AEC PUBLICATIONs 2007

literature study

preparing young musicians for professional training:

what does scientific research tell us?

fieke werner

The Polifonia project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views of its authors and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which might be made of the information contained therein.

A free electronic version of this final report is available through www.polifonia-tn.org.

literature study preparing young musicians for professional training:

what does scientific research tell us?

fieke werner

Contents

executive summary foreword: why this document? introduction to the literature study 1. why teach music? 1.1 Benefitsofmusiceducation 2. research on the necessity of starting with music early to become a professional musician3. childhood developmental theories 3.1 LevVygotsky 3.2 JeanPiaget 4. musical development theories 4.1 Musicaldevelopmentingeneral 4.2 Thedevelopmentofexpertmusicalperformance5. factors influencing musical development 5.1 Ismakingmusiconlyforthetalented? 5.2 Theinfluenceofrelatives 5.3 Theinfluenceoftheteacher 5.4 Theinfluenceofpeers 5.5 Practice 5.6 Othercharacteristicsoftheindividual6. music and the human brain 6.1 Thehumanbrain 6.2 Thedevelopmentofthebrain 6.3 Musicperformanceandthebrain7. conclusions, discussion and recommendations 7.1 Conclusions 7.2 Discussionandrecommendationsforfurtherresearchreferencesappendicesappendix a TheAssociatedBoardMusicExaminationsappendix B Informationaboutseveralmethodstostudythebrain

579

1010

23303031333339444450545758697272757681818588

95

96

5

5

exeCutive summary

In the frameworkof theERASMUSThematicNetwork forMusic “Polifonia”,an investigationhasbeenconductedintothemusiceducationlevelspriortothehighereducationlevel,theso-calledpre-collegelevels. Inordertobesuccessful infuturecareers,musicianshavetostartataveryearlyagewithmusicactivitiesandinstruction.Withtheaimtosupportthisview,aliteraturestudywasundertakenofexistingscientificresearchthatshowedsuchanearlystartwasnecessary.Inaddition,someotherrelatedresearchtopicswereformulated.

Thefollowingquestionswereaskedinthisliteraturestudy:1. Shouldchildrenstartearlywithmusiclessonsinordertobecomeprofessionalmusicians?2. Isthereacertainageatwhichchildrenshouldideallybeginwithmusiclessons?3. Arethereanyphysicalorpsychologicalbarriersthatpreventstartingwithmusiclessonsbefore

theageoffour?4. Are there other important – external - variables that influence the level of musical expertise

reachedbyaperson?5. Dopopularmusiciansandclassicalmusiciansdifferintheirearlydevelopment?6. Is there a relation between musicality, making music (playing an instrument, composing or

singing)andintelligenceand/orothergeneraldevelopmentalskills(social,emotional)?1. Astheresearchhasshown,itisclearitisindeeddesirabletostartearlywithmusiclessonsifone

wantstoreachaprofessionallevelofmusicalperformance.Themajorityofthechildreninthedifferentstudiesstartedbeforetheageofnine,mostofthemwereevenyounger.Brainresearchhasalsoshownthatstartingwithmusiceducationbeforetheageofapproximatelysevenresultsinplasticchangesinthebrainastheplasticityofthebrainislargestinearlychildhood.

2. Thesecondquestionhasalreadybeenpartlyansweredbytheanswertothefirstquestion.Allreviewedresearchsuggeststhatitisbestthatchildrenstartwithmusiclessonsattheageofninelatest,butpreferablyaroundtheageofsevenorbefore.

3. Tothethirdquestion,thefollowingcanbestated:Indifferentstudies(e.g.Manturzewska1990;Bloom1985)childrenstartedasyoungasthreeyearsold.Inaddition,intheliteraturetherearenoindicationstherearephysicalorpsychologicalbarrierstostartbeforetheageoffour,aslongasthemusicalengagementinwhichthechildisinvolvedisappropriatetotthedevelopmentandcapacityofthechild(Lehmann,SlobodaandWoody2007).

4. Related to the question on external variables that influence the level of musical expertise,researchfindingsindicatethereareindeedseveralsuchexternalvariables.Besidestheinternalfactorsoftalentandmotivation,suchfactorsaresupportfromparentsandsiblings,teachersandpeers,theamountofaccumulatedpracticehoursandthewayofpractising.

5. When addressing any differences between popular and classical musicians in their earlydevelopment, it becomes evident the majority of the studies about musical development hasfocused on classical musicians. Nevertheless, even the limited amount of search on popular

6 7

musicians seems to indicate there are some differences. The main difference is that popularmusiciansmainlypractisebythemselvesandwithfriends;theroleofateacherismorelimitedintheirmusicaldevelopmentcomparedtoclassicalmusicians,forwhichtheteacherisregardedasvery important.Anotherdifferenceseemstobethatclassicalmusiciansneedtostartwithregularinstrumentalinstructionmuchsoonerthanpopularmusicians.

6. The last question raised concerns the supposed influence of music and music education onintelligenceandothergeneraldevelopmentalskills.Studiesshowthatmusiceducationhasapositiveinfluenceonspatial-reasoningskillsofchildrenandIQ-scores.Tohavemorecertaintyontheinfluenceofmusiconliteraryskillsmoreresearchisneeded,becausetheavailablestudiesdonotseemtoprovideaclearpictureyet.

6 7

Foreword: why this doCument?

TheERASMUSThematicNetworkforMusic“Polifonia”1,thelargestEuropeanprojectonprofessionalmusictrainingtodate,involved67organisationsinprofessionalmusictrainingandthemusicprofessionfrom32Europeancountriesand30expertsin5connectedworkinggroupsinanintensive3-yearworkprogrammefromSeptember2004–October2007.Theproject,whichwasco-ordinatedjointlybytheMalmö Academy of Music – Lund UniversityandtheAssociation Européenne des Conservatoires,

Academies de Musique et Musikhochschulen (AEC),receivedsupportfromtheEuropeanUnionwithintheframeworkoftheERASMUSProgramme.Theaimsoftheprojectwere:1. TostudyissuesconnectedtotheBolognaDeclarationProcess,suchasthedevelopmentoflearning

outcomesfor1st(Bachelor),2nd(Master)and3rdcyclestudiesthroughthe“Tuning”methodology2,theuseofcreditpointsystems,curriculumdevelopment,mobilityofstudentsandteachers,andqualityassuranceinthefieldofmusicinhighereducation

2. Tocollect informationon levels inmusiceducationother than the 1st (Bachelor)and the2nd(Master)studycycles,inparticularpre-collegetrainingand3rdcycle(Doctorate/PhD)studiesinthefieldofmusic.

3. Toexploreinternationaltrendsandchangesinthemusicprofessionandtheirimplicationsforprofessionalmusictraining.

OneoftheaimsofPolifoniawastostudytheeducationallevelinmusiclowerthanhighereducation,theso-called“pre-collegelevel”.Itmayseemunexpectedtofindachapteraboutthepre-collegelevelaspartofaprojectthatfocusesonhighereducation.Buttherearegoodreasonstoincludepre-collegeeducationintheresearchonthecurrentsituationprofessionalmusictraininginEuropeanhighereducation.

Professionalmusiciansusuallystartlearningmusicataveryyoungageandcontinuebeingactiveasmusiciansuntilorevenaftertheyretire.Thismakesmusiconeofthemostevidentexamplesoflifelonglearningandalsoasubjectareathatdistinguishesitselfinthissensefrommanyotherdisciplinesinhighereducation.Forprofessionalmusictraininginstitutionsatthehighereducationlevel,therefore,itisessentialthatthepre-collegelevelpreparesstudentsforenteringthehighereducationleveladequately.Withoutthispreparation,studentswouldnotbeabletomeetthecurrenthighqualitativestandards inhighermusiceducation institutionsand,evenmore importantly, thefierceandever-increasingcompetitioninthemusicprofession.

Until now, it was common knowledge among musicians and (to a certain extend) among policymakers that this preparatory phase to higher music education was important and had to besupported. This understanding, however, has become increasingly under pressure with national

1 Seeformoreinformationabout“Polifonia”www.polifonia-tn.org.

2 Formoreinformationaboutthe“Tuning”methodologypleaseseehttp://www.tuning.unideusto.org/tuningeu/index.php?option=

content&task=view&id=172&Itemid=205.

8 9

governments focusingmostlyon thehighereducational levels inrelation toprofessional trainingduetotheBolognaprocessdevelopments,inparticulartheimplementationofthe3-cycle(Bachelor/Master/3rdcycle)structure. InsomeEuropeancountries,whereprofessionalmusic trainingwasorganisedasacontinuumstartingwithtrainingatayoungageuptoafirstprofessionalqualificationwithin one continuous structure, the pre-higher education levels in music have been faced withmanydifficulties.Inaddition,itseemsthatthepositionofmusicinprimaryandsecondarygeneraleducationisweakeningaswell.

Inordertoassistinstitutionsintheirdebateswithpolicymakersin(higher)educationandinlocal,regionalandnationalgovernmentsonthenecessityofawellorganisedpre-collegesysteminmusic,theAECdecidedtomakepre-collegetrainingapriorityinthePolifoniaproject.ThroughaEurope-wideinvestigation,argumentsandexamplesofgoodpracticeweretobedevelopedthatcouldbehelpfulindiscussionsonmusiceducationforyoungpeople.

Theinvestigationhadthefollowingcomponents:• Firstly,inordertosupportthefactthatmusicianshavetostartlearninganinstrumentatayoung

age inorder to reachasufficient level for themusicprofession,a literaturestudywasmadeof existing scientific research that supports the abovementioned opinion and gives insight inhowyoungmusicianslearnfromamusicpsychological,sociological,pedagogicalandphysicalperspective.

• Secondly,aEuropean-widemappingexercisewasundertakentodescribesystemsandapproachesinpre-collegetraining.

• Finally,inordertocreatealinkwiththeworkbeingdoneinthe“Tuning”componentofPolifonia,inwhichcompetencesandlearningoutcomesweredevelopedtoactasreferencepointsforthe1st,2ndand3rdcyclestudiesinmusic,thepre-collegeworkinggroupformulatedasetoflearningoutcomesthatcanbeusedbypre-collegemusicinstitutionsforthepreparationoftheirstudentsforthehighereducationlevelandthatareconnectedtothelearningoutcomesforthe1stcycle.

Thisdocumentpresentsthefirstcomponent,whichistheliteraturestudy.ItwaswrittenbyFiekeWernerasaMaster’sthesisinmusicologyatUtrechtUniversity.

8 9

introduCtion to the literature study

The literaturestudywill identifyexisting researchonquestionsconcerning thedevelopmentandexistenceofmusicalability.Forexample,isitnecessarytostudymanyhoursadayatayoungageorisitnecessarytostartasearlyaspossiblewithmusicinstructioninordertobecomeaprofessionalperformer?Thisisdonebyreviewinganddiscussingcontemporaryliteratureonmusiceducation,music psychology, musical development and musical expertise. An attempt will also be made toidentifyanydifferencesinexistingresearchbetweenthesituationsofmusiciansinclassicalandinpopularmusic.Wewillthereforelookforanswerstothefollowingquestions:

1. Shouldchildrenstartearlywithmusic lessons inordertobecomeprofessionalmusicians? Isthereacertainageatwhichchildrenshouldideallybeginwithmusiclessons?

2. Aretherephysicalorpsychologicalbarriersthatpreventstartingwithmusiclessonsbeforetheageoffour?

3. Are there other important – external - variables that influence the level of musical expertisereachedbyaperson?

4. Dopopularmusiciansandclassicalmusiciansdifferintheirdevelopment?5. Is there a relation between musicality, making music (playing an instrument, composing or

singing)andintelligenceand/orothergeneraldevelopmentalskills(social,emotional)?

Thefirstchapterfocusesongroundsforteachingmusicandtheintrinsicvalueofmusicandmusiceducation.Thischapterformsthefoundationofthestudy,byemphasizingtheimportanceofmusicandmusiceducationforallchildren,whethertheywillbeprofessionalmusiciansornot.

Inthesecondchapteranoverviewofthemainliteraturethatisusedforthisliteraturestudyisgiven.

Athoroughunderstandingofthedevelopmentofmusicstudentsisneededtoprovidethemwiththebestmusiceducationpossible.Inordertounderstandthedevelopmentofchildreningeneralandchildrenwithaninteresttobecomemusiciansinparticular,developmentalandmusicdevelopmentaltheoriesareaddressedinthethirdandfourthchapters.

Thisisfollowedinchapterfivebyadiscussiononexistingliteratureandresearchaboutimportantfactorsthatcontributetothedevelopmentofmusicalperformance,includinginfluencebyparentsandsiblings,peersandtheteacher,butalsothestartingageandtheamountofstudyhours.Chapterfivewillstartwithadiscussionoftheroleoftalent inthedevelopmentofmusicalityandmusicalperformance.

Chaptersixwillreviewliteratureabouttheinfluencemusicmakinghasonthehumanbrain.Theresearchresultsseemtoprovethatstartingearlywithmusiceducationandmakingmusichasalong-lastinginfluenceontheshapeofthebrain.

Thelastchapterreturnstothequestionsformulatedinthisintroduction.

10 11

1 why teaCh musiC?

1.1 Benefits of music education

As explained in the introduction to this document, the main question for this literature studyaddressesthenecessityofstartingyoungwithmusicinstructionforthosewantingtobecomemusicprofessionalsinthefuture.Thisputsthisdocumentclearlyintoacontextrelatedtothetrainingforthemusicprofession,whichisthemainareaofstudyofthe“Polifonia”project.However,beforethismainissueisdiscussedmorein-depthintheotherchapters,anotherissuethatisvitaltomusicingeneralandtoprofessionalmusictrainingaswellwillbeexploredfirst:whyshouldmusicbetaughtingeneral?Formanyitisnotalwaysevidentwhythisshouldbedoneorwhymusicshouldbepartoftheschoolcurriculum.Thiscausesuncertaintyformusicteachers,parentsandeducationalleaders.However,therehavebeenseveralexpertstryingtofindananswertothequestion“whyteachmusic?”Inthischapter,severalpossibleanswerstothisquestionwillbediscussedasanintroductiontotheliteraturestudyonthemaintopicmentionedabove inChapter2.Bydoingso, thissectionof thedocumentformsthefoundationoftheoverallstudy,byemphasizingtheimportanceofmusicandmusiceducationforallchildren,whethertheywillbeprofessionalmusiciansornot.

1.1.1 why engage in music: for intrinsic values or extra-musical effects?

In his discussion of Bastian’s study on the positive effects of music on the cognitive and social-emotional development (see section 1.1.2), Koopman (2005) wonders whether we should look fortheextra-musicaleffectsofmusiceducationtojustifyitorfocusontheintrinsicvalueofmusicandmusiceducation.Bystressingtheextra-musicaleffectswemakemusiconlyameansthroughwhichwegainothergoals.Koopmanthinksmusichasanintrinsicvalue;itisthereforenot–orshouldnotbe–necessarytojustifymusiceducationreferringtothebeneficialextra-musicaleffectsofmakingmusic.Phillips(1993)doesnotagreewiththisopinion:hethinksthatmusiceducatorsandmusicphilosophersshouldnotbeafraidofmentioningthe“functionalbenefits”(p.17)ofmusicinadditiontotheaestheticexperience.However,Phillipsacknowledgesthefactthatmostmusiciansbecamemusiciansbecauseoftheaestheticexperienceandnotbecauseoftheutilitarianaspectofmusic.Atthesametime,hedoesbelievethatdefendingmusiceducation–inschools–willbenefitfromtheuseofutilitarianargumentsaswell.

Rauscher(2002)discussesthissameproblem.Sherecognisesitmaybeverybeneficialformusiceducationprogramsthatextra-musicaleffectsofmusicaltrainingexist,butontheotherhandshedoesnotwantmusicinstructiontobeleadbyscientificgoalsinsteadofmusicalgoals.Reimer,listeningtoRauscheronaconferenceoftheMENC3,feltthreatenedbyherresearchontheextra-musicaleffectsofmusiclisteningandmusiceducation(e.g.Rauscher2002).Hefindstheideathatmusicmayone

3 MusicEducators´NationalConference,theNationalAssociationforMusicEducationintheUS.Seewww.menc.org.

10 11

daybetaughtonlytoenhancechildren’scognitiveabilitiesortheiracademicachievementsworrying(Reimer 1999). He wonders why music has this vulnerable position in education and he finds anexplanationwithRenéDescartes(1596-1650).TheFrenchphilosopherclaimedthatthemathematicalwayofthinkingistherightmodelofreasoningandthewaytoachievepure,reliableintellect.Thiswayofthinkingisfreefromemotionsandfreefromunreliableinformationfromthesenses.AccordingtoReimer,thiswayofthinkingstillinfluencestheWesternwayofthinking,leadingtotheideathatineducationtherearecognitivesubjects likemathematics,scienceandlanguagesthatarebasicandregardedvaluableanduseful,andsubjectsthatarerootedinthesensesoremotions,likethearts,whicharenotconsideredbasicandthereforenotregardedasvaluable.Therefore,whenanunimportantsubjectlikemusicisabletosupportoneoftheimportantsubjects,thisiswelcomed.AccordingtoReimer(1999)thiswayofthinkingiscommoninWesterneducation,causingaconstantthreatoftheplaceofmusicintheschoolcurriculum.

Inthefollowingsectionashortdiscussionwill followwhy it is importanttoengage inmusicandhence,whyitisimportanttoeducatemusic.Afterthisphilosophicalpart,areviewfollowsofresearchaboutextra-musicalbenefitsofmusic:theso-called“Mozart-effect”.Supportersofthistheoryclaimaneffectofmusicandmusicmakingoncognitiveandsocial-emotionalabilitiesanduseresearchprovingthiseffecttostresstheimportanceofmusiceducation.

1.1.2 the intrinsic value of music

InhisPresidents’AwardLecture1999,theBritishprofessorofpsychologyJohnSlobodasummarizesseveralgoodreasonsforengaginginmusic.Hesays:“Thenotionthatmusiccouldbeengagedinpurely forpersonal fulfilment, for thebuildingupofcommunityand friendship, for thesheer joyofmakingbeautifulsoundstogether,isastrange,almostreprehensible,conceptinmanypeople’sminds” (Sloboda 1999, p. 455). Gembris (2003) agrees with Sloboda when he says that the mainargumentformusiceducationshouldbethevalueofmusic(andart),althoughthisvalueisnotclearforallpeople.

AccordingtoElliot (1991) therearedifferentwaysof lookingatmusiceducation.Onehecallsthephilosophyof“musiceducationasaestheticeducation”(p.22).Accordingtothisphilosophy,musiceducation’s main aim should be the contemplation of aesthetic objects called musical works inabstractionfromtheircontextsofuseandproduction.Thegoalofmusiceducationfollowingfromthisphilosophyisthenteachingchildrentolistentomusic.Bylisteningtomusic,childrenshouldbeabletogaintheknowledgemusicalobjectsoffer,asmusicalworksaresymbolsthatofferinsighttothegeneralformsofhumanfeelings.AccordingtoElliot,thisphilosophyseesperformanceasanevilwiththeonlyaimtohaveotherslisteningtomusic.Itfailstoacknowledgethatperformancecanbeanendinitself.This is then the second way of looking at music education: learning to perform music because“musical performing can be a form of thinking and knowing valuable for all children” (p.23). In

12 13

musicalperformanceknowing,thinkingandactingareinterwoven.Playingapieceofmusicrequiresapersontoknowhisinstrumentandwhattodotomakemusic.Whileheplaysthepieceofmusicheisthinkingabouthowtoperformitandreactingduringtheperformance.Everytouchon–forexample- thepiano isbasedonknowledge, isdone intentionally isaresultof thought,and it isnotpossibletoseparateactionfromthought.Itisawayofactiveknowledge.Insteadofexpressingverbally what he knows, the musician performs his knowledge. This knowledge is only availableforperformersandnotforlisteners,whichisthereason,accordingtoElliot,thatmusiceducationshouldentaillearningtoperform.Still,thequestionremainswhypeoplewanttoperform.ToanswerthisquestionElliotcitesMihalyiCsikszentmihalyi:thispsychologistthinksthatourSelfneedsconstructiveknowledgetogrow,tobefulfilled.Constructiveknowledgeisgainedbyamatchbetweenchallengesandtheknow-howtodoit.Thismatchnotonlybringsconstructiveknowledgeandthusgrowth,butenjoymentaswell.Realgrowthisonlypossiblewhenachallengeissoughtthatisabletostaychallenginginordertodevelopandgrow.Musicperformanceissuchachallenge,whichgrowsalongwiththeindividuallearningtoperform.Inshort,makingmusicisasourceofconstructiveknowledgeandthusenjoymentandself-fulfilment,becauseitoffersprogressivelevelsofchallengeandwaysofimprovingone’sknow-how.

ThiswayoflookingatmusiceducationisalsorecognisedbyPitts(2000).Shegivesanoverviewofacentury-longdiscussionintheUKabouttheimportanceofmusiceducation.Shediscoversthreeargumentsthathavebeenusedtopleadformusiceducation.

Thefirstargumentismusicasawayoflearningabouttheculturethechildbelongsto.Partofthisargumentisthatchildrenwillappreciatetheirownculturemorebyknowingthemusicand,asaresult,knowmoreaboutthehistoryoftheirculture.Thisisimportantaccordingtotheadvocatesofthisargument,becauseitcanpreventdegenerationofthecultureandofthecountry.Thisargumentwas mainly used before the Second World War, but in the 1990’s the Chairman of the NationalCurriculumCouncilintheUKstillusedit.HestatedthateverychildgrowingupinBritain,irrespectiveoftheirbackground,shouldbetaughtaboutkeytraditionsandinfluenceswithintheBritishheritage(Swanwick1994).Forchildrentoknowthemusicoftheircultureandcountryitwasthoughttobeenoughtolistentoit.Whenchildrenaretaughtmusicbasedonthisargument,theywillmainlylearntolistentomusic,whichisaratherpassivewayofengaginginmusic.Fromthe1950´s,theviewthatclassicalmusic–themainkindofmusicthatwastaughtatthetime–wasaself-evidentpartofadultlife(andthusofculture)changedandcausedthisargumenttobecomelessimportant.Popularmusicandworldmusicshadbecomemoreavailableanditwasnotlongersufficienttosaythatmusichadadesirableculturalinfluence.Itbecamenecessarytodefinewhatwasmeantwithculture.Inaddition,theroleoftheteacherasaguideintotheworldofmusichaddisappeared,asmostchildrenalreadylistento(theirown)musicbeforemusiceducationstarts.

12 13

ThesecondargumentPittsfoundisthatmakingmusicisagoodwayofspendingfreetime:musicasleisure.AccordingtotheBoardofEducation4,educationmusttakeintoaccountthewholepersonandshouldaimitseffortsatteachingstudentsawiseuseoftheirleisuretime(HandbookofSuggestionsfor Teachers 1927, in Pitts 2000). The board thought that music could play a major part in thiseducationaltask.Musicthenbecomespartofeducationforlife; itenableschildrenandadultstoparticipateinmusicaslistenersorperformers.Expertsusingthisargumentthoughtthatmusicwasabletogivechildrenanopportunitytohavefulfillinglivesoutsidetheirfutureworkasadults.Musicseeninthiswayfulfilsaroleinthecurriculumsimilartohandicraftandgardening:asubjectwithout“realuse”.Forsome,this“uselessness”wasareasontopleaformusicinthecurriculum,becauseitcouldgiveanaddedvaluetotheotherwiseutilitariancurriculum.Asforthefirstargument,theriseofpopularmusic inthe1950’sand60’sledtonewchallenges,because children experienced different music cultures at home and at school; teachers did notalways appreciate the music children listened to at home en vice versa. The argument also lostpower,asapparentlychildrendidnotlongerneedmusiceducationatschooltolearnhowtospendleisuretimeonmusic.

Nowadays there is reasonable agreement on the opinion that music education is relevant for allchildren.Thisisintensifiedbytheideathatstressesthe“transferableskills”.Thesearethenon-orextra-musicaleffectsofmusiceducation thatwillbediscussed in theparagraph 1.1.3.Formanypoliticiansthesetransferableskillsareagoodreasontokeepmusiceducationinthecurriculum.

ThethirdreasontoteachmusicdiscussedbyPitts-theonethatresemblesElliot’sargumentforeducatingmusic-ismusicasacatalystforemotionalandpersonaldevelopment.Thefocusishereonthedevelopmentoftheindividualchild,notonthecultureoronacquisitionofskills.Thisargumentisusedthroughoutthetwentiethcentury,buthasalwayskeptaratherisolatedposition.Musicinthiswayisseenasa“guidingprincipletoregulateandilluminatealltheactivitiesofourexistence”(CambridgeshireCouncilofMusicEducation1933,p.16).Pitts(2000)citesthemusiceducatorYorkeTrotterwhowrote:“artistheexpressionofwhatImaycalltheinnernature,thatnaturewhichfeels,whichhasaspirationsandideals,whichreachesouttosomethingbeyondthematerialneedsofthisworld”(p.39).AccordingtoYorkeTrotterthisvisionofmusicandmusiceducationasksforaveryhighintegrityandcommitmentfromtheteacher.

Koopman (2005) adds a fourth reason. From the Middle Ages till the twentieth century, a periodKoopmancallstheChristianera,musicwasmeanttostrengthenpeople’sbeliefanddevotion.Musicwascomprehendedinanarrowway,becauseitinvolvedmainlysinging.Theaimofmusiceducationinthisperiodwasnottolearnmusic,buttobeabletosingpsalms,hymnsandotherreligioussongs.Thewordswereimportant,notthemusic.Insomereligiouscircles,thisisstillthereasonmusicistaught.Reimer(1999)describeshowsingingschoolswereestablishedintheUnitedStatesbecausebettersingingqualitywasneededduringworshipservices.Thisisaclearexampleofmusiceducation

4 TheBoardofEducationofGreatBritainco-ordinatestheworkofprimaryandsecondaryeducation.Schoolsthatarerecognized

bytheboardareunderGovernmentinspection.

14 15

servingreligion(Reimer1999).LeonhardandHouse(1959)mentionseveralotherreasonsmusicistaught,suchastoadvancestudents’health,todevelopsocialaspectsoflife,toimprovehomelife,ortodevelopgoodcitizenship.

Koopman(2005),however,feels,asisclearintheintroduction,thatmusichasavalueofitsown,anintrinsicvalueandthatthisisthereasontheteachmusic.Thisintrinsicvalueconsistsoftheuniqueexperiencesmusic,andtheotherarts,provideuswith.Musicisasourceofjoyandhappinessandgiveshumansafeelingofself-fulfilment.ThisissimilartothethirdreasondiscussedbyPitts.Thisfeelingaboutmusic isalsosharedbyAlperson:tothisphilosopher“musicseemstobeasourceofgenuineenrichmentwithoutwhichourliveswouldbeconsiderablediminished”(Alperson1991).LeonhardandHouse(1959)usethephilosopherDeweytosaybasicallythesame.Theydescribeaprocessinwhichapersonexperiencesdisequilibriuminhisenvironmentandgainssatisfactioninfindingwaystoovercomethisdisequilibrium.Artisticexperiencesarecapableofhelpinghumanswithregainingequilibriumandarethereforevaluable.Artisticpiecesalsosymbolizethehumanstruggleofloosingandregainingequilibrium.Theywrite:“Anexperienceisaestheticwhenresistance,tension,excitement,andemotionaretransformedintoamovementtowardfulfilmentandcompletion”(p.81).

Aswillbeclearfromtheabove-mentionedauthors,thereareseveralreasonstoteachmusic,themostimportantonebeingthepossibilityofself-fulfilmentandpersonalgrowth,andhencehappinessandjoybymakingmusic.ThisisalsounderlinedinstudiesonpopularmusicbyChristensonandRobertsfrom1998citedbyTerBogt(2003).AccordingtoChristensonandRobertsyoungpeoplehavefourreasonsto listentopopularmusic.Oneof these is“moodmanagement”: listeningtomusicimproves theirmoodandmusicmoves thememotionally. Itmakes themhappierpeople (or lessunhappy).

LeonhardandHouse(1959)statethatart ingeneral-andmusic inparticular-shouldbetaughtforindividuals’personalfulfilment.Whenonlyhisphysicalandintellectualpotentialsareused,“heneverattainshistruestatureasahumanbeing”(LeonhardandHouse1959,p.99).Butitstillremainsunclearwhyitismusicthatgivesusthesefeelingsandnot–forexample–gardening.AccordingtoLeonhardandHousemusicisasymbol,thetonalmotioninmusicsymbolizesthesubject’s(anypersoncomposing,performingorlisteningtothemusic)conceptionorunderstandingofthewaysofhumanfeeling.Theythinkmusichasimportancebecauseitisaformwhichhassignificanceasasymboloftherhythmoflifeexperience.

Accordingtothewritersof“TheCambridgeshireReportontheteachingofMusic”,(1933)musicisthegreatestofallspiritualforces.Otherssayitwithlesshighwords.Hodgessaysmusic“isoneofthehallmarksofwhatitmeanstobeahumanbeing”(Hodges2000).Reimer(1999)statesthatsomehumanneedscanbemetonlythroughmusic,“that is, throughthekindsofmeaningsandsatisfactionsthatonlymusicalsounds,definedandstructuredaccordingtoculturalexpectations,traditions,andidentitytraits,canprovide”(p.1).AccordingtoReimer,teachingandlearningmusic

14 15

aremeaningful,becauseitgivespeopletheopportunitytodevelopskillswithwhichtheycangainmeaningful,gratifyingmusicalexperiences.Thiscanbedonethroughaestheticeducationingeneral,accordingtoLeonhardandHouse,butmusichasuniquequalitiesthatmakeisthemostdesirablemeansoforganizedaestheticeducation.Themostimportantqualityofmusicisthatallhumanbeingsareuniversallysensitivetomusicandatsomelevelandinsomewaycapableofmakingmusic.

1.1.3 other benefits of engaging in musicDespitetheargumentsformusiceducationprovidedintheprevioussection,manypeoplestilllookforotherreasonstoteachmusicinordertogivemusicamoresolidplaceintheschoolcurriculum.Therefore, inthissectionanoverviewofstudieswill followthathavetriedtoshowextra-musicaleffectsfrommusiceducation.AcitationfromReimer(1999)willmakeclearwhythisisdoneanddoesnotcontradictthediscussionintheprevioussection.“Wearehappythatit(musiceducation,FW)hassuchpositiveeffects,andaswegoaboutfulfillingourmusicteachingresponsibilities,wewillbesensitivetoandsupportiveofallthemanypositivewaysinwhichmusicstudyandexperiencecanenhancepeople’slives(p.6)”.

influence on cognitive abilitiesWhenwritingandtalkingabouttheinfluenceofmusiconcognitiveabilities,oneshouldmakeclearadifferenceexistsbetweenmakingmusicandlisteningtomusic.Therearetwoexplanationsforthepossibleeffectsoflisteningtomusiconcognitiveabilities.Thefirstoneisbasedonthe“trion”model.Thisisamathematicalmodelofneuronalfiringwithcomplexspatialandtemporalpatternsinthebrain.BecauseMozart’smusicisorderedaccordingtoequalcomplexspatialandtemporalstructures,listeningtothismusicpreparesthebrainforspatiotemporaltasks,whichwouldcausehigher scores on spatiotemporal tests. Another theory claims the effect of listening to Mozart’smusiciscausedbytheincreasesinarousalandmoodafterlistening.Thismighthaveasmalleffectonspatiotemporalreasoningorcognitionasawhole(Črnčec,WilsonandPrior(2006).ThiscouldexplainwhythereisnotonlyaMozart-effect,butalsoaneffectafterlisteningtoSchubert,astoryofStephenKingofchildren’ssongs(Schumacher2006).

TherehavebeenseveralstudiesontheeffectsoflisteningtomusicandaccordingtoGembris(2003)thesehaveallthesameresults:ageneralimprovementoftheintelligenceafterlisteningtomusicwas not demonstrated. Rauscher and colleagues reported in 1993 that subjects who listened toMozartforabouttenminutesscoredhigheronspatial-temporalreasoningtasksimmediatelyafterthelistening.Thiseffectlastedforabouttenminutes(Rauscher2002).Thepopularpresspaidalotofattentiontotheseresults,evenexaggeratingthesestrongly.The impressionwasgiventhatallclassicalmusic(andespeciallyMozart)wasabletoimprovepeople’sgeneralintelligenceandschoolresults,andthatitispossibletomakechildrenlittleprodigiesonlybylisteningtoclassicalmusic.Theresearchersortheresearchresults,however,neversuggestedthis.AccordingtoCosta-Giomi,areviewof theliteraturebySchellenberg in2001showedthatrecentresearchnotsupportedtheMozartEffect(Costa-Giomi2004).

16

Inastudy inwhich136childrenwhere testedbymakingapaper-folding test5during listening toMozart(K448),apieceofpopularmusicfamiliartochildren(Zorba’sdance)orinsilence,Črnčec,WilsonandPrior(2006)showedthattherewasnoeffectfromMozart’smusic,norfromthepopularmusic.Thechildren’sresultsdidnotdiffersignificantlybetweenthethreetestingsituations.Therewasasignificantcorrelationofthechildren’smood,arousalandincreasedpreference.However,thisdidnotresultinbetterresultsafterlisteningtothemostpreferredmusic.Thestrongestpredictorofpost-testfoldingscoresappearedtobethepre-testresults(Črnčec,WilsonandPrior(2006).Črnčecandcolleagues(2006)concludefromthisthatthereisnoMozart-effectinchildren.However,theyassumethatitispossiblethatthereissuchaneffectinadults.

Researchresults maybedifferent,however,fortheeffectsofmakingmusicandmusiceducation.Rauscher(2002;RauscherandZupan2000)performedastudytoseewhateffectmusicinstructionhadonchildreninkindergarten.Itwashypothesisedthatmusicinstructionwouldpositivelyaffecttheir spatial-temporal abilities, but not their memory. Bilhartz, Bruhn and Olson (2000) give thefollowing definition of spatial-temporal reasoning: “a process that requires mentally maintainingimageswithouttheassistanceofaphysicalmodelandthenreformingandcombiningtheseimagesinways thatcreateameaningfulwhole” (p.616).Theystate that thisprocess isusedtoperformhighermentalfunctions,suchasplayingchessandsolvingmathematicalequations,and–accordingtoseveralscholarstheymention–alsotoperformmusicaltasks.Rauscher(2002)providessomeevidencethatthereisalinkbetweenspatial-temporaltasksandmathematicalability.

For this research Rauscher studied a group of children receiving twenty-minute piano lessonstwiceaweekforeightmonthsandagroupofchildrennotreceivinganymusicalinstructionatall.Beforethestartofthemusicinstruction,allchildrenweretestedwithtwospatial-temporaltasksandonememorytask.Aftereightmonthsthechildrenweretestedagain.Theresultsshowedthatthekindergartenchildrenreceivingmusicinstructionscoredhigheronspatialreasoningtasksthanchildrennotreceivinganymusicinstruction.Therewerenodifferencesinresultsonthememorytask.

Infirstgrade,somechildrenreceivedmusicinstructionagainandothersdidnot.Asaresult,threedifferentgroupsexisted:onegroupofchildrenreceivingpianolessonsinkindergartenandinfirstgrade,onegroupofchildrenreceivingpianolessonsinkindergartenbutnotinfirstgrade,andonegroupofchildrenreceivingnopianolessonsatall.Allgroupsweretestedagainafterfirstgrade.Thesetestsshowedthattheresultsfromthechildrenreceivingmusicinstructiononlyinkindergartendidnotdiffersignificantlyfromtheresultsfromthechildrennotreceivingmusicinstructionatall:theydidscorehigherbutnotsignificantly,whichsuggeststhatoneyearofmusicinstructionisnotenoughtoinducelong-termeffects.Thescoresofthechildrenreceivingmusicinstructionsincekindergartenhadfurtherimproved.Again,thesedifferenceswerefoundonlyforthespatial-temporaltasks.

