To think most "gifted" children are from affluent backgrounds?

[Notapushymum1]

I was reading about Alma Deutscher, a child prodigy who started composing at age 6 and had her first opera performed at age 9. She is a child prodigy who is home schooled, her parents are scholars with interest in music, she had the best teachers from age 3 and according to Wikipedia:
^^
Professor Gjerdingen recommended to Deutscher's parents the renowned Swiss improvisor Rudolf Lutz, who then connected them with the Swiss musician Tobias Cramm.[51] Gjerdingen sent exercises and commented on technical aspects of Alma’s composition, while Alma had lessons in improvisation from Cramm via Skype, with the pair using the pedagogical method of the eighteenth century Italian partimenti, instructional bass lines used for the teaching of harmony, counterpoint and improvisation.[52] Alma quickly became fluent in the music syntax of eighteenth century music

She spends 5 hours a day on music lessons from "Renowned violin and piano teachers at Yehudi Menuhin music school".

AIBU to think that most kids will become "prodigies" with such input?

Boboismylife sorry to hear about your experience. Do you mind if I ask how old you were when you went to music school? I must admit it seems odd to sign a child up to a school and have their life planned out from an early age. What if you decide you do not want to be a musician?

I was 12 - I had only started lessons maybe when I was 9 which was considered very late.

Also even those from my music school (it was about 120 people from 8-18) maybe only two people I knew in my time have actually become very successful concert soloists. And the problem with music schools is that's what they gear everyone towards, rather than being more rounded musicians who will probably have to spend a chunk of their time teaching.

We did 6-7 GCSES and lots of people dropped to 2 A levels. I left during 6th form and went to uni, ended up doing something completely different. But I had such a weird up-bringing there and came out with such gaps in my knowledge, its taken years to get over.

That's really interesting bobo which is why I resist ds's pleas to go to music school . He had to be sure that it's what he wants to do and feel that he really can change his mind . I think he knows ( sort of) that he will have to have a diverse career if it's what he ends up doing - certainly that's what his CAT scheme is gearing them all up for . They work with a huge variety of professionals and are always encouraged to talk about how all the different muscicians earn a living so I think his eyes are opening to how hard it will be as well as the possibilities for quite a diverse career if it's what he chooses ( and is successful - lots stacked against him - started late , we aren't muscicians etc !! but so far he's holding his own )

Wrong...

I've always had a big thing on nature verses nurture.

I grew up in the olden days with siblings a plenty, life was pretty tough, my parents left school and went to work.

For context the eldest was naturally very clever and the school wanted to push them to a better school as they were so gifted. But the parents were worried how fair it would be. Out of 6 children 1 was really gifted, another somewhat gifted, if I think about it, each had their own talents. So one that wasn't great academically, was amazing at sport.

When I had DC I got everything ready, like the perfect childhood in my eyes with every resource a child could want. PFB not that fussed and has to be nagged, PSB fussed but works really hard.

On the other hand I knew children that went to private school who were challenged, it was money wasted in a way as they struggled alongside more able peers.

So to think that private schools are full of your next Einstein, I would say that assertion is wrong, there is a broad spectrum of students.

I remember a friend a year older than this other child, friend was at comp, other child at private school. Friend would tutor them or get paid to do work. This was Ye Days of Old. I don't really know what they did but I remember exasperation that you could put the answer in front of private school child, they literally had no clue.

You can have all the money in the world, but if a child isn't interested you have to take it as it is. You can have all the books that would have been your dream collection as a child, but if your DC doesn't like reading you can't force them.

This is coming from a parent who supplemented DC's learning as much as possible. Something which wasn't really around when I was a student.

Back to what I was saying at the beginning, our family was lower working class, so even putting food on the table was hard at times. You didn't have tax credits back then, you had your wage and that was it.

Going slightly off subject, considering families of old would have 10 children, it makes you think how they survived without the additional money you get now for DC.

For me there is nothing worse than seeing a typical working class family moan about money, but then their DC is wearing brand new designer trainers. It's not something I've ever bought into as to me it's a waste considering how they grow. The same with designer pushchairs or Mums who have a collection of pushchairs, I can't get my head round it.

There was a thead on here last year around A level/GCSE results day, where to OP wanted tips on how to raise her toddler in to an A student.

Does anyone remember it?
It was really good. Had tips on like if you have TV on, only put on educational stuff like documentaries and get child interested in nature before people.

offtocatchatrain

Did your DD start at 4? My DD is 2.5 and shows some interest in my brother's piano. She's still a bit wild at the moment so can't sit still, but would love to start her on lessons.

get child interested in nature before people

Really??!

I think I phrased my OP a bit wrong, I was not thinking about academic abilities, but rather music/tennis/art etc etc... Things that need understanding of the subject, connections and cash.

As a teacher I’ve met so many obviously incredibly bright children who just don’t get the support needed to do well.

On the other hand, I have also met many fairly average or slightly above average children who’ve done excellent work in class because they have support at home.

It sucks.

