of phonemes in pairs, recognition of phonemes in pairs, discrimination of phonemes in sequences, instruction retention and word associations.

Following instructions includes eight tasks in which the experimenter gives short instructions and the student replies or reacts according to them. Three tasks also include a picture (Mitić-Petek, 2001), e.g., “Touch your nose with a hand”; “Color the car.”

Discrimination of phonemes in pairs consists of 10 tasks of pairs of phonemes. The student first makes two examples for practice. Then the experimenter reads out a pair of phonemes (e.g., A–U) and the student tells if phonemes are equal of different.

Recognition of phonemes in pairs includes 10 tasks. Each task includes a specific phoneme and two words. The experimenter first reads out a phoneme and, after that, two words. The student has to say in which word he/she heard the phoneme. In the first five words, the student has to find the phoneme b, and in the next five words, the phoneme h, e.g., phoneme b—tree, boat. At each phoneme the student first goes through three examples.

Discrimination of phonemes in sequences consists of 10 tasks. Each task includes a phoneme. First, the student has to retain the phoneme. Next the experimenter reads the sequence of five phonemes. The student answers in such a way that they raise a hand when they hear the phoneme which they retain, e.g., the phoneme t in the sequence: g–t–p–e–d.

Instruction retention includes four pictures with four drawn objects (Mitić-Petek, 2001). For each picture the student indicates the object that starts with the phoneme that the experimenter has read out, e.g., s: star.

Word associations to a given phoneme consists of six tasks. The experimenter tells the student a phoneme (e.g., c) and the student speaks a word which starts with this phoneme (e.g., c: cat).

Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients for individual subtests at the first measurement were 0.80, 0.87, 0.90, 0.99, 0.87, and 0.94.

Procedure

Before the beginning of the music lessons, we collected informed consent from the students’ parents. The first author (licensed teacher for music introduction according to the E. Willems method and psychologist) applied all measures individually three times: before the start (October 2014), immediately after the end of lessons (May and June 2015) and in delayed measurement, after 10 months (March and April 2016). Each student was tested in two sessions. In one, cognitive and language tasks were applied and, in the other, music ability tasks. Each session lasted approximately 60 minutes and there was a break approximately every 15 minutes. The data were analyzed with nonparametric statistics methods (Friedman’s ANOVA, Wilcoxon signed-rank test) with SPSS 22 software.

Music instruction process

For a period of 1 year, students attended a total of 35 lessons at the first level of music instruction designed according to principles of E. Willems and taught by first author. Each lesson comprised four parts: auditory development, development of rhythmic sense, vocal development (singing songs), and natural body movement, which always follow in this sequence. The records of each lesson are kept by the first author.

The beginning of every lecture is dedicated to auditory development, which includes the following activities: recognition of different sounds, implementation of the tone movement (pancromatic, diatonic), recognition of sounds with various pitches, repetitions of different intervals and melodic sequences, and promotion of knowledge of basic harmonies. The lesson continues with rhythmic activities. These activities first include metrically unregulated rhythms, with speed, length, and dynamic differences. Students repeat the rhythms and invent their own. Singing songs is the central part of the lecture. The teacher uses various folk and other songs, which are adequate (in terms of content and melody) for the age and ability of the students and create different atmospheres. The teacher also has to take care of correct intonation, rhythmic accuracy, pronunciation, and the beauty of the voice. The lecture ends with natural body movement that encourages free motion and the feeling for meter. The natural movement includes walking, running, jumping, swaying, etc. At first, the teacher adjusts their playing to accompany a child’s movement, but later the child has to adapt their movement to the music.

In each lesson the tasks are planned in such a way that students can be successful. Positive feedback is particularly important in the population of students with ID, because they need a lot of reinforcement for learning.

