I am posting here, not just for teachers but had to put it somewhere.
My daughters class teacher has suggested she may be gifted and talented where music is concerned.
As she practices for aprox 2 hours a day, I would like to think that she had some ability and had made progress and of course the two private lessons we pay for are worth it.
The teacher concerned admits she knows nothing much about music and it is only a normal state primary school not specialist at all.
My daughter struggled to talk and went to speech therapy but only needs to hear a song and from being a baby could sing it back perfect almost 100% of the time. She is 8 now not particularly what I would call gifted. Due to take gr 2 violin soon not done any vocal exam yet but sings gr 3 stuff.
How would anybody tell if a child was particularly gifted as opposed to done alot of practice.
Does it matter about having a diagnosis , would it mean any more if they had a label in terms of opportunities.
Finally, this subject interests me irrespective of my daughters ability, especially regarding the nature/nurture debate. Does anybody know of any relevant and reliable studies I could obtain please?
I would like to hear any opinion as obviously I intend to support and encourage my daughter, but mainly because she loves music and never stops singing, humming, etc.

The term used in state schools for gifted children is the top 10% within a year group. So within her school they may see her as gifted and in another state school she could be the bottom 10% so it depends on the cohort.

How long has she been practising for two hours per day and is this on the violin?

Yes there is a spectrum of natural aptitude for music, and yes, practice makes much difference too: whilst aptitude can speed up rate of acquisition, it can't totally substitute for practice. If the child's aptitude has been rated as above average, then the services reckon putting some cash into promoting learning more will be worthwhile .

In all honesty though, what matters just as much is whether the child wants to do it or not: if she's humming a lot, she's effectively practising, though tuition, and therefore focusing that practice, would bring more.

My two have some aptitude, but have ultimately opted to go their own way on this one, but why not try out to see if she likes it, and go from there?

There are no easy answers to any of the points you raise. For me, they probably raise a whole load more questions...

My immediate reaction is how do we define gifted and talented? What makes someone who is gifted at something better than the next? What does having a talent for something really mean in practice? At the end of the day, will one person's definition be the same as the next? I was recently presented with two new pupils: one parent assured me that their child was very talented at music; the other was unsure. To my mind, in reality, the exact opposite was the case.

Does it matter about having a 'diagnosis'? To me: no! To my mind, the terms gifted and talented have been introduced to make up for an education system in which it is, to put it frankly, an annoyance to be different. It is, in many places, unfashionable to be good at something. Plus, it only revolves the circle once more, back to the questions of how do we define gifted and talented?

In my experience, it is true that some pupils have a more natural ability for music than others. That might be because of the way they learn or because of an 'inner' feeling for music. They are few and far between, but they have maybe a little extra spark which others don't have. It's one of those things I think you know it when you find it.

Most of the story you present is familiar to me. I hear it on a regular basis from parents keen for their child to start lessons. The opinion you've had is, as you say, from a school teacher with little experience. They may be comparing your daughter to others in the class, and in that situation, it's quite easy for the musical one to stand out. What would happen if they were compared to a wider group of musicians? I can't tell you either way as I've never heard her. The school teacher may be quite right.

As a parent, the questions you're asking are very valid, and as I say, there are no easy answers. At the end of the day, you want to support and encourage her, and that's the most important thing. If you strongly feel that there's something musical about her which is worth 'tapping' into, then seeking the opinion of a specialist teacher would be valuable. Like me, they'll have been presented with many pupils over the years and will have a good idea of where your daughter...at this moment in time...may fit in alongside this. They would also be able to advise what's the best way for you to support this. Some may feel that you're already doing all that's necessary; others may suggest more.

Sorry for above meanderings...

she has been practising for this long for about 6 months now, we are a musical family of sorts although I never really touch clarinet anymore. It is not all at once more staggered through the day. She started playing piano not seriously though about 2, just plonking about really. Started violin aug 2010 and singing lessons nov 2011. Thanks to Young Musician she is determined to audition for a JD at 11 which we are supporting but even though we encourage her, it has mostly come from her.
Her Dad is a pro musician though and she is used to seeing lots of gigs, concerts and family friends who are mostly musicians, and leaders in their field.

I'm a non-musical parent with a multi-instrumentalist for a daughter.

I'm not sure that I would take too much notice of being told my daughter is talented by someone wiht limited experience. In the early stages I wouldn't have been able to judge and even now I wouldn't be keen to say. Putting a label on a young child can be a huge burden. It might be nice to just enjoy her progress, encourage, support and watch her grow as a musician.

Mine was a bit of a sponge, particularly in the early stages but there did come a time when she couldn't make the rapid progress she was used to. I guess this is something that comes to most young musicians and it has to be worked through. I

If you really want JD it is possible to go before age 11 but check out it's everything you want it to be before you do, and I do know people who have started young and left as teenagers.

When I realised that my daughter might be quite good at the fiddle and was not being helped by a less than interested school teacher (though I am not suggesting that yours is like this, by the way), I found out the names of the best teachers in my local area and asked for consultation lessons.

It was very easy, because most of them were not interested in a 9 year old girl who had a grade 2 distinction. One of them did see us, after which he agreed to give lessons a go. She has had 1-2 lessons a week, over the holidays too because she can't bear to miss them. That was a little over 3 years ago, and the rest is history - she's working towards her dipABRSM now......

I've taught violin now for 20 years (eeek!) and I have a large number of sons who learned to play too. I also teach singing!

It's great that your daughter wants to play and sing and practise, I strongly suspect that your school teacher is telling you (honestly) what she thinks you want to hear and there is nothing wrong with that, especially as you recognise that she has limited knowledge in the field.

I believe passionately that every kid can learn to play and sing. Every single one. That's the real joy of my job that I get to find a way that makes that work for all the kids I teach. But the 'gifted' ones that I teach pick things up very quickly, I show them something new and they do it, they apply what they learn in another appropriate situation and they make connections between things that make artistic sense.

Some of my students have gone to JRNCM, Chets, NCO, got music scholarships at swanky schools so I am probably aware of the degree of 'talent' needed for those things, write me a PM if you'd like to talk about your daughter or to come to a violin group class with my students, I run these monthly, it would be fun for her to play with others who love their violins also!

Where I live, any 8 year-old who can play a little Bach or Mozart ditty half-way passably is labeled as 'gifted'.

It is basically a non-musical environment and the primary school teachers find it genuinely amazing that a young person can play 8 bars of music with both hands playing at the same time !!! (I'm talking piano . . .)

If your daughter has 3 music teachers, ask them whether they fell that she is gifted or talented or simply hard-working. They will give you an informed answer.

I agree with much of your post

The two hours practice didn't surprise me as I could have easily claimed Emsoboe did two hours practice at age almost 10 when she started. Everytime I looked at her she had an instrument of some description in her hand. Looking back I realise even though there were exams involved much of what she did was messing around and fun. I wouldn't have wanted it any other way. Things become serious as they get older and mature and there is plenty of time for that.

Lots of interesting points in you post "Onemoretime".
Regular forumites will know I have no truck with the whole gifted and talented labels. I think they are dangerous and ultimately destructive, de-motivational tools. I think it's fair that I point out my response comes from the perspective.

The teacher is not a music specialist, but you don't need to be to spot a player who has received training and who hasn't. I suspect that is what the teacher is noticing - that your child plays well/seems musical because she has put the time and effort in to her musical education - not some mythical talent. She might be marking out your child as the school has funding, or can get it, for a "gifted and talented" programme.
I would agree with you that her hours of practice on top of the lessons are what makes her stand out as the superior musician in her class.

As for singing back songs - most children are very good mimics - they have to be it's how we learn to talk. Your daughter has grown up in a musical household and dabbled at the piano from age two. All the exposure and exploration will have contributed to the development of her musical ear. It's interesting that you mention she could sing when she struggled to speak. I can't remember the paper/reference of the top of my head, (maybe Oliver Sachs?) but there are studies of people who can sing, but struggle to communicate in other ways - such as those who have had strokes. There is one study of a guy with short term memory loss who can only get dressed by singing the "getting dressed song." You could try http://www.amazon.com/Musicophilia-Tales-M...s/dp/1400040817 for further reading, or http://www.amazon.com/This-Your-Brain-Musi.../ref=pd_sim_b_2 From what I remember there are many parts of the brain associated with music, so it is more diffused across the brain and therefore can be accessible when spoken language isn't.

From the point of view of labelling, as I said I think they are harmful at the least. The first half of this book http://www.amazon.com/Bounce-Federer-Picas...7540&sr=1-1 says much about talent vs hard work. And for an interesting study you could try http://www.amazon.com/Mindset-The-New-Psyc.../ref=pd_sim_b_3 Both books pretty much say "hard work is where it is at" and that talent is a myth - which I wholly agree with. More importantly they point to talent and gifted based praise as resulting in poor achievement when compared to effort based praise.

So from your daughter's point of view it might be worth letting the school label her if it means she gets better opportunities (but if you search the forums there are several posts that point to the "gifted and talented" programmes not being great for music students - though some must be). My caveat would be - whatever you decide - tell her it's her effort and hard work that's making her a good player not some mythical talent.

