Interactive technologies in the instrumental music classroom:

a case study with the Music Paint Machine.

Luc Nijs
IPEM, Ghent University, Belgium
Luc.Nijs@Ugent.be

Marc Leman
IPEM, Ghent University, Belgium
Marc.Leman@Ugent.be

Abstract
In this paper we describe a nine-month longitudinal study in which twelve
children (1st and 2nd grade) learned to play the clarinet. Six of the
children received instruction with an interactive music system, called the
Music Paint Machine. This educational technology allows a musician to
make a digital painting by playing music and by making various
movements on a coloured pressure mat. The aim of the system is to
support instrumental music teaching and learning by stimulating musical
creativity, by promoting an embodied understanding of music and by
supporting the development of an optimal musician-instrument
relationship.
The overall goal of the longitudinal study was (1) to integrate the Music
Paint Machine in instrumental music instruction in order to develop good
practices with the system and (2) to investigate the possible effect of
instruction with the system on the learning process.
The study adopted a non-equivalent control groups design with several
pre-tests and a post-test. To measure the effectiveness of instruction with
the system, children were administered the Primary and Intermediate
Measures of Music Audiation (Gordon, 1986) as pre- and post-test.
Furthermore, pre-tests were organised to map possible confounding
variables, such as personality, home musical environment, motor skills and
self-regulation skills. No statistically significant differences were found
between the control and intervention group.
Dealing with the complexity of a real-life educational setting and with the
requirements of the quasi-experimental design, this study has provided
insights on methodology (design, measures, analysis) in music
educational technology research. As such, it can contribute to the further
development of this branch of educational research.

1. Introduction
The emergence of new technologies has always led to new possibilities
for teaching and learning. In particular, the increasing computational
power and the embedded computing continuously change the way
we interact with computers and learn (Dourish, 2004). The traditional
desktop computing is increasingly complemented and possibly even
gradually replaced by a new breed of computational systems (iPads,
smartphones) in which mouse and keyboard are exchanged for other
types of sensors and controllers. Evidently, this offers possibilities for the
design of new educational technologies and applications.
In the domain of music education, an emerging trend is the
development of interactive systems that offer active ways of engaging
with music, using the multimodal nature of the musical experience as a
basis for visual, sonic and bodily interactions. Some of these systems
focus at instrumental teaching and learning. They monitor a musicians
playing and provide auditory and visual feedback on music and
movement (e.g. Larkin, Koerselman, Ong, & Ng, 2008; Ng, Larkin,
Koerselman & Ong, 2007; Brandmeyer, Hoppe, Sadakata, Timmers &
Desain, 2006; Howard, Welch, Brereton, Himonides, De Costa, Williams
& Howard, 2004; Welch, Himonides, Howard, & Brereton, 2004).
Interactive music systems are assumed to stimulate the musical
learning process (e.g. Pritchard and Woollard, 2010) for several reasons,
such as: the engagement of multimodal processing capabilities (e.g.
de Jong, 2010; Sweller, Van Merinboer & Paas, 1998), the use of

objective performance measurement (e.g. Hoppe, Brandmeyer,

Sadakata, Timmers, & Desain, 2006; Howard, et al., 2007), the
stimulation of student autonomy and self-regulation (Carneiro, Lefrere
& Steffens, 2011), the creation of a powerful learning environment (e.g.
Jonassen, Campbell & Davidson, 1994), and their appeal to the daily
life world of young people (e.g. Burnard, 2007; Folkestad, 2006). As
such, interactive music systems have the potential contribute to a
constructivist approach to instrumental teaching and learning. This
approach is embodied and extended in the sense that new interactive
technologies intervene with the multimodal aspects of perception and
action that underlay how to play a music instrument.