Results

The normality of distributions of data was checked first. In most tasks, the results deviate from normal distribution, thus we used a nonparametric test in further analyses. Friedman’s ANOVA was performed first, and, in the case of significant results, Wilcoxon signed rank test to find the differences between individual measurements. Due to the small sample, we used the exact test to reveal the significance of differences (p ⩽ .05). Finally, we performed a post hoc Wilcoxon signed rank test of differences between individual measurements and calculated the effects sizes (r) for these differences. Cohen considers the effect sizes from 0.30 to 0.50 as moderate to large and effect sizes above 0.50 as large (Field, 2005) and Hattie (2009) considers effect size 0.40 as the hinge-point, where the effects of innovation in the real world can be noticed. We will first describe the results of music ability tasks (Table 1) and then the results of linguistic skills tasks (Table 2).

Table 1.

Results of Friedman’s ANOVA for all the measurements of the music ability tasks (M, SD, χ², p).

Music abilities	1st measurement		2nd measurement		3rd measurement		χ² (d f = 2)	p
Music abilities	M ₁	SD ₁	M ₂	SD ₂	M ₃	SD ₃	χ² (d f = 2)	p
Pitch comparison	3.13	1.73	3.38	2.07	4.00	2.00	8.40	.010
Melody comparison	3.13	3.76	4.50	3.74	3.13	3.60	4.36	.137
Rhythm comparison	2.13	3.00	3.38	4.07	3.25	4.03	4.10	.139
Rhythmic pattern repetition (clapping)	2.88	1.73	3.63	1.60	4.13	1.81	8.00	.012
Rhythmic pattern repetition (spoken rhythm)	2.50	1.19	4.00	1.30	4.13	1.13	9.30	.006

Table 2.

Results of Friedman’s ANOVA for all the measurements of the language skills tasks (M, SD, χ², p).

Language skills	1st measurement		2nd measurement		3rd measurement		χ² (df = 2)	p
Language skills	M₁	SD₁	M₂	SD₂	M₃	SD₃	χ² (df = 2)	p
Following instructions	4.38	2.00	5.88	0.83	6.00	1.06	5.85	.049
Discrimination of phonemes in pairs	3.75	4.46	6.38	4.14	6.50	4.00	7.68	.019
Recognition of phonemes in pairs	3.00	3.50	4.88	4.22	4.88	4.42	6.78	.046
Discrimination of phonemes in sequences	2.38	4.41	3.38	4.75	2.50	4.63	3.00	.667
Instruction retention	1.63	1.77	2.13	1.73	3.13	1.46	5.43	.063
Word associations to a given phoneme	1.75	2.49	2.50	2.14	2.25	2.25	3.10	.228

Friedman’s ANOVA of music abilities showed significant differences in pitch comparisons and in rhythmic pattern repetition for clapping and spoken rhythm. In all cases, the results increased from first to second and third measurement. A post hoc Wilcoxon signed rank test revealed significant differences between the first and the third measurement (Z = −2.33^b, p = .02, r = −58) and differences approaching significance between the second and the third measurement (Z = −1.89^b, p = .06, r = −.47) in pitch comparison. In rhythmic pattern repetition (clapping rhythm) post hoc analysis showed significant differences between the first and the third measurement (Z = −2.26^b, p = .02, r = −.56) and a trend of improvement between the first and the second measurement (Z = −1.67^b, p = .09, r = −.42). In spoken rhythm repetition, differences were significant between the first and the second measurement (Z = −2.03^b, p = .03, r = .-56) and between the first and the third measurement (Z = −2.26^b, p = .02, r = −.57). Therefore, the largest improvement between the first and the second measurement was found in rhythmic abilities.

Friedman’s ANOVA in language skills showed significant differences in tasks which are related to following instructions, discrimination, and recognition of phonemes in pairs. In all of these dimensions, students showed the largest improvement from the first to second measurement. A post hoc Wilcoxon signed rank test showed significant differences between the first and the second measurement (Z = −1.98^b, p = .01, r = −.50) and between the first and the third measurement (Z = −2.21^b, p = .02, r = −.55) in following instructions. In discrimination of phonemes in pairs the differences were approaching significance between the first and the second measurement (Z = −1.83^b, p = .06, r = −.46) and were significant between the first and the third measurement (Z = −2.03^b, p = .03, r = −.51), and in recognition of phonemes in pairs of words the same results were found: Z = −1.83^b, p = .06, r = −.46 and Z = −2.08^b, p = .03, r = −.52, respectively.

