Pre‐ to post‐intervention analyses indicated that only the ‘MusiMath’ group showed greater transfer to intervention‐trained and untrained fractions than the comparison group. Music and math were assessed before, immediately following, and 3‐ and 6‐months post‐intervention. In the math lessons, the students learned the analogy between musical durations and 1 2, 1 4, 1 8 fractions, but also practiced fractions other than 1 2, 1 4, 1 8. The music programs used a 4/4 time signature with whole, half, quarter and eighth notes. They worked toward adding musical notes to produce a number (fraction), and created addition/subtraction problems with musical notes. Students in both music programs learned to write musical notes and perform rhythmic patterns through clapping and drumming as part of their fraction lessons. The third class received regular fraction lessons (comparison group, n = 22).
Another class attended the ‘Academic Music’ acoustic program (Courey et al., Educ Stud Math 81:251, 2012) ( n = 25) which uses rhythm only. Three classes of fourth graders attended 12 lessons on fractions: One class attended the ‘MusiMath’ holistic program ( n = 30) focusing on rhythm within the melody. The current study examined the effect of two integrated intervention programs representing holistic versus acoustic approaches, on fraction knowledge. Controversy exists regarding transfer from musical training to math achievements. Music and mathematics require abstract thinking and using symbolic notations.
0 kommentar(er)
