Beethoven's Violinists: The Influence of Clement, Viotti, and the French School on Beethoven's Violin Compositions

Over the course of his career, Ludwig van Beethoven (1770–1827) admired and befriended many violin virtuosos. In addition to being renowned performers, many of these virtuosos were prolific composers in their own right. Through their own compositions, interpretive style and new technical contributions, they inspired some of Beethoven’s most beloved violin works. This dissertation places a selection of Beethoven’s violin compositions in historical and stylistic context through an examination of related compositions by Giovanni Battista Viotti (1755–1824), Pierre Rode (1774–1830) and Franz Clement (1780–1842). The works of these violin virtuosos have been presented along with those of Beethoven in a three-part recital series designed to reveal the compositional, technical and artistic influences of each virtuoso. Viotti’s Violin Concerto No. 2 in E major and Rode’s Violin Concerto No. 10 in B minor serve as examples from the French violin concerto genre, and demonstrate compositional and stylistic idioms that affected Beethoven’s own compositions. Through their official dedications, Beethoven’s last two violin sonatas, the Op. 47, or Kreutzer, in A major, dedicated to Rodolphe Kreutzer, and Op. 96 in G major, dedicated to Pierre Rode, show the composer’s reverence for these great artistic personalities. Beethoven originally dedicated his Violin Concerto in D major, Op. 61, to Franz Clement. This work displays striking similarities to Clement’s own Violin Concerto in D major, which suggests that the two men had a close working relationship and great respect for one another. The first recital was performed in Ulrich Recital Hall; the second and third recitals were performed in Gildenhorn Recital Hall at the University of Maryland. All three performances were collaborations with pianist, Hsiang-Ling Hsiao. A Recording of the first program can be found in the Digital Repository at the University of Maryland (DRUM). Recordings of the second and third recitals can be accessed at the University of Maryland Hornbake Library.

INVESTIGATING THE USE OF MAZE-CBM FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

Recent legislation and initiatives set forth high academic expectations for all high school graduates in the area of reading (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, 2010; Every Student Succeeds Act, 2015). To determine which students need additional support to meet these reading standards, teachers can conduct universal screening using formative assessments. Maze Curriculum-Based Measurement (Maze-CBM) is a commonly used screening and progress monitoring assessment that the National Center on Intensive Intervention (2013) and the Center on Instruction (Torgesen & Miller, 2009) recommend. Despite the recommendation to use Maze-CBM, little research has been conducted on the reliability and validity of Maze-CBM for measuring reading ability for students at the secondary level (Mitchell & Wexler, 2016). In the papers included in this dissertation, I present an initial investigation into the use of Maze-CBM for secondary students. In the first paper, I investigated prior studies of Maze-CBM for students in Grades 6 through 12. Next, in the second paper, I investigated the alternate-form reliability and validity for screening students in Grades 9 and 10 using signal detection theory methods. In the third paper, I examined the effect of genre on Maze-CBM scores with a sample of students in Grades 9 and 10 using multilevel modeling. When writing these three papers, I discovered several important findings related to Maze-CBM. First, there are few studies that have investigated the technical adequacy of Maze-CBM for screening and progress monitoring students in Grades 6 through 12. Additionally, only two studies (McMaster, Wayman, & Cao, 2006; Pierce, McMaster, & Deno, 2010) examined the technical adequacy of Maze-CBM for high school students. A second finding is that the reliability of Maze-CBM is often below acceptable levels for making screening decisions or progress monitoring decisions (.80 and above and .90 and above, respectively; Salvia, Ysseldyke, & Bolt, 2007) for secondary students. A third finding is that Maze-CBM scores show promise of being a valid screening tool for reading ability of secondary students. Finally, I found that the genre of the text used in the Maze-CBM assessment does impact scores on Maze-CBM for students in Grades 9 and 10.