On a more personal note - I think you daughter is very lucky to have such a supportive parent.

Thanks very much for the info regarding further reading, I will have a look when I get time. My husband always says that to be a competent musician it takes x amount of hours practice. I can't remember the number but no doubt will post it when he next tells me.
Also thank you to the other posters with words of support and encouragement.
I know that one day the homework will be important and we will have to look at cutting other activities out but for now she doesn't have any.
I think its up to us as parents to encourage all we can when our children are passionate about something. We are giving her the opportunity to get to the level where she is able to have choices and then of course it is up to her what she decides. Even though I secretly hopes she chooses music.




Hello notmusimum.
It sounds like your daughter has lots of fun. If you don't mind me asking what age is she now and and what sort of level? I ask out of interest for your daughter and it would be nice to hear how somebody with a similar start progressed. My apologies if this is too pertinent a question.

My advice to you, Onemoretime, is to do exactly what Barncottagecat did with her daughter and find the best teacher you can straight away. My son showed signs of musicality which I ignored, hoping it would go away! It didn't, and now I am annoyed with myself that I didn't get him a better teacher immediately.

Having the right teacher is the most important thing one the child can bond with as well as being very good at what they do.

A long time ago I read some research from John Sloboda at Keele University that said that the single strongest influence for success in musical achievement was the quality of the relationship between the student and their first teacher.

Presumably because if it is not good they give up more often! But I think there is a bigger truth here that others have said - getting the best teacher/student combination matters enormously.

Homework? It is absurd for 8 year olds to get homework. Finland has the most effective state education system in the world and children do not get homework until they are in their teens. I would much prefer a child to be spending 2 hours a day on music than on school homework. Far more good for them.

I do not deny that there are inborn differences between people, and that these can enable some to excel in some endeavours. But for the aspiring musician (or anyone aspiring to excellence in any field) "Gifted" and "Talented" are not very helpful concepts. Even if such things can be accurately assessed, they make little difference to what has to be done to learn music and develop performing skills. Everyone that wants to be a musician has to do the same work, which amongst other things includes: training the ear; learning the concepts of music; and for instrumentalists and singers training the nervous system in feats of extreme co-ordination. No-one achieves those without studying and practicing.

ABout the only benefit of being so-labelled that I can see is that the "Gifted" child is given more or better opportunities within the school system. And even that is a contentious issue. Some may be quicker on the uptake than others, but that can be for many reasons other than genetic gifts. What is more the quick learner in the early stages is not necessarily the one that will (or can) eventually reach the highest standard, so it is unfair of schools to deny the slower learners the same opportunities as the "Gifted".

For your daughter it is far more likely that she has unexceptional levels of "natural talent" (whatever that might be) but that she is good at music (and it has been noticed by the class teacher) because she practices 2 hours a day [Which, unlike Soprano101 I do not think is too much, provided that she enjoys it, chooses to do it for herself, and is working correctly so as not to injure herself].

Being labelled "Gifted" may flatter the ego, but it can even be counter-productive. The so-called "Gifted" child may come to expect achievement and improvement to come with little work. And indeed for a while it may, but one day they will reach the point where only determined effort will produce more progress, and they have not learned that habit. [There have been properly designed experiments showing that children who are told they are gifted achieve less than those who are praised for the effort they make].

So I agree with the others. So long as you have normal intelligence, hearing, and no motor-co-ordination problems, what really matter most are a love for music, a love for the instrument, and the right kind of practice. And in those areas your girl has made an excellent start.

I agree with that too, though I do wonder if we're jumping the gun a bit. I agree that it would be useful to get some more professional opinions on the OP's daughter's playing/singing from either her own or other teachers. To rush out and seek to find the best teacher you can immediately seems a bit hasty. So far, the only opinion seems to have come from a inexperienced school teacher.

I would have thought that if the child is keen enough to practise two hours a day and is aiming for a JD at eleven, it would be a very good idea to get the best teacher possible so that the child is learning with the correct technique and that the teacher is teaching at a pace that is appropriate for the child. We had years with a teacher who knew next to nothing about saxophone technique, and didn't realise that my son was playing all the pieces in his exam books rather than just the one that was set for him.

I wasn't making any judgement on the childs current teacher it's just that parents often don't keep a close eye on that sort of thing. I know my child has suffered in the past from lack of guidance and it's something I'm perhaps a bit too concious of. I know parents who should be more proactive where teaching is concerned and it's holding the child back.

Absolutely - wasn't criticising anyone, it just occured to me that we're talking about getting the 'best teacher you can straight away' (Chris H) based on the opinion seemingly of one person.

