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?

Cosy

Your dd talent certainly comes from Waitrose, I hope you get her to practice a lot

@Notapushymum1

You haven't met my son! He has ADHD and until recently was just not capable of applying himself to a task that didn't interest him. He has had teachers in tears. His talents are encouraged and as he matures they become more apparent and he can concentrate and complete a task. But there is no way on God's green earth he could have written an opera regardless of the input.

You don't seem to have met a wide range of children.

(In case I seem disloyal to DS - he stumped a range of physicists with his question of the day at a recent science fair, he beats me at chess, he's written two cinquains in Scots this week, having lived in England until he was 6).

King Your DS sounds like mine . His talents are music & art (he is yet to write an Opera) though he is talented at writing, he loves chess, has got his teachers close to tears and also has ADHD.

King, you are right, I am an only child and can only judge by my 3 kids. But I was always under the impression that you can teach any child of an average intelligence to a certain degree. Just some kids will need more input than others. For example I am sure that any average child can pass 11+, music grades, etc etc if there is enough time spent preparing them.

I think it's all about what your child wants to do. My DDs love gymnastics, they practice at home and they're good at it. We encourage them and have enrolled them in gymnastics on a Saturday morning. But without our encouragement, we enrolled them in holiday clubs, it wouldn't have happened.

Thanks @OneFineDaye, I guess it's those parents with a batch of neurotypical children who see a kid like ours having a difficult moment and think theirs are doing better because of the fabulous parenting. Sometimes they get a shock if they have a subsequent child that is challenging.

Basically Notapushymum is saying if our children aren't passing music exams it's because we aren't doing enough to support them. Not that the children might be tone-deaf, or completely deaf, have no sense of rhythm, just not like music much and not be born compliant people pleasers, so they won't apply themselves to tasks they don't like.

Cosy
DH also born with that talent. Was rated as gifted by his peers at school for his achievements with large biscuits. In reality he just has a big mouth..... :)

Gilly
Am sitting downstairs as DS is in a bad mood upstairs. He may be great at maths, but jeez is he hard work. Yes, it can be a double-edged sword. I wish sometimes schools would steer away from the G&T terminology and instead use SEN as that's basically what it is - they have educational needs different to the majority of the class. They can find it difficult to get through school where that provision just isn't there. I also wish things like 11+ were a complete meritocracy where tutoring and associated costs weren't a factor and that society would be happy just to accept that schools that concentrate on music/art/sport/academics are good for all kids and no one should compare like for like. Kids are good at different things and teachers should be in a good position to point these out and guide kids towards specialist programs. I do sometimes wonder how things would be if we could just cherry pick kids out of school for what's called 'academic' subjects - maths, languages, science and have specialist schools for those too, in the way they exist for drama, music, etc. It would be interesting to see what those young minds could achieve.

Notapushy you can train to a certain degree but there's a ceiling.

For example I am considered "bright". Went to a top school (scholarship). Achieved well etc. However although I was in the same class as my classmates, I was top of the class in (for example) History yet some of them were streets ahead in Maths over me. No matter how much time I'd have spent on Maths, I wouldn't have matched or surpassed some of those in my class. It wasn't to do with tuition at home either, as soon as a new concept was introduced to the class those girls would instantly get it, right in front of us all. So there was no skullduggery where they were secretly average but were tutored behind the scenes. They were just very naturally talented at Maths.

Even in primary school I remember I knew as young as Top Infants (Year 2) who were the "clever" ones in the class and who struggled. By 4th year Junior (Year 6) we all knew perfectly well who was bright and who wasn't, and it wasn't to do with tuition, and it wasn't because of who we'd been told was bright. We knew among ourselves.

A child can be tutored so far, but it would be very hard to take them to a high level of achievement and keep them there for their entire academic life without there being real natural talent. It would just be too hard.

As for music, probably any child could achieve some of the lower grades with input, interest and practise. But to get to Grade 8 takes years, dedication, real skill with the instrument and musicality. The expression you give to a piece. The technical skill you need to be able to perform pieces at that level. The examiners are not looking for "just" a perfect rendition of a piece, technically correct with no wrong notes (although this is necessary). There is timing, expression, musicality. Making that piece come alive. You have to have skill/talent to do that.

I am useless as sports so I'd never be a top sportswoman or even an average hobby sportist. Even if I'd been coached I might have been a bit better but I'd never be good, just average. We all have different born levels of intelligence, co-ordination, spacial awareness, finger dexterity, musicality etc. It can be improved on but above a certain level it's talent as much as tuition.

I was doing very badly at school, finished with very bad marks, did not get into a sixth form and got a waitress job soon after. I was dyslexic, I could not get my head around maths/sciences at all. I also have a very bad working memory.

While working as a waitress i met a group of students and got very envious of their lifestyle. I bought a maths book, and was doing about 4-5 hours of maths daily, untill it started to click. I set a maths exam and got 100%, it is very rare to get 100%, hardly anyone gets it in my country. That gave me lots of confidence and I re-seat all my exams within a year.

To get into a university I had to pass a very hard exam, a combination of maths/english/verbal/nonverbal. Being so confident after passing all my exams by myself, I decided I can study for this exam without any tutoring (most people took a 6 month course at a college to pass). I spent many many hours per day getting ready for that exam. I am sure my peers spent less time trying to understand same consepts. I passed that exam with top marks, got a place at a top university (say same as getting into Oxford in England) and yes, I had to study harder than anybody else because I am not as bright, but I managed to graduate with a 1st class degree and continued with my post grad education in a highly scientific field. And yes, I still feel like a fraud :)

Maybe due to my experience and also my DC later I believe most people (without disabilities) are capable of learning anything, providing they really want to do it.