5 Inthisstudy(Črnčec,WilsonandPrior2006)thechildrenmadetheFitzgeraldpaper-foldingtest.Thistesthasdemonstrateda

goodinternalconsistencyandtest-retestreliability.Thetestconsistsofapracticeitemand20testitemsandtakesabout10-15

minutestoperform.Childrenhavetovisualisepapertobefolded,puncturedandunfoldedandthenpicktherightanswerfrom

andmultiple-choicelist.Thetestissuitedforthetestingofspatio-temporalabilities,becauseitrequiresspatialimageryand

thenthetemporalorderingofspatialcomponents.

16

Insecondgradeallchildrenreceivedmusicinstruction(againpianolessons),whichagainresultedinthreedifferentgroupsofchildrenallreceivingmusicinstruction,butoverdifferentlengthsoftime.Thechildrenwhohadreceivedmusiceducationinkindergartenandthenagaininsecondgradedidimprovesignificantly;thechildrenreceivingmusiclessonsforallthreeyearsdidimprove,butnotsignificantly.AccordingtoRauscherthisisduetothe“ceilingeffect”,meaningthattheparticipantisalreadyperformingathisorhermaximumcapacityandthereforefurtherimprovementsarenottobeobserved(Rauscher2002,p.271).Thechildrenwhoreceivedmusiceducationforthefirsttimeinsecondgradedidalsoimprove,butnotsignificantly.AccordingtoRauscher,theseresultsshowthatmusicinstructiononlyhasthesebeneficialeffectsonspatial-temporalreasoningwhenstartingataveryyoungage.ThesefindingsareconsistentwithHetland’s(2000),whoalsoinvestigatedtheeffectofmusiceducationofspatialreasoning.

Afterthirdgradeallchildrenweretestedagain,butthistimetheresearchersusedanother,moredifficult test.Thedatashowedthatthechildrenreceivingmusic lessonsforall fouryearsscoredthirty percent higher than children receiving music instruction in kindergarten, second and thirdgrade,andfifty-twopercenthigherthanchildrenstartingwithmusic instruction insecondgradeonly.Theseresultsnotonlyshowthatmusicinstructionhasabeneficialeffectonspatial-temporalreasoning,butalsothattheseeffectsarefoundmainlywhenmusicinstructionstartsataveryyoungage(Rauscher2002).Additional proof for the effect of music instruction on spatial-temporal reasoning was gainedby Bilhartz et al. (2000). In this study two groups of children were compared: children attendingKindermusik(acurriculumdesignedtodevelopmusicallistening,movementandsingingskillsinanage-appropriate,holisticway)andagroupofcontrol-subjects.Ineachofthetwogroupschildrenparticipatedfromlow-,middle-andhigh-incomegroupsandtheresearchersdifferentiatedbetweenthesegroups.Bilhartzetal.foundthatchildrenattendingacourseofKindermusikscoredhigheronatestthatmeasuredabstractreasoningabilities(theBeadmemorysubtestfromtheStanford-BinetIntelligenceScale).Theeffectwaslargestwithchildrenthathadattendedmostofthecourse,butevenchildrenhavingattendedhalfofthecourse(mostlyfromlow-incomefamilies)scoredhigherthanthecontrolgroup.Therewerenosignificantdifferencesbetweenthegroupsonothersubtests.EastlundGromkoandSmithPoorman(1998)performedasimilarstudy.Theydivided30pre-schoolersfromaprivateMontessorischoolintwogroups:onereceiving30minutesmusiceducationperweekforsevenmonthsinwhichtheyalsodancedtothemusic,theothergrouphavingnomusicinstructionatall.Beforethemusicinstructionstarted,allchildren’sspatial-reasoningabilitiesweretestedwiththespatial-reasoningtasksfromtheWechslerPreschoolandPrimaryscaleofIntelligence-Revised(WPPSI-R). It seemed no differences between the two groups existed. After the seven monthsinstructionperiod,thechildrenweretestedagain.Thescoresweredifferentnow,showingthatthechildrenintheexperimentalgroupscoredsignificantlyhigherthanthechildreninthecontrolgroup.Inaddition,furtheranalysisshowedthatthegaininIQscoresforyoungerchildren(threeyears)waslargerthanforolderchildren(fouryears)andthatthehigherscoreswereonlymaintainedwhenthemusicinstructionwasalsocontinued.

17

18 19

Črnčec,WilsonandPrior(2006)alsoprovidedsomeevidencethatmusiceducationenhancescognitiveabilities. In their study, mentioned in paragraph 1.1.3., they tested the effect of Mozart, popularmusicorsilenceonthespatio-temporalreasoningof136children.Beforethetestingwasdone,theresearchersaskedtheparentstoprovideinformationabouttheextra-curricularmusiceducationthechildrenhadreceivedandaboutothermusicalexperiences,followedbytheBentleyMeasuresofMusicalAbilitytestmadebythechildren,whichconsistsoffoursubtests(pitch,tunes,chordsandrhythm).Despitethefactthatthestudyshowedno“Mozarteffect”(betterspatio-temporalreasoningafterlisteningtoMozart’smusic),therewasasmallbutsignificantcontributionfromtherhythmsubtesttothescoresofthepaper-foldingtest.FromthediscussedstudiesonlythestudybyEastlundGromkoandSmithPoorman(1998)involveddancingormovingonmusic.However,accordingtoLetland(2000),whoproducedameta-analysisofseveralstudiesabouttheeffectofmusicinstructiononspatialreasoning,musicinstructionwithorwithoutmovementseemtohavethesameeffectonthespatial-temporalabilities.

Both Rauscher (2002), Rauscher and Zupan (2000), Bilhartz and colleagues (2000) and EastlandGromkoandSmithPoorman(1998)showedthatmusiceducationimprovesthescoresonspatial-reasoningtasks.Thisisindeedconfirmedbythemeta-analysisperformedbyLetland(2000).Letlandalsoconfirmsthefindingofotherresearchersthatageisanimportantfactorfortheeffectofmusiconthespatialabilities.Sheconcludesfromthestudiessheanalyzed,thatthespatialreasoningofyoungerchildrenismoreenhancedbymusicinstructionthanthespatialreasoningofolderchildren.TheageofthechildreninthestudiesanalysedbyLetlandvariedfrom3to12yearsofage(kindergartentosixthgrade).

ThatbetterresultsarereportedwhenmusicinstructionisgivenataveryyoungagemightbethereasonthatinastudybyCosta-Giomi(2004)nosignificantdifferenceswerereportedinscoresonacademicachievement.Inherstudy,childrenfromlow-incomefamilieswithoutmusicinstructionorapianoathomebeforethestudystarted,receivedthirtyminutesofpianolessonsonceaweekforthreeyears.Thestudystartedwhenthechildrenwereinthirdgradeandapproximatelynineyearsofage.Apartfromtheolderageofthechildren,anothersignificantdifferencebetweenthisstudyandthepreviousdiscussedstudiesisthatthechildrenweretestedfortheiracademicachievementwithscholasticperformancetests(theCanadianAchievementTest2andtheDevelopingCognitiveAbilitiesTest)insteadwithtestsforspatialreasoning.Theschoolresultsofthechildrenonmusic,French,Englishandmathwerealsoincludedinthestudy.AsreportedbyRauscher(2002),verylittleevidencewasfoundthatalinkexistsbetweenscoresonspatial-reasoningtestsandmathematical–orotheracademic-abilities.Theonlyimprovedschoolmarksasaresultofthepianolessonswere-notsurprisingly-themarksformusic.

OrsmondandMiller (1999)testedwhethermusiceducation improvedchildren’sspatialskillsandverbalskills.Spatialskillswere testedwith three tests thatallcoverdifferentaspectsofspatial

18 19

reasoning.ThesubjectsinthestudyparticipatedinSuzukiclasses,theiragerangingfrom44monthsto80months.Thecontrolsubjectsdidnotreceivemusicinstructionatall.Theywerematchedtothesubjectsbyage,genderandethnicbackground.The results from thestudyshowed that thechildrenwiththeSuzukimusic instructionalreadydifferedonsomeofthetestsbeforethestudybegan(theyscoredhigheronreceptivevocabulary).Afterthestudytherewasonlyadifferenceinscoresonavisual-motorintegrationtest(aspecificspatialskill)betweenbothgroups.OrsmondandMillersuggestthismightnotevenbearesultofthemusiclessonsimprovingspatialreasoning,butofmusiclessonsimprovingthemotorskills.Asaresult,theyconcludemusicinstructionimprovesmainlyspatialskillswithamotorcomponent.

Instead of focusing on the spatial-reasoning ability of children, Schellenberg (2004) performed astudytotestwhethermusiceducation improvesgeneral IQscoresofyoungchildren.Whereas inotherstudieswiththeaimtoproveapositiveeffectofmusiceducationtherewereusuallyonlytwogroups (one receivingmusiceducationandonenot),Schellenbergwanted toknowwhetheronlymusiceducationhaspositiveeffectsonIQorotherextracurricularactivitiesaswell.Healsowantedtoknowwhetherthekindofmusicinstructioninfluencestheresults.A sample of 132 children (all six years of age) was divided into four different groups: one groupreceiving keyboard instruction, one receiving vocal lesson with the Kodály method, one receivingdramalessonsandonereceivingnoextralessons.Thechildrenwerepre-testedwiththeWechslerIntelligenceScaleforChildren–ThirdEdition(WISC-III).Theireducationalachievementswerealsotested,withtheKaufmanTestofEducationalAchievement(K-TEA)toseewhetherchangesintheIQwereaccompaniedbychangesineducationalresults.Athirdtestwasdonetomeasuresocialfunctioning.Alltestsweretakenagainafterthe36-weeksperiodofthelessons.Thelessonshadbeengiveninsmallclassesexistingofsixchildren.Thepost-testsshowedthatthechildrenreceivingthemusicinstruction–eitherkeyboardorvocallessons–hadsimilarincreasesinIQscores(anaverageincreaseof7.0points).Thechildreninthedramaclassesand in theno-lessongroupsalsohadasimilar increase in IQscores (anaverageincreaseof4.3points).Thisshowsthatdramalessonshavethesameeffectonintelligenceashavingno lessons. The increase in IQ points had influenced the educational achievements, because thechildreninthemusicgroupsscoredhigheronallfivesubtestsoftheK-TEA.Thedifferencesbetweenthemusicgroupsandtheothergroupsweresmall,butsignificant(Schellenberg2004).

Bastian(2003)chairedaresearchteamthatstudiedtheworkingofmusiconthedevelopmentofchildren. They hypothesized that making music would positively influence cognitive, creative,aesthetic, social and psychomotor functions of children. The team studied five schools at whichtherewasextensiveattentionformusicandtwocontrolschoolsatwhichtherewasonlythelegallycompulsoryamountofmusiclessons.AlthoughBastianrecognisedthatintelligenceisonlythatwhatIQ-testsmeasure(andthusthatthereisnoabsolutedefinitionofintelligence),heusedtheIQ-testsCFIandAIDformeasuringthebenefitofmusiceducationonintelligence(Koopman2005;Bastian2003).Incontrastwithreportsinthemedia,theeffectsofmusicmeasuredbyBastianwerenotveryevident:onlyasmallimprovementoftheIQwasmeasuredthroughtheCFItest.

20

Athirdareainwhicheffectsofmusiceducationcanbefoundisliteracy.DouglasandWillatts(1994)foundaweaksignificancebetweenmusicalability(rhythmdiscriminationandpitchdiscrimination)and reading and spelling. The strongest (but still rather weak) relation they found was betweenreadingandrhythmdiscrimination(.306)6.Thesecorrelationswerefoundinchildreninfourthgradeatprimaryschool.Aftertheyfoundthesepositiveresults,theauthorswerealsointerestedtoseewhether music instruction had a positive influence on the literary skills of children with readingproblems.Theytestedtwogroupsofchildrenwithlearningproblems.Asthiswasonlyapilotstudy,thegroupswererathersmallwithsixchildreninbothgroups.Thechildrenintheinterventiongroupsjoinedamusicalprogrammethatlastedforsixmonths.Thisprogrammewasdesignedtodevelopthechildren’sauditory,visualandmotorskills.Duringthemusicsessionsthechildrensang,andusedtunedandun-tunedpercussioninstrumentsforplayingallkindsofgames.Thesessionsentailedavariedprogrammeofactivitiesinordertokeepthechildren’sinterest.Thechildreninthecontrolgroup joinedanon-musicalprogramme inwhich they learneddifferentdiscussionskills.Similarto the musical programme, the design of this programme was developed to keep the children’sinterest.Beforeandafterthesix-monthperiod,allchildrenweretestedfortheirreadingabilities.Thescoresof the pre-tests had shown no differences between the two groups, as both groups consisted ofchildrenwithreadingproblems.The test resultsafter thesix-monthperiodshowedasignificantimprovementofthereadingabilitiesofthechildrenintheinterventiongrouphadincreased,whereasthescoresofthecontrolsubjectshadnotchanged.

Inhismeta-analysisofstudiesontherelationbetweenmusictrainingandscoresonreading/verbaltests, Butzlaff (2000) made a distinction between correlation studies and experimental studies.Thecorrelationstudiesonlytriedtoshowacorrelationbetweenmusictrainingandreadingabilitywithoutpointingadirectionofthisrelationship,andwithoutclaimingahigherscoreonreadingtaskswascausedbythemusictraining.ThecorrelationstudiesButzlaffanalyseddidthisbylookingatthescoresatreading/verbaltestsofstudentshavingandstudentsnothavingmusicinstructionprevioustothetests.In experimental studies different groups of students were tested of whom some received musicinstructionandothersdidnot.Thestudentswerealwaystestedbeforeandafterthemusicinstructionwasgiveninordertoshowtheeffectofthemusicinstruction.TheexperimentalstudiesinButzlaffanalysis,however,didnotshowanysignof theexistenceofapositiveeffectofmusic instructionon reading ability. In Butzlaff’s meta-analysis there were a few studies that did produce positiveresults,buttheoverallpicturewasnegative.OneofthestudiesexaminedbyButzlaffwasthestudybyDouglasandWillatts(1994)discussedearlier.Butzlaffthinkstheirpositiveresultsfromthepilotstudywereduetothefactthattheauthorsknewwhichsubjectswereintheinterventiongroupand

6 Correlationsareexpressedinafigurebetween1and-1.-1meansthereisanegativerelationand1meansthatthereisapositive

relation.0meansthatthereisnorelation.Anyfigurebetween-1and1indicatesthedegreeinwhichtwothings(skillsinthis

case)arerelated.Acorrelationof.306isnotverystrong:acorrelationof.7orhigherisnormallyseenashighenoughtoidentify

arelationbetweenAenB.

20

whichinthecontrolgroup,thuscausingexperimenterexpectancy.Inaddition,DouglasandWillattschosethosestudentsofwhomtheyexpectedtheycouldusesomeextrahelp.AccordingtoButzlaff,otherresearchhasshownthatmainly low-achievingstudentsbenefitedmost fromtheeffectsofteacherexpectancy.Butzlaffconcludedthatmoreresearchonthissubjectisneeded,asofthe(only)sixexperimentalstudieshehadanalysed,twostudiesreportedpositiveresults,threereportednoorminimalresultsand only one produced negative results after music instruction. These differences ask for moremethodologicalresearch.

Schellenberg(in:McPherson2006)statestherearefourpossibleexplanationsoftheeffectofmusiceducationonintelligenceandseveralscholasticskills.ThefirstoneisthatschoolingraisesIQ,aneffectdemonstratedbyCeciandWilliamsin1997.Althoughitappearstheeffectofmusiceducationcouldalsohavebeenreachedbychess,mathorreadinglessons,Schellenbergthinksthatmusiceducationisoneoffewscholarlyout-ofschoolactivitieschildrenactuallylike.A second reason for the effect of music education is that in the music lessons a wide array of(intellectual)skillsaretrained,suchasfinemotorskills,reading,learningbyheartoflargepassages,knowledgeofmusicalstructures(includingscales,chords,intervals,harmonyetc).Theseskillsare,adjustedtospecificsubjects,alsousedinschoollessons,andtheselessonsmightthereforebenefitfromtheextratraining.AthirdreasonSchellenbergmentionsisthatsomethingspecificallymusicaliscausingtheeffect,namelythatmusicisanabstractionthatcanberecognisedindifferentshapesaslongasthepitchand temporal relations that form its identityare intact.Learningabout thisabstraction inmusicmightenhancetheabilitytoabstractreasoningoutsidemusicaswell.Thelastoptionisthatmusiceducationiscomparabletolearningasecondlanguage,whichisalsoknownforitsnon-lingualcognitiveeffects.However,Schellenbergwarnsthatmusiceducationisnotasimplewaytoenhancechildren’sintelligence,consideringtheextensiveeffortsittakestomasteramusicalinstrument(Schellenberg,inMcPherson2006).

Twopointsareyettobemadebeforeconcludingthissection.ThefirstoneisaninterestingfindingfromLetland’smeta-analysis.Shefoundthatthesizeofthegroupinwhichthechildrenaretaughtisofrelevancefortheeffectsofthemusicinstruction.Theresultsfromheranalysisshowthatone-to-oneteachingmayleadtobetterresultsthangrouplessons,although,aswasshownbefore,evengrouplessonsappeartohaveapositiveeffect.

Thesecondpointisthatitisnotclearhowlongtheeffectsofmusicinstructiononcognitiveabilitieslastaftertheinstructionhasstopped.Therehavebeennostudiessofarthatfollowstudentsseveralyearsaftertheirmusiclessonsstoppedtostudywhatthelong-termeffectscouldbe(Letland2000).Besidesthat,thereissomeevidencethattheimprovementisnotendless.ThechildreninRauscher’sstudy(2002)whoreceivedmusicinstructionforallthreeyearsdidnotimprovesignificantlyafterthesecondgrade.Rauscherthoughtthiswasduetothe“ceilingeffect”whichmeansthattheparticipantwillnotshowanyfurtherimprovementbecauseheisalreadyperformingathisbest.

21

22 23

influence on social-emotional development Bastian (2003) also measured whether music education has a positive influence on the social-emotionaldevelopmentofchildren. Itappearedthat thechildren in theschoolswithextramusiclessonswerelesslikelytorejecttheirclassmatesincomparisontochildreninthecontrolschools.Thiswas,however,ameasurementofchildren’sownviewof theirbehaviour towardschildren intheirclassinsteadofameasurementbyothers(adults)ofthechildren’sbehaviour.Wethereforecannotbesurewhetherthechildrenwerereallymoresocialandlesspronetorejectingclassmatesorthatthechildrenonlythoughttheywere.OtherclaimsmadebyBastianwererejectedbyKoopman(2005).

Gembris(2003)writesthatalthoughmusiceducationhasalmostnovisibleormeasurableeffectonthesocialbehaviourofchildren-asbecameclearinBastian’sstudy–,musicmayplayanimportantrole in social processes. Gembris describes a project in Munich in which children from Greek,Turkish,Sinti,Kosovo-Albanianandothercommunities,usedtofightingeachotheringangs,workedtogether inmusicals, theatreandmusicperformances. In thiscontext, thechildren learnedhowtoworkandplaytogetherinsteadoffighting,andhowtoengageindialogueinsteadofaggression.GembrisclaimsthediscrepanciesbetweentheresultsfromBastianandthisMunichprojectcanbeattributedtothefactthatstandardizedtests,liketheoneBastianused,areunabletomeasureallfactorsplayingaroleintheinfluenceofmusiconpersonality.Moreover,thispositiveeffectofmusiconlyappearswhenthemusicisusedtohavethiseffect(forexampleintherapeuticsituations),whichisnotthecaseingeneralmusictrainingonprimaryorsecondaryschoolsandwhichwasthecaseinthementionedprojectbyBastian.

Adamekdescribesastudythatshowedpersons,whohadlearnedtosingaschildrenintheirfamiliesorschools,hadanenhancedcapacityofregulatingtheiremotionslaterinlife.Thesepersons(hecallsthemsingers)werepsychologicallyandphysicallyofbetterhealth(Adamek1997).Inaddition,thesingersweremoresatisfiedwiththeirlife,morebalanced,hadmoreself-confidence,theirmoodwasbetterandtheyfeltmoresocialresponsibilitythanthenon-singers.

other influences of music instruction ThestudyperformedbyCosta-Giomi(2004)showedthattheacademicachievementofthechildrenwhoreceivedmusic instructiondidnot improveafterone, twoandthreeyearsof the instruction.There was however another feature of the children that did improve: this was the self-esteemof thechildren.Childrenreceivingpiano lessons in thisstudyhadahigherself-esteemthan thechildreninthecontrolgroup.Costa-Giomiacknowledgesthefactthatthehigherself-esteemmaybeaconsequenceoftheattentionfromparents,peersandthepianoteacherinsteadofthepianoinstruction itself. However, according to Costa-Giomi, this is in fact still a positive consequenceofmusic instruction thatwillhappentoallchildrenreceivingmusic instruction incomparisontochildrennotreceivingmusiclessons.

22 23

2 researCh on the neCessity oF starting with musiC early to BeCome a ProFessional musiCian

Inthischapteranoverviewofseveralsignificantstudieswillbegiven.Pleasenotethatthesestudieswillbementionedmoreoftenthroughouttheentiredocument:fortheconvenienceofthereaderandinordertoavoidrepeatingthespecificationsandmethodsofthestudies,ageneralintroductiontothesestudiesisgivenhereinaseparatechapter,butthemainresultsofthestudieswillbementionedanddiscussed inchapters4and5 incombinationwithotherexamplesof research.Theseotherexamplesofresearchwillappear inothersectionsofthisdocumentaswell,buttheywillnotbediscussedandreviewedasextensivelyasthesignificantstudiesmentionedinthischapter.

sosniak (in Bloom 1985)Sosniak investigated the lives of twenty-one young pianists. The pianists were all finalists ofinternationally renowned competitions. The study was done by interviewing the participants. Thestudents were also asked permission to invite their parents to the study: twenty students gavepermission,while theparentsofsixteenof thepianistswereprepared tobepartof thestudybygivingextrainformation.OnbasisoftheinterviewswiththepianistsSosniakfoundthatthelivesofthepianistscanbedividedintothreestages,whichwillbediscussedinChapter4.

manturzewska (1990)Tofindoutmoreabouttheprocessofbecominganartistandaboutthelife-longdevelopmentofmusicians,Manturzewskastudied the livesofagroupofPolishprofessionalmusicians.Shewasinterestedintheinteractionbetweenthelivinghumanorganismanditssocio-culturalenvironment,andinfactorscontributingtothemusician’sdevelopment.Thepurposeofthestudywastocollectempiricaldataaboutthelifecourseofprofessionalmusiciansandtolearnaboutthestructureoftheirlives.The group of 165 musicians she investigated was composed of two sub-groups: one basic groupconsisting of 35 outstanding musicians, who were prize-winners in international competitionsandwerementionedintheWorld’sWho’sWhoinMusic7andWho’sWhoinOpera8;andthecontrolgroupconsistingof130“ordinary”musiciansresemblingthebasicgroupinage,regionandmusicalinstrument.Theoldestmusicianwasborn in1890, theyoungest in1960,at thetimeof thestudytheyrangedinagefromtwenty-onetoeighty-nine.The165musiciansrepresentedsevenfieldsofmusicalactivity:composers,conductors,pianists,violinists,woodwindandbrassinstrumentalists,and singers. The musicians were interviewed between 1976 and 1980 on the basis of structuredquestionnaires and biographical interview schedules. Some of the topics asked about in thequestionnairesare:

• Earlymusicalexperiencesandmusicaleventsinthechildhood;• Thebeginningandcourseofmusicaltrainingandmusiceducation;

7 Kay,Ernest(Ed.)International who’s who in music and musicians directory (7th edition).Cambridge:InternationalWho’sWhoin

Music,1975.

8 Rich,MariaF. (Ed.)Who’s who in opera: an international biographical directory of singers, conductors, directors, designers, and

administrators, also including profiles of 101 opera companies.NewYork:ArnoPress,1976.

24 25

• Sponsorsandtutors;• Ancestorsandfamilyenvironment.

Theinterviewsweretape-recorded.Besidestheinterviewstheresearchusedobjectivedatasuchasconcertdiaries,photographs,reviewsfromnewspapers,datafromorchestra’sortrade-unions,etc.

sloboda and howe (1991)SlobodaandHoweperformedastudytofindoutmoreaboutwhysomeyoungmusicplayersbecomehighlysuccessfulandothersdonot,evengivingupmusicmaking.SlobodaandHoweassumedthatreachingahighlevelofmusicmakingdependsontheavailabilityofopportunitiesforlearning,andthefamilyandculturalbackground.Especiallytheencouragementgivenbyaperson’sfamilywasthoughttobeveryimportantinthedevelopmentofmusicalskills.Theaimofthestudywastofindoutwhatcircumstancespromotemusicalexcellenceinyoungpeople.SlobodaandHoweinterviewed42childrenfromaspecialistmusicschool.Thechildrenwerequasi-randomlyselectedbytheschool.Thechildrenweredividedintotwoabilitygroups,aclassificationmadebythestaffoftheschool.ChildrenwithoutstandingorexceptionalabilitiesbyschoolstandardswereplacedingroupA;ChildrenwithaverageorunexceptionalabilitiesbyschoolstandardsingroupB.Everychildwasfurtherplacedinagroupbasedonfirst-studyinstrument(piano,violin,cello,windorbrass),gender(maleorfemale),andage(thirteenyearsandyoungerorfifteenyearsandolder).Thechildrenwereinterviewedalonebyoneoftheresearchersattheschoolandtheinterviewswererecorded.Theinterviewsfollowedasemi-structuredformatandconcernedelementsofthemusicaldevelopmentpriortobeingselectedasastudentoftheschool.Inadditiontothechildren,twentyparentswerealsointerviewed.

ericsson, krampe and tesch-römer (1991 and 1993)Ericsson, Krampe and Tesch-Römer (1993) performed two studies about the role of “deliberatepractice”intheacquisitionofexpertperformance.Inthesestudiestheirbasicassumptionwasthat“theamountoftimeanindividualisengagedindeliberatepracticeactivitiesismonotonicallyrelatedtothatindividual’sacquiredperformance”(Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer1993).Intheirfirststudytheyinvestigatedthepracticehabitsof30youngviolinists.Thesewereviolinistsratedbytheirteacheraseither“bestviolinists”(withpotentialforasolocareer,internationalcompetitionwinnersorplayinginaninternationallyrenownedorchestra),“goodviolinists”(goodviolinists,butnotsuitableto participate in international competitions) or “music teachers” (music education students withviolinasthemainsubject)–presumingthatmusicteachersplaytheviolinnotaswellassoloistsororchestramembersduetoloweradmissioncriteria.Everygroupconsistedof10persons.Inadditiontotheyoungviolinists,Ericssonetal.alsoincluded10middle-agedviolinistswhoplayedintwoWest-Berlinsymphonyorchestraswithinternationalreputation.Thestudentswereinterviewedduringthreesessions.Inthefirstsessionsbiographicalinformationwasobtainedlikestartingage,sequenceofteachers,andparticipationincompetitions.Subsequently,theresearcherspresentedataxonomyofactivitiestothestudents.Thistaxonomyincludedteneverydayactivitiesandtwelvemusicalactivities.Examplesoftheeverydayactivitieswerehouseholdchores,

24 25

childcare,sleeporsports;examplesofmusicalactivitieswerepracticealone,practicewithothers,playingforfunorsoloperformance.Thestudentswereaskedtoratetheseactivitiesaccordingtothreedimensions:(1)therelevanceoftheactivitytoimprovingperformance,(2)theeffortacquiredtoperformtheactivityand(3)howmuchtheyenjoyedtheactivitywithouttakingintoconsiderationtheirevaluationoftheresultoftheactivity.Inthisfirstinterviewthestudentswerealsoaskedtoestimatehowmuchtimetheyspentduringthelastweekonthedifferentactivitiesofthetaxonomy.Inthesecondsessionthestudentswereaskedabouttheirconcentrationandpractice.Theyfilledinaspeciallydesigneddiarysheetabouttheirdaybeforethesecondinterview.Thisdiarysheetcoveredthe twenty-four hours of a day divided into ninety-six fifteen-minute intervals. After the secondinterviewthestudentskeptadiaryusingthespeciallydesignedsheetsforsevendays.Beforethethirdinterviewsession,thestudentsencodedeverythingtheydidaccordingtothetaxonomyanditsthreedimensions.Accordingtothediariesofthestudents,thereweretwoactivitiesjudgedtobehighlyrelevantforimprovingtheirviolinperformance,whichexceededthedurationofmorethanfivehoursaweek.Theseactivitieswerepracticealone(average19.3hoursaweek)andsleep(average58.2hoursaweek).Practicealonewasconsideredthemostimportantactivityfortheimprovementofperformance.Onthebasisofthestudents’estimationsoftheirdailypractice,therewasalsoanestimationmadeoftheamountofpastpractice.Theresearchersexpectedtheestimationofpastpracticetoberatheraccurate, because students careful monitored the duration of their practice. The students wereaskedtoestimatetheamountofpracticetheyhadengagedinforeveryyearsincetheystartedwiththeviolin.

Thesecondstudywasperformedtofindoutiftheresultsofthe“violinists-study”couldbereplicated.Twodifferentgroupsofpianistswereinvolvedinthisstudy:(1)pianostudentsforwhomthesameselection criterion were used as for the group of good violinists in the violin study, (2) amateurpianists.Unfortunatelytheresearcherswerenotabletofindpianistsasgoodasthebestviolinistsin theviolinstudy.Theresults thatEricssonetal.present in theirarticle (1993)arebasedonanextendedstudythatinvolvedtwomoregroupsofpianists:elderlyprofessionalpianistsandelderlyamateurpianists.Theresearchersusedabbreviatedversionsoftheinterviewsusedinthefirststudy.Inadditiontotheinterviews,therewereseveraltasksforthepianistsinwhichcomplexmovementcoordinationwasmeasuredusingtheirhandstogetherorbothhandsapart.Inthesecondsessionthepianistsgavethreesuccessiveperformancesof thePreludeNo.1 inC-major fromTheWell-TemperedClavier,bookIbyJ.S.Bach.Participantsweregiven15minutespreparationtimetothinkofaninterpretationandwerethenaskedtoperformthisinterpretationthreetimes,tryingtobeasconsistentintheirinterpretationaspossible.Forceandonset-offsettimesforsinglekeystrokeswererecordedwhilethepiecewasplayedandanormaltape-recordingoftheperformancewasmadeaswell.Aftertheperformance test thepianistswereasked tocomplete two tests tomeasure thecognitive-motorspeed.Thiswasfollowedbyfreefingertappingtaskstomeasuresimplemotorefficiency.

2726

sloboda, davidson, howe and moore (1996)Slobodaetal.performedastudytoinvestigatetheemergenceofspecialistmusicalskillsandtheinfluenceofenvironmental factors.Asa lotofotherstudiesalreadyhadshownastrongrelationbetweenpracticeandperformance,thisstudymainlyfocusesisonotherfactorscontributingtothedevelopmentofhighlevelperformanceandtothenon-developmentofsuchskills.Forexample,theresearchesinthisstudyciteEricsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993)andManturzewska(1990).However,theyfeelthatthesestudieshavetwodisadvantages.Thefirstisthattheylackcomparisonsbetweensuccessfulindividualsandindividualswhohavenotbeensuccessfulorevenstoppedmakingmusicatall.Theseconddisadvantageisthattheestimatesmadebythesubjectsabouttheamountofaccumulatedpracticearealwaysmadeyearsafterthepracticewasdone,asthesubjectswereinterviewedin(early)adultlifeabouteventsintheirchildhood.Slobodaetal.triedtoavoidthesedisadvantagesbyperformingthisresearchwithchildrenthathadreceivedtuitiononat leastonemusicalinstrumentandtheirparents.

Theyformulatedthreehypotheses:1. “Ifformaleffortfulpracticeisthemainpreconditionforskillacquisition,thenweshouldexpect

lowerorzerorelationshipsbetweenskilllevelandmeasuredamountsofotherformsofactivity”(p.289).

2. “Increases in therateofachievement followed,rather thanpreceded,significant increases inparentalorteacherinvolvementandincreasesintheamountofpracticeundertaken”(ibid.).

3. Olderandmoreaccomplishedindividualsareexpectedtoshowhigherdegreesofpracticestability.Youngerandlessaccomplishedindividualsareexpectedtoshowhigherlevelsofpracticeonlyattimeswhenteachersactivelyencouragetheirpupils(p.290).

Thegroupconsistedof257childrenagedbetweeneightandeighteenyears.Theyweredividedintofivegroups,matchinginsocio-economicstatus,age,genderandmusicalinstrument.Thefirstgroupconsistedof119youngmusiciansattendingaspecialistmusicschool(“thespecialists”),thesecondgroupconsistedof30youngpeoplewhowerenotadmittedtoaspecialistmusicschool(“therejectedspecialists”),thethirdgroupwere23childrenwhoseparentshadaskedinformationaboutattendingthespecialistmusicschool(“thepassiveinterestspecialists”),thefourthgroupincluded27childrenwhoplayedamusicalinstrument,butonlyasoneofmanyhobbies(“non-specialistinstrumentalists”),andthefifthgroupconsistedof58childrenwhohadgivenupplayinganinstrumentatleastayearpriortotheinterviews(“thegiven-upinstrumentalists”).Toconfirmthattherewasacleardifferenceinmusicalcompetencebetweenthedifferentgroups,dataofexaminationsoftheAssociatedBoardandGuildhallSchoolofMusicgradeswereused(seeAppendixI).Itappearedthatthe“specialists”hadachievedthebestgrades,the“given-upinstrumentalists”hadachievedthelowestgradesandthegroupsinbetweenhadachievedintermediategrades,withnosignificantdifferencesbetweenthem.Allthesubjectswereinterviewedface-to-faceorbytelephone,andofeverychildatleastoneparentwasalsointerviewed.Inaddition,theamountofdailyformalpracticewasmeasuredandestimatedforthepastyearsthechildhadreceivedmusiclessons.Toachievethis,theparticipantswereasked

27

to fill inaspeciallydesignedgrid.Because the researcherswerealso interested in theeffectofothermusicalactivitiesthanformalpractice,theparticipantswereadditionallyaskedtoestimatethe amount of improvisation, playing through previous learned pieces and unstructured informalactivities.Fortheseactivitiestheyonlyhadtoestimatewhethertheamountoftimespentonitwasgreaterthan,thesameasorlessthantheamountspentonformalpractice.Asubsetoftheinterviewsamplewaswillingtoparticipateinadiarystudy.Thisgroupconsistedof5childrenofgroup1,noneofgrouptwo(duetoorganisationalreasons),23fromgroup3and26fromgroup4.Foreveryweekthechildreceivedasheetwithseparatedentriesformorning,afternoonandeveningofeachdayoftheweekandseparateentriesforthedifferentkindofmusicalactivities(e.g.formalpracticeofprescribedpieces,formalpracticeoftechnicalexerciseorplayingforfun).Theparticipantswereaskedtoestimatethetimespentoneachactivityeachdayforthemorning,afternoonandeveningofthatday.clawson (1999)Clawsonperformedastudytofindouthowtheearlyprocessofwantingtobeamusician,learningtoplayaninstrument,andbecomingamemberofarockbandareshapedbygender.SheexaminedthemusicaldevelopmentofmaleandfemalerockmusicianswhohadparticipatedintheWBCMRumble,the best known and highest institutionalised band competition in the United States organised bythe rock radio station WBCN. In this yearly competition, twenty-four bands selected by radioprogrammersonthebasisof tapessubmittedto theradiostation,competewitheachother.Thebands’lifeperformancesarethenjudgedbypanelsofjournalists,radioprogrammersandemployeesfromrecordingcompanies.ByusingthebandsparticipatingintheRumble,Clawsoncouldinterviewbands thatwerenot yet commerciallysuccessful,butwereprofessionallyactiveperformers inaregionalmusicmarket.

Themeanageofthemenwas26.9andthemeanageofthewomenwas28.7years.Nineteenfemaleandtwenty-fourmalemusicianswereClawson’srespondentsofwhomsheinterviewedtwenty-ninebytelephoneandfourteenbyamailsurvey.Allmusicianswerewhite,whichisinaccordancewithrock’scharacterasamainlywhitepopgenre.Mostofthemusicianshadattendedcollegeforatleastsomeyearsandcamefrommiddle-classbackgrounds.Noneofthemusiciansearnedtheirlivingaspopularmusicians;theyhadallsortsofotherjobsrangingfrombar-tendingorcleaningtobeingveterinariansorarchitects.Despiteofthissituation,formostofthemusiciansperformingwastheirprincipalworkandtheyallsharedanambitionforalong-termmusicalcareer.

Jørgensen (2001) Jørgenseninvestigatedtherelationshipbetweenstartingagewithmusiceducationandperformancelevelofconservatoirestudents.Themainquestioninthisresearch,basedontheexpertisetheoryofEricsson(e.g.1997),is:“Havethemostaccomplishedperformersstartedearlierwithlessonontheirmaininstrumentthanthelessaccomplished?”(p.227).Basedonseveralotherstudies,Jørgensenstatesthatmostinternationallevelperformers-instrumentalistsandsingers-startedaroundthe

28 29

ageofsix,buthealsoacknowledgesthefactthatsomehavestartedlaterandstillsucceededtobecomeanexpertperformer.

The study was performed at a Norwegian conservatoire on students in their early twenties. Thestudentswereinafour-yearundergraduateprogramme.Thefieldsofmusictheywereengagedinwere instrumental (piano,strings,woodwind,brassetc),vocal,churchmusic (churchorgan),andmusiceducation(sameinstrumentsastheinstrumentalstudentsandjazzandpopinstruments).Allthestudentsinthesamplewereaskedwhatagetheywerewhentheystartedwithformallessonsontheirmaininstrument.“With“formallessons”ismeantlessonsfromaninstrumentalteacheroutsidethegeneralmusiclessonsinschoolandoutsideinstructionfromaconductororchoirorbrass-band”(p.66).Theformallessonsmusthaveprevailedforatleastsixmonthtobeincludedinthestudy.Subsequently,theperformancelevelofthestudentswasmeasured.ThestudentsinJørgensen’sstudyweredividedintothreesub-groups:theexcellentstudents,theverygoodstudentsandthegoodstudents.Thisdivisionwasbasedonthestudents’finalexaminationyearattheendofthefourthyear.Aone-hourconcertbythestudentwasjudgedbyathree-personcommitteeofconservatoireteachers.Thegradesforthisexaminationwerebasedonafive-pointscale:excellent,verygood,good,acceptedandfailed.Overall,onlythethreehighestlevelsweredistributed.Forthemusiceducationstudentstherewereonlya“pass”or“fail”grade,sotheywereexcludedfromtheresultsfortherelationshipbetweenstartingageandperformancelevel.

green (2003)Greeninterviewedfourteenpopularmusiciansaimingtoknowmoreabout“thenatureofpopularmusicians’ informal learning practices, attitudes and values” (p. 7). Green also wanted to knowwhethertheexperiencesofthemusiciansinformaleducationchangedduringthepastfortyyearsand whether the musicians’ learning practices changed during this period. The musicians sheinterviewedwereagedbetweenfifteenandfiftyyearsandlivedallinoraroundLondon.MostofthemGreeninterviewedfiveorsixtimesuntilnomorenewtopicswerediscussed.

Sixofthemusicians,agedtwenty-seventofiftyatthetimeofthestudy(1998-1999),wereinsecondaryeducationbeforepopularmusicwastaughtinformalmusiceducation.Twooftheinterviewees,agedtwenty-oneandtwenty-three,were insecondaryeducationduringa tumultuousperiod inBritishmusic education when there was a transition period in the music curriculum. The youngest sixmusicians,agedfifteentonineteen,experiencedthechangesthathadoccurredafterpopularmusicandworldmusicwereofficiallyrecognisedaspartofthecurriculum.ThecriteriaGreenusedforselectingthemusiciansinherstudywerethatthemusicians1)werenotfriendsorpersonallyacquaintancesoftheresearcherpriortothestudy,2)shouldhaveattendedschoolinEngland,3)shouldbeprofessionalorsemi-professionalmusicians(theolderpersons),orshouldplayinabandorbeatthepointtostartaband(theyoungerpersons),and4)wereinvolvedin“Anglo-Americanguitar-basedpopandrockmusic” (p.9).Concerningthefourthcriterion, theevidenceshowedthatmostmusiciansplayedmorethanoneparticularpopularmusicstyle,with

28 29

oneofthesubjectsalsobeingactiveinclassicalmusic.Theinstrumentsplayedbythesubjectsweremainlyelectricguitar,bassguitaranddrums.Somealsoplayedkeyboards,onesangandoneplayedthesaxophone.Thegroupofpopularmusiciansconsistedoftwelvemenandtwowomen,andtheywereallwhite.They came from different backgrounds, their parents ranging from professionals with highereducationdegreestoscrapyardmerchantsandfactoryworkers.Theirownoccupationalsovariedbroadly: some had worked in unskilled jobs or had been unemployed for many years, some hadworkedinsemi-skilledjobs,andonepersonworkedasahighereducationlecturerinpopularmusic.Theyoungestmusicianswerestill inschool.Green foundthemusiciansbyaskingaround inhercircleof friends, familyandacquaintances.The interviews lastedbetweenanhourandanhour-and-ahalfandalltheinterviewsweretape-recordedandtranscribed.Thequestionconcernedthenatureofthemusicians’skillandknowledge,theirdevelopmentasmusicians,whatattitudesandvaluestheyattachedtoacquiringmusicianship,theirexperiencesinformalmusiceducation,theiropinionsregardingtheplaceofpopularmusicinmusiceducationandtheirpossibleexperiencesasteachers.

Asmentionedintheintroductiontothischapter,theactualresultsofthesestudieswillbementionedinchapters4and5.

30 31

3 Childhood develoPmental theories

InordertoputtheexistingresearchonspecificmusicaldevelopmentreviewedinChapter4intoalarger framework,somegenerallyacceptedtheoriesofchildren’sdevelopmentwillbediscussedinthischapter.ThesetheoriesoriginatefromtheSwissbiologistJeanPiagetandtheRussianLevVygotsky.ThereasonPiagetisdiscussedhereisbecausehistheoryhashadanenormousimpactonthewaypsychologiststhinkaboutdevelopmentandeducation,includingonthinkingaboutmusicaldevelopment.ThereasonVygotskyisdiscussedisalsobecauseofhisinfluenceonthinkingaboutdevelopment and learning. Especially his emphasis on the social interactions in learning is veryimportant.Interestingisthedifferencebetweenthesepsychologists:Piagetbelievedthatdevelopmentisaratherautonomousprocesswithoutinfluencefromthechild’senvironmentorculture,whereasVygotsky claimed an important role for the interactions between the child and its culture, beingrepresentedbyparents,teachersandotherimportantpersonsinthechild’senvironment(Vygotsky1978).

3.1 lev vygotsky

LevVygotskywasaRussianpsychologist(1896-1934),whosetheorythesocialinteractionsbetweenthe child and representatives of his/her culture (like a parent or a teacher) were given a veryprominentplace.Vygotskyclaimedthatthehighermentalfunctionsgrewoutoftheseinteractions.Bylookingateffectivewaysparents,teachersorothersignificantpersonssolveproblemsorthink,a child internalises these ways of doing and thinking that is common in his culture. The way achildinternalisestheseculturalmoresdependsofhisageanddevelopmentalstage.SignificantinVygotsky’stheoryisthatthechildlearnsbyparticipatingintheculture.Withhisparticipationthechildsometimescausesachangeinhisdevelopment,anextstep,butmostofthetimesthechildneedsthehelporguidancefromanotherpersonforthistohappen.A very important term in this theory is the “zoneofproximaldevelopment”.This is thedistancebetweentheactualdevelopmentofchilddeterminedbytheleveloftasksitcansolvebyitselfandthepotentialdevelopmentdeterminedbytheleveloftasksitcansolvewiththehelpofadultsormorecapablepeers.AccordingtoVygotskytheabilitytosolveaproblemortaskwiththehelpofsomeoneelse(amoredevelopedperson)istellingusmuchmoreaboutthepotentialmentaldevelopmentthanwhatachildcandoonitsown(Vygotsky1978).Byguidingachildtosolveaproblemitlearnsanditwillbeabletogrowtoanextstageinhisdevelopment.Thismakesthehumanlearninganespeciallysocialprocess.Vygotskyproposesthateducatingchildrenisdonewellwhentheteacheris“in”thezoneofproximaldevelopmentofhispupil,becausethisadvancesthedevelopment.

Inadditiontobeingpartofacultureinwhichhighermentalprocessessuchasabstractthinking,self-awarenessandproblemsolvingtakeplace,thechildlearnstheseprocessesalsoinconversationsanddialogueswithhimself.Theseinternalconversationsarethebasisforinternalprocesseslikethinking(SeifertandHoffnung1994).

30 31

3.2 Jean Piaget

TheSwissbiologist,philosopherandpsychologistJeanPiaget(1896-1980)developedatheoryaboutchildren’scognitivedevelopment.Hebelievedthatthethinkingofchildrendevelopsisaseriesofcomplexstages,whichreviseandincorporatetheprecedingstages.Frombirthtoadulthood,Piagetthought,everychildgoesthroughfourstages:thesensorimotor,thepreoperational,theconcreteoperationaland the formaloperationalstage (SeifertandHoffnung1994).Thedevelopment fromonestagetothenextdependsonseveralprocesses:adaptation,socialtransmissionandphysicalmaturation.

In the process of adaptation two other processes are working, assimilation and accommodation.Whenthesetwoareinbalance,adaptationoccurs.Tounderstandtheprocessofassimilation,anotherPiagetiantermneedsfurtherexplanation:theterm“scheme”.“Aschemeisacognitivestructureofactions,behaviours,thoughtandproblem-solvingstrategies;inshortastructuretowhichaclassofsimilaractionsequencesbelongs”(Flavell1963,p.53).Suchaclassprovidesaframeworkofhowtorespondtoagivenintellectualchallengeorsituation.Theactionsequencesinaschemearetightlyboundtogether,andthebehaviouralelementsarestronglyinterrelated.Piagetbelievedthatchildrenarebornwithafewschemesandthattheseschemesareadjusted,extendedandchangedthroughassimilationandaccommodation.The innateschemesaremadeofsimplepatternsofunlearnedreflexes,suchassucking,lookingandgrasping.

Assimilationisthecognitiveencounterofanenvironmentalobjectorsituationthatisnewforthechild,thereisnotyetaschemetellinghowtorespondtotheobjectofsituation,andtheinterpretationand response to the object or situation based on existing schemes. The core of the assimilationprocessisrespondingtothepresentintermsofthepast.

Whenachildisconfrontedwithanewobjectorsituationinwhichexistingschemesdonotwork,a new scheme will develop. This is called accommodation. The interplay between assimilationand accommodation is called adaptation. It is the process of deepening and broadening existingschemeswhenpossible(assimilation)andofmodifyingwhennecessary(accommodation)(SeifertandHoffnung1994).

Thesecondwaythetransferfromonestagetothenextismadeisthroughsocialtransmission.Thisis theprocess throughwhichachild is influencedbyandadopts informationand ideas fromthesurroundingcultureandsociety.Thisisamajorinfluenceonachild,becauseitdetermineslargelywhichobjectsandsituationsachildencounters.Socialtransmissionworksthroughimitationandmodelling.

The thirdand lastexplanationPiagetused for thechange fromonestage to thebest isphysicalmaturation.Achildhastoreachacertainphysicalagetobeabletodocertainthings,forexampletonameobjects.

32 33

As stated before, Piaget divided the child development in four stages. The first stage is thesensorimotorstagelastingfrombirthtotwoyears(allageindicationsareapproximateandaverage).Duringthisstagetheinnateschemesareadaptedthroughassimilationandaccommodation.Theonly“ideas”achildhasabouttheworldisviathesenses(sensoryexperiences)anddirectcontactwiththeworld(motorexperiences).Thismeansthatachildhasnoideaaboutanobjectunlesshecantouchitorthroughanothersensoryexperience.Graduallyschemesdevelopforallsortsofobjectsandexperiencesthechildhas.Theseareimportantbecausetheyformthebasisofmorecomplexschemesthatwilldeveloplaterinlife.Betweeneightandtwelvemonthsthechildwillachieveobjectpermanence.Thismeansthattheunderstandingthatpeopleandthingsdoexisteventhoughyoucannotsee,taste,feel,smellorhearthem.

Fromtwotosevenyearsofagethechildisinthepreoperationalstage.Inthisstagethereisashiftfromtheaction-orientedschemesfromstageonetolanguage-andothersymbol-orientedschemes.During thisstage thechildslowlystartsmasteringcertain logical rulesandbecomescapableofsolvingproblemswithwordsoractions.Childreninthisstageexperimentwithsymbolsthatrepresenttheworldindifferentways.Childrendothiswithdeferredimitationanddramaticplay(forexampleplayinghouse).Themostobvioussignofchildren’sabilityofunderstandingandrepresentingtheworldbyusingsymbolsisthedevelopmentoflanguage.Thisbeginswiththeuseofsinglewordsandendswithcomplete–mostlygrammaticallycorrect-sentences.Whenthechildstartstalkingitonlyreferstoobjectsofsituationsthatarepresent,butlaterthechildisalsocapableoftalking(andthinking)aboutthingsthathavebeenofwillbe.

Thethirdstage,theconcreteoperationalstage,lastsfromtheseventhtilltheeleventhyear.Thisstagebeginswhenchildrenarecapableofmakingrepresentationsand learnhowtoco-ordinatethoselogically.Piagetdefinedoperationsaslogicalrelationshipsamongconceptsorschemes.Intheconcreteoperationalstagechildrenbecomecapableofusinglogicalrelationshipsforthefirsttime,butthisskillisstilllimitedtoobjectsandeventsthatareconcreteandreal.Aconsequenceofthisdevelopmentisexistenceofconservation.Thisisthebeliefthatthequantityorcontentofsomethingremainsthesamedespiteachangeoftheformoftheobject.

Thelaststage,fromeleventhroughadulthood,istheformaloperationalstage.Inthisstage,children(adolescentsnow)becomecapableofthinkingabstractly,logicallyandhypothetically.Enteringthisstagealsomakesindividualsableofthinkingabouttheirownthinkingandofabstractandcomplexmatterssuchasmoral,religionandpolitics.Bydoingthistheadultidentityisformed(SeifertandHoffnung1994).

It should be acknowledged here that many psychologists do not really believe the stages Piagetdescribedreallyexist(Hargreaves1996).Thefirstreasonforthisisthatthetheorydoesnottakeintoaccountanyculturalorenvironmentaldifferencesthatmaycausedifferentdevelopments.Piagetsawtheenvironmentastherawmaterialforthecognitivedevelopment,butnotasactuallytakingpartinshapingthecourseofthinking,whichisthecurrentdominantview.ThesecondreasonisthatPiagetthoughtthatforalltasksordomainsoftasksthedevelopmentwouldhavethesamespeedorcourse(functionalcoherence).This,however,appearsnownottobethecase.

32 33

4 musiCal develoPment theories

In the followingchapterseveral theoriesconcerningmusicaldevelopmentwillbediscussedanda connection will be made with the developmental theories in the previous chapter. Overall, twotypesofmusicaldevelopmentaltheoriesexist:theoriesaboutmusicaldevelopmentingeneralandtheoriesaboutthedevelopmentofexpertmusicians.

4.1 musical development in general

In this section, two theories of musical development will be reviewed. The first is developed byKeithSwanwick,aBritishmusicianandemeritusprofessorofmusiceducation.ThesecondisbyDavidHargreaves,amusicianandprofessorofchildpsychology,whosemainresearchandteachinginterestslieindevelopmentalpsychologyandarteducation.

4.1.1 Keith swanwick

Swanwick(1994)studiedhowchildrenagedthreetoelevencompose.Despitethefactthatthisstudyconcernedcomposition,Swanwickfeelsthat“theimplicationsofthisstudygobeyondthespecificactivity”(p.85).ThroughstudyingcompositionsSwanwickwasabletogetaninsightofhowpeoplethink musically. This way of studying musical development may be more effective than askingchildrentoexpressinwordswhattheythink,feelandunderstandaboutcertainpartsofmusicormusicalparameters,becauseitcouldwellbethattheyunderstandmorethantheycanexpress.Itshouldbenotedthatcomposingwasdefinedverybroadlyinthisstudy.Itincludedeventhebriefestspontaneous musical utterance as well as more elaborated works consciously created by thechildren.Alsospontaneousinvented,butnotnotatedmusicwasconsideredasacomposition.Fromasmallsamplefromthecollectedandrecordedcompositions,eachcompositionwaslistenedtobythreeindependentteachers,whowereaskedtoestimatetheageofthechildwhomadethework.Theteachers’judgementsagreedwitheachotheronapositivestatisticallevelandwiththeagesofthechildren.

Swanwickdistinguishesfourfieldsofmusicalknowledgethataremasteredinthefollowingorder:materials,expression,formandvalue(seefigure1).Thegainingofthisknowledgetakesplacethroughtwoprocesses,assimilation(anintuitiveprocess)andaccommodation(ananalyticalprocess).Theleft-side of Swanwick’s model is the intuitive and playful side, starting with the exploring of thesensoryqualitiesofmusic,whichisthentransformedintopersonalexpressiveness,structural(or“formal”)speculationandendswithapersonalcommitmenttothevaluesofmusic.Theseintuitivecharacteristicsareextendedbytheimitativeandanalyticalaspectsofmusicaldevelopment:skillmastery(manipulatingthematerials),knowingtheconventionsofthemusicalvernacularandafterthatidiomaticauthenticity.Itendswiththesystematicextensionofmusicalpossibilities.Swanwickpresentsmusicaldevelopmentthiswaybecauseheseesitasadialecticalprocess.Everysteptaken

35

inthisprocessisqualitativelydifferentfromthepreviousstep,notquantitatively.ThefourfieldsofmusicalknowledgearedescribedinFigure1,basedonSwanwick(1994).Eachfieldhastwolevels,onefromtheintuitivesideofthemodelandonefromtheanalyticalside.

Value

Form

Expression

Materials

Symbolic

Systematic

Speculative

Idiomatic

Vernacular

Personal

SensoryManipulative

Figure1:Swanwick’smodelofmusicaldevelopment(Swanwick1994,p.87).

“Note: the terms “Romantic” and “Classical” are here still being used in the special sense developed by Robert Pirsig, as are those

provocative words “subjective” and “objective”” (ibid).

materialsLevel1(sensory):Thechildfindspleasureinmusic,especiallytimbreandvolume.Itplaysoccasionallywithinstruments,buttheorganizationisspontaneous,thepulseisunsteadyandtoneandrhythmdonotseemtohaveexpressivevalue.Level2 (manipulative):Themanipulationof instrumentsbecomesmorecontrolledanda regularpulseispossible.Thechildisabletousethephysicalstructureoftheinstrumenttoproducespecificsounds,suchaglissandiorintervallicpatterns.Whenthechildmakesupacompositionittendstoberatherlongandrepetitive.

expressionLevel3(personalexpressiveness):Expressivenessbecomesclearbychangesinspeedandvolume,andbycommunicatingdramaandatmospherethroughthemusic,sometimesreferringtoanextra-musicalidea.Despitethefactthatphrasesarebeginningtodevelop,thereislittlestructuralcontrolordevelopmentofideas.

34

ANALYSIS

ACCOMODATIONASSIMILATION

INTUITION

Artistic

Intellect

Conceptions

Relationships

“Classical”

Objective

Underlyingform

Separation

Tradition

Imitation

Aesthetic

Imagination

Impressions

Individualthings

“Romantic”

Subjective

Appearance

Integration

Creation

Play

35

Level4(thevernacular):Thechildisabletoproduceandrepeatmelodicandrhythmicpatterns.Thepiecesareshortandaremainlyestablishedingeneralconventionsandhenceratherpredictable.Thephrasesaretwo,fouroreightbarslong.

formLevel5(thespeculative):Compositionsbecomemoreelaborativeandlessconventional.Thechildisabletoexplorestructuralpossibilities,contrastingandvaryingmusicalideas.Level6(theidiomatic):Technical,expressiveandstructuralcontrolisshowninlongercompositionswhichhavea recognizablestyle.Patterns likeansweringphrases, call andanswerandvariationthroughelaborationandcontrastingsectionsarelikelytooccur.

ValueLevel7(thesymbolic):Originalandcoherentmusicalstatementsaremadethroughacombinationofformalrelationshipsandexpressivecharacter.Theindividualisabletogivehiscompositionastrongpersonalsenseandisabletodevelopparticulargroupsoftimbresandharmonicprogressions.Level8(Thesystematic):Theindividualcomposesmusicalworksbasedonnewlygeneratedmusicalmaterials,likescales,novelharmonicsystemsorelectronicsounds.

Ingeneral,individualsgothroughthestagesinthisorder,butwhenonephasehasbeenreached,itisstillpossibletocomposeormakemusicinthemannerofapreviousstage.Inaddition,whenanextstagehasnotreallyhasbeenreachedyet,itispossibletolightlytouchit.Alevelisreallyreachedwhenthecompositionsshowthecharacteristicsofthatlevelinaconsistentway.

AccordingtoSwanwick,thecrossingfromtheleftpartfromthemodeltotherighthappensnaturallywhen children develop, but it has to be supported by music education, because just intuitiveexperimentingandbeingexpressivewillnotcauseanyfurthermusicaldevelopment.Childrenwillneedteacherstoteachthemaboutmusicalparametersandtheirconventions.

Whencrossingthebordertoanewfieldofmusicalknowledge,accordingtoSwanwick,amentalshifttakesplacewhichhelinkstoPiaget’stheory.Inthefirstlayerofthemodelassimilationandaccommodation generate sensory-motor intelligence through sensory and motor experiences,whichboundthepossibilitiesoflevelsoneandtwo.Inordertobeabletoseemusicasabletomeansomething metaphorical, more than just a direct imitation of sensory phenomena a qualitativementalshiftisnecessary.Thisistheshiftto“representationalimitation”,ortherepresentationofanabsentobject.AccordingtoSwanwick(1994)thisliesattheheartofmusicmaking:forproducingmusicwithanexpressivecharacter, it isnecessarytoabstractfeelingsorthoughtsfromreal lifeandtransformthenintomusicalgestures.Childrenbecomeableofrepresentingthingsthatarenotpresent(objectpermanence)atayoungerage,butinmusicthisqualitycomesonlywhenachildiscapableofrepresentingthatabsentobjectinmusic.Whenthisispossiblethechildwillmakethesteptotheexpressivestage.Itbeginsintuitive,butsoonitwillbemoreanalytical.Thenthechildiscapableofusingvernacularpatternsandmusicalconventions.

Subsequently,asecondqualitativementalshiftoccursthatSwanwickcallsconstructionalplay.Bythisshiftthechildisabletoformmusicalstructures,suchassequencesorcontrapuntalmotives.Thisconstructionalplaycanalsobeseeninperformingmusic,forexamplewhencontrastingphrasesor pointing up differences of similarities between phrases or passages. Again, this phase startsintuitively;theeffectivenessofamusicalformismeasuredbyitscapacitytosurpriseorexpress.Afterthisconstructionalplaytakesitplaceintheconventionalrulesorframeworksofsetmusicalstyles(Swanwick1994).

Swanwickdoesnotmentionathirdshifttomovetothefourthfieldofknowledge,value,becauseheseesthisasaratherdifferentissue,asitisdevelopedthroughthedevelopmentofotherfieldsofknowledge.Itgoesbeyondsensoryandexpressiveenjoymentorcapabilities,butitisaboutbecomingconsciouslyawareoftheimportanceofmusicasamajorbenefactiontohumanbeingsandtosociety(Swanwick1994).

4.1.2 david hargreaves

Hargreaves(1996)builtamodelofmusicaldevelopmentbasedonPiaget’stheoryontheonehandandonchildren’sdevelopmentsinotherfieldofarts(drawing,writingandaestheticperception)ontheother.Insteadofusingtheword“stage”fortheprogressionheusestheword“phase”.Hedoesthisfortworeasons:thefirstisinordertoavoidtheimpressionthatthestages(orphases)dopossessome sort of functional coherence. The second reason for using the word phase is that Piaget’stheoryismainlyaboutlogical-scientificthinking,whichmayberatherinappropriateinthearts.

Hargreavesdistinguishesfivephases:thesensorimotorphase,thefiguralphase,theschematicphase,therulesystemsphaseandtheprofessionalphase.ForeveryphaseHargreavesdescribestheskillsachildprobablywillobtaininsinging,composing,melodicperceptionandgraphicrepresentation.

sensorimotor phase (0-2 years)In this phase, as in Piaget’s sensorimotor stage, development mainly involves the practice anddevelopmentofphysicalskillsandintegrationofsensoryinformation.Obviouslychildrenthisagedonotreallysingyet,butastart isalreadypresent inchildren’sbabblingandrhythmicdancing.Non-musicalbabblingfirstappearsintheinfant’sfirstyearandafterthismusicalbabblingappears.Whereasnon-musicalbabblingdoesnotseemtobearesponsetotheenvironment,musicalbabblingseems a reaction to musical sounds in the child’s environment (Hargreaves 1985). The “songs”theseyoungchildrenproduceconsistofsoundsofvariedpitch.Theyaresungononevowelorafewsyllables.Rhythmicallythese“songs”areamorphous.Apartofthesingingdevelopmentofinfantsistherhythmicdancingthatparallelstheirsinging(ofcourseaftertheyareabletodosophysically).Hargreaves(1996)citesMoog(1976)whoperformedastudyonfivehundredpreschoolchildren.Moogfoundthatchildrenfromtheageofsixmonthsmoverhythmicallytomusicandtheco-ordinationbetweenmovementandmusicappearedtoincreasewithage.

TheactionsinfantsperformwithinstrumentsHargreavescallscompositionandalsointhismusical

36

domainthesensorimotoraspectispresent.Compositioninthisphasemainlyinvolvesmasteringthemainsofproducingsoundswithinstrumentsandphysicallycontrollingthem.

Regardingmelodicperception,researchhasbeendoneusingmeasurementofchangesinheartrateandheadturningasmeasureofdiscrimination.Thesestudies,forexamplebyChangandTrehub(1977),showthatinfantscandistinguishbetweenmelodicdifferences,especiallywhenthecontourofamelodychanges,andareabletorecogniserhythmicsequencesaswell.Thegraphicrepresentationofmusicinthisphaseisscribbling;thismeansthatchildrenscribblewhattheyaredoingorhearing,forexampletheydrawrhythmicpatterns.However,thesepatternsdonothavemuchresemblancewiththemusicitisbasedon.

figural phase (2-5 years)Importantinthisphaseisthatchildrenhaveacquiredtheabilitytosymbolizeorrepresentthingsthatarenotpresent(objectpermanence).Onethingthatbecomespossibleafterachildacquiresobject permanence is graphic representation. Graphic representation in this phase is figural.Regardingmusicalnotationthismeansthatthenotationordrawingconveysthefigureorshapeofthesequence,whichwasseenbyBamberger9asanappreciationofmusicalexpressiveness.Inthisphasethemetricalrepresentationisnotcompletelydevelopedandthereforelikelytobeflawed.

After the ´babbling songs´ from the sensorimotor phase, children are in this phase capable ofproducingarticulateandrecognisablesongs.Spontaneoussongsinventedbychildrenoftenborrowaspectsfromexistingsongs.Davidson(1994)studiedthesongsof69childrenandconcludedthatthree-yearoldchildrenrelyonthewordsofasongtosingit.Theycansingdistinctpitches,butthereisnointervalstabilityyetnortonalcoherence.Thechildrenhaveacquiredtonalitywithinphrases,butincompletesongstheyhavenot.Theindividualrelationshipsbetweenthepitchesarenotyetarticulated.Ayearlaterthechildstillreliesonwords,butthemelodiccontourisproducedmoreaccurately. However, it still does not convey complete tonal coherence. At the end of the figuralphase children are capable of singing melodic contours and intervals correctly, but a coherentwholecomposedofallpartsofsong isnotorganisedbeforethechild is intheschematicphase.Regardingmelodicperceptionchildrenappeartodiscriminatepitchesandthecontourofasong.Theircompositionsshowthat in thisphasechildrenareassimilating themusiccommon in theirenvironmentorculture.

9 JeanneBambergerisProfessorEmeritaofMusicattheMassachusettsInstituteofTechnologywhereshetaughtmusictheory

andcognition.Amongotherthingsshestudiedmusicaldevelopmentandlearning, inparticularaspectsofrepresentations

among both children and adults (http://web.mit.edu/jbamb/www/). In her work she described the earliest stages of music

cognition:whatchildrenhavelearnedaboutmusic,rhythmpatternsentunebuildingthroughtheirowndiscovery,andhowthey

graphicallyrepresentwhattheyhearinordertofindouthowmusicaldevelopmentoccurs.(http://www-classes.usc.edu/engr/

ise/599muscog/2003/week14/paper.html).

37

38 39

schematic phase (5-8 years)Bytheageoffive,whentheschematicphasestarts,childrenhaveagoodpictureofadultconventionsandprobablyhaveinventedsomeoftheirowninventions.Fortheartsthismeansthatchildrenarebeginningtodevelopartisticconventions,butthesearenotintegratedinacompletesenseofstyle.Incomposingthisleadstousingvernacularconventions,suchastheuseofmelodicorrhythmicostinati,butnotyetacoherentstyle.

Childrenfromtheageof fivesing“firstdraftsong”,atermusedbyDavidson(1994).Thismeansthatthesongsareveryrecognisablemodelsofthesongsofthechild’sculture,buttheyarestillnotaccurate.ResearchfromDavidson,McKernonandGardner(1981,citedbyHargreaves1985)showedthatfive-yearoldchildrenachievesongsinfourphases:firstthewordsofasongandthenallphrasesandtheorderofthephrases.Thentheunderlyingpulseofthesongbecomespresentandaconstantspeedisestablished,thisiscalledthephaseoftopology.Thenextphasesarerhythmicsurface,pitchcontourandkeystability.

Thegraphicrepresentationofmusicalsodevelopsfurther in thisphase.Childrenwereonlyableto represent one element of a melody in the figural phase, but are now capable of representingmoredimensions.Forexample,at theageofsevenchildrenareabletounderstandthedifferentdurationsofthenotesandcanalsoincludetheshapeandcontourofaphrase.Theycanrelatethedifferent“systems”workinginthemusic.Thesameisseenfortheperceptionofmusic:childrendiscriminatedifferentpitches,butalso intervalsand tonality.Asaresultof this,childrenshowagrowingpreferenceforwesterntonalityandharmonyfromtheageoffiveyears.

rule systems phase (8-15 years)Inthisphasetheadultconventionsaremastered.Thisisshownintheperceptionofmusicaswellasinitsproduction.Insingingthismeans,forexample,thatchildrenarecapableofsingingsongsinonekey,insteadof“falling”toanotherkeyaftereveryphrase.Thiskeystabilityisalsopresentintheirmusicperception,asisthechildren’sanalyticalrecognitionofintervals.

Thegraphicrepresentationbecomesformal-metric.Thismeansthatthedrawingsconveyallaspectsofthemusicinaformal,conventionalway.Whencomposing,childreninthisphasearecapableofusingidiomaticconventions,whichmeansthattheycancorrectlyusetheidiomofseveraldifferentstyles.However,thesmallbodyofresearchonstylesensitivityinmusichasnotproducedclearanddefiniteresultsyet.

Intherulesystemsphasetheaestheticexperienceofworksofartbecomesmoreimportant.Beforetheageofeight,childrenaremainlyfocusedontheconcretepropertiesofworksofartandonthemeanstoproducethem,but in therulesystemsphasechildrendevelopstylesensitivityandthisbecomesanimportantaspectoftheirjudgementsofmusicalworks(orotherworksofart).

38 39

professional phase (15 years and older)Havingenteredthisphasemeansthatanindividualiscapableofproducingworksofartthatshowindependence from the conventions and common styles and of making his own rules. Anothercharacteristic of persons in this phase is that they are capable of self-reflection in relation toconventional styles and (their own) works of art. Hargreaves (1996) thinks that this level is onlyachievedbyprofessionalartists. Itacknowledgesthefactthattherearenoabsolutestandardsinartandthatrulesmayexisttobebroken.Animportantaspectofperformanceinthisphaseisthatindividualsarecapableofadaptingtothedemandsofasituation,astheyareabletoreflectonthissituation.

4.2 the development of expert musical performance

The following section will address several theories on the development of expert (musical)performance.ThefirstmodelisdevelopedbyMariaManturzewska(1990),whilethesecondmodelisbasedonresearchbyBloom(1985),lateradjustedbyEricssonetal.(1993;1995).

4.2.1 manturzewska’s model

Manturzewska(1990)madeanoverviewofstagesinthelife-spandevelopmentofclassicalmusicians.Shebasedthisschemeofmusicaldevelopmentonthelivesof165professionalPolishmusicians10.Todistinguishbetweenthestages,Manturzewskausedfivecriteria:

1. changesinmusicalbehaviourandformofmusicalexpressionspecificandtypicalforaparticularstage;

2. changesinmotivationandinterestinmusic;3. changesinmusicalachievementandactivity;4. changesinstyleandformofmusicallearningandmusicalexperience;5. formsandcontentofuseofindividualpotential(self-realisation).

Manturzewskalearnedfromtheresearch interviewswiththemusiciansthateverystage“seemstobea“criticalperiod”forlearningspecificskills,particularsensitivity,andreadinesstodevelopand accumulate specific experiences which are important for the musician” (p. 131). She statesthatthedifferentstageshavedifferentdurationsinthelivesofdifferentmusicians;thestagesarethereforenotfixedatcertainagesandareoverlapping,althoughManturzewskagavesomeroughageindications.

Manturzewskafoundsomeinterestingdifferencesbetweensingersandinstrumentalists,butthisseemstohaveinfluencedonlystages3and5;instage3becausemostsingersstartlater(seealsoJørgensen)andinstage5becausetheyusuallystopearlierthaninstrumentalists.

