Editing PLATO (computer system) (section)

=== Significant early efforts ===
==== Pitch recognition/performance judging ====
In 1969, G. David Peters began researching the feasibility of using PLATO to teach trumpet students to play with increased pitch and rhythmic precision.<ref>{{cite thesis|last=Peters|first=G. David|title=Feasibility of computer-assisted instruction for instrumental music education|date=1974|publisher=University of Illinois, Dissertation Abstracts International, 1974, 35, 1478A-1479a, University Microfilms No. 74-14, 598|type=EdD}}</ref> He created an interface for the PLATO III terminal. The hardware consisted of (1) filters that could determine the true pitch of a tone, and (2) a counting device to measure tone duration. The device accepted and judged rapid notes, two notes trilled, and lip slurs. Peters demonstrated that judging instrumental performance for pitch and rhythmic accuracy was feasible in computer-assisted instruction.<ref name="watanabe">{{cite journal|last1=Watanabe|first1=Nan|date=February 1980|title=Review of Audio Interfacing Literature for Computer-Assisted Music Instruction|journal=Journal of Computer-based Instruction|volume=6|issue=3|page=87}}</ref>

===== Rhythm notation and perception =====
By 1970, a random access audio device was available for use with PLATO III.<ref name="CERL Report A-13" />

In 1972, Robert W. Placek conducted a study that used computer-assisted instruction for rhythm perception.<ref>{{cite thesis|last=Placek|first=Robert|title=Design and trial of a computer-assisted lesson in rhythm|date=1973|publisher=University of Illinois, Dissertation Abstracts International, 1973, 34, 813A, University Microfilms No. 73-17-362|type=EdD}}</ref> Placek used the random access audio device attached to a PLATO III terminal for which he developed music notation fonts and graphics. Students majoring in elementary education were asked to (1) recognize elements of rhythm notation, and (2) listen to rhythm patterns and identify their notations. This was the first known application of the PLATO random-access audio device to computer-based music instruction.

Study participants were interviewed about the experience and found it both valuable and enjoyable. Of particular value was PLATO’s immediate feedback. Though participants noted shortcomings in the quality of the audio, they generally indicated that they were able to learn the basic skills of rhythm notation recognition.<ref name="Placek">{{cite journal|last1=Placek|first1=Robert|date=April 1, 1974|title=Design and trial of a computer-assisted lesson in rhythm|journal=Journal of Research in Music Education|volume=22|issue=1|pages=13–23|doi=10.2307/3344614|jstor=3344614|s2cid=145786171}}</ref>

These PLATO IV terminal included many new devices and yielded two notable music projects:

==== Visual diagnostic skills for instrumental music educators ====

By the mid-1970s, James O. Froseth (University of Michigan) had published training materials that taught instrumental music teachers to visually identify typical problems demonstrated by beginning band students.<ref>{{cite web|date=2018|title=Visual Diagnostic Skills Program|url=https://www.giamusic.com/store/search?elSearchTerm=visual+diagnostic+skills+program&x=0&y=0|access-date=February 8, 2018|website=Music for the Church|publisher=GIA Publications, Inc.}}</ref> For each instrument, Froseth developed an ordered checklist of what to look for (i.e., posture, embouchure, hand placement, instrument position, etc.) and a set of 35mm slides of young players demonstrating those problems. In timed class exercises, trainees briefly viewed slides and recorded their diagnoses on the checklists which were reviewed and evaluated later in the training session.

In 1978, William H. Sanders adapted Froseth’s program for delivery using the PLATO IV system. Sanders transferred the slides to microfiche for rear-projection through the PLATO IV terminal’s plasma display. In timed drills, trainees viewed the slides, then filled in the checklists by touching them on the display. The program gave immediate feedback and kept aggregate records. Trainees could vary the timing of the exercises and repeat them whenever they wished.

Sanders and Froseth subsequently conducted a study to compare traditional classroom delivery of the program to delivery using PLATO. The results showed no significant difference between the delivery methods for a) student post-test performance and b) their attitudes toward the training materials. However, students using the computer appreciated the flexibility to set their own practice hours, completed significantly more practice exercises, and did so in significantly less time.<ref>{{cite thesis|last=Sanders|first=William H.|title=The effect of computer-based instructional materials in a program for visual diagnostic skills training of instrumental music education students|date=1979|publisher=University of Illinois, Dissertation Abstracts International, 1979, DAI-A-41/06|type=PhD}}</ref>

