Riding the train of thought initiated by Will Richardson regarding sea change and What the Future Holds (?), I too got the shivers recently reading about a new interface design for composing music.
Reactable’s website describes their design as a “multi-user electro-acoustic music instrument with a tabletop tangible user interface. Several simultaneous performers share complete control over the instrument by moving physical artefacts on the table surface and constructing different audio topologies in a kind of tangible modular synthesizer or graspable flow-controlled programming language.”
Their instrument is intended to be
- collaborative: several performers (locally or remotely)
- intuitive: zero manual, zero instructions
- sonically challenging and interesting
- learnable and masterable (even for children)
- suitable for novices (installations) and advanced electronic musicians (concerts)
Similar to screen technology the reactable’s tangible user interface allows a person to interact with digital information through a physical environment; it makes visible the processes associated with shaping and controlling wave forms that characterize the musical notes we hear. A colleague of mine refers to this type of design as “transparent reality,” that is, making elements once hidden open and viewable. The reactable allows you to see how combinations of filters work together to affect the music that is produced. The feedback is visual, aural, and tactile which is quite similar to acoustic instruments. Yet the reactable allows you to see the waves and patterns that are conventionally quite difficult to see with the unaided eye. The visual feedback allows users to see each other’s connections as well as play off each other’s ideas and movements as they evolve. (Call it eye-jamming!)
So why does this excite me?
While the world is not a computer, computing is becoming more ubiquitous. However, the ways we have of interacting and controlling digital media is somewhat limited (type, type, type, click, scroll). Social and tangible computing represents the next big sea-change in how we interact with the digital world, yet it has been rather slow in coming. What really excites me is what such haptic devices trigger in my mind about educational change.
I love listening to and playing music. I know may people who say they would love to learn how to but were never able to find the time or motivation to do so. Imagine owning such a device like a reactable where you could select rhythms and musical samples without formal musical training and create your own compositions. And since the reactable is not like a word processor, you could compose music and literally play with others simultaneously (Think tabletop Garageband).
The reactable also triggered an idea in my head about educational reform: One of the most amazing educators I have ever met was my daughter’s middle school band director. His program starts with an introduction to instruments and basic instruction the summer before school begins. He sets a goal of a winter concert and works each day with this motley group of 11-12 year olds teaching them how to read music, how to play their instrument, how to play together, how to play in time and in tune, etc. -- So many subtle yet critical details. By December the concert goes off with a squeak and a bang while parents coo and giggle over renditions of Jingle Bells and Old Macdonald. By the time students reach age 14, they are playing complex arrangements by Claude Debussy, Aaron Copland, and Count Basie. I found myself absolutely mesmerized by how far these kids were able to progress within a relatively short amount of time.
The music program took time, effort, patience, and persistence by all people involved. I thought about the mathematics teacher, the science teacher, the reading and social studies teachers and wondered how they would feel about designing their courses similarly? Why couldn’t we design courses that had a teacher working with the same students for three years, where performance could be measured regularly and demonstrated publicly?
Similar to the notion of embodied interaction outlined in Paul Dourish’s Where the Action Is, tangible and social computing represent an opportunity to reconsider how we interact and participate with our environment. The same ideological shift needs to take place in our educational institutions. Instead of arguing how to recruit and retain teachers into an environment and working conditions that are broken and uninspiring, we need to change the environment, change the ways schools operate.
I’m not really sure what’s holding up this change? It’s not a technology issue. Policies can be rewritten and adjusted. So why do researchers and politicians only talk about a crisis in education rather than taking action? Is an atelier model too foreign, too cumbersome, too unrestrictive? What keeps us from changing or trying something different? Really?
“Becoming a force of nature doesn't mean that all of our aspirations must be "grand." First steps are often small, and initial visions that focus energy effectively often address immediate problems. What matters is engagement in the service of a larger purpose rather than lofty aspirations that paralyze action. Indeed, it's a dangerous trap to believe that we can pursue only "great visions."” -- From Senge, P., et al. (2005) Presence : An Exploration of Profound Change in People, Organizations, and Society. P. 138.
Photo credits:
reactable photo: at the exhibition by ben cerveny.
“Let the Music Play” by CraigOppy.
Christmas Concert by dgroth.
Keywords: atelier, change, collaboration, computing, educational reform, learning, meusic education, music, Paul Dourish, reactable, screen technology, social computing, tangible computing, teaching, transparent reality, ubiquitous computing, Will Richardson, YouTube
Comments
That kind of atelier approach would work beautifully with teaching writing, and, in fact, the research (and my experience) shows that kind of a teaching/learning environment is very powerful. But so is the weight of history and the status quo.
And thanks for linking to the definition of "haptic" - a lovely word!
I agree with Joan. This type of approach would be great in most classes, from art to the social sciences. I can only imagine what might result. I, too, have watched as my children have taken up music. I have a daughter who, in less than 6 months, is progressing beyond where anyone thought she would be. Her piano teacher does amazing things with the children she teaches. I have also watched what an incredible band teacher can do with a group of inexperienced children and the result is nothing short of miraculous. It makes one wonder what's holding back the water this time!
Kelly
As per usual I love what you wrote - and agree. Also with the first comment. I see these challenges, research and knowledge of 'other ways' of doing not being integrated and I wonder what is currently in our systems - I see this pattern as not limited to the education sector but a mirrored across all sectors - that reduces the impetus for such action?
Where I do derive hope is from the notion of 'and'. Perhaps is there were a way to give many people an experience of 'another way' and also have them see that it doesn't mean rejecting the past but rather having more ideas of better ways of doing then maybe there is a way for such change to happen.
I also am positive when I remember that human systems are made up of people - and the more of them there are open, accessing and exposed to other ways of thinking, communicating and acting the more opportunity there is for change.
A final note - people don't like to feel dumb so I imagine there has to be a way to make new programs fun and accessible for those who have been doing it the 'old' way.
wow - longer than I anticipated writing! Really glad there are people like you involved in spreading positive change. Hope you are well
natalie