10 Seechapter2formoreinformationaboutthisresearch.

40 41

stage 1: development of sensory-emotional sensitivity and spontaneous musical expression and activity Thisstagecovers the firstsix yearsof lifeand itendswhensystematicmusic lessonsbegin.Aswe will later see, this generally happens at six years. When a child starts before six with musicinstruction,stage1endsatthatage.Becauseoftheenormousdevelopmentachildhasinhisorherfirstsixyears,stage1isdividedinthreesub-stages:1. theformationanddevelopmentofsensory-emotionalsensitivitytosoundsandmusic(0–fifteen

months);2. thedevelopmentofcognitivesensitivitytoacousticandmusicalstimuliandthedevelopmentof

categoricalperceptionofpitch(sixteen–thirty-sixmonths);3. thedevelopmentofmusicalmemoryandimaginationandspontaneousvocalandinstrumental

activity(three–fiveyearsofage)(Manturzewska1990,p.133).

stage 2: intentional, guided musical developmentAtthisstage,thatusuallystartsaroundsixyearsofage,basictechnicalandperformancecapacitiesandmusicalknowledgearegained.Manturzewskadrawsthesomewhatidealisticpictureofchildrendemandingmusiclessonsbecauseoftheirneedtolearntoplayonaninstrument,eveninfamilieswithoutmusicaltraditions.Betweentheageoftenandfourteenthegreatestprogressinperformanceabilitydevelops.AccordingtoManturzewskastage2isessentialforthedevelopmentoftechnicalperformance.Whenefficiencyintechnicalperformancedoesnotexistinthisstage,itisveryunlikelytodeveloplaterinlife.Therefore,misuseofthiscriticalfunction,startingmusiclessonsaftertheageofnine, inadequate instructionor toomanyteacherchangeswillprobably leadtodifficultieswithreachingaprofessional level.Thisstageendswiththetransitionfromprimarytosecondaryschool11.stage 3: formation and development of the artistic developmentAtthisstagetheyoungmusicianreflectsonphilosophiesanddevelopsapersonalviewonmusicalperformanceandinterpretation.Usuallythisstagereachesitspeakat18-20years.Thedevelopmentofsingers,conductorsandcomposerscanbedifferentfromthedevelopmentofinstrumentalists:singershavetheirfirstsystematiceducationinthisstageafteryearsofsuccessfulamateursingingandcomposersandconductorshavetheirfirstnon-professionalachievements.Thesefirstartisticachievementsinthelivesofsingers,composersandconductorsseemtobenecessaryintheirmusicalandprofessionaldevelopment.Itcouldbecomparedtothesuccessfulandplayfulperformancesoffutureexpertinstrumentalistsintheirpre-schoolyears.

Inthisstagetherelationshipwiththeteacherseemsofgreatimportance.Manturzewskadrawstwopossibledevelopmentallines.Ontheonehandyoungmusicianmayhaveaverygoodandintenserelationshipwithateacher;ontheotherhandtheyoungmusiciansdevelopwithintheenvironment

11 Theageofchildrenatthetransitionfromprimarytosecondaryschooldifferspercountry;typically,childrenarebetween12and

14years.

40 41

andsub-cultureoftheirpeers.Althoughthelatterdevelopmentbeingnormal–andhealthy-foryoungpeople,Manturzewskaexplicitlystatesthatforthedevelopmentofaninternationalcareerinmusicitisimportanttohaveagoodrelationshipwithateacherormaster12.

Stage3endswiththegraduationfromaconservatoire13.InthestudyofManturzewskathisusuallyhappens at the age of twenty-three or twenty-four. After graduation – sometimes even beforegraduation-theyoungmusicianhastofindaplaceintheprofessionalcommunityforhimself. Itis likely for themusician to joindifferentensemblesandorchestras.Manturzewskastresses theneedforateacherormanagerhere,becausewithoutone,themusicianismorelikelynottofindtherightpathforhimself.Theteachercanhelptheyoungmusicianwithsettingupcontactwithothermusiciansormanagers.Thisdependsonthenetworkoftheteacher,asisalsoshownbySosniak’sstudy(1985).

stage 4: first professional stabilisationAt this stage, which usually lasts from thirty to fifty years, the musician has found professionalemployment.Theperformanceactivityreachesitspeak,asdoesthegeographicalspanofjourneys.Inthisstagethemusicianhasthehighestartisticoutput(annualnumberofconcerts,recordingsandnewpiecesontherepertoire).Againtheimportanceofaguide(inthisstagethiscouldbeamanager)isstressed.Withoutone,themusicianmaytendtoworktohardwithoutrest,whichmayleadtoaperiodofgreatphysicalandpsychologicalfatiguebetweentheageofforty-fiveandfifty-five.Inthis“criticalperiod”themusicianstartsfindingnewwaysofbeingactiveasamusicianandhisinterestinpedagogicalandphilosophicalmattersincreases.Inthisway,themusicianslowlygoesintostage5.

stage 5: teaching phaseAtthisstagethemusicianismorecapableofinterestinandidentifyingwithothers,suchasstudents.Themusicianhasagreatersenseofsocialresponsibilitiesandthereismorereadinesstobecomeinvolvedingeneralissues.Theamountofconcertswilldecrease.(Solo-)Singersandviolinistsusuallygivetheirlastconcertataroundtheageofsixty.Membersofensemblesandorchestrasandsomepianistscontinuegivingconcertsforalongerperiodoftimeandthereforestayinthisstagelonger.

stage 6: slow but systematic retreat from professional activityAtthislaststagethemusiciangraduallyretreatsfromanyprofessionalactivity.Teachersaswellasperformersretire,butsomekeepplayinginanorchestralessfrequentthanbefore.Someexceptionalmusiciansmayswitchtorepresentativefunctions,suchasbeingamemberofjuryofmusicalcontestsorparticipateinhonorarycommittees.

4.2.2 Bloom and ericsson’s model

EricssonmadeamodelofexpertmusicaldevelopmentthatisbasedoninterviewsheldbySosniak

12 Pleasenotemoreinformationabouttherelationshipbetweenteacherandstudent,respectivelybetweenmusiciansandtheir

peerscanbefoundinparagraphs5.3and5.4.

13 Withtheterm“conservatoire” aninstitutionforprofessionalmusictrainingismeanthere.

42 43

(1985) with international-level performers and their parents and teachers. These internationalperformerswereactiveinmusic,sculpting,athletics,mathematicsandneurology–fieldsthatdemandlongperiodsofpreparationanddevelopment.Bloom’sstudystartedwithinterviewingpianistsafterwhich the researchers recognisedseveraldevelopmental stages.After thedevelopmental theorywasmade,itappearedtobeapplicabletootherfieldsofexpertiseaswell.AccordingtoBloomthedevelopmentconsistsofthreestages.

stage 1Thefirststagecontainstheplayfulactionsanindividualhasinthedomainofmusicatayoungage.Itends,aswithManturzewska’smodel,when instructionanddeliberatepracticestart,whenthechildhasbecomemoreinterestedandshowssomepotential.InthestudybyBloometal.(Sosniak1990;Bloom1985),mostofthetalentedindividualswereintroducedtotheirfuturedomainintheirfamilies.Theirparentswerenotlikelytobeprofessionalsthemselves,butthefieldinwhichtheirchildwouldbecomeanexpertplayedamajorroleinthefamily.Themusicians,forexample,listenedtomusicalmostfromthedaytheywereborn.Sosniak’sdescriptionofthefirstphaseimpliesthatthemotivationneededtopursueamusicalcareerisbasedonthejoyfulinteractionswithmusicintheseyears.Shewrites:“Theeffectoftheearlyyearsofplayful,almostromanticinvolvementwithafieldseemedtobetogetthelearnerinvolved,captivated,“hooked”-motivatedtopursuethematterfurther”(Sosniak1990).

stage 2In the second stage the parents help their child to establish regular practice and give supportandencouragementwhenthechild improves.Asopposedto the firstphase inwhich there isnoconcernfor“correctness”,inthisphasethereismoreattentionfordetailandtechnicalskill.Withtheperformanceofthechildincreasingandimproving,better-qualifiedteachersareengagedandtheamountofdailypractice increases.There isagreaterneedof rational instruction insteadoftheinformalandpersonalwayoftuitioninthefirstphase.Duringthisphasethestudentsdevotealargepartoftheirtimetopracticeandgiveupotheractivitiestomakethispossible.Thisstageendswiththemusician’scommitmenttopursueactivitiesinthemusicdomainonafull-timebasis.AccordingtoSosniak(1990),makingthiscommitmentisverydifficultformoststudents.Theywillhave topicture themselvesaspotentialprofessionalsandhave todedicateall their time to theirdomain. This moment was, for most of the individuals who were interviewed, the first time theymadeaconsciouscommitmenttothepursuitofexcellence.Usually,accordingtoBloom’sstudythishappenedinthemusicians’mid-teens.

stage 3Thethirdstageconsistsofthefull-timecommitmenttoimprovingtheperformanceandtheyoungmusician making a great effort in reaching the top level of their domain. Usually this involves asearchforamasterteacherandoptimaltrainingconditions.Sometimes,thefamilyofthemusicianmoves to another region to make this possible. In all cases Bloom studied (artists, athletes and

42 43

mathematicians and neurologists), the master teacher is someone who himself reached the toplevel inhis fieldorsomeonewho taughtotherpupilswho reached the top level (Ericsson 1996).Therelationshipwiththeteacherwasnolongerbasedonaclosepersonalbond,butentirelyonthededicationofboththeteacherandthestudenttothefield.Inthisphasethestudentbecomesmoreindependent;hedevelopspersonalconcernsandwaysofworking,andsolveshisownproblems.Theworkingisdonemoreforpersonalsatisfactionthantosatisfytheteacher.Thisstageendswhenthemusiciancanmakea livingofhismusicalactivitiesorwhen themusicianendshis full-timeengagementinmusic.

Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer (1993)suggest that it ispossible torecognisea fourthstagein thedevelopmentofprofessionaleliteperformers.Thisstage isbasedonresearchEricssonetal.performedonviolinistsandpianists.Aftermoreresearch,KrampeandEricssonevenaddedafifthstagetothisdevelopmentalmodel(Rink1995).Thisway,themodeldescribesthewholelifeofamusicianandnotjustthelearningperiod.Ericssonetal.(1993)emphasisethatmusiciansneedsupportfromimportantothers,suchasparentsandteachersinallstages.

stage 4Inthisstage,calledthestageofinnovation,themusicianhaslearnedalmosteverythinghisteacherisabletoteachhim.Themusiciannowstartsseekingforwaystoinnovateorimprovehisdomain.Doing so will provide the musician with great public recognition. In The practice of performanceeditedbyJohnRink(1995),KrampeandEricssongiveaslightlyotherdescriptionofthefourthstage.Inthisstage,themusicianhastoearnalivingfrompublicperformances,workinginensemblesorteaching.AccordingtoRink,KrampeandEricsonn,whenthemusicianhasasolocareerthisusuallypromoteshis/herdevelopmentfurther,whereasteachingorplayinginanorchestraneedtimefordeliberatepractice.Thismaymeanthattheteachingmusicianortheorchestralmusicianmayhavefewer opportunities to further increase his level of musical performance. Krampe and Ericssonacknowledgethefactthathardlyanymusicianwillbeabletoearnalivingbysoloperformingonlyandwillhavetoteachorplayinanorchestraaswell.AsinManturzewska’sdevelopmentdescription,thehighestdegreeofmusicalsuccessforinstrumentalistsisinthisphase.

stage 5Thisphasedenotesthelastyearsbeforeretirement.Mostexpertswillmaintain“deliberatepractice”inordertobeabletoperformonaprofessionallevel,butitdependsonthecareeroftheindividualmusician.Ifamusiciansucceedsinasolocareerhewillhavemorefreedomandindependencethanthoseplayinginanorchestra.Someexpertmusicianshadalreadyinthisphasegivenupperformingbecauseofproblemssuchasthelimitedfreedomtochooserepertoire,difficultiesinmakingpracticalarrangements,orbadreviewsinthemedia.Somemusiciansinthisstagepursuedinteaching.

44 45

5 FaCtors inFluenCing musiCal develoPment

Inthischapterthemainfactorsinfluencingthemusicaldevelopmentofchildrenwillbediscussed.Manturzewska’s research showed that there are several factors contributing to the level ofperformance the musicians eventually reach. These are starting age, the way of practising, theaccumulatedamountofstudyhours,theinfluenceofparentsandotherrelativesandtheinfluenceoftheteacher.Otherresearchershavealsostudiedthelivesofmusicians,butforshorterperiodsthanManturzewska.Forexample,Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993)investigatedtheamountofhoursmusicstudentshadstudied,andSloboda,Davidson,HoweandMoore(1996)investigatedtheroleofpracticeinthedevelopmentofperformingmusicians.Sloboda(2000)mentionedthatthereisnotmuchknownyetaboutthemusicaldevelopmentofpopularmusicians,becausemusicalculturesotherthanclassicalmusical-suchaspop,jazzandfolk–havereceivedalmostnoseriousscientificattention, which is confirmed by Ter Bogt (2003) and by Green (2003), who writes that “detailedinvestigationsbymusiceducationresearchers into thespecificnatureofpopularmusic learningpracticesortheirrelationshipwithformalmusiceducationhavebeenrelativelysmall”(p.6).Withtheroleoftypesofmusicotherthanclassicalmusicbecomingincreasinglyimportantandvisibleintoday’smusicalpractice,itwouldnotberighttoignorethesituationofmusiciansinthesegenres.Therefore,attentiontothesetypesofmusiciansisalsogiveninthischapter,despitethefactthatlittleresearchexists.

Thischapterwillstartwithashortoverviewofliteratureabout-theexistenceof-talent,anareainwhichheateddebateshavetakenplaceforyearsinrelationtomusicalexpertperformance(e.g.Gagne1999;SlobodaandHowe1999).

5.1 is making music only for the talented?

Thereisanon-goingdebateinmusicabouttheoriginofexpertperformance(O’Neill1997).Somepeoplebelieve thatonly individualswithso-called inborngiftsareable toreceiveanexpert levelofmusicperformance(e.g.Gagné1999).Ontheotherendofthespectrum,therearepeoplewhothinkeveryindividualis-intheory-capableofexpertperformanceandthatthereareotherfactorscontributing to musical expertise. Between these extremes, there are many psychologists andeducators-andothers-whothinkthat,althoughinborntalentplaysacertainrole,alotofpersonalandenvironmentalfactorsareimportantaswell.Theyassumethattheobservedbehaviouristheresultofaninteractionbetweentheindividual’sgenesandenvironmentalfactors.

Bothstandpointshavesocialandeducationalimplications.Forexample,whenassumedthatachilddoesnothaveanytalentformusic,itisoftendeniedaccesstomusiceducation.Reactionsofparentsorteacherstomusicalutterancesofachildmaybeverysceptical,whichinturnmakessurethatthechildhasnegativefeelingsaboutmusicmakingandwillnotpursueitanyfurther(Howe,DavidsonandSloboda1998).KempandMills(2003)describethecasewhen“somethinghasbeenspottedin

44 45

thechildthatdestineshimorherforgreatnessassomekindofmusicianoratleastindicatesthatitisworthgivingthechildopportunitiesthatmaybedeniedtootherchildren,forexample,lessonsonamusicalinstrument”(KempandMills2002,p.3).Itmayhaveconsequencesforthemotivationandtheself-imageofthechildaswellwhenitisbelievedtobetalented.Theideaofachildofbeingatalentedorgiftedchildcangiveitthestrengthtopersevere(HoweandSloboda1991a).

Astheremaybedifferencesofopinionaboutthecontentandmeaningofthewordtalent,itisusefultohaveadefinition.Howe,DavidsonandSloboda(1998)giveadefinitionoftalentthatwillbeusedhere.Theirdefinitionconsistsoffivepropertiestheyascribedtotalentrecognisableforscientistsaswellasforoutsiders.Thefirstpropertyisits-partly-inheritablecharacterthroughgeneticallytransmittedstructures.Thesecondpropertyisthepresenceofearlyindicationsthatacertainpersonistalentedallowingatrainedpersontorecognisethegiftevenbeforetheexceptionalperformancehasbeenshown.Thethirdpropertyisthattheseearlyindicationsmakeitpossibletopredictwhoistoexcellaterinlifeandwhoisnot.Thefourthpropertyoftalentisthatonlyaminorityofthepeopleistalented.Thelastpropertyisthattalentsarerelativelydomain-specific.However, this last property is not acknowledged by everyone. There are psychologists who thinkhighlygiftedchildrenoradultshavetalentsformorethanonedomain,butthatthedomainchosenisdirectedbycircumstances(e.g.Freemann1991).Freemansuggestsgeneralartisticabilitycomesfrom thesamebroadsource,butwhyacertain field ischosenmay, forexample,dependon theinterestsofthefamily.Ericsson(1997)describesadevelopmentinmusic(andotherarts)regardingthissubject.Inprevioustimesmusicianswereexpectedtoplayseveralinstruments,conductchoirsandorchestrasandcomposeaswell,makingtalentlessdomain-specific.Nowadays,musiciansarehighlyspecializedandtheirtrainingisfocusedononeparticularspecialization.Theconsequenceisthattheyexcelinonlyonedomain.

Thereare,however,otherpossibledefinitionsoftalent.Gagné(1999)defines(musical)talentasfollows:“thedemonstrationofsystematicallydevelopedabilitiesintheplayingofamusicalinstrumentatalevelwhichplacesthe individualamongthetop10%ofpeershavingsimilartraining”(p.39).ThisindicatesthereisquiteadifferencebetweenthisdefinitionandthefirstoneofHoweetal.Howe,DavidsonandSlobodabelievethattalentisshownbyearlyindications(thesecondproperty–seeabove),butthatitisnotnecessarilya“demonstrationofsystematicallydevelopedabilities”.Accordingtothem,thesystematicdevelopmentofabilitiesiswhathappensafterthetalentisrecognised;itisnotthetalentitself.WhatGagnédescribesas“musicalgiftedness”isclosertowhatHoweetal.calltalent:hewrites“thetermmusicalgiftednessdesignatesthepossessionanduseofnaturalabilities(oraptitudes)indomainsthatinfluencethedevelopmentofmusicaltalent”(p.39).

IntheirarticleHowe,DavidsonandSloboda(1998)giveseveralreasonswhypeoplecouldbelieveinthetalentaccount.However,theyalsogivesomecommentsonthesereasonsthatmakeithardnottosearchforotherimportantfactorsthatinfluencethemusicaldevelopment.Oneargumentin

favourofthetalentaccountisthefactmanyreportsexistofveryyoungchildrenalreadycapableofimpressiveskills.Howe,DavidsonandSloboda’scommentonthisargumentisthatthesestoriesareusuallyreportingfrommanyyearsback.Theyarenotobservedbyresearchers,but-forexample-byparentsand,moreimportantly,manyprodigiesreceivedfromanearlyageintensive,supervisedtrainingandguidance.KempandMills(2002)thinkthatanearlysignofmusicalpotentialisactuallyasignofmusicalachievement:somechildrendidhavelearningexperiences(formalorinformal)otherchildrendidnot.Becauseoftheselearningexperiencesthosechildrenseemtobemoretalentedthanotherchildrenlackingtheseexperiences.Theseexperiencescanberathersimple,likesingingchildren’ssongsbytheparents,butwhenachildlackssuchanexperienceitwillnotbelikelyforthechildtosinganychildren’ssongs.

Sosniak(1990)writesaboutthestudybyBloometal.thatmostoftheindividualstheystudieddidnotshowanysignofprecocityinearlychildhoodandearlyachievement,nordidtheydemonstrateearlycommitmentandsingle-mindedpursuitofthedomain.Theacknowledgementoftheirabilitiescameonly in their teens.Anotherargument favouring the ideaof inherited talent is the fact thatrelativelyrarecapacities,whichareseenasapartorproveofmusicality-e.g.perfectpitch-,seemtoappearinsomechildrenspontaneously.Howeetal.reacttothisbystatingthata)aperfectpitchisnotnecessarilyautilitytoorproveofmusicalexpertiseandb)thatperfectpitchcanbelearned.Howeetal.useresearchbyTakeuchiandHulsetoshowitisnotdifficulttotrainchildrenforperfectpitchbefore theageof fiveandthat itcanbe learnedevenbyadults.TakeuchiandHulse (1993),however,arenotascertainaboutthislaststatementasHowe,DavidsonandSloboda(1998).Theydescribeseveralstudiesthatshowedanimprovementofpitchidentificationaftertraining,buttheadultsubjectsdidnotreachthelevelofanabsolutepitchpossessor.CohenandBaird(1990)describeaninvestigationofabsolutepitchacquisitionbychildrenagedtwotofourandadults.Itappearedtobedifficulttoobtainabsolutepitchforthechildrenaswellastheadults.Cohenetal.assumethatitmaybenecessaryforchildreninordertoobtainabsolutepitchtohavepiano(orinstrumental)lessonsaswellasabsolutepitchtraininginsteadofabsolutepitchtrainingonly,becauseinaJapanesestudychildrentrainedthiswaydidobtainabsolutepitch.Asaresult,accordingtoHoweetal.thereisnoevidencethatabsolutepitchappearsspontaneouslyinchildren,butalwaysafterspecificpracticeortraining.ThisissupportedbyasmallstudybyPlantingaandTrainor,whofoundthatsix-montholdinfantsdidnotpossessabsolutepitch(2004).

Athirdargumentseeminglyinsupportofthetalentaccountisthereportedappearanceofbiologicalcorrelations of certain skills and abilities. An example of this is the bigger left hemisphere ofmusicians’brainsasreportedbySchlaug(1995b).Itis,however,notcertainwhetherthesebiologicalcorrelationsareacauseof thedifference inskillsoraconsequenceof thedifferentexperiencesindividualshad14.

14 Seechapter6aboutthemusicandthebrainforafurtherdiscussionofthissubject.

46

A last argument favouring the talent account is the existence of autistic children and so-called “idiot-savants”.Theyseemtobeabletoperformaspecificskillwithoutthedevelopmentofother-cognitive-skills.AccordingtoHoweandDavidsonwemustkeepinmind,however,thattheexpertperformancesofthesechildrenareaccompaniedbyobsessiveinterestinthisparticularskillandhighdegreesofpractice,whichmakesitmorelikelytobeaconsequenceofpracticethanoftalent.KrampeandEricssonaddtothisargumentthatalotoftheseidiot-savantsareblind;thereforetheirauralskillsmaybesowelldeveloped–partly-tocompensatefortheirlackofsight.

Afterrefuting thesearguments in favourof theexistenceof inherited talent,HoweandDavidsonrefertodifferentresearchfindingsthatcontradictthetalentaccount.Thefirstoftheseisthelackof reportsofearlysignsofmusicalabilitywithoutabove-averagedegreesofparentalsupportorpractice.Whenconsideringreportsofprodigiesandearlysignsofmusical talent, thosechildrenalwayswereverymuchsupportedbytheirparents,oftenhadaliving-inteacherandwere(duetothesefactors)stimulatedtopracticeintensively.Thereare,accordingtoHoweetal.personswhothinkofanearlyinterestinmusicasasignofmusicaltalent.Whenthinkingofanearlyinterestinmusic(whichisnotthesameastheskilltoperform)asasignoftalentorgiftedness,weshouldbeaware,accordingtoHowe,DavidsonandSloboda,thattheinterestsofchildrenaremanipulatedbythereactionsoftheirparentsandimportantothers.Therefore,whenachildreactsspontaneouslytomusicinawaytheparentslike,theywillreinforcethisbehaviourbypraisingthechildorgivingitotherwisepositiveattention.Thiswillmakeitmorelikelyforthechildtoactlikethisthenexttimeithearsmusic.

AnotherstudyHowe,DavidsonandSlobodausetorejectthetalentaccount isastudyperformedbySloboda,Davidson,HoweandMoore(1996).Slobodaetal.investigatedhowmanyhourschildrenneededtopracticetobeabletoenterthenextgradeintheBritishmusicalboardexamination.Theyfoundthattherewerenosignificantdifferencesintheamountofpracticetimeneededtoreachacertain level between highly successful children and other children and that, according to theresearchers, talenthadnothing todowith the fact that thesuccessful childrenentered thenextlevelsooner.Thesuccessfulchildren justpracticedmore.This researchsuggests that there isamoreorless“fixed”amountofhoursneededtobeabletoproceedtothenextlevel.Thedifferencebetweensuccessfulchildrenandothersisthusthatthemostsuccessfulchildrenpracticemoreandconsequentlytransfertothenextlevelsooner.Otherresearchshowedthatsuccessfulmusiciansneedatleastten(Ericsson,Krampe&Tesch-Römer1993)tosixteen(Manturzewska1990)yearsofstudytoreachaprofessionallevel15.Simonton(1991)thinkstenyearsofpreparationisanunderestimation.Basedonhisstudyof120famousclassicalcomposershestatesthatmostofthemstartedwithmusiclessonsatagenine,startedcomposingatage17andmadetheirfirstcompositionwithwhichtheygainedaplaceintheclassicalrepertoireattheageof26to31.However,heacknowledgesthefactthattherearesome“great”composerswhostartcomposingatayoungerage.Hethinksthismightbearesultofahighercognitivespeed.

15 Pleasenoteinparagraph5.5aboutpracticethissubjectwillbefurtherdiscussed.

47

A third area of research Howe and Davidson use to refute the talent account is about achievingexceptionallevelsofachievementinnormalpeople.Itappearsthatafterintensivetrainingonspecificskillsadultswereabletoperformthoseskillsonahighlevel.Howe,DavidsonandSlobodareviewedseveralstudiesonthissubjectbyCecietal.(1988),ChaseandEricsson(1981)andEricssonandFaivre(1988).

Conflicting evidence from a study performed by Sloboda and Howe (1991) seems to suggest thattheamountofpracticeisnotthatimportant.Theyinvestigatedthemusicallivesofstudentsfromaspecialmusicschoolformusicallygiftedchildren.Fromthisstudyitappearedthatthebestachievingstudentshadnotaccumulatedthelargestamountofstudyhours.Thiswasthecasefortheirmaininstrumentaswellasforalltheinstrumentsplayedbyoneindividual.Thebeststudentsdidspendmorehoursontheirother instruments thantheaveragestudents,butoverall thebestachievingstudentsspend less timepractising than theaveragestudents.Thebestachievingstudentsalsodidnotspendthemosthoursplayingforfun.Anothercontradictingoutcomefromthisstudyisthatthebeststudentsstartedlaterwithmusiclessonsthantheaveragestudents,althoughthiswasnotasignificantdifference.Fromtheseresultstheauthorsconcludethatitisnotthesheeramountofpracticeononeinstrumentthatisimportant,butthedistributionofeffortacrossdifferentinstrumentsthataccounts for theaboveaverageachievementof thesestudents.KrampeandEricsson (1995)attributetheresultsofthisstudytothefactthatthepracticeintensityofthesestudentswasmuchlowerthaninotherinvestigationonthissubject(Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer1993)andthatonlyafractionofthestudentsoftheschoolwasworkingtowardsacareerasprofessionalmusicians.Consequently,thedifferencesinoutcomesmayalsobeattributedtotheselectionofthesamples.

Athirdreasonforthesurprisingresultsfromthisstudyisthattherewerenoquestionsaskedaboutthewaythestudentspractised.Aswillbeclearfromthenextsections,thisisanimportantfactor.SlobodaandHowe(1999)giveanotherexplanation:thestudentswereselectedonthebasisofthesubjectiveopinionsof their teachersascommunicated to thembyasinglememberof thestaff,insteadofusingtheEnglishmusiccouncilboardexaminations.Itwas,therefore,ratherdifficultfortheresearcherstotellwhetherthesestudentsreallydifferedintheirachievements.

ItseemsasacontradictiontotheoverwhelmingevidenceHowe,DavidsonandSlobodaofferintheirarticle,butintheendtheresearchersacknowledgetheexistenceoftalentinastrictdefinition.Theyselecttwooftheabovementionedfivedefiningattributesoftalent:“1)Individualdifferencesinsomespecialabilitiesmayindeedhavepartlygeneticorigins,and4)theredoexistsomeattributesthatarepossessedbyonlyaminorityofindividuals”(1998,p.407).Intheirwords:“Inthisveryrestrictedsense,talentmaybesaidtoexist”(p.407).KempandMills(2002)alsoacknowledgethatnoteveryonehas the same innate possibilities for developing musical skills, they write: “musical potential issomethingallchildrenhave,althougharguablysomemayhavemoreofitthanothers”(p.4).

48

ItappearsthereforethatHowe,DavidsonandSloboda(1998)attributeatleastapartofthemusicalperformance to talent. Manturzewska (1990) seems to do the same. She mentions that childrenshouldstartwithmusiclessonsbeforetheageofnine,becausechildrenwillnotbeabletoreachaprofessionallevelwhenstartinglater–thisisclearlynotaninnatefactor.However,Manturzewskakeepsmentioningthattherearespeciallygiftedchildren,whichimpliesthatshecontributesacertainmusicallevelnotonlytofactorsoutsidethechild(suchasstartingageandlengthofpractice),buttotalentaswell.

Acknowledgingsomekindofinnatepotentialdoes,however,notmeanthattheenvironmentisnotimportantinthedevelopmentofthismusicalpotential.GembrisandDavidson(2002)explainthatmanynowadaysthinkthatmusicalabilityisaspecialgiftthatdevelopswithoutanyenvironmentalinfluence,becauseofthenotionofthegeniusthatemergedinthenineteenthcentury.GembrisandDavidsonshowthatgeneticfactorsinfluencethegeneral–andmusical–developmentinthreeways:maturationaldevelopment,physicalcapacity,andmentalcapacity.Anexampleofagenetic,physicalfactorcontributingpositivelytothemusicaldevelopmentisthesizeofanindividual’shands.Personswithbiggerhandshaveanadvantagewhenplayingcertainmusicandcertainmusicalinstruments.Thesamegoesformentalcapacity.Awell-developedcapacityofproblem-solving–whichisatleastpartlyinheritedaspartofthegeneralintelligence-mayhelppeopletoidentifyamusicalpatternquicker,whichmakesiteasiertoperformauraldiscriminationtasks.

Theseexamplesclearlyshowthatinnatecomponentsareimportantinmusicalability.But,asmostresearchersnowagree (HoweandSlobodaaswellasGagné), todevelopan individual’smusicalpotential,environmentalinfluencesareofgreatimportance.Especiallytheinteractionbetweentheinnatecapacitiesandtheenvironmentdeterminethe levelofmusicalperformance.Gagné(1999)designedamodelthatclearlystatesitisexactlytheinteractionbetweenpersonal,environmentalandinnatefactors,whichdeterminesone’sskillsandperformancelevel.Hismodel–theDifferentiatedModelofGiftednessandTalent(DMGT)-existsoffourfieldsoffactors:(1)intrapersonalcatalysts(e.g.motivation,health),(2)giftedness(e.g.intellectualofcreativegiftedness),(3)environmentalcatalysts(e.g.influenceofthesocialsurroundings,influenceofpersons),andthisresultsin(4)talents(e.g.inacademicsorthearts).ItisimportanttomentionthatGagnéaddsafifthelementtohismodel,thedevelopmentalprocesswhichexistsoflearning,trainingandpractising.

WecouldthereforecarefullysuggestthatSloboda,Davidson,HoweandGagnébothacknowledgetheexistenceofinnatetalentandtheimportanceofpracticeandenvironmentalfactors.Itisthewaytheystressthedifferentfactorscontributingtoexpertperformancethatdiffers:Howe,DavidsonandSlobodastressingmainlytheenvironmentalor“non-innate”factorssuchasamountofpractice,andGagnéstressingtheimportanceofinnategifts.

Therefore,inthenextsectionseveralfactorsthatcontributetothedevelopmentofmusicalpotentialwillbereviewed:first,someenvironmentalfactorssuchastheinfluenceofrelativesandtheteacher,

49

50 51

the influence of practice mode, and the influence of starting age and amount of practice will bediscussed.Thechapterwillthenendwithsomeconsiderationsaboutpersonalcharacteristics.

5.2 the influence of relatives

5.2.1 Parents

Inherstudyonthelife-spandevelopmentofprofessionalmusicians,Manturzewska(1990)askedthemusiciansabouttheirmusicalandsocialfamilybackground.Shefoundthatmoststudentscamefromfamilieswithacertaindegreeofmusical tradition: fiftypercenthadfathersandtwenty-fivepercentmothersinthemusicprofession.Onlyfivepercentofthemusiciansoriginatedfromafamilywheretherewasnomusicaltraditionatall,butitwasinterestingtonotethattwooftheoutstandingmusicianscamefromsuchafamily.Manturzewskathinksthereforethatitnotessentialthatachildlivesinamusicalfamily,althoughitisafactorofconsiderableimportance.Green(2003)agreesthatforpopularmusicianstheroleofparentsisalsoveryimportantandthatitisevenmorelikelythemusicianscomefromfamilies inwhichmusicplaysanimportantrole. Inthelearningofpopularmusicians, “enculturation”,which is theacquisitionofmusicalskillsandknowledge through theinvolvementinthemusicandmusicalpracticesofaperson’ssociety,seemstoplayamoreimportantrolethanwithregardstoclassicalmusicians.

In Sloboda and Howe’s study of young musicians at a specialist music school the parents alsoappearedtobeveryimportantforthechildren.Mostparentswereinvolvedinmusic,butthisvariedfromjustlisteningtomusicathometoprofessionalengagement.Mostparentswerealsoinvolvedintheirchild’spractising,forexamplebypraisingthechildwhenapiecesoundsnice,orbystimulatingthechildtopracticeeveryday.Thesefactorsdid,however,notdifferforthetwodifferentiatedabilitygroups (exceptional and average). This could mean, according to Gagné (1999) that the influenceoftheparentsisnotthatrelevant.However,ontheotherhand,thisresultcouldalsobeattributedtothefactthattheclassificationofthestudentsinthetwoabilitygroupswasnotcorrect(SlobodaandHowe1999;seealsosection5.1). In their 1996study,Slobodaetal. tried tocorrect this fact.Theyfoundseveraldifferencesbetweenthefivegroupsusedinthisresearch16:groups1and2werecharacterizedbyhighparentalinvolvementinthechild’spractice,whereasgroups3and4showedintermediatelevelsofparentalinvolvementandgroup5showedlowlevels(Davidson,Howe,MooreandSloboda1996).Therewasalsoadifferenceintheinvolvementoftheparentsinmusiclisteningandmusicplaying.Themothersingroup1weremoreinvolvedinlisteningtoandplayingmusicthanthemothersinanyothergroups,thefathersingroups1and2weremoreinvolvedinmusicthanthefathersingroups3and5.Therewasnodifferencebetweenthefathersingroup4andtheothergroups.Anotherinterestingresultofthestudywasthatbytwentyandfortypercentoftheparentsingroups1,2and3achangewasreportedintheirmusicalbehaviourandinvolvementaftertheirchild’slessons

16 SeeformoreinformationaboutthisstudyChapter2,p.24andfurther.

50 51

started,whileonly3percentoftheparentsingroups4and5reportedsuchchange.Bycombiningseveralinterviewquestions,Davidsonetal.concludethattheparentsofgroups1and2childrenwerealreadyinterestedinmusic,andbecamemoreinterestedinmusicaftertheirchildhadstartedwithmusiclessons.Theparentsingroup3werenotreallyinvolvedorinterestedinmusicbeforetheirchildhadstarted,butafterthattheirinvolvementgrew.Theinvolvementofparentsingroups4and5wasminimalbeforethelessonsstartedandthisdidnotchangeafterwards.

O’Neill (1997) investigated the influence of several factors contributing to the performance levelof youngchildren.She interviewed thechildrenbeforeentering formalmusiceducationandoneyearafterwards.Oneofthefactorsshethoughtmayinfluencetheperformancelevelofthechildrenwastheinvolvementofparentsinthechild’slessons.Shefoundthatparentsofhighandmediumachieving children were significantly more involved than parents of low achieving children. But,asO’Neillremarked,itisnotclearwhetherthisdifferenceiscausedbytheprogressofthebetterachieving children or the actual cause of the improved achievements. It could be possible thatparentsaremotivatedtobecomemoreinvolvedintheirchild’slessonsbecausethechildmakessuchgoodprogress.O’Neillsuggests,however,thatbecausethisstudyconcernedthefirstyearofmusiclessons,theparentalinvolvementprecededthesuccessininstrumentallearning.ThisconclusiondiffersfromtheconclusionbyDavidsonetal.(1996):theystatedthatparentswhofollowratherthanleadtheirchild’sgrowingsenseofmusicianshipmayassistthelearningprocessmost.

