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?

Haven't read the whole thread but the book "Talent is overrated" www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01HPVHLT4/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1&tag=mumsnetforum-21 is quite interesting on the topic

Also there is a fairly well known study that shows a strong correlation between musical attainment and deliberate practice. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4073287/

The idea of both is that for learned skills (eg music) as opposed to sports where there is more of a physical dimension (eg Usain Bolt / sprinting), what really matters is hours spent practicing in the right way (Deliberate Practice).

Gilly, I agree with you. DS is terrible at languages and I am worried his language GCSE will let him down :(

We have just found out that dd will have to take double science, even the though the board they use offers the single.
It's really narrowed her options and looks like she has no choice now.
I wouldn't mind but why call them options arghhhhh!
She will struggle and need lots of additional support. , she'd have managed the single award and been able to take another language, which is what she wanted.
It's good to note that even with a gift, if you aren't academic you still face the same problems as other non academics when it comes to public exams.

Gilly she must be a complete opposite of DS, he is doing triple science, but the thought of languages/history terrifies him. I find the system quite strange, children expected to be equally good at all areas. He wants to do science at uni, but has to sit geography/history/languages and gain As to get into his super selective sixth form:(

It didn't use to be like this, pupils could just drop the subjects they weren't good at. I dropped the sciences as I was no good at them. I excelled at languages.

I agree, @DuckbilledSplatterPuff I did say it isn't something that happens a lot, hence why she's an 'amazing woman'. Unfortunately, I do blame the fact that her marriage to my father was emotionally abusive, it's only since being on MN that I've understood this. (He abused us, but I've talked about that elsewhere.)

Basically she let him quash her ambitions, she helped him with his PhD, he didn't support her desire to do one herself. She appeared to be the strong one, but he emotionally blackmailed her (I read his letters to her a couple of years ago). He wouldn't let her go on a work weekend away because he thought she would be unfaithfulness (he went on at her about this, despite what he was actually doing).

She could have done it before, that's the tragedy of it.

Replying to your last question - Yes.
Most children being taken care of and nurtured talents and skills could become prodigies. In one area.
Is it worth it?
That's harder to say, but if the child doesn't mind and enjoys, why not?

I understand that science is a compulsory core subject, and it should be, even if it is to encourage more girls into STEM careers.
However, the single award is surely a good option for those not wanting or incapable of taking it further.
She'd never manage the exams of Humanities, but with languages she is above average and would probably get a 7 with commitment, that she is prepared for.
I'm sure it will sort out, but why on earth do schools call them options when some kids have no choice at all.

KingLooieCatz have you tried your ds on a keyboard (computer)? My ds has dyspraxia and found writing a tortuous task at a young age and even to this day (he's 17), his handwriting is complete chicken scratch. I started him typing at 4 or 5 and by 7 or 8 he was typing all his school assignments with no trouble at all. I had a lot of doubters, but a few years ago I read a book called my stroke of Insight by and she describes how handwriting and typing happen on opposite sides of the brain, so it's perfectly possible for someone to be useless at one and brilliant at the other. Ds also had some issues with his eye muscles which meant that he had trouble tracking along a line of type, so he took a long time to learn how to read (because it just gave him a headache when he was younger). As his muscles became stronger he became the fastest reader in his year and now is a prolific reader who loves to read. If he had been tracked at 7, he would have been put in the lowest class and in fact his 1st and 2nd grade teachers tried to tell me that he would have to repeat those grades because he wasn't learning. I had him privately tested in 3rd grade and it turned out he had a genius IQ with a few learning differences.

All of this is to say that different children learn in different ways and just because they learn differently doesn't mean they aren't smart or gifted or capable.

A PP mentioned languages. My genius father who was short listed for the noble prize is totally and completely useless at languages. He has been married to my Italian mother for 58 years and spent almost every summer of that marriage in Italy and still cannot utter more than two words of Italian.

Reading back through this thread I am struck by the thought that some children who had potential, in area's like arts, sports and music that are not considered as important as more academic subjects these days, do not have equal access to opportunities to pursue those subjects (which might be where their true talents lie) This is not to say that parents who do have the resources are being unfair, I wish them and their children well, but it is such a pity that so much potential and ambition is not being realised and there is not enough support for it. The example one poster mentioned of the regional orchestra that doesn't include any Glasgow children springs to mind.

Thanks SofiaAmes we'll try that. His handwriting has come on really well in the past 6 months. The school told us they were going to try a handwriting rescue thing with him. He's also got into a hobby that involved painstaking fine motor skills. On the whole you're saying what I was getting at - we all have different strengths and aptitudes. Even if you're bright you don't have an aptitude for everything.