Discussion

In our exploratory pilot case study, we were interested in potential effects of music instruction according to the E. Willems method on music abilities and some other language skills that are related to reading acquisition. Students with ID participated in the study, because this approach is especially suitable for them because it is based on promotion of auditory perception, development of rhythmic abilities, singing songs, and natural child’s movement, which is always adapted to their level of functioning and development. The research already confirmed positive effects of music instruction on music abilities and language skills in the normative population, but not in students with ID.

Our results related to music abilities showed the existence of differences in pitch comparison, and rhythmic pattern repetition for clapping and spoken rhythm. Further analysis in the area of rhythm repetition showed that the differences were due to improvements between the start and the end of training in spoken rhythm repetition, and the same trend was found in clapping rhythm repetition. In the delayed measurement after 10 months, the results were the same as at the end of training and they did not improve further. Similar results were also found in other research related to improvement of music abilities after music instruction (Smolej Fritz, 2000; Pearce & Christensen, 2012). A significant improvement in the rhythmic abilities in our study is probably the result of systematic training included in two elements of each lesson using the E. Willems method. The first element is promotion of rhythmic abilities, where the accent is on repetition and creation of different rhythms. The second is natural body movement, which promotes the sense of meter and is indirectly related to rhythm. Rhythm repetition abilities did not increase further after the end of lessons, which is why we can probably exclude developmental changes and assign the increase in these abilities to music instruction.

Contrary to rhythmic abilities, the improvement in pitch comparison showed the trend to be larger in delayed measurement, when the students did not systematically train this ability any more. Research in auditory perception showed that it is usually completed at the age of 10 to 11 in children (Nicolay-Pirmolin, 2003), and the same applies to pitch judgements (Stevens & Gallagher, 2004) and judgments of music stimuli according to tonal structure (Koniari, Predazzer, & Mélen, 2001). Our results of pitch comparisons might also reveal the developmental improvement in this music ability. In the interpretation of these results, we also have to take into consideration the very low reliability of the tasks for measuring pitch comparison. Therefore, further experimental studies are necessary to confirm this explanation.

The results of the impact of music instruction on linguistic skills also comply with those achieved by other authors who found that music instruction can improve different skills (Geritty et al., 2013; Hallam, 2010). We found better results in following instructions immediately after training. Such improvement in instruction might be the result of increased attention due to the activities in music classes and its transfer to other, not just music-related content. Putkinen and co-workers (2015) confirmed an increase in executive functions development, namely in the top-down attention control in students attending music classes. Following instructions in our study required that the students shift their attention to the teacher, keep it as long it is necessary to process the information in working memory and correctly react to it in numerous music activities.

We also found improvement in discrimination and recognition of phonemes in pairs. In both cases, we found a trend of improvement immediately after training, which was not evident in delayed measurement any more. Other authors found that music instruction influenced phonemic awareness and especially the speed of phonemic segmentation (Gromko, 2005), ability to recognize sequences of words (Piro & Otiz, 2009), and awareness of final phonemes in words (Herrara et. al., 2011). Music instruction in our study included many activities in which children had to direct their attention to pitches, duration, colors, speed, accentuations, and dynamic differences. Increased attention to different dimensions of sounds might also transfer to listening to speech. Better discrimination and recognition of phonemes in pairs can also be the result of better pitch and rhythm discrimination of sounds, which are also central for the recognition of phonemes and language patterns and show the possibility of music instruction transfer to similar acoustic information processing. Nevertheless, we have to be careful with the conclusions; although these improvements in our study exceeded the hinge-point of effect size of 0.40 (Hattie, 2009) immediately after instruction, they did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusions

In sum, we found some similar results of the immediate effects of music instruction on music abilities and language skills in students with ID in our study to those already found in the normative population. Music instruction according to E. Willems turned out to be efficient in promoting rhythmic abilities, in following instruction, and in discrimination and recognition of phonemes in students with ID. Therefore, further research could reveal which dimensions in the E. Willems approach are especially beneficial in the population concerned.