MacMillan (2004) investigated the involvement of parents with their child’s music lessons andpractice, and the way teachers encourage parents to be involved. She found that some teachersthink itbestwhen there isnoparent involvement,because it is thechild’sdomainorpractice isthechild’sownresponsibility.Otherteachers,however,encouragetheparentstobeinvolved.Fromherresearchshefoundthatitwasofnoimportancewhethertheparentwascapableofplayingamusicalinstrument;whatwasimportantwaswhethertheparenthadasenseofbeinghelpfulduringpractice. Incontrast tootherresearch(e.g.Davidson,Howe,MooreandSloboda1996)MacMillanfoundnocorrelationbetweenparentalinvolvementandchildachievementorenjoyment.Shefound,however,thatchildrenreceivingparentalsupportenjoyit.Shethinksthecontrastingresultsareduetothesmallsampleandthedifferingqualitiesoftheteachersinthestudy.

Hallam (1998) also investigated the influence of several factors on the musical achievement ofchildrenandthereasonsfordroppingoutonmusicaleducation.Shestudied109childrenranginginagefrom6.6to16.3yearswhowereplayingtheirinstrumentbetween3.3and9.75years.Allthechildrenreceivedtheirlessonsinsmallgroupsfromthesamemusicteacher.Shefoundthattheinfluence of parents is mainly on the practice of the children and less on motivation or learningoutcome.Parentsinfluencedtheamountofpracticemorethanteachersorpeers.HoweandSloboda(1991a)writeabouttheinterviewstheyhadwithparentsofyoungmusicstudents:“Theunspokenthemethatrunsthroughnearlyalltheobservationsisoneofquietanddoggedperseveranceintheundramaticprocessofhelpingthechildgettheworkdone”(HoweandSloboda1991a,p.51).

52 53

Green(2003)describesthatformostoftheyoungpeopleshestudiedtheparentswereveryimportant.Theygavethechildrenverbalencouragement,butalsoorganizationalandmonetarysupport.Someof the parents also taught some of their own knowledge to their children, for example showingchordsonthepianoortheguitar.OneoftheboysGreeninterviewedhadreceivedsupportfromhisparentswhenhewasyoung,butwhenhewantedtobecomeaprofessionalpopularmusician,heandhisparentsstartedtohaveseriousconflicts.ThisseemstocontradictaconclusionfromBennettand Finnegan who are cited by Clawson, who writes that both authors stress one of the centralcharacteristicsof rockmusic is its relativeautonomy fromdirectadult imitation, instructionandsupervision(Clawson1999).

GembrisandDavidsonmentionseveralwaysparentsinfluencetheirchild’smusicaldevelopment.Thefirstthingthatseemstosupportthemusicaldevelopmentismusic-relatedactivitiesinthefamily.Theseactivitiesaremainlysingingandmakingmusictogether,butattendingconcerts,discussingmusictogetherandpractisingintheparents’presencealsocontributetothemusicaldevelopment.GembrisandDavidsonmentionoutcomesfromManturzewska’sstudyofPolishmusicians(seealsoManturzewska1990).Oneparentcharacteristicshefoundisthechild-centredattitudeoftheparentswithanemphasisonthemusicaleducationofthechild.Thismeansthatitisimportantfortheparenttosupportthechild’smusicalactivities.OthercharacteristicsGembrisandDavidsonmentionare:• Deliberateorganizationandchannellingofchild’sinterests,time,andactivities• Atleastonepersoninthefamilybelievinginthepotentialofthefuturemusicianandencouraging

thechild• Musicbeingagenuinevalueinfamilylife• Emphasisnotbeingplacedonamusicalcareerbutonenjoyingmakingmusic• Praiseandrewardsevenforsmallersuccesses• Apositiveemotionalatmosphereformusicalactivity• Carefulselectionofteachersandmonitoringofmusicaldevelopment• Conscious and active organisation of a supportive and understanding network for the child,

includingpersonalcontactstoprofessionalmusiciansandmusicteachers• Willingnessto investconsiderabletimeandeffort inmusicalactivities (Manturzewska1995 in

GembrisandDavidson2002).

SomeofthesearealsomentionedbyHoweandSloboda(1991)whentheywrite“[T]ime,transport,money,organisationandmotivationarevitalelementswhichnearlyalloftheseparentsprovided”(HoweandSloboda1991a,p.51).

StolleryandMcPheeinvestigatedwhatfactorscontributedtothedevelopmentofengagementinmusicformusicteachersandmusicpsychologists.Theycalledthesefactors“crystallising”experiences.Thetwomostmentionedexperienceswere“motivationthroughpraiseandenhancementofself-esteem”and“parentalencouragementandsupportinvariousforms”(StolleryandMcPhee2002,p.93).Therefore,musicallyeducatedpeople,likemusicteachers,indicatethattheinfluenceoftheparentsontheirmusicaldevelopmentisveryimportant.

52 53

Theinfluenceoftheparentscanalreadybeimportantinearlychildhood.Theintensive,quasi-musicalcommunication,includingholding,rockingandsingingtothechild,betweenthechildanditsparentsorothercaretakers,connectstheloveandcareoftheparentstotheexperienceofmusic.Thisgivesthechildapositivefeelinglisteningtoandmakingmusic,whichisimportantinbecomingmotivatedandhencehasalifelonginfluence(GembrisandDavidson2002).

5.2.2 siblings

Thereisnotmuchknownyetabouttheinfluenceofsiblings,butfromtheliteratureondevelopmentalpsychology it isknown thatsiblingscan influenceeachother.Forexample, fromvariousstudiescitedbyDavidson,HoweenSloboda(1997),itisclearthatoldersiblingsactlikeasortofteacherfortheiryoungersiblings.Notonlyinthemusicalareaoldersiblingsactlikeasortofparenttotheiryoungerbrothersorsisters,thishappensthroughoutlife,mainlybecausetheoldersiblingsimitatetheparentswhentheyinteractwiththeiryoungerbrotherorsister(SeifertandHoffnung1994).

Davidsonetal.(1997)askedthesubjectswhethertheirsiblingshadanyinfluence,and,ifso,whatinfluencethishadbeen.Itappearedthatmostsubjectshadexperiencedaneutralorpositiveinfluencefromtheirbrothersorsisters.Theinfluenceexistedeitherofinspirationbythesiblingorofimitatingthesibling,mostlybecausethesiblingalreadyplayedamusicalinstrument.Theoldersiblingisthenarolemodelfortheyoungerchild(SeifertandHoffnung1994).SlobodaandHowe(1991)alsofoundthiskindof influence in theirstudyofhighachievingandaveragestudentsofaspecialistmusicschool.Tensubjectsreportedbeingbulliedbytheirsibling(s),butforsixofthesesubjectsthishadapositiveeffect.

InanearlierstudyHoweandSloboda(1991a)investigatedtheroleoffamilyinfluenceson42childrenataspecialistmusicschool.They found thatalmosthalfof thechildrenhadbeen influencedbyolderchildren,mainlysiblings.Thesiblingplayinganinstrumentcausedawarenessofmusicatthechildorthepossibilitytoplayaninstrument.Italsoprovidedamodelforthechilditcouldcopyandcreatedanatmosphereinwhichmusicplayingandpractisingwasseenasnormal.Insomecasesthesiblinghadamorenegativerole.Somechildrenstartedplayinganinstrumentbecauseofjealousy.Therewas,however,nodifferencebetweenhighandaverageachievingchildren.Anothernegativeinfluenceofsiblingscouldbethesiblingalsoplaysaninstrument,butdoesthismuchbetterthantheotherchild.Thisislikelytocausesomejealousy(SeifertandHoffnung1994).Otherinfluencefromsiblingsmaycomefromthesiblingimitatingtheparentsinbeinginterestedinthemusicalchild.Thisway,thesiblingprovidesexternalmotivationtothemusicallyeducatedchild(Davidson1997).FromthealreadymentionedstudybyStolleryandMcPhee(2002)itbecameclearthatmotivationprovidedbysiblingsandothermembersofthefamilywasaveryimportant“crystallising”experienceformusic teachers,whichwerequestionedabout important factorscontributing to theirmusicalengagement.

54 55

5.3 the influence of the teacher

ManturzewskamentionedinherstudyonthelifespanofprofessionalPolishmusicians(1990)theimportanceoftheteacher.Sheputsitveryclearly:“Whatis,however,ofparamountimportancehereisthepresenceofspecificallymusicalmotivation(drivetowardmusic)andthepersonality,musicalcompetence, and socio-professional prestige of the teacher, who becomes a “master” for theaspiringmusician”(Manturzewska1990,p.125).GembrisandDavidsonagreewithherandsayitevenshorter:“Teachersareperhapsthemostimportantearlyinfluencebesidestheparents”(GembrisandDavidson2002,p.23).Theyexplainthisisbecauseteachers“transmitmusicalabilitiesbutalsobecausetheymoreorlessinfluencemusicaltastesandvaluesandarerolemodelsandholdakeypositionwithregardtomotivation–forgoodorforbad”(ibid.).StolleryandMcPhee(2002)alsohavesomeevidencefromtheirstudyon“crystallising”experiencesformusicteachers,thattheinspirationfromagiftedteacherisaveryimportantfactorinthemusicaldevelopment.Themusicteachers,musicspecialistsandeducationaliststheyquestionedexpressedtheopinionthattheinfluenceofagiftedteacherwasoneofthethreemostimportantfactorsinfluencingtheirmusicalcareer.

However,theinfluenceoftheteachermaybedeclining.GembrisandDavidsonciteseveralstudiesaboutmusiclisteningbehaviourofyoungpeople.Americanresearchperformedin1986showedthat12-to-14-year-oldAmericanslistentomusicmorethansevenhoursadayonaverage.AGermanstudyshowedthat93%ofthechildrenagedsixtoninehearmusicintheirleisuretimeand98%ofthe10-to-13-year-olds.Itisthereforeclearthatchildrenhearmoremusicoutsidethanduringtheirmusiclessons.Thismayreducetheinfluencetheteacherhasonmusicaltasteandvaluesofthestudentandalsoresultsinthechildhavingmoremusicalrolemodelsthanjusttheteacher.Theexactinfluenceofthisis,accordingtoGembrisandDavidson(2002),notclearyetduetomethodologicaldifferencesintheperformedstudies.Theythink,however,thatmusicaldevelopmentcannotbeexplainedwithouttakingtheseinfluencesintoconsideration.

Despitetheabove,themasterisimportantbecausethe–excellent-studentdevelopsandgrowsintherelationshipwiththeteacher.Agoodmaster,accordingtoManturzewska,notjustconcentratesonthetechnicalsideofthemusicaldevelopment,butalsohelpsdevelopingtheentirepersonality.Theteacheraccompaniesthestudenttoauditionsorconcerts,showshimwhatbookstoreadorwhatmusictoplayandintroducesthestudentintoprofessionalcircles.FromtheresearchdonebyBloometal.(Sosniak1990;Bloom1985),thisappearstobetrue.TheteachersoftheyoungpeoplestudiedbyBloomandcolleaguesencouragedtheirstudentstotakepartinpublicperformances,arrangedmeetingswithpeerswiththesameinterestorwithprofessionalsinthefieldofthestudents.Theteachersalsotaughtthestudentsimportanthistoricalfactsabouttheirdomainbyrecommendingbooksorrecordings.

Manturzewska’sresearchshowedthatstudentswithoutamastergrowupanddevelopthemselveswithin theenvironmentandthesub-cultureofpeergroups.According toManturzewskathis isa

54 55

disadvantage.Becausealltheoutstandingmusiciansinthestudydidhaveamaster,itseemsthathavinga(goodrelationshipwitha)masterisaprerequisiteforacareerasasoloist.Themusicianswho found employment in orchestras or ensembles did develop in peer groups. According toManturzewska,however,theperiodoffindingemploymentasaprofessionalmusicianwaslongerandmoreerraticthanforthosewhohadamasterormanager.

Other studies also stressed the importance of the teacher. Jørgensen studied the age at whichchildrenstartedwithmusiceducationrelatedtotheirlevelofperformanceattheconservatoiretofindananswertothequestionwhetheritisnecessarytostartearlyinordertoreachahighlevelofperformance. Itappearedthatthestartingage isavery importantfactor,butJørgensenfoundfourotherimportantfactors.Oneoftheseisthe“carefulandappropriateguidancefromateacher”(p.236).KrampeandEricsson(1995)statethat“theearliermusiciansfindappropriatecoaching,themore considerable the benefits for their development” (p. 86). Obviously, this begs the followingquestion:whatisappropriateteaching?Thisquestionwillbeconsideredinparagraph5.5.

AboutthepersonalityoftheteacherKempandMills(2002)statethatinthefirstfewmonthsachildhasmusiclessons,itisimportantforateachertobewarm,nurturingandtobeabletoprovideaplayfulclimate.Afterwardstheteacherwillmodifyitsbehaviouraccordingtothepersonalityofthechild.This is inaccordancewithfindingsofseveralresearchers inthegeneralfieldofeducation,whoallacknowledgetheimportanceofcertaincharacteristicsoftheteacher.SkinnerandBelmont(1993),forexample,foundthatahighinvolvementoftheteacherisveryimportanttothechildren’sexperiences.DeciandChandler(1986)foundthatafriendlyandwarmteacherisimportantforstudentmotivation.HoweandSlobodaalsoconfirmedthisintheirstudyonyoungmusicstudents(HoweandSloboda1991b).Theyconcludefromtheirresearchthat,attheearlieststageofmusicaltraining,itisfarmoreimportantforateachertobeeffectiveatmotivatingandencouragingthechildthantobeahighlyskilledperformer.TheconcertpianistsinSosniak’sstudy(1985)confirmthisfinding.Almostallofthemhadawarmandfriendlyteacherwhentheystarted.Mostofthoseteacherswerenotveryfamousorspecialmusicians,butjust“theteacherinthestreet”.

Whenachildbecomesolder,thecharacteroftheteacherbecomeslessimportant,andtheprofessionalqualitiesoftheteacherbecomemorerelevant.GembrisandDavidson(2002)studieddifferencesintheirjudgementoftheirteachersbetweengoodstudentsandchildrenwhostopwithmusiclessons.Becausethegoodstudentsinthisstudybecamemoreself-motivated,theprofessionalqualitiesoftheteachergainedrelevancecomparedtothepersonalcharacteristics,whereasthechildrenwhostopped did not make this distinction between personality and professional qualities. A study byLepperandWoolvertonshowedthatinexpertteacherbehaviourthereisabalanceinfocusingonaffectiveandcognitivefactors(LepperandWoolverton2002).

Besides the warmth and friendliness of the teacher, there appears to be another aspect of theteacher’scharacterimportantfortherelationshipwiththepupil(SlobodaandHowe1991).Thiswas

56 57

describedastheamountofautonomyateachergivestohisstudents.Moststudentslikeditwhentheteacherchallengedthemandmadethempractice,anddislikedwhentheteacherwastoomuchlaidback.However,verystrictteacherswerealsonotlikedbytheirstudents.Thisisinaccordancewithliteratureaboutexpertteachers.SkinnerandBelmontshowedthattheamountofautonomygiventothestudentsiscrucialforstudents’motivation(1993).KempandMills(2002)alsostressitisoftentheapproachoftheteacherthatwillleadtoalackofrecognitionofachild’smusicalpotentialormotivation.Thiscouldbecausedbya“misfit”betweentheteacherandthepupil.

Anotheraspectoftheinfluenceoftheteacheristherelationshipbetweentheteacherandthechild’sparentsandthewaytheparentsareincontactwiththeteacher.Themorecontactthereisbetweentheparentsandtheteacher,thebetteritseemstobeforthemusicaldevelopmentofthechild.

Alastdistinctivefactorineffectivetrainingconcerningtheteacheriswhetherapersonistrainedindividuallyorinagroup.AstudybyBloom(1984,inLepperandWoolverton2002)showedthatpupilstaughtbyatutordidsignificantlybetterthanpupilstaughtinagroup.Inmostteachingsituationsinmusic,theteacherortutorisnotaroundeverydayortheentireday.Thereforetheteacherdesignspracticeactivitiesforthepupilthatmaximisehisimprovement(LepperandWoolverton2002).Thesepracticeactivitiesaremeanttobeusedbythepupilduringthetimeinbetweentwomeetingswiththeteacher.AstudybyDavidson,Howe,SlobodaandMoore(Sloboda,Davidson,HoweandMoore1996,andDavidson,HoweandSloboda1997)showedthatthethreemostsuccessfulgroupsofsubjects(see page 22) received individual instruction; the other children received group instruction only.AccordingtoDavidsonetal.thismeansthatifachildwantstoreachahighlevelofperformance,it is likely tobenefitmost fromone-to-one tuition.Advantages fromone-to-one teachingare theindividualizedcharacterofthetutoringwhichenablestheteachertodirectallhisattentiontoonepupilandthuselicitingmoreeffortandon-taskattentionfromthepupil.Anotheradvantagefromthismethodisimmediacy:feedbackorresultsareknowntothestudentassoonashehasperformedit,oronlyshortlyafterit.Thisispositive,asitismoreeffectiveandlikelytobebetterunderstood.Alastadvantageisthatthereismoreinteractionbetweenteacherandpupil.Theteacherisabletoreactmoretotheneedsandpreviousknowledgeofthestudentandthestudentcanshowhispersonalpreferences(LepperandWoolverton2002).

Incontrasttotheclassicalmusicstudent,teachersseemtoplayalessrelevantroleinthedevelopmentofpopularmusicians(Green2002;Clawson1999;Bennett1980).InClawson’sstudymostmusicianswereprimarilyself-taught.Organisationalmattersdonebyteachersforclassicalmusicstudents,suchascontactwithpeersor informationaboutmusicorcompetitions,areaccomplishedbytheyoung popular musicians themselves. This does not mean, however, that popular musicians orchildren wanting to become a popular musician never have a music teacher. From the fourteenmusicians in Green’s study thirteen had received music lessons; five of them had also receivedtheoreticallessons.However,noaccountsweremadeaboutthespecialorcrucialinfluenceofthisteacherontheirmusicalcareers.

56 57

5.4 the influence of peers

TheinfluenceofpeersisdiscussedonlybyGreen(2002)inherstudyonpopularmusiciansandshortlybyManturzewska(1990),Clawson(1999)andBennett(1980).ForManturzewskatheinfluencedoesnotseemapositiveone,whenshewritesthatyoungmusiciansinfluencedbytheirpeersinsteadoftheirteacherhaveabiggerchanceofnotfindingtherightpathforthemselves.

TheinfluenceofpeersisestimatedmuchmorepositiveandmoresignificantbyGreen,ClawsonandBennett.AccordingtoGreen,thesolitaryactivityoflisteningandcopyingrecordingsorlivemusic(see section 5.5.1.) is accompanied by other practice activities that are equally important. Thesepracticesinvolvefriends,siblingsandotherpeers.Startingrockbandsacquiretheirmembersfromtheirpeergroups,theyemanatefromfriendshipinwhichsocialisingandmusicmakingarecloselylinked(Clawson1999).Greendistinguishestwokindsofpeer-involvedactivities.Thefirst ispeer-relatedlearning.Thisentailstheteachingofoneormoreperson(s)byapeer.Thesecondisgrouplearning,whichislesshierarchic:thelearningoccursasaresultofpeerinteractionandthereisno“teacher”involved.Bothactivitiescanhappenbetweenonlytwopeople,butalsoinlargergroups;theycanoccurinorganizedmeetingsbutalsoincasualencounters;theycanhappenduringorapartfrommusic-makingsessions.Mostofthispeer-involvedlearningoccursinbands,whichresultsinadifferencebetweenboysandgirls,asboystendtostartabandatayoungeragethangirls.

Clawsonalsodescribesthatpeersareveryimportantinpopularmusic.Especiallyinstartingbands,themembersarepeersbothinageandmusicallevel.ButsheimpliesthatlearningismorelimitedthanGreenassumes,because“ahighlyskilledmusicianwouldbeplayinginamorehighlyskilledband” (Clawson 1999, p. 104), thus implying that beginning musicians do not meet more skilledcolleagues.Butsheacknowledgesthefactthatforthemusicians’developmentjoiningagrouporband is essential. This also is noted by Sloboda (1990) who concluded that several factors seemrelevantforuntutoreddevelopmentofjazzskills.Oneofthesefactorsisthe“opportunitytotakepartincommunaljazzactivitieswhere“mistakes”aretoleratedandwhereonecanchoosethelevelofriskanddifficultyofone’sownperformance”(p.174).Therefore,notonlyinthefieldofpopmusic,butalsoinjazztakingpartinabandorothercommunalactivitiesseemtobeimportant.AnexampleofthiswayoflearningisprovidedbyCollierwhodescribedthemusicaldevelopmentofLouisArmstrong(summarizedinSloboda1991).Armstronglearnedtosingandreceivedthorougheartraininginavocalquartetheformedwithboysinhisneighbourhood.Afterhavingdonethisforafewyears,hejoinedaband inwhichhe learned toplay the tambourine,drums,altohornandbuglewithoutateacher.Notuntilhewasnineteenandalreadyanestablishedprofessionalmusician(Sloboda1990),Armstrongmetapersonwho functionedasasponsorand teacherandstarted learningmusicalnotation.

TwootheractivitiesrelatedtotheinfluenceofpeersthatGreenmentionsarelearningfrompeersbywatchingeachotherandtalkingwithpeersaboutscales,harmonies,metres,styles,musichistory,

58 59

chordsinstrumentsetc.However,thistalkinghappensnotonlybetweenpeersbutalsowitholder,moreexperiencedmusicians.Thiskindofpeer-learning isalsorecognisedbyBennett (1980):bytalking with and watching each other, young rock musicians and starting bands gain their initialexpertiseasrockperformers.Afinalpointabouttheinfluenceofpeersinthelearningofpopularmusiciansisthatfriendshipbetweenthemusiciansishighlyimportantandhasanenormouseffectontheirlearningexperiences.Possiblythiscouldbecomparedtotheimportanceofafriendlyandwarmteacherforstartingclassicalmusicstudents.

5.5 Practice

In this paragraph, the following aspects of practice will be discussed: the way of practising, thestartingageandtheamountofpractice.

5.5.1 why practice and how

Manybelievethatmaximalperformance isreachedbymerelyengaging inapracticeactivity inasufficient amount. However, already in 1897 Bryan and Harter showed in a study of Morse codeoperators, that with mere repetition the performance of a certain skill does not improve to themaximumlevel. If further improvementwastobereached, thepracticeof theskillneededtobethoroughlyreorganized(BryanandHarter1897;Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer1993).BryanandHarter(1897)write:“itisintenseeffortwhicheducates”(p.50).TheydescribethatthelevelofMorse coding usually stays at the same level for years unless an individual is forced to improvehimselfinordertosecureacertainjobposition.Ericsson(1988)providesevidencethatpracticealsoimprovesthememoryskill.Hedescribesthecaseofastudentimprovinghisskilltomemorisedigit-spansfromsevenwhenstartingtheexperimenttoalmosteighty,twoyearslater.

Thereisevidencepresentdayperformersinsportsandmusicarefarmorecapableincomparisontotheircolleaguesfiftyyearsoracenturyago.Worldrecordsinsporthaveimproved,sometimesafewtimesayear,andmusicpiecesoncethoughtofastoodifficulttobeplayed,belongnowtothestandardrepertory. Ericsson (1996) cites Ericsson and Lehmann, who in 1994 studied the recommendedsequenceofpiano instructionatmusic institutionsandmusiccurricula.They foundthatmoderntechniques(forexamplepolyrhythm)areestimatedtobemoredifficultthanoldertechniquesandhence are placed later in the study programme. In addition, they found an increase in difficultyofpianosonatas from1750 (Haydn) to 1825 (Schubert)basedonpublisheddifficulty ratings.Thisexplainswhymusicians’abilitieshaveimproved:itisonlypossibletoimproveaskillifyouknowwhatyouwouldliketobecapableof.The(musical)cultureinwhichanindividuallivesandwhichdemandscertainskillsfromthisindividualisanimportantfactor(Lehmann,Sloboda,Woody2007).Ifmusicofacertainlevelhasnotyetbeencomposed,itisimpossibleforamusiciantoreachthatlevel,becauseheisasgoodasthemostdifficultpiecehehasplayed.ThisisillustratedbyananecdotedescribedbyEricsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993).“WhenTchaikovskyaskedthegreatestviolinistsofhisdaytoplayhisviolinconcerto,theyrefused.Todayeliteviolinistsconsiderthisconcertopartofthestandardrepertoire”(p.366).

58 59

Lehmann(in:Altenmüller,WiesendangerandKesselring2006)mentionssomeothercausesthatexplainwhymusiciansaremorecapablethaninearliertimes.Inthepast,manyinstrumentalistsusedtoplaymoreorlessbysight-reading,usingtheirimprovisingskillsmorethantheirtechnicalabilities.Relatedtothisissueisthefactthatmodernaudiencesexpectanear-to-perfectperformance,whichalsodoesnotvarytoomuchfromearlierorfutureperformancesorfromCD-recordingsfromaparticularmusicianormusicalwork.Musicianshavetopracticemoreandlongertobeabletomeettheseexpectationsandconsequentlybecomebettermusiciansthantheircolleaguesinthepast.OtherreasonsLehmannmentionsarethattheinstrumentshavebecomebetterandmoresuitedforchangesindynamicsandforplayingtechnicallydifficultpassages,andthattoday’smusiciansareusuallyspecialised inone instrumentwhere itwascommonforpastmusicianstoplaymoreinstruments,composeandteachyoungermusicians.Trainingplays,accordingtoLehmann(2006),animportantroleinthebetterachievementsofmodernmusiciansaswell,becausetherearemoreandbettereducatedteachersavailablewhousespeciallydesignedtrainingprogrammes.AlastreasonLehmannlistsisthatmusicians(similartoforexamplesportsmen)wanttobecomebetterthanothermusiciansincompetitionsandthereforearemotivatedfortheyearsofpractice.

Theabovementionedfactsalreadyrevealsomegoalsofpractice,mainlypracticetomastera(new)piece and practice to improve. Barry and Hallam (2002) mention several purposes of practice.Musicians practise to “acquire, develop and maintain aspects of technique, learn new music,memorizemusicforperformance,developinterpretationandprepareforperformance”(p.155).Themainpurposeofpracticeistoenablemusicianstoperformphysical,cognitiveandmusicalskillsfluentlyandwithaslittleconsciouscontrolaspossibleinordertofreecognitiveprocessingcapacityforhighermentalprocessessuchasthecommunicationofaninterpretation.Indevelopingamotorskill threestagesare recognised.The first is thecognitive-verbal-motorstage inwhich learningandperformingisunderconsciouscontrol,takeseffortandmaybeaccompaniedbywords.Inthesecond, associate stage, the learner becomes more able of putting the sequence of responsestogetherthatareneededforthedesiredoutcome.Inthethirdstage,calledtheautonomousstage,theskillbecomesautomatedandwithoutconsciouseffort(BarryandHallam2002).

According to Ericsson, Krampe and Tesch-Römer (1993), it is possible, after thousand years ofeducation,tonamefourconditionsforoptimallearningandskillimprovement.Theyreviewedseveralstudiesforthispurpose(BowerandHilgard1981;Gagné1970).Thefirstconditionismotivation.Withouttheindividual’smotivationtoattendtothetaskandpersistin trying to improve theirskills, itwouldnotbepossible to improveone’sperformance,becauseof thegreateffortandamountof time it takes.Becausedeliberatepractice isnotenjoyableandrequireseffort,individualsareusuallyonlymotivatedtodoso,becausetheywanttoimprovetheirskills.Thisisevenstrengthened,asdeliberatepracticegeneratesnoimmediatemonetaryrewardsandgeneratescosts(suchasaccesstoteachersandtrainingenvironments).Anindividualengagedindeliberatepracticewill thereforehaveanunderstandingofthelong-termconsequencesofhispracticeandwillhaveaclearendinview.AccordingtoEricsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993)theonlyreasonthatindividualsaremotivatedtoengageindeliberatepracticeisthatthepracticeimprovestheirperformance17.

17 Foradiscussiononmotivation,seealsoparagraph5.6.

60 61

Thesecondconditionisthatthedesignofthetaskshouldtakeintoconsiderationanypre-existingknowledgeandabilities.This istoensurethatthetaskiswellunderstoodafterashortperiodofinstructioninordertopreventthetaskbeingtoodifficultforthestudent.Thisconditionisimportant,asitisdiscouragingformostpeoplewhentheyareunderestimated(DeciandChandler1986).Givingimmediateinformativefeedbackandknowledgeofresultsofhisperformancetothelearneris the third condition for performance improvement and optimal learning. Without this, efficientlearningisimpossibleandimprovementminimal.Thelastconditionistherepeatedperformanceofthesameorsimilartasksbythelearner,giventhatheotherconditionaresatisfied.Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993)summarisetheconditionsas follows: “To assure effective learning, subjects ideally should be given explicit instructionsaboutthebestmethodandbesupervisedbyateachertoallowindividualiseddiagnosisoferrors,informative feedback,andremedialpart training.The instructorhas toorganise thesequenceofappropriatetrainingtasksandmonitor improvementtodecidewhentransitionstomorecomplexandchallengingtasksareappropriate”(Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer1993,p.367).

Davidson,HoweandSloboda(1997)alsoacknowledgethefactthatsheeramountofpracticeisnotenoughtoimproveone’sperformance.TheycitestudiesbyGruson(1988)andMiklaszewski(1989),statingthatthestructureofthepracticeisanimportantfactor.Miklaszewski’sstudyofanexpertpianistshowedthatthispianiststudiedapieceofmusicinfragments.Thelengthsofthefragmentsbecame longer as the practice progressed and the fragments improved. The pianist used thestructureofthepiecetodivideitintofragments,butforthemostdifficultpassagesheusedsmallerfragments.Otherpracticetechniquesusedbythepianistwerevisuallyexaminingthepieceduringpractice,changingbetweenfastandslowtempiandwritingcommentsorfingeringsinthescore.Inastudyofacellistpreparingforaconcert,theresearchersfoundsimilaritiestotheabovementionedapproaches.Thecelliststartedthepracticebyplayingthepiecesight-reading.Inthesessionsafterthatshepractisedthepieceinparts.Whenshemadeerrors,thecelliststoppedandplayedthesamefragmentanothertime(Lisboa,Chaffin,SchiaroliandBarrera2004).Duringthepracticeperiod,thesegmentswithoutinterruptionsbecomelonger.

Grusoncomparedyounginstrumentallearnersandmoreexperiencedmusicians.Shefoundthattheexperiencedmusicianspaidmoreattentiontostructuralunitsinthemusic–forexampleatheme-and,asinMiklaszewski´sstudy,studiedthosestructuralunitsapartfromtherestofthepieceinsteadofrepeatingthewholepieceagainandagain.Thebeginnerstendedtoplaythewholepieceseveraltimesinsteadofplayingonlythosefragmentsthatarenotplayedwell.Otherpracticebehavioursthatincreaseasthemusicallevelisincreasingareself-guidingspeech,totalverbalizations,andplayinghandsseparately(Gruson1988).Grusonalsoinvestigatedwhetherthepracticebehaviourschangedduring a sequence of practice sessions of the same pieces. This appeared not to be so; hencethedifferencesbetweentheseparateperformancelevelsremainedthesameduringtenpracticesessions.FromthisGrusonconcludes“itappearstobemanyhoursofpractisingawidevarietyofmusicpiecesthatinfluencespractisingbehaviours”(Gruson1988,p.104).

60 61

Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993)calltheabove-discussedpracticeactivities“deliberatepractice”.Theydistinguishthesefromotheractivitiessuchasplayfulinteraction,paidwork(suchasapublicperformance),andtheobservationofothers.Theysummarizetheactivitiesofdeliberatepracticeasfollows:“Themosteffectivelearningrequiresawell-definedtaskwithanappropriatedifficultylevelfortheparticularindividual,informativefeedback,andopportunitiesforrepetitionandcorrectionsoferrors.Whenalltheseelementsarepresent,thetermdeliberatepracticecanbeusedtocharacterizetrainingactivities”(Ericsson1996,p.20-21).

Whenmusiciansstudytoomuchtimeeverydaytheymayfalltoexhaustion.SeveralstudiesquotedbyEricssonetal.indicatethefollowingfindings.Thereisnobenefitfrompracticedurationexceedingmore than four hours per day and reduced benefits from practice exceeding two hours per day.Studiesoftheacquisitionoftypingskillandotherperceptualskillsshowthatthebestamountofdeliberatepracticeperdayisprobablyclosertoonehour.However,thestudiesEricssonetal.usehereareratherold,datingfromthe1930stothe1980s.Thereasonthatstudentsareabletoengageindeliberatepracticeforonlysuchashorttimeperpracticesessionisthatittakessomucheffort.Inordertobeeffective,thepractisingindividualshouldbefullyattentivetohisplayingsothaterrorscanbeimproved.Itisnotpossibletodothatforalongperiodeverydaywithoutriskingexhaustion.But,Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993)havesomeevidencethatitmaybepossibletoslowlyextendtheamountofpracticeanindividualiscapableofeachday.Thisisonlypossible,however,whenapersontakesthetimetorecoverfromhispractice.Itisprobablypossiblethentoextendthedailyamountofdeliberatepracticetofourhoursperday.ThisisthedailyamountthebestandgoodviolinistsandtheprofessionalpianistsinthestudybyEricsson,KrampeandTesch-Römerstudiedalone.Theauthorsthinkfourhoursdeliberatepracticeperdayisthemaximumamountthatcanbesustainedwithoutexhaustion.Thisdoesnotmean,however,musicianscanbeinvolvedinmusiconlyfourhoursperday:theyengageinothermusicalactivitiesaswell,suchaspracticewithothers,playingforfunortakinglessons(Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer1993).BarryandHallam(2002)confirmthis,basedonOxendine (1984).Theywrite thatshortpracticesessionsareusuallymoreeffective than longpracticesessions,butat thesametime, that longerandmorecomplex taskssometimesrequirelongerpracticesessions.Theyalsostatethatgrouppracticesessionsmaytakelongerthanindividualsessions,becauseapersoninvolvedinagroupactivityisprobablynotplayingtheentiretime,whichisofcoursethecaseinanindividualsession.ThisprobablyexplainswhythemusiciansinEricsson’setal.study(1993)areabletopractiseforaboutfourhoursindividuallyandinadditionpractisewithothersorindifferentwaysduringothermomentsoftheday.

Intheirstudyoftheroleofpracticeinthedevelopmentofperformingmusicians,Slobodaetal.foundaweakrelationshipbetweeninformalpracticeandlevelofperformance(Sloboda,Davidson,HoweandMoore1996).Thelowestachievingindividualsdidtheleastofthiskindofpractice,butthebestachievingindividualsdidnotspendthegreatestproportionoftheirtotalpracticetimetoinformalpracticebuttodeliberatepractice.However,becausethebestachievingindividualsspendsomuchtimeonpractice(formalandinformal),itisstillpossiblethattheyspendmorehoursoninformalpracticethanthelowestachievingindividuals.