Clearly, the belief in a didactic potential of interactive music systems

needs to be substantiated on the basis of empirical studies. At this point
we believe a critical stance is needed in relation to feedback, use of
technologies, pedagogical model, and intervention studies. Due to the
stimulation of multiple senses, feedback systems may cause a
degrading of learning due to cognitive load (e.g. Sadakata, Hoppe,
Brandmeyer, Timmers, & Desain, 2008; Thorpe, 2002), dependency (e.g.
Ronsse, Puttemans, Coxon, Goble, Wagemans & Wenderoth, 2011;
Schmidt, 2008) and the stimulation of an internal focus (e.g. Wulf &
Lewthwaite, 2009). Innovative educational technologies may be used
for the sake of the technologies and at the cost of the pedagogical
goals. The pedagogical model may stick with the schoolish master-

apprentice model of traditional instrumental music teaching (Bowman,

2002; Hennessy, 2001; Lehmann, Sloboda, & Woody, 2007). Last but not
least, there is a lack of longitudinal interventions studies that show the
effectiveness in using interactive music systems for learning. Studies are
often based one-shot experiences, a limited number of participants
and a lack of statistical analysis that supports the findings. Therefore,
studies are needed that take these issues into account and that pave
the path towards full-blown intervention studies.

In this paper we address these issues on the basis of our work with the
Music Paint Machine, an interactive music system that translates the
combination of music and movement into a creative visualization, i.e.
a digital painting. To avoid as much as possible the above-mentioned
pitfalls, the design and implementation of the Music Paint Machine has
been embedded in a framework that addresses pedagogy,
technology and intervention (see Fig 1.1; see also Nijs, Moens, Lesaffre
& Leman, 2012a).

<<<<<<< INSERT NIJS_Fig1_1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 1.1. Overview of the research framework. The research unfolded
through the iteration between a pedagogical, a technological and
empirical component.

Goals at these three levels guided the iterative process according to

which the Music Paint Machine was designed and arrived at its current
state. Although our study does not realize a full-blown intervention
study, we believe that it contributes to that goal. In the following

sections we first shortly explain the system, then we report on our

intervention study with the Music Paint Machine.

2. The Music Paint Machine, a short introduction.

The Music Paint Machine (henceforth: MPM) is an interactive music
system that allows a musician to make a digital painting by playing
music and by making various movements on a pressure sensing
coloured mat. A detailed description is given elsewhere (Nijs et al,
2012a). Here we shortly describe the aims and features of the system.

2.1 Educational goals of the Music Paint Machine

Our overall objective is to enhance instrumental learning using the
MPM as a facilitator for creativity, understanding, and control.
Consequently, the MPM should invite learners to be playful with musical
parameters (e.g. Delige & Wiggins, 2006; Kratus, 1991) and enhance
the occurrence of an optimal experience (e.g. Addessi & Pachet,
2005; Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Woszczynski, Roth, & Segars, 2002). An
experimental study with the MPM has shown its potential to induce this
kind of experience (Nijs et al, 2012a, 2012b). In addition, we aim at
supporting an embodied understanding of music (e.g. Leman, 2007;
Bowman, 2004) by integrating body movement as an essential
component of musical expression and by providing a multimodal
experience in which body movement and music converge into a
common visual stimulus, i.e. the digital painting. The MPM invokes a

variety of non-instrumental movements and as such stimulates bodily

involvement. Based on the embodied music cognition paradigm
(Leman, 2007; Bowman, 2004), it is believed that this appeals to the
bodily basis of music learning. Finally, we aim at supporting the
development of an optimal relationship between musician and
musical instrument by using the combination of movement and music
to control the multimodal interaction. The design concept of the
system is based on a philosophical investigation of the musicianinstrument relationship (Nijs, Lesaffre & Leman, in press). A key
inspiration of the system is the notion of original motility and its
importance for (musical) perception (Merleau-Ponty, 1945). These
goals are reflected in the four basic features of the system.

2.2 Basic features of the Music Paint Machine

A first feature concerns the creative use of visual feedback. The system
visualizes in real-time parameters of the music that is being played as
well as how the musician moves while playing. For example, the system
can provide information on the degree to which intonation is steady
when dynamics changes (see figure 2.1).

<<<<<<< INSERT NIJS_Fig2_1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 2.1. The system shows changes in intonation when, as exemplified
in this figure, the musician plays crescendo and diminuendo.

However, the visualization of music and movement is more than mere

visual feedback on aspects of playing music. It invites users to

creatively use movement and music in order to obtain a personalized

outcome, namely the digital painting. Consequently, the visualization
can be considered a creative output that results from the expressive
intentions of the musician (see Fig. 2.2.).