"Why on earth would you want your young child to write and direct an opera? How does that child relate to their peers?"

If they wanted to and were able to then why not? Some children spend a lot of time on, say, football, horse riding, dancing, skating or computing. Usually they also have friends and a life outside their favourite interest.

But to get to Grade 8 takes years, dedication, real skill with the instrument and musicality. The expression you give to a piece. The technical skill you need to be able to perform pieces at that level. The examiners are not looking for "just" a perfect rendition of a piece, technically correct with no wrong notes (although this is necessary). There is timing, expression, musicality. Making that piece come alive. You have to have skill/talent to do that

Nah, technique can be taught and and you don't need musicality at all for grade 8, you do need to practice though.

I did grade 8 when I was 13 - so about 10 years.

But you may not realise that not everyone can do that. You could do it because you have an aptitude for it, which not everyone has.

Similarly, my DH is able to grasp maths and is now a civil engineer. I can't, the best I could do was GCSE D. Whereas I did well at French and Linguistics. We all have different talents, and that's a good thing.

Riding what did you get Grade 8 in and how old were you when you took your first grade? Did you do all the grades?

I'm aware that not everyone can do grade 8 at 13. But I'd say most people who are relatively intelligent, relatively well co-ordinated could get to grade 8 if they started young and kept practising. You don't need to be musical - depending on how you interpret the word.

Violin and piano. I think I did grade 7 for practice but I don't remember doing one before that. You have to do grade 5 theory for grade 8 and so I did that.

You went straight for Grade 8 in violin AND piano aged 13 without doing ANY previous grades AND with completing the very technical Grade 5 theory beforehand (so, say, 12?)

Good grief.

I'm really sorry Riding but I find it super hard to believe. And if that did happen that you can't remember if you did Grade 7 or not?!

And in BOTH piano and violin?

And you don't consider yourself having a musical prodigy for getting Grade 8 in BOTH violin AND piano without doing (possibly) any previous exam in either instrument before, it's just well-co-ordinated?

Sunday, you don't have to sit previous exams. You only need grade 5 theory before attempting grade 8.

@SeaLover Maybe she has a gift, maybe she doesn’t. According to Malcolm Gladwell in his book Outliers, it takes 10000 hours to become a master at something. If she’s practising 5 hours a day then I’m not surprised she’s amazing at it!! But that isn’t what childhood is about, that isn’t learning through play and developing a thousand other life skills. Each to their own but you become and adult too quickly - I say let them be children and discover their ‘gifts’ by themselves

Do that and they ll achieve nothing special at all, children need guidance or they ll live in their bedrooms on the ipad.

Alma Deutscher is an exception, anyone who has heard her speak or listened to her music cannot but be blown away with her talent, 99.999999% of the population could practise all they like and they d never be an Alma.

Celebrate her success, we can't all be an Alma or a Lewis Hamilton but we can try to help our kids be the best they can at whatever they want to do.

As I said I think did grade 7 for practice. I don't recall doing any before that, but I may have just forgotten. I did grade 5 theory when I was 10. My mum is musician so she taught my sister and me the theory.

But I'd done a lot of performing and I'd done music scholarship auditions aged 11 so it was fairly similar.

I was seen as a prodigy-ish at the time, but I wasn't particularly. I just had good teaching from a young age.

But I wasn't really using myself as an example of my point because I'm aware not everyone can do grade 8 at that age. I know many, many people who did grade 8 somewhere between 15 and 18 who were simply relatively intelligent and reasonably well co-ordinated.

Oh guidance of course!
I can’t get started on screen time 😆

I did two grade 8s by 11 - 12, after doing one grade 5 and 5 theory age 9 (when I then started the second instrument.) . During these grades I had a shit average teacher. I was considered behind at music school.

I remember the grade 5 theory was a massive struggle at the time though - scraped a pass

Notapushy I know you don't have to sit any grades prior other than Grade 5 theory. I have Grade 8 myself in piano so I know the system and requirements very well.

My point is that you could get Grade 8 in TWO instruments at 13, not have done any previous exams (or maybe one, can't remember) and still only put that down to "Nah, technique can be taught and and you don't need musicality at all for grade 8, you do need to practice though".

It makes light of Grade 8 as though it's nothing and everyone could get Grade 8 in two instruments at 13 if only they practiced.

But then it turns out Riding has a musician parent, had done lots of performing, and done a musical scholarship at age 11 and was seen as "prodigy-ish" at the time. Which is exactly as it should be. It's a huge achievement no matter how much Riding plays it down. It's not down to "just" practice and starting early. And I disagree that musicality isn't required "at all" for Grade 8. It's part of the marking process, the pauses, the expressions, the phrasing. Riding should know that, I'm really surprised someone of her talent would say differently.

But again, you absolutely can't teach a kid to be a prodigy. Prodigies are incredibly rare. Doing grade 8 in primary school is still not Alma's level.

If you could simply teach your kid to be a prodigy than I'm sure lots of rich people would.

Sunday, usually before the exam I make my kids watch Chinese children on youtube practicing exam pieces. Then tell them to copy it note for note
They always get full marks/close to full marks for their pieces during exams. And lots of comments about their "musicality" at festivals. I am not convinced you can't teach musicality to a certain degree to any averagely musical child...