Reference
Storrs, C. (2009, November 26). People Hear With Their Skin, As Well As Their Ears. Scientific American. Retrieved from http://www.scientificamerican.com
Summary
A recent study by Bryan Gick and Donald Derrick from the Department of Linguistics at UBC shows that very small puffs of air directed at participants' hand, neck, or ear, contributed to their accurate hearing of the syllables "pa" and "ta." These puffs were equivalent to the air released when these sounds are verbally made. Without the puffs of air, "pa" was heard as "ba" and "da" was mistaken for "ta" 30 to 40% of the time. Accuracy increased by 10 to 20% when air puffs corresponding to these syllables were sent over their skin. There was no improvement with air sent to the ear.
For tests with the sounds "ba" and "da" that were accompanied by puffs corresponding to "pa" and "ta", participants' accuracy decreased by about 10%, compared with their accuracy without any puffs of air at all.
Gick explained that when we speak, the tiny puffs of air released help us distinguish sounds. A windy day can even stop us from hearing accurately.
Reflection
Though this article didn't pertain to music specifically, it did make me wonder about how we might perceive live music as compared to recorded music. Anecdotally, many people seem to enjoy concerts more than sound recordings. It's possible that the visual spectacle contributes to this preference, but even in more intimate venues, without flash and glamour, many still enjoy the live setting in a very different way.
This study makes me wonder if emotions in music might be more potently felt when heard in a concert hall, small club, outdoor setting, etc. This also means that if there are any disruptions to the air in the environment---in a crowded room, a smoky bar, etc.---audiences would respond in a variety of ways.
If music can be heard differently through our skin, I wonder how performers might be able to manipulate the environment in order to heighten particular emotional effects of their sound. What types of challenging messages might be sent if air that "contradicts" the content of music is channeled to listeners? What might happen in silences within a piece (while our brain processes the music that came before) by "playing" on our skin?
Showing posts with label Myrtle D. Millares. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Myrtle D. Millares. Show all posts
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Friday, December 11, 2009
Musical Expectation and the Brain
Reference
This event, called Notes & Neurons: In Search of the Common Chorus looked at cultural similarities and differences in our understanding of music. They discussed pitch, intervals, timbre, rhythm, etc. as universal elements of music. However, the way we employ these stylistically and interpret its combinations varies depending on preset associations in our brain.
What struck me most when I first saw this video is the ease with which a general audience can grasp the pentatonic scale. Now, it's not a terribly hard scale, but it shows how quickly expectation is created. Soon, Bobby McFerrin can have the audience sing while he "conducts" and they fill in the notes with ease. It's hard to say whether the audience came from musically diverse backgrounds, but quite possibly, most of them grew up in the western music tradition. I wonder how easily other cultures might grasp this scale---perhaps its wide use in a variety of cultures ensures that there is something "universal" about it. More likely, though, is that there is a universal capacity to be enculturated.
I have a beginner-level piano student who has just learned "Engine, Engine" on the black keys. I asked her to make up a song on the black keys, and after playing it she said, "That sounds more asian." This is a student who doesn't listen to much music at home, and has somehow, through our culture, made this association.
To be honest, I am quite simply amazed at how the brain forges pathways of thought. This can be advantageous in that a receptive mind can be taught quickly. But the potential for a stubborn mind also exists. Defying expectation can lead to further learning and expansion of the mind. I'm curious to know what happens in a brain that rejects anything other than what it expects.
This event, called Notes & Neurons: In Search of the Common Chorus looked at cultural similarities and differences in our understanding of music. They discussed pitch, intervals, timbre, rhythm, etc. as universal elements of music. However, the way we employ these stylistically and interpret its combinations varies depending on preset associations in our brain.
What struck me most when I first saw this video is the ease with which a general audience can grasp the pentatonic scale. Now, it's not a terribly hard scale, but it shows how quickly expectation is created. Soon, Bobby McFerrin can have the audience sing while he "conducts" and they fill in the notes with ease. It's hard to say whether the audience came from musically diverse backgrounds, but quite possibly, most of them grew up in the western music tradition. I wonder how easily other cultures might grasp this scale---perhaps its wide use in a variety of cultures ensures that there is something "universal" about it. More likely, though, is that there is a universal capacity to be enculturated.
I have a beginner-level piano student who has just learned "Engine, Engine" on the black keys. I asked her to make up a song on the black keys, and after playing it she said, "That sounds more asian." This is a student who doesn't listen to much music at home, and has somehow, through our culture, made this association.
