choice activity period in preschool. She reported that the songs had very clear organizational patterns, unlike adult patterns; they generally had a restricted range of pitch intervals but with distinct brief melodies. Veldhuis further explored the situations in which singing occurred. She found that the children's singing was stimulated by objects, such as musical instruments, and by environmental sounds. Singing was found to often spread through "vocal contagion". Importantly, Veldhuis noted that singing had clear social functions (e.g., communication and cooperation) at this age.(11)
Other detailed observations of naturalistic behavior have documented the spontaneity of singing and other music making in young children. For example, Miller studied three to five year olds in a preschool setting and found that they freely engage in exploring and manipulating melodic and nonmelodic instruments, create songs and imitate rhythms by bodily movements. The children chant and sing to recorded music, without specific instruction or encouragement.(12)
In addition to the systematic description of childsong, a few researchers have also asked whether singing in children has other effects. Positive findings have been reported. For example, ten weeks of group musical activities including singing are reported to increase scores on tests of vocabulary and language in two to five year old developmentally delayed children.(13)
Kalmar reported several positive effects of singing in normal children in a long term study.(14) She examined the effects of the Kodaly method of singing instruction (involving the accompaniment of music with rhythmic movements and the verbal or physical representation of songs) on several measures. Three year olds were assigned either to the experimental group, which received twice-weekly special singing lessons over a three year period, or to the control group, which attended only regular nursery school programs. The experimental group showed greater improvement than the control group on measures of motor development (particularly coordination), abstract conceptual thinking, play improvisation, originality, and verbal abilities. There were no differences in drawing ability or overall IQ between the two groups. The findings both document the potential benefits of singing education on cognitive and motor development and also show that measurable developmental benefits need not involved IQ scores. While these findings are quite provocative, causal attribution to singing per se would require a control group that also received enriched experience of a different type. One would hope for follow-up studies.
In summary, while no one would claim that singing in animals is the same as singing in humans, nonetheless animal song has many of the characteristics of human song. And it may be that song is related to the evolution of speech. Observations of the spontaneous behavior of infants and children show that singing is present early in life, exhibits regular developmental stages and serves bio-social roles. Thus, singing may be a biological imperative with both individual and group functions. Quite apart from issues of its biological bases, singing appears capable of promoting several cognitive processes and even motor coordination. But whether or not the benefits prove to be caused exclusively by singing instruction, most parents and teachers would be pleased to have any means of facilitating the mental and physical development of infants and young children. Thus, Kalmar's findings should not be ignored. Additional focused research and application are certainly warranted.
It is fascinating and particularly instructive that infants and children readily make use of the one musical instrument with which they come "equipped", their voices. Perhaps parents, other caregivers and indeed all adults should listen to them more closely, encouraging singing as much as we encourage language. Then the apparently natural activity and desire of children to sing could be used for their own benefit, both directly musical and indirectly to ot