I'm a bit sensitive about teaching and there are things i'd like to change for my daughter. I'm trying to work round it currently. In the past I let her be far too independent when she should have had teacher support. Seeing the young recorder player last night brings that home to me more than anything.

I've done some stupid things in allowing daughter to continue lessons with a piano player who claimed to have grade 8 recorder . It only lasted a term and it made me look for a specialist teacher but someone else would have allowed that arrangement to continue.

Some of my daughters friends are learning sax with people who are clarinet specialists (more than one person and several teachers) and you can see that reflected in the playing of the pupils.

I totally accept it's hard to get the right teacher in the early stages so is recognising when it's time to move on. I wouldn't be prepared to accept second best again.

I have had similar experiences to Notmusimum. I just think that if a child is practising two hours a day of their own volition at that age and talking of going to music college, then they will have the determination and the aptitude to succeed, and if they haven't, the teacher who the parents are approaching will tell them. Musicians are made, not born, and it seems to me that this child is showing all
the signs of being able to become a musician.

I think as far as teachers are concerned we are ok, and with hubby being specialised sax teacher we both are on the ball where everything but technical instrumental stuff is concerned and then we ask for clarification if they require us to observe her practice. Although he does help with breathing, good practice and general musicianship.
Practising is good as we both help with that and she seems to have motivated herself most of the time, and of course as he teaches from home she gets to hear improvement in other peoples playing.
Her violin teacher went to NRCM and her singing teacher I'm not sure about but whatever she has said so far seems to make sense. One is private the other from the LEA.
I can see the point in seeking good teachers but then I don't believe its cut and dried, sometimes the best on paper aren't necessarily the best players.
I know its early days yet but as I previously said (maybe other posts), I see it as our job to give her the opportunity to reach a level where she is able to at least audition. Then it's up to her and what she wants, really. She does know it takes work and effort but we never dress things up and are honest with her.
Thank you all for your views, support and encouragement. Its so good to be able to talk to other like minded musically interested people. My problem now is that of being a bad role model, having stopped at grade 5. Oh well better think of getting my clarinet out of its case !!!!!.

Having never played at all I think I must be the worst role model ever

You sound like you are doing all the right things and I completely agree that the best on paper is not always the best teacher.

And sometimes the best players aren't the best teachers

The violin teacher sounds fine if she went to RNCM. I'm a bit sensitive when it comes to teachers, as Musucstand's first teacher doesn't really play the sax.

Yes would totally agree with this too. I guess youv'e heard the same from a semi pro playing in a pub, spouting yes I'll teach you everything I know. Then realising they probably know very little. Lol.

BerkshireSon's first teacher didn't play the clarinet - he was a flautist who was also pretty competent on saxophone and piano. Very musical chap but hopeless on clarinet technique. After three years of his tuition BS had so many faults in technique to correct, but at least he knew what a musical performance should sound like. In the end that was perhaps the more important aspect, though it did take several years to relearn technique. At that time the school music provider would only give you a specialist teacher once you had grade 5 practical and theory.

It's unfortunate that school music providers often expect instrumental woodwind teachers to teach any woodwind instrument. It probably happens to some extent with brass too, but I've never seen a violinist being expected to teach cello.

Really? As a viola player, I had to teach violin, viola & cello when I worked for the county music service. They would have liked me to teach double bass as well, but I knew when I was beaten! Mind you - colleagues of mine certainly taught all members of the string family.

I did try to get any talented young cellists transferred to a 'proper' cello teacher as soon as possible, or talked to their parents and quietly suggested that they might like to look for a private teacher.

Bit baffled by people not wanting to find the best possible teacher as soon as they can though. Why wouldn't you look for the best teacher if you're going to take music remotely seriously?

I'm in the very early stages of bringing up my own child at the moment and starting to think about various classes. As a musician, I'm checking out the credentials and methods of anyone running music based classes, but for physical activity things, I'll go with the nearest nice person until/ unless my son shows any aptitude, at which point I'd do more research, and find the best possible teacher / coach / class.

She probably is fine. She can probably play the violin really well! But she may not be the best possible teacher for this particular kid, that depends on the personalities and learning styles of the teacher and student doesn't it? One cannot know that the 'fit' is good simply because of where the teacher studied.

It's worth making an effort and a half to find the best possible match of teacher for your child if you have the energy, time, money and determination. I know that I am not the best teacher for some kids. I am good at wild boys and slow learners, I am less good with brilliant but quiet girls!

I agree, but in my mind what you have just mentioned is the icing on the cake - we'd have been happy with a teacher who could teach basic technique!