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Fig2_2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 2.2. An example of a creative output of playing with the system

Therefore our visual feedback differs from most existing interactive

systems where visual feedback is most often in the form of symbolic
representations (see Fig. 2.3 for some examples).

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Fig2_3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 2.3. Some example of the kind of visual feedback that is used in
interactive music systems. Upper left: Seeing Sound (Ferguson, 2006) Upper right: Practice Space (Brandmeyer, Hoppe, Sadakata, et al.,
2006) Bottom left: WinsingAd (Howard, et al., 2007) Bottom right:
AMIR (Larkin, Koerselman, Ong, & Ng, 2008)

Instead the MPM provides an enactive-iconic representation of the

learners music and movement (Bruner, Oliver, & Greenfield, 1966).
A second feature concerns body movement as controller of the
system. This feature invites the learner to actively use the body
movements in order to generate a desired effect such as, for example,
drawing from right to left instead of drawing from left to right by
pointing left with the body. In this way, the system introduces a
variability of movement, the deployment of which is believed to
stimulate the development of body awareness and to increase

enactive - knowledge, i.e. knowing in and through the body

(Juntunen & Westerlund, 2001). This approach to the body is related to
the idea of differential learning (Schllhorn, 2000) and to the variability
of practice hypothesis (Schmidt, 1975). Using this approach, the system
goes beyond the corporeal dimension of merely instrumental gestures
(sound-producing and sound-facilitating; Jensenius, 2010).
A third feature concerns the adaptability to a variety of didactic
practices. The software of the MPM allows the design of all kinds of
practices to support different educational goals. For example, the
mapping from musical and movement parameters to visual
parameters can be changed. One educational goal might favour the
mapping of pitch to vertical position (e.g. matching melodic patterns),
while another educational goal might favour the mapping of pitch to
colour transparency (e.g. when the goal concerns intonation). In
addition, the range of the measured values (e.g. pitch, loudness) is
adaptable to the learners range of notes (see Figure 2.4) or loudness
(see Figure 2.5). At the same time, it allows challenging learners by
setting ranges that delicately exceed their ranges.

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Fig2_4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 2.4. The screen height of the Music Paint Machines visual output
can be adapted to the players tessitura (range of notes).

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Fig2_5 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 2.5. Ranges of in- and output can be controlled to fine-tune the
system to a player's skills

As such the system allows the teacher to create a learning context that
appeals to but also challenges the current skill level of the learner.
A fourth feature concerns the control of conditions for optimal
experience, using the features defined above. These conditions are: a
balance between skills and challenge, clear goals every step of the
way and unambiguous feedback (Cszicksentmihalyi, 1990).

3. Learning to play the clarinet: An intervention study with the

MPM.
In this section we describe a study with the MPM, in which 12 children
learned to play the clarinet during nine months. The goal of the study
was to develop good practices with the MPM in the classroom. In
addition, we wanted to test the effectiveness of instruction with the
system in supporting the musical learning process.

3.1 Methods
3.1.1. Participants
Twelve children (first and second grade, six boys and six girls) and one
teacher (the researcher in this study and first author of this paper)
participated. Seven children were grade one and five children were

grade two. Most of the childrens parents were highly educated. The
researcher-teacher received formal training in music performance and
music teaching. He was a clarinet, saxophone and ensemble teacher
for fourteen years.

3.1.2. Design
This study was conducted during nine months. In order to investigate
the possible effect of instruction with the MPM, a non-equivalent
control groups design was used. Six children were non-randomly
assigned to the intervention group and received instruction with the
support of the system. A timetable was constructed to schedule the
lessons of the children in such a way that the parents organizational
demands were met but at the same time age and grade of the
children were as equally as possible distributed (see Table 3.1).
Table 3.1. Assignment of the children to the control or treatment group
aimed at an equal distribution with regard to age and gender.

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Tab3_1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

All children were pre-tested (O) and post-tested (O). In Table 3.2, a
diagram of the experimental design is shown.

Table 3.2. Diagram of the experimental design of the study. Groups

were non-randomized (NR). The study used four measurements (O) of
music aptitude as dependent variable. In between the measurements,
children received instrumental music instruction. The treatment group
received instruction with the Music Paint Machine (X).

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Tab3_2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

It was hypothesized that instruction with the MPM (independent

variable) would enhance the development of tonal and rhythmic
discrimination skills and, as such, to the developmental tonal and
rhythmic aptitude (dependent variable) (Gordon, 1986).

3.1.3. Procedure
In this study, the researcher acted as teacher. The practical reason for
this decision concerned the difficulty to find a teacher who wanted to
work a whole year with the MPM. The substantive reason concerned
the unique position the teacher-researcher holds in order to gather,
interpret and use research-generated data about the different aspects
of teaching and learning (Regelski, 1994; Campbell, 2011).
Participants were recruited through a large-scale information
campaign in local schools. An information letter and a website were
provided with detailed information on the program, the experiment,
the enrolment procedures, practical matters (e.g. location, important
dates), the requirements (minimum attendance and participation in
data collection) to enrol for the program and the compensations

(refund of enrolment fee and reduction on the cost of the instrument)

participants would receive. There was no selection procedure. A
meeting was organized during which the necessary information was
provided so parents could make an informed decision on enrolling
their child for the program. All parents who enrolled their child signed
an informed consent.
Prior to the instruction, the parents and the children participated in a
number of pre-tests. Parents were administered three questionnaires in
which they reported on their childs self-regulation skills (Schwarzer,
Diehl, & Schmitz, 1999), home musical environment (in-house designed)
and personality (Mervielde & De Fruyt, 1999). The children participated
in two standardized tests. One test probed the childrens music
aptitude (Primary Measure of Music Audiation; Gordon, 1986); the
other tested the childrens motor skills (M-ABC-2; Henderson, Sugden, &
Barnett, 2007).
Lessons were given once a week for a period of 9 months, with the
exception of school holiday weeks. Children attended class in groups
of three and received instruction during one hour. The first two groups
received regular instruction; the second two groups received
instruction with the Music Paint Machine. The learning content for all
groups was kept the same as much as possible. Lessons were based on
an aural approach in which the children were guided from sound to
sign on the basis of a carefully designed learning path. The children

learned to play by ear, starting from well-known childrens song. Both

improvisation and composition were an integral part of the lessons.
Throughout the nine months of instruction, several variables were
repeatedly measured. First, parents were asked to keep a log of their
childs practice time per day and of the help they provided. Second,
at the end of each lesson, the children completed a questionnaire on
classroom experience. Third, every three months the children were
administered the music aptitude test (Gordon, 1986).

3.2 Results
3.2.1. Development of good practices
The weekly use of the Music Paint Machine has led to several good
practices with regard to the use of visual feedback and movement.
These practices can be categorized into free exploration, guided
exploration and direct instruction. Free exploration consisted of sessions
in which learners were completely free to make a digital painting.
Figure 3.1 shows some examples of digital paintings that resulted from
the free play sessions.

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Fig3_1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 3.1. Four examples of flashcards that were used in musical games
to develop musical skills and to stimulate musical creativity. Some
flashcards used Morse code to learn about note duration and rhythm
(top left), to develop childrens emotional expression (top right), to use

movement (bottom left) or to be creative with melodic contour

(bottom right).

Guided exploration was based on activities with game cards that

contained specific tasks with regard to different musical, movement
and visual parameters. In Figure 3.2, some examples of these game
cards are presented.

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Fig3_2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 3.2. Four examples of flashcards that were used in musical games
to develop musical skills and to stimulate musical creativity. Some
flashcards used Morse code to learn about note duration and rhythm
(top left), to develop childrens emotional expression (top right), to use
movement (bottom left) or to be creative with melodic contour. This
exercise could be done with or without the Music Paint Machine.

Direct instruction activities consisted of consecutive sessions in which

learning content was gradually built up based on carefully designed
practices with the system. Figures 3.3, 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 give some
examples.

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Fig3_3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 3.3. The painting of the MPM gives visual feedback on pitch
differences (a). In this example pitch is mapped to position on the
vertical axis, while duration is mapped to length on the horizontal axis.
Children can try to overwrite (b) or copy (c) tonal or rhythmic patterns.

