This is a tangent to the 'able to play' thread which is itself an offshoot of the poll (which itself probably sprang from some other threads on similar topics)...

It appears almost impossible to get a concensus about what it really means to be at the standard of a particular grade or how to define what constitutes being able to play an instrument. There are a lot of different aspects involved - technical control of the instrument, interpretation, sight-reading, memorising, playing by ear, transposition, etc. plus wider issues of theory and aural and which aspects of aural are relevent to different people.

So, here's the thing...
If you could design a music program for a student, to try to develop their all-round musicianship and give them a wide range of relevent skills as well as making progress on their instrument, what would you include?

What if you could take a kid from age 5 and shape their all-round musical education right the way to 18? What would you want to cover and when? How would you do it? What age would you get them started on various instruments? How much music history would you get into? What extra skills would you want them to learn?
(I know that in the real world a lot would depend on the kid, on their inate ability, interest level, choice of instrument(s), but for this just take a generic kid. Assume he's quite musical, has at least average intelligence, will practice and will choose whichever instrument(s) you think are best! You can even pick a name for him if you like..)


T.

Interesting idea - you wouldn't be writing the next set of dip essay topics, would you T?

Nope! I'm a fairly solid grade 5 standard student (I've got a 4 and a 6 and the rest are 5s). Even grade 8 is quite a long way off, let alone diplomas! :-)

But I play around with ideas like this about education in general, so I'm now trying it for music education.

T.

In an ideal world a child would learn to sight read fluently and be able to play by ear at a party. Those are the two most useful skills IMO, oh and they would never have to take a music exam until they are 18!

Depends on what they want to do wiht their life.....If thye wanted ot be a musician then it would be difficult if they had never taken an exam.

I seem to recall saying that in real life it would depend on the individual kid.
What I'm interested in here is a hypothetical 'ideal'.

I think we can take it as a given that enjoyment, fulfillment, encouragement and inspiration should be part of the learning process.

T.

I don't actually think it is always as simple as just going with what the student "chooses" to do because that choice isn't always "free", it is influenced by parents, by what university they want to go to and about how society values certain musical skills above others. Perhaps it is useful sometimes to look at what we would do "ideally" and question assumptions about what a good music education is.

I wonder how many children really do want to do exams for their own enjoyment or they pick up from their well meaning teachers and parents that this is something that is expected of them. Also the really amazing musicians often do not do exams, when you are playing chopin etudes at 10 they become a bit irrelevant! I know of someone for example who progressed amazingly in a few years, he did take grade 8 at 18 to get into college but if he had taken any other exams before then it would have actually slowed him down and he wouldn't have played and learnt half the repertoire he did.