62 63

Aninterestingfeatureofhighlevelperformers’practicefoundbySlobodaetal.(1996)andEricssonetal.(1993)isthatthebestachievingmusiciansspendthegreatestpartoftheirdeliberatepracticeinthemorning.AccordingtoSloboda,Davidson,HoweandMoore(1996)thehardestandlessrewardingpractice-ofscales-wasdonesignificantlymoreofteninthemorningbythebestachievingindividualsthaninotherpartsoftheday.Fortheothergroupstherewasnosignificantdifferenceintimeofday.Theyfoundnodifferenceintimeofdayforthepracticeofrepertoirebetweenthedifferentgroupstheystudied.

TheviolinstudyofEricsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993)showedthatthetwobestgroupsofviolinistspreferredtopracticealonebeforelunchtimewhilethethirdgroup(themusiceducationstudents)didnothavesuchapreference.Thebestandgoodstudentsalsostudiedintheafternoon,the amount of study hours per day accumulated up to eight hours (Krampe and Ericsson 1995).The expert pianist studied by Lehmann and Ericsson (1998) during her preparation for a publicperformancealsopreferredtopracticethemostdifficultpiecesinthemorning.

Green’sstudyonpopularmusicians(2002)suggeststhattheirlearningisratherdifferentfromwhatismentionedabove.Themaindifferenceisthatpopularmusicians“oftentaketheinformalrouteofmusiclearning”(p.5)andthatwhentheyhaveformaleducationaswell,theshareofinformallearningintheirmusicaldevelopmentismuchlargerthantheshareofformaleducation.Exceptone,allmusiciansinherstudyhadreceivedsomeformalmusiceducation,nineofthemevenclassical,butformostofthemthisformaleducationlastedforonlyafewmonthsoryears.FromherresearchGreenlearnedthatthemostoccurringinformallearningpracticeofhersubjectswashearingandcopyingrecordings.Formostofthemthiswasamoreorlessunconsciouslearningprocess,partoftheir“enculturation”.Greendistinguishesthreekindsoflistening.Thefirstis“purposivelistening”,withthepurposetolearnsomethingandtoputthattouseafterwards.Thistypeoflisteningispartofinformalandformallearning.Thesecondtypeoflearningis“attentivelistening”.Thisrequiresthesamelevelofattentionaspurposivelistening,butithasnottheaimtolearnsomething.Thelasttypeis“distractedlistening”:theonlypurposeisenjoymentorentertainment.Thesethreekindsoflisteningcanvaryeasily,evenwithinonesongorpieceofmusic.Greenstatesthatforallmusicianslistening is important in theirdevelopmentand ispartof formaland informaleducation,but fordevelopingpopularmusiciansitformsacentralpartoftheirlearningprocess.

Practisingbylisteningwascombinedwiththeuseofnotationbysixofthemusiciansandallofthemusedofhadusedbooksormagazinesaboutplayingtechniques.Bennett(1980)andClawson(1999)alsodescribethiskindoflearningfromlisteningtorecordings.Green,BennettandClawsonmentionplayingtogetherinabandasanotherveryimportantwayofpractisingforpopularmusicians,ashasalreadybeendiscussedinparagraph5.4.

62 63

5.5.2 the importance of the starting age or “the-ten-years-rule”

Therearemanyfamousstoriesaboutchildrenabletoperformprofessionallyataveryyoungage,theso-called“musicalprodigies”.Thisphenomenonseemstocontradictthepresuppositioninthisliteraturestudythatanearlystartandlargeamountsofpracticearemoreimportantfordevelopinghighlevelsofmusicalperformancethanthepossessionof innatetalent.Asmentioned,HoweenDavidson (1998) showed that there are several reasons not to attribute the performance of theprodigytosheertalent.Inthefollowingsectionseveralstudieswillbereviewedthathavefocussedontheimportanceofanearlystartwithmusicalinstructionandpracticeforreachingahighlevelofperformance.

ThestudyperformedbyManturzewska(1990)showedthatthereareseveralfactorscontributingtoeventualsuccess.AnimportantfindingofManturzewskawasthatmostofthemusiciansinthestudystartedtheirmusiclessonsbetweenfiveandsixyears,althoughthereweresomemusicianswhostaredaslateas26.Manturzewskabelievesthisisrelatedtotheyearofbirthofthemusiciansandhenceothereducationalsystems:thelatestartingagewasonlyfoundinthegroupsoftheoldestmusicians,thosebornbetween1890and1925.Furtheranalysisofthedatasuggests,accordingtoManturzewska,that“theageatwhichapersonstartshis/hermusiceducationisessentialforthefuturecareer”(p.124).“Thehypothesiscanbeformulatedherethatifmusicaltrainingstartsafternine,thecareer,particularlyinthecasesofvirtuoso-typepianistsandviolinists,willnotleaduptothemasteryregardlessofthemusicalabilitiesanddegreeofmotivation”(Manturzewska1990).Ofthemusicians in thestudystarting latewithmusiceducation,only theonesactive inconductingandcomposingwereabletoreachtheinternationallevelofmusicalactivity.Themeanageatwhichthe outstanding musicians started music lessons was 6.9 and age of first music lessons rangedfromfourtoeighteen–thosestartingatageeighteenbeingamemberoftheoldestcohorts(bornbetween1890en1925).Themeanstartingageofthetotalsamplewas8.97,whichisconsiderablyolderthantheoutstandingmusicians,theageoffirstmusiclessonsforthewholegrouprangedfromfourtotwenty-six–againthosestartingatagetwenty-sixbeingamemberoftheoldercohorts(bornbetween1890en1925).

The study of Jørgensen (2001) shows a difference between singers and instrumentalists (exceptchurchmusicians)concerningthestartingage.Themeanageatwhichthesingersstarted(14.4)differedsignificantlyfromthemeanageatwhichinstrumentalplayersstarted(11.3).Theminimumageatwhichthevocalstudentsstartedwasnineyears;theminimumageatwhichtheinstrumentalstudentsstartedwasfiveyears.

Jørgensentriedtoanswerthequestionwhethertheexcellentstudentsstartedhavingmusiclessonsearlierthanthegoodorverygoodstudents.Theresultsshowedthatthestudentswiththehighestgrades(theexcellentstudents)startedearlierwithmusiclessonsthanthosewithlowergrades.Themeanageatwhichthesub-groupsstartedis11.3forexcellentstudents,12.5forverygoodstudentsand

64 65

14.8forgoodstudents.Whentheseresultsaredividedintoseparatestudyprograms(instrumental,vocal,andchurchmusic),theresultsshowthatfortheinstrumentalstudentsthemeanageatwhichtheystartedmusiclessonsdiffersnotsignificantlyforthethreelevelsub-groups.Themeanstartingagesofexcellent,verygoodandgoodinstrumentalstudentsisrespectively11.4,11.5and11.0.

For thevocalstudentsasignificantdifferencewas found.Bothminimumageandmeanagearelowestfortheexcellentstudents(min.age9,meanage9.5)andhighestforthegoodstudents(min.age16,meanage18.0).Forthechurchstudentsthedifferencebetweenthelevelsub-groupsisintheexpecteddirection(loweststartingageforexcellentstudents,higheststartingageforgoodstudents),butthedifferenceisnotsignificant.FromtheseresultsJørgensendrawsthefollowingconclusion:“Forthewholestudentpopulation,the conclusion is that those with the highest grades started earlier with lessons on their maininstrument than those with lower grades” (2001, p.237). It is clear, however, that this conclusionwill not stand for the separate specializations, for which Jørgensen gives several reasons. Thefirstreasonistheamountofpracticeanindividualhasalreadystudiedinhislifeatthetimeofthestudy(Ericsson,Krampe,Tesch-Römer1993),whichislikelytodifferperstudent.Twootherfactors,alreadymentionedarethequalityoftheteacher(section5.3)andthequalityofthepractice(section5.5.1).Jørgensenaddsafourthfactor:acombinationofinfluencesthattogetheraccountforsomeofthevariancebetweenstudents.Amongtheseare,forexample,theinfluenceontheperformancelevelofwindinstrumentalistsfrombandexperiences;theinfluenceofstudentsplayingontheirownforseveralyearsbeforehavinganylessons;theinfluenceofplayingtherecorderbeforestartingwithanotherwindinstrument,orthepianobeforestartingwithorgan.Thesearenotfactorsthatwereaddressedinthisstudy,butmayhaveconsiderableinfluenceontheperforminglevelofthestudents.“Nevertheless”,Jørgensenstates,“thisstudyshows,aboveall,thatthereisapositiverelationshipbetweenstartingagewithlessonsandlaterlevelsofperformance”(2001,p.238).

InthestudybyEricssonetal. (1993)withpianists,theexpertpianistsallhadmorethan14yearsofexperience,whilefortheamateurstherangewasfromfivetotwentyyearsofexperience.Theexpertsstartedsignificantlyearlier(5.8yearsofage)withtheirlessonsthantheamateurs(9.9yearsofage).Onaveragetheexpertpianistsreceived19.1yearsofformalinstruction,significantlymorethantheamateurs,whoreceived9.9yearsofformalinstruction.Fromtheresultsoftheirstudiesonviolinistsandpianists,Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993)concludethefollowingabouttherelationbetweenstartingageandperformance.Theexpertpianistsstartedreliablyearlierthantheamateurpianists.However,forthevioliniststherewasnodifferenceinstartingage(themeanstartingagewas7.9years),butitmustbepointedoutthattheviolinistswereallprofessionalsortrainedtobeprofessionalsandamateurviolinistswerenotinvolved.Inanotherstudyofpianists,KrampeandEricsson(1996)againfoundthatexpertpianistsstartedreliablyearlierthanamateurpianists:themeanageatwhichtheprofessionalsstartedmusiclessonwas6.75yearsandthemeanageatwhichtheamateursstartedwas9.33years.Forbotholderandyoungerpianiststhisdifferenceinstartingagewasnoticed.Inthisstudytherewasalsoasignificantdifferencefoundinyearsofformalinstruction,theexpertpianistshavingreliablymoreyearsofformalmusiclessonsthantheamateurpianists.

64 65

AswasalreadyshowninthestudyofJørgensen(2001),therealsoseemstobeadifferenceinstartingagefordifferentinstruments.ThestudyofEricssonetal.showedthattheviolinistswereolderwhenstartingwithmusiceducationthanthepianists,butthereareotherstudiesinwhichtheviolinistsstartedearlierthanthepianists(KrampeandEricsson1995).

Whenanindividualstartsearlierhehasmoretimetoaccumulateacertainamountofpracticehoursthananindividualstartinglater,hencetheearlystarterislikelytohaveacquiredahigherlevelofperformanceatacertainage.Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993)stateitappearsnecessaryforprofessionalmusicianstostartearlierthanmostoftheamateursinthesamedomain.InThePractice of Performance (1995) Krampe and Ericsson write: “Our proposition that the amount ofdeliberatepracticedeterminesone’sdegreeofsuccessateachstageofdevelopmentimpliesthatthe age at which practice starts plays a crucial role” (p.99). This is based on one more study ofvirtuosoviolinistsandpianists.Theviolinistsstartedat5.0yearsofageandthepianistsat5.8years.Buttheydidnotonlystartearlierwithmusiceducation,theyalsofoundtheirmasterteacherearlierthan theexpertmusiciansandasa resultdidnothave to findnew teachers later in life tohaveoptimalinstruction(KrampeandEricsson1995).

Asalreadymentionedbefore,intheManturzewska’sstudyallexpertmusiciansplayinganinstrumentstarted before the age of nine. This was also the case in Sosniak’s study of twenty-four concertpianists(1985):theyallstartedwithformalmusicinstructionbetweentheagesofthreeandnine.Also in other domains (for example chess playing), elite performers are exposed earlier to theirdomainandstartearlierwithdeliberatepractice.AccordingtoEricsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer“it isgenerallyfound[inmusicandballet] thateliteperformershavestartedwellbeforetheagewhenmostchildrenfirstgainaccesstotraining”(1993,p.389).

Forpopularmusiciansstartingageseemslessrelevantthanforclassicalmusicians.FromClawson’sstudy(1999)itappearsthatthemalemusiciansstartedplayingarockinstrumentatanaverageageof12.9years,andthefemalemusicianswereevenolder,theirmeanagewas18.0years.Theamountofyearsbetweenstartingplayingan instrumentand joiningorstartingabandwasrathersmall,theboystheaveragelengthwas2.7yearsandfortheyoungwomenitwas3.3years.However,itispossiblethatthemusiciansinthisstudyalreadyplayedaninstrumentbeforetheystartedplayingarockinstrumentandthusalreadyhadsomemusicalexperience.

InGreen’sstudy(2002)thestartingagesofthemusiciansarenotclearlydescribed.Throughoutthebookseveralageindicationsaregiven.Forexample,itseemsthatmostofthemusicianswhotookclassicallessonsdidstartaftertheageoften.However,thisdoesnotmeanthattheydidnotstarttheirinformalpractisingbefore.Oneofthem,forexample,taughthimselffromtheageofsix,butonlytooklessonsagedelevenortwelve(thesubjectdidnotrememberexactlywhatagehehadatthetime).InspiteofthefactthattheUnitedKingdomhasaratherelaboratesystemofmusiceducationinschools,mostsubjectsinGreen’sstudyhadnotreceivedmusiclessonsinprimaryschoolorcould

66 67

notrememberhavingsuchlessons.Wheremusiclessonsweregiveninprimaryschools,thiswasmainlydonebygeneralteachersinsteadofspecialistmusicteachers.

In theprevioussection itwasalreadymentionedshortly that thereappears tobeaminimumoftenyearstrainingrequiredtobecomeaprofessional.This isnotonlythecaseformusicians,butalsoforotherartists,athletesandscientists(Ericsson1997).TheviolinistsinthestudybyEricssonetal. (1993)hadallspendmore thantenyearspractising their instrumentby theageof twenty-threeandthepianistsallmorethanfourteenyears.Simontonprovedtheclaimofaminimumoftenyearspracticetobetrueforcomposers.Hestudiedthelivesofone-hundred-twentyclassicalcomposersandfoundthatlessonsusuallystartedaroundtheageofnine,compositionaroundtheageofseventeenandthatthefirstsuccessfulcompositionappearedsomewherebetweentheageoftwenty-sixandthirty-one.Simontonconcludesfromhisresearchthattheaverageamountofmusicalpreparationisbetweenseventeenandtwenty-twoyears,andtheaverageamountofcompositionalpreparationisbetweentenandfourteenyears.

Manturzewskaaskedinherinterviewsalsoaboutthelengthofthemusicalstudy.Itappearedthatthereareconsiderabledifferencesbetween themusicians, theyearsofmusical training rangingfromfourtotwenty-fiveyears.Therearedifferentrangesforthedifferentagecohorts.Thelengthofmusicaltrainingoftheeldestmusiciansrangedfromfourtotwenty-twoyears,andoftheyoungestmusicians(bornbetween1937en1960)rangedfromtwelvetotwenty-fiveyears.Themodevalue(thelengthofmusicaltrainingmentionedmost)indicates,however,thatittakessixteenyearsofstudywithaqualifiedteachertobeabletobecomeaprofessionalmusician.ThisisevenlongerthanthetenyearsEricssonthinksarenecessary,basedonhisownresearch.Whenthewholegroupissplitintodifferentinstrumentsub-groups,thereisaninterestingdifferencebetweensingersandtheotherspecialisationgroups.Themeanlengthofmusicaltrainingisforallinstrumentgroupsaboutfifteenyears,butonlyforthesingersitisless:meanlengthbeing10.83years.Forallothergroupsthemeanlengthofmusicaltrainingislongerandtheminimumlengthrangesfromeightyears(violinists)totwelveyears(composersandconductors).Interestingalsoisthatthereisagainadifferencebetweentheoldestcohorts(bornbetween1890and1925)andtheyoungestcohorts(bornbetween1937and1960).Thelengthofstudyyearsfortheoldestcohortsrangedfromfourtotwenty-twoyears,butfortheyoungestcohortsitrangedfromtwelvetotwenty-sixyears.Itseemsthatthetimenecessarytobecomeaprofessionalmusicianincreasedduringthetwentiethcentury.Possiblythisisduetotheincreasedtechnicaldemandslaiduponthemusicians,asdescribedinparagraph5.5.1.

ThepianistsinthestudybySosniakstartedtohaveformalinstructionbetweentheageofthreeandnineyears.Theageatwhichtheyfirstwonamajorcompetitionrangedbetweennineteenandthirty-one.Thissuggeststhattheyhadbetweentwelveandtwenty-fiveyearsofformalinstructionbeforewinningthecompetition.Theaveragelengthofthestudywasseventeenyears.

Inconclusionofthisparagraphsomeremarksaboutthequestionwhetherisitpossibletostarttooearlywithmusiceducation.

66 67

There have been no reports of children starting “too early’; some musicians in Bloom’s andManturzewska’s study started as young as three years old with music education. According toLehmann,SlobodaenWoody(2007)noageistooyoungtostartwithmusiceducation,aslongasitisappropriateforthedevelopmentandabilityofthechild.Theymentiontheteachingofmusicalnotation as an example of a rather abstract skill that is best taught when the child has ampleexperiencewithdealingwithmusicalsounds“byear”.Toteachchildrenundertheageoffourspecificinstrumentaltechniquesmightbedifficult,becausechildrenatthatagedonothavetheabilitytofocusonspecifictechniquesyet.Forsuchyoungchildreninstrumentscanbeusedtoillustratehowsoundsaregeneratedandtoletthembecomeacquaintedwiththeinstruments.Musicalgamesareusuallythemostappropriatewaytointroducechildrentomusicassoonastheyareabletoattentiveandcontrolledresponses(Lehmann,SlobodaandWoody2007).

5.5.3 amount of study hours

Thestartingageisnottheonlyfactorcontributingtothetotalamountofstudiedhoursatacertainage.Itisobviousthattheamountofpracticeatoneparticularorlimitedamountoftimeisalsoacontributingfactor.AstudyperformedbyEricssonetal.(1993)showedtheimportanceoftheamountofpractice.InthisstudybyEricsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993),quitelargedifferencesappearedbetweenthefourgroupsparticipatingintheresearch:thegroupofbestviolinistshadaccumulated,attheageofeighteen,anaverageof7,410hoursinpractice.Thiswasreliablymorethanthe5,301hoursthegroupofgoodviolinistsataverageaccumulated.Thegroupofmusiceducationstudentshadaccumulated3,420hoursofpracticeatageeighteen.AccordingtoEricssonetal.(1993;KrampeandEricsson1995)thedifferenceinaccumulatedhoursofpracticebetweenthebestandthegoodviolinistsexplainsthedifferenceinperformancelevelatthemomentofthestudy.Forthetwobestgroupsofviolinists(thebestandthegoodviolinists)theamountofhourspractisedaloneinoneweekdidnotdiffersignificantly.Theaverageofhoursforthesetwogroupswas24.3hours.Thisdiddiffersignificantly fromthegroupofmusiceducationstudents,whopractisedonaverage9.3hoursaweek.Therewasalsoasignificantdifferenceintheamountofpracticesessionsthestudentshadperweek.Thebestandthegoodstudentshadanaverageof19.5sessionsinoneweek;themusiceducationstudentshadanaverageof7.1sessions.Thedurationofthesessionsdidnotdiffersignificantly.Thereisareliabledifferencebetweenthetwobestgroupsandthemusiceducationstudents.Ericsson,Krampe and Tesch-Römer (1993) conclude from this that “there is a complete correspondencebetweentheskilllevelofthegroupsandtheiraverageaccumulationofpracticetimealonewiththeviolin”(p.379).Furthermore,theaverageamountofpracticehoursfortheprofessionalviolinistsis7,336.Thisisveryclosetothe7,410fromthebeststudentsandthedifferenceisnotsignificant.Thisisinteresting,becausethebestviolinistsareexpectedtofindaprofessionalcareerinorchestrassuchastheonestheprofessionalviolinistswereengagedin.Asinthestudyontheviolinists,thepianistsinthesecondstudywereaskedtokeepadiary.Fromthistheresearcherslearnedthattheexpertpianistsspent26.71hourstopracticealone,significantly

68 69

morethanthe1.88hoursoftheamateurs.Alsofortheseparticipants,theamountofpracticealonefromthebeginningofmusicinstructionwasestimated.Attheageofeighteentheexpertpianistshadaccumulatedanaverageof7.606hoursofpracticealone,reliablymorethanthe1,606hourstheamateursaccumulated.

TheseresultsareinaccordancewiththeresultsofthestudybySlobodaetal.(Sloboda,Davidson,Howe and Moore 1996; Davidson, Howe and Sloboda 1997). They discovered objective differencesbetween five different level-groups. The specialists appeared to achieve the best grades and thegiven-up instrumentalists the lowest. The specialists also progressed much faster through thegradeexaminationsthantheothergroups.Thereforeitcouldbeassumedthatthespecialistgroupwassomehowmore talented than theothergroups.However,when theprogression through theexaminationswascomparedtotheaccumulatedamountofpracticebyeachgroup,itappearedthattherewerenogroupdifferences.Thismeansthateverygrouphadtoaccumulatethesameamountofpracticetoprogresstothenextgrade.Thespecialistgroupprogressedsomuchquickerbecausetheyreachedthenecessaryhoursofpracticesoonerthantheothergroups.Bytheageofthirteen(thelastageforwhichsubstantialdataareavailableforallgroups)themeanaccumulatedhoursofpracticeonallinstrumentsforthedifferentgroupswas(fromgrouponetogroupfive)2572,1434,1438,807and439.Slobodaetal.(1996)addtothesenumberstheinterestingobservationthattheamountofhoursaccumulatedbygrouponeiscomparabletotheestimatesofaccumulatedpracticemadebythebestviolinistsandpianistsfromthestudiesbyEricssonetal.(1993).

Lehmann and Ericsson (1998) investigated an expert pianist’s preparation for a public musicperformance. The preparation time for this recital was nine months in which the pianist had tomasterandmemorizethreepiecesofmusic,dividedintoeightmovements.Thispianisthadstudiedforfifteenyearsatthemomentofthestudyandinthesefifteenyearsshehadaccumulatedalmost10.000hoursofstudy.This is inaccordancewith theabovementionedstudybyEricssonetal. inwhichitisstatedthatittakesatleasttenyearsofpreparationtobecomeaprofessionalmusician.In Ericsson’s study (Ericsson, Krampe and Tesch-Römer 1993) the students had accumulated anaverageof7,410hoursofpracticeattheageofeighteen.ThepianistintheLehmannandEricssonstudywastwenty-fiveyearsoldandhadthereforeaccumulatedmorehoursofpractice.

Aswillbeclearnow,startingageisanimportantfactorcontributingtogaininganexpertlevelofperformance.However,therearedifferencesinperformancelevelbetweenindividualswhostartedearly.Thisisduetotheweeklyamountofdeliberatepractice.ThestudiesperformedbyEricssonetal.showacorrelationbetweentheamountofdeliberatepracticeandthelevelofperformance.ThiscanalsobeconcludedfromastudyperformedbyHallam(1998).Shefoundthatlengthoftimelearning (theageatwhichachildstarted)and timespentpractisingare importantpredictorsoflearningoutcome.TogetherwithageinmonththosefactorshighlysignificantlycontributedtotheoverallachievementscoreofthechildreninHallam’sstudy.Thecorrelationsofachievementwithlengthof study (.69)weregreater thanwithage (.67),which,according toHallam,suggests thatlearningismoreimportantthanmaturationinpredictingachievement.

68 69

TheamountofpracticeaccumulatedbythepopularmusiciansinGreen’sstudy(2003)differedhugely:somepractisedseveralhoursaday,butoneofthesubjectshadhardlypractisedatall.Theamountofpracticeinacertainperiodoflifedependedontheirmood,othercommitments,ormotivation.Alsostartinginanewbandorcomposingasonginfluencedtheamountofpracticeinapositiveway.All thesefactorstogetherresulted inperiodsof intensepracticealternatingwithperiodswithouthardlyanypracticeatall.Animportantdifferencewithclassicalmusicstudentsseemstobethatthepopularmusiciansdonotpracticewhentheydonotfeellikeit,whereastheclassicalstudentsarelikely(andexpected)topracticeeverydayforseveralhours(Green2003,Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer1993).

5.6 other characteristics of the individual

Howe and Davidson (1998) think there are additional influences, which contribute to the effectsusuallyattributedtotalent.Theseare:• Relevantpriorknowledgeandskills• Attentiveness,concentration,anddistractibility• Interestsandacquiredpreferences• Motivationandcompetitiveness• Self-confidenceandoptimism• Otheraspectsoftemperamentandpersonality(seeKempandMills2002)• Enthusiasmandenergylevel• FatigueandanxietyHallam(1998)alsomentionssomeofthese,suchasrelevantpriorknowledge,interest,motivationandself-confidenceinherstudyonthepredictorsanddropoutininstrumentaltuition.

5.6.1 motivation

Ericssonetal.(1993)statemotivationisthefirstoffourconditionofoptimallearningandimprovementofperformance.O’Neill(1997)alsostressestheimportanceofmotivationintheprocessofbecominganexpertperformer.Butshestatesthatthereisyetalotunknownaboutthewaymotivationhelpsinthisprocess.Dweck(2002)citesseveralstudiesthatshowedtheinfluenceofmotivationoftheachievementsofseveralhigh-levelperformers.Itappearsthatmanynowfamousathletesorartistswere once ordinary or low-achieving children until they were motivated to dedicate enormousamountsoftimetopracticeandtraining.

Generally two typesofmotivationaredistinguished: intrinsicmotivationandextrinsicmotivation.The first one is considered to be necessary for and beneficial to creativity, the last one harmful(CollinsandAmabile1999).Intrinsicmotivationcouldbedescribedasthemotivationtoengageinacertainactivity for itsownsake,becausethe individual likesthetask, is interested in it,movedorchallengedbyitorperceivesitassatisfying.Amajorconsequenceofintrinsicmotivationisthat

70 71

peopleareabletoworkforalongtimeandveryconcentratedonatask.Extrinsicmotivationontheotherhandismotivationtoengageinanactivityforreasonsorgoalsthatareextrinsictothetaskitself,forexamplea(monetary)reward,praisefromparentsorteachers,orpassinganexam.Themaineffectofextrinsicmotivationisthat,accordingtoCollinsandAmabile,individualsbecomelesscreative thanwhen theyare intrinsicallymotivated.Anothereffect is thatpeoplearemoreeasilydistractedfromtheirwork.Thereismorerecentresearch,however,thatsuggestsnotallkindofextrinsicmotivation isharmful forcreativity.Amabile (cited inCollinsandAmabile 1999)madeadistinctionbetweentwokindsofextrinsicmotivatorsthatshouldexplainforthedifferenteffectsofit.Thefirsttypeissynergisticextrinsicmotivation.Thisprovidestheindividualwithinformationabouthisperformanceandhowtoimprove;itcanthereforeactinsupportoftheintrinsicmotivation.Thesynergisticextrinsicmotivation ismainly important inthephaseofcreativitywhereconsolidationofan ideaorskill is important.Whenan individualstarts, forexample,practisinganewpieceofmusic,heislikelytobeveryenthusiasticaboutit.Butlateron,whenhehastoworkondifficultpartsorsmalldetails,thisenthusiasmmaydecline.Inthisphasesynergisticextrinsicmotivationcouldbeofhelp.Itisimportant,however,thattheextrinsicmotivatorsleavetheindividualsenseofself-determinationandself-controlintact.Thesecondtypeisnon-synergisticextrinsicmotivation,whichhasamorecontrollingcharacter.Thiskindisincompatiblewithintrinsicmotivation

Therearedifferentopinionsaboutthedevelopmentofmotivation.KempandMills(2002),forexample,thinkthatthefirstmusicalresponsesofachildareintrinsicallymotivated.Theycallit“manifestationsofthechild’smusicalneeds”(p.9).Parentsandothercaretakerscanreactonthesemusicalactionsinenjoyableactivitiesandthechildwilllearnofthistoaskformore.However,accordingtoKempandMills,itisimportantthattheparentsleaveittotheirchildtostartamusicalaction.Theyshouldneverpushtheirchildindoingamusicalactivitywhenthechildisnotwillingtodosoandthenpraisethechildforit.Thatway,theinnermotivationofthechildmaydisappearandbereplacedbyextrinsicmotivation.Thiswillmakeitnearly impossibleforthechildtoreachahighlevelofperformance,becausethatwillonlybepossiblewhenthechildisintrinsicallymotivated.

Noteveryonethinksthedevelopmentofmotivationworksthisway.Severalresearchersthinkchildrenarefirstmotivatedbytheirparentsorteacherstobehavemusically,andwillonlylaterdevelopanintrinsicmotivationformusic.Forexample,Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer(1993)writethat“thesocial reactionofparentsandother individuals in the immediateenvironmentmustbeveryimportantinestablishingthisoriginalmotivation”(p.372).ThechildmaystartlikingmusicbecauseitsparentsreactveryenthusiasticallywhenitsingsorconductswhileaCDisplaying.Toputitmoreprecisely:thechilddoesnotnecessarilylikethemusic,butitlikestobepraisedbyhisparentsorreceivetheirattention.

Theparentsarealsoimportantmotivatorswhenthedeliberatepracticehasalreadystarted.Theyhelptheirchildwithadailypracticescheduleandpointoutthevalueofdailypractice.Bypraisingthechildwhenitpracticesinarightway,thechildinternalizesthiswayofpractisingandthemotivation

70 71

willbeintrinsic.Praisingthechildthiswaymightbesynergisticextrinsicmotivation.Laterinlife,when the individual has become a professional musician, he will practise mainly out of intrinsicmotivation,butshort-termgoalssuchasconcertsalso(extrinsically)motivatehim.

AccordingtoDweck(2002)thewayparentsandteacherspraiseachildisveryimportantindevelopingintrinsicmotivationtostudy.Whentheyonlypraiseagoodachievement,thismayleadthechildtothinkingthathehasanunchangeablemusicaltalentandpracticewillnothelpdevelopthistalent.Itmaybenotmotivatingforthechildtobepraisedthisway,becauseeverychildhasoccasionsatwhichhisachievementsarenotthatgoodandpraisewillnotbegiventhen.AccordingtoDweckthiswillnotmakethechildworkharderanexttimebecausehethinksworkinghardisnotinfluencinghisachievements,whereaspraisingthechild’seffortswillleadthechildtobemotivatedtostudyandhencedevelophispotential.

Inspiteofthedifferentviewsonthedevelopmentofmotivation,researchersdoagreeonthenecessityofintrinsicmotivatedmusicalbehaviour,becauseitwillotherwisenotbepossibleforanindividualtopracticethegreatamountofhoursneededtoreachahighlevel(e.g.Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer1993;Howe,DavidsonandSloboda1998).

72 73

6 musiC and the human Brain

Duringthelastdecades,researchhasbeendoneonwheremusicmakingislocatedinthehumanbrainandwhetheritispossibletoseeaneffectofmusiconthebrainsofadultsandchildren.Thereasonwhythismatterisbeingaddressedinthisliteraturestudyisthatthisresearchprovidessomeevidenceto thenotion thatearlymusiceducationor training leadstodevelopments in thebrain,whichdonottakeplacewhenanindividualstartswithmusiceducationatahigherage.

Thischapterwillstartwithasectiononhowthebrainfunctionsandadescriptionofthepartsofthebrainthathavearoleinthemakingandlisteningtomusic.Subsequently,severalstudiesontheinfluenceofmusiconthebrainwillbereviewed.Onemustkeepinmindwhilereadingthischapter,that “neuroscience technologies are complicated and in evolution” (Flohr and Hodges 2002): itappearsthereismuchscientistsstilldonotknowaboutthebrainandtheinfluencesofmusic.

6.1 the human brain

Fromresearchdoneduringthe1970’sitwasconcludedthatmusiccouldbelocalizedintherighthemisphere.Laterresearch,however,showedthisconclusionwastoosimple.Musicmakingandlisteningtomusicappearedtoinvolvepartsalloverthebrain(e.g.Hodges2000;FlohrandHodges2002).According toHodges (2000)andAltenmüller (2001), themusical functionsof thebrainaremodulized. With this they mean that different musical functions are in different modules in thebrain,alsoindifferentpartsofthebrain.FlohrandHodges(2002)combinethisideawiththeideaof“connectionism”.Connectionismtakesaholisticviewofthebrain,statingthatthebrainfunctionsasawhole.Whenthesetheoriesarecombinedtheideaexistsofdifferentpartsormodulesofthebrainfordifferentmusicalfunctionsworkingtogetherinaco-ordinatedway.

Forthefollowingdescriptionofthehumanbrain,achapterbyAltenmüllerandGruhninThescienceandpsychologyofmusicperformance(2002),editedbyParncuttandMcPherson,wasmainlyused.

The brain can be divided in three parts: the hindbrain, the midbrain and the forebrain. Togetherthehindbrainandthemidbrainformthebrainstemwhichregulatesallvitalfunctions(breathing,heartbeatetc.),butalsoregulatesmanysensoryandmotorfunctions(eyemovementsandvisualandauditoryreflexes).

Thehindbrainalsoconsistsofthreeparts:themedulla,theponsandthecerebellum.Thecerebellumcontrolsbodyequilibriumandaccuratetimingofmovements.Thecerebellumisthereforerelevantforthelearningofmusicalperformanceskills.Themidbrainconsistsoftwoparts,thethalamusandthehypothalamus.Thefirstoftheseactsasagatewayforthecortexbytransmittinginformationfromallsensorysystemstothecerebralcortex.Thehypothalamuscontrolsallautonomicandendocrinefunctions.

72 73

Theforebrainconsistsofthetwoouterhemispheresofthebrainandthreestructuresthatliedeeperinthebrain.Thesearethebasalganglia,thehippocampusandtheamygdaloidnucleus.Allthreeof themare relevant tomusicalperformancebecause thebasalganglia is involved in regulatingmotorperformance,thehippocampusinmemorystorageandtheamygdaloidnucleusharmonizestheautonomicandendocrineresponsesinconcurrencewithemotionalstates.

Theouterpartofthebrainiscalledthecerebralcortex,whichcontrolsallthecognitivefunctions.Thecortexconsistsofapproximately100billionneurons.Theneuronsareinterconnectedbyadensewebofnervefibreswhichmakeitpossibleforthenervecellstocommunicatewithtenthousandsofothercells.Inthenetworkoffibresaresocalledsynapses.Thesearesmallnodesconnectingthedifferentkindsofnervecells.Informationistransportedinthebrainthroughthesesynapses.Aswellastherestof thebrain, thecortexconsistsof twohemispheres.Thecorpuscallosumistheconnectionbetweenthetwopartsofthecortex.Itconsistsof100millionfibresinabundle.The twocortexhemispheres looksymmetrical,but therearesomedifferences.Their function isdifferentaswell.Anotherfeatureofthecortexisthateachhemisphereisconcernedwithsensoryandmotorprocessesoftheoppositesideofthebody.Athirdfeatureofthecortex,importantinthecontextofthisdocument,isthatearlyintensetraining,startingbeforetheageoften,islikelytoleadtoenlargementofthecorticalregioninvolvedinthetrainedability.Eachhemisphereisdividedintofourregions,thefrontal(front),temporal(side),parietal(upperback),andoccipital(back)lobes.Everyoneofthelobeshasitsownfunction.Thefrontallobesaremainlyconcernedwiththeplanningoffutureactionandthecontrolofmovement.Thetemporallobesareconcernedwithhearingandwithcross-modallearning,memoryandemotion.Theparietallobesareresponsiblefortheprocessingofsomaticsensationandbodyimage.Finally,theoccipitallobesareconcernedwithprocessingvision.Itwillbeclearfromthisshortdescriptionofthehumanbrain,thatmanypartsofthebrainareinvolvedinmusicmaking.

