In the last conference, ECER 2020 we presented the paper “Development and application of a music teaching programme, to improve inclusion” (2020 ID: 1522), revealing and explaining (during the presentation) the steps we followed to evaluate and validate the programme prior to its implementation. In this year’s panel we would like to continue the presentation picking it up at the same point we left it in the last session.

In this sense, we present a proposal that focuses the attention on the development and explanation of the methods used in the application of the programme (point 2).

1. Proposal Information

“Art education increases cooperation, respect, tolerance and appreciation and has positive effects on the development of social and cultural empathy”(Bamford, 2009, p.169). Various studies recognize the importance of artistic education, in particular, musical education, in the development of learning skills (process), as well as in fostering team work and inclusion. Musical education stimulates all the natural abilities of the human being: abstraction, logical and mathematical reasoning, imagination, memory, order, creativity, communication, awareness of the senses, among other things (Andreu (2012), Domingo (2006)). In the same perspective, Bamford (2009) writes that schools must reaffirm their commitment to the artistical education that fosters critical thinking, problem solving and that invites to reflection. This statement exposes that the only way to make artistic education bring benefits (such as those explained by Domingo (2006) and Andreu (2012)) is that it is an education with Quality. Meaning that, it brings an active collaboration between schools, art institutions, teachers, artists, and the local community. There is a shared responsibility for the programme planning, implementation, and evaluation, it offers opportunities for exposure and representation and training in artistic disciplines (art education) in combination with an artistic and creative approach to learning (education through arts). This is true, when it has elements of critical thinking and reasoning and if it emphasizes team work and has an inclusive mentality (Bamford, 2009).

1.1 The aims of the study

Given what has been pointed out as characteristic for Quality Art Education, the presented programme has been designed (seeking) to develop students’ abilities, paying special attention to those who are faced with barriers in their learning processes and considering the social and personal development of all students.

This method has been elaborated and validated from an inclusive point of view, analysing its theoretical and logical coherence, the consistency between planning and implementation and analysing its quality, checking if the following criteria are met: Improvement in the musical learning process, group cohesion and inclusion of all students.

To accomplish this purpose, it is essential that this project takes place within the school, in the ordinary class, where the whole group of students, with different characteristics (origin, social environment, progress in learning skills, approach to arts and music...) can be included in it.

Therefore, this is intended to be a program that effectively responds to the diversity of the students. To address this diversity, an approach based on the constructivist theory of teaching was chosen, as some of its key ideas are directly linked to the methodological functioning of the programme.

The programme meets the criteria of flexibility and personalization of teaching and learning, which is important from an inclusive point of view, as it can be adapted to the different levels of the students’ knowledge, to diversify materials and activities and guarantees the participation of all students.

The research methodology focuses on the critical paradigm, specifically, the methodological orientation of programme evaluation. The main objective is to evaluate the music programme to respond to student diversity. That is why we followed Robert Stakes’ methodology of respondent evaluation. Our purpose is: a)To analyse the theoretical and logical coherence of the programme. b)To analyse the consistency between programme planning and implementation. c)To analyse the quality of this programme, checking if the following criteria are met: to check if the interaction between the students improve, their participation, the climate in the classroom and the musical academic performance). In the last conference we exposed the methods we used to prove point “a”. This year we will focus on the methods we applied to prove point “b”. This research is defined as “comprehensive” evaluation, as it is guided by the experience of being personally involved in context, collecting data and observing the process. The purpose is to look after and document this programme quality and to prove to what extent it has worked out. In this evaluation, it have been used both criteria-based measurement and interpretation.The evaluation of this programme departs from a positivist approach and approaches an interpretative and critical one; the focus is concentrated in some contexts on “understanding” and “transforming” them. This evaluation is also defined as participatory, as it is organized based on the interests and concerns of having been actively involved in the evaluation; therefore, it has been organized around what is really happening in the classroom. Before applying the programme, the necessary data were collected to ensure that the program was validated and as close as possible to the educational reality in the area where it was going to be implemented. Once the previous validation was done, it was time to enter the field of study to put the programme into practice. So, the next thing to do was to create a sociogram and to perform a test to the students who were going to take part, to discover the productivity and level of affection of the groups and to know the actual knowledge of the students. Afterwards, we scheduled the sessions with each group, and implemented the different points of the programme. To monitor the development of the implementation, as well as the process by the students, we created a field diary to record both the progress and incidents that might occur.

To prove the validity and effectivity of this programme, the implementation was carried out in four different groups, from two different educational contexts, in Germany and Spain. At the end of the implementation, the relevant data collection methods were used again to prove if there had been any significant changes. The purpose was to see : - if the model effectively responded to diversity, based on the constructivist theory of teaching and learning. It meant considering what the student could do and learn at a certain moment and drawing the attention to the possibilities and capabilities of all students. - if the model met the criteria of flexibility and personalization of teaching and learning, important from an inclusive point of view. - if it guaranteed the active participation of all students, making them protagonist of the new learning. - if it met Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development, in which, in order to progress, the student expanded and created new development zones, and one of the basic elements was the learning that was received from others, in that case, from peers.

- Bamford, A. (2009). El Factor¡ Wuau! El papel de las artes en la educación. Un estudio internacional sobre el impacto de las artes en educación. Barcelona: Ediciones Octaedro - Stake, R. E. (2006). Evaluación comprensiva y evaluación basada en estándares (Vol. 10). Grao. - Riera, G. (2010). «Cooperar per aprendre/aprendre a cooperar» (programa CA/AC). Avaluació d’un programa didàctic per ensenyar a aprendre de manera cooperativa. Universitat de Vic - Andreu i Duran, M.(2012). L'assoliment de les competències bàsiques en alumnes de Centres integrats de primària i música Construcció i aplicació d'un instrument d'avaluació de les competències bàsiques i anàlisi comparativa dels resultats obtinguts en alumnes de sisè de primària de centres integrats de música i d'un grup control.