To think a secondary school choir rejecting an 11 year old based on their voice is horrible?

[tigerdrew]

Just had DD come in upset. It's quite random as it's the middle of the night and a weekend and we had a nice day today, told me she is still sad about how she is a bad singer and she doesn't want to see her music teacher as she is too embarrassed etc etc

DD tried out for the school choir which is done by audition so obviously she was aware there was some kind of judging involved and so was I but I do think rejecting a year 7 into something they are interested in trying is harsh, especially when it's hard enough for year 7s.

AIBU to think a school choir should just be for whoever is interested? When kids are all singing in a group they do sound the same anyway! Obviously maybe solos could be kept for the particularly talented but I'm honestly just a bit sad and even annoyed.

Because it’s an inclusive school that values all the children - and it is a very happy school.

We’re just talking about an after school choir that meet up and practice, not the school curriculum. In which music is offered to all pupils.

I don’t know why parents think schools should or are able to cater for every child’s whim under the guise of “inclusivity”

YABU. I would say most artistic activities are for everyone to enjoy regardless of skill, but singing is not one of those things. It's very unpleasant to endure listening to someone who sings badly, much more so than it is to look at paintings made by someone who can't paint very well, or to read a poem written by someone who can't write very well. It's an assault on the senses! One terrible singer in a choir can ruin it for everyone. It's perfectly normal to lack aptitude for some things and it shouldn't be seen as an offense or a trauma to be told so.

I suppose it depends on what you think of as a whim.

Many children love participating in music. It’s not a new thing or a whim. It’s been around for millennia so has stood the test of time.

Sport too, despite the fact that many schools push medal-winning for the few over participation for the many.

But can’t you see that there is no way of including everyone fairly?

If you include the bad singers, you’re excluding the decent ones as they won’t engage / won’t be developed to the best of their ability.

If you include the good singers, you exclude the bad ones.

Ideal is to have different groups that cater to all - but there are obvious resourcing issues.

No I’m not saying Music is a whim. Music is on the national curriculum and taught to all pupils from 5-14 years; whether they want to do it or not!

I do understand your view about the advantages of allowing all pupils to join a choir if they wanted, you have some valid points.

I think what’s up for debate is whether it’s damaging to children to be told, I’m sorry you haven’t won on a place on the school choir.
I don’t think it is and parents should help manage a child’s disappointment at not winning/ qualifying for something rather than being angry , saying the school are “horrible” (op’s words) and it’s so sad that this particular activity isn’t inclusive to everyone.

Lets give some credit to children who are 11 or older. They are capable of managing disappointment and accepting others may be better at something than they are.

Sorry but it is perfectly possible to develop a very decent mixed ability choir provided the participants are engaged and prepared to take direction. I’ve seen and heard it.

The school may not win the national gold medal for Best Choir Ever - but I suppose each school needs to decide what it thinks is important in the long run.

My experience has been very different, unfortunately. I’ve never known a mixed ability choir where the more able are sufficiently challenged.

I’m sure that some mixed ability choir might not stretch the very able.

Choices choices: should a school only cater for very able singers - and the majority of ordinary children seek out and pay for music classes elsewhere (or not sing at all, if they can’t afford it).

Or should the school cater for everyone - and the smaller number of able singers seek out extra singing opportunities in addition to what they do at school, this getting a double helping of what they are good at.

I know which I’d choose.

I've had to audition for CHURCH choirs. An audition suggests a limited number of spaces and high standards. You can't have too many sopranos for example so the number of sopranos is restricted by the number of altos, tenors and basses. Not getting into the choir does not indicate your DD is a bad singer, especially in Y7. I've sung professionally yet failed to get into the School Production in Y7 as they gave priority to students higher up the school.

Get feedback from the Music Teacher perhaps? Mine had a similar problem with hockey tryouts. Excellent at hockey but they already had several excellent players on the wing.

You are being precious and teaching her she can be entitled to anything as mummy says so.
get a grip and look at what you are teaching your child.

Not all schools have those choices do they?

Quite often there are limited spaces, limited staff available after school and the hall or wherever they practice has a maximum safe capacity or staff to pupil ratio.

So your preferred choice is often not possible, leaving auditioning or operating some sort of lottery for places (which would probably garner even more parental complaints).

Yup. And in my view, the needs of the children who would like to sing are just as important. And with a good enough teacher, both can be accommodated

A choir I was in as a student auditioned with the view that reading choral notation confidently and being able to sight sing were skills that could be developed. You didn't have to be a brilliant sight reader, you didn't have to have a brilliant voice or be a future soloist, you didn't have to have had vocal lessons. You did have to have a reasonable vocal tone and enough musicality to learn the skills required fairly independently with support from the conductor. Not everyone in the choir had vocal lessons and almost all of us were from local state schools. We would learn a piece of music on a Saturday afternoon and perform it on the Sunday. That's not possible if the fairly wide range of singers in the choir also had to slow right down for the handful of people who didn't have musical aptiude and needed help to sing an 8 bar melody in tune.