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Fig3_4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 3.4. Painting duration & rhythm: an enactive basis for symbolic
representation. First students learn about long and short, then the learn
how to measure duration, then learn rhythmic patterns and, finally,
they learn about notation.

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Fig3_5 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 3.5. Playing scales with the Music Paint Machine. The split screen
allows comparing two paintings (e.g. visualization of scales) and finding
possible mismatches as an opportunity for learning. Here the mismatch
concerns the position of a semitone in a major scale. The visual pattern
of the second scale (Fmaj) differs from the original (Gmaj) while it
should be the same because of the specific sequence of tones and
semitones in a major scale. This mismatch was a motivation to learn a
new note (B).

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Fig3_6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Figure 3.5. Playing scales with the Music Paint Machine. Here, each
note of the scale is played as a whole note (4 beats). Using different
colours per two beats, this exercise adds movement to feel the
subdivision of the whole note in half notes.

3.2.2. Effectiveness of instruction with the system

The results of the PMMA pre-test show moderate scores in most groups.
In table 3.3 the mean percentile scores are presented.
Table 3.3. The mean scores and standard deviations of the PMMA pretest.

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Tab3_3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

An initial difference exists between the control group and the

treatment group, showing a moderately higher music aptitude for the
control group. This difference is larger with regard to the rhythmical
aptitude. Standard deviations of both the control and treatment
groups are rather large, indicating the heterogeneity of the group.
Clearly, Group A stands out with a high score (80th percentile or
above) for both tonal and rhythmical tests. The standard deviation of
this group was rather small in comparison to the other groups,
indicating the homogenous nature of this group. However, a MannWhitney U statistic did not reveal a significant difference between the
control and treatment group.
With regard to the development of the childrens music aptitude,
differences can be found between the control (ID = 1 to 6) and
intervention (ID = 7 to 12) groups. Table 3.4 shows the scores of both
PMMA and IMMA when categorized as low (1), average (2) or high (3).
Table 3.4. Scores of both the PMMA (regular) and IMMA (italic)
transformed into three categories: low score (1; 20th percentile or
lower), average score (2; between 20th and 80th percentile), high score
(3; 80th percentile or higher) (3).

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Tab3_4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

In the control group, two children were administered the IMMA already
from the second test and additionally the other children from the third
test on. The sixth child of the control group also took the IMMA in the

post-test. In the experimental group, three children were administered

the PMMA throughout the whole study, which indicates that they did
not reach the 80th percentile of the PMMA (Gordon, 1986). Two
children of the treatment group took the IMMA from the third test and
one in the post-test. These results also show that children with a high
score from the beginning, except for one child (ID=3), keep scoring
high in the next tests, regardless which test (PMMA or IMMA) has been
administered. Children with a low score in the pre-test show a different
result. Some children (ID = 4,6,12) have an increased score; some
children (ID = 8,10) show a more stabilized score. At the end of the nine
months, most children (75%) were administered the IMMA test.
Although scores of the PMMA and IMMA cannot be compared, the
shift from PMMA to IMMA indicates that development music aptitude
progressed. Three children (25%) were still administered the PMMA. The
mediocre scores of the three children (all part of the treatment group)
who were administered the PMMA throughout the whole study suggest
a rather low aptitude of these three children. Yet, the high standard
deviation has to be taken into account. One of the three children had
a high score (93) for tonal aptitude. Table 3.6 shows the mean and
standard deviations of the post-test.
Table 3.5. Mean and standard deviations of the post-test. Because
results of the PMMA and IMMA cannot be compared, scores are
differentiated.

<<<<<<< INSERT Nijs_Tab3_5 >>>>>>>>>>>>>

To investigate the influence of possible confounding variables, a

correlation analysis was performed between the different measures
and the P/IMMA scores. Findings indicated a positive correlation
between singing behaviour and results of the tonal pre-test test,
between the personality aspect perseverance and results of the tonal
pre-test, and between the personality aspect concentration and
scores on the rhythmic pre-test. A negative correlation was found
between the personality aspects anxiety and irritability and the
scores for the tonal pre-test. Due to the small sample size and the
mixture of PMMA and IMMA scores in the post-test, it was not possible
to perform a correlation analysis to investigate the relationship
between the potential confounding variables (e.g. HME, personality)
and the post-test.

4 Discussion and conclusion

In this study, a specific educational technology, the Music Paint
Machine (MPM), was integrated in instrumental music instruction. The
first aim of the study was to design good practices with the system.
The weekly lesson preparations and the experience of using the system
during instruction led to different practices (free exploration, guided
exploration, direct instruction) that were carefully designed in function

of specific learning goals. They were tested and refined throughout the
study.
The second aim of this study was to investigate whether instruction with
the system could positively influence the developmental music
aptitude of the children. It was hypothesized that providing instruction
with the MPM would contribute to the establishment of a rich musical
environment in which the development of music aptitude can be
stimulated. We used the PMMA and IMMA (Gordon, 1986) to measure
music aptitude. Although for most children a progress in the scores was
found, some childrens scores showed a fluctuating effect and one
childs score even degraded continuously. No significant differences
between the control and intervention group were found. However, in
line with a study by Tai (2010) results suggested that singing behaviour
has an effect on the scores of the PMMA. Results also suggested a
relationship between facets of personality (e.g. concentration,
perseverance) and the PMMA score. Personality has been linked
before to music aptitude, in particular to Cattells personality factor
intelligence (Schleuter, 1972). We believe that these results shed light
on the occurrence of variables that might influence the scores on the
aptitude test and as such urge caution with regard to the
interpretation of its results. Another point of attention with regard to the
use of these tests is the fact that results of the PMMA and IMMA cannot
be compared (Gordon, 1986). Because most students progressed
towards a PMMA score above the 80th percentile, they needed to do

the IMMA as post-test instead of the PMMA. As such and because of

the limited number of participants, it was not possible to perform a
correlation analysis to investigate the relationship between the
potential confounding variables (e.g. HME, personality) and the scores
for musical aptitude. Therefore, it remains inconclusive whether the
changes that occurred in the childrens scores are due to instruction
with the MPM. Further investigations are needed and the choice of the
dependent variable and the instrument to measure it needs to be
reconsidered.
Next to the limitations with regard to measuring the dependent
variable, this study had other limitations. One limitation concerned the
use of the system. Students were not able to use it at home. Arguably
this affected the results. Being able to use the system at home might
reinforce its influence on the development of music aptitude. A second
limitation was the limited number of participants (n = 12). This affected
statistical power. Nevertheless, we believe that working towards a fullblown intervention study was worth the effort. A third limitation
concerned the system itself, which is a proto-type and sometimes
didnt work as expected. However, besides these limitations, the
presented study has provided several insights and outcomes that are
important for further research.
First, conducting the study led to insights with regard to the focus of the
study (effectiveness of the technology) and to the adopted method
(design, measures). It became clear that it is necessary to focus on the

transformative impact of technology (see also: Beckstead, 2001;

Kiesler, 1992). It also became clear that the control group design has
many benefits in educational technology research but needs to be
conducted in function of investigating processes (transformative
impact) and not only products (amplicative impact).
Second, didactic practices have been designed that can be used to
conduct future experiments. These practices are further developed in
collaboration with other teachers through currently ongoing follow up
studies. The further development of the MPMs software will entail the
design of ready-to-use modules based on these practices.
Third, in this study video footage of all lessons (132 hrs) was made. A
follow up observational study will be conducted in order to
complement current data. This will allow studying how the integration
of an educational technology such as the MPM affects the different
components of instruction, i.e. student behaviour, teacher behaviour,
student-teacher interaction and materials (Kennel, 2002). It is expected
that different behavioural measures will also provide insights on the
results of the repeated measurers used in this study.

To conclude, this study investigated the integration of an educational

technology in a naturalistic instrumental music classroom setting.
Although we knew in advance that the limited amount of children
participating in this study (due to all kinds of practical concerns) could
not be considered to be representative for our statistical tests, we

believe that our study went a step further than the lab experiments that
are more commonly in this research domain. Dealing with the
complexity of a real-life educational setting and with the requirements
of the quasi-experimental design, this study has provided insights on
methodology (design, measures, analysis) in music educational
technology research. We believe that our approach holds a promising
potential to conduct ecologically valid music education intervention
studies.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work is part of the EmcoMetecca Project (Leman, 2007) supported by the Flemish
Government (http://www.ipem.ugent.be/EmcoMetecca). The authors wish to thank
their IPEM colleagues Ivan Schepers and drs. Bart Moens. Also many thanks to the
children and their parents for participating in this study.