==== Musical instrument identification ====
In 1967, Allvin and Kuhn used a four-channel tape recorder interfaced to a computer to present pre-recorded models to judge sight-singing performances.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Kuhn|first1=Wolfgang E.|last2=Allvin|first2=Raynold|date=1967|title=Computer-Assisted Teaching: A New Approach to Research in Music|journal=Council of Research in Music Education|volume=11|issue=Fall|pages=1–13}}</ref>

In 1969, Ned C. Deihl and Rudolph E. Radocy conducted a computer-assisted instruction study in music that included discriminating aural concepts related to phrasing, articulation, and rhythm on the clarinet.<ref>{{cite report |title=Development and Evaluation of Computer-Assisted Instruction in Instrumental Music |last=Deihl |first=N.C. |date=1969 |publisher=[[ERIC]] Document Reproduction Service |id=ERIC Number: ED035314 |url=https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED035314}}</ref> They used a four-track tape recorder interfaced to a computer to provide pre-recorded audio passages. Messages were recorded on three tracks and inaudible signals on the fourth track with two hours of play/record time available. This research further demonstrated that computer-controlled audio with four-track tape was possible.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Deihl|first1=Ned C.|last2=Radocy|first2=Rudolf E.|date=1969|title=Computer-Assisted Instruction: Potential for Instrumental Music Education|journal=Council of Research in Music Education|volume=15|issue=Winter|pages=1–7}}</ref>

In 1979, Williams used a digitally controlled cassette tape recorder that had been interfaced to a minicomputer (Williams, M.A. "A comparison of three approaches to the teaching of auditory-visual discrimination, sight singing and music dictation to college music students: A traditional approach, a Kodaly approach, and a Kodaly approach augmented by computer-assisted instruction," University of Illinois, unpublished). This device worked, yet was slow with variable access times.

In 1981, Nan T. Watanabe researched the feasibility of computer-assisted music instruction using computer-controlled pre-recorded audio. She surveyed audio hardware that could interface with a computer system.<ref name="watanabe" />

Random-access audio devices interfaced to PLATO IV terminals were also available. There were issues with sound quality due to dropouts in the audio.<ref name="eddins">{{cite journal|last1=Eddins|first1=John M.|date=1978|title=Random-access Audio in Computer-Assisted Instruction|journal=Journal of Computer-based Instruction|volume=5|pages=22–29}}</ref> Regardless, Watanabe deemed consistent fast access to audio clips critical to the study design and selected this device for the study.

Watanabe’s computer-based drill-and-practice program taught elementary music education students to identify musical instruments by sound. Students listened to randomly selected instrument sounds, identified the instrument they heard, and received immediate feedback. Watanabe found no significant difference in learning between the group who learned through computer-assisted drill programs and the group receiving traditional instruction in instrument identification. The study did, however, demonstrate that use of random-access audio in computer-assisted instruction in music was feasible.<ref>{{cite thesis|last=Watanabe|first=Nan T.|title=Computer-assisted music instruction utilizing compatible audio hardware in computer-assisted aural drill|date=1981|publisher=University of Illinois, Dissertation Abstracts International, A-42/09, University Microfilms, AAI 8203628|type=PhD}}</ref>

==== The Illinois Technology-based music project ====
By 1988, with the spread of micro-computers and their peripherals, the University of Illinois School of Music PLATO Project was renamed ''The Illinois Technology-based Music Project.'' Researchers subsequently explored the use of emerging, commercially available technologies for music instruction until 1994.

==== Influences and impacts ====

Educators and students used the PLATO System for music instruction at other educational institutions including [[Indiana University]], [[Florida State University]], and the [[University of Delaware]]. Many alumni of the University of Illinois [[University of Illinois School of Music|School of Music]] PLATO Project gained early hands-on experience in computing and media technologies and moved into influential positions in both education and the private sector.

The goal of this system was to provide tools for music educators to use in the development of instructional materials, which might possibly include music dictation drills, automatically graded keyboard performances, envelope and timbre ear-training, interactive examples or labs in musical acoustics, and composition and theory exercises with immediate feedback.<ref>{{cite book|last=Gooch|first=Sherwin|date=March 1978|title=PLATO Music Systems|url=http://eric.ed.gov:80/ERICWebPortal/Home.portal?_nfpb=true&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_1=%22Gooch+Sherwin%22&ERICExtSearch_Operator_1=OR&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_1=au&_pageLabel=RecordDetails&objectId=0900000b80102360&accno=ED161421|access-date=2006-04-13|publisher=ED.gov}}</ref> One ear-training application, Ottaviano, became a required part of certain undergraduate music theory courses at Florida State University in the early 1980s.

Another peripheral was the [[Votrax]] speech synthesizer, and a "say" instruction (with "saylang" instruction to choose the language) was added to the Tutor programming language to support text-to-speech synthesis using the Votrax.