Thus, cursive writing has been considered an essential precursor for further academic success ( Fears and Lockman, 2018), and the skill is typically acquired during childhood in societies with a strong literacy tradition ( Kiefer et al., 2015). The skill of cursive writing is often used as a tool for learning ( Arnold et al., 2017), considering the depths of processing that note-taking by hand provides, even in the absence of a review of the notes ( Kiewra, 1985). Therefore, it is essential to further investigate the long-term implications for learning and how the processes of cursive writing, typewriting, and drawing are working in the brain within a developmental perspective.Ĭursive writing is a complex and central cultural skill ( Kersey and James, 2013 Kiefer et al., 2015), involving many brain systems and the integration of both motor and perceptual skills ( Vinci-Booher et al., 2016 Thibon et al., 2018). Due to contradictory results, it has been hard to achieve an explicit agreement, whether the technology serves to help or hinder student performance. Despite several studies supporting the benefits for learning when taking notes by hand compared to laptop note-taking (e.g., Longcamp et al., 2005 Smoker et al., 2009 James and Engelhardt, 2012 Mueller and Oppenheimer, 2014 Van der Meer and Van der Weel, 2017), it is still unclear how computer use impacts student productivity and learning ( Patterson and Patterson, 2017). We conclude that because of the benefits of sensory-motor integration due to the larger involvement of the senses as well as fine and precisely controlled hand movements when writing by hand and when drawing, it is vital to maintain both activities in a learning environment to facilitate and optimize learning.ĭigital devices are increasingly replacing traditional writing by hand ( Longcamp et al., 2006 Kiefer et al., 2015), and as both reading and writing are becoming more and more digitized at all levels of education, it is crucial to examine the long-term implications of this practice that are still largely unknown ( Mangen and Balsvik, 2016 Patterson and Patterson, 2017). We suggest that children, from an early age, must be exposed to handwriting and drawing activities in school to establish the neuronal oscillation patterns that are beneficial for learning. For 12-year-old children, the same activation patterns were found, but to a lesser extent. However, as this activity was desynchronized and differed from when writing by hand and drawing, its relation to learning remains unclear. When typewriting on a keyboard, we found event-related desynchronized activity in the theta range and, to a lesser extent, in the alpha range in parietal and central brain regions. When drawing, we found similar activation patterns in the parietal areas, in addition to event-related desynchronization in the alpha/beta range, suggesting both similarities but also slight differences in activation patterns when drawing and writing by hand. ![]() Existing literature suggests that such oscillatory neuronal activity in these particular brain areas is important for memory and for the encoding of new information and, therefore, provides the brain with optimal conditions for learning. For young adults, we found that when writing by hand using a digital pen on a touchscreen, brain areas in the parietal and central regions showed event-related synchronized activity in the theta range. Analyses of temporal spectral evolution (TSE, i.e., time-dependent amplitude changes) were performed on EEG data recorded with a 256-channel sensor array. ![]() High-density electroencephalogram (HD EEG) was used in 12 young adults and 12, 12-year-old children to study brain electrical activity as they were writing in cursive by hand, typewriting, or drawing visually presented words that were varying in difficulty. To write by hand, to type, or to draw – which of these strategies is the most efficient for optimal learning in the classroom? As digital devices are increasingly replacing traditional writing by hand, it is crucial to examine the long-term implications of this practice. Developmental Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |