In: Kaivo Thomson, Timo Jaakkola & Jarmo Liukkonen (Eds.

) Promotion of Motor Skills in Sports and Physical Education University of Jyvskyl, Finland Department of Sport Sciences,Research Unit of Motor Skills.Publications 2/2006. Pp. 9-18.

WHAT IS MOTOR LEARNING? Timo Jrvilehto Faculty of Education and Kajaani University Consortium, University of Oulu, Finland timo.jarvilehto@oulu.fi SUMMARY It is argued, on the basis of organism-environment systems theory, that motor learning doesnt exist in the sense that it would be learning confined to the motor system only, and that it could be contrasted to other types of learning. Motor learning means learning of new acts, and each act consists of both motor and sensory constituents. Learning is a process that involves always the whole organism-environment system, leading to a new organization making new results of behavior possible. It is also stressed that all human learning has essentially a social character, developing in relations to other people, which forms the basis of motivation and self-esteem necessary for high-level performance. INTRODUCTION Motor learning is a term widely used in relation of learning of new skills, and gives the impression that motor learning is a specific form of learning. This may be seen in usual definitions of motor learning such as Motor learning is the process of improving the smoothness and accuracy of movements or A motor skill is a skill that regards the ability of an organism to utilize skeletal muscles effectively. Such definitions imply that human behavior may be divided in sensory and motor parts the latter one being the object of motor learning. However, we may ask what really is trained in motor learning situations. In fact, the object in the training a motor skill is not the ability to perform specific contractions of the muscles with associated movements of the limbs, but rather the accomplishment of certain behaviors of acts. A trainee trying to learn how to master the motor skill of jumping as far as possible is not really training the muscles of the body for specific movements, but he is rather trying to develop the ability to achieve a certain result, the maximal distance in jumping. This result may be achieved under different circumstances by different movements, and the same movement may have different significance depending on the situation. Thus, motor learning is not really motor, but the process of learning new acts for the achievement of specific results. An act, furthermore, always consists of a constellation of many components, only part of them being motor. In order to accomplish any act many other constituents are needed, belonging also to the sensory part of the nervous system.

From the point of view of the accomplishment of an act motor and sensory are only anatomical divisions that cannot be functionally separated. It is also interesting to note that both muscles and senses have, in fact, both afferent and efferent innervation, afferent for muscles in the form of Ia afferents, for example, and efferent for senses in the form of efferent fibers controlling the sensitivity of receptors (see e.g. Jrvilehto, 1999). TWO SYSTEMS OR ONE? The concept of motor learning is based on a functional motor- sensory dichotomy. Such a dichotomy is understandable if the theorizing starts with a primary organismenvironment dichotomy, in which organism and environment are regarded as two different systems in interaction (Fig.1).

System 1 Organism Subject Mental Representation Social

System 2 Environment Object Physical Stimuli Other people

Fig. 1. Organism and environment as two different systems. In this view motor means traffic from the organism to environment, whereas sensory means action from the environment to the organism. Such a division is based on our common sense intuition: here am I and outside me is located the environment. However, if we interested in learning of new acts we may ask if this kind of abstraction is useful after all. The theory of the organism-environment system (Jrvilehto, 1998a,b; 1999; 2000) starts with a postulate that most conceptual problems in psychology are due to the common sense abstraction of organism and environment as two separate systems. This primary dichotomy leads to many other dichotomies and controversies that can be solved only by changing this two systems starting point. No organism can act without an environment, and every act consists of elements belonging both to the organism and the environment. Thus, an act as a system should be, just from the beginning, treated and analyzed as an undivided whole. We dont have two systems in interaction, but just one system that is organized in relation to the result of behavior (Fig.2).

Fig. 2. The theory of the organism-environment system. Any act is accomplished by a system consisting of both organismic and environmental elements. The architecture of the organism-environment system is determined by the result of behavior, not by such anatomical divisions as motor-sensory, for example. It is also this system in which mental processes are realized, and in which learning takes place, not in parts of the system. Thus, on this basis, the following definitions of the basic concepts may be presented: Mental is a process in the organism-environment system, in which inner and outer cannot be separated. Psychological concepts refer always to the organization of the whole system involving both sensory and motor components. Perception and action, for example, are two sides of the same coin. Learning is a process of differentiation and widening of the organismenvironment system making new results possible. Sensory is not related to information processing from the environment, but to joining of the organism with environment Motor motion is not based on efferent signals, but on reorganization of the whole organism-environment system THERE IS NO SEPARATE MOTOR LEARNING On the basis of the theory of the organism-environment system, there is no motor learning that could be contrasted with sensory learning, for example. Learning is a process that involves always the whole organism-environment system, leading to a new organization making new results of behavior possible. Thus, it is also futile to try to find motor learning in the brain. From the psychological point of view, there is nothing motor in the motor cortex, as little as there is anything sensory in the sensory cortices. The units in the brain do not carry out psychological operations; the neurons are only parts of a larger system, in which psychological operations are accomplished. During learning there are, of course, changes in the

