To think music/art/drama etc should be optional at schools?

[LunaLoveg00d]

I have one child who is in his second year at secondary school (Scotland) who is so un-musical it is not true. He cannot carry a tune in a bucket, has zero interest in music, cannot differentiate between a tuba or a violin when he hears it and has never shown any interest in playing an instrument. We have just had his end of year report which on the whole is VERY positive apart from the music/art reports which basically say he is unhappy in the class, makes some effort but has a long way to go and his ability is very low. He is very down about the fact he has to endure 2 periods a week of compulsory music and another of art for another year before he can drop them. Drama he enjoys a bit more, but he has very little interest in it either.

i think the problem I have with these "talent" subjects is that unlike the traditional maths/english/science, they can only be taught to some extent. Even the best teachers in the world are not going to turn a child with zero artistic or musical talent into Picasso or Mozart. Or even someone who could pass an exam in it. On the flip side, good teachers can support and teach most children (obviously excluding some with SEN) to achieve passes in English, Maths, Science, History etc.

So would it not be better to leave the talent subjects at secondary to those who have ability in them?

I teach drama and I think it is essential for all children to do it at least until the end of KS3. I will continue to hold that opinion until someone can point me in the direction of a job or jobs which involve no need for interaction with other human beings. I do get the occasional parent who tells me they can't see the point, to which I explain that communication skills, team work, problem solving, pubic speaking and confidence are all learned and developed through drama.

1805

What happens to the gifted in music but rubbish at Maths?
That is an awful system, my dd would be so upset at that school.
She'd refuse to go. How do they get away with it?

NewLife - it's not all that uncommon. I've had students in "bottom" sets for years because the sets are based on maths or English, who excel at drama. I think mixed ability is better for my subject.

I also disagree. I loathed music and drama lessons at school but definitely learned something. Chi!dren should be exposed to as many subjects as possible so that they can experience a rich diversity of influences and interests and have a broad general knowledge.

What happens to the gifted in music but rubbish at Maths?

Or on the flip side, those who are excellent at Maths and poor at music? If Music sets in our school were done according to Maths ability, my son would be in the top set for that too. Along with the kids who play in orchestras and train at Scottish Opera in their spare time. That would make his lack of ability shine through even more.

As for "he can play a scale" - well yes, he can plonk out the notes and say C D E F G A B C. But as someone up thread said, that's not the same as playing with any rhythm or enjoyment of it. Or feeling or expression. He's really not learning anything from that, gaining any appreciation of music and all it's doing is hardening his resolve to drop Music as soon as he possibly can. It's the strong practical element I have a problem with.

I also think the people who are musical or artistic just don't "get" why people wouldn't enjoy music or art and are very evangelical about it all. It's like when people post they don't like chocolate or don't like to travel - I just can't get my head around that at all. Musical people can't understand why everyone's not like them.

Creativity can be expressed in so many different ways - my son enjoys creating and developing his own computer games using Scratch, or building all sorts of models with Lego. He reads voraciously and has a great imagination. He just doesn't like the "fine art" ethos of being asked to draw a pretty picture or still life.

Still don't accept I'm being unreasonable ;-) I just think that the emphasis on practical art and music has gone too far, and in the many lessons it took to force my reluctant son to produce a musical composition, he could have learned an awful lot more about musical genres, or composers, or history of music or something.

Why did you bother asking op? Your fixed mindset does you and your ds no favours, thanks for wasting everyone's time attempting to educate you to an alternative growth mindset. As I said upthread parents like you make educators jobs very difficult with your blinkered bigotry.

parents like you make educators jobs very difficult with your blinkered bigotry

It must be awful for educators to have children in their class who are lacking in talent and enthusiasm yet still manage to grade good or excellent for behaviour and effort.

Actually op plenty of us have replied saying we/ our dc are neither musical or artistic, and don't enjoy it either. But still disagree with you. So don't try and pretend people are only saying yabu because they don't understand what it's like.

I'm also at the idea of basing music sets on maths.

I also think the people who are musical or artistic just don't "get" why people wouldn't enjoy music or art
I do get it - absolutely. I am rubbish at Art. My son couldn't bear Music and lacked the co-ordination for Art. All of the creative subjects were a nightmare from him, but with the support of 1 teacher, he developed some good design skills.

But I think you are completely missing the point.
The struggle - the not being able to do something, THAT is important.
It is most important for a student who is high achieving in other subjects.

You don't get that because your mindset is do fixed. You don't value the creative subjects and you think it is a good idea to give up and do something different when a subject takes a lot of work and you're not that good at it.

Studying music isn't all about what you can produce at the end of it but what the brain goes through as it learns. Basically it reaches parts other beers can't reach. As those in charge of education (who aren't themselves educators) are obsessed with results, I would say any school that has compulsory music and drama is a very healthy one that values healthy, mentally agile students.

OP - you picked up on a couple of my points - I was trying to say that your ds can at least TRY to participate fully in the lessons. He doesn't need to be Mozart, he just needs to TRY.

You haven't responded to my suggestion about taking him to have his ears tested. I really think you should if his ability to hear differences is so poor.

