Enacting teaching and learning in the interaction process: “Keys” for developing skills in piano lessons through four-hand improvisations

• Authors: Julien Laroche , Ilan Kaddouch
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Embodied mind theories underline the role of the body in the act of knowing. According to the enactive approach, we learn to perceive and to know through our bodily interactions with the world (Varela, Thompson & Rosch, 1991). However, such an approach remains incomplete as long as sociality is not taken into account (Froese & Di Paolo, 2009). Recently, an inter-enactive approach has accordingly been proposed. Social interactions are seen as processes of coordinated sense-making that emerge from the dynamics of the inter-action process itself (De Jaegher & Di Paolo, 2007). As learning mainly takes place in intersubjective contexts (e.g. as an effect of teaching), this approach is relevant to the issue of pedagogy. Teaching settings are a special case though: cognitive interactions are reciprocal but asymmetrically guided by the teacher. In this paper, the question of the relations between body and education is thus addressed from the point of view of the inter-enactive approach. To this end, we first sketch out the phenomenological and theoretical contours of embodied intersubjectivity and intersubjective embodiment. Then, we present an interactive pedagogical method for musical learning (free spontaneous four-hand improvisations in the context of the Kaddouch pedagogy) and discuss it using illustrative case studies. The teacher’s role appears to operate directly within the dynamics of the interaction process, a source of knowing and skill enaction for the learner

Keywords

EN

enaction; interaction; coordination; teaching; learning

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Journal of Pedagogy
• Year: 2014
• Volume: 5
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 24-47