We also have to be aware of the limitations of our study. Our study was a pilot case study. Therefore, we have to be careful with the generalization our results. Further studies will have to include the experimental design with random assignment of students into experimental and control groups and also more teachers included in training in order to avoid the impact of a teacher’s teaching style on the results. Only then will we be able to confirm the causal relationship between music instruction, improved music abilities, and their transfer to other language skills in the population concerned. They will also have to include larger and more homogenous samples of students with ID, as well as comparisons of the E. Willems approach with more established approaches involving students with special educational needs. In future, special attention should also be paid to the improvement of the tasks for measuring music abilities in order to improve their metric characteristics, especially the reliability of pitch comparison and spoken rhythm repetition tasks. Despite the limitations, the present study is a promising start towards understanding the impact of the E. Willems approach on the measured variables in students with ID.

Footnotes

Appendix

Appendix.

Main characteristics of the E. Willems teaching approach.

	Level	Main characteristics of the level
Musical introduction	First	• sparking the student’s interest in music • enabling different music experiences for students • using imitation as the main learning method • illustrating musical elements with movement (e.g., tone movements are accompanied with gestures)
	Second	• broadening musical knowledge and experiences obtained on the first level • using graphic representation (with lines) of musical elements (e.g., tone movement) • introduction to solmization
	Third	• preparing the student for learning instrument and for solfeggio • consolidation of knowledge of different musical elements (e.g., tone names, intervals, rhythmic values) • using exercises for development of body coordination and precision of movement important for learning an instrument
“Live” solfeggio	Fourth	• broadening of all musical elements from the first three levels • beginning of reading and writing music (use of notation)

Funding

The study was financially supported by the Slovenian Research Agency, program P5-0110 titled “Psychological and neuroscientific aspects of cognitive control, personality and subjective well-being”.

References

Altenmüller

E. O.

(2001). How many music centres are in the brain ? Annals of New York Academy of Sciences, 930, 273–280.

Anvari

S. H.

Trainor

L. J.

Woodside

Levy

B. A.

(2002). Relations among musical skills, phonological processing, and early reading ability in preschool children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 83, 111–130

Bentley

(1966). Musical ability in children and its measurement. London: George Harrap.

Božič

Habe

Jerman

(2007). Povezanost glasbenih sposobnosti in fonološkega zavedanja pri predšolskih otrocih [Connectedness of music abilities and phonological awareness in pre-school children]. Pedagoška obzorja, 16(1), 39 – 52.

Cohen

Manion

Morrison

(2011). Research methods in education. London: Routledge.

Costa-Giomi

(1999). The effects of three years of piano instruction on children’s cognitive development. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47, 198–212. doi:10.2307/3345779

Costa-Giomi

(2015). The long-term effects of childhood music instruction on intelligence and general cognitive abilities. Applications of Research in Music Education, 33(2), 20–26. doi:10.1177/8755123314540661

Field

(2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: Sage.

Geritty

K. W.

Hourigan

R. M.

Horton

P. W.

(2013). Conditions that facilitate music learning among students with special needs: A mixed-methods inquiry. Journal of Research in Music Education, 61(2), 144–159. doi:10.1177/0022429413485428

10.

Gordon

E. E.

(1990). Breaking 100 in music. In Wilson

F. R.

Roehmann

F. L.

(Eds.), Music and child development (pp. 413–414). St. Louis, MO: MMB Music Inc.

11.

Gordon

R. L.

Jacobs

M. S.

Schuele

McAuley

J. D.

(2015). Perspectives on the rhythm–grammar link and its implications for typical and atypical language development. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1337, 16–25. doi:10.1111/nyas.12683

12.

Gromko

J. E.

(2005). The effects of music instruction on phonemic awareness in beginning readers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53(3), 199–209.

13.