structure of the nervous system and in the functioning of neural units, but these changes are related to the achievement of new results, not to separate psychological functions. In the learning process the neurons form new action systems making new results possible. And in this process both motor and sensory components are always necessary. On this basis we may have also a new look on learning of motor skills: This process is not related to movements as such, but rather to formation of sensory-motor integration in the form of action systems for specific results, being the target of the training process. Such systems are formed when the trainee acts in the teaching program by carrying out movements related to the result, but partially such systems may be formed also without the movements. In the latter case we speak about mental training. This kind of training is not at all more mental than the former one (i.e. when actual movements are performed), but it is related to the formation of parts of the action systems necessary in the final accomplishment of the object of training. As all motor learning is directed towards the accomplishment of certain results, the process is essentially prospective, i.e. it cannot be regarded as response to certain stimuli, but rather as a self-organizing process for the expected ends. The subject is not waiting for certain stimuli in order to act, but it is rather his action which renders certain environment components useful in the achievement of the result. This also explains why in many performances amazing speeds of movement are possible. EXAMPLE: IS READING A SENSORY OR MOTOR PROCESS? As an example of sensory-motor integration we may look at such a skilled process as reading: Is reading a motor or sensory process? One could call it motor, because of the significance of eye movements and especially because the control of saccades is an essential component. However, from the traditional point of view, reading is conceived rather as a sensory process, as a process of transmission of information from the written text. However, from the present point of view, neither description is accurate. In our recent experiments (Holappa and Vierel, 2006) we studied the reading process by recording eye movement parameters, reading speed, and delay from fixation to uttered word with three different types of text: 1) normal (text written normally), 2) scrambled (txet wrttien in scrabmeld from, and 3) continuous (textwrittentogether). It was assumed that the main differences in studied parameters should appear with the scrambled text if reading is based on linear and hierarchical sensory processing of textual information.

Fig. 3. Saccade amplitudes and number of fixations with different types of text.

Fig. 3 shows some of the results. In contrast to the hypothesis, 1) and 2) did not significantly differ in any reading parameters, whereas marked differences were found with 3) in most parameters studied. It was also significant that the delay between fixation to a word and its uttering was very short, on the average about 600 ms, indicating that there is not even time for any complicated processing of textual information after the fixation. Furthermore, this delay was maximal with the continuous text. Such results support the interpretation of reading as process of anticipation of meaning, in which fixation to a word is not a start, but rather the end of the prospective process of generation of meaning. Thus, reading is not a sensory or motor process, but an integrated process for the achievement of results SOME GENERAL ASPECTS OF THE LEARNING PROCESS If learning is defined as differentiation and widening of the organism-environment system it is clear that learning cannot be sensory or motor, only, but the process of learning involves always many systemic constituents. Learning to master of a skill consists essentially of development of prospective organization of the organismenvironment system for skilled sequences of results, in which sensory and motor components are integrated.

It is also important to stress that from the point of view of the organism-environment theory human learning has essentially a social character and presupposes the existence of consciousness (see Jrvilehto, 2000). According to the organism-environment theory, consciousness develops in cooperation with other people; thus, human learning is a process exceeding the borders of the individual organism-environment systems. It is this larger organization in which the human learning is realized, and therefore all efficient learning presupposes the participation of both the teacher and the pupil (or the trainer and the trainee).

Fig. 4. The development of consciousness. Consciousness develops in a system that consists of several organism-environment systems directed towards achievement of common results. Communication is the tool for creating the system. From this it follows that the task of the trainer is not that of information transmission (teaching in the classical sense), but rather creation of the cooperative organization in which the learning resources of the trainee may be realized. An essential characteristic of this kind of process is the determination of the developmental possibilities of the trainee, and finding out his personal style in the process of achievement of the desired results in cooperation with the trainer. Coaching is not a process of transmission; it is rather a process of development of the pre-existing skills of the trainee in a larger organization consisting, in the beginning, of the trainer (and all other relevant people) and the trainee, but getting with continuing training more differentiated and narrow, until the trainee is able to achieve the results also without the immediate support of the associated people. Such a process was coined by Vygotski already in the beginning of the last century with the term zone of proximal development. However, according to the present view this development doesnt mean a shift from external to internal control of behavior, as implied by Vygotski, but rather as a process of development of the personal aspect of performance.

In conclusion, the development of mastering of motor skills is not a process of motor learning going on in the motor cortex of the trainee, for example, but rather a deeply social process directed towards creation of an integrative organization consisting of many participants. The brain is, of course, also an important aspect of the necessary conditions of such an organization, but the learning process is not confined to the brain only, but it presupposes also many other necessary components, such as the body, environmental possibilities, social relations, etc. It is also this larger organization, in which the motivational factors and the self-esteem develop --- mastering of the skill as a consequence of result-oriented training, and motivation and self-esteem on the basis of relations to other people --- making eventually the high-level performance possible. POSSIBLE RESEARCH PROBLEMS On the basis of the present theoretical account, the following central research problems may be formulated: What are the critical components in formation of prospective organization for results? Differences in prospective organization with different levels of mastering the skill. Developmental differences: skill development. Role of emotions (motivation) in creating the prospective organization. Prospective and relational organization in teams of players.

REFERENCES Jarvilehto T (1998a) The theory of the organism-environment system: I. Description of the theory. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 33, 321-334. URL: http://wwwedu.oulu.fi/homepage/tjarvile/orgenv1.pdf Jrvilehto T (1998b). The theory of the organism-environment system: II. Significance of nervous activity in the organism-environment system. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 33, 335-343. URL: http://wwwedu.oulu.fi/homepage/tjarvile/orgenv2.pdf Jarvilehto, T. (1999). The theory of the organism-environment system: III. Role of efferent influences on receptors in the formation of knowledge. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 34, 90-100. URL: http://wwwedu.oulu.fi/homepage/tjarvile/orgenv3.pdf Jarvilehto, T. (2000). The theory of the organism-environment system: IV. The problem of mental activity and

consciousness. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 35, 35-57. URL: http://wwwedu.oulu.fi/homepage/tjarvile/orgenv4.pdf Holappa, E. and Vierel, H. (2006) Miten lukeminen tapahtuu. V ertaileva tutkimus eri tekstityyppien yhteydest lukijan silmnliikkeisiin ja lukemisen kestoon. University of Oulu: Masters thesis.