References
Addessi, A. R., & Pachet, F. (2005). Experiments with a musical machine: musical style
replication in 3 to 5 year old children. British Journal of Music Education, 22(01), 21-46.
Beckstead, D. (2001). Will Technology Transform Music Education. Music Educators
Journal, 87(6), 44-49.
Bowman, W. D. (2002). Educating musically. In R. Colwell & C. Richardson (Eds.), The
new handbook of research on music teaching and learning (pp. 63-84). New York:
Oxford University Press.
Bowman, W. D. (2004). Cognition and the body: Perspectives from music education.
In L. Bresler (Ed.), Knowing Bodies, Moving Minds: Towards Embodied Teaching and
Learning (pp. 29). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Brandmeyer, A., Hoppe, D., Sadakata, M., Timmers, R., & Desain, P. (2006).
PracticeSpace: A platform for real-time visual feedback in music instruction. Paper
presented at the 9th International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition,
Bologna, Italy.
Bruner, J. S., Oliver, R. R., & Greenfield, P. M. (1966). Studies in cognitive growth. New
York: Wiley.
Burnard, P. (2007). Creativity and technology: Critical agents of change in the work
and lives of music teachers. In J. Finney & P. Burnard (Eds.), Music education with
digital technology (pp. 131-141). London: Continuum.
Carneiro, R., Lefrere, P.& Steffens, K. (Eds.) (2011). Self-regulated Learning in
Technology Enhanced Learning Environments: A European Review. Technology
Enhanced Learning, Vol. 5. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York:
Harper & Row.

de Jong, T. (2010). Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional

design: some food for thought. Instructional science, 38(2), 105-134.
Delige, I., & Wiggins, G. (2006). Musical creativity: multidisciplinary research in theory
and practice. New York: Psychology Press.
Dourish, P. (2004). Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction.
Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Folkestad, G. (2006). Formal and informal learning situations or practices vs formal
and informal ways of learning. British Journal of Music Education, 23(02), 135-145.
Gordon, E. E. (1986). Manual for the Primary Measures of Music Audiation: And, the
Intermediate Measures of Music Audiation. Chicago, IL: GIA Publications.
Hennessy, S. (2001). Research and development in music education. In C. Philpott &
C. Plummeridge (Eds.), Issues in music teaching (pp. 238-251). London: Routledge.
Hoppe, D., Brandmeyer, A., Sadakata, M., Timmers, R., & Desain, P. (2006). The effect
of real-time visual feedback on the training of expressive performance skills. Paper
presented at the 9th International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition
(ICMPC9).
Howard, D. M., Welch, G. F., Brereton, J., Himonides, E., DeCosta, M., Williams, J., &
Howard, A.W. (2004). WinSingad: A real-time display for the singing studio.
Logopedics Phonatrics Vocology, 29(3), 135-144.
Jensenius, A. R., Wanderley, M., Godoy, R., & Leman, M. (2010). Musical gestures:
concepts and methods in research. In R. Godoy & M. Leman (Eds.), Music, Gesture,
and the Formation of Embodied Meaning (pp. 12-35). New York: Routledge.
Jonassen, D. H., Campbell, J. P., & Davidson, M. E. (1994). Learning with media:
Restructuring the debate. Educational Technology, Research & Development, 42 (2),
31-39.
Juntunen, M., & Westerlund, H. (2001). Digging Dalcroze, or, Dissolving the MindBody
Dualism: philosophical and practical remarks on the musical body in action. Music
Education Research, 3(2), 203-214.

