An informative article in The New York Times (January 20, 2011) caught my eye. The title is “To Really Learn, Quit Studying and Take a Test,” reporting on a study that is detailed online at the journal, Science.
The gist of the study was this: Three groups of students were asked to read a passage of scientific information. One group re-read the material several times. Another group engaged in “concept mapping,” (a method I often use) in which diagrams, lines, notes, color-coding, etc., are created to help organize one’s thoughts. The final group took a test on the reading material, to discover how much recall they had with what they had just read.
One week later, each of the three groups was tested on the initial passage. To everyone’s surprise, the final group (those who had been given a written test after the reading) did much better on the test–about 50% better. In other words, the relatively passive exercise of simply reading was not as effective, nor was the more active approach of creating a visual “map” to identify the conceptual relationships.
The study actually was a bit more involved than what I describe. The Times article includes comments from several scientists (some of whom were not involved in this study), on how the mind seems to reorganize material through testing, making it easier to access in the future. “I think that learning is all about retrieving, all about reconstructing our knowledge,” said the lead author, Jeffrey Karpicke, a psychologist from Purdue. “I think that we’re tapping into something fundamental about how the mind works when we talk about retrieval.” I highly recommend that you find the newspaper article to learn more; some of you may want to study the entire article in Science. If you do that, please leave comments here for all of us.
For performers, I see several implications in this study. Actually, many of us already know some things to be true that are validated or explained by this study. (Yes, that’s a subtle way of saying, “I told you so.”)
First and foremost, the activity of performing is itself a major piece of the learning/growing process. Who among us does not recognize the value of rehearsal, dress rehearsal, “studio class,” preview performances, “taking it on the road” before the reviewed performances are given, etc.? In the practice room and in the studio, it is vital for the performer to gather his/her “performer energy” and make a performance–often at the end of a session, perhaps at the beginning of the session. Many of us who teach like to occasionally bring colleagues or other students into the lesson to hear what a student is doing, e.g. In reality, this is a sort of test for the student that gives him a chance to put some things together. Very often, one may find that she is actually more together than previously realized!
Every public performance–particularly those that we call Junior Recital or Senior Recital–is a means of learning and moving ahead. Those tests must not be mere “Look at me!” photo-op attempts to validate what has already been achieved. The artist must actively engage in each performance, so that retrieval can support the moving ahead/growing process.
Far too often, the immature student (even a chronologically-advanced artist!) seems to think that public performance is merely a vehicle to display accomplishment–an occasion to gain the approval of family, fellow students, the public, even God–eagerly depositing a dead mouse on the back doorstep to establish “top cat” status.
A primary benefit of performance is the strengthening of the performer’s relationship with the repertoire. That success empowers the next performance to be even more textured, more effective!