Hallam

(2010). The power of music: Its impact on the intellectual, social and personal development of children and young people. International Journal of Music Education, 28(3), 269–289. doi:10.1177/0255761410370658

14.

Hansen

Milligan

S. A.

(2012). Aural skills: At the juncture of research in early reading and music literacy. Music Educators Journal, 99(2), 75–80. doi:10.1177/0027432112462894

15.

Hattie

(2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London. Routledge.

16.

Herrera

Lorenzo

Defior

Fernandez-Smith

Costa-Giomi

(2011). Effects of phonological and musical training on the reading readiness of native- and foreign-Spanish-speaking children. Psychology of Music, 39(1), 68–81. doi:10.1177/0305735610361995

17.

Hyde

K.J.

Lerch

Norton

Forgeard

Winner

Evens

A. C.

Schlaug

(2009). The effects of musical training on structural brain development: A longitudinal study. The Neurosciences and Music III: Disorders and Plasticity: Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 1169, 182–186. doi:10.1111/j.1749–6632.2009.04852.x

18.

Koniari

Predazzer

Mélen

(2001). Categorization and schematization processes used in music perception by 10- to 11-year-old children. Music Perception, 18(3), 297–324.

19.

Mitić-Petek

(2001). Preizkus zaznavno-motoričnih sposobnosti otrok [Perceptual-motoric abilities test for children]. Ljubljana: Center za psihodiagnostična sredstva.

20.

Moreno

Marques

Santos

Castro

S. L.

Benson

(2009). Musical training influences linguistic abilities in 8-year-old children: More evidence for brain plasticity. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 712–723. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhn120

21.

Nikolay-Primolin

(2003). Auditory perception in the child. Acta orto-rino-larincologica Belgica, 57(4), 237–41.

22.

Pearce

M. T.

Christensen

J. T.

(2012). Conference report: The Neurosciences and Music-IV–Learning and Memory. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind, & Brain, 22(1), 70–73. doi:10.1037/a0027235

23.

Pečjak

Magajna

Podlesek

(2011). Ocenjevalna shema bralnih zmožnosti učencev 1.–3. razreda—OSBZ [Reading competencies assessment form for students in grades 1 to 3—OSBZ]. Ljubljana: Center za Psihodiagnostična sredstva.

24.

Piro

J. M.

Ortiz

(2009). The effect of piano lessons on the vocabulary and verbal sequencing skills of primary grade students. Psychology of Music, 37(3), 325–347. doi:10.1177/0305735608097248

25.

Putkinen

Tervaniemi

Saarikivi

Huotilainen

(2015). Promises of formal and informal musical activities in advancing neurocognitive development throughout childhood. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1337, 153–162. doi:10.1111/nyas.12656

26.

Rauscher

F. H.

Hinton

(2011). Music instruction and its diverse extra-musical benefits. Music Perception, 29, 215–226. doi:10.1525/mp.2011.29.2.215

27.

Seashore

C. E.

(1967). The psychology of music. New York: McGraw-Hill.

28.

Smolej Fritz

. (2000). Razvoj glasbenih sposobnosti, ki jih meri Bentleyev test [The development of music abilities measured with Bentley test]. Psihološka obzorja, 9(1), 91–106.

29.

Stevens

Gallagher

(2004). The development of mental models for auditory events: Relational complexity and discrimination of pitch and duration. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 22, 569–583.

30.

Tomac Calligaris

. (2004). Osnovno glasbeno izobraževanje po metodoloških načelih Edgarja Willemsa [Primary music education according to E. Willems’ methodological principles]. Retrieved from http://www.mizs.gov.si/fileadmin/mizs.gov.si/pageuploads/podrocje/glasba/pdf/E_Willems_program.pdf

31.

Tomac Calligaris

. (2010). Vrednote Willemsovega pristopa h glasbeni vzgoji v današnjem času [Evaluation of Willems approach to music education in present time]. Glasba v šoli in vrtcu, 15(1), 21–28.

32.

Willems

(2012). Psychological foundations of musical education. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.