To be honest, I am quite simply amazed at how the brain forges pathways of thought. This can be advantageous in that a receptive mind can be taught quickly. But the potential for a stubborn mind also exists. Defying expectation can lead to further learning and expansion of the mind. I'm curious to know what happens in a brain that rejects anything other than what it expects.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Arts Training & Cognition
Reference
How Arts Training Influences Cognition
By Michael Posner, Ph.D., Mary K. Rothbart, Ph.D., Brad E. Sheese, Ph.D., and Jessica Kieras, Ph.D., University of Oregon
http://www.dana.org/news/publications/detail.aspx?id=10762
Summary
The authors of the study sought to examine how arts training can improve cognition via attention mechanisms in the brain. They hypothesized that executive attentional areas of the brain can be improved through specific training. Enthusiasm for the arts, including music, might allow children to pay closer attention to artistic pursuits. This enthusiasm may therefore lead to improved motivation, allowing for better attention, and therefore cognitive improvement.
Surveys with adults showed that interest in a particular art correlated with actual engagement in the art. A general openness towards the arts led to an appreciation for the arts (except dance, which it seems the survey did not define well as some took it to refer to dancing that happens socially, rather than as a performance art).
Tests on children showed that motivation (by means of a reward or through knowing how they did on a task) leads to better performance on tasks, especially when the motivation is sustained for longer periods. They stated that “findings support the idea that interest in the arts allows for sustained attention, providing an increased opportunity for the training to be effective”, though the way the study specifically supports this is unclear. By their own admission, “[t]he link between arts training and motivation, though plausible, remains speculative, and needs to be tested through experimental research.” Nonetheless, the idea is that if children are open to and interested in the arts, then they are likely to be motivated to pursue that art and to sustain attention through artistic activities.
The researchers also used attention training to examine the executive attentional network (midline and lateral frontal areas) in the brain, which is engaged in self-regulation of cognition and emotion. The aim of this training, which was related to emotion and cognition regulation, was to see if it improves cognition. The exercises were designed to be interesting and motivating. EEG results showed that the training did improve the function of the executive attentional network in resolving conflict. The network in these children (6-year-olds) resembled that of adults. These children also scored better on intelligence tests.
Not all children benefited from the attention training. Genetic differences seem dependent on the form of a dopamine transmitter gene present in the child. The researchers involved in this study are therefore continuing research in genetics to determine whether certain genes lead to interest in the arts, and to greater attention.
Reflection
The ability to sustain attention is usually a characteristic teachers long to find and further develop in their students. Often, we associate attention or focus with learning, or at least the increased possibility of it. Teaching very young children has certainly posed many challenges for me and I continually seek ways to attract their attention.
Unfortunately, this article did not specify the tasks involved in the attention training given to children. The researchers assume that interest creates motivation and sustained attention, but do not explain how the latter can be improved by certain activities. In this study, the attention tasks used seem to be related to conflict tasks, though it is not very clear. In the introduction, they state that the training consisted of conflict resolution training, but their outline of the actual study conflates the details of the tasks, making it difficult to give a clear summary. They say that the conflict-resolution tasks were interesting in the way they “assume arts training to be for children with the appropriate interests.” It would have been helpful to know what caught the children’s interests.
I also noticed that this study used training exercises that were not artistic, but it nonetheless claims that artistic training likely improves attention and that this would translate to improved overall cognition. Supporting the hypothesis about the link between the arts and cognition without using artistic tasks leaves me wanting further direct explanation.
From my own experience, it does seem that musical training instills a sense of focus and perseverance that is linked to motivation. The physical and mental training involved in acquiring skills of musicianship require patience, and continued practice may train the executive attentional networks of the brain in the way any continued exercise reinforces neuronal pathways in the brain. I continue to wonder how to train these networks, though. I find that studies on attention as it relates to music frequently claim that music study improves attention but the “how” question has not been answered in any study I’ve come across. I think many teachers would benefit from knowing the types of activities that train students to focus.
How Arts Training Influences Cognition
By Michael Posner, Ph.D., Mary K. Rothbart, Ph.D., Brad E. Sheese, Ph.D., and Jessica Kieras, Ph.D., University of Oregon
http://www.dana.org/news/publications/detail.aspx?id=10762
Summary
The authors of the study sought to examine how arts training can improve cognition via attention mechanisms in the brain. They hypothesized that executive attentional areas of the brain can be improved through specific training. Enthusiasm for the arts, including music, might allow children to pay closer attention to artistic pursuits. This enthusiasm may therefore lead to improved motivation, allowing for better attention, and therefore cognitive improvement.
