Failure, neuroscience and success: Differentiating the pedagogies of music technology from electroacoustic composition

Christopher J KEYES*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Although the pedagogy of music technology more closely resembles that of other academic subjects, the teaching of electroacoustic composition involves a significant degree of creativity, and thus relies on different creativity-specific parts of the brain and memory systems (Lehmann 2007). This paper reviews recent neuroscientific research that may assist differentiation between effective pedagogical approaches of these two subjects where knowledge is stored in separate, discrete and sometimes competing long-term memory locations (Cotterill 2001). It argues that, because of these differences, the learning of music technology and electroacoustic composition is best kept separate, at least in the beginning stages. These points are underscored by an example of a demonstrably failed pedagogical model for teaching electroacoustic composition contrasted with a subsequent highly successful model employed in the same university music programme; an experience that may translate well to other learning environments.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)190-200
Number of pages11
JournalOrganised Sound
Volume18
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2013

Scopus Subject Areas

  • Music
  • Computer Science Applications

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Failure, neuroscience and success: Differentiating the pedagogies of music technology from electroacoustic composition'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this