Actually, this thread is so stupid I'm going to un-follow it. The OP has such an arrogant mindset they are not prepared to listen. learn or consider any other opinions other than their own. I feel for your dc having to study subjects he neither enjoys nor has a particular aptitude for, but really, the educators DO know best, and there is good reason for the teachers to continue to try and teach some sort of knowledge of music and art to your son. Let your child be educated.

You're just nasty and obtuse now op, good luck with that.

In the US they passed the "every child achieves' act last year, which has art and music as core subjects.
They have recognised that depth and breadth of education is more important than teaching kids to pass exams.

New life - don't worry - ds is at a school that can cater for the poor set 4 musical genius!! He has a diploma in piano and cello at age 13!!! But that is another thread….

I'm not sure why people are piling in on the OP quite so unpleasantly (except that it's AIBU, I suppose). The obsession with the value of children doing subjects they hate and have no ability at is also quite odd. I don't think there's anything inherently character-building about being crap at something either, especially as the OP's son probable tone deafness (and yes, this is a genuine condition) means that, however much works he puts into composition, he doesn't get anything out of it.

"I just think that the emphasis on practical art and music has gone too far, and in the many lessons it took to force my reluctant son to produce a musical composition, he could have learned an awful lot more about musical genres, or composers, or history of music or something."

This seems perfectly fair enough to me.

1805

i'm glad to hear this, I wondered how on earth it would work.
my dd is really bottom for maths and sees SENCO daily for help until assessment has completed and plan put in place.
Musically though, she believes she's been put on this earth to play

Your ds is obviously very musical, I can't make out if you are saying he is good or bad at Maths.

I do understand part of what the OP is referring to. In primary my dd couldn't see how everybody wasn't musical like her, she didn't show off but thought it was a given that everybody could do it.
I also see the point about the curriculum too, perhaps the non musical students would do better learning about music as a subject rather than the elements of composition and performance.
maybe then her ds could tell the difference between instruments.

Guys - don't panic about the maths/music setting system. We're not talking about your average secondary school here. Ds's school has masses of facilities and time, and teachers, and opportunities for the talented musician. The setting system is merely for timetabling. I just mentioned it because you've got the reverse of OP's situation going on. It's not a life threatening situation either way round it is. Don't know why I mentioned it really. Thought it was funny, that's all!!

Christ what a fucking philistine place it would be in 30 years' time if we stopped children doing music and drama. One of the few areas the country still excels in and is recognised as such around the world.
This and every single other post that recognises the importance of a creative education.

You are being so very unreasonable. Totally fucking unreasonable. YABVTFU.

This country is known for its creative brilliance and I'm fed up of people like you and politicians (I'm looking at you Nicky Morgan/Michael Gove) denigrating the arts. Just because you have no talent in art doesn't mean you cannot appreciate art or have a hunger to know about it. Just because you can't sing or play an instrument doesn't mean you cannot appreciate and learn about music in all forms. Music and art make the word a wonderful colourful place full of wonder and magic. It's a shame you see no value in it.

NewLife - not my ds!! (he is set 1)

"I'm fed up of people like you and politicians (I'm looking at you Nicky Morgan/Michael Gove) denigrating the arts."

Setting aside the politicians point (where I agree with you, but it's an entirely different issue), I don't see where the OP has denigrated the arts or said that children generally shouldn't study art or music? She has just queried the value of compulsory practical music or art for her talentless (in this respect) and disengaged secondary school son.

If anything this thread reflects rather badly on the teaching of reading comprehension in UK schools!

irene the OP's DS is in 2nd yr of secondary school. I don't think children of that age should be deciding to drop subjects at that age and certainly not even younger. It's far too young. Children's educational experience should be as wide as possible for as long as possible.

Exactly - I'm not "denigrating the arts" at all. My other kids who are yet to reach secondary school age will probably enjoy music and art much more as they have more ability in it.

Arts are important - nobody's saying they are not. But there are SO many different ways of exposing children to the arts without "doing". In the last year at Primary, my oldest son and his class went to see a Scottish Opera schools production where they stopped the performance every so often to explain what was going on, sung in English, and had subtitles up. That gives children exposure to opera that many don't have and is very valuable - but is very different from getting them up on stage and expecting them to sing O Mio Babbino Caro. You can learn about watercolours, oils, collage, expressionism, cubism etc without getting the paints out.

It's BALANCE which is lacking. Children who are not natural performers are being forced to perform in music, produce artwork or act in drama, be ridiculed by their peers for their lack of ability, which dents their confidence and smothers any liking for the Arts they had in the first place.

Balance is not lacking in the direction you thing it it. I was shit at English language and literature. Truly shocking, no amount of teaching helped me. I had to suffer it daily until my A levels.

My reports were bad for the subject. I hated it, do you think I should have been allowed to drop it at year 7?

The two hours art a week were my time to shine. And as much as I hated the English lessons, they benefitted me in the long run. Bits stuck with me and then as an adult I found my own way.

Actually the doing, or attempting, is very different to learning about things. We can learn about anything. It's the doing that challenges and stretches. It really the result but the journey that is valuable. You know sometimes you have to trust that teachers and good school leadership know what they are doing and know how to best challenge, stretch and nurture their students. We don't question other professionals nearly as much....