Strawberrygelato, my DS started violin before the age 3 (I actually lied about his age to his teacher, nobody wanted to accept such a young student). We went for classical lessons, I tried Suzuki with my other children and realized that it has its limitations. DS was reading music way before the words, and now has an amazing music reading ability and a very deep understanding of music theory. He is also a few years ahead in maths and his spelling is unbelievable. I think it is all connected, music helps with academic development too.

However, we are doing it purely as a hobby, DS does not want to be a musician when he grows up and we are not considering music schools.

Boboismylife it is horrendous that it affected all your education. So many at a school like that I would imagine to be very bright and capable of far more educationally. Another school ( I would hope) would be questioned as to the poor attainment of such a promising cohort.

Notapushymum1

Was his concentration good? My DD is quite emotional and her attention span isn't so good. Maybe your parenting style has something to do with it?

*get child interested in nature before people

Really??!*

Yes, really.

Strawberry, DS 3 was dragged to concerts/music lessons from birth, in his car seat, with the older siblings. So he grew up listening to them studying/practicing. He asked me for the lessons himself. He could concentrate for 20 minutes, and practiced about 15 min a day. I never forced him, he just liked doing it.

@Trumpet

That's probably a good idea. There was a tiny number of funded places on the government scheme. A handful places would come up in every year each year - half for international students and a couple for UK. People were auditioning every week for them. So we were constantly told that "we were lucky to be there" - like a nineteenth century orphanage my parents said.

I think lots of parents think that the boarding there would be similar to a private boarding school, but its absolutely not. There was no pastoral care, awful facilities, awful food, no activities, an hours practice before breakfast....

If you had loads of money and a talented child, better sending them to private school; its very very easy to get a full music scholarship to a private school compared to getting into music school. But less affordable as you are still paying 50%...

Re the prodigies thing - a lot of people who were bordering on prodigy actually didn't sustain. They stopped practicing or got burnt out when they were older. The person who became super successful was brilliant, but not a prodigy, and came from a relatively normal UK family (where most who reach a certain level are Russian or East Asian and have musician family).

and now has an amazing music reading ability and a very deep understanding of music theory

I started at the same age as your son. I'd say that music reading and theory are not the most important or fulfilling aspects of learning an instrument - which would be playing itself. Reading music is not much use if you don't have the technique to perform what you read.

Music teaching in general is quite poor in this country.

Riding, I agree. But my DD was doing Suzuki, which resulted in huge gaps in reading/writing ability, so I am happy DS turned out to be good at music reading. It helps a lot in orchestra/learning new material/writing his own music.

@yoyo

I wouldn't say "poor attainment!" Most people who wanted to be musicians did, but it was being in orchestras and chamber groups with a lot of teaching to supplement. That's far more realistic than pushing people to be successful concert soloists as very very very few manage this, even from music schools. The problem is that so many people were disappointed.

We didn't do many academic subjects because there wasn't time with the amount of practice expected, and music colleges don't ask for A levels, so why bother. People also didn't bother with academic subjects because it seemed easy to do exams and gets As/Bs with absolutely no work. But that sets up awful habits.

I got back into the swing of things eventually, but it took me until half way through university - there were massive gaps in my knowledge, socially also!

I hear ya bobo

My parents sent me to an educational pychologist to establish if I should go to music school. The psychologists' conclusion was that I was intelligent and wouldn't get a good enough education so unless I actually wanted to be a concert violinist/pianist there wasn't any benefit. I think it was good advice.

I know quite a number people who went to music schools - the majority were committed to being musicians from a very young age.

I mentioned some of the things on this thread to DH. I mentioned to him that one of the posters had been to music school and not enjoyed it ( I was not sure of when you started Boho). DH was horrified at the idea of the schools he said that the only careers he could see were music teachers/examiners, concert performers all of which he thought were awful. Yes, some songwriting we thought could be okay ( my suggestion). It just seems so limiting.

I probably started....circa 2004, something like that. But by the sounds of things, it hasn't changed much!

There was a programme about child geniuses a while ago and basically most of them went on to be quite unhappy :( I think moderation is good, to be bright but also well rounded.

With the example in the original post, yes I think you would have to come from an affluent background because I'd imagine with composing, you'd need to be able to read/write music, understand music theory, maybe play an instrument and all of those things, at age 6, are most likely from wealthier families, god know how much 5 hours of music lessons a day costs! I think most children would be lucky to get a one hour lesson a week?

I do think it is "poor attainment" if very intelligent children leave school with 6-7 GCSES and 2 A levels when capable of much more. I completely understand these certificates would be at top grades as I have no doubt of the ability of you all and the ability you have to work hard and practice.

But my DD was doing Suzuki, which resulted in huge gaps in reading/writing ability

As I said, there's a lot of poor music teaching in the UK. A good Suzuki teacher should be teaching reading and theory as well. But many don't.

Equally, many conventional teachers let pupils plough through pieces without teaching technique.

Really great teachers are like gold dust.

Another thing parents might want to consider is Junior Royal College/ Academy on Saturdays. Also the National Youth Orchestra/ Country Youth Orchestras when younger. If have a super talented kid there are so many better options than music school. And if good enough for music school, pretty much guaranteed scholarships everywhere...