First, formakingmusic very refinedmotorskillsare required.Theseare requiredafter yearsofpractice.Tobeabletoimproveone’sperformanceauditoryfeedbackisnecessary.Thismeansthatoneisabletohearwhatoneisdoingandisabletoreact.Therefore,musicmakingrequiresintegrationofauditoryandmotorcapacity.Inaddition,inordertoplayaninstrumentorsing,somatosensoryfeedback is also necessary; this means feeling what your body does and making adjustments ifnecessary.Forthisthekinaestheticsensehastobewelldeveloped.Thiskinaestheticsenseallowsforcontrolofmuscleandtendontension,itmakesapersonawareofthepositionofhisbodyandlimbs.

Making music requires the ability to make voluntary movements. There are four parts involvedinvoluntarymovements: theprimarymotorarea (M1), thesupplementarymotorarea (SMA), thecingulatemotorarea(CMA),andthepremotorarea(PMA).IntheM1themovementsofbodypartsarerepresentedinaseparateandsystematicorder.Forexample,thelegmusclesarerepresentedonthetopandtheinnersideofthehemisphere,theleftlegintherighthemisphereandtherightleg

74 75

inthelefthemisphere.Abodypartwhichasksformorecontrol,forexamplebecauseitneedstobeableofmakingfinemovements,likethetongue,isrepresentedinalargerpartofthebrain.Thisisbecauseofthelargeramountofnervecellsthatarerequiredtotransporttheinformationfromthebraintothemusclecells.Itisimportanttonotethattherepresentationofbodypartscanchangebyusage,forexamplemusictraining.IntheSMAparticularlytheco-ordinationofthetwohandsiscontrolled.Thisismainlydonebythesequencingofcomplexmovementsandthetriggeringofmovementsbasedoninternalcues.TheSMAisdividedintotwoparts.IntheanteriorSMA,asfarasknownonthismoment,theplanningofcomplexmovementsisprocessed.IntheposteriorSMAtwo-handedmovementsarecontrolled,inparticularinthesynchronizationofthehandsduringcomplexmovements.ThefunctionoftheCMAisnotyetclear. Itseems tobe important in the interventionbetweencorticalcognitive functionsandlimbic-emotionalfunctions.Thefourthpartofthebraininvolvedinvoluntarymovementsisthepremotorarea(PMA)whichismainlyinvolvedwhenexternallystimulatedbehaviourisplannedorprepared.

TheSMA,PMAandCMAareso-calledsecondarymotorareas: thismeanstheyarenotplanningsimplemovementsbutrathermovementpatterns.Twootherpartsofthebraininvolvedinmovementarethecerebellumandthebasalganglia.Thefirstoftheseisinvolvedinthetimingandaccuracyof fine-tunedmovements.Thebasalgangliaarenecessary forall voluntarymovements thatarenotautomated.Theycontrol thevoluntarymovementbyselectingtherightmotoractionsandbycomparingthegoalandcourseoftheactionswithpreviousmotorexperiences.Also inthebasalgangliaistheemotionalevaluationofmotorbehaviourbecausetheinformationfromthecortexandthelimbicemotionalsystemcometogetherthere.

Informationistransportedinthebrainthroughneuronsornervecells.Afferentneuronstransportinformation from the organs and tissues to the central nervous system (CNS), efferent neuronstransport information from the CNS to the effector cells (active in secreting antibodies) andinterneurons connect neurons within the CNS. There are many types of neurons, but a generaldescriptionoftheiranatomyispossible.Theyconsistofthreeparts:firstthecellbody(soma).Thesecondpartistheaxon,averythincablethatextendsthesomaandtransportsinformationawayfromthesoma.Everyneuronhasonlyoneaxon,buttheaxoniscapableofspecializingandthereforecancommunicatewithdifferenttypesoftargetcells.Thethirdpartoftheneuronisthedendrite;thisistheinformation-receivingnetworkofaneuron.Everyneuronhasmanydendritesandtheseareextendedinmanybranches.Neuronscommunicatewitheachotherthroughcontactbetweenthedendriteofoneneuronandtheaxonofanother.Wherethesetwomeet,thereisasynapse.Theaxonsarecoveredwithmyelin;thisenablestheinformationtobetransportedfasterthaninunmyelinatedaxons. By use of the neurons the myelination improves, thereby causing advanced informationtransportation. When neurons are not used anymore (or in certain diseases) demyelination mayoccur18(Smit1996).

18 Fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuron,sitevisited07-07-2005.

74 75

6.2 the development of the brain

FlohrandHodges(2002)describefourelementsinthedevelopmentofthebrainthatarerelevanttothequestionofanearlystart:criticalperiods,optimalperiods,windowsofopportunityandplasticity.Theideaofcriticalperiodsisthat incertaintimeframesstimulationisneededfordevelopmentstooccurorthatatcertaindevelopmentalstagestheorganismismorereceptivetoenvironmentalinfluences(Spreen,RisserandEdgell1995).Whenthisstimulationorinfluenceisnotpresentthedevelopmentwillnotoccuroronlystunted,evenifthestimulationisthereafterthistimeframe.Forthebrainthismeansthatitisonlyopenforcertainexperiencesduringspecificperiodsinthedevelopmentofthehumanbeing.Iftheexperienceisnotthere,certaindevelopmentswillnotoccur.Theexistenceofcriticalperiodsmaydependonsome“biologicalclock”,onbrainstructuresthathavedevelopedcausingtheimpossibilitytorecogniseorinterpretnewsensorydata,oracombinationofboth.Formusic,anycriticalperiodshavenotyetbeenfound,accordingtoFlohrandHodges.Münteandcolleagues(2002),however,thinkthatplasticchangesinthebrainthatarespecificformusiciansare to happen before the age of seven. It is not impossible to become a musician when startingafter thatage,but thechanges in thebrainwillnotoccur.Hodges (inMcPherson2006)usesaninvestigationbyMooreetal.(2003)amongprofessionalmusiciansthatshowedthatanearlystartisessentialtobecomeaconcertartist.

Thismaybedifferentfortheoptimalperiods.Theseareperiodsinthedevelopmentofanindividualinwhichdevelopmentwillbeeasierorfaster.Formusicthereareseveralexampleknownofoptimalperiods.Itiseasiertolearntosingintuneduringtheageofthreetosixthanwhenapersonistwenty-fiveyearsofage.ResearchbyFlohrshowedthatiteasiertolearnthedifferentmusicallanguagesofjazz,classicalmusicoratonalmusicbeforetheageofsixthanlaterinlife.FlohrandMillertested,usingEEG(seeappendixII)howchildrenagedfivereactedtodifferentstylesofmusic.ThedifferentstylesdidnotproducedifferentEEGreadings.Whenthesamechildrenweretestedagaintwoyearslater,theEEGreadingsshoweddifferentreactionsdependingonthesortofmusic(Flohr1999).

“Windowsofopportunity”isatheoreticalconceptdescribingtherearecertaingeneraltimeframesinwhichcriticaloroptimaldevelopmentsarelikelytotakeplace.Awindowofopportunityisthereforenotthesameasacriticaloroptimalperiodand,accordingtoFlohrandHodges,itisimportanttomakethedistinctionbetweencriticalandoptimalperiodswhentalkingaboutwindowsofopportunity,becauseofthedifferencebetweenthem.Later,Flohr(2004)statesitlikethis:“Windowsofopportunityareeitheroptimalwindowsorcriticalwindows.Themedia,public,andmusiceducationingeneralneedstobeclearintheuseofoptimalandcriticalperiodsofdevelopment”(Flohr2004).

Plasticityistheabilityofthebraintochange.Itisreferredtoas“thegeneralabilityofourcentralnervoussystemtoadapttobothchangingenvironmentalconditionsandnewlyimposedtasksduringlifespan”(AltenmüllerandGruhn2002,p.63).AltenmüllerandGruhnwritethatmusicalexperienceandtraining,accompaniedbytheindividual’sdevelopment,causechangesthatoccurnotonlyinthe

76 77

neuronalnetworkofthebrain(e.g.strongerneuronalconnections),butintheoverallgrossstructureaswell.Severalauthors(Amuntsetal.1997,Hallett1995,Rauschecker2001)statethatplasticityisgreatestinayoungperson’sbrainandthatplasticitydecreaseswithaging.Rauscheckerevenclaimsthat“ageofonsetofmusicaltraininghasbeenshowntobecriticalfortheextentofreorganization”(2001,p.334).

According to Münte, Altenmüller and Jäncke (2002) plasticity is caused on the one hand by thenewgrowthand improvementofdendrites,synapsesandneurons,andon theotherhand to thedisinhibition (slowing down or suppression) or inhibition of already existing lateral connectionsbetweenneuronsbyafferent19input.ThesetwomechanismsarealsorecognisedbyPascual-Leone(2001).Hethinkstheinhibition(or“unmasking”ashecallsit,p.317)ofalreadyexistingconnectionsisthefirst,necessarystepinordertolaterestablishlong-termchangesbythenewgrowthofdendritesenthusnewconnections.Whenthishappens,skillshavebecomeautomatic.

6.3 music performance and the brain

Inthelastfifteenyearsseveralstudieshavebeenperformedtofindoutmoreabouttheroleofmusiconthebrainandonthedifferencesinthebrainofmusiciansandnon-musicians.Someexamplesoftheinfluenceofmusichavebeendiscussedinparagraph1.1.3.Itappearedthatmusicmakingmayhavepositiveeffectsforotherextra-musicalactivityandskills,suchasspatialreasoning.Otherinfluencesofmusiccanbefoundinthebrainitself.Somepartsofthebrainofmusiciansseemtohavedevelopedinadifferentwaythanthebrainsofnon-musicians.Oneofthestudiesshowingthattheirbrainsofmusiciansandnon-musiciansaredifferentinsomeaspectsistheoneperformedbySchlaugetal.(1995b).Theystudiedthepartofthebraincalledplanumtemporale.Theplanumtemporaleispartofthecortexandisinvolvedinauditoryassociation.Previousresearchhasshownthat the planum temporale in human beings (and other higher primates) is asymmetrical, beinglargerontheleftside.Asaresult,researchersagreethatthisasymmetryisconnectedtotheleftsidedominanceforlanguage-relatedauditoryprocessing.Moreover,post-mortemandinvivoresearchhas shown that the left planum temporale is dominant in the production and comprehension oflanguage(inamajorityofthepeople).Therehavebeenseveralattemptstolocalizemusicalfunctions,butthesehavebeennotreallysuccessfulyet,becausethisresearchhasnotproducedclearresults.According toSchlaugetal. thiswill changenow,becauseofanew technique tostudy thebrainwiththeso-calledpositronemissiontomographyPET20.ResearchwithPEThasshownthatthelefthemisphere isactiveduringphonological, lexical,orsemantic language tasks,and that therighthemisphereisactiveduringmelodicandpitchperceptiontasks.However,thisdependsonthelevelofmusicalexperienceofthesubject.Moreexperiencedsubjects’lefthemisphereisactiveduringmusicaltasks.

19 Afferentisaconceptfromtheanatomyandisusedtoindicateanypartofthebody(aveinornervus)thatleadstoanotherpart

ofthebody(astructureororgan)fromhttp://en.wikipediaorg/wiki/Afferent,sitevisited28-08-2007.

20 PleasenotethatexplanationsforallabbreviationsusedinthischaptercanbefoundinAppendixB.

76 77

For theirownstudySchlaugetal.used invivomagneticresonancemorphometryof theplanumtemporale,whichmeansthattheymeasuredtheleftandrighthemisphereoftheplanumtemporaleoftheirlivingsubjects.Theirsubjectswerethirtymusicians,ofwhomelevenwithperfectpitchandnineteenwithout,andthirtynon-musicians.Thesubjectswerematchedforage(meanagetwenty-six),sex(male)andhandedness(right).Itappearedthatthemusicianswithperfectpitchhadasignificantlarger left planum temporale than the musicians without perfect pitch and the non-musicians.AccordingtoSchlaugetal.thisstudyshowedthatPETisabletolocalizemusicalperceptioninthebrainareawhich includes theplanumtemporale,whilepreviouspostmortemresearch,citedbySchlaugetal.hadalreadyshownthattheleftplanumtemporalewasinvolvedinmusicperception.Theauthorssuggestthatanincreaseofmusicalfunctionsofthebrainisshownbyalargerleft-rightasymmetryoftheplanumtemporale.

However, according to Schlaug et al. it is not yet certain whether this asymmetry is caused bytrainingorinnatefactorssuchastalent,orthattheasymmetrycausesthegreaterabilityformusicalperformance.Buttheysuggestitispossiblethatthegrossanatomyofthebrainisstillsusceptibleforchangeafterbirth,becausethematurationoffibretractsandintracorticalneuropil(thebraintissuebetweenthecellbodies,whichiswithfibretractspresumedtobedeterminantsofgyralshape)isstillprogressingattheageofseven,thusimplyingthatthechangesinthemusicians’brainswerecausedbytheirtraining.OtherresearchbySchlaugetal.(1995a)providedalsoevidenceoftheinfluenceofearlymusictrainingonthebrain.Theystudied30musicians(violinistsandpianists)and30non-musicians.Therewasa division made between musicians having started musical training before the age of seven andthosehavingstartedafter thatage.Threeof themusiciansappearedtobenon-consistentright-handedaccordingtotheseveralhandpreferenceteststhatwereperformed;theothersubjectswereallclearlyright-handed.Thesymmetryofthehandmotorperformancewasalsotested.Thistestshowedthatthemusiciansperformedthetaskswithalargersymmetrybetweentheleftandrighthandthanthenon-musicians.Themeasurementsoftheanteriorpartofthecorpuscallosumshowedthatthisbrainareawassignificantlylargerinmusiciansthaninnon-musicians.Thisdifferencecouldbecompletelyattributedtothemusicianswhostartedmusictrainingbeforetheageofseven.Thisfindingisinteresting,asalargercorpuscallosumispositivelycorrelatedwithahighercapacityforinterhemisphericcommunicationandwithalargersymmetrybetweenthehemispheres.Thisfastercommunicationenhancestheperformanceofcomplexsequentialbimanualmotorsequences.FromresearchcitedbySchlaugetal(1995a)itappearsthatbrainplasticityislargestinearlychildhood.Inthisperiodlargeamountsofbraincellsarecapableofchangingtheirfunction.Thismeansthatan early commencement of musical training enhances the development of brain cells as corpuscallosum cells. This causes, as will be clear from the above, an easier communication betweenthetwohemispheresandthusaneasierperformanceofbimanualhandmotorsequences.Thesefindings are in accordance with findings cited by Flohr and Miller (2000). They write that severalstudieslendsupporttotheideathatearlymusiceducationforchildrenfostersmoreefficientandprofuseconnectionsinthebrain.

78 79

Elbertetal (1995)performedastudy tocompare therepresentation in thebrainof the lefthandofmusiciansandofnon-musicians.Frompreviousresearchtheylearnedthatchangesininputinthebrainorcentralnervoussysteminduceplasticchangesinthebrain.Thesechangeswereforexampleobserved in theauditorysystemsand themotorsystems.Themeasuredchangesweresmallforsmallerlimbs,forexampleadecreaseofseveralmillimetresofbraintissuerepresentingthefingerafteranamputationofonlyafinger,butwerebiggerafteranamputationofawholelegorarm.Ontheotherhand,experienceswithmonkeysandhumanshaveshownthatincreaseininputin thebraincausesagrowthof thebrainpartrepresentingthatpartof thebody, forexampleanincreasedcorticalrepresentationoftheindexfingerofBraillereaders.Tostudytheincreasedcorticalrepresentationofoftenusedbodypartsfurther,Elbertetal.decidedtocomparestringplayers(violinists,cellistsandoneguitarist)andnon-musicians.Theaimofthestudywastoinvestigatetheeffectsofdifferentafferentinputtothetwosidesofthebrain.Stringplayersusetheirsecondtofifthdigitofthelefthandforfingeringthestrings.Thefirstdigitofthelefthand,thethumb,isnotasactiveastheotherfingers,butitgraspstheneckoftheviolinandmovesalittleinordertochangethepositionofthehand.Thefingersoftherighthandarenotinvolvedinindividualmovementsastheytogetherholdthebow.Usingmagneticsourceimaging,Elbertetal.showedthatthecerebralcorticesofthestringplayersweredifferentinsizethanthecorticesofthenon-musicians.Beforetheactualresearchtookplace,thestringplayerswereaskedtokeepasmalldiaryinwhichtheyhadtorecordhowmuchtheyhadexercisedeverydayforoneweek.Theywerealsoaskedtoestimatehowmuchpracticetheyhadaccumulatedthepreviousmonthandyear.Thedatashowedthatthecentreofcorticalrepresentationfortactilestimulationofthefingersofthelefthandofthestringplayerswasshiftedcomparedtothatofthenon-musicians,suggestingthatthecorticalarearepresentingthefingersofthelefthandwasincreased.Thestrengthofresponsewasincreasedinthemusicians.Forthemusicians’thumbtheshiftwassignificantsmallerthanforthelittlefinger.Analysisofthedataforthewholehandshowedthattherewasasignificantdifferencebetweenthelefthandsandtherighthandsofthemusicians.Inadditiontherewasadifferencebetweenthelefthandsof themusicianscomparedto the lefthandof thenon-musicians: theneuralactivityafterstimulationwasbiggerforthemusicians’lefthandthanforthenon-musicians’lefthand.Elbertetal.foundacorrelationbetweentheageatwhichthestringplayershadbeguntheirmusicaltrainingandthemagnitudeofthechangeinneuralactivityafterstimulationincomparisonwiththenon-musicians.Therewasnosignificantrelationbetweentheamountofpracticeofthemusiciansandthesizeofthecorticalrepresentations.To explain the differences between the musicians and the non-musicians, Elbert et al. mentiontwopossibleexplanations.ThefirstisalreadymentionedinthearticlebySchlaugetal.(1995b):itpresumesthatthestringplayersaresuccessfulbecausetheircorticalrepresentationoftheirlefthandisalreadyenlargedcomparedtotheirrighthandandcomparedtootherhumans.Therefore,whentheystartwithmusicaltrainingit iseasierforthemtobecomesuccessfulandtocontinue.Elbertetal.objecttothisexplanationthatanimalresearchalreadyclearlyshoweduse-dependentenlargementsofsomatosensorybrainareas.

78 79

Thesecondexplanationisthattheresultsareaconsequenceofashiftincorticalresponsivityandanintensificationoftheresponse.Elbertetal.proposeathirdoptionthatexplainstheresultsasaconsequenceofanexpansionoftheleft-handcorticalrepresentation.Accordingtothemthisthirdexplanationismorevalid,becausethereisacorrelationbetweenamountofcorticalreorganizationandageatwhichmusicaltrainingbeganandalsobecausethechangeinneuralactivityfollowstheonedirectionthatisconsistentwiththeexpansiontheory.Encouragedbythepreviousdescribedstudies,Amuntsetal.(1997)wantedtoinvestigatewhethertheearlystartandlongdurationofmusicians’motortrainingandthecomplexbimanualfingermovementsof pianists may lead to persistent, macrostructural adaptations of the motor cortex, which mayunderlietherepresentationalplasticityseeninpersonswhoareacquiringandperformingfinemotorskills.Amuntsandcolleaguesciteearlierresearchwhichshowedthatthereiscorticalasymmetryinthehumanbraincorrelatedwiththehandednessofpeople.Right-handedindividualsshowalargerlefthemispherethanleft-handedindividualsandviceverse.Theyassumedthatmusicianswhoareintenselybimanualtrained,forexamplepianists,showasmallercorticalasymmetryincomparisonwithnon-musicians.Theyalsoassumed,basedonthestudybySchlaug(1995a)andElbert(1995),thatthedifferencesbetweenmusiciansandnon-musiciansarecorrelatedwiththeageoffirstmusicalandmotortraining.The subjects were male, right-handed professional musicians, all keyboard players. The controlsubjectswere individualswhohadneverplayedan instrumentor individualswhohadplayedaninstrumentforlessthanoneyearaftertheageoften.Thecontrolswereallright-handedandwerenotprofessionaltypists.Theresearchersstudiedthesizeoftheprimarymotorcortex,theso-calledintrasulcallengthoftheposteriorgyrus(ILPG).Thisbrainareawaschosenasitisacorrelateofthecorticalmotorhandrepresentation.Theresearchshoweda leftwardasymmetry in ILPGforboththemusiciansandthenon-musicianscausedbytheirright-handedness,buttheasymmetryfortheright-handedcontrolsubjectswassignificant larger than for themusicians.Thiswasdue to thefactthattherighthemisphereoftheposteriorgyruswaslargerinthemusiciansthaninthenon-musicians.Therighthemisphereiscontrollingthelefthandthatisnon-dominantinright-handedsubjects.Keyboardplayersusetheirlefthandmorethannon-keyboardplayers,whichexplainsthesmallerasymmetry.

Amuntsetal.alsoinvestigatedwhethertherewasacorrelationbetweenageoffirstmusicaltrainingandtheILPG.ThereappearedtobeahighcorrelationbetweenanearlystartandtheleftandrightILPG.Theyoungeranindividualwaswhenbeginningwithmusicaltraining,thelargertheILPGwas.Again,thesamequestionwasasked:isthedifferenceinthebrainanatomyaresultofthedailypracticeofthemusiciansorwerethesubjectsabletobecomemusiciansbecauseoftheirmoresymmetricalmotorcortex?Amuntsetal.answerthisquestionreferringtothehighcorrelationbetweenageoffirstmusicaltrainingandILPG.Theyconcludefromthiscorrelationthatthereisa“training-inducedanatomicalplasticity”(Amuntsetal.1997,p.212).ThesefindingsagreewitharesearchresultsfromHallet (1995),which indicateplasticitydecreaseswithagingandthatthemostthoroughplasticity

80 81

effectsoccurduringthefirstyearsoflife.ButAmuntsetal.acknowledgethefactthatonlyaboutfortypercentoftheILPGisdeterminedbyageofcommencement,andthatthereforetheremustbeotherexplanationsaswell.Thiscouldhardlybeotherwise,asotherpartsofthebrainthanthemotorcortexplayanimportantroleinbimanualfingermovements,forexamplethebasalganglia,thesupplementarymotorcortexandthecerebellum.Changesinthemotorcortexarechangesinthemacrostructureofthebrain.Amuntsetal.citeseveralstudiesthatshowedthatchangesinthemicrostructureofthebrain,forexampleincreaseoftheamountofsynapses,arepossible.Thesemicrostructuralchangescould leadtomacrostructuralchanges.Thesecitedstudiesprovethatlong-termrepresentationalchangesinthebrainoccurredasaconsequenceof intenseandlong-lastingmotoractivity,suchasmusicalpractice.

Schlaug (Altenmüller, Wiesendanger and Kesselring 2006) also tried to find an answer to thequestionwhetherchildrenbecomemusiciansbecausetheirbrainshaveacertainshapethatisaptformusicorbecausetheystartyoungenoughtoenabletheirbraintoadapttothedemandsmadebythemusicalpractice.Schlaugetal.tested50childrenaged5to7beforetheystartedwithpianoorviolinlessons.Theyalsotested25childreninthesameagewithoutmusiclessons.Besidesthetests(severalintelligencetests,auditoryanalysistestsandmotortests)theyunderwentandMRI.Afteroneyearofmusictrainingbothgroupsofchildrenweretestedagain.Itappearedthattherewerenodifferencebetweenthechildreninthefirsttestepisode,beforeanyofthechildrenhadhadmusiclessons.AccordingtoSchlaugthisis“makingitunlikelythatchildrenwhochoosetolearnaninstrumentdosobecausetheyhaveanatypicalbrain,andsuggestingthattheatypicalitiesseeninthebrainsofadultmusiciansaremostlikelytheproductofintensivemusictrainingratherthanpre-existingbiologicalmarkersofmusicality” (Schlaug inAltenmüller,WiesendangerandKesselring2006,p.145).Schlaugpresentspreliminaryresultsbecauseonlyhalfofthechildrenhascompletedtheirsecondroundoftesting,butalreadyitisclearthatthechangeinscoresintasksdirectlyrelatedtomusictrainingofthechildrenwithmusiclessonsissignificantlygreaterthaninthecontrolgroup,beingfinemotorskillsandauditorydiscrimination.Therewerealso(non-significant)differencesintheincreaseofgreymatter.Inanotherinvestigation,thistimewithchildrenagedninetoelevenyearswiththreetofouryearsofmusiceducation,thereappearedtobeasmallbutsignificantdifferenceinthevolumeofgreymatter,wherebythemusicallyeducatedchildrenhadthelargestvolume.Inaddition,themusicallytrainedchildrenperformedbetteronthevocabularysubtestoftheWISC-III21(anintelligencetest),amathematicstestandaphonemicawarenesstest.

Theimportanceoftheabovementionedresearchresults isexpressedclearlybyAltenmüllerandGruhn(2002,p.79):“Themainpointhere is that thebrain ismost flexible (orplastic)duringtheearlyyearsofchildhood;lateritbecomesincreasinglydifficulttocompensateforanunderdevelopeddispositionformotorskillsandfinemotorreflexes.”

21 The WISC-III (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, third version) exists of 13 subtests that measure the verbal and

performance intelligence. The verbal intelligence subtests measure language skills by asking oral questions. One of the

subtestsmeasureschildren’svocabulary.Theperformancesubtestsmeasurespatialskills.

80 81

7 ConClusions, disCussion and reCommendations

Inthislastchapterthequestionsposedinchapter1willberevisitedand,ifpossible,answerswillbeformulatedasaconclusion.Inaddition,adiscussionwillleadtorecommendationsforfurtherresearch.

7.1 Conclusions

1. should children start early with music lessons in order to become professional musicians? is there a certain age at which children should ideally begin with music lessons? InSosniak’sstudy (1985)allsubjectsstartedwithmusiceducationbetweentheageof threeandnine.InManturzewska’sstudytherewherelargerdifferencesinstartingage,butthemeanageatwhichtheoutstandingmusiciansstartedwas6.9years.Therewasaninterestingdifferencebetweentheoldestsubjects inthisstudyandtheyoungerone. Itappearedthat fortheoldersubjectsthestartingageseemedlessimportantforbecomingaprofessionalmusician.However,themusicianswhostartedafternineyearsofagewereonlycomposersandconductors.TheresultsofherstudymadeManturzewskaconcludethatifmusicaltrainingstartsafternine,thecareerwillnotleaduptothemasteryoftheinstrumentonaoutstanding,professionallevel.Itappearsfromtheresearchthatmostclassicalexpertmusiciansstartedbeforetheageofnine.Somestartedlater,butwithreferencetotheamountofaccumulatedstudyhours,itseemsimportanttostartearly.InEricsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer’sstudy(1993)studytheexpertpianistsstartedatanaverageageof5.8years,theamateurpianistshadstartedatameanageof9.9years.Themeanstartingageofthe(professional)violinistswas7.9years.InanotherstudybyEricsson(KrampeandEricsson1996)theprofessionalpianistshadstartedatameanageof6,75,significantlyyoungerthantheamateurpianists,whosemeanstartingagewas9.33years.Jørgenseninhisstudyalsoshowedthatonaveragetheexcellentstudentsstartedearlierthanthegoodstudentsdid.Therewerehoweverconsiderabledifferencesbetweensingersandinstrumentalists.Thesingersstartedsignificantlylaterthantheinstrumentalists,theminimumageatwhichsingersstartedwasnineyears,fortheinstrumentaliststhiswasfiveyears.Regardingthemeanstartingage,Jørgensenonlyfoundsignificantresultsforthesingers.Theexcellentsingersstartedonaverageattheageof9.5years,thegoodstudentsstartedonaverageattheageof18.0years.InneuroscienceAltenmüllerandGruhn (2002)show there isevidence thatearly intense trainingbeforetheageoftenislikelytoleadtoenlargementofthecorticalregioninvolvedinthetrainedability.Thisenlargementisduetothefactthattherearemorenervecells intheinvolvedregion.This plasticity is greatest in a young person’s brain and may lead to a more successful musicaldevelopment.AccordingtoRauschecker(2001)theageofonsetofmusicaltrainingisevencriticalfortheextentoftheplasticityorreorganizationofthebrain.AccordingtoMünteetal.(2002)theseplasticchangesshouldoccurbeforetheageofseven.Musicaldevelopmentafterthatageispossible,butmayprogressslower.FlohrandHodges(2002)makeadifferencebetweencriticalperiodsandoptimalperiods.Critical

82 83

periods, theystate,arenotyet found formusicaldevelopment.But there isevidence foroptimalperiods.Itis,forexample,easiertolearntosingintuneattheageofthreethanlaterinlife,anditiseasiertolearnmusicallanguagesbeforetheageofsix.AlastexampleofevidenceisprovidedbySchlaugetal.(1995),whoshowedthatmusicianswhosemusicaltrainingstartedbeforetheageofsevenhaveagreatercorpuscallosumthatnon-musiciansormusicianswhostartedaftertheageofseven.Thesizeofthecorpuscallosumispositivelycorrelatedwith a higher capacity for interhemispheric communication which enhances the performance ofcomplexbimanualmotorsequences.Fromtheabovementionedresearchexamplesitbecomesclearthatthereisevidencethattheageatwhichmusictrainingstartshasinfluenceontheshapeofthebrainandthatthisinfluencesthefurthermusicaldevelopmentofthemusicians.Theexactageatwhichmusicaltrainingshouldstartdependsonthespecificmusicalactivity,butthefindingsseemtoindicatethatchildrenshouldstartbeforetheageofseventoten.However,asHodges(2006)states,thereisa“needtoplaceneuromusicalfindingswithinalargercontext”,becausethemusicalbraindoesnotgrowinisolation(p.63).

2. are there physical or psychological barriers that prevent starting with music lessons before the age of four?Intheliteraturetherearenoindicationstherearephysicalorpsychologicalbarrierstostartbeforetheageoffouraslongasthemusicalengagementinwhichthechildisinvolvedisappropriatetothedevelopmentandcapacityofthechild(Lehmann,SlobodaandWoody2007).

3. are there other important – external - variables that influence the level of musical expertise reached by a person?One-to-one teachingappearedtobeabeneficialinfluenceinthemusicaldevelopmentofchildren.ThiswasshownbyBloom(1984,inLepperandWoolverton2002)andbyDavidson,Howe,SlobodaandMoore(1997).TheresearchbyDavidsonandcolleaguesshowedthatthebestthreegroupsofmusicstudentsreceivedindividualinstruction.LepperandWoolverton(2002)explainwhychildrenbenefitmorefromone-to-oneteachingthanfromclassinstruction.Inprivatelessonstheteacherisabletodesignpracticeactivitiesfortheindividualstudentthatmaximisehisimprovementandtheteacherisalsoabletodirectallhisattentiontoonepupil,whichelicitsmoreeffortandon-taskattentionfromthepupil.Afurtheradvantageisthattheteacherisabletoreactmoretotheneedsandpreviousknowledgeofthestudentinsteadoftheaverageknowledgeinaclass.One-to-oneteachinghasalsoapositiveinfluenceonthenon-musicaleffectsofmusiceducation.FromLetland’smeta-analysis(2000) itbecameclearthatone-to-oneteachingmayleadtobetterresultsonspatialreasoningthangroupteaching.

The accumulated amount of study hoursappearstobeanotherveryimportantcontributortothelevelofmusicperformanceanindividualwillreach.ThestudyonfivedifferentgroupsofmusicstudentsbySloboda,Davidson,HoweandMoore(1996)showedthatitwastheamountofpracticethatmadethebeststudentsreachthehighestlevelsoftheexaminationsystemsoonerthantheotherstudents.The

82 83

studentsallneededthesamenumberofpractisinghourstoreachanextlevel,butthebeststudentspractisedmostandwerethereforeabletoreachahigherlevelofmusicalperformanceatacertainagethantheotherstudentsinthestudy.ThestudybyEricsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer (1993)alsoshowed that thebeststudentshadaccumulatedthemostpracticehoursandthemusicteacherstudentstheleast.Thegoodstudentshadaccumulatedintermediateamountsofstudyhours.Aninterestingdetailofthosetwostudieswasthattheamountofstudyhoursaccumulatedbythebeststudents inthestudybySlobodaetal. (1996)wascomparabletotheamountofstudyhoursaccumulatedbythebeststudentsinEricsson’sstudywhentheywereatthesameage.InotherstudiesbyEricsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer (1993)professionalpianistsandamateurpianistswerecompared:inthisstudythebestmusiciansstudiedthemostaswellandastudybyLehmann and Ericsson (1998) showed that a professional pianist had accumulated about 10.000hoursofpracticeattheageoftwenty-five.

Anotherimportantfactorincontributingtoahighlevelofmusicalexpertiseistheamount of parental

support. InDavidson’sstudy (Davidson,Howe,MooreandSloboda1996) itappearedthat thebeststudents(fromgroups1and2)hadparentswiththehighestlevelsofinvolvementandsupport.Thestudentsintheintermediatelevelgroupshadparentswithintermediatelevelsofinvolvementandthe parents of the children who stopped having music lesson were least involved in their child’spracticeandmusicstudy.AstudybyO’Neill(1997)showedthatparentsfromhighachievingchildrenweresignificantlymoreinvolvedintheirchild’smusiclessonsthanparentsfromotherchildren.AsmallstudybyStolleryand McPhee showed that for music teachers and music psychologists parental “support andencouragementinvariousforms”and“motivationthroughpraise”werethemostimportantfactorsinfluencingtheirmusicaldevelopment.Alaststudyshowingthatthesupportofparentsiscrucialinmusicians’developmentwasperformedbySlobodaandHowe,whointerviewedmusicstudentsandtheirparents(1991a).Theysuggestthatthesupportoftheparentsmainlyinhelpingthechildpractiseandmotivatingthechild.Consequently,parental support is very important, because without practice and motivation, no child is likely tobecomeaprofessionalmusician.

AccordingtoEricsson(Ericsson,KrampeandTesch-Römer1993;Ericsson1996;1997) the way an

individual practisesisveryimportant.Hestatesthatmererepetitionofamusicalworkisnotenoughtoimproveone’sskills.Itisimportantthatstudentsreceiveexplicitinstructionswhattostudyandhow,supervisionfromateacherwhoisabletorecogniseerrorsandhelpthestudentcorrecttheerrorsandgivepersonalfeedback.Ericssonandcolleaguescallthemosteffectivepracticedeliberatepractice.Theystatethat“deliberatepractice”hasthefollowing“ingredients”:awell-definedtaskwithanappropriatedifficultylevel,informativefeedbackandopportunitiesforrepetitionandcorrectionoferrors.

84 85

Alsofromotherstudiesthestructureofthepracticeappearstobeveryimportant(Davidson,HoweandSloboda1997).Gruson(1988)concludedfromherstudyonbeginningandexperiencedpianiststhatexperiencedmusicianspracticedifferentlythanbeginners.Theyusuallydividethemusicalworkinsmallerpartsorfragmentsandrehearsethosepartsinsteadofrepeatingthewholepiecetimeaftertime.

4. do popular musicians and classical musicians differ in their development?It is not yet possible to make definitive statements concerning the ideal starting age of popularmusicians,becausethereisnotenoughresearch.Fromthestudiesreviewedinthisliteraturestudyitappearsthatmostpopularmusiciansstartatanolderagethanmostclassicalmusicians.ThemalemusiciansinClawson’sstudy(1999)startedplayingarockinstrumentonaverageattheageof12.9years;thefemaleswereevenolder(meanage18.0).Inthisstudytherewerenoaccountsofthesubjectsplayingaclassicalinstrumentbeforestartingwithrockmusic,butitispossibletheycouldalreadyplayaninstrument.In Green’s study some of the musicians started with playing music at a young age, but very fewexactdataareprovided.Inaddition,thegroupofmusiciansGreeninterviewedisverysmalltomakedefinitivestatements.