Dates

published

2014-06-01

online

2014-07-10

Contributors

author

Julien Laroche

• Ph.D. Akoustic Arts 48, rue rené Clair 75018 Paris France

author

Ilan Kaddouch

• Akoustic Arts 48, rue rené Clair 75018 Paris France

References

• Auvray, M., Lenay, C., & Stewart, J. (2009). Perceptual interactions in a minimalist environment. New Ideas in Psychology, 27, 79-97.
• Barandiaran, X., Di Paolo, E. A., & Rohde, M. (2009). Defining agency: Individuality, normativity, asymmetry, and spatio-temporality in action. Adaptive Behavior, 17 (5), 367-386.[Crossref]
• Baron-Cohen, S. (1994). The mindreading system: New directions for research. Current Psychology of Cognition, 13, 724-750.
• Bernstein, N. (1967). The coordination and regulation of movements. London: Pergamon Press.
• Condon, W. S., & Sander, L. W. (1974). Neonate movement is synchronized with adult speech: Interactional participation and language acquisition. Science, 183, 99-101.
• Dale, R., Fusaroli, R., Duran, N., & Richardson, D. C. (2014). The self-organization of human interaction. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 59, 43-96.
• De Jaegher, H. (2006). Social interaction rhythm and participatory sense-making. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Sussex.
• De Jaegher, H. (2009). Social understanding through direct perception? Yes, by interacting. Consciousness and Cognition, 18 (2), 535-542.[Crossref]
• De Jaegher, H., & Di Paolo, E.A. (2007). Participatory sense-making: An enactive approach to social cognition. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 6 (4), 485-507.
• De Jaegher, H., Di Paolo, E.A., & Gallagher, S. (2010). Can social interaction constitute social cognition? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14 (10), 441 - 447.
• Di Paolo, E. A. (2005). Autopoiesis, adaptivity, teleology, agency. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 4, 97-125.
• Di Paolo, E. A. (2010). Overcoming autopoiesis: An enactive detour on the way from life to society. Advanced Series in Management, 6, 43-68.[Crossref]
• Feldman, R. (2007). Parent-infant synchrony and the construction of shared timing; physiological precursors, developmental outcomes, and risk conditions. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48 (3-4), 329-354.[Crossref]
• Froese, T., Virgo, N., & Izquierdo, E. (2007). Autonomy: a review and a reappraisal. In F. Almeida e Costa et al. (Eds.), Advances in Artificial Life: Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Artificial Life (pp. 455-464). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
• Froese, T., & Di Paolo, E. A. (2009). Sociality and the life-mind continuity thesis. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 8 (4), 439-463.
• Froese, T., & Fuchs, T. (2012). The extended body: a case study in the neurophenomenology of social interaction. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 11 (2), 205-235.
• Froese, T., & Gallagher, S. (2012). Getting interaction theory (IT) together: Integrating developmental, phenomenological, enactive, and dynamical approaches to social interaction. Interaction Studies, 13 (3), 436-468.[Crossref]
• Fuchs, T., & De Jaegher, H. (2009). Enactive intersubjectivity: Participatory sensemaking and mutual incorporation. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 8 (4), 465-486.
• Gallagher, S. (2001). The practice of mind: Theory, simulation or primary interaction? Journal of Consciousness Studies, 8, 83-108.
• Gallagher, S. (2008). Inference or interaction: Social cognition without precursors. Philosophical Explorations, 11 (3), 163-73.[Crossref]
• Gratier, M. (2003). Expressive timing and interactional synchrony between mothers and infants: Cultural similarities, cultural differences, and the immigration experience. Cognitive Development, 18, 553-554.
• Gratier, M. (2008). Les rythmes de l’intersubjectivité. Spirale, 4, 47-57.
• Gratier, M., & Apter-Danon, G. (2009). The musicality of belonging: Repetition and variation in mother-infant vocal interaction. In S. Malloch & C. Trevarthen (Eds.), Communicative musicality: narratives of expressive gesture and being human. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Gratier, M., & Magnier, J. (2012). Sense and synchrony: Infant communication and musical improvisation. Intermédialités: Histoire et Théorie des Arts, des Lettres et des Techniques, 19, 45-64.
• Hane, A. A., Feldstein, S., & Dernetz, V. H. (2003). The relation between coordinated interpersonal timing and maternal sensitivity with four-month-old infants. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32 (5), 525-539. [Crossref]
• Heidegger, M. (1927). Etre et temps. Trad. François Vezin. Paris: Gallimard.
• Hurley, S. (1998). Consciousness in action. London: Harvard University Press.
• Husserl, E. (1952). Idées directrices pour une phénoménologie et une philosophie phénoménologique pures. Tome 2: Recherches phénoménologiques pour la constitution. Trad. Escoubas, E. Paris: PUF.
• Jaffe, J., Beebe, B., Feldstein, S., Crown, C. L., & Jasnow, M. D. (2001). Rhythms of dialogue in infancy: Coordinated timing in development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 66 (2), i-149.
• Kaddouch, R., & Miravète, S. (2012). Des mimes et des murs. Paris: éditions Gruppen.
• Kaddouch, I., & Laroche, J. (2014). Trois études de cas d’improvisations. Gruppen, 8, 42-59.
• Kelso J. A. S. (1995). Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Kelso, J. A. S., & Engstrom, D. A. (2006). The complementary nature. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
• Kostrubiec, V., Zanone, P. G., Fuchs, A., & Kelso, J. S. (2012). Beyond the blank slate: Routes to learning new coordination patterns depend on the intrinsic dynamics of the learner - experimental evidence and theoretical model. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 6.
• Kelso, J. A. S. (1981). On the oscillatory basis of movement. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 18 (63), 9.
• Kelso J. A. S. (1995). Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Kelso, J. A. S. (2009). Coordination dynamics. In R. A. Meyers (Ed.), Encyclopedia of complexity and systems sciences (pp. 1537-1564). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
• Kelso, J. A. S., Dumas, G., & Tognoli, E. (2012). Outline of a general theory of behavior and brain coordination. Neural Networks, 37, 120-131.
• Kendon, A. (1970). Movement coordination in social interaction: Some examples described. Acta Psychologica, 32, 100-125.[PubMed]
• Large, E. W., & Jones, M. R. (1999). The dynamics of attending: How people track time- varying events. Psychological Review, 106 (1), 119.[Crossref]
• Laroche, J. (2013). Le processus d’interaction comme attracteur dans la coordination temporelle entre les personnes. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Metz.
• Lenay, C. (2010). “It’s so touching”: Emotional value in distal contact. International Journal of Design, 4 (2), 14-26.
• Lenay, C., Stewart, J., Rohde, M., & Amar, A. A. (2011). You never fail to surprise me: The hallmark of the other: Experimental study and simulations of perceptual crossing. Interaction Studies, 12 (3), 373-396.[Crossref]
• Lenay, C., & Stewart, J. (2012). Minimalist approach to perceptual interactions. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6.
• Malloch, S. N. (1999). Mothers and infants and communicative musicality. Musicae Scientiae. Special issue 1999-2000, 29-57.
• Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1987). The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Boston: Shambhala Publications.
• McGann, M. (2010). Perceptual Modalities: Modes of Presentation or Modes of Interaction? Journal of Consciousness Studies, 17 (1-2), p. 1-2.
• McGann, M., & De Jaegher, H. (2009). Self-other contingencies: Enacting social perception. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 8 (4), 417-437.
• Merleau-Ponty, M. (1945). Phénoménologie de la perception. Paris: Gallimard.
• Murray, L., & Trevarthen, C. (1985). Emotional regulations of interactions between two- month-olds and their mothers. In T. Field & N. A. Fox (Eds.), Social Perception in Infants, (pp. 177-197). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
• Morowitz, H. J. (1979). Energy Flow in Biology. Woodbridge : OxBow Press. Nijholt, A., Reidsma, D., van Welbergen, H., op den Akker, H. J. A., & Ruttkay, Z.
• M. (2008). Mutually coordinated anticipatory multimodal interaction. In Nonverbal features of human-human and human-machine interaction. Lecture notes in computer science, 5042, 73- 93. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
• Oullier, O., & Kelso, J. A. S. (2009). Social coordination from the perspective of coordination dynamics. In R. Meyers (Ed.) Encyclopedia of complexity and systems science (pp. 8198- 8212). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
• Richardson, D. C., Dale, R., & Shockley, K. (2008). Synchrony and swing in conversation: Coordination, temporal dynamics, and communication. In G. Knoblich (Ed.), Embodied communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Shannon, C., & Weaver, W. (1948). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana IL: University of Illinois Press.
• Strogatz, S. (2003). Sync: The emerging science of spontaneous order. New York: Hyperion.
• Thompson, E. (2005). Sensorimotor subjectivity and the enactive approach to experience. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 4 (4), 407-427.
• Thompson, E. (2007). Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Trevarthen, C. (1979). Communication and cooperation in early infancy: A description of primary intersubjectivity. In Margaret Bullowa (Ed.), Before speech: the beginning of interpersonal communication, Cambridge: CUP.
• Trevarthen, C. (1999). Musicality and the intrinsic motive pulse: Evidence from human psychobiology and infant communication. Musicae Scientiae, Special Issue 1999-2000, 155- 215.
• Trevarthen, C. (2011). What is it like to be a person who knows nothing? Defining the active intersubjective mind of a newborn human being. Infant and Child Development, 20 (1), 119- 135.[Crossref]
• Varela, F. J. (1988). Invitation aux sciences cognitives. Paris: Seuil.
• Varela, F. J. (1996). The specious present. In J. Petitot, F. J. Varela, B. J. Pachoud & M. Roy (Eds.), Naturalizing Phenomenology, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Varela, F. J. (1997). Patterns of life: Intertwining identity and cognition. Brain and cognition, 34 (1), 72-87.[Crossref]
• Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/jped-2014-0002