Surveys with adults showed that interest in a particular art correlated with actual engagement in the art. A general openness towards the arts led to an appreciation for the arts (except dance, which it seems the survey did not define well as some took it to refer to dancing that happens socially, rather than as a performance art).
Tests on children showed that motivation (by means of a reward or through knowing how they did on a task) leads to better performance on tasks, especially when the motivation is sustained for longer periods. They stated that “findings support the idea that interest in the arts allows for sustained attention, providing an increased opportunity for the training to be effective”, though the way the study specifically supports this is unclear. By their own admission, “[t]he link between arts training and motivation, though plausible, remains speculative, and needs to be tested through experimental research.” Nonetheless, the idea is that if children are open to and interested in the arts, then they are likely to be motivated to pursue that art and to sustain attention through artistic activities.
The researchers also used attention training to examine the executive attentional network (midline and lateral frontal areas) in the brain, which is engaged in self-regulation of cognition and emotion. The aim of this training, which was related to emotion and cognition regulation, was to see if it improves cognition. The exercises were designed to be interesting and motivating. EEG results showed that the training did improve the function of the executive attentional network in resolving conflict. The network in these children (6-year-olds) resembled that of adults. These children also scored better on intelligence tests.
Not all children benefited from the attention training. Genetic differences seem dependent on the form of a dopamine transmitter gene present in the child. The researchers involved in this study are therefore continuing research in genetics to determine whether certain genes lead to interest in the arts, and to greater attention.
Reflection
The ability to sustain attention is usually a characteristic teachers long to find and further develop in their students. Often, we associate attention or focus with learning, or at least the increased possibility of it. Teaching very young children has certainly posed many challenges for me and I continually seek ways to attract their attention.
Unfortunately, this article did not specify the tasks involved in the attention training given to children. The researchers assume that interest creates motivation and sustained attention, but do not explain how the latter can be improved by certain activities. In this study, the attention tasks used seem to be related to conflict tasks, though it is not very clear. In the introduction, they state that the training consisted of conflict resolution training, but their outline of the actual study conflates the details of the tasks, making it difficult to give a clear summary. They say that the conflict-resolution tasks were interesting in the way they “assume arts training to be for children with the appropriate interests.” It would have been helpful to know what caught the children’s interests.
I also noticed that this study used training exercises that were not artistic, but it nonetheless claims that artistic training likely improves attention and that this would translate to improved overall cognition. Supporting the hypothesis about the link between the arts and cognition without using artistic tasks leaves me wanting further direct explanation.
From my own experience, it does seem that musical training instills a sense of focus and perseverance that is linked to motivation. The physical and mental training involved in acquiring skills of musicianship require patience, and continued practice may train the executive attentional networks of the brain in the way any continued exercise reinforces neuronal pathways in the brain. I continue to wonder how to train these networks, though. I find that studies on attention as it relates to music frequently claim that music study improves attention but the “how” question has not been answered in any study I’ve come across. I think many teachers would benefit from knowing the types of activities that train students to focus.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Musicians slightly crazy, but smarter?
Reference
Gibson, C., Folley, B. S., Park, Sohee (2008). Enhanced divergent thinking and creativity in musicians: A behavioral and near-infrared spectroscopy . Brain and Cognition, 69(2009), 162-169. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2008.07.009.
Summary
The purpose of this study was to examine creativity as demonstrated by divergent thinking and to link it to personality traits, intelligence (IQ), and activity in the frontal cortical regions of the brain, which have shown increased activity in association with creative (divergent) thinking.
Divergent thinking has long been seen as a component of creativity as it requires flexibility in thinking and problem solving, in particular, the ability to guide one’s thoughts without clearly defined parameters. Interestingly, in a previous study, people displaying more schizotypal personality traits also showed greater activity in the frontal cortical area of the brain, demonstrating a link between creativity and psychosis-proneness.
Musicians are seen as highly creative people, so the authors of the study recruited 20 classical music students and 20 non-musicians for two experiments. All participants were assessed for intelligence, handedness (fine motor skills in each hand), and verbal fluency. They also filled out questionnaires regarding creativity and schizotypal personality.
EXPERIMENT #1:
a) Remote Associates Test (RAT) – Participants were given three words and were asked to find another associated word. They could generate as many words as they want but there’s one correct answer.
b) Divergent Thinking Test (DTT) – Participants were asked to generate uses for objects alone and in combination with others. There was no time limit and they could come up with as many uses as they wanted.
EXPERIMENT #2: (used a subset of the original group: 8 musicians, 7 non-musicians)
Near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) was used to measure blood oxygenation changes in the frontal cortex during a modified DTT.
RESULTS:
Musicians self-reported greater creative and schizotypal traits in the questionnaires. Musicians showed higher levels of divergent thinking and IQ (including verbal). There was no difference in handedness between groups. Musicians scored better on both the RAT and DTT. Musicians showed greater activity in both sides of the frontal cortex whereas non-musicians showed more activity in the left side.
Reflection:
This study, by the authors’ own account seems to provide greater credence to the idea that music makes you smarter. Musicians also seem to be more creative and think more ‘out-of-the-box’ than non-musicians. Perhaps a bit more disturbing is the link to psychosis-proneness, though musicians in this study did not achieve clinical levels. It’s also not the first time that higher IQ has been linked to mental health concerns (click here for an example).
Musical training certainly encourages an expansion of the imagination, and even without knowing that music causes activity in many areas of the brain, it’s easy to recognize the full-body involvement it calls for, not to mention the emotional element that factors into the equation. Divergent thinking may be an outcome of our need to draw from diverse thoughts and experiences----tactile, sensual, emotional, etc. It makes sense that the cognitive-perceptual part of the schizotypal questionnaire has to do with “perceptual aberrations and magical thinking”. I’m not sure what they mean by magical thinking, exactly, but what else to we do when we write, improvise, or interpret a piece, but conceptualize the world in ways that others may not?
I do wonder, however, whether musical training can cause a greater manifestation of these traits, or whether those predisposed to toward these traits and ways of thinking gravitate toward music and other arts.
Gibson, C., Folley, B. S., Park, Sohee (2008). Enhanced divergent thinking and creativity in musicians: A behavioral and near-infrared spectroscopy . Brain and Cognition, 69(2009), 162-169. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2008.07.009.
Summary
The purpose of this study was to examine creativity as demonstrated by divergent thinking and to link it to personality traits, intelligence (IQ), and activity in the frontal cortical regions of the brain, which have shown increased activity in association with creative (divergent) thinking.
Divergent thinking has long been seen as a component of creativity as it requires flexibility in thinking and problem solving, in particular, the ability to guide one’s thoughts without clearly defined parameters. Interestingly, in a previous study, people displaying more schizotypal personality traits also showed greater activity in the frontal cortical area of the brain, demonstrating a link between creativity and psychosis-proneness.
Musicians are seen as highly creative people, so the authors of the study recruited 20 classical music students and 20 non-musicians for two experiments. All participants were assessed for intelligence, handedness (fine motor skills in each hand), and verbal fluency. They also filled out questionnaires regarding creativity and schizotypal personality.
EXPERIMENT #1:
a) Remote Associates Test (RAT) – Participants were given three words and were asked to find another associated word. They could generate as many words as they want but there’s one correct answer.
b) Divergent Thinking Test (DTT) – Participants were asked to generate uses for objects alone and in combination with others. There was no time limit and they could come up with as many uses as they wanted.
EXPERIMENT #2: (used a subset of the original group: 8 musicians, 7 non-musicians)
Near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) was used to measure blood oxygenation changes in the frontal cortex during a modified DTT.
RESULTS:
Musicians self-reported greater creative and schizotypal traits in the questionnaires. Musicians showed higher levels of divergent thinking and IQ (including verbal). There was no difference in handedness between groups. Musicians scored better on both the RAT and DTT. Musicians showed greater activity in both sides of the frontal cortex whereas non-musicians showed more activity in the left side.
Reflection:
This study, by the authors’ own account seems to provide greater credence to the idea that music makes you smarter. Musicians also seem to be more creative and think more ‘out-of-the-box’ than non-musicians. Perhaps a bit more disturbing is the link to psychosis-proneness, though musicians in this study did not achieve clinical levels. It’s also not the first time that higher IQ has been linked to mental health concerns (click here for an example).
Musical training certainly encourages an expansion of the imagination, and even without knowing that music causes activity in many areas of the brain, it’s easy to recognize the full-body involvement it calls for, not to mention the emotional element that factors into the equation. Divergent thinking may be an outcome of our need to draw from diverse thoughts and experiences----tactile, sensual, emotional, etc. It makes sense that the cognitive-perceptual part of the schizotypal questionnaire has to do with “perceptual aberrations and magical thinking”. I’m not sure what they mean by magical thinking, exactly, but what else to we do when we write, improvise, or interpret a piece, but conceptualize the world in ways that others may not?
I do wonder, however, whether musical training can cause a greater manifestation of these traits, or whether those predisposed to toward these traits and ways of thinking gravitate toward music and other arts.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Musical Training, Brain Structures, and Behaviour
Reference
Hyde, K. L., Lerch, J., Norton, A., Forgeard, M., Winner, E., Evans, A. & Schlaug, G. (2009). Musical Training Shapes Structural Brain Development. The Journal of Neuroscience, 29(10), 3019-3025. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5118-08.2009.
Summary
The purpose of this study was to examine brain structure changes and correlated musical behaviour in two groups of children. The "instrumental" group was made up of 15 children (mean age: 6.32 years) and the "control" group was made up of 16 children (mean age: 5.9 years). For 15 months, the instrumental group received half-hour weekly keyboard lessons while the control group participated in a weekly 40-minute group music class that involved singing and playing with drums and bells. Before and after the 15-month period, MRI scans were done and each child was given music behaviour tests. These tests consisted of
Near-transfer measures (These test skills that are directly related to music participation.)
a) a 4-finger motor skill test for each hand
b) a melodic and rhythmic discrimination test
Far-transfer measures (These test skills that are further removed from music participation.)
a) object assembly test
b) block design test
c) vocabulary test
Researchers found that the students in the instrumental group experienced greater structural changes in motor-related areas of the brain. This was correlated and predicted by improvements in left-hand motor skills. Changes in the right auditory area were correlated and predicted by improvements in melodic/rhythmic discrimination. No advantage was gained by the instrumental group over the control group in the far-transfer skills. These findings support results of tests on musicians and non-musicians.
They also found structural changes in the brain outside of the motor and auditory areas. Researchers were particularly excited by changes observed in the left posterior pericingulate region, since this is in the vicinity of Brodmann area 31, which is involved in the integration of visual information and the limbic system. Musical notation and its emotional interpretation is an example of this type of integration.
Reflection
In reading this study, I did wonder, "So what if the brain can change in just 15 months?" Will this make a difference in how I do things now? In what I choose to do? How I choose to teach?
To be honest, I don’t know, but perhaps it ought to. There are already many reasons, not specifically conceived as brain development reasons, why I make decisions as it is. In particular, my reasons for choosing to focus on music-related issues did not come from a consideration of how it would change or help my brain, per se. But, admittedly, since the brain controls everything, I guess indirectly, this is what I’ve done. More precisely, it seems to me that music provides access to a part of people that other means don’t seem to get at the same way.
Indeed, this study shows that music changes the brain, even in areas that are just beyond the direct music/motor-related centres. In reading both Jourdain’s Music, The Brain, and Ecstasy and Levitin’s This Is Your Brain on Music, there appears to be much evidence that music involves the whole body, the whole brain. Even without such proof, I think most of us have experienced this.
What significance does that have? It seems to me, that development of the whole person in many different ways allows for a more varied way of thinking, and maybe a different way of looking at day-to-day problems---personally, socially, globally. Not that by listening to or playing music, we can look at, say, environmental issues, and solve them “musically”, but by developing as many parts of ourselves, our brains, as we can, we’ll have that many more tools at our disposal for collaborating on issues.*
It therefore interested me to see that the Toronto Star ran a series of articles about brain science-informed education: http://www.thestar.com/topic/Atkinson2009 as I had wondered for some time whether knowing what's happening in the brain could someday allow me to teach and play the piano more effectively by targeting areas known to be developed by certain tasks. A new movement is beginning to look at exactly how neuroscience can improve education.
An instinctive concern of mine in reading the summary of this study is that focus on brain structure and resultant behaviour may end up sidestepping other important factors in the learning environment. In this study, for example, factors such as teacher experience and interaction with each of the groups was not mentioned; neither was interaction between students in the group class. Perhaps the instrumental group developed more, in part, because of the one-on-one attention that was given.
Nonetheless, the idea that the brain remains malleable even into old age is such a remarkable discovery. It's a liberating thought that change is possible at every stage. It gives me a sense of motivation---there's always a reason to learn and to teach. The application of neuroscience to education, if done in dialogue and collaboration with those who influence and are influenced by the field---philosophers, educators, parents, students, etc.---, seems another important tool in improving the field.
------------------------------------------
*I should note that though far-transfer skill did not seem greatly affected in this study, the authors surmise that this may have been due to a) too short a duration for the effects to be seen, b) varying intensities of keyboard practice among the children), c) perhaps the sample being too small.
Hyde, K. L., Lerch, J., Norton, A., Forgeard, M., Winner, E., Evans, A. & Schlaug, G. (2009). Musical Training Shapes Structural Brain Development. The Journal of Neuroscience, 29(10), 3019-3025. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5118-08.2009.
Summary
The purpose of this study was to examine brain structure changes and correlated musical behaviour in two groups of children. The "instrumental" group was made up of 15 children (mean age: 6.32 years) and the "control" group was made up of 16 children (mean age: 5.9 years). For 15 months, the instrumental group received half-hour weekly keyboard lessons while the control group participated in a weekly 40-minute group music class that involved singing and playing with drums and bells. Before and after the 15-month period, MRI scans were done and each child was given music behaviour tests. These tests consisted of
Near-transfer measures (These test skills that are directly related to music participation.)
a) a 4-finger motor skill test for each hand
b) a melodic and rhythmic discrimination test
Far-transfer measures (These test skills that are further removed from music participation.)
a) object assembly test
b) block design test
c) vocabulary test
Researchers found that the students in the instrumental group experienced greater structural changes in motor-related areas of the brain. This was correlated and predicted by improvements in left-hand motor skills. Changes in the right auditory area were correlated and predicted by improvements in melodic/rhythmic discrimination. No advantage was gained by the instrumental group over the control group in the far-transfer skills. These findings support results of tests on musicians and non-musicians.
They also found structural changes in the brain outside of the motor and auditory areas. Researchers were particularly excited by changes observed in the left posterior pericingulate region, since this is in the vicinity of Brodmann area 31, which is involved in the integration of visual information and the limbic system. Musical notation and its emotional interpretation is an example of this type of integration.
Reflection
In reading this study, I did wonder, "So what if the brain can change in just 15 months?" Will this make a difference in how I do things now? In what I choose to do? How I choose to teach?
To be honest, I don’t know, but perhaps it ought to. There are already many reasons, not specifically conceived as brain development reasons, why I make decisions as it is. In particular, my reasons for choosing to focus on music-related issues did not come from a consideration of how it would change or help my brain, per se. But, admittedly, since the brain controls everything, I guess indirectly, this is what I’ve done. More precisely, it seems to me that music provides access to a part of people that other means don’t seem to get at the same way.
Indeed, this study shows that music changes the brain, even in areas that are just beyond the direct music/motor-related centres. In reading both Jourdain’s Music, The Brain, and Ecstasy and Levitin’s This Is Your Brain on Music, there appears to be much evidence that music involves the whole body, the whole brain. Even without such proof, I think most of us have experienced this.
What significance does that have? It seems to me, that development of the whole person in many different ways allows for a more varied way of thinking, and maybe a different way of looking at day-to-day problems---personally, socially, globally. Not that by listening to or playing music, we can look at, say, environmental issues, and solve them “musically”, but by developing as many parts of ourselves, our brains, as we can, we’ll have that many more tools at our disposal for collaborating on issues.*
It therefore interested me to see that the Toronto Star ran a series of articles about brain science-informed education: http://www.thestar.com/topic/Atkinson2009 as I had wondered for some time whether knowing what's happening in the brain could someday allow me to teach and play the piano more effectively by targeting areas known to be developed by certain tasks. A new movement is beginning to look at exactly how neuroscience can improve education.
An instinctive concern of mine in reading the summary of this study is that focus on brain structure and resultant behaviour may end up sidestepping other important factors in the learning environment. In this study, for example, factors such as teacher experience and interaction with each of the groups was not mentioned; neither was interaction between students in the group class. Perhaps the instrumental group developed more, in part, because of the one-on-one attention that was given.
Nonetheless, the idea that the brain remains malleable even into old age is such a remarkable discovery. It's a liberating thought that change is possible at every stage. It gives me a sense of motivation---there's always a reason to learn and to teach. The application of neuroscience to education, if done in dialogue and collaboration with those who influence and are influenced by the field---philosophers, educators, parents, students, etc.---, seems another important tool in improving the field.
------------------------------------------
*I should note that though far-transfer skill did not seem greatly affected in this study, the authors surmise that this may have been due to a) too short a duration for the effects to be seen, b) varying intensities of keyboard practice among the children), c) perhaps the sample being too small.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)