Kennell, R. (2002). Systematic research in studio instruction in music. In R. Colwell (Ed.),

The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning (pp. 243-256). New
York: Oxford University Press.
Kiesler, S. (1992). Talking, teaching, and learning in network groups: Lessons from
research. In A. Kaye (Ed.), NATO advanced workshop on collaborative learning
through computer conferencing (pp. 145-165). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Kratus, J. (1991). Growing with improvisation. Music Educators Journal, 78(4), 35-40.
Larkin, O., Koerselman, T., Ong, B., & Ng, K. (2008). Sonification of bowing features for
string instrument training. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on
Auditory Display, Paris, France.
Lehmann, A. C., Sloboda, J. A., & Woody, R. H. (2007). Psychology for musicians:
Understanding and acquiring the skills. New York: Oxford University Press.
Leman, M. (2007). Embodied music cognition and mediation technology. London:
The MIT Press.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1945). Phnomnologie de la perception. Paris, Edition Gallimard.
Mervielde, I., & De Fruyt, F. (1999). Construction of the Hierarchical Personality
Inventory for Children (HiPIC). Paper presented at the Eight European Conference on
Personality Psychology Tilburg.
Ng, K., Larkin, O., Koerselman, T., & Ong, B. (2007). i-Maestro gesture and posture
support: 3d motion data visualisation for music learning and playing. Paper presented
at the EVA 2007 London International Conference, London.
Nijs, L., Moens, B., Lesaffre, M., & Leman, M. (2012a). The Music Paint Machine:
Stimulating Self-monitoring Through the Generation of Creative Visual Output Using a
Technology-enhanced Learning Tool. Journal of New Music Research, 41(1), 79-101.
Nijs, L., Coussement, P., Moens, B., Amelynck, D., Lesaffre, M. & Leman, M. (2012b).
Interacting with the Music Paint Machine: relating the concepts of flow experience
and presence. Interacting with Computers, 24, pp. 237-250.

Pritchard, A., & Woollard, J. (2010). Psychology for the classroom: constructivism and
social learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
Regelski, T. A. (1994). Action research and critical theory: Empowering music teachers
to professionalize praxis. Bulletin of the council for research in music education(123),
63-89.
Ronsse, R., Puttemans, V., Coxon, J. P., Goble, D. J., Wagemans, J., Wenderoth, N., et
al. (2011). Motor Learning with Augmented Feedback: Modality-Dependent
Behavioral and Neural Consequences. Cerebral Cortex, 21(6), 1283-1294.
Sadakata, M., Hoppe, D., Brandmeyer, A., Timmers, R., & Desain, P. (2008). Real-time
visual feedback for learning to perform short rhythms with expressive variations in
timing and loudness. Journal of New Music Research, 37(3), 207-220.
Schleuter, S. L. (1972). An investigation of the interrelation of personality traits, musical
aptitude and musical achievement. In E. Gordon (Ed.), Experimental research in the
psychology of music: Studies in the psychology of music. Iowa City: University of Iowa
Press.
Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological
review, 82(4), 225.
Schmidt, R. A. (2008). Principles of practice for the development of skilled actions:
Implications for training and instruction in music. In A. Mornell (Ed.), Art in motion.
Musical and athletic motor learning and performance (pp. 41-67). Frankfurt am Main:
Peter Langer.
Schllhorn, W. (2000). Applications of systems dynamic principles to technique and
strength training. Acta Academiae Olympiquae Estoniae, 8, 67-85.
Schwarzer, R., Diehl, M., & Schmitz, G. (1999). Self-regulation scale. Retrieved from
http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~health/selfreg.htm on October, 28, 2006.
Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture
and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296.

Tai, T. C. (2010). The effect of violin, keyboard, and singing instruction on the spatial
ability and music aptitude of young children. Doctoral dissertation, University of
Maryland, Baltimore.
Thorpe, W. (2002). Visual feedback of acoustic voice features in singing training.
Paper presented at the 9th Australian Speech Science & Technology Conference,
Melbourne, Australia.
Welch, G. F., Himonides, E., Howard, D. M., & Brereton, J. (2004). VOXed: Technology
as a meaningful teaching aid in the singing studio. Paper presented at the
Conference on Interdisciplinary Musicology (CIM04 ), Graz, Austria.
Woszczynski, A., Roth, P., & Segars, A. (2002). Exploring the theoretical foundations of
playfulness in computer interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(4), 369-388.
Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2009). Attentional and motivational influences on motor
performance and learning. In A. Mornell (Ed.), Art in Motion: Musical and Athletic
Motor Learning and Performance (pp. 95-117). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.