In my area now there are primary schools with choirs, secondary schools with choirs (some audition, some mixed, some both), some town/county choirs, a multitude of community choirs for different ages, high quality amateur choirs, several chamber groups, a whole host of performing arts clubs that include singing and musical theatre, several rock and pop / glee club type groups, and that's before you start counting the drama and am dram and youth theatres (and many of those have singing as part of it).

School ensembles cannot be all things to all people.

Always an excuse as to why something can’t be done.

Absolutely, so for those with talent there are a host of options outside a school.

Meaning that the SCHOOL should be free to teach all of its pupils, not just a select few.

Always an excuse as to why something can’t be done.
Reasons aren't excuses.

How many unpaid hours do you think music teachers should be expected to do each week to ensure that everyone who wants to has access to ensembles that are appropriate for their personal interests, level of musical aptiude and vocal ability?

No ensemble can be all things for all people. There has to be a trade off somewhere.

Meaning that the SCHOOL should be free to teach all of its pupils, not just a select few.

I thought we were talking about extracurricular stuff here? That’s always going to be a select few, even in a non-auditioned choir.

Absolutely, so for those with talent there are a host of options outside a school.

Meaning that the SCHOOL should be free to teach all of its pupils, not just a select few

They do teach all its pupils. In their music LESSONS, which are part of the curriculum.

I hope you also argue that sports teams shouldn't pick the strongest players, that the slower runners should represent the school at inter-school cross country if they want a go, that the maths Olympiads shouldn't take strong mathematicians, that the school productions should give everyone a prominent role, the debating clubs should accept mumblers as speakers for events, that all artwork should be up around school - not just the talented artists.

After all it would be terrible if schools offered opportunities to students who excel in certain areas. Best make sure that success isn't something to strive for in school clubs just in case some parents don't want to tell their 11 year old that they can always try again next year.

So schools should never be able to compete against each other? Give out awards? Audition for plays? Everything should be randomly assigned to save the feelings of pupils? Then we chuck them out at 18 only to discover you have to interview for jobs and then even if you get one, they can sack you for poor performance?

My DD's Secondary School choir welcomes anyone who wants to join. It's for anyone who enjoys singing and it's an absolutely lovely group of happy teenagers just having fun singing songs together.

My DD isn't a terrible singer but she isn't particularly talented either. The strong singers get solos within songs the rest singing together.

It works just fine. They have done performances at lots of school fetes and regional choir concerts and sound good. Not perfect but good.

I imagine the songs are selected to be achievable for all and they are usually catchy pop or film theme tune songs.

My DD loves it. It gives her a lot of joy and a confidence boost. I am very grateful that their priority is letting the kids join in and have fun, rather than perfection.

That’s nice for your DD, and the school’s obviously decided that’s what works for them, but it’s a shame that kids aren’t getting to experience singing repertoire beyond “catchy pop or film theme tune songs”

Must be upsetting for your DD, however it is important that children learn that life can be harsh. Try your best to build her confidence back up though, we all make oopsies!

Lindy2
That sounds nice. I've known some school choirs like that. They've obviously pitched their repertoire to the choir they've chosen to run.

Giving out solos doesn't necessarily mean the musically able are being challenged though. Not all talented musicians want to be soloists, and not all solos are musically challenging.

I'd have hated being given a solo, but enjoyed the challenge of working through a piece of challenging choral music with interesting harmonies. I doubt I'd have grown to love a range of classical music if it wasn't for being exposed to it as a pupil. I really like the fact our conductors and music teachers exposed us to a huge range of styles and composers. It gave me a breadth of cultural experience that I'd never have had otherwise. Looking at my own DC, I want them to have that breadth of cultural experiences too. As it stands I don't have faith that school music offers that sort of breadth in many places.

The teacher didn’t ‘go around telling kids they aren’t good at something’ though. Obviously, that would be unreasonable. Your daughter chose to audition for something that required a level of ability / talent and didn’t meet the standard. If you audition for something then you are being tested and there’s a chance you might not succeed. She had to be told that she’d not successfully auditioned and she’ll no doubt face other disappointments with jobs etc later in life so it’s a good lesson that you can’t expect to succeed every single time and you do have to dust yourself off. You can’t have a child that can’t sing in a choir any more than you can have someone in a youth orchestra who can’t play the violin well. It’s upsetting for her to be rejected, I understand that, but it’s absolutely not a problem with the teacher!

You’re misunderstanding what I’ve said.
You seem to think that people should only do music or sport or art with a view to entering competitions. A very limited mindset.

Since we’re being facetious, I’ll lower myself to say that regarding, for example, the Maths Olympiad, I would think it more important that every child in the school learns Maths rather than that one or two train for the Olympiad and the rest do no maths at all.

Regarding sports, I’d rather see all children achieve a good level of fitness and enjoyment of sports than that ten are chosen for a team and the rest do nothing.

The gifted few are perfectly free to enter competitions and pursue whatever they like to a higher level - if not at school than outside of it.