5. is there a relation between musicality, making music (playing an instrument, composing or singing) and intelligence and other general developmental skills (social, emotional)? Theresultsofvariousstudiesonthissubjecthaveproducedratherdifferentresults,whichisinpartduetothedifferentresearchmethodsthatwereusedandthedifferentaspectsofintelligencethatwerestudied.Adivisioncouldbemadebetweenstudiesthatinvestigatedtheinfluenceofmusiconspatialreasoning,ongeneralIQscores,onreadingskillsandonsocialskills.

Regardingspatial-reasoningskills,Letland(2000)madeameta-analysisof15studiesstudyingtheeffectofmusiceducation.Sheconcludesthat“activeinstructioninmusicdoesappeartoenhancespatial-temporalperformanceforpreschoolandelementary-agedchildren,atleastwhileinstructionisoccurringandatleastupthroughtwoyearsofinstruction”(p.220).However,itisnotyetknownwhether thiseffect lastsafter themusiceducationhasstopped.Letlandalsoconcluded that theeffectofmusiceducationonspatialreasoningislargerwhenchildrenaretaughtinaone-to-onesituation.

SchellenbergstudiedwhethermusiceducationcouldincreasethescoresonIQtests.ItappearedthatIQscoresfromchildrenwhohadeitherkeyboardtrainingorvocallessonwiththeKodalymethodincreasedmorethanIQscoresfromchildrenwhohaddramalessonsornolessonsatall.Besidesthis,theacademicachievementsofthechildreninthemusiceducationgroupsincreasedmorethantheacademicachievementsoftheotherchildren.AstudyperformedbyBastianinelementaryschoolsinBerlinproduced lessclear results.Heused two IQ tests tomeasure thechange in intelligentquotient.OnlyoneofthetestsshowedasmallincreaseoftheIQscoresofthechildrenwhoreceivedextramusiclessons,buttheothertestproducednosignificantdifferences.

84 85

Forreadingskillstheresultsarealsonotclearyet.DouglasandWillats(1994)studiedtheinfluenceofmusiceducationofchildrenwithreadingproblemsandfoundthatmusiceducationimprovedthereadingabilitiesofthechildrencomparedtochildrenwhodidnotreceivemusiceducation.However,Butzlaff(2000)statesthatthisstudyshowedsomemethodologicalproblemsbecauseofwhichtheresultsareratherequivocal.Hismeta-analysisofstudiesontheinfluenceofmusiconliteraryskillsshowsthatapositiveinfluenceofmusiccannotbestatedwithcertaintyyet.

FromBastian’sstudy(2003)the–weak–resultsshowedthatthechildren’sinschoolswithmoremusic education thought of themselves as more social and less likely to exclude classmates.However, these results were a bit controversial. Koopman (2005) acknowledged the fact that thechildren’sself-reportsweremorepositiveonschoolswithmoremusiceducationthanonschoolswiththenormalamountofmusiceducation,butstressesthefactthatthechildrenreportedabouttheirownbehaviourinsteadofindependentadultsjudgingthechildren’sbehaviour.Gembris(2003)citesamusicproject,inwhichchildrenfromdifferentbackgroundslearned–throughthemusic–toplay,workandtalkwitheachother insteadoffightingandarguing. Inthisprojectmusicseemedtoplayapositiveandcriticalrole.AccordingtoGembristhisisduetothefactthatitisimpossibletomeasurealleffectsmusichasonpeople’sbehaviourwithtests(liketheonesBastianused).AstudybyAdamek(1997)showedthatpeoplewholearnedtosingofwereusedtosingintheirfamiliesorschoolsinchildhoodwerelaterinlifehappierandmoresocial.

Thereisonlyonestudyreferringtoinfluencingtheemotionaldevelopmentofchildrenthroughmusiceducation.ThisisCosta-Giomi’sstudy(2004).Thisstudyshowedthatchildrenwhoreceivedpianolessonshadahigherself-esteemthanchildrenwhodidnotreceivepianolessons.

7.2 discussion and recommendations for further research

Studyinghumanbehaviouranddevelopmentisnotanexactscience;thismeansthatitisnotpossibletogiveexactanswersoranswersthatareapplicabletoallhumanbeings.Humanbeings’behaviourisnotsystematic,butisinfluencedbymanyfactors.Factorsmentionedinthisliteraturestudyarethegenes,educationalinfluencesandinfluencesfromparents,peersorotherpeopleinaperson’slife.Asaresult,itisverydifficulttosaywithcertaintywhatanindividualhastodotoreachaspecificaim.Therewillalwaysbepeoplewhocontradictthegeneralruleswiththeircourseoflife.Inthisliteraturestudysomegeneralruleswereformulatedthatmighthelpeducators,parentsorpoliticianstomakedecisionsaboutmusiceducationforchildren.However,thisdoesnotmeanthattheserulesarevalidinallsituationsandforallhumanbeings.Butitcanbestatedthatfollowingtheseruleswillmakeitmoreprobableandeasiertoreachacertainaim,inthiscaseaprofessionallevelofmusicperformance.

Fromtheresearchdiscussedandreviewed in this literaturestudyseveral important factors thatwereexpectedtoinfluencemusicaldevelopmentindeedappearedtobeveryimportant.Theseare

86 87

theageatwhichachildstartswithmusicaltraining;theamountofpracticethechildaccumulatesduringhislife,thewayachildpractisesandtheinfluenceoftheparents.Butfromtheresearchthereappearedtobeothercontributorstomusicaldevelopmentaswell: the influencefrompeersandsiblings,theinfluencefromtheteacherandmotivation.Motivationisoneofthemostimportantfactorsinreachingahighlevelinwhateverfield,andthusalsointhefieldofmusicperformance.Itisonlypossibletopractiseandworkseveralhoursadayformorethantenyearswhenapersonishighlymotivated.Oneserioustaskofmusiceducatorsisthustomotivatetheirstudentsortoofferanenvironmentinwhichmotivationisadvancedandrewarded.Thekindofmotivationanindividualfeelsforstudyingmaychangeduringhislifetime,butgenerallyitisimportantthatapersonisintrinsicallymotivatedandisautonomousinsteadofforcedtomakemusicorpractisebyextrinsicrewardsorthreats.Thiswayamusicianismorelikelytomaintainhispractice.Anotherimportantcontributortochildren’smusicaldevelopmentistheteacher.Someauthorsevenstatethat,besidesstartingageandmotivation,thisisthemostimportantfactor.Initiallyateacherisimportantinmotivatingthechildandinadvancingthechild’sinterestinmusic.Inthisperiodthecharacteroftheteacherisimportant,he(orse)shouldbeaniceandwarmperson.Laterthisbecomesmoreirrelevant,butthequalitiesoftheteacherasamusiciansgainrelevance.The teacher should be able to teach in a right way, but also to show the student the way in theprofessionalmusicworld.Fromthestudiesonpopularmusiciansitbecameclearthatpeersareveryimportantforpopularmusicians,possiblyevenmoreimportantthanateacher.Thepeersprovideeachotherwithmusicalexamples,trainingexperiencesandtheoreticalknowledge.Frompractisingtogetherinbands,popularmusicianslearnalot.Theroleofpeersseemslessimportantforclassicalmusicians.Siblingsarenotasimportantasteacher,peersorparents,butdoplayaroleinthemusicaldevelopmentofchildren.Theyprovidearolemodelforyoungsiblingswhentheyalreadyplayaninstrumentthemselvesandsometimesmakeachildmoreeager tobecomeagoodmusician.Siblingscanalsoencourageabrotherorsisterwhoplaysaninstrumentbecausetheyimitatetheirparents.Somequestionswerenotansweredreadingtheliteratureforthisstudyandotherquestionsrose.Someofthestudiesdiscussedinthisdocumentprovidedthereaderwithinterestinginformation,but could answer more questions when slightly adjusted. For example, the study by Jørgensen(2001)madeclearthatthereisrelationshipbetweenstartingageandlevelofmusicalperformanceinconservatoirestudents.However,itwouldalsobeinterestingtoknowiftheresultswheremoreclearlyifJørgensenwouldhaveaddedamateurmusicianstothestudyaswell.Otherquestionsalsorosefromhisstudy.Forexample,whatistheinfluenceofthefirstinstrumentachild learnstoplayonlatermusicmaking?Innoneofthestudiesthefirst instrumentandthestartingageoftheplayingthefirstinstrumentwasconsidered.Onlythemaininstrumentandthestudents’ starting age on that instrument were investigated. However, starting with the recordercouldinfluenceprogressionwhenlaterplayinganotherinstrument.Thiswouldmeanthatinfurther

86 87

researchonthistopicresearchersshouldnotonlyaskforthestartingageofthemaininstrumentasubjectplaysbutforthestartingageofapreviousinstrumentaswell.

Iwillfinishmyliteraturestudywitharatherutopianresearchproposition:Agroupofresearcherswillfollowalargesampleofchildrenfromthemomenttheystarthavingmusiclessonsuntiltheyaregrownup.Allfactorsthatarenowknowntocontributemusicaldevelopment– starting age, amount of practice hours, influence of parents, siblings, peers, and teachers,motivation-willbemeasuredregularly throughquestionnairesand interviewsandwiththehelpofbraintechniques.Afterfifteenyearsthedifferent influences,experiencesanddevelopmentsofchildrenwhoendupasprofessionalmusicians(classical,poporotherwise)andchildrenwhowillhaveotherprofessionalcareerswillbeclear.

88 89

reFerenCes

Adamek, Karl. (1997) Singen: Die eigentliche Muttersprache des Menschen. Empirische Befunde undVorschlagezurMusikerziehung.Musikforum,vol.33,no.86,23-31.

Alperson,Philip.(1991)Whatshouldoneexpectfromaphilosophyofmusiceducation?Journal of Aesthetic

Education,vol.25,no.3,215-242.Altenmüller,EckartO.The neurobiology of music perception: cortical processing of time and pitch –structures.

DiscussantpapersubmittedtotheGünneConference2001.http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/agki/www/ik2001/prog/av/paper.pdf.

Altenmüller,EckartO.andGruhn,Wilfried.Brainmechanisms.In:RichardParncuttandGaryE.McPherson(eds.)The Science and Psychology of Music Performance. Creative strategies for teaching and learning,63-82.Oxford[etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress,2002.

Amunts,Katrin;Schlaug,Gottfried;Jancke,Lutz;Steinmetz,Helmuth;Schleicher,Axel;Dabringhaus,AndreasandZilles,Karl.(1997)Motorcortexandhandmotorskills:structuralcompliancein

thehumanbrain.Human Brain Mapping,vol.5,no.3,206-215.Barry,NancyH.andHallam,Susan.(2002)Practice.In:RichardParncuttandGaryE.McPherson(eds.)

The Science and Psychology of Music Performance. Creative strategies for teaching and learning,151-165.Oxford[etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress.

Bastian,HansGünther.(2003)Muziek maakt slim (translated by Wim van der Zwan).Katwijk:PantaRhei.Bennett,H.Stith.(1980)On becoming a rock musician.Amherst:UniversityofMassachusettsPress.Bilhartz,TerryD.,Bruhn,RickA.,Olson,JudithE.(2000)Theeffectofearlymusictrainingonchildcognitive

development.Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,vol.20,no.4,615-636.Bryan,WilliamLoweandHarter,Noble.(1897)Studiesinthephysiologyandpsychologyofthetelegraphic

language.The Psychological Review,vol.IV,27-53.Butzlaff,Ron.(2000)Canmusicbeusedtoteachreading?Journal of Aesthetic Education,vol.34,no.3-4,

167-178.CambridgeshireCouncilofMusicEducation.(1933)Music and the Community: The Cambridgeshire report on

the Teaching of Music.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Clawson,MaryAnn.(1999)Masculinityandskillacquisitionintheadolescentrockband.Popular Music,vol.

18,no.1,99-114.Cohen,A.J.,Baird,K.(1990)Acquisitionofperfectpitch:thequestionofcriticalperiods.Psychomusicology,

vol.9,no.1,31-37.Collins,MaryAnnandAmabile,TeresaM.(1999)Motivationandcreativity.In:RobertJ.Sternberg(ed.).

Handbook of Creativity,297-312.Cambridge[etc.]:CambridgeUniversityPress.Costa-Giomi,Eugenia.(2004)Effectsofthreeyearsofpianoinstructiononchildren’sacademicachievement,

schoolperformanceandself-esteem.Psychology of Music,vol.32,no.2,139-152.Črnčec,Rudi,Wilson,SarahJ.andPrior,Margot. (2006)NoevidencefortheMozartEffect inChildren.

Music Perception,vol.23,no.4,305-317.Davidson,JaneW.,Howe,MichaelJ.A.,Moore,DerekG.andSloboda,JohnA.(1996)Theroleofparental

influencesinthedevelopmentofmusicalperformance.British Journal of Developmental Psychology,vol.14,no.4,399-412.

88 89

Davidson, Jane W., Howe, Michael J.A., and Sloboda, John A. (1997) Environmental factors in thedevelopmentofmusicalperformanceskill.In:DavidJ.HargreavesandAdrianC.North(eds.):The

Social Psychology of Music,188-206.Oxford[etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress.Davidson,Lyle.Songsingingbyyoungandold:adevelopmentalapproachtomusic.In:RitaAielloandJohn

A.Sloboda(eds).Musical Perceptions,99-130.Oxford[etc]:OxfordUniversityPress,1994.Deci,EdwardL.andChandler,CristineL.(1986)TheimportanceofmotivationforthefutureoftheLDfield.

Journal of Learning Disabilities,vol.19,no.10,587-594.Douglas,SheilaandWillatts,Peter. (1994)The relationshipbetweenmusicalabilityand literacyskills.

Journal of Research in Reading,vol.17,no.2,99-107.Dweck, Carol S. (2002) Messages that motivate: how praise molds students’ beliefs, motivation, and

performance(insurprisingways).In:JoshuaAronson(Ed.).Improving academic achievement. Impact

of psychological factors on education,37-59.Amsterdam[etc.]:AcademicPress.EastlundGromko,JoyceandSmithPoorman,Allison.(1998)Theeffectofmusictrainingonpreschoolers’

spatial-temporaltaskperformance.Journal of Research in Music Education,vol.46,no.2,173-181.Elbert, Thomas, Pantev, Christo, Wienbruch, Christian, Rockstroh Brigitte and Taub, Edward. (1995)

Increasedcorticalrepresentationofthefingersofthelefthandinstringplayers.Science,vol.270,no5234,305-307.

Elliot,DavidJ.(1991).Musicasknowledge.Journal of Aesthetic Education,vol.25,no.3,21-40.Ericsson,KarlA.(1988)Analysisofmemoryperformanceintermsofmemoryskill.In:RobertJ.Sternberg

(ed).Advances in the psychology of human intelligence;vol.4,137-177.Hillsdale,NewJersey:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.

Ericsson, Karl A. (1996) The acquisition of expert performance. In. Karl A. Ericsson (ed.). The Road to

Excellence. The acquisition of Expert Performance in the Arts and Sciences, Sports, and Games,1-50.Mahwah,NewJersey:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates,Publishers.

Ericsson,KarlA. (1997)Deliberatepracticeandtheacquisitionofexpertperformance:anoverview. In:HaraldJørgensenandAndreasC.Lehmann(Eds.).Does practice make perfect? Current theory and

research on instrumental music practice,9-51.Oslo:Norgesmusikkhøgskole.Ericsson,KarlA.,Tesch-Römer,CandKrampe,RalfTh.(1991)BiographienundAlltagvonSpitzenmusikern,

Musikpädagogische Forschung, bd. 12: Musiklehrer. Berug, Berufsfeld, Berufsverlauf, 175-188.Essen:DieBlaueEuleVerlag.

Ericsson, Karl A., Krampe, Ralf Th. and Tesch-Römer, C. (1993) The role of deliberate practice in theacquisitionofexpertperformance.Psychological Review,vol.100,no.3,363-406.

Flavell, John H. (1963) The developmental Psychology of Jean Piaget. New York [etc.]: D. van NostrandCompany.

Flohr,JohnW.(1999)Recentbrainresearchonyoungchildren.Teaching Music,vol.6,no.6,41-45.Flohr,JohnW.(2004)Physiologicalmusicresearchwithyoungchildren:implicationsforpublicpolicyand

parenting.Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Music Perception & Cognition.Adelaide,Australia:CausalProductions.

Flohr, John W. and Hodges, Donald A. (2002) Music and neuroscience. In: Richard Colwell and CarolRichardson(Eds.).The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning,991-1008. (Oxford[etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress.

90 91

Flohr,JohnW.andMiller,DanielC.(2000)EEGstudieswithyoungchildren. Music Educators´ Journal,vol.87,no.2,28-34.

Freeman,Joan.(1991)Gifted Children Growing Up.London:CassellEducationalLimited.Gagné,Françoys.(1991)NatureorNurture?ARe-examinationofSlobodaandHowe’s(1991)InterviewStudy

onTalentDevelopmentinMusic.Psychology of Music,vol.27,38-51.Gembris,HeinerandDavidson,JaneW.(2002)Environmentalinfluences.In:RichardParncuttandGary

E.McPherson(eds.)The Science and Psychology of Music Performance. Creative strategies for teaching

and learning,17-30.Oxford[etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress.Gembris, Heiner. (2003) Musische Bildung und Persönlichkeitsentwicklung. Vortrag zur Veranstal-tung

“Kultur macht schlau – musische Erziehung in den Schule stärken”.LandtagDüsseldorf,1.Juli2003.Green, Lucy. (2003) How popular musicians learn: a way ahead for music education. Aldershot [etc.]:

Ashgate.Gruson,LindaM.(1988)Rehearsalskillandmusicalcompetence:doespracticemakeperfect?In:John

A. Sloboda (Ed.). Generative processes in music. The psychology of performance, improvisation and

composition,91-112.Oxford:ClarendonPress.Hallam,Susan.(1998)Thepredictorsofachievementanddropoutinmusicaltuition.Psychology of Music

vol.26,116-132.Hallet,Mark.(1995)Theplasticbrain.Annals of Neurology,vol.38,no.1,4-5.Hargreaves,DavidJ.(1985)The developmental psychology of music.Cambridge[etc.]:CambridgeUniversity

Press.Hargreaves,DavidJ.(1996)Thedevelopmentofartisticandmusicalcompetence.In:IrèneDeliègeand

John Sloboda (eds.). Musical beginnings. Origins and development of musical competence, 145-170.Oxford[etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress.

Hetland,L.(2000)Learningtomakemusicenhancespatialreasoning.Journal of Aesthetic education,vol.34,no.3/4,179-238.

Hodges,DonaldA.(2000)Implicationsofmusicandbrainresearch.Music Educators’ Journal,vol.87,no.2,17-22.

Hodges,DonaldA.(2006)Themusicalbrain.In:GaryE.McPherson(Ed.)The Child as Musician. A handbook

of musical development,51-68.Oxford[etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress.Howe,MichaelJ.A.andSlobodaJohnA.(1991a)Youngmusicians’accountofsignificantinfluencesintheir

earlylives.1.Thefamilyandthemusicalbackground.British Journal of Music Education,vol.8,no.3,39-52.

Howe,MichaelJ.A.andSlobodaJohnA.(1991b)Youngmusicians’accountofsignificantinfluencesintheirearlylives.2.Teachers,practisingandperforming.British Journal of Music Education,vol.8,no.3,53-63.

Howe, Michael J.A., Davidson, Jane and Sloboda, John A. (1998) Innate talents: reality or Myth? The

Behavioral and Brain Sciences,vol.21,no.3,399-442.Jørgensen,Harald.(2001)Instrumentallearning:isanearlystartakeytosuccess?,British Journal of Music

Education;vol.18,no.3,227-239.Kemp,A.E.,&Mills,J.(2002)MusicalPotential.In:RichardParncuttandGaryE.McPherson(eds.)The

Science and Psychology of Music Performance. Creative strategies for teaching and learning,3-16.Oxford[etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress.

90 91

Koopman,C.(2005).Maaktmuziekslim?In:J.Herfs,R.vanderLei,E.Riksen&M.Rutten(eds.)Muziek

leren: Handboek voor het basis- en speciaal onderwijs,19-35.Assen:VanGorcum.Krampe,RalfTh.andEricsson,KarlA.(1995)Deliberatepracticeandelitemusicalperformance.In:John

Rink (ed.) The Practice of Performance. Studies in Musical Interpretation, 84-102. Cambridge [etc.]:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Krampe, Ralf Th. And Ericsson, Karl A. (1996) Maintaining excellence: deliberate practice and eliteperformanceinyoungandolderPianists.Journal of Experimental Psychology,vol.125,no.4,331-359.

Lehmann,AndreasC.andEricsson,KarlA.(1998)PreparationofaPublicPianoPerformance:TheRelationBetweenPracticeandPerformance.Musicæ Scientiæ,vol.II,no.1,67-94.

Lehmann,AndreasC.(2006)Historicalincreasesinexpertmusicperformanceskills.In:EckartAltenmüller,Mario Wiesendanger and Jürg Kesselring (Ed.). Music, Motor Control and the Brain. Oxford [etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress.

Lehmann,AndreasC.,Sloboda,JohnA.andWoody,RobertH.(2007)Psychology for Musicians.Oxford[etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress.

Leonhard,CharlesandHouse,RobertW.(1959)Foundations and Principles of Music Education.NewYork[etc.]:McGraw-HillBookCompany,Inc.

Lepper,MarkR.andWoolverton,Maria.(2002)Thewisdomofpractice:lessonslearnedfromthestudyof highly effective tutors. In: Joshua Aronson (Ed.). Improving academic achievement. Impact of

psychological factors on education,135-158.Amsterdam[etc.]:AcademicPress.Letland,Lois.(2000)Learningtomakemusicenhancesspatialreasoning.Journal of Aesthetic Education,

vol.34(2000),no.3-4,179-238.Lisboa, Tânia, Chaffin, Roger, Schiaroli, Adrienne G., Barrera, Abby. (2004) Investigating practice and

performance on the cello. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Music Perception &

Cognition.Adelaide,Australia:CausalProductions.MacMillan,Jenny.(2004)Learningthepiano:astudyofattitudestoparentalinvolvement.British Journal of

Music Education,vol.21,no.3,295-311.Manturzewska,Maria.(1990)Abiographicalstudyofthelife-spandevelopmentofprofessionalmusicians.

Psychology of Music,vol.18,112-139.Miklaszewski,Kacper.(1989)ACaseStudyofaPianistPreparingaMusicalPerformance.Psychology of

Music,vol.17,95-109.Münte, Thomas F., Altenmüller, Eckart and Jäncke, Lutz. (2002) The musicians’ brain as a model of

neuroplasticity.Nature Reviews; Neuroscience,vol.3,473-478.O’Neill,SusanA. (1997)TheRoleofPractice inchildren’searlymusicalperformanceachievement. In:

HaraldJørgensenandAndreasC.Lehmann(eds.).Does practice make perfect? Current theory and

research on instrumental music practice,53-70.Oslo:Norgesmusikhøgskole.Orsmond,GaelI.andMiller,LeonK.(1999)Cognitive,musicalandenvironmentalcorrelatesofearlymusic

instruction. Psychology of Music,vol.27,no1,18-37.Overy,Katie,Norton,AndreaC.,Cronin,KarlT.,Gaab,Nadine,Alsop,DaveC.,Winner,EllenandSchlaug,

Gottfried. (2004) Comparing rhythm and melody discrimination in young children using fMRI.Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Music Perception & Cognition.Adelaide,Australia:CausalProductions.

92 93

Pantev,Christo,Engelien,Almut,Candia,VictorandElbert,Thomas. (2001)Representationalcortex inmusicians:plasticalterations inresponsetomusicalpractice.Annals of the New York Academy of

Science,vol.930,300-314.Pascual-Leone, Alvaro. (2001) The brain that plays music and is changed by it. Annals of the New York

Academy of Sciences,vol.930,315-329.Phillips,KennethH.(1993)Astrongerrationaleformusiceducation.Music Educators’ Journal,vol.80,no.

2,17-20.Pitts,Stephanie. (2000)Reasonsto teachmusic:establishingaplace in thecontemporarycurriculum.

British Journal of Music Education,vol.17,no.1,33-42.Plantinga,JudyandTrainor,LaurelJ.(2004)Areinfantsrelativeorabsolutepitchpossessors?Proceedings

of the 8th International Conference on Music Perception & Cognition. Adelaide, Australia: CausalProductions.

Rauschecker,JosefP.(2001)Corticalplasticityandmusic.Annals of the New York Academy of Science,vol.930,330-336.

Rauscher,FrancesH.andZupan,MaryAnne.(2000)Classroomkeyboardinstructionimproveskindergartenchildren’sspatial-temporalperformance:afieldexperiment.Early Childhood Research Quarterly,vol.15,no.2,215-228.

Rauscher,FrancesH.(2002)Mozartandthemind:Factualandfactualeffectsofmusicalenrichment.In:JoshuaAronson(Ed.).Improving academic achievement. Impact of psychological factors on education,267-278.Amsterdam[etc.]:AcademicPress.

Reimer,Bennet.(1999)Facingtheriskofthe“Mozarteffect”.Music Educators Journal,vol.86,no.1,37-43Seifert, Kelvin L. and Hoffnung, (1994) Robert J. Child and adolescent development. Boston; Toronto:

HoughtonMifflinCompany.Schellenberg,GlennE.(2004)MusiclessonsenhanceIQ.Psychological Science,vol.15,no.8,511-514.Schellenberg,GlennE.(2006)Exposuretomusic:thetruthabouttheconsequences.In:GaryE.McPherson

(Ed.)The Child as Musician. A handbook of musical development,111-134.Oxford[etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress.

Schlaug, Gottfried, Jäncke, Lutz, Huang, Yanxiong, Staiger, Jochen F. and Steinmetz, Helmuth. (1995a)Increasedcorpuscallosumsizeinmusicians.Neuropsychologia,vol.33,no.8,1047-1055.

Schlaug, Gottfried, Jäncke, Lutz, Huang, Yanxiong, Steinmetz, Helmuth. (1995b) In vivo evidence ofstructuralbrainasymmetryinmusicians.Science,vol.267,no.5198,699-701.

Schlaug,Gottfried(2006)Brainstructuresofmusicians.In:EckartAltenmüller,MarioWiesendangerandJürgKesselring(Ed.).Music, Motor Control and the Brain.Oxford[etc.]:OxfordUniversityPress.

Schumacher,Ralph(2006)Einleitung.In:Bildungsforschung Bank 18. Macht Mozart Schlau? Die Förderung

kognitiver Kompetenzen durch Musik.Berlin:BundesministeriumfürBildungundForschung.Simonton, Dean K. (1991) Emergence and Realization of Genius: The Lives and Works of 120 Classical

Composers.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,vol.61,no.5,829-840.Skinner,EllenA.andBelmont,MichaelJ.(1993)Motivationintheclassroom:reciprocaleffectsofteacher

behaviorandstudentengagementacrosstheschoolyear.Journal of Educational Psychology,vol.85,no.4,571-581.

92 93

Sloboda,JohnA.(1990)Musicalexcellence–howdoesitdevelop?In:MichaelJ.A.Howe(Ed.).Encouraging

the development of exceptional skills and talents,165-178.Leicester:BritishPsychologicalSociety.Sloboda,JohnA.(1991)Musicalexpertise.In:K.AndersEricssonandJacquiSmith(Eds.).Toward a general

theory of expertise.Prospectsandlimits,153-171.NewYork[etc.]:CambridgeUniversityPress.Sloboda,JohnA.(1999)Music–Wherecognitionandemotionmeet.The Psychologist,vol.12,no.9,450-

455.Sloboda,JohnA.(2000)Individualdifferencesinmusicperformance.Trends in cognitive sciences,vol.4,no.

10,397-403.Sloboda,JohnA.,Davidson,JaneW.,Howe,MichaelJ.A.andMoore,DerekG.(1996)Theroleofpracticein

thedevelopmentofperformingmusicians.British Journal of Psychology.vol.87,287-309.Sloboda,JohnA.andHowe,MichaelJ.A.(1991)DevelopmentofMusicalExcellence:Aninterviewstudy.

Psychology of Music,vol.19,3-21.Sloboda, John A. and Howe, Michael J.A. (1999) Musical Talent and Individual Differences in Musical

Achievement:AReplytoGagné(1999).Psychology of Music,vol.27,52-53.Smit,LeoM.E.(196)Kinderneurologie(moduleNeuropedagogiek).VakgroepPedagogischeWetenschappen,

UniversiteitvanAmsterdam.Sosniak,LaurenA.(1985)Learningtobeaconcertpianist.In:BenjaminS.Bloom(Ed).Developing talent in

young people,19-67.NewYork:BallantineBooks.Sosniak,LaurenA.(1985)Phasesoflearning.In:BenjaminS.Bloom(Ed.).Developing talent in young people,

409-438.NewYork:BallantineBooks.Sosniak,LaurenA.(1990)TheTortoise,theHare,andtheDevelopmentofTalent.In:MichaelJ.A.Howe

(ed.).Encouraging the Development of Exceptional Skills and Talent,Leicester:BritishPsychologicalSociety.

Stollery,PeteandMcPhee,AlastairD.(2002)Someperspectivesonmusicalgiftandmusicalintelligence.British Journal of Music Education,vol.19,no.1,89-102.

Swanwick, Keith. (1994) Musical Knowledge. Intuition, analysis and music education. London; New York:Routledge.

Takeuchi,AnnieH.andHulse,StewartH.(1993)AbsolutePitch.Psychological Bulletin,vol.113,no.2,345-361.

Taylor,Clara.(2001)These Music Exams.London:TheAssociatedBoardoftheRoyalSchoolsofMusic(firstedition1998).

Ter Bogt, Tom. (2003) Tijd onthult alles…popmuziek, ontwikkeling, carrières. Amsterdam: Vossius-persUniversiteitvanAmsterdam.

Vygotsky, Lev Semyonovich. (1978) Mind in Society. The development of higher psychological processes.

(Edited by M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner and E. Souberman). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard

University Press.

94 95

aPPendiCes

94 95

aPPendix a the associated Board music examinations

IntheUnitedKingdomthefourRoyalCollegesofMusichaveestablishedacharitablecompanyforthebenefitofmusiceducationwhichiscalledtheAssociatedBoardortheRoyalschoolsofMusic.ThemainactivityoftheBoardistheoperationofanauthoritativeandinternationallyrecognisedsystemofexamsandassessments.Theaimofthissystemistoencourageandmotivateinstrumentalistsandsingersbyprovidingthemgoalsandthepossibilitytomeasureimprovement.ThereareeightGradesofexaminationwithGrade1beingtheeasiestandGrade8themostdifficult.EveryonecanenterthesysteminanyGrade,irrespectiveofageorhavingtakenapreviousGrade.ThereareGradesformanyinstrumentsandsinging(calledpracticalgrades),solojazz,theoryandpractical musicianship. Before entering practical Grade 6 or above, solo jazz, theory or practicalmusicianshipGrade5(orabove)mustbepassed.BeforeenteringGrade1itispossibletodoapreptest,whichisapreparationfortheGrade1examination.Theexamsaretakenbyexaminerswhoarerespectedmusiciansfromeverybranchoftheprofession.Beforebeingallowedassessingstudentsthemselves,theexaminerhastofollowanindividualtrainingofaweekendandafivedayperiod.OnthefifthdaytheexaminerhastotakeexamsobservedbytheChiefExaminer.Areadingpanelreadstheexamformstomaintainthequalityoftheexaminer,andseminarsandtrainingsareofferedfrequently(Taylor2001).

96 97

aPPendix B

information about several methods to study the brain

eegElectroencephalogram(EEG)measuresthesmallamountsofelectricitywhichisproducedbybraincellsoveracertainperiodoftime.Thisisdonebyplacingseveralelectrodesonasubject’sskull.EEGresearchprovidesfourtypesofdata:frequency(Herz),amplitude(microvolts),formanddistribution.Thefrequencyismostoftenusedtosetadiagnoseorforotherresearchends.OriginallyEEGwasusedtostudydifferentlevelsofarousalinaperson,butnowadaysitisalsousedtostudycognitiveprocessesingeneralandmusicprocessingspecifically.

mriMagneticResonanceImaging(MRI)isusuallyemployedformedicaldiagnostics,butitappearedalsoveryusefultogaininsightinthenormaldevelopmentofthehumanbrain.MRIproducesdetailedpicturesofanyinternalpartofthebody,notjustthebrain.MRIdoesnotprovideinformationaboutfunctionsofbodyparts.The functional MRI (fMRI) is used to gain information about changes in the volume, flow oroxygenationthathappenswhenanindividualperformsacertaintask(Flohr1999).Thistechniquedoesgiveinformationaboutlocationàndfunction,andiscurrentlyusedtoprovidemoreinformationovermusicians’brains.Adisadvantageofthistechniqueisthatthesubjectshavetolie inaverynoisymachine,theMRIscanner.Themotionofthecamera’sinthescannerproducearhythmicalsoundthatcompeteswiththemusicalsoundsthesubjectshavetolistentoinresearchonmusic.Afterbetter(nonmagnetic)headphonesorothersolutionshavebeenfound,fMRIisprobablyisveryusefulinstrumentinstudyingtheinfluenceofmusiconthebrain(FlohrandHodges(2002).Overyetal. (2004)describeamannerwhich limits thenoiseof theMRIscannerandavoidsanyinterferencewiththeauditorystimuli.Theyusedasparsetemporalsamplingtechniquewithclusteredvolumeacquisition.Inthiswaytheycouldtakeadvantageofthenaturaldelayinthecerebrovascularresponsetoneuralactivity.

petUsuallythistechnique,likeMRI,isusedtodiagnosesomeonewhenheorsheisill,butitcanalsobeusedforresearch.Positronemissiontomography(PET)helpsresearcherstovisualizefinedetailsofthebrain.BesidesthatPETiscapableofdeterminingtheactivitylevelsthatareoccurringinvariousbrainareas(Flohr1999).Togetthisinformationfromthebrain,radioactivelytaggedoxygen,waterorglucoseisinhaledorinjectedintrothebloodstream.ThesubjectisthenaskedtoperformcertaintaskswhilePETscansdetectbrainmetabolismorregionalcerebralbloodflow.Itisalsopossibletoidentityarea’sthataremostactiveduringthetasksbysubtractingtheactivationpatternsofone

96 97

taskfromanother.Inthiswayitisalsopossibletoseewhatbrainareasarelessactiveduringcertaintaskswhichcanbeveryusefulinformation.AdisadvantagefromPETisthatitonlygivesinformationaboutfunctionandnotaboutthelocation.ThatiswhyPETisoftenusedtogetherwithMRIdata.Thiscombinationgivesinformationaboutwhatishappeningwereinthebrain(FlohrandHodges2002).AccordingtoFlohr(1999)anotherdisadvantageofPETisthatitrequirestheinjectionofwater,oxygenandglucose.Parentsarenotverywillingtogiveresearcherspermissiontodoconsentforthiswhenitisforresearchendsandnottocuretheirchild.

Association Européenne des Conservatoires,Académies de Musique et Musikhochschulen (AEC)PO Box 805 NL-3500AV Utrecht The Netherlands

Tel +31.302361242 Fax +31.302361290Email aecinfo@aecinfo.org Website www.aecinfo.org

